It seems that some people are sceptical of whether the police department has their best interests at heart. Being a retired cop, I've dealt with this at times. For example, African Canadians in Toronto (in particular areas) have voiced their opinion that the police have been repressive to them as a group. Other ethnic groups may well feel similarly. This opinion seems to extend to other groups who have a similar outlook. Some examples include Native Canadians, gun rights groups and those concerned with environmental or gay rights.
Do you feel that police purposefully target their enforcement on these and other groups unfairly? If so, why do you feel this to be the case?
My personal perspective is that this is not the case. My experience is that the police respond to a particular threat which is actual, not imagined. It is not a police function to make law, rather than to enforce it. The area to be enforced is a matter of priority (you don't give out parking tickets, when there's a robbery in progress).
None you improvise, one (or more) is luxury.
What time frame or historical period would we discuss Wayne? Currently the LGBTQ2 community is not as much a target of law enforcement in Canada. In the past this happened http://toronto.citynews.ca/2016/06/21/toronto-police-chief-expresses-regret-for-81-raids-targeting-citys-gay-community/ Was this group unfairly targeted?
Scrounger,
Yes, the time frame is important, I worked organized crime with a Metro Toronto Detective Sgt who worked undercover in the homosexual bath house project (we still rib him about it and he's a Superintendent now at 21 (22?) Division). 🙂 Before then homosexuality was a criminal offense under the Criminal Code; so I can't say it was unfairly targeted. Distribution of pornography is also a criminal offense.
Like I mentioned, Detectives don't waste their time. We don't use resources needlessly. We do however enforce the laws that the Government puts on-the-books. It's the Public that elects the lawmakers. Certainly I don't agree with some of the laws that exist and some laws that have been repealed that I think shouldn't have been...
None you improvise, one (or more) is luxury.
It was a criminal offense in 1981?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_Law_Amendment_Act,_1968%E2%80%9369
Wayne
Take a gander at this article. Tends to support the opinion of some African Canadians in certain areas of Toronto.
https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2017/07/06/toronto-marijuana-arrests-reveal-startling-racial-divide.html
It was a criminal offense in 1981?
Homosexuality was decriminalized before then, I believe that the bathhouse project was focused on the distribution of pornography (a criminal offense). At the time (and before then), the Gay community was targeted by the police as undesirable.
I'm retired now so I don't have to deal with the parades and flag waving, At least I can be entertained with Society going down the drain... 🙂
None you improvise, one (or more) is luxury.
Wayne
Take a gander at this article. Tends to support the opinion of some African Canadians in certain areas of Toronto.
https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2017/07/06/toronto-marijuana-arrests-reveal-startling-racial-divide.html
In many cities there are areas/pockets of high crime. Many investigations point to individuals residing there as prime suspects. These areas are the target of more police enforcement which results in more vehicles stopped/searched and more drug offenses being found. If this area is predominately white, more whites will be charged than east Indians. If the area is populated predominately with blacks, more charges will be laid against blacks than those of Chinese descent.
Historically, there have been high crime areas in Toronto that are black neighbourhoods. These are not the only bad areas. In a diverse ethnic community you have pockets with their own crime areas. I've been involved with both white collar crime, crime families, Gangs, the Cartels and the Tongs/Triades. It had nothing to do with picking on people because they were white, Italian, Russian, Chinese or Latino.
None you improvise, one (or more) is luxury.
Wayne,
Here you state, Then homosexuality was a criminal offense under the Criminal Code; so I can't say it was unfairly targeted...
Scrounger,
Yes, the time frame is important, I worked organized crime with a Metro Toronto Detective Sgt who worked undercover in the homosexual bath house project (we still rib him about it and he's a Superintendent now at 21 (22?) Division). 🙂 Then homosexuality was a criminal offense under the Criminal Code; so I can't say it was unfairly targeted...
Like I mentioned, Detectives don't waste their time. We don't use resources needlessly. We do however enforce the laws that the Government puts on-the-books. It's the Public that elects the lawmakers. Certainly I don't agree with some of the laws that exist and some laws that have been repealed that I think shouldn't have been...
I showed you that it had been decriminalized long before that.
Which you then parroted back to me.
Changing tack you then claimed raid were due to pornography distribution. If you had really read article you would know that was not true.
You then said Gays were targeted as undesirables by police. Doesn't this contradict your initial assertion?
In reading your responses it seems like you are trying to suck and blow at the same time..
Scrounger,
So what's your point? I've stated that:
1. In the past, Gays were targeted because they were breaking the law by being Gay.
2. That the bath house project that I referred to was focused on pornography (again Gays breaking the law).
3. I knew about this project through a Metro Toronto Detective Sergeant that I was working with (after the project in-question had been completed). He worked undercover posing as Gay.
4. The Toronto bath house raids that you've reported (bawdy-house related) had nothing to do with the bath house project I was referring to. Do you really believe that these raids were the only time a group of Gay men have allegedly been involved in criminal activity?
5. I've never been personally involved in any investigation directed against homosexuals or pornography. These guys make my skin crawl and I'm much more comfortable dealing with gangs, drug lords and contract killers.
6. It was my understanding that none of the policeman that I knew accepted the Gay community. Much of Society at that time felt the same way.
7. There's a difference in targeting a community that isn't breaking the law and one that is. I don't believe that Gays are being targeted today, but if they break the law, the Police may decide to take a hard line approach.
8. I concede that when it comes to sucking and blowing, that you seem to know much more about it than I do. 🙂
It appears that the Toronto Police Chief apologized for actions taken 30 years before. Personally, I believe that's crap. The Officers at that time would have consulted the Crown and decided to proceed with the raid. They would have had reasonable and probable grounds that the bath houses that were raided fell under the definition of a bawdy house under the Criminal Code, If not, I'm sure it wouldn't take 30 years for the papers to report it. I certainly can't second guess what was done 30 years ago when I wasn't involved in anything to do with it.
You've suggested that the police today are politically corrupt. I suggest that the Toronto Chief's statement is an example to strengthen your argument. A politically correct statement to satisfy a particular group. Balderdash.
I've asked two questions in this thread:
Do you feel that police purposefully target their enforcement on these and other groups unfairly? and
If so, why do you feel this to be the case?
You have referred to newspaper articles that have reported on events as others see it, but have failed to express your personal opinion, Do you have anything to add other than criticism? As you've pointed-out the time-line is important (current situation vs the past).
None you improvise, one (or more) is luxury.
Scrounger,
I see your concern by my use of the word 'then.' I neglected to add the word 'before' (then). I've changed it accordingly. My point is that Gays have been targeted in the past as a group. They were targeted because it was a criminal offense to be gay. Subsequently, bath houses were targeted in the past because they were believed to fall under the definition of a bawdy house. Individuals (whose targeted customers happened to be Gay and were working out of bath houses) were targeted because they were criminals dealing in pornography.
Individuals (who happened to be black) were targeted because they were making their living distributing narcotics in that community. Subsequently, arrests were made. They were made because people were breaking the law, not because of their skin colour.
Personally, I've always arrested people on an equal opportunity basis. I really don't care the colour of a person's skin, their age, sex, sexual persuasion, religion, nationality, or political preference. If they engage in criminal activity, they'll be arrested and processed. In my years as a cop, I didn't see anyone prosecuted because of their race, language, or religion.
None you improvise, one (or more) is luxury.
Well now Wayne, that depends. When you started this thread were you genuinely looking for other peoples opinions. Even ones that may differ from yours? Or perhaps you had other motives. I thinks the answer is pretty obvious based on your posts. I understand that. Some people derive their self worth from what they did/do for work. When they feel people are disparaging that they tend to get their back up. I think if you could just step back from this you would see that. Or not. Ultimately we are all responsible for our own mental well being. Carrots and peas
Is it possible that the raids on the gay bathhouses were not because they were gay, but because of the activities that might be going on at the bathhouses?
I remember reading a story back in the early ‘80s (1981, I think) about a police raid that hit the wrong apartment. Upon crashing through the front door of the wrong apartment, however, the police found a man being given a ménage-a-trois by two women. Although the cops had the wrong place, all three of the occupants were charged – IIRC – with public lewdness, because having three people there meant that one or the other of them was a witness to the other two having sex, which made it “public” (the bathhouse angle, see).
This all occurred while Zoolander’s dad was Prime Minister, and according to Zoolander’s dad, the government had no business in the bedrooms of the nation. That was fine to a point, but when the justice minister at the time, a p’tit bozo from Shawinigan, said he was going to drop the charges, the Catholic Bishop got involved.
The Bishop threatened the governing party that if they allowed the charges to be dropped, the Catholic Church would use their pulpits to preach against the political party come election time. Well what do you think happened? The Justice Minister allowed the charges to go ahead, and the guy was sent to trial.
I’d worry less about the cops than I would some scum sucking politician who’d sellout his stated beliefs, and your future, to buy a few more votes.
Is it possible that the raids on the gay bathhouses were not because they were gay, but because of the activities that might be going on at the bathhouses? .
I agree. This makes the most sense to me as well.
...the police found a man being given a ménage-a-trois by two women. Although the cops had the wrong place, all three of the occupants were charged
I think the man should have been congratulated instead... 🙂
None you improvise, one (or more) is luxury.
Scrounger,
You are correct in-that I have a reasonable understanding of my own opinions. Opinion has been expressed on another thread that the police are corrupt and that their actions are discriminatory. This is an area in-which I'm interested. My question was posted to get a better understanding of how people of today think. As I've mentioned, I'm retired. Because of this, I'm not dealing with the public daily. Times change and so do people's opinions. The country is much more liberal than it once was.
My son is with the RCMP and in discussion with him, I can't believe how much the job has changed. Not just that, but police officers have seemed to change as well. In my time they were dependable. In more cases today, they're happy to tattle-tale on any minor infraction another officer makes. Charges have to be cleared through the crown before they are made and officers are charged under the Police Act for the most minor infractions. It's certainly not the job that I remember (although I haven't worked uniform in decades).
The Society has changed greatly as well. In my day it was ok to be competitive. Not everyone were winners. You could fail a grade in school and it was ok to have to do homework. A university graduate use to be able to spell. Drugs were considered taboo and laws weren't changed to permit recreational use. Peanut butter was good for kids and they were encouraged to go outside to play. It doesn't surprise me if the attitude has changed toward the police in some people's minds...
None you improvise, one (or more) is luxury.
Ok, I understand now Wayne. I see how you could go through your career and not "see" any bad apples. You did not want to be seen as not dependable. Maybe even thrown out of the club.
I mean who wants to be this guy right. Would you have had the balls to tattle?
As far as the RCMP goes, you have two tiers. A small group of professionals that investigate the larger crimes in Canada. The rest are rent a cops doing municipal contract work that the feds heavily subsidize. To keep costs down they stretch staffing levels to bare minimums. Wage wise they probably don't even crack the top 50 or 60 police services in Canada. Meanwhile staff harassment lawsuits drag on. Upper level bonuses pile up. A friend of mine is working towards a career in LE. He was advised to give them a wide berth. The Scarlet Tunic ain't what it used to be.
