Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
I appreciate Mark Follman's very optimistic article about Insite in my home city of Vancouver. I am very much in favor of the site despite what I am going to say next.
It is now a regualar occurance to see one or two addicts shooting up in the back alley of my apartment. I live in the fairly well-off neighborhood of Kitsilano, several miles from the Downtown Eastside that houses Insite. It's likely that these same people are the ones breaking into our apartment's garage and vandalizing cars every couple of months. Petty crime in Vancouver is on the rise, and drug use is spreading to all parts of the city (I don't know if numbers are up, but many are no longer staying in the Downtown Eastside).
It's easy to find crime statistics here: http://www.city.vancouver.bc.ca/police/Planning/Reports/District.html
Mark mentioned in his article about the 4 pillars that targets prevention, treatment, and crime (and something else that I can't remember). This was great rhetoric for its time, but the only thing that is funded properly is Insite. The police force is vastly underfunded. When we report a break-in to our apartment building, the police don't even show up---just an automated service to report your crime.
My point is that Vancouver has gone too far with its carrot approach and it is affecting the non-drug-addled citizens. I do not want to see Insite go away, but I do want to see fewer criminals on the street.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
