BC reserves have been booting people out for a while now-drug dealing/poaching/sexually abusing children/generally being criminal vermin-they end up in the nearest town.
Banish These Drug Dealers (& such) To Where?
- Thread starter Ron in Regina
- Start date
Does it? Or does it kick them off 'that' welfare, and land them on 'this' welfare..?
And then what? They go straight, self support financially, and
become upstanding citizens? Or they just become someone
else's problem? Like the Hooker scenario above?
Kicking someone off the reserve doesn't mean they lose their 'treaty indian' status and/or whatever benefits accrue to them as members of that band I imagine that taking that away involves a lot of politics.
Have read some background on that over the years but it's not the sort of thing a person retains-it's just small town politics.
And as to where they end up take a drive through Port Alberni sometime......
Have read some background on that over the years but it's not the sort of thing a person retains-it's just small town politics.
And as to where they end up take a drive through Port Alberni sometime......
Google the words "North Central" and see what happens...
Here's a map: Community Crime Map – Regina Police Service
North Central is the 'red' area and the fringe around it.
Here's a map: Community Crime Map – Regina Police Service
North Central is the 'red' area and the fringe around it.
My time there was as a child and a teen. Ask Petros for the current 'skinny' on
North Central.
I haven't been there since Thanksgiving but yeah, there is good reason to be armed and yes I see the migration in the evenings and the chilly stagger home at dawn. The hooker traffic is insane. North Central has the highest HIV rate in the free world with its own localized strain.
But the trees are nice.
But the trees are nice.
My sister once lived in North Central but that was decades ago..........she now lives in Craven and is extremely happy to be out of the city.
I did clarify an exception for when it's prescribed by at least two physicians.
Well, when the system is broken...
As for the friend I'd mentioned in other threads who was accused of working in Canada without a visa, the police report was riddled with grammatical, orthographical, and even lexical errors. The officers involved were members of a 'human trafficking and exploitation unit,' yet somehow one officer misused the term 'human trafficking' in his report because from how I read it, though it claimed to be a human trafficking investigation, no such investigation occurred. The cops checked nothing!
However, the police statements looked Shakespearean compared to the CBSA officer's statements which were written in such bad English as to have literally led to communication breakdown. That part was proved at my friend's bond hearing.
The hearing transcript had revealed that even the Minister's counsel's English was broken to the point of requiring the tribunal to correct her more than a few times when she had misunderstood the meaning of statements in the accused's affidavit that were written in Standard English! The interpreters' English was subpar too both at the first hearing and at the appeal hearing too.
Even the first tribunal's English was somewhat broken, but at least his was good enough to understand the affidavit and correct the Minister's counsel and recognize the problems with the police report.
As you probably know, in an adversarial system, the Minister's counsel, who is hired for the explicit purpose of proving the guilt of the accused, is often the gatekeeper to the names and contact information of the police officers and the other primary witness on the scene.
At the first hearing, the Minister's counsel resisted sharing that info, even the arresting officer's name! with the accused's counsel, and so the tribunal rightfully ruled in the accused's favour saying that the Minister could easily have proved the accused's guilt had she been guilty, but the Minister appealed.
At the second hearing, the tribunal, who I believe might have been a native English speaker based on his name and his more standard English in the hearing transcript, ruled that the Minister's counsel had no obligation to present the officer's name and the primary witness' name and contact onformation and so ruled in favour of the Minister. My friend will now appeal to federal court to try to subpoena the intercepting officer and the other primary witnesses on the scene to prove the falsity of the police statement.
Another friend of mine who has also read all of the documentary evidence got her permission to write a book on her case. He's an Esperantist like me, so his focus will be on the language barriers throughout.
And yes, just to clarify, all of this has been going on in Canada, a supposedly English-speaking country.
Even when I read everything, I couldn't believe how bloody illiterate it all was.
I can only imagine how much money this had cost the taxpayer already when all the Minister's counsel had to do was present a witness statement from a primary wintess on the scene or at least present the anonymous officers involved for questing. Given how bloody obbvious it is, you'd think the Minister's counsel and the tribunal were in collusion to make work for themselves.
Google Vancouver's Downtown East Side (DTES). Now that could serve as an experimental lab. If they find a way to solve the problem without resorting to NIMBYism, then we could replicate that elsewhere.
I don't consider myself to be macho. Is that really how I come across to you?
Last edited:
Your definition of "system is broken" is "somebody I know didn't win, or won but not as easily as I thought she should have."
No clients, no hookers.
That puts us in a catch-22.
On the one hand, paying for sex is difficult to prove. You have to that the alleged client had sex with an alleged worker, that he gave the worker money for sex, and that the money was directly linked to the sex, all beyond a reasonable doubt.
On the other hand, given what I know of cops and tribunals, I would not trust lowering the burden of proof to a mere balance of probabilities.
One nice balance though might be the following:
We must prove fornication beyond a reasonable doubt and paying for sex on a balance of probabilities to fine him for fornication.
Since we would still need to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, he'd still be protected from incompetent police officers and tribunals. But since the charge would no longer be paying for sex but merely fornication, we need to prove only fornication beyond a reasonable doubt and paying for sex on a balance of probabilities. That way we could finally crack down on the clients.
The officers involved were functionally illiterate and the second tribunal opined that the Minister's counsel had no obligation to provide readily available proof such as anonymous officers' names and a primary witness.
When a police report is written in such broken English, we can't even be sure of the intended meaning of the lexis in the text of the report.
When I read it, I couldn' believe it. I thought one had to be functionally literate to become a police officer, and especially a Minister's counsel.
Maybe it's time to teach grammar, spelling, and vocabulary at police academies and law schools?
I can understand you, Tek. Even I would not have believed the functional illiteracy of the officers involved had I not read it with my own eyes. selfsame's English might be comparable, I kid you not.
And Tek, consider the context. In the US, you need to ensure your state counsels and tribunal's know English well. In Canada's federal system, they need to know both English and French. Same goes for Border agents. That totally changes the quality of the language. In Canada, a participant might be semi literate in each official language but functionally literate in neither.
I would clean it up the same as the rest of any drug infested areas', drug squads go in, bust the drug dealers and haul them to jail. But in too many of these cases, the government needs to go in and help the people; stop giving money to the wrong people and start using this money to build centres, where sports, arts, music, specialty courses are encouraged.. this would open up prospects to the young and give the ones who want it, an outlet to get out and succeed elsewhere than their community, young people need hope.
Chiefs in the various first nations communities should have the power to execute drug dealers in their communities.