Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Deadly force - Fatal encounters with police in Canada: 2000-2017

  1. #1

    Deadly force - Fatal encounters with police in Canada: 2000-2017

    In the absence of a national accounting of such encounters between Canadian citizens and law enforcement, a team of CBC researchers spent six months assembling the first country-wide database of every person who died or was killed during a police intervention. The records, from 2000 to the end of 2017, contain more than a dozen details on each of the 461 incidents. Even when adjusted for population growth over the 17-year window, the number of people dying in encounters with police has increased steadily.
    https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/long...m/deadly-force

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Bavaria, Germany
    I had a look at the data. It seems to contain allmost every fatality, including suicides.
    On the other hand it does not include non fatal shootings, and does not compare the fatalities to assaults on and killing of police officers.
    I think it's useless.
    If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Luger View Post
    I had a look at the data. It seems to contain allmost every fatality, including suicides.
    Typical tactic with junk science studies. Include irrelevant data to skew the results for a predetermined outcome. There was a study in 1993, called the Kellerman study, that concluded that the mere presence of a firearm in a home increases the risk of death. They included suicides, illegal firearms and other factors to skew the results in their favor, these statistics are routinely cited by anti gun groups, even though the study was discredited years ago. More recent studies conclude that the company you keep has more to do with violent death than the mere presence of a firearm (heard this on NPR). This, along with the whole concept of 'gun free zones' leads me to conclude that many of the individuals who are anti gun, believe that the mere presence of a firearm can influence the behavior of those in close proximity. This is a form of 'Anamism':

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animism

    I'm sure if you confronted someone of that persuasion with this, they would deny it, but I believe in paying attention to what people do rather than what they say.
    Last edited by Tabasco; 04-07-2018 at 03:49 PM. Reason: spelling

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Bavaria, Germany
    If you wanted to compare the use of force between two police forces you would have to think about several factors:
    - How many citizens do they serve? You can't just compare the number of shootings between Bavaria with about 12.000.000 people and the USA with over 330.000.000 people. But you could compare the number of shootings per 100.000.
    - How many shootings are there? You can't just compare the number of fatal shootings, but you have to look at the shootings with wounded suspects and the shootings where the officers misssed, too. Otherwise a force with poorly trained shooters would look "better".
    - How violent is the community they serve? How many officers are attacked with deadly force? Because if police face violent encounters more often, they will have to use force more often.
    - How big is the chance of an officer to survive an attack? Because a decisive use of force might either keep officers safer, or put them at greater risk.
    If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •