Ron 7 #26 January 26, 2005 QuoteIf that would make me wise, I'll stay stupid. ____________________________ Your choice, at least you are entertaining."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,123 #27 January 26, 2005 QuoteYour choice, at least you are entertaining. We are a pretty good team Ron. You set them up and I kick them in. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ScottishJohn 25 #28 January 26, 2005 Quote Title of your post : England: Worst Crime Rate in World Yet the article does say that the Dominican Republic, New Zealand and Finland have higher crime rates than England and Wales So that means that England and Walse Don't have the highest crime rate in the world. I think it's a moot point anyway as not every country rcords crime in the same way so there is no acurate method of comparing the statistics. john---------------------------------------------------------------------- If you think my attitude stinks you should smell my fingers Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #29 January 26, 2005 John, how many times now have I had to lecture you on the fact that the way we record crimes has changed significantly since 1997? Jeez man, I only posted about it last week. Do you just not listen at all!? One more time John, just for the record. These figures are based on RECORDED crime. When you change the way you record crimes, you are going to change the number of crimes you record. When Labour came to power in 1997 they started messing with the way we record crime in a big way. Recorded crime went through the roof. Meanwhile other crime statistics usually show no rise and sometimes even fall. You’ll recall we only discussed this a week ago. When the old ways of recording figures are used, (as often it’s still possible to do) again often no rise is seen. Two kinds of people seized on these new statistics. First there were the people and newspapers who wanted to make the Labour government look bad (there are many more convincing ways to do that than this). These people are deliberately misleading their audience as they know there are better statistics available but instead chose not to use them. The second class is the stupid person. The stupid person either isn’t clever enough to look into these changes or simply doesn't understand their effect. As such the stupid person could perhaps be said to be slightly less blameworthy. Unfortunately this doesn't change the fact that they are stupid. If you want to continue to post things like this, do yourself a favor. Go look up the NCRS and the changes in crime recording which preceded them. Otherwise you just look like you fall into one of the above categories. After the number of times I’ve discussed guns with you, I know that you really don’t. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #30 January 26, 2005 Quotethe left always sees a victim. We have a right not to do business with them. Well, it looks like the unrelated "Cuba" comment has grown into a full-blown thread hijacking. I find it ironic that the left spends so much time crying about how America is intervening in the affairs of other countries, and calling for us to pull out and leave them alone. And yet here we have a case with Cuba where we're doing exactly that, and yet now they're crying that we're not involved in their country. I wish they would make up their mind... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #31 January 26, 2005 QuoteWhat makes me disbelieve the statistics is that I live in one of the shittier areas of London, a place which you would expect to have above the average crime, and the worst thing that has happened to me or my wife over the last five is she had a couple of CDs nicked from our car. Quote from the original article: "England and Wales had 9,766 crimes for every 100,000 people." That means that for every 100,000 people, 90,234 of them did not suffer from a crime last year. Congratulations for being in the "lucky" category. Just because you were lucky, does not mean that the statistic is a lie. QuoteI have no idea why you are suggesting the cause of crime in the UK is lack of guns. There is no credible evidence for that whatsoever. I've not said that. What I am pointing out, is that confiscating guns from law-abiding people doesn't stop crime. It's a wasted effort, and deprives people of their property rights. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #32 January 26, 2005 Quote"Pushing and shoving" (i kid you not) is now classified as a violent crime. Hence numbers of "violent crimes" have gone up. That's called "assault" in America, which is also a "violent crime" here too. What you have failed to show is why England fares worse than America in this comparison. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #33 January 26, 2005 Quoteprove that the crime rates would have been better in England and Wales if the laws regarding guns hadn't changed. They might not have been. But in either case, taking guns away from the citizens had no effect upon it, and therefore the gun confiscation was a wrongful action to take. I'm not arguing that the gun confiscation caused more crime. I'm just saying that the gun confiscation was a wasted effort that accomplished nothing, other than to deprive law-abiding citizens of their property and their right to the ultimate self defense tool. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #34 January 26, 2005 QuoteTitle of your post : England: Worst Crime Rate in World From the article you base this on : England and Wales have the highest crime rate among the world's leading economies Firstly, do you understand that the claim you make in the title of your post is not true? Secondly, the article mentions England and Wales yet you choose to single out England in the title of your post. Why is that? Brevity. You can't write a dissertation in a subject title. QuoteDon't be a hater, nobody likes haters. I don't hate anyone. Just because I point out the uselessness of a gun confiscation, doesn't mean that I hate the British people. Likewise, I assume that just because some foreigners criticize certain policies of the American government, that they don't hate the American people. Right? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #35 January 26, 2005 QuotePerhaps it's "the culture". After all, you always blame "the culture" for the US having the highest murder rate among leading industrial nations. Gotta be consistent there, John. Ding ding ding! Correct - it is the culture that causes crime. You are incorrect about the U.S. having "the highest" murder rate. Speaking of consistency: I'm sure those who like to nit-pick about "twisting of facts" will jump in here and defend America now, since you mis-stated that fact... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #36 January 26, 2005 QuoteQuote Title of your post : England: Worst Crime Rate in World Yet the article does say that the Dominican Republic, New Zealand and Finland have higher crime rates than England and Wales. So that means that England and Walse Don't have the highest crime rate in the world. Subject title clarification noted. Congratulations for beating out Finland, New Zealand and the Dominican Republic. Woohoo! I've corrected the subject title (above) to reflect this clarification. QuoteI think it's a moot point anyway as not every country rcords crime in the same way so there is no acurate method of comparing the statistics. That complaint should go to the UN, which did the study. But the U.S. and England do have similar crime reporting methods. And England, where private gun ownership is severely restricted, has a higher crime rate than America, where there are more guns than ever in circulation. Isn't that interesting? The only logical conclusion you can draw from this comparison is: Gun ownership doesn't cause crime. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,123 #37 January 26, 2005 QuoteI'm just saying that the gun confiscation was a wasted effort that accomplished nothing, other than to deprive law-abiding citizens of their property and their right to the ultimate self defense tool. But, those figures don't prove that. We have no way of knowing that these increases would not have occured if the English Laws had not changed. You have not proven any correlation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #38 January 26, 2005 QuoteJohn, how many times now have I had to lecture you on the fact that the way we record crimes has changed significantly since 1997? Nice speech. But this wasn't about the rising crime statistics in England, so I'm afraid your point was off-topic. This post was about comparing crime rates from different countries, and England fared badly. Are you suggesting that the British police are counting crimes that never actually happened, falsely inflating their statistics? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #39 January 26, 2005 QuoteQuoteI'm just saying that the gun confiscation was a wasted effort that accomplished nothing, other than to deprive law-abiding citizens of their property and their right to the ultimate self defense tool. But, those figures don't prove that. We have no way of knowing that these increases would not have occured if the English Laws had not changed. You have not proven any correlation. By that standard of proof, you can never prove anything. Because no matter what course of action you decide upon, you can always claim; "Well, we don't know that things would have been different if we had done nothing!" You've not proven that the gun confiscation had any positive effects. And if you're going to deprive people of their property, you sure as heck ought to be able to show some significant societal good for it. Failing that, you've committed a travesty of freedom and justice. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #40 January 26, 2005 It's got a lot to do with it John - read your own article. QuoteAn analysis of total recorded crime figures before 1998 also suggests that England and Wales have moved sharply up the league table since Labour came to power in 1997. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #41 January 26, 2005 QuoteWhat I am pointing out, is that confiscating guns from law-abiding people doesn't stop crime. Seriously John, this is getting old. I've explained this to you before. Try looking here: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1439715#1439715 It's only a week ago for Christ’s sake. The 1997 legislation was not intended to have much of an effect on overall violent crime rates. It hasn't. Why are people surprised by that? If you want stats on violent crime look to the above thread again. Violent crime is down by 36% since the 1997 gun ban. I'm saying there's no causal link between the two whatsoever. Why are you always going on about the two in the same breath? The 1997 legislation was created to remove guns from those people who would otherwise have legally owned them – nothing more. Why on earth does that give you so many sleepless nights? It has no impact on you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #42 January 26, 2005 QuoteThe 1997 legislation was created to remove guns from those people who would otherwise have legally owned them – nothing more. Crime is the justification given for gun confiscation. Confiscating guns has no effect upon crime. Got it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mikkey 0 #43 January 27, 2005 QuoteQuoteThe 1997 legislation was created to remove guns from those people who would otherwise have legally owned them – nothing more. Crime is the justification given for gun confiscation. Confiscating guns has no effect upon crime. Got it? How much time have you spent in the UK and Europe? I have traveled a lot in the States but would not get myself involved in the gun debate as I just don't have enough experience about the local "environment" and culture. Crime stats are very difficult to compare. Firstly it depends how they are compiled (look e.g. at the Russian stats mentioned - try to travel to Moscow and tell me how safe it is...) and secondly it also depends on urbanisation, i.e. how many % of people live in cities and how big are those cities in average. You probably agree that a 50 K town is much safer then LA.--------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimbarry 0 #44 January 27, 2005 QuoteQuoteThe brutal effects Cuba has suffered is due to their choice of socio-political-economic model, not because the US won't do business. BULLSHIT, China operates udner the same model and the US is jumping up and down doing business with them. Nice. You flip words around, then call them bullshit. I didn't say the US won't do business *because* of the model they chose; I said the cause of their problems is self-imposed, not due to the US. How do you figure the US is obligated to do business with Cuba? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimbarry 0 #45 January 27, 2005 QuoteQuote The brutal effects Cuba has suffered is due to their choice of socio-political-economic model, not because the US won't do business. Either are good explanations. If we treated them like every other Caribbean banana republic, they'd probably be at least a bit better off. They do get a lot of European and Canadian tourists for the fact that we can't go there, but that doesn't make up for it. Agreed. No doubt they would be a lot better off had we been trading partners these last few decades, but that still doesn't explain how the UN decreed that Cuba's ills are the US's fault. Blockade? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jaaska 0 #46 January 27, 2005 I used a differend source (e.g. had not England, but the Great Britain etc.). These numbers are from a Finnish statistic pages (www.stat.fi) and are based on: World Bank: Atlas 2003; World Bank: World Development Indicators 2004; The International Institute for Strategic Studies: The Military Balance 2003·2004; IMD: The World Competitiveness Yearbook 2004; Eurostat yearbook 2003...) Murders, violent crimes and armed robberies known to the police (per 100 000 persons): 1999; 2000; 2001 The US - ; 485.1 ; 472.7 The N-Z - ; - ; - Dom. Rep. - ; - ; - Finland 82.2 ; - ; - The G-B - ; 198.2 ; 214.3 - = no data available source: http://www.stat.fi/tup/maanum/17_julkinen_sektori.xls I'd say things haven't changed that much here in Finland during the last 5 years or so - it depends on how the statistics are collected. Eg. there are no universal codes of collecting data and labeling them... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crozby 0 #47 January 27, 2005 QuoteI'd say things haven't changed that much here in Finland during the last 5 years or so - it depends on how the statistics are collected. Eg. there are no universal codes of collecting data and labeling them... Are you suggesting that the NRA only draws attention to statistics that back their cause? That's outrageous!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
miked10270 0 #48 January 27, 2005 QuoteAre you suggesting that the NRA only draws attention to statistics that back their cause? That's outrageous!!! I agree! Surely The NRA (No Rules Anywhere? Nasty Right-wing Antisocials? Naff Republican Activists?) wouldn't twist the truth!? Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freakbrother 0 #49 January 27, 2005 QuoteQuotePerhaps it's "the culture". After all, you always blame "the culture" for the US having the highest murder rate among leading industrial nations. Gotta be consistent there, John. Ding ding ding! Correct - it is the culture that causes crime. You are incorrect about the U.S. having "the highest" murder rate. Speaking of consistency: I'm sure those who like to nit-pick about "twisting of facts" will jump in here and defend America now, since you mis-stated that fact... I'll bite: which "LEADING INDUSTRIAL NATION" has a higher murder rate than the USA?. . www.freak-brother.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Frenchy68 0 #50 January 27, 2005 QuoteI'll bite: which "LEADING INDUSTRIAL NATION" has a higher murder rate than the USA? Atlanta? "For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
