This is full of lies and unconstitutionality. Come and follow me on a journey of discovery....
"Known gang member": Scheer does not define gang - in fact the word "gang" does not appear in the Criminal Code. But there sure is a lot of racist baggage there. So how are we going to define a "known gang member". Scheer provides no criteria - but trust him.
And if a "gang member" commits a serious crime - like a firearm offence - there is already a reverse onus for bail. And what if a "gang member" steals a candy bar from a convenience store? Scheer proposes a revers onus? Talk about over broad.
Biker gangs: Criminal Code covers this. The Crown can prove a bike gang is a criminal organization. Scheer wants "known biker gangs" to automatically be classified as criminal organizations. Unconstitutional and completely unworkable. GOD FORBID PROSECUTORS HAVE TO PROVE STUFF.
Parole: Scheer wants to retroactively revoke parole for gang members. Again, no definition provided but also WAY unconstitutional. Retroactively limiting parole was found by the SCC to violate the Charter - sure as hell completely revoking it will be a violation
And parole ALREADY can cover this. - break a parole rule and go back to jail. One of those rules can be an usual is to not to associate with certain people or persons with criminal records. Break the rule or commit a new crime you go back to jail automatically.
These last there are just lies. A "gang member" who commits an aggravated assault on behalf of a gang will not revive a fine. Show me one - ONE - case where that has ever happened. 
Just because a sentence is possible does not mean it will be imposed. Ex: it is possible for a "gang member" to get a fine for manslaughter - there is no mandatory minimum sentence for manslaughter. Does Scheer not care about this?
These last three points are just lies. You are a lying liar.
Scheers new "policy" suggestions won't deter crime (that is what the evidence and experts say). They are also racist - by "gang" member he means young black men. Scheers policies don't fill any gaps in the current law. And they are very very unconstitutional.
But most importantly statements like this are the types on misrepresentations and lies that do real harm to the justice system. This is snake oil being settled by a man bereft of real idea. Don't buy his bullshit.
