Britain cooking the books on crime stats.

[Blind_Io]

So how's that "No Gun" law really working out for you?

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/cri...cle2710596.ece

Government figures 'missing' two million violent crimes
By David Barrett, PA Home Affairs Correspondent
Published: 26 June 2007

An extra two million violent crimes a year are committed in Britain than previously thought because of a bizarre distortion in the Government's flagship crime figures, it was claimed yesterday.

A former Home Office research expert said that across all types of crime, three million offences a year are excluded from the British Crime Survey (BCS).

The poll caps the number of times a victim can be targeted by an offender at five incidents a year.

If anyone interviewed for the survey says they have been targeted more than five times a year, the sixth incident and beyond are not included in the BCS.

The authors of a report by think-tank Civitas said the five-crimes limit is " truly bizarre" and "misleading".

Professor Graham Farrell of Loughborough University and the former acting head of the Home Office's Police Research Group, Professor Ken Pease, calculated that if the cap is ignored, the overall number of BCS crimes is more than 14 million rather than the current 11 million a year estimate.

Violent crime is 82 per cent higher at 4.4 million offences compared with 2.4 million in the BCS, the survey claims, including a 156 per cent rise in " acquaintance violence" from 817,000 incidents to 2.1 million.

Domestic violence is 140 per cent higher, up from 357,000 incidents a year to 857,000, the authors said, while there are nearly three million common assaults a year rather than the 1.5 million estimated by the BCS, a rise of 98 per cent.

Burglary is 20 per cent higher than currently estimated, at 877,000 a year, and vandalism is 24 per cent higher, the report calculated.

Robbery is 7 per cent up on the official estimates, or an extra 22,000 crimes bringing the yearly total to 333,000.

"If the people who say they suffered 10 incidents really did, it is capping the series at five that distorts the rate," the authors said.

"It is truly bizarre that the victimisation survey, based as it is on the assumption that people will by and large tell the truth about what happened to them, ... suddenly withdraws its trust in their honesty when what they are told does not chime with their own experience.

"Yet the reality is that some people are very frequently victimised, and that frequent victimisation is what they suffer rather than being an invention or exaggeration."

The cap of five crimes for repeat victims has operated ever since the inception of the BCS in 1981.

Ministers claim the survey - which now polls 40,000 people a year about their experiences of crime, is the most reliable indicator of crime levels,

The authors said: "The unwillingness to believe the facts of chronic victimisation means that crime control, police training and criminal justice action are now substantially misdirected."

In particular, the system means that the most vulnerable people in society may not be getting the police protection they require from repeat offenders, the report said.

[Hidden_Hunter]

for fucks sake we get you like guns, it's not your country deal with it

[Derek]

[eltoro507]

It's not perfect, but they're at least not leading the world in gun related deaths

[Peter3hg]

I fail to see the link between the article and guns?
All it is about is the government twisting statistics which isn't exactly a suprise.

[nomix]

Listen, yes, there does appear that we Europeans allso have crime, but we have less people shooting each other. How would that be any better if the guy who stabs a guy in the arm instead could buy a gun over the counter and shoot him? First off, when someone attacks you with a knife, you CAN defend you. If someone pulls a gun on you, you are de facto defenseless.

There is NOTHING you can do, even if you have a gun, you won't get it up to defend yourself, no matter what.

Let's put it the other way, how's that gun loving of yours going? No murders? Of course not. People need to understand that people allways want to kill each others, and do it the ways they are able, but I just don't see the point of providing even more effective tools for murder.

Damn, it's easier for an 18yo to get a Beretta 92 than a Budweiser..

[teeb]

Originally Posted by Blind_Io

So how's that "No Gun" law really working out for you?

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/cri...cle2710596.ece

Brilliant, thanks. The article doesn't mention guns once - although they probably are part of the 'violent crime' category.

I'm quite happy with our 'no gun' law. I've never seen a gun in my life, let alone held one. And to be honest I'd be happy if that stayed constant my entire life.

[Blind_Io]

Alright, nevermind. I guess I can't poke fun at previous Politics threads. I know that guns were not listed, but if you recall in a previous thread I made a comment about crime stats in the UK and how I suspected they were not quite accurate. Lo-and-behold, they aren't.

I forgot that you can't have a sense of humor in this section.

[Momentum57]

Are not the swiss the biggest gun freaks in the world its something like 3 guns for everyone.

[Blind_Io]

That's because every of-age male member of the population is part of their militia.

[zenkidori]

Originally Posted by nomix

Damn, it's easier for an 18yo to get a Beretta 92 than a Budweiser..

except you can't buy handguns when you're 18, dumbass.

but I do agree, I see no relevance to the gun issue here, I think you're just looking for a soapbox, which is unfortunate because all it does is weaken any argument and credibility you could have had.

Also, while fishing my roomate and I shot a 9mm handgun yesterday, just because we felt like it.

[nomix]

I know. It's tempting. I love guns. Absolutely adore them. When I become more established, get the money needed, I'll probably start some target practice. Just start off with a small, nimble .22.

Who knows what'll come later, but I think, that in the process of learning to shoot, it will be practical to have the ability to use cheap .22 bullets, rather than, let's say .357 magnums.

But then again, I won't buy it for protection. I'll dismantle it, keep every single piece in a different place, the ammo on a different place, or just lock it into a cabinet at a gun club.

Why? Cause even a .22 can kill, if you hit the right spot. And you never know who could get their hands on one if I were throwing a party, or something like that.

"Eyh, look what I found, ha ha ha ha"

Bang?

Who knows. Just won't take the risk, however miniscule.

My 2 cents.

[TomCat]

I think people are just afraid of guns. Looking at stats, accidental gun deaths are minuscule. You're more likely to get struck by lightning. It's kind of like saying you remove the battery from your car every night, because you don't want someone to accidentally find the keys, get in your car, start it up, put it in gear, and hurt someone.

But yeah, crime rates can be effected by gun laws. Some areas of the US required gun ownership for homeowners and crime rates plummeted.

[tigger]

Originally Posted by eltoro507

It's not perfect, but they're at least not leading the world in gun related deaths

Ha, I think I might rather get shot than robbed 5+ times in one year.

Originally Posted by zenkidori

except you can't buy handguns when you're 18, dumbass.

Not legally. It's pathetically easy to get a hold of illegal firearms if you know where to look. I don't live in Mr. Rogers neighborhood by any stretch though.

[Blind_Io]

...and in that case all the gun restrictions don't matter, do they? There will always be an illegal gun market, so why restrict the law abiding citizens?

[Viper007Bond]

Originally Posted by eltoro507

It's not perfect, but they're at least not leading the world in gun related deaths

Yeah, population has nothing to do with it...

[zenkidori]

Since the thread was headed there anyway:

Originally Posted by nomix

Who knows what'll come later, but I think, that in the process of learning to shoot, it will be practical to have the ability to use cheap .22 bullets, rather than, let's say .357 magnums.

and I bet a suzuki cappuccino is more practical than a ferrari...

Originally Posted by nomix

Why? Cause even a .22 can kill, if you hit the right spot. And you never know who could get their hands on one if I were throwing a party, or something like that.

"Eyh, look what I found, ha ha ha ha"

Bang?

Who knows. Just won't take the risk, however miniscule.

My 2 cents.

You're a complete retard if you don't have your guns locked up, ESPECIALLY if you keep ammo in the house. Having a gun safe is 1000X safer than the unnecessary practice of dismantling your gun and hiding the pieces.

Not legally. It's pathetically easy to get a hold of illegal firearms if you know where to look. I don't live in Mr. Rogers neighborhood by any stretch though.

...and in that case all the gun restrictions don't matter, do they? There will always be an illegal gun market, so why restrict the law abiding citizens?

I'm all 100% all for keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and unstable people.

[teeb]

Originally Posted by Viper007Bond

Yeah, population has nothing to do with it...

I couldn't find any more recent statistics, but this 1998 report puts the US top of a gun crime list in first-world countries, per 100,000 people. Meaning it has nothing to do with population.

Originally Posted by TomCat

I think people are just afraid of guns. Looking at stats, accidental gun deaths are minuscule. You're more likely to get struck by lightning. It's kind of like saying you remove the battery from your car every night, because you don't want someone to accidentally find the keys, get in your car, start it up, put it in gear, and hurt someone.

But yeah, crime rates can be effected by gun laws. Some areas of the US required gun ownership for homeowners and crime rates plummeted.

Accidental gun deaths are very small, according to statistics. According to this theory though this is possibly due to mislabelling in hospitals. In their sample, using a revised classification meant there were 6 times more 'accidental' gun-related deaths.

I'd agree that people are scared of guns, though. Maybe just me, but I would brick myself just holding one. And (personally), it's not something I'd ever want in my house.

[zenkidori]

Originally Posted by teeb

I'd agree that people are scared of guns, though. Maybe just me, but I would brick myself just holding one. And (personally), it's not something I'd ever want in my house.

I just don't understand this kind of thinking, is it like being scared of snakes or spiders or something? Actually, I can see that easier, because you don't know what a spider or snake will do, they could bite you for no reason, but a gun doesn't just go off by itself.

for a gun to "accidentally" shoot someone, it has to be at least:

• loaded
• chambered
• off safe
• trigger pulled

those are all things a person needs to do, so somewhere along the line the owner fucked up. If you keep your weapons or at least ammunition in a safe how is it going to just randomly go off and kill someone? It won't, that's how.

safe ownership practices are all that's needed here.

[nomix]

Originally Posted by zenkidori

Since the thread was headed there anyway:and I bet a suzuki cappuccino is more practical than a ferrari...

But a lot cheaper. And it's easier to learn to drive with a Suzuki Cappuccino than in a Ferrari, I suppose.

You're a complete retard if you don't have your guns locked up, ESPECIALLY if you keep ammo in the house. Having a gun safe is 1000X safer than the unnecessary practice of dismantling your gun and hiding the pieces.

Yup. Best thing would be to lock it up, and in case someone should get into the cabinet, you keep crucial parts at another place. For instance at the gun club.

That would be my sollution.

Point is, I'd make sure that even IF someone were to break into my house and get into a locked cabinet, some people will be able, they would not be able to use my hand gun.