Statistics Canada study confirms firearms and violent crime not linked

Statistics Canada study confirms firearms and violent crime not linked

This is a discussion on Statistics Canada study confirms firearms and violent crime not linked within the General Firearm Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Garry is a Member of Parliment who has been looking after us shooters for years, this guy has been a pitbull hounding the previous government ...

Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Statistics Canada study confirms firearms and violent crime not linked

  1. #1
    Distinguished Member Array Colin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Vancouver, Canada

    Statistics Canada study confirms firearms and violent crime not linked

    Garry is a Member of Parliment who has been looking after us shooters for years, this guy has been a pitbull hounding the previous government and now working to change our gun laws for the better.

    February 28, 2008 For immediate release

    Statistics Canada study confirms firearms and violent crime not linked

    Ottawa – Saskatchewan M.P. Garry Breitkreuz says a new Statistics Canada
    study proves that hunters and sport shooters have nothing in common with
    violent criminals.

    Breitkreuz started his fight against useless gun control laws in 1994 and
    part of that fight has been to relentlessly expose the
    truth about the relationship between violent crime and guns.

    Last Wednesday, Statistics Canada released its study for 2006 entitled:
    Firearms and Violent Crime (see link below).

    It reported that firearms were used in only 2.4 percent of all violent crime
    in Canada in 2006.

    It also reported that handguns (which have required registration since 1934)
    made up nearly two-thirds of all firearms used.

    CanWest news summarized the Statistics Canada report this way: "In 2006,
    three-quarters of all violent crime victims were attacked by people without
    any weapons at all.

    Knives, clubs and other blunt instruments were used against 9.2 per cent of
    victims, while guns were used against only 2.4 percent.

    Knives were used to commit more murders, robberies, sexual assaults and
    assaults than guns."

    "In December 2006, I released unpublished Statistics Canada tables showing
    that of the total homicides committed between 1997 and 2005, only 2.27
    percent were committed with a registered gun," explains Breitkreuz.

    "Only 1.21 percent were committed with a firearm registered to the accused
    murderer, and 2.14 percent were committed by a person that held a valid
    firearms licence (see link below).

    Obviously, law-abiding gun owners aren’t the problem and yet the Government
    of Ontario and the City of Toronto want to ban the handguns owned by honest

    "Why is there a Liberal, NDP and Bloc preoccupation with guns owned by
    citizens that aren’t the problem?" asks Breitkreuz.

    "Remember that 102 of 108 handgun homicides (94 per cent) in 2006 were
    committed with unregistered handguns or the registration status was unknown.
    We need mandatory minimum sentences for using weapons in violent crimes.
    Knife and club attacks occur at a rate almost four times higher than guns.

    "That’s why the federal government introduced Bill C-2, our Tackling Violent
    Crime Act," he adds.

    "Statistics Canada tables also show that knives and clubs result in more
    injuries than guns (see link below).

    This study makes it obvious that we need all governments to focus on the
    real problem of violent crime and especially target those criminals that use
    any type of weapon in the commission of an offence."


    Statistics Canada Study: Firearms and violent crime 2006
    The Daily, Wednesday, February 20, 2008. Study: Firearms and violent crime

    December 7, 2006 - 5,194 homicides 9 years: Only 2.27% of guns were

    Other tidbit on how much it costs to register guns!

    My Fellow Canadian ~

    I once read an excellent Isaac Asimov non-fiction essay on really big numbers. Humans are in general really bad at understanding big numbers. Because of my math / science / engineering background, I'm maybe a bit better than average, but I'm no Asimov. I have though learned a few ways to help me better understand big numbers, so that I can better deal with them when I need to. This essay shows how some of those methods work.

    The initial Government of Canada estimate for the gun registry database system was $1 million. Technically, I think that's probably a bit low. Based on my on three decades of work in the field of distributed multi-user database transaction processing systems like the registry, and on some systems I'm currently working on which are of that type, I think $3 million would have been a better estimate.

    If someone from the Government of Canada can provide me with a simple accounting showing some component of the system that I've missed, I'd be more than happy to adjust my analysis of the situation to take that data into account. My current analysis is based on the numbers I have collected from the public media over the last few years.

    Given how important it is for state monopolies to serve citizens to the highest possible ethical standard, let's throw in a factor of three-ish over my base estimate and call it $10 million, to be as careful as possible.

    Now, say you had such a $10 million contract with some customers. And then, say you spent three times that: $30 million. Does it occur to you that your customers (in this case, we citizens) might be, oh, shall we say, somewhat angry? Ok, let's say it's another factor of three: $90 million. How are your customers doing now? Fine. Let's throw in another factor of three, so we're now up to $270 million. How angry are your customers now? In more primitive times than we live in, would you still be alive? But wait, there's more. How much would we pay for another factor of three? Oh, about $810 million. Say, that's interesting, the gun registry database system has, according to the CBC, cost $750 million.

    It didn't cost 3 times as much. Or 3 times 3 times as much. Or 3 times 3 times 3 times as much. It cost 3 times 3 times 3 times 3 times as much.

    That's like planning to have two children, and ending up with 162 (two times three to the power of four). Now stop. Think about that number, 162 children. It's unimaginable that you could legitimately have 162 children, in any way whatsoever. Likewise, there is no way I can come up with to imagine how the registry database project could legitimately cost $750 million, whatsoever.

    Never mind that it is to me unfathomable that it could take eight years to develop the registry database, and never mind that according to the CBC it doesn't actually work; $750 million divided by eight years is about $250,000 per day. That's right, they spent what should have been, at its most extreme, a $10 million budget for the entire project, they spent that much every 40 days, for eight years.

    Here's another way to look at it. The database system has cost about 750 / 8 = $94 million per year, for eight years. Loaded full-time staff costs in this field are about $100,000 per year. That means the development of this system employed 940 full-time staff per year for eight years. How the hell can a database fundamentally designed
    to store and retrieve 7 million gun records distributed across 3 million person records take 7,500 man-years to develop? What is this, the Pyramid of Cheops?

    (Actually, the CBC's total cost figure of $2 billion for the entire gun registry "file" amounts to about $685,000 per day, which means they spent the entire initially estimated budget of $2 million, again according to the CBC, every three days, for eight years straight.That's 20,000 man-years, to register 7 million guns. But what do I know, I'm just a software guy, I'll stick to the database system.)

    Corporations get sued for cost overruns on the order of tens of percent. Assuming my careful $10 million estimate is reasonable, the registry database is not 10 % over. It's not 100 % over. It's not 1,000 % over. It's 7,500 % over.

    It's not 10 times less than the standard we citizens are held to, under threat of criminal prosecution. It's not 100 times less. The state's standard of performance for itself is 750 times less than the standard it holds us to.

    Who the hell, exactly, do these people think they are, and why the hell shouldn't we smite them?

    Ok, I'll tell you what. Section 380 of the Criminal Code of Canada calls for jail for up to 10 years for fraud over $5,000. Applying the 750 factor apparently used by State Canada, let's just say that any politician or civil servant that is guilty of fraud over $5,000 should go to jail for 7,500 years.

    That's starting to sound like a big enough number for me.

    Tony Olekshy,
    The Sagacious Iconoclast

  2. #2
    VIP Member Array pogo2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006


    I always enjoy seeing someone use logic, numbers and irony to expose human folly.

    The fact that legal firearms ownership by honest citizens is not related to crime is obvious to any student of human nature. Most citizens in any society are honest and do not commit crimes. A minority of citizens commit most of the crimes, because they are parasites who lack in moral standards and respect for the rights of others.

    Liberal politicians, who generally don't understand human nature and live in a fantasy world of their own making, view citizens as helpless sheep who must be guided and controlled by the politician to avoid harming themselves. This view is their justification for enlarging government size and power. Private gun ownership, which empowers the individual and gives them some small measure of control of their lives, is anathema to the liberal politician. Therefore he tries to stamp it out, as we see in Canada.

    The crime/gun connection is merely a convenient fable to feed the masses.
    Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the Peoples' Liberty's Teeth." - George Washington

  3. #3
    Member Array cupsz71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    North Dakota
    Take that you anti-defense liberals.

    The study proves pretty much what most honest minority gun owning Canadian citizens have been TRYING to say all along. Unfortunately the Canadian Gov't likes to spend $Billions on fixing what they see as the "crime epidemic" in the big metropolitan centers in Ontartio & Quebec by making ALL guns bad.

    The Liberal Idealism - "take the guns away.....crime goes away..... and Utopia will prevail. And fear not citizen...sleep well....we the gov't will take care of you."
    XD9sc w/CT Laser Grip
    SIGSauer P226SCT (New! w/22lr Conversion)
    S&W 5906
    BERSA T380 - RUGER Single Six .22

  4. #4
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    This was already posted on Monday.

    Search on "Statistics Canada".

    - Janq
    Last edited by Captain Crunch; March 7th, 2008 at 01:13 PM. Reason: Add link.
    "Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy

    "A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman." - Florida Div. of Licensing

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Similar Threads

  1. ATF source confirms ‘walking’ guns to Mexico to ‘pad’ statistics
    By Ram Rod in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: January 8th, 2011, 01:15 PM
  2. australian violent crime
    By mreymann in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: March 11th, 2010, 06:08 PM
  3. Bad and Ugly: Violent mob used meat tenderizer to beat victims (Canada)
    By Janq in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: November 18th, 2008, 02:14 AM
  4. Statistics Canada study confirms firearms and violent crime not linked
    By BAC in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: March 15th, 2008, 07:48 AM
  5. Terrorist threat confirms need for private citizen firearms ownership.
    By havegunjoe in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: August 3rd, 2006, 03:30 PM