Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Guns & Ammo Discussion

View Poll Results: Should handgun hunting be permitted?
yes, unrestricted. 120 51.50%
yes, but with special testing requirements. 51 21.89%
yes, but only for grouse. 1 0.43%
yes, but within it's own season. 14 6.01%
yes, but within the primitive season 9 3.86%
yes, but only for grouse. 0 0%
no. never. 35 15.02%
undecided. 11 4.72%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 233. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #211  
Old 01-03-2012, 09:30 PM
CaberTosser's Avatar
CaberTosser CaberTosser is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 19,416
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rwm1273 View Post
Without getting too far into your numbers, you fail to show the per capita amount of guns to people.

Next you have picked a couple countires that almost have no pistols.

And you you point out that many of the guns used in homicide are illegal.

You should do some research on Switzerland and their gun laws. It has the most guns per citizen rate in the world if I am not mistaken, and they have one of the lowest home invasion rates, and murder rates are also equally low.
The Vulcan in me would interpret Switzerlands numbers and tie them to their excellent education system and high standard of living; which reduce the social woes that foster high murder rates. This tied to statistically high firearm ownership. England and Austrailia both have already had Orwellian seizure and destruction of a significant amount of their citizens firearms, severely reducing firearm availability to both good citizens and criminals alike. What you can't even find, you certainly can't kill with (necessitating other modes of homicide). Now we need to see all their homicide and suicide statistics regardless of the methods & weapons used.

If tied to other statistics such as GDP, literacy rates, firearm per citizen ratio's, employment rates, and probably a host of others comparisons could be better made. Another fly in that ointment would be how many guns are actually in citizens hands versus what each national politbureau has reported in their records. For all of their similarities, the best comparisons would be the US states closest to our own border with comparable population densities; both socially and geographically it's the closest match available.
__________________
"The trouble with people idiot-proofing things, is the resulting evolution of the idiot." Me
Reply With Quote
  #212  
Old 01-03-2012, 09:53 PM
MK2750's Avatar
MK2750 MK2750 is online now
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sylvan Lake
Posts: 3,411
Default More to Worry About

Crazy how a Liberal fear monger shows a couple numbers and gives the impression that so many of us are gunned down.

News Flash-We are all going to die.


Death Statistics in Canada
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What is Killing Canadian Men?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Deaths Cause of Death Frequency
39,290 Circulatory system diseases 1 death every 13 min.
30,481 Cancer 1 death every 17 min.
9,411 Respiratory system diseases 1 death every 56 min.
3,774 Digestsive system diseases 1 death every 2 hrs.
2,923 Suicide all causes 1 death every 3 hrs.
2,376 Motor vehicle collisions 1 death every 4 hrs.
2,317 Substance abuse 1 death every 4 hrs.
1,932 Suicide, non-firearm 1 death every 5 hrs.
1,559 Mental Disorders 1 death every 6 hrs.
1,288 HIV 1 death every 7 hrs.
991 Suicide by Firearms 1 death every 9 hrs.
985 Accidental falls 1 death every 9 hrs.
528 Accidental poisoning 1 death every 16.5 hrs.
487 Homicides all causes 1 death every 18 hrs.
309 Homicide, non-firearm 1 death every 28 hrs.
178 Homicide, by firearm 1 death every 2 days
142 Homicide, by cutting/piercing instrument 1 death every 3 days
74 Surgical/medical misadventure 1 death every 5 days
61 Fatal gun accidents 1 death every 6 days

Causes of Death 1992 (Minister of Industry, Science and Technology, Statistics Canada, Health Statistics Division, Sept. 1994); and, Method of Commiting Homicide Offences, Canadian the Provinces/Territories, 1992
(Minister of Industry, Science and Technology, Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, 1992)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What is Killing Canadian Women?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Deaths Cause of Death Frequency
36,921 Circulatory system diseases 1 death every 14 min.
25,167 Cancer 1 death every 21 min.
7,252 Respiratory system diseases 1 death every 72 min.
4,830 Breast cancer 1 death every 2 hrs.
3,450 Digestive sytem diseases 1 death every 3 hrs.
2,034 Mental disorders 1 death every 4 hrs.
1,153 Accidental falls 1 death every 8 hrs.
1,061 Motor vehicle collisions 1 death every 8 hrs.
844 Substance abuse 1 death every 10 hrs.
786 Suicide, all causes 1 death every 10 hrs.
727 Suicide, non-firearm 1 death every 11 hrs.
245 Homicide, all causes 1 death every 32 hrs.
198 Accidental poisoning 1 death every 2 days
176 Homicide, non-firearm 1 death every 2 days
80 Surgical/medical misadventures 1 death every 2 days
70 HIV 1 death every 5 days
69 Homicide, by firearm 1 death every 5 days
68 Homicide, by cutting/piercing instrument 1 death every 5 days
59 Suicide, by firearm 1 death every 6 days
2 Fatal gun accidents 1 death every 183 days
Causes of Death 1992 (Ministry of Industry, Science and Technology, Statistics Canada, Health Statistics Division, Sept. 1994); and, Method of Commiting Homicide Offences, Canadian the Provinces/Territories, 1992 (Ministry of Industry, Science and Technology, Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, 1992)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply With Quote
  #213  
Old 01-03-2012, 10:14 PM
Rocky7's Avatar
Rocky7 Rocky7 is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 5,062
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Element View Post
You've won... Hope you're happy.
Yup.
__________________
"If everything isn't black and white, I say, 'Why the hell not?'" - J.W.
God made man. Sam Colt made them equal.
Make Alberta a better place. Have your liberal spayed or neutered.
Reply With Quote
  #214  
Old 01-03-2012, 10:47 PM
Rocky7's Avatar
Rocky7 Rocky7 is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 5,062
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Element View Post
The crime of homicide is selected for two reasons. First, unlike other crimes, the definition of homicide tends to be fairly consistent across nations, thus enabling international comparisons....

Source: Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Homicide Survey; Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.; Australian Institute of Criminology; and England & Wales Home Office.

All four countries reported that...
The FBI's Uniform Crime Statistics tracks "homicide" differently than we do. Was your source using the Uniform statistics or using the Expanded Homicide Statistics (which are separate)? Do you care?

How come U.S. murder rates have been falling faster than ours for a decade?

Did you know that U.S. murder rates were higher than ours when neither country had any gun control? Does any of that matter to you?

Stats Canada tracks "murder" rates differently over time and differently in regions. Thus:

In Canadian law, murder is the most serious form of culpable homicide (the others being manslaughter and infanticide). Broadly stated, it is the act of unlawfully causing the death of another person intentionally, or recklessly with intent to cause bodily harm. The legal definition of murder and its several specific forms has undergone numerous changes since 1961.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/11-516-...147446-eng.htm

Now, what was that you were saying about "overall" rates of "homicide" and guns and "easy comparisons" between U.S., England, Australia and Canada?

It is useful to look at changes within a country because that removes international variables. Morton Grove, ILL. banned handguns in 1981. In 1982, some dummass rednecks in Kennesaw GA responded by passing an Ordinance requiring every able-bodied, sane homeowner in Kennesaw to have a gun and ammunition therefor on hand at all times in his/her house.

Morton Grove's murder, violent crime and gun crime rates skyrocketed.

Kennesaw's murder, violent crime, gun crime and every other crime rate dropped into the basement. The Kennesaw area became one of the safest, fastest-growing areas in the region. That happened almost immediately.

Hell, I dunno. Could be a coincidence.

(Read John Lott's work. And Kleck. Oh, and watch for an upcoming peer-reviewed publication by Dr. Caillin Langmann from Ontario. It'll knock your socks off.)
__________________
"If everything isn't black and white, I say, 'Why the hell not?'" - J.W.
God made man. Sam Colt made them equal.
Make Alberta a better place. Have your liberal spayed or neutered.
Reply With Quote
  #215  
Old 01-03-2012, 10:50 PM
Scar270 Scar270 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 468
Default

Anti's always seem to want to lump the US into one big homogoneous stat. That can't be done when trying to compare gun laws to crime rates, as the US firearms laws very greatly from state to state. If you actually look at crime by state, you will find some of the highest murder rates happen in area's that have levels of gun laws that make Canada look like a libertarian paradise. Washington DC had a murder rate several times the national average, higher then any state, when it's laws banned all handgun ownership and only allowed long guns if disassembled and locked up. That rate dropped significantly within the first year after the Heller case which tossed out DC's law as unconstitutional.

Florida's crime rates dropped dramatically after they legalized concealed carry.

Also to compare murder rates without comparing socio economic factors is absolutely useless, as those factors far outweigh any gun laws in their effects on crime rates of all kinds, not just homicides.

As for all those who think the pro handgun hunting side should be providing stats, that is not how freedom works. I want to do something, you don't want me to. The onus is upon you to demonstrate why I should not be able to do it. I don't need to show a need for something I want to do, nor do I have to show it's safe. You have to show me that it's dangerous, and that that danger effects you.

If we truly believe in freedom, we don't ban things we don't like, we don't ban things we don't want, we only ban behaviors that harm each other, and then we should punish those who harm eachother. If someone isn't an ethical hunter, I don't care what tool they use, they should be removed from the hunting fraternity. A handgun hunter who uses a 38 spl revolver at 200 yards is no less ethical then someone using a 30-30 at 600 yards.
Reply With Quote
  #216  
Old 01-03-2012, 11:24 PM
rwm1273 rwm1273 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Deadmonton
Posts: 6,368
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scar270 View Post

As for all those who think the pro handgun hunting side should be providing stats, that is not how freedom works. I want to do something, you don't want me to. The onus is upon you to demonstrate why I should not be able to do it. I don't need to show a need for something I want to do, nor do I have to show it's safe. You have to show me that it's dangerous, and that that danger effects you.

If we truly believe in freedom, we don't ban things we don't like, we don't ban things we don't want, we only ban behaviors that harm each other, and then we should punish those who harm eachother. If someone isn't an ethical hunter, I don't care what tool they use, they should be removed from the hunting fraternity. A handgun hunter who uses a 38 spl revolver at 200 yards is no less ethical then someone using a 30-30 at 600 yards.
I believe we need to know what they are going to try to use as an argument so we can counter it. But from what I have seen, some of these people make up stats or pull them from their rectum. Either way they are bunk, but get eaten by the Liberal Media.

I have been vocal about wanting to see some kind of testing for handgun hunting, but my reason is because I know that is what the other side will demand. So if I already have a plan for their argument, it cuts down their momentum, and shows that they truly are ignorant.
Reply With Quote
  #217  
Old 01-04-2012, 12:08 AM
rugatika rugatika is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 17,790
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Element View Post
Just thought I would through some numbers up for you guys to make you happy. I know you're going to find multiple ways to blow holes in this data as I would yours...

This will be my last post. Perhaps I've had too much time on my hands over the holidays and started psoting. I'm bowing out and switching back to the read only version. You've won... Hope you're happy. This has been like talking to a brick wall and not worth my time. I've been a member since 2008 and have really appreciated the many things I've learned on this forum. Unfortunately, I believe if the general public read this forum, it would be a great embarrassment to the Alberta outdoorsman...

Let the bashing begin once again...


Canada's firearm homicide rate is lower than the United States but higher than Australia and England and Wales...

This compares Canada's firearm-related homicide rates to those in the United States, Australia, and England and Wales. The crime of homicide is selected for two reasons. First, unlike other crimes, the definition of homicide tends to be fairly consistent across nations, thus enabling international comparisons. Second, because of its severity, homicide is more likely than any other crime to be known to police and to be the subject of thorough investigation. Thus, a census of detailed homicide data, including the type of weapon used to commit the offence, is available from each of the four countries. Whether the rates of other firearm-related violent crimes, such as attempted murder or robbery, would show the same pattern as homicide is unknown.

Overall homicide rates are highest in the United States, followed by Canada, Australia, and England and Wales. While non-firearm homicide rates are similar between the four countries, the rates of firearm-related homicides are quite different (Chart 4). In 2006, Canada's firearm-related homicide rate (0.58) was nearly six times lower than the United States (3.40), but about three times higher than the rate in Australia (0.22) and six times higher than the rate in England and Wales (0.10). Firearms accounted for about one-third (31%) of all homicides in Canada, approximately two-thirds (68%) in the U.S., 16% in Australia and 7% in England and Wales.


Homicide by method for selected countries, 2006




Source: Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Homicide Survey; Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.; Australian Institute of Criminology; and England & Wales Home Office.

All four countries reported that handguns were the most common type of gun used in the commission of firearm-related homicides. In 2006, handguns were responsible for 75% of all firearm-related homicides in the United States, 57% in Canada, 47% in Australia and 44% in England and Wales.

Canadian homicide data from 2003 to 2006 indicate that where registration status was known, 7 in 10 firearms used to commit homicide were reported by police to be unregistered.2 Among persons accused of homicide, 27% were found to possess a valid firearms license. Data from Australia show that most firearms used to commit homicide are unlawfully held by accused persons (Mouzos, 2000).
The murder rates of the U.S. and U.K. are also affected by differences in the way each counts homicides. The FBI asks police to list every homicide as murder, even if the case isn't subsequently prosecuted or proceeds on a lesser charge, making the U.S. numbers as high as possible. By contrast, the English police "massage down" the homicide statistics, tracking each case through the courts and removing it if it is reduced to a lesser charge or determined to be an accident or self-defense, making the English numbers as low as possible.
fr http://reason.com/archives/2002/11/0...ome/singlepage

Read the whole article.
Reply With Quote
  #218  
Old 01-04-2012, 05:46 AM
Unregistered user Unregistered user is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 5,140
Default

Too many stats argue the "bad" side of guns never the good as so many defensive uses of guns by good people go unreported. gun whiners always try to keep the argument thus focussed. Bottom line we are allowed to own hand guns in Canada. So what does it matter how we enjoy them? I would like the freedom to choose my hunting tool (I'll stick with my 338 winmag thank you) or perhaps be allowed to pack one when bow hunting or fishing in toothy places here in Alberta.
__________________
Former Ford Fan
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.