Firearms and their relation to crime figures

[Radman]

Alright thought i'd stick my two pence worth in here, in the UK I work for a large national Police Force (if someone on here knows their UK Police forces they will probably be able to guess it if I said we're the only national force in the UK not to carry firearms as routine.)

Bobbies in the UK in general do not want firearms, society in the UK in general does not want to have firearms legalised either, far be it from me to comment on the American constitution but since when was a 'well organised militia' the right for everyone to bear arms?

Guns in my opinion bring nothing but trouble, injury and death, my view is keep them well way from the general populous and leave it at that.

I certainly wouldnt want to carry one whilst going about my duties and to be honest gun crime in the UK doesnt merit it (yet) it'll be a sad day for British policing when firearms come into play for every front line officer/general policing duties, a sad day indeed.

:edit:

Also Damnitboy is there any need for racist terminology? We arent in the 1950's deep south any more you know...

 

[Sicblades]

Murders by guns are worse than murders by non-guns then?

No, but the title of the thread is firearms and their relation to crime figures. If those aren't murders by firearms, it's kinda off topic, that's all.

 

[MutantScalper]

Alright thought i'd stick my two pence worth in here, in the UK I work for a large national Police Force (if someone on here knows their UK Police forces they will probably be able to guess it if I said we're the only national force in the UK not to carry firearms as routine.)

Bobbies in the UK in general do not want firearms, society in the UK in general does not want to have firearms legalised either, far be it from me to comment on the American constitution but since when was a 'well organised militia' the right for everyone to bear arms?

Guns in my opinion bring nothing but trouble, injury and death, my view is keep them well way from the general populous and leave it at that.

I certainly wouldnt want to carry one whilst going about my duties and to be honest gun crime in the UK doesnt merit it (yet) it'll be a sad day for British policing when firearms come into play for every front line officer/general policing duties, a sad day indeed.

:edit:

Also Damnitboy is there any need for racist terminology? We arent in the 1950's deep south any more you know...

Nice to hear from a member of the law enforcement. I remember being in the UK and feeling very safe on the streets at late hours, and the statistics prove that your system concerning gun laws is working very well indeed. The UK is light years ahead of most European nations and the US in preventing gun crimes.

As for the terminology, I agree but it's up to the mods to decide what is allowed here and what isn't.

 

[Sander]

Nice to hear from a member of the law enforcement. I remember being in the UK and feeling very safe on the streets at late hours, and the statistics prove that your system concerning gun laws is working very well indeed. The UK is light years ahead of most European nations and the US in preventing gun crimes.

Too bad they're way behind most of Europe when it comes to stopping violent crime or murders. The objects used in these crimes doesn't particularly interest me, what interests me is whether or not restricting these objects has a measurable effect on the number of crimes and the impact of those crimes. I have yet to see convincing evidence for either case.

As for the terminology, I agree but it's up to the mods to decide what is allowed here and what isn't.

'Negro' isn't exactly an offensive word. It's a factual description, if a bit old-fashioned.

 

[Radman]

Alright thought i'd stick my two pence worth in here, in the UK I work for a large national Police Force (if someone on here knows their UK Police forces they will probably be able to guess it if I said we're the only national force in the UK not to carry firearms as routine.)

Bobbies in the UK in general do not want firearms, society in the UK in general does not want to have firearms legalised either, far be it from me to comment on the American constitution but since when was a 'well organised militia' the right for everyone to bear arms?

Guns in my opinion bring nothing but trouble, injury and death, my view is keep them well way from the general populous and leave it at that.

I certainly wouldnt want to carry one whilst going about my duties and to be honest gun crime in the UK doesnt merit it (yet) it'll be a sad day for British policing when firearms come into play for every front line officer/general policing duties, a sad day indeed.

:edit:

Also Damnitboy is there any need for racist terminology? We arent in the 1950's deep south any more you know...

Nice to hear from a member of the law enforcement. I remember being in the UK and feeling very safe on the streets at late hours, and the statistics prove that your system concerning gun laws is working very well indeed. The UK is light years ahead of most European nations and the US in preventing gun crimes.

As for the terminology, I agree but it's up to the mods to decide what is allowed here and what isn't.

The UK is generally a safe place to live (contrary to popular media opinion) however our society is too lenient now a days when it comes to the courts actually prosecuting criminals.

From my own experiences there have been a number of times when cases have either been dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS - Sort of like the American District Attorneys) or where deals have been made by the CPS and the defendant has received a much lighter sentence for pleading guilty to a lesser offence (even though on police interview the bloke point blank refused the give any account what at all - in the UK there is no such thing as 'pleading the fifth' if the police ask you a question in relation to a crime and you fail to provide an answer or reply 'no comment' then the courts can now draw a negative inference from the failure to provide a response, in reality however the courts and CPS tend to make their own rules up to fit as and when.)

*rant over*

The type of crime that effects most every-day people is what we refer to as 'low level anti-social behaviour' basically youths being troublesome, low level swearing, street drinking and gangs of kids hanging around outside corner shops and such.

Too bad they're way behind most of Europe when it comes to stopping violent crime or murders. The objects used in these crimes doesn't particularly interest me, what interests me is whether or not restricting these objects has a measurable effect on the number of crimes and the impact of those crimes. I have yet to see convincing evidence for either case.

Violent crime has actually declined in the UK and has been doing so for the past 10 years, if you're going to throw facts about atleast support them.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2010/04/violent_crime_falling_says_new.html

'Negro' isn't exactly an offensive word. It's a factual description, if a bit old-fashioned.

I'm afraid it IS a racist word, in the UK you'd end up being arrested for it if directed at someone in the streets (Racially Aggravated offence) i'm afraid times have changed and moved on a ways since then.

 

[White Knight]

Actually, it isn't that racist. Its the spanish word for black. Its just that some people choose to use it in an offensive way, and so the word has been declared unlawful as a whole.

 

[Radman]

Actually, it isn't that racist. Its the spanish word for black. Its just that some people choose to use it in an offensive way, and so the word has been declared unlawful as a whole.

Agreed to some degree but as I said:

Over here the UK see's it differently

(Check out the guys mustache)

 

[Sander]

Violent crime has actually declined in the UK and has been doing so for the past 10 years, if you're going to throw facts about atleast support them.

I never said violent crime was increasing. I said it was at a higher level than most of the rest of Europe. Which it is.
See: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...73/UK-is-violent-crime-capital-of-Europe.html

I'm afraid it IS a racist word, in the UK you'd end up being arrested for it if directed at someone in the streets (Racially Aggravated offence) i'm afraid times have changed and moved on a ways since then.

Really? That's stupid. Will I get arrested if I call a Chinese man 'Asian' too? If you want to refer to a group of people whose main common denominator is their skin colour, you have to be able to refer to that somehow.

In any case, 'negro' is not an offensive word in the US for as far as I know, and that's the main English-language demographic of this site.

 

[MutantScalper]

I never said violent crime was increasing. I said it was at a higher level than most of the rest of Europe. Which it is.
See: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...73/UK-is-violent-crime-capital-of-Europe.html

Those figures don't really add up with reality since the methodology to gather them was different from country to country.

In terms of gun crime UK is still one of the safest places in Europe.

Really? That's stupid. Will I get arrested if I call a Chinese man 'Asian' too? If you want to refer to a group of people whose main common denominator is their skin colour, you have to be able to refer to that somehow.

In any case, 'negro' is not an offensive word in the US for as far as I know, and that's the main English-language demographic of this site.

http://www.slate.com/id/2241120/

 

[Sander]

I never said violent crime was increasing. I said it was at a higher level than most of the rest of Europe. Which it is.
See: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...73/UK-is-violent-crime-capital-of-Europe.html

Those figures don't really add up with reality since the methodology to gather them was different from country to country.

Can you find a better study? I can't. All data I can find point to the UK having a high violent crime rate.

In terms of gun crime UK is still one of the safest places in Europe.

Again: hardly relevant. Whether you get killed or threatened with a knife or a gun makes no difference to the victim. Eliminating gun crime doesn't eliminate crime, it simply changes the method.

http://www.slate.com/id/2241120/

'African-American' isn't inclusive enough because it excludes, say, British blacks. Negro may not be the most fashionable term, it's hardly a put-down of blacks.

 

[Radman]

I never said violent crime was increasing. I said it was at a higher level than most of the rest of Europe. Which it is.
See: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...73/UK-is-violent-crime-capital-of-Europe.html

Yeah but theres also skewing of the figures in the way in which they are recorded the labour government had a thing where-by EVERY report was generally automatically given a crime ref, I cannot see the same thing happening in places like France or spain, that and the fact that the UK has ALOT more categorisations of violent crime when compared to most western nations (let alone Europe) what’s classed as a violent crime in the UK may not be a crime in France or Spain for example... (Threatening Behaviour is a violent crime in the UK, yet to my knowledge no such crime exists in France or Spain.)

Really? That's stupid. Will I get arrested if I call a Chinese man 'Asian' too? If you want to refer to a group of people whose main common denominator is their skin colour, you have to be able to refer to that somehow.

In any case, 'negro' is not an offensive word in the US for as far as I know, and that's the main English-language demographic of this site.

See my quote above, i'm going off what I know (in the UK) I cannot comment on how the US decides to conduct itself.

As for asian over here we call the chinese community chinese, asian tends to describe those from the 'middle east' in the UK (a very american thing calling people from the far east 'asian.')

 

[Sander]

Yeah but theres also skewing of the figures in the way in which they are recorded the labour government had a thing where-by EVERY report was generally automatically given a crime ref, I cannot see the same thing happening in places like France or spain, that and the fact that the UK has ALOT more categorisations of violent crime when compared to most western nations (let alone Europe) what’s classed as a violent crime in the UK may not be a crime in France or Spain for example... (Threatening Behaviour is a violent crime in the UK, yet to my knowledge no such crime exists in France or Spain.)

Feel free to cite better or different numbers, but I can't find a single study that draws a different conclusion.

 

[Radman]

Yeah but theres also skewing of the figures in the way in which they are recorded the labour government had a thing where-by EVERY report was generally automatically given a crime ref, I cannot see the same thing happening in places like France or spain, that and the fact that the UK has ALOT more categorisations of violent crime when compared to most western nations (let alone Europe) what’s classed as a violent crime in the UK may not be a crime in France or Spain for example... (Threatening Behaviour is a violent crime in the UK, yet to my knowledge no such crime exists in France or Spain.)

Feel free to cite better or different numbers, but I can't find a single study that draws a different conclusion.

My point was Sandy that in the UK we record alot more crime then most other European nation simply because of the sheer number of British Laws which fall under the scope of 'violent crime' heres what I pulled off wiki (I know, its not a source but...)

United Kingdom
[edit] England and Wales

Includes all violence against the person, sexual offences, and robbery as violent crime.[8]

Imagine how many laws and statutes 'violence against the person covers'

Threatning Violence
Common Assault
ABH
GBH
Sexual Assaults
Robberies
Aggravated Vehicle Taking

I've just plucked them from the top of my head...

 

[MutantScalper]

Can you find a better study? I can't. All data I can find point to the UK having a high violent crime rate.

Not right now but that doesn't mean that the Eurostat-figures were accurate. Some countries don't even count 'mild' offences, does that make these countries safer then UK? I don't think so.

But I agree that there should be studies about the subject.

Again: hardly relevant. Whether you get killed or threatened with a knife or a gun makes no difference to the victim. Eliminating gun crime doesn't eliminate crime, it simply changes the method.

No it doesn't. The availability of guns increases the possibility of violent crime.

'African-American' isn't inclusive enough because it excludes, say, British blacks. Negro may not be the most fashionable term, it's hardly a put-down of blacks.

Only older US blacks might use the term of themselves, as a term it is outdated. I wouldn't recommend you using it of blacks in the States.

 

[Sander]

My point was Sandy that in the UK we record alot more crime then most other European nation simply because of the sheer number of British Laws which fall under the scope of 'violent crime' heres what I pulled off wiki (I know, its not a source but...)

United Kingdom
[edit] England and Wales

Includes all violence against the person, sexual offences, and robbery as violent crime.[8]

Imagine how many laws and statutes 'violence against the person covers'

Threatning Violence
Common Assault
ABH
GBH
Sexual Assaults
Robberies
Aggravated Vehicle Taking

I've just plucked them from the top of my head...

That's fine. I get your point. But it's still the best data I can find. I can also find no contradicting sources anywhere. So, I'm going to go with that, because there's no reason to do otherwise.

Not right now but that doesn't mean that the Eurostat-figures were accurate. Some countries don't even count 'mild' offences, does that make these countries safer then UK? I don't think so.

But I agree that there should be studies about the subject.

If I can choose between a statistic that's published by a respected authority, and ehm...well, no counter-point, then I'm going to go with the former.

No it doesn't. The availability of guns increases the possibility of violent crime.

We went over this numerous times in the last thread. There is no conclusive evidence either way. You can keep stating that it's true, but that doesn't make it so.

 

[MutantScalper]

Have you actually read the Eurostat-study? Here's a quote from it.

Comparisons of crime levels based on the absolute figures would be misleading, since they are affected by many factors, including:

* different legal and criminal justice systems;
* rates at which crimes are reported to the police and recorded by them;
* differences in the point at which crime is measured (for example, report to the police, identification of suspect, etc.);
* differences in the rules by which multiple offences are counted;
* differences in the list of offences that are included in the overall crime figures.

Figures for the prison population may also be affected by many factors, including:

* number of cases dealt with by the courts;
* percentage of convicted criminals given a custodial sentence;
* length of the sentences imposed;
* size of the population on remand;
* date of the survey, especially where amnesties (or other early or executive release arrangements) apply.

For these reasons, direct comparisons of crime levels in different countries should always be avoided. Rates per head of population (which might imply that such comparisons could be made) are, therefore, not presented in this statistical article, except in the case of homicide and the prison population, where the figures may be more readily comparable. In these cases, rates per 100 000 head of population averaged over three years have been calculated.

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Crime_trends_in_detail

Helps if you read the studies.

 

[Radman]

Have you actually read the Eurostat-study? Here's a quote from it.

Comparisons of crime levels based on the absolute figures would be misleading, since they are affected by many factors, including:

* different legal and criminal justice systems;
* rates at which crimes are reported to the police and recorded by them;
* differences in the point at which crime is measured (for example, report to the police, identification of suspect, etc.);
* differences in the rules by which multiple offences are counted;
* differences in the list of offences that are included in the overall crime figures.

Figures for the prison population may also be affected by many factors, including:

* number of cases dealt with by the courts;
* percentage of convicted criminals given a custodial sentence;
* length of the sentences imposed;
* size of the population on remand;
* date of the survey, especially where amnesties (or other early or executive release arrangements) apply.

For these reasons, direct comparisons of crime levels in different countries should always be avoided. Rates per head of population (which might imply that such comparisons could be made) are, therefore, not presented in this statistical article, except in the case of homicide and the prison population, where the figures may be more readily comparable. In these cases, rates per 100 000 head of population averaged over three years have been calculated.

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Crime_trends_in_detail

Helps if you read the studies.

Thanks for this Mutantscalper, this is what I was trying to get across.

 

[Sander]

Again: any data is better than no data. And moreover: I've found *no study at all* claiming something else. If you disagree with the numbers, provide something else to use. If you can't, the only guideline I have is the numbers I have access to.

And since it cites homicide as reliable, let's look at that:
Belgium - 2.04
Bulgaria - 2.37
Czech Republic - 1.99
Denmark - 1.17
Estonia - 7.3
Germany - 0.9
Ireland - 1.45
Greece - 1.05
Spain - 1.12
France - 1.46
Italy - 1.13
Cyprus - 1.66
Latvia - --
Luxembourg - 1.42
Malta - 0.66
Netherlands - 1.06
Austria - 0.64
Poland - 1.37
Hungary - 1.57
Portugal - 1.47
Romania - 2.02
Slovenia - 0.93
Slovakia - 1.76
Finland - 2.23
Sweden - 1.05
UK: England&Wales - 1.43
UK: Scotland - 2.17
UK: Northern Ireland - 1.59

Clearly, the UK is in the upper echelon of Western Europe there.

 

[MutantScalper]

Well I would say Scotland is in the upper echelon, rest of UK is average - relatively low.

 

[Sander]

Well I would say Scotland is in the upper echelon, rest of UK is average - relatively low.

England&Wales murder rate is higher than in Denmark, Germany, Greece, Spain, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Slovenia and Sweden.

If we exclude non-Western European countries, only Belgium, Ireland, France, Finland and Portugal have a higher murder rate.