Coun. Isaac Gilbert

[bobbyrog]

*removed*

[fluffy]

Knowing where they came from solves nothing and doesn't bring us any closer to a solution because we cannot do anything with the data.

Exactly. Yes, former inmates as a group show a higher tendency to reoffend than those who haven’t been to prison, is that the fault of the prison system or a wider societal symptom ? Crime rates aren’t a function of prison releases, they come from addiction issues, homelessness, mental health issues, chronic underfunding of law enforcement and a society that continues to look down its collective nose at these issues. Like it or not, once an ex-con has fulfilled his debt to the correction system he/she has the same rights as you or I, and that includes a right to live free of persecution based on prejudice.

[workthatwedo]

They will have a criminal record and will have to complete a CRRA check for most employment.

It is a requirement in any role that could see this person working with minors or vulnerable adults.

You can't volunteer for your kids' school or sports without a CRRA check.

It's not quite as cut and dry as you make it sound. Try entering the USA with a recent conviction.

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/safe ... anizations.

[fluffy]

They will have a criminal record and will have to complete a CRRA check for most employment.

It is a requirement in any role that could see this person working with minors or vulnerable adults.

You can't volunteer for your kids' school or sports without a CRRA check.

It's not quite as cut and dry as you make it sound. Try entering the USA with a recent conviction.

Point taken, but they are not without rights. I’m still curious as to what council feels could be done with this information that isn’t being done already by other branches of government.

[A Concerned Citizen]

... once an ex-con has fulfilled his debt to the correction system he/she has the same rights as you or I, and that includes a right to live free of persecution based on prejudice.

The issue here is gilbert's incompetence ... not trying to obfuscate and treat criminals like victims ... and if someone can't, like him, figure out what to do with data that's their problem and no one else's ... remember there are people, who I submit includes gilbert, that no matter how hard one tries to explain it for them they will never be able to understand it for them ...

[fluffy]

The issue here is gilbert's incompetence ... not trying to obfuscate and treat criminals like victims ... and if someone can't, like him, figure out what to do with data that's their problem and no one else's ... remember there are people, who I submit includes gilbert, that no matter how hard one tries to explain it for them they will never be able to understand it for them ...

Mr. Gilbert’s alleged “incompetence” is the issue at hand for some, but it is opinion and by no means established fact. The simple fact that no one is willing to supply any definition to what could be done with the data shows that there is a need to ask questions. I applaud Mr. Gilbert to have the spine to stand up against the potential for actions that appear to be based in prejudice.

[workthatwedo]

If OCC is simply releasing inmates out of their front gates into the South Okanagan, then the facility is effectively funneling criminals from all over the interior into the communities that neighbor the facility.

At one time, the Greyhound was how the corrections system returned inmates back into their communities. That option shriveled up roughly 5 years ago. How exactly are they getting these folks home?

To answer your question, if the data confirms that this is what is happening, THEY WILL HAVE TO STOP FLOODING OUR COMMUNITIES WITH CONVICTED CRIMINALS. The system will have to be held accountable, someone will have some explaining to do and the proper process will begin being followed.

If it turns out that they are following the correct procedure, then the focus can move towards finding the root of the issue. To any reasonable person, this would be the logical place to start investigating. The simplest answer is often the correct one.

Do fluffy or bobbyrog have any better suggestions, or are you two just here to question what most would consider common sense?

[bobbyrog]

If OCC is simply releasing inmates out of their front gates into the South Okanagan, then the facility is effectively funneling criminals from all over the interior into the communities that neighbor the facility.

At one time, the Greyhound was how the corrections system returned inmates back into their communities. That option shriveled up roughly 5 years ago. How exactly are they getting these folks home?

To answer your question, if the data confirms that this is what is happening, THEY WILL HAVE TO STOP FLOODING OUR COMMUNITIES WITH CONVICTED CRIMINALS. The system will have to be held accountable, someone will have some explaining to do and the proper process will begin being followed.

If it turns out that they are following the correct procedure, then the focus can move towards finding the root of the issue. To any reasonable person, this would be the logical place to start investigating. The simplest answer is often the correct one.

Do fluffy or bobbyrog have any better suggestions, or are you two just here to question what most would consider common sense?

I'm sure the reason this took six pages to come up with was definitely "it's common sense, you should've known" and not "I couldn't think of anything"... especially considering how many times we've asked and received no answer. Plenty of insults, though! Very creative. I'll give credit where credit is due however and will say this is the best use for the data anybody has mentioned yet, but that might just be because nobody else has offered any alternatives.

As far as I'm aware they can't force anybody onto a bus to "go back where they came from". Even if they could, nothing is stopping them from simply returning to the Okanagan. We're already aware of where crime occurs, from my perspective we need to send the message it's not welcome here regardless of where you're from. Make criminals see the Okanagan as an undesirable location, instead of just loading them on a bus to who knows where and hope they don't come back.

[fluffy]

As far as I'm aware they can't force anybody onto a bus to "go back where they came from". Even if they could, nothing is stopping them from simply returning to the Okanagan. We're already aware of where crime occurs, from my perspective we need to send the message it's not welcome here regardless of where you're from. Make criminals see the Okanagan as an undesirable location, instead of just loading them on a bus to who knows where and hope they don't come back.

I agree. I doubt there is any legal basis to keep someone out of the city on the basis of what they might do. The solution is as bobbyrog says, make the city a place they don’t want to come too. That means more boots on the ground, be it bylaw or RCMP.

[twobits]

[
Exactly. Yes, former inmates as a group show a higher tendency to reoffend than those who haven’t been to prison, is that the fault of the prison system or a wider societal symptom ?

Source please. Beyond that....if someone can be called a former inmate, does that not directly indicate they were an incarcerated person and thus a "former inmate"? And those that have not been incarcerated and thus not former inmates will be less likely to reoffend? Either you do not understand the ridiculous circular argument of that statement or you believe that the Cretans of society that get a jail free decision from the Judge are somehow less likely to reoffend because no incarceration was doled out.
I respect ya fluff but I really think you are crapping your pants on this one.

[fluffy]

Fair enough. And I think you are supporting the idea that council should be able to act against former inmates based on prejudice. I think that’s the point that Mr Gilbert was trying to make, that “once a criminal always a criminal” just doesn’t fly.

[A Concerned Citizen]

Fair enough. And I think you are supporting the idea that council should be able to act against former inmates based on prejudice. I think that’s the point that Mr Gilbert was trying to make, that “once a criminal always a criminal” just doesn’t fly.

It is quite the assumption that someone is supporting council "based on prejudice" when in fact all that council was doing is trying to get some facts and then also guessing at the point that gilbert "was trying to make" ... that's the kind of logic and reasoning typically attached to social justice warrior speak that tries to make something an issue when it isn't an issue and using a preposterous assumption as a starting point to justify the latter point ... in fact, that's exactly the kind of circular thinking that I believe we will see more of from gilbert as he himself wants to be perceived as a fountain of sincerity and social justice ...

[fluffy]

I can’t help but notice your arguments are consistently based on attacking Mr. Gilbert’s credibility along with anyone who supports him rather than consider what would (or could) be done with said information were it secured. Is there any legal precedent for keeping people out of the city based on something that hasn’t happened yet ? That’s not the way the law works.

[A Concerned Citizen]

I can’t help but notice your arguments are consistently based on attacking Mr. Gilbert’s credibility along with anyone who supports him rather than consider what would (or could) be done with said information were it secured. Is there any legal precedent for keeping people out of the city based on something that hasn’t happened yet ? That’s not the way the law works.

Fluff, be honest with yourself ... starting out with a phrase that someone is 'attacking' is just backhand social justice warrior speak and then following it with a question (ie 'legal precedent') that isn't even related is an excellent example of the preposterous approach to such issues. The latter point is a further example of trying to simply change the conversation to turn issues into some sort of circular argument to deflect from the inane comments that were made by gilbert ...

Do yourself a favour and go back and watch the council meeting and the notice of motion that was put forward by Councillor Konanz. There was a complete explanation that answers all of your questions along with the debate and even the question that was put forward by Joe Fries.

[bobbyrog]

*removed*