I Want Some Of That Tattoo Money

Wednesday, August 19, 2009 03:45 AM

The Integrated Task Force to fight crime in BC has come up with a new idea. If you want to leave your gang they will step in and pay for the cost of removing your tattoos.

Supt. Dan Malo of the Integrated Task Force says "We have to begin to think out of the box in order to fight crime."

The Force reasons that it is to society’s advantage to pay out sometimes as much as “thousands of dollars”, to have the tattoos removed.

Now that they are on a roll ,how about, putting up money for say, the gal who married ,”Ralph” and has a tattoo plastered on her but can’t afford to have it removed even though she and Ralph parted company some time ago and the new boy friend is not happy?

How about putting up thousands of dollars for people who get hooked on gambling or booze to send them off to the far north where they won’t be a bother to anyone around them or themselves? Hell for that matter, how about sending along a few thousand bucks to me, I belonged to the Winnipeg Motorcycle Club and the Peg Outlaws back when I was a kid, to kind of get me to shy away from my old ways?

The Task Force has popped a cork on this one; problem is that it is the Canadian Taxpayers who are footing the bill for their ideas.

How about suggesting that if the gang members want to stay with the crowd they run the risk of doing some serious time? Now that is a novel idea but it has a much better chance of working.

Policing and seeking out criminal activity are one thing, being just plain stupid is another.

I’m Meisner and that’s one man’s opinion.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Wednesday, August 19, 2009 03:45 AM in Views by Ben Meisner

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: Andyfreeze on August 19 2009 6:48 AM

Well said Ben!
I often wonder if guys like Malo and the rest of the "Integrated Task Force" actually believe what they are saying...or are they really that dumb?

Posted by: metalman on August 19 2009 8:52 AM

Paying for tattoo removals fights crime? Where is this Malo guy, in some sort of alternate universe? Suppose some maggot really really wants to leave his or her life of crime, will shucking tattoos do that for them? DUH.That's not thinking outside the box, that's just plain stupid.
metalman.

Posted by: Loki on August 19 2009 9:42 AM

What ya'll don't understand is that a gang tattoo is an identifier. It identifies the individual, the rank, deeds done and the gang association. By removing those tattoos, it gives the reformed gang member a fighting chance to integrate into society. It is pretty challenging to get a job with any tattoos let alone gang or jail tattoos.

Remember, this service is for informants, people that have risked their own lives and that of their family members by "ratting out" former associates to the courts. Should the courts renege on their promise to protect a valued information source because they made poor choices in their youth? Normally I agree with Ben, but in this case I do not. It is part of the cost in prosecuting gangs, and the courts need all the help they can get from private citizens. Without informants most cases get dismissed.

So now choose, pay for tattoo removal at a couple thousand per informant or risk having no informants and therefore few (not fewer, few) convictions.

Posted by: gus on August 19 2009 10:21 AM

"Remember, this service is for informants".

I do not read that anywhere. However, if it is, are gang members so stupid that if they do not see a tattoo anymore that they cannot recognize the person, know that he was an informant and do whatever they want with him for revenge or their "justice".

Exactly how does removing a tattoo protect an individual from reprisal?

I can see that if he was a member in "good standing" and the gang does not have anything against someone moving on to other things, that removing a tattoo would be assist in moving into "normal" society. It might even assist in moving to a different gang down the road.

No guarantees.

Are these things tattooed on people's noses? In other words, would judiciously worn clothing not hide them?

Posted by: MrPG on August 19 2009 10:36 AM

"Now that they are on a roll ,how about, putting up money for say, the gal who married ,�Ralph� and has a tattoo plastered on her but can�t afford to have it removed even though she and Ralph parted company some time ago and the new boy friend is not happy?"

The difference is, people have been shot for wearing the wrong colour, or in this case, displaying the wrong tattoo. If a former gang member really wants to go straight and this will help them in that cause, I have no problem with it.

Posted by: Loki on August 19 2009 12:05 PM

Ralph's gal did not turn Ralph in to the man!
The new boy friend will have to pony up on this one or shut up.

Tramp Stamps don't count either.

Posted by: diplomat on August 19 2009 12:39 PM

Wouldn't it be a lot cheaper and easier to pay the new boy friend of the gal to change his name to "Ralph"?

That way he could feel happy again when he looks at her tattoo at any time of the day or night!

Monty Python, where are you?

Posted by: metalman on August 19 2009 2:27 PM

I imagine that there would be no shortage of volunteers to help a gangbanger get off tattoos for free, why, I know plenty of people who own mini grinders, be glad to help, no name changing required (evil grin)
metalman.

Posted by: Wolfie on August 19 2009 2:48 PM

Ah yes. Everyone wants less crime, but nobody wants to pay for it.

As MrPG says "If a former gang member really wants to go straight and this will help them in that cause, I have no problem with it."

That should pretty much be the end of the discussion right there.

Posted by: diplomat on August 19 2009 3:22 PM

Wolfie, what is wrong with a gang member who seriously wants to go straight paying out of his own pocket for the removal of his own tattoo?

Every time somebody "thinks out of the box" my taxes go up.

Don't tell me that the former gang member is all of a sudden too poor to look after this little item that would make life safer, as is suggested in the story.

"The Task Force has popped a cork on this one; problem is that it is the Canadian Taxpayers who are footing the bill for their ideas."

Bang on! The Task Force has no trouble spending other people's money.

How about erasing the tattoos from our streets first, the tattoos called potholes!

Not enough money? Well, I made my point.

Posted by: Rounder on August 19 2009 4:55 PM

What do potholes have to do with gangs?

If potholes are all we have to worry about in life, things must be good.

Removing the tattoos won't "hide" the person from his/her past, but it might help him/her gain employment and contribute to society.

Posted by: diplomat on August 19 2009 7:36 PM

"What do potholes have to do with gangs?"

Nothing.

However, if we have surplus tax money to pay for removing tattoos we should also have enough money to fix potholes and not leave them until the next year and the year after that...and so forth.

Does that make sense? No? I didn't think so.

Posted by: MrPG on August 19 2009 8:00 PM

It's got nothing to do with 'surplus' tax money, either. How is this different from the multitudes of other social programs (funded by you and me) to help people in various states?

Posted by: diplomat on August 20 2009 6:56 AM

Well, I don't mind if you want to include the multitudes of other social programs and their cost as well - that's fine with me!

I only used one example: potholes. What other (more urgent than tattoo removal!) social programs come to your mind? Lack of affordable housing? Children that come to school without having had a proper nourishing breakfast?

How much does it cost to remove gang tattoos?

How many hours at how many dollars per hour?

I'll bet it isn't chicken feed.

Posted by: MrPG on August 20 2009 8:22 AM

Well, for example, there are agencies which assist people with finding employment. If you want to look at it this way, tattoo removal is one program that helps former gang members integrate back into mainstream society.

There are many other taxpayer-funded programs that help people with life skills, employment, etc. that do the same thing. And yes, it all costs a lot of money.

Posted by: diplomat on August 20 2009 9:01 AM

Let's help those people first. If there is anything left over...use it to remove something that was put there by personal choice and must now be fixed with thousands of dollars (per case) of our tax money because personal responsibility has become a casual concept with some members of our society.

That's where our opinions differ and I do respect your assessment of the situation to the same degree that you are prepared to respect mine.

Posted by: chrislivingdowntown on August 20 2009 10:44 AM

A rat is a rat. You rat you die simple. Skinners and rats need to die

Posted by: MrPG on August 20 2009 10:51 AM

Thanks, gangsta.

Posted by: Loki on August 20 2009 11:23 AM

Chris: that is so street!

This article is about reforming some that were cast to the street by society and they are now trying to change their ways. Sure, it took being arrested and charged with major offenses to make them turn on their associates. The fact of the matter is that these people are risking their own and their families well being by being a "RAT". It is that kind of street mentality that hinders the progress of cleaning up our streets. I used to think that way to. Then I grew up and got a job. The street is not as cool once you mature into a functioning adult. Gangsters are not functioning adults. They are just big kids with guns and money that was not earned by honest effort.

The saddest part of that is that our youth think gangster is cool. Just look at all the rap and hip hop lyrics and the clothing styles today.