Nuanced. - 17. Jon Heidt: Criminologist & Author

Episode Date: November 3, 2020

Jon Heidt is a husband, father, professor, author, and a researcher at the University of the Fraser Valley.Jon Heidt is an associate professor of criminology at the University of the Fraser Valley in British Columbia, Canada. He completed his B.A. in sociology from the University of Montana and his Ph.D. in criminology from Simon Fraser University in 2012. His doctoral dissertation, entitled The Evolution of Criminological Theories, passed with no revisions and was awarded a dean’s medal. He has been studying criminological theories for over 15 years and has taught a variety of courses at different academic institutions in British Columbia. He has co-authored a textbook from Sage Publications called Introducing Criminological Thinking: Maps, theories, and understanding and is a contributor to the best-selling Understanding Crime in Canada textbook (edited by Professor Neil Boyd). His work has appeared in The Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Criminology, Critical Criminology, The International Journal of Criminology and Sociological Theory, and The Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice.  Dr. Heidt was also involved with research on the supervised injection sites in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside during his Ph.D. In 2018, he completed a study on cannabis legalization and will complete a follow-up study in 2020.  He is currently in the middle of an evaluation study about the reintegration of serious offenders and a study on sports involvement and crime prevention.  His other interests include ethnography, corrections, and the history of the criminal justice system. Send us a textSupport the shownuancedmedia.ca

Jonathan Haidt. It is a pleasure to have you here. You are a doctor. You've written a textbook. Can you give us a brief introduction? Sure. Well, thanks for having me here. It's kind of an interesting opportunity. So, and I'm glad you're doing this. I guess what about me? I'm, I guess I'm currently a professor of, associate professor of criminology. at UFV, University of the Fraser Valley in Abbotsford, British Columbia. I've been at UFV. I've been teaching there for almost since 2007, so nearly 15 years. And I was hired on as a permanent faculty member in 2012. And so I've been there a little while now.

I guess as far as my background, I'm not a real. Originally from Canada, I grew up in the U.S., so it was quite a shift. I mean, it was quite a shift in some ways coming up here. I grew up in North Dakota, and I was born in Bismarck and raised there. Bismarck's the capital of North Dakota. It's still a fairly, you know, the cities there are really small by standards out here. I mean, it would be probably around the size of Abbotsford. Actually, it might be a little smaller, especially when I was growing up there.

So I grew up there. I ended up going to school at the University of Montana in Missoula. There's a little bit of a story behind that. So I'll hold off until the adversity part, I think, because it kind of plays into that anyway. Yeah, so I ended up at the University of Montana. I did a sociology degree there, sociology with a criminology. emphasis. I had like really no interest in

sociology when I started. I was really all about the criminology part of it. I was interested in crime and criminal behavior and why people do bad things and that sort of stuff. But then I eventually saw you know, kind of the beauty of some sociology. I really like

the discipline. It's an interesting area. So after that, it was about graduated in about 2000. 2001 and then I ended up coming up here to do a grad school MA master's program and criminology at Simon Fraser University yeah and so yeah I guess that's that's how I got here fair enough well one of the things I wanted to start with is some of the

adversity you faced because I think that that gives us a better understanding of where you started from and how getting here is so monolithic yeah I sure. I guess when I talk about adversity, I kind of want to preface it. I mean, I had a really good childhood. I had really good parents. You know, I didn't face a whole lot of adversity growing up. You know, I wouldn't say I came from a hugely privileged or, you know, my parents weren't wealthy or anything like that, but we definitely weren't poor. So we were kind of middle of the road. So, you know, when I talk about adversity, it's, you know, a lot of of its decisions I made that put me in a bad spot that I had to get out of or that I had to

deal with. So that would be the kind of adversity I'm talking about here. But I guess I'm a huge fan of irony, right? I think people enjoy irony. And so, you know, you might find it kind of ironic. I'm a, you know, I'm a professor now. But I really, really struggled my first couple of years in university. I actually, I didn't start at the university of Montana. I started at community college in the town I grew up and I went there for a year. I really wasn't too into school. I just wasn't interested. I, you know, I had a really good set of friends in high school and I wasn't really happy about the change, right? You know, that change. You have those, you know, you have a great group of friends and then it's great for like two or three years when you're

in high school then all of a sudden everyone's gone or you know and it's gone and I kind of wanted to hang on to that and it just didn't work out so I went a year at community college I wasn't sure where I wanted to go and then I ended up going to uh at the time it was called Moorhead State University it was in Moorhead Minnesota uh if you've ever heard of Fargo most people have heard of Fargo of course the movie right and now the TV series I was right on the other side of Fargo so all my All my friends were going to school at NDSU, which is in Fargo, North Dakota State, University. And I was going to the place across the way and didn't go very well. It was not good.

I never lived away from my parents. You know, I was like 18, 19. And, you know, I went through high school and I really didn't have a lot of problems academically. I, you know, in everything pretty much but math, I would get A's without a lot of work. And then, you know, community college was kind of the same thing. It was almost easier than high school in some ways because, you know, you're being compared against different people, right? So, you know, I didn't have much trouble there.

And then I hit university and it was like a tidal wave. Like I didn't know how to study. I, you know, because I'd never really had, I had a good memory. I never really had to study. And, yeah, it was really difficult. I really struggled. And, you know, it was partially my fault. I was immature.

I didn't, I wasn't a serious student, et cetera, et cetera. But the school also was, it was a lot different than what we might be used to today. You know, the professors were not real friendly. You know, you'd come to office hours and there wasn't a warm greeting. It was like, why are you bothering me kind of thing. Yeah. And so I got to the point where I was, I was getting depressed and I didn't want to go to class. I didn't want to get out of bed.

And I just, I was sitting there one day and I was like, I can't be here anymore. I got to drop. I got to quit. Like this is, I'm wasting. You know, it wasn't a cheap school either. I think at, you know, this was the late 90s. So it was, oh, probably per year. I think it was six or seven thousand dollars to go.

Wow. And I was, you know, my parents, my parents. my parents were paying for a lot of it and I just was like I'm wasting this is a waste I'm just wasting their money I'm not getting anything out of this it's just making me depressed basically and so I decided I dropped out in the middle of the semester I just it was Christmas and I just was like I'm not coming back and I cleaned out my dorm and went home and dropped out which you know it's never a good thing when you move out of your parents house and then it I think very Seinfeld makes a joke about this at some point where he says something like, well, it's not a sign that you're real successful when you're moving back in with your parents, right? That's not something you break about. And so it was kind of embarrassing.

And, you know, I took one night class and I didn't really know what I was going to do. And so I had a group of friends going out to, they were going to go to the university. A couple of them were going to University of Montana. A couple were just moving to Missoula. and you know I thought you know I'd heard a lot about it it was a beautiful you know it's a beautiful place in the middle of the mountains and I actually went there I was thinking about going then I a bunch of my friends went out for a

Pearl Jam concert so we all went out and camped and saw Pearl Jam in Missoula and it was like the most beautiful I remember driving in it was just like nothing I'd ever seen I was just like oh my gosh this place is paradise the city was cool just a great place and so uh yeah that was i mean that was probably when i think about bad times i've had that was really bad i thought my parent you know i thought my parents kind of had lost faith in me uh you know i it was not it was not a good time so uh but uh i you know things get better after a while i guess so yeah that's that's something that happened to me as well and you might remember this because during my like, I think by first year I had a class with you and I don't think I'm that same person

anymore, but you're working through yourself when you're going through those courses and the courses sometimes asking more of you than you might have to offer at that point in time because I didn't think I was that intellectual when I was in your class and when I was in first year it was like, I just want to get through all of these courses. And then by fourth year, I had a different outlook and I was like, I really get this stuff. And the professors actually treat me more like equals than in first year and that transition and having that respect motivates you to go farther. So what caused you to go back to school? You mean with the Missoula starting at Missoula kind of starting over again or then going to grad school, which shift? The first shift.

The first shift. You know, I knew I'm not a trades guy. I never was into that kind of stuff. And that, you know, that's the other big option, right? And that's something I think a lot of people don't consider explore enough. It's just, it's not me, right? I mean, I'm not going to be out on a construction site working. I'd done a little bit of work like that. I worked on like an archaeology dig site and it was fun, but I couldn't do it forever. And it's, you know, I wanted more job stability. And yeah, you know, I always knew I wanted to go to school and, you know, it just kind of fell into my lap and my plan was to, I kind of came up with a plan. At first, when I went to school, I wanted to be in law enforcement. And I talked to a couple of people who worked in law enforcement. I had a friend

whose dad was actually part of the FBI. And I was like, oh, that would be neat. And, you know, I mean, I think a lot of people who are interested in criminology are kind of like, you know, they think, oh, well, I'll just do my degree and I'll go into the FBI. It's that simple. Yeah. But You know, I talked to this guy and he was like, well, you're going to have to do, you know, a couple of years of policing, you know, so you'll be a, you know, a uniformed officer for three to four years. And then you'll have to, you know, demonstrate that you have, you know, value to the, to the Bureau and all this stuff. And I was just like, oh my gosh, this is way more complicated than I thought. And I was like, I'm not, you know, and at that point I started to realize that, you know, I'm not a cop. I'm not a police officer. That's not what I'm going to end up doing. And so then my next thing was I wanted to be a lawyer. And University of Montana had a really good law school and pretty renowned and respected. And so I thought, well, I'll do my undergrad and then I'll go to law school. And then when I got out to Missoula, I had a friend who was in law school.

And I got to know him pretty well. And at some point, I said, oh, yeah, I want to do law school after I'm done with my degree. He was like, don't do law school. It's terrible. I was like, oh, no. I was like, why? And he's like, oh, it's just stressful. it's not like your undergrad.

I don't think it would be a good fit for you if I'm being honest with you. And it's like, oh, geez, what I'm going to do now? And I guess, you know, I struggled with that for a little while while I was out there. And then some other stuff happened. And it, you know, I guess that's another story I could talk about. Okay. Well, let's get into it because I think that it's so valuable for people to understand that university is not meant to be some easy-peasy thing that you're going through personal development

and your educational development and those are coinciding at the same time and often people struggle and they wonder why they're struggling and it's because you're trying to sort out your career plans your familial plans your community plans where do you want to live and you're trying to sort out your education and what you want to do for the rest of your life and all those ideas put together it's not easy to find a way forward and a lot of people get discouraged to go to university because of this. And that's why I also want to touch on what motivated you to continue because I think we're not having the proper conversation when it comes to university at this point. Because everyone's looking at university now is to get the job.

And I think there's so much more within the education and within being able to think coherently that people never talk about. Yeah, I totally agree with you. I think it kind of came out stuff I was saying earlier. At first, I was like, well, I need to get a job. And that was my goal. And it wasn't, I felt like I knew as much, you know, I felt like, you know how it was, right? Like, you feel like you know everything. And like these professors, what do they know? And like, I'll just take your stupid class and get it over with. And, you know, this will be four years and I'll, you know, hang out with my friends and party a little bit. And it'll be over and then I'll have a job. Yeah. Doesn't really work like that. And so, yeah, so I was out, I was at the first semester at Mon, if I'm being, honest, the first semester at Montana did not go super well for me. I was still in that period of adjustment. You know, I had it in my brain that I should just be able to get A's without trying. And, you know, it was like I said, it was like that a lot in high school. And so that's kind of how I approached school at that point in time. And just wasn't working. I didn't do super well in some of my classes. I was doing better than I did at Minnesota because I was happier. I was, you know,

living around people, you know, a lot of good friends, and I like the area I was in much, I mean, Missoula versus Moorhead, Minnesota is not, it's no contest, let me tell you. And so it was like my second semester there, I think, and I had to take this required course called Social Research Methods. Sounds like real fun, you know, I showed up, oh, what's this going to be? And so this guy walks in, and he's the professor. He doesn't really live, look like a professor because he's kind of, you know, dressed, you know, at the other school I was at, the professors would dress up, right? I mean, and more so than even probably what you're used to at UFV. I mean, we're talking suits, you know, and nice clothes, right? So this guy walks

in, he's wearing tennis shoes, jeans, and a flannel. I'm like, who's this guy? Oh, he's teaching the class, okay. And so he starts teaching the class and oh my gosh, like just one of the most interesting people I've ever met in my life. I mean, just his research was about social movements and cults and things like that. And that's kind of what he studied. He started out as a criminologist, but he kind of shifted into this area because it's a form of deviance, right? So he started studying religious cults and things like that. And he had, I mean, his stories were just incredible. I mean, he, you know, I was hanging out. with a gang of white supremacists and

drinking, you know, because he'd do this participant observation research with them. You know, like I said, the stories were just, it was like watch, it was, you know, you'd rather do this than any, go to a movie or watch TV. Was that entertaining? And I, you know,

partway, after a couple, I would never miss a lecture. I'd never skip. I'd go, like, you know, even if I didn't feel like going, I'd go anyway. I'd just be like, I have to see what this guy does this week. so good. And one week, I was like, gosh, I mean, is this, like this guy, this kind of seems like maybe what I want to do. And I started kind of thinking about it in, you know, the back of my head a little bit. And I was like, well, don't get ahead of yourself. See how you do in his class first, right?

So, we took the first exam and I didn't feel terrible about it. I didn't feel super great about it. and went back to class the next week, and I got it back, and I had, like, just barely a B-minus, which was kind of disappointing. I was like, eh, and I looked at it, and I saw some areas where I was like, well, why do you take points off here? Why do you take points off there? It's kind of what you do. There's that phase when you're the want-to-be lawyer as an undergrad, and like, you want to come in and argue every point with the prof, right, even though they've been doing this for, you know, it's longer than you've been alive. And so I went to his office hours the next day, and I talked to him. I said, well, you know, look here, look here. And, you know, I feel like I should have a point here and a point there and all this. And he just kind of looked at me and he was like, no. And I was like, that's it. No, no debate, no argument, nothing.

He's like, no, I don't think you need any more points. I don't think it's going to make that big a difference. I think he was right. I think it would have been a little morale boost for me, but I don't think it was really going to change my. grade or change my life or anything. And I was like, so we can't even talk about this. And he's like, no, I don't think you, I don't think you deserve any better than this. Sorry. And I was like, oh, and I just was kind of, I was crushed because this guy was kind of like my hero. And I kind of

looked up to him and I was mad because I felt like you should at least talk to me about it. So I stormed out of his office. Went home and I was pretty upset. And I was like, well, you know, the only thing to do now is to just like, this is my life now. I'm going to get a good grade on the next exam come hell or high water. I don't care. I don't care what I have to do. I don't care how much time I have to. I'll quit watching TV if I have to. I'll quit going out. I don't care. I'm going to do well on this next exam because he kind of, you pissed me off. And looking back, I think maybe he was doing that on purpose. I don't know. Yeah, it kind of seems like it because that seems like it was the motivation underneath you that pushed you even farther. And I've had a few guests come on and talk about how when

the professor says, you're not going to succeed. It's kind of like that, hey, like, I, I think I can, and I'm going to turn this around. And that kind of sounds like what happened. Yeah, well, it gets, it gets more interesting. So we had the next exam. Oh, my God. I, this is where, you know, remember when I give you guys study tips in class, this is where those study tips came from. I, studying for this exam, I talked, went and talked to friends who I knew in the program who were doing well. I said, what are you doing? Like, I need to learn how to study. I obviously, I'm not doing it right. And they showed me, uh, you know, a lot. A couple of them were, you know, like you got to write things down a lot because it helps you remember stuff. You got to read stuff at least two or three

times. And you can't do it all at once. You got to do it once during the semester or once before the exam, you know, you got to keep on schedule. And then you got to have it all done. And then maybe a week before you got to go back through all of it again. They, you know, they gave me all these tips. And so I really took the writing thing, you know, the writing stuff down. I really took that to heart. And I just, I mean, my roommates thought I, like, had a mental disorder for a while, I think, because I was just, this is all I would do. I'd be sitting there with a pen and paper, just writing. So the test came up. I mean, I went to bed early. I studied the night before. I had a good meal. I treated it like I was going to go, you know, playing a soccer match the next day, right?

I wanted to just be ready and just be focused and on the ball. Got there, took the exam, felt really pretty good about it. I was like, I must have done okay, better than the first one for sure. We'll have to wait to find out. And so the next week we get it back. And so the professor, he starts the exam by saying, or he's, you know, he's got a full lecture. And he starts off the class by saying, well, I've got your exams marked. And I was a little disappointed. And he said, you know, I've been teaching here since 1969, and someone, you know, no one has ever gotten 100% on one of my exams ever. It's never happened. And he said, so, you know, I guess I'm going to have to start writing harder exams because now it happened. It happened. Someone in this class got

100%. And I was sitting there, oh, my gosh, who got the 100%. I can't believe it. Like, you know, I sat there and wondered through class the whole time. And I was like mad at the person. I was like, I want the 100%. And he started handing back the exams and he got to one of them and he kind of looked and he was like, oh, this is the 100% John Hight, stand up and be honored. And I thought I was having a dream. I was like, oh my gosh, what?

And I was like, okay. And I stood up and got it. And he was like, yeah, no one, you know, I've been teaching here over 30 years and this has never happened before. And I was like, oh, okay, awesome. And I was like speechless pretty much for the rest of the day. day. I was like on a high, right? And I remember riding my bike back after I was done with classes for the day and I started thinking, I got to go talk to Dr. Bulch. I think maybe, maybe this is what I want

to do now. And so I went and talked to him about a day after that during his office hours. And he kind of laughed and he was like, oh yeah, I guess my motivation worked. He kind of started laughing. And I was like, yeah, I guess so. I'm really happy. I did well. And he was like, well, I was you, I mean, I I literally went through your exam three times trying to figure out how to take points off and I couldn't do it. And that's never happened before. And I was like, oh, wow. And I was like, I, well, to be honest with you, you know, I was just wondering how do, like, how do I get into doing what you do? I want to do what you do.

He was like, oh, like, do you want to be a sociologist or a professor? What do you want to, what are you talking about exactly? And I said, well, I like, my dad kind of had an interest in cults for a little while. And I said, you know, I find that part of your work really fascinating, and I'd like to study that sort of stuff, too. I just think it might be a good fit for me. And he said, well, yeah, we can try to work something out. You know, one thing that you're going to have to get comfortable with is teaching, because that's the big part of my job. And so, you know, we do have this program at Montana called, well, they were called preceptorships, I think, or something like that.

And so what you would do is you would be like an undergraduate TA and you would mark papers for the prof and you'd get one 300 level credit and a stipend of about $1,000 for doing it. And he was like, you know, we could do that next semester. It was old, you know, this was spring semester. So we had the summer. And he was like, just contact me next fall and we can try to set something up. And I was like, oh, wow, that's awesome. Thanks. And yeah, I contacted him and never forget getting.

I called him and left a message because he wasn't at home. And then I went out to buy groceries or something with my roommates and came back home. And I saw the, you know, this was back in the olden days where we had answering machines, right? Really old. So, yeah, I saw the little thing blinking. I rushed over to it and I hit it. And it was him. He was like, oh, hey, John, nice to hear from you.

You know, I'd like you to, you know, since you did really well in the methods class, I always have trouble finding people to do that class as a TTA. So, you know, would you be interested in doing the method? class. If you are, just give me a call back. And so, yeah, that was the first class. I T-Aed a couple of classes for him. And then as, you know, he gave me my own office, because there was this little utility office or something that he had for some of his research. And he was like, you can be in here and you can have office hours and, you know, pretend you're a professor kind of thing. And I was like, oh, this is so cool. And yeah, and then eventually he approached me and he said, you know, he would do

these field trips to, he called them field trips to these strange groups that he'd study all the time. And so he started, he said, you know, would you be interested in coming along on some of those field trips? I could really use, you know, I take sometimes 10 to 15, you know, 19 to 24 year olds on these field trips and they're kind of hard to keep track of. So I could use like a kind of an assistant to just help me with that. And you get some experience, you know, in the field. And I was like, yeah, definitely I'll sign me up for whatever field trips you want so I ended up going on all these cool field trips with them we went to area nations which is a white supremacist group in cordelaine Idaho we went to the love family which is oh kind of like a hippie commune

cult sort of thing they live in they were in Arlington Washington I think it was called and we went we we came up actually to burn one of the first time i ever came to Vancouver we came to he was doing some research on a group of harry krishna's uh the harry krishna temple in burnaby i think they're still there actually really uh down on marine drive there okay and so we went and stayed with them for a week and uh yeah and so you know we went to area nations several times went to the love family twice, went to, uh, uh, the Harry Krishna's went there once and stayed about a week. And so what were those experiences like? That's while. Well, yeah, I was, I can't even explain

to you how lucky I am. I mean, I just like, I look back on it and I'm like, I can't even believe some of this stuff happen sometimes. Yeah, I cannot imagine because you grow so much by experiencing so many huge sides of the spectrum, like white supremacists to hippies are completely different sides of the ideological spectrum. Yeah, yeah. And so really amazing stuff. I mean, we went, I guess

the Aryan Nations while it was the most disturbing it was also insanely interesting because we actually got to have, I mean, we had, we would have lunch. We had lunch with kind of the leader of Aryan nations at the time. His name

was Richard Butler and some of his I don't know, I guess I'd call him cronies or henchmen. I don't know which one. But I mean, we, you know, they were dressed in full, like, Nazi regalia and everything. One was carrying a, like a loaded gun, like a sidearm on his, on his hip because Idaho has open carry so you can carry wherever you want. And so we're sitting in a rest, you know, this restaurant with like this huge group of planes of premises having lunch. And yeah, it was, it was crazy. crazy stuff. What did you learn? Like, what did, did you get any insights on these individuals? Because obviously the media is pretty clenched onto them right now. What was that like back then when maybe it wasn't as known? Well, I don't, I don't want to be an apologist for them at all. I think their views are horrible, despicable. But at the same time, you know, I think some of them are, there's a certain

group, a certain element in that, in you know, this, this kind of a group and I feel like they are bad people, but then I feel like a lot of, you know, I talk to a lot of them and a lot of them are not bad people. They're, they were, they feel

left behind. They don't feel like they fit in. They, you know, they don't feel a lot of them aren't very successful, especially the ones who are not the leaders or not real successful people. They're tend to be poor, you know, they're looking for a scapegoat, right? They're looking for a way to feel better about themselves. So I think a lot of people just kind of, it's the knee-jerk reaction,

right? White supremacists are evil. They're evil people. And it's more complicated than that a lot of times. You know, I think some of them are, you know, just kind of hateful. Yeah, they're just hateful people and that's why they got into it. And those tend to be the leaders. But then a lot of the followers, it's not so simple, right? I've heard of one individual. and he was on the Joe Rogan podcast and he talked about how he goes out and he tries to connect with like at the bars that they hang out with and he's like a black individual and he'll sit there and he'll wait for them to come by and then for any of the stragglers he'll sit down and just try and have an honest conversation not focus on the crimes they've committed or their terrible viewpoints but just show he's a real person and they're a real person and they both have struggles they're both perhaps in poverty they both don't have the same opportunities as other people might have and just try to trying to bridge those divides because you're right. Some of them, it's just they feel left behind. And that happens with tons of different belief systems like Scientology is an example of people

get sucked in to bad ideas. And I think that that's one area we as a society has trouble forgiving people and understanding that we can be sucked into bad ideas sometimes because of our life circumstances. Yeah, I mean, it's easier to just take the simple, you know, it's people don't like to think hard. You know, it's complicated, right? And so I guess I learned that from being out there. I mean, it's really been interesting these last couple of years when, you know, because at the time, white supremacists were very, you could look at them and you could be like, yep, that's a white supremacist.

They had a certain look, right? They had shaved heads. They wore white t-shirts, certain types. And, you know, some of that stuff's kind of coming back now with the boogaloo boys. I don't know if you've heard of that group. They have a certain outfit they wear. It's like khaki pants and Hawaiian shirts or something like that. But they're kind of the modern white supremacists.

So there are some of them, but a lot of the people who are involved now look pretty normal. And so that was kind of a shift that we were talking about back then, which is kind of interesting. You know, they went from having shaved heads to, you know, wearing white t-shirts and certain style of jeans and Doc Martin boots to wearing suits to being more than. more respectable. It's almost, it kind of reminds me of some of the stuff the Hells Angels

did when they were trying to kind of recuperate their image for a while. They were trying to be more respect, you know, appear to be more respectable. So they'd get less, uh, pressure from the police. And, uh, I think the white supremacists kind of did the same. It was a similar thing that happened. And now we're seeing, you know, it's been going on for years and years. Now we're seeing that like all these people who you might not expect are actually into that. sort of stuff. They're just very quiet about it. Wow. And how does that contrast with meeting the hippies and building

those relationships? Well, the hippie the hippie commune cult group, they were an interesting crowd. It was called the Love Family and their leader was a guy named Love Israel. I don't think, I'm pretty sure that wasn't his real name. I don't know what

his real name was. But they were they were kind of hippies, but it was, I'd say It's closer on the continuum to being kind of culty almost. They would, you know, they'd get, they'd have a lot of people living out there who are younger people who would show up on their property and they were kind of lost souls and a lot of them tended to be from like families that had money. And so what they would do is they'd let them live out there and they kind of take them in as part of the group. And then as part of that, you would have to turn over all of your property because that was part of their philosophy, right?

all the property would be signed over to this Love Israel guy who would be in control of everything. So he was like a millionaire. So he would, their property was so interesting. It was, or their compound, they would have, like, Love Israel has this beautiful house. It has like glass ceilings and terrariums and plants and it wasn't a mansion person. It wasn't quite a mansion, but it was getting close. Everyone else is living out on, on the property in these things called yurts. which are like little

they're a few steps up from a tent oh no a lot of them didn't have indoor plumbing electricity was limited you know for them and you know so they'd hand over all their money to him and then he'd take control of it and I mean there was a lot of crazy stuff

the guy who I was going out there with by the way this guy's name was Dr. Rob Bulch he was the professor who was studying these people. He had been studying them for years and years and years and he had been out there several times and he had found out some kind of crazy stuff. They were, you know, using the money that they would take from these younger people for like private cocaine parties and things like that. And so it was quite the scene. And they actually, it was funny, we took a group of students out there one time and they tried to recruit one of the student, a young female student

who was with us. No way. Well, And I could get in. I mean, there was a lot of weird stuff going on out there. I'm trying to think if it's appropriate to talk about. Right. Yeah, I don't think it's that bad. They were matching people up to breed. Oh, no. Yeah. And they liked her looks and they like, you know, and they'd asked her to stay there. And then she turned them down. I think she went back and actually kind of leveraged that and did a little study on them. I can't remember because that was after I left. But I seem to remember Dr. Boltz telling me about that after I had left. He was like, oh, remember so-and-so? She actually went and did a study on him. So I think she actually ended up out there again. She did a little research on them using that to her advantage. But that was kind of what they do.

Again, a lot of them really nice people just seemed kind of lost. And, you know, there's something to be said. They were the people who didn't like to deal with taxes and they didn't like to deal with all the bureaucracy and things like that. And that was their advantage to moving out there. If they moved out there, they had a guy who was living there, who was kind of the love's right-hand man who would deal with all the taxes and all the technicalities that they didn't want to deal with. So, yeah, I mean, it was like going into a different world when you were out there.

I mean, it was just really crazy. Have you heard of the Yellow Daly here in Chiluac? No, uh-uh. Okay, well, they're kind of similar. I think that they're a little bit less on the culty side of the spectrum, but they all live on like a commune on Fairfield Island just 20 minutes from here and they all have a very unique way of dressing if you go in there it's all very old school everything's made out of wood they've got like unique sandwiches and it's a very unique experience because all of these people

live in homes together and they don't own things all of their clothing is like plaid shirts and just very very simple it looks like it might be from the thrift store and they've like I have one friend there named Mahir, and he's just told me some of their backstories, some of their religion, and we've gotten into discussions because I would go in there to do my studying, and we would be able to discuss our different viewpoints, and he would talk about how he lived in Coquitlam most of his life, and he just never, ever fit in with anyone, and was always alone, always felt like a failure to his parents, traveled all the way across to Europe, didn't have anything, his parents wouldn't pay for him to come back to Canada, and so he was stuck there for a long

time and when he got back he just walked into one of the yellow deli places i think in on the island and just never left and has been there ever since and he's like honestly it's just so much easier i fit in here people listen to me um i can develop myself i get to build up the community here and i don't have responsibilities to pay any taxes to build anything i just get to be a part of something and all i have to do is love and that's all i have to do all day and so his outlook is just he's happy there and for me i just don't think he's lying to me because we've had so many conversations over a four-year degree where if he was tricking me he's done a very very good job because it's been so long yeah but it's so interesting and it fascinates me because part of i guess

their commune in other like in the united states they have spots there too and those have had documentaries written on them on abuses and inappropriateness and so that's leaked into chilewack and how much is true and how much is not is something i don't have an answer to but the people I've dealt with have always been fair and level-headed. So it'd be interesting to learn more about them, and that just kind of goes to your point. Yeah, that's really, do you know the group's name by any chance? Yes, 12 tribes. Oh, wow, I know them.

Yes. Yeah, I, that's weird. I actually was, I took the, was one of my first years of grad, my first year of grad school, I took the bus all the way back home from, I started here, and then I stopped in Missoula and hung out a couple of days and then I took the bus again and I caught the bus in Missoula and there were two guys from 12 tribes on on the bus with me and I talked to him a little bit so what was that experience like oh I just it was pretty brief but it was really you know I was fascinated because I was like oh my gosh these guys are almost like the love family yeah they are like the love

family they're very similar in a lot of ways I think they're kind of a Christian identity movement so yeah that's what the love family was and oddly the love family also had a rest of that they ran, I think it was in Seattle. Wow. And so, yeah, there's a lot of similarities there, I think. But, yeah, I mean, you know, it was younger people again. And, yeah, you know, I think that's an important point about some of the, you know, that's what I loved about Dr. Bolt's is he, you know, some of us would be like, oh,

these guys are such suckers. They're giving their money up and all this. That's one way to look at it. But he said, you know, you got to, you got to also look at it from their point of view. I mean, they don't want to deal with all this stuff. This is a choice they're making. And you kind of got to, you know, this is the way they want to live their life, right? 100%.

And if you think of people today who might be in university, they don't feel like they fit in. They're on YouTube for seven, eight hours a day, and they're completely disconnected from friends, family, and people don't treat them well. It's like, what would we have them do instead? Like, is that a meaningful life or is feeling like this community? It's definitely not for everyone. And I'm definitely not saying that we should all move to that. But for some people, you just don't fit in. And there isn't a lot of opportunities.

and that can be really hard for people and finding a spot where you can just be yourself is often what churches and religion offer people is a safe haven of you can be yourself, you can be as flawed as you are, and we'll still accept you. And that's something that it's hard to just dismiss as stupid people.

Yeah, no, definitely. Yeah, I totally agree. So moving forward, you get to experience all these wild things. Can you tell us a little bit more about the Burnaby spot? Oh, the Hari-Krishna group. Yeah, they were... I really think they get a bad rap. You know, I don't know.

It's not so much anymore. It just seemed like when I was growing up, there was a lot of negative stuff about Harry. You know, they were made fun of a lot of times. I think there was a movie at some point, like Airplane or like an older 70s movie where they made fun of them. And they were just kind of the butt of everyone's joke.

And then there were all these allegations that there was abuse going on on their compound down in Burnaby. and I don't know, you know, I'm not sure what was going on, but they would take, they would literally take in anyone who showed up. And so their side of the story was we took in these people, this is what we do, you know, we take in anyone who comes here no matter what they look like, no matter, you know, how awful they look or we don't look into their background, and we ended up taking in these two people who had this background of abusing people, and we kicked them out immediately when we found out things were going on. And, no, but I found them to be really pretty personable. And again, you know, it's a lot of people who just are having trouble fitting in and don't seem to have a good place to go in life. And I don't know. I saw the environment down there was very positive.

I mean, it reminded me more of a church rather than a cult. I mean, I think that's more what they're going for down there. I mean, you know, they did have some guys who lived on the compound, but they were also family. families would go down there and it was almost, you know, it was the equivalent of going to church, right? So yeah. Yeah, I mean, it was an interesting, definitely an interesting experience. I wasn't crazy about the food because they have a very, very strict, it's not so much the vegan part of it, but there's all these things they can't cook with. So they can't use garlic or onions or, you know, a lot of spice. And it's a lot of curry and a lot of butter and baked goods.

milk and you know things like that so yeah that was probably the hardest uh part to get used to but i yeah we stayed with them for about a week and then uh uh kind of a crazy you know it was just a group of students and uh the professor uh another professor came along with us and uh i mean it got to be long it was you know all five days you kind of felt like you lived there after a while and you would get up we were trying to do everything they we wanted to like live like they were living, right, as much as we could. And so they would get up, I can't, I'm trying to think, I think it was like three o'clock in the morning. They would get up for meditation. Wow. And you would meditate for like four hours or something like that. Oh my gosh, it was crazy. Uh, Dr. Bulch,

it was funny. We went out there and I remember meditating. I think I was asleep. You know, I was literally like sitting up asleep some of the time, but I was trying to do it as well as I could just to So you get their point of view on things. But it was funny. I came home for Christmas after we had that trip. And we got this thing in the mail from Dr. Valsh. My parents, he sent it to my parents. He somehow got my address and sent it to my parents.

But it was this picture of me. It was like a picture like that. And I was like sitting in all the Harry Krishna gear and stuff. And I was meditating. And I looked like I was just, I was like asleep basically. Yeah, that's kind of funny. That's awesome. So what pushed you into coming up here and completing your education?

Because that's a long distance to travel. You already came because of that experience and you were already in Burnaby. But was that kind of a motivating factor? Yeah, what happened was, it was kind of funny. I had been Dr. Bolt's teaching assistant for a little while. And he just, he ended up, I was in the office that he had given me in Mark and Papers or something. He walked in. And he was like, hey, John.

It's like, hey, and he's like, so would you be interested in going? to grad school in British Columbia and I was like, what? Are you kidding? Because you got to understand at this point, like, Missoula was a bit of a kind of hippie sort of town. A lot of young people there. And the place, you know, the only place that was better than Missoula to go was like British Columbia. You know, like that was what, that was where everyone would have wanted to go, right? And I was like, are you serious? And he's like, oh yeah, I have the student up at, uh, Simon Fraser University. He was a former student. He's a really good guy. Kurt Griffiths. You know, I'll talk to him and you can apply there and we can see what happens. And I was like,

oh, and he's like, and I think it's a really good program. Yeah, I found out later when I got in that when I entered the program, I think they were like, they were in the top five worldwide for criminology at that point. They do these rankings all the time. Yeah, because Simon Fraser or specializes in theory-based ideas, right? Yeah, a lot of, it's shifted now, but when I went there, it was a lot of environmental criminology and stuff like that, so some of the theory stuff and did a big contingent of critical criminologists,

and they had, you know, a couple of other people working up there who were notable, like Ray Corrado, and, yeah, so a couple of people. Before we go much farther, I just want to bring up how interesting it is that you had this professor that gave you 100% and then in my course with you you gave Trevor Johnson like I was it 100% or was it like 98% and I remember him saying like John came back to me and he handed me my paper and he was like well I never gave 100% and it was like the exact same story and that was a huge motivator for I think like most of our class because we saw Trevor come in and he had this such a unique story of what he'd

been through and he was excelling in your class and he was a person I had on and he didn't believe in himself. He didn't believe he was like a student who would go to university. He saw himself as a tradesman and then through that course, I think that was probably one of the best marks he's ever gotten. And then on top of that, now he works in research methodology and those things at Chiluac community services. And that's like one of his passions and I was trying to understand systems and how people work in research methods. So it's so cool that that can happen through like, happened to you and then you passed that on to him and now he's he loves his job and i've never seen him all the time he texts me that he's happy with what he's doing and part of that was

continuing that motivation and giving someone that belief because when you got 100% it clearly motivated you and did the same thing for trevor and it's just amazing to watch those things kind of occur so going back to what we were talking about before what was that like to come up to sfU well uh i mean it was kind of intimidating at first i mean i ended up i did end up i did end up getting in. But I mean, geez, when I got in, I didn't know what to expect, right? Like, I had just learned about, like, it's all kind of mysterious, you know, when you're trying to figure this out, especially when you're an undergrad. Like, how do these professors get to where they're at? And what are they doing? But yeah, I was very intimidating. I came up and

SFU they recruit a lot of pretty high caliber students and a lot of them have experience working in the criminal justice system and some I mean are you know they're kind of well-known people right I mean well there was a guy named Cash Heed who was in my he was in my cohort and you know he was a chief I think he was a chief of police in North Van for a while and he was a pretty prominent in law enforcement he's done a lot of different I think he worked soul gen for a while, Solicitor General, I forget, but, you know, he was there and, you know, there was a warden in my cohort, like, who had ran a prison, and I just was like, whoa, like, whoa. I mean, I don't have nearly, you know, I had my, I was lucky that I had all those experiences from an undergrad, from my undergrad, you know, because it kind of brought me up a little bit, but it was still very intimidating. You know, there were some students who were kind of straight out of undergrad in the, but they were, I mean, very high caliber, you know, straight A's. I was a little bit of an exception. I didn't have straight A's because I didn't do very well in my first two years. But I ended up bringing up my GPA quite a bit, but it still wasn't, you know, I didn't have a 4.0. And there were people, there were people who I was going to school with who had like a 4.17.

I was like, how do you, you can't get a 4. How do you get over a 4.0? I didn't even know you could do that. And so, yeah, I was intimidating at first. And I was out here all by myself. So that was a little tough. You know, I literally, the only person I knew when I moved here was Kurt Griffiths, and I met him once. And he seemed like a real nice guy, and he's awesome.

But, you know, he's a busy guy. And, yeah, I didn't have any friends or anything. So it was kind of just starting over. So that was a little bit. it wasn't as hard. It wasn't as hard as the undergrad experience. I'll say that, but it was a little difficult at first. Wow. And then so you start in that program and at what point in time do you decide to settle roots here? Was it like during that period or? Well, I was in the master's and so that's kind of a temporary, you know, I was really shooting for the PhD. I was not going to be happy with a master's

degree because I really, I wanted to be a professor and a teacher. You know, that was my main thing. And I thought, I figured, well, maybe I'll do some research too. So, yeah, I was kind of shooting for that. And I guess, you know, I viewed this as temporary when I moved up here initially because it was a master's. And what a lot of people do is they, you know, they'll do their undergrad one place, their master's one place, and their PhD at a different place. It's, you know, you got more diversity that way. It gives you a stronger resume when you're applying for jobs after the fact. But, you know, I did pretty well with the master's degree.

I passed with no revisions, which is about as well as you can do. And they were interested in keeping me up here. And I started to think about it. And I was like, you know, this place is like number four or five in the world in criminology. How am I, I mean, I'm not going to be able, if I go someplace else for a Ph.D., it's going to be a step down, if anything. And so I'd talk to my senior supervisor. who was also director of the department, Rob Gordon, and he said, you know, I think you should probably

stay here. I don't know. He was kind of the same as me. He was like, I don't know where you're going to go. That's better than here. And, you know, it's kind of self-serving, but I kind of agreed with him. So I decided I'd stay here after I got into the PhD program. It was a done deal, right? So I ended up getting into the PhD program and that was kind of when I was like, oh, I'm going to be here for a while now. Yeah. Yeah, and it was. That's awesome. So at what point in time did you meet your wife? Oh, uh, that would have been, uh, I think it was the second, no, third, second, third year of my PhD, uh, she came in as a master's student. And what's that like? It was strange. I mean, we ended up, I made a really, actually this guy. Yohannis,

uh, I met Yohannis, uh, before I met her. Uh, and he kind of was in this group of friends. He was from Nova Scotia originally, and my wife was from Nova Scotia. They didn't know each other growing up or anything. They lived in different, they lived fairly close to each other. They just had never met.

They kind of had this Nova Scotia bond going on. And there was other, you know, a whole group of friends there. And I kind of just, you know, I met Johannes and we really hit it off. And so I started hanging out with that group of friends. And eventually I just developed a crush on Reagan. For some reason, and she didn't know who I was.

And, yeah, and I guess we've talked about it before, and she was like, oh, there was this one time when you came back and you were, you know, we were all hanging out and you were talking about a class you were in, you'd gotten into a debate with someone on the news about how they were portraying crime and criminals on the news. And, you know, it's just, like, that's when I first realized you were alive or whatever. So, yeah, and I don't know, we ended up going on a date at one point. And then what did you guys do? What was that first experience? We went to the, the foggy dew for a delightful meal. It's a place in Burnaby. Is it still there?

Yeah, I think so. It was kind of like a party place, but we just went there to have food and like a drink or something. And so we went there and ate out and she's going to love that I'm talking about this. But, yeah, then I'd had a weird, you know, like a lot of guys who are in their 20s, you have a lot of relationships that don't go the way you wanted them to. And you kind of get a little cynical after a while. And that had happened to me. I wasn't planning on, you know, I had kind of just been like, oh, I'm not going to get married. Women are evil.

Like kind of thing. And so we went on that date and then I didn't call her for two weeks. And she still hasn't forgiven me for that. Eventually at one point, Johannes approached me and he's like, John, what's going on? I was like, what, nothing? I'm fine.

How are you? He's like, well, Reagan told me you haven't called her and you guys went on a date. What's going on? I was like, oh, I don't know. I just, I don't know. Why didn't she called me? He's like, come on, John. I said, well, okay.

And he's like, well, do you like her or not? And I was like, well, yeah, sure, I like her. But why didn't she call me? And he's like, that's not the way it works, John. And so he kind of gave me a little push. And so we eventually ended up going on another date. And then just one of the coolest people I've ever met in my life. So easy to get along with such a good, she's just like an amazing person.

Can't say enough good things about her. And yeah, we went on a couple of dates. and ended up moving in together. I mean, she was very patient with me because I was, you know, I was paranoid and like, I was just paranoid about some of the previous experiences I had, but she was very patient and we ended up moving in together.

We got two cats and kind of all over after that. Wow, that's so amazing because it kind of just, it works out where you're working on your education and then the familial relationships start to come about. And so what made you make the decision to stay here in BC? Like what point was that at? Because now you're in a relationship. You're finishing your Ph.D.

What held you guys here? Well, before I even talk about that, another thing she was very patient about was me during my Ph.D. Because the last, this is the way it goes with a PhD. Those last few years are sheer hell. I mean, it is brutal because you are, that's when they're, you got to do all this stuff.

You've got to take comprehensive exams, which are a complete absolute nightmare. I mean, you basically are, you get to pick your poison, you get to be like locked in a room for nine hours and write, or you get like four days to write. And then like the expectations are higher. And you got to produce like 60 pages of writing in like four or five days. I mean, it was just crazy. Some of the stuff that they'd want you to do. Wow. And I mean, you know, you might think, oh, it's a rubber stamp process. But I had a friend who failed their comps and had trouble proceeding in the program after that. So it wasn't just a rubber stamp thing. And so it was really nerve-wracking. So she was very patient with that. But why did we stay up here? Well, I was open to going other places.

I had been trying to get a job at UFV. But there was issues with me being from the United States because it's very difficult to hire people from outside of Canada. You have to prove that there's no one else in Canada who could be a better fit for the job, basically. And so they, they had a post and I applied and they were like, yeah, it's not going to work unless you have a work permit. And I was like, well, I can't get a work permit unless I have a job offer.

And so it's like, oh, well, this is cool. This is exactly what would happen to me, you know, because like, I'm doing well, I'm doing well, I'm like, you know, they like me at this school, but they can't hire me. They want to because, you know, I need a work permit, but I can't get a work permit unless I have a job offer. And I was like, well, what the hell do I do? so eventually they they didn't hire anyone for that position at that point in time then they re they readvert they reposted the position again and then it was slightly different

and it was like we want someone to teach theories and I was like well who bring it on I mean I think I can do that and there's not going to be that many people who are going to be ahead of me so maybe I have a shot at this and so yeah I went in for an interview and waited for a god it felt like six years to hear back. I was just so nerve-wracking because the other dynamic that was going on during this time was, and it's still kind of happening, there aren't jobs out there now for people with, you know, for, you know, to become a professor, that traditional path is the, a lot of universities especially, Canada is much better, but especially in the United States, they've gone to full-on sessionals and temporary contract instructor.

so they don't have to pay insurance, they don't have to give benefits, they don't have to do anything. You can pay them a fraction of what you'd pay a professor, and then you can terminate them whenever you feel like it. So they're in a drain on your budget, right? So I was getting, I mean, the competition for jobs in the U.S. was just crazy. There was a glut. There was too many people coming out with PhDs. There wasn't enough positions. They were cutting positions. The only, a lot of the stuff I was finding at that point in time was, hey, move to to Tennessee and we'll give you a job for nine months and you can teach eight classes and like I mean just crazy like slave labor type stuff not good not a good situation and so yeah so I

was pretty happy I found out I got the job and then things kind of just started falling into place, right? I got the job and then we we ended up moving out of our apartment. We were living a new west for a long time. And it was what you might, it was kind of like the zone and transition area. I mean, it was not a nice place. Our building was, you know, there'd be people smoking drugs down in our carport half the time when I'd come out in the morning. I mean, it was not a good situation. So it was great to move out of there. And we're really, really lucky with our house too. I mean, we we got into the market right before it just went completely crazy. I mean, I don't think we could even afford a house at this point. It would just be

too much. Yeah. And I want to get into the theories part of things because you've written a textbook on it. You teach students about it and you are one of those professors where everybody knows you're teaching what you care about. And even when I mentioned to Zena before the podcast we recorded, I was like, I'm hoping to have John. on and hopefully you can talk about that and she's like this is a perfect platform for him he is going to have the opportunity to talk about theories and i think that this is so important because theories are one of those things i feel like it takes critical thinking and that's why people fall off that's why i fell off when it was being asked to me because i could do questions that just

clearly laid out like what are the seven rules of policing um and like that's easy to answer but theories require you to consider the concept and try and apply it and figure out how would it apply and not apply so can you help us through and walk us through some of the nonsense that we started with in the 1900s because it's hilarious that people actually thought these things and like but you have to start from somewhere and even when you were teaching me about these concepts I'm hoping we can talk about the face one where somebody believed that the shape of your face would indicate whether or not you were going to commit crimes but and you taught us that and then I was sitting there and I remember sitting there being like why would I ever need to know this

This is nonsense. And it's like, you need to know that because somebody could come up with that idea today. And we need to know that we tried that idea. It was nonsense. And we're not going to go back there. But without having someone first explore it, we don't know whether or not that's true or false. And now we know it's clearly false, but you have to do the first initial steps of testing those things out. So can you tell us about what drives your passion for theory and then maybe just walk us through some of the textbook and some of the ideas that are key to you and what have helped develop our communities?

Okay, that's a long question, so you might have to jog my memory halfway through, but I'm getting old. So one thing I want to mention before anything, you're totally right about, that's funny, the Lombroso face, well, Lombroso had a lot of kind of wacky ideas. But, you know, one reason to respect him is that he was the first person to come up with this idea that you could explain crime. And so that's where you've got to give him some respect. I agree. Some of his other ideas were kind of crazy. but you know one one reason why it's important to kind of learn about that I don't know if you've heard about this but have you heard about the new there were some I want to say they were Chinese researchers I can't remember off the top of my head but it was a it was definitely a foreign country but they are looking into facial recognition technology and they're basically saying that you can take a look at someone's face and you can put you know apply mathematical form formulas to, you know, measure different characteristics and you can predict if people are going to commit crime.

Does that sound familiar? Oh my gosh. Is that true? Yeah. That's wild. Yeah. They're saying that they can basically take a photograph and apply these methods and they can tell you if that person is a criminal or not. The only reason I can see that being the case is because from my understanding, I also recently learned that our face is considered like a television in the sense that we,

Like our eyes are specifically designed so I can see what you're looking at, so I can see what you're valuing. And on top of that, you have parts of your face that are controlled by like one neuron. And so you can drastically change the look of your face through trying to control those voter outputs. And I had no idea that that was the case, but that would explain why you'd be able to see that is because if your face is like a television, it would show what your intent is. Like we can see disgust on people's faces in like milliseconds and understand those things. So that does make sense. Yeah. And there might, you know, I don't want to totally dismiss their research either. There might be something to what they're talking about. Just like, you know, Lombroso, there was something to what he was saying. He was just way off in a lot of ways. But that's, it's often what happens when we look back on old science. I mean, there's lots of examples. You know, we had the super male syndrome for a while where you, some people have a, what is an XYY, an extra Y chromosome males will have it. And then they have all these physical characteristics. that are different. And they did this study where they looked at prisoners. And they found that a really

high percentage of prisoners had it. And then everyone was like, oh, this is the, you know, this is the gene for crime. They thought it was another kind of situation like that. Now we look at it as like, oh, yeah, that was that was ridiculous. But I mean, that wasn't that long ago. That was 70s, 80s kind of era. So it wasn't a real long time ago. So this stuff does run in cycles. That was one of the, I guess one of the most profound things I realized when I was studying theories as a PhD in my senior supervisor was great about pointing this out. He was like, you have to understand things run in cycles.

That's why we study history. And I think everyone knows that on some level, but it really became, when you realize that it just really lights up, right? Like, you're really like, yes, they do. Like, because, you know, the Lombroso stuff coming back now is, I just think, very

fascinating where, you know, the other problem with these researchers, I have a feeling they have, they are unaware, they're not criminologists. they're, I think they might be psychologists, I'm not sure, but they don't seem to be aware of anything that Lombroso has done and that they're kind of replicating some of the things that he's done in a way. So where do you want me to start like at the beginning, like start with Lombroso? Yeah, because I think it's important that people understand some of the history

because what you're doing when you're talking about Lombroso is you're giving him some sort of benefit of the doubt. And that is something we're not so good at in this culture right now is believing that there might be something to something that we don't understand. And so I think that that would be valuable. Yeah, sure. So Lombroso was a medical, he was like a medical doctor and, you know, a scientist. And he studied, you know, he would do autopsies on people. And he studied a lot of, you studied firemen and students.

He studied a whole wide range of people and he would do measurements, you know, some of the stuff that we've been talking about. You'd take measurements of all the parts of the body, especially it's stuff around the face, size of your, eye orbits, your ears were important, the length of your forehead, your overbite, all this kind of stuff. So he looked at that and he thought he, his idea was that criminals are less evolved than everyone else. He was a, you know, Darwin was big at this time. Just coming out, the hottest thing, you know, around. And everyone wanted to use his ideas, right? And so he, his idea was that criminals are less evolved. They're a throwback, the adivistic man, and that's why they commit crime. I mean, on some level, that might make some sense, but I mean, if you step back, you know, you've got to step back and you got to remember that during this time, they didn't have white-collar crime.

It just wasn't defined. That kind of stuff wasn't really defined as crime, and so it was more aggressive types of crime and stealing from people, you know, small items, that sort of stuff. And so I don't know, maybe he would have, you know, I'd be interested to hear what he had to say about white collar crime because those people are clearly not less evolved. And, you know, they tend to be very intelligent and clever with what they get away with. So we have Lombroso. And then, you know, in all fairness to Lombroso, towards the end of his career, he did start taking in. His students kind of pushed him, especially Enrico Ferry, pushed him into considering other types of factors rather than just biology. And he admitted towards the end of his career that, you know, social and economic factors are probably important in understanding crime, too. So he did kind of change his ways a little bit towards the end.

And then we have this, you know, there was a lot of psychological work going on. You know, they weren't specifically interested in just crime. They were more like antisocial behavior and violence and that sort of stuff. I guess the next big event is the you know the Chicago school and the sociological social side of things that was kind of the new or that was at the time in the 19 1920s like early 1900s that was something new this idea that well people aren't less evolved and they aren't just evil people who commit crime aren't less evolved and they aren't just evil they're people who come from poverty and they're poor people and they're desperate and they're you know it's more the nature of the the neighborhood or your community rather than the nature of the individual that causes you to become involved with crime which was you know we take it for granted now but that was again that's a here at the time no one thought about crime like that at all they just really wasn't some it wasn't

a consistent or uniform thing that people thought about crime it was you know and so there was no real study of social factors of crime before that time and And so they kind of went to town on that, and they were very dominant for a really long time. You know, at the same time, you have a lot of psychological stuff going on that's sort of loosely related to crime, work on psychopathy and things like that. And, yeah, I mean, what else, where else should I go with this? So one thing that I think develops through your book is that there are these simplistic ideas of crime. and then Chicago school comes along and it kind of complicates everything

and we start to understand that there are a lot of factors that go into it and I think your book goes through and starts to walk people through from the beginning of Lombroso all the way through to these complex ideas of crime and I think people know about some of these ideas like broken windows theory

is like an idea of crime that if there's a broken window that might contribute to somebody looking at the broken window and saying well people aren't taking care of this so I'm going to destroy it and this is going to go while psychology is starting to develop and understand how human beings just function simplistically.

And so how does that develop after Chicago school? Well, the Chicago school keyed on a couple of ideas, like this idea that opportunities, sometimes, you know, it's the, you have to look at how many opportunities a person has to commit crime. You can't just, it's not this idea that you can just go out and you can go out and start committing crime by yourself, I suppose. but it's going to be, you know, vandalizing things and just randomly stealing things. I mean, to really get involved in crime. You need people around you who have, you know, to like sell drugs, for example. You need to have connections.

You need to have people who know what they're doing. You need to have sources to get the drugs. There's all these things that you have to take into account. And so then after the Chicago school, people started pointing that kind of stuff out. And eventually that kind of evolved into this, you know, this rational choice idea. some of the stuff you were talking about with Broken Windows is related there that we need to look at the environment

and how it offers opportunities and we need to try to think about how we can prevent crime by reducing opportunities rather than just trying to punish people into submission, right? And so, you know, broken windows theory was kind of in the middle ground.

Broken Windows theory, it's been a little distorted in the way it's gotten applied, right? And James Q. Wilson, if he were around, he'd tell you the same thing. A lot of people, now it has a lot to do with zero tolerance policies about things. And that was never really part of broken windows to begin with. There's a great article. I think it was actually written by the other George Kelly, who was Wilson's co-author.

And he wrote kind of a sarcastic article about, I forget what the name of it was, but it was like, don't call my broken windows theory or theory or something because it was being distorted, right? And it was not being applied in the way that he and Wilson had wanted it to be applied. It wasn't about, you know, going around and stop and frisk and zero tolerance and all this kind of stuff. It was about eliminating opportunities to commit crime by making the area look better, by keeping things picked up, that sort of stuff. Well, and I think one example of that is a net vogue's partner is very well versed in these types things and it's fascinating to see because as a criminology student I look at how areas are

developed and how the bushes are set up and all of these details that nobody thinks about the way bus stops now have like little spots where you sit in this individual seat and it's not a long form bench that you can lay across anymore it's designed differently to prevent these types of things but I don't think that the normal public ever gets to look at how the hospital set up or the parking lot set up so that you can see end to end all the details and that's part of like the beauty of criminology that I don't think people get to expose themselves to because it's like it's this intrinsic idea that if you set up the environment where a person a nurse walking to her car late and I think this happened in mission they redesigned the parking lot so you can see everything and all

the bushes are set up so you can see all the way across that's going to discourage crime because there isn't this element of being able to hide behind a bush or in a bush and then now staircases are designed in this way where you can see all the way down the stairs and you can see the staircase from outside and we're changing things but i don't think the normal public gets to notice that and that all comes out of these theories of broken windows and stuff so can you tell us a little bit more and what that's been like oh yeah uh well i remember when we used to live in new westminster uh there was an area there what was it uh i think it was new westminster sky train station And I'm trying to think if that's the right one.

It was either that one or the next stop after it. But, you know, it was this weird setup where they had. There was like a vacant lot next to it and a whole bunch of bushes. There was a pay phone there. And most of the time it was okay. But my gosh, you get down there late at night. You know, you're waiting for the bus. I would have friends come up sometimes and we, you know, hop on the sky train and go downtown to hang out.

And then we come back late. And I mean, there was just, it was just like, like just a buffet of criminal, like criminal activity going on there. There were people doing stuff in the bushes. There was drug dealing. There were people trying to call for drugs on the phone. There was, you know, all this, all this kind of stuff. I saw a fight breakout down there a couple of times. Like, it was just terrible.

And it was all because of the way the place was designed. There was all this cover. There was all these, like, kind of shady. dark spots and corners. And then, gosh, what, 2010, maybe,

around there, they completely changed everything. And now there's like a mall in the Skytrain station at that station. And it's totally been redesigned. They got rid of the vacant lot. They've, you know, totally gentrified the place.

And you don't see crime there anymore. And it's just, it has to do with how you design things and, uh, intelligent design, you know, trying to take into account where people are going to be hiding, where they're going to, you know, where there's going to be good spots to make drug deals or to, you know, hide and victimize people, that sort of stuff. So, yeah, you know, the, the branding, Paul and Patricia Brandingham at SFU, uh, help a lot with this kind of, they help, uh, design a lot of this kind of stuff.

They'll design SkyTrain, you know, some of the SkyTrain station, or they'll give their, they work as consultants, basically. they have all this knowledge about, you know, they're, they're kind of the ones who invented some of this, you know, like pattern theory and environmental criminology is all kind of them. So, uh, they were, you know, they were some of my mentors at SFU. So, uh, that's where I learned a lot of this stuff was taking their classes and interacting with them. And, uh, I always liked it, you know, there's, uh, there's something, you know, in sociology. It's called the sociological imagination.

That's kind of what the Chicago school was into, you know, opening up your mind and, realizing that crime has a lot more to do with social factors than you might initially realize. Well, their kind of answer to that is the geographical imagination. You have to think geographically. You have to think about where are targets clustered in an area. Well, that's where you're going to see a lot of crime. How do you figure out where a hotspot is? Well, what kinds of things, what kinds of businesses will attract criminals?

as well, pawn shops, the check cashing places, fast food restaurants, dive bars, liquor stores. If you have an area of town and has all those things, you're probably going to see a lot of activity there. And so that's kind of how they figure out where the hotspots are. And police use this stuff all the time. I mean, this is a big thing now, right? I mean, that's a very primitive. They're very sophisticated about the way they do it. Now the new thing is, or the more recent thing is it's block by block.

It's not areas of town anymore because they've found that you can have one block with very serious crime. The next block might be completely crime free. The next block might have fairly serious crime again. So you've got to take it block by block. So that's the newest way they're breaking it down now. Well, and I love that because often people who go to university is like, well, I want to go to university to get the degree. We've already kind of talked about that. But there are these brilliant areas where the university becomes practical and where you see this intermingling and when they connect, it's like, oh, this is how our world's set up and our hospitals are designed in this way and our bus stops are designed in this way.

And we consider where to zone things based on this information and that's where the world becomes practical. But if you just learn that the environment influences crime, it's like, well, what do you do with that? You don't do anything with that. But once you realize that you can modify things and you can change things, that's where everything becomes practical. And I think you do a really good job of that because I think you're one of the most vocal criminologist at UFE for writing articles and being a part of the news. I have a few of your news articles. I have a few of your presentations. And I think that that's so valuable because it makes all of this information accessible.

And it makes it make sense in a realistic way where when you are walking to your car at night, you can see like, okay, well, my area that I'm working at isn't set up for my. safety. I don't feel safe here because there's bushes all around me and it's very dark. There's no light and that's why. And you can go to your employer and say, hey, could we do something about this because I really don't feel safe in this circumstance? And that's a practical way people could take this information and apply it to their own lives. And I really value that. So what was your development? What motivated you to write this textbook? Well, I always, I always, like, I'm really, I'm kind of a book junkie. I love books. I mean, I have like eight bookshelves in my little office, and they're just stacked by boxes of books everywhere.

I go to used bookstores all the time. I've always been into books. I've always liked writing. I got really into, I mean, especially when I was a grad student, you have to, you're going to suffer if you don't get into writing. So you just have to do it. And I always kind of liked writing. You know, when I was starting as an undergrad, one thing that really changed where I really turned the corner was I started looking at, writing a paper more as like a creative thing rather than work.

Like I was, you know, almost like you're writing a music or a story or something. And I felt like I could, it was easier to write when I looked at it like that. Because I think I'm kind of like I think I'm kind of a creative type, right? I mean, I have all these weird, you know, I'm left handed, which, you know, Lombroso would be concerned about because left hand. You've heard about left hand. I think I was also taught like I was left handed to start with and then I was forced. I got switched because of those types of reasons. They tried.

I was too stubborn. They tried to do it, but I kept switching back and they just gave up. But yeah, yeah, Lombroso believed that going back to Lombroso just for a second, he believed that people who were left handed were tended to be criminals. There's a little truth to that. they are at risk a little bit higher than other people are. But yeah, you know, and in Latin, the Latin for left is sinister. No way. Yeah.

You can look it up. Yeah. So, yeah, so I've always been kind of a creative type. And I guess when I started looking at things as more of a creative, looking at papers as more of a creative thing, it got easier to write them. And eventually I started to think, well, I'd really. like to write a book because I had all this, you know, I'd been writing a lot of my dissertation. I had all this stuff in my head. And I was like, I'd really write, you know, I've spent so long studying

theory at that point. I wanted to get something down on paper. And the weirdest way it happened, got to give credit to Johannes. He's a very extroverted fella. He, you know, which is good. It helps a lot. And he went to a conference and he struck up a conversation with an agent from Sage publications who published a book. And he said, oh, would you guys, he started, he was getting interested in theory kind of because we were, you know, he had met me and we were friends and I was into it. And he just was like, oh, this, you know, I look at your master to see how you did things. And he started asking me all these questions. Like he liked the diagram. I did all these diagrams in my master's thesis and my PhD and he was really into those.

and yeah he was at this conference and he just pitched that he was like so you know me and my colleague have all this experience teaching theories and he was like we have over you know 20 I don't know what he's like 15 years combined years teaching theories or something like that and we have this idea for a textbook and you know we were wondering if you guys would be interested in the agent reacted really positively and he was like yeah I'd love to see a book proposal like do one up and send one to me and so johanna just emailed me and he was like, hey, I, you know, I got this off or do you want to, do you want to try to write this thing? You want to try to write a proposal and see what happens? And I was like, yeah, I'd like to. And yeah, that was, that whole process was kind of interesting just writing up the proposal and, you know, you don't, you don't really have a sense of what's going to happen, right? So we wrote this proposal up and we sent it off. And my senior supervisor at the time was like, why are you, what are you doing? Like, you're like six or seven years into your PhD and now you're going to write a textbook at what are you doing? Like, this is ludicrous.

And I was like I had, part of it was I felt like I had to do it because I needed to be competitive on the job market. And I didn't have a lot of, you know, I was not hooked into a bunch of research projects and getting my name on a bunch of publications and journals at that point. And, you know, I had one that I had written with Johannes, and that's really all we had at that point. And I was like, I'm not going to get a job with one publication. That's, it's not going to happen because unfortunately, most universities don't care about your teaching ability. They could care less. They just, they want you to teach a class and not have the class mutiny and try to kill you.

That's really the standard. You know, they could care less about the quality. They want big research projects. They want your name on all these publications. They want you to bring in a bunch of money. And that was never going to be mean. And so I was like, well, I got to make myself interesting. So I decided to pursue this, sent off the proposal.

What they do is they take it and they send it to, I think they sent it to like seven other people who were deemed experts in the realm of theory. And then they, you know, they had this form they would fill out, giving feedback about the book. And then we'd get all the feedback back back. So we got the proposal back initially. We had out of seven, we had about four. were pretty positive. They were like, yeah, this could work, not bad. We had two people who were like, yeah, I don't know. Then we had one guy, like, you'd be crazy to offer these people a text book contract. Like, well, he, because we'd have to, we had to send our CVs to, and he knew I hadn't

gotten through grad school, hadn't done a PhD. And he was like, you shouldn't be even offering a PhD student, a contract to write a textbook. That's so crazy. Just in my opinion, because like, having you as a professor and seeing your passion it's like the fact that that's missing from that person's analysis just blows my mind because it isn't just for people listening they don't care if you have a PhD or you don't have like they don't care they think you're interesting no matter what and so to have people be like well they don't have this this three letters so don't do it it's like that's crazy to most listeners that that would happen to you yeah it was it was weird and he didn't you know the thing it's fine I don't need everyone to like everything I do I can take

criticism. But my problem with what he said was, that's all he said. That was his criticism. He didn't have a criticism about the proposal or anything. It was just like, you're not a PhD, so you can't do this. And I was like, oh, okay, well, and I was like, well, that's over. You know, this isn't going to happen. And then I called Johannes and I was like, so that sucks. We're not going to get this contract. And he was like, oh, I don't know. He was like, I think we should do some revisions and maybe send it off again. And I was like, Johanus, I, I'm at the end of my My senior supervisor doesn't like me doing this. I don't know. He's like, John, we can't give up. You've got to do that. We got to just take a few hours a day. Let's try it. Let's just see what happens. It's like, fine. So we put it, put a couple. I did what he said. I put a couple. I just would take two hours every day for about a week. I worked on it, got it done. Sent it back to him. He was like, oh, it looks good. We sent it off again. And then the second round of proposal comments were much better. And we. got about a five out of five.

There were there were some really positive things going on. They said, well, we don't really want to give you a book contract yet because you guys have never written a book and neither of you have a, or only one of you has a PhD and he's the co-author. So this is all backwards. So I think at one point, Johannes actually put his name first just so he'd be a PhD and then I was second and then we were going to, we switched it back later because I was like, I can't write, you know, I can't be second author on this.

I got to be first. He was like, that's totally understandable. So he did that. And then we got him back and they said, yeah, we'd like to see two sample chapters. So then we had to write two sample chapters. And kind of, you know, they fell into place pretty well. And we sent those, it was three sample chapters. So they fell into place pretty well.

We sent those off and really good feedback about those. And so then, I mean, one of the people was a, she was a fairly well-known psychological criminologist, and she said, this is the best write-up of psychology and crime I've ever seen. Like, this is great. And so then they were like, okay, well, do you guys want to do this? And we're like, yep. And I mean, it was, it was tough because, funny story, I was working on the final revisions for my textbook. And I was talking to Johannes on the phone, actually. And my wife went into labor at that point in time. And so I was like, oh, Johannes, I can't talk anymore. I think Reagan's going into labor. And he was like, oh, you better go. So I hung up and we drove to the hospital. And Reagan went into labor and had a baby.

And we were almost done with the textbook. Then we were trying to get out of our house. So there are a few months left on the edits that we had still had to do. And so the very last part of the very, very last part of the final edits, I was actually doing them in our new house or no it was in our apartment on a box with my computer on top of it like I don't know but it got done you know there's stuff I might do different but I think you know I've gotten really good feedback about it so far students seem to like it they did not like the old textbook that we were using I mean I saw what they were talking about

it was, it's very stuffy, very not interesting to read, unless you're really, really interested in theory. It's a little too complex, I think, for most undergrads. You know, it's, it was a book that we used in grad school, actually, that was kind of the standard textbook. Yeah, I do remember that because I think I had the first textbook in first year, and then I had the new textbook, and this one received great feedback from, like, my peer group, and, like, it was so strange because during my first year, we were all slackers.

everyone I sat around and then when I was in the third year class with you everyone was passionate and discussing the complexities and you gave like three different essay options and the response was like people were like I'm going to do this one because I really think I can push the limits and it was like what are you doing like are we slackers like what's going on people got really excited because the book is so consumable there's information there's side notes it's really easy to read the chapter and not feel overwhelmed where when it's just text, text, text, it can be exhausting for a student to want to continue to read. And so that is something that's so different about it.

What were some of the things that you got to do differently about it that you enjoyed? Well, I like, you know, I agree. One of the shortcomings of some of the text is they have just pages and pages and there's no break. It's just one section. I'm like half the time you're reading and it's like, what was I? what were they talking about? What was this section about? I don't even remember. It was like seven pages ago. So one thing that we really wanted to do is we wanted to break it down into more like bite-sized pieces, right? So you can go through. And I think another problem with text, like the theory

textbooks that are available is they don't break thing. They just don't break up all the little parts, right? Because there's all these little parts of theories that you have to understand. They like to present the theory and then they they don't really explain like this is a concept. and this is an assumption they don't make any of those distinctions a lot of times they might in the first chapter but then after that it kind of goes out the window and they're just kind of talking and so I wanted to be really focused and kind of break it down like that you know johannis was really into research and we're both kind of really into the practical practical side of things I mean one thing about theory uh one of the reasons why I got into it was because uh people in

criminology don't like it. Like even criminologists don't like theories. That's why it was such a, you know, being a theory instructor, you kind of have an advantage because no one wants to teach theory courses. So if, you know, a program has theory courses, they're always trying to figure out who's going to teach them. And then they have to find someone who's into that and who can do it because some people want, some people are interested and they can't, they can't pull it off. It's just they're a little tough to teach. You know, it's not like, Oh, let's talk about prisons now. You know, I mean, that's interesting. I could, you know, that's not as, this is abstract thought. And so you've got to be a little bit different about it. It's more like teaching a methods, even a methods course. It's more practical, right? You're learning a skill most of the time.

But with theory, you know, it's kind of like something you said earlier. It's hard, it can be hard for people like, why am I learning this stuff? Like, why don't we just learn the new stuff and be done with it? Well, there's a reason to learn the older stuff. Well, and I think that that lands on a really important point, because courses are there for a reason, and one of the interesting things I think is that this course might have been one of the hardest courses for people to learn, but it is the whole point of university is to challenge that practical, pragmatic outlook on the world and thinking, well, everything, like, trades are very much you're going to learn what you need to use. A cooking course is like, we're going to teach you how to make an apple pie. And once you learn how to make an apple pie, you can make an apple pie forever. And where this is like push your brain beyond what it's used to. And, I think often we forget that we've evolved from like monkeys. Like we're we've come so far and this is probably the hardest part for people to

this is like similar to planning the future which everyone hates doing. If you ask someone, what are you going to be doing in seven years? It's like I have no idea. I couldn't tell you. And it's because that's the hardest part of thinking is going to the abstract side of things. And so now looking back on this course, it's so valuable because parts of law are very conceptual and, not based in just look over there and you'll see this idea it's like it's something we pulled out

like innocent until proven guilty is one of the most unlikely things a human being would ever think of because if you don't like how somebody's behaving you just blame them for stuff you don't think well we'll hold them innocent until we have something proof and so those ideas are so important but we don't we don't enjoy it because it is the hardest part for our prefrontal cortex to grasp is conceptual ideas that don't have a place in like the biological world and so I do think that that's probably one of the most valuable classes because it forces a student to grapple with the fact that things aren't obvious, things aren't clear. And I think that you do a really good job of teaching this course because you're passionate and that comes through in the course

because you do admit sometimes this is really dull part of it, but we're going to learn it anyways because of these three reasons. And I think that that justifies the education to the student. Well, that's great. I really appreciate the feedback. I mean, it's always, you know, it's nice to hear that people appreciate the course because you never you're you get evaluations but you never really know like it's nice to talk to a student who's gone out and done some stuff I've heard I've heard some things in the past similar where they say I actually use this stuff so that's uh that's great that you guys can put it to use I mean it's a little bit like math right that I think it's the same reason why people don't like to do math because you have to you have a principle like addition subtraction multiplication

whatever you're using and then you've got to apply it to a problem to figure out the problem and it's not easy to do I mean you got to understand the principle you got to know what you're doing with the problem to solve it it's hard and so well and people often get away with I'm just not a math person yeah and it's like you can be though like if as as long as you're able to put in the work for the most part you can grasp these concepts and that's the same example I had so many friends I'm just not a theory person and it's like well nobody's a theory it's a lot of work. It's not just something you're just naturally born with. And even for you, it was like, your first grade wasn't 100%. It took work to get there. And then now you're teaching courses

on it, but you didn't start from having like 100%. And now you're here teaching people about it. So it's obviously not just automatically people grasp it and get 100%. And those are the people who succeed in this. Well, yeah, one of the, that's funny, you reminded me as something. My first theory class that I ever took was called social theory. It was about sociological theories. Not of criminal behavior, just social theory. So, you know, we studied some people that you've heard of, like Durkheim and Marx and, you know, all the hot, Weber, all the hot shots, right? And then there were, you know, there was Hegel and Simmel and some of these other people. And, I mean, it was real dry.

It was real dry. The teacher did a pretty good job of, like, trying to relate it to real life. And I was super, I put off taking theory until my last semester because I was scared. I honestly, I was scared of it. I thought I was going to wreck my GPA. Everyone talked about how it was, oh my gosh, it's so hard. Like, it's just a nightmare. I hate this class, like, blah, blah, blah.

And so I finally took it. I had a friend in the class. And first exam, you know, she did pretty well. She got an A minus, I think, and I got like a B plus. And I was kind of struggling with it a little bit because at this point I was a better, I had gotten to be a better student. And I was doing better, but I was still like, ah, I'm back to the B. now. What the hell? And I was sitting there working on it and kind of being stressed out. And one of my other

mentors, Celia Winkler was her name. She was actually my undergraduate supervisor, which is kind of another funny. She was a feminist and I was a criminologist and they matched us up because the criminologists were too busy to deal with me. So I was like, oh great, I get to go, what I, I'm my I want to be a criminologist and I have a feminist supervisor who doesn't study crime. This is awesome. But she was amazing, amazing person. It was funny. And I would spend hours and, you know, I did kind of confide in her early on.

I said, you know, I'm really, I really struggled at my old school, really having trouble trying to figure out how to study and what I need to do. And she was like, you can come to my office and talk to me anytime you want. Like, you know, I teach these classes. You should take one of them. I'm always willing to talk. I'm not going to ignore you. And she totally followed, like, she totally followed through on that. I mean, I was in her office a lot.

I mean, at one point, she said, John, you're good. Just go home. You know what you need to know. So she'd have to throw me out of there. But, yeah, one, it was funny. I got to know her really well. And then one, I was taking the social theory class and it's kind of stressing about it. She walked into the office.

She was like, what's wrong? And I was like, oh, I'm just, oh, the social theory class. It's bothering me. I just, I don't, I don't think I'm a theory class. guy, which is funny, you know, to think about now. And she's like, what are you talking about? And I was like, what do you mean? She's like, you do theory. Every paper you've written for me has had theory in it. You're like, that's how your brain works. What are you talking about? You're good at this stuff. And I was like, I am. Oh, and then I got A's for the rest. I mean, that's all it

took was her just saying, you're good at this. And then I was like, oh, okay, I'm good at it. Right. And then it was fine after that. It was really strange. So that is so strange. Because we get into these narratives of I'm this type of person who could never succeed at this type of thing like and working through it and having somebody just say like hey you're good at this it's like oh I have permission to not beat myself up and say I'm not good at these things and that happens when people have injuries like I've watched documentaries on people saying like I just have a bad arm and I just have a bad wrist and then they do look at the wrist and it's like your wrist is fine it's just you've been saying that for 20 years now and you've just ingrained this idea into your head and you have have to grapple with that. So that's really cool. Can we talk about how you approach the course because you teach a first level course and a third level course? What do you expect out of a first year, first year student in comparison to a third year? Because obviously they're just getting their toes dipped into the water. What is that like to meet them? And they're likely just like me, no idea what they're doing. And now you're talking to them. I guess in the first year, I'm looking for

I mean, I want the person to be putting an effort, right? I mean, I guess that's important regardless, but especially at the first year effort. And, you know, I'm not expecting you to change the world with your writing or comments in class or anything like that. I just want you to have read stuff. And I want you to try to answer the questions. That's all I care about. You know, I try to push a little bit when I feel like it's appropriate, you know, because there are students in the 100 level who are just, for some reason, they're just past other people.

I don't know if it's life experience or the education. They had a good high school education, good teachers. I'm parenting. I don't know what it would be. But, you know, the first year is more laid back. I mean, it's not as demanding, right? Because it's, you know, it's a 104 sociological explanation. So you're only looking at sociological theories.

So I'm not expecting much about, you know, trying to understand how the theories fit together or anything like that, really. I don't like to break things down too much. You know, if you start talking about assumptions and all this stuff, it can get kind of overwhelming for someone at first. So I try to be a little bit more general about things. When you hit the third year, I'm looking for more thought, more analysis, more independent thinking, I guess. You know, you've been around, you know, most of these people have been in university for a few years and they know what's going on. And they've taken a lot of criminology classes at that point.

So you should be able to bring some of that stuff in, right, from other, you know, and I love it when students like, oh, this class, I learned this in this class, and it kind of applies in theory, right? So that's more what I'm looking for, the ability to kind of take a step back and look at the big picture and understand, you know, I think when early, I think students a lot of times they come in and they kind of have this idea about what causes crime or why people commit crime, you know. social factors or it's biological factors or it's maybe, you know, a psychological anomaly, something like that. But, you know, there's, they're all important. You kind of have to consider them all at once. I mean, that's why I really like the biosocial theories a lot when they're done correct, when they're done appropriately and correctly. Because I think sometimes in criminology, the biosocial theories get to be, it's more about the biology than the social part. But I think ideally, it reminds me of something at another mentor at SFU named Gail Anderson. They call her the bug lady.

She's actually got a Ph.D. in biology. She's an entomologist. And so she looks at how you can kind of predict or how you can tell how long a body has been there based on the rate of decomposition that you're observing. And so that's kind of her area. And yeah, she always used to say, you know, like it's funny. I feel like the criminologists who are interested in biology, they don't understand, like, they throw the social stuff out the window because they're interested in biology. But she's like even a biologist, like me, for example, I would never disregard social factors.

I mean, she said, like, I think they're almost more important than biological factors. Because, you know, a biological factor is something like, well, this person, for whatever reason, they're just, they tend to be impulsive. Okay. Well, that can relate to crime, clearly, because a lot of crime has kind of an impulsive nature to it, but that can be funneled into a different direction, too. You're not, just because you're impulsive doesn't necessarily mean you're going to be a criminal. You know, there's all kinds of things you could go out and you can kind of, you can kind of harness that energy into a more positive direction sometimes. And so, in other words, all these things are mediated by social factors, you know, how your parents are. You know, how your parents are. raised you, the friends you have, the opportunities that you have, you know, the environment that you're living in, are you surrounded by a bunch of people who are committing crime or, you know, living in a crime-ridden area? Is that what you're seeing on a daily basis? So there's all these things that have to be taken into account. And the biological factors, I think they're important. I love teaching about them. I think they're fascinating,

fascinating stuff. But I think I agree with, you know, Gail that a lot of times it's like the fascination factor with criminal they're like ooh it's biology and this isn't like you know all this social stuff that we've been doing or you know there's the there's the flip side of that too where people come in and they're like well biology has nothing to do with anything it's all just social factors you can't be like that either i mean not all people living in poverty commit crime a lot of them are very law-abiding good people and they don't but that's kind of the you know that's the standard sociological explanation as poverty leads to crime. And same with having criminal friends. There's people who hang out with people who are doing things that aren't very good and, you know, they might not necessarily be criminal all the time. So you got to look at all. I think that's why we break down the textbook like we do because it's important to just take all that stuff into account and not truly not disregard anything. Yeah. And I think that that's something that's done really well. And it also leads into that whole idea of multi-level analysis where for the most part if you look outside and you see

like a field it's like well it's just a field but it's also well what happens here at 10 p.m. in comparison to 9 a.m. when kids are at school how does this intermingle what is how did this person grow up and so there's so many complexities and that's what I really love about doing this podcast is you're not a simple person you've been through so much and you have so much experience and everyone has that and but we don't get to talk about it long form how often do we get to really dive into somebody's experiences and what they've learned and how they view the world and what different perspectives do they use to understand the world around them and how does that intermingle with their familial relationships and how does it interact with the community they live in and

I think that that's so valuable to be able to go through these things and have a biological perspective and then say well you can't just have that you have to have a social perspective and a psychological perspective and then it just shows how little we know when you haven't gone to university you don't you just don't know these things and that's what shows that someone from university is going to know a more broad perspective and have all these ideas tied together and what makes great literature and great writing is that you can bring all of these ideas together into one book that explains it from multi-level perspectives what was that like to bring that into the book because you said something that I think is really important which is the opportunities

for university professors has like died down in the state and I think that one of the weird things that I asked Zena about was I just don't understand why we don't hear from you the individual as much because it feels like that's what the university's offering is I don't want to just go learn theories I want to learn theories from somebody who cares about theories and that's you and I don't want to just learn about how methodology works I want to learn from somebody who's made it their life career like Zina has she's learned about these things fundamentally but I don't feel like we hear from the professors, the individuals within the university, and then obviously that impacts your ability to stay here in the country and continue to do

the work you're doing at certain stages of your career, which just seems wild to me that we don't have a longer understanding and like full videos of a professor explaining, hey, this is, I got into this for this reason and I didn't like theories when I started. Now I'm here and I teach theories and I'm passionate about it. And it just, it shocks me that that's not something UFB pushes they're not like hey John would you be open to writing making a video just explaining why you care about what you're teaching like why wouldn't that seems like an easy and then instead of someone having to look on to rate my prof of who you are which I think is a bias not always reliable source we would be able to hear from the person who's chosen to make this

your life like you've dedicated your life to writing textbooks and educating students on it and we don't get this this ability to hear why you why are you different than SFU and I think that that's so valuable and I'm so grateful to have you on. So what is that like for you to have this passion? And for students, it's usually just check my prof and like it's a required course. Yeah. Well, what was the question? Sorry. The question is what do you think of the universities like not doing that? Or do you think that there would be some value in doing something like that? Because I feel like we're not hearing from the people we will be learning from. If I want to be a crim student, I have to take your course and I have to take it twice.

So wouldn't it be useful for me to know more about the person behind the scene? I totally, yeah, I think you're right about that. I think that's something I really think every school, probably, every department, you know, all the ones that I've ever known. They all struggle with that kind of stuff. I mean, part of it is, is the professors themselves. A lot of times, for starters, they're very reluctant to, I mean, even making videos, right? Like, we're doing everything online now.

And so you have to have to have some kind of face time with the students. So you do the office hours, but it's also a good idea to do a couple of videos during the semester just so you're talking to them, makes them feel better, makes you a person instead of this weird, like are you an AI on the other end? like artificial intelligence grading my papers, or are you real? So, you know, I think it's partially the, you know, the, if the deans wanted to organize something like that, I would feel sorry for them because there would be a lot of resistance from a lot of professors who would just, it's time, it would be time consuming for them. They wouldn't want to do it. I mean, we have trouble.

Like, there's a lot of people, you know, what, you, well, even in the department, it's hard to get people to talk to media, to talk to like, you know, If they're an expert in something, they're very hesitant to talk to the media. And I am too. You know, it makes me kind of nervous, too, because you never know if what you say is going to be totally distorted or if it's going to come off as real. So there's that kind of fear that you're going to be misinterpreted or something like that. The, you know, the extra workload is not great.

Wouldn't you have more leverage, sorry, to be able to negotiate your position within the university if people did that more because it sounds like being stuck at a sessional instructor, if you want to get from there to being a fully fledged professor, what you need to do is demonstrate that you have leverage to, hey, like I've got social media followers. I have YouTube followers who just enjoy me explaining these things because I think one thing that YouTube's really shown is people can be interested in some weird things and very passionate about things.

And it can be educational. And I've seen professors post their videos, to YouTube and it do really well, and then their own individual, you don't have to rely on just one university. And so I'm just curious because it feels like with the book, you now have leverage, but if you were able to make YouTube videos for yourself, or if Zena was, or if you guys were able to have your own thing, then the university would have to negotiate with you as someone who has a following, who has supporters, rather than someone who's voiceless and only known within the halls of the university. Well, and you might be right, like this might be the way

things could go this direction now. I mean, especially in the environment we're dealing with right now, there might be a push towards doing something more like that. I mean, we do try to do that. It's not the same thing, but it's similar to what you're talking about when we have our like, did you ever come to the orientation?

Yes, but it was, we were so focused on the individuals and our peer group that we weren't paying attention to any at all who the professors were. Yeah, that's kind of our attempt to, you know, and there are meet and greets sometimes. But, you know, it's basically a lot of times what it is is like, oh, they're doing a meet and greet. Here's what

time it is. Can you be there? And it's like, well, you know, since you're telling me two weeks before and you didn't ask about my schedule, no. But, you know, and a lot of times I would like to be there. But yeah, I totally agree with you. I think, I think there's a lot of talent, you know, at UFV that goes unrecognized because people just don't know who the professors are really. I mean, you know, a great example is the guy I was talking about earlier, Dr. Bultz, he was a little bit of a media darling, because he had done, like he has kind of a crazy past. He did, are you familiar with the Heaven's Gate cult? You ever heard of them? No. Oh, they were, I was in the early 90s. It was a group of people who were basically in this cult and they thought the Hail Bop comet, I think it was. They thought the tail of the comet was a spaceship coming to pick them up. And when the comet, came through, they had this plan and they basically put on all these Nike jumpsuits and they drank this concoction. It was basically poison. They all killed themselves. And it was a big news story at the time. So that happened in the 90s. Well, in the 70s and 70s or 80s, maybe early

80s, Dr. Belch had infiltrated this group. And when I say infiltrated, there was a time when as a researcher, you could pretend that you were interested in being part of the group and you could join them and kind of study them surreptitiously. And so he has all these crazy stories. Because, you know, he joined this group under the guise of being a follower and he was actually a sociologist trying to study him. So another reason why he was super interesting. But he had all these crazy stories of, you know, like they would match you up with a partner to kind of keep track of you and he'd have to like go to the bathroom to take his field notes. He'd steal like a pen and keep it on him and he'd take napkins and stuff to take notes on.

Wow. And he'd keep going to the bathroom to write things down. The guy was with him thought he had like gastrointestinal issues or something. And so, uh, I mean, like I would never know when he was at University of Montana unless I had him as a teacher. And so yeah, I think you're right. I think there is something to be said about raising the profile of, uh, some of the professors. Now, you know, another thing that can happen is, uh,

that I think maybe they're, you know, maybe this has something to do with it. Not everyone is as active as everyone else, right? And so some people don't have as much to talk about, right? Just they, you know, they're teachers and that's kind of how they define themselves and they're not really into doing research and they just wouldn't have a lot to talk about. And so I think it might be a problem with the power, they want to not make power dynamics in the departments. That could have something to do with it. But I, you know, I think you might have, you might have something there.

This might be a direction that things are going. Because we do get, we do get asked more and more to do this kind of stuff to try to raise our profile and, uh, well, I just, I think about it when I'm reading like a newspaper and I saw some of the articles that you were a part of for like the Abbotsford News. And it was just like, I cannot believe that out of all of this article, it gives you two quotes. And it's like 10, 10 words. And like, you probably said so much more during the interview that they just had to cut it down. to this small bite size piece and it's like this isn't this isn't informative like this is so small and I just I feel like people miss out because all that I don't I don't know if this happens in Abbotsford but we have like Chilliwack Beware sites that just attack people who are in the

courts and it's like this person's in court today this person's in court today and it'll be it'll have their face and like this indigenous person is in court today and it's just it doesn't give like a backstory of who they are what they've been through it gives no information yeah where if we had a mixture of like you being able to be a part of this you can be like well there's clearly bio factors social factors there's clearly like an environmental factor here just so people don't bite their heads off because I see so much of like oh we should just lock these people up forever and it's just like we just don't know anything about this person other than they were accused of theft and that's not enough information for us to decide this person needs to be stigmatized

and pushed out of our society and that's just so frustrating for me because I know there's brilliant people in these fields and then I'll see like a poster of like just lock them all up and it's just no we're doing the wrong things and that's just frustrating to know there's there's great people in the field working hard to figure these things out and then that's not translating into broader society where Facebook is still filled with like hateful messages of criminals stealing a bike and it's like well why did they steal a bike well we know that the fact that um if you're using drugs that impact your prefrontal cortex and then you're not thinking as clearly and then that part of your brain can turn off over time and you're living in poverty and you're living day to day

and then of course you're going to steal a bike because what does that bike matter and who who owns that bike what does that matter when you're not even getting to think things through and the only thing you get to work towards is like your next opportunity to use drugs and that's not even their preference they probably started and two years ago they made a decision to use and then now it's not even a choice because it's been ingrained in them and it's just become a part of them just like how we say like i'm not a theory person like we get ingrained in these things and it's hard to get out and we don't give people that benefit of the doubt anymore. And I just think part of that is we don't get to hear from the brilliant people

enough. And I think that that's just to your credit, important that we hear from people like you. Oh, thanks. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, that could make a difference. I mean, I think I think you're definitely right there. It's unfortunate. There's a lot of anger directed, especially at mentally ill people who are homeless, you know, I hear a lot of it a lot of the time and you can't, you know, you can't engage with everyone who says that kind of stuff because you're not going to change their mind and, you know, 30, three minutes or whatever. But yeah, it's really, it's too bad because, you know what, I worked for a little while. Well, I didn't work with them, but I attended a couple of the meetings of a group called Drug War Survivors in

Abbotsford. And, you know, there were weren't, these weren't bad people. They're people who are homeless. A lot of them had jobs at one point in time. A lot of them have addiction issues because they were prescribed opioid drugs by the doctor and then they were cut off without any kind of weaning process or anything. And it's almost like it's out of their control and they have some really tough stories and it could, you know, people think, people tend to think that they, it could never happen to them. And I know from talking to people it could happen to anyone. You know, I've had some people really. really close to me, you know, become addicted to drugs, and it was opioid drugs. And, you know, they never had a drinking problem, never had any kind of issues, never had any kind of mental health issues, really. You know, and suddenly they're addicted to this drug. And luckily they had a support system that was good, and they were able to work around it. But, you know, if you don't have that support system, you're not going to get out of it.

It's going to be, it's going to take you down. 100% can I ask you about what it's like to teach criminology students because I would say that we are a unique bunch because we are like the most disagreeable in terms of like I had all throughout my education I had disagreements in the middle of class where me and another student are going back and forth and disagreeing on ideas and then you go into like a philosophy class and everybody's pretty silent and we're all pretty calm and I've had feedback from other students who are psych students and say like you. guys don't let anything go like you're so passionate about like well it's like somebody you'll say oh that's because of this and then we'll be like well did you consider this did you consider and we're very confident and i think that that came through when i was in your 300 level class because i had like russell rupsing right beside me Trevor and they were also passionate that we all just start going back and forth and there are genuine class discussions that i don't see in other areas so what does it like to teach criminology students who are a little bit more vocal oh i love

I love the students who are chatty and I love devil's advocate. You know, I like I can appreciate that. It's great. I love teaching. I mean, it's a blessing teaching criminology students. You know, I think one of the reasons why you guys are maybe a little bit different is because you are passion. Crime is a passionate thing to begin with. And so that's one reason.

But you also get exposed to, you know, criminology is not the same as psych. criminology is a mixture of a bunch of different things and you guys get exposed to a lot of different things as you're doing your degree whereas a psych student is studying psych for the most part and then they you know they have these other they might take a crim class or they might take a philosophy class or something but they're really focused on psych and so you're learning everything in the context of psychology and that line of thinking there's nothing wrong I'm not insulting psychology I work with a bunch of psychologists I used to be interested in it I almost had a minor in it and it, loved my abnormal psych and I love social psychology, but it's a certain way of thinking and it's different from other disciplines. And so I think sometimes when you guys are in another class or even in, you know, you have so many ideas that you're able to draw on and you're good at sparking conversations like that. It might be interpreted as being disagreeable, but I look at it as like, that's what we're here to do, right? Like, it's not, like, it would be horrible if you guys just came and like listen to me for three hours and then we left. I mean,

that would be awful. I, you know, uh, I've heard there's classes like that and I'm sure like, I can't imagine the teacher having a good time, right? Like, I mean, when I go to lecture, it's almost like three hours to me seems like about a half an hour or 45 minutes a lot of times. Like, it just goes by so quick because I'm having a good time when I, you know, And I like the students. I like their interaction. I like, yeah, it's been great. I like the small part of UF.

I like the fact that we have smaller classes at UFV. That's another huge advantage. Because I have taught, you know, I taught at SFU a couple of times, and I had 100, 150 students. And they're great. I mean, the classes went well, but it's not the same when you have 150 students

and you're trying to talk about stuff and get their ideas out there. There's very few people who are willing to speak up in front of that large a crowd, right? I mean, it's nerve-wracking when you're the lecture and you're trying to lecture to that many people because there's something about, for me anyway, you hit about 40 or 50 people and the dynamic, that's a crowd. You know, the dynamic changes and it's huge. Probably 50 or 60 actually.

I can handle 40, but like it just starts to look really like, that's a lot of people. And then they don't want to talk, right? And they just kind of want to sit there and take notes. And I just, I honestly, I don't know if that, I'm wondering if that's going to be around much longer, these massive, I think they will to a certain extent, but I've even heard that some schools are kind of switching to a different,

they're doing less of that. Because I never, I was never a huge fan of the big lecture style situation. You feel like a number or an aunt or something just in this huge crowd of people. And so, yeah, it's great. That's one of the reasons why I'm at UFV. They respect teaching. I really like that about them and they're small classes. And, you know, the students are great.

Like, they'll push you sometimes as an instructor, I've noticed. You know, they'll challenge you on stuff. I think that's probably true anywhere. But, yeah, I've had a great time teaching there so far. Yeah, I love that because one of the interesting things is, I think with criminology specifically, is you learn about things you might not want to know if you were like if you just wanted to stay naive and think that your worldview was correct you don't get to keep that because as I said people on

Facebook they like to simplify things down to like oh it's just people like poor people or it's just these type of people and it's like when you're in criminology you get faced with like well it's partly like biological and then you're like okay well maybe it's partly biological and then they're like well it's also psychological and you're like ha like it's also that and then it's like well and it's an environment too and you're like holy it's just everything and All of these things can come together. Can we really quickly talk about, I forget what it's called, the gene, the crime gene? Oh, the warrior gene.

The warrior gene. The warrior gene. The M-A-O-A. Yeah, sure. Because that's one thing I found that was really popular because it was this uncomfortable feeling that we could, like, when you hear that there is a gene that's linked to crime, not causes crime, but linked to crime, you start to go, do I have it? Like, what's going on? Yeah. And you can mail away for a test kid if you want to do that.

And it doesn't take that long. And it's just a swab, right? So, yeah, you know, I think it's what one out of, I think it's one out of every three people, if my memory is serving correct, has this shortened version of the MAOA gene. And it's kind of a complicated thing to get into, but it doesn't, what happens is as you get neurotransmitters, kind of a neurotransmitter overload serotonin. And it can make you, normally serotonin makes you happy. or makes you feel calm and nice. But if you get too much of it, it can get out of control real quick and you can get excited and hyper kind of hyped up.

And so with the warrior gene, yeah, it's linked to crime, but as you know, it's not a cause and effect situation. In fact, there's lots of people who have it who are really successful and really good at what they do. It's just they've learned a channel that energy a little bit differently. And that's the important thing to realize about genes. I mean, it's like I said, I love studying this stuff. I think it's really interesting, the biology stuff.

But, you know, it's always mediated through something else. And that's why that the thing we do in class is that's one of my favorite exercises is where we get to try to predict things. And, oh, is this person going to have it or not? And, you know, everyone gets it wrong or like you get one or two right. It's like, wow, okay. Same thing happened to me, and I'm a criminologist. You know, I went in, I didn't know much about the Warrior Gene when I saw it initially, and I was just trying to make predictions like a student would.

And, yeah, once you see it enough, you know, once you do it enough times, you start to realize there are hints through the video that we watch that the person, you know, this person is going to have it. This one isn't, but they're so subtle. It would be impossible to pick up on. And it's impossible to figure out the other mediating factors. that are going to change, you know, influence the situation, right? So you can have a person who looks like they won't have it, but they do. And the only reason why it looks like they don't have it is because they had a good family,

they had good parents who dealt with their issues the way they were supposed to, and they channeled that energy into something positive. Usually, you know, they end up being good business people. I think a lot end up, you know, probably in sports and more. athletic type stuff. So, yeah. Well, I really like that just because it does seem to me to be the case that you can't look at anyone simplistically as a biological creature, as a social creature, or any one of those things. And I like that because the podcast, my goal is not to make you John Haidt university professor. That's it. It's like, I want to hear about what it's like

to work with your wife at the University of the Fraser Valley to set those examples, to have children, to be a multi-leveled person that has all of these different attributes, because I think we got it wrong 20, 30 years ago where we were defining people by their career and not by everything else they do. So can you tell us what it's like to work with your wife at the University of the Fraser Valley? Because I think it's, I obviously knew that. And obviously a lot of criminology students knew you guys were married. You had the same last name. So you weren't keeping it a secret. But are you at all trying to set an example? Because I do think that we all knew that and we all respected you as like a happy couple. And so what is that like to kind of

carry that when you're when you're working obviously you're not around each other all the time but what is that like to have students maybe look up to your relationship and give that respect maybe even when you're not thinking about it uh it's great i you know a lot of people have friends be like you work with your wife that must be awful and i'm like no it's fantastic i we rarely ever see each other on campus because we're there at such usually our classes don't overlap uh for various you know kids and all that kind of stuff. But yeah, it's funny, like, because when I was at SFU, there was the husband-wife couple, Paul and Patricia Branningham, right?

There are these two, you know, just genius people, like, I mean, two of the smartest people I've ever met in my life. Like, Paul's kind of a lawyer type. I think he ended up, I think he might just have a lot degree, but he might have done a PhD. I can't remember. But he's very, like, scientific and very, very. smart, you know, expert in the criminal law, just an impressive guy. And then his wife is, like, Patricia is like this mathematical genius. Like, I think she did her, like, I'm thinking I'm remembering

this, right? She had, she had a math degree, like a pure math, like I think it was an M.A or an M.S or Master of Science in Math or something like that, which is not, I mean, that's, you know, MAs are, you know, a normal person can do them and get along. Okay. You can. can't just be anyone though and go and do a math degree. You've got to be really good at math and you've got to be really smart. So she did that and then she had a, she did a crim degree too to be a professor and she did it in like nine months or something like that. Nine months, PhD. Wow. Like I don't even know. It took me nearly eight years.

Like I was teaching and everything and not rushing, but nine months just blows my mind because you have to produce research that other criminologist respect as a part of your P.A. HD, that's part of the game. And yeah, she was able to do that. And so they were kind of the people I was like, ooh, the Brandinghams, you know, the husband, wife, criminology couple. And now you're... And now, like, I've evolved into that, I guess. No, it's great teaching around Reagan.

I definitely benefit from it. Reagan is, well, as you know, she's, like, outstanding, like an amazing teacher. Like, I'm probably one of the best at UV. And that's not me being her husband. that's me just telling you the truth, just a, you know, very positive, incredibly good at, like, marking papers and giving feedback that, and incredibly good at, like, not being mean about it, but being firm. And I've learned a ton from her, you know, it was before you were around,

but when I was, when I first started teaching, I was much more of a hard ass than I am now. I mean, I was much more strict. I wasn't mean, because I was treated pretty poorly when I was an undergrad. I never wanted to be like that. But I wasn't as patient sometimes as I should have been. And then after watching Reagan, the way she dealt with people. And then, you know, it's obvious too, like, since she started teaching at UFC, like, I always have this thing where, like, one of my students will come up to me and they'll be like, so, are you Reagan's husband? I'm like, yeah. And they'll go, oh, I really love your wife. She is. She is. just amazing. I'm like, thanks. Do you like my class? No, but I, you know, I picked up on that

and there's a reason why they do that because she's a very personal about person. She connects with you. She's very fair. She's a, you know, a rigorous marker. She's, she's got everything that a good teacher should have. And so, you know, at some point, I was like, you know, I got to learn something from her. She's, you know, because I was, I was not super popular for a little while, especially, you know, some of the early, early days of when I was teaching. I think that's normal for, especially when you're a Ph.D. student, you know, a lot of people don't know. You don't get taught how to teach anyone. You just end up doing it at some point. You might be able to do some TA and teaching assistant, but it's not the same as, you know,

flying the ship, right? So, yeah, at some point I really sat down. I was like, you know, I really got to learn to be more patient with people. I'm, you know, I'm pretty good, but then if someone does something wrong, I'm, you know, I, I sometimes act more like a drill sergeant when I should be being more like a coach, you know, like Reagan acts. I mean, she's very supportive, encouraging, positive. She's always there for people. So, you know, she's been a great, honestly, she's been a great role model for me in a lot of ways. That's awesome, because I think it's so cool to hear that, because when I was starting out, you need that person who's going to be a bit more firm and a bit more put you in your place, tell you when you're not doing the work, tell you when you're,

because every person who submits like a first year assignment, they think that they've created like artwork and that they really just, they really understood everything. And like I did half the readings, didn't put in the effort. And then to have that come out and somebody say like, this is not very good. It's like, but I put in work into it and I half asked it.

And like you think that you did so much better. And I think that that's so valuable for people to be able to be able to, experience what it's like to be wrong but to have somebody guide you and going to the rate my proff I was looking into that just before and your feedback is consistently throughout most of it obviously there's nonsense clients that nobody should ever listen to yeah but for the most part it's passionate about what he talks about firm but incredibly fair and I think that that is a good representation and that's who you want you want the people we're going to be more reasonable but you want the people who are going to expect better from you

and that's what university is supposed to be about is what can you do what are you putting on the table and then how can we make that better for next time and i feel like that's what i definitely got out of your third year course in my first year course i was slacking so much you can't you can't think that i learned much there but for the third year course i really learned how to understand and take criticism and i think that that's something that a lot of people who don't attend university lack is this your ideas aren't that great because what the heck do you know and I have a lot of people like I don't want you to challenge my opinions like they're just they're my opinions and it's like you don't we don't live in that world where you have opinions that you keep in a box by yourself you have to share these and we have to figure out the best way forward and I feel like when you have a person who's willing to look at your work and say you can do better and I know I can expect better and that's the energy I feel like you gave off in that course which was so valuable for students who didn't have like I didn't have a father figure so professors expecting better from me and saying you're not all that you could be and you could put in a lot more work and be so much better than you are is something I desperately needed to hear

because most of my high school professors were you aren't going to succeed and you're not going to become anything and like what do you know and you're not doing the work and who are you going to be and so to go to a place and say you're not all that you could be but you could be more is such an important message for university students to hear yeah I agree and uh well that's too bad that you weren't treated better when you're in high school I mean that's terrible uh sorry that's just like that's shocking uh yeah you know i i think it's really important to expect the best out of your students i mean one shift that i've gone through was like i said i try to be you know i try to be more like a coach right uh like a because i coached i coached

when i was younger and i was a soccer player and so i have a lot of experience in that realm. And, you know, the coach is not always going to tell you that you're, you know, you're not going to win games if your coach is like, yeah, you're the best. And then you get out there and, oh, you're the best. Don't work. No, there's sometimes where you need to hear negative criticism. And, you know, it's unfortunate. I think, I think in the modern university, we've gotten better about certain things, you know, I notice like the stuff that was, you know, the way I was treated like during office hours with some professors, that would never stand today. That would never be okay.

It would be nipped in the butt. I believe that. On the flip side of things, I mean, I think, you know, we've gotten a little carried away with evaluation sometimes. And I think they mean, I don't know if it's that people think they mean more than they do or they're going to be interpreted differently. And so sometimes you don't get that kind of feedback and that's too bad. But I really think that's important. you know, it's not, it's not a personal thing. It's that we're trying to make you guys better, right? And it's just, you know, the way you responded to it, I just really have a lot of respect for that. You know, the shift that you went through, that's just, it's great. That's exactly what university is supposed to do. And so I'm glad that, you know, you were able to, you know, come to that conclusion that it's not that we didn't like you. You know, it's that we wanted you to be better when you were done, because that's part of our job. job, right? That's, we have to do that. And I don't think a lot of students, I don't know if a lot of students look at it that way. You know, I think a lot of them take things very personally and I totally understand that because I did that sometimes too. But, you know, that's part of the value about actually getting to know your professor and talking to him and realizing they're also a human and, you know, they want the best. I'm sure there's exceptions. But for the most part, you know, we got into this because we want to improve you guys. We want to. We want to.

the best for you guys and we'll do what we have to to make sure that happens and you know we all have our different methods right yeah uh but that's kind of how life is too right uh you know your bosses are going to be different the people you work with are all going to be different you're going to have to figure out what they want and you know how to how to you know what they're looking for and what they're trying to do with you and so uh i guess you know you come out from that point of you it's better but yeah we really it's really great to see you know you doing all this stuff it's great as a teacher to see that. Well, and I think it's so cool because with criminology,

I'm not sure what other disciplines are like, but for criminology, it's nobody has the answers. Like, Yvonne Dandarand suggested that I do research on the overrepresentation of indigenous people, and I looked at a lot of the literature, and I was like, well, some of those are fair points, and some of those are less fair,

and like, this is a complicated issue, and then I went to him, I handed in my paper, I got it back, and he was like, this is perfect. And I was like, but I didn't have a solution. Like, I don't have an answer on how to fix it. And he's like, nobody does. We don't know what to do. Like, how do we fix this in a real?

But all of you guys did that. It's like, the theory book, it's not done. It's not like, now we've solved crime and we know how it works. It's a lot of you grappling with the fact that this is complex stuff and you're at the peak level of like, we don't know what to do from here. We're putting pieces together still, but we don't have the final answer. And there may be no final answer. And so part of it is now you have to go and find more answers.

and that's your role once you finish your undergrad. And that's definitely how I felt because all of the professors were like, we've taught you what we know, now go and try and figure out the rest of the information and put more pieces together. And that's such an encouraging way to leave your university as like go, continue, figure it out, start to solve these immense problems. So can we talk a little bit about the problems you start to be involved in? Because one of them was marijuana.

And obviously it's legalized here now. I still think that it's got the same level of stigma because even saying it on the podcast is like, people are going to be like, whoa, where are we going here? But you did a lot of research into the effects of what other states have done and what's going on here in BC and more specifically than Abbotsford. And I think that that's so valuable for people because, again, we hear about marijuana on like a Canadian level or on a Western level, but we don't get to hear here in Abbotsford, what are the ways forward and what is some of the research suggest? And research is real research where you have to look into things. So can you tell us?

less about what that project kind of pulled out for you. Oh, yeah. Well, that was, yeah, that was, I've always been interested in, I'm the drug guy, right? Like, that's, I'm either the theory dork or the drug guy, one of the two. Like, those are my two titles. Anyway, so yeah, I've always, like theory was kind of my main passion. I kind of did that, like, especially when I was younger as a graduate student. It was based on advice I got from Celia Winkler, who was.

my undergrad supervisor. She was very interested in, I guess, the legal side of drugs and criminalization, prohibition, things like that. And she told me before I came up, she said, you know, you should probably not, you know, you don't go broadcast that you're all interested in drug use and drug policy, you know, it's, you're going to, you might get labeled and you don't want that to happen early on in grade, grad school. You know, the professors, they're all criminologists. They might not have the same point of view that we have around here, you know, because there were sociologists for the most part. Well, all of them were sociologists with sociology department. And, you know, I've always, I've, like I started my undergrad as thinking that drugs, we needed to

punish dealers and users much more harshly to solve the drug problem. I think there was even at the point in my life, I hate to admit this, but I maybe serious drug dealers who were repeat offenders, maybe we needed to use the death penalty. I was pretty extreme. But then, you know, I started reading a lot. It just became something I, I don't know how to explain it. It was something I was just really interested in. It was like fun for me. So I would do, I would go to the library and do my homework. And then I'd sit in the library and I'd go and I'd just get piles of books. And, you know, they're all in the same section, right, drug section. So I'd go to the drug section.

I'd just take a pile of books and I'd go through all the books and read parts and skip parts and try to digest what I was reading. And like I did that for years, honestly, during my undergrad, especially when I was at Montana. And after reading a lot, I mean, it becomes undeniable that drug prohibition is never going to work. I mean, look what we have right now. It's not working. It's never going to work. I don't think there's a way to do it right. I don't think you can arrest your way out of this problem. I've been told by police that you can't, so I think they know. So I think generally, I think drugs need to be decriminalized.

I think decriminalizing cannabis is a good step, a good step in the right direction. But I think we need to look at doing it in a more widespread way. Now, with cannabis specifically, I, basically, I had this plan to apply for a big research grant, and I was working with a guy up at SFU, one of my mentors from there who was interested in drug use, Neil Boyd. He had published a lot in this area, and I had, like I said, I had worked with him for a little while. I worked with him on the supervised injection site research.

Which we also need to talk about. Yeah, we can talk about that later. And so I just said, hey, do you want to, I mean, you know, this was before cannabis legalization actually happened. What I noticed was in the downtown area, there were all these dispensaries popping up everywhere. And it was like you could go in and you could just buy marijuana. And as a criminologist, I was like, well, that's interesting. This is against the law, but we have all these stores selling it. and some of them have like a doctor that you can talk to

or like a guy online who says he's a doctor and they'll be like, well, what's your problem? Well, I have back pain. Well, marijuana. You need to smoke. Come on. Like, or do some edibles, something. You need some THC flowing through your veins.

I just thought it was really interesting because the cops or the police just didn't seem to care. You know, I think what had happened, I kind of knew what had happened. They had just given up because it was like, this is a pointless activity. We're never going to control this. So they just kind of let them. operate and they'd bust them periodically, but I just thought that was really interesting that they had been like, okay, we're done. I'm not going to deal with this problem anymore.

It's not, there is no solution, so we'll just quit. I think they made the right call because that kind of, you know, that creates a situation where now you've criminalized something that you have a law that's no longer being enforced and that's not a good, it's not a good thing, you know, it starts to erode other laws. Yeah, it starts to break down the way people look at criminal justice as an institution, right? Which I feel like has really disappeared, like our attitude towards, it felt like it was so thick and so visceral before it was legalized, that people were like, let's just do this. And then it was done.

And I feel like we've not talked about it since, like, Trudeau has not gotten, like, I'm not a huge fan of the guy, but he has not gotten that credit at all that he did that and that our societies have just gone back to normal. Like there were petitions going around. Oh, I know. They're still. Yeah. Oh, they're still.

stuff happening. I mean, there's still a huge anti-legalization movement even now, and they want to undo it. I mean, there's a whole variety of people out there who are coming up with interesting things that happen when you smoke marijuana that people should be skeptical about. But yeah, I agreed. Trudeau hasn't gotten the credit. Part of the problem with the way he did things was, you know, I think maybe at this point cannabis legalization in Canada, it's a good thing. But they have not, they've made some mistakes in the approach that they took, especially in, you know, with regards to a place like this in B.C. where you have this heavily developed marijuana subculture already existing. And then you try to take all of those people, you know, you try to create a whole new legal market without involving the people who were into it before. And there's probably some good reasons for that. You know, some of them were, some of them are associating with organized crime and involved in other. forms of crime, which is a problem. But I, you know, I think there's a lot of people out there who were smaller growers who have a lot of expertise. And this is based on the research that I did

initially. And I'm also doing, I was on sabbatical for the last year. So, uh, I was doing a follow-up study that I'm almost, I'm just finishing up, actually. I was just working on the conclusion yesterday. Uh, but, uh, you know, they've, they've really not use the expertise that we have in B.C. effectively. Instead, they brought in a lot of larger companies, a lot of people with a lot of degrees, but people with less experience on the ground about marijuana, you know, haven't been around users a lot, haven't talked to people who are working in the industry before. And so they made all these mistakes. You know, one of the ones that I thought was interesting, and this is, again, something that's, it's not me making this up. This is something an expert on marijuana told me,

you know, they sell a lot of it in those little plastic jar things, right? Plastic containers. Well, there's a million problems with doing it that way. First, the plastic containers have microscopic jagged bumps and edges on them. And so when the marijuana is being transported, it's not packed in there fully. There's usually space. So it's bouncing around all over the place. So it's wiping off all of the chemicals and degrading the product before it even gets to market.

There's a reason why people in the industry before used glass jars or plastic bags because they don't do the same thing. And so, you know, it was a lot of stuff like that that they were, I think they were a little arrogant. I guess I'll just say it. You know, they thought, oh, well, these idiots who were doing this before don't know what they're talking about. We know better. We'll, you know, get some, get some scientists and some people who have a lot of money in here and we'll do it better. And, I mean, do you know how much marijuana B.C. sold on the legal market? I think it was way below their estimates. Oh, yeah. I think, what was it? I forget where the statistic is from. I think it was from just this last year, but it was before COVID started.

They had a budget come out where they were hoping that they would have, and I think it was like something like 20 years. 20% of 30% or something. Yeah, a huge shortfall. I mean, we, if you rank all of the provinces and how much they sold, number one by far was Alberta. I think Ontario was up there. Quebec might have been up there. BC was like second to last.

And who were they behind? Like Prince Edward Island or something like that. And this was just reporting how much marijuana had been sold. It wasn't controlling for population or anything like that. So we aren't even, I mean, I remember looking up these stats. I think it was Prince Edward Island, was dead last. I mean, their population is like a fraction of what BCs is. And they're selling, you know, they're almost selling as much as we are.

And we know that people didn't quit smoking after legalization took hold, right? So there's still people in the black market, and that was one of the promises that were made, that we're going to try to get rid of the black market and get organized crime out of this. But, you know, based on what I've been finding, I think they might have strengthened the black market. Because now you've created this situation where you always have to go back to rational choice theory, right? Consumers of marijuana are rational actors, and they're going to do what is rational for the most part. So are you going to, like, you aren't going to go to a legal marijuana store and buy stuff that's not as good and that costs more. And, you know, you're not going to pick that over the black market.

If you can get it cheaper on the black market, it's more convenient. I mean, they don't even have stores up in a lot of places yet. I mean, Chilowack's been, you guys have quite a few, I think, two or three. Five or six. Oh, gosh, I got to keep. We just had a bunch open. Oh, did you? Okay, yeah.

And so Chilowack's been, you know, Chilowack's been doing well with that because, you know, if you're going to make this legal, you can't restrict access. You can't do that. Mission doesn't have one. Abbotsford doesn't have one. So where are all those people getting it? Do you think they're all going to drive to Maple Ridge or Chilawak to go to the legal marijuana store and buy their? No, they're not doing that.

They're not going to. And there's a lot of different problems that cause this. I mean, it gets pretty complicated. You know, like even if you do open more stores, you don't have the product. You just don't have the products to sell because they aren't as high quality. They're a bit inferior. They do other, they irritate, they put it through a process of irradiation. which we don't know, there's some debate around what that does to the product.

A lot of people think it does affect the way taste and the way the high hits you and everything like that. So there's been some mistakes made. And so I guess what I did with the research was initially I was just looking at Abbotsford and it was very kind of exploratory. And it was really based on like this previous study that I was doing, I had applied for a research grant through a really prestigious, it's called Shirk Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. They award a lot of money every year to do research. And so we put in this proposal.

They rejected it. They didn't think it was a great idea. And it was almost like dead in the water. And then the research office at UFB called. And they said, you know, we saw you put this this proposal in. Would you come talk to us about it? And I was like, okay. And I kind of thought I was in trouble. And then I sat down with him. There was like, well, why didn't you run this through UFB? And I said, well, because I was not, investigator on the study and I was working with this other guy and I said, they told me it would just be more complicated, you know, to do it at both schools. They said, oh, well, we're, you know, we would have liked to know about it. We could have maybe given you some feedback, but they're like, do you want to do something like this because this looks really interesting. I was like, well, yeah, I'd like to, but I don't have any funding. It appears I won't be able to get any. We're like, no, we'll give you a little funding so you can have a little bit of money to have some students work for you and you can have, you know, some reports made up. So I ended up interviewing 20 people from Habitsford, various stakeholders, like business people and residents and service provider types and also dispensary people who worked in like dispensaries or who owned dispensaries. And so it was really interesting research.

I was going into legalization thinking this was going to be a piece of cake. You know, I was looking at what happened in Washington and Colorado and they seemed to do a pretty good job with it. And I was like, no, it's going to go great. And like, I was getting this feedback from some of the participants, especially the ones who were involved with the industry. And they were saying this is going to be a disaster. You don't understand. And I was like, what are you talking about? How, like, it's money. People want to make money. It's not going to be a disaster. They're going to be motivated. And they were telling me this stuff early on. I almost, I hate to say it, I almost didn't listen to my participants. I was like really hesitant to include any of that in the original report because I thought I was going to, I thought it was going to kind of make me look stupid. But then I was like, no, you're a researcher. You can't just, you know, assume you know, better than the people you're doing, you know, you've asked to help you with, you know, be participants and stuff. So I, I wrote it all out as they said it, you know, did what I was supposed to do. And, uh, it ended up, I mean, it ended up being kind of prophetic. Like,

they, they really knew what they were talking about. And, uh, everything they said happened, What happened happened. It's not been very successful. I mean, it is a slow process. I will, you know, you got to give it a couple of years for it to be successful. But at the moment, they really need to change some of the regulations in my view. It's not even my view. That's according to what I know based on the research I've done. So I did talk to these 20 people from Abbotsford, did, you know, fairly in-depth interviews about what they expected to happen, ended up right. a report about that. And now I'm currently working on another report as kind of follow up a year after legalization to see what they think of what's happened with the problems are. And this time I really, for various reasons, I focused on people who have experience with marijuana. It could be that they're users. It could be that they work in the industry. It could be that they work with drug using populations. I talked to some, you know, people who do social work type stuff, people who work in drug education. And, yeah, it was, I mean, it was, it was tough to do because

of COVID, because I got completely interrupted in the middle of it. I had 15 interviews and then COVID shut everything down. It was hard to even get anything after that. But I ended up with 21 for the second study. And so I'm just writing that up now. We also, we also, have wrote a paper in the meantime, too, that's going to be coming out in critical criminology as a peer-reviewed journal about cannabis legalization and some of the stuff that's going on kind of related to almost like distortion of research type things where there's this big thing, big news narrative right now about you probably heard of it, cannabis causing mental illness and violence. It's been in the news a little bit. Yes. It's really an interesting feel, like kind of area. It all comes out of a research,

King's College, London researchers, psychiatric researchers. And, you know, they are finding some stuff that's significant, but if you really look at their research, there's some issues with, you know, the way they're approaching the topic and some of the assumptions they're making about what they can say based on their research. And so article,

is kind of a critique of that and kind of a research agenda. And then we entered that, we found out we're getting to publish, then we decided we're going to do an online criminology conference. So we put our abstract in for that. And recently we were contacted by an agent from Rutledge Publishing, which is a UK publishing group. Pretty prestigious. And they were asking for a book proposal.

So I think we might end up writing a book. about this stuff. I don't know. I mean, that's still way off, but... That's so cool, and I think that that just goes to what a lot of people don't understand about universities, which is that it's not just about sitting in a classroom and having someone lectured you for three hours, which is what I think a lot of people imagine when they're like, should I go to university, or should I not go to university, that's where their mind goes. But the fact that you can have students come in, work for you, learn about these topics, because I had an opportunity to assist Yvonne Dandrand and Annette Vogue on First Nations

court and that jumped out at me because it's like well how are we trying to fix the overrepresentation of indigenous people and what are some of the ideas people put forward and are they any good or are they nonsense and to have the opportunity to grapple with whether things are going well or poorly is something that only you get when you're in a university and when you can discuss things and challenge other universities who are coming up with ideas because people I think right now there's a lot of conspiracy theories going on is this person right is this person wrong is this true is it's not true. But one of the cool things when you're at this level is that you get to look over at their ideas and they've written them all down and you can go, well, it's clear you made

an assumption here that isn't predicated on evidence-based ideas. You just assumed it. And I can see that and I'm going to be hesitant with your ideas coming forward because you made a fatal flaw in your ideas and it wasn't founded on anything sturdy. And so your ideas are shaky now. And so the ability to do that is something that nobody ever gets to do. And you're in this position of looking at it and going, hey, we might have to come up with the opposing idea because it seems like they're evidence is shaky and that's so unique in your position. Yeah. Yeah, it was, it's really, I didn't think it was going to go anywhere initially. I thought it was an interesting idea and then I got shot down. I was like, oh, this isn't going to work. But yeah, I'm really,

I can't believe that it's actually evolved into this. It's kind of neat. And I mean, I guess it's all, I wouldn't have much to write about if legalization was going well. But so, yeah, I mean, I hope they can fix some of the issues. I mean, we do have to be patient with the government to a certain extent because it does take a few years to reduce the black market. I just, I think they do need to pay attention to some of the expertise that's out there that existed before legalization took place and maybe kind of draw on those people a little bit more. Yeah, well, and it's so cool to have, like, you here and you're from the Valley. and you're living here and you're the voice of these ideas and you're the manifestation of the counterpoint to what's going on in government and you're doing it rationally reasonably

and when people listen they can hear that you're not pushing one agenda it's these people may have done something wrong this is what's going on here chelawak seems to be doing this and it's so unique to have a Fraser valley based perspective on something that's gone across canada and had implications is there anyone else in your field like in bcc right now who's doing similar research or anything like that? Or are you the forefront? I think there's a couple of, I mean, I know Neil Boyd does some stuff. I don't know if he's done anything on cannabis legalization lately. I've lost track of that, but he studies the issue two. There's some people at UBC who I, again, they're drug researchers. I think, I don't think

there's a lot of people writing, but I think part of the thing is the people at UBC are really focused on. There's a lot of drug issues going on right now, right? you know, opioid overdose and... So cannabis has kind of fall into the... Well, I think people just look at it as like it's cannabis. It's been, you know, because it was like, it was what you'd call de facto decriminalized or legalized here for a really long time. You know, police did not arrest people if you were carrying around a small amount of marijuana. It was if you were a dealer or something, or if you were being a jerk when you were being arrested and they found it in your car or something like that, then they probably take...

But there were very few charges actually laid just solely for marijuana, right? So I think people look at it as like, well, this is just something that was going on and now it's official and the problem's finished. And I don't see it that way. I mean, there's a lot of, you know, the black market involvement part is really an organized crime, I should say, because when you say black market, that could mean a lot of different things. But especially the organized crime involvement, it shouldn't be happening right now. we should be fixing this. And it's kind of disturbing that it may have strengthened them. I don't know.

You know, that's based on my study and some of the other things that I've been looking at. So, and it's, let's be realistic. It's only 20 interviews. But I feel like I did get a pretty diverse sample together. And they all kind of seem to say similar things for the most part. So,

yeah, I think it's really important. You know, the stigma part is important too. I mean, there's a lot of people who are using it for medical purposes and they actually do really need it and actually does make their life a lot better, especially older people have started.

And that was one of the interesting things that the new users aren't really young people. Actually, like, that was kind of an interesting part of it. The rates of young people in places that have legalized haven't really gone up or down very much. Some places they've gone down. they've kind of just stayed steady and the new demographics that that's using it as older people and it's usually for medical issues things associated with getting old and it's a lot of CBD but there's also THC being used now too because they're finding out that has pain reducing properties and

can be helpful for other issues but yeah the stigma is really a problematic thing I mean it's just it's always struck me as interesting that we have practically, I mean, I guess there's a little bit of stigma about alcohol, but not, it just doesn't seem very widespread and it's like you have to be using alcohol in a particular way to have any kind of stigma about it, right? Which is crazy because alcohol, like the crime rates of alcohol, like 50% of people who commit crime are using alcohol. That's such a huge monolithic number for us to just be like, oh, I'm just can have a drink of wine with dinner. And it's like, it's all, it's like half the crime is caused by that. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, I know. Yeah. Alcohol is, it gets such a pass. It's a cultural thing,

obviously. And, but it's amazing how people just don't, you know, they're, they're very quick to stigmatize people who smoke cannabis. Even if they're using, even if they're using it for legitimate reasons. And we have to remember, too, that not all recreational users are using cannabis because it's fun, right? There's some people who use it. Recreationally who are actually probably using it in kind of a medical way. Yeah, they're just labeled as recreational users because they don't want to You know, I don't want to go through the hassle of going to the doctor and having three doctors laugh in their face because they think they need this and being told no like you should be on antidepressants or you know this painkiller or something else. I know better than you do Uh, uh, uh, yeah, I I think it's a real problem. Uh, and hopefully that gets better. But, Wow. I don't think legalization really made that huge of a difference. I mean, I think people are a little bit more accepting now for the medical use, for sure. But as far as recreational use and it being viewed in the same way as alcohol, it doesn't seem like that's taking hold. It seems like everything's kind of the same except the law has changed.

Well, I do think that it's really cool because you're like a role model for this, your trailblazing an idea that you didn't think had much merit to it. And now you're leading the way. and you may be one of the only people in BC who's looking at this critically and going, okay, we're not taught. Why aren't we talking? Let's talk about it. And I think that there's a lot of people who are probably feeling the same way, but don't realize that there's an avenue of action that could have a policy implication and your research can have that policy implication.

And again, that just goes back to you don't realize where your life's going to go and where your passion is going to bring you, but you can have a monolithic impact on BC and how we proceed with our marijuana legislation. because of your passion for research theories, drugs, and being the drug guy, we're lucky to have someone like you who takes those types of interest. And I don't think we do a good job of appreciating the people behind the scenes coming up with better ideas and trying to improve things. We just go, well, he just works at a university and he's doing research. But that research can have real implications that can make all of this different and possibly way better than it is

currently. And so we are lucky to have your voice working on this. And so just on that point, I'm very grateful. And then also, you were involved in insight and doing research into the downtown east side. And obviously, that's kind of become a pillar and an example. And a lot of communities are arguing about it. But you were part of the research. So can you tell us your thoughts and where you view all of this going? Because I hear in Chilliwack, we want to bring a safe injection site and hope. But what did you find and what are your thoughts on how we're proceeding? Well, again, when I got involved in that initially, I was like, wow, this is a really awful idea. What are you guys doing? And that was, you know, that was me being ignorant about

what was actually happening down there. I quickly changed my mind once I actually started going down and studying the problem a bit more. I was kind of invited by Neil Boyd to just be a researcher on this project. I was, you know, I was a data gatherer, you know, walking around, like, interviewing people, that sort of thing. So I was probably, I think. think I was the fourth or fifth author on the publication. It's just a government report. But it was pretty, I mean, at the time, it was very topical and kind of exciting because I'd be, you know, I'd be going down on the sky train, listening to the radio, like, or, you know,

driving back and forth between Abbotsford and New West listening to the radio, ready to go downtown to do this research. And, you know, Stephen Harper would come on the radio and start talking about how the supervised injection sites were terrible. and it was like a moral failing in Canadian society and all this stuff. And then, you know, they'd be talking to Neil Boyd on the radio and he'd be like, well, our evidence suggests that these are a good thing. And, you know, it was just weird to be in the middle of it.

And, yeah, you know, I, like I said, I went in thinking that it was probably not the best idea to be doing this. But, you know, it's really, people who haven't actually seen what happens down there shouldn't really be talking about. Unless you've actually read a lot and you know what you're talking about it. talking about people you know they they think that it's some glamorous like you walk in there and there's music playing and people dancing around and partying at the supervisor it's not like that at all it's it's actually kind of like a medical facility and it's actually not a real nice it's very clean it's well lit but it's not a good vibe you know you can the the struggle you can feel it in the air right like you can feel the heaviness and the it

you know the sadness really like because these people are not happy people for the most part they aren't they're like ooh let's have fun you know I'm at the supervisor it's not like going to a bar and that like I've had a ton of students you know suggest that even like surprisingly even like 300 level students who should maybe know better uh it's gotten better over the past couple of years it's become much more accepted but ooh like when I would talk about it in class early on even for a few years after that people would be like well what do you think drug you use is okay. And I'm like, well, no. But, you know, this is an effort to solve a problem. And our problem was, was that we had rates of disease in that area that were going towards like undeveloped

countries who are very poor, you know, rates of HIV and hepatitis and all these, you know, diseases that other people can get who aren't using drugs were rampant down there. I had to sign a risk waiver to even work on the research. I carried. hand sanitizer around with me. This is pretty, you know, 10 years before COVID, or 13 years before COVID happened. But hand sanitizer was like your thing. And, uh, yeah, I mean, it's, they are, like I, there's piles and piles of research from UBC that prove that these are something that we need, you know, to deal with this problem. Uh, you know, there's just, there's really not a lot of ways to deal with the problem. I mean, that's the problem. You can't, you can't, you can't, you can't,

just lock everyone up who uses drugs. It's never going to work. They get their drugs inside. You have to let them out after a while and they still have drug use problems. It just becomes a never-ending cycle. And so, you know, part of the role of the supervised injection site is to attempt to make them more functional. Because, you know, these people don't need to be sitting around getting just blasted every all the time. Some of them go there and they do their thing. They have a little bit. Some of them have jobs and they go work. And then they go back, you know, maybe when they have a break and they do another hit and then they can go work because they aren't going through withdrawals and that's one of the that's the thing that people don't understand about drug use it starts off as a pleasurable thing a lot of times but it turns into this thing where you keep doing it because you don't want to go through the pain of letting it go and going through the withdrawal symptoms that's so weird because alcohol is the worst because a hangover is with your body withdrawing from alcohol and it feels like no like everybody's like how do I kick this hangover And it's like, well, truthfully, to drink more would get rid of it because you're withdrawing from it.

And we don't talk. Again, we just let alcohol off the hook for having these consequences. And then we have like advertisements of like the hangover cure. And it's like, that's alcohol withdrawal cure. Like that's what you're trying to do. It's so weird we don't say it. Yeah. Well, and alcohol.

You know, I didn't know this until a few years ago, but I had a guest speaker come into my class. And she was accompanied by an emergency room nurse who deals with people. who have drug issues all the time. And a lot of people don't know this, but you know what drug has by far the worst withdrawal symptoms? Which? Alcohol. You can die.

You can die if you don't wean yourself. She can't even tell people you need to quit. They can be severe alcoholics. And she said, I will never tell anyone to quit cold turkey because that is dangerous. You can go into shock your body. You can just die. That doesn't happen with heroin.

Your body won't go into it. You'll be in pain and you will, feel like hell, but you're not going to just die. And yeah, I think it's something people don't realize alcohol is very dangerous and we give it a pass a lot of times. And it's too bad that we don't acknowledge at least that it is something that we need to, you know, especially excessive like regular alcohol use. I mean, that's... It's just so weird because like when I spend time with my friends and like more adult groups,

it's like it's a pressure thing. Like when I say now, I'm I'm good. Like, I don't want a beer. I don't want this. It's like, are you, are you sure? You don't want a glass of wine. You don't want this. You don't want. And it's like, I don't want none. Like, I'm good. And then they're like, oh, all right, I guess. And it's like, what am I doing? Yeah. Yeah. No, and that will never change. And that's, you know, that's the issue. And, you know, it's partially because people feel more comfortable if they're drinking. People feel more comfortable if everyone around them is drinking. A lot of times it's interpreted as like, is there something wrong? Are you know, are you sad? Like, what? What's, what's, what's? What's wrong? Well, nothing. I just don't want to drink right now. Is that okay? Yeah. And it's a social thing. And you don't, you just don't see that with any, anything. I mean, maybe food kind of becomes like if you aren't eating as much, you know what I mean? Like, oh, come on, eat some more food. Maybe. But like, yeah, there's, there's no comparison. So it's, it's, it's strange that people don't think of it that way. I've always been, that's one of the reasons why I'm fascinated with drug use. You know, I grew up. It's one of the reasons why I talked about the, the adverse you know I said I hadn't I hadn't really dealt with a lot of adversity you know I grew up with friends who didn't have dads or they had dads who were drinking all the time every night like and not like a few beers we're talking 10 or 12 or more maybe sometimes uh maybe hard alcohol on top of that passing out you know like in front of people like in front of kids right and so uh it's just amazing that we don't acknowledge that it's more of a problem than it is. It seems like it gets swept under the rug a lot. I completely agree. So do you think that we need more supervised injection sites? And I guess I'll couple that with something interesting. I noticed I was working up in Hope and there's like a lot of talk in their community about bringing in supervised injection sites. And one of the arguments

was like, well, this will just like, if we put it here, it will bring the criminal element. And to a certain extent, I think that that is true because if you think of a place like Agassi it's it's so unique because they have no social programs they have like their agacy community services that's it and they don't do like i don't think they do a ton of um reaching out to the community they have like no homeless population and if it is it's very like very small and so i do think that if you put a supervised injection site in agacy you would bring a criminal element to a place where they just don't have that but in places like chilewack it's like you've hit a population size where you would never put it in like rider lake or a place in the middle of nowhere.

You'd put it right in the community base. And I think that that obviously makes sense. But that does encourage criminal elements and individuals who are addicted to drugs and we're stealing to come to that community. So I think that sometimes we don't want to admit the downsides of it. And we want to say, well, like, of course a supervised injection site wouldn't bring people and it's like, well, it will because people using who want to get off are going to go there and they might do other things within that vicinity and by a block by block radius.

And so I think that we've been a little bit on the dishonest side about the fact that that doesn't happen because you can look at communities who have no social programs and they don't have a criminal element because there's no one there who's doing those things. And so I'm just curious, what are your thoughts on bringing more of them in and how should we go about doing or how have you seen it done well? I think you're a lot of, yeah, I think you're right on a lot of points there. Before I say anything, we did study the one in the downtown east side, and we weren't finding any increases, but that's because those people are already there, and so it's more of a management thing. It could well turn out differently in different places. Definitely no doubt about that. I do think there needs to be more, but I'm a little worried that we're thinking we can just solve the problem with supervised injection sites now. You know, that's what people, rather than doing something more, and that's why I said, you know, I, I'm for drug decriminalization. I'm serious about it. I see no evidence that prohibition is working. The only, you know, the only argument you can make in favor of it is I have a moral problem with drug use, and that's why it should be illegal. That's, that's my opinion. I've never seen it.

I'm just trying to think of examples, and I, you know, they're not coming to me. It just doesn't, it just doesn't. work. I mean, you can even look at, like the U.S., I mean, in places where they have less social programming, they have more severe penalties for drug use, they often have worse problems with drugs. And there's a reason for that. You know, people get stuck in that lifestyle and they can't get out of it. And then they're beat down by the system the whole time. And so that's a problem. So I think, you know, great, let's do some supervised injection sites in a very measured way. Let's study them, see if they're doing what they're supposed to be doing, just like we did in the downtown east side. I think it could be done anywhere. If we find they're attracting criminal

elements, we need to figure out how to control some of that. There's things that we were talking about earlier with environmental criminology that could be applied with that to cut down on some of the things they might be doing. But I think that needs to be accompanied by a shift in thinking, you know, on a more kind of global scale, right? I think, you know, people love to bring up Portugal all the time because Portugal has had really good success. They've decriminalized all drugs. They did it in 2001. I've looked at the data. It's pretty clear that it's working the way it's supposed to work, but we can't just assume Canada is Portugal. Canada is different from Portugal and Portugal went through a kind of a shift there in society where they as a society

they were wanting to take a different approach and I think you know that's going to be a slow process but I think we have to do it eventually because you know Portugal didn't just decriminalize drugs and magically it was fine you know I think that's some diverted the funding yeah they did all kinds of crazy stuff to get you know to get these people who had addiction problems away from their addictions or to give them, you know, to raise their self-esteem, really at the end of the day, a lot of these drug users, they've been beat down and they don't think they can do anything. And so, you know, what Portugal did was they have a lot of social programs. They have a lot of, you know, like getting people into art and physical activity and things like that that try to

take them away from their addiction a little bit. They had programs set up to get, you know, they would go in and they make a deal with like a mechanic. or something. They say, well, you employ, this guy, you know, he's got drug issues, but he does have skills to be a mechanic. Would you employ him for a year and see if it works out? We'll pay half his salary. If you pay the other half, will you try it? And, you know, a lot of business owners are willing to take that kind of risk. So they, you know, they instituted some of that stuff over there. And it, you know, it seems to really have made a difference. It seems to be what you need to do. but I just I just think you know right now it's funny to hear people try to defend prohibition it's like I just don't see how you do it I mean look at what's happening you know we have an overdose epidemic Canada has some of the highest rates of young people using drugs in the world like you know prior to legalization Canada had the highest rate of young people using marijuana in the compared to all the other countries even the

U.S. I think they were above the U.S. too. U.S. was quite high. Is that what prohibition was supposed to do? Was it supposed to make people use more drugs? I mean, you know, since drug prohibition over the years, all it's given us is we've got drugs that are cheaper. We've got drugs that are now more powerful, right? Because that's part of what happens during prohibition. It's, again, going back to rational choice theory, you know, you can even relate it back to stuff that went on during alcohol prohibition. You know, if you're a user, let's say, let's say we're living during alcohol prohibition. If you're a alcohol user, what kind of alcohol are you going to go by during alcohol prohibition? What are you going to drink? What's the most concentrated kind

called? Like Everclear or something really strong with a high proof. Now, why are you going to do that? Because you can only get a little bit of it. Yeah. And you can hide it. You're not going to be running around with 12 pack of beer when it's illegal because you have all this illegal substance. Dealers aren't going to want to sit there with all this, you know, alcohol that isn't easy to transport. And so when you prohibit something and you actually enforce the law, the drugs start to become stronger. And if you think about it, you can see this in every, you know, just think about it for a second, every type of drug. Okay, so let's go back to Prohibition, what were the most popular types of. of drinks. Well, cocktails became very popular. Hard alcohol was very popular. Cider, beer, all that stuff, low alcohol percentage, not as popular anymore. Let's go for fentanyl and heroin. We start out with heroin. Eventually, we move up to fentanyl. And that becomes, now that's... And then car fentanyl. Yeah, and it just keeps going. You can see this with some of the designer drugs that are coming out now, synthetic sorts of drugs.

each generation gets more and more powerful. I mean, it's to the point now where you can just, it's like fentanyl, you can just throw stuff in, you know, just a little bit and it, you know, it's enough for hundreds of people. When police officers are in danger going into these buildings

because a little speck of fentanyl in the air can impact them and their ability to operate and they have to wear suits to try and protect themselves and masks. Yeah. And so it just, you know, even if you want to talk about cannabis, look at what happened with cannabis, marijuana.

We have something called beauty. Hach oil. We have shatter of butter. I mean, this stuff is like sometimes 70, 80% THC. You know, the most concentrated flour marijuana you're going to get is probably 30% maybe. I mean, there's probably something stronger, but it'd be extremely uncommon. And, you know, that's what it's gotten us. It's gotten us more concentrated drugs rather than doing what it was supposed to do. I mean, what's popular to, you know, if you just think about alcohol now, what do people drink now? Mostly beer, I guess. Right. And it's the weak, it's almost the weakest form of alcohol you can buy. Well, there's a reason for that because that's, it's enjoyable, right? You don't take a shot

and it's done and you kind of feel funny afterwards. You can slowly drink a beer and it's a okay feeling, right? And so it works the same way with other drugs too. And I mean, this is all based on economic theories, right? There's an interesting theory. It wasn't developed for drugs. It was developed for basically products. It was called the Elkian-Ellen-Elechian theorem. Elkian-Alan theorem. And it suggests that

high you know, it's an economic theory about what kind, you know, that you're going to want to ship away your highest-priced goods because you're going to make more money off of them, that sort of thing. And then someone applied it to Prohibition. They came up with this iron law of prohibition, what's called. And basically

the idea is that if you have Prohibition, the law is enforced, you're going to end up with stronger and stronger drugs. And that's not what we want to happen. So, you know, anyone who has to, anyone who wants to defend prohibition has to deal with all that stuff. And I just don't see how you do it. Well, and I'm so grateful to have someone who started on the other side of the spectrum and worked their way over to where you are now. It's like, it's perfect because good research should be done by somebody who goes in with their bias and then comes out with the exact opposite of what they would have liked to have found. Like, you've demonstrated, you've said, like, I had.

this position when I saw it and now I'm way over here because of the evidence and the evidence moved me from here to here and I think the problem we run into with drugs is kind of the same one we run into with abortions is nobody wants to promote more of like we're not like go out everybody go have one whenever you want like after you get a massage going like that's not what we're doing but it feels that way when we're saying it's okay yeah and that's where people have that reaction to drugs and it has that reaction to allowing people to have abortions as we don't and I know people who've had multiple abortions and they don't even view it as a thing anymore and it's like that's that's probably too far because we need to have some sort of moral understanding of what

world we live in and then we try and help people going through that like we've said nobody in when you hit that point of drug use you're not enjoying yourself anymore you're living you're surviving and you're the place you're in is not like a party area anymore it may have started there but it doesn't end there and so we have to let people have their morals but start to understand the evidence and move them over with the evidence you've just provided is just like what evidence can you prove that Prohibition works? And that's where the Conservatives have a real hard time listening to the evidence because it goes against their morals.

And it's like it's fine to keep your morals and we shouldn't advocate more drug use, but we should advocate for proper use and more appropriate use so we can have this under control. And so people who need help aren't afraid to talk about it. And that's where I think we're going through that cultural shift of, let's talk about it. Let's have the conversation, the uncomfortable conversation. And I think for some people, they're starting to push drug use and say, like, it's okay. Anybody who uses drugs is fine. And it's like, no, we want to get them away from it, but we want to treat them with dignity and respect. And I think that that's so all complex that people can simplify your idea of like, oh, you're pro drugs. And it's like, well, that's not what I'm really arguing. So I think that it's really good to have you on to offer all these nuances and to lay out a sturdy evidence-based argument for removing this prohibition. Yeah, I think the comparison to abortion is perfect. I mean, you know, I'm pro choice because I think it's ridiculous beyond belief that a male should tell a female what she can do with her body. I don't know how these politicians can sit there and do that because it's usually

old white men who are making these decisions and that's, it's just crazy to me. And at the end of the day, like, it's, like, I, I, I, I, I, I was, I was raised in a very conservative place. I sometimes come off as a liberal, uh, especially if I'm around more conservative people, but then I'll be hanging out with liberal people and they'll call me a conservative. And so I guess, I'm just right, I guess. So, okay. Uh, but, you know, at the end of the day, you're, you're, you're totally allowed to have moral issues with drug use. I do too. I, I, I never want my daughter to get into that kind of stuff, uh, you know, especially the harder. stuff, just like I wouldn't, I don't want her to grow up to be an alcoholic or to abuse

alcohol because I'm worried about her safety and a million different other things and her health and everything. But it's a practical thing. You know, it's kind of the same thing with abortion. If you outlaw abortion, you don't allow people to have it. Guess what? They're going to go have abortions anyway and they're going to be dangerous and, you know, wealthy people will be able to get them because there's going to be a doctor somewhere if you have enough money who will do one on the down low, right? But it's not going to control the It's a practical issue, right? It's a practical thing.

You've got to think about it practically. Morals are great, but that's kind of like, well, here's my theory. Okay, well, what are the practical implications of your theory? And it works the same way with drugs. You know, we tried this prohibition thing. I don't see how anyone could argue that it's worked very well. Like, I don't see the adjustments that you make to make it work very well. And so what's the solution?

Well, it's to do something else. And I, you know, morals are fine. You can be anti-abortion and still think, like, that's a decision someone else makes. I think you can even do it if you're religious. Because, you know, I was raised in the Lutheran Church and I went to, you know, I went to Bible study and I, you know, I had to go through confirmation, which are like classes you take and learn about the Bible and things like that. one thing I learned all the time was that, you know, the person who judges people, that's God. That's not for us to do. And so I think you can be against abortion and still be pro-choice.

You can be against drug use and still think prohibition is a ridiculous waste of time. They're two separate things, right? Yeah, but it takes that mind of being able to see where both are coming from in order to grasp that. And I think that that's where university comes in and teaches you that there are so many different levels of a perspective. and both can be valid and they can contradict each other and you can still live with that and that's where I think the scientific movement fails a lot of people is because science is about one thing is one thing

and it can't be itself and its opposite at the same time but human beings we do that all the time we say all the time I'm really going to stop eating cake now and I'm going to be healthy and I'm going to get on my diet and we do the exact opposite the next day and we are contradictory to creatures and when you can use that contradiction to say I am morally against this

But at the same time, I understand that the evidence says this and I'm going to follow the evidence and I'm still going to be anti in my morals, but pro this in my policy making decisions. That is a lot of nuance for an individual. And that can be really hard for people to get their hands on. And so it's great to have brilliant minds like yourself who are able to lay this out for people. Well, thanks, man. I appreciate. It's nice to have your viewpoint appreciate it because it's not always like that. But yeah, yeah, I hope things can eventually.

change and, you know, we can start dealing with this problem a little bit better. I mean, I really think that, you know, some of the problems we have with homelessness, even some of the problems we have with mental illness, I think they would be a lot better if we did away with drug prohibition. I also think, you know, if you want to get into this part of it, uh, I think the police get an unfair, uh, job to do when they're asked, hey, why don't you go deal with these people who, you know, are on drugs and have mental problems? Why don't you just go, handle it as well, you know, we haven't trained you much for this and you're not an expert in mental illness or drugs, but go, you know, go deal with them. That's not fair, you know. I mean, I'm, I'm hoping we'll move towards the model. Like, there's a lot of places doing, there's some places doing in the U.S. I think, I think actually BC is trying it, uh, to a certain extent, but they have people who go with the police who know nurses. Yeah. Well, even, I've even, uh, encountered, I think it's the angel program or something like that. It's called in Abbotsford. Uh, But basically, you get a person who has experience with drug use.

A lot of times they might be former addicts who have gotten cleaned up and gotten some education. And they actually go with the police to help try to handle the situation. You know, if they have a person who they know is using a lot of drugs and they might have mental problems, they send this person in rather than the police officer, we shouldn't be asking the police to do. You know, this contributes to all the negative stuff that the police have to deal with right now. If you look at these cases that have been in the news, Eric Floyd, what are the other ones, Brianna Taylor. What about the one in that Kelowna here?

Oh, which one? She was dragged down the hallway out of the door by a police officer. Yeah, I heard about that. Yeah. You know, how many times do drugs have a role that they're playing? And I'm not, I don't want to give the police officers a complete pass. I don't agree with that point of view either. But I think we got to take a step back and.

look at what we're asking them to do, you know, we're being unreasonable. They can't fix every single problem by themselves. And if they're not trained to do it, they're going to do the best they can with it. And yeah, and I think, you know, if you look at these cases, a lot of times the universal thing is that these people have drug issues and the police maybe didn't know how to handle it the right way. I think that's all, it seems like that's always a factor. So, you know, I think if we did away with prohibition, I think it's not going to fix everything, but like, I I think it would make, I think people would be shocked at how many other things might get better, you know. I think it really would have an impact if we do it the right way.

Completely. Yeah. I cannot believe how much content has been in this. We're going to have to do this again when you write your book on marijuana and where that's at. And when you're done your other paper, we've just done over three hours. Wow, that went by really quick. Yeah. And we just got right into the policy implications and that was fantastic.

I really appreciate you coming on. I think that you've shown a lot of important characteristics that of having an opinion and moving over to another position based on the evidence. I think that that's something people can really get out of this and realizing that we aren't the person we think we are until we become that. You started out and you were like, I'm not a theory person and now you are the theory person and that's what you're known for. And so I think that those developments are really important for people because it's often that we say we aren't the thing that we could become. and I think you're a really good example of that. I think you're passionate about what you do and I think people need to figure out what they're passionate about

and go and chase that and share that with the world. So I'm really grateful to have had you on. Well, I appreciate being on thanks. This went by really quick. And I just want to say, you know, I'm not just speaking for myself. I'm speaking for a lot of the people I know at UFV and the Krim Department.

We're really proud of like how, you know, the stuff you're doing, the things you've done since your degree, and how, you know, even how you talked about how you changed from your first year to your third year, you don't understand how nice that is to hear for us as teachers because it, you know, sometimes you don't know if you're really making much of a difference with people, but it's great to just see you doing this stuff. I think this is a great idea to do a podcast like this.

I think it seems like it's going really well. So just congratulations on everything you've been able to do. You know, I'm very proud of you. Well, it's because of mentors like you, and I sincerely mean that all of the professors I had there taught me something, and you really exposed me to being pushed beyond what my brain thought it was capable of and saying, I'm not a theory person, and now I definitely respect all the work you've put into it, and I really think you show a positive side of theory in comparison to the previous books we've seen. So it's really great to have someone bring that forward. Thank you. Thanks. Thank you.