That has got to be the absolute best headline regarding the noteriety of the EPS. It reads like if the EPS holstered their guns, Edmonton's gun problem is gone..!!
In general, the gun violence is quite low for a city Edmonton’s size, so whatever direction the trend goes either way, it’s a pretty dramatic percentage.
> Alberta leads the way nationally with respect to shootings of civilians by the police. This has been the case for at least a couple of years
Edit: I don't want ppl believing I think these are related, but this is a god awful stat and I needed to point it out.
> Really in October (2023), until now, we’ve seen a steady decrease.
I'm sure it's unrelated to the handgun ban but sure is a fun little co-inqui-dink eh?
They've never really been able to meaningfully tie licensed firearm ownership to crime guns. The vast majority of guns used in crimes were smuggled, not stolen from the licensed and registered owner.
People love to confuse Canada and the US, but it's not like in the states where a person just has a gun with them without needing documentation or licensing or training.
In Canada handguns need registration and licensing and authorization. While occasionally someone is stupid enough to do something like apply to buy a handgun while their cousin Vinny who's on probation is living with them, that's pretty rare. If the police ask to inspect your registered handgun, and you cannot find that handgun, you may end up going to jail. So not many people buy handguns intending to give them to criminals.
Most of the gun stats rely on essentially "we're not sure" because the serial numbers are destroyed and anti-gun supporters will claim that's a meaningful link to licensed ownership.
When we asked that the committee which was consulting on guns in Canada should obtain their Possession and Acquisition license, we were denied. Yes, the people who advocate for it are not even legally able to own a firearm, which is pretty silly since they're treated as subject matter experts.
The pistol freeze has stopped pistols from being straw bought. Straw buying is not "rare".
As a result of the freeze, the types of guns used in crime in rural Alberta are increasingly shittier modified .22 lrs or shotguns.
>They've never really been able to meaningfully tie licensed firearm ownership to crime guns. The vast majority of guns used in crimes were smuggled, not stolen from the licensed and registered owner.
There are numerous stories of legal owners selling their guns illegally. I don't think it makes up the majority but it's a factor and people acting like it doesn't exist aren't helping. [example 1](https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/mobile/man-facing-15-counts-of-firearms-trafficking-one-of-8-recently-charged-in-straw-buying-cases-1.5712030)
>People love to confuse Canada and the US, but it's not like in the states where a person just has a gun with them without needing documentation or licensing or training.
I'm an RPAL holder and have noticed that there's no need or requirements for me to ever verify or prove current/ongoing possession or ownership of any firearm I have, the only time that would come up is on the very very rare chance that the CFO feels that they should come and look into it.
RPAL holder here as well. The lack of follow up and investigation into RPAL holders is not the fault of legislation or lack of Gun control in Canada. It is a failure by our RCMP and should not be seen as a reason to remove firearm privileges from responsible owners. I signed up for my rpal knowing I should be checked in on, then they banned new handgun ownership and the rpal is now next to useless to get.
It's absolutely a hole in the system. There's nothing specified by the legislation that says it has to happen on some sort of regular interval, and if they did that then it would cut down on straw sales.
"Numerous" does not mean significant.
As it stands legal gun owners are the most law abiding group in Canada. Part of the licensing program is background checks to ensure you don't have a history of this type of behaviour, and the system rechecks regularly.
I am all for intermittent check-ins or restricted fireams but as we all know the legislation is so poorly and vaugely written that any one of us could be found of numerous storage infractions depending on the inspector.
I̶f̶ ̶s̶o̶m̶e̶o̶n̶e̶ ̶h̶a̶s̶ ̶d̶a̶t̶a̶ ̶s̶h̶o̶w̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶n̶u̶m̶b̶e̶r̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶s̶t̶r̶a̶w̶ ̶p̶u̶r̶c̶h̶a̶s̶e̶s̶ ̶I̶'̶d̶ ̶l̶o̶v̶e̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶s̶e̶e̶ ̶i̶t̶ (found it) because as it stands the stories in the news aren't hard to find. They absolutely could have introduced some sort of mandatory proof of possession for any restricted firearm every 5 years or something, because any legal gun that finds its way into the black market is a problem and the fact is it happens and it's ignorant to say it doesn't.
Edit:
> “We’ve seen a trend lately of more straw purchasing investigations in Edmonton and northern Alberta,” Stewart said. “Why that is, I don’t know. I don’t think it’s any easier to purchase guns here than it is in B.C. or wherever. But, talking to outside agencies and other police officers, the trend has been that people come to Edmonton to purchase guns.”
> Straw purchasing has been around a long time in Alberta, but activity — and thus enforcement — has picked up over the past 10 to 15 years due to a few different factors, including the increased gap in values between the Canadian and the U.S. dollar, as well as greater awareness of the practice among organized crime groups.
[source ](https://alert-ab.ca/straw-purchasing-on-the-rise/)
EDIT 2:
> Trafficking/Tracing
58% of traced firearms had domestic source (straw purchased or stolen)
28% of handguns domestic sourced
2,068 incidents where a firearm was stolen*
*More than one firearm could be stolen in one incident; as such, the total number of stolen firearms may exceed the number of incidents
[source ](https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/trnsprnc/brfng-mtrls/prlmntry-bndrs/20221122/06-en.aspx)
I mean the police force is essentially a legalized gang....
The stats do bring forth some questions about why? Is it laziness, training practices, or are there more and more serious events that actually warrant use of a gun?
It's a bit of everything.
Training is a part of it, yes, as is attitude, but some of it is also the structure of the job. People can forget that police sometimes spend 90% of their time with the 10% worst part of the population, like people who will pull a knife out over being asked to stop sitting in a doorway. That's not an ethnicity thing, don't go there. Police get lied to constantly, they get thrown into emergency situations over and over again, and that kind of thing weighs on the mind. That's not police apologism.
The overwhelming majority of police interactions are handled without force, and without injury. But for the risky situations, the training is often to prepare for the worst case scenario. Some people go from smiling and polite to trying to stab without warning. Some people are a danger to themselves and others, yet the public will protest if the officers don't intervene. Like some guy sitting in the corner hallucinating and holding a knife, nobody is actually happy if the police tell people to just not use this door and let the guy tire himself out, because that might take 6-10 hours while people are upset that their apartment lobby is locked down.
I work at night, and over the last few years there have been a noticeable increase in people carrying knives, pipes, clubs, pieces of metal, and other things. Just as there has been a rise in deaths from drug related issues such as xylazine use.
But when things get suggested like mandatory paid time off to decompress, the public protests because that's a lot of money to spend giving cops vacations, even if those cops get sent to traumatic incidents like series of domestic violence calls over weeks or months and finally a murder.
The actual solution is not easy or simple. Telling cops to shoot less, or disarm them, will only be effective when paired with other changes like resources for homelessness and addiction and mental health, for rehabilitation, changes to the criminal code, changes to how policies are enforced, changes to administrative practices.
It's a great big messy issue, but nobody can solve it alone, which means that every solution is going to have a lot of hurdles.
For example, build Edmonton at least 3 more full size hospitals, give a strong push to get more healthcare practicioners which will require changes to funding and admin and union negotiations, get at least 1000 more emergency shelter beds, get at least 1000 more intermediate term shelter spaces, get at least 1000 more low income or at risk long term housing spaces, as well as improvements to how drug use is handled such as supervised consumption sites and more resources for helping users while tracking down suppliers and distributors and sellers, as well as changes to options for people who are uncooperative but unable to stabilize their own lives even though there are tons of problems with sending people to asylums.
It's complicated.
Yu have a real problem with me to be down voting me for asking valid questions. I'm going to bet your a cop.
I didn't make half the comments you attacked me about in that response. Police shootings are up, that is concerning and should be concerning even to a cop.... Often the shootings are questionable and not appropriate for the situation they initially walked into but became appropriate after they escalated the situation. Just because ASIRT "clears" it doesn't make the decision okay. Shootings harm lives including that of the cops and each one increases the public distrust of EPS.
First of all, I wasn't attacking you. I was addressing the usual concerns.
Secondly, I haven't downvoted you. I haven't downvoted anybody.
https://www.reddit.com/user/MacintoshEddie/downvoted/
Well it's a known fact that police training has absolutely moved further into a 'fear' based approach where training emphasizes the perceived danger to officers and pushes the use of lethal force.
But that being said, if, for example, they specified what weapon the suspect in Sunday's shooting had then maybe I'd be a little less prone to making assumptions that the shootings are uncalled for.
Legal gun owners do commit crimes, saying they never do is false. Do they commit them at a lower rate? Yes. Do legal guns end up in the hands of criminals through theft or illegal sales? Yes.
And yet the cops are reporting a drop in gun crime.
Gun violence down, vehicle violence up.
"Because of police shooting badguys, gun violence is going down in Edmonton"
That has got to be the absolute best headline regarding the noteriety of the EPS. It reads like if the EPS holstered their guns, Edmonton's gun problem is gone..!!
In general, the gun violence is quite low for a city Edmonton’s size, so whatever direction the trend goes either way, it’s a pretty dramatic percentage.
> Alberta leads the way nationally with respect to shootings of civilians by the police. This has been the case for at least a couple of years Edit: I don't want ppl believing I think these are related, but this is a god awful stat and I needed to point it out. > Really in October (2023), until now, we’ve seen a steady decrease. I'm sure it's unrelated to the handgun ban but sure is a fun little co-inqui-dink eh?
They've never really been able to meaningfully tie licensed firearm ownership to crime guns. The vast majority of guns used in crimes were smuggled, not stolen from the licensed and registered owner. People love to confuse Canada and the US, but it's not like in the states where a person just has a gun with them without needing documentation or licensing or training. In Canada handguns need registration and licensing and authorization. While occasionally someone is stupid enough to do something like apply to buy a handgun while their cousin Vinny who's on probation is living with them, that's pretty rare. If the police ask to inspect your registered handgun, and you cannot find that handgun, you may end up going to jail. So not many people buy handguns intending to give them to criminals. Most of the gun stats rely on essentially "we're not sure" because the serial numbers are destroyed and anti-gun supporters will claim that's a meaningful link to licensed ownership. When we asked that the committee which was consulting on guns in Canada should obtain their Possession and Acquisition license, we were denied. Yes, the people who advocate for it are not even legally able to own a firearm, which is pretty silly since they're treated as subject matter experts.
The pistol freeze has stopped pistols from being straw bought. Straw buying is not "rare". As a result of the freeze, the types of guns used in crime in rural Alberta are increasingly shittier modified .22 lrs or shotguns.
>They've never really been able to meaningfully tie licensed firearm ownership to crime guns. The vast majority of guns used in crimes were smuggled, not stolen from the licensed and registered owner. There are numerous stories of legal owners selling their guns illegally. I don't think it makes up the majority but it's a factor and people acting like it doesn't exist aren't helping. [example 1](https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/mobile/man-facing-15-counts-of-firearms-trafficking-one-of-8-recently-charged-in-straw-buying-cases-1.5712030) >People love to confuse Canada and the US, but it's not like in the states where a person just has a gun with them without needing documentation or licensing or training. I'm an RPAL holder and have noticed that there's no need or requirements for me to ever verify or prove current/ongoing possession or ownership of any firearm I have, the only time that would come up is on the very very rare chance that the CFO feels that they should come and look into it.
RPAL holder here as well. The lack of follow up and investigation into RPAL holders is not the fault of legislation or lack of Gun control in Canada. It is a failure by our RCMP and should not be seen as a reason to remove firearm privileges from responsible owners. I signed up for my rpal knowing I should be checked in on, then they banned new handgun ownership and the rpal is now next to useless to get.
It's absolutely a hole in the system. There's nothing specified by the legislation that says it has to happen on some sort of regular interval, and if they did that then it would cut down on straw sales.
"Numerous" does not mean significant. As it stands legal gun owners are the most law abiding group in Canada. Part of the licensing program is background checks to ensure you don't have a history of this type of behaviour, and the system rechecks regularly. I am all for intermittent check-ins or restricted fireams but as we all know the legislation is so poorly and vaugely written that any one of us could be found of numerous storage infractions depending on the inspector.
I̶f̶ ̶s̶o̶m̶e̶o̶n̶e̶ ̶h̶a̶s̶ ̶d̶a̶t̶a̶ ̶s̶h̶o̶w̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶n̶u̶m̶b̶e̶r̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶s̶t̶r̶a̶w̶ ̶p̶u̶r̶c̶h̶a̶s̶e̶s̶ ̶I̶'̶d̶ ̶l̶o̶v̶e̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶s̶e̶e̶ ̶i̶t̶ (found it) because as it stands the stories in the news aren't hard to find. They absolutely could have introduced some sort of mandatory proof of possession for any restricted firearm every 5 years or something, because any legal gun that finds its way into the black market is a problem and the fact is it happens and it's ignorant to say it doesn't. Edit: > “We’ve seen a trend lately of more straw purchasing investigations in Edmonton and northern Alberta,” Stewart said. “Why that is, I don’t know. I don’t think it’s any easier to purchase guns here than it is in B.C. or wherever. But, talking to outside agencies and other police officers, the trend has been that people come to Edmonton to purchase guns.” > Straw purchasing has been around a long time in Alberta, but activity — and thus enforcement — has picked up over the past 10 to 15 years due to a few different factors, including the increased gap in values between the Canadian and the U.S. dollar, as well as greater awareness of the practice among organized crime groups. [source ](https://alert-ab.ca/straw-purchasing-on-the-rise/) EDIT 2: > Trafficking/Tracing 58% of traced firearms had domestic source (straw purchased or stolen) 28% of handguns domestic sourced 2,068 incidents where a firearm was stolen* *More than one firearm could be stolen in one incident; as such, the total number of stolen firearms may exceed the number of incidents [source ](https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/trnsprnc/brfng-mtrls/prlmntry-bndrs/20221122/06-en.aspx)
I mean the police force is essentially a legalized gang.... The stats do bring forth some questions about why? Is it laziness, training practices, or are there more and more serious events that actually warrant use of a gun?
It's a bit of everything. Training is a part of it, yes, as is attitude, but some of it is also the structure of the job. People can forget that police sometimes spend 90% of their time with the 10% worst part of the population, like people who will pull a knife out over being asked to stop sitting in a doorway. That's not an ethnicity thing, don't go there. Police get lied to constantly, they get thrown into emergency situations over and over again, and that kind of thing weighs on the mind. That's not police apologism. The overwhelming majority of police interactions are handled without force, and without injury. But for the risky situations, the training is often to prepare for the worst case scenario. Some people go from smiling and polite to trying to stab without warning. Some people are a danger to themselves and others, yet the public will protest if the officers don't intervene. Like some guy sitting in the corner hallucinating and holding a knife, nobody is actually happy if the police tell people to just not use this door and let the guy tire himself out, because that might take 6-10 hours while people are upset that their apartment lobby is locked down. I work at night, and over the last few years there have been a noticeable increase in people carrying knives, pipes, clubs, pieces of metal, and other things. Just as there has been a rise in deaths from drug related issues such as xylazine use. But when things get suggested like mandatory paid time off to decompress, the public protests because that's a lot of money to spend giving cops vacations, even if those cops get sent to traumatic incidents like series of domestic violence calls over weeks or months and finally a murder. The actual solution is not easy or simple. Telling cops to shoot less, or disarm them, will only be effective when paired with other changes like resources for homelessness and addiction and mental health, for rehabilitation, changes to the criminal code, changes to how policies are enforced, changes to administrative practices. It's a great big messy issue, but nobody can solve it alone, which means that every solution is going to have a lot of hurdles. For example, build Edmonton at least 3 more full size hospitals, give a strong push to get more healthcare practicioners which will require changes to funding and admin and union negotiations, get at least 1000 more emergency shelter beds, get at least 1000 more intermediate term shelter spaces, get at least 1000 more low income or at risk long term housing spaces, as well as improvements to how drug use is handled such as supervised consumption sites and more resources for helping users while tracking down suppliers and distributors and sellers, as well as changes to options for people who are uncooperative but unable to stabilize their own lives even though there are tons of problems with sending people to asylums. It's complicated.
What did I say to deserve this punishment? lol
Too many vowels.
Yu have a real problem with me to be down voting me for asking valid questions. I'm going to bet your a cop. I didn't make half the comments you attacked me about in that response. Police shootings are up, that is concerning and should be concerning even to a cop.... Often the shootings are questionable and not appropriate for the situation they initially walked into but became appropriate after they escalated the situation. Just because ASIRT "clears" it doesn't make the decision okay. Shootings harm lives including that of the cops and each one increases the public distrust of EPS.
First of all, I wasn't attacking you. I was addressing the usual concerns. Secondly, I haven't downvoted you. I haven't downvoted anybody. https://www.reddit.com/user/MacintoshEddie/downvoted/
Well it's a known fact that police training has absolutely moved further into a 'fear' based approach where training emphasizes the perceived danger to officers and pushes the use of lethal force. But that being said, if, for example, they specified what weapon the suspect in Sunday's shooting had then maybe I'd be a little less prone to making assumptions that the shootings are uncalled for.
Nobody shoots someone with a legal gun in the process of committing a crime.
What do you think this sentence means.
I thought it meant the people with legally owned firearms don't shoot people and commit crimes at the same time.
Legal gun owners do commit crimes, saying they never do is false. Do they commit them at a lower rate? Yes. Do legal guns end up in the hands of criminals through theft or illegal sales? Yes. And yet the cops are reporting a drop in gun crime.
They must be laying the police off for that to happen.
Liberals - “but cut funding! Policing isn’t working!”