Sunday, August 22, 2010

Guns In The GTA

The T.O Star has produced the map above of GTA firearm licence holders as a percentage of the population, by postal area. The numbers for Stouffville are so high because--so I hear at least--the farmers out there need fire arms to guard their crops. Steve Earle explains.

26 comments:

ridenrain said...

I guess since the criminals hacked the registry so often, they might as well report on who owns what for average folks to worry about.

Rotterdam said...

All the more reason to abolish the registry.
Stoufville law abiding farmers have a high rate.
Jane Finch has a low registration rate.
Where would you feel safer?

Gene Rayburn said...

The previous two talking points have been brought to you by Douchebag Wine.

"For when you only have straw men to back you up."

ridenrain said...

I guess shooting deaths have all but vanished since the gun ban, right?

偉DimpleHolloway043昀 said...

這個部落格好好好~棒棒棒.................................[/url]...............

RuralSandi said...

Oh for heavens sake ridenrain - do you always have to act the fool?

I know farmers who still use a scarecrow and donkeys. Yup, and it works.

We've been have real problems with wolves and coyotes, running through town as well - no rabbits, missing cats galore. Well, wolves and coyotes are deathly afraid of donkeys, so some farmers rent donkeys to protect their hen houses, etc. - it works.

nike said...

Articles are meaningful, and your blog is nice!
Cheap Nike Air Jordan Shoes LV JeansEvisu JeansRed Monkey JeansDolce Gabbana JeansAbercrombie Fitch JeansCoogi JeansBbc JeansArmani JeansArtful Dodger JeansAfflication JeansBape Jeans

蒲亮奇 said...

很精彩的部落格 期待你的繼續加油..................................................

Tof KW said...

Rotterdam said...Stoufville law abiding farmers have a high rate.
Jane Finch has a low registration rate. Where would you feel safer?


Jane/Finch ...because statistically speaking crime rates are higher in rural areas by proportion. Confirmed by StatCan (get the info while it's still accurate). Less cops and much greater response times; so less chance of getting caught.

This has always been the case, even Sherlock Holmes pointed this out to Watson in "The Adventure of the Copper Beeches". When riding by train through the countryside, Watson made the comment about the feeling safer there than in the confines of Baker St.; to which Holmes countered with his anxieties ...backed by the truth of the matter.

Gayle said...

"I guess shooting deaths have all but vanished since the gun ban, right?"

Yup.

Just like the DNA data bank and the sex offenders registry and completely eliminated sexual assaults.

And how increasing sentences for certain crimes has completely eliminated those crimes.

ha ha ha

ridenrain said...

During our latest drug gang shoot out, many of the folks involved were on bail or on parole for gun related crimes. All were individuals known to police and all had a past history of violence and illegal firearms. If they were in jail under the mandatory firearm law, they could not have been out to commit those crimes.

Gene Rayburn said...

You have drug gang shootouts Ridofbrain? Maybe you should be the one in jail.

Paul S said...

Jane/Finch ...because statistically speaking crime rates are higher in rural areas by proportion. - T of KW

Stastistically, overall crime rates are lowest in urban areas.

Total violent crime is highest in small urban areas.

Robbery rates in large urban areas are 1000% higher then in rural areas.

Weapon use (guns/knives) in violent crimes is 200% to 300% higher in large urban areas than rural.

Homicides rates are similar; with rural rates slightly higher.

Confirmed by StatCan (get the info while it's still accurate). - T of KW

You are far more likely to be violently assaulted with a gun or a knife in big cities then in rural areas. And your odds of being robbed are 1000% higher.

That's what StatsCan data say.

I can't find StatsCan data on rates of sexual assault, but again, I suspect it is far, far higher in large urban areas.

Such civilized people in large cities. ;)

ridenrain said...

I'm sure Jane Creba would agree with you, Paul.

Tof KW said...

Paul, why does Saskatoon have a higher murder rate than TO? Just asking.

Tof KW said...

"I can't find StatsCan data on rates of sexual assault, but again, I suspect it is far, far higher in large urban areas."

I highly doubt that, if not almost even it will be slightly higher in rural communities. All violent crime rates are higher in rural areas according to StatsCan.

Take TO's 2.5 million and spread that over a sparsely inhabited rural province. TO's problem (all major cities really) is the population is concentrated so you hear about the crime all the time. Less cops mean more crime, its that simple because criminals are not completely stupid.

BTW - I do agree with you there are some dangerous areas in any city (Jane/Finch among them) however the overall trend is that rural centers have higher crime rates than urban.

Read it if you don't believe me...

Smaller centres see their share of crime

Gene Rayburn said...

How are you sure Ridofbrain? Can you communicate with the departed or do you lead a school of gifted individuals Professor X?

Paul S said...

Paul, why does Saskatoon have a higher murder rate than TO? Just asking. - T of KW

Exception to the rule, I guess.

. . . the overall trend is that rural centers have higher crime rates than urban. - T of KW

Not according to StatsCan.

Robbery rates in large urban areas?
1000% higher than in rural areas.

Violent assaults with knives and guns? 200-300% higher in major urban areas.

TO's problem (all major cities really) is the population is concentrated so you hear about the crime all the time. - T of KW

Yes, one hears about crime more in a major city, but it is also true that the crime rate per 100,000 is much higher in big cities.

StatsCan is too professional to say that a citizen is much safer from crime living in our rural areas, but that is what their data says.

Lenny said...

Trouble reading, Dumstrum?

You're full of shit.
Rural Canada does indeed have a higher rate of violent crime, homicide and firearm homicide, as is made clear by TofKW's Statscan link.

Paul S said...

--> Small urban areas have the highest rates of total violent crime.

--> Robbery rates in large urban areas 1000% (yes, 1000%!) higher in large urban areas over rural areas.

--> Use of guns and knives in the commission of a violent offence 200% to 300% higher in large urban areas then rural areas.

A Comparison of Large Urban, Small Urban and Rural Crime Rates, 2005, Statistics Canada

Paul S said...

. . . the overall trend is that rural centers have higher crime rates than urban. - T of KW

Yet the StatsCan report you link to says otherwise.

. . . small urban areas have the highest rates of both total violent crimes (murder, assault, sexual assault and robbery) and total property crime. - Statistics Canada

The StatsCan report is a bit fuzzy though because they say the above and then go on to say that homicide is highest in rural areas.

sharonapple88 said...

Yes, one hears about crime more in a major city, but it is also true that the crime rate per 100,000 is much higher in big cities.

The crime rate may be higher if you consider property crimes, but the violent crime rate is higher in rural areas.

On the release you link, StatCan states the following:

-Large urban areas reported the highest rates for both robbery and motor vehicle theft. In particular, robbery rates were more than double those of small urban areas and almost 10 times higher than rural areas. Overall violent crime rates,
however, were lowest in large urban areas.

Rural areas had the highest homicide rate in 2005 as has been the case over the past decade. However, rural areas reported the lowest rates for overall crime, total property crime, robbery and motor vehicle theft.
The proportion of homicides committed with a firearm was actually slightly higher in rural areas (39%) than in large urban (35%) and small urban areas (23%).The type of firearm used to commit homicide differed widely between urban and rural
areas. While a handgun was the weapon of choice in the large urban areas, a rifle/shotgun was most commonly used in rural areas

Page two, the graph per 100 000 has rural areas beating urban on violent crime, 1067 per 100,000 for rural and 830 per 100,000 for large urban.

Page 4, there's a graph on the murder rate -- rural is 2.5 per 100,000 and the urban rate is 2.0 per 100,000.

Tof KW said...

Paul, I'm uncertain if you just like playing the devil's advocate, or you wish to hold on to the old stereotype, whether you simply enjoy bashing TO (I admit I do this myself), or you are taking this on as a right vs left argument.

If it is the later I feel sorry for you, as this is not a political argument. The various police forces in rural and smaller urban areas have been telling us this for years now, all in hopes of educating the public in order to pressure the various levels of government to hire more police officers and/or give the existing ones the resources to tackle the problem.

What part of the formula "less cops + greater response times = higher crime rates" do you not get? Criminals sure understand it. It's also the reason rural folk feel strongly about their hunting rifles. Now that's not very politically correct, but it sure is understandable to me.

Oh, and loving your '1000% higher' and '200-300% higher' stats. You and I are reading very different reports from StatsCan ...or just looking at them differently.

Now you can continue to propagate the myth that rural and small urban centres are some type of Utopia straight out of the Leave it to Beaver era; or you can face the reality of what the police and StatCan have been trying to educate us about for years now. Rural / small urban centres indeed have their share of crime ...and then some.

Lenny said...

Trouble with math, Dumstrum? 118.1 is not 1000% of 13.7.

"Small urban areas have the highest rates of total violent crime."

And next comes rural areas, followed by the lowest violent crime rates in urban areas. Also keep in mind that, according to Statscan, these "small urban areas" often include rural areas, and are generally service centres for surrounding rural areas. Places like Turkey Pucker, Alberta don't bear much relation to Toronto.

Clearly, the lower homicide, and combined violent crime rate in large urban areas like Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver, make them safer than rural areas and their small urban centres.

Paul S said...

The StatCan report is somewhat confusing in some of their conclusions. They are clear though in saying the robberies are "nearly" 1000% higher in large urban areas then rural.

Also, Quebec and Alberta are not included in the stats.

Quebec, with their highest crime rates in large urban areas, would likely affect the national data significantly. It's too bad we don't have their data, and Alberta's too, included in the StatsCan report.

Not including Quebec in particular

Lenny said...

Your comprehension skills have failed you again.
Quebec and Alberta are indeed factored into those stats. The report simply points out that the crime rate is highest in LUAs in Quebec, and highest in rural Alberta, contrary to the rest of the country.