Today they're highly opportunistic. They're taking advantage of the void created by the big arrests among the Italians and the Hells Angels. They're elbowing their way in to determine who's going to do what. It's disorganized right now, but, as Julian was saying, the Hells Angels have in a way moved from thug status to the status of band council members. In the major import operations, there can be a member from the Hells Angels, one from the West End Gang and one of the Italians around the table. Each one puts up a certain amount. That happens constantly. It's about those who have contacts. We saw that even when the RCMP opened its exchange counter. That operation was aimed at the Italians, but all the Montreal riffraff ultimately went to launder their money there.
Of course, I agree that we should ban the Hells Angels. It's also a matter of image. You have to restore public trust, but that's definitely not the ultimate solution. I know these people will come back, will become criminals again. However, they'll be less organized; they won't be able to count. Within the structure and in the context of criminal acts, the guy from Quebec won't be as close to the one from Ontario or British Columbia.
As for changes to the act, I wonder why offenders should serve 50% of sentences for gangsterism and not 100%. There's no justification for that. We've determined how much profit they've made, so why don't we tell them they'll stay in prison until they pay that money back? That seems tough, but why take baby steps? Let's bring the hammer down. After all, we're talking about gangsterism.