Gang Sweep?

[Slava]

^ I'm glad that someone has said this. I was about to chime in and no doubt be branded as a bleeding heart! I hate that they are free as much as the next guy; honestly though the innocent until proven guilty thing is a cornerstone of our system.

[CaptainCrunch]

To me, the minute that your arrested in anything related to firearms, gangs, or massive amounts of drugs, there's no way that you should get bail. Its not like these were bb guns, or rubber knives, and how do you think they're going to pay for their legal defense, probably by dealing drugs and keeping their network going.

The law needs to be ammended. I'm fine with bail for non violent potential, but the minute that they're injury or death or even the potential for injury or death, they should wait in prison until their trial.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Slava

^ I'm glad that someone has said this. I was about to chime in and no doubt be branded as a bleeding heart! I hate that they are free as much as the next guy; honestly though the innocent until proven guilty thing is a cornerstone of our system.

The first time someone is charged, I agree with you. Innocent until proven guilty.

The problem lies in the third, fourth, fifth, etc times they've been charged, all for the same crimes, and proven guilty in the past. IMO, they don't deserve near the same luxury.

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

To me, the minute that your arrested in anything related to firearms, gangs, or massive amounts of drugs, there's no way that you should get bail. Its not like these were bb guns, or rubber knives, and how do you think they're going to pay for their legal defense, probably by dealing drugs and keeping their network going.

The law needs to be ammended. I'm fine with bail for non violent potential, but the minute that they're injury or death or even the potential for injury or death, they should wait in prison until their trial.

How would you define a gang and how would you determine who belongs to a gang? The FOB and FOBK names get tossed out a lot but "membership" is quite fluid. Unlike other gangs in our province there is no hierarchical structure, there are no clearly recognized leaders and there are few if any clearly defined roles within the group. These are dial a dopers with loose associations with each other and bonds based on a shared rivalry with other loosely associated dial a dopers.

It's also difficult to determine when there is a potential for injury or death. There is always a possibility of injury or death when drugs are involved like this. Heck, you could increase the potential for injury or death if you start locking members of rival gangs in the same remand centre placing them in close proximity to those they would like to harm anyway.

As far as their legal defence goes, I bet you end up paying for a good chunk of it. I imagine a lot of these people will obtain Legal Aid to fund their defence.

I don't know what the answer to our revolving door justice system is. Throwing everyone indiscriminantly or arbitrarily in jail until trial based on the nature of their offence may not be the answer though.

[Barnes]

So in one year they only managed to find 14 people? One undercover cop could pick up the same amount of low level bangers by standing on the corner of 8th and 7th in one day.

[troutman]

[At the big conclave/street gang meeting, Cyrus, the boss of the street gang appears]
Cyrus: [yelling] Can you count, suckers? I say, the future is ours... if you can count!
[a couple of soldiers cheer for Cyrus]
Cyrus: Now, look what we have here before us. We got the Saracens sitting next to the Jones Street Boys. We've got the Moonrunners right by the Van Cortlandt Rangers. Nobody is wasting nobody. That... is a miracle. And miracles is the way things ought to be.
[Few more soldiers cheering for Cyrus]
Cyrus: You're standing right now with nine delegates from 100 gangs. And there's over a hundred more. That's 20,000 hardcore members. Forty-thousand, counting affiliates, and twenty-thousand more, not organized, but ready to fight: 60,000 soldiers! Now, there ain't but 20,000 police in the whole town. Can you dig it?
Gang Members: Yeah.
Cyrus: Can you dig it?
Gang Members: Yeah!
Cyrus: Can you dig it?
Gang Members: YEAH!
[shouting and Cheering]

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by Barnes

So in one year they only managed to find 14 people? One undercover cop could pick up the same amount of low level bangers by standing on the corner of 8th and 7th in one day.

Gathering evidence, building a case, obtaining search warrants, organizing a mass take down... these things all require time and tremendous resources. You have to be sure of a lot of things before you go and arrest 14 people. Besides, would you really want these guys charged with minor offences related to street corner trafficking? Not only would they get bail easily but they probably wouldn't even be sentenced to much more than a fine and probation.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by fredr123

Gathering evidence, building a case, obtaining search warrants, organizing a mass take down... these things all require time and tremendous resources. You have to be sure of a lot of things before you go and arrest 14 people. Besides, would you really want these guys charged with minor offences related to street corner trafficking? Not only would they get bail easily but they probably wouldn't even be sentenced to much more than a fine and probation.

Right but putting pressure on these guys may lead to finding out more about the gang and it's doings helping the larger investigations. You fell a tree by hacking at the bottom. Cops don't walk the streets, don't know the shopkeepers, don't seem to be in touch. (From a policy standpoint)

I am just really frustrated with known areas of criminal activity going un patrolled and having 3 city cops checking transit tickets at Sommerset station or fishing for stop sign violations at 22x and 52nd st.

[Smoldering_Puckster]

I used to know 2 of those guys in my high school years. No suprise. They were the type of guys that would have been voted "most likely to be dead or in jail by 30" in the high school year book if it had those categories.

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by Barnes

Right but putting pressure on these guys may lead to finding out more about the gang and it's doings helping the larger investigations. You fell a tree by hacking at the bottom. Cops don't walk the streets, don't know the shopkeepers, don't seem to be in touch. (From a policy standpoint)

I am just really frustrated with known areas of criminal activity going un patrolled and having 3 city cops checking transit tickets at Sommerset station or fishing for stop sign violations at 22x and 52nd st.

If there were more cops focused on that, then there would be less on the gang unit and other specialty units. I can also say that there have been far more than 14 gang members being arrested for such charges...just cause this story made the news doesn't mean there's anything else going on...

Originally Posted by Barnes

Right but putting pressure on these guys may lead to finding out more about the gang and it's doings helping the larger investigations. You fell a tree by hacking at the bottom. Cops don't walk the streets, don't know the shopkeepers, don't seem to be in touch. (From a policy standpoint)

I am just really frustrated with known areas of criminal activity going un patrolled and having 3 city cops checking transit tickets at Sommerset station or fishing for stop sign violations at 22x and 52nd st.

Explain that comment. Tell me what CPS policy is. I would like to know.

Tell me these criminal areas that are unpatrolled. Is checking for tickets at a ctrain station or writing tickets for stop sign violations not part of the daily duties of a police officer? Maybe ask the dirt bags that the ride the ctrain if they like a police presence. Ask the loved ones of people that die at intersections like the one you mentioned (22X and James McKevitt also comes to mind) if they think traffic enforcement isn't important.

[BBQorMILDEW]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

Explain that comment. Tell me what CPS policy is. I would like to know.

Tell me these criminal areas that are unpatrolled. Is checking for tickets at a ctrain station or writing tickets for stop sign violations not part of the daily duties of a police officer? Maybe ask the dirt bags that the ride the ctrain if they like a police presence. Ask the loved ones of people that die at intersections like the one you mentioned (22X and James McKevitt also comes to mind) if they think traffic enforcement isn't important.

I don't think he was downplaying the importance of traffic violations or LRT police presence..

I think he was saying that their are "known" spots in the city where low level wannabees are selling drugs right on the street. And it's frustrating seeing cops not busting these lowlives, but instead setting up speed traps in order to make a buck for the police force.

A cop busting a drug dealer means no money goes into the force.
A cop busting a person speeding means he is meeting his quota and making money for the force..

it's sickening to think that a crack dealer has more of a chance of getting off for dealing then me for speeding..

Which one is worse??

[Bobblehead]

I think it is the officers and the Police Union that has always fought against the idea of quotas. Then Joe Sixpack complains how he could write 3 tickets every day on the way into work, why can't the cops make an easier quota then that. Of course then when Joe gets a ticket, he complains about why the cops are out solving "real" crime. Until he almost gets hit by someone running a stop sign, then he complains about how there are never any cops around when you need one, and they should give all these other bad drivers a ticket to teach them a lesson. Until Joe gets a ticket and.....

Well, you get the idea.

I was speaking with an off-duty officer over a few pints a few weeks ago. He was telling me how many officers they have in the area he works (a pretty notorious area). It was pretty interesting.

[yyc]

So long as drugs are illegal we will have gangs, too much money at stake.

LEAP, or law enforcement against prohabition is an USA based group of ex Cops, judges etc that has decent vidoe on the matter. {its more along the legalizing drugs then gang issues but does talk about it} one problem they see in major gang sweeps is the void of drugs being sold in the area, the new demand of clients brings in new gangs, which inturn fight it out over the new source of income. Creating a new war and more dead guys. {Sorry no link, bad spelling but comp crashes every few minutes}

edit link to video, this is more anti war on drugs, but it does fit the thread.
this is all from a group of cops so i think its wortha view.

http://www.leap.cc/cms/index.php?name=Content&pid=28

[Winsor_Pilates]

The head of LEAP came and talked to one of my UofC classes once. Their approach is very interesting to say the least, and to have it coming from law enforcement officers certainly adds some validation.
I don't think they'd stand much chance of getting far with it in the States though, or even Canada for that matter.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by calculoso

The first time someone is charged, I agree with you. Innocent until proven guilty.

The problem lies in the third, fourth, fifth, etc times they've been charged, all for the same crimes, and proven guilty in the past. IMO, they don't deserve near the same luxury.

Its a thin line that we'd be walking as a society though. This type of attitude in the justice system is a good way to end up in a police state with no rights.

[onetwo_threefour]

Originally Posted by Slava

Its a thin line that we'd be walking as a society though. This type of attitude in the justice system is a good way to end up in a police state with no rights.

Not to mention the practical impact of denying bail is that time served in remand is credited at somthing like 1.5:1 which means that after a conviction, the sentence is shorter if the person was incarcerated pre-trial than if they were not....

[Tron_fdc]

Originally Posted by BBQorMILDEW

I don't think he was downplaying the importance of traffic violations or LRT police presence..

I think he was saying that their are "known" spots in the city where low level wannabees are selling drugs right on the street. And it's frustrating seeing cops not busting these lowlives, but instead setting up speed traps in order to make a buck for the police force.

A cop busting a drug dealer means no money goes into the force.
A cop busting a person speeding means he is meeting his quota and making money for the force..

it's sickening to think that a crack dealer has more of a chance of getting off for dealing then me for speeding..

Which one is worse??

Totally. It's pretty sad when the first thing I think of when the city asks for more cops is "great, 200 more speed traps around the city". I'd be all for adding more cops to take out the criminal and game activities, but I get a little annoyed when my tax dollar is supporting the 4 officers putting up radar traps in the gravy areas. Intersections that have high collision rates and playground zones are one thing; but a down hill 4 lane road that has a 50 limit with a radar trap at the bottom is just plain stupid.

I know a few guys that are cops, and although they don't have "quotas" they have "targets" that they are strongly encouraged to hit each month. Strongly encouraged as in you get fairly strongly reprimanded if you don't reach them. One of my buddies told me that he spends most of his time on the beat chasing crack dealers, then spends a day or two on the Paigan off ramp from Glenmore handing out tickets to reach his "target". How is that helping anything?

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by onetwo_threefour

Not to mention the practical impact of denying bail is that time served in remand is credited at somthing like 1.5:1 which means that after a conviction, the sentence is shorter if the person was incarcerated pre-trial than if they were not....

Sounds like that practice has to go, too.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by calculoso

The first time someone is charged, I agree with you. Innocent until proven guilty.

The problem lies in the third, fourth, fifth, etc times they've been charged, all for the same crimes, and proven guilty in the past. IMO, they don't deserve near the same luxury.

What if a say 3rd time offender had finally got his act together and was just at the wrong place wrong time? should he rot in jail because of priors?

Years ago I got litterly attacked by a cop walking home drunk from a party "because i looked like someone else" It was a damn nightmare, I was charged with assault because I defended myself against a goof cop that jumped me from behind a tree. I barely got an apology for my 6 hours of grief.

There is no way in hell I would give the cops that kind freedom, they would start arresting a lot of innocent people.