How American gun deaths and gun laws compare to Canada's

[frigidweirdo]

...Politicians can help make a climate of tolerance, or intolerance. They can impact education, they can impact social inequality, they can do so much which changes people's perceptions...

You have just touched upon a key point... trying to CHANGE peoples' perceptions... Blacks flock with Blacks... Whites flock with Whites... etc... it's OK... it's not Evil.

...South Africa... Politicians made this situation...

Doubtful... we are dealing with instinctive prejudices as well as environmental and historical ones.

...White flight happened for many reasons...

All of which circle back to the "I don't want to live next to Black people" nucleus.

...The US is hardly the most integrated country on the planet...

Never said otherwise. We have improved greatly in that area over the past 50 years since passage of the Civil Right Act and related, but we are by no means perfect.

...You say white people don't want to live next to black people. Why? There's no logical reason for people of equal status and stature in society to not want to live around each other...

I give you the primary reason for White Flight during the so-called Great Migration of Blacks from the South to the North.

...black people and white people do live side by side in many places without a problem...

Quite true. My own distant suburban town and my own subdivision and my own block are evidence of that. The White Attitude here is that a few scattered here-and-there are very welcome, so long as their numbers don't build-up beyond a threshold that would give them local political power - beyond which White Folk would start to bail from here as well.

...The issues of why people don't want to live next to each other could be similar to what happened in the Balkans...

What was that maxim... Occam's Razor?.... (paraphrase): "The least complicated answer is usually the right one."

Left to their own devices, Black Folk flock with Black Folk... White Folk with White... Yellow with Yellow... Brown with Brown... Red with Red.

Left to their own devices, people will first flock with others who look like them, then, second, act like them, then, third, think like them.

Left to our own devices, all other conditions being equal, each of us is far more likely to save a child of our own race, than a child of the other's.

That's instinctive, gut-level stuff that cannot be changed or legislated away, and some social reformer -types are unable to accept that Reality, because it dooms their own hopes.

We could revisit this issue in 10,000 years, and, instinctively, Black will still flock with Black, White with White, Yellow with Yellow, etc. - all other things being equal.

It's OK to recognize those instincts; hell, in the long run, acknowledging that Reality - the 10,000 LB elephant in the room - is the only way to move forward.

However, kidding ourselves about our own built-in prejudices, and how to work around them, while oftentimes more politically INcorrect, is also, ultimately, a doomed exercise.

Or so it seems, to this observer.

Prejudice can be changed. How politicians react to situations can fuel prejudice. If adults are being prejudiced then children will follow them. Then you have another generation of prejudice. If prejudice isn't considered acceptable then kids won't learn that prejudice is acceptable.

The perfect example of this is Germany and Austria post WW2. The Germans were split into two. The West was told it was guilty of all these crimes and it had a concerted effort to learn from history. The Austrians were told they were the victims of German aggression, and the East Germans didn't give a damn.

You look at far right parties, the NPD in Germany:

And you see it basically aligns with the former East Germany. This is no coincidence. Berlin is lower, why? Because A) half of Berlin was in the West and B) because open minded Westerners are more likely to move to Berlin than anywhere else.

Austria has a political party, the FPOe, (and had the BZOe in Carinthia under Jorg Haider until he killed himself in a car crash) which is quite far right, and yet considered a legitimate party, but was diplomatically embargoed by the EU in 2000 (even though it was in the EU).

Prejudice has be combated and, while not completely defeated, it has seen a massive reduction.

Politicians made this situation. The Soviet overlords in East Germany didn't care who people were as long as they pretended to be good Communists. Prejudice was allowed to remain because the politicians didn't care. In Austria the politicians had no reason to combat this, as long as they can ski, swim in lakes and go naked, then they don't give a damn, it's quite a conservative society anyway. But in West Germany they did care and they combated it.

Yes, in the US things have got better. However better isn't good in many respects. The racial tension that should have disappeared a long time ago is still around. Black people feel like they've been duped by the other people around them, kids grow up with no hope unless it comes from crime, and conservatives tell them everyone can make it in America, yet those saying it are putting their kids through good school and can afford to send them to university, while many black kids (25% of black people are in poverty) don't have these opportunities and are expected to make it none the less.

Your view about blacks in your neighborhood is political. The reason people don't want black people controlling is because there is a divide in the US and people share that view. But if black and white people were equal, and black people didn't feel the need to be politically black, then there wouldn't be a problem at all. Again, politicians have made this.

I believe that there is more right than wrong in your dissertation, although we do not share your optimism that racial prejudice is the sort of easy fix that you hope it to be, nor do I share your perspective that the playing field between the races should be forcibly leveled still further.

I didn't say it was easy to fix. It takes effort, and in the US the politicians don't often have the desire to fix it, the rich who control them have no desire to fix it, and the people have are controlled by the money don't bother thinking about it much either.

Also, I didn't say that the playing field should be forcibly leveled further. What I'm talking about is setting up conditions in society for society to improve, and with it the people.
For education to be at a decent standard for all. For things that work, like after school programs, to be put in place and funded, for education to have a focus on how to be a good parent, a good spouse, and a good adult in general. For skills to be taught kids that will be useful in their lives, instead of trying to make Nobel winning scientists out of everyone, to focus a lot of people on technical jobs, like plumbers, electricians, builders, so when they leave school they have a purpose and aim in life.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Good luck devising a defensible means for comparing the two, which takes into account the diverse factors attributable to the two...

Canada lacks the large Black minority populations which have taken-over their inner cities within Living Memory and which do not mix well with their Whites.

They also lack the White Flight of Living Memory by which their White populations abandoned their cities for the suburbs, in order to avoid living in close priximity to their Blacks.

They also lack 50-60 years of inner urban degeneration by which their once-sturdy and beautiful neighborhoods have been turned into ghettos and shit-holes by their Blacks.

They also lack an ancient history of Black enslavement which gave their Blacks a permanent and un-fixable Inferiority Complex and Sense of Entitlement that stunted their growth.

They also lack shared land borders with Mexico by which fresh waves of mostly ignorant and dead-broke Latinos swarm over their borders, reinforcing old White Flight behaviors.

They also lack the new-era Gang Wars by which Latinos begin to dominate the inner cities as their numbers grow to equal and exceed the old and more stagnant Black population.

Until one factors these things - and others not yet conjured here - into the equation, any comparison between the two is more of a pointless circle-jerk than it is science.

And perhaps, more fundamental than any of the foregoing, is this:

The United States was founded in violent rebellion against a horrendous tyrant.

Canada was founded in cowering and grovelling before this same tyrant.

By itself, I say this is far more than enough reason for any American to reject any attempt to compare the two nations, and to reject any suggestion of anything from canada as a model for what should be done here in the U.S.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

You [guano] have the cognitive skills of a 'Special Needs' person.
Everything you post is from the mind of an eight year old.

I think that remark was totally uncalled-for. I have never met an eight-year-old, nor a “special needs person” of any age, who is deserving of that insult of being compared to guano in such a manner.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Yep. They love to use Belgium as the shining example. But...Belgium is small. And mostly white. Just like Utah and Connecticut. And Belgiums violent crime rate is almost exactly the same as Utah and Connecticut.

Belgium doesn't even exist..

 

[Bob Blaylock]

The nazis were atheists and pagans not catholics……and yeah…do you know how you can tell that the Jews did not have a fixation with guns….they didn't have any when the nazis started taking over and later when they were being sent to the gas chambers…………unlike the Swiss who had 435,000 civilians armed with rifles who were ready to fight…and no, I am not blaming the Jews…they had no idea what was coming….and we know what happened and people like you still want to disarm everyone…..you didn't learn the lesson of the Holocaust…….

I do not think it is a matter of not having learned the lesson. People like guano and JoeB131 and others of that ilk imagine that the next time large groups of people are rounded up and exterminated, that they will be on the side doing the rounding up and exterminating, rather than on the side that is being rounded up and exterminated. Of course it stands to reason that they want those that they expect to be rounding up and exterminating to be unarmed, and unable to fight back.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

those "saturday night specials" were affordable to poor people who couldn't get police protection...by outlawing cheap guns all they did was disarm poor, law abiding citizens who didn't have the money for expensive guns...criminals...they get whatever guns they want.

That was the exact intent behind such laws, to reserve the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms only to those who could afford more expensive arms, while denying this right to those in lower economic classes; and particularly, to blacks.

The term “Saturday Night Special” is a bowdlerized form of the original term, sanitized to obscure the original meaning and intent. The original term was “Níggértówn Saturday Night Special”. If referred specifically to low-cost arms that were available and affordable to black people.

 

[Spinster]

Yep. They love to use Belgium as the shining example. But...Belgium is small. And mostly white. Just like Utah and Connecticut. And Belgiums violent crime rate is almost exactly the same as Utah and Connecticut.

Belgium doesn't even exist..

Wow, excuse me, Bob, Belgium certainly does exist. Maybe you're getting a little wound up. Think about going bedie bye before you hurt yourself.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Yep. They love to use Belgium as the shining example. But...Belgium is small. And mostly white. Just like Utah and Connecticut. And Belgiums violent crime rate is almost exactly the same as Utah and Connecticut.

Belgium doesn't even exist..

Wow, excuse me, Bob, Belgium certainly does exist. Maybe you're getting a little wound up. Think about going bedie [sic] bye before you hurt yourself.

Don't feel too bad. A very large portion of the world's population has been completely taken in by this hoax. But the truth is that there is no such place as Belgium, and never has been.

 

[westwall]

And they don't have a gun lobby like the NRA pimping for the gun industry

“When looking at firearm-related homicide rates in comparable countries, Canada’s rate is about seven times lower than that of the United States (3.5 per 100,000 population)"



According to a StatsCan report from 2012 – the most recent year available – the U.S. suffered a total of 8,813 murders involving the use of firearms that year. Canada, in the same year, recorded just 172 firearms-related homicides.

How American gun deaths and gun laws compare to Canada's

Still trying to compare an elephant with a flea I see. Canada has one tenth the population of the US and no black or Hispanic gang bangers. Epic fail guano, epic fail.

 

[Spinster]

Yep. They love to use Belgium as the shining example. But...Belgium is small. And mostly white. Just like Utah and Connecticut. And Belgiums violent crime rate is almost exactly the same as Utah and Connecticut.

Belgium doesn't even exist..

Wow, excuse me, Bob, Belgium certainly does exist. Maybe you're getting a little wound up. Think about going bedie [sic] bye before you hurt yourself.

Don't feel too bad. A very large portion of the world's population has been completely taken in by this hoax. But the truth is that there is no such place as Belgium, and never has been.

Interesting, Bob, but you're a blow heart that is clueless. You can put your response in red all you like, but I know for a fact you're wrong. Dead wrong. What planet do you think you are from? Not earth, apparently. STFU!

 

[Kondor3]

...And perhaps, more fundamental than any of the foregoing, is this: The United States was founded in violent rebellion against a horrendous tyrant. Canada was founded in cowering and grovelling before this same tyrant. By itself, I say this is far more than enough reason for any American to reject any attempt to compare the two nations, and to reject any suggestion of anything from canada as a model for what should be done here in the U.S.

I'm not sure that the nature of the founding of each, is more 'fundamental' to the issue than more contemporary conditions, but it's certainly a delightful exercise in historical comparison that should also have a noteworthy place on The List of Differences that comes to the table... the collective Submissive Mindset vs. the Independent Mindset.

 

[JoeB131]

those "saturday night specials" were affordable to poor people who couldn't get police protection...by outlawing cheap guns all they did was disarm poor, law abiding citizens who didn't have the money for expensive guns...criminals...they get whatever guns they want.

After they were introduced, the crime rate spiked. The murder rate spiked.

Fact is, most gun deaths are otherwise "law-abiding" gun owners who just had a shitty day (suicides, accidents, domestic arguments).

 

[JoeB131]

I do not think it is a matter of not having learned the lesson. People like guano and JoeB131 and others of that ilk imagine that the next time large groups of people are rounded up and exterminated, that they will be on the side doing the rounding up and exterminating, rather than on the side that is being rounded up and exterminated. Of course it stands to reason that they want those that they expect to be rounding up and exterminating to be unarmed, and unable to fight back.

GUy, the reality is, when a large part of the country wants to exterminate group X, there isn't all that much you can do about it.

Hey, at the same time, the Germans were rounding up the Jews and putting them into camps, America was rounding up Japanese Americans and putting them into camps. We didn't exterminate them, of course, but not a one of them fought back with guns. They knew it was a losing proposition.

And the way you guys are shitting yourselves because two Muslims shot 14 co-workers, (as opposed to the other 33,000 gun deaths, which don't bother you so much). Right now, I'm listening to Limbaugh screeching about how we need to Round up immigrants. I can't imagine that you guys would rethink it because a few of them shoot back.

 

[JoeB131]

So imagine this. America has a brain fart and elects Trump, and Trump orders the mass deportation of "illegals". Some of those illegals have guns and start shooting back. What do you think would be the reaction of most Americans? Do you think they will start considering immigration reform? Or do you think they'll DEMAND government do something about it?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Good luck devising a defensible means for comparing the two, which takes into account the diverse factors attributable to the two...

Canada lacks the large Black minority populations which have taken-over their inner cities within Living Memory and which do not mix well with their Whites.

They also lack the White Flight of Living Memory by which their White populations abandoned their cities for the suburbs, in order to avoid living in close priximity to their Blacks.

They also lack 50-60 years of inner urban degeneration by which their once-sturdy and beautiful neighborhoods have been turned into ghettos and shit-holes by their Blacks.

They also lack an ancient history of Black enslavement which gave their Blacks a permanent and un-fixable Inferiority Complex and Sense of Entitlement that stunted their growth.

They also lack shared land borders with Mexico by which fresh waves of mostly ignorant and dead-broke Latinos swarm over their borders, reinforcing old White Flight behaviors.

They also lack the new-era Gang Wars by which Latinos begin to dominate the inner cities as their numbers grow to equal and exceed the old and more stagnant Black population.

Until one factors these things - and others not yet conjured here - into the equation, any comparison between the two is more of a pointless circle-jerk than it is science.

 

[Kondor3]

So imagine this. America has a brain fart and elects Trump, and Trump orders the mass deportation of "illegals". Some of those illegals have guns and start shooting back. What do you think would be the reaction of most Americans? Do you think they will start considering immigration reform? Or do you think they'll DEMAND government do something about it?

Your words referenced "shooting back".

What you really said was "initiating the shooting".

Should they "start it", they will be given very short shrift.

Beginning with the local-yokel police and sheriff's departments, and working upwards through National Guard, Reserve and Active formations, as required, to suppress rebellion.

As to 'immigration reform' - who gives a shit?

In the Liberal lexicon, Immigration Reform = Codespeak for Shamnesty.

A path to citizenship for 11,000,000 Illegal Aliens and buying millions of them time to pop-out more puppies - a.k.a. Anchor Babies.

No thank you.

It is SUPPOSED to be difficult and time-consuming and expensive to obtain entry into the United States.

We just don't need immigrants the way we did a hundred years ago and we sure as hell don't need more mouths to feed and house and employ when our own are suffering.

We are a nation built upon historical immigration but we are not obliged to continue operating in that mode in perpetuity, once it begins to work against our own best interests.

We can't even get our shit together, in enforcing EXISTING immigration law... not because it's unworkable, but because it's routinely ignored by Dark Interests on both sides.

The Pubs want a continuing stream of Underground Labor to exploit and to suppress and hold-down wage-levels in various trades and in the unskilled labor pond.

The Dems want legions of grateful future voters who receive Shamnesty through the efforts of their cynical, conniving advocates.

With American workers and tradesmen and - to a lesser extent - the Middle Class itself - stuck in the middle, between two selfish Dark Forces - unable to stem the tide.

And then some hard-ass comes along, who says: "You know what? Let's do it. Let's get rid of these phukkers." - and, then we're surprised, when The Hard-Ass does well.

If either the Pubs or the Dems would press the Reset button on Immigration, and come down in favor of the American People, instead, they could sweep the field.

But - damned fools - blind, deaf-and-dumb fools - they won't - so The Hard-Ass continues to threaten to shove them aside, and take over, despite their best efforts.

Big surprise.

Not.

 

[Dr Grump]

Wow....Canada's gun deaths are about 7x lower? Hmmmm. Their % of population that is black is also over 7x lower.......

Their population is also 1/10th of ours. And...as we all know...crime increases in warmer weather. Canada is colder. Much colder.


Good job Guno. You aren't even comparing apples to oranges. You're comparing a tree to a pickup truck.

Read the link properly before commenting, else look stupid. There is a comparison per head of population so your population issue is a non starter.

As is your 'black'. Deaths are deaths. Most of your mass shootings and serial killers are white males. Almost exclusively.

 

[Dr Grump]

[
Great post.

It has been proven that if the USA were to magically remove all young black and Latino males from it's population, crime would be reduced to minimal levels. This should mean something to the Left, other than their typical infantile response of racist name calling.

Facts mean little to those with an agenda. What I find surprising are the large numbers of Americans willing to give up their gun rights. Have these ignoramuses learned nothing from history?

BS re your second paragraph. Total phooey.

At the end of the day most gun control advocates don't give a shit if gang bangers go around shooting each other. Good luck to them. The issue is the mass shootings. The randomness of them. People would like to go to the movies or school without having to worry about some loon with a chip of their shoulder shooting them because they've had a bad day.

 

[JoeB131]

Your words referenced "shooting back".

What you really said was "initiating the shooting".

Should they "start it", they will be given very short shrift.

guy, your sort never makes those kinds of distinctions when talking about how you all needs your guns to protect yourself against the "gummit".

And I don't think you'd be as sympathetic to armed Hispanics taking over the immigration center as you would be to the Bundy Family seizing federal lands and buildings.

The rest of your screaming rant is a bunch of Stormfront nonsense that isn't worth my time to address, because you are getting off subject.

Point is, you guys wouldn't suddenly be more friendly to illegal immigrants or Muslims if they started using their second amendment rights to fight back. You'd be doing exactly what you said, expecting the police and the National Guard to do something about them.

so it is EQUALLY absurd for people like you and Dick Tiny (aka 2AGuy) to claim that if ONLY the Jews in Germany had guns, they'd have stopped the Holocaust. Of course they wouldn't have. The Holocaust happened because you have anti-Semitism hard-wired into Christian theology. The Jews killed Jesus. Therefore, they deserve whatever they get.

Yes, after the Holocaust, everyone feels all bad about that, but before it, no one had much of a problem with it. And a few Jews shooting a German soldier wouldn't have made that much better.

 

[Kondor3]

Your words referenced "shooting back".

What you really said was "initiating the shooting".

Should they "start it", they will be given very short shrift.

guy, your sort never makes those kinds of distinctions when talking about how you all needs your guns to protect yourself against the "gummit". ...

What "sort" is that, Joe?

...And I don't think you'd be as sympathetic to armed Hispanics taking over the immigration center as you would be to the Bundy Family seizing federal lands and buildings...

Are you operating under the delusion that I support(ed) the Bundy Family?

...The rest of your screaming rant is a bunch of Stormfront nonsense that isn't worth my time to address, because you are getting off subject...

Stormfront?

Being 'Anti-Illegals" does not equate to neo-Nazism.

It is that kind of Leftist hyperbole - spanning the past couple of decades, and concentrated in the past 7-8 years, that is making Trump look like a viable alternative.

In your shoes, I, too, would decline to address the core issues (the greatly reduced need for continued immigration, motives of the parties, lack of enforcement, etc.) raised in such texts.

...Point is, you guys wouldn't suddenly be more friendly to illegal immigrants or Muslims if they started using their second amendment rights to fight back...

There is no physical, gun-toting "fighting back" to which an Illegal Alien is entitled, in the context of US Government operations to deport them from our soil.

...You'd be doing exactly what you said, expecting the police and the National Guard to do something about them...

That is the function of the Police, the National Guard, the Reserves, and our active duty Armed Forces - to defend the Republic and its People against its enemies; such as Invaders on our soil, engaged in armed rebellion against the lawful authority of the United States - should your imaginary scenario ever actually unfold.

....so it is EQUALLY absurd for people like you and Dick Tiny (aka 2AGuy) to claim that if ONLY the Jews in Germany had guns, they'd have stopped the Holocaust...

Are you operating under the delusion that I do not support wholesale Gun Control reforms?

... Of course they wouldn't have. The Holocaust happened because you have anti-Semitism hard-wired into Christian theology. The Jews killed Jesus. Therefore, they deserve whatever they get...

Which is, no doubt, one of the reasons why you defend Islam so rigorously.

...after the Holocaust, everyone feels all bad about that, but before it, no one had much of a problem with it. And a few Jews shooting a German soldier wouldn't have made that much better.

I have no idea what you're yammering about.

Then again, neither do you.

So... it's a wash.