Unwelcome, but not entirely unexpected: escalating shoplifting crisis sparks violent responses

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 18/10/2024 (403 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

When it comes to matters of crime and punishment, black-and-white thinking is attractive to many.

It is easy to say, for example, that the law is the law and that anyone caught committing a crime forfeits their right to any sympathy from the public should they suffer ugly consequences over it.

It is also, however, easy to sit on a high horse, demanding endless sympathy and understanding from the public as frustrations grow over wanton criminal activity because criminality is a result of various institutional failures and, therefore, we must be understanding.

Case in point: a 28-year-old man is facing charges of aggravated assault and possession of a weapon after allegedly attacking a shoplifter caught stealing merchandise from his West Alexander store. According to police, the suspect used a large, edged weapon to repeatedly strike the shoplifter. A 41-year-old man was taken to hospital in unstable condition with serious injuries. The suspect is, of course, innocent until proven guilty.

Winnipeg, like many parts of the world, has been beset by a wave of brazen shoplifting. At times, this has resulted in employees brandishing weapons at thieves or, as in this most recent case, allegedly using them. Public reaction to the case has been divided among the aforementioned lines: either satisfaction or revulsion.

There is an old saying among left-wing circles, popularized by Polish socialist Rosa Luxemburg: “socialism or barbarism.”

Luxemburg used this binary to talk about the choice faced by decaying capitalist societies. Let us discuss it here, not as an endorsement of one system or another but to illustrate the void in which we find ourselves trapped.

Advocates for dealing with criminal activity by more compassionate needs often speak to the dire need to shore up neglected support systems for those who struggle against poverty, mental illness and addiction. We have made the same arguments in this space, time and time again. Broadly speaking, this is the “socialism” of which Luxemburg spoke.

Then we have the “barbarism” path: lock them all up and throw away the key. If Winnipeg has 10,000 shoplifters, we should build 10,000 prison cells whose doors have no keyholes.

But the truth is we are not really taking either option. Despite what right-wing pundits might claim, Canada is far from pure socialism — we are more socialist than our neighbours to the south, yes, but that’s a low bar to clear.

But neither are we engaging in the barbarism that might, however brutally, also reduce the presence of criminals on our streets. Courts seem uninterested in remanding suspects, or are unable to, often releasing them on a promise to appear in court.

In the absence of any clear institutional solution, frustration is mounting: no one on the lower rungs of the socio-economic ladder has much in the way of prospects or support; the criminal justice system keeps sending repeat offenders back onto the street, leaving them to find another victim. Thieves walk out of stores with armloads or cartloads of stolen goods, often unimpeded.

Eventually someone decides they’ve had enough and decides to deal with the problem themselves, sometimes violently.

Is that the right thing to do? No.

But we cannot expect saintlike patience from the average person, especially one constantly victimized by criminals.

A retail worker choosing to fight a shoplifter is not unlike the thief themselves: someone pushed to a breaking point as a result of a broken system, one in which people seem to increasingly feel they are left to fend for themselves.

Our leaders and lawmakers must recognize that we are headed down a dark path.

Let us hope they soon make choices that will lead us down a better one.