babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » rabble columns   » Gottschalk - A US view: In our hearts we know the answer

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Gottschalk - A US view: In our hearts we know the answer
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 04 January 2006 09:49 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
If you had asked Jane Creba on the morning of her death what the future held for her, what do you think she would have said? Similarly, on the same morning, if you asked the young men who would be firing guns on Yonge Street what they thought the future held for them, what do you think they would have said?

Keith Gottschalk


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Boarsbreath
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9831

posted 04 January 2006 10:03 PM      Profile for Boarsbreath   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well, I was gonna post that that was a rare display of good sense, rare for the media; but I see he's really AE.

There ya go.


From: South Seas, ex Montreal | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Mush
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3934

posted 04 January 2006 10:13 PM      Profile for Mush     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I really like this article. Sadly and cynically, they're just lining up to make political hay of this shooting. Warren Kinsella's practially blamed the mayor, saying that Toronoto needs a "real mayor". I assume he means John Tory.

Of course, there's very little that any mayor can do, and nothing that anybody can do that will make an instant difference. Steady investment in communities and making sure these kids have hope for futures that they don't want to jeopardize by getting involved in criminal activity.


From: Mrs. Fabro's Tiny Town | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
The Evil Twin
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11561

posted 05 January 2006 03:23 PM      Profile for The Evil Twin     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
From the article:""Diebel wrote Creba's slaying was different because “. . . at 15, she could have been anybody's daughter, sister, friend. Partly, it's because she was mortally shot on Yonge St., in the heart of the city, simply because she happened to go shopping on Boxing Day.”

Did that make her slaying that much different than the 78 others? Were they not someone's child too? Did they not have lives as well? "


This what I found most disappointing. Linda Diebal is an usually progressive writer. However like many other whites (left or right), she became overly sentimental over Creba's death because she was "everygirl".

From the article:"In our hearts on both sides of the border, we know what the solutions are. The real question is do we have the guts to address the issue of racism and make the necessary changes not just in our policy, but in ourselves?"

This IS the main issue. The author hits it on the head. The issue is not guns or gun violence (our murder rate is more or less the same as in previous years, and much less than the high in 1991). The real issue is RACISM and how most Canadians define themselves ("whiteness" seems to be one way of self-defination, which is why Creba became "everygirl"). An excellent article.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Makwa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10724

posted 05 January 2006 04:11 PM      Profile for Makwa   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by The Evil Twin:
This IS the main issue. The author hits it on the head. The issue is not guns or gun violence (our murder rate is more or less the same as in previous years, and much less than the high in 1991). The real issue is RACISM and how most Canadians define themselves ("whiteness" seems to be one way of self-defination, which is why Creba became "everygirl"). An excellent article.
Yes, thankyou (but not in a good way) yes.

From: Here at the glass - all the usual problems, the habitual farce | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
nonsuch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1402

posted 05 January 2006 04:48 PM      Profile for nonsuch     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And the famous, extravagantly overpriced gun-registry did what, exactly?

quote:
Well-meaning people want to do something about gun crime. NDP candidate Olivia Chow expressed her exasperation to the Star.

“How many more innocents will it take?” she asks. “We all have to face this. It is our collective responsibility. If we have kids being killed in the streets by other kids, we have to realize that something is very wrong. They grew up in here in Toronto. How did they turn into hardened, heartless and brutal killers? ”


I see a number of issues to be faced here. Gun-ownership is the least of them. Racism is secondary. Economics is the big, bad elephant in the room. And nobody is going to disturb it.

Ps. Another good one, EA!


From: coming and going | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
ronb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2116

posted 05 January 2006 05:40 PM      Profile for ronb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
There's a whole lot of not-so-subtle racism involved with how brutally Toronto's education system was fucked over by Snobelin and Harris.
From: gone | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 05 January 2006 05:56 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
if you asked the young men who would be firing guns on Yonge Street what they thought the future held for them, what do you think they would have said?

I bet they'd take a minute to wistfully mourn that thanks to racism they couldn't fulfill their dream of being a middle manager with a mortgage and a practical sedan, then they'd probably say "well, there's always second choice: being rich enough to throw money around on gold jewelry, status cars, designer clothes and 'bitches'".

Then they might add "Oh ya, and I forgot. That guy that dissed my crew... I'm gonna kill him."

Once denied the opportunity to have a "regular" Canadian life of taxes and quiet obscurity, many of these young men seem remarkably willing to settle for the life of 50 Cent, which is pretty accomodating of them.

That's just my guess.


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 05 January 2006 10:56 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
That's one of the more repulsive things I've ever read on babble. Thanks, Magoo.
From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Américain Égalitaire
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7911

posted 05 January 2006 11:00 PM      Profile for Américain Égalitaire   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by al-Qa'bong:
That's one of the more repulsive things I've ever read on babble. Thanks, Magoo.

Seconded. A bit much even for him.


From: Chardon, Ohio USA | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
Transplant
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9960

posted 05 January 2006 11:41 PM      Profile for Transplant     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by al-Qa'bong:
That's one of the more repulsive things I've ever read on babble. Thanks, Magoo.

Yep, you've gone too far this time Magoo.


From: Free North America | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Makwa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10724

posted 06 January 2006 12:11 AM      Profile for Makwa   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Magoo:
I bet they'd take a minute to wistfully mourn that thanks to racism they couldn't fulfill their dream of being a middle manager with a mortgage and a practical sedan, then they'd probably say "well, there's always second choice: being rich enough to throw money around on gold jewelry, status cars, designer clothes and 'bitches'".
Speaking of not-so-subtle racism. Grr.

From: Here at the glass - all the usual problems, the habitual farce | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
rinne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9117

posted 06 January 2006 12:14 AM      Profile for rinne     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Add me to the list.

Peel away a little of that cleverness and my, my, my.

Not a pretty site.


From: prairies | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
rinne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9117

posted 06 January 2006 12:18 AM      Profile for rinne     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
But really I came to thank Keith, that was an excellent article.
From: prairies | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 06 January 2006 12:37 AM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by a citizen of winnipeg:
Add me to the list.

Peel away a little of that cleverness and my, my, my.

Not a pretty sight.


Yeah, "true colours" and all that.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 06 January 2006 01:06 AM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It's the same point I was making before Boxing day, in other threads about violence: we're making this huge assumption that everyone wants what "we" want, and that it's the inability to have what "we" have that somehow drives people to join a gang.

Sorry I'm not jumping on the "it's the racism" bandwagon or the "it's the poverty" bandwagon, but I simply don't believe someone decides to join a "crew" and start shooting up Yonge St. over an insult because they've been denied the opportunity to go to community college and be a mortgage-paying, TTC-riding, retirement-plan-contributing schlub like me.

And I'm not saying racism doesn't exist, or that POC aren't denied opportunities, or that maybe lots of POC might want exactly what I do out of life. I'm just saying I don't think that alone can cause someone to decide to shoot someone else over a perceived slight.

And if you're surprised at what I wrote, I'm a little surprised at what others have written as well. Here we have, or appear to have, two groups of individuals having a gunfight on Yonge St. that kills one person and injures several others, over what? Pride? Turf? The right to sell the most drugs in some neighbourhood, and thereby afford the best BMW? And rather than noting that these individuals represent a small, small minority in their community — a community that suffers under the same social conditions as these few — we rush to pin the "real" blame on Mike Harris, cuts to after-school programs, systemic racism, and poverty.

Again, I'm not suggesting these problems don't exist, nor that we shouldn't be fixing them. But what ever happened to simple greed, or plain old macho tough-guy bullshit? How is it that if you or I crave ostentatious luxury and are willing to kill anyone in our path to get it that's horrible, but if you're a gang member it's understandable? How is it that if I were to punch someone for looking at me funny I'd be regarded as a common thug, but if someone in a gang shoots someone for not paying them the proper amount of respect, that's somehow understandable?

And of course there are other questions as well. How it is, for example, that so many people live in poverty, some in worse poverty than the shooters, and yet they don't feel the need to shoot up Yonge St.? And how is it that this lifestyle and this type of crime bears such an uncanny resemblance to a lifestyle endorsed by so many movies and music videos imported from the United States?

It seems as though there's a willingness (or a desire) to ignore simple (and sadly common) greed, callousness and thuggery as primary causes of this kind of violence, in order to substitute some other social ills and call that the cause. Honestly, I'm a little surprised that no anarchist-type has come out to blame it all on Capitalism somehow.

quote:
Speaking of not-so-subtle racism.

Huh. I hadn't thought I'd mentioned any race. Just gangs. Recall, we don't know the identities of the shooters yet, just that they're rival gang members. Isn't it OK to mention gangs, and the things we know they covet and that they're willing to shoot one another for?

Think about this again for a moment: we don't actually know who the shooters are, what their ethnic background is, what their family life was like, where they lived, how much education they have or whether they have jobs.

And yet we're comfortable assuming that they're POC, underpriveleged, have been denied opportunities and that these experiences must have driven them, somehow, to be on Yonge St. on Boxing Day firing guns wildly.

Sorry, but I just don't think it's that simple.


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Makwa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10724

posted 06 January 2006 01:39 AM      Profile for Makwa   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Magoo:
I hadn't thought I'd mentioned any race.
I never said you did - you merely highlighted the racialized stereotypical icons of 'bitches', 'gold jewelery', 'bling' and '50-cent'. Not that these images have not become appropriated throughout the culture, but to pull them out as targets sets up a very disturbing dynamic, particularly since the non-identifying photo of one of the persons charged has already been published. A simple apology would be a good thing, IMHO.

From: Here at the glass - all the usual problems, the habitual farce | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 06 January 2006 02:11 AM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
you merely highlighted the racialized stereotypical icons of 'bitches', 'gold jewelery', 'bling' and '50-cent'.

Have you read any of the backgrounder pieces on this? I don't have the link handy, but apparently the feud that took place on Yonge is spillover from a feud that's been going on throughout much of 2005, and one of the great tips as to what's going on and who's doing it has been an underground DVD that police managed to get their hands on, containing an assortment of rappers from one side taunting the other, boasting of possessions and turf and implying threats, and a second DVD responding to the boating, upping the threats, etc.

How can we talk about gangs and gang culture in a way that won't introduce racialized stereotypes?


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Makwa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10724

posted 06 January 2006 02:18 AM      Profile for Makwa   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Magoo:
apparently the feud that took place on Yonge is spillover from a feud that's been going on throughout much of 2005, and one of the great tips as to what's going on and who's doing it has been an underground DVD that police managed to get their hands on, containing an assortment of rappers from one side taunting the other, boasting of possessions and turf and implying threats, and a second DVD responding to the boating, upping the threats, etc. How can we talk about gangs and gang culture in a way that won't introduce racialized stereotypes?
The previous description seems reasonable enough.

From: Here at the glass - all the usual problems, the habitual farce | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
nonsuch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1402

posted 06 January 2006 12:19 PM      Profile for nonsuch     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Honestly, I'm a little surprised that no anarchist-type has come out to blame it all on Capitalism somehow.

I thought that was too obvious to belabour. Isn't the greed you describe so eloquently the cornerstone of capitalism?
Indeed, isn't the very existence of a large Black underclass in North America a direct result of unfettered capitalism?

From: coming and going | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
N.R.KISSED
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1258

posted 06 January 2006 12:36 PM      Profile for N.R.KISSED     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It is interesting that even progressives like our friend Keith fall for the Guiliani crime myth

quote:
The first proof is that the drop in criminal violence in New York began
three years before Giuliani ascended to power at the end of 1993, and continued
at the same rate after he assumed office. Better still: the incidence of
homicides committed without the use of firearms in the city has been falling
100 SOCIALIST REGISTER 2006
slowly but steadily since 1979; only gun-related murders declined sharply
after 1990, after having taken off between 1985 and 1990 due to the spread
of the crack trade; and neither of these two curves displays any particular
inflection under Giuliani.20 The second proof is that the ebbing of criminal
violence is just as marked in cities that did not adopt the New York policy
of ‘zero tolerance,’ including those that opted for a diametrically opposed
approach, such as Boston, San Francisco or San Diego – where so-called
problem-solving policing strives to establish ongoing relationships with residents
aimed at preventing offences, rather than dealing with them ex post by
all-out penal repression.21 In San Francisco, a policy of systematic ‘diversion’
of delinquent youth towards job-training programmes, counselling and social
and medical treatment made it possible to cut the number of jail admissions
by more than half while reducing criminal violence by 33 per cent between
1995 and 1999 (compared with a 26 per cent drop in New York City, where
the volume of jail entries swelled by a third during the same period). And
for third proof, from 1984 to 1987 New York Mayor David Dinkins had
already implemented an aggressive and assiduous law-enforcement policy
similar to that deployed after 1993, under the code name ‘Operation Pressure
Point’, which was accompanied by a sharp increase in criminal violence,
and especially homicides.22 Whence it emerges that, contrary to the claims
of the promoters and importers of the ‘Bratton model,’ the policing strategy
adopted by New York during the 1990s is neither necessary nor sufficient to
account for the crime drop in that metropolis.


Link

From: Republic of Parkdale | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
faith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4348

posted 06 January 2006 12:53 PM      Profile for faith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
There is another reason that violent crime in the 90's decreased everywhere. Most violent crime (89.5%-87%) is committed by men of ages 18-35 years. That age group, with the aging of the baby boomers, has decreased in proportion to the rest of the population. Studies show that even if criminals start out their early adulthood committing violence they tend to mellow as they get older.
When you combine this with good social programmes you get the result we have seen over the last decade. Getting tough policies show themselves to be just a lot of hot air, as we see in the US, all it results in is more prisons,which turn out more 'competent' criminals.

From: vancouver | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
Américain Égalitaire
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7911

posted 06 January 2006 08:25 PM      Profile for Américain Égalitaire   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Magoo writes:

quote:
It's the same point I was making before Boxing day, in other threads about violence: we're making this huge assumption that everyone wants what "we" want, and that it's the inability to have what "we" have that somehow drives people to join a gang.

Ironic that you go on to make several assumptions yourself. Like this one:

quote:
Sorry I'm not jumping on the "it's the racism" bandwagon or the "it's the poverty" bandwagon, but I simply don't believe someone decides to join a "crew" and start shooting up Yonge St. over an insult because they've been denied the opportunity to go to community college and be a mortgage-paying, TTC-riding, retirement-plan-contributing schlub like me.

quote:
Here we have, or appear to have, two groups of individuals having a gunfight on Yonge St. that kills one person and injures several others, over what? Pride? Turf? The right to sell the most drugs in some neighbourhood, and thereby afford the best BMW?

Afford the best BMW? Why not a Mercedes? Why not a Dodge minivan? Interesting you decry later on in your screed that you're amazed anarchists haven't blamed capitalism and here you are providing ammunition for the argument. Conspicuous consumption (BMW) supply and demand (the drug trade). Watch your OWN speculating before casting accusations at others.

quote:
And I'm not saying racism doesn't exist, or that POC aren't denied opportunities, or that maybe lots of POC might want exactly what I do out of life. I'm just saying I don't think that alone can cause someone to decide to shoot someone else over a perceived slight.

Ok, then what do you think it is? What in your estimation causes someone to become so devoid of any concern for their own life or the lives of others that they draw and fire on each other on a crowded street in broad daylight?

quote:
How is it that if you or I crave ostentatious luxury and are willing to kill anyone in our path to get it that's horrible, but if you're a gang member it's understandable? How is it that if I were to punch someone for looking at me funny I'd be regarded as a common thug, but if someone in a gang shoots someone for not paying them the proper amount of respect, that's somehow understandable?

Did I or anyone hear say those words "its understandable" about the methods used in the shooting. The whole POINT is that we are grappling to understand it and looking for the root causes that underlie a hopelessness that drives young people in dire circumstances to these methods. I don't CONDONE by any means the methods used by gang members but what do we do about it? My point was that you can be like the US and create a giant prison population or rely on capital punishment and you will NOT put this genii back in the bottle and you know it.

You mention "greed, callousness and thuggery." Explain then for all of us how these attributes began to manifest themselves in gunfire on crowded street corners. How DO people become greedy, callous and thug-like? What drives them to these ends. Are they merely evil? Why were there not so many of these evil people shooting up Toronto's streets in the 80s? Or most of the 90s for that matter?

Make you deal - you don't engage in simplistic arguments and I won't try to either, OK?

quote:
And of course there are other questions as well. How it is, for example, that so many people live in poverty, some in worse poverty than the shooters, and yet they don't feel the need to shoot up Yonge St.? And how is it that this lifestyle and this type of crime bears such an uncanny resemblance to a lifestyle endorsed by so many movies and music videos imported from the United States?

First question: some do, some don't. We're concerned with those that do or will because as I alluded to above, their numbers and ferocity seem to be growing. Second question: I made the same point in my article. Look it up. We agree on this.

quote:
Huh. I hadn't thought I'd mentioned any race. Just gangs. Recall, we don't know the identities of the shooters yet, just that they're rival gang members. Isn't it OK to mention gangs, and the things we know they covet and that they're willing to shoot one another for?

We know one caught and charged with pointing an illegal handgun during the shooting:

One of two people arrested at Castle Frank subway station a short time after the shooting incident on Yonge Street is driven into Toronto Police 51 Division station Monday night. Police laid firearms charges against a man and a teen, but said the charges were unrelated to the shootings.
HENRY STANCU/TORONTO STAR

That's an old cutline - police continue to think these two will lead to others involved in the shooting.

And this: Toronto Sun

quote:
Community residents said many of the gunmen involved in the Yonge and Dundas Sts. shooting have gone underground in Brampton, Mississauga and Vaughan.

Some community and church leaders spoke yesterday about establishing a truce between warring gangs.

"A truce can be attained through intervention," said Rev. Don Meredith, chairman of the GTA Faith Alliance.

He said church leaders will reach out to gang members and troubled youth.

The alliance is also trying to find 400 people to mentor 400 mostly black youths.

And from the report on AM640:

Sources tell AM 640 Toronto there will likely be more arrests to come, as the massive sweep to root out gangs continues. Officers are working with other units to find up to 15 gunmen, who are the subjects of border alerts. But members of the black community say most of the gunmen involved in the Yonge Street murder have gone underground in Brampton, Mississauga and Vaughan.


Let's not be silly here Magoo. Figure the odds.

quote:
And yet we're comfortable assuming that they're POC, underpriveleged, have been denied opportunities and that these experiences must have driven them, somehow, to be on Yonge St. on Boxing Day firing guns wildly.

I don't think I said that in my column. Other people can speak for themselves here. I specifically wrote:

quote:
When you do not see yourself represented in the mainstream, whether it be on television, in the classroom or the boardroom, one can assume you're not fully thought of a member of the broader community, whether it's Los Angeles or Toronto, the United States or Canada.

The term is marginalisation. Why would these youths join gangs if the world was their oyster like Ms. Creba?

quote:
Have you read any of the backgrounder pieces on this? I don't have the link handy, but apparently the feud that took place on Yonge is spillover from a feud that's been going on throughout much of 2005, and one of the great tips as to what's going on and who's doing it has been an underground DVD that police managed to get their hands on, containing an assortment of rappers from one side taunting the other, boasting of possessions and turf and implying threats, and a second DVD responding to the boating, upping the threats, etc.

How can we talk about gangs and gang culture in a way that won't introduce racialized stereotypes?


Wait, I thought you said we didn't know the race of the shooters? And yet here you make an allusion about racialized stereotypes. Apparently, in answer to your question, you can't.

How 'bout a little more?

Canadian Press, January 3

quote:
Pressured to move after the brazen shooting of Jane Creba lifted Toronto's total of gun deaths last year to 52, police and senior bureaucrats from Ottawa, the province and the City of Toronto agreed to meet Wednesday to discuss strategies to curb gun violence.

But a spokeswoman for the Coalition of African Canadian Organizations complained that leaders from Toronto's black community were not invited and suggested that campaigning politicians are only moving to act now because Creba was white.

"We have been calling for a summit for the past three months," Sandra Carnegie-Douglas said at a news conference.

"We've had over 40 black youth die as a result of gun violence, and we have not seen our government react in such an immediate and strong way."

"And so we wonder, if it was a black youth that was murdered on Dec. 26, whether or not they would have moved as quickly. We don't feel that they are taking our issue as seriously as it ought to be taken. To us, it is a continuation of the different way in which we are treated as black people in this country."


Jim Coyle from yesterday's Star

quote:
A start, maybe, is for Mayor David Miller to speak frankly about all aspects of the project.

He should stop insisting that the alacrity with which yesterday's high-level summit meeting was organized after the Boxing Day shooting death of a 15-year-old girl had nothing to do with the fact she was white, lovely, vivacious, popular and accomplished. The tipping point in this city was always going to be when gun violence spilled into the world of the white middle class. Just as the black community is being asked to accept certain difficult truths, white Toronto should own up to that. It's doubtful that white Toronto will ever forget the name of Jane Creba. It's doubtful that most of white Toronto could remember the names of three of the black youths killed last year.

It's impossible to count the times and ways it has been privately said in recent years that as long as the killing was confined to certain neighbourhoods and certain sorts, few living at a safe distance from the fray would be much bothered.

It's probably in the nature of how people look at things. Either we compare. Or we identify. We say, "We're not like that, it could never happen to me." Or we say, "That could have been my little girl or boy." That identification, as all politicians know, is the engine for political pressure and action.

The mayor should also ensure that, every day and in every way, leadership from Toronto's black communities is involved in brainstorming sessions such as that held yesterday. Black Toronto has paid the biggest price for the gun violence. Black Toronto has the most at stake. And to precisely the extent that it is part of the problem, black Toronto must be part of the solution.

If the best counsel comes, as always, from those with experience, it seems also to contain approaches from all sides of the debate. And just such wisdom was offered yesterday on CBC Newsworld by Dr. Gary Slutkin of Chicago's CeaseFire project, which he said has contributed to significant reductions in shootings and killings in that city.

Better policing and tougher justice is probably needed in troubled communities, he said. But it is not enough. "Law enforcement keeps trying to do more and more and more and be harsher and harsher, but it actually does not make the change."

What's needed, he said, is a huge public education effort aimed at building social disapproval of violence. There needs also to be disapproval expressed from within the community itself. And surprisingly — or maybe not — it's a message best carried by those once involved in violence themselves. "In other words, their peers."

The shift toward acceptability of violence — a trend noted among the young across the U.S. by pollster Michael Adams in his new book American Backlash — "is not driven by just bad people," Slutkin said. "This is driven by a social phenomenon where it becomes accepted, in fact praised, to do the violence."


[ 06 January 2006: Message edited by: Américain Égalitaire ]


From: Chardon, Ohio USA | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
Américain Égalitaire
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7911

posted 06 January 2006 08:33 PM      Profile for Américain Égalitaire   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by N.R.KISSED:
It is interesting that even progressives like our friend Keith fall for the Guiliani crime myth


Link


Didn't fall for it. I didn't claim in my article that Guiliani's tactics were responsible for the overall drop in gun crime in NYC during his tenure. But it is clear that Times Square and many other prime commercial and tourist areas in NYC were swarmed with aggressive police tactics which radically transformed them. Times Squre in particular was the prime example of the deployment of aggressive police tactics against hithero unmolested squeegee guys, prostitures, johns and petty grifters. The problem was moved to other areas of the city, was it not? And how many victims other than the ones I mentioned (when Louima was sodomised by Officer Volpe with a broom handle he claims Volpe said "its Guiliani time now.") were a result of these tactics? My question could have been clearer - is this kind of tactics that Toronto wants their police to adopt in the fight against gun crime? I think Fantino does, don't you think so as well? And will these tactics be any more effective?


From: Chardon, Ohio USA | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
N.R.KISSED
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1258

posted 06 January 2006 08:46 PM      Profile for N.R.KISSED     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Didn't fall for it.

Sorry AE I was over eager to make a point didn't mean to implicate you.


From: Republic of Parkdale | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca