Canadian Crime Rates And Public Perception

[Moderate Centrist]

Before I start let me say crime by its very nature is an issue to be taken seriously. However, it is not an issue that should be dealt with through the lense of paranoia and fear mongering.

Crime and public perception of it interest me very much for the simple reason that the public often cries for the laws to be changed for no apparent reason.

Many people I know base their knowledge of crime in television dramas and sensationalized news reports.

Crime, and it is is violent crime that really upsets the public, affects only a minority of Canadians and rates have been dropping for the past 20 years now.

Yet many contributers to this site often make the claim that - crime in Canada is on the rise and out of control.

From the right we have calls for "tougher laws", the death penalty and I seem to recall one writer on this site suggesting police/prison guard torture was acceptable.

From the left we have calls for huge databases for guns and people and increased government survellience.

I've challenged several people here to provide statistics to back up their claims that crime is increasing and none have so far come forward.

Here are some quotes from Statistics Canada followed by a link to the page. They refer to violent crime:

"In 1999, the rate decreased in nearly all major categories of violent crime, including homicide, attempted murder, assault, sexual assault, robbery and abduction."

"Homicide—which includes first- and second-degree murder, manslaughter and infanticide—hit its lowest rate in 32 years in 1999. The homicide rate has generally been declining since the mid-1970s, and together with attempted murder represents less than 0.5% of all reported violent incidents. "

"Most Canadians believe youth crime is on the rise...77% of Canadians believed that sentencing of young offenders was too lenient."

"The overall rate of youth crime has in fact been decreasing since 1992—a drop that includes a 7% fall in 1999. "

Source: http://142.206.72.67/04/04b/04b_002b_e.htm

Hugo also made the claim that Canada,

"one of the most violent and crime-ridden countries in the Western world"

This statement is reactionary at best. I did manage to find the following info on incarceration rates:

"At 123 per 100,000 of the population, Canada's incarceration rate is higher than most western democracies. "

Source:http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/pubed/skit/skit5_e.shtml

Here is another site with some additional statistics:

http://www.crime-prevention-intl.org/engli...tm#anchor557075

The point of all this is that the status quo is OK. Crime will always be with us. The only way to eliminate it is to eliminate free will and abandon civil rights.

Fighting crime also takes a variety of stategies of which imprisonment, more police and proper enforcement are essential but not solitary contributers.

If anyone wants to challenge me on this I'm listening.

[SirRiff]

well i think all your info is right. i belive the same trend in the US too, with crime decreasing over the last 20 years.

but, i think we are willing to accept less violence as the middle class grew richer during the 80s and 90s. drunk driving and domesitic abuse were all made social issues, which really helped us advance as a society.

to be honest, if two rival gangs in toronto beat each other up, well we will never stop that. i dont really care too much if some gang banger dies because he lived a violent and risky life for whatever reason. as long as it doesnt spill onto innocents.

i considering the biggest quality of life crimes to be sexual assaults against young women/children. i am not sure how rape as decreased over the last 20 years, but something tells me that the exploitation of women is still a very big problem and alot of the suffering goes unreported. i dont think we can ever gauge how many young girls and boys are molested every year.

incidently, for the first time in my life, or really anybody i know, i had my car broken into. the first time it was sitting in the middle of a mall parking lot and my parents left the door unlocked. someone took apart the steering column and tried to get it started but couldnt. 800$ cost to insurance. just last week again it was sitting in the middle of my apartment lot and someone ripped out my stereo. its a 1998 neon with a cassette deck. so i cant imagine what they were trying to get at exactly.

sirriff

[Communist_boy]

i dont really care too much if some gang banger dies because he lived a violent and risky life for whatever reason. as long as it doesnt spill onto innocents.

it is interesting that u say wat u say, the law exists to protect all peple innocent or guilty. even once they r proven guilty they still have basic rites.

[SirRiff]

the law exists to protect all peple innocent or guilty. even once they r proven guilty they still have basic rites.

its not the law that is harming criminals, its themselves. my point is if two drug dealers kill each other it doesn;t bother me for the same reasons as if an innocent bystander was killed. my concern is for law abiding citizens first.

one person chooses to act like a criminal, the other doesnt.

sirriff

[Michael Hardner]

MC.

Loved the post.

The point of all this is that the status quo is OK. Crime will always be with us.

I agree with the first sentence, but not the second. I think crime will trickle down to [almost] nothing over time as anti-socialites realize that it's not worth the risk to rip off an $80 stereo. Also, I think there's more of a social stigma associated with criminality than there used to be. Of course, there's no way to back this up...

[Moderate Centrist]

Hello All,

Thanks for your responses. I'll add another quote which is important to remember,

"One of the greatest challenges facing the Correctional Service of Canada is low public awareness and understanding of federal corrections and conditional release. Too often, myths and misperceptions shape public attitudes, making it difficult to discuss policy and program reforms."

Source: http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/pub-ed_e.shtml

The above comes from Corrections Canada and I suggest having a look at it.

Crime is one of those topics everyone gets worked up about yet few people truly understand. It is also one of those issues in which people call for changing the laws - ex: bringing back the death penalty, tougher laws, using torture on prisoners, trying children as adults.

My position has been stated many times but is essentially very simple - law and response to crime must be based on reason, not passion.

We cannot advocate changing the laws based on sensationalized newspaper stories which consistently report crime out of proportion to its occurance.

Crime is also an issue in which the statement, "people have too many rights nowadays" is uttered. I do not agree with this at all. It leads to the perception that criminals are treated lightly and are constantly getting away with their misdeads and this is not true.

Instead of posting more quotes this link will take you to a "Myth and Reality" page at Corrections Canada where you can gain some additional information on crime in Canada:

http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/pubed/mr_e.shtml

I'd like to hear more opinions and I still challenge anyone to prove the claim Canada's crime rate is rising or reaching proportions requiring a change in the status quo.

[Morgan]

1. The following article seems to challenge the information in the links that you have posted:

Crime without punishment, by Eli Lehrer, May 27/02

Crime has recently hit record highs in Paris, Madrid, Stockholm, Amsterdam, Toronto, and a host of other major cities. In a 2001 study, the British Home Office (the equivalent of the U.S. Department of Justice) found violent and property crime increased in the late 1990s in every wealthy country except the United States. American property crime rates have been lower than those in Britain, Canada, and France since the early 1990s, and violent crime rates throughout the E.U., Australia, and Canada have recently begun to equal and even surpass those in the United States. Among the economically powerful democracies in the Group of Seven, only the Japanese now have a lower victimization rate than the United States.

Not surprisingly, overwhelming evidence demonstrates that keeping criminals locked up reduces crime. British academic Donald E. Lewis's comprehensive 1986 examination of studies on the correlation between sentence length and crime rates (published in the British Journal of Criminology) concludes that doubling the length of the sentence for a crime will cut the likelihood that criminals will commit that crime by a little less than 50 percent. In a comprehensive comparison of crime rates in the United States and Great Britain, a Bureau of Justice Statistics researcher and the head of Cambridge University's Criminology Institute hit on the key fact: Crime rates fell in the United States as punishment increased and rose in Britain as punishment decreased. As James Q. Wilson has observed, "coincident with rising prison population there began in 1979-80 a steep reduction in the crime rate as reported by the victimization surveys."

2. Though these Canadian youth crime stats are from 1999, they give a good picture of dramatic increases that have taken place in the last few years:

Youth Violent Crime, Stats Can, December 21/99.

the rate of youths charged with violent crimes in 1998 was still 77% higher than it was a decade ago. The increase in violent crime among young people has been much greater than the increase for adults. Since 1988, the rate of violent crime among adults has increased only 6%....Since 1988, the rate of violent crime among female youths has more than doubled (+127%), compared with an increase of 65% among male youths.

[Moderate Centrist]

Hi Morgan,

Interesting rebutle. Your #2 point would seem to contradict some of the information I have from the same site.

The article you sited does indeed challenge my information. I guess it comes down to who you believe. The article did not provide valid statistics or sources.

And "record highs" is a reletive term at best.

All of this really doesn't matter to me as violent crime high or low affects a very small percentage of the population.

Even if the crime rate was climbing it really doesn't affect me anyway.

The best defense against criminals is common sense.

[Craig Read]

Morgan is correct and so is Hugo - crime is on the rise - and the nature and violence is disturbing. You can state that crime does not affect you and therefore no change is needed. This strikes me as nonsense. That is akin to saying that the war on terror does not affect me so no need for us to fight it.

Solving crime, protecting property and rights, gettng scum off the streets, cleaning up the drug laundering and preventing scams is THE prime responsibility of local governments.

To state that the status quo is okay is nonsense. The value of property, business, wealth and income is directly tied to the saftey and security of the city in question.

Capital is mobile and investments will be made where security is supreme. Russia is experiencing capital flight [no private property rights there], and no one invests in Afghanistan or the Sudan or Somalia. Ever wonder why?

[remember the liberal nonsense that the invasion of Afghan. was to secure the oil pipeline and allow US investment? Hmmm where is the reality to back up that moronic idea ?]

Major US cities that have been reformed such as Milwaukee, NYC and Philadelphia have seen an increase in business, tax revenues and urban revitalisation. The fomer mayor of Milwaukee - Nordquist - published a great book 'The Wealth of Cities' - i encourage people to read it.

Reducing crime is central to wealth accretion.

Try transforming communities riven by crime - you can't until crime is reduced and property rights and human rights protected.

[Moderate Centrist]

Well let me ask this then:

The stats I posted from Canadian Statistics site are false then? Yes or no.

Has anyone on this site ever been the victim of violent crime? Yes or no?

Crime like the war on terror has been blown out of all proportion. I am prepared to live with both because to a certain degree neither will ever be eliminated.

We have the laws in place now to deal with both crime and terrorism. We don't need anymore laws and we don't need to give the police anymore power. This is what I mean by accepting the status quo.

I am not suggesting we don't fight crime. I'm saying we have the tools to do it now. And I'm also saying we should not give in to hysteria.

"Solving crime, protecting property and rights, gettng scum off the streets, cleaning up the drug laundering and preventing scams is THE prime responsibility of local governments."

Craig

This is being addressed now is it not?

As for property rights, and scams there is not the same level of public outcry as there is for violent crime which affects a minority of Canadians but is a major concern for them.

Russia, Afghanistan, Somalia and Sudan are not relevent in post. The issues they face are not even remotely connected to criminal issues in Canada.

I'll ask specifically what you would like to see changed about police forces, the law and/or what you feel is currently lacking.

[Hugo]

I'll ask specifically what you would like to see changed about police forces, the law and/or what you feel is currently lacking.

According to the RCMP, police strength in Canada (181 officers per 100,000 population) is lower than both the United States (250) and England and Wales (240).

I would like to see more police funding and more cops! That might lower the crime rate, rather than wasting over $1bn on a stupid gun registry. For comparison, the total police expenditures (regional and RCMP) for 2001-2002 in the entire country were $6.8bn - the money wasted on that registry could really have made a difference, but it was pissed away instead.

[Moderate Centrist]

I agree the funding for crime fighting should go where it will do the most good.

However part of the problem with the gun registry is that it arose out of an irrational and for the most part baseless fear of gun crime.

And as such we've now been provided with a solution that doesn't work to a problem that doesn't exist.

This is why I stress extreme caution in addressing issues of crime which most often involved judgements based on passion rather than reason.

[Craig Read]

Passion vs. Reason ? Reason and facts indicate that crime IS a problem leading to lower property values, less investment and entire parts of some cities inaccessible to enterprise, good housing or good schooling.

Hugo is right, more cops are needed, more training and more community monitoring and control. Crime is a huge issue and needs to be addressed.

Like I stated cities in the US which are revitalised and growing [especially their centre's] fought crime with a zero tolerance policy including getting the riff raff off the streets.

At least for Toronto, the same attitude is needed, but with left wing aging hippies running the place, that will never happen. In fact here, they pass out 'clean' needles and blankets to the dispossessed. Soon it will be pot and beer.

The gun registry had little to do with reason or facts. It was based on political grandstanding and the desire for regulation and associated fees.

[RT_1984]

Despite overall crime dropping in Canada, organized crime is booming in Canada. This crime is arguably the most serious since the criminal organizations have extensive resources, collaborative networks, and the capacity to bribe public officials. Accusations that the Canadian Alliance is unjustified in its concern on crime often leave out these facts. And despite what many liberal-thinking people may argue, restitution is still a very significant aspect of our justice system and the public demands it. People find that if criminals are punished then it provides a greater sense of closure for the victims and their families.

[Morgan]

I think the justice system needs to be reformed. How this can be done, I don't know.

Many of the "liberal" thinkers you speak of , RT_1984, are currently warming the judicial benches. If the "bleeding heart" judges give soft sentences, and the criminals are out and about in a short time, it doesn't matter how many police officers you have on "the beat."

Here's an example of the Canadian justice system in action. The US is calling the Canadian justice system lax, which means it's really bad, because the US system is pretty soft, too. Defendents have more rights according to the ACLU and the Supreme Court than law abiding citizens.

The Canadian justice system is a lax joke and a breeding ground for scam artists who are ruthlessly bilking countless thousands of elderly Americans out of billions of dollars, a frustrated assistant U.S. attorney charged Tuesday. "It's the courts and the way the system works," Ellyn Lindsay told The Vancouver Sun from Los Angeles. "I'm sick of this. They need a kick in the ass is what they need." Scam artists sought by American authorities in Canada are typically released from jail pending lengthy extradition proceedings, during which they continue to perpetrate their crimes, she said, adding justice officials in Canada are not keen on launching their own prosecutions because the courts treat fraud artists leniently. But Valerie MacLean, general manager of the Better Business Bureau of Mainland B.C., said she fully supports Lindsay's assertions,..

[Moderate Centrist]

"If the "bleeding heart" judges give soft sentences, and the criminals are out and about in a short time..."

Morgan,

Criminals by and large are not getting soft sentences and are not getting out in short time.

I'm basing this on the information provided by statistics Canada and Corrections Canada. If anyone thinks this is false they should write these departments and have the information corrected.

Reforming the justice system can mean many things. If by this you mean increased police powers that will in anyway infringe on our basic rights I'm against it.

In my experience many people are afraid of violent crime yet extremely few have ever experienced it. It is a rarity.

Organized crime is definetly a serious problem in Canada, the USA and in most democratic countries in the world. However it is a problem in which there is very little public outcry.

I can't tell you how many times I've heard the Hell's Angels referred to as "good fellas" or the Mob as people who deserve respect.

This is largely due to the services organized criminals provide - money laundering, prostitution, gambling and infiltrating unions. There is not a direct affect on the average citizen enough to call for action. The methods of organized crime are largely hidden from the public.

In any case I don't walk around in constant fear from criminals - that is paranoia. I'm happy with the way things are... for the most part.

[Alliance Fanatic]

Well most police officer's would say that violent crime has gone up in this country. In Edmonton their were alot of attacks on police officers. In Toronto gang shootings were on the rise I believe. It seems that the left can always say that the crime rate has decreased majorly due to statistics, yet the actual police officers on the front line say their has been an increase. The most effective way to police a country is

2 police officers per 1000 people.

And I also believe that the following should be considered

-creating a highway patrol, much like the one in the US, this would save resources for such agencies as the RCMP, and the Provincial Police Forces, as well as local police agencies.

Moderate do you only listen to the left wing nuts at the CBC, CRIMINALS GET SOFT SENTENCES. In Saskatchewan the men who raped a 13 year old girl only got house arrest for twelze months, because the 13 year old wanted it.

In Edmonton criminals who tried to injure police officer were allowed to post 3000$ bail, and once again get off.

The woman who urged her boyfriend to kill a RCMP officer may get off in 3 years.

Scumbag, Karl Toft, is right now living in a minimum security prison, with no gaurds, and unlimited high speed internet.

- 1 in 3 women will be sexually abused by the time they reach the age of 21.

Wow what a great justice system mod,

[Moderate Centrist]

"Wow what a great justice system mod,"

Alliance

Well that's the first thing you've said I agree with.

Firstly, police officers are too close to the action to give an accurate picture of crime rates. This is because they deal with it everyday and it is all they ever see. So in their eyes crime and the crime rate will always appear worse than it really is.

Police departments have also been known to suggest the crime rate is rising around budget time to get more money.

Second, are you seriously suggesting that Statistics Canada and Corrections Canada are part of a left wing conspiracy?

If you dispute their stats you should write to them and have them make the appropriate corrections.

"2 police officers per 1000 people"

Fanatic

First - how did you arrive at this number.  Perhaps you can enlighten us with your extensive experience in criminal law and public policy.

Second - this sounds like a police state to me and a pretty good way for the public to be harrassed by police with nothing to do.

"CRIMINALS GET SOFT SENTENCES."

Fanatic.

I would agree with this statement if you had said a minority of criminals get soft sentences. This is a blanket statement and means nothing.

The stories you related also mean nothing. Certainly they are regretable. But as I've stated before criminal policy in this country can not be dictated by newspaper stories.

These stories are not a reflection of the criminal justice system as a whole.

Furthermore you consistently post information with no source to back it up. I have no idea of the context of these stories and therefore usually have very little confidence in their value.

However I did some research.

The rape story is this one I assume:http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/09/04/saskrape030904

You neglected to mention that there was suspicion by the judge that the girl had been a victim of abuse within the home by family members. Certainly no justification for what happened but the story is certainly not black and white.

With regard to Karl Toft you neglected to mention that he had served 2/3 of a 13 year sentence and is now residing in a halfway house.

Concerns about his behavior and release in the community are certainly valid.

But he certianly hasn't gotten away with anything. story here.

I couldn't find a source on the RCMP officer you say was killed. I may try again later or perhaps you could get us a source.

Finally I believe police power should be kept at a minimum so as not to interfer with the general pubic.

We have the laws in place now to deal with crime. Our system is not perfect but is certainly one of the best in the world.

"1 in 3 women will be sexually abused by the time they reach the age of 21."

Fanatic

Very troubling especially since most of these women will experience this from someone they know - family member or aquaintance. And how exactly do you propose to deal with this? We have laws in place now to deal with sex offenders. Are you suggesting more laws? What is your solution?

[Craig Read]

Well crime and immigration are linked - as is the lack of local police talent and force to cope with escalating crime. There is a big difference between Toronto and the big cities and the rural areas [excepting the reservations] of course. Toronto needs better policing or private property [remember Tent City and the taking of Home depot property by drug addicts and assorted freaks ?], and wealth creation will decline.

Toronto is full of gangs, shootings, beatings and drug trafficking. Part of the problem is our lousy immigration system. Apparently we need lots more Tamils and less Englishmen, more Jamaicans and less Dutch and more Chinese snakeheads than Italians. Obviously those nasty white Europeans are no match for the diversity circus that the Federal Gov't of Canada wants to create here - all paid by Toronto of course.

When the criminals are caught we can't even deport them due to the 'Charter of Rights' and other legal impediments.

Here is another story from the NP - 51 Tamil gang members were to be sent home 3 years ago, and 49 are still here and back on the streets. Wonderful.

http://www.nationalpost.com/home/story.htm...82-0CE02D8DA90E

[Alliance Fanatic]

Well, 2 police officers for every thousand, was the set minimum back in 1950. I believe that we should get more police officers to go on a beat, and help people with their problems whether big or small. If their are too few police officers, then most will be busy working on larger cases, and will not be able to help people with some of their problems due to a work overload. As for the RCMP officer who was shot and killed, his name was Denis Stronquil, and was stationed in Manitoba.

What is wrong with having 2 police officers for every thousand people. Most departments force officers to work 12 hour shifts, and on some nights additional police officers are needed. So it would actually mean one police officer for a thousand people.

Why do you think that hiring more police officers to keep communities safe from dangerous predators, would turn this country into a police state.

[Morgan]

Moderate Centrist said:

The methods of organized crime are largely hidden from the public. In any case I don't walk around in constant fear from criminals - that is paranoia. I'm happy with the way things are... for the most part.

But as I've stated before criminal policy in this country can not be dictated by newspaper stories...Finally I believe police power should be kept at a minimum so as not to interfer with the general pubic.We have the laws in place now to deal with crime.

First of all, you are naive if you think you are somehow insulated or removed from the effects of organized crime. Here's a report on the RCMP website to remind you of " how no one in Canada can say they're not affected somehow:"

Organized crime gets us where we live

As well, your bias against law enforcement but support for the legal judicial branch is misguided IMHO. Why would you believe that increased police presence/powers would "interfere" with the public good when it's police officers who are physically the last and most potent barrier between criminals and the ordinary citizen? That's interference, but good interference which I, for one, wouldn't want to live without. So more "interference" betters the odds that I will not be a victim of crime.

IMHO, it's police officers who deter crime, sometimes sacrificing their lives in the process, not "laws" or criminal attorneys or judges. Were there no police, simply having laws on the books would not prevent crime. That's why criminals engage in what's known as "unlawful" activities...it's not their nature to automatically respect/observe the laws on the books.

As for your dismissal of newspapers stories as not giving an accurate picture of crime because they're isolated events, whereas the opposite is true with Stats Can...guess you haven't read the classic book entitled "Statistics Lie."

Stats Can is run by government bureaucrats, need I say more? I don't think there is a left wing"conspiracy" per say, but on the otherhand, I don't think Stats Can will necessarily put itself out to pursue statistical studies that might prove to be embaressing to the PMO.

For example, recidivism rates...those statistics would be helpful for the taxpayer to know as an evaluation tool of our judicial/correctional system... is the current "rehabilitative" approach to criminals working or not? But Stats Can decided it did not have the "resources" to pursue that rather important issue.

Why no ones knows what the recidivism rate is, Ottawa Citizen, March 23/02

Statistics can also promote a false picture just by omission of facts. Though you distrust comments made by police officers because they are "too close" to the subject of crime, I'd suggest that you should apply the same skepticism to bureaucrats who might have a hidden agenda.

Here's an example where the Justice Dept. used statistics to promote a "false picture" because they wanted to sell the public on a touchy feely idea.

Looking at the revised Young Offenders Act.

On April 1,2003, the Young Offenders Act will be replaced with the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA). Justice Canada says the new legislation encourages rehabilitation over incarceration but will deal more harshly with violent offences. But critics say the new Act offers too many "soft" options, like Restorative Justice, and makes society the jail cell. A widely touted statistic (it's on the Justice Canada website) is that Canada currently has the highest rate of youth incarceration in the western world. After questioning the statistic, the Docket learned that Justice Canada defines "incarceration" as any custodial sentence, including "open custody". Open custody is a sentence served in the community, not in jail or a correctional facility.

[Moderate Centrist]

I don’t really oppose more police but rather more police power. Most of the arguments I hear re: crime prevention, involve things like lowering civil rights, bringing back the death penalty, creating gun registries, placing video cameras all over town and reducing a defendants ability to get proper council.

The police are the strong arm of the state - more police power equal more state power.

Crime prevention goes way beyond just having more police officers who are primarily a reactionary tool in the fight against crime.

We have the laws in place to deal with crime now. If those laws aren't being applied in an appropriate manner then we have a legitimate complaint but I don't see the issue that way.

I must also object to how you present information which is inaccurate. You are throwing around "get - off" pretty loosely.

You were in error in the following:

The Strongquill case - nobody is getting off. You stated,

"The woman who urged her boyfriend to kill a RCMP officer may get off in 3 years.”

Alliance

This is wrong.  Here is the correct version,

"Laurie Bell will spend the next seven years in jail for her part in the death of RCMP Const. Dennis Strongquill. Bell was convicted of manslaughter earlier in June. Justice Robert Menzies gave Bell a 10-year sentence with three years off for time already served. (Italics mine)”

Source: http://winnipeg.cbc.ca/regional/servlet/Vi...entence20030630

So either you didn’t read the story correctly in the first place or you deliberately gave us an incorrect version of the sentence to make it sound worse than it is. 

Also on Strongquill,

"Bell's boyfriend, Robert Sand, was convicted of first-degree murder and has been sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole for 25 years.”

Source: http://winnipeg.cbc.ca/regional/servlet/Vi...entence20030630

Perhaps you could explain to us how this fits into your theory of judges handing out “soft sentences” seeing as this is a specific case you cited to back up your claim.

If I may be so bold I think this casts into doubt much of what you claim. If you expect to be taken seriously you may want to start with doing some serious research to back up your position. That includes providing correct information.

[Moderate Centrist]

"First of all, you are naive if you think you are somehow insulated or removed from the effects of organized crime. "

Morgan

I don't recall saying it doesn't effect me rather it doesn't concern me. I highly doubt I'm on the hit list of any organized crime gangs that I know of.

I take organized crime very seriously but it is not organized crime that really scares the public.

Also, I don't require police protection. The streets are not filled with violent thugs bent on the overthrow of the civilized world.

Where is this violence and mayhem? I've worked outside the home all my life. I've never been attacked, robbed or assaulted in broad daylight before and have never witnessed such activity and am not aware that any of my friends have either and they also work outside the home.

I'm not saying you are wrong to be concerned about crime - I'm saying for me personally it's not an issue that keeps me up at night.

I expect and want the police to enforce the law and protect citizens. Beyond that I want very little from them and need very little. The chances of me becoming a victim of violent crime are slim to none.

"As for your dismissal of newspapers stories as not giving an accurate picture of crime because they're isolated events, whereas the opposite is true with Stats Can...guess you haven't read the classic book entitled "Statistics Lie."

Morgan

First - no I have not read Statistics Lie

Second - I am well aware of that fact

Third - I did not say Statistics Canada was infallible.

Fourth - newspapers are also in the entertainment business. They lie, report facts inaccurately and try to stir public emotion. Their primary goal is to sell sell sell. They may be a great way to find out WHAT happened but a very poor way to find out WHY it happened.

Fifth - I will be basing any claims I make statistically on the information provided by Statistics Canada. If you or anyone else has a problem with how they opperate or their methods it is your responsibility to write them and make your voice heard. You can use your expertise in statistical analysis and public policy to tell them what they're doing wrong.

It is interesting to see the conspiratorial mind at work here:

"Stats Can is run by government bureaucrats, need I say more?"

Morgan

"I don't think there is a left wing"conspiracy" per say, but on the otherhand, I don't think Stats Can will necessarily put itself out to pursue statistical studies that might prove to be embaressing to the PMO."

Morgan

Sorry but that in my opinion is ridiculous. The very fact that you mention the word "conspiracy" makes me wonder. We have another post on conspiracy if you'd care to check it out and promote your theories there.

[Morgan]

Look, Moderate Centrist, you were the first person to use the word "conspiracy" in this thread, not me, so don't speak derisively about my use of the word in a defensive manner.

If you want police to enforce the law, but you don't want to address the problem of how the "soft" judicial/legal process undermines what police can do, it's difficult to debate with you.

How's about if I ask you directly to comment on:

a) the effects of "conditional sentencing"

the effects of the revised Young Offenders Act that calls for restorative justice not punitive justice

c) what you think of the September'03 Supreme Court's ruling on the classification of dangerous offenders. Now judges are required to look at more "options" than just the dangerous offender label before sentencing someone with a history of violent and sexual crimes will affect law enforcement.

These are examples of what I perceive to be"soft" justice, and since we have no statistics on recidivism rates, how can we properly evaluate if "soft" justice serves society well? There are as many offenders in the community under conditional sentencing as there in prisons, and politicians like that because costs of monitoring criminals in the community are about 25% of what it would cost to have the offender jailed. But is it good for society?

[theWatcher]

Statistics are so easy to manipulate or interpret so its hard to be accurate I think.

Is crime really going down, or are people just reporting it less, or are judges just convicting less?

I have been a college instructor for the past 20 years and I certainly don't "feel" safer now than i did 20 years ago. Three times in the past year I was certain that I was going to be assaulted and it was only through luck that it didn't happen.

I also had a student who would bring in a 10 inch knife and lay it down on his desk. Any time anything was said that the student didn't like he would pick it up and start playing with it. We couldn't ban him from class because some beaurocrat came up with the ruling that knives were dangerous only if they were bigger than 12 inches, so it was perfectly fine for him to bring in a 10 inch knife and wield it in class.

This same student later assaulted the President of the school with the same knife and the police had to be called in. A year later he applied to my program, the Program Head rejected him, so he sued the institute and won because apparently the police had lost their records somehow, or there was no record of a conviction. So he came back and yes, he brought the knife into school everyday he attended. I did not feel "safe" teaching him, thats for sure.

Vandals regularily destroy and or steal from dozens to hundreds of cars at a time. This past year 2 kids cut the tires and broke the windows on about 200 cars in my neighbourhood. One of their fathers had to turn them in. Now is that going to be reported as 1 crime or 200?

Two houses near me have been pumped full of bullets and in other locations 3 people were killed in the past 2 years in suspected gang/drug violence, all within about 3 blocks from my house.

About a year ago someone carried a lawn gnome onto an overhead walkway on the freeway near my parents house and cut a hole in the fencing and dropped it onto a passing school bus killing the driver.

A customized automotive stereo shop near my house had been broken into 3 times in the past year so the owner started sleeping in his shop at night because his insurance rates had risen so high. 3 vandals drove a vehicle right into his shop crashing through the front door and literally destroying his business. He shot and hit one or more of them and was was ultimately charged, but none of the 3 vandals were charged due to lack of evidence.

I don't have any proof but my feeling is that violent crimes are up, while many of the lesser crimes aren't even being bothered to be reported any longer.