• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Cabinet Shuffle- (Wednesday 26 July).

Meanwhile, Public Safety is becoming an oxymoron. Maybe that's why they gave Blair, the previous minister, the boot... to Defence (sadly)


‘Vile behaviour’: Retail chain demands accountability for B.C. shoplifting violence​


A retail chain with 79 stores in western Canada including 52 in B.C., is demanding action and justice for what it describes as an “ongoing tsunami of crime” after Global News reported on the low charge rate in a recent VPD anti-shoplifting blitz.

70c8fc80

Retail violence has increased by 500 per cent over four years, according to London Drugs’ loss prevention general manager, and the pharmacy chain is now spending upwards of $1.5 million more on security at its Vancouver stores than it did two years ago.

“We’re seeing a lot of random sort of violence or threats that take place, a lot of vile behaviour, racism, abuse of customers and staff around the people who are doing these crimes,” Tony Hunt told Global News in an interview Tuesday.

Eight security staff were on shift Tuesday afternoon at the chain’s busy location on Granville at Georgia streets in downtown Vancouver.



 
Costs of shoplifting (part of "shrinkage") are passed along to customers, and like taxation and insurance, are diffuse. Authorities seem increasingly to be betting on the well-established observation that diffuse interests are relatively impotent, politically. They don't want the political trouble of increasing spending to deal with the problem, or the political trouble of facing down the agitators who will find a thousand reasons to go easy on shoplifters.
 
Costs of shoplifting (part of "shrinkage") are passed along to customers, and like taxation and insurance, are diffuse. Authorities seem increasingly to be betting on the well-established observation that diffuse interests are relatively impotent, politically. They don't want the political trouble of increasing spending to deal with the problem, or the political trouble of facing down the agitators who will find a thousand reasons to go easy on shoplifters.
Individual shoplifters are a shrinkage problem. Once they form into teams or mobs that blitz a business they become a organized criminal gang and should be treated as such.

🍻
 
Individual shoplifters are a shrinkage problem. Once they form into teams or mobs that blitz a business they become a organized criminal gang and should be treated as such.

🍻
This has been going on in Winnipeg for a long while. "The Meat Gang" and "The Diaper Gang" were well known entities among the Loss Prevention people in the early 2000s. They would fill carts full of goods, walk right past the check out - no one would challenge them - and a half ton would pull up. The cart was lifted into the truck and they were gone.
Things like expensive razors etc are now in secure cabinets instead of the normal display.
They don't want the political trouble of increasing spending to deal with the problem, or the political trouble of facing down the agitators who will find a thousand reasons to go easy on shoplifters.
And that can be countered by spelling out in no uncertain terms shoplifters are thieves that increase the cost of living for us all. To the Stocks and Pillories with them!!
 
Individual shoplifters are a shrinkage problem. Once they form into teams or mobs that blitz a business they become a organized criminal gang and should be treated as such.

🍻
I agree. But if security camera footage and testimony of, inevitably, multiple eye-witnesses isn't enough for prosecutors to proceed, what's the explanation?

Governments will impose, or effectively allow to be imposed, costs on businesses. If businesses subsequently exit the market, then the politicians will complain. Fools deserve no respect.
 
Stop calling them shoplifters. They are looters and thieves. How long until they become murderers? Acquiescence to their acts only emboldens them. They've been conditioned by the liberal soft on crime actions. When breaking the law, without consequence, becomes the norm, you have anarchy.
 
Stop calling them shoplifters. They are looters and thieves. How long until they become murderers? Acquiescence to their acts only emboldens them. They've been conditioned by the liberal soft on crime actions. When breaking the law, without consequence, becomes the norm, you have anarchy.
By declining to act effectively, governments are at least promoting "fast failure", which is what we should want. All that remains is to avoid reinforcing failure by somehow propping up this state of affairs - businesses should exit those markets quickly; let the communities figure out who they want to police them and how they want to be policed. (By "police", I mean the entire system.) If they want permissiveness, they can have it. They just might not have as many shopping options, and might have to pay higher prices.
 
I agree. But if security camera footage and testimony of, inevitably, multiple eye-witnesses isn't enough for prosecutors to proceed, what's the explanation?
I haven't seen any studies so anything I say is purely guess work. There is the issue of likelihood of conviction which is cited above but I think in most of these cases its more of a question of costs of processing these crimes. Like the military, governments like to save money on the judicial process, from the costs of prosecutors to judges to the incarceration system. When the only two real punishments that the system can impose is fines - which most of these offenders can't or won't pay - or incarceration - which is expensive; the justice bureaucracy just shrugs its shoulders and says - "What the hell; let's just go for violent crimes." The problem goes right up the chain though. It's not just shoplifters that get a bye, serious high end white collar crime is poorly investigated and prosecuted because the system generally doesn't have the talent to deal with complex fraud operations. The number that do get prosecuted is tiny compared to the number actually committed.

Governments will impose, or effectively allow to be imposed, costs on businesses. If businesses subsequently exit the market, then the politicians will complain. Fools deserve no respect.
Neither do they deserve to be re-elected., and yet...

Remember that I'm a fiscally conservative; social liberal guy BUT - there is a point where if you do not enforce social responsibility and an overarching safety of society in order to cater to either costs or extreme social liberality then you risk that your society might react in ways that you can't imagine or stop.

I'll go off the shoplifting issue for a second and go to the example of eco-protestors and the numerous examples of the police doing nothing to clear major roads of sit-in protestors. The times where citizens are going to take their own actions is getting closer. Police need to police. Prosecutors need to prosecute. Judges need to judge. Too many people think they can do whatever they want with impunity - whether eco-protestors or sovereign citizens or shop lifters.

🍻
 
I'll go off the shoplifting issue for a second and go to the example of eco-protestors and the numerous examples of the police doing nothing to clear major roads of sit-in protestors. The times where citizens are going to take their own actions is getting closer. Police need to police. Prosecutors need to prosecute. Judges need to judge. Too many people think they can do whatever they want with impunity - whether eco-protestors or sovereign citizens or shop lifters.

🍻
That was happening more frequently in the last few weeks of the Convoy protest with counter protests, and people doing things like surrounding vehicles out for supplies and not moving until they took down their various periphanelia. The Freedumb folks got a lot less mouthy when they were suddenly outnumbered by pissed off locals that just wanted to be able to drive down their street or sleep without honking.
 
The times where citizens are going to take their own actions is getting closer.

🍻

Just today, my 28 year old son., who is not an extreme right wing nut in any sense of the description, told me again that quite a few of his friends are getting to the point where they constantly talk about the need for them to rise up, do something quite radical and violent or accept to live with the consequences of inaction,

Those are all Community college or university educated kids, which should tell us something.
 
I'll go off the shoplifting issue for a second and go to the example of eco-protestors and the numerous examples of the police doing nothing to clear major roads of sit-in protestors. The times where citizens are going to take their own actions is getting closer. Police need to police. Prosecutors need to prosecute. Judges need to judge. Too many people think they can do whatever they want with impunity - whether eco-protestors or sovereign citizens or shop lifters.

🍻

And another timely and relevant piece from the Torygraph...

Met chief cracks down on support for woke causes​

Sir Mark Rowley sets out approach as he says: ‘There are very few causes policing should be attached to’

ByMartin Evans, CRIME EDITOR28 August 2023 • 9:08pm

Police officers take the knee at a Black Lives Matter demonstration

Police officers take the knee at a Black Lives Matter demonstration CREDIT: Ian Davidson / Alamy Live News

Britain’s most senior policeman has said his officers will not be allowed to express support for “woke” causes while on duty because it is essential that they are impartial.


The comments by Sir Mark Rowley, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, suggest that he will not tolerate officers taking the knee, flying rainbow flags or adorning their uniforms with badges that support environmental causes.

He described himself as “fairly narrow-minded” on the issue and said the only acceptable additions to uniforms were remembrance poppies, Help for Heroes wristbands and the police memorial badge.

His comments signal that he will take a much harder line than his predecessor, Dame Cressida Dick, who was criticised for allowing officers to take the knee while policing Black Lives Matter protests and under whose watch officers danced and skateboarded with Extinction Rebellion activists.

Sir Mark said getting drawn into political causes – even popular ones – could be “fatal” for policing, telling The Telegraph: “Wearing a poppy in the autumn is perfectly proper, but there is not a lot that we should align to because the danger is that once you say, ‘we are going to align ourselves to a cause because 90 per cent of the population support it’, what about the 10 per cent?

“Once you start having environmental and other subjects there are lots of people in the organisation who will personally support those causes and that is OK, but the Metropolitan Police explicitly supporting them is quite tricky. I’m fairly narrow-minded on this. There are very few causes policing should be attached to.”

Sir Mark Rowley said getting drawn into political causes – even popular ones – could be ‘fatal’ for policing CREDIT: Jonathan Brady/PA Wire

Sir Mark’s comments signal that he will be less tolerant than Dame Cressida, under whom Scotland Yard initially said it was at individual officers’ discretion if they wanted to take the knee to support Black Lives Matter, even while they were policing protests. Dame Cressida later said she would not take the knee and that she had ordered her officers not to do so.

Under her watch, a police vehicle was given a Pride rainbow colour scheme to show support for LGBTQ+ causes at taxpayers’ expense.
In 2019, there was public outrage after Met officers were seen dancing and skateboarding with Extinction Rebellion eco-warriors when they were meant to be policing an illegal protest. The officers’ commander later described the behaviour as “unacceptable”.

Sir Mark said: “Engaging with communities to understand what worries them is not ‘woke’. Starting to align yourself to causes is not something policing should be doing.

“The challenge in the modern world of activists and protest groups – and so much of it is online – is they do drift in different directions, some groups you can think of do have a very sensible majority membership and then a few people with extreme views and you can’t legislate that from outside it.

“If people don’t believe we operate without fear or favour, that is pretty fatal to us more than pretty much anybody else and that is why I think we have to be tougher on that.”

Sir Mark recently banned his officers from wearing the “thin blue line” badge, which was created by the Care of Police Survivors charity as a mark of remembrance and respect for those who died while working. The move came after it emerged that the symbol had links with white nationalism in the United States.

Sir Mark defended the ban, insisting officers could end up wearing hundreds of badges if he did not take a firm line.
It is understood that Sir Mark has not changed the Met’s uniform policy, which makes exceptions only for the insignia of the National Police Memorial Day Trust, Help for Heroes and the Royal British Legion.


‘Anti-social behaviour reports won’t be ignored’​

The Met Police Commissioner has urged the public to report every incident of anti-social behaviour, no matter how small, insisting they will not be ignored.

Sir Mark said Scotland Yard’s decision to stop responding to mental health callouts would free up officers to concentrate on the priorities of preventing crime and catching criminals, including dealing with thugs who blight communities.

Following an agreement with health and social care leaders the Met will stop attending incidents where a person is having a mental health crisis from Oct 31 unless a crime has been reported or there is a risk to life.

It is estimated that Met officers currently spend around 10,000 hours a month dealing with mental health callouts, even though they are not appropriately trained or equipped to handle them.

Sir Mark told The Telegraph: “It’s perverse for us to be doing things we aren’t the right people for – at the same time there is police work we are not doing. They shouldn’t be filling gaps for other services when they could be doing work in the communities and fighting crime.

“Our ability to meet more expectations than we are currently meeting is partly dependent on how we use our people and having them sidetracked into things that are not core policing work means the public don’t get what they want. Communities raise very practical stuff around anti-social behaviour, knife crime and things they want us to do better.”

He has made it clear he will not tolerate officers taking the knee, flying rainbow flags or adorning their uniforms with badges that support environmental causes while on duty, adding: “Once you start having environmental and other subjects, there are lots of people in the organisation who will personally support those causes – but the Met explicitly supporting them is quite tricky. There are very few causes policing should be attached to.”

Sir Mark has made tackling anti-social behaviour one of the foundations of his New Met for London plan, believing it is one of the key ways in which he can help restore trust and confidence in the force.

Asked whether the public should report every incident of anti-social behaviour to the police and expect a response, Sir Mark replied “absolutely”, adding: “If there is a pattern of things that are making you feel unsafe – it may not be a particular incident, but you are just worried because you are concerned there is something going on outside the local shops, is it drug using or drug dealing or whatever – speak to your ward officer.”

The Met is boosting neighbourhood policing teams with more officers and PCSOs on the ground where anti-social behaviour takes place.
Sir Mark said the early signs were positive, with surveys conducted by the Mayor suggesting concern about anti-social behaviour was already going down, adding: “It matters to people feeling safe where they are and the secret to confidence in the police is ‘do I have police officers in my patch who know what the most important issues are and are they doing something sensible about it?’.

“If you believe where you live in London that there are some local cops who know what is going on and are doing some sensible stuff, that has a massive effect on your view of the police. You don’t expect it to be perfect, but you do expect there to be some people who care and are trying to do something that is the cornerstone of policing.”

Sir Mark also stressed the importance of reporting all crimes to the police, even if there is little chance of the offender being caught. He explained: “Report it all. We are not going to solve every crime but the pattern of crime matters. If we have a spate of car crimes in your area, we need to know about it and then we can carry out an operation to crack down on that.

“Likewise, if you report a particular crime we will solve the ones that can be solved quickly. We can give you advice on how to prevent recurrence, we can help you in other ways so all of that matters. People still want local police officers to deal with their problems and they want a sense that the police care and are reliable.”


Brit coppers were being encouraged to monitor the internet and arrest people chatting on sites like this if they said unpopular things.
Meanwhile people stopped reporting thefts and non-violent crime and anti-social behaviour (hanging around the 7-11 after dark) because the coppers weren't doing anything about it anyway.

New management in Manchester and London is calling for the public to report everything. The police may not be able to solve every crime but the new guys want all the data so they can then go hunting for patterns.
 
By declining to act effectively, governments are at least promoting "fast failure", which is what we should want. All that remains is to avoid reinforcing failure by somehow propping up this state of affairs - businesses should exit those markets quickly; let the communities figure out who they want to police them and how they want to be policed. (By "police", I mean the entire system.) If they want permissiveness, they can have it. They just might not have as many shopping options, and might have to pay higher prices.
it isn't the community per se. The police make the arrest, the individual is on the street before the ink is dry on the forms. It has to be a team effort starting with the courts. Vote liberal, vote anarchy
 
I'll go off the shoplifting issue for a second and go to the example of eco-protestors and the numerous examples of the police doing nothing to clear major roads of sit-in protestors. The times where citizens are going to take their own actions is getting closer. Police need to police. Prosecutors need to prosecute. Judges need to judge. Too many people think they can do whatever they want with impunity - whether eco-protestors or sovereign citizens or shop lifters.
I agree, but part of the problem is the Charter binds the cops, the prosecutors and the judges; it doesn't bind the band of pissed off neighbours.
 
I haven't seen any studies so anything I say is purely guess work. There is the issue of likelihood of conviction which is cited above but I think in most of these cases its more of a question of costs of processing these crimes. Like the military, governments like to save money on the judicial process, from the costs of prosecutors to judges to the incarceration system. When the only two real punishments that the system can impose is fines - which most of these offenders can't or won't pay - or incarceration - which is expensive; the justice bureaucracy just shrugs its shoulders and says - "What the hell; let's just go for violent crimes." The problem goes right up the chain though. It's not just shoplifters that get a bye, serious high end white collar crime is poorly investigated and prosecuted because the system generally doesn't have the talent to deal with complex fraud operations. The number that do get prosecuted is tiny compared to the number actually committed.


Neither do they deserve to be re-elected., and yet...

Remember that I'm a fiscally conservative; social liberal guy BUT - there is a point where if you do not enforce social responsibility and an overarching safety of society in order to cater to either costs or extreme social liberality then you risk that your society might react in ways that you can't imagine or stop.

I'll go off the shoplifting issue for a second and go to the example of eco-protestors and the numerous examples of the police doing nothing to clear major roads of sit-in protestors. The times where citizens are going to take their own actions is getting closer. Police need to police. Prosecutors need to prosecute. Judges need to judge. Too many people think they can do whatever they want with impunity - whether eco-protestors or sovereign citizens or shop lifters.

🍻
This - well said and I have been saying things like this - except in a way not as eloquent.

A multiple sex offender was released in Winnipeg today. Every time he gets out he reoffends - he is a well known rapist and inmate - and a violent rapist at that. At some point someone is going to murder this guy because he won't stop raping women. And it seems the Crown is in no hurry to prosecute him as a Dangerous Offender.
 
Yes it will when the Crown prosecutes vigorously.
Fair enough, if crimes are committed, but angry neighbours can more easily harass, restrict, corral, disrupt, etc., basically lots of things we generally don't want our criminal justice system to do. As well, if a court has ruled that 'x' activity is Charter protected, the cops and prosecutors are bound. Angry neighbours, not so much.
 
That was happening more frequently in the last few weeks of the Convoy protest with counter protests, and people doing things like surrounding vehicles out for supplies and not moving until they took down their various periphanelia.

Not as exciting as watching the street action in real-time on TV, but they can be hit in their wallets. That's gotta hurt.

The Freedumb folks got a lot less mouthy when they were suddenly outnumbered by pissed off locals that just wanted to be able to drive down their street or sleep without honking.

Try that in the wrong neighbourhood.

 
This - well said and I have been saying things like this - except in a way not as eloquent.

A multiple sex offender was released in Winnipeg today. Every time he gets out he reoffends - he is a well known rapist and inmate - and a violent rapist at that. At some point someone is going to murder this guy because he won't stop raping women. And it seems the Crown is in no hurry to prosecute him as a Dangerous Offender.
You need a Charles Bronson…

TBH the lack of enforcement is what inspires vigilanteism. LA and NY are prime examples of the ebb and flow of the ‘justice’ system and how criminal activities rise and decline depending upon the degree of enforcement.
Often the government only acts when individual citizens are starting to take matters into their own hands.
 
You need a Charles Bronson…



I imagine strap-hangers will be keeping an eye on the Michael Jackson impersonator case as it winds its way through the system...
 
Back
Top