Do Canadians use firearms in self-protection (original) (raw)

Armed Self-Defense: the Canadian Case

There is a vigorous debate over the frequency with which private citizens resort to the use of firearms for self-defense. No information has been previously available about how often firearms are used defen-

The Failed Experiment : Gun Control and Public Safety in Canada, Australia, England and Wales

Journal on firearms and public policy, 2004

This brief review of gun laws shows that disarming the public has not reduced criminal violence in any country examined here: not in Great Britain, not in Canada, and not in Australia. In all cases, disarming the public has been ineffective, expensive, and often counter productive. In all cases, the means have involved setting up expensive bureaucracies that produce no noticeable improvement to public safety or have made the situation worse. The results of this study are consistent with other academic research, that most gun laws do not have any measurable effect on crime (Kleck 1997: 377; Jacobs 2002). As I have argued elsewhere (Mauser 2001a), the history of gun control in both Canada and the Commonwealth demonstrates the slippery slope of accepting even the most benign appearing gun control measures. At each stage, the government either restricted access to firearms or prohibited and confiscated arbitrary types of ordinary firearms. In Canada, registration has been shown to mean ...

A Look at the Criminal Misuse of Guns in Canada Do Triggers Pull Fingers

Advocates of restrictive gun laws contend that simply having a firearm available can precipitate violence, transforming an angry encounter into murder, or a fit of depression into an impulsive suicide. In other words: triggers pull fingers. Supporters of civilian gun ownership, on the other hand, argue that, while criminals should not have firearms, guns are a positive social force in the hands of solid citizens. Firearms are even said to be indispensable for protection and for keeping the peace. This paper examines the available Canadian statistics on criminal misuse of firearms, searching for connections between criminal violence and civilian firearms owners. First, the paper provides a brief review of current firearms laws in Canada. Next, civilian firearms owners and criminals who misuse firearms are compared. In order to probe behind the published statistics, a number of Special Requests to Statistics Canada are reported on. The results demonstrate stark differences between civilian firearms owners and those who commit violent crimes with firearms. Law-abiding firearms owners are exemplary middle class Canadians, in that they are employed, tax-paying, law-abiding, contributing citizens. Demographically, civilian gun owners are solid citizens who contribute substantially to their communities. Historically, armed civilians have played crucial leadership roles in their communities, including protecting the country from attack. Firearms misuse is typically gang-related. In Canada, almost half (47%) of firearm homicides from 1974 to 2012 were gang-related. Lawful firearm owners are rarely involved. Analysis of a Special Request to Statistics Canada found that between 1997 and 2012, just 7% of the accused in firearms homicides had a valid firearms license (or 2% of all accused murderers). According to police, the lion’s share of “crime guns” are smuggled, primarily within the drug trade, in which drugs flow south in exchange for firearms coming north. As long as drug crime is profitable, criminals will actively bring in illegal firearms. No methodologically solid study yet conducted has found that Canadian legislation managed to have a beneficial effect on homicide rates.

Gun use in the United States: results from two national surveys

Injury Prevention, 2000

Objectives-To determine the relative incidence of gun victimization versus self defense gun use by civilians in the United States, and the circumstances and probable legality of the self defense uses. Methods-National random digit dial telephone surveys of the adult population were conducted in 1996 and 1999. The Harvard surveys appear unique among private surveys in two respects: asking (1) open ended questions about defensive gun use incidents and (2) detailed questions about both gun victimization and self defense gun use. Five criminal court judges were asked to assess whether the self reported defensive gun uses were likely to have been legal. Results-Even after excluding many reported firearm victimizations, far more survey respondents report having been threatened or intimidated with a gun than having used a gun to protect themselves. A majority of the reported self defense gun uses were rated as probably illegal by a majority of judges. This was so even under the assumption that the respondent had a permit to own and carry the gun, and that the respondent had described the event honestly. Conclusions-Guns are used to threaten and intimidate far more often than they are used in self defense. Most self reported self defense gun uses may well be illegal and against the interests of society.

Canada's 1995 Gun Control Legislation: Problems and Prospects

We discuss Canada's universal gun registration legislation (Bill C-68), passed in December 1995. It has been plagued by a variety of problems: delays in coming into force, huge cost overruns, need to cut fees to encourage compliance, massive problems with its computer systems, stubborn resistance by anti-control groups, and the fact that eight of 10 provinces refused to participate in administering the new law. To hide the overruns, the federal government resorted to "back door" financing. While the latest deadline for registration of all long guns and hand guns was July 1, 2003, it is not clear that universality was achieved. For one thing, the official estimate of the stock of guns is almost far below the actual number of guns in private hands. We explain that, like almost all previous gun control legislation in Canada, Bill C-68 reflects a persistent kultur kampf and opportunistic behaviour by politicians.

Mass Homicide by Firearm in Canada: Effects of Legislation

2022

Canada implemented a series of laws regulating firearms including background checks and licensing, references, psychological questionnaires, prohibition of paramilitary style rifles, and magazine capacity restrictions in order to decrease the incidences and deaths from mass shootings. The associated effects of these laws were examined over the years 1974 to 2020.A model was constructed using difference-in-differences analysis of firearms and non-firearms mass homicide incidences and death rates. Mass homicides were defined as a homicide due to one event involving three or more deaths.Incidence rates of mass homicide by firearm were found to be 0.11 (95%CI 0.08, 0.14) per million compared to a non-firearm mass homicide rate of 0.12 (95% CI 0.10, 0.15) per million. Mass homicide death rates by firearm were found to be 0.39 (95% CI 0.29, 0.49) per million compared to a non-firearm mass homicide rate of 0.47 (95% CI 0.34, 0.61) per million. Overall, there is a gradual declining trend in...