Canadian Firearms Legislation and Effects on Homicide 1974 to 2008

Abstract

Canada has implemented legislation covering all firearms since 1977 and presents a model to examine incremental firearms control. The effect of legislation on homicide by firearm and the subcategory, spousal homicide, is controversial and has not been well studied to date. Legislative effects on homicide and spousal homicide were analyzed using data obtained from Statistics Canada from 1974 to 2008. Three statistical methods were applied to search for any associated effects of firearms legislation. Interrupted time series regression, ARIMA, and Joinpoint analysis were performed. Neither were any significant beneficial associations between firearms legislation and homicide or spousal homicide rates found after the passage of three Acts by the Canadian Parliament--Bill C-51 (1977), C-17 (1991), and C-68 (1995)--nor were effects found after the implementation of licensing in 2001 and the registration of rifles and shotguns in 2003. After the passage of C-68, a decrease in the rate of the decline of homicide by firearm was found by interrupted regression. Joinpoint analysis also found an increasing trend in homicide by firearm rate post the enactment of the licensing portion of C-68. Other factors found to be associated with homicide rates were median age, unemployment, immigration rates, percentage of population in low-income bracket, Gini index of income equality, population per police officer, and incarceration rate. This study failed to demonstrate a beneficial association between legislation and firearm homicide rates between 1974 and 2008.

Lethal Firearm-Related Violence Against Canadian Women: Did Tightening Gun Laws Have an Impact on Women’s Health and Safety?

“…The current results suggest that hypothesized links between the Canadian firearms legislation of 1995 and reductions in lethal violence against women (Senior, 2010) are not well supported by empirical evidence. This is consistent with observations made by Langmann (2012) and extends those observations by applying gender disaggregation to the data.…”

“…Although various studies report a significant change in firearm homicide trends after legislative changes (Blais & Gagné, 2011;Bridges, 2004;Department of Justice, 1996;Sproule & Kennett, 1988), others have found no effect (Langmann, 2012;Mauser & Holmes, 1992;Mundt, 1990;Stenning, 2003). These results are similar to international findings, particularly for countries with comparable social histories and social circumstances to Canada (such as the United Kingdom and Australia; see Baker & McPhedran, 2007;Lee & Suardi, 2010;McPhedran et al, 2011).…”

“…Two different analytic approaches were used: autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) modelling, and Zivot-Andrews (ZA) structural breakpoint tests. These methods have been used on similar homicide time series data (Baker & McPhedran, 2007;Langmann, 2012;Lee & Suardi, 2010;McPhedran et al, 2011).…”

Mixed Impact of Firearms Restrictions on Fatal Firearm Injuries in Males: A National Observational Study

“…[12] reported that suicide due to firearms declined significantly after a policy change in the Israeli Defense Forces in 2006, which dictated that soldiers must leave their weapons on base when they go home for weekend leave. There are however, more studies that failed to demonstrate measurable effect of legislation on homicide by firearm, as in a recent study from Canada: This study examined firearm homicides at national level from 1947 to 2008, and relatively few effects of the legislative changes were observed [42]. …”

Mass shootings in Australia and the United States, 1981-2013

“…Some North American studies have suggested that the introduction or tightening of firearm controls led or acted to maintain declines in firearm deaths (see e.g. Bridges, 2004;Bridges and Kunselman, 2004;Cook, 1983;Fleegler et al, 2013;Hoskin, 2001;Langmann, 2012;Rosengart et al, 2005). Others found no significant effect, and in some cases a counter-effect (i.e.…”