How to fight the gangs

Gang-related crime is rising, overwhelming authorities. Something can be done.

by Ken MacQueen on Thursday, March 12, 2009 10:50am - 14 Comments

Gang members are made, not born, says Peary, the Abbotsford mayor, and a lot of little things can make a difference. He wants to reinstitute uniformed police school liaison officers and foster alternate education programs. Even a hot breakfast program for primary school children can save a child from falling behind, becoming alienated and seeking belonging in gang life, he says. Winnipeg, home to some of the country’s hardest street gangs, has launched a multi-pronged series of diversion programs. Among them is SPIN (Sports Programs in Inner-City Neighbourhoods). The program removes such barriers to inner-city sports programs as financing, transportation, coaching and volunteers, says Winnipeg Mayor Sam Katz. “We took those away and provided a healthy and positive environment for children in the community we believe would be at risk of joining gangs to feel accepted.”

In Toronto, police have a series of outreach programs in at-risk areas and announced the posting of 30 uniformed officers in area high schools. And the department hires, with provincial funding, students from “priority neighbourhoods” for a variety of jobs. Many had never met the police before, at least on good terms, says spokesman Mark Pugash. “We now have people who have worked with us for three months who want to become police officers,” he says. In Montreal, Projet Espoir (Project Hope) is spearheaded by Lionel Anglade, a Haitian-born Montreal police officer and boxer who runs a boxing program for kids susceptible to gangs.

Such long-term thinking is all too rare for politicians who rarely look beyond the next election, says Chettleburgh. “We need to be keeping them engaged in pro-social activities because [if] the kid doesn’t have a connection to traditional society, whether that’s school, sports and recreation or family, he’s going to become socialized on the street.”

If anything good comes of the mad spiral of gang violence in Vancouver, it’s the realization “that it affects us all,” says Chettleburgh. “This is not just the gangster community that is dying.” All Stephen Harper had to do to appreciate that last Thursday was look to his right, into the face of Eileen Mohan.

Weeks earlier she’d talked to Maclean’s about what it is like for her and her husband Sunil to open the door to an empty home, one that used to be filled with music, laughter, running shoes and all the great pieces of their son’s life. She seems tired, and ever more frail, and yet she is everywhere these days, at rallies, public forums and at the Prime Minister’s side. She runs on faith, determined, as Harper said in another context, not to waste this crisis. There are laws to be changed, and parents to be made accountable, and rights of victims and victimizers to be rebalanced.

She speaks regularly with the homicide team investigating the murder of her son, who died because he stepped into his apartment hallway, apparently on the way to play basketball. Progress, they tell her, is “steady, but slow.” She tries to be patient. She knows the challenges they face, and that it will be these men and women—more than new laws or politicians or speeches—who will deliver what measure of justice she can hope for in this life. “When you’re a parent who has lost a beautiful son you want to believe in something,” she says. “I want to believe in them, because I’ve lost believing in anything else.”

With Nancy Macdonald, John Geddes, Nicholas Köhler, Martin Patriquin, Patricia Treble, and Susan Mohammad.

Bookmark and Share
  • Bill Simpson

    One…easy…solution: legalize hash, cocaine, and ecstasy. This is a manufactured problem, just as prohibition was.

    • Gordeaux

      Agreed. You can’t protect people from themselves and attempting to do so takes all the negative effects of drug addiction and externalizes them, making them public, rather than private, costs.

      Organized crime may not have disappeared following the repeal of prohibition, but it certainly was dramatically undercut. Let’s do it again.

      • Vince

        By that logic, you’re also OK with paying for smokers’ health care costs.

        • LeenieJ (imho)

          we already do.

  • Derek

    Bill?Gordeaux:

    Yeah sure. The same guys who kill each other on the street with no regard for the law or for other people are suddenly going to become upright taxpaying citizens just bcause we make drugs legal. Talk about fantasies .

    Booze was legal before prohibition and remained so in most countries and that’s why he industry returned to ‘normal’ after prohibition. And even at the height of the mob wars in the US in the 30s there was some beleif in keeping violence off the streets. Compared to these guys the mob were boyscouts.

    Making drugs legal will only increase the carnage because there will be that much more business to fight and kill over. On the other hand it would give the Liberals yet another opportunity to avoid dealing yet another isue. Banning guns wont work either, the UK has a total handgun ban and gun violence there has never been higher.

    What is required is a long hard slog identifying the scumbags, arresting the scumbags, trying the scumbags and eventually imprisoning (or dare I say it, executing) the scumbags. Of course that will need Judges who aren’t afraid of doing any of the above.

    • Irvin

      Derek, please think about what you’re saying.

      First of all, there were gang wars during prohibition (Does the Valentine’s Day massacre ring a bell – to name a few?) During prohibition the criminals got very rich, and of course started turf wars in an effort to reduce competition and to carve out larger areas of control for themselves. This is what is happening today.

      Taking gang leaders off the streets will never have a good effect. It only opens up higher positions in the gangs for underlings to aspire to. This in turn, leads to internal conflicts within the gangs, and increased conflicts between them. Do you think that jailing (or even executing criminals) will stop others from entering the field? The profits are so large – that the lure is irrisistable. Mercenaries prove that people will do anything for enough money.

      One of two solutions would be to eliminate the desire of the public to use drugs, but this will never happen. The drug industry is fueled by demand – not supply.

      The only other solution is to take control of the product, by making it so cheap that there is no longer any incentive for the criminals to involve themselves with it, and this could be accomplished by legalizing drugs. However, if the government slaps prohibitive taxes on the drugs, then it will continue to encourage a black market – usually run by criminals.

      What I do seriously believe is that if drugs were legal and very cheap, that the amount of property crime in this country would virtually disappear. Breaking into houses and apartments and then trying to fence the loot is something that few addicts would continue to do – if they could just get the drugs they crave at a price they could afford, and when they are ready to go for treatment, our government will have a lot of money saved from the police and court budgets to help these people get the help they are now asking for.

  • greg

    Hey Vince, smokers save the health care system money. Studies conducted and published by real economists (and not the anti-smoking lobby) show that the early death of large numbers of smokers saves on future health care and retirement home costs. As an ex-smoker i agree that smoking is bad and should be discouraged, but you should get your facts straight before you voice your opinion. You’ll come out sounding more intelligent.

    • Vince

      I never mentioned whether or not it saved the health care system money. All I said was that you would be OK with paying for their health care costs. The power of assumption can do magical things when you’re pissed off.

  • Gordeaux

    Derek –

    I labour under no illusion that legalizing drugs will turn thugs into anything but poorer thugs. But cutting off their major source of income will deprive them of the funds to buy illegal weapons and the incentive to kill each other off (along with innocent bystanders) in shootouts.

    As for your assertion there wasn’t anything like it in the bad old days, I’m not sure the historical record backs you up. Take the St. Valentine Day Massacre — of the seven victims, at least one was simply a mechanic in the wrong place at the wrong time.

    Also, when you say legalization will mean more business to fight over — that’s my whole point. Businesses in legal industries don’t shoot it out on street corners. When’s the last time you heard about a Seagram’s rep busting a cap in a Wiser’s rep’s @ss?

    Sure, prosecute the scumbags, by all means. But as long as there’s this vast, lucrative trade out there, they’ll simply be replaced by the next.

    Gord

  • Dane

    The gun lobby? When did this organization ever exist in Canada, I’ve seen legal gun owners in Canada being kicked in the ribs by the government for the past 30 years, and it hasn’t stopped crime. Its time to address the real issue which is poor government policy in punishment and enforcement, gun owners are not criminals so gun ownership is not a crime issue.

  • Mike Pawluk

    Businesses that can legally import guns also have a large number slip out the back door, either through theft or illegal sales, says a recent analysis of firearms movement in B.C.

    Source please.

    This is stupid. Yet again, responsible firearms owners and sellers are targeted as part of the problem.
    WE OBEY THE LAWS WHEREAS CRIMINALS DON’T. Banning and laws WILL NOT change this. Neither will fearmongering such as the above – NON ACCREDITED quote.
    Sloppy and irresponsible – I feel like I’m reading CNN. I expect more from Canadian journalism.

  • Chilled

    Ahhhhhhhhhh, the Constitution………….hasen’t it served us so well!!!!

  • Jim Powell

    The only way to fight this war and win is to end the “war on drugs”. As long as we have willing sellers in some of the poorest areas of the world like Afghanistan and Columbia, and willing buyers by the millions, whenever you put one group of wholesalers and retailers out of business at great cost another group will replace them (probably before the jail house doors close behind them). Since the business generates large amounts of money and has no legal protection for those funds, the dealers will use violence to enforce their “rights” and guard their profits.

  • Dan

    Do like they did in the wild west and whoever is caught selling drugs hang'em high! Just like they did to horse thieves. Justice served.

From Macleans