Victimization in Canada part 2

[Stephen Maize]

Canada’s Assault rate according to International Victimization Survey for 2010 was 3.5%.

https://wp.unil.ch/icvs/category/uncategorized/

The burglary with entry rate according to the International Victimization Survey is 1.3% for 2010. 3.0 in 1988. 3.4 in 1991. 3.4 in 1995. 2.3 in 1999. 2.0 in 2003/04.

The Canadian Victimization Survey 2009 physical assault rate was 7.9% and in 2014 4.8%. However, the physical assault category includes threats and threats with weapon and assaults.

This is an addition to my Canadian vs. United States Victimization post.

 

[Stephen Maize]

The International Victimization Survey would not let me break down by region or by stranger and acquaintance Violence. That is why I trust the Canadian Victimization Survey.

The International Victimization Survey Assault rate for 2003/04 was 1.5% or 1.6% for Canada on page 86.

http://unicri.it/services/library_documentation/publications/icvs/publications/ICVS2004_05report.pdf

It is important for people on this forum to realize that I love Canada despite her imperfections, if the assault rate is slightly higher than the United States, it is still a very peaceful country. People need to respect Canada and have love for her.

 

[hso]

You may find that the IVS doesn't get the same granularity of data that the Canadian does. Reporting inconsistent data in the IVS would be problematic while US and Canadian data is easier to detail due to its consistency.

The violence rates you've made us aware of are a valuable contribution. Especially since the US is often compared to Canada for homicide numbers instead of violence rates.

 

[Stephen Maize]

Maybe it will point pro gun people in the right direction

 

[Stephen Maize]

The violence rates you've made us aware of are a valuable contribution.

Thank you,hso

 

[Stephen Maize]

You may find that the IVS doesn't get the same granularity of data that the Canadian does. Reporting inconsistent data in the IVS would be problematic while US and Canadian data is easier to detail due to its consistency.

The violence rates you've made us aware of are a valuable contribution. Especially since the US is often compared to Canada for homicide numbers instead of violence rates.

Thank you so much,hso

 

[Stephen Maize]

You may find that the IVS doesn't get the same granularity of data that the Canadian does. Reporting inconsistent data in the IVS would be problematic while US and Canadian data is easier to detail due to its consistency.

I feel the Canadian Victimization Survey overestimates the Canadian assault rates.

I feel that the assault rates according to the International Victimization Survey are more accurate.

 

[Stephen Maize]

The burglary with entry rate according to the International Victimization Survey is 1.3% for 2010. 3.0 in 1988. 3.4 in 1991. 3.4 in 1995. 2.3 in 1999. 2.0 in 2003/04. 1.3% in 2010.

The assault rate according to the International Victimization Survey for Canada is 3.9% in 1988. Assaults with force 1.7%. In 1993, it was 4.8%. Assaults with force, 1.8% In 1995, it was 4.0%. Assaults with force,1.4%. In 1999, it was 5.3%. Assaults with force, 2.3% In 2003/04, it was 3.0. Assaults with force 1.6%. For 2010, it was 3.5%. I only have Assaults with force for 2010.

 

[hso]

However, the physical assault category includes threats

Then the data is flawed for our uses if threats are included in the physical assault statistics. Actual physical violence has to be parsed from threats and presented coherently. The gaps between the cited years are not consistent and we expect this sort of data to be collected on a schedule to make for more accurate trending.

Assaults with force are what are relevant and more recent data is needed than 2010.

So if I put your information in simpler form we see Assault with Force in Canada has been in the 1.7% from '88 to '03 except for a real jump up in '99. Then in 2010 there's nearly a doubling of the general rate. It would be valuable to know what the years after trended, up or down. It would be interesting to know why 2010 saw an nearly doubling of assault with force and why '99 went up.

1988 1.70%
1993 1.80%
1999 2.30%
2003 1.60%
2010 3.50%

In summary, though, it appears violence in Canada saw an increase over the general trend. Such violence increases the risk of crippling injury and a threat of a crippling injury is as serious as a threat of death. Taken on face value this demonstrates that Canada has been trending towards greater rates of violence since the late 80's. US data has America trending towards less violence and risk of death. While the risk may be less in Canada the trend is very interesting and useful in countering arguments that Canada is a model for how the US should regulate firearms.