CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
Forum Junkie
Forum Junkie
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 596
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 8:38 am
 


My last column before my vacation argued that despite the efforts of the “hug a thug” lobby to ignore it, Canadian crime statistics show that regardless of small annual drops in our crime rate since the early 1990s, crime remains alarmingly high compared to the past.

Today, let’s examine another disturbing issue — the high incidence of unreported crime.

To review, Canada’s violent crime rate last year (crimes reported to police per 100,000 population) was 316% higher than when comparable records first started being kept in 1962.

The property crime rate was 56% higher.

The rate for “other Criminal Code incidents” — counterfeiting, child porn, weapons violations, etc. — was 282% higher.

The overall crime rate was 131% higher.

Statistics Canada determines annual crime rates based on reported crimes to police.

Unreported crime is estimated through crime victimization data compiled for the General Social Survey (GSS).

This scientific poll is conducted every five years — the last one in 2004.

It interviewed 24,000 Canadians over 15 years of age, asking if they’d been victims of one or more of eight designated crimes in the previous year.

As Statistics Canada explains: “One way to estimate the extent of crime that is not reported to police is through the GSS victimization survey. Because the GSS asks a sample of the population about their personal victimization experiences, it captures information on all crimes, whether or not they have been reported to police. The amount of unreported victimization can be substantial. For example, the 2004 GSS estimated that 88% of sexual assaults, 69% of household thefts and 67% of personal property thefts were not reported to the police. As a result, victimization surveys usually produce much higher rates of victimization than police-reported crime statistics.”

In 2004, (the next survey, containing data up to 2009, will be released this fall) only an estimated 34% of all crimes were reported to police, while 64% were not.

For violent crime (sexual assault, robbery, physical assault), 33% of crimes were reported, 66% were not.

For household crime (break and enter, motor vehicle/parts theft, theft of household property, vandalism) 37% of crimes were reported, 61% were not.

For theft of personal property, 31% of crimes were reported, 67% were not.

(Figures don’t total 100% because some people didn’t know or didn’t say whether the crime was reported.)

Finally, the reporting of criminal incidents to police dropped to 34% in 2004 from 37% in 1999.

There are limitations to this data because it’s a poll, not all crimes are included and estimates are influenced by such factors as the recollection of victims.

That said, efforts by many in the media to downplay and mock the significance of unreported crime, for example by inaccurately implying the GSS only deals with minor incidents, suggest their soft-on-crime bias.

This started with a recent exchange between national media and Treasury Board President Stockwell Day, in which Day was challenged by an … uh … “objective” reporter, to explain why the Conservatives will “blow” money on increased prison spending when crime is declining.

Day gave a serious answer, but unwisely started by referring to the uptick in the frequency of unreported crime identified in the 2004 crime victimization data.

He was making the legitimate point, in the context of the reporter’s question, that reported crime rates don’t tell the whole story about actual crime levels.

However, unreported crime is largely irrelevant to prison spending. (As are small dips in the annual crime rate, despite what many media believe.)

The relevant issue, whether one agrees or disagrees with the Conservatives on crime, is that their measures to toughen sentencing create a need for more prison space and thus for more spending on prisons.

During and after the news conference, some commentators inaccurately suggested Day’s comments on unreported crime had no factual basis.

Some didn’t know Statistics Canada does research on unreported crime.

Others charged Day, by citing unreported crime, was attempting to discredit reported crime statistics showing a drop in annual crime rates.

This was — at best — a misinterpretation of what Day said, and what Statistics Canada says, about unreported crime.

But it’s par for the course in Canada, where we’re barraged by hug-a-thug propaganda from soft-on-crime media, politicians, academics, lawyers and prisoners’ rights groups.

Lectured, for example, that since “crime is down”, anyone calling for tougher parole, given that a rapist sentenced to nine years in prison can be out on unsupervised temporary absences in 18 months and full parole in three years, must be hysterical.

Sure, guys.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33492
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 8:44 am
 


It's that rise in unreported crime that I'm worried about. I agree we need to build more unreported crime prisons. Fill em with unreported criminals, or Liberals, take your pick.


Offline
Forum Junkie
Forum Junkie
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 596
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 9:09 am
 


The question is why are they going unreported. It's because the police can't do anything about the small crimes and criminals get slaps on the wrist for the big crimes. I myself had two crimes against my family go unreported. I guess if we hide our heads in the sand and pretend that crime is on the decline we can sleep better at night.


Offline
Forum Junkie
Forum Junkie
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 596
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 9:18 am
 


This shop keeper was so frustrated at reporting shoplifters to the police and getting nowhere he stopped reporting them. So he decided to take matters in his own hands, only to be charged himself.



David Chen wore a patiently strained smile as he sat in the back of a Toronto courthouse yesterday morning, shifting only slightly while he waited to face charges for the alleged assault and kidnapping of a shoplifter outside of his Chinatown produce store.

Despite being surrounded by supporters from the Chinese-Canadian community, Mr. Chen-- the city's most notorious shopkeeper -- seemed out of place. He was a far cry from the Lucky Moose Market, the shop he owns just off of Spadina Avenue.

Until May, when Mr. Chen and two employees were charged with attacking and confining a shoplifter who had returned to his store, the Chinese immigrant spent most of his time behind his shop counter.

Yesterday, however, was spent with his lawyer in court, with a brief midmorning break in front of a swarm of television cameras and news reporters.

"I feel anxious and nervous," he said in English, through his strained smile, before turning to a supporter for help translating.

"I feel this is really unfair to me...I feel a lot of pressure. I don't have a lot of time to run my business."

Mr. Chen was arrested in May and charged with the alleged assault and kidnapping of a suspected shoplifter, Anthony Bennett.

Surveillance video from May 23, 2009, shows Mr. Bennett taking a tray of plants from outside the Lucky Moose Market and stowing it on the back of his bicycle before riding off.

An hour later, he returned. Mr. Chen and two employees chased him, caught him, bound his hands and held him in the back of a van until police arrived.

Because the citizen's arrest did not occur during the commission of an offence, Mr. Chen was charged with assault, kidnapping, forcible confinement and concealment of a weapon, a box cutter he kept on his belt.

Mr. Bennett was charged with two counts of shoplifting, one relating to a King Street flower shop. But after agreeing to testify as a Crown witness against Mr. Chen, he pleaded guilty and his sentence was significantly reduced.

Mr. Chen's lawyer, Peter Lindsay, said he had hoped to have the charges against his client dropped yesterday. Instead, prosecutors appeared ready to proceed with them all.

"Mr. Chen is being dragged through our criminal courts and it is ridiculous to me," he said.

Mr. Lindsay said yesterday prosecutors wanted Mr. Chen to plead guilty to the charges of forcible confinement and concealing a weapon. He said there was no chance Mr. Chen would plead guilty to anything.

"What today's events say about our justice system is that up is down and left is right and everything is perverse," he said on the steps of the courthouse.

Dropping the kidnapping charge, an indictable offence, was still being considered by the Crown. By facing an indictable offence, Mr. Chen would be guaranteed a jury trial. Mr. Lindsay said he would love to have a jury of his peers decide Mr. Chen's fate.

"Right and wrong is pretty obvious to ordinary members of the public. I have great faith in ordinary members of the public, but I really lose faith in our judicial system when it treats people the way Mr. Chen is treated."

Mr. Lindsay said Mr. Bennett had a criminal record dating back to 1976 and admitted in his guilty plea to feeding a crack addiction by stealing from local businesses.

Along the strip of markets and shops in Chinatown, where few speak English as their first language, Mr. Chen is considered a hero for standing up to Mr. Bennett, who had been stealing from area shops for years.

Shopkeepers went into a frenzy at the mention of him. He was notorious in Chinatown for shoplifting. Grabbing plants from one location and selling them up the street was his specialty, one shopkeeper said.

Outside Asian Arts City, with its rows of bonsai trees and ceramic elephant statues, owner John Chan pantomimed the actions of a thief as the owner of a nearby clothing store vigorously nodded in agreement.

Mr. Chan claimed he had stolen plants from outside his shop as recently as two weeks ago, not long after being released from jail.

"He took a big pot of flowers," Mr. Chan's wife, Mei-Kuan Huang, wrote in testimony identifying Mr. Bennett as a serial shoplifter. "It sold for $29 plus tax."

If Mr. Chen's case does go to trial, Mr. Lindsay promised there would be a constitutional challenge to redefine when a citizen's arrest is permitted.

"All we want is the Criminal Code to work for the store owners, and not for the criminals," said Chi-Kun Shi, a supporter and member of the Victim's Rights Action Committee.

There was some victory for Chinatown shopkeepers yesterday. By late afternoon, Toronto police confirmed they had received testimony collected by Mr. Lindsay and had interviewed Ms. Huang about the alleged theft of the pot of flowers.

An investigation into that incident has been launched.

Mr. Chen's trial date will likely be set at his next court appearance, on Nov. 3.



Read more: http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story. ... z0y0pOiiSZ


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 2372
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 11:26 am
 


Apollo Apollo:
This shop keeper was so frustrated at reporting shoplifters to the police and getting nowhere he stopped reporting them. So he decided to take matters in his own hands, only to be charged himself.




I believe a lot of the unreported is like this. I tried explaining in a past thread here why some businesses in certain areas, in that case Winnipeg's North End gang area, would not report shoplifting. I won't rehash that as some clearly don't understand the cultures of those areas. Calling the cops brings retribution, not doing anything brings more shoplifting, what does the guy do? Handles it himself. A lot of gang related crime is unreported, why would they report an assault when it might clue the cops into the drugs they are dealing, as well as bring more assaults upon them. As a small irony a week after I tried to explain this that a man in Winnipeg called the cops on some guy trying to steal his car at his house. When the dude arrested got out of jail, like a few days later they returned to beat the snot out of him, or burned his house or something like that. Guess who won't be reporting crime anymore? Luckily many of us are not affected directly by gang crime (yet we all are indirectly) but the fact remains it is still crime and most unreported.

The other aspect is small mischief and property crimes. People just don't think the police have time to deal with them or can do much about them. I'll admit I've seen this and not reported crime for this reason. Once we had our gargarge paintballed and never reported it. I'm not sure most would these days but I know 30 years ago people would have. A few weeks back I highly suspected some kids were having a pool party at a neighbors house two doors down while they were away. I spoke to the immediate neighbor who confirmed they were away for the weekend but thought maybe their son was home even though the house was dark and when I spoke to the kids they would not produce the teen that lived there to talk to me. The immediate neighbor's reaction was, "Well what is one going to do?" and he went on with watching TV. I did call the cops due to the suspect nature of it but if I had not, and they were trespassing, doing a B and E or whatever and I never saw it the neighbor would have just let it happen. This is just to make the example of how people are not willing to call anymore, the serious things if yesteryear are now considered just minor ignorable things.

What this means is we as a society are just more accepting of our slip down the hill of orderly society. We are far from chaos, some might argue that, but each slip down gets us closer.

The father of modern policing, Sir Robert Peel, said that public involvement is part of any effective policing. Once the public gives up the police are in trouble.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 50938
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 11:41 am
 


I also think the retribution thing is a big one. Call kids on the shit they do, and you get a big mouth. Call the cops on them, they'll get a warning, and you get your windows smashed in. Who wants that?


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
Profile
Posts: 2944
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 11:45 am
 


There are over 2 million reported crimes in Canada each year according to the Almanac. Actually crime is popular. Over a few years rather a lot of the population commits crimes. This get tough on crime sentiment around is get tough on other people's crimes.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15681
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 1:20 pm
 


Are there no prisons?


Offline
Forum Junkie
Forum Junkie
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 596
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 2:33 pm
 


Brenda Brenda:
I also think the retribution thing is a big one. Call kids on the shit they do, and you get a big mouth. Call the cops on them, they'll get a warning, and you get your windows smashed in. Who wants that?


Its a lose - lose for law abiding Canadians. Pathetic really!

This is what happens in hug-a-thug societies.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 50938
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 2:50 pm
 


EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Are there no prisons?

Sure, but no judges who want to convict, unless you committed murder. Then you get 3 years.
What's the use, really?


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15681
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 2:56 pm
 


I was being Scrooge Brenda........


Offline
Forum Junkie
Forum Junkie
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 596
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 2:56 pm
 


Brenda Brenda:
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Are there no prisons?

Sure, but no judges who want to convict, unless you committed murder. Then you get 3 years.
What's the use, really?


They should set up special residences next door to judges homes. Every criminal they let off has to live next door to that judge for at least 5 years. I bet judges would think twice before they let some of these criminals off so easy. It's always easy to let them free knowing the judge or his/her family will never see them on the street.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 50938
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 2:57 pm
 


EyeBrock EyeBrock:
I was being Scrooge Brenda........

I guess you missed my sarcasm ;-)


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 50938
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 2:59 pm
 


Apollo Apollo:
Brenda Brenda:
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Are there no prisons?

Sure, but no judges who want to convict, unless you committed murder. Then you get 3 years.
What's the use, really?


They should set up special residences next door to judges homes. Every criminal they let off has to live next door to that judge for at least 5 years. I bet judges would think twice before they let some of these criminals off so easy. It's always easy to let them free knowing the judge or his/her family will never see them on the street.

No kidding!
:)


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 23084
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:11 pm
 


Wow, crime is higher now than in 1962! 8O

Next thing, you'll be telling me prices are higher too!


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 77 posts ]  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.