HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Calgary > Calgary Issues, Business, Politics & the Economy


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 3:24 AM
Policy Wonk's Avatar
Policy Wonk Policy Wonk is offline
Inflatable Hippo
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Suburban Las Vegas
Posts: 4,015
Guess what, locking up junkies DOES work, it gets them off the street and unless your Inspector Clouseau comming up with a list of charges that will keep a junkie in jail for a very long time isn't very difficult. Perhaps that isn't good for the junkie, but does anyone ask what is good for Paul Bernardo?

Uhh... there are not very many places where weed isn't in abundance, it isn't as though people are turning to meth for lack of weed. Meth is sort of the last resort for the hardcore junkie, it will still get them off when everything else has been dulled.
__________________
Public Administration 101: Keep your mouth shut until obligated otherwise and don't get in public debates with housewives.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 3:37 AM
Hardhatdan Hardhatdan is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,287
Locking up junkies doesn't solve the problem, drugs are rampant in the prison system. All it does is remove them from the street for a period of time.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 3:51 AM
Calgarian's Avatar
Calgarian Calgarian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 24,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by Policy Wonk View Post
Guess what, locking up junkies DOES work, it gets them off the street and unless your Inspector Clouseau comming up with a list of charges that will keep a junkie in jail for a very long time isn't very difficult. Perhaps that isn't good for the junkie, but does anyone ask what is good for Paul Bernardo?

Uhh... there are not very many places where weed isn't in abundance, it isn't as though people are turning to meth for lack of weed. Meth is sort of the last resort for the hardcore junkie, it will still get them off when everything else has been dulled.
The problem isn't whether locking up junkies would work, it would for some, and it wouldn't for others. That is irrelevant, you CAN'T lock up junkies, what are you going to charge them with? being intoxicated? even if you caught them with a bunch of rocks, our legal system is a joke, they would probably get 2 years or a conditional sentence or some other bullshit. We have to make it so that people won't start, and get rid of the pushers that get them to start.

I don't know how many other people see crack heads everywhere downtown, but I do. The East Beltline if full of them. I used to work with a guy who got stuck on crack, he had a pretty rough childhood and didn't get any direction. He found the wrong people and got hooked. Some people make a bad decision and spend the rest of their life paying for it. This guy has been trying to get clean for years, but once that shit gets you, it's pretty much impossible to get off. He tried to go to AADAC about a year ago, but they told him they were too full and that he had to come back in a couple weeks.

THIS is what we need to fix, we need the cops to be able to arrest and force treatment on the people who are addicted, and we need the places that accept voluntary treatment to be able to help those who want it. Sentences for people selling crack, meth, heroin and all the other hard drugs have to be steeper so that they will think a little harder about selling shit.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 4:14 AM
Policy Wonk's Avatar
Policy Wonk Policy Wonk is offline
Inflatable Hippo
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Suburban Las Vegas
Posts: 4,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardhatdan View Post
All it does is remove them from the street for a period of time.
That is all I am looking for,
__________________
Public Administration 101: Keep your mouth shut until obligated otherwise and don't get in public debates with housewives.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 4:18 AM
Policy Wonk's Avatar
Policy Wonk Policy Wonk is offline
Inflatable Hippo
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Suburban Las Vegas
Posts: 4,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnyc View Post
The problem isn't whether locking up junkies would work, it would for some, and it wouldn't for others. That is irrelevant, you CAN'T lock up junkies, what are you going to charge them with? being intoxicated? even if you caught them with a bunch of rocks, our legal system is a joke, they would probably get 2 years or a conditional sentence or some other bullshit. We have to make it so that people won't start, and get rid of the pushers that get them to start.
Vagrants commit crimes every day, unfortunately throwing the book at the vagrants for a cumulative list of crimes is difficult, because it requires police work that our slacker cops just won't do - after all there are non-smelly people JAYWALKING after 11:00 at night! Won't someone think of the children!
__________________
Public Administration 101: Keep your mouth shut until obligated otherwise and don't get in public debates with housewives.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 4:26 AM
ummagumma66's Avatar
ummagumma66 ummagumma66 is offline
Booooring!
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 573
forced De-Tox for the hard drug users, and the second offence, make it a federal offence and boot them off to prison for 5 years, when they get out they should stay clean, unfortunatly we need to take a very hard stand against, remember the double murder last month was a deal worth $60 gone bad, and I agree with whoever it was who said, you wanna use a DI, be ready to piss in a cup. this cities drug, homeless and crime problems are going out of control and some hard and drastic mesures are going to be needed, sure the so-called bleeding hearts are going to strongly disagree with my point, but when you see deals going down in front of young children and the elderly and the public in general, how safe can the that area be? on a warm day just walk down riverfront and look along the bike path and watch the deals going down.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 8:08 AM
KrisYYC's Avatar
KrisYYC KrisYYC is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 786
You will never stop a junkie from using drugs unless they go to treatment. However, if somehow the price of crack is so low that profits off of it are minuscule than most would be dealers wouldn't bother with it. This removes much of criminal element at least. Throwing more police at the problem (stings etc.) doesn't help. Look at how much the US invests in its "War on Drugs" that goes nowhere.

Another thing I'd like to add:

Prostitution should be legalized. This drastically reduces the criminal elements of the sex trade. There will always be a small amount underground catering to sickos. But the majority of Johns are just Joe Schmoes looking to get off, if they had the option to go to a legal brothel that has to maintain certain standards to be licensed, then they would go for that option without question. Much safer for them. Hell the government could even slap a tax on it and make some money off of it. Good examples are The Netherlands, Germany and Denmark.

Kris
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 1:11 PM
Rob D's Avatar
Rob D Rob D is offline
Coasting
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,588
City agrees to shelter homeless
'Humanitarian' beds provided at last minute
Kim Guttormson Calgary Herald Tuesday, April 03, 2007


CREDIT: Calgary Herald Archive

A man walking with a shopping cart filled with personal belongings, during a cold spell.After dozens of homeless people spent a cold night sleeping on the street, the city abruptly reversed its stance at the 11th hour and provided emergency shelter Monday night.

Calling it a "humanitarian" response, between 100 and 125 people were to be housed in the EMS headquarters in Whitehorn. As well, the Salvation Army found room for 24 more people at its Centre of Hope and Booth Centre, prevented by lack of staff from opening more beds. "It's wonderful news," said Diana Schwenk of the Mustard Seed, which has operated at capacity all winter and allowed 15 people to keep warm in its lobby Sunday night as the temperature dropped. "It takes the pressure off all the shelters."

The move to use the Whitehorn multi-service centre in northeast Calgary allows the city to provide shelter under a humanitarian banner, after vigorously stating it couldn't unless strict criteria were met under disaster services legislation. City staff -- including fire Chief Bruce Burrell, head of disaster services -- spent most of Monday defending the decision to not provide temporary accommodation Sunday night for those left without shelter after the Brick site closed. The city argued the rules stipulated the air temperature -- without windchill -- had to hit -15 C before it could activate its disaster services response. It was -18 C with windchill Sunday night, and social agencies were vocal in their criticism the city should have done something as dozens were turned away.

Chris Branch, the city's director of community and neighbourhood services, said the powers allowed under disaster services legislation are so sweeping the rules must be followed. "You don't want to go there unless you're really at that emergency situation, that major disaster, that forces you to go down that path," Branch said. "This is really a response to what's happened on our streets and the fact that we don't feel it's OK that people be out in the cold in these conditions." Asked whether looking at humanitarian alternatives a week before would have meant shelter Sunday night, Branch said it was "a tough call."

The city also worked with shelters Monday trying to find ways to accommodate more people. Late in the afternoon Monday -- with predictions the temperature would drop to -17 with windchill overnight -- administration decided to use the Whitehorn building as a temporary facility. The sudden move angered the area alderman, who had been told a few weeks ago the community would be consulted beforehand, and the president of the Whitehorn community association. "They're talking to me two hours before people are put in there," Ald. Ray Jones said. "I understand the need to put these people somewhere, I truly understand that. "It's probably just (Monday) and (Tuesday) night . . . but it just comes down to consulting people when you do something."

Raleigh Dehaney, president of the Whitehorn community association, said it was a "typical case of a community being blindsided by idiots at city hall. "My concern is that the community was not consulted and the concern is what is the security going to be. If the security is as good as the information, I have no confidence in it." EMS Chief Tom Sampson and Erika Hargesheimer, general manager of community and protective services, were to be at a community meeting Monday night to discuss the decision. "It's going to be cold in May, too. What's the plan?" Jones said. "I can't believe they couldn't leave the Brick open for three or four more days."

While many have questioned why the city didn't allow the Brick site to remain open a little longer, Branch said it wasn't possible. He said the development permit expired March 31. Monday, crews were to begin removing showers and other fixtures from the building, which will likely be used in whatever temporary site is found for next winter.

kguttormson@theherald.canwest.com

© The Calgary Herald 2007
__________________

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 2:25 PM
skytowers skytowers is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 62
What portion of the people on the streets are actually from Calgary?

Are our services providing for people who are looking at Calgary as the success story of places to go and let the city / province help them.

In my opinion if we build more shelters, more will come. Sorry if that sounds awful as I'm not against helping people. But it's like that old phrase - build it and they will come. Are we providing for our homeless or a lot of people who are thinking that Calgary is just the place to go?

I also think that the people on the streets downtown are becoming a blight. From a tourist viewpoint I'd personally be turned off if I was walking around downtown and hit up several times for money.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 2:51 PM
Calgarian's Avatar
Calgarian Calgarian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 24,072
There are lots of working poor from other parts of the country who can't afford an apartment yet, so they sleep on the streets in the meantime.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 3:16 PM
Policy Wonk's Avatar
Policy Wonk Policy Wonk is offline
Inflatable Hippo
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Suburban Las Vegas
Posts: 4,015
the working poor are a minority among the people literally on the street.
__________________
Public Administration 101: Keep your mouth shut until obligated otherwise and don't get in public debates with housewives.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 3:21 PM
Calgarian's Avatar
Calgarian Calgarian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 24,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by Policy Wonk View Post
the working poor are a minority among the people literally on the street.
Do you have some stats to back that up? I think there are a hell of a lot more working poor than people realize.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 7:41 PM
Policy Wonk's Avatar
Policy Wonk Policy Wonk is offline
Inflatable Hippo
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Suburban Las Vegas
Posts: 4,015
There are the visible homeless and the invisible homeless,

When I say "literally on the street" I mean sleeping on a park bench as opposed to in a shelter or other marginal housing situation. The working poor don't usually fall through the cracks that far and in many situations are favored for support by service organizations as they are the most likely to be sucessful.
__________________
Public Administration 101: Keep your mouth shut until obligated otherwise and don't get in public debates with housewives.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 9:53 PM
Blue_Cypress's Avatar
Blue_Cypress Blue_Cypress is offline
Snarkotron
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mount Pleasant, Calgary
Posts: 2,580
A lot of you have strange concepts about drugs, poor people, social services, and law enforcement. I offer the following thoughts and responses.

- Jaywalking and drug use are both crimes, and both are equally worthy of enforcement.

-Many people use marijuana, in a manner similar to cigarettes, in moderation and with consideration of its' effects both short-term and long term. I don't think it should be used without care, but nor do I think that its' current level of criminalization is justified. Alcoholic beverages, for example, result in more widespread social ails and are more readily available.

-Homeless people who have jobs don't ask for money. They're at work during the day, and in shelters during the evenings, and I've often found that they're too ashamed to call attention to their plight, and favor short-term benefit over long term gain to an extreme, I.E. they cannot get an apartment because they spent their paycheck on drinks at the bar and rent for a hotel room for a couple days.

-Our holding cells are full, our arrest processing unit is overworked, and we don't have enough J.P's. The city has told the police department to try and find alternative solutions to arrest for minor crimes. The provincial government made huge cuts to mental health and social programs 2 decades ago, and the system never recovered. The funding doesn't meet minimum levels. We don't have enough resources to keep our society socially healthy. There is no place in our society for the least fortunate of us because Klein thought we couldn't afford it, and the justice system has been trying to mop up ever since. A lack of funds and facilities are greatly exacerbating common social ails.

-Methamphtamine is jib, crack is food (yes, they really call it that), and it's pretty difficult to address a drug problem if you don't even know the name a drug is given by those who use it. The problem with trying to cure drug use is that no one who is in a position to help wants to get near enough to the problem to understand what the root causes are.

-Drug use is a passive crime, and by itself should never result in criminal sentences and imprisonment, as this has been shown time and time again to be an ineffective deterrent, and may actually worsen the overall social condition. There are lots of drugs in our jails, and incarcerating people won't help them kick the habit. A criminal record is a barrier to social advancement, locking criminally convicted drug users into poverty. Community service, rehabilitation, and counselling are the most effective in deterring repeat drug-use.

It is my opinion that simply locking up those who would choose to take drugs has a net negative impact on society -- sooner or later we let them out again and while they're in there it's a free ride, with free food, free t.v. free education and free room and board, all paid for by the taxpayer. On a larger scale, this system rewards the criminal element and punishes the honest and the just.

-Homelessness and poverty are longstanding and widespread social issues that have been seen around the world and for millenia. This first thing any of you should do is do your homework. This isn't a new problem, and while there is certainly room for new solutions, there is also a lot of data on what has been tried elsewhere and what came of it, and we should start by looking around for success stories elsewhere.

The time we spend looking will save us the time it would take to implement and review an ineffective methodology, and will shorten the time it takes us to find something that works. If anything, looking around will tell us what not to do. The probability of our finding the right solutions the first time around is astronomically high.

Last edited by Blue_Cypress; Apr 3, 2007 at 10:03 PM. Reason: Clarification
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 11:14 PM
ArtRambo's Avatar
ArtRambo ArtRambo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 92
To me homelessness is a symptom of the decline of our society. I can remember when there were no homeless people in Alberta. Then we thought that made us superior to third world countries like India or Brazil that had homeless people. Old people would tell stories about the dirty thirties and we looked back at that time like the dark ages. Nobody bothered to board up derelict houses. We thought we had learned our lessons. Now we've been down for so long that it looks like up. In the future we will look back with amazement that nobody realized anything was wrong. Cities have existed for thousands of years, its not normal for the centers to be transformed into giant parking lots after 100 years. There are a lot of people in denial. I blame Ralph Klein.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 11:20 PM
e909 e909 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 882
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtRambo View Post
To me homelessness is a symptom of the decline of our society. I can remember when there were no homeless people in Alberta. Then we thought that made us superior to third world countries like India or Brazil that had homeless people. Old people would tell stories about the dirty thirties and we looked back at that time like the dark ages. Nobody bothered to board up derelict houses. We thought we had learned our lessons. Now we've been down for so long that it looks like up. In the future we will look back with amazement that nobody realized anything was wrong. Cities have existed for thousands of years, its not normal for the centers to be transformed into giant parking lots after 100 years. There are a lot of people in denial. I blame Ralph Klein.
When did Edmonton have no homeless people?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 11:27 PM
DizzyEdge's Avatar
DizzyEdge DizzyEdge is offline
My Spoon Is Too Big
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 9,191
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl.../National/home

B.C. government buys up hotels, buildings for homeless
STEVE MERTL

Canadian Press

VANCOUVER — The B.C. government has quietly bought up more than a dozen fleabag hotels and other properties as part of a plan to curb rising homelessness in Canada's most expensive real estate market.

Community activists have led a rising clamour that owners of so-called single-room-occupancy hotels want to cash in on the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics by converting their buildings to house tourists.

The expected wave of evictions will exacerbate Vancouver's already serious homelessness problem, critics say.

The Pivot Legal Society estimates hotel conversions have already led to some 700 evictions.
But neither Premier Gordon Campbell nor Housing Minister Rich Coleman say the province's $80-million announcement Tuesday was intended to quiet the alarm.

“The short answer is no,” Mr. Campbell said in an interview after announcing the funding at the Salvation Army's headquarters on the edge of Vancouver's bleak Downtown Eastside.

They said it's part of the Liberal government's provincial housing strategy announced last fall to protect existing affordable housing and couple it to support programs to help people such as drug addicts and the mentally ill to overcome their problems.

“We made a major commitment to municipalities and to communities across the province in October last year,” Mr. Campbell said.

Mr. Coleman said he came up with the buy-up plan in January as a way of expediting the government's strategy.

“I said to my guys, what if we became the purchaser and the modernizer here and we went and protected some of the stock for transition and supportive housing,” he said in an interview.

Mr. Coleman said the plan flew below the radar. The ministry set up a numbered company and worked through a real estate group to avoid a scramble of property owners hoping to sell their buildings at inflated prices.

“We wanted to pay market price like anybody else,” he said. “I thought if we could get five, we would do well. We didn't have any expectation we would get 10 in Vancouver.”

The funding covers the purchase of 15 buildings, including 10 single-room occupancy hotels in the Downtown Eastside and one in Victoria.

In addition, four buildings in Burnaby and Victoria will be converted into housing units for those with mental health and addiction issues, along with three sites owned by the City of Vancouver for a total of 996 new units.

Mr. Campbell says the government has an obligation to give people the opportunity to live in “safe, clean and affordable housing.”

The housing initiative was first announced last fall, with additional funding committed in the February budget.

Mr. Campbell said his government has tripled the amount of money spent on social housing since 2001, including increased shelter allowances and assistance for elderly renters.

The announcement will bring to 2,200 the number of supportive housing units the government has funded, he said.

“This is the largest single acquisition of this critical housing stock in the history of the province,” Mr. Campbell said.

Vancouver Mayor Sam Sullivan effusively endorsed the government's housing strategy, calling it the largest commitment ever to social housing.

“I think today is the day that we begin to turn the tide on homelessness,” Mr. Sullivan said. “This is a wonderful day.”

The mayor said he'll recommend to city council that $5 million it allocated to buy and upgrade single-room-occupancy buildings be put towards the provincial program.

The announcement even drew praise from Pivot.

“This response is a direct response to the advocacy of Downtown Eastside organizations and the work that we've done on the housing issue,” said lawyer David Eby, a Pivot volunteer.

“We're very pleased to see that the government is finally reacting to the problems down here.”

But Mr. Eby said the plan protects only about 20 per cent of low-income units in the Downtown Eastside, leaving many residents still vulnerable to eviction.

The program fulfils a recommendation by a committee that looked at the Olympics' impact on housing, which called for government to buy up and improve 800 downtown units.

But it also recommended 3,000 new units be built leading up to the Games, he said.

“What we'd like to see happen is the provincial and federal governments begin to build replacement social housing,” he said.

The buildings the government purchased are run down and will need a lot of renovation, Mr. Eby added.

“B.C. Housing has essentially become Vancouver's biggest slum lord now with the purchase of these buildings,” he said.

Mr. Coleman said his officials will sit down with non-profit groups to discuss who will manage the buildings.

“Some of it needs to be upgraded, frankly,” he said. “We'll go in and fumigate the things for bedbugs, cockroaches or whatever's in them.”


A resident of Vancouver's troubled downtown eastside walks past the abandoned Pennslyvania Hotel, in this 2005 file photo. The B.C. government is buying up hotels and other buildings in Vancouver, Victoria and Burnaby to reduce homelessness. (Chuck Stoody/CP)
__________________
Concerned about protecting Calgary's built heritage?
www.CalgaryHeritage.org
News - Heritage Watch - Forums
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 11:40 PM
Blue_Cypress's Avatar
Blue_Cypress Blue_Cypress is offline
Snarkotron
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mount Pleasant, Calgary
Posts: 2,580
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtRambo View Post
Cities have existed for thousands of years, its not normal for the centers to be transformed into giant parking lots after 100 years.
A symptom of the skyscraper. A hundred years ago stacking floors a hundred storeys high was a dream, and cities had to have ground density because that was the only kind of density available. Now we have vertical density, and we make more tradeoffs in our economic benefit. We evolved a different citybuilding method which gave rise to the skyscraper and the parking lot next door. It's just an order of magnitude more dense than the 4 storey cities of the last few thousand years, just as a city itself was an order of magnitude more dense than countryside and small townships, and we're still getting accustomed to the extra space.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 11:42 PM
DizzyEdge's Avatar
DizzyEdge DizzyEdge is offline
My Spoon Is Too Big
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 9,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtRambo View Post
... Cities have existed for thousands of years, its not normal for the centers to be transformed into giant parking lots after 100 years...
100 (or 1000) years ago, there weren't many cars
__________________
Concerned about protecting Calgary's built heritage?
www.CalgaryHeritage.org
News - Heritage Watch - Forums
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 11:45 PM
Blue_Cypress's Avatar
Blue_Cypress Blue_Cypress is offline
Snarkotron
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mount Pleasant, Calgary
Posts: 2,580
Wow that article about Vancouver is really fucked up.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Calgary > Calgary Issues, Business, Politics & the Economy
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:00 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.