ModlrMike said:It depends on how you frame the interpretation: guns account for the most frequently used means vs guns account for the majority of murders.
Lies, damned lies, and statistics...
Journeyman said:In what way are they false?
Numbers, data, and perhaps psychic abilities must be your speciality.Hafoc said:They are false in the sense they are cherry picking data. You will notice they (Media etc.) use the term ….
Journeyman said:Numbers, data, and perhaps psychic abilities must be your speciality.
The government hasn't yet surveyed these other, unnamed countries, so I'm not predisposed to judge that 'they' (as in government, not media) are cherry-picking data or using dubiously vague language. I do assume that their sources will be more credible than evil, tree-hugging media headlines from these countries though.
So while I don't claim it as a "specialty," I am predisposed to wait for the results to come in...or at least know the questions being asked... before judging.
Welcome to the site. :cheers:
Response via PMSeaKingTacco said:You aren't a firearms owner, are you?
Me too. I've heard both accounts now and wonder where the final answer is with where did the gun come from.Remius said:ok, I'm a little confused.
A concealed carry holder stopped a gunman on Saturday in Florida who opened fire on a back-to-school event where dozens of children were present.
Law enforcement officials say that the shooting happened at Isaac Campbell Park around 5 p.m. when a man "returned to the park after a fistfight and began firing," WFTV reported.
Once the gunman opened fire, an armed citizen, who was legally carrying, shot him. The gunman was reportedly taken to a nearby hospital after sustaining life-threatening injuries.
According to Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale, Bill C-71 is a response to substantial increases in gun violence since 2013. It is legislation driven and justified by the empirical evidence. Or so it would seem.
In actuality, the statistical basis for Bill C-71 is particularly weak. Its reliance on faulty assumptions regarding crime and firearms breaks with the government’s promise of legislation tempered by “evidence-based decision making.”
Minister Goodale’s assertion that “gun homicides are up by two-thirds since 2013” should concern Canadians. After all, that’s quite an increase. But why select 2013 as the baseline for comparison?
2013 was a year of historical lows, a statistical outlier of sorts. According to Statistics Canada, 2013 had the lowest police-recorded crime rate since 1969. In fact, it had the lowest rate of criminal homicides in 50 years (1.45 per 100,000) as well as the lowest rate of fatal shootings ever recorded by Statistics Canada (0.38 per 100,000).
Patrick Deegan, a senior range officer, displays long guns at a gun store in Calgary in 2010.
By selecting a year of record lows, marginal increases in succeeding years are made to look like significant surges. This explains Minister Goodale’s decision to use four years (2013 to 2016) of crime data instead of the standard five. Selecting 2012 as the point of comparison would weaken the perception that gun violence had increased precipitously.
In truth, gun homicides have not exploded. They have regressed to normal levels prior to 2013. In fact, Canada’s crime rate has steadily declined since the 1990s.
A handgun ban will still be low hanging election fruit starving liberals will be grasping for.
Journeyman said:Response via PM
And while the current Prime Minister has reaped a significant amount of well-deserved skepticism, I don't feel a need to pre-emptively foam at the mouth and call everything I personally disagree with "fake news".... especially before anything actually happens.
Colin P said:When it comes to legal firearms, the Liberals have a long history of being untrustworthy and for targeting gun owners for political gain.