# Homeless in Fort York Armouries



## Pte. Bloggins (5 Feb 2004)

I‘m not sure if everyone has heard about this, but Fort York Armouries in Toronto has been used as a homeless shelter since mid-January. Any opinions?


Shelter gets 1 week more
Military lets city use armoury

But substitute must be found


KERRY GILLESPIE AND PHILIP MASCOLL
STAFF REPORTERS

The military has made a temporary 11th-hour retreat from the plan to end use of the Fort York Armoury as an emergency shelter for Toronto‘s homeless.

But the extension is for only one week and by next Thursday a new location will have to be found, Cathy Crowe of the Toronto Disaster Relief Committee said last night after Mayor David Miller negotiated an extra seven days with the Department of National Defence.

The idea is to give the city and federal government a week to find an alternative, Miller said. 

After he spoke last night with Defence Minister David Pratt, Miller told the media, "We‘ve agreed to continue discussions to try and find an alternative for the temporary beds, and at the moment the armoury will stay open for a further week to allow those discussions to occur."

The military had planned to stop sheltering the homeless in the armoury, on Fleet St. near Exhibition Place, today.

Since the armoury‘s doors were opened to the homeless three weeks ago, Crowe said, 100 to 120 people have been sleeping there each night.

"I am pretty disappointed," she said. "I am sick of having to fight this one issue. We have expended lots of time and energy, and the homeless are people who are super anxious about what they will do."

She hopes a closed school or other unused building downtown can be found to substitute. 

"But the city has to be willing ... we need the political will."

Still, Crowe held out hope for a reprieve. "The city is closer than they were three weeks ago."

Use of the armoury is becoming an annual battle. The military maintains it needs the space; the armoury is used for training and exercises by at least 500 reservists each week.

But every winter there is pressure from activists to open the doors to people who would otherwise be sleeping in crowded shelters or on the streets.

"The federal government seemed to be optimistic that there is a reasonable solution that meets their needs to have training facilities for the reserves while meeting our needs to have temporary shelter beds," Miller said.

He said he understands why the armoury is popular.

"It‘s safe, it‘s clean, it‘s well organized and you know it‘s out of the cold. So it‘s been a very important addition at a really cold time of the year to our shelter system," Miller said.

City and federal staff plan to meet today to discuss the issue.


----------



## Tpr.Orange (6 Feb 2004)

IT SUCKS! Ive been training at fort york, and i had to stay at HMCS york instead for the rest of my training weekends...now ive been extended another weekend at HMCS York...The homeless do need a place to stay granted... but this is a pretty bad alternative... 


On top of that, the smell inside of fort york is so nauseating that i cant step in it for more then 5 minutes.


----------



## Vigilant (6 Feb 2004)

I am training in the same Platoon as Tpr. Orange and I completely agree. Why the heck don‘t they stick the homeless at HMCS York instead of FYA? We were unable to do any weapons drill due to this issue.

Stick the homeless elsewhere, there should be places found for them elsewhere. The Federal Government sholud come up with so money to build them housing so DND with its stretched buget doesn‘t have to deal with this crud.

All we need now is those "Homes not Bombs" idiots to show up and our misery would be complete.


----------



## Padraig OCinnead (6 Feb 2004)

A society will be judged on the quality of mercy it gives to its most destitute and desperate citizens. As soldiers you‘d better get a grip on yourselves. You joined the army to protect and provide aid to those who can‘t do so for themselves. Shame on all of you.


----------



## girlfiredup (6 Feb 2004)

Padraig, I agree with you to a certain degree.  The homeless also need to help themselves and what I mean by that is do whatever it takes to better their situation instead of always expecting a handout from society.  Society owes us nothing people!  Nothing!  We are ultimately responsible for our situation.  Where you are at today is the result of your own decision making.  Life doesn‘t just happen, you make it happen.  I don‘t think its the resposibility of the soldiers to provide for the needs of the homeless.  Its not going to change their situation unless the homeless take responsibility for themselves.

Here‘s a motto:  If you give a man a fish, you feed him for a day.  If you teach a man how to fish, you feed him for life.

Having said that, the armory should put the homless to work. Have them shovel snow or lay down salt or something.  The bible says if you don‘t work, you don‘t eat and they should not be allowed to just sit around and do nothing.


----------



## Padraig OCinnead (6 Feb 2004)

GirlFiredUp,

Nothing that you said was wrong. I agree with you that they should help themselves. What I have today and what my family has today is because I worked for it.

However, we (the military), serve the government and it‘s people. That means Mom, Dad, Betty-Sue and the stinky man asking for a hand-up. There are people who feel we (society) owe them everything from food to wages to shelter. This is true. But mostly these other folks just need a bit of help. God help those people who don‘t feel for them. Most of us are only one paycheck or two from a life on the streets/shelters.

Nice quote however. Put it up above the  front entrance to the Armouries in Fort York.

Slainte, (even to you heartless SOB‘s lol)


----------



## girlfiredup (6 Feb 2004)

I agree but if you keep feeding someone (I‘m not referring to food only), they will never learn to feed themselves.  Many people go through life living living on barely-get-along street constantly digging themselves out of a ditch.  Are we to keep feeding them?  There‘s nothing wrong with assistance, don‘t get me wrong.  I think discipline is the key and leading by example and discipline is still mercy.


----------



## winchable (6 Feb 2004)

So the armoury smells, and the homeless people take up space....But at least they‘re not frozen dead in a bus shelter.

Maybe I‘m a bit of a softy on the homeless issue, I have been working with them for 6 years now, soup kitchens, issuing blankets clothing and finding suitable shelter for them. I can sayt that most homeless people are not looking for a Hand-OUT they are looking for a hand-UP, a helping hand. In many cases (a majority) the homeless are not homeless because of the decisions they made, but becasue of the situation they were born in to. You can only be responsible for your situation to a certain degree.

The inconvenience of not being able to maximise the use of the armouries is small in comparison to the inconvenience a frozen homeless person faces; IE Death by starvation or hypothermia. You‘re absolutely right, the government DOES need to work on an alternative, but until then I‘m sure you can stick it out.

Social assistance and the arguments of laziness aside, the armouries are a government building and the government has the responsibility to even the least able and least well-off members of society.

That being said, these people at the armouries should definetly be doing all they can within their abilities to minimise their interference in the training of the reserves. They should be working, as girl-fired-up said, around and inside the armouries. As much as they are able, and I think you‘ll find for the most part that they will be willing to work. If not, then you have a valid complaint.

If the smell bothers you, there are things you can do: Offer the people soap, deodorant,(are there showers are your armouries?) showers, old clothes etc. etc. 

I suppose I am speaking from the outside, also sorry about the length.

Regards.


----------



## Pte. Bloggins (6 Feb 2004)

I‘m not going to say much on the issue- I‘m sure some of the people staying at the armouries are truly needy and would be sleeping out in the cold.

But you can hear CELL PHONES going off from the sleeping homeless...dang if you can afford a cell phone...plus it wouldn‘t be so bad if they wouldn‘t harass the military personnel. There is tape around dividing the ‘homeless‘ side of the parade aquare and ‘our‘ side, but they still go over it sometimes and yell stuff at us. Couple weeks back, some troops from another unit were leaving the armoury and went by the door where the homeless smoke (on the way to their cars) and they (the homeless) fully start swearing and yelling at them. And we don‘t know if these guys are drunk or high or whatever. 

Just my 2 cents.


----------



## winchable (6 Feb 2004)

Aah see no one mentioned that before.
See, this must be the difference between the homeless in toronto and the homeless in Halifax.

They‘re not homeless if they have cars and cell phones.
They‘re probably just sick of mom and dads rules so they ran away from their cushy Richmond hill 2 story.
These are the people that take advantage of nice people like me     it drives me nuts, but I just normally tell myself, if one person is genuinely helped then it is worth it.

yeah yeah...I‘m soft


----------



## Pte. Bloggins (6 Feb 2004)

No I meant the troops were going to their cars...

Oh well everything else is true.


----------



## Padraig OCinnead (6 Feb 2004)

There are definitly slackers and non-hackers (the kind of people I have the least time for) in the midst of these "homeless" people I am sure. For everytime few times we give out a helping hand to someone who deserves it there‘s probably someone screwing the system. That being said I won‘t paint all of them with the same brush. Perhaps representatives from both sides could discuss what has been mentioned on this forum and agree to a common understanding. I‘ve been to these armouries this past summer while on a bike trip with the army, and it‘s a very nice one so I hope they are not fouling it up.


----------



## Danny (6 Feb 2004)

> Originally posted by Pte. Bloggins:
> [qb]
> 
> But you can hear CELL PHONES going off from the sleeping homeless...dang if you can afford a cell phone...plus it wouldn‘t be so bad if they wouldn‘t harass the military personnel.
> ...


Ok that changes everything. I dont feel sorry for these people at all.

I was in halifax a few years ago and I saw  a group of guys dressed in business suits asking for spare change on springarden road. I guess they didnt want to break their twenty. My girlfriend actually had to restrain me from going over to them and killing them, it was the most disgusting thing I ever saw.


----------



## GrahamD (6 Feb 2004)

> Here‘s a motto: If you give a man a fish, you feed him for a day. If you teach a man how to fish, you feed him for life.


What happens when that man is mentaly deficient and cannot remember how to fish 5 minutes after you teach him?

What happens if he is missing an arm and is 50 years old and no one wants to bother teaching him because that would be putting themselves out?

There are any number of valid reasons why people are not able to fend for themselves in our society, and if this was 200 years ago natural selection would solve that problem.  This isnt 200 years ago though, and ignoring the issue of poverty and homelessness in our society today is immoral.

Obviously though, real solutions need to be devised to address this problem.  Opening up government facilities such as the Fort York Armoury is nothing more than a band-aid fix for a critcal situation.
Personaly I refuse to hand out money to induviduals on the street because it is enablement, pure and simple.  If no one handed out any money at the street level, and instead donated to agencies, then those panhandlers would be inclined to seek the structured assistance of angencies like the United Way.  They may not like losing their resource for alcohol and drugs, however a few weeks of starving on the street with no money for intoxicants would be all it would take for them to start seeking alternative means to exist.

For anyone who would argue that crime would escalate, I would agree.  However after an initial burst of increased robbery style crimes, and the subsequent convictions, you would have those induviduals off the streets and in the system.

 Anyway, my personal idea for a solution would be to build government funded communities which would have apartment or townhome style accomodations, entertainment, recreational, educational,and most importantly medical facilities.  It would be a secure facility where visitation and access to the outside world would be monitered and assessed on an induvidual basis by medical, correctional, and phychological professionals.
The residents would be given all the aid they needed medically and be given their basic rights as Canadian citizens, ie clothing, food, and shelter.
Those well enough to work would be able to atain jobs working in the facilities within the community.  They could additionaly receive training and education to assist them in returning to the outside world.  The community could in theory be relatively self sufficient after several years of operation.  They could grow much of their own food, and produce their own revenue with the placement of a factory within the community.
Even if you built only one large community somewhere in canada, you could send everyone who meets the criteria for entrance, via bus or van as they do in the correctional department now.

For people who think that its just an idea for a glorified prison, well, it is.  It would also cost an immense amount of money to begin with, however all I ever hear on the subject is how much we need a solution, how everyone dislikes seeing homelessness on our streets.  Well, any solution is going to cost money, a lot of money.
  Most people who are homeless need professional help, be it medical, or phychological, or even simply to be looked after because they have permanently lost their ability to cope with life.
They need to be put into the system, and the system needs to be prepared to foot the bill.  Those people who are all about affordable housing for the homeless have it wrong in my opinion.  I think that will ultimately only help the very limited few who are actually responsible for themselves and have just had tough breaks in life.
I think that most homeless people need a signifcant level of professional care, not just a house.  Having a house isn‘t going address addiction problems, schizophrenia, or liver disease.

The best part of my idea as I see it is that no homeless person would be able to fall through the cracks.  Vagrancy is illegal, therefore we would be legally justified in putting them into a community.  It would not be an infringment on their rights.  Those who show ability to reform and do not require permanent care could be released back into the community prepared to contribute to society.
Those who are too far gone would be off the streets forever.
  It would be just like in prison, only it would be a more compassionate environment, after all the real crime is perpetrated by those who continue to make the streets a place where dysfunctinal people can survive.  Those people aren‘t really doing the homeless any favours at all.

Sorry to rant on about it, but homelessness really bothers me on many levels, and every "solution" I hear bantered around is no solution at all.  Its all a bunch of enablement.

If there‘s one thing I know, its that at a point  problems often become to big to end with a simple solution if no one steps up and makes the commitment to solving them.  As a country we need to put our money where our mouths are when it comes to homelessness.


----------



## nbk (6 Feb 2004)

If the government is allowing their property (Ft. York) to be used by the homeless, they should be allowed to appoint these people jobs.

Not Bay street banker‘s jobs, but more mundane things, janitorial work, shoveling snow (as was suggested), picking up litter, planting trees, painting buildings, etc.

Now I know a million hyperconservatives are going to jump on my back and call me a communist, but I am advocating this with respect only to people who cannot find jobs for whatever reason, not all people. Allow them to have showers, get clean clothes.

Something like what Mr.GrahamD suggested, however I think that would take a lot longer and cost a lot more, and the government would be wise to start small, and then expand towards something like a planned community for these people.

This would also curb the people who wish to become homeless just because they dont like living with their parents or whatever. If they know they will be forced to work, they may re evaluate their lives.

I think the current government does not have the balls to really do anything. They would rather have them be homeless then dare ask them to do some work becasue it may offend them. The government needs to grow a pair and get harder on them. If people dont want to work because they are lazy or they would rather be criminals or whatever, they should be forced to work. Or they go to jail or something. 

The prisons also need to be overhauled so that they are not an attractive looking thing for the people. They should be an actual deterrent from crime.


----------



## FlightSergeantRose (6 Feb 2004)

or. . . the ones that arnt missing any arms can go get cleaned up and work at wallmart, and the ones that dont have any arms, or their mentally screwed up; their families can take care of them, it‘s more their responsibility, not societys‘. I dont feel sorry for any bums. For 95% of them, it‘s there own daamned fault that they are where they are.


----------



## Danny (6 Feb 2004)

Well said BadBird.


----------



## koalorka (6 Feb 2004)

Well said Bad Bird. There is no explanation for being a bum in Canada. This country has opportunities for people with a good will and work ethic. 95% of the homeless are most likely dopers, drunks oraz just darn lazy and expecting our gov‘t to support them. Although people with mental oraz physical disabilities should be treated seperatley.


----------



## winchable (6 Feb 2004)

"the ones that arnt missing any arms can go get cleaned up and work at wallmart,"

Most would be more then willing to, but who would give a "bum" a chance? Even if they were clean enough to apply to wal-mart(and the logistics behind that are dificult enough); Work experience? none, Education? Very little, References? None. Etc. If a 16 year old applies to walmart with no experience, it‘s understandable. A 35 year old man applying to walmart (or any other entry level job) with no experience is strange, Stranger then companies would want.

"and the ones that dont have any arms, or their mentally screwed up; their families can take care of them,"

Do you think if they had family they would be living on the street? Most do not have the option of a family, or the coping ability to seek help.

"it‘s more their responsibility, not societys‘."

You can only be so responsible for yourself. I‘m sure that you haven‘t gotten to wherever you are today entirely on your own, there had to be something there to help you along the way.

"I dont feel sorry for any bums. For 95% of them, it‘s there own daamned fault that they are where they are."

And the 5% left over?
I‘m sure you wouldn‘t say any of this if you were in that 5%, but you wouldn‘t have the luxury of being able to preach from the mountaintop if you were.


If you want to look at it from a more conservative view point; The social programs and infrastructure funded by the government, would get the homeless off the streets and turn them into productive members of society, increasing GDP and all those nice bottom line things businesses and governments look for.


----------



## girlfiredup (6 Feb 2004)

I‘m sure if some of these homeless people really wanted to change their situation they could stand on the side of a highway with a sign that read, broke, hungry and tired of being homeless.. looking for a job!  The response would be overwhelming no doubt.


----------



## winchable (6 Feb 2004)

"The response would be overwhelming no doubt"


...the overwhelming response of people driving by and going "Get a job then" or "stupid hitchiker"
or "stupid bum"

Fact of the matter is, very, very, very few people are willing to do anything even when the cry for help is so blatant.


----------



## girlfiredup (6 Feb 2004)

Che, why don‘t you try it sometime.  Place a sign on the side of the road and tell me how many contacts you get for job leads.  I‘m willing to bet you would end up with a job by the end of the day.

There was someone here in Ottawa that did that a few years ago and the guy ended up getting a job in the IT field for $12 an hour around there.  Mind you, he wasn‘t homeless but hey, he might have been if he CHOSE not to do anything about his situation.


----------



## winchable (6 Feb 2004)

So are you suggesting that every homeless person stands by the side of the road and does that?

If he wasn‘t homeless, and had the education to be able to have a job in the IT field, chances are once people followed him up on that sign they found all this out and hired him.

If I did that, they would find out that I‘m a highschool graduate, a university student, a private business owner, with a family, no history of mental defect, no physical defect and a serving member of the reserves.

If a homeless person (A real one mind you) were to do that, they MIGHT get an interview, where the employer will find out that the person has had no steady job, maybe a highschool graduate (although most likely not) might have a mental problem, physical defects (birth defect) history of abuse, no family and no prospects for the future.

I would end up with a job, a real homeless person, would not.

If you do not want to help people less fortunate then you that‘s fine, lots of people don‘t. However, as a soldier I think it‘s my duty in and out of uniform to help those who can‘t help themselves.

Earlier you said  "Feed a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish; and you have fed him for a lifetimeâ ?
The problem is finding a teacher, which is where the government steps in and does their job.


----------



## Evan (6 Feb 2004)

Here in hawaii there are alot of homless people, most is due to addiction (ICE, it plagues hawaii), majority of murders and other crimes were comittted by criminals who were on ice. 

after comining out of prison these people are rejected by society, would u want to hire a ex ice user? (for those who dont know, crystal meth aka ICE cause such side effects as schizophrenia, paranoia, and other mental problems.)

 Alot of ex users who come out, helped and well tacken care of, hope to get jobs and start a new life, but when unable to do so they become homless and turn back to crime.
 Currently Hawaii is fighting ice with everything they got, and the hawaiin ohana is starting to help the ex users, busnesses are starting to hire theses ex convicts to do manuel labor, and other light jobs. 

And thats basicly what we have to do, no matter how hard it would be to get past the trust issue, there are people out on the streets who dont want to be there, but society has not helped them back on there feet, some of them might just fall back down but the few that stay standing maybe just the best workers there employer may have ever seen.     :boring:  n/m i forgot what was talking about anyways, this has probably been my bigest post yet


----------



## girlfiredup (6 Feb 2004)

Che, no I‘m not suggesting every homeless person stands on the side of the road looking for work but then again, if that‘s what it takes.  What I meant is the homeless need to make a conscious (sp) effort to change and take advantage of the services available to them.

Also, as person who donates over $6000 to charities locally and internationally, I wouldn‘t say I am to be classified as one not willing to help out the homeless. If I had a few million, I would take them all in, clean them up, dress them up (they might start feeling a whole lot better after that) and get them educated/trained and then get them out in the real work world but my point is they have to be willing.


----------



## winchable (7 Feb 2004)

Well then we agree?

Back to the Fort York armouries, before the thread spins into oblivion.

Can someone who trains there, give a fairly detailed first hand description of the problem?

Also, has anyone sent a complaint up the chain?


----------



## Sh0rtbUs (7 Feb 2004)

ok, heres my take on this situation.

I‘ve been going downtown around FYA for some time now, with a larger group doing volunteer work. We hand out socks, food..anything the homeless people we meet along the way need. 

I find the mantality of most of Toronto absolutely sickening. People stepping over these people, treating them like **** in the treads of their shoes, and I‘ve even seen people steal blankets from a persons set-up for kicks. 

If FYA wants to house these people, good for them. its about time people realised they are people just like us, looking for a hand. Notice I didnt say "hand-out". I‘ve talked to ALOT of homeless people, and the majority want to work. They simply cant due to their current situation. They‘re in a rut, and its not hard to get out on ones own.

Yes, FYA IS an Armoury, and yes, its an inconvenience.

But how about people put their own petty issues aside, and open up to it. As a soldier, you have the duty to protect and serve your country (ALL citizens within). You dont pick and choose pending on your own inconvenience. But whats greater, as a human being, you have the obligation to help others.


----------



## Derick Lewis (7 Feb 2004)

I‘m very torn on this issue myself, I belive that the homeless need something, what that is I havent a clue. However my sticking point is this, we are a Military as such yes it is our job to "Protect" our country however our "service" stops at that barring the usual natural distaster clean up and such, we serve the people only in so much as to protect them to do what they deem is in their best intrest as a free society. It seems to me that a Military training area is not a place to house the homeless, it is where those members who have chosen to be in the military train for the day when they may be called upon to deffend the country and or its governments intrest. Seeing as how the homeless are at the least hindering or at the most stoping the use of the building for training, they should not be there. Also if they cause a disturbence such as swearing at the troops or interfering in activites they should be removed and banned. The issue is moot of course seeing as how they are leving the armoury soon, but I think it should be brought up through the chain that this situation isn‘t the best for the troops or the military in general, seeing as how it degrades from the areas reservist from meeting their training goals.

Just my 2c though perhaps I‘m wrong or my logic is flawed?


----------



## armydrake01 (7 Feb 2004)

Not that I think all homeless are bums, there are legitimate problems out there that are in there situation from circumstances greater than them.  However, I did read some time ago in a Reader‘s Digest an article by a journalist who had posed as a homeless man for a month to determine the extent of the problem and just how needy the people were.  His analysis of the situation was this:  the majority of those on the street were there by their choosing and were making more money than him by faudulent welfare activity, begging and "other means".  The people that actually needed the help were the ones that couldn‘t ask for it or find it themselves.  For your information he was in Toronto when he conducted this study.  There are certainly people out there who need and deserve our sympathy and help, unfortunately, the laziness and selfishness of those who don‘t but are demanding it anyway is doing a great deal to keep them from getting it.  I would suspect that the people yelling obscenities are probably those who do not really need the help and so don‘t appreciate it.  Perhaps you should point out to the others that are behaving that their roommates are going to land them all back in the cold.  Maybe they will sort the problem out themselves.


----------



## Pte. Bloggins (7 Feb 2004)

> Originally posted by Che:
> [qb] Also, has anyone sent a complaint up the chain? [/qb]


We have had a couple of briefings in the situation and what to expect, but even our CO doesn‘t like it anymore then we do. No one can do anything about it; it was a decision made higher-up (WAY higher-up) and that‘s that.

We were told if there were any specific complaints to send it up the chain and it would be dealt with (I‘m assuming someone would talk to the city staff working there, etc.)


----------



## winchable (7 Feb 2004)

Perhaps the larger situation cannot be fixed, but certainly specific problems such as rowdiness and interference can be sorted out at a low level by the city staff that are there.

As for the idea that some are simply mooching the system and abusing it, that is hard to deal with. But, are we to ignore the truly needy in order to avoid these people? It‘s unfortunate and quite ineffecient that there are people who abuse the system etc. but it‘s compassion and mercy like that that make Canada a good place to live.

However, If they only have a week left, really there isn‘t much point in getting all worked up over it.
Some situations can‘t be ideal, the only way to get through them is to grin and bear it.(think BMQ)


----------



## GerryCan (8 Feb 2004)

My opinion in the matter is that it may be an inconvenience to the soldiers that normally train at the Fort to have to go elsewhere to do so and have the place smell bad. But if it in no way interferes with training, than I think it is no big deal. If it DOES interfere with training than I think they should be sending them off somewhere else. We need all the training we can get, reserve or reg force, so I dont believe it should be put in our court in that sense. But like I said, if it‘s causing nothing more than a slight inconvenience well than I‘d rather see them there instead of dead on the street. Whether or not homeless people in Canada have an excuse? I have my opinions, but it‘s a topic that can be argued over for years on end if you‘ve got the right minds on each side, so I‘ll leave it at that.


----------



## Padraig OCinnead (8 Feb 2004)

This isn‘t the first time this has happened. Bases have been used in the past to house homeless and even refugees. Kosovar refugees were housed in a few bases just a few years ago. St-Jean was used during the Ice Storm as well. These were probably quite different than this but it shows that different levels of civil bureaucrats are willing to use these buildings for this sort of thing. I wonder if it is a sign of things to come. Besides the homeless people might come in handy if a PLQ is being run and you need a few extra bodies for a drill mutual.


----------



## Harris (10 Feb 2004)

My 2 cents:

Rant on.
In my opinion, more than %50 of the "homeless" people I‘ve talked to are there because they want to be there.  For example I asked one guy who approached me for $ in Halifax, why he was begging and not looking for a job.  His answer was that he had finished University and just needed some time to "find himself".  I‘ve offered to buy a homeless person a meal instead of giving him $ and been refused.  I admit that there are legitimate people out there who need our help, but I suspect the number is really low compared to the grand total of "homeless people".  Personally I don‘t feel that using any armouries as a shelter is acceptable EXCEPT in an Emergency.  Some may say that this is an emergency, but when an activity takes place year after year, I don‘t consider it an emergency.  What about all the vacent Military housing that is located across Canada?  Why not fix it up and work out some plan to help people move into these and become a productive member of society instead of tearing them down?  Here‘s a suggestion I‘m sure will draw fire:  Why not stop sending $ to other countries and use it instead for our own poor/handicapped/homeless/etc?  If it is such a problem in Canada why are we helping others first?

If I were the King I‘d decree that all persons who were on welfare/homeless/etc or not otherwise employeed (except those with physical or mental issues) be required to work for their keep.  Many examples have been given above but there are tons of jobs that no body wants to do that doesn‘t require University education.

Rant off.


----------



## Infanteer (10 Feb 2004)

There isn‘t many excuses for being homeless in the socialist paradise that Canada is.

I work hard enough as it is to have any sympathy for junkies and lazy bums.


----------



## portcullisguy (10 Feb 2004)

I‘m going to weigh in on this not because I know what‘s going on with the homeless at FYA, but because my prior job had me in contact with homeless people quite often.

I worked security a few years back at an office tower/mall complex in downtown Toronto.  I saw many homeless come through the mall, and for the most part they were self sufficient but quite firm in their desire to stay in their situation.

At the time, the Public Guardian & Trustee‘s office was located at this mall, and for adults who were mentally ill, but not in a custodial situation, the PG&T would dole out their funds (regardless of the source) to the beneficiaries every weekday, Mon to Fri.

Oh what an assortment of people would show up!  Such a rowdy bunch on Fridays, especially, that a paid duty police officer was required to keep order.  And these folks were lining up for free money, in most cases.  Some of them were on welfare, and the PG&T would give them their funds in small increments so that they had some left over to pay rent, etc.  Some of these folks were heirs to fortunes, and would have their money given to them in small portions for the same reasons.

Within a few hours of them getting their cash from the kiosk, we would find them quite often in one of the building‘s stairwells, smoking up a crack rock.  We couldn‘t ban them from the property, because they had a "right" to go back to the PG&T office for their money the next day.

Even the normal assortment of panhandlers I‘d watched over the months work the Yonge & Dundas area, easily half would scoot off the street as soon as they had their $20 for their rock.  We used to see them exiting stairwells on the video cameras, and find the evidence (baggies and crack cans/pipes) where they had been.  And they‘d be out again hustling for hand outs.

An unseen portion of homeless never came to our attention, I‘ll admit, because they‘d just pass through the mall without making a fuss, and without smoking any drugs.  Good on them.  But even these ones for the most part were mentally ill in some way (then again, I‘m no doctor).

One thing I do know for sure:  If I found myself in the unfortunate circumstance of living on the streets, I would ensure the situation was remedied at the double-quick time.  Food banks, hand outs, and shelters are nothing more than a temporary fix.


----------



## Jeff Boomhouwer (11 Feb 2004)

I train at FYA. Our guests of the city have added an interesting aroma to the parade square, shouted at us "Oakaaaa!!!" And have made going to the bathroom a pain in the ***. However, I have signed my name to defending citizens of this country in time of need. Not when it‘s covienient for me or interrups my training a little. You people that are complaining should re evaluate the reason you signed on.these people are in need. Yes some have cell phones. Have you thought that maybe that would be the way a potential employer may get a hold of them? I‘m sure there are a few that abuse the system or have their priorities out of whack. But the vast majority had a spell of bad luck or became ill or whatever you see my point. It‘s the few bad apples that stand out and ruin it for mass. Remember the Canadian Airborne Reg.? If I can help by giving a few hundred square feet of space in a building most of us go to 5 hours a week then so be it. I sure if your on course it sucks. Hey welcome to the army. Your the lowest on the totem pole. Suck it up troop or go home. If your crying already I don‘t want you in my unit.


----------



## Pte. Bloggins (11 Feb 2004)

Looks like the homeless will be out by Friday (plus it‘s no longer as cold as it was when the armoury was first opened as a shelter) so I guess this will pretty much become a non-issue, as it was only a temporary solution to the homeless problem. 

Oh by the way the figure of 100 people a night is incorrect, that was only when it was much colder. I was there this week and there couldn‘t have been more then 30 people using the shelter. 


Short reprieve for armoury shelter



Toronto  â â€  The Fort York Armoury will remain open as a homeless shelter until Friday as the city seeks alternate arrangements for the people who use it. 

The armoury was temporarily converted to a shelter last month, but is now needed for military training exercises.

The city had arranged to use the facility as shelter for three weeks. After one extension, that arrangement had been set to end after today.

The temporary shelter has been used by about 100 people a night.


----------



## jimbunting (12 Feb 2004)

Some of you are missing the POINT.

There is a HOMELESS INDUSTRY here in canada. One that NEEDS to have a continuing supply of "homeless persons" so that THEY can continue to have a job, being "homeless advocates".

Example: The City of Toronto spends $31,000 per "homeless person" every year, to supply shelters, food and medical services to them. The "homeless advocates" are now trying to get the city council to reduce the Metro Police budget for "comunity policing" which serves EVERYONE, and put that money ( millions of dollars) towards the "homeless" who by even the most liberal estimates number kess than 5,000 people in Toronto.

The "homeless advocates" have absolutely no intetest in "solving the problem" as that would mean that they would no longer get Federal, provincial, and city funding, which means they would be OUT OF A JOB. Its real easy to be a bleeding heart when you get a nice pay cheque for doing so. Don‘t agree with me. Do some research and find out how much these "advocates" are being paid, with YOUR TAX DOLLARS. There are litteraly DOZENS of "homeless groups " in Toronto, all operating on tax dollars.

As for the location of a homeless shelter.......If WE the taxpayers are going to PAY for it, why can‘t it be somewhere really nice, like the Ontario Legislature, or the main floor of the Toronto Stock Exchange? Nah, too public, too messy, lets just use the DND armory, those army guys wouldn‘t complain, they are suppossed to "serve the public" right?

I took the time to go down to Fort York, one day last week, at about 8 am. The "homeless types" were all gathered at the west end entrance, having a smoke. The group, of about 10 people, looked to be quite capable of walking and talking, and the clothes they were wearing looked quite presentable, with lots of just like new winter parkas and caps, probably donated by some charity. I can tell a bunch of scammers when I see them, and thats what these people were. 

Funny how the vast majority of these people are NOT immigrants to Canada. I wonder why? More self esteeem, more dignity? You tell me?

Jim Bunting.


----------



## winchable (12 Feb 2004)

"Funny how the vast majority of these people are NOT immigrants to Canada. I wonder why? More self esteeem, more dignity? You tell me?"

I‘m sorry, could you elaborate.
I‘m not trying to make a big deal for once, I‘m just not sure I understand that.


----------



## The_Falcon (12 Feb 2004)

Thank you Jim, I take it you read Sue-Ann Levy‘s Column in the Toronto Sun.  There is a massive homeless industry in Toronto.  Any attempt to actually make any headway in addressing the issue is completely blocked by our weak-kneed council and the "homeless advocates".  They (the advocates) would like us to spend more on the homeless and less on community policing.  They refuse to have the shelters be held accountable for all the money they are getting, they refuse to actually take a count of the homeless to find out how many thier are.  Instead they would like the city (and province and feds) to give them hand-outs so they can continue to distribute "safe crack" Kits and programs to make your own wine. Now they want to introduce a "Safe Heroin Injection" in the Moss Park area.  This city is @$$ backwards.  But even though DND opened up FYA, they did that to minimize the users that would attend.  FYA is not in the Core of the city it is a bit of a walk.


----------



## Marauder (12 Feb 2004)

Saw a story on this on the Commie Broadcasting Corp during lunch. Must have been a TSR parade night, their CO was on camera.
Funniest thing was when they showed a clip of a bunch of (I assume) BMQs, still in the ODs. What had me laughing was buddy, hey diddle diddle right in the middle, bearmarching like a champ. Everyone was in step but this kid.
My lunch companions couldn‘t understand why I was howling laughing at the boob tube.


----------



## Gunnar (12 Feb 2004)

As long as they‘re using public funds anyway, why not offer them a job in the army?  When they refuse, look them straight in the eye and ask:  "Are you refusing the job I have offered you?  Then you must not be eligeable for benefits any more...".  Not physically capable?  That‘s OK, we need civilian contractors too.  Mental problems?  Perhaps you should be held at the Queen‘s pleasure....

Dura lex, sed lex:  The law is harsh, but it is the law.


----------



## jimbunting (13 Feb 2004)

CHE:

It is quite simple really. Anyone who has the guts to apply to be an immigrant to Canada, who has the initiative to move a long way to a new country, is very un-likely to then allow themselves to fall to such a lowly life style. 

My point is this. The ones that I see on the streets are in most cases either born in Canada white people or Aboriginals. I live near St Clair and Bathurst, and in my neighbourhood, there are 3 Aboriginal men‘s shelters that are full all the time. Why? These guys come to Toronto from the REZ because they know that they can live without working, and survive on charity. Drop by the St Clair TTC  subway station entrance anyday, and count the number of bums standing around. It is no coincidence that there is also a LCBO store right there on St Clair.

Immigrants have more self respect than those who are "homeless". They will work two jobs, and jam into a small place, in order to "get ahead".

Could it be that they come from places that have "real poverty", and that makes them motivated to improve their lives? I think so.

Jim Bunting.


----------



## The_Falcon (13 Feb 2004)

I would say that is case for 90-95% of newcomers to this country.  There are some immigrants who before they get here or when they get here realize that there is a giant network of agencies and the like that will provide for them and they won‘t have to work a day in their life.  Just ask Immigration how many so called "refugee" claimants have just up and disappeared. Or Toronto Police how many (illegal)immigrants from certain countries (that will remain nameless) come to this city (Toronto) in particular and are nothing but a plague on society, by involving themselves in criminal dealings.


----------



## jimbunting (13 Feb 2004)

Gentelmen"

I‘ve just did some GOOGLE research about the use of Fort york Armoury, and found that back in 1999, it was a contentious issue. Seems the Toronto Disaster Relief Committe, a tax payer funded organisation was stirring the pot back then, as it continues to do today.

I don‘t know about you, but to me, a DISASTER is something that is un-planned, and comes as  a big surprise to us all, and one that effects the community as a whole, not a tiny minority. To me a Disaster Relief Committee should have stock piles of food, blankets and emergency shelters, like tents, BUT, as far as I can find out this group has none of those things, nor do they have ANY trained persons who could assist in a DISASTER.

What they do have is a AGENDA, to try to convince the citizens of Toronto that our city has a "homeless problem" and they appear to be doing that job quite well. So well, in fact that they have been funded by THREE levels of Government, for the last 12 years. By applying to all three levels, under a number of different group names, all with the same office address, they maximize their chances of getting funds. Remember that the next time your asked to "sacrifice" something to help the CF do it‘s job.

Jim Bunting.


----------



## The_Falcon (13 Feb 2004)

FYI, Back in 99 when the Armouries were opened the first time (It was only Moss Park), It happened because of the owner (Ross McLeod) of Intelligarde International had some connections.  DND agreed to open up Moss Park and provide medics and cots, only if Ross‘s company provided security and the city provided support staff and the food.  The rules were simple you checked your "medicine" at the door, you didn‘t harass the army folk in the building and you did not cause a disturbance.  Now for those of you who do not anything about Intelligarde, they are a no nonsense private police force (in essence).  They enforced the rules and kept people in check, but they were not harsh about it.  They allowed the homeless to come and go as they pleased, to have thier medicine outside  etc.  However if they were a problem, they were immediately removed.  Those who used the shelter were happy with situation because they knew they were safe and nothing bad was going to happen.  The following year Ross wanted to set this up again, but the "professional" homeless adovates (TDRC, OCAP) balked at allowing security (let alone Intelligarde) at the armouries.  DND told them no security, no armoury.  I guess things have changed, and not for the better, from the accounts of those who were training at FYA.


----------



## winchable (13 Feb 2004)

Jim that‘s what I figured, I just wanted to make sure that I wasn‘t misinterpreting it. I come from a family of immigrants so I can attest to the fact that they are anything but unmotivated.


----------



## jimbunting (14 Feb 2004)

Gentelmen:

An up-date for all of you.............

Fort York is no longer a homeless shelter. The operation has been moved to number 2 Murray street, near University and Elm . The building used to a part of the Nightingale Nursing College, of George Brown College. The shelter will remain open, there, until April 15th, of this year.

On a similar note, the old Princess Margaret Hospital site, at Wellesley and Sherbourn will continue to be a homeless shelter as well. 

Jim Bunting.


----------



## winchable (14 Feb 2004)

Any ideas of what will happen in April?
Or is it another bandaid?


----------

