But what does it all mean?

The Toronto Star reports on homicide statistics released by Statistics Canada:

A 12 per cent spike in the national homicide rate last year was paired with a jump in the rate of nationwide gun killings, which rose for the third year in a row, according to a new Statistics Canada report.

In all, there were 622 homicides in Canada in 2004, including 172 firearms-related killings, 11 more gun slayings than in 2003 and 20 more than in 2002. The rise in the homicide rate comes a year after the rate had reached its lowest point in more than three decades.

But even after a violent summer in Toronto — during which the number of gun killings reached 41, surpassing the previous high of 35 set in 1991 — crime statistics experts say that when put into context, the numbers are not as dire as they seem.

The 2004 increases in death by guns still ranked below the national average of 176 over the past decade, said Mia Dauvergne, a Statistics Canada homicide survey manager and author of the report. She also said that over the last 30 years, firearms-related deaths have actually been declining.

In 2004, shootings decreased as an overall percentage of total homicides while stabbing ranked as the number one method of killing. In Toronto, the number of gun-related homicides dropped slightly to 27 out of a total of 64 in 2004. The city's overall homicide rate held relatively steady at about 1.8 per 100,000 people.

The problem with statistics is that really tell you very little. For example the homicide rate has apparently risen by 12% over last year but according to Mia Dauvergne of Statistics Canada death by guns have actually been declining overall in the last 30 years which is I am sure a cold comfort for all those who succumbed by bullet. As a country, are we really more peaceful than we were 30 years ago?

At first blush one could draw the obvious conclusion that over a 30 year period Canadians are no longer using guns to murder overall but would that be the correct conclusion? One should not discount the fact that great strides have been made in trauma medicine over the last 30 years which makes it just as likely that an emergency medical team saves more lives today than it could 30 years ago. It could also have to do with how this statistics are collected and collated.

Presumably the homicide statistics are based on actually deaths by murder but if trauma teams are saving more people than they were 30 years ago does that mean that the murder rate has actually declined? What about the attempted murder rates, have they declined or increased in the last 30 years? A charge of attempted murder only means that the alleged attacker was unable to accomplish his goal whether by incompetence, medical intervention or circumstances. But even taking into account these two statistics to judge crime rates one needs to examine how these statistics are collected and are they based on convictions or charges laid?

For example, I knew a man who was shot five times in a downtown Yorkville nightclub. He took five bullets and not only lived but after being shot proceeded to beat the shooter senseless before finally succumbing to his injuries. The newspapers were calling him the bionic victim. The shooter was charged and tried with attempted murder and convicted in the end of aggravated assault and illegal possession of a firearm.

I knew another man who was shot outside a daycare playground by a shooter who stood merely 10 feet away from the victim. The shooter emptied his gun of bullets but only managed to hit the victim once in the stomach. The victim lived and the shooter in the end was tried for attempted murder but convicted of aggravated assault and illegal possession of a firearm.

These are just two examples and one cannot discount the fact that if the Crown does not have enough evidence to prove a case of attempted murder in court it does not necessary follow that the attack was not a bona fide attempt to murder to the victim. A lack of evidence is not conclusive proof of innocence.

Are we a more peaceful and law abiding society than we were 30 years ago? To answer that question we would need to examine the rate of conviction for all violent crimes (assault, robbery, rape, attempted murder and murder) but for an even fuller picture one should also take into account the number of charges laid for all violent crimes as well.

And for the record, I will not support a national knife registration program for my kitchen utensils just in case any of our political social Einstein’s has a brain wave after reading this article.