Experienced Cop Shoots Self in Foot Raises Questions About Public Safety

An experienced police officer in Canada’s largest city accidentally shot himself in the foot during a routine training exercise yesterday, making you wonder just how safe it is to have this fellow wandering the streets with a gun.

The 33-year-old police officer’s gun accidentally went off as he put it back in his holster, after a gun range exercise at the Toronto Police College, in Toronto, Canada.

Rest assured, the cop is going to be okay, according to police, he was alert and breathing when taken to hospital, with non-life-threatening injuries. All that appears to really have suffered his is pride.

Or more likely, the public’s perception of just how safe it is to have gun wielding cops in the city.

All of “Toronto’s finest” have to go through the yearly gun range drills to carry their firearm – even the highest cop in the land, the chief must do the annual gun range.

Yet, there is no word as to what happens when a police officer – especially an experienced one – fails the drill.

Not that we are questioning the need for law enforcement officers to protect themselves and the public by carrying guns. One of the unfortunate ills of our modern society is the level of weaponry criminals have at their disposal – from pistols and sawed off shotguns, to fully automatic weapons with armour piercing rounds – crime reports read like movie scripts, but the firepower is anything but fiction.

However, when an experienced cop shoots himself during a regular drill, one must question just how effective the training is?

Most police in cities and towns across North America never have to draw their weapon. And those that have, often say they never want to do that ever again.
But when a police officer holsters his or her sidearm before heading out on their shift, we trust that police officer knows how to use that sidearm impeccably well. Because all it takes is one mistake, and innocent lives could end instantly.

We wish the officer from the Toronto Police Service well, and hope he gets better soon. And we hope that this incident alerts the top brass at that police service that maybe, just maybe, they should take a long, hard look at their weapons training program, to make sure embarrassing incidents like this don’t turn into public tragedies.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Toronto police officer accidentally shot (theglobeandmail.com)
• Toronto cop shot during training exercise (canada.com)
• Police officer shot during training exercise (thestar.com)
• US cops: armed and dangerous? | Jennifer Abel (guardian.co.uk)
• Policeman accidentally shoots himself (news.theage.com.au)
• Harrisburg police officer's gun stolen (pennlive.com)

Okay, Toronto Looks Like a War Zone – Remind Me Why?

Much of the world’s media focused on Toronto, Ontario, Canada the weekend just past. Images of police cars on fire, masked protesters throwing things, and running rampant among a wall of poorly prepared heavily armed police and military personal – oh and American President Barack Obama was there too.

My favourite image – one which perhaps captured the weekend’s activities best – was that of an innocent bystander, just coming out of a corner store with a jug of milk, suddenly surrounded by a dozen or more police in full riot gear, throwing the poor local resident down on the grown, handcuffing her, and then tossing her into the back of a passing mini van, which then took off to destinations unknown.

Later, the poor person – who had all the proper identifications on her person when the incident occurred – was released without being charged from a temporary jail the police had set up at a former movie studio.

All of this thanks to a semi-regular gathering of the world’s most powerful political leaders from twenty of the most economically and politically powerful nations on Earth – the G20 Summit.

The G20 Summit was held in Canada’s largest city this past weekend, and for as long as these meetings of minds has been held, they are always overshadowed by the ravaging throngs of protesters, violently and without any regard for anyone – even themselves – destroying everything and anything around them.

All because they want the world peace.

Funny, when the protest movement began from its grass roots in the 1960’s, they really were peaceful, chanting pretty much the same slogans they screamed this weekend.

“NO Justice NO Peace!”
But back in the 1960’s, even up until the late 1970’s, most of these protests were peaceful walks down the street, with the occasional person being hauled off by police.

According to the Integrated Security Unit (ISU) which coordinated the security for the G20 Summit, over 900 people were arrested, and five temporary courts have been created to deal with the enormous backlog of cases.

Regardless of the numbers of protesters, the Canadian government estimates about a billion Canadian dollars have been spent on protecting the 20 world leaders and their support staffs for the weekend-long summit.

That dollar figure is expected to rise, as more police were called in than originally planned for, to handle the massive riots in Toronto’s downtown core – even retired cops were brought in to bring back the peace.

But that peace never came during the summit – all is quiet now that it is over. So one wonders just where that billion dollars went, because it certainly didn’t prevent one of the most peaceful cities in the world from becoming a war zone for two days.

Maybe that billion dollars will be used to clean up the mess which was left behind – storefronts were smashed, buildings spray painted, fences overturned, police cars burned.

Toronto Mayor David Miller obviously isn’t intending his city pay for the damage – today he told reporters that it’s unfair to expect anyone but the federal government to pay for the damage, as it was organized by the Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

And so another battle has begun – between Mayor and Prime Minister, as they hammer out the details of who takes responsibility for the mess left by the G20.

Hey, I’ve got an idea, wouldn’t it make more sense to have these G20 meetings virtually? What’s the worst that could happen if all the leaders participated in a virtual teleconference, or videoconference? The technology is very good – I’ve had videoconferences in the past and the quality is just like watching TV.

Then again, maybe the G20 leaders just like the attention, to fuel their egos.

“Look! Down there! It’s an Italian flag – they are fighting over me!”

“Non, non, that is obviously a French man, look at the cut of his bandanna.”

Related articles by Zemanta

• Toronto's financial district returning to normal after G20 (financialpost.com)
• Toronto cleaning up from G20 vandalism (ctv.ca)
• Security fence taken down as Toronto prepares for normalcy (calgaryherald.com)
• Protests turn violent around G-20 summit site (msnbc.msn.com)
• Toronto prepares for normalcy after G20 (canada.com)

Monkey Meatballs – What’s In Your Food?

Yesterday, Indonesian police arrested two cooks for serving up meatballs made from the flesh of endangered monkeys.

About a dozen Silver-Leaf monkeys were poached from Baluran National Park, in Java Island by these “chefs” and the meat was used to make meatball soup (known locally as “bakso”) which is a local delicacy.

The rare monkeys were used because the pair couldn’t afford the more expensive beef or chicken usually used in the meatballs.

Here in North America, we’re more fortunate to have better controls on what goes on in our local eateries.

Or are we?

Just last week, a cop in Vancouver, Washington, USA found a big gob of spit on his burger, from the local Burger King. DNA testing was used on the burger, and matched up with the burger giant’s employee who made the burger. The burger flipper pleaded guilty to assault and the matter is before the courts.

A few years back, an Alberta, Canada food inspector found four skinned and gutted canines in a Chinese restaurant’s freezer. The inspector wasn’t able to determine from the carcasses if they were dogs or coyotes.

When we go out for a night on the town, or stop off at a fast food joint for a quick bite, we never really think about what we are putting into our bodies.

We don’t stop to think about whether the chef that tossed your salad washed his or her hands, if the kid that asked if you wanted fries with that spat in your burger, or if that burger itself is made from monkey, dog, or some other stuff, which might not be what we intended to consume.

Often we can’t see the food in a restaurant being prepared, usually we’re engaged in a social situation, and involved with the discussions with those at our table, instead of keeping a close eye on the cook.

The best advice is if something just doesn’t seem right, don’t eat it. If your beef burger doesn’t taste like what other beef burgers taste like, don’t eat it. If something which is supposed to be served cold isn’t refrigerator cold, don’t eat it. If something which is supposed to be served hot isn’t hot-from-the-oven hot, don’t eat it.

We can’t always control what goes into our food, but we can always control what goes into our mouths.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Burger King Sued Over Whopper With Spit (news.sky.com)
• KFC Double Down Sandwich Isn't The World's First Bunless Burger (manolith.com)
• Florida Burger King adds beer, reason to go to Burger King (inquisitr.com)
• Fast food chains go over the top (cnn.com)
• The Grossest, Yet Most Delicious, Fast Food Sandwiches of the U.S.A. (amog.com)
• Dubai diners flock to eat new 'camel burger' (cnn.com)

Scam Watch: No Change No Problem

There’s a new scam circulating right in front of our noses – or more likely knocking at our front doors. Even worse, we’re letting these scammers into our homes without even suspecting them.

Fast food delivery men and women show up at your door, with your piping hot pizza, Chinese food, fried chicken, or whatever else it is you ordered, and when you promptly offer to pay, they suddenly exclaim that they are sorry, but they don’t have any change.

This scam almost made my pizza dinner last week of $23.40 cost me $40. All I had were twenty dollar bills, and the Dominoes Pizza delivery man at the door apologized, but said he hadn’t any change. I offered to put it on my credit card, but he said he couldn’t do it, because it had originally been ordered as a cash delivery.

The delivery driver then asks for the $40, and says he’ll go and get change – but you never hear or see from him again. Sure, you have your fast food, but you just gave the delivery driver a $16.60 tip (that’s a tip of 41.5 percent!), because when you call the pizza place and complain, they inform you that the delivery driver denies it all, and shows from his returned receipts that you paid the exact amount. Now it’s your word against the delivery driver, and the fast food company – having been paid for their products and services – stands behind their employee.

An alternative play on this scam, is the delivery driver takes your $40, and tells you next time you call, they will credit your next order the outstanding amount owing to you. But again, when you call and place your order, requesting this “credit” you find out that there is no credit, not even a record of what was said between you and the delivery driver. Again you are out $16.60 (using our numbers from above, but if you ordered more or less your numbers would differ).

This isn’t the first time I was made a victim to this scam, so I wasn’t going to let it happen again. Last time I lost $10 on a pizza order with another pizza place.
This time, I simply gave the driver the $20, and told him when he brought change for the other $20 (for $40 in total) I’d give him the remainder. At first he was adamant that I overpay him – because that is the whole nature of this scam – but once burned, twice shy, so the saying goes.

Begrudgingly, he took off with the $20, and surprisingly within five-minutes he came back with the change for a $40 payment. So I gave him the second $20 and took the change he provided.

Delivering fast food isn’t the most glamorous of gigs, and usually I tip my fast food delivery drivers for their time and effort. But when they pull scams like this, they’ll be lucky if I don’t call the police.

Though the cops can’t help much in these scams. Again, it is all based on a quick conversation at your front door between you and the delivery driver. All the police can do, is advise you to talk to a lawyer – and with the average lawyer costing about $100/hour, you’d lose more money doing just that. Even small claims court usually has a filing fee above $50 in most Canadian provinces, not worth the investment for a loss of under $20.

Quite the clever scam, but we’re on to you Mr. and Ms. Fast Food Delivery Person.
Problem is, from our research, this scam isn’t that uncommon. Others have fallen victim to this fast food delivery scam, happily giving the scammers several times more money than their orders cost, with a promise of either receiving the change soon, or a credit on their next order, only to find that neither promise will ever be fulfilled.

One could argue that there probably are instances where delivery drivers legitimately are out of change; however, delivering your fast food quickly is only part of the job. Being able to make change for common denominations is just as important as getting that food to you. And when they really can’t, honesty goes a long way towards keeping loyal customers coming back, or leaving for the competition.

From now on, despite the ease of home delivery, it may be best to go and pick up fast food yourself, or if you must order take-out, put it on a credit card.

NEVER give a delivery driver more than you intend to pay for your order unless they can provide the change immediately -- no matter what they say -- because if you do, you just kissed that money good-bye.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Phone scam hits Calgary seniors, police say (calgaryherald.com)
• Adventures in extreme dog-sitting (timesunion.com)
• 2 reviews of Saskatchewan (rateitall.com)
• Pizza delivery man robbed on Central Avenue (timesunion.com)

Surfing the Net in Canada – Watch Where You Click

A proposed new law is being introduced in Canada’s House of Commons today, which would grant police the power to force your Internet Service Provider (ISP) to hand over all records of your online activities without a warrant.

Imagine having someone go through all your personal emails, chat room conversations, website histories, file transfers and surfing habits, without your knowledge, and for reasons which may or may not be justified.

The proposed law, a Bill called “An Act Regulating Telecommunications Facilities to Support Investigations,” gives Canadian law enforcement agencies unprecedented sweeping powers to dig up all this dirt, without justifying their reasons.

Simply cut off a cop on the highway, and next thing you know, they b

reak down your door because you downloaded last summer’s block buster movie off the net.

Supporters of the Bill – including police forces across the country – say situations like these aren’t likely, because they will only use these new rights to investigate criminal activates. They say the Internet has become an easy and important tool by criminals, pedophiles, terrorists, drug dealers and scam artists.

However, Canada’s Federal Privacy Commissioner and other privacy watchdogs are very worried about this proposed legislation, because it allows police to have carte blanche access to your complete online life, with nothing more than a hunch.

Currently, law enforcement agencies must obtain a warrant – by providing reasonable and probable grounds to a judge to get that warrant – just to listen in on your phone conversations, or to search your places of work or residence. They don’t presently have any rights to access your online usage from your ISP.

Police and other law enforcement agencies across Canada have been demanding this type of law for years, to help in their criminal investigations.

Granting law enforcement agencies the right to gather this information from ISPs isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but allowing them to have this information without a warrant is.

Being a police officer is a tough job, but being a cop also means having a certain element of power and responsibility.

Placing the responsibility in those that have the power is a dangerous combination – that’s why the proposed Bill is a bad Bill. It allows police to regulate themselves in terms of what prompts them to order an ISP to hand over personal online information.

You could be out at a restaurant with a group of friends, one joke taken the wrong way by a police officer in earshot, and that cop goes off and starts searching through your online life – and you may never know about this, especially if there is nothing incriminating against you.

If the police and other law enforcement agencies want to have laws allowing them to access the personal information of suspected criminals online – fine. But giving them unfettered access, based on what may just be a best-guess, is a step closer to living in a country like China, where the government regularly blocks Internet access under the guise of “protecting its citizens.”

Like when the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) reported during last summer’s Olympic Games that some of the ceremonies broadcast “live” from China, were actually pre-recorded and edited by the Chinese government. Within hours of CBC reporting that story, the Chinese government had blocked all CBC sites within China.

It would take a long time, and many more similar Bills proposed and passed in Canada, before such a controlled online world were to happen. But this Bill is the first step towards just that.

Is that the type of society we want here in Canada?

Related articles by Zemanta

• New laws would let police eavesdrop on Internet (ctv.ca)
• Central Bureau of Investigation Origanizing Cyber Crime Conference (taragana.com)
• Privacy advocates concerned about potential internet wiretapping law (cbc.ca)