Canada -
News Sections
Violent gun crime rate stayed stable in 2006
Font-size: 
Share 
Print
Comments(68)
CTV.ca News Staff
Date: Wed. Feb. 20 2008 9:08 AM ET
Violent crime involving firearms has stayed stable for a fourth consecutive year, Statistics Canada reports.
Handguns accounted for about two-thirds of all violent gun crime in 2006, with police services reporting 8,100 victims of such crime, the agency said in its report released Wednesday.
Firearms account for 2.4 per cent of all victims of violence, it said.
However, clubs and other blunt objects accounted for three per cent, while knives account for another 6.2 per cent, it said.
While the overall rate is stable, there is a rise in the use of guns by young people, it said.
"The rate of youth aged 12 to 17 accused of a firearm-related offence has risen in three of the past four years, increasing 32 per cent since 2002," the report said.
Young people were mainly using them in robberies, it said.
Youths seem to be using guns more than adults.
"In 2006, 1,287 young people were accused of a violent offence in which a gun was used. They accounted for 2.8 per cent of all youth accused of violence; in contrast, 1.8 per cent of adults accused of a violent offence had used a firearm," the report said.
Guns a big-city problem
Gun-related violent crime primarily remains a big-city problem.
"Vancouver had the highest rate among all census metropolitan areas (CMAs), followed by Winnipeg and Toronto. Among youth, however, the rates of violence involving firearms were highest in Toronto and Saskatoon," it said.
The rates for the three worst cities are:
- Vancouver: 45.3 violent gun-related offences per 100,000 population
- Winnipeg: 43.9
- Toronto: 40.4
The national average is 27.5 such offences per 100,000 population.
"Provincially, firearm-related violence was higher in the Western provinces than in the East, reflecting the trend in violent crime in general," it said.
Robberies and assaults accounted for about three-quarters of violent, gun-related victimizations, StatsCan said.
About one-third of attempted murders and homicides were carried out with a firearm. Handguns are the weapon of choice in gun-related homicides.
There were 190 gun-related homicides in Canada in 2006, down 33 from 2005.
Edmonton had the highest gun-related homicide rate, followed by Abbotsford, B.C., the leader the previous four years.
"Canada's 2006 firearm homicide rate was nearly six times lower than the United States," the report said.
"But it was about three times higher than the rate in Australia and six times higher than in England and Wales. The rate of non-firearm homicide was fairly similar in all four countries."
Violent gun crimes in Canada are treated more harshly by the courts, the study found.
"Adults convicted of a violent gun crime were sentenced, on average, to just over four years in prison, double the typical sentence length of those convicted of the same violent offence where a firearm had not been used."
User Tools
Share with your social Network:
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Stories
Related Websites
User Tools
About the tools
Need to get in touch with CTV? You can email the CTV web team using the 'Feedback' button.
-
Font-size - Print Article
- Comments(68)
-
Feedback
Share it with your network of friends
Share this CTV article or feature with your friends. Click on the icon for your favourite social networking or messaging system, and follow the prompts.
Share this article with Facebook
Share this article with Digg
Share this article with Newsvine
Share this article with delicious
Share this article.
Send Email
Share this article with Twitter
Share this article with StumbleUpon
Share this article with Reddit
Share this article with Yahoo! Buzz
Most Viewed News Stories
Most Talked about Stories
The chance of the destruction of our planet is very very small with this collider, but who are these people to decide what risks are acceptable for all of mankind? It puts me at unease and adds to my anxiety. CERN acknowledges that there are miniscule risks -- they admit to it so please spare the convoluted retorts.
kc-bby
Hadron Collider back in action after year of repairs
Please Add Comments( )
JPC
0
said
0
arthur
0
said
0
JDW
0
said
0
Daley
0
said
0
Maybe we should take the 2 plus billion dollars that the Libs have wasted on the gun registry and reinvest it in crime prevention.........or better yet the health or education systems.
Simon Stirling
0
said
0
Nations with the most stringent gun control are also among the most violent. Look at the UK, NZ as prime examples.
Wake up people! Gun control = more crime.
leslie
0
said
0
Socialism is killing us
0
said
0
Bill
0
said
0
k
0
said
0
dana - sparwood
0
said
0
Pat Dusablon
0
said
0
All the register has managed to do is waste a thoudsand times more taxpayer money than it was supposed to and has yet to prevent a single crime.
RPLech
0
said
0
DW
0
said
0
Paul
0
said
0
bennji
0
said
0
Wake up people! Gun control = more crime."
Have you forgotten about our dear neighbours to the south?
Brian
0
said
0
Wes
0
said
0
Matt
0
said
0
The reason our violent crime rates are so low is because Canadians are generally good law abiding citizens.
I'd say with the estimated 7-11 million guns in Canada 190 gun homicides shows that Canadians just aren't gun toting maniacs.
I agree 190 deaths is not acceptable, but many of these deaths are from illegal guns held by unlicensed people, many of whom already have criminal records.
The problem is limited number of criminals who want to kill, and they need to be stopped.
Big Mac
0
said
0
The gun crimes that everyone (including upstanding gun owners in Canada) want to get rid of are the ones that are being committed with handguns - and by handguns I mean handguns that were never, and will never, be registered in any registry. These are the handguns that are smuggled in from the US specifically so they can be used by criminals. If you really want to stop gun crime target the illegal guns coming in from the US. Leave the hunters and farmers alone.
canucklehead
0
said
0
It's non-sensical. By definition a criminal is someone who knowingly and willingly breaks the law. Do our laws against murder prevent a higher rate of murder? How about drug use?
MKR
0
said
0
red river
0
said
0
TKF
0
said
0
brt
0
said
0
Ron
0
said
0
PBW
0
said
0
Gun crimes continue to occur in Canada because a) those who commit such crimes know they can get away with murder, either at the initial trial or on appeal; and b) because no government in Canada since the abolition of capital punishment has had the guts to fully enforce the laws.
With regard to a), consider the case of the Winnipeg man convicted of murder using a hand gun. He is appealing based on the claim that the judge did not take fully into account that he was in fact defending himself, since the man he killed, the store clerk, attacked him with a baseball bat. That he killed the clerk with a hand gun has gone by the wayside.
That the Manitoba Court of Appeal has agreed to hear the case speaks to b) above. For the last who knows how many years, the justice system has gradually been twisted to support criminals over the victims of crime, and governments both Provincial and National do nothing about it, witness the delay in passing the various crime bills passed by Commons and delayed in Senate. Witness the disgraceful happenings in Caledonia, ON, where the Rule of Law is conspicuous by its absence.
Should the Winnipeg murderer win his appeal, every citizen in this country would be justified in taking the law into their own hands, for the authorities, in whom such power is invested will not enforce the laws we have, let alone the laws the citizens of this country want.
The result would be anrchy, brought about by the actions and inactions of law makers and law adjudicators. The law enforcers are innocent, as they must do as their masters instruct.
Craig
0
said
0
It has prevented nothing. When a crime is committed, all the police can do is look up the list and see IF the gun was registered. Looking at the list does not stop a crime from happening. It doesn't stop a murder.
Also, given that criminals DON'T register their guns, it serves no purpose but giving the Liberals and their supporters a feel-good story.
As for handguns, there already is and always was a control method in place. There are mandatory waiting periods and back ground checks.
rem
0
said
0
Elias
0
said
0
Mike
0
said
0
The guns used for crimes in this country are handguns, which are purchased illegally. Registration of guns cannot stop the use of illegal guns.
Also, to those of you that do not know... handguns cannot be purchased with a normal PAL licence.
Dan
0
said
0
Steve O'Neill
0
said
0
Shawn
0
said
0
It was proven that when the FAC was introduced that the suicide rate remained unchanged, only the method changed.
It is also interesting to note that drunk drivers have killed a similar number of people per year but don’t seem to get the same attention.
This article seems to support the stats from over 10 years ago.
I want to make it clear that I believe that any death caused by a firearm is one too many and that person should be held accountable for what they do.
Lets also look at who is doing the killing. It is not hunter in the woods, it seems to be more domestic situations or gang related incidents. Registration of all firearms as not protected anyone. The guns that are typically being used are restricted or prohibited which were required to be registered prior to the long gun registry anyway. Unless the gun came up through the US illegally, then it wouldn’t be registered here anyway.
The billion(s) that have been wasted on the registry could have gone to the CSBA or police to provide them with better training, equipment and officers to remove the guns from the streets.
For anyone who really thinks that the guns laws dramatically changed with the introduction of the long gun registry, research it and you will find for the most part, the old laws were re-worded enough to make you think it is better. It is easier to obtain a PAL now then it was to get an FAC then.
ME
0
said
0
mike
0
said
0
Jim
0
said
0
If anybody wants to know the real reason we have a universal registry, follow the link.
http://www.lowe.ca/Rick/FirearmsLegislation/AGangThatCouldn'tShootStraight.html
Rod E.
0
said
0
None whatsoever. The registry is a ghastly waste of resources that could be better spent on projects that will have an actualy chance of saving some lives, as opposed to just tracking a miniscule fraction of recovered crime guns after the fact.
Dean
0
said
0
Shawn
0
said
0
While I am not aware of the Winnipeg case you have referred to, under law, if the clerk approached the defendant with the bat before the gun was shown, then the defendant has every right to defend himself if he believes that he will experience serious bodily harm or his life is in jeopardy. If it is the other way around then the clerk has every right to defend himself.
This is the same system that police use to justify using lethal force. That is why some officers are not charged when others think they should be, but that is another topic.
The same applies to everyone if some breaks into your house. If they guy comes in to your home and is taking your stuff (no weapon) and you simply shot him, you are guilty of murder.
I think this law needs some revision. If you commit a crime, especially when you bring a gun in to play, the victims should have every right to defend themselves to the fullest. If this were true maybe other crimes would go down. In Texas when concealed weapon permits were issued, the muggings dropped to almost nothing on the first day.
Enwright
0
said
0
JNG
0
said
0
Jim
0
said
0
Why? Because criminals are cowards.
An interseting link regarding Right to Carry...
http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?ID=18
Devon K.
0
said
0
"The rate of youth aged 12 to 17 accused of a firearm-related offence has risen in three of the past four years, increasing 32 per cent since 2002," the report said.
We've had this gun registry for years and it seems to have no effect on youths getting and using guns. In fact, the article suggests that the registry hasn't had any impact at all.
Maybe the article shows us the real problem:
"Adults convicted of a violent gun crime were sentenced, on average, to just over four years in prison, double the typical sentence length of those convicted of the same violent offence where a firearm had not been used."
The article flatly tells us that if you use a gun you'll get on average 4 years in jail and that's double what you'd get for not using a gun. So if you're beaten with a frying pan you'll average 2 years. The problem isn't guns and this national gun registry is powerless with other devices or tools of murder. The real problem is that if your the victim of a violent crime the criminal is going to get on average 2-4 years in jail.
That's the problem. There's no substantive penalty or deterrant to violent crime in this country.
David fm NS
0
said
0
Rod
0
said
0
Criminals don’t care about the laws. That’s why they are criminals. Law abiding peaceful people are victims because; it’s legal to be a victim, it’s illegal to protect yourself from these Criminals. Liberalism at its best, try to make people dependent on government, so that they have no means to control of protect their own lives.
Is there any common since or reasonable thought left in this country?
NO that is why we will be a police/ nanny state!
JJPL
0
said
0
Lart from Above
0
said
0
Paul Morin
0
said
0
Nickorette
0
said
0
City in Ontario with the highest number of firearms offences per capita, and the lowest number of registered firearms per capita? Toronto
That all all the proof you need to realise that the registry is a complete waste of money.
And don't even talk about banning anything. In the UK, since they've banned handguns, handgun crime has rised THREE TIMES!!!!! In switerland it is required by the government that all men of military age, shall have a full automatic/selective fire firearm in their home issued by the government. and guess what.. their firearms crime is lower than the States.
This whole article is moot anyways, since more people have been stabbed/clubbed than shot in 2006. I don't know what the hystaria is, but if it was up to me, I'd much rather be shot than stabbed to death.
leslie
0
said
0
Violence is part of life. War is all over the world. Street wars & violence will increase.
Not sure myself. I do know that the Police needs better support from government at all levels.
eskiefan
0
said
0
Jim
0
said
0
"The gun registry is working by tracking guns before they are stolen by or sold to criminals. It is consulted thousands of times a week by police across the country, preventing countless crimes through these investigations."
How does it work by tracking guns before they are stolen? Are the police now issued crystal balls? This makes no sense whatsoever!
As to the hits to the registry's database, it has been shown that the vast majority of these are automatic queries whenever the the CPIC system is consulted, even in something as simple as a triffic stop. I doubt many front line officers consult the registry directly...only a fool or a rookie would trust their life to its information.
I defy you to come up with one example of these so called preemptive investigations you claim are preventing countless crimes.
Just count me ONE!
Absolute gun control hogwash!
Trent
0
said
0
Drug prohibition, drinking age limits, gun control... . We all know that there are no drugs in Canada, that minors don't drink and that we don't have any gun crimes.
Our everyday laws for crimes such as theft, assault and murder do not stop criminals. Why do we think another lower level "control" law would make a difference.
We waste so much money trying to control things instead of focusing on the real problem, the criminal.
It's interesting, this article states that "...clubs and other blunt objects accounted for three per cent, while knives account for another 6.2 per cent..." of all weapons used yet this forum has turned into a gun control debate.
Perhaps it would be better to focus more on these objects and less on guns because it is 4 times more likely to stabbed or bludgeoned than shot.
Of course, to a baseball bat of knife owner it would be absured that they turn in their "weapon" because they would never use it to hurt anyone.
This is exactly how a normal gun owner feels.
Mel from DC
0
said
0
Mike - North Western Ontario
0
said
0
Are you saying that just to cause a stir? You can't be serious. Are you saying I shouldn't be allowed to hunt deer and moose?
You must live in the borders of a city and never leave those borders. Try visiting rural Canada once and a while. Why should rural Canada pay for the crimes in cities?
Spencer
0
said
0
The 12 to 17 year olds are not old enough to buy beer, but they can get their hands on an illegal handgun.
It looks to me that the purpose of the registry is to generate paperwork and collect licence fees.
The 12 to 17 year olds are still young offenders, another brilliant move from goverment.
Your tax dollars at work
JD in Alberta
0
said
0
-Jon Doe owns a gun.
-This is his address, and type of gun he owns.
Tell me how that protects anyone?
-Then his house is robbed and the gun is taken, he files a report with the police.
-A year later the gun is used in a robbery and someone is shot, and the gun is left at the crime. Then what?
All the registry tells you is that John Doe owned a gun and it was stolen. That's it. Again how does this help?
Does the registry show a record of all the illegal guns smuggled in from another country? Or better yet did the criminals that have the illegal guns register it?
The only way to remedy this is stiffer penalties for crime where any weapon is used, And get rid of the young offenders act. Send them to prison for 20 years with no parole. who cares if they're 13 or 30. They don't care about the life they may take while committing a crime.
Paulinski
0
said
0
Supporting registry and believing it reduces crime is a testament to how many people are looking at the world through rose colored glasses.
Maxx
0
said
0
Dawn
0
said
0
Lisa
0
said
0
I was interested in these quotes so i looked up a little more. I see that the raeson for calling for an outright ban on handguns is that a lot of handguns used in crimes are stolen from registered gunowners.
According to the Stats I saw published from Toronto it says that only 4% of guns recovered from crimes were ever owned by registered gunowners.
So 96% of the guns are coming from somewhere else?
Where are they coming from?
USA. Why is so much money being wasted on these registries and bans, when 96% of gun related crimes won't be affected by them?
Mike
0
said
0
Ban pencils to stop spelling mistakes!
It is a poor thought out plan that doesn't touch on the problem at all.
Oh yeah, and it costs Billions.
ScottS
0
said
0
my take on this
0
said
0
JessD
0
said
0
While the number of fatal shootings and stabbings amongst teenagers in the UK has reached epidemic levels, Labour Party politicians have been left scrambling for some fairly desperate solutions given that there are no more handguns to ban. Just recently in what appears to be a final attempt to address rising criticism from the media and public the Labour government announced further gun restrictions banning the sale of replica and deactivated firearms, despite evidence that out of the 10,198 reported firearms incidents last year that only 4 replicas had been used. The absurdity of this latest rule was highlighted the other week when the BBC reported that a childrens' pantomime production was forced to register its toy stage gun, and four swords with local police, even though the gun only produces a flag with the word bang on it, and the swords were made of plastic. All of this news comes on the announcement that the Labour government will be installing hundreds of metal detectors at schools across the UK to deter gun and knife crime.
Politicians looking to ban handguns from competitive shooters in this country are burying their heads in the sand, and are merely politicking to score cheap points with voters, if they think that such legislation will have an impact on gun crime. The UK's experience clearly debunks the notion that confiscating guns from legally licensed gun owners will reduce gun crime. In fact, it can be argued that no correlation exists between the availability of guns and gun crime; both Norway and Switzerland have some of the highest gun ownership rates in the world, and yet have some of the lowest rates of gun crime.
The problem of violence we face today has nothing to do with the availability of guns but what we have allowed society to become. Our politicians aren't prepared to tackle this problem for fear of contravening the codes of political correctness. In short, gun owners and their guns are easier to vilify. Furthermore, despite the fact that Toronto’s first murder of the year was committed with a knife, there have been no calls since to ban knives.
It would be extremely naive of our politicians to embark on further draconian gun control measures that fly in the face of reason without looking first to the experiences that other countries like the UK have encountered. According to a recent article in the UK's Independent newspaper just under 1000 people were shot in the UK in 2007. Given this vast number it doesn't look like their gun ban has worked.
Matt
0
said
0
JPC
0
said
0
Jody Waring
0
said
0