Canadian Gun registry hits rough waters

[Toad]

From Gman's link:

"One man is murdered with a firearm every 3 days.  One woman is murdered with a firearm every 9 days.

One man is murdered with a knife every 5 days.  One woman is murdered with a knife every 10 days."

The Canadians seem to have that "sharp instrument" thing under control.  Not like the Brits with 3X the "sharp instrument" homicide when compared to their firearm homicide.

You'd think the Brits would really be working on that "sharp instrument" homicide rate but they seem oblivious to it.

[beet1e]

Mr. Toad is right. Our sharp instrument homicide rate is far in excess of the homicide rate by firearms. I will write to Home Secretary, David Blunkett, recommending that more guns be allowed into circulation amongst the general public in the hope that firearms related homicides will exceed 300 annually. (5% of the US tally) That way, the sharp instrument homicide rate will be on a par with firearms homicides.

[AKDejaVu]

I find it ironic that the British "need" sharp instruments for food preperation when everyone knows that British cuisine has killed more people than knives and guns combined.

BTW Pongo... excellent post.  I bet that wasn't easy.

AKDejaVu

[Toad]

Gee, Beetle. I thought from your posts you were one of those "if only ONE life is saved, all this inconvenience and restriction is worth it."

Yet now you want to put more guns into circulation rather than REDUCE the number of "sharp instruments" that are involved in some many homicides in your country? (yes, I saw the rolleyes)

Come, come, come. Let's be consistent here. Aren't you the one saying you must reduce guns in circulation to reduce firearms homicides?

Would this not also be true of "sharp instruments?" Wouldn't you need to reduce the number of those in circulation to reduce "sharp instrument" homicide?

Because if you can eventually reduce all dangerous objects to zero... make a "nerf" society if you will..... then criminals will stop killing people altogether, right? They wouldn't slug their fellow man over the head with a rock like Cain did to Abel, would they?

Oh... wait....... that was the rock's fault, of course.

[Pongo]

Thats just National Rock Association retoric.

[Toad]

Like it or not, it takes a human losing control of his anger, losing control of his soul even, to kill another human being in a homicide situation.

The implement used is a distant second to that failure.

[beet1e]

Mr. Toad - OK, so why is your very own president Dubya going to so much trouble to ensure that Iraq does not have stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction? After all, people kill people. It's not the fault of sarin/tabun/VX gases.  << another rolleyes.

Indeed, to use Lazs's logic, the world should be a safer place if every nation is armed to the teeth. So why doesn't Dubya furnish Iraq with nuclear weapons? More nukes = less wars? Or, how about "More Nukes, Fewer Wars. Genocide: Understanding Genocide and Nuke/WMD Control Laws (Studies in Law and Economics)"    <

[Toad]

LOL, I edited that post immediately just for you. Right after I posted it I thought "I better add 'in a homicide situation' for Beetle. Otherwise he'll make some silly association between Jack the Ripper killing a hooker with a sharp instrument and a nation attacking another nation in an attempt to make them look like the same thing."

Tell me, if Hussein uses his chemical scuds against another sovereign nation, would it count in the "homicides per 100,000" stats for Iraq?

[lazs2]

gee beetle... I think ya gotta admit that the world was a safer place when it wasn't just the bad guys who had nukes?   If yu look at the present situation... we are treating nukes kinda the same now... they are in the hands of the good guys but we are taking em away from the bad guys...

still... you seem to be evading toads question...  wouldn't some sensible knife control prevent the needless slaughter in limeyland?  I mean... do it for the children... you could simply ban em and allow em only at "home office" approved eateries... knife collecting preverts could have "knife clubs" where the pervs could go to fondle their knives.   Surely you are not oppossed to some sensible legislation?

I bet that somebody with a knife would think twice about attacking a concealed carry permit owner... they do here.   That is our form of "knife control".   that and not being able to take even a nail file on an airplane.
lazs

[beet1e]

ROFL! Mr. Toad.  

Lazs - Our Home Office has stats on US homicides. Does your Bureau of Justice have stats on Britain's knife homicides?  -would love to see, because you sound like you're talking out of your arse.  

[beet1e]

Mr. Toad!  Quite a few people are fond of citing a "sharp objects" homicide crisis in Britain, including yourself. Just to set the record straight, I revisited that Bureau of Justice website which gives details of homicides by method used. In the years 1976-2000, the US experienced at least 2,000 homicides a year by knives, and sometimes almost 5,000. I think you and Lazs would agree with me that a knife is a "sharp instrument". Seems like your sharp instrument problem over there is worse than ours! LOL!  Just setting the record straight.  To paraphrase the bible (Matthew Ch.7) you should first remove the plank from your own eye, and then you may be able to see well enough to remove the speck of sawdust from mine.  :D

Indeed, it seems like you have a "blunt object" crisis, as the number of US homicides with a "blunt instrument" exceeds the total number of UK homicides by any method for most years.

Bureau of Justice URL: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/weapons.htm

Well, must dash. I've been promised a nice roast beef dinner tonight. It will be good. I wish you could be here to join us.

Toodle-Pip!   :D

[Nashwan]

you could simply ban em and allow em only at "home office" approved eateries

It sounds silly, but that's because it is silly.

If you can't come up with a sensible way of banning sharp objects, it's because no-one can.

Unlike guns, they are absolutley necessary.

Humans have been using sharp objects for the past million years or so.

As I said before, everybody here owns and uses sharp objects on a daily basis. Most do not own or use guns regulary.

Guns are also far more lethal than knives. In America, where guns are (almost) freely available, guns are used for several times as many murders as knives are, despite the fact there are many times as many knives in use.

Many countries have banned or severly restricted guns, non have banned knives. That's because it isn't practical, and your joke suggestion remains just that, a joke.

Like it or not, it takes a human losing control of his anger, losing control of his soul even, to kill another human being in a homicide situation.

The implement used is a distant second to that failure.

Lose control of your anger with you fists and you are likely to hurt someone. Lose control of your anger with a gun and you are likely to kill them.

The number of people murdered during an argument or act of revenge in England and Wales was 254. In the US it was just over 4000, a rate  2.5 times that of the UK.

Take out the guns from the US figure, and the rate is almost exactly the same as the UK.

Are you seriously saying you wouldn't be more concerned if you got in to an argument and the man pulled a gun on you, rather than simply put up his fists?

If you want to defend yourself and your family, why do you need a gun, as according to your theory a knife or rock is just as effective a weapon?

[Toad]

Didn't intend to have a total hijack of Pongo's thread, which seems to me is more about total government incompetence and the results of attempting "gun control" in that case.

I was actually just mirroring a anti's behavior.

Look for replies in another thread.

Apologies, Pongo.

[GRUNHERZ]

So you are telling me that Canada is spending 1 billion a year to register and keep track of guns in the hands of law-abiding (by default) citizens while they only spend 1.7 billion over three years on national defense. What on earth are you people thinking?  I bet those few snipers in Afghanistan were the whole Canadian army. And didnt the Canadian government reject a US request to award some combat performance and bravery medals to that unit because it could be seen as "militarism" in sensitive Canadian minds?

[lazs2]

beetle... our government doesn't track stats in england because... well.... we just don't care what you do..  we don't have the same envy problem that you do.    You also seem to freely mix total homicides and homicides per capita figures.. kinda hard to follow.   maybe you could do the math for me and compare our allmost 300,000,000 people with your less thatn 50,000,000?   Also... you might compare ease of getting away with crime... seems that for being on a little tiny island that you can't even get off of without permission... your criminals are acting rather brazenly... here... serial killers can live in a car and travel freely within an area that would stagger a brit.  

but yeah... I shouldn't have taken the bait but beetle hijacks every thread with a his busybody "home office" nanny post.    
lazs