# Toronto's First Shooting Death of 2006: Tragedy or Good Riddance?



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

Saw in the Globe that Toronto has already experienced its first shooting death of the year! Looking at the person who was shot, I really can't say that I have any sympathy:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060102.wxshooting02/BNStory/National/

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...442&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154

I'm going to put up a poll with this thread because people may not want post anything that's politically incorrect or inflammatory.


----------



## RevMatt (Sep 10, 2005)

If you honestly believe the "one more scumbag", as 50% of respondents currently do, then you are free to say so. Indeed, I encourage people to do so. It helps me to know who to outright ignore. One of my resolutions for this year is to stop wasting so much time and energy having political discussions with people who's opinions are so abhorrent they have no place in modern society. So please, identify yourselves.

edit - modified to make it more what I actually mean, and less gratuitously inflammatory


----------



## ice_hackey (Aug 13, 2004)

I voted 'one less scumbag', because by all accounts he was a gangster.

However, I also voted 'Tragedy for the City' because the shooting could have injured an innocent bystander. Certainly this person is no great loss to Toronto.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

RevMatt said:


> One of my resolutions for this year is to stop wasting so much time and energy having political discussions with people who's opinions are so abhorrent they have no place in modern society.


It's good to know you possess a clear definition of 'modern society'. Do share this undebatable truth that was bestowed upon you. 

I also had such a truth bestowed upon me but, despite it being Truth, people still consider the abhorrent NDP to have a place in modern society. Go figure.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

ice_hackey said:


> I voted 'one less scumbag', because by all accounts he was a gangster.
> 
> However, I also voted 'Tragedy for the City' because the shooting could have injured an innocent bystander. Certainly this person is no great loss to Toronto.


Those were the two I was leaning towards. I don't think any of the three options were how I felt, but those two combined sort of get there. Sad for Toronto, but seemingly not the kind of loss as occurred on Boxing Day.


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

It's good to start the New Year off with a bang! 

Well, given that I was snug in my bed at midnight
instead of shooting someone in the head
which would make for an exciting sight
I decided, instead, to settle on this thread.



I haven't voted just yet but I look at this and ask myself why? I also looked at the front page of the Saturday Toronto Star. Holy cow! Anyone else notice how many people of colour there were? They made up the vast majority! 

I know I know...some people would call me a racist and an ignoramus here but, really, don't these people have anything better to do than get themselves involved in gang violence and crime?

I know some of the bleeding heart liberals around here would say that it's because of discrimination, lack of opportunity and lack of parental guidance. Geez Louise! I look at the United States; a nation that has enslaved African-Americans, blatantly segregated them, and viciously discriminated against them. Yet, I can name off the top of my head 4 African-American leaders in various areas of society without breaking a sweat! (Oprah Winfrey, Whoopie Goldberg, Chennault (head of American Express), George Washington Carver (the inventor of peanut butter)).

Yet, I can only name one Canadian of African descent who has vaulted to the top, our Governor-General and that was only because she was in the news recently. Are we going to go around and say that we should set up programs for them and coddle them? Geez Louise! Did the people that I named go through government programs? NO! They did it by themselves...not through government handouts.

Maybe we should do something but my government programs won't involve coddling these sort of people. They would include corporal punishment, incarceration and deportation.


----------



## MLeh (Dec 23, 2005)

I believe that the senseless loss of any life is a tragedy. Not for the loss of life as it existed, but for the loss of the potential of that life. We all have untapped potential and the job of all decent humans is to help others reach their full and best potential.

People have a wonderful capacity to live up to our expectations of them. Unfortunately they also are capable of living DOWN to whatever expectations are laid on them by society.

Condemnation and prejudice go nowhere in solving the problems. If you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem.

Expect better of yourself - expect better of others.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Beej said:


> It's good to know you possess a clear definition of 'modern society'. Do share this undebatable truth that was bestowed upon you.
> 
> I also had such a truth bestowed upon me but, despite it being Truth, people still consider the abhorrent NDP to have a place in modern society. Go figure.


Now that IS odd. Same thing happened to me.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

This pretty much sums up our country today:

"Oh Alice, where did your country and your civilization go? It has been raped by people who have lost the ability to empathize and feel for others. They have evolved, as so much of society is evolving, not into something grander and greater but into something that is base and vile. This is important. We are not getting better as a society but without doubt becoming much worse."

http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Coren_Michael/2005/12/31/1373985.html


----------



## enaj (Aug 26, 2004)

For those of you who voted one less scumbag - I ask you to take the time to read the facts:

_Toronto Mayor David Miller said yesterday's shooting appeared to be connected to gangs and the drug trade, *but police said they had no evidence of this.*_

So, why is this guy a scumbag?


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

enaj said:


> For those of you who voted one less scumbag - I ask you to take the time to read the facts:
> 
> _Toronto Mayor David Miller said yesterday's shooting appeared to be connected to gangs and the drug trade, *but police said they had no evidence of this.*_
> 
> So, why is this guy a scumbag?


Um, er, ah, let me see.

Because he shot and killed an innocent bystander on a crowded city street?

Yeah, that's it!


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

enaj said:


> So, why is this guy a scumbag?


From the Toronto Star:



> Police confirmed Anderson was charged three years ago with robbery and using an imitation firearm in an incident that also involved a youth armed with a gun.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Wrong incident SINC...this guy was found shot in his car.

But just because there isn't any evidence of drug trade, doesn't mean it _ain't so_...

Live by the sword...die by the sword. 

Add me to the "ignorant" group.


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

HowEver said:


> Here's my vote: this is an ignorant thread which has as its basis ignorance and fear. Check!


HowEver, you should know by now that ignorance is really not a term that can be applied to me. 



HowEver said:


> As for the person who couldn't name many prominent positive, role-model type Canadians who are of colour,


It took three white Canadians standing in line at the AGO this morning a few minutes to name:

Donovan Bailey
Ben Johnson
Perdita Felicien (that was my contribution)

*Care to name three yourself? I challenge you to give us three Canadians of African descent who are recognized across this country as positive, role-model type Canadians.*



HowEver said:


> it's time to take a walk out of that cocoon and take a few baby steps into the light.


This is why I decided to give people the option of expressing their opinions through an anonymous poll - so, they're not subjected to personal attacks. 

So far, it looks like half of the people on this thread believe that it's good riddance to bad rubbish.


----------



## tedj (Sep 9, 2004)

How about "one less misguided scumbag who is (not-so-tragically) no longer involved in the low-level narcotics trade any longer."


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

kps said:


> But just because there isn't any evidence of drug trade, doesn't mean it _ain't so_...
> 
> Live by the sword...die by the sword.
> 
> Add me to the "ignorant" group.


A 21-yr old shot dead in a *Cadillac Seville*? I don't know about the rest of you guys but I never heard of any paper route that paid that well.


----------



## tedj (Sep 9, 2004)

Errr... a paper route and smack, then?


----------



## enaj (Aug 26, 2004)

IronMac said:


> *Care to name three yourself? I challenge you to give us three Canadians of African descent who are recognized across this country as positive, role-model type Canadians.*.


To further that - can you name me three positive role models of:
Chinese descent
Japanese descent
East Indian descent
Polish descent

So, if you can't name them, what does than mean? 

I still say we must look back at the facts
1) a young black man was found dead
2) he has a past history of crime
3) police have no evidence (maybe not yet) that it was drug/gang related

And now assumptions:
4) since he has a history of crime, he can never reform
5) the mayor said it is linked to drugs and gangs

A lot of decisions are being made on assumptions (at least, it seems to me)

My two cents.

**********************
Of interest, who are your three white role models?


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

enaj said:


> To further that - can you name me three positive role models of:
> Chinese descent
> Japanese descent
> East Indian descent
> Polish descent


Ask me to name off three positive role models for the above groups when over fifty of them are shown as being killed by guns on the front page of the Toronto Star in a year.

I had earlier brought up the issue of role models because that is what some people will say...that this particular group doesn't have any and it helps to explain why there is such a high crime rate. I think that that's a bit bogus. Why?

The above groups (off the top of my head-Chinese-Ky Ho of ATI, Japanese - David Suzuki) that you've listed don't seem to have any positive role models yet they don't seem to have a significant history of gang violence and crime. Certainly not to the extent that it strikes one as interesting when you look at the pictures.


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

enaj said:


> 2) he has a past history of crime


A past history that seems to include shooting people in the head:

http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20060102/murder_060102/20060102?hub=TorontoHome



CTV Toronto said:


> He was previously involved in the robbery of two men who were held at gunpoint in a car. When one of the men tried to escape, he was shot in the head. The man survived and Anderson was charged with the shooting.



I guess he could still have reformed if he hadn't been shot in the head himself...


----------



## enaj (Aug 26, 2004)

IronMac said:


> A past history that seems to include shooting people in the head:
> .


My point was you made your decision BEFORE this fact came out.



IronMac said:


> I know I know...some people would call me a racist and an ignoramus here but, really, * don't these people have anything better to do than get themselves involved in gang violence and crime?*


IronMac. After re-reading your past posts and seeing this comment, I am stopping my comments. I do not want to go do far to say you are a racist, but you are seem to be generalizing a whole race ('these people') by the actions of a small group (because of pictures in a newspaper). 
If you really feel "these people" are in gangs and comitting crimes because they "don't have anything better to do", then I don't see this thread as being based on anything but fear, anger and (as you called yourself above) ignorance. Being this is Canada and a free country, I respect your right to voice your opinion. But I will no longer participate in anything that promotes hatred towards citizens of our city.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

enaj said:


> IronMac. After re-reading your past posts and seeing this comment, I am stopping my comments. I do not want to go do far to say you are a racist, but you are seem to be generalizing a whole race ('these people') by the actions of a small group (because of pictures in a newspaper).
> Being this is Canada and a free country, I respect your right to voice your opinion. But I will no longer participate in anything that promotes hatred towards citizens of our city.


Right you are sir.

Wouldn't want to read any derogatory comments about this guy:

"Police are revealing more information about the violent background of Dillan Anderson, 21, who was killed on New Year's Day while on probation for a shooting two-and-a-half years ago.

He was previously involved in the robbery of two men who were held at gunpoint in a car. When one of the men tried to escape, he was shot in the head. The man survived and Anderson was charged with the shooting."

Nice guys you support there, enaj.


----------



## enaj (Aug 26, 2004)

SINC said:


> Nice guys you support there, enaj.


SINC
If you really think I support this guy, then you missed my point.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

enaj said:


> SINC
> If you really think I support this guy, then you missed my point.


Yep, must have missed it completely.

Enlighten me?


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

This thread is making me sick to my stomach. I can't see thru my disappointment in some fellow ehMac'ers to respond. Maybe tomorrow.

My vote: another tragedy.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Perhaps because I am of East Indian descent, I pay more attention to these, but:

- Deepa Mehta (award-winning, internationally renowned independent film maker)
- Rohinton Mistry (award-winning author, including the Governor General's award)
- Shyam Selvaduri (award-winning author)

I can also think of a number of news anchors, although names escape me at the moment.


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

IronMac said:


> Saw in the Globe that Toronto has already experienced its first shooting death of the year! Looking at the person who was shot, I really can't say that I have any sympathy:


A man is dead, at 21 years of age. And you can't find any sympathy in yourself for him? Because of something he did 3 years ago?



IronMac said:


> I'm going to put up a poll with this thread because people may not want post anything that's politically incorrect or inflammatory.


I hate the expression "politically incorrect." I never use it. Its meaning is too obscure to be useful.

I keep encountering individuals making witless comments like "this may be un-PC, but Canada has too many damn immigrants," or "the politically incorrect may not like it, but we need Jesus back in the schools."

The problem isn't "political correctness." The problem is political intolerance.

As for "inflammatory," how's this: from The Book of Matthew

25:31 “But when the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then he will sit on the throne of his glory. 
25:32 Before him all the nations will be gathered, and he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 
25:33 He will set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. 
25:34 Then the King will tell those on his right hand, ‘Come, blessed of my Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; 
25:35 for I was hungry, and you gave me food to eat. I was thirsty, and you gave me drink. I was a stranger, and you took me in. 
25:36 I was naked, and you clothed me. I was sick, and you visited me. I was in prison, and you came to me.’
25:37 “Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry, and feed you; or thirsty, and give you a drink? 
25:38 When did we see you as a stranger, and take you in; or naked, and clothe you? 
25:39 When did we see you sick, or in prison, and come to you?’
25:40 “The King will answer them, ‘Most certainly I tell you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’ 
25:41 Then he will say also to those on the left hand, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire which is prepared for the devil and his angels; 
25:42 for I was hungry, and you didn’t give me food to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me no drink; 
25:43 I was a stranger, and you didn’t take me in; naked, and you didn’t clothe me; sick, and in prison, and you didn’t visit me.’
25:44 “Then they will also answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and didn’t help you?’
25:45 “Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Most certainly I tell you, inasmuch as you didn’t do it to one of the least of these, you didn’t do it to me.’ 
25:46 These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

BTW, I am an atheist. But still, I see a valuable message in the ideal of forgiveness. How sad so many have forgotten this, only 5 days from the Feast of the Epiphany.

I am sorry this man is dead. I guess I must then be numbered among the "sheep of political correctness," while the goats stop seeing a man as a man simply because he is also a former convict.


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

enaj said:


> To further that - can you name me three positive role models of:
> Chinese descent
> Japanese descent
> East Indian descent
> ...


I like the way you think, sir!


----------



## enaj (Aug 26, 2004)

Ok, so it seems that I am getting a few people riled up (and maybe not without reason), so I will try to explain myself a little further.

When I first joined this thread, the information (of the two posted links) we knew about this guy was that 
_Police confirmed Anderson was charged three years ago with robbery and using an imitation firearm in an incident that also involved a youth armed with a gun.
The North York Mirror reported at the time that the man Anderson allegedly robbed was shot in the parking lot of a North York highrise as he tried to flee._

But, he was charged with robbery and using an imitation firearm. He was not charged (in the original article) with shooting anyone. Thus, a comment came out 
_“I voted 'one less scumbag', because by all accounts he was a gangster”_

So, all I quoted was the article that the police did not know at the time if it was gang related. I also gave the benefit of the doubt to the person as yes he has one incident of crime in the past (robbery and imitation firearm), but our legal system is setup to not only punish criminals, but to help them reform (at least in theory). Thus, all I was implying was that people should not be so quick to jump to the conclusion that he is a gang member.

OK, then a comment came out:

_“don't these people have anything better to do than get themselves involved in gang violence and crime?”_

Well, I thought that was a generalization of a race – but after re-reading the post, maybe he was just talking about the people who had been killed that were actually in gangs. So, if that was the point I apologize to IronMac for my comments. But, if he was making the statement about the entire race, then I stick my previous remarks. 
But I also think IronMac brought up an excellent question of “don’t these people have anything better to do?" Well, let’s explore that question a bit further and assume for the sake of arguement that maybe they don’t have anything better to do. But maybe that is what you get after 8 years of cuts (read – Mike Harris) to social programs and the school system. We are now reaping the benefits of all those young people who had their (and families) social program cuts. And, the high school drop-out rate has been increasing every year with the more cut backs we do to the school system (not to mention losing so many after school activities/sports). So, what could one possible thing people who have minimal education, no social programs to support them and nothing to do all day do? Maybe turn to crime. Maybe join a gang. I’m not saying that is the definitive answer, but there are arguments out there that support this theory. 

But now, the news is reporting much more past information about the murder victim. Yes, it seems that he has a sordid past. but I still believe it is a tragedy when anyone is murdered.


----------



## enaj (Aug 26, 2004)

Sonal said:


> Perhaps because I am of East Indian descent, I pay more attention to these, but:
> 
> - Deepa Mehta (award-winning, internationally renowned independent film maker)
> - Rohinton Mistry (award-winning author, including the Governor General's award)
> ...


Hey, I just finished R. Mistry's "Such a Long Journey". Excellent book!


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

Anybody who thinks that gunning down a scumbag somehow solves a problem is sorely mistaken. Gun violence spills over into everybody's life.

I have no problems with scumbags dying. When guns are involved though, it gets scary.


----------



## CamCanola (Jan 26, 2004)

I('ve) know a few "scumbags" and not one of them ever deserved to die.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

enaj said:


> Hey, I just finished R. Mistry's "Such a Long Journey". Excellent book!


If you liked "Such a Long Journey", you will love his "A Fine Balance". I'm a little less impressed with "Family Matters", however--good, but not as good.

You might also like Shyam Selvaduri--I recommend "Funny Boy" in particular.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

do we now NOT allow Conrad Black to be out on bail?
surely his alleged crimes are heinous

what about the enron boys or worldcom?
if u take someone's savings and financially ruin them, is that not horrible?


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

> I haven't voted just yet but I look at this and ask myself why? I also looked at the front page of the Saturday Toronto Star. Holy cow! Anyone else notice how many people of colour there were? They made up the vast majority!
> 
> I know I know...some people would call me a racist and an ignoramus here but, really, don't these people have anything better to do than get themselves involved in gang violence and crime?


IronMac... this type of racist language is totally unacceptable on ehMac. It is flat out racist, and you can take the kind of crap talk off ehMac. 

This whole thread has left me a little sick to my stomach and I'm extremely disappointed in many ehMac members here. You're not anonymous to me, and I've lost respect to those of you who can view any civilian murder by a gun, in public, as a positive thing. Like this person who was involved with crime getting shot it the head is going to solve something.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Rather ironic that a millitary recruiter, who signs up young men to die in foreign lands, quotes the bible as an atheist and gets all worked up (to the point of sickness) over the murder of a convicted fellon.

I just don't get it....

No one here said this punk deserved to die...but die he did and I, for one, will not shed a single tear.


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

kps said:


> Rather ironic that a millitary recruiter, who signs up young men to die in foreign lands...


Not to *die* but to *fight*
Dying is a risk for a soldier, not the purpose. Same as for a firefighter or a policeman or any dangerous job.



kps said:


> ...quotes the bible as an atheist....


As George Orwell once observed, 2+2=4, even if Hitler believed it. You don't need to be a Christian to admire some of Jesus' teachings.



kps said:


> ...and gets all worked up (to the point of sickness) over the murder of a convicted fellon.


And I'm sick over the reaction here to his death. I only feel sorry for him.



kps said:


> I just don't get it....


Clearly.



kps said:


> No one here said this punk deserved to die..


Except for those cheering for the death of another "scumbag."


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

ehMax said:


> IronMac... this type of racist language is totally unacceptable on ehMac. It is flat out racist, and you can take the kind of crap talk off ehMac.
> 
> This whole thread has left me a little sick to my stomach and I'm extremely disappointed in many ehMac members here. You're not anonymous to me, and I've lost respect to those of you who can view any civilian murder by a gun, in public, as a positive thing. Like this person who was involved with crime getting shot it the head is going to solve something.


:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:


----------



## Jacklar (Jul 23, 2005)

I think its funny that because of two newspaper articles one can decide the fate of a person and justify their death.

Really quite the honorable thing to do there, never mind you know nothing about this person, his life, his family, or his surroundings.

While gun violence needs to be dealth with harshly, walk a mile in one of their footsteps and see how they have to live before you jump head first into judging. I'll be first to say we should punish they people strictly but before you judge take some time to think so you don't sound like an idiot.


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

ehMax said:


> IronMac... this type of racist language is totally unacceptable on ehMac. It is flat out racist, and you can take the kind of crap talk off ehMac.
> 
> This whole thread has left me a little sick to my stomach and I'm extremely disappointed in many ehMac members here. You're not anonymous to me, and I've lost respect to those of you who can view any civilian murder by a gun, in public, as a positive thing. Like this person who was involved with crime getting shot it the head is going to solve something.


When I looked at those pictures on the front page I could not help noticing that there is a vast majority. You can't hide from it. 

I don't know why there should be this predominance. This is a great country and there are opportunities here. There is a problem with this particular group and, yes, I'm generalizing but it's not as if they don't have the same access to the same educational system (separate black schools? Sorry, that smacks of segregation/favouritism) and it's not as if they're not officially treated the same way under the law (racial profiling by the police? Yes, it happens.).

I don't know and it bothers me. Is it because of race? I don't know and I don't think so because of my earlier American examples.

Is it because of our immigration system? I don't know because it's supposed to be based on a point system.

Is it because of our inability to deport criminals and the situation has deteriorated where there is now a buildup of a particular group? I don't know.

Is it because of our criminal system? I don't know if the penalties are not stiff enough. Notice that I did not advocate capital punishment which is usually murder by the justice system in private and does not solve anything either.

Maybe it is wrong to point out that it's predominantly blacks who are being killed by handguns while linked to criminal activities but when we start developing and financing programs aimed towards that same group will you start yelling that it's racist?

If you don't like this thread then it's your prerogative to pull it. No harm no foul because there is no expectation of free speech when it comes to a private forum.


----------



## RevMatt (Sep 10, 2005)

Thanks, Max and lpmckenna. (Hehe. First time we have agreed, lp )



IronMac said:


> When I looked at those pictures on the front page I could not help noticing that there is a vast majority. You can't hide from it.
> 
> I don't know why there should be this predominance. This is a great country and there are opportunities here. There is a problem with this particular group and, yes, I'm generalizing but it's not as if they don't have the same access to the same educational system (separate black schools? Sorry, that smacks of segregation/favouritism) and it's not as if they're not officially treated the same way under the law (racial profiling by the police? Yes, it happens.).


See, this ignorance right here is what is at the basis of your basic understanding of the way this country works. It is plain fact that thoe who are poor in this country receive a worse education, and harsher treatment by the law. And since people of colour are more recent immigrants to this country for the most part, they tend to occupy the bulk of the lower income classes. Combine that with the reality that racism is still quite common, and that it is most common in the old power families, and you begin to understand the problem. There is a predominance of people of colour in the background of crime because we are still a society that is structured around keeping those who have no power or wealth in their place, and the most recent immigrants will always be those people. Once upon a time, it was the Irish, or the Italians and so on. Right now, it is people of colour. The fact that they are visibly different just makes it that much easier. And if you honestly don't see the reality that is racial profiling as different treatment under the law, you need help.



IronMac said:


> I don't know and it bothers me. Is it because of race? I don't know and I don't think so because of my earlier American examples.


Right. So you came up with 4 examples from a country of 300 million, and one from a country of 30 million. And you think that means that people of colour are less visible here? In fact, of course, they are. If for no reason other than the reality that we are a whiter country than the US in our make up.



IronMac said:


> Is it because of our immigration system? I don't know because it's supposed to be based on a point system.
> 
> Is it because of our inability to deport criminals and the situation has deteriorated where there is now a buildup of a particular group? I don't know.


Where has anyone said anything about this individual not being a Citizen? 



IronMac said:


> Is it because of our criminal system? I don't know if the penalties are not stiff enough. Notice that I did not advocate capital punishment which is usually murder by the justice system in private and does not solve anything either.
> 
> Maybe it is wrong to point out that it's predominantly blacks who are being killed by handguns while linked to criminal activities but when we start developing and financing programs aimed towards that same group will you start yelling that it's racist?


Programs are aimed at those who need them, but nowhere will you see a program to help black people. Poor people, yes, and since in some parts of TO the poor are almost 100% black, the result will be a program that is largely for black people in that location. But that is hardly the same thing. And pointing out the statistics is not the problem. It's the attitude that all black people are somehow evil or criminals that is the problem. And I and others heard that attitude loudly in your posts, and in posts from others.


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

RevMatt said:


> See, this ignorance right here is what is at the basis of your basic understanding of the way this country works. It is plain fact that thoe who are poor in this country receive a worse education, and harsher treatment by the law. And since people of colour are more recent immigrants to this country for the most part, they tend to occupy the bulk of the lower income classes. Combine that with the reality that racism is still quite common, and that it is most common in the old power families, and you begin to understand the problem. There is a predominance of people of colour in the background of crime because we are still a society that is structured around keeping those who have no power or wealth in their place, and the most recent immigrants will always be those people.


If you truly think that the lower income classes; those with little education, little wealth and little power; provide the bulk of our criminal element then how do you explain why there are no Native Canadians on that same front page (or, at least none that I noticed)? I mean, they make up over 4% of Canada's population or 1.2 million.

In fact, your comment about immigrants moved me to go to the Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC Canada) website, here you will notice that the intake of immigrants for the past 10 years is predominantly from the Asian and Pacific regions. According to your argument, we should see those people on the front page of the Toronto Saturday Star or at least a greater representation but there isn't. I mean, they can't ALL be educated, they can't ALL be wealthy and they can't ALL be powerful, can they?

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pub/facts2004/permanent/9.html


----------



## RevMatt (Sep 10, 2005)

IronMac said:


> If you truly think that the lower income classes; those with little education, little wealth and little power; provide the bulk of our criminal element then how do you explain why there are no Native Canadians on that same front page (or, at least none that I noticed)? I mean, they make up over 4% of Canada's population or 1.2 million.



Most of whom are corralled on reserves. Since we don't really care, we have no idea what goes on there, and it certainly doesn't make the papers.



IronMac said:


> In fact, your comment about immigrants moved me to go to the Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC Canada) website, here you will notice that the intake of immigrants for the past 10 years is predominantly from the Asian and Pacific regions. According to your argument, we should see those people on the front page of the Toronto Saturday Star or at least a greater representation but there isn't. I mean, they can't ALL be educated, they can't ALL be wealthy and they can't ALL be powerful, can they?



Firstly, it takes time for a group to establish itself to the point where the demographics shift. Secondly, if you ask anyone from Vancouver or Richmond Hill (north of TO), you will know that in some places the demographics have shifted. Thirdly, the asian immigration is in some ways a statistical anomoly, since the vast majority of immigrants from that part of the world in recent history are extremely wealthy. Why? That are, for the most part, the rich fleeing Hong Kong. Not a normal situation.


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

RevMatt said:


> Most of whom are corralled on reserves. Since we don't really care, we have no idea what goes on there, and it certainly doesn't make the papers.


LOL!!! Even your first sentence admits that some of them aren't corralled on reserves. Out of 1.2 million, a few tens of thousands of potential criminals (according to your argument) can't make it to the big city?



RevMatt said:


> Firstly, it takes time for a group to establish itself to the point where the demographics shift.


Really? According to CIC, immigration from the Asian and Pacific regions are running 5:1 over South and Central America. For the past TEN years. You're going to tell me that that immigration from Africa and South and Central America has been the norm from the 1960s to 1980s? (Before 1960s, I believe that the norm was European immigrants.)



RevMatt said:


> Thirdly, the asian immigration is in some ways a statistical anomoly, since the vast majority of immigrants from that part of the world in recent history are extremely wealthy. Why? That are, for the most part, the rich fleeing Hong Kong. Not a normal situation.


That does not make any sense. HK was handed over in 1997 which is a full 8 years ago. The numbers may indicate that, up to 1997, a significant number of those people were from HK but there has been little or no incentive for those people to emigrate to Canada since then.

The greater majority of immigrants since then are from Southeast Asian countries and I don't see the vast majority of them as being very wealthy. Given that their intake numbers run 500 percent higher than the group in question they should have caught up in population or your tipping point, no? Which means that they should be more represented in handgun/criminal activities deaths, no?


----------



## andreww (Nov 20, 2002)

Why even bother debate this topic? In past threads I've taken verbal abuse from people like RevMatt for being ignorant, racist, etc. You can't debate with people like that. They only see their liberal side of the issue and will only try to belittle you for disagreeing. In fact RevMatt has already made his resolution to ignore anyone who doesn't agree with his philosophies. 

Racial problems have been ignored too long in this country, in fact they have been purposefully ignored. It is better to analyze and deal with a problem rather than sweep it under a rug. Debates like this are healthy when you can learn from the other side, but when you simply ignore or pass arguments off as ignorance or racism, the entire process becomes useless.

BTW, I voted "One less scumbag". Live by the sword, die by the sword!


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

> When I looked at those pictures on the front page I could not help noticing that there is a vast majority. You can't hide from it.
> 
> I don't know why there should be this predominance. This is a great country and there are opportunities here. There is a problem with this particular group and, yes, I'm generalizing but it's not as if they don't have the same access to the same educational system (separate black schools?


"Generalizing" is not the proper term...  You're racist comments have no place here on ehMac.


----------



## andreww (Nov 20, 2002)

Since when does identifying a problem amount to racism?


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

andreww said:


> Racial problems have been ignored too long in this country, in fact they have been purposefully ignored. It is better to analyze and deal with a problem rather than sweep it under a rug. Debates like this are healthy when you can learn from the other side, but when you simply ignore or pass arguments off as ignorance or racism, the entire process becomes useless.
> 
> BTW, I voted "One less scumbag". Live by the sword, die by the sword!


I'm sorry, but I don't know how one can debate with someone who in one sentence says its better to analyze and deal with a problem, then in the next sentence says he voted for the public shooting and murder of a Canadian citizen as a good solution. 

Its one thing to discuss racism and how to alleviate it. Its totally another to discuss a problem as being caused by race.


----------



## andreww (Nov 20, 2002)

ehMax said:


> I'm sorry, but I don't know how one can debate with someone who in one sentence says its better to analyze and deal with a problem, then in the next sentence says he voted for the public shooting and murder of a Canadian citizen as a good solution.
> 
> Its one thing to discuss racism and how to alleviate it. Its totally another to discuss a problem as being caused by race.


I do not think that "One less scumbag" equates to advocating public executions. Please do not attempt to put words in my mouth. I simply do not have the same compassion for this victim that I have for the victims of the boxing day shootings.


----------



## andrewenterprise (May 22, 2005)

I voted one less scum bag aswell.. as its proven that even with rehabilitation the criminal mind can never be *fully* rehabilitated.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

I'm not sure why, but this thread almost immediately resulted in the drawing of lines and the making of assumptions based on very few words on both sides of the discussion. I thought there would be more discussion of the options or what options people would have preferred to see in the poll or something at least somewhat constructive. What is going on?

In an attempt to change course, I'll repeat my earlier thoughts (paraphrased):
I didn't find the poll options to match what I thought, but some combination of bad for Toronto but seemingly not as bad as the boxing day death would fit. 

To be completely open, despite the tone of the thread discouraging it: I picked the first option and didn't know you could pick more than one option. If I had, I would have picked either 1 and 3 or, less likely, all three. That doesn't mean any or all the statements reflect my thinking, it's just a starting point for discussion...or so I thought.

For further clarification, 'One less scumbag' does not reflect my thinking, but the notion of 'Tragedy for the city' is incomplete in that it doesn't make any distinction of degree while society clearly does (for better or for worse). Not all murders are viewed as equally tragic by society, although some individuals do feel that way. That could be an interesting discussion, at least relative to racial generalizations and ostracism.


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

andrewenterprise said:


> I voted one less scum bag aswell.. as its proven that even with rehabilitation the criminal mind can never be *fully* rehabilitated.


uhhhhhh........


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

Beej said:


> I'm not sure why, but this thread almost immediately resulted in the drawing of lines and the making of assumptions based on very few words on both sides of the discussion. I thought there would be more discussion of the options or what options people would have preferred to see in the poll or something at least somewhat constructive. What is going on?


I'm not sure either...believe me, I've looked over this thread and my comments many many times this morning (3 hours in total today).

My initial reaction was to the front page of the Globe yesterday when I saw another person gunned down and they had a picture of him. That twigged immediately to the picture on the front page of the Toronto Star with its predominace of "Canadians of African origin". It also twigged to something else that someone said from last week after the shootings, where they said, why not just deport them all?

When that person said that, I smirked and laughed thinking it's just the racism of an older generation talking. Then, came that front page. You cannot look at that page and say that there is not a particular group that is overly represented and you have to wonder.

Was I hasty in linking that particular ethnic minority to guns and crime? Yes, perhaps, but I am frustrated at the sheer waste of potential and resources and anyone who knows me personally will know that I take immediate action. I saw something there, a relationship that may or may not hold. I'm not saying that it's "in the bones" or it's genetics. That's racism.

The options in the poll, as Beej points should have been better thought out.


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

andrewenterprise said:


> I voted one less scum bag aswell.. as its proven that even with rehabilitation the criminal mind can never be *fully* rehabilitated.


Is that so? Got a reference for that?


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

andreww said:


> Why even bother debate this topic? In past threads I've taken verbal abuse from people like RevMatt for being ignorant, racist, etc. You can't debate with people like that. They only see their liberal side of the issue and will only try to belittle you for disagreeing. In fact RevMatt has already made his resolution to ignore anyone who doesn't agree with his philosophies.


There is no "liberal side."



andreww said:


> BTW, I voted "One less scumbag". Live by the sword, die by the sword!


And who said "live by the sword, die by the sword?" Jesus.
Who did he say it to? Simon Peter.
And what did Simon Peter go on to do?

Apparently, some people *can* be rehabilitated.


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

ehMax said:


> "Generalizing" is not the proper term...  You're racist comments have no place here on ehMac.


First of all, if you believe that I am advocating separate black schools as in your quote of my post, that's incorrect. Here is the full sentence:



IronMac said:


> (separate black schools? Sorry, that smacks of segregation/favouritism)


Second, also in that post, it is your prerogative to yank this thread. As I said before, no harm no foul in doing so because you are the final arbiter of what can and cannot be posted. It is your forum.


----------



## DEWLine (Sep 24, 2005)

Tragedy to me. It means no one is yet safe. What if _I'd_ been mistaken for a real target of some gangster's ire?

Or you?

And it may yet happen to you, if we don't act.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

IronMac said:


> You cannot look at that page and say that there is not a particular group that is overly represented and you have to wonder.


I didn't wonder, I believe it to be deeper social problems that crop up with any race in the same situation, but I wouldn't shout you down for wondering or wanting to explore. 

Your particular choice of words did get me concerned ('they' type statements), but I gave you the benefit of the doubt thinking things would get cleared with further poster involvement...then things got even worse with all sorts of anger and I didn't even feel like participating in the grim circus (some expressed this feeling as 'sick to their stomach' I believe). Eventually I caved and jumped in again. Oh well, I'm a sucker for barstool philosophy.


----------



## Myrddin Emrys (May 24, 2005)

First, the only choices for the poll only serve to show if someone may be Liberal, PC or NDP; I voted 'one less scumbag' due to the context to the question.

Colour, race, culture, yadda, yadda, yadda... it is people who commit violence plain and simple. All these so called 'profiles' are just bureaucracy flexing it's muscles to give the illusion that anything is truely being done. Modern politics never wants to solve a problem that affects voters, just find a scape goat and suggest a patch.

If you keep people arguing then law enforcement or goverments don't have to do anything; there is a downside to democracy.

These wars, I think the term is appropriate, that are going are no less than the situations in Iraq, etc. Who controls the streets?

I little while back I returned home to find that our visitor's parking lot was a crime scene, if fact they just took away the bodies and the spent bullet shells were still circled on the ground. After I proved I lived in the building I was allowed to check on my family. This little sqirmish was in fact part of a gang war spanning across the city of Toronto. I could of gotten home a little earlier and I could of been one of the causulties of this little war. I easily say that I almost needed new underware.

My point? We are not discussing something as third party, we are all part of the war if we like it or not; we need responsible to solve the problem.

Case in point, the U.S. is being blamed for the guns coming to Canada, that may be part of the problem but guns don't act out on there own. If not for guns then it would be knives, axes, or even spoons, anything can be a weapon. The intent of the individual is the problem and has to be confronted.

(end rant)


----------



## nxnw (Dec 22, 2002)

> When I looked at those pictures on the front page I could not help noticing that there is a vast majority. You can't hide from it.


Rather than condemn the black population for being overrepresented on that page of victims, a more appropriate response would be horror and sympathy.

Further, your implication that all of the blacks in the picture were involved in criminal activity* is false and reprehensible.

I stand with everyone who has condemned your posts and this thread.

* emphasis added in each case:


Ironmac said:


> ...Anyone else notice how many people of colour there were? They made up the vast majority!
> 
> I know I know...some people would call me a racist and an ignoramus here but, really, *don't these people have anything better to do than get themselves involved in gang violence and crime?*





Ironmac said:


> ...Ask me to name off three positive role models for the above groups *when over fifty of them are shown as being killed by guns on the front page of the Toronto Star in a year.*


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

All right! The "race" issues are out! Racists are saying "I'm not racist but...". Non-racists are being called racist because they even DARE use the word "black" in a sentence. Let's see how Toronto homicides for 2005 add up.

http://www.thestar.com/static/googlemaps/starmaps.html?xml=homicides2005.xml

Take a look through that. I don't see an overwhelming lean to one race or another. Seems murders don't have a preference of skin colour.

No one particular neighbourhood seems safe either.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

lpkmckenna said:


> Not to *die* but to *fight*
> Dying is a risk for a soldier, not the purpose. Same as for a firefighter or a policeman or any dangerous job.


Any dangerous job? Truck drivers have a more dangerous job than firefighters, police or the military.

SOURCE: http://www.safetycenter.navy.mil/articles/dangerousjob.htm straight from the military.

Would you put lumberjacks and truck drivers into the same category just because of the danger quotient? Flawed logic there...

Firefighters fight fires, not other people and they do not carry guns, they save lives.

Police carry side arms, but their mandate is to protect life, not to take it.

Soldiers are trained for combat, which is to kill other humans, en masse. Big difference!

You can not compare essential civilian service personnel with the military on most levels. On some levels you can, but not when it comes to combat.

The military is a special segment of society, that's why we have the term *civilians* for the rest of us. Although the military has varied tasks, including search and rescue, etc. their main purpose is to take the life of an opponent and are trained to do so if need be. As quoted in the movie Patton..."by making the *other* son-of-a-bitch die for his country". And how do you do that? By killing him.

Don't think me anti-military. I have a high regard for anyone who joins to serve their country and that includes you. It's just that your statement is the kind of logical fallacy that needed an answer. On the surface it makes perfect sense, but underneath it's a fallacy. You, of all people, should know better.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Anyone notice this poll totals about 120% when you add up the votes?


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

software routine must have written by some programmer in the electronic calculator generation


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

I'm not going to say another word...

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...le&cid=1136328631785&call_pageid=968332188492



> A coalition of *black community leaders* is upset that it wasn't invited to a meeting over *guns and gangs* between the three levels of government; a conference it has been demanding for several months.


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

SINC said:


> Anyone notice this poll totals about 120% when you add up the votes?


The poll allows one to choose more than one option.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Ah, so that's it. Thanks IronMac.


----------



## med8or (Jan 18, 2002)

Well, I've been debating whether or not to delve into this conversation. But I figured why not. My perspective is not in taking sides in this issue, but to offer some things that come to my head.

First off, IMO, I don't think noticing and saying that a certain percentage of the killings are of a certain race is racist in itself, though it is far from conclusive either as to any form of causality. It's like saying that if the majority of these people on the front page of the star had brown eyes, that perhaps that meant something. My point is, that I don't see noticing trends as racist as long as it doesn't blind the viewer from seeing other perspectives. How many were male??? Perhaps we need to offer them classes on "how to get in touch with their feminine side?" Obviously tongue firmly planted in cheek but really not different then many of the fixes that some may think are needed for dealing with "race problems".

As a mediator, it is my job to help all sides see each other's opinion. I often don't share in these opinions, and in some cases, they are offensive to me...but the bigger point to this, is understanding. Though I think most people would argue that they see all sides, that doesn't happen simply from reading another person's post. I would question, how many people took a day to reflect on someone's comment, before replying? How many replied as soon as they read it? How many said "I don't understand your point/arguement here when you said....can you explain it another way?" Again, this doesn't show anything in itself, but to perhaps highlight my point that both sides need to try to understand the other perspective, and understand where they are coming from. Perhaps some in this group are fundamentally racist. Perhaps. But calling someone a racist is probably the quickest way to get someone to stop listening to your perspective. You don't have to agree, but you don't have to disagree to make your point heard.

My long-winded point is this: people often say they are open-minded, but saying and doing are often two different things. There is a lot of gray in this conversation and a lot of people have lenses formed by varied lives.

J


----------



## med8or (Jan 18, 2002)

Now I'm not a Saint and have been drawn into this very debate on a number of occassions. I tend to believe that we need to see "big picture" when dealing with any issues like this, violence, homelessness, health issues, etc. It is far too easy (and done far too often) to see things in black and white. I tell my clients, black and white does not exist because no two people see the world the same way.

I remember reading a book in university called (I think) The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison. I recalled this book recently with the recent mine accident as we discussed in class about the difference between violent crime and other crimes (for example if a mine operator ran a mine substandard and it resulted in an accident). This itself has always facinated me. Why are people so preoccuppied on violent crime? Well, I'd imagine because of the psychology involved: how shocking it can be, how "in your face" it tends to be in the media, how cause and effect it is. But I wonder why some people focus so much on this particular type of crime vs other crimes? Perhaps just because they are harder to identify? 

The example of corporate crime has been used in this thread and seems valid. Is the company that steals $ from those who can barely afford it (or anyone for that matter), and forces them to live a life different then they have "earned", any less a crime? Are the effects less then a person being shot? Perhaps. But perhaps to some people, living their lives, scraping by (when they should have been set comfortably) would see this akin to being shot. I don't mean to exagerate, nor am I trying to dramatize, but a person shot (let's say not fatally) will likely heal. What about the pensioner who looses the house, the nest egg, etc. How easy is it for them to "heal". My only point with this little illustration is to point out that violent crime may not deserve the focus we sometimes put on it, especially when it prevents us from seeing other things that may be just as detrimental. That's not to say in any way, that violent crime isn't an important issue to deal with....let's just keep it in perspective?


Ok......perhaps I've said enough...


----------



## K_OS (Dec 13, 2002)

I just read trough this whole thread and still haven't voted. One thing that pisses me off about this whole situation is that this happened right around the corner from where I live, for years the neighbourhood talked to the police about the tiny alleway behind the old 7/11 now a Starbank convenience store and the things that we're seen there cars always parked there, people going to the cars and coming out with envelopes or bags full of what I can only imgine but it's been happening for at least the last 10 years since we moved to the area. So in the end I'm not surprised that somebody had to be killed for the police to finally show up and do something about it too bad it was too late then.

Laterz


----------



## PosterBoy (Jan 22, 2002)

Wow.

What a hate fest.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

There are a couple worthwhile opinion pieces in the Globe and Mail today, for those interested in reading some more points of view. One, by Simpson, challenging the uproar with some data; the other by a former 'delinquent' providing their point of view on what can be done. Worth it for the perspective.


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

kps said:


> Would you put lumberjacks and truck drivers into the same category just because of the danger quotient? Flawed logic there...


My point was that the *purpose* is soldiering is not to die, but to fight. Dying is only a risk. That's not flawed logic. (Also, the majority of soldiers are not killed in battle. They are more likely to die of environmental conditions, disease, accidents, and so on. Just like the rest of us.)



kps said:


> Firefighters fight fires, not other people and they do not carry guns, they save lives.


So do soldiers. Mostly, they save other soldier's lives.(Incidentally, firefighter and truckdriver are also military trades, just like signals or artillery or infantry. And military firefighters and truckdrivers *do* carry weapons.)



kps said:


> Police carry side arms, but their mandate is to protect life, not to take it.


The majority of military trades do not involve combat. Medics, intelligence, signals, supply, and so on usually have no occassion to kill anyone. But they are still soldiers.



kps said:


> Soldiers are trained for combat, which is to kill other humans, en masse. Big difference!


Agreed. Still doesn't mean their purpose is to die.



kps said:


> You can not compare essential civilian service personnel with the military on most levels. On some levels you can, but not when it comes to combat.


Agreed. Still doesn't mean their purpose is to die.



kps said:


> The military is a special segment of society, that's why we have the term *civilians* for the rest of us. Although the military has varied tasks, including search and rescue, etc. their main purpose is to take the life of an opponent and are trained to do so if need be. As quoted in the movie Patton..."by making the *other* son-of-a-bitch die for his country". And how do you do that? By killing him.


Actually, police *are* a military institution. Particularily in Canada, where the RCMP are considered a component of Canada's defence.
(By the way, beware of quoting movies to support ideas about the miltary. Military movies are overwhelmingly about the infantry and other close-combat trades. Infantry != Military.



kps said:


> Don't think me anti-military. I have a high regard for anyone who joins to serve their country and that includes you. It's just that your statement is the kind of logical fallacy that needed an answer. On the surface it makes perfect sense, but underneath it's a fallacy. You, of all people, should know better.


I don't think you anti-military. And which fallacy would that be, then?

I know which fallacy your thinking reflects: equivocation.


----------



## ComputerIdiot (Jan 8, 2004)

I didn't realize you could vote for more than one 'take' on the poll, so went with 'tragedy for the city' before reading more than a post or two. At that point all I had was the mayor's opinion that this was possibly drug- and gang-related. Backup on that didn't come till later.

Having read further, I'll stick with my original vote. I have to admit I don't feel as sorry for this person as I did for the Boxing Day victims, but nor do I think he 'deserved' what he got. Very few people 'deserve' something like this.

As to solutions...I'm stymied, particularly as I have no idea what brought this particular person to this particular unpleasant ending.


----------

