Andrew Weichel (ctvbc.ca) – A new Angus Reid survey suggests British Columbians’ opinion of the RCMP has plummeted over the past two years — and pollsters say the death of Robert Dziekanski is to blame.
Of a national survey polling public confidence in the internal operations and leadership of the Mounties, 57 per cent of Canadians said their opinions had stayed the same.
But in B.C., 61 per cent of those surveyed said their confidence in the RCMP had worsened.
“This is really something that we’ve never seen before, the level of confidence dropping so dramatically,” Angus Reid spokesman Mario Canseco told ctvbc.ca.
Alberta had the second highest number of negative responses at 36 per cent – roughly half the number of British Columbians who expressed disappointment in the Mounties.
Canseco credits the shift to the widely-reported death of Robert Dziekanski and the public inquiry that followed.
“I think it has a lot to do with the stories that have been done about the Dziekanski case, and the way that the story has changed,” Canseco said.
“As time has gone by, we’ve learned that maybe they haven’t been as forthcoming as they could have been at the beginning.”
Interestingly, the most critical demographic appears to be those aged 55 and older, Canseco said.
“There’s this idea that younger people don’t have much confidence in the RCMP, but we find out that only 21 per cent of those aged 18 to 34 say that their confidence has decreased.”
Comparatively, 45 per cent of those aged 55 and older said they had decreased confidence in the Mounties.
The survey, conducted online on Dec. 17 and 18, polled 1,002 randomly selected Canadians. The margin of error is plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.
Calvin, you fail to note the other side of the coin:
DT
You are 100% right about the other side of the story. Some RCMP members will look for ways to abuse anything.
The point is that the cat is out of the bag. Who in government or RCMP Management will have the intestinal fortitude to chase it?
Calvin Lawrence
CGL Consulting
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
10 
2
I think you would be more accurate if you delineated your position and surroundings as opposed to broad brushing the RCMP in general. There is empirical data to support the successful investigation and resolution of harassment in the RCMP via civil means as carried once in a while in the papers. Case in point the sexual harassment that the women in Alberta reportedly suffered during some undercover operations. A complaint was laid, an investigation ensued, other witnesses were located by investigation, and a settlement in 6 figures was obtained.
Obviously in your case this was not the resolution. The Federal Court website alone recounts numerous cases which were launched and obviously settled out before Court adjudication was necessary.
Could there be improvements to the system? No doubt. But I think a wholesale condemnation of 16,000+ regular officers in the RCMP is not supported. Your able description of harassment is instructive, however, limited to your experience, and does short shrift to dedicated persons not falling into that categorization.
The fact that some incidents are subject to rabid, and numerous times inaccurate, media coverage like never before does not mean that it was never an occurrence previously, nor frowned upon by the organization concerned.
Hot debate. What do you think?
6 
4
I agree with what both Deepthroat and Calvin are saying about the “system”.
In respect to both arguments, it demonstrates a breakdown in the system to properly investigate and effectively deal with these types of complaints and individuals.
Hot debate. What do you think?
5 
4
I thought some things Calvin pointed out in his last reply were really well said.
“The abused member is now likely shunned by other members or further abused by members who wish to side with the RCMP no matter what the truth may be.”
The RCMP loves having sheep for employee’s- people they can intimidate and manipulate. If the RCMP is pursuing the harasser, people will side with the target. If the RCMP goes after the target, they will side with harasser. Very few people will defend the truth, just the position the organization is taking.
It can also occur that the harassment will never be properly investigated. Whether for litigation protection or to protect the reputation of the supervisor who was duped for months, the harassment when investigated never makes it onto paper. If it does, good luck getting it under the freedom of information act.
What most people don’t understand about hostile workplaces is that it’s like being in the twilight zone. NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO, THE ATTACKER WILL ALWAYS FIND AN ANGLE TO GET YOU. The whole process revolves around a conflict and the attackers will never allow the conflict to ever be resolved. No matter how hard you try to appease people and fit in, they will always shift the social boundaries to exclude you and keep you on the fringes.
The attacker always has allies and “Reality” is always distorted. They will take a grain of truth and always add much more to the story. Most of the campaign is done behind your back and ask anyone who has been a target they will tell you it is like trying to fight an “invisible” enemy.
Apart from being isolated, everything you say and do is taken out of context, distorted or misrepresented. They will say 10 bad things about someone and when they suck you into saying one thing they will go tell that person and get them attacking you.
Being around these people is precarious, so you go it alone. You get labeled asocial. When you stand up to them or become difficult because you won’t dignify the way you are being treated, you are labeled anti-social. If you are in a good mood and enthusiastic, they will spoil your mood and claim you are prone to mood swings and label this an example of bipolar disorder. If you get frustrated and swear under your breath, they will say you are talking to imaginary people. When you start to become hyper-vigilant (a condition where you are watchful of your abuser) because you are constantly under attack you are labeled paranoid (a pre existing mental condition that was never there to begin with) and are now labeled a borderline schizophrenic. When you start to point out how the ring leader is sabotaging your career, they feign victimhood, (despite no history of violence) than they fear for their lives and go whining of to the supervisor that this person they made angry is going to shoot them with their service pistol. This is on top of fear mongering the entire workplace, poisoning and making everyone afraid of you.
Ninety percent of this is done behind your back When you get confronted by all of this it is like a bomb is dropped on you. You never learn exactly what was said and by who, so all you are being told is that you have a problem. You never have access to what was ever said. You only learn the fine details when you get your file under the freedom of information act.
Now supervisors are not totally stupid and may not buy into all these kinds of things, but they are put under extreme pressure to get rid of you. At best this is written off as a “personality conflict” and they refuse to intervene and acknowledge this behaviour for what it really is. The conflict never resolves itself and your personal reputation is still ruined and you are still shunned by coworkers.
Often times when you seek justice on your own and speak to a lawyer, much of the malice is written off as “Qualified opinion” and can be discouraged from seeking justice as the worst thing you can do is lose a slander or libel suit.
I was always drawn to a police career to help others. What disturbs me is that a starving person gets in more trouble for stealing a chocolate bar in a candy store than for stealing someone’s career and life…
The thugs in uniform that do this, will in my heart always be bigger criminals than the homeless will ever be.
Hot debate. What do you think?
8 
5
Your comment NRF is indicative of active search for negativity. Indeed a sad and tragic event, the RCMP is in the “due process” to terminate this individual, by suspension and ordering him to resign. He chose to ignore the order and to avail himself of his rights in the legal system.
How you distill “corruption” and “incompetence” from that set of facts is perplexing.. What you should be concerned with is the legal system that denies the organization the ability to summarily terminate someone. But then that is what naysayers do, any example to spread negativity and gain support, instead of reasoned debate and proffering of solutions.
Calvin, you fail to note the other side of the coin: The abused complains, they are usually transferred to where they would like to go (or sit home), lengthy internal investigations as per policy on the abuser, both parties have to front their own cases with detailed documentation of events and provide witnesses.
There is a new lexicon in the RCMP in this respect and it says: he/she went home “mad”, don’t know how long they will be off. After 18 months of due process the “abused’ is found to be exaggerating, conniving and really just wanted a transfer. Or did not like the position they were in and wanted to go to another. Until a determination is made, it could go either way. As with other organizations and society it is real easy and with no consequences to cry wolf.
Any finding by the investigating parties can be challenged by the participants, and they do not need a lawyer to do it.. Federal Court is the avenue, and its less than 100 dollars to file.
However, the cure for such nonsense is clearly a union.
Hot debate. What do you think?
6 
3
The process that the RCMP uses to abuse and remove members:
The objective is to remove a member from the RCMP by an unethical process. A member is wronged in some way by a supervisor or another member and decides to fight back. In response the RCMP uses TIME, MONEY, and STRESS, to achieve their goal.
TIME: The internal process (Div.Reps) fail to assist, sides with the unethical person, or are just ineffective. Any grievance process that you start is intentionally or unintentionally bogged down. This could last for years. The abused member decides to file a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission, or file a civil suit. It usually takes years to conduct an investigation. If a tribunal is ordered the human rights commission withdraws from the process. The abused member has to pay legal fees to proceed with the process and may not win the case. If a civil process is followed the abused member has to pay a lawyer upfront to proceed. It is a big gamble. Who has 30,000 dollars to gamble on this process? The award in a human right case is usually lower. The RCMP will intentionally delay any process regarding any of the above options.
If the abused member is successful in the humans rights process and civil process; the RCMP will appeal. Add on several more years and legal fees before the situation is put to rest.
MONEY: The abused member has traveled down a road to seek justice. There has been investments made in legal fees, meetings, travel etc. The RCMP has unlimited resources in the justice department. RCMP members with law degrees are also used. They are able to act unethically because they have not been admitted to the bar. The abused officer cannot file a complaint with the watch dog overseeing lawyer’s behaviour.
STRESS: The abused member is now likely trying to deal with the years or months of stress and his/her work is suffering. The RCMP will now make this a performance issue when it is really a medical issue. The abused member is now likely shunned by other members or further abused by members who wish to side with the RCMP no matter what the truth may be. The abused member now goes on sick leave due to stress, may be on medication, and seeing mental health professionals. This is all paid for by the taxpayers of Canada. The abused members is now placed in a negative light because of being off on sick leave due to stress for years. The abuser’s story never sees light the of day. The abused member is encouraged by the RCMP to take a medical discharge. The abused member would then receive a Veteran Affairs Canada Pension (VAC) The member is told that no further monetary compensation should be paid because the abused person is receiving a VAC pension. (This has been brought before the courts by the RCMP.) I am not sure of the final result. He is further despised because he is receiving his salary and a VAC pension. Remember that there is no money trail with a VAC pension because it does not have to be entered on a tax return.
The abused member is told that he/she will be called to return to work. In some cases the call never comes and the member sits at home in limbo.
Money is not a factor when the RCMP wants to remove and abuse a member. The taxpayers have plenty.
RCMP mission accomplished! The member has been abused and removed from the organization.
Calvin Lawrence
CGL Consulting
Hot debate. What do you think?
9 
7
Perhaps public opinion will continue in decline if stories like these occur:
“. . . Ottawa police Cst. Czapnik, the most recent victim, a father of four, was killed by Kevin Gregson. An RCMP member, Gregson had been removed from duty in 2004 because of irrational and hostile behavior. Despite Gregson’s refusal to take treatment, a 2005 seizure from him of weapons and ammunition and a conviction for threatening a church official with a knife in 2007, he remains a member of the RCMP, albeit now suspended. . . . ”
Is it hard to conclude that management of this organization, from the politicians to the Commisioners, perhaps more, is corrupt and incompetent?
Hot debate. What do you think?
11 
8
Deepthroat, thank for your concern and advice. It is hard to convey emotion over a blog, but I sincerely mean that.
Where things are with me is that these people I have had a bad experience with and I don’t fume on a daily basis. I was enraged for a long time, but most of that has passed. My life right now is better than theirs could ever be. The kind of people I speak of are miserable inside. It speaks to more about who they are, than me.
You are right about some of the hostility I have, but these discussions mostly bring it out. This is not indicative of my current daily life. Though there is some anger, my statement was in jest. With the way you asked me if “Horse troughing was OK”, I got the impression you felt as if I wouldn’t have the stomach for such a thing. I felt I would try and humor you by trumping your suggestion. Like I said, typing doesn’t convey emotion the best.
I have spoken to two other people who have had a similar experience as I. The forensic pattern of behavior was the same. It is very easy for me to tell the difference between someone who has a legitimate complaint of workplace harassment vs someone who is making excuses for not cutting the grade or hacking the stress. Better than anyone I know what to look for and can empathize. My case was also validated by Canada’s #1 expert on hostile work environments Dr. Kenneth Westhues. He has done hundreds of studies and he knew I wasn’t making it up. He is a really nice man and he sent me copies of two books he wrote. We are so behind on our thinking on this subject here in North America. I really learned alot from him. This really is the stressor to beat all stressors.
Everyone has had a work environment where everyone is playing like a team, working hard for the collective. I am sure most everyone has a a group where there is stife and dysfunction, where mediocrity is the norm. People spend more time pointing fingers to drag others down instead of trying to build themselves up. Industrial psycopaths thrive on creating dysfunction. It makes it easier to for them to manipulate others. Angry mobs out for blood never occur in normalcy.
Apart from the slugs, I was well liked and respected by most people I encountered. I wasn’t attacked by the hardest workers or the most competent people. People would come to me for advice and never them! The reason I feel I was picked out was because I was old fashioned in my thinking, set the standard for work ethic and was the only who ever stood up to and never backed down from the chief trouble maker. I was just in the wrong place in the wrong time and I didn’t play the game very well. I am a George Patton type of guy. I’m gung ho, take no crap, speak my mind and work hard. I make a good foot soldier, but a lousy politician. The more they tried to make my life hell, the harder I would work. Most people fall apart when this happens to them, but I was the exception. When people started ignoring me, spreading lies, maligning my character, poisoning my supervisors and constantly trying to set me up to fail, the more pressure I put on myself to be perfect. This was my way of trying to adapt and overcome. If you are perfect, the less ammunition they have and the less they are able to to take a small mistake and make it sound like a big one. This wears you down big time and and makes you severly unhappy, which they prey on like parisites. It severley compromises your immune system. Small colds quickly turn into major infections. Though what one experiences is a normal reaction to a abnormal situation, your body is trying to tell you something is very wrong.
I agree with you that the same problems exist every where. Most people aren’t that nearly that bad. You just feel shellshocked. It is like being a soldier that fought in Vietmam. If the job wasn’t hard enough their own, people would spit on them and shun them. You expect abuse from the enemy, but when you put your heart into what you do and it is from your own kind, it changes your perspective and positive outlook. It is the normal reaction to the abnormal situation. As time goes on my perspective becomes more and more balanced, and I get less and less cynical but damn, sometimes it is hard to overide your self preservation/survival instincts.
Hot debate. What do you think?
7 
4
Mr. Inkster reportedly made the statement and wrongly believed that anyone can do anyone else’s job. The approach should have been, what an RCMP member does often he/she does best.
The hiring practices statements can be summarized on all levels and groups by the following statement:
“In the RCMP politics is always put before performance.”
Calvin Lawrence
CGL Consulting
Hot debate. What do you think?
6 
6
Well JohhnyG, from what I understand, Inkster retrofitted the community policing model of service delivery onto the RCMP’s existing model. Much confusion has ensued. You can thank Lying Brian for that one, Inkster was his man.
As for hiring more female officers and visible minorities, I have no problem with that. As Calvin points out, they all have to pass the same physical requirements. Where you start to get into trouble is with quota systems, when a certain percentage of RCMP recruits must be female or members of a visible minority. So if women lose interest in a policing career as they feel that “glass ceiling” has been broken (look at Bev Busson’s career) and recruitment drops off among visible minorities because they would rather join one of the large municipal or regional police forces (you gotta remember, outside of B.C., the RCMP don’t police municiplalities the size of Surrey and Burnaby), what do the RCMP recruiters do then?
I think that the RCMP tries to raise a troop from Quebec every year because of a policy dating back to the Trudeau era. How many of those officers quit after five years and end up policing back in Quebec? Still, the RCMP tries to raise a troop from Quebec every year. Go figure.
Calvin’s Adam-12 analogy was very apt. Not that that show or Dragnet were 100% realistic but the emphasis was not on car chases and guns.
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
9 
0
Your negative experience is definitely a coloring agent for you in your outlook. Your line “…what I would like to do to these trouble making sub-humans.”, is indicative of severe hostility and should be addressed by a professional. The fact that you see horsetroughing as a possible tool of the “bad” people shows you have no faith in any reconstructive attempts. There are methods to deal with disruptive, self serving, self promoting persons, and a professional is the best choice to address them. Everyday spent in hate and seething anger is a day of life wasted.
I would say that your experience in the RCMP is not a widely shared view. The organization has some definite challenges to overcome, mostly from the top down I would say, however, the everyday officer is still doing his/her best to get through the 3 million calls without trying to “screw” his fellow members.
I cannot think of any organization that does not have similar difficulties due to present societal conditions and laws. The measure of persons in the organizations is how they are able to affect positive change in concert with their fellow workers.
You should watch the Courage in Red series for a bit of balancing perspective.
Hot debate. What do you think?
5 
8
MS, I think Calvin’s analogy of the Adam 12 was the best I have seen. Policing has gone downhill from there.
The community policing model in the RCMP was brought in by Norman Inkster in the late 80’s. This was his vision. If you ask me, this was double speak or “code” for hiring more females and minorities, not to mention it’s demilitarization.
Yes I think there is a lot more symbolism than there ever was. A warm fuzzy feeling has been put on the concept, but if anything I am of the opinion that the rank and file cop is less in tune with the community than ever.
There was a lot of debate in the rank in file during this time. Many were against it, and the ones that were for it felt any cop worth their salt had been doing it for years. The problem is they never imagined how bad things would ever slide…
Hot debate. What do you think?
3 
7
You are right about the promotion system, definite break down there. Too much careerism.
The only problem I have with horsetroughing in the year 2010, is it would be more likely used by the malevolent. The people I have seen in action would be the lazy, trouble making cancers that would be the first to whip everyone into a hateful frenzy than bring up the idea of doing it to someone else, before someone got the idea of giving them a lung full of horse instead. Screw someone else, before they screw you. This is the game careerists play.
Horsetroughing though would be letting them off very easy compared to what I would like to do to these trouble making sub-humans. You don’t want to know how far I would go should I get amnesty inside a locked into a room with some of them…
Hot debate. What do you think?
7 
5
The debate continues to be interesting. JohhnyG, Calvin, and Deepthroat continue to raise new points that are valid.
Both Calvin and JohhnyG have touched on the notion of “community policing” and the idea of the police being a force rather than a service. Sir Robert Peel stated that the police were part of the community back in the day. As the Mounties found themselves policing differing jurisdictions throughout Canada, there seemed to be a bit of a dissconnect between the police and the community they served. So some well-meaning political in Ottawa decided to make the “Community Policing Philosophy” the raison-detre of the RCMP.
The problem is that I rember most “town cops” in the RCMP were always rather good at connecting with the community’s they served. As Calvin said, a good cop has to be a good communicator. So these officers kept the system rolling in small town Canada outside of Ontario and Quebec. Were the Mounties had problems was in larger jurisdictions (notably the Vancouver and Victoria suburbs) where there was an almost constant shortage of officers and regular transfers in and out (regardless of this, the Mounties still got the job done and were popular with the local governments).
Lets return to the notion of a police force as opposed to service and to the notion of police officers as servants of the law.
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
12 
0
The “cure” for the ill you mentioned is rooted in the ability of supervisors to supervise. The present promotion system is a joke and persons such as you outlined are able to get into supervisory positions they would have never gotten into in days (systems) past.. The type of behavior included in harassment should never be tolerated, however, with those very persons allowed to be promoted under the present system, it is a self reproducing cancer. You will have to build in serious repercussions for those who falsely accuse as well.
Horsetroughing was not a bad tool to deal with miscreants. Are you OK with that?
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
10 
2
I don’t think I misrepresented your position Deepthroat, misunderstood is probably more appropriate. I don’t think we are so much in disagreement, that we both are not understanding where the other is really trying to say. When you spoke about things like “clean out your locker”, I wasn’t sure what to think.
I agree with you that yes, things have gone too far. I have heard stories of useless members that went and got lawyers when the force tried to kick them out, and saved their own jobs.
I agree with most of what you say. The issue I have is harassment has to be investigated properly. This is something the force doesn’t do nearly as well as it should. Now I am not talking about the petty crap where someone gets offended by a joke. I mean the type where it’s purpose it to unfairly ruin the reputation of someone.
Take the recruit in Depot from 10 years back. I agree that this went too far up the chain and sounds like he is making a lame excuse. But, if his performance was poor because people were harassing him because he was different or because of his race, it is unacceptable that this be allowed to happen.
If someone is sub par, and just making excuses that is different. There is a pattern to this kind of behaviour. My point is that the system is very poor at figuring out and dealing with the difference.
I have no problem with the concept of a troop putting some heat on someone who is lazy and their performance is dragging everyone else down. I think it can be beneficial. This works well when you have firmly established a team concept.
The problem you see more often ever with the new University/corporate feel is that low life’s (just like in jail) often form little cliques or gangs and go after anyone they don’t like or is showing them up. Just like on the TV show survivor these bottom feeders go after anyone who is a threat to them. With the I/Me concept of today, they cut the high flyers down to size. The attitude here is “if you do it well, I have to and I don’t want to work that hard” This is the real cancer, but there is strength in numbers, so these types of self serving groups sit back and pick people off one by one. There is always a target, and they are always making their lives hell, and spreading lies about them as it keeps the heat and attention off their own sub par performance. Instead of working at making themselves better at their job, they sit around plotting and conspiring. Once they get rid of someone, they move onto the next target. I am serious. These are the kinds of tumors that are destroying the outfit. I know some retired members that joined in the 1960’s and some have been in the military that are all for the old system, but have never seen the kind of problems and malice that exists today. Take away the team concept and you get self serving anarchy.
The problem with dealing with it is the archaic thinking that this is “troop discipline”. There is a big difference and most everyone is either too lazy, too stupid to acknowledge it or do anything about it.
I once had the pleasure of briefly meeting Asst. Comm John Spice. He struck me as a very honest, hard working and sincere man. He is someone who really cares about doing things right and he is very highly respected by anyone who knows him. Look at he had to say about this kind of dysfunction.
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/213891
My point is as long as you have unethical and dishonest people, you need to have a some checks and balances. I have no problem taking a persons job away for competence, but be dammed if I will support a system that allows unethical people to destroy others.
Hot debate. What do you think?
3 
5
You misinterpret my assertions on due process. While I advocate that everybody should be entitled to due process, it is the make up of the present due process that I have an issue with.
Just how far are you willing to carry due process? Witness the recruit dismissed from depot about 10 years ago for his inability to make the grade. We are now in another round of appeals. Is that really what you want? I submit that this is a fine example of due process gone amok. It is also a fine example of how there is no accountability in society. He maintains he was discriminated against. Well so far, no legally binding authority has sided with him. So now what? Lets go to the Supreme Court of Canada, then if that is not successful, lets try a public plebiscite? Where does it end?
I do not maintain the RCMP doesn’t make mistakes. Not sure where you got that one from.
Human resource management is not what you have today. As Calvin mentioned, some members are not allowed to carry guns except while on duty. How utterly ludicrous. In days of yore, the terms of employment were not written down. If some judge ruled you were suspended from driving for two years as a result of an impaired charge, you no longer met the job requirements so out you went on two counts, one no drivers license and two a criminal record. I personally do not have a problem with that.
It is as simple as the private sector in some areas. One being that when you sign on the bottom line, you acknowledge the terms of your employment. those include, no criminal record, a valid drivers license, the ability to work at night, the ability to work alone, the ability to be called back for duty at the discretion of the Officer Commanding, the passing of bi-yearly medical and psychological testing,. yearly performance assessments that are satisfactory. You also acknowledge that if you cannot abide by the terms you are dismissed. 5 year retention dates, renewed upon security screening and suitability recommendations up the line.
Plain and simple. Sound good? It was that way at one time, until the “due process” train gathered a head of steam unbridled.
Calvin speaks of the old crusty Sergeant to keep the young lads in check. Thats way it was, with Line Officers that could terminate your “career”. Would you be willing to submit to such authority? My guess is no. You would have an issue with their version of “due process”. Kept a lot of riff raff out.
Hot debate. What do you think?
6 
2
MS, sorry about the “P” thing. Just a bad habit as I grew up around Thompsons and had local businesses with that name.
I think you would enjoy Jack Maple’s book. I once met a former NY transit cop who knew him well.
Some of the things that were touched on in the book were how supervisors didn’t like ambitious street officers as it meant more work for them.
I liked reading about his philosophy that people who spit on the sidewalk or jaywalk are more likely to commit other crimes and have warrants. By enforcing such petty laws, you can make arrests and get the scum off the street as it is a very small minority of the population that causes most of the crime.
He talks at length about the “water pond” analogy. Where predators such as lions hang around near ponds waiting for a zebra to come by and have a drink. The pond in the city represents a high risk area such as a bottle neck on a sidewalk where close contact with others is a fertile ground for pickpockets. Stake out cops at these locations, dry up the pond and get the criminals off the streets.
The broken windows approach is most visible with some of these graffiti squads you see in cities that pull it down as quickly as it goes down. Where you see graffiti in an secluded area, you than see beer bottles, the weed and pardon the pun, but then come the condoms.
I don’t think “in your face” is the way to clean up society, but neither is hiring a bunch of bureaucrats and wanna be social workers under the pseudonym of community policing either.
British police have been having problems with their water down policing. Here is a good article called ” Police are now the useless uniformed wing of the new Labor party.”
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2009/08/police-are-now-the-useless-uniformed-wing-of-new-labour.html
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
8 
1
Sounds like an interesting read JohnnyG, I am familiar with how some senior NYPD officers came up with the “Broken Windows” strategy and how Gulianni took credit for it. The NYPD seems to have adopted a proactive policing strategy without the “in-your-face” attitude that got the LAPD into so much trouble in the 80s and 90s.
Oh its Thomson without a “P;” Its the Scottish spelling (not a problemo though).
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
7 
0
MS Thompson, I once read a book by Jack Maple called “Crimefigher, putting the badguys out of business”. For anyone who doesn’t know he was behind much of how Guilliani cleaned up New York. He spoke at length about how to stop crime and just as importantly, how to clean up a police department from all it’s laziness. He said 10% of cops hate their job and are terrible. 40% are useless, 40% do a half decent job, but don’t go the extra mile. It was the last 10% that were highly motivated and did 90% of the work. The problem I often see is that the top 10% become targets for the bottom 50%. Misery likes company.
Deepthroat, lets be clear about something. Nowhere did I “espouse” all of American police. I commented on the “State” police agencies I have seen and the members I have met. They are set up very differently than municipal agencies, but I am sure you are aware of this. I have a pretty good understanding of the problems of many municipal agencies in the US, particularly New Orleans. I know all about the desertion and looting by police during the Katrina disaster and the bad apples such as Antonette Frank that have plagued their outfit for years.
I agree with what you say regarding the legal system. The charter was the worst thing to ever happen to law enforcement in Canada, especially the search and seize laws. The courts are a big part of the problem, but by no means the whole problem with what plagues Canadian police.
In respect to “Due Process”, the miliary has a system of justice where it can be especially harsh and they have traditonally put up with very little nonsense. If you are late for work, they can fling your butt into military jail. But, at the end of the day you get a fair hearing. You get “Due Process”. Getting rid of the rift raft and giving people a fair hearing is not a dichotomy.
In respect to how you denigrate the whole concept of “due process” I am curious about something. You seem to enspouse this romantic concept that the RCMP never makes mistakes. To streamline the process of getting rid of people that don’t fit the mold, you are willing to see go people lose their careers when the lack of due process is used as a weapon against them. Am I correct? So what you are saying is when good people like John Hudak, Ken Smith and Calvin Lawrence get harassed and become targets of malicious persecution, they should have no opportunity to properly defend themselves when their careers and lives hang in the balance? Just tell them to “clean out their lockers”, right? I’ve never said the bad apples must hang around, but advocating a one size fits all approach to human resource management is ignorant and it is wrong.
I once visited the Nazi death camp Auschwitz in Poland. I even saw the room where they operated their version of a Kangaroo court. I remember poem I heard regarding the holocaust called “First They came…” by pator Martin Niemöller
First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out for me.
Deepthroat, when one takes away the concept of Due Process this is what comes to mind. Persecution is always someone else’s problem, that is until it becomes yours….
Hot debate. What do you think?
2 
6
In days of yore, assaulting a police officer in the execution of his duty was jail time.
DT
You are bang on with the above comment.
The courts have also become lenient in their dealing with RCMP officers. There are RCMP members who are prohibited from carrying a firearm except when they are on their tour of duty. That is a controversial concept.
I have updated my opinion on police training. This applies to policing in the US and Canada
Society- There is a different mind set today among our young police recruits. I will take you back to the days of the TV programs of Dragnet and Adam 12 where the police officers were depicted as showing respect to the public and their supervisors. But then came along the Dirty Harry Movies and Die Hard Movies where Mr. Eastwood and Mr. Willis were the lone cops who made up their own rules and the police officers who went by the rules were portrayed stupid and out of touch with reality. These types of portrayals found their way into the TV police programs as well. There is now a program on the A&E network featuring the renowned martial artist Steven Segal. People don’t watch the program to see him talk to people. They want to see him use his skills on the public. A number of police recruits have no idea what police officers do. They watch these programs and say, “I want to be a cop”! They emulate what they see.
Youth plugged in- Youth today are plugged into ipods, cell phones, and computers. They have no idea how to talk to people. In policing the goal should be to obtain Voluntary Compliance by Verbal Intervention (VCBVI). Force may have to be used but if the police officer is not seeking VCBVI in the officer/violator contact the question; “why not” has to be asked. We then expect recruits to be able to talk to a people. Some of these citizens are frightened, angry or afraid. That makes the communication even more difficult.
Police Force vs. Police Service. – In most of my time in policing, the police agencies were referred to as Police Forces. We had to have on our official police cap, we wore a tie, we did not wear sun glasses except when absolutely necessary, we were clean shaven except for a neatly trimmed mustache, our sideburns could no go below our ear lobes, we did not wear soft body armor, we did not wear gloves except when it was cold, we wore pants and police boots. Now the dress of the day is baseball caps, beards, sideburns, sunglasses, sometime worn on their foreheads, turtle necks, combat pants and boots. I am well aware that equipment such as vests and gloves are required to save lives. My point is, that police offices must learn how to communicate even better because of these dress barriers. (Gloves, Vests) Do we look like a service?
The Supervisor – Supervisors today are becoming victims of the above examples that I just gave. They cannot communicate well to the people that they supervise or the public. Most of us as new police officers had that crusty old Sgt. to keep us in line when we became power hungry or spoke to the public in a negative manner. Police officers now are supervised by computers in the police vehicles. RCMP Training – I spent five years as instructor/facilitator at RCMP Depot Division, Regina Sask. There was a tradition that the troop upon graduating would design a T shirt and wear it to their demonstrations. The T shirt was mounted and framed in the Cadet’s Stand Easy Lounge as well. I observed T shirts that depicted Buffalo with an RCMP member mounted on its back breaking down a brick wall; a Mountie sitting on a horse holding his gun with the caption “Unforgiven”. What the message here? I encouraged my troop to have a different message and they did. Their T shirt stated: “Only the Hard Can Afford the Luxury of Appearing Soft.” General Barriers to Effective Verbal Communication by Police officers: Police presence in populated cities and business areas were symbolized by the police officer walking the beat. That police officer came in contact with the public in a non conflict environment and they communicated. This in itself was a teaching tool. The beat approach is not always possible due to rural environments. But there are environments where it is possible. In the name of efficiency and cost cutting the police officer on the beat has been replaced with store front offices, cameras on lamp posts, police officers on bicycles or roller blades, and in vehicles. In major airports the contact with the public involves security guards rather than police officers. The general erosion of the police officer talking to the public has contributed to the inability by the police officer to communicate. We as a society can pay the extra cost of police officers on the beat now or we can pay the cost in inquires, financial settlements, and lack of trust and credibility, later.
Conclusion – Ninety-nine percent of what police officers do is talk to people. Even if communication to avoid excessive use of force. We spend very little time teaching force has to be used; once the person is under control we must revert back to verbal recruits how to communicate with difficult, scared, and angry people. In 2009 we have the best equipped, educated, and trained recruits that we can find. What’s going wrong? I suggest the above is part of the problem.
Calvin Lawrence (RCMP RETIRED)
CGL Consulting
Hot debate. What do you think?
8 
5
American author Matt Baker (author of ‘Nam’) wrote a book similar to Carsten Stroud’s ‘The Blue Wall’ in the 1980s about policing in the USA. I read it years ago and forget the name of the book. One thing that stuck with me was Baker paraphrasing what one senior NYPD officer had told him about cops: 10% were saints; 10% were criminals; and the other 80% could go either way. Baker felt that applied to most cops working in most big cities in the USA. This might also apply to policing in Canada.
Canada and the USA are both heirs to the policing tradition established in England with Sir Robert Peel’s creation of the Metropolitan Police in London in the 1830s. But Canada is as different from the United States as it is from Great Britain. Similarities exist, good ideas can be looked at and incorporated, but the differences have to be kept in mind.
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
8 
0
Bully for Vermont. You will note a large difference in the American model in a number of areas because they have learned the lessons that we have yet to learn. Before you espouse “American” look at New Orleans, and New York.
You have to ask yourself why there is more physical confrontation with the police today than 25 – 30 years or more ago. The answer is quite simple. In days of yore, assaulting a police officer in the execution of his duty was jail time. The Courts backed the enforcement arm of the judicial system. Today, nobody wants to be accountable.
The Americans learned that just because of a typing error in a search warrant or information to charge, the case shouldn’t get throw out.
Such examples abound. The RCMP is made up of us, the Canadian Society, and it always has been. It also reflects the legal system that allows police officers to be regularly assaulted and feel that it is “part of the job”. When you do not provide the impetus for protection of the police from assault, do you really expect them to take it without consequence?
The Americans have emphasized evidence obtained rather than method of evidence obtained for convictions. The examples of this are so blatant and unrelenting in our legal system it is nothing short of ludicrous.
Lawyers wanting to call the US manufacturer (to court) of vials of chemicals (used in breath testing) to ensure their distribution was really “random” to police offices. Forget the fact that the driver of the car literally fell out of the vehicle reeking of booze and registered 3 times the legal limit.
One of the recent case law decisions was that it cannot take more than 5 minutes from the time the officer formed the reasonable and probable grounds to believe the driver was impaired, to the time he read the breath demand. Of course the notes and every time has to be recorded in the notebook contemporaneously, and the driver is cooperative. More than 5? Out the case went. Outrageous.
The RCMP has always had alcoholics, abusers, timidity, bullies, etc. The only difference is that they handled their own, including summarily dismissing some without “due process”. However we are now a kindlier, gentler society that we have to give every person their due, their ambition free rein, the ability to be whatever they want regardless of qualification.
You will find that Robinson is being given his due process, the very processes you have fostered and enjoyed for yourself, so you cannot complain. In days of yore, he would probably never got in (native hiring program), got through the training (internal troop discipline), made it through the 5 year (used to be able to deny further employment after the 5 year term), or even be promoted (against his last supervisors comments from Merrit, BC).
The RCMP responds to over 3 million, that’s 3,000,000 calls every year for service. You only hear of the YVR like cases which are a minute fraction of case handling by the Force. Check out the “Courage in Red” series on OLN. Its not that bad.
Remember Johnny, Bell and Twardowsky are long gone and so are many of their “improvements” to RCMP training.
We have met the enemy and he is us.
Hot debate. What do you think?
7 
5
I agree with you JohnnyG, the problems facing the RCMP today can be traced back to decisions made in Ottawa that were made, in some cases, decades ago. Our elected officials are looking down the road about as far as the next election. Long term consequences are not thought out; they never are.
Still, I agree with Sir Winston Churchill that “democracy is the worst political system, except for all the other systems…” So enough cynisism for now.
Good debate though guys.
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
10 
1
M.S Thompson. About 23 years ago, I heard to senior guys talking about the people being hired back then. One stated that in the 60’s 80-90% of the troop turned out to be good police officers. Back in the 80’s with the point system regarding Bilingual/degree craze they felt only half the troops were any good as people were hired on their language skills or education rather than ability to do police work.
In the conversation one stated that in our day you could send one guy down to the fishing wharf to make an arrest, now you need a car load of these idiots to the same job.
In the United States, the State Police agency’s have kept their high standards of entrance and training and it shows. I believe most state police agencies are far superior to the RCMP. I have spent a bit of time in Vermont and they have a very good organization. I would even call it elite. Though they have ugly green unifoms, they look far sharper in them than the RCMP do in theirs. As liberal as Vermont is, they have not watered the VSP down with political correctness. They command FAR, FAR,FAR more respect from the public than the RCMP has in many years.
My point is, the stuff I say wasn’t created out of a vacuum. The problems the RCMP has were seen coming many years ago. Necessity is the mother of invention. I believe hiring standards across policing help propel the development and wide use of tasers as seen today. The formula the RCMP had was to create a great police force and it evolved that way for a reason. When people like Dr. Bell start tampering with this formula with his social engineering nonsense, you see some of the problems we have today.
Hot debate. What do you think?
9 
4
Everyone please disregard the part in the first paragraph regarding “taser brought back”. I should say scaled back. Thank you.
Do you Like or Dislike the above comment:
5 
0
In my post I was focussing too much on the taser vs hands. Calvin is right, verbal intervention should be the first step, but that should really go without saying. The relevance of fighting vs the taser is simple, less people would be dying if the taser was brought back and the toughness was instilled in the outfit once again.
My point is if cops had to rough it up instead of pushing an electronic button, they would be more apt to use verbal intervention in the first place. In the old days there was a physical price to pay for dispensing with the discussion.
My belief is that there are too many people on the force incapable of discussion or using their bare hands. That is why I feel the taser is over used.
I agree 100% about Dr. Bell. It was sheer lunacy to put him in the position he was in. That made as much sense and putting a street cop as president of a university. The force will be suffering the effects of his damage for years and years to come.
Regarding women and martial arts. I have seen some of these women doing their stupid backwards kicks. I can’t say I was too impressed. I feel they left themselves too wide open to a ferocious punch to the back of the head. Pardon the pun, but I want the boxing champion in my corner!
Hot debate. What do you think?
7 
7
Well Calvin, you do make some valid points. It does “appear” (do not jump down my throats here guys, I did say “appear”) that the training received by the rookie RCMP constables at YVR failed them. They escalated right to the CEW. And it appears their leadership (by Monte Robinson, who did have 11-years of experience as a Mountie) also failed that fateful day.
I am reminded of a point that JohnnyG made in another post several months ago about the decision to close the training depot in Regina back in the 1990s. That and a wage freeze on Mounties created a staffing crisis that has persisted throughout this decade as older, experienced RCMP officers quit to work for large municipal and regional police forces in Ontario and left B.C. under-policed. Now I personally do not agree that it was some sort of plot by the Chretien Grits to undermine the RCMP, it was just the usual short-sighted act of political expediency that still goes on today.
So when the contract policing provinces complained, the RCMP seems to have been given its marching orders to turn out more recruits at a faster pace. Remember, Ottawa wants a profit and the provinces want a bargain. How many tragedies have occured since then? Though the RCMP is taking this one on the chin, and some senior Mounties who have become bureacrats and politicians probably deserve to take it on the chin, someone further up the food chain is ultimately responsible for the corners being cut in Regina.
The loss of support for the RCMP in the 55+ demographic in B.C. is crucial and cannot be glossed over. This is the demographic that is most resistant to change and most supportive of police in general and the RCMP in particular. Many people in that age group have commented to me that in ‘their day’ one Mountie (or Provincial) would have handled Dziekanski without needing a taser (again, guys, I am just repeating what I have heard and have no desire to second-guess Braidwood). Nostalgia? Yes. But the anger is out there and the politicians are oblivious to it.
Hot debate. What do you think?
9 
3
I was posted at RCMP Depot from 1997 to 2001 as a Facilitator/Instructor. My comments are based on my observations and involvement at that time.
It doesn’t matter if we are talking about farm boys, city boys, women, or education. It doesn’t matter who has received a punch in the mouth. The choices of using a taser or pepper pray are all secondary to the training that is required to use verbal intervention to obtain voluntary compliance. That process is only limited by our imaginations.
Use of force may have to be used. Prepare for the worst outcome and work towards the best outcome. When force is required the three to one rule kicks in. If I am only physically prepared for a confrontation and you are mentally and physically prepared for that confrontation; the odds are three to one that you will win.
Men have more muscle mass than women; but never think that women are not capable of physical violence. From a personal and professional position I have observed first hand the martial arts expertise of women. If you think that women can’t become physical without training just try and harm her child or steal her baby from her carriage.
The University of Depot approach by Dr. Bell was a dismal failure. Verbal Judo should have been used as a major tool of training. See website.
Verbal Judo Canada
I have been in what I would consider a dozen major physical confrontations in 36 years of policing. I consider that a small number by today’s standards. I probably could have lowered that number if I had talked a little longer.
I being the 1975 Canadian Heavy Weight Amateur Boxing Champion would exclude me from someone who was fearful of a physical confrontation.
Calvin Lawrence
CGL Consulting
Hot debate. What do you think?
9 
4
Regarding my last comment.
I didn’t mean to say “most men go around blasting people with a taser.”
What I meant to say was when faced with a situation that involves fighting or the taser, most men nowadays use the taser. As far as I am concerned the taser and pepper spray amounts to lazy police work.
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
10 
3
M.S Thompson. You make some valid points.
The reason the RCMP has veered away from hiring rural farm boys in favor of educated city slickers is that the latter will buy into and accept a more liberal feminized RCMP. Farm boys rely on common sense and work ethic. The type of people they hire today rely on initials after their names, politics and working the system.
In depot, like the current education system- the women are expected to act like men and the men are expected to act like women. Most of the guys today have never taken a punch in the mouth, or given one. That is why most of the men in the RCMP go around blasting everyone with taser.
When an organization is controlled too closely by it’s political masters, it often becomes like them… The idea of farm boys and common sense just isn’t trendy enough for the elite in Ottawa.
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
15 
8
A shooting buddy of mine at my range is an ex-RCMP officer, a veteran from the 1970s and 1980s who worked in the LMD for the first 10 and last five years that he was a Mountie. I asked him about this issue the last time I saw him and he pointed out that in his day the force seemed to be waiting to abandon the LMD. Elected leaders at the provincial and municipal levels were talking about metropolitan policing for Greater Vancouver and the federal government and RCMP seemed very willing to let those contracts lapse. The RCMP would still be B.C.’s provincial police force and would still be Canada’s federal law enforcement agency, so there would still be a significant RCMP presence in the Lower Mainland.
I remember reading about the issue of metro-policing in the news back in the 1980s and it seemed not to be a question of “if” the RCMP would leave large urban detachments like Surrey and Burnaby, but “when.”
My friend pointed out that in those days, contract policing was a cost-sharing service offered by the federal government and that the RCMP was not run like a business but still run under the “professional police” mode of organization. My friend also pointed out that in his day, the Mounties recruited kids right out of high school and many of them from small towns in the contract provinces. He said that today, they are trying to recruit college-educated kids from suburban and urban Canada. He felt that recruitment in Quebec and Ontario would “dry-up” without the large lower mainland detachments but that the RCMP has to think twice about wheter it can continue to offer its services to this region. Senior Mounties are incapable of saying “No,” and even if they said “No” some ministry official in Ottawa would overrule them and say “Yes,” without even considering the consequences.
As I have said before, we elected the guys who created this mess and now seem to be content to try and ignore it so it just “goes away.” And people wonder why voter turnout is now so low in Canadian elections.
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
14 
0
How very true Calvin. I would suggest that the present promotion process will adversely affect the RCMP even more than anything else. Under the present system there is no incentive to complete, or in fact ensure scrupulous accuracy, simply because it does not have any affect on promotion. The I. ME, system of look how competent I am in these two examples does not engender year long quality of service.
In the promotion process, even the members personnel file is off limits. How regressive. Anyone being considered for promotion in any organization should be subject to an overall service review, as far back as deemed necessary by the promotion boards. The addition of a 360 degree instrument would be invaluable in the process, yet it is totally absent in the present process.
The very idea of a 14 year employee, promoted to a rank of Inspector in the RCMP is a nonsensical reality. In the promotional literature for the RCMP in decades past, it was stated that only after many years experience can one become a competent police officer. That would appear to be an assailable fact, however, it would also appear that upper management has lost sight of this simple corollary. Many years of avoiding actual basic police work should disqualify you from advancement.
I do temper my point with a little reality in that with the flood of persons being pushed through the training facility, there will come a time when promotions will be very hard to obtain strictly due to that demographic . It has happened before, and it will happen again.
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
15 
3
While posted at RCMP Depot (Facilitator/Instructor) I was once approached by a cadet. He was being posted to a large detachment in BC. His thinking was that he would not be doing worth while police work. He would be taking reports and passing them on for investigation. My question to him was who would you be passing the information (file) on to?
The light came on! The information would be passed on to other RCMP officers just like him. When he got to BC he could work his way into an investigative unit.
This story illustrates that the duties that an RCMP member performers are important. Some member’s perception however, is that it is of little value at the street (patrol) level.
This attitude is consciously or subconsciously passed on to the public.
The promotional process went from a scoring system to a Performance Report for Promotion (PRP) process. The basic duties held little value for transfers and promotions. The PRP process divided members rather than encouraging them to work together. E.G. I as a member can’t help you with your file. I am too busy finding examples for my PRP. I believe some form of the PRP system is still in use.
The “not important attitude” about the duty is reinforced by the chronic failure of some supervisors to do annual assessment reports on the members as required by RCMP policy. Some members have not had annual assessments for several years. Where is the positive feed back?. This also creates a problem when a member’s competence is being examined. No assessments for years means no tracking of his/her ability to do the job. How can you state the member is incompetent with no written documentation?
When backed into a corner the supervisor does one assessment covering several years, has the members do their own assessment, or asked for a copy of their last assessment to use as a guide.
Everyone wants to be a supervisor but no one wants to supervise.
In BC and elsewhere a number of members are saying I want a transfer. When asked where; they say, anywhere but here.
Why? They deem their job is worthless and is not meaningful work.
Calvin Lawrence
CGL Consulting
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
12 
3
I think Deepthroat has a point regarding not being able to please anyone. We live in a society of whiners and it is only getting worse. Living in the electronic age, mountains can be made into molehills in seconds.
Though you can’t please everyone, I think it is not impossible to come up with an organization that will better serve the grass roots. The government has to get out of the way and let this happen.
The problem the RCMP is that for a really large organization, one mistake a member makes brings everyone into the mud with them. In the electronic age, what one member does wrong in BC will reflect on the organization in every corner of the country. As we increasingly live in the age of rapid news reporting, I believe one day it will become necessary to compartmentalize policing and you will see a shift in responsibility going back to the provinces.
As it stands the RCMP is too cumbersome and left too wide open to attack from across the board. Human nature is all about guilt by association. In an ideal world what a provincial contract RCMP member in BC does should reflect no more on a RCMP member in the prairies or maritimes, than it does for a member of the OPP or the Surte du Quebec. But that’s not the way of the world or how people think….
Hot debate. What do you think?
7 
2
AJ, there was once a troop in Depot that had designed a troop T shirt that said “RCMP, Worlds largest street gang”. The brass smartly told them they couldn’t have it. I can just imagine if some of these idiots were stupid enough to wear that in public.
Far too many RCMP members are out to screw each other and eat their own. It is terrifying what they must want to do to the public.
Just because they don’t have the T-shirt, doesn’t mean they don’t play the part.
Hot debate. What do you think?
7 
2
The issues I always have with polls (and indeed headlines) is the context, and as Johnny mentioned, the framing of the questions. It is noteworthy that 82% of the contract partners in BC returned a very high degree of confidence in the RCMP. Institution vs entity. Timing close to fresh emotional response is not indicative in my opinion.
With respect to context, I would venture to say that if you substituted the initials RCMP for GOVT, SPCA, CPC, OPP, CBC, COURTS, you would get a similar response. It is fair to say that people in general do not hold any of the establishment in high regard. It is presently the era of instant gratification, I am not responsible, and blame the _____. Along with the infallibility of hindsight.
The root causes of any activity precipitating a response by authorities are usually ignored or minimized in the unholy zeal to hold said authorities to some kind of totally unreasonable standard.
I am sure a reasonably intelligent person could construct a poll that gives the RCMP unwavering support if the questions were aligned and timed. Besides, are they not deemed accurate within 3 percentage points 19 times out of 20? So that is a variation of what, 15%? So your 61% may actually only be 46%, or could be 76%, or anywhere in between, with the 500 phone calls made to the same people.
As far as changing to be the Force that Canadians want, with all due respect, that is rubbish. You will not find a definition to fit and satisfy everyone. A look at some simple complaints against police are an instructive example. There are those who come in contact with the police who consider the use of humor in any interaction to be “unprofessional” Yet there are those who complain that officers conducted themselves like “robots showing no emotion”. The only questions that should be asked and satisfied are whether or not the officers acted within the civil and criminal laws. Whether or not he smiled or made small talk is totally irrelevant.
A colleague of mine was recently charged with a Provincial traffic offense. Having recently been the victim of a residential break and enter, he was acutely concerned with the lack of progress on his victimization vis a vis his recent offense and summary charge. A bit of research on his part, revealed there was a “blitz” in the area and he was informed of recent instances that necessitated same. He was satisfied and felt a little sheepish at his initial attitude. There is a simple moral there.
Hot debate. What do you think?
8 
5
It is not only BC where the RCMP rank low in the eyes of the public. In Alberta they trample and bully people on a regular basis because they can.
There is a member who laid charges of assault seven months after an incident where NO charges were ever laid. But only because a complaint was filed against him and his conduct that night, did he lay charges and only after is superiors instructed him to do so. Now that Paul Kennedy is leaving, who will keep the RCMP in line (not that it has done any good) The RCMP think they are a law unto their own when in fact they are employees of the citizens of Canada. Something needs to be done as they are not willing to change and be the force Canadians want.
Hot debate. What do you think?
9 
4
I would be curious to see what the questions on the survey suggest. Given the difference of opinion in the demographic, I wonder if there is more to this than meets the eye.
Pre Dziekanski much of this 55+ demographic had a very low opinion of the RCMP anyway. In 2005, A former Staff Sgt. once told me that the RCMP was riding the coat tails of the Red Serge and that in a “couple of years, everyone is going to find out what they are really about”. Well, his prophecy came true as things came crashing down in in 2007.
Others I have known that were business owners and pillars of the community had no use for the outfit. They are not stupid. They hear all this community policing double speak, but never meet the members that usually live in communities outside their detachment area. How are officers going to convey that they care about their community when they won’t even live there or get involved in the community?
The image is tattered. This group remembers a much more dedicated/professional looking spit and polished RCMP, not some of the slobs you see today. One where membership means something special, not the feminized, taser wielding, politically correct joke it has become.
Finally, this demographic is very distrustful. One complaint I heard is that there is no honor in the RCMP and it is an organization they don’t trust. Some see the membership as self serving. One more interested in screwing people than helping them.
For too long the RCMP has spent too much time appeasing special interest groups and the advisory council on the status of women. Like the fall of Rome, when a organization abandons the values that made it great occurs, you see the problems the RCMP is now experiencing.
The silent majority is now speaking, and they would be smart to listen….
Well-liked comment. Do you Like or Dislike:
13 
4