Most of what Western News editor Jason Winders wrote makes sense (‘City not in mood for this silliness,’ March 22).
Attempting to name a cause for the Fleming Drive riot is impossible. Possible causes mentioned include mob mentality (psychologizing), landords and parents (social background), the economy (wider social context), weather (environmental factors), overindulgence of alcohol (personal, social history), dense student housing (other social factors) and street layout (geographic factors). To me, it makes sense to try to keep all these in mind when considering punishment, solutions and preventative measures, although more often than not, people will select one or two of these to focus on as the real problems.
Winders refers to the main rioters as a “group,” the original instigators, the ones who did the worst damage, and who were arrested (assuming they are one and the same). Perceiving them in this manner – as a group with like aims to their actions, same values, education, background and place of residence – simplifies the matter. Lumping them all together can lead to devaluing the individual, not seeing the diversity among them and possible redeeming factors.
In his speech, Fanshawe College President Howard Rundle asked students who were suspended or at risk of losing their place, to meet with the college to try to resolve this situation, presumably, according to their individual circumstances and other factors referred to above. Fair enough.
There may be ‘representatives’ from various groups, such as Fanshawe students, local high school students, unemployed residents or youth from other communities who came specifically for this St Patrick’s Day event for unknown reasons, and became one of the ‘group’ who was arrested and now faces charges. But this group is the end result, not the original source of the rioters.
They don’t represent London; however, they are still part of it.
Sue McPherson