As public debate over the long gun registry heats up, the Gun Control Lobby is continuing to push their stance of gun control being a women’s issue. In particular, they are claiming that it is a rural women’s issue. I decided to take a look at this stance in a three part series.
In Part 1, I discussed how the current system of gun control in Canada is diverting money away from programs that could help women who are victims of abuse. In Part 3, I will be dealing with self defense.
In this part, I’m going to break down the numbers regarding violent crime, family violence and homicide in this country. Where does it happen, who are the victims, and what are the causes.
Contrary to what gun control and feminist advocates would have us believe, guns are not a risk factor for domestic violence. According to the Canadian Department of Justice, the major risk factors for spousal violence are
- being a young person
- living in a common law relationship
- having a partner who periodically drinks heavily
- emotional abuse in the relationship, and
- marital separation
Statistics Canada also adds being Aboriginal to that list. 20% of the Aboriginal population has reported being victims of family violence compared with 7% of the non-Aboriginal population.
A journal article, National Trends in Intimate Partner Homicides: Explaining Declines in Canada 1976-2001 made some more interesting points. I would especially like to point out the date range of this study, 1976-2001, and remind my readers that the long gun registry did not come into force until 2001.
Over the time period studied, spousal homicide rates had declined by about 50%, falling from 8.5 (per million spouses) in 1976 to 4.2 in 2001. Spousal homicides using a firearm had declined by 81% over the same time period.
For those who like to make comparisons with the United States, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, from 1976-2000 our “gun loving” cousins to the south saw a decline in spousal homicides of 45%. Keep in mind that gun ownership in the US of A increases by about 4.5 million guns per year. Allow me to repeat that: over a 24 year period, as gun ownership increased spousal homicide decreased.
According to the National Trends article, the reasons for these declines in both countries were
- male to female employment ratios (more women had jobs)
- higher education levels for both men and women
- marrying later in life
- starting a family later in life and having fewer children
- social programs which make it easier for victims to leave their abusers
I hope my anti-gun readers have noted how guns and gun control are not mentioned anywhere as either a cause or a solution to the issues of domestic violence.
Where does it happen?
There is definitely some truth to the claim that rural Canadians are more at risk of spousal violence than their urban neighbours.
|POPULATION||SHELTERS||SHELTERS PER 100,000||RATE OF SPOUSAL VIOLENCE*|
|Nfld & Labrador||508,900||15||2.9||123|
* Rate per 100,000 population
** Incomplete data for British Columbia
There is little data available on the reasons for the greater incidence of abuse in rural areas. One thing that is known is that there is less help available to victims of spousal violence in rural Canada. Even though the territories have a high per capita number of shelters, those shelters have very limited services available. Additionally, because of the vast distances involved in all rural areas, it is not always possible for victims of abuse to reach help when it is available. Other factors like education levels, financial dependence and divorce rates also play a role in this urban/rural divide.
While spousal violence may be a bigger issue in rural Canada, there is no clear divide when it comes to violent crime and homicide. Large and small communities are affected equally in this regard. There are many socio-economic factors that come into play.
Who are the victims?
Here’s where the numbers become interesting. There are about 330,000 victims of violent crime in Canada each year. If we believe our misandrist lobby groups, the number of female victims should far exceed the number of male victims. Right?
Wrong. In 2007, 50.04% of the victims of violent crime were female. Basic math tells me that 49.96% of the victims were male. Hardly a staggering difference. In cases of domestic violence, 7% of women and 6% of men have reported violence at the hands of their partner. Again, hardly a noticeable difference.
Specifically regarding family violence, the numbers are still not so different, with 63% of female victims and 61% of male victims suffering from common assault (Level 1). However, the results are not always so balanced. Men are twice as likely as women to be the victim of a serious assault (Level 2 or 3 – assault with a weapon or assault causing bodily harm).
Common assault has been declining steadily since the 1970s, however serious assault has been increasing for the last 25 years, falling for the first time in 2008. It’s no large stretch to see that violence against women is on the decrease, while violence against men is on the increase.
Let’s take a similar look at homicides in Canada. In 2008, the lowest rate (24%) of female victims since 1961 was recorded. Conversely, the rate of male homicide victims has been rising steadily for the last 10 years. In terms of spousal homicide, women are 4 times as likely as men to be killed by a current or former intimate partner (51 vs. 14 for 2007).
To summarize all those numbers and add a couple of new ones:
- men are twice as likely as women to be assaulted with a weapon
- men are three times more likely to be the victim of a homicide
- all forms of violence against women have been falling since the 1960s
- all forms of violence against men have remained stable or have been increasing
- spousal violence and homicide has been falling since the 1970s
- women are four times more likely than men to be killed by an intimate partner
- homicide by long gun (rifle/shotgun) has been falling steadily since the 1970s
- homicide by handgun has increased by 24% since 2002
Putting it all together
Well, now that I’ve bamboozled you with statistics, what does it all mean?
It means that violence in our society is not a simple issue. Gun control advocates and feminist groups would have us believe that women are always the helpless victim at the hands of Neanderthal men.
What I have attempted to show you with all these facts is that, while women are more often the victim in specific circumstances, the same holds true for men. Guns are not a gendered issue any more than drunk driving is a mother’s issue. Violence in our society affects everyone and the divisive tactics employed by groups like IANSA and the Coalition for Gun Control do little to help anyone.
Guns are not the problem in our society, nor are they the solution. Until the real problems are addressed, weapons – including guns – will always have a place in our world.
- Bureau of Justice Statistics, Intimate Partner Violence 1993-2001
- Statistics Canada, Family Violence in Canada: A Statistical Profile, 2009
- Statistics Canada, Homicide in Canada, 2008
- Statistics Canada, Police Reported Crime Statistics, 2008
- Statistics Canada, Residents of Canada’s shelters for abused women, 2008
- Myrna Dawson, Valerie Pottie Bunge, and Thierno Balde, National Trends in Intimate Partner Homicides: Explaining Declines in Canada 1976-2001
- NRA-ILA, Gun Ownership at All-Time High, New FBI Report Shows Violent Crime at a 35-Year Low, Murder at a 43-Year Low
- Department of Justice, Canada, Spousal Abuse: A Fact Sheet from the Department of Justice, Canada
WOMEN AND GUN CONTROL – PART 1
WOMEN AND GUN CONTROL – PART 3