Rant: School Shootings

[Toboe]

Without understanding the methodology of the study (and its possible bias) its difficult to comment.  Probably safe to assume that a study on mass killings with civilian, police and joint response doesn't include statistics for no killing (the shooter was deterred or apprehended) or just the shooter killed; one death not fitting the definition of a mass killing.

Canada, being a de  facto gun free country (ATC is almost non-existant) still has mass killings with some alarming regularity.  I'm not sure how that plays out on a per capita basis.

Not about mass killings per se, but if "Intentional Homicides per 100k citizens"[1] from wikipedia is ok:

Canada: 1,6

Germany: 0,8

Switzerland: 0,6

Japan: 0,3

compared to:

United States: 4,6

So, if that is an appropriate measure, Canada is doing better per capita than USA but worse than Switzerland(regulated guns), Germany(regulated guns) or Japan(virtually gunfree).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country

[Irreverent]

Not about mass killings per se, but if "Intentional Homicides per 100k citizens"[1] from wikipedia is ok:

Canada: 1,6

Germany: 0,8

Switzerland: 0,6

Japan: 0,3

compared to:

United States: 4,6

So, if that is an appropriate measure, Canada is doing better per capita than USA but worse than Switzerland(regulated guns), Germany(regulated guns) or Japan(virtually gunfree).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country

The problem with this is that its all homicides, not just (as near as I can tell) firearms related.   Additionally, the number of guns per 100 residents in Canada is understated by by about half.  This is not surprising, as the Liberal government of the day was never able to reconcile the number of firearms that were involuntarily registered (under threat of jail time) with the last 100 years of commercial firearm import records and domestic firearm production.  From Canada Revenue and Customs, we derive that there should be aprox 21-25M firearms in Canada, not 10M.

Edited October 5, 2015 by Irreverent

[Toboe]

The problem with this is that its all homicides, not just (as near as I can tell) firearms related.   Additionally, the number of guns per 100 residents in Canada is understated by by about half.  This is not surprising, as the Liberal government of the day was never able to reconcile the number of firearms that were involuntarily registered (under threat of jail time) with the last 100 years of commercial firearm import records and domestic firearm production. 

Yup explicitly not just firearm related, since if people go for stabbing/home made explosives/whatever because guns aren't available  that's still a kill.

Reducing overall homicide -> progress,

Just changing the weapon of choice -> bullshit symbol

Going for "Firearm-related death rate per 100k population: Homicide" [1] with the big grain of salt: It's using different years (there is also an undecided cases field, which doesn't neccesarily have the same year as the homicides field, making for even more of a mess )

Canada: 0,51 (2007-2011)

Germany: 0,20 (2010)

Switzerland: 0,23 (2013)

Japan: 0,00 (2008)

compared to:

United States: 3,55 (2013)

So, if you squint enough to ignore the flaws and use it as rough trends, it is again: Germany and Switzerland together, followed by Canada, followed by USA

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

[Irreverent]

That table seems to suggest that ownership of firearms is not linked to firearm related homicides.  Or simply put, many (but not all) countries with fewer firearms per capita have higher firearm homicides per 100k.

[Toboe]

Actually, you are right, it starts with 3rd world countries with low gun ownership, that trend doesn't seem to hold for the first world countries, though.

 

[Irreverent]

Actually, you are right, it starts with 3rd world countries with low gun ownership, that trend doesn't seem to hold for the first world countries, though.

 

Stats, damn stats and oops we made a mistake with the data stats?

[#00Buck]

Pew Pew!

[AshleyAshes]

Canada, being a de  facto gun free country (ATC is almost non-existant) still has mass killings with some alarming regularity.  I'm not sure how that plays out on a per capita basis.

Mass killings with alarming regularity?  There's the parliament hill shootings last year where there was only one casualty, a Canadian soldier.  Somewhat earlier in 2014 was the Moncton shooting where three RCMP officers were ambushed and killed.  The next 'mass killing' before that was the Dawson College shooting in 2005 where only one actually died despite the shooters best efforts.  Then we need to go back to 1999 with the OC Transpo garage shooting where four were killed.  Then there's the Concordia U shooting in 1992, four killed. And tragically, the École Polytechnique massacre of 1989 with 15 killed.

That's 28 dead in a 26 year history of mass shootings (And we're stretching the word 'mass' since a couple there only killed ONE person, but they get an E for effort at least), with 15 of those deaths making up a single incident way back in 1989.  The Sandy Hook shooting in the United States all on it's own killed only one less with 27 killed. (I haven't included the shooters deaths in any of these counts)

So call me 'Not alarmed by mass shootings in Canada'.  Heck, OC Transpo had more deaths by driving a bus into the side of a moving train than it did at the garage shooting.

Edit: Oh wait, Moncton, of course Moncton.  Hang on, this post is being edited.

Edited October 5, 2015 by AshleyAshes

[Crazy Lee]

There are ideas and thoughts I have about this, and I want to put them all down, and also read through the parts of this thread I haven't caught up with yet, but in another post. Right now I'm interested in the knee-jerk reactions I've seen from the right.

As predicted, many claim that the President (or liberals) are using this tragedy for political reasons. Bull. If they were, they'd be doing something that would get them re-elected. It is the left's full belief that there are too many guns and they are too easy to get, and better/stronger laws to regulate guns may prevent such a tragedy, or (more likely) reduce significantly the amount of shootings. To them, gun laws are the answer to fixing this problem. That's not playing politics or exploiting a tragedy, it's someone who believes that their ideas will prevent it from happening. If anything, the pundits on the right are exploiting it to make the left look stupid.

I've also heard the phrase multiple times "Bad things happen" or "Bad things will always happen, you can't prevent all bad things." Okay, so should we just not do ANYTHING? That's the attitude I get from the right wing talk radio folks, and Jeb and Trump. You can't prevent every bad thing, let's not try to prevent any of it. Well, if that's the logic you employ, let's get rid of laws on murder and theft. You're not going to prevent every murder, every theft, so why bother?
No. Trying something is better than these "do nothing" assholes. It's true that you'll never prevent every killing, every bad thing, you never will. But trying to prevent as many of them as possible is better than nothing. If you can save one life, then you've done something good. Trying to lower the rate of bad things happening is always a good thing.

And of course some on the right have been blaming the usual things. I've heard video games so far, movies. People have brought up his supposed religion (though it was never stated) and the fact he was targeting Christians. Michael Savage (who's the most mentally crazy person I've ever heard) has called him a satanist, a nazi, the anti-christ, claimed he was a pagan wiccan (religion of satan). Savage even has claimed he was drugged up on legal drugs, since Savage seems to have this hate-on for prescription drugs in general.
Someone said he was a Neo-darwinist, not sure what that means but probably means one of those "evil secular atheists who believe in *GASP* evolution like someone against Jesus would". And also, apparently he's a Muslim terrorist as well according to some right wing conspiracy sites like this one (which I link to because I just found it). So yea.


Also, something for thought. Why is it that only men do these mass shootings?

 

Edited October 6, 2015 by Crazy Lee

[Irreverent]

Mass killings with alarming regularity?  There's the parliament hill shootings last year where there was only one casualty, a Canadian soldier.  Somewhat earlier in 2014 was the Moncton shooting where three RCMP officers were ambushed and killed.  The next 'mass killing' before that was the Dawson College shooting in 2005 where only one actually died despite the shooters best efforts.  Then we need to go back to 1999 with the OC Transpo garage shooting where four were killed.  Then there's the Concordia U shooting in 1992, four killed. And tragically, the École Polytechnique massacre of 1989 with 15 killed.

Credit for the ones named but you've left out more than three dozen mass kills in the last two decades, most notably absent from your list  are the Pham Liu incident in Edmonton 2014 (7), Taber Alberts (1/4) 1999 Sydney River Macdonalds 1992 (3/1), Mayertthorpe (4) RCMP killings 2005,  Shafia Kingston 2009 (4), Ottawa Valley 2015 (3), Just desserts Toronto 1994 (1/2),  Lortie Quebec Ciry 1984 (3/13)The Surry Six 2008 (6).  I suspect the omission has more to do with regional  under-reporting of news  and Ontario-centric news cycles. While still low, its a surprising number of mass kills in Canada.  (dead/wounded) On average, 1-2 per year for the last two decades.  This may not be alarming, so much as it is concerning; poor choice of words on my part.  My bad.

 

The problem with this sort of ad-hoc reporting is that it takes a "killing is killing" approach and does not examine the underlying root causes (crime, religion, mental illness, ideology, terrorism, revenge etc) nor differentiate between guns used as a cause of death or guns used leading to deaths. 

Couple of interesting links (by no means complete)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting#Canada
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:School_killings_in_Canada
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Spree_shootings_in_Canada

 

 

 

 

[Machine]

Also, something for thought. Why is it that only men do these mass shootings?

Golena postal facility shootings

Halifax mass shooting plot

Edited October 6, 2015 by Machine

[AshleyAshes]

Credit for the ones named but you've left out more than three dozen mass kills in the last two decades, most notably absent from your list  are the Pham Liu incident in Edmonton 2014 (7), Taber Alberts (1/4) 1999 Sydney River Macdonalds 1992 (3/1), Mayertthorpe (4) RCMP killings 2005,  Shafia Kingston 2009 (4), Ottawa Valley 2015 (3), Just desserts Toronto 1994 (1/2),  Lortie Quebec Ciry 1984 (3/13)The Surry Six 2008 (6).  I suspect the omission has more to do with regional  under-reporting of news  and Ontario-centric news cycles. While still low, its a surprising number of mass kills in Canada.  (dead/wounded) On average, 1-2 per year for the last two decades.  This may not be alarming, so much as it is concerning; poor choice of words on my part.  My bad.

 

The problem with this sort of ad-hoc reporting is that it takes a "killing is killing" approach and does not examine the underlying root causes (crime, religion, mental illness, ideology, terrorism, revenge etc) nor differentiate between guns used as a cause of death or guns used leading to deaths. 

Couple of interesting links (by no means complete)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting#Canada
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:School_killings_in_Canada
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Spree_shootings_in_Canada

I'll concede the 2014 Edmonton shooting, though I have some doubts as to weather mass murders within families count.  Even in the United States those seem to outnumber your typical mass killings.  Sydney River was a robbery gone wrong rather than a mass murder attempt.  The Mayerthorpe was a shoot out with police at a grow-up, that really doesn't count.  It's not like Moncton where the shooter specifically lured police for no other reason than to kill police. The Shafia family murders were a DROWNING. (Though one of the worst examples of domestic violence in our history).  The Ottawa Valley 2015 was a rather specifically targeted act of domestic violence as well, though it did involve a firearm.  Just Desserts Toronto was ALSO a robbery (It's apparently a bad idea to punch the guy with the shotgun rather than give your wallet to him).  Denis Lortie, okay, you got me there, totally your typical mass shooting, though it's just farther back than I wanted to go, but if we're going as far back as 31 years ago.  The Surry Six was a targeted series of gang killings so it also doesn't fit the description.

Golena postal facility shootings

Halifax mass shooting plot

However, they do raise an interesting point.  Women are disproportionately underrepresented as the perpetrators of mass shootings, but there's also a racial oddity to it.  All races except for whites and blacks are disproportionately underrepresented in the demographics of mass shooters.  They are almost all white males and failing that, black males, rarely is it anyone of any other demographic.

[Irreverent]

I'll concede the 2014 Edmonton shooting, though I have some doubts as to weather mass murders within families count.  Even in the United States those seem to outnumber your typical mass killings.  Sydney River was a robbery gone wrong rather than a mass murder attempt.  The Mayerthorpe was a shoot out with police at a grow-up, that really doesn't count.  It's not like Moncton where the shooter specifically lured police for no other reason than to kill police. The Shafia family murders were a DROWNING. (Though one of the worst examples of domestic violence in our history).  The Ottawa Valley 2015 was a rather specifically targeted act of domestic violence as well, though it did involve a firearm.  Just Desserts Toronto was ALSO a robbery (It's apparently a bad idea to punch the guy with the shotgun rather than give your wallet to him).  Denis Lortie, okay, you got me there, totally your typical mass shooting, though it's just farther back than I wanted to go, but if we're going as far back as 31 years ago.  The Surry Six was a targeted series of gang killings so it also doesn't fit the description.

 

Which was exactly my point and the caveat in my last post.  The statistics record "homicides" regardless of motivation.  And the stats include homicides of all types, not just those committed with a firearm.   Once you start to layer on all types of filters, (this doesn't count, that's drug crime, not hate crime, that's not really a mass kill etc) it becomes a rather slippery slope.  Especially if you're trying to use the result as an argument in support of (or against) certain types of legislation.  We've seen this before, when the Liberal rammed in their $6B dollar registration fiasco in 1995. 

The reality is, that multiple-murder scenarios do occur in Canada; with a regularity that most Canadians would find alarming, if they could see the raw data and not have it predigested by the evening news cycle.   Do school shooting happen with alarming regularity in Canada?  No.  Only one about every 5 years.  Do mass killings of all types happen in Canada?  Yep, about 1 every six months.

[#00Buck]

Well, it's still a good reason not to go to school.

[Machine]

However, they do raise an interesting point.  Women are disproportionately underrepresented as the perpetrators of mass shootings, but there's also a racial oddity to it.  All races except for whites and blacks are disproportionately underrepresented in the demographics of mass shooters.  They are almost all white males and failing that, black males, rarely is it anyone of any other demographic.

I don't care about demographics. Everyone is capable of violence.

[PheagleAdler]

Never been a huge fan of the ignorant "guns don't kill people" mantra. No shit. No one actually believes that, okay? Guns are dangerous and should be regulated, so psychos like these cannot gain access to them. Criminals can obtain guns [illegally], sure, but it would be a lot damn harder if we didn't have so many fucking guns here in the first place. 

As far as school shootings go, these people should just turn the gun on themselves first, it may be a bit abrasive but if they have such a strong disregard for life (including their own) perhaps it's for the best, as opposed to ending innocent lives.

[Sidewalk Surfboard]

Why the fuck did you bring race into this
Why
Do you like starting arguments
Because I'm starting to think you do

[#00Buck]

Who be talking about racE?

[Butters]

Jon Oliver puts it best.

[#00Buck]

I'm not a fan of John Oliver. Not very funny.

[StrangerCoug]

Funny. I was going to make a topic about how disillusioned I have gotten about American gun culture. I suppose here is an appropriate place to vent about it.

I really don't want to come off as a cold, heartless freak, but I've gotten numb about this sort of thing. The news stories about gun violence has become background noise. Forget "sex sells"; lead sells! But yes, I have to agree that America has a gun violence problem, and I think it's too complex of one to have a single solution that will work.

[StrangerCoug]

And yet another shooting happens. Flagstaff, Arizona, near where a couple of my friends lived.

That's actually what prompted my post.

[Lucyfish]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/09/us/northern-arizona-university-shooting/index.html

Jesus Christ. Something is wrong here.

[#00Buck]

There will always be more. Why is anyone ever surprised when it happens again?

[DevilishlyHandsome49]

*sighs*

[JegoLego]

I blame CNN

[Irreverent]

As predicted, many claim that the President (or liberals) are using this tragedy for political reasons. Bull. If they were, they'd be doing something that would get them re-elected. It is the left's full belief that there are too many guns and they are too easy to get, and better/stronger laws to regulate guns may prevent such a tragedy, or (more likely) reduce significantly the amount of shootings. To them, gun laws are the answer to fixing this problem.

 Stronger laws prevent nothing.  If they did, drug use, speeding, drinking and driving and crime generally would be eliminated.  Even in regimes where being caught committing a crime results in instant, summary execution, crime is still committed.

That's not playing politics or exploiting a tragedy,

 While I appreciate your idealism, I fear it may be a tad naive, Go google, "wedge issue politics " and then google "dog whistle politics."  The left is sending a message, both to their faithful and the undecided voters.  And why not?  They'd be fools not too.  Unelected parties don't form governments.

If anything, the pundits on the right are exploiting it to make the left look stupid.  

The left needs no help from the right in making them selves look stupid.  Its something both the left and right are very good at doing, and the reason why nothing will change. 

Our daily trifecta is complete with YET ANOTHER ONE in Kentucky.

Copy cat killing perhaps?  Or just media hypersensitivity?

[#00Buck]

I blame CNN

I blame furries.