How would that help?

How would that help? Wouldn't it be the same officers as we have now?

I don't think a metro force wil ever happen.

metro police force

Actually Wilfred Laurier, our reporter lists this as an item on the NDP's platform:

"Studying the feasibility of regional policing in Metro Vancouver"

Here's an article The Tyee published on the idea two years ago:

http://thetyee.ca/News/2007/03/08/Police/

I take a different approach to Gang shootings........

.......... history has shown, when the rule of law is flaunted by the rulers of the land, the bottom feeders of society think they are above the law as well.

In BC, it is no secret that the ruling BC Liberal Party is up to its proverbial teeth in conflicts, questionable acts, and police investigations, so much so that they collectively show a utter and complete disregard to the rule of law in the province.

The gangsters and general 'bad boys' of BC now think that they are too above the law and resorted to summery executions to secure their grip on the illegal drug trade. There is no surprise in what is happening and more police or a 'metro' police force will not solve anything. In fact more police means there is more of a chance that they will investigate those in charge!

It is the rule of law that protects society and why politicians think that they can act above the law is the root of the recent spat of shootings. What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, so to speak.

when they ended prohibition

when they ended prohibition in the 30's the murder was immediate cut in half and did not reach the same levels it was during alcohol prohibition until recently due to our current prohibition.

anything else shows total bias in the media or stunning ignorance or both. The other deadly demon in all this is the religious belief of many in the media right and left who are dogmatically opposed to the evidence if it conflicts with their beliefs.

Not an attack on Mr. Beers but everyone in the media seems to be playing from the same hymn book on this matter...Mr. Beers - any comment? Thanks!

Regional force

Dan the Socialist:

Right now, one of the problems that our police forces face is jurisdictional issues. Namely, it becomes difficult for a force in a particular municipality investigate crimes that may take the investigation outside of the municipality.

This is why we have seen the advent of IHIT and a couple of groups targeting organized crime (e.g. OCA).

I don't necessarily buy into the idea that a regional force would be a more cost efficient way of delivering police services. But I doubt that a regional force would be more expensive.

Also, you have to look at things like displacement - where one force cracks down on a particular crime but the net effect is to displace that crime to an adjacent municipality, thereby not actually "taking a bite out of crime."

A regional force would allow for greater strategic planning around easily displaced crimes.

Finally, the only real hold-up here is likely coming from the politicos, especially the municipal poobahs who probably like having a measure of control over their obedient little dobermans.

But if you think about it, if we were to start from scratch today, we would never, ever build the mish-mash of forces that we have today. It just wouldn't make sense. So why should we let our history get in the way of our future?

MichaelT

You make a good point. The politicians aren't offering a deep analysis of the roots of crime in BC. I'd welcome any substantive post by you on the topic -- as I would from any of our readers.

The goal of this piece was to discuss how the parties were reacting to the fact that 'crime' rates high on recent polling on citizens' concerns. We wanted to document the ridings where it might be higher given number of shootings and report what the parties were saying on the campaign trail and in their platforms. Reporter Irwin Loy also quotes an SFU expert who is frustrated with the lack of depth in either parties' proposed solutions.

this increase in shootings and crime

happened under the Campbell government. Yet voters think that this same corporate shill will be the man to fix it. What is everyone smoking in Vancouver and the lower mainland?

Anyone willing to take on the closing of casinos?

4 years ago in toronto, a

4 years ago in toronto, a 'wave' of shootings hit the city. average citizens were reported as being 'afraid to go out', and were lamenting the days when the streets were 'safe'. toronto's mayor had much to say about the violence, but little was done, except for america-bashing (all the guns came from across the border, RIGHT! lol!), and a toronto councillor suggesting that police search all cars driven by black people, in case they were carrying guns to be used in future violence...(like the movie Minority Report)
am i the only person who sees that, for desperate people with little education, violence is a means to an ends? if my choices, at 20, involve working in the fast-food industry for $9/hr, versus making hundreds of dollars potentially each day, selling drugs, or driving criminals around, or some other 'gang-related' work, i would like to say i would chose burger king over drug kingpins, but i can't answer that honestly because i haven't been in that situation. with violence, guns, drugs, alcohol and cheap sex glorified on tv, music and movies, why do you think that gangs seem to be growing in numbers? our social welfare system is terrible; jobs for undereducated people are lousy; the political system is so corrupt the cracks are beginning to show; unemployment is hitting blue-collar families hard; 2012 is playing on many people's minds. you can blame drugs, and guns, and immigration laws, but the real culprit is our broken culture.

More police is not going to

More police is not going to solve the gang problem, when governments actively encourage the multinational corporate mafia to take over and collectivize economies, depriving millions of decent living.

If stealing a candy bar, or holding up a store is a crime, why isn't it a crime when corporations take over whole slew of stores, or mills, or any other businesses and fire people by the hundreds and thousands to rehire some at starvation, minimum wage, part time jobs.

All I can see in our supermarkets are ads for part timers. No such thing 30 -40 years ago, when people were making wages with good buying powers and we had no crimes, or gangs.

The organizations of multinational corporations, like the Bilderbergers and the Trilatelars, not to mention the NAFTA, etc. are in reality criminal gangs organized to collectivize, colonize and exploit humanity and the whole world.

Not visibly with guns, but with the perceived power of imaginary capital "created" from the air.

This is the example followed by the gangs in more crude and primitive ways, but always based on the simple rule:

"WEALTH CAN NOT BE CREATED, ONLY TAKEN FROM OTHER SECTORS, THE ENVIRONMENT, AND THE FUTURE"

As long as "wealth creation" is a permitted and taught principle, the violence will rise. Perhaps one day our professors and politicians may just stumble of simple, long known physical facts. SURPRISE!!!!!!!!!!!!

I grew up in a police family in a European country, impoverished by WW1, then the great depression, then WW2. We were dirt poor, but had no crime, or juvenile delinquents, or violence to speak of, and nothing was stolen in the schools, although we had no lockers and our coats, major expense for any family, were hanging out in the hallways.

Figure it out.

Ed Deak.

I think the course was set in the 60's

Those were the boom years. Land developers ruled, growth was the only thing that kept the economy going. BC was ripe for the picking. Vancouver, and I lived there, was a nice city. Today it is place I avoid. The sad thing is that the whole mentality that created today's Vancouver moved like a cancer east through the valley. Why anyone would live there is beyond me.

prevention

I am very frustrated with the knee-jerk response to this issue always being more police officers and tougher sentences. If that really worked, wouldn't we have fixed it by now? We've had more "law and order" governments in BC and Canada in the last few years than in the previous 30, and clearly, the situation is getting worse.

The biggest problem is that all of the proposed solutions are after-the-fact, closing-the-barn-door-after-the-horse-is-gone approaches.

As a teacher, I believe the root of the problem is the underfunding of education, resulting in higher classes than ever at secondary when kids are making the decisions that will impact the rest of their lives.

In Surrey, where I work, nearly all of the over-sized classes (upwards of 1000 at last count) are at secondary. I think people have this idea that secondary students can fend for themselves, and they don't need as much attention. Teaching is not just about passing the test.

With my own teenagers, I feel that they crave that one-on-one attention more than ever. They want to be acknowledged as real people, and they want someone to show that they care. If you are a secondary school teacher, working full time, you can easily have upwards of 200 students in a year. If your seven classes have only 30 each, you'll have 210. I don't think that is a situtation that lends itself to making personal contact with students of a very meaningful kind. The fact that so many secondary teachers succeed is an amazing testament to their commitment and hard work.

Gang membership is about a feeling of belonging, and that is exactly what we are losing in underfunded secondary schools.

It is no accident that we are having this problem in BC, where after 8 years of Liberal cuts, we have the highest pupil-teacher ratio in the country, and the worst funding.

Education is the best investment for crime prevention AND for the economy.

We've lived in Vancouver for

We've lived in Vancouver for 24 years between 1955 and 79, had our own business, house, etc., but even by the late 70s the city was becoming a bloody mess.

I haven't been back to that worldclass dump since 1988 and my wife since 1980. Every time we see it on TV we shudder and thank our lucky stars that we managed to get out in good time.

Ed Deak.

BC Greens offer only real solution

Anyone concerned about crime should vote BC Green Party. The NDP and Liberals offer the same old solutions: stiffer sentences, more police, longer prison terms. But we cannot imprison our way out of the crime and gang problem. The USA has tried and is far less safe than Canada, even though 1 in every 100 citizens is behind bars.

If increased law enforcement and imprisonment worked, then the USA would be safer than Canada. But it’s not. Imprisoning people does not stop the gangs or violence. When a gang member is jailed, someone replaces them, and gang members recruit while in prison.

Building prisons and jailing people relates to symptoms of the problem, not the cause of the problem. The cause of the gangs’ turf violence is the lucrative finances earned under drug prohibition. We have to end prohibition to end the gang violence, just as ending alcohol prohibition stopped the gangsters’ shootings in the 1920s and ‘30s.

We must move the illegal drug industry out of criminal control into a taxed and regulated system. The BC Green Party understands that ending prohibition will properly address the crime and gang problem, so concerned citizens should vote Green on May 12th.

Real risks

Obviously the shootings are disturbing and the pattern of crime is worth addressing at its roots, but I also have to wonder what the real risks are.

What I mean is, for your average person living in Greater Vancouver, how likely is it that a gang-involved shooting is a danger, compared to any number of other risks, from car crashes to air pollution? Are we going to throw a lot of money at this issue, in possibly ineffective ways, that might actually save more lives if directed elsewhere, or more intelligently at the causes rather than the symptoms of the problem? And, importantly, what does actual evidence from other jurisdictions (such as Portugal, where even hard drugs have been legalized) suggest?

A few years ago I would never have considered drug legalization as reasonable, but it seems to me that a significant proportion of the misery in our otherwise wonderful city is driven by a drug market that runs underground. I doubt more police and more enforcement will do much on its own. The unfortunate fact is that many people use drugs, and will get them however they can, directly or indirectly via gangsters if necessary.

Prohibition and Police more of the same

Excellent commentary Jodie. This article proves that the NDP and the Liberals are completely ignorant and beholden to vested interests. As long as prohibition continues the Court of Bang Bang will be the only avenue to resolve disputes between drug market players. The governments and corporate interests have decimated the job economy, and the forest sectors. A job in organized crime becomes very attractive under these circumstances. Legalization is the only moral solution.