Canadian Assaults

I was working on the General Social Survey in Canada with Greg and Joanne on the victimization survey. The next survey came out in 2019, which is not yet available. Analysts provided me with this and Greg and Joanne was more than happy to provide.

From our subject matter division:

Here it is.

First column = % of victims of assaults as most serious violent victimization, excluding spousal violence. Second column is the same, but including spousal violence. Of note, since it includes only those who were not victim of a more serious offence (such as robbery or sexual assault), these numbers might slightly underestimate the actual % of victim of assault.

Spousal assault
2004: 3.0% / 4.2%
2009: 3.4% / 4.3%
2014: 2.3% / 2.8%

My estimate

2003: 3.0% / 4.2%
2008: 3.1% / 3.5%
2013: 2.3% / 2.8%

According to police recorded crime major assaults increased but minor assaults decreased. Spousal assaults declined. Police recorded crime shows assaults declined from 241,000 in 2004 to 190,000 in 2009 excluding the northern territories. If you include the northern territories, it rose.

Why is Canada a more violent society? Do Canadians argument more or do they get so heated that they use violence more often?

My parents used to argue and yet they never used violence.

The u.s. bjs victimization survey for 2004 has assaults for 12 and over 1.3% and in 2014 0.9% if 15 and over, maybe 1.0? Or 0.8%? But still it is to show you a higher assault rate for Canada.

I don’t put much stock in police statistics. It is too easy to – ahhhh, hmmmm, lets say get creative with the results.

Omaha Ne. police cooked the books some years ago to show that violent crime was actually falling… they were caught and the truth was that violent crime was on the increase.

The Left is also very good at changing numbers to backup their religion of hate.

4 Likes

I had to for canada

Removed by me.

I think it’s a little unclear what your hypothesis is and what statistics you are using to formulate that hypothesis. I also don’t understand the columns you listed as excluding spousal violence where you then head with “Spousal assualt.”

Is your hypothesis that Canadians are more violent than another country? Is your hypothesis that spoual violence is higher in Canada than another country? What statistics from other countries are you using to compare?

A comparitive analysis on something like MS Excel or Google Sheets comparing certain types of crime amongst countries might be helpful in your analysis, and will even allow for creation of graphs to better visualize and communicate your info. Additionally, even with a phone, you can screenshot the chart/graph for easy uploading to the site if necessary.

I don’t know if this helps, and I don’t like referencing the UN for things, but you might find this page ineteresting in relationship to crime reporting in different countries and the complication with relying on available statistics: Compiling and comparing International Crime Statistics… not to be “that guy,” but their official Office of Drugs and Crime didn’t even capitalize the “c” in “comparing” or “compiling” (image on web page) on that page… although I could be wrong in thinking they are supposed to be capitalized in that situation.

The CIA website might be a good reference for statistics: CIA: The World Factbook: Canada

More edits…
I think this website is from is Canada’s National Statistics Office: Section 3: Intimate partner violence (2013)

And one more edit: Wow… I put in your “General Social Survey in Canada” into a google search and it brought me to that Statcan website I linked above. Are you working for that organization?

1 Like

No, I’m not working for the organization. I simply asked them to provide me with numbers.

2004: 3.0% / 4.2%
2009: 3.4% / 4.3%
2014: 2.3% / 2.8%

My estimate

2003: 3.0% / 4.2%
2008: 3.2% / 3.5%
2013: 2.3% / 2.8%

The first category is Assault and the second category is spousal assault. StatsCan analysts helped me with the numbers. I also felt the number 3.4% and 4.3% was wrong for 2009, because police statistics show that both assaults and spousal assaults were declining from 2004 to 2009. Only 61% of respondents responded to the 2009 general social survey on victimization. I’m like there is no way to say that assaults and spousal assaults dropped from 3.4% in 2009 to 2.3% in 2014 and from 4.3% to 2.8% It’s too big of a drop. I feel that if 75% of respondents responded to the survey that it would be my estimates that would be represented.

International Crime Victimization Survey has 3.5% for assaults and threats for 2009. 22% responded to that survey. But I consider the 3.5% for assaults for 2009 to be more in line with reality. They also said 3.0% were assaulted for 2004. The GSS had 4.3% The survey had a 66% response rate for the survey while the GSS had a 75% response rate for that year. I feel that the GSS was more accurate with 80% response rates for the 1988,1993 and 1999 and 2004 surveys, then it started to slip with 75% response rate for 2004, 61% for 2009 and 51.2% for 2014. I was critical of the survey and even told the analysts you have to get the response rate back up to 75% or greater.

Plus I was given this information to clarify

Here is the answer to your questions:

For the first question, we can’t speculate on the reasons, mostly given that we didn’t do any detailed analysis on B&E trends specifically. We did a Juristat specific to B&E a while ago, it’s a bit dated, and it’s using UCR, not GSS, but maybe he could find some answers to his questions:

As for the CI discussion, here is the standard description we now give in our methodology sections:

As with any household survey, there are some data limitations. The results are based on a sample and are therefore subject to sampling errors. Somewhat different results might have been obtained if the entire population had been surveyed.

Confidence intervals should be interpreted as follows: If the survey were repeated many times, then 95% of the time (or 19 times out of 20), the confidence interval would cover the true population value.
So to illustrate this with 2009 and 2014 break and enter (excluding attempts), let’s suppose the true values (the ones we would have got if we had done a census) would be 2.4% in 2009 and 1.9% in 2014.
In 2009, we had 2.66% of Canadians victim of B&E, and the (approximate) confidence interval (CI) was 2.37% to 2.98%, so the supposed 2.4% falls into this bracket (the lower end of it). In 2014, we got 1.73% B&E, with a (approximate) CI ranging from 1.56% to 1.92%. The hypothetic 1.9% also falls within this CI. Of note, the 2009 and 2014 confidence intervals do not overlap, which allows us to say there was a statistically significant difference, so that we’re quite sure that there was an actual true decrease between 2009 and 2014, although the decrease might not be as large as when comparing the exact % we got from the survey.

When we look at the actual numbers we got, it dropped from 2.7% to 1.7%, which indeed seems like a big drop. But in reality, the drop may just as well been from 2.4% to 1.9%, which seems like a more reasonable drop, and our survey data would still be accurate as the true value would have been included in both years CIs. In this example, both the 2.4 and the 1.9 are at the ends of their respective CIs, so this is what I meant here: In 2009, we may have got a sample where the % of victims of B&E was “higher” than in reality, but not necessarily wrong as we always assume the real value would fall within a certain range (CI) from the survey estimate.

Of course, the 2.4% and 1.9% are hypothetical, but it’s just to illustrate that the difference between 2009 and 2014 may be not as large as it looks like (though it could also be as large as it looks like; we don’t know and can’t know for sure), which is why we need to be somewhat cautious when looking at the exact numbers and always keep in mind that the true value will fall within a range from the survey estimate (Of note, in part for this reason, our new standard is now to show confidence intervals in our tables).

As for the victimization by province, this would be a custom data request. we are facing a considerable backlog, since the COVID disruption has channelled almost all of our resources into our core products.

1 Like

Yes, that is my hypothesis of the United States and Canada. I’m using statistics given to me by StatsCan using the General Social Survey and the Bjs Bureau of Justice National Crime Victimization Survey

General Social Survey 2004

General Social Survey 2014

Bjs NCVS 2013 includes 2004

See Table 4

Bjs NCVS 2014 includes 2005

1 Like

Scotty, have I answered your questions?

Your graph doesn’t support your math and I don’t understand what you’re getting at.

3 Likes

My graph doesn’t support my math?

That Assaults are higher in Canada than the states

Interesting info… there is a lot to digest, and it is a little confusing as much of it seems to be an analysis with differing methodology in breaking down demographics. However, page 8 of Statistics Canada – Catalogue no. 85-002, Vol. 25, no. 7 makes me wonder if your reference to the Northern Territories is related.

The General Social Survey Canada is only for the Provinces, not the Territories.

There is a separate victimization survey for the territories.

Yes, it’s related.

Canadian assault…?

1 Like

Yes,sir

He posted a similar thing here.

I’m not trying to be mean, but I even made a statement (which I deleted) supporting his hypothesis why more break ins happen in Canada (I said because in Canada they legally have to lock up ammo and guns separate not giving them the freedom to freely carry or have it loaded and ready. Where as in America, bad guys could end up looking down a number of different barrels. In other words, gun ownership in America is a huge deterrent for break ins.

But… he quoted my statement and said “That’s not funny”…

Somethings off. Not trying to be mean, maybe it’s just miscommunication, but the conversation here and over there really doesn’t make much sense.

2 Likes

Burglars should not be faced with a gun unless they are actually violent.

Burglars should face the barrel of gun when they break into your home…

Are you a mind reader? The very act of breaking in means they are criminals and they are willing to commit a crime, and may very well be violent. So, unless you are a mind reader, you do not know if they are actually ‘violent’

Nobody said they should immediately be shot… only face the barrel of a firearm.

5 Likes

They can be

Stephen,
in the graph provided, it looks like an incidence rate for major assault of a little less than 140/100,000 in 2014.
Isn’t that 0.14% of the population(providing there are no repeat victims)?
I don’t know where you get your ‘estimate’ from. Are you saying that in 2003, 3% of the 0.14% of the population were victims of the most serious victimizations? Most importantly, do not assume that each country reports crime the same way. For that matter, each state and province will likely have differerences that will make it hard to compare.
I’m tryiung to read your mind–you are not clear with your logic, and you are failing to draw a conclusion or make a point. You have one graph, and have inserted some stats with no reference and cite the US rate with no reference.
I don’t know that your conclusion on Canada being more violent can be believed from this. Now if you tell me that Yellowknife is usually colder than MiamI, you won’t get an argument.
I have to ask-- are you from Canada?
I don’t know if you noticed, but this is the USCCA–(the US stands for United States). If you want to debate Canadian crime, I’d think there is probably a better forum than here.
Personally, given Canada’s restrictive gun laws, and the registration at the border for all hunting weapons, for nonresidents, my outdoors adventure money has consistenly been spent elsewhere, along with many of my friends. I would love to hunt caribou, moose, and maybe bear there. I’ve turned down annual fishing invitations to Canada for 3 decades. Between my friends and me, I would conservatively estimate that Canada failed to realize around $100k in tourism (that’s 4 guys over the last 10 years alone).
MY POINT–I don’t care about Canada’s crime or gun laws. I’m not a subject/citizen there, and for good reason. If they want to get rid of guns, if they want legalize pot, if they want to legalize marrying barnyard animals—I don’t care. I respect their sovereignty, and will refrain from discussing their policies here.
I would expect the same restraint in return.

4 Likes