The NDP's "Boots on the Ground"

[Derek 2.0]

I'm forced to laugh at all the past claims of a Harper police State, when I here this from the NDP:

“It’s boots on the ground that fight crime, not empty Conservative promises,” said Mulcair. “Stephen Harper’s plan is failing and despite years of his ‘tough on crime’ rhetoric, the number of police officers in Canada has been on the decline.”

I would have assumed the NDP to have thought loafers or Roman sandals worn by social workers and addiction counsellors would be more fitting......but no:

To help police protect our communities, an NDP government will work with provinces, territories, municipalities and First Nations to provide stable, ongoing funding to put 2,500 new officers on the streets and keep them there. To achieve this goal, the NDP will re-establish the Police Officer Recruitment Fund that was cancelled by Stephen Harper, with a $250 million investment over the next four fiscal-years, followed by permanent ongoing funding of $100 million annually.

I thought many decried the Conservative approach to crime prevention............why is the NDP promising several thousand additional police officers, when crime rates, including violent crime, is decreasing across Canada?

Why are the NDP attempting to address an issue that isn't an issue? And to think, there are those on the left that accuse the Tories of pimping fears among voters. What is behind Mulcair's pledge for more "boots on the ground" across Canada?

Edited August 20, 2015 by Derek 2.0

[Evening Star]

I don't know the details of what the need for police officers is in different communities but hiring more police officers to enforce the law is a totally different issue from whether or not one supports Tory crime policies.

[Derek 2.0]

I don't know the details of what the need for police officers is in different communities but hiring more police officers to enforce the law is a totally different issue from whether or not one supports Tory crime policies.

Is it? The Tories were criticized for building more prisons despite falling crime rates, yet when the NDP promise more police officers, its a different issue?

As I said, what requirement is there for more police officers when crime has been decreasing for decades? And why, outside of the RCMP, is the Federal Government responsible for hiring more police officers, for various communities, across Canada? Is that not why we pay taxes to our Provinces, cities and towns?

[Boges]

As I said, what requirement is there for more police officers when crime has been decreasing for decades? And why, outside of the RCMP, is the Federal Government responsible for hiring more police officers, for various communities, across Canada? Is that not why we pay taxes to our Provinces, cities and towns?

More Unionized Public Servants. Good thing for a party like the NDP.

[Black Dog]

I thought many decried the Conservative approach to crime prevention............why is the NDP promising several thousand additional police officers, when crime rates, including violent crime, is decreasing across Canada?

Why are the NDP attempting to address an issue that isn't an issue? And to think, there are those on the left that accuse the Tories of pimping fears among voters. What is behind Mulcair's pledge for more "boots on the ground" across Canada?

Yeah it's a real head-scratcher why a party usually considered soft on crime would make statements like this in the midst of a hotly contested election campaign. Guess we'll never know their motivation.

[Derek 2.0]

Yeah it's a real head-scratcher why a party usually considered soft on crime would make statements like this in the midst of a hotly contested election campaign. Guess we'll never know their motivation.

I personally have no qualms with the NDP doubling down on the Tories "Law & Order" agenda........Are you suggesting Mulcair's "boots on the ground" is just an election ploy? Or would the NDP fill the prisons built by the Tories with their thousands more police across Canada?

[Boges]

Beyond the RCMP, I'd like to know how a Federal Government can mandate X-amount of police officers hired by provincial and municipal governments.

You need money for Infrastructure, Healthcare and Education but this money we're giving you can only go to hiring police you don't need.

Sounds awesome to me.

Edited August 20, 2015 by Boges

[Derek 2.0]

Beyond the RCMP, I'd like to know how a Federal Government can mandate X-amount of police officers hired in provincial and municipal governments.

You need money for Infrastructure, Healthcare and Education but this money we're giving you can only go to hiring police you don't need.

Sounds awesome to me.

Indeed, I wonder if Mulcair's "boots on the ground" will arrest those guilty of drug offenses and illegal protests?

[Evening Star]

Are they talking about something that goes beyond hiring more RCMP officers? That's not clear to me.

The Tories were criticized for building more prisons despite falling crime rates, yet when the NDP promise more police officers, its a different issue?

The Tory crime policies that I oppose most have to do with sentencing, mandatory minimums esp for drug-related offences, 'anti-terror' laws, laws about 'barbaric cultural practices'. Hiring police officers seems like a different issue to me.

Edited August 20, 2015 by Evening Star

[Black Dog]

I personally have no qualms with the NDP doubling down on the Tories "Law & Order" agenda........Are you suggesting Mulcair's "boots on the ground" is just an election ploy? Or would the NDP fill the prisons built by the Tories with their thousands more police across Canada?

You mean the statement he made at a campaign event? I have no idea what could be behind this!

[Smallc]

The Tory crime policies that I oppose most have to do with sentencing, mandatory minimums esp for drug-related offences, 'anti-terror' laws, laws about 'barbaric cultural practices'. Hiring police officers seems like a different issue to me.

I often hear people talk about the difference between American and British police. Having more officers doesn't necessarily mean more arrests, more charges, or more people in prison. Also, boots on the ground isn't just officers. There's a whole host of people in different government organizations involved in crime prevention and deterrence that Mulcair could conceivably be talking about.

[Shady]

Mulcair wants troops in the streets! Troops. In our streets. In Canadian streets.

[Derek 2.0]

You mean the statement he made at a campaign event? I have no idea what could be behind this!

So Mulcair is talking hokum? What about:

We'll standup to Stephen Harper's so-called law and order agenda; an agenda that applies to everyone except him. He keeps breaking the law.

Now is the time to reach out beyond our traditional base, talk to other progressives in other parties; tell them that there is only one party that's the real deal. A party that's not going to talk about progressive ideas and then forget them once elected. A party that's going to say exactly what it's going to do, and then once elected we'll go ahead and do it. This time, Canadians will be able to vote for the change they want, and actually get it.

So the NDP isn't going to fund thousands of unneeded police officers across Canada?

[Boges]

Mulcair wants troops in the streets! Troops. In our streets. In Canadian streets.

Hidden Agenda.

[Derek 2.0]

Also, boots on the ground isn't just officers. There's a whole host of people in different government organizations involved in crime prevention and deterrence that Mulcair could conceivably be talking about.

Accept, he clearly stated 2500 Police Officers...........

[Black Dog]

So Mulcair is talking hokum? What about:

So the NDP isn't going to fund thousands of unneeded police officers across Canada?

I don't know if he means it. It's a dumb policy for sure. I am imply speaking to your question of the motivations behind such a policy, motivations which will forever be shrouded in mystery.

[Boges]

I don't know if he means it. It's a dumb policy for sure. I am imply speaking to your question of the motivations behind such a policy, motivations which will forever be shrouded in mystery.

Courting powerful police unions. Duh.

[Black Dog]

Courting powerful police unions. Duh.

That's exactly it. Unions and the Sun demo in one shot. Bad policy but good politics.

[Derek 2.0]

I don't know if he means it. It's a dumb policy for sure. I am imply speaking to your question of the motivations behind such a policy, motivations which will forever be shrouded in mystery.

Right, I get the notion of political BS.........but I can't fathom why the NDP would promise 2500 more police, making upwards of six figures each, when crime rates are declining, and with the same financial outlay, they could hire probably close to double the amount of social workers, addiction therapists, outreach workers etc.........

[Derek 2.0]

That's exactly it. Unions and the Sun demo in one shot. Bad policy but good politics.

Is it though? What of all the "social justice warriors", progressive university students and poverty activists that comprise a portion of the NDP's base.......could they flock to the Liberals? Nope, C-51 and Bill Blair.........but the Greens?

[Smallc]

Except, he clearly stated 2500 Police Officers...........

And that's fine too - though that doesn't exclude police officers trained in crime prevention and deterrence.

[waldo]

I'm forced to laugh at all the past claims of a Harper police State, when I here this from the NDP:

I'm shocked at your selective quote cherry-picking... shocked I tells ya! You know, the part of that article that speaks to prior commitments made by Harper... and not kept! Like the 100 additional RCMP Harper committed just for Surrey... like the (same) 2500 additional officers Harper committed for communities across Canada... the commitment for which Harper Conservatives failed to provide adequate funding for. How did you miss that in your background reference, hey?

if you're going to take on such a subject you should really do your homework! This is nothing new - Layton made similar pledges in 2011 - NDP pledge aims to stamp out gang-related crime at its source

notwithstanding there are pockets within communities all across Canada that have serious crime... increasing crime, you choose to blindly throw out national crime stats... without actually looking at those stats with any degree of questioning, of any scrutiny whatsoever. The classic failure in improper qualification is the homicide rate --- how is that rate decrease happening when there are more guns, gun violence isn't decreasing, populations are increasing, gangs are more prevalent, drug related violence seems rampant in large cities, etc.. Well guess what? Wars have indirect consequences... like bringing war theatre medical advances forward, like related/improved emergency/trauma care having an influence in helping to reduce gun (and stabbing) related murders. Gun/stabbling related murders have significantly shifted to become related assaults with victims that previously died now living.

Murder rate drops as more survive gunshots, stabbings - A Canadian today is half as likely to be a homicide victim as in 1975

[Argus]

IWhy are the NDP attempting to address an issue that isn't an issue? And to think, there are those on the left that accuse the Tories of pimping fears among voters. What is behind Mulcair's pledge for more "boots on the ground" across Canada?

But it is an issue. Canada has fewer police per population than most other western democracies. The RCMP are notoriously short staffed, too. Even before the terrorist thing on parliament hill they were letting most fraud go because they didn't have the cops to investigate. Putting all those extra cops on parliament hill basically stripped much of the organized crime group and other areas bare.

The problem is we have fewer police because they're so incredibly expensive compared to police elsewhere. Also, I spoke with a friend at the RCMP just yesterday about the NDP saying we needed more RCMP. She said the reason the RCMP is having trouble in recruitment is very simple, their main recruitment efforts are aimed at women and minorities - who mostly don't want to be cops. You can expect more of that under the NDP.

Edited August 20, 2015 by Argus

[Argus]

Right, I get the notion of political BS.........but I can't fathom why the NDP would promise 2500 more police, making upwards of six figures each, when crime rates are declining,

Sure, like, when you have nobody to investigate fraud, people stop reporting it. And guess what? Fraud rates drop really low! Well, not really. But statistically,since nobody's bothering to report it. Same goes for any number of other crimes. They're not really dropping. The statistics on 'police reported crime' are dropping because people aren't bothering to report crime to the police. Why bother if you feel they're not likely to do anything anyway?

[Derek 2.0]

I'm shocked at your selective quote cherry-picking... shocked I tells ya! You know, the part of that article that speaks to prior commitments made by Harper... and not kept! Like the 100 additional RCMP Harper committed just for Surrey... like the (same) 2500 additional officers Harper committed for communities across Canada... the commitment for which Harper Conservatives failed to provide adequate funding for. How did you miss that in your background reference, hey?

if you're going to take on such a subject you should really do your homework! This is nothing new - Layton made similar pledges in 2011 - NDP pledge aims to stamp out gang-related crime at its source

notwithstanding there are pockets within communities all across Canada that have serious crime... increasing crime, you choose to blindly throw out national crime stats... without actually looking at those stats with any degree of questioning, of any scrutiny whatsoever. The classic failure in improper qualification is the homicide rate --- how is that rate decrease happening when there are more guns, gun violence isn't decreasing, populations are increasing, gangs are more prevalent, drug related violence seems rampant in large cities, etc.. Well guess what? Wars have indirect consequences... like bringing war theatre medical advances forward, like related/improved emergency/trauma care having an influence in helping to reduce gun (and stabbing) related murders. Gun/stabbling related murders have significantly shifted to become related assaults with victims that previously died now living.

Murder rate drops as more survive gunshots, stabbings - A Canadian today is half as likely to be a homicide victim as in 1975

Yet, from your CBC story's link, overall, all violent crime, in all its forms, decreased by 17% over the last decade........furthermore, non-violent property crime has dropped by 33%, other criminal code offenses have dropped by 1%, drunk driving by 7%, the trafficking of pot down 30%.........all forms of crime within Canada have dropped by 23%.............So equate why this requires thousands of more "boots on the ground"?

So what gives with Mulcair's envisioned police state? Is he beholden to police unions or what?