In a story published by the New York Times this morning the headline reads: As U.S. Guns Pour Into Canada, the Bodies Pile Up. So with that assertion in hand, the Times invites us to buy into the assumption, proclaimed to be universal truth by gun control fanatics everywhere, that the mere existence of guns is a cause of “gun violence”.
The Times’ story notes that
“American firearms are spilling increasingly into a country where gun control is far stricter than in the United States, according to government data and the authorities.”
It is important to note that not only is the preceding sentence manifestly false; the Times’s interpretation of the situation is incorrect and the underlying data is problematical.
First things first. There is an obvious question, namely this. If gun control in Canada is far stricter than it is in the US, then how is it that guns are increasingly spilling into Canada from the US? A reasonable conclusion to draw is that enforcement of gun control measures in Canada is very lax, which calls into question just how strict Canadian laws are in practice. A second question concerns whether it is it in fact correct that guns from the US are ‘increasingly spilling’ into Canada and if so, if that increase is causally related the increase in murders.
The Times article uses gun seizures at the border as a measure that captures the quantity of guns that slip over the border from the US. Note that the incidence of seizures may or may not be related to the quantity of guns entering the country. Note too that the number of seizures may or may not be related to the number of crimes committed with those guns.
Nevertheless, the Times insists on claiming (implicitly) that an increase in guns from across the border necessarily implies an increase in crime. But the number of gun seizures at the border has, in recent years, gone down rather than up. See the graph below.
Still, the Times insists that
”…The proliferation of illegal guns from the United States has fueled bloodshed in Canadian cities and even in remote northern communities.”
However, notwithstanding the Times’s assertions, both the number of homicides and the homicide rate in Canada have remained essentially flat for the last 5 years, according to the central statistics office in Canada. See the graph below. (Years from 2019 through 2024).
It may very well be the case that the murder rate has actually risen in Canada. But the Times article doesn’t reflect that. It actually shows the opposite. But even disregarding that, the Times article fails to show a causal link between an increase in crime and an increase in guns—legal or otherwise.
The article does illustrate one thing that any economics student could predict.
According to the article “…The price of trafficked guns has risen sharply in recent years…Today, a handgun bought in Florida for $500 can fetch up to $4,300 in southern Ontario…”
The article notes that
“In 2023, Canada further tightened control over handguns, making them virtually impossible to buy or transfer legally.”
The rise in the price of trafficked guns reflects the increase in the incentive for traffickers to ply their trade. Still that explanation does not illustrate a causal relationship between an increase in crime and an increase in guns.
But the willingness of gangs to use guns might be strategic. It therefore might be a causal link. Further, the hesitation to prosecute is more than likely to be the connection between crime and shootings. Which is to say that the cause is the behavior of people: gangs, prosecutors and the body politic. Trying to foist off the availability of guns as a cause is a cop out. It is human behavior and the incentive structure created by a society that represents the causal link.
JFB
