MUST SOMEBODY DIE?

We don't need to set up a task force to deal with this specific situation
now, but if that situation were to arise, we'd address that issue then."

That's what Winnipeg Police Chief Jack Ewatski said when Sun reporter Greg
Di Cresce asked him if he was thinking of setting up a special task force
to deal with the current rash of drive-by shootings.

Our police chief seems to think Winnipeg's drug turf war has not escalated
to the point where immediate action is required.

We suggest Chief Ewatski look up the word escalate in the dictionary where
he will discover it means to become or cause to become more intense or
serious. After he's done that, we'd like him to tell us just how much more
intense and serious the shootings have to become before they warrant
specific action.

Would a dead, innocent bystander do it?

How about a badly injured kid?

Is there a specific number of drive-bys we have to reach -- 25? 35? --
before we have a situation of sufficient seriousness and intensity? Seven
drive-bys and seven injuries since Dec. 8 aren't enough? At least 14
unreported drive-bys since the beginning of November don't quite do it?
Evidently not.

What has to happen before we have a situation, an escalation? The answer is
as obvious as it is horrifying. We have a situation right now; we have an
escalation now. Therefore, we need to take action now.

Chief Ewatski went on to say that he leaves the management of personnel
with the divisional commander and a deputy chief, both of whom have assured
him "that adequate resources are in place."

Meanwhile, when The Sun contacted the mayor's office for a comment, we were
told to direct all questions to the police chief. Do you see a pattern
emerging here? One with a caption that reads, "Pass the buck."

We're talking a drug war here, not a rash of vandalism on library walls;
we're talking shootings not snowballs. This situation is serious and it is
escalating.

The mayor does not wish to take responsibility, and the chief of police is
relying on his underlings to keep him up to date.

Apparently, neither man is willing to take the initiative required of a
leader and declare the situation untenable. Neither man wants to take
responsibility. Neither man wants to take immediate action.

Neither man wants to be accountable.

So, who's in charge? And when will whoever that is do something? Preferably
before somebody gets killed.