Saturday afternoon I ran across a tweet from CBC News that caused me a lot of alarm, initially, but then realized filtering the news was something I have also participated in from my own days working full time in the media. The question posed was: “Should media outlets report that an accused person is a refugee?” It was a result of a case this past week when a Syrian refugee was charged with multiple sexual assaults stemming from an incident at the water park at West Edmonton Mall. The thinking behind this is that very few refugees commit sexual assaults so why do we need to mention it and send people into hysteria with a false sense of worry every time they come into contact with a refugee. A cynic may see the leftist media is interested in suppressing crimes committed by refugees because to publicize it would be counter to their efforts.
I can recall a summer, approximately ten years ago (may have been longer), where I conducted an interview with RCMP officials and I acted upon a tip I received concerning gang initiation in Saskatchewan. In particular, there were two specific situations I inquired about: 1) people using the self serve option at gas stations being approached and then stabbed, surprisingly, after someone asks an innocent question to start a conversation, and 2) people out for a walk on the sidewalk experiencing a vehicle pulling up beside them at regular city speed and opening a passenger door, causing an assault. Neither scenario was denied, but I was told it would be in my best interests not to send people into a state of panic and have everyone afraid to go for a walk or pump their own gas by reporting on these infrequent crimes. I obliged and kept it off the air, but I made no secret in private conversations that I felt you should be vigilant and mindful of some possibilities when engaged in those two activities.
As I look back at keeping the gang initiations under wraps and compare it to the non-reporting of the background of someone who commits a sexual assault; I see a lot of similarities.Of course you should always be aware that just about anyone can victimize you at the worst possible time; but it doesn’t hurt to know that if you live in a city with a gang problem, here are a couple of very specific things to watch for. In Europe, where migrants and refugees have been accepted in massive numbers, we are seeing reports of similar crimes where young people are being touched inappropriately. It doesn’t hurt to be careful, and there is a difference between careful and discriminatory. One of my favorite arguments is when someone says, “Most sexual assaults are committed by Canadians, not refugees.” True, but that’s like saying, “Most of the crime in China is committed by Chinese people.”
I wanted to write more about Will Baker last week, but space didn’t permit it. Topically, he made the news again this week as it was deemed he is worthy of a discharge and no longer has to check in with officials to ensure he’s taking his medication. Baker, you may recall, decapitated and cannibalized a bus passenger nine years ago. Ordinarily, a common person would think anyone guilty of such an unimaginable offense would spend the rest of his natural life in some sort of a facility where the public wouldn’t have to worry. Not in Canada. Instead, Baker (his new identity) has a second chance at life, even though his victim and the First Responder who later killed himself, aren’t given that same opportunity. I’m not trying to be insensitive to mental illness, but is this the new way of thinking? Let’s use pig farmer Robert Pickton as an example. Does anyone think he is of sound mind? Can he be fixed and allowed to assimilate back into society? Pickton, himself, no. The verdict is in. But a future Pickton, definitely, is going to have that opportunity and that should be unacceptable to all Canadians. Should Baker reoffend, all the people who signed off on letting him go free without conditions should be also looking at charges. if we added something like this to our legal vernacular, you’d see a lot fewer people released freely.
If his freedom isn’t enough to appal you (and we get offended at so little these days that I can’t imagine any one reading this isn’t offended at Baker being free without a single condition), the fact that taxpayers funded his name change and are not allowed to know his whereabouts should frighten you. He may live in a home near you or your loved ones. I bet he doesn’t live anywhere near the judge, lawyers, and doctors who have deemed him a low risk to reoffend.
Nice person mentions this week: Garrett Karcha (in case I missed you last time, and you actually have me wondering because I forget everything), Erika Strimbold, Derek Helberg, Michele Rein, and Dave Leaderhouse.
