![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shannon_aAs I mentioned in my Bowling for Columbine notes (below), I was interested in a few stats regarding guns, to try and put what Moore said into perspective.
Here they are:
US of A
Total Guns: 192 million (in 1994)
Total Pop: 290 million (in 2003)
Expected Gun Value: .66 [probably higher, per year differential above]
%Age Homes w/Guns: 35%
Gun Deaths: 11,127 (in 2001[?])
Per Capita to Population: .0038%
Canada
Total Guns: 7 million (in 1998)
Total Pop: 31 million (in 2002)
Expected Gun Value: .22 [probably higher]
%Age Homes w/Guns: 24%
Gun Deaths: 165 (in 2001[?])
Per Capita to Population: .00053%
So, clearly Canada does have lower per-capita deaths by guns no matter which way you calculate it. Based solely on gun deaths to population it's a 7:1 ratio. If you adjust additionally for ratio of the number of households which own guns, it's instead 5:1. If you instead adjust per capita for both total population and total guns it's 2.5:1.
Personally I'd find the middle number, with the 5:1 ratio, based on population and household ownership to be the most meaningful, and that's indeed a major difference with implies a difference in culture.
See http://www.ncjrs.org/txtfiles/165476.txt , http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/publications/GunsinCanada.htm , http://www.bowlingforcolumbine.com
Here they are:
US of A
Total Guns: 192 million (in 1994)
Total Pop: 290 million (in 2003)
Expected Gun Value: .66 [probably higher, per year differential above]
%Age Homes w/Guns: 35%
Gun Deaths: 11,127 (in 2001[?])
Per Capita to Population: .0038%
Canada
Total Guns: 7 million (in 1998)
Total Pop: 31 million (in 2002)
Expected Gun Value: .22 [probably higher]
%Age Homes w/Guns: 24%
Gun Deaths: 165 (in 2001[?])
Per Capita to Population: .00053%
So, clearly Canada does have lower per-capita deaths by guns no matter which way you calculate it. Based solely on gun deaths to population it's a 7:1 ratio. If you adjust additionally for ratio of the number of households which own guns, it's instead 5:1. If you instead adjust per capita for both total population and total guns it's 2.5:1.
Personally I'd find the middle number, with the 5:1 ratio, based on population and household ownership to be the most meaningful, and that's indeed a major difference with implies a difference in culture.
See http://www.ncjrs.org/txtfiles/165476.txt , http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/publications/GunsinCanada.htm , http://www.bowlingforcolumbine.com