Re: OT Canadian Gun Control

Chris Guynn wrote:
>According to
http://irawrites.com/Informationdata...dercities.htm:

>Austin is about 1/4 and only had about 28 murders in 2000. I realize
it's
>not half, but the population only counts the actual city of Austin
which is
>quite small. OTOH, it probably only counts the murders in Austin as
well...
Austin covers 266 square miles and has a population of 656,000.
That's twice the murder rate and one quarter the population density.

>How about Nassau County... (part of the New York Metropolitan area).
>Population in 2000 was 1.3 million. Murders in 1998 were 9
Nassau County is a suburb, not a city. Compare apples.

>San Antonio Texas had a population of 1.145 million in 2000 (close to
half
>of Toronto) with 85 murders. I'd say that's pretty close.
San Antonio covers 368 square miles and has triple the murder rate.
Hardly a good example for your argument.

>San Diego California had a population of 1.2 million in 2000 with 54
>murders.
The City of San Diego covers 319 square miles. There are half the
people and nearly as many dead.

>Has Toronto had explosive growth in the last 10 years or so? My source
>shows Toronto with a population of about 653,000 in 1996 with 55
murders in
>1987 and 78 in 2001.
Toronto absorbed it's boroughs. The figures I quoted for population,
area and murders are for the expanded city. 2.4 million in 247 square
miles with only 60 murders. We've got more people per square mile
than any city you've listed and half the murder rate.

>What about other violent crimes? What were those rates like? when I
>mention violent crimes, I am including things like rape, aggravated
asault,
>aggravated robbery, etc...
So you think we're freely raping and robbing each other because we
know we won't get shot?

<cam.barr@beer.com> wrote in message
news:ce8i3a$k5n@odah37.prod.google.com...
<snip>

> >What about other violent crimes? What were those rates like? when I
> >mention violent crimes, I am including things like rape, aggravated
> asault,
> >aggravated robbery, etc...

> So you think we're freely raping and robbing each other because we
> know we won't get shot?

Not at all. There are a few things to point out though.

There are a few comparisons that would help to put things into perspective.

1.) How does non gun-related crime compare between America and Canada?
2.) How does all crime (gun related or not... excluding crimes that are
solely based on possession) compare between the two?
3.) How does gun related crime compare between the two (excluding possession
crimes).

If all crime is less in Canada than in America, then it is unfair to say
that the low gun related crime rate is due to the absence of guns. This is
especially true if the non-gun related rate is less.

If the non gun-related crime rate is higher in Canada while the gun-related
rate is lower, then it *may* point to the conclusion that gun control helps
gun related incidents, but hurts other areas.

If the non-gun related rate is equal while the gun-related rate is lower in
Canada, it may suggest that gun control helps.

At any rate, the data in America shows that, generally speaking, after
concealed carry laws are passed, the violent crime rate begins to drop.
Florida is the most extreme example, but there are plenty of others.

It would also be interesting to compare the crime rates within Canada before
and after they passed their gun control laws.

<cam.barr@beer.com> wrote ...
> So you think we're freely raping and robbing each other because we
> know we won't get shot?

Nawh, I figure it is a shortage of caribou... At least on the "raping" part
of that statement...