Around This Town: Safety, PechaKucha, blogs and other stuff

Downtown safety
I'm not sure what brought this on, but a big discussion among the on-line community about downtown safety emerged recently. I guess it started with this article in the Spectator Tribune ...

Winnipeg’s most perpetuated myth: Downtown is dangerous

"Get downtown.  Break the cycle of lies and misdirection that our local media outlets propagate.  See for yourself what is going on.  And remember, just because someone is brown doesn’t mean that they are going to gut you."

... which spawned this response in the same alternative media outlet ...

Winnipeg’s most perpetuated myth: A response

"saying that Winnipeg’s downtown is safe simply because I haven’t experienced violence, or so that my family isn’t worried about visiting in my ‘edgy’ neighbourhood doesn’t cut it if we are going to be real about the problems of race and class in the city."

... and this blog post ...

 Entry number "I've lost count" re: safety in downtown Winnipeg

"Men don't have the same fear complex as women because in a purely physical sense, it is MUCH EASIER to physically intimidate a woman. As a woman, I know we're a much easier target than the average male. We carry giant purses and vaginas everywhere we go. We have much more to lose on very, very extreme levels.
...
Here is the discussion. It's so simple. Downtown Winnipeg has a crime problem, but it's also a great place with a lot to offer. How do we reconcile the two? How do we make people feel safe to be here, and how do we deal with what makes people afraid to come down here?"

... and an on-going twitter conversation. The Winnipeg Internet Pundits will carry on the conversation on Wednesday with the author of the previous blog and some of the usual pundits.

I worked downtown for 14 years and never had a problem, but I also know people who have been assaulted, including somebody who was shot in the head and killed, although those incidents were a while back.

It's a complicated discussion and one I should probably stay out of ... actual safety vs perceived safety; safety of women vs men, safety during the day vs at night, et cetera. And what is safe? Is there some metric of Assaults per 1000 People Hours that defines the threshold of "safe"? Everybody agrees that more safe is better than less safe, but how safe is safe enough?

Oh look, somebody got stabbed.


Community centre funding

Arenas and swimming pools are crumbling all over the city. When Southdale Community Centre launched it's $9.4 million expansion, some accused it of queue jumping. Some accused elected officials of buying votes in a swing riding. Some complained about preferential treatment for a relatively affluent part of town.

But what's done is done. The expansion was completed one year ago, and now it's time to focus on spending scarce tax dollars on those other facilities that are in dire need of attention in areas of town were kids rely on ...

Wait... What's that? Southdale needs another half mil? Sure, here you go!

Oh stop complaining. They did have a Bud Spud & Steak to raise some of their own money you know.


PechaKucha

PechaKucha is kind of like a mini Ted talk with shorter presentations. Volume 13 of PechaKucha Winnipeg is taking place this Thursday at the Park Theatre.

There is an interesting and diverse group of speakers. Should be a good evening. Maybe see you there.


New blog

Somebody named after my favourite Thanksgiving meal has started a new blog called Winnipeg Spends. He or she is monitoring the contracts that the city is awarding and all money that is being spent, and summarizing on the blog with bar charts and analysis.

Did you know that the city just spent $95,000 on gloves? Well I do, and that's because I read Winnipeg Spends !


Audience participation blog

As far as Winnipeg bloggers go, James Hope Howard is about as famous as they come (second only to Winnipeg Cat). If you're a fan of Slurpees and Murder, now is your chance to find out more about the author, because ... March is Ask James Anything Month at Slurpees and Murder!


Random act of heritage

Another one of Winnipeg's top local bloggers, Christian Cassidy, held a Random Act of Heritage this Sunday. It was a presentation and tour of the intrepid Arlington Bridge, which is really much more interesting than it sounds. The Arlington Bridge is the second oldest bridge in Winnipeg and was built using surplus parts from the Eiffel Tower.

That might not be true. I didn't actually make it to the event. I took advantage of the nice day to go for a big long bike ride up the Seine River instead, however I do have a picture from somebody else who was able to go:

This random act of heritage thing is a great idea. It is encouraging to see that the media picked up on it, and hopefully Mr.C does more of them. He needs to schedule them around my bike rides though.


Well, that's it for this week's edition of Around This Town. Tune in 3 months from now for next week's edition.

*****
RIP Nick Ternette. Very few people worked harder to make their city a better place than him.

Southside Golf Course Vandalized.

If you read the post title to mean that Dan Vandal had a killer round of golf, then I'm sorry to mislead you. What I mean is that the Southside Golf Course has been damaged by vandals.

Late Thursday night, fools in a GMC Sierra pickup truck drove on to the golf course and spun circles on four of the greens doing substantial damage. Holes 1, 7 and 8 all have damage on large portions of the greens, but they remain playable in parts. The green for hole number 3 is in very bad shape and cannot be used at all. A temporary green has been set up for players.

A GMC Sierra was seen on the golf course, and later was found burned out a few miles away. The torched truck turned out to be stolen, but the culprits have not yet been caught. I suppose joy riding a stolen vehicle on a golf course is safer than joy riding it on Portage Avenue, but the completely senseless destruction of private property is still very aggravating.

In some ways it's fortunate that this occurred late in the season. The man I spoke to at the club house ... I can't remember his name ... (I would suck so bad as a reporter) said that three of the four greens could be brought back to reasonable shape by next season. The green for hole 3, however, is more problematic. "We're looking at our options" he said.

The rest of the golf course is still in good condition, and green fees have been discounted by $6 to compensate for the damage.

Cherenkov reporting for Anybody Want A Peanut.

How to create a mass murderer

People base their expectations of future events on their observations of prior events. It is a principle that Thomas Bayes, a Presbyterian Minister with a fondness for mathematics, expressed in an elegant formula over 250 years ago, and may help explain why at least three girls are dead today.

James Turner did us a favour by posting Shawn Lamb's rap sheet on his blog. Click here. It provides a great amount of insight into how somebody could end up as a career criminal, with the assistance of the criminal justice system.

In 1976, Lamb as a teenager got his first taste of jail with a 6 month sentence for theft over $200. In 1979 he was convicted twice of break, enter and theft with sentences of 9 months and then 6 months in jail. I do not know how much of that he actually served.

It does not get better. Over the years he committed many other thefts and frauds with ever-decreasing sentences ...
1984 theft under $200: 1 month in jail.
1987 theft over $1000: 5 months less a day, concurrent with other sentences.
1990 uttering a forged document: 30 days
1990 theft under $200: 15 days
1990 theft over $1000: 3 months
1991 theft under $1000: 20 days
1991 theft under $1000: 20 days
1991 theft under $1000: 10 days
1997 theft under $5000: 3 days

He was convicted of approximately 40 crimes related to theft or fraud, and regardless of how bad his track record got, the punishment in terms of jail time never exceeded the 9 months he received as a young adult in 1979.

In 1980, Shawn Lamb graduated to violent offences with armed robbery and assaulting a peace officer (x2). He received 2 years for the armed robbery and 6 months for each assault. For all of the violent offences that followed, he never had to spend over 2 years in jail.

In 1992, he graduated once again to a more serious offence: sexual assualt. For this he was sentenced to 4 years in prison, but despite 45 previous convictions he was paroled after only 16 months behind bars, having served only 1/3 of his sentence.

I think a visual representation might help. In the following graph I show the jail-term implications, as best as I could determine based on the data on James' blog, of violent crimes for which Lamb was convicted. My somewhat arbitrary grouping includes assaults, weapons offences, uttering threats and break & enter with violence.

Though the severity of the offences and the jail terms incurred vary, it is a stunning pattern. Not only did the offences not get harsher as his rap sheet got longer, but if anything the opposite occurs.

If you wanted to breed a career criminal, Lamb's sentencing history would make a perfect template. It is a demonstration that criminal history means nothing. Repeat offences are not discouraged with higher penalties. Using the innate Bayesian inference that we all use, Shawn knew what punishment to expect when committing another robbery or assault or other crime: the same sentence he got last time, give or take ... the same punishment that didn't work every other time.

It is a pattern that firmly embedded Shawn in a criminal lifestyle, so deeply that he could do nothing but plunge further in. It should be a surprise to nobody that he would graduate once again to murder, as he is alleged to have done.

Many people argue that jail time does not work, and that we should focus on alternative measures. Those people could point to this pitiful record and claim it as evidence. See! He's been in jail dozens of times and keeps re-offending. Jail doesn't work! That would be the absolute wrong conclusion to take away from this. The conclusion should be: jail time doesn't work as a disincentive when you don't use it properly.

What is desperately required is sentencing that takes into account behavioural science, or even just basic common sense. Supposing Lamb's jail terms increased significantly with each subsequent conviction for a similar crime. Lamb's expectations would have adapted accordingly. He would know that if he gets caught again he would have to suffer a yet-harsher penalty. Perhaps he would have refrained from committing the additional offence, and the one after that and the one after that. Perhaps he would have not graduated to violent crimes. At the very least he would have spent more time behind bars where he would not have had the opportunity to commit crimes. And ... perhaps the three girls would still be alive.

___________________________________________________
The graph groups convictions in 2 year increments. Prison terms that were shorter than a month I rounded up to a month so that they're more visible on the graph. When a single sentence was give for multiple crimes, I divided the sentence up among the crimes. The time served before parole was used for the sexual assault. For all other crimes the actual sentence was used.

Montreal protests: a photo blog

Before I went to Montreal I joked to a friend about getting caught in the middle of a protest. You know those French people like to protest, and they've been doing a lot of that lately. The target of the anger: the government's plan to raise tuition fees from by far the lowest in the country to a little bit higher but still by far the lowest in the country.

Anyhow, flash forward to Friday as the wife and I were taking a stroll through Old Montreal on our way the Montreal Science Museum. Do de do de do ... (that's the sound of us strolling along.)

It appeared to be an ordinary day. People milling about. Young adults chatting on a street corner, one of them wearing ski goggles. Hmm, that's kind of weird. Oh well. This is Montreal ... anything goes!

Do de do de do ... Oh! Look at the pretty building. I think I'll take a picture of it:


Did I notice the guy with his face covered? No. But then again, this is Montreal .. anything goes.


However it was impossible not to notice all the cops closing off streets. Every block, more cop cars. A helicopter hovering over head. Yup, something is definitely brewing here, but wha .... oh:


Ah ... I think we'd better keep walking dear. Dodedodedodedodedo.

What I didn't know was that the pretty building pictured above contained the Premier, and became the focal point of this only minutes later: Montreal student protest turns violent

Later that afternoon we passed back that way and everything was more or less back to normal, except for the dozens of police cars and trucks lining the streets, some of which had smashed windows.


We had successfully avoided the riot, but the movement itself goes on, and you can see signs of it everywhere. People with red swatches pinned to their jackets, red balloons tied to lamp posts, statues with red tape over their mouths ...

You see, a protest is just a protest, but when you add a COLOUR to rally around it becomes a revolution. Every good revolution has a colour.

Unfortunately for the students, every good revolution also needs something else: popular support, and this the students don't appear to have. I was told by people on TV whom I'm sure are reliable that the majority of Quebecers support the tuition increase, to their credit, and are getting annoyed by the blocked streets and mayhem and such. Yet the protests have been going on for almost four months, and don't show any sign of abating. The semester is a write-off for the striking students anyhow.

I can't even begin to guess at the cost to the Quebec taxpayers of all the destruction, but more especially the mountains of police overtime that go into containing these protests. I don't know how many cops were out last Friday, but I think it was all of them.

In a way it might have been fun to get right in the middle of the mayhem and get the genuine riot experience. I even thought about starting a Riot Tourism business. Search out hot spots around the world where chaos is about to erupt, and take customers there to experience an adrenaline rush that only getting hit by pepper spray or rubber bullets can provide. I'm sure there's a market for that.

April 6: The day Troy Cowley died

In my own sort of This Was Manitoba-esque type post... It was this day in 2003 that a friend of mine was murdered.

His name was Troy Cowley. Troy worked as a facilities manager at my place of employment at the time. It was an IT business office in downtown Winnipeg, and the nature of Troy's work brought him in contact with most people there at one time or another. He was well very liked in the office, as I'm sure he was outside the office, because of his outgoing nature and perpetual good spirit.

In the evenings, Troy worked as a bouncer in an exchange district nightclub called Lot 115. He was not on-duty on April 6. He was there as a guest, but when a fight broke out on the patio behind the club he went to go help. Shortly after he stepped out of the back door of the club to calm things down he was shot twice in the face.

I had heard something about a shooting at the club, but I didn't know who got killed until I walked into the office the morning of April 7 and saw a colleague crying.

Troy was killed by this person:


Manitoba Warriors gang member Russell Thomas. Russell was, as they say, known to police. For example, in 1999 he was charged with gang and drug-related offences. Convicted only of the drug offences he was sentenced to over 4 years in prison and was on day parole a year later. Other events transpired and by the time of the shooting he was under three separate weapons-related court orders.-cbc-

Maybe the justice system was too inept to keep this turd off the street prior to April 6 2003, but in his conviction of second degree murder for the shooting of Troy, the courts took the unusual step of doubling the minimum time until parole to 20 years. And then one year later they accidentally let him go.

Fortunately they got him back in custody, and as far as I know he is still behind bars. I am pretty sure he is because Gang Life Recordz, "the realist shit on this side of the boarder", is still rapping to "Free Russell Thomas".

But forget about them. On this day I raise a glass to memory of Troy Cowley.

Winnipeg Police Service Strategic Plan

Edit: oops .. I forgot to give the post a title! How embarrassing! Oh well ... fixed.

A few days ago Brian Kelcey wrote an op-ed in the Free Press admonishing Chief McCaskill for his failure to produce a crime reduction strategy, and our politicians for failing to motivate the Chief of Police to do so. Now today, we finally have a plan! Apparently the planning started over two years ago. The delay was probably a result of a low toner cartridge in the printer or something.

The document starts off with a message from the Chief that includes this:

"we must not allow ourselves to get comfortable with our past successes."

Comfortable? COMFORTABLE??? We've had 35 murders and countless arsons in less than 11 months ... who the hell is getting comfortable?!? Oh and by the way: buying a helicopter is only a "success" in the sense that you have successfully spent money. Success is in results, not actions.


You might think that if a plan is serious about dealing with violent crimes, they would provide some analysis of the violent crime problem. You know: you have to recognize that you have a problem before you can fix the problem. Later on they do claim that violent crime is going down, however all we are given in this document are three bar charts for broad categories of crime that are generally flattering to the police force. There is an effort here to make it appear as though everything is proceeding very nicely, and that by even putting forth a plan they are going above and beyond what is necessary.

Edmonton, our competition for Crime Capital, doesn't gloss this over:

New challenges have emerged including a marked increase in the severity of violence that we must address.

.. and they provide 9 "immediate initiatives" to deal with the violent crime problem, and remember, their Chief has been in office for less than half a year. How does our approach compare?

Jumping to the Violent Crime Reduction Strategy on page 20 ... we are given three goals:
• Reduce incidents of sexual assaults by 3% by 2014.
• Reduce incidents of assaults by 9% by 2014.
• Reduce incidents of strong-arm robberies by 3% by 2014.

Reduce murders in the murder capital of Canada? Not a goal. Murders are too unpredictable.

The strategy:

"Adopt a philosophy of law enforcement in Winnipeg to be proactive and fluid in the approach to policing higher crime areas and the rest of the City."

Is that all? What about "thinking outside the box" and "drilling down to the root causes"? Even "leveraging synergies in the pursuit of efficiencies in law enforcement" might be a good way to go. Geeze, do I have to do everything for them?

Thankfully the proposed actions are marginally more specific:
A. Establish and Enhance New Permanent Beat Foot Patrols
B. Implement Project-based Initiatives.
C. Create High-value Target Suppression Database
D. Develop Crime Prevention Partnership Program .. notably the MLCC
E. Did we mention Beat Patrols?

There are other little things here and there, like "give apartment owners and managers the power to evict or deny residency to those residents who partake in criminal or nuisance activities" and "Recruit and train Crime Analysts", but overall I am somewhat underwhelmed. It would have been nice to see more details and creativity ... but at least we have targets, like reduce assaults by 9% in 3 years. The real target that everybody else will be keeping an eye on, however, is that pesky murder rate.

The Police can't do everything however: What we really need is greater differentiation in sentencing. A focus on rehabilitation for new offenders but progressively harsher punishment for repeat offenders. For that we need reformed legislation at the Federal level, and a reformed attitude at the Provincial level.


An aside:
The report provides an interesting summary of our urban sprawl:

"Since the 2006 Census, Winnipeg has developed, and is in the process of developing a number of new neighbourhoods. Notable new neighbourhoods include: Amber Trails, Canterbury Park, Richmond West, Royalwood, Sage Creek, Transcona West and Waverley West. Together, these neighbourhoods add 3205 hectares (7919 acres) of newly inhabited land in Winnipeg. The new developments represent an increase of 6.74% of patrollable land within Winnipeg’s boundaries."

Winnipeg's population increased by less than 5% during that same time frame, therefore population density has decreased as well over that time. Just FYI...


Related: The Crime Scene .

Foreseeable gang war

So it appears we have a gang war on our hands. A Montreal-style Rock Machine versus Hells Angels blow-em-up kill fest. This here is big-boy gang fighting, not like the amateur north end drive-by nonsense perpetrated by wanna-be gang bangers wearing hoodies and DC sneekers.

How could this have happened? Well, son, it all started back in February 2006 with something called Project Defense. The Manitoba Integrated Organized Crime Task Force, along with the RCMP, Winnipeg Police Service and Brandon Police Service, conducted raids and arrested 13 people including high-ranking Hells Angel Ian Matthew Grant. To accomplish this task, they paid an informant with a "less-than-savoury background" over half a million dollars. (source)

Then in December of 2007, Defense was followed up by Project Drill, in which there were 18 arrests, made possible by paying an informant $650,000 plus expenses, according to court records. (source)

Despite all these arrests, crime continued to escalate. "Many legal experts believe a subsequent rise in Winnipeg street gang crime over the past two years was triggered by the fall of the Hells Angels and an ongoing battle to fill the void and make lucrative profits from the sale of drugs." wrote Mike McIntyre and Jennifer Pawluk in 2009. Perhaps if we made the void larger that might help ... December 2009 was Project Divide, which netted more arrests than the other two combined: 35. Once again, assistance was obtained by purchasing the services of a "longtime criminal" for "at least $500,000 of tax-free money".

Now, in 2011, after paying criminals over $1,650,000 for their assistance and hundreds of thousands more in court costs and witness protection costs, the Hells Angels have been sufficiently neutered to allow the Rock Machine to make a play for our drug market. Hence the shoot-ups and fire bombings.

This was not unforeseeable. I recall some people predicting this outcome back when Project Divide was carried out. Much like overthrowing a corrupt middle-eastern government, unless you can replace it with something better, you risk, in fact, making things worse.

Options:
1) Stop busting the gangs. Let them fight it out and (hopefully) establish a new stable order in the drug underworld.
pros: less violence in the longer term, less money spent on informants, prosecutors and attorneys.
cons: continued violence in the short term, and uninhibited flow of illegal drugs into the community

2) Keep busting the gangs. Follow Projects Defense, Drill and Divide, with Projects Doubtful, Dandelion, Denture Cream, Dampness, Dystopia, etc..
pros: maybe ... just maybe ... the gangs will get the message that Winnipeg is not open for illegal drug business and they will stop trying to infiltrate our city.
cons: but more likely, we will spend millions of dollars and have continued violence on our streets

3) Legalize drugs. A favourite of the Libertarian nut jobs, er, advocates.
pros: easier access to drugs! Wait, I think that's a con. K, forget that. Pros: remove the demand for illegal drugs, thereby permanently neutering the gangs via market forces; Increased tax base with sin taxes on newly legalized drugs.
cons: easier access to drugs. Potential for crippling trade with the U.S.

Tough choices ... What's your favourite option?


also posted/printed in the Winnipeg Free Press

Drinking and driving and progressive penalties

A new bill was proposed on Dec 1 to make repeat sentences for DUI offences progressively harsher. Besides the parts about driving boats, planes and trains, the bill concerns those who are "mildly" impaired:

Currently, a 24-hour suspension is imposed for drivers caught with a blood-alcohol concentration of .05 per cent or higher. The new law when passed would bring in a 24-hour for a first offence, 15 days for a second violation, 30 days for a third and 60 days for a fourth and subsequent violation. -fp-

I am all for progressive penalties like this. I think we should do more of it. If you have been reading this blog for a while you may remember a post I did last year about logarithmic sentencing. The premise being that punishment will be most effective if it gets progressively harsher with each additional offence. Not marginally harsher. Dramatically harsher. Make people think really hard about re-committing an offence. "Nobody should ever be the fifth or sixth victim of a criminal."

So I think this proposal is a good idea in principle, however it sort of misses the mark. Why are we going through all this effort to target people who are only slightly impaired, when the biggest risk is from people who are truly impaired?

I did some internet searches for news stories of incidences where people have died because of drunk drivers. It is not comprehensive or scientific, but nor did I cherry pick stories. I simply started at the first story and went down the list, noting the descriptions of the drivers:

*****

"more than double the legal limit" -source-

"high-speed car crash" "her blood-alcohol level ranged between .128 and .153" "the car was travelling at 148 km/h .. on a stretch of road with an 80 km/h speed limit" -source-

"speeding north" "ran a red light" "blood-alcohol content was at least .159" -source-

"clearly highly intoxicated" -source-

"had two and a half times the legal level of alcohol in his body" -source-

"possibly during a drag race" "more than twice the legal limit of .08" -source-

"blood alcohol level was .137, or almost twice the legal limit, when he ran a red light" -source-

"a blood alcohol level of 0.139 and was travelling at 130km/h in an 80km/h zone" -source-

".189 blood alcohol content" "allegedly tore through downtown" -source-

... and my favourite:

"suffers from nerve condition Carcot-Maire-Tooth disease - got behind the wheel of his motability car despite having earlier been denied more alcohol in a pub because he was too drunk. The drug addict, who was almost three times the drink drive limit, then sped out of Montrose" -source-

*****

You may have noticed that none of them say "blood alcohol level of 0.05 and driving the speed limit." They all were either highly intoxicated, or speeding, or both.

Here's what I think we should do: 0.08 should be the limit for a criminal DUI offence as it is currently. However the punishment for the offence should be much greater if:

a) you are at twice the legal limit or more.

b) speeding while impaired, or

c) texting or talking on a cell phone while impaired.

... because it's those combinations of risk factors that is really the biggest risk. Maybe you've been drinking, but if you're driving below the speed limit and stopping at the red lights and obeying all of the rules of the road it is unlikely that you will get in an accident. It is when you're so impaired that you cannot do those things, or when you amplify your impairment with other risk factors, that you really become a menace.

Your average person who has had a couple of beers after the game is not a particularly serious threat if he's paying attention to what he's doing on the road. And after all, we as a society tolerate a certain level of impairment. We have to, otherwise almost nobody would be allowed to drive. People drive when they are tired or stressed, when they have noisy kids in the back seat, when they're drinking a venti steamer from Starbucks, when they're wearing Crocs -- all of it legal and all of it impairing your ability to drive. We even allow people to drive while talking on a hands-free cell phone, which, as I've pointed out before, is just as dangerous as criminal drinking and driving (0.08+) according to countless studies (and the Myth Busters).

On occasion, we even encourage people to drive with serious impairments. Who hasn't seen a story on TV about some poor sap who lost both his arms and the left half of his brain in a tragic cooking accident, but can still lead a "normal" life by driving around in a specially modified van. We're supposed to feel good about this. I don't know about you, but I would rather share the road with an able-bodied person who has a b.a.c. of 0.06, than a mentally handicapped person driving a van with his mouth.

footnote:
I started writing this almost three weeks ago and filed it away for a while, but finally decided to finish it off even though it will probably mean that I will never get friended by MADD on Facebook. I'm just trying to make the world a better place. Is that so wrong?

Dial "A" for Arbitrary, Part II

On Thursday, July 15, it will become illegal to drive while talking on a cell phone in Manitoba. I jumped the gun a bit a year ago, thinking that it was already illegal, but I would like to reiterate a point that I made in that original post.

Our ban, like similar bans in most other jurisdictions, only applies to hand held cell phones. Hands-free cell phones are excluded from the ban. Like I pointed out before, this makes as much sense as prohibiting drinking and driving, but only if you were drinking whiskey or red wine. If you were drinking gin or white wine, you ought to be able to get as blasted as you want and still drive, according to the logic used by our law makers.

Why? Because it's not the fact that you're holding a phone that's dangerous -- it's the fact that you're talking on the phone that's dangerous. It doesn't matter if it's in your hand, on the console, or embedded in your skull. When you're talking on the phone, your mind is elsewhere and your driving reactions are delayed.

Says me? No ... says this study:

Results: When drivers were conversing on either a handheld or hands-free cell phone, their braking reactions were delayed and they were involved in more traffic accidents than when they were not conversing on a cell phone.

and this study:

unconstrained conversations using either a handheld or a hands-free cell phone resulted in a twofold increase in the failure to detect simulated traffic signals and slower reactions to those signals that were detected. We suggest that cellular-phone use disrupts performance by diverting attention to an engaging cognitive context other than the one immediately associated with driving.

and this study:

Hands-free and handheld phones revealed similar patterns of results for both measures of performance ... We suggest that (a) there are significant costs to driver reactions to external hazards or events associated with cell phone use, (b) hands-free cell phones do not eliminate or substantially reduce these costs, and (c) different research methodologies or performance measures may underestimate these costs.

and this study:

Conclusions When drivers use a mobile phone there is an increased likelihood of a crash resulting in injury. Using a hands-free phone is not any safer.

and every other study I have come across on the subject. This cell phone ban is not about making the streets safer. It's about appearing to make the streets safer.

In the interest of full disclosure, I have to admit that I'm a bit of a hypocrite in this area: I do occasionally talk on my cell phone while driving. I have a hands-free adapter, but I rarely use it. However, most of my conversations are very short ... usually something like this:

"Hi? Ya, need me to pick anything up at the store on the way home? ... Milk, ok ... tomatoes? I thought we had some .... Wait, you did what with the tomatoes? ... Oh geeze ... ok, I'll get some more."

One thing I never do is text while driving. Texting is one of the worst things you can do while driving. If you lose your license and have your car impounded for drinking and driving, then the punishment for texting should be at least that stiff. In fact, you should also get a kick in the groin -- by Alexis Serna -- for being an idiot. At least when you're drunk you're keeping your eyes on the road.

Walking with Vince Li

I know that everybody is just dying to hear what I have to say about Vince Li getting supervised walks outside the mental institution where he now makes his home.

Well, I more or less agree with Graham over at PW. I think many people have lost their perspective on this matter. Vince's crime was so horrific that it has created an event horizon around people's brains from which rationality cannot escape. I got dangerously close to that threshold ... I was somewhat appalled when I found out he would be walking in a yard with no fences or barriers separating him from the public, and when his shrink said "I would let him walk my daughter home from school" my reaction was "Worst ... father ... ever." I realized, however, that this is not a completely rational position to take. I mean, the part about letting him outside for a few minutes each day. (I still would not let him walk my daughter home from school.) Murderers in prison get to go outdoors once in a while, and locking Vince up in a dark cell like Henri Charriere in Papillon would likely just make his sequestered demons even stronger.

As I have probably mentioned before, I worked in the same building and on the same floor as Vince Li for about half a year. During that time, I am happy to say that Vince did not decapitate, mutilate, nor cannibalize me. In fact, every single person that Vince has met during his life -- except one -- can say the same thing. The point is that certain conditions and circumstances have to come together to trigger the combination of neurons that caused him to commit those horrific acts. One of those factors, of course, is a lack of medication. He is currently in a controlled environment where he takes his meds and is under constant supervision, therefore he is not a risk.

For that reason, I also do not believe he should be allowed to leave that controlled environment. he may very well reach a point where he appears capable of reintegrating into society, but left on his own there is no guarantee that he will continue to take his medication and will not have another "episode". Given the severity of his last episode, I'm not sure that's a risk society should take.

Nevertheless, at the current time Vince is not a risk, and people -- including our Attorney General Mr. Swan -- are overreacting. Dan Lett makes an excellent distinction between "public interest" and "public opinion" in the paper. They are not necessarily the same thing, and in this case our government representative made the decision to score cheap political points by catering to irrational fear, rather than concentrating on the public interest. Lord knows there are many other pressing crime and justice problems that demand action in the public interest that Andrew Swan should be spending his time solving.

Peace adhors a vacuum

When the U.S. invaded Iraq and ousted the brutal dictator Saddam Hussein, a power void was created that allowed Al Qaeda to establish a presence in the country, and all sorts of other fanatical nut jobs to build their power base and feed ethnic and religious conflict that is still continuing today. Saddam was a ruthless murderer, but his ruthless rule kept the country in some sort of order in spite of all the different factions, tribes and ethnic groups. When he left, Iraq became a much more dangerous place to live.

The Winnipeg Police have apparently take the lessons-not-learned from Iraq and applied them to the Gang War in Winnipeg. From the Free Press:

Police say a pair of newly arrived gangs are at the centre of the brewing battle as they try to fill the "vacuum" created by a major undercover sting operation dubbed "Project Divide" that ended last December. Police used a career criminal-turned secret agent to infiltrate the Hells Angels, resulting in the arrests of 34 high-ranking members and associates. Police say every member of the Zig Zag Crew, the Hells Angels' so-called puppet club, was put behind bars while only a handful of Hells Angels remain free.

Awwwwwwesommmmme. So good to see the Rock Machine moving into town, with their guns and their bombs.

"So, smart guy", you ask, "what's the solution?" While some may advocate legalization of drugs. If drugs were legal, like alcohol, there would be nothing for the gangs to fight over, except for small-ticket things like prostitution and black-market organs. Though I might support legalization of pot, I have a real hard time advocating the legalization of crack, meth, heroin, and other such things.

Truth is, I don't have an answer. Going after the street dealers will not get rid of drugs. I say legalize and tax pot to take a huge chunk out of the market for illegal drugs, and let the Hells Angels control the rest. Or you can keep fighting gang after gang and paying off informant after informant, while people die in the streets. Maybe after 10 years of battle, the enemy will give up and we will be at peace. Maybe Iraq will elect a representative government that will bring all factions together, and settle into peaceful coexistence. Or maybe not.

Graphic television ads to annoy viewers

Graphic television ads to target city speeders (free press)

The two commercials show a group of distracted youths and a harried young father speeding before their vehicles crash, leaving them smashed and bloody. In both spots, the sound of crying women can be heard as the commercials close.

Nice. I'm looking forward to that.

These ads will not make me drive any slower. They will not make anyone drive any slower. I, like the vast majority of people, drive a reasonable speed based on the conditions. That may not always be the posted speed limit, but it is a reasonable speed. When you see instances of serious "speed related" crashes, it almost always involves a drunk driver or a stolen car -- as opposed to a "harried young father". Even the example used in the Free Press article is of a drunk driver. That is the real problem -- people driving while hammered, and kids joy-riding in stolen cars.

These ads will be a waste of money. Just my opinion. I've gotta run, though. Late for work!

Cody Bousquet, Louis Riel, and more graffiti

On Page A13 of the Saturday Free Press, there was a little article called "Minimum sentences prevail":

Canada's top court refused to lower the sentence below the legislated minimum for Lyle Nasogaluak, an Alberta oil rig worker who suffered broken ribs and a punctured lung from an RCMP beating when he was arrested for impaired driving and leading police on a high-speed chase.

As it should be. A wrong by one person doesn't cancel out a crime by another. Unfortunately the Supreme Court didn't say anything about dropping charges and essentially buying off a dangerous offending punk like Cody Bousquet because the police officers wrongly, but understandably, roughed him up a little bit. Those officers should be reprimanded I suppose, but no way should the crown have given an inch in prosecuting the little shit.

***

Q: Is Louis Riel a hero or a villain?

A: He's both.

Riel is different things to different people, and through the clouded lens of time he can be viewed as either. I argued on the first Louis Riel day, partly tongue-in-cheek, that it doesn't really matter. Most heroes from the past were flawed, but we forget about the bad things and remember the good things because it gives us a figure to rally around. At that point they become icons ... almost fictitious. Riel the person was a murderer, possibly insane, and certainly divisive. But Riel the hero and icon is something else entirely.

RELATED: Dust My Broom one and two. That second one is a particularly good read.

***

I just noticed that the Free Press also picked up on the "authorized graffiti area" puzzle that I wrote about here and here. I must say that the Uniter did a much better job of covering it.

I suspect that commenter B-bonn is a reader of this blog.

Should we pay out the Lost Boys?

Last week the Province of Manitoba apologized to former residents of the Cathedral Valley Group Home in Grandview -- some of whom refer to themselves as "Warriors of Lost Boys". This all started in June of 2008, about a week after Stephen Harper delivered an apology to the former students of the Residential School system, and about three months after the "Common Experience Payments" began for said students.

A fellow named Sam McGillivray camped out in from of the provincial legistature and demanded an inquiry into the Cathedral Valley foster home. It was run by a man who, by all accounts, was a hard-ass who used corporal punishment and physical labour as means to straighten these kids out, whether they needed straightening or not. With the help of Phil Fontaine, Sam got his inquiry, which led to the report that was issued last week and the apology by Minister Mackintosh.

The review found that several residents benefited from the facility and that the operator of the group home, Henry (Red) Blake, provided well-intentioned and "appropriate placement for most of the residents." It also said there was no "systematic abuse or exploitation." However, Tuckett, a former provincial ombudsman, found that discipline at the group home was at times excessive. -fp-

The polarizing nature of this story is demonstrated by opposing editorials our two local rags: Brodbeck in the Sun and Reynolds in the Free Press. Reynolds argues, basically, that they should get over it and "move on". We've all been through that. Times have changed and what is wrong now was not wrong then, and there was no wrong doing that requires an apology. Brodbeck, on the other hand, tries to support the allegations of wrong-doing before seeming to run out of steam towards the end of his column. "knowing what we do now, it obviously wasn’t appropriate for many kids, at least two of which later committed suicide as adults." Crickey, if only two people from my school committed suicide that would be a huge improvement.

Here's the thing: we shouldn't apologize if there was no intentional wrong-doing, and we certainly shouldn't pay compensation, which is the inevitable next step. That sets a bad precedent where everybody who ever had anything bad happen to them will camp out on the lawn of the leg demanding an expensive inquiry, followed by an apology and compensation. Think of all of those catholic schools where nuns would beat their students with rulers if they got out of line. In fact, most public schools used corporal punishment, including mine.

When I was in grade 5 I got into some trouble at school and got called into the principal's office. The principal, who I believe to be Policy Frog's dad, incidentally, sat me down and asked me: "why I shouldn't I give you the strap?" That was a hard question to respond to. I didn't get the strap -- I got a series of detentions instead -- but I was pretty sure that if I got out of line again I would get it, and that was a motivating factor in my not getting in trouble again -- at least until I got out of that school.

Perhaps, instead of apologizing for how Henry Blake ran his school, we should learn from him and find a balance between his hard-line policies and our coddling "no fail and no punishment" policies that are teaching kids that there are no consequences to bad behaviour or poor performance. Our increasingly numerous young offenders in particular could use a good helping of "child labour" to straighten their asses out: learn something about respect and consequences, and develop a work ethic while they're at it. I wonder if Red Blake is still out there and looking for a consulting gig?

related:
cheatbuster

Some of the beating were so severe that they caused injuries still felt today – 30 years later. There were allegations of sexual abuse by Mr. Blake himself. There have been suicides attributed to the psychological damage inflicted at the home.

(Cheatbuster does not provide a source for these allegations.)

Mostly Moose. Some other stuff

I went to the Saturday night Manitoba Moose game. It was an entertaining, but low scoring game, with the good guys winning in the OT shootout after a 1 - 1 tie.

Thumbs up goes to:
- the Moose defense, for keeping the Toronto Marlies to around 20 shots on net, and to goalie Cory Schneider for only letting in one of those (and only one in the shootout.)
- the game programs. The free handouts are four pages, with one page devoted to the lineups, and another filled with various stats and analysis.
- the scalper who sold me a 3rd row center ice ticket for $20.

Thumbs down goes to:
- the MTS Centre cleaning staff. The seats where really dirty. General grime, dried beer, feathers ... it was kind of gross actually. Time to pull out the Bissell for a quarter-season cleaning I think.
- Santa Claus, for causing all of the streets downtown to be closed off. Although parking was a snap once I decided to drive around the barriers.
- The Moose offense. That's not really a fair assessment though, because they worked hard all night, got over 30 shots on net and plenty of scoring chances. It just comes down to a lack of scoring ability. For example, at one point Marco Rosa had an open third of the net and hit the post ... from six inches away. That's what happens when everybody on the team who is capable of scoring more than 10 goals a year (and isn't over 40) gets pulled up to the parent club.

Other notes:
- best fan comment: "Hey Deveaux. How do you explain to your friends that you aren't even good enough to make the Maple Leafs?"
- former PC party leader Stu Murray was handing out St.Boniface Hospital lottery leaflets. Good to see him out doing the nitty gritty promo stuff.

Summary / Jets rant:
The Moose are a good fit for Winnipeg. It's affordable, the team is relatively successful, and the entertainment isn't bad most nights. I can't really complain. Could I have bought a $20 3rd-row ticket for a Jets game? Not a chance, but I probably could have bought a $50 ticket for the top of the cramped balcony, and the calibre of play would have been better. I feel like a traitor saying this, but I can live without the Jets. It would be cool to have an NHL team again, but Winnipeg is about 300,000 people and 5 or 6 big head offices too small to have the economic base for a successful team. Our arena is also very very marginal. Rexall Place in Edmonton holds 16,800 and the owners there are saying that's too small, and are pushing hard for a new downtown arena. Having said that, I do think the NHL will come back to Winnipeg. Where there's smoke there's fire, and there's more smoke all the time. As not-profitable as the New Jets will be, they will still be far more successful than some of the struggling US teams, like the Old Jets for example. I think it's going to happen.

~~~~~~~~

Hey, since I have my thumbs all warmed up, a big thumbs up to Mary A Welch for her article about wind farms (or lack thereof), and to the Free Press editors for sticking it on the front page of the weekend edition. This is something that deserves more attention. And thumbs down to Minister Wowchuk (I'm having an "I Married an Axe Murderer flashback right now. Woooooo-Chuck! Anyhow ... back to the program ....) for idiotic comments:

it's not fair to compare Manitoba to Ontario, since our province already relies almost exclusively on renewable energy but Ontario is powered largely by dirty coal.

And that makes a difference how? Maybe in a world where exporting electricity was impossible ...

And, she said, Manitoba is blessed with cheap power, meaning ratepayers would take a hit if the province threw open its doors to wind power

Oh, you mean those artificially cheap rates that contribute to us being among the biggest consumers of electricity in the world, and to Hydro's massive debt, which will be much more of a problem when interest rates rise again? Those cheap rates? That is why we're not building more power even though we've potentially over-committed on power exports and may face blackouts according to an independent auditor?

~~~~~~~~

Also a thumbs up to Gordon Sinclair for a good column about the Bomber's management woes. How about that, eh? I said something nice about Gordon! Although he still had ... let's see ... 1..2 .... 34 one sentence paragraphs. You still need to work on that, Gordo.

~~~~~~~~

Still with the Freep ... to borrow a gambit from Kate at SDA: Now is the time when we juxtapose!

Mia Rabson

Aboriginal inmates in Canada make up too high a percentage of Canada's prison population and tend to get harsher sentences and less programming, a report from the country's prison watchdog said Friday.

Colleen Simard

Waywayseecappo Chief Murray Clearsky went to court for another drunk driving charge. It ended up with Clearsky getting a light sentence with no jail time. ... The worst part is this wasn't the first time Clearsky had been convicted of a drunken driving charge. He's been charged three times since 1983, and also has a dangerous weapon conviction.

~~~~~~~~

On Crime and Punishment

In my last post I mentioned some of the recent bad publicity that Winnipeg has received because of it's various crime infestations. The question is: what do we do about it? Here at the Peanut, we're not just whiners and complainers. We are problem solvers!

Three of the four punks arrested for the stabathon Friday night were acquainted with the law, including "numerous breaches of court orders" stemming from previous offences. Likewise, I suspect most violent crime and property crimes are committed by repeat offenders.

The current system of punishment works something like this:
1st offence: a stern talking-to, a warm coddle, and a big grape-flavoured lollipop.
2nd offence: a stern talking-to, a playful noogie, and a small citrus-flavoured lollipop
3rd offence: a stern talking-to, and no lollipop
4th offence: a stern talking-to, suspended sentence.
5th offence: a stern talking-to, credit for time served, and a recommendation to stay away from the friends that are being such a bad influence on you.
etc...

Nobody should ever be the fifth or sixth victim of a criminal. I have heard all the arguments against jail time: it will "harden" the criminal, they will lift weights and learn new ways to jack cars, they aren't responsible for their actions beacuse they have FASD, whatever .... Gets these fucks off the street. That's how you solve the problem. Specifically, you need A) minimum sentences for violent crimes, and B) logarithmic sentencing.

A) If you shoot somebody or stab them in the chest, whether they live or die is a matter of chance. I don't care if the victim walks out of hospital the next day, the crime should be heavily punished. Violent crimes should be punishable by at least 5 years in prison every time, if not more depending on the circumstances. And I don't mean "5 years" as in 2-for-1 credit for 8 months in remand and immediate parole. I mean "5 years" as in 5 years behind bars.

B) Logarithmic sentencing recognizes that people make mistakes and do dumb things. They need to be given a chance to smarten up and get their lives in order. However, if a person is unable or unwilling to be reformed, then they should not be on the streets. Punishments need to get progressively harsher as an individual shows a higher probability of reoffending. (There are a lot of judges out there who could learn a few things from Thomas Bayes.)

This will do a number of things: it will keep serious re-offenders off the streets where they can not harm more people, it will free up police and court resources to catch and prosecute more offenders, and it will cause the offenders themselves to take the system seriously and think about the consequences of their crimes. Further, if a person is spending 5 or 10 years in the slammer, the may actually learn a skill or get an education, if for no other reason then to pass the time. Reform and education programs need to be implemented in prison, not just in the community where they can be ignored by the criminals.

Yes, maybe we'll need to build a new prison, but so what? It will stimulate the economy of some small town. And eventually, if all goes according to plan, gangs will fall apart because all of the leaders are in the slammer, and the new recruits will not be so anxious to follow in their footsteps. Crime rates will go down, and our little PR bugbears (murder capital of Canada, car theft capital of Canada ...) will go away.

Now: what to do about the child prostitution problem... Maybe we just need to put a positive spin on it. Youth employment capital of Canada, anyone? No? Alright ... I'll work on a real solution and get back to you.

Friday afternoon thoughts

Fly like the wind, little birdie

The young peregrine falcons are going to take their first flight any minute now. They are getting up on the edge of the platform, flapping their wings, building up their nerve for their dramatic leap over the traffic-filled canyon below.

You can check them out on the CBC Manitoba web site


epic immigration fail

"I have concerns that you are dangerous to the public in Canada," McPhelan said via video conference from Vancouver to a Winnipeg courtroom. "The way you have conducted yourself in Canada is despicable. You are a danger to girls under 18."

however ....

"The need to protect the Canadian public is outweighed by the risk you face in your country of origin."

Really??? To me, the need to protect innocent Canadians far outweighs the risk to the life of a convicted cocaine-trafficking sex offender. I question whether this guy is genuinely at risk of death in his home country, and even if he is, he put himself in that position. This McPhelan ass-hat has seriously fucked-up priorities and needs to be fired. 32 comments and counting on the Free Press web site.


Jazz Winnipeg Festival wind-up

It looks like a nice weekend to catch the wind-up of the 2009 festival with the free concerts in Market Square. I'm looking forward to catching one of the Beast performances. Unique sound, and cool video too


Matt Hill

I see that the young Canadian golf talent and NCAA star Matt Hill found his way into a PGA Tour event. Matt is from the same home town as Mike Weir -- Bright's Grove, ON -- and is (was?) a member of the Canadian Junior golf team. The coaches of that team include Winnipeg golf pro and frequent CPGA Teacher of the Year, Derek Ingram. The Peanut wishes Matt well with his PGA career.

Helicopters are cool

You don't see them nearly as often as airplanes, so it's always kind of special when you hear the thumping of a helicopter flying overhead. Hey, where's that coming from? Oh, there it is! Coooool...

They look cool; they sound cool; who wouldn't want one?

The paramedics want one for Winnipeg, after the life-saving rescue of miracle-boy Samuel Gross involving our medical rent-a-copter during the flood.

Tom Brodbeck wants another one for the Winnipeg Police:

The story of the scumbags who smashed their way into the home of Winnipeg police Insp. Danny Smyth over the weekend is a perfect example of how a police helicopter could have helped apprehend the suspects. ... If a police helicopter had been airborne at the time, it probably would have arrived on the scene in less than two minutes.

Yes ... if it were airborne. Is this thing going to be airborne 24 hours a day? Yikes ... that could get expensive. It is very tempting because of the aformentioned cool factor, but seriously, what is the return on investment here? Ok, suppose we catch the kids who broke into the house or stole the car or whatever: these kids get another mark to add to the collection on their record and get released back into public the next day. Was that worth the hundreds of thousands of dollars that it cost to buy this machine, staff it, fuel it, maintain it, and have it flying around all the time? Maybe once the justice system is toughened up a little bit, but right now it doesn't seem worth it. Perhaps if we equip the helicopter with guns or heat-seeking missals ....

Let me bounce another idea off the interweb: a combined-use Emergency Services helicopter. I don't know if that's doable, but if they could stick an infra-red camera on a medi-chopper and make it available for use by both the Police and Paramedic services, then we could "leverage our synergies" and make the whole thing a little more cost-effective.

_________ in appearance

I picked on CTV yesterday, so I guess I'll pick on CBC today:

A lady was recently robbed of her rings at knife point after getting off the bus. The description of the assailant?

• Male
• Aboriginal in appearance
• 14-16 years of age
• 5’6” in height
• Thin build
• Dark hair
• Pierced left ear
• Wearing: a black jacket, possibly a white sweater & hoody, black pants and a white baseball cap with markings or print. Of note: the cap was turned/worn to the left side of his head/face.

This is how the Free Press reported it, but this is not how the CBC reported it on the 6:00 news today. The CBC left off the part about "Aboriginal in appearance"*. Don't you think that might be an important piece of information? Thin with dark hair is pretty general. Could be any ethnic background.

So who made that call, and why? Surely the CBC isn't afraid of the Canadian Human Rights Commission. Does their left-wing thirst for political correctness outweigh the safety benefits of potentially identifying a dangerous criminal? How do we know it's not this guy?:


*I can't find video of the news story on their website, so if somebody can confirm that I wasn't hallucinating that would be great. If I'm mistaken I'll delete this post, but I'm pretty sure about it.

Where does crazy start?

No man who kills another man outside of a combat situation is completely well, from a mental health point of view. It is natural to want to kill someone ... I think ... sometimes ... you know, like when Gordon Sinclare or Francis Russell writes something really retarded in the paper. But it's not natural to actually do it. Yet when people kill we usually find these people criminally responsible. Clearly there's a continuum that ranges from "not quite right" to "dude, that's fucked up".

Decapitator Cannibal Man Vincent Li is clearly fucked up. We all know by now that he was not found criminally responsible for what he did, and this has stirred a lot of debate and commentary in the papers, blogs and around the proverbial water coolers. I don't like the term "not criminally responsible". That's a bull shit term. This guy cut off a person's head and ate his eye balls. He's a criminal. Period. Well not quite period: he is also fucked up, as mentioned earlier, and because of that he is a "special" criminal. Jail is not the right place for this guy. I agree with that much. However he should also not walk free ever again. I don't care how much treatment he undergoes, this dude's brain is broken and no amount of treatment or medication will ever make it quite right.

The thing that really makes people nervous is this:

He will be institutionalized without a criminal record and will be reassessed every year by a mental health review board to determine if he is fit for release into the community.

That means he'll be reassessed next year. And the year after that. And every year until some quorum of doctors eventually decides that his symptoms are "manageable with medication" and he is set free. It could be two years from now or 15 or 30, but it will almost certainly happen. I'll ask you this: supposing he gets released 5 or 10 years from now, would you voluntarily sit next to Mr. Li at a movie theatre? Would you pitch your tent next to his at a camp ground when you're out camping with your family? If you answered 'yes' you're lying. When is comes down to it, you want nothing to do with this guy because you know what he's capable of. And that will never change, and that is why he should never see the light of day again.