Posted on: October 8th, 2013 by Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council
Young males commit most violent crimes in Canada and they are at a higher risk of being a victim of crime. Young males are more likely than other age and gender cohorts to be involved in petty crime such as vandalism and graffiti. As such, the number of males aged 15 to 24 in a community is likely to have an impact on the crime rate. The chart below measures the absolute number of males 15 to 24 living in the Waterloo Region and the percentage of the overall population made up of males 15 to 24.
The Statistics
Date Source: Statistics Canada, Census (Released Every Five Years)
The Story Behind the Numbers
The number of males in Waterloo Region, aged 15 to 24, is slowly increasing. However, this increase is currently similar to the increase in the overall population in Waterloo Region. Therefore the percentage of the male population 15 to 24 is remaining steady at between 7.2% and 7.4%.
That was my initial reaction when I read the report, “Snapshot in Time: The Root causes of Crime in Waterloo Region”, and especially the information related to Males 15-24 and the following page that talks about youth unemployment and the fact that those things combined with high levels of alcohol consumption, “it is believed to cause an increase in the homicide rate”. Sometimes it just seems that research doesn’t reveal anything in the way of new information but only serves to confirm what have been long held beliefs by members of our community. It doesn’t make the information any less useful to us and in fact it is important information to guide and direct actions we can take to address these specific issues related to the criminal activities of males 15-24 in our community.
Ray of Hope operates Secure and Open custody facilities on behalf of the Province of Ontario for young men aged 13-17 and in the course of any given year we will serve a few hundred young men. Some of them may spend most of their teenage years returning to our care because of their ongoing conflict with the law and as the report suggests conflict with their peers. For many they have not learned the social skills required to manage their anger in a socially acceptable manner. Unlike most adults who learn constructive ways to deal with conflict, or can afford to have lawyers argue for them, young men tend to be impulsive and find the quickest and easiest way to deal with someone they are having trouble with, which generally relates to some type of punch to the face and escalating violence.
It also comes as no surprise that alcohol or drug use may also contribute to criminal behaviour. Ray of Hope also operates a variety of Youth Addiction Treatment programs in the community and there are a number of similarities between the youth we serve in these programs and the youth engaged in our justice programs. The majority of youth entering our addictions treatment programs already have some type of probation orders from the court system related to previous behaviour, but they have not gone far enough to have landed in custody. The majority of youth in our custody programs have substance abuse problems with drugs or alcohol that are related to their crime. For some, they were involved in robberies or break and enter crimes to fund their drug habit, while others committed their crimes while intoxicated or high.
I don’t think that anything I have stated should come as a shock to anyone reading this blog. It is kind of how life is in any community and it has been this way for years. The question we have to ask ourselves is, “can we do anything to change this”? In their report, “Review of the Roots of Youth Violence (2008)”, The Honourable Roy McMurtry and Dr. Alvin Curling identified the following as contributing factors to youth violence:
Poverty,
Racism,
Community Design,
Education System,
Family Issues,
Health,
Lack of a Youth Voice,
Lack of Economic Opportunity, and
Issues in the Justice System
Even without delving into any of the details of the report it is evident that the issue is extremely complex and that no single simple solution can possibly resolve this situation for our community. As a single issue, something like poverty is a huge challenge for our community and seems to be constantly in the news. But there seems to be little political will to really address the issue and find the resources it will take to minimize the impact of poverty let alone eliminate it. The challenges of system change seem to be too overwhelming and yet if we can bring about some systemic changes the impact could be transformative.
But maybe more can be accomplished by focusing on individuals. Over the past few years the Ministry of Children and Youth Services, Youth Justice Services has introduced a concept entitled, “Relationship Custody” to both direct run and transfer payment agencies. The idea behind this concept is that staff are not to be primarily concerned with guarding youth in our facilities but with building relationships with them and trying to encourage them in making better choices for their lives in the future. I believe that Ray of Hope has operated with this type of philosophy from its very beginning and we are always looking for ways to connect with youth and provide them with the support they need to keep them from reoffending.
At a recent staff meeting one of our staff shared about a young man who had spent some time in one of our custody programs in his early teens. He was still struggling with a number of things so a friend suggested he connect with one of our reintegration staff. After meeting with this youth and exploring his life situation, the youth agreed to enter one of our addiction treatment programs. After successfully working through this program he has now enrolled in our Youth Employment program where he is gaining specific life skills and job skills to help him take control of his future. We may not have transformed the system, but this one young man’s life is being transformed.
The challenge is to try and work at both the system and with the individual and then maybe at sometime in the future the percentage of young males 15-24 in our community may prove to be an indicator of a positive healthy community rather than indicator of violent crime.
Author: Harry Whyte For the past 5 years Harry Whyte has served as the CEO of Ray of Hope Inc, a local agency that provides support to youth in the areas of Justice, Employment and Addictions, along with the Ray of Hope Community Centre that provides support to people impacted by poverty. Harry and his wife Lois were also the parents of 4 boys, now in their late 20’s and 30’s and so has some firsthand experiences with the challenges faced by young men and their families.
Find more community responses from colleague’s in Waterloo Region who also work with young men:
No cookie cutters in the kitchen, please by Rohan Thompson, Project Manager, inREACh
Women’s Crisis Services of Waterloo Region operates two emergency shelters for abused women and their children: Anselma House in Kitchener and Haven House in Cambridge (for a total of 75 beds) plus a regional Outreach program. We are the only agency of its kind in Waterloo Region.
Annually, Women’s Crisis Services provides assistance (shelter and outreach services combined) to about 2,600 women and their children; approximately one third of this number is children. According to Stats Canada, less than one quarter of victims of domestic violence report the incident to police. In Waterloo Region, with a population of approximately 550,000 residents, police respond to about 6,100 domestic violence calls per year. If this number reflects one quarter as suggested by Stats Canada, then 24,400 women in our community are being abused. Even for those of us who do not excel in math, one is easily able to decipher that these numbers are quite bizarre; especially when considering the number of abused women and their children that Women’s Crisis Services is assisting per year. Undoubtedly, we have much work to do in ending violence against women here in Waterloo Region.
Did you know that every six days, another woman in Canada is murdered by her current or former partner? And, every night in Canada, more than 3,000 women (along with their 2,500 children) stay in an emergency shelter because it’s not safe for them at home. This is beyond deplorable! Why is it that in 2013, after centuries of male domination that we are still tolerating abuse against women and children in our society and moreover in our community? Further, why doesn’t our government create a system whereby the women and children remain in the family home and the abuser is removed?
2013 marks the 35th anniversary of Women’s Crisis Services; having provided shelter and outreach services to our community since 1978. A few trends have been evidenced over the past decade. Our agency has experienced a steady decline in crisis phone calls and simultaneously a significant increase in shelter stays; to the point whereby in 2011 Anselma House opened its new 45 bed facility, replacing the previous 20 bed building. We are now planning to rebuild Haven House also, in order to continue meeting the needs of abused women and their children in Waterloo Region. Instead of building bigger shelters, we need to turn our minds to how we collaboratively eradicate violence against women.
One of our agency’s primary objectives is our commitment to continuous improvement; more so now than ever, in order to meet the needs of the younger generation whose methods of communication style are through social media. Abuse takes on many faces in addition to physical assaults. Stalking has and continues to be a serious misuse of power and control in relationships. This is exacerbated through the use of texting by abusers. Many of our young women do not view obsessive texting as abusive; but rather as a display of affection. This is just one example of how our awareness and education needs to shift in order to reach this and future generations.
With our 35 year history, comes the stark reality that we are now serving the third generation of abused women in the same families. Breaking the intergenerational cycle of abuse is critical to the eradication of violence against women. Doing so requires the input and assistance of our community…and that means each of us. Violence against women is a societal issue and therefore requires a community response. We need to be diligent and active. Each of us needs to make a pledge that abuse is unacceptable and we will not tolerate it…ever. And then we need to turn our commitment into action and when we become aware of an abusive situation, we need to intervene rather than view the matter as a private one and look the other way. It is only by working together in partnership that violence and abuse against women in our community will be reduced and eventually eradicated.
Author: Mary Zilney Mary Zilney has a Master’s degree in Social Work from Wilfrid Laurier University. For the past 8 years, she has held the position of Chief Executive Officer of Women’s Crisis Services of Waterloo Region. Mary has worked in the area of family violence for almost 20 years.
Posted on: August 7th, 2013 by Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council
Less than one quarter of victims of domestic violence report the incident to police. Collecting information from the Women’s Crisis Services of Waterloo Region provides an additional method of tracking domestic violence rates independent of police data. The chart below measures the number of women and children who received support in a Women’s Crisis Services of Waterloo Region shelter, the number of crisis calls received, and the number of women served through outreach by Women’s Crisis Services of Waterloo Region.
The Statistics
Source Data: Women’s Crisis Services of Waterloo Region, Annual Report
The Story Behind the Numbers
The crisis calls for support recently dropped. The number of women served through outreach appears to be relatively stable over the past three years. In the past year the number of women and children living in shelters increased dramatically. This increase is believed to be associated with the opening of the new site for the shelter. The opening generated publicity and improved living conditions for women in the shelter which is believed to have made women more comfortable seeking service.
Posted on: June 25th, 2013 by Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council
Our Waterloo Region community has a lot to say about most any topic you can think of, but, we are particularly passionate when it comes to talking about making change for a healthier and stronger community. We’re pretty good at moving to action too, not just talking about it!
The Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council believes monitoring the root causes of crime can aid the community in addressing crime, victimization and fear of crime through awareness, discussion, leadership and action. Once the root causes are understood more clearly, resources can be applied to areas where the community is doing poorly. A Snapshot in Time: The Root Causes of Crime in Waterloo Region identifies the root causes of crime right here in Waterloo Region and provides a tool to aid local policy makers in targeting interventions to where they are most needed and where they can have the greatest impact.
In addition to being a monitoring tool the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council is using this report to aid members of the public in comprehending the complex connection between social and economic circumstances and crime. The report was written in a straightforward manner with each of the root causes containing an explanation of why it was included, a graph showing the statistics for Waterloo Region and a short story giving details on what is going on behind the numbers. Additionally, Wade McAdam created the following information graphic to help tell the story of the root causes in an easily accessible format.
A Snapshot in Time is also designed to be a catalyst for conversations in Waterloo Region about the root causes of crime. Over the next ten weeks tune in to this discussion through our blog series where community leaders, community residents and leading experts across Waterloo Region weigh in on the root causes of crime outlined in the report. Numbers only tell part of the story. It’s the human stories and context that make them come alive, create insight and move us to action.
I hope you will join us. We’re standing by… waiting to hear what you have to say!
Being a leader doesn’t necessarily mean being at the front of a rally with a megaphone. There are many components to leadership. It’s important, especially for the guys reading this, to remember that we are all leaders, whether to our brothers and sisters, our partners, our friends, or to our sons and daughters.
The sexism, misogyny, transphobia and homophobia found in the media and in our everyday interactions can be overwhelming and confronting these issues can make us feel vulnerable or powerless. At the same time, many men (and women) do not know how to confront these issues in their own lives. Unfortunately, this means that a lot of us remain silent. However, when we remain silent about violence against women we are perpetuating a rape culture – whether we intend to or not.
What does rape culture mean?
Rape culture is a term used to describe a society wherein sexual violence is normalized through behaviours, attitudes and practices that tolerate rape. Okay… what does that mean? Rape is not the only action that perpetuates rape. How we act and what we say go a long way in telling those around us what is acceptable. For example, if we laugh or remain silent when a rape joke is told by one of our co-workers while we are not condoning the behaviour described in the joke – we are allowing the attitude expressed by the person who told the joke to remain unchallenged and spread.
While sexist and misogynistic attitudes may not physically harm women we know that language structures our thoughts and behaviours. The more prevalent these attitudes become, the more they are internalized by men and used as justification for their treatment of women. Admittedly, the intent of jokes that dehumanize women is generally not to encourage men to physically harm women. However, the impact of rape jokes is the creation of a rape culture that tells the men listening that their behaviours and attitudes towards women are acceptable.
Undoubtedly, this is a societal issue — but it also needs to be addressed individually. I want to encourage men to become accountable in their own lives and understand that they can make a difference simply by working to be the best version of themselves that they can be. One way we can do this is by leading with lollipops:
To end, I would like to say that while men need to become more active, we must continue to be accountable to women and women’s organizations such as the Sexual Assault Support Centre Waterloo Region (sascwr.org) who have been doing this work for decades and who make the work we do possible. Men who become involved in ending violence against women are often romanticized while the work of women goes ignored or unnoticed. As such, it is important to remember that while the dominant construction of masculinity may not work for all men – patriarchy does.
Author: Stephen Soucie is a MAASV Public Education Facilitator for the Sexual Assault Support Centre of Waterloo Region. Currently, he is a Masters student in the Critical Sociology program at Brock University. His research areas include: violence against women, men and masculinities, masculinity and sport, and engaging men in anti-violence activism.
Posted on: June 12th, 2013 by Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council
The 2013 Ontario Budget was passed in the Ontario legislature on Tuesday June 11, 2013. The Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council always looks to the budget through the ‘smart on crime’ lens of crime prevention. The 2013 budget presents some interesting spending and ‘non-spending’ as it relates to crime prevention. We look for information with an eye for the root causes of crime which are economic factors, social environment and family structures. The economic factors we look for include poverty, employment & educational opportunities, and housing. The social environment relates to social inequalities, support to families and neighbourhoods, accessibility to services, and children & youth well-being. The family structures may include parenting challenges & conflict, parental, spousal or children criminality, lack of communication, respect and responsibility, abuse or neglect of children, and family violence.
We have reviewed the budget and analyzed where it will directly or indirectly affect crime prevention through the root causes of crime. Here are few key highlights supporting crime prevention:
Health: Health is an important category to crime prevention because it targets the social environment which individuals live and supports family structures.
Funding growing to $93 million per year by 2013-24 for the Comprehensive Mental Health and Addiction Strategy which focuses on
Early intervention, community-based counseling, employment training, supportive housing, prevention of and treatment for substance abuse and problem gambling
Developing a narcotics monitoring system to reduce the abuse of prescription narcotics and controlled substance medication
Creating 23 health care links across the province to encourage greater collaboration and coordination by a patient’s different health care providers
Education: Education is an all around important part of crime prevention. It supports better economic factors, by increasing an individual’s chance for employment and health. It also provides a better social environment and leads to stronger family structures.
Government will work with the education sector to broaden measure of success to include higher-order skills such as:
Character, citizenship, communication, collaboration and teamwork, critical-thinking and problem-solving, creativity and innovation, entrepreneurialism, connection to postsecondary education and careers
$12.6 million over 3 years for the expansion of summer learning programs
Employment: Employment is very important for improving economic factors; it leads to a positive social environment and better family structures.
$195 million over 2 years for the Ontario Youth Employment Fund
Employment opportunities for 25,000 youth in Ontario
$200 from the first employment earnings can now be saved by recipients of Ontario Works and ODSP
Poverty: Poverty is directly linked to economic factors that may cause crime. Addressing poverty help to reduce economic factors that may lead to crime and improve the social environment in which people live.
Reduce child poverty by %25 by continuing the 5-year Poverty Reduction Strategy, which includes:
5-year extension of the Investment in Affordable Housing program announced in the 2013 federal budget, this should provide funding for:
Construction & renovation of affordable housing units, home ownership assistance, rent supplements, shelter allowances, renovation & repair of accommodation for victims of family violence
Aboriginal Peoples: Aboriginal Peoples are a large part of our population and are an important factor in preventing crime. Support and improvements to Aboriginal Peoples directly affects all the root causes of crime – economic factors, social environment and family structures.
$5 million per year to improve student achievement and explore strategies for successful transition from on-reserve schools to provincially funded schools
Develop a multi-year Aboriginal Children and Youth Strategy, which will focus on:
Building community driven, integrated and culturally appropriate supports to help Aboriginal children and young people group up healthy and reach their full potential
$4 million for 40 front-line positions for First Nation police services
Policing and Crime Prevention: policing and crime prevention are key ways to prevent crime directly. Funding and support are essential in order to create a social environment in which people feel safe and productive, improving economic factors and creating positive family structures.
$12.5 million annually for Provincial Anti-Violence Intervention Strategy and the Toronto Anti-Violence Intervention Strategy which focus on:
Intervention, prevention, enforcement, and community mobilization strategies such as dedicated neighbourhood police officers
Currently 17 police services participate in PAVIS
$30 million over 3 years to Legal Aid Ontario, strengthening the capacity of Family Law Service Centres and other community legal clinics across Ontario
Children and Youth: Children and youth are the future of society and are directly related to crime prevention. In order to improve the future economic factors, social environments and family structures we need to work directly with the children and youth within our society.
Ontario Early Year Policy Framework – implement full-day kindergarten and support child care system
Youth Action Plan (& Premier’s Council on Youth Opportunities) – increase the number of Youth Outreach Workers
Areas the budget is not supporting crime prevention:
NO mention of C-10 – this is important for crime prevention as it has direct impacts economic factors, for example personal taxes and employment insurance. The fact that the budget did not mention this is concerning to crime prevention as it will continue to be part of federal legislation.
raise awareness and generate a dialogue on crime prevention in Ontario;
highlight the opportunities to move forward;
set the stage for the development of further crime prevention work with will build and enhance crime prevention partnerships, encourage the development of coordinated, multi-sectorial responses and promote community leadership and participation in crime prevention.
The fact that the budget does not mention this is noteworthy for future crime prevention as we intend to and assume the province intends to participate and follow the Ontario Crime Prevention Framework.
NO mention of how Ontario will pay for prisons – the document “Funding Requirement and Impact of the ‘Truth in Sentencing Act’” prepared by Rajakar A., and Mathilakath, R. states, “[…] the cost of new construction stemming from “Truth in Sentencing Act” will be borne in the proportion of approximately 21% to 22% by the federal GC, and 78% to 79% by the provincial governments.” The fact that our provincial budget does not discuss the costs or spending related to prison construction is noteworthy for future crime prevention. It is important to understand how the province is planning to fund the construction of new prisons and support the social environment and economic factors directly related to this.
ONLY 60% of Drummond report recommendations being implemented – The Drummond report, “‘The Commission on the Reform of Ontario’s Public Services’” was established in 2011 to provide advice to the government on how to deliver the most effective and efficient public services possible[…]” (from 2013 Ontario Budget, page 111). This is important for crime prevention because it is directly related to the root causes of crime and crime prevention.
When reviewing the budget it is important to note all the areas it will support crime prevention and the areas that are lacking in support of crime prevention. The lens of crime prevention allows us to view the budget critically to assess how and where it will directly and indirectly affect the work we are currently doing and the work we plan to do in the future to address the root causes of crime.
Author: Alexandra Kraushaar
Placement Student, Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council, is currently at University of Waterloo working towards an Honours degree in Knowledge Integration with Minors in International Development and Economics. Summer Placement Student at the Crime Prevention Council to gain valuable experience in community and social development. When I am not at school or at my placement, I can be found in St. Clements riding my horse. I am a passionate equestrian enthusiast, competing in Dressage throughout Canada and the US.
Stand Up. Speak out. is the invitation MAASV extends to men and male youth to be part of the work of ending gendered violence in Waterloo Region. One in five men (21%) reported that they did not actively support community efforts to stop violence against women because no one had asked them to get involved.
Well, we’re asking!
A gendered analysis of sexual violence recognizes that women and children make up the majority of those who experience sexual assault and men make up the majority (98%) of offenders (Statistics Canada, 2003). Given the high percentage of male perpetrators, the significant percentage of boys who experience sexual abuse and the men whose lives are impacted when someone close to them experiences sexual violence, this is clearly a men’s issue too.
MAASV provides training and resources for parents, teachers, coaches and social service providers or will facilitate workshops with youth. Topics include: healthy masculinity, healthy relationships, respect, diversity and more.
Check out Jackson Katz – educator, author and filmmaker – internationally recognized for his ground-breaking work in the field of gender violence prevention education with men and boys. Katz speaks about men’s involvement in ending gendered violence.
In two upcoming guest blog posts you will hear from some of our male allies about their experiences and the strategies and tools they have learned and use in their lives.
Author: Joan Tuchlinsky is the Public Education Manager at the Sexual Assault Support Centre of Waterloo Region and coordinates the MAASV program. She is inspired by her five children and three grandchildren to work with others to create a safer and more equitable world.
Last night I put together a “Grocery Store Stand” for my four-year old granddaughter. I had difficulty, not because I hadn’t been engaged in a similar activity for about 25 years, reading with weary eyes “Easy to Follow” directions written for MIT grads. No, I had a hard time because I would have tears in my eyes thinking of the parents in Newtown, Connecticut who would not be prying open boxes, assembling bikes and bridges and stores and castles, assembling what would be the joyous shouts of discovery, of Christmas.
As most Americans, I wept for them and for this nation, this wonderful nation, this giving nation with nimble democracy, a nation that can change when it wishes, a nation that banned slavery, gave women the right to vote, passed civil rights and anti-gay discrimination laws, and, overcoming deep prejudices, elected its first Roman Catholic President and then its first African American President. A friend and colleague from Montreal, with whom I worked when I served as a board member of the International Centre for the Prevention of Crime called me when Obama was first elected four years ago. He said, “I get mad at your country so often, your violence, your disparity of wealth.” “And then you do something like this. You are so flexible. You do terrible things, then you change. And when you do, you give us all hope.” His words were choked. He thanked me. He thanked America “as a beacon for what nations can be.”
Will we have this courage? Will we then, overcoming deep prejudices, passionately held views, agree to aim the diagnosis beyond the individual , to us, our social values? We protect what we value: if a car is defective, it is recalled, the driver not blamed for a broken axle; the FDA tests and retests drugs, and if one is proven harmful, as Thalidomide, it is banned; if tainted spinach poisons a handful of individuals as it did recently, the government stops growers from growing, not eaters from their menu selections. Recall that spinach was removed from grocery store shelves across the nation. Toys are recalled because the paint, if licked, can cause stomach aches, and large warnings emblazon plastic bags that can suffocate children.
But not so a weapon, a weapon once banned, a weapon of war, a weapon raised high in Syria, and Libya, a weapon designed for U.S. troops in Vietnam, a weapon that kills a roomful of children in minutes, a legal weapon, a weapon, a toxin in our civic stream that remains while spinach is pulled.
The ironies are almost too painful to recount. A sudden “international newsbreak” on one of the TV channels I was watching interrupted the agonizing, incomprehensible Newtown story to report on a disaster in Syria in which 20 civilians, mainly women and children, were killed. Syria, a nation at war. 20 dead. America, a nation not at war, 28 (this does not include others who were killed that day by guns across the U.S).
On December 15 the New York Times reported on a deranged Chinese man who stormed into a classroom of kids brandishing a knife, intent on killing. 22 received knife wounds, and 22 survived.
My life’s calling has been to serve and help improve the lives of children and families and the neighborhoods in which they live. I have served on the state and federal levels and as President and CEO of the National Crime Prevention Council. More recently I have been working with 24 cities across America helping these cities craft and then implement gang and violence prevention plans blending prevention, intervention, enforcement and reentry (returning offenders). Those I’ve had the pleasure to meet and work with are the most committed, professional and courageous individuals I’ve ever met – among them law enforcement, educators, mayors, faith and community leaders, recreation officials, the philanthropic sector, public health and hospitals to name only a few . Yet their delicate and complicated work, work that tries to change a social norm to one that does not tolerate violence, one that supports, nurtures and protects, can be shattered by a shooting. “We are outgunned,” one law enforcement officer told me. Yet in the face of this fire, they continue.
And so do those living in war zones. I was asked to run a “listening session” of parents living in a high crime area of Philadelphia. One woman told me that her goals in life is to get her kids “to and from school without being shot.” She escorts her kids to school and back, sometimes walking on pavements “with dried blood on them,” and always by “little memorials, a cross, flowers for kids who have been shot and killed.” Just across the river in Camden, New Jersey on the City Hall’s front lawn, 55 crosses bear stark and public witness to the killings in that city . Not Syria: Philadelphia, Camden and sections of all large cities across the nation.
We hear “loner” this, loner that. Perhaps it is a trait among the shooters in Columbine, Aurora, Virginia Tech and Newtown, but most loners don’t kill. Do we screen for lonerism? Are we more violent than other nations? We are not a different species, but guns make the difference: anger and depression, however mild, have probably touched most everyone who has lived. In the face of a divorce, loss of job, death of a spouse, death of a child, loss of a girl friend, a few “normal” people can break. Spouses shoot spouses, rejected lovers shoot those who spurned them and disgruntled employees shoot employers. It matters enormously whether what is at hand for those who break is a knife or an assault weapon. E.J. Dionne points out in his Washington Post Editorial on December 17, that we should improve our “treatment of those who may be prone to violence,” but that this is “too often part of a strategy to evade any action on guns themselves.”
We must, at a minimum, ban the sale of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines (and consider rewards on existing weapons and magazines that are turned in), perform rigorous background checks on all who would purchase a weapon, disqualifying those have committed a felony and those with history of mental health problems, and close gun show loopholes. We must also support jurisdiction-wide planning and implementation of comprehensive violence prevention plans that interweave prevention, intervention, enforcement, rehabilitation and reentry thus making every effort to change a culture of violence.
Bob Dylan’s haunting “Blowin’ In the Wind” asks “How many times must the cannon balls fly before they’re forever banned?” He continues: “How many ears must one man have before he can hear people cry? How many deaths will it take till he knows that too many people have died?” Perhaps this time we will have seen enough, heard enough, been, finally, ashamed enough to acknowledge that the front line soldiers in this debate were little children who were slaughtered by a hail of bullets.
Business Week, hardly a liberal journal in its August 16, 1999 issue said, “It is vital to crack down on the handful of gun dealers who time and again provide weapons to criminals… There is no rational reason of any individual to possess an assault weapon. There is no reason for most people, especially those with children, to own handguns. There is no reason why extremists should determine government gun policies that threaten the lives of innocent people. It is time for serious gun control.”
The Greeks have two words for time, chronos time, as in 9:15 p.m., the time I’m writing this blog; and chiros time as in “wasn’t that a time,” an epochal “time” in history. Let’s commit at this time in our history to stop the cannon balls from flying, each of us pledging that this is the time to change: Time that this nation again rose to greatness by having the courage to change.
Jack Calhoun, December 20,2012
Director, California Cities Gang Prevention Network
Former CEO and Director, National Crime Prevention Council
Former U.S. Commissioner of the Administration for Children, Youth and Families
Jack Calhoun was a keynote speaker at the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council Annual Justice Dinner in April 2010.Reprinted with permission from Jack Calhoun and Hope Matters.
Posted on: November 1st, 2012 by Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council
Being tough on crime often means talking about keeping criminals off the street, protecting the rights of victims and deterring offenders from either offending in the first place, or re-offending upon release. All of these things, however laudable, sound great on talk radio. In my very unscientific poll listening to a recent local talk radio program where the host interviewed the Honourable Rob Nicholson, Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of Canada about toughening the Safe Streets and Communities Act (Bill C-10) about 90% of the callers supported this tough stance that would result in more offenders going to prison. Now, these are serious offenders, not joy-riders or B+E specialists. These are the people found guilty of violent offences. Tough to argue against that. But, have these callers thought about where we are sending these offenders and at what cost, or do they give much thought at all to prison, beyond it being the destination for bad guys (and girls in increasing numbers)?
“Canadians should be interested in who is ending up behind bars. Questions about whom we incarcerate and for how long and why are important public policy issues…Visible minorities, Aboriginal people and women are entering federal penitentiaries in greater numbers than ever before. Twenty-one percent of the inmate population is of Aboriginal descent and 9% of inmates are Black Canadians. In the last five years, the number of federally incarcerated women has increased by about 40% while the number of Aboriginal women has increased by over 80% in the last decade. In fact, if not for these sub-groups, the offender population growth rate would have flat-lined some years ago.”
Think about that for a moment. Does this not seem out of whack to you? How often have we heard our politicians or talk show hosts calling attention to these stats? Not very, at least in my memory. How long can we keep sweeping this issue under the proverbial rug before we need an SUV to climb over it? Why is this not on the national radar?
Mr. Sapers goes even further to paint a picture of today’s inmate:
“More offenders are admitted to federal penitentiaries more addicted and more mentally ill that ever before. 36% have been identified at admissions as requiring some form of psychiatric care of psychological follow-up. 63% of offenders report using either alcohol or drugs on the day of their current offence…These needs often run ahead of the system’s capacity to meet them.”
Given this, would it not make sense for the government to invest some of the money it is using after the fact to house these people to invest at the front end in some form of proactive therapy that can address alcohol and substance abuse issues as these are often linked to mental health problems? We know that it currently costs the government (in reality you and me, the taxpayer) about $98,000 to incarcerate one male (female prisoners are much more expensive to house, in fact about twice the cost) for one year in a medium security federal prison. By the way, these figures come from Public Safety Canada. I am not making them up. If that money were invested in mental health and addictions counselling (and it wouldn’t even cost near that amount) for a person when symptoms first arise, it would save exponential amounts of money after the fact in costs of incarceration. This isn’t bleeding heart liberalism. It’s simple mathematics. You should know that there is a range of costs for persons incarcerated that is dependent on whether or not they are in a federal or provincial institute, whether they are male or female and the level of security and so on. I think there are more options out there that are less expensive and arguably more effective.
Look for example at InREACH, the anti-gang project running in Waterloo Region. In 2009, the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council received nearly $3.8 million from the National Crime Prevention Centre (Canada) for a 45 month time period to create and implement a collaborative street gang prevention project that involved a collaboration among various community agency partners. You can read about the initiative yourself so I won’t take you through all it offers in terms of its programs like addictions counselling, mental health supports, job skills training, community mobilization and so on. Visit the site though. You will be impressed.
In a recent monitoring report of the project prepared by Karen Hayward, she notes that 210 youth have been referred to the program since 2010. If, and it’s a very big if, all of these youth would have gone on to commit crimes which would land them in a medium security federal penitentiary the cost to the taxpayer would be $20,580,000. Okay, that’s a stretch. It depends on lots of factors so I am asking you to give me some leeway here. So, let’s say only a quarter of these youth could be diverted successfully. The cost is still $5,145,000. Oh, by the way, this is per year. So, if for example we say that the program diverted 25% of these youth from a federal penitentiary over three years, at a program investment of roughly $3 million and without it, the government (again, you and me) would be on the hook for $15,435,000 – does it not look cost effective? And, interestingly enough, inREACH is scrambling for funding since the money is running out. It begs the question as to why, when simple economics tells us it makes more sense to invest upfront dollars that will save the taxpayer huge amounts later on. I know there are a lot of suppositions in my example that may fail to take various factors into consideration, but the message is still clear: pay now or pay a lot more later.
Mr. Sapers helps make my argument. “Expenditures on federal corrections totalled almost $2.5 billion in 2010-11, which represents a 43.9% increase since 2005-06.” Have we seen the same percentage increase going to mental health and addictions support? Well, it appears not. According to the Canadian Psychiatric Association, the federal government has cut mental health services at Correctional Services Canada including three doctors, 28 nurses, six psychologists, three social workers and two occupational therapists. These numbers don’t include the 18 nurses and five psychologists affected by the closure of Kingston Penitentiary who will lose their jobs.
When one considers, as Mr. Sapers’ report notes, that 4 of 5 offenders have substance abuse problems, 50% of federally incarcerated women report a history of self-harm, over half identify a current or previous addiction to drugs, 85% report a history of physical abuse and 68% experienced sexual abuse at some point in their lives, any cuts to mental health supports seem short-sighted. And I am not even touching on the story of Ashley Smith, as an example of what can happen to a person with mental health needs in our prison system.
As much as I think many callers to talk shows debating the tough on crime agenda reasonably want to protect victims, it might be time for them to think about what happens after the cell door slams. After all, at some point these people are coming out and will be standing in line with us at Tim Hortons or riding the bus with us. From a strictly selfish point of view, do we want them to come out healthier, more able to handle stress and addictive tendencies, more compassionate and remorseful, or just angrier and more damaged?
Is it time to stop pretending prison is our best option? What are we pretending not to know?
Author: Frank Johnson is a regular guest writer for Smart on Crime in Waterloo Region. Frank is a retired principal with the local Catholic school board, a dad, and sometimes runner who possesses an irreverent sense of humour that periodically gets him in trouble. He lives in Waterloo, Ontario.
Frank Johnson’s writing reflects his own opinions and do not necessarily reflect the views or official positions of the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council.
Author: Harry Whyte
Author: Mary Zilney
Source Data: Women’s Crisis Services of Waterloo Region, Annual Report
We have reviewed the budget and analyzed where it will directly or indirectly affect crime prevention through the root causes of crime. Here are few key highlights supporting crime prevention: