If Gun Restrictions Work, Why Are Canada's Rural Murder Rates So High?

[Quick Enough]

Originally Posted by GuitarHero45

True but, unfortunately, none of that matters when accounting for nationwide murder rates.

In Mexico, for example, there are many cities and rural areas that are very peaceful and law abiding but the major cities where the drug cartels operate in contribute to the majority of the homicides there.

" none of that matters when accounting for none of that matters when accounting for nationwide murder rates.

Which is why "nationwide murder rates" are useless and do NOT tell the ENTIRE story.

To accuse the "nationwide" people, takes away from where 80% of ALL these crime take place.

The dems NEVER want to talk about Chicago, Balt, DC, etc.

Take away these dem run cities and urban areas and America is near the BOTTOM of the list WORLDWIDE.

[Natnasci]

Originally Posted by Quick Enough

" none of that matters when accounting for none of that matters when accounting for nationwide murder rates.

Which is why "nationwide murder rates" are useless and do NOT tell the ENTIRE story.

To accuse the "nationwide" people, takes away from where 80% of ALL these crime take place.

The dems NEVER want to talk about Chicago, Balt, DC, etc.

Take away these dem run cities and urban areas and America is near the BOTTOM of the list WORLDWIDE.

Over 82 percent of Americans live in urban areas. So ya, take away 82 percent of your population, and you'll get to a stat that serves your purpose, but in the end, means nothing.

[Kracer]

Originally Posted by TheseGoTo11

Homicide rates:

Nanavut 18 per 100k
Saskatchewan 5 per 100k
Manitoba 5 per 100k

North Dakota 1.2 per 100k
Idaho 1.9 per 100k
Minnesota 2 per 100k
Vermont 2 per 100k
Nebraska 2 per 100k
Utah 2 per 100k
Wyoming 2.6 per 100k
South Dakota 2.9 per 100k

The Canadian provinces strictly regulate permitting for ammunition and guns, while the Dakotas just across the border are open carry. If gun regs stop homicide, why isn't that working in rural Canada?

biden anti violence supporters please explain the discrepancy ...

Maine among other states has the most liberal gun laws, no mag cap, open carry, fully automatic, fed tax stamp for silencers, gun on your dash in car or truck as long as it is unloaded...According to the anti gun contingent, the streets of Maine should be running red with blood.

According to the left anti gunners and obama, 'the safest places have the strictest gun laws'

Has anyone DARED investigate the difference among states and cities, comparing the occurrence and cause of dramatic differences in violent incidents ???????????????? that would be a critical first step in approaching a solution.

The left wants us to believe the violence is widespread across states and cities.......IT IS NOT!!!! The violence is clustered. Why ignore this giant clue???????????? why mislead the discussion if honestly trying to solve the problem????

How on earth will bidens'/socialist anti gunner's proposal mitigate the daily slaughter of mostly black lives in the prominent inner city killing grounds??????

Why would Biden propose regs that have no bearing on the loss of life that is occurring TODAY?????????

Apparently the left is pursuing a theoretical goal of, no guns equals no gun violence. the end goal is no private gun ownership. Until that distant academic theoretical goal is reached, how do you justify the horrifying loss of innocent lives.

T

The left does its best to avoid approaching a solution to the killings by offering a ineffective solutions, over and over again that target guns and not violence. They avoid discussing other variables as they might offend social justice zealots. Additionally they lie about the facts and the media supports the lies and misleading information.

why wasn't obama challenged when he made his statement about the safest places having the strictest gun laws? A solution will never be reached if discussion is restricted and facts are ignored.

The media is the keystone to championing a solution and instead, echoes the nonsense coming from the socialists who want to disarm american citizens.

.

[normstad]

The USA has a gun problem.

All the spin, dodging, deflecting, and denying does not change that. Blaming the "Dems" doesn't change that. Blaming the "Libs" doesn't change that.

Isn't it interesting that most of the developed world is considered by most to be left of where even the mainstream Democrats are by any rational analysis. Isn't interesting that ALL of the developed world has only a fraction of gun deaths that the USA has. Isn't it interesting that all those countries have commonsense gun laws (I don't agree with all of them necessarily), and yet....

When it comes to the USA right wing think tank CATO institute's Freedom Index, the USA ranks 17th. The Fraser Institute (Canada's equivalent of the CATO institute) ranks USA as 6th in economic freedom. Don't pretend that the 2A is the gold standard of freedoms, it is not.

It's an excuse some Americans use.

[Zoisite]

Originally Posted by TheseGoTo11

And as much as you hate it, the fact remains that rural Canadian provinces have higher homicide rates than the US states they border.

It's a non sequitur.

(1) - Not all provinces in Canada share borders with states.

(2) - ALL Canadian provinces are completely rural everywhere except for a few heavily populated areas within 100 miles of the border. So the vast majority of Canada is rural or uninhabited. Roughly 95% of Canada.

(3) - Canadians who live in rural areas of the provinces all possess firearms whether they're permitted to have them or not. Not all Canadians in cities possess firearms since they don't go hunting and don't otherwise have a use or need of firearms.

(4) - USA has a higher rate of firearms deaths per 100,000 population than what Canada has per 100,000 population. Regardless of what's rural and what's not rural in the states. Period. How far north your states are is irrelevant.

I'm not sure what kind of point you're trying to make but it seems to be pointless. When the USA's population all declines to the same population as Canada's and becomes 95% rural or uninhabited across the country like Canada is now then you could try to make a comparison. Until then there's no comparisons, nothing to discuss and no point to be made.

.