PDA

View Full Version : Re: Britain: From Bad to Worse


John HUDSON
November 25th 04, 12:16 AM
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 18:22:04 -0500, Will Brink
> wrote:

>Britain: From Bad to Worse
>
>Dave Kopel, Dr. Paul Gallant and Dr. Joanne Eisen
>Thursday, March 22, 2001
>During the 19th century, and most of the 20th, Britain enjoyed a
>well-deserved reputation as an unusually safe and crime-free nation,
>compared to the United States or continental Europe. No longer.
>
>To the great consternation of British authorities concerned about
>tourism revenue, a June CBS News report proclaimed Great Britain "one of
>the most violent urban societies in the Western world." Declared Dan
>Rather: "This summer, thousands of Americans will travel to Britain
>expecting a civilized island free from crime and ugliness ... [but now]
>the U.K. has a crime problem ... worse than ours."
>
>Not surprisingly to many observers, the violent crime rate has risen
>dramatically and steadily since gun bans have been instituted. That's a
>trend seen wherever strict gun control laws have been implemented. And
>that's the part of the story British officials have tried to keep under
>wraps.
>
>A headline in the London Daily Telegraph back on April 1, 1996, said it
>all: "Crime Figures a Sham, Say Police." The story noted that "pressure
>to convince the public that police were winning the fight against crime
>had resulted in a long list of ruses to 'massage' statistics," and "the
>recorded crime level bore no resemblance to the actual amount of crime
>being committed."
>
>For example, where a series of homes were burgled, they were regularly
>recorded as one crime. If a burglar hit 15 or 20 flats, only one crime
>was added to the statistics.
>
>More recently, a 2000 report from the Inspectorate of Constabulary
>charges Britain's 43 police departments with systemic
>under-classification of crime * for example, by recording burglary as
>"vandalism." The report lays much of the blame on the police's desire to
>avoid the extra paperwork associated with more serious crimes.
>
>Britain's justice officials have also kept crime totals down by being
>careful about what to count.
>
>"American homicide rates are based on initial data, but British homicide
>rates are based on the final disposition." Suppose that three men kill a
>woman during an argument outside a bar. They are arrested for murder,
>but because of problems with identification (the main witness is dead),
>charges are eventually dropped. In American crime statistics, the event
>counts as a three-person homicide, but in British statistics it counts
>as nothing at all. "With such differences in reporting criteria,
>comparisons of U.S. homicide rates with British homicide rates is a
>sham," the report concludes.
>
>Another "common practice," according to one retired Scotland Yard senior
>officer, is "falsifying clear-up rates by gaining false confessions from
>criminals already in prison." (Britain has far fewer protections against
>abusive police interrogations than does the United States.) As a result,
>thousands of crimes in Great Britain have been "solved" by bribing or
>coercing prisoners to confess to crimes they never committed.
>
>Explaining away the disparity between crime reported by victims and the
>official figures became so difficult that, in April 1998, the British
>Home Office was forced to change its method of reporting crime, and a
>somewhat more accurate picture began to emerge. In January 2000,
>official street-crime rates in London were more than double the official
>rate from the year before.
>
>So what's a British politician to do when elections coincide with an
>out-of-control crime wave? Calling for "reasonable" gun laws is no
>longer an option. Handguns have been confiscated and long guns are very
>tightly restricted. So anti-gun demagoguery, while still popular, can't
>carry the entire load.
>
>Conversely, the government would not find it acceptable to allow its
>subjects to possess any type of gun (even a licensed, registered .22
>rifle) for home protection. Defensive gun ownership is entirely illegal,
>and considered an insult to the government, because it implies that the
>government cannot keep the peace. Thus, in one recent notorious case, an
>elderly man who had been repeatedly burglarized and had received no
>meaningful assistance from the police, shot a pair of career burglars
>who had broken into his home. The man was sentenced to life in prison.
>
>The British authorities warn the public incessantly about the dangers of
>following the American path on gun policy. But the Daily Telegraph (June
>29, 2000) points out that "the main reason for a much lower burglary
>rate in America is householders' propensity to shoot intruders. They do
>so without fear of being dragged before courts and jailed for life."
>
>So what's the government going to do to make voters safer? One solution
>came from the Home Office in April 1999 in the form of "Anti-Social
>Behaviour Orders" * special court orders intended to deal with people
>who cannot be proven to have committed a crime, but whom the police want
>to restrict anyway. Behaviour Orders can, among other things, prohibit a
>person from visiting a particular street or premises, set a curfew, or
>lead to a person's eviction from his home.
>
>Violation of a Behaviour Order can carry a prison sentence of up to five
>years.
>
>Prime Minister Tony Blair is now proposing that the government be
>allowed to confine people proactively, based on the fears of their
>potential danger to society.
>
>American anti-gun lobbyists have long argued that if America followed
>Britain's lead in severely restricting firearms possession and
>self-defense, then American crime rates would eventually match
>Britain's. The lobbyists have also argued that if guns were restricted
>in America, civil liberties in the U.S. would have the same degree of
>protection that they have in Britain. The lobbyists are absolutely
>right.
>
>Dr. Paul Gallant practices optometry in Wesley Hills, N.Y.

Which of course qualifies him magnificently to pass learned discourse
on the British way and purpose!! Perhaps he needs his eyes testing!!
;o)

>Dr. Joanne Eisen practices dentistry in Old Bethpage, N.Y.

This is a great background from which to base opinions of how things
are done in a foreign country. Perhaps she needs to get her teeth into
something a little closer to home!! ;o)

>Both are research associates at the Independence Institute, where Dave Kopel is research
>director.

Dave needs to get a little more direction to his directing and stop
allowing 'amateur' sleuths from the health profession to provide his
pap!!

>Reprinted with permission of the authors.

But without the approval of the targets of this scurrilous work of
fiction!!

Another great piece of 'trawled crap' from the very biased gun-toting
little Willy!! ;o)

John HUDSON
November 25th 04, 09:54 AM
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 09:33:32 GMT, "the guvnor"
> wrote:

>
>"Larry J." > wrote in message
>
>>> Homicides:
>>>
>>> Los Angeles 592
>>> New York 489
>>> Chicago 485
>>> London 199
>>
>> But you don't report most of yours. No fair...
>
>People don't report murders to the police???

Well...... certainly not their own!! ;o)

Lordy
November 25th 04, 11:24 AM
[groups snipped because my news-server made me]

Gregory Procter > wrote in
:

>
>
> the guvnor wrote:
>
>> "Will Brink" > wrote in message
>>
>> > The lobbyists have also argued that if guns were restricted
>> > in America, civil liberties in the U.S. would have the same degree
>> > of protection that they have in Britain. The lobbyists are
>> > absolutely right.
>>
>> Homicides:
>>
>> Los Angeles 592
>> New York 489
>> Chicago 485
>> London 199
>
> Shouldn't those numbers be shown in relation to the respective
> populations?

Not sure where the homocide figures came from, but since we're here..

(There was a great URL for looking this stuff up (worldwide not just US))

Figures from Wikipedia give

LA 3.7m
NYC >8m
Chicago 2.8m
London 7.1m

Giving homicides per million ratios of

LA 160
NYC ~61
Chicago 173
London 28

Lets say (for sake of argument, and, in keeping with this thread, being
completely ridiculous about it) that an incredible 50% of murders slip
through the stats in London. That puts London at 56.

--
Lordy

Lordy
November 25th 04, 11:52 AM
Lordy > wrote in
:

> [groups snipped because my news-server made me]
>
> Gregory Procter > wrote in
> :
>
>>
>>
>> the guvnor wrote:
>>
>>> "Will Brink" > wrote in message
>>>
>>> > The lobbyists have also argued that if guns were restricted
>>> > in America, civil liberties in the U.S. would have the same degree
>>> > of protection that they have in Britain. The lobbyists are
>>> > absolutely right.
>>>
>>> Homicides:
>>>
>>> Los Angeles 592
>>> New York 489
>>> Chicago 485
>>> London 199
>>
>> Shouldn't those numbers be shown in relation to the respective
>> populations?
>

Here is a chart for people that like pretty pictures....(per 100,000)

(figures to 2001, I suspect London has gone up in the last 3 years)

http://gangresearch.net/Globalization/guggenheim/london.html
http://gangresearch.net/Globalization/guggenheim/fourcities.html

So its probably worth looking here too

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/153988.stm
http://www.angelfire.com/rnb/y/homicide.htm#murd


> Giving homicides per million ratios of
>
> LA 160
> NYC ~61
> Chicago 173
> London 28
>


--
Lordy

John HUDSON
November 25th 04, 12:39 PM
On 25 Nov 2004 11:52:55 GMT, Lordy > wrote:

>Lordy > wrote in
:
>
>> [groups snipped because my news-server made me]
>>
>> Gregory Procter > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> the guvnor wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Will Brink" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> > The lobbyists have also argued that if guns were restricted
>>>> > in America, civil liberties in the U.S. would have the same degree
>>>> > of protection that they have in Britain. The lobbyists are
>>>> > absolutely right.
>>>>
>>>> Homicides:
>>>>
>>>> Los Angeles 592
>>>> New York 489
>>>> Chicago 485
>>>> London 199
>>>
>>> Shouldn't those numbers be shown in relation to the respective
>>> populations?
>>
>
>Here is a chart for people that like pretty pictures....(per 100,000)
>
>(figures to 2001, I suspect London has gone up in the last 3 years)
>
>http://gangresearch.net/Globalization/guggenheim/london.html
>http://gangresearch.net/Globalization/guggenheim/fourcities.html
>
>So its probably worth looking here too
>
>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/153988.stm
>http://www.angelfire.com/rnb/y/homicide.htm#murd

Well done Lordy! ;o)

That puts paid to Will's constant attempts to brand the UK as a
lawless jungle because our citizenry don't bear arms!!

I'm never sure what he is trying to prove, with his silly statistics
and his pathetically amateur and biased articles trawled from the
Internet. I think it is likely that he targets us because we disprove
his 'gun-toting' theories.

Personally, I don't care whether Will Brink wants to 'tote
six-shooters' or not - whatever turns his inadequate little self on!!
However, I do object to him constantly attempting to paint this
'Sceptred Isle' as though it were a 'third world' lawless
dictatorship.

This green and pleasant land, while constantly evolving (perhaps not
always in it's indigenous population's best interests), is still the
envy of the world!!

Will Brink
November 25th 04, 02:26 PM
In article >,
Lordy > wrote:

> Lordy > wrote in
> :
>
> > [groups snipped because my news-server made me]
> >
> > Gregory Procter > wrote in
> > :
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> the guvnor wrote:
> >>
> >>> "Will Brink" > wrote in message
> >>>
> >>> > The lobbyists have also argued that if guns were restricted
> >>> > in America, civil liberties in the U.S. would have the same degree
> >>> > of protection that they have in Britain. The lobbyists are
> >>> > absolutely right.
> >>>
> >>> Homicides:
> >>>
> >>> Los Angeles 592
> >>> New York 489
> >>> Chicago 485
> >>> London 199
> >>
> >> Shouldn't those numbers be shown in relation to the respective
> >> populations?
> >
>
> Here is a chart for people that like pretty pictures....(per 100,000)
>
> (figures to 2001, I suspect London has gone up in the last 3 years)
>
> http://gangresearch.net/Globalization/guggenheim/london.html
> http://gangresearch.net/Globalization/guggenheim/fourcities.html
>
> So its probably worth looking here too
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/153988.stm
> http://www.angelfire.com/rnb/y/homicide.htm#murd


The UK now leads the western world, includinf the US, in most crimes.
Their crime went way up while ours went way down. You are now 10 times
more likely to experience violence in London then you are in NY city
Regardless if a gun, knife, or club is used). Point being, the UK is a
great and noble country, but you should get your own house in order
before whining about the US or making stupid claims.

"Gun crimes during the first 10 months of the annual period have tripled
in most of the urban areas which have so far submitted statistics to the
Home Office. [Sir John Stevens, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner]
said: "The price of hiring or buying a gun has come down because there
are more guns circulating." Handgun crime has soared past levels last
seen before the Dunblane massacre of 1996 and the ban on the weapons
that followed. The ban on ownership of handguns was introduced in 1997.
It was hoped that the measure would reduce the number of handguns
available to criminals. According to internal Home Office statistics,
however, handgun crime is now at its highest since 1993.
--THE DAILY TELEGRAPH (LONDON), 2/24/02



>
>
> > Giving homicides per million ratios of
> >
> > LA 160
> > NYC ~61
> > Chicago 173
> > London 28
> >

--
Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

John HUDSON
November 25th 04, 02:54 PM
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 09:26:30 -0500, Will Brink
> wrote:

>In article >,
> Lordy > wrote:
>
>> Lordy > wrote in
>> :
>>
>> > [groups snipped because my news-server made me]
>> >
>> > Gregory Procter > wrote in
>> > :
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> the guvnor wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> "Will Brink" > wrote in message
>> >>>
>> >>> > The lobbyists have also argued that if guns were restricted
>> >>> > in America, civil liberties in the U.S. would have the same degree
>> >>> > of protection that they have in Britain. The lobbyists are
>> >>> > absolutely right.
>> >>>
>> >>> Homicides:
>> >>>
>> >>> Los Angeles 592
>> >>> New York 489
>> >>> Chicago 485
>> >>> London 199
>> >>
>> >> Shouldn't those numbers be shown in relation to the respective
>> >> populations?
>> >
>>
>> Here is a chart for people that like pretty pictures....(per 100,000)
>>
>> (figures to 2001, I suspect London has gone up in the last 3 years)
>>
>> http://gangresearch.net/Globalization/guggenheim/london.html
>> http://gangresearch.net/Globalization/guggenheim/fourcities.html
>>
>> So its probably worth looking here too
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/153988.stm
>> http://www.angelfire.com/rnb/y/homicide.htm#murd
>
>
>The UK now leads the western world, includinf the US, in most crimes.
>Their crime went way up while ours went way down. You are now 10 times
>more likely to experience violence in London then you are in NY city
>Regardless if a gun, knife, or club is used). Point being, the UK is a
>great and noble country, but you should get your own house in order
>before whining about the US or making stupid claims.
>
>"Gun crimes during the first 10 months of the annual period have tripled
>in most of the urban areas which have so far submitted statistics to the
>Home Office.

Meaningless, unless you state the actual figures involved, otherwise
it could simply mean that one alleged gun crime has become three (ie.
"tripled") in the period stated.

> [Sir John Stevens, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner]
>said: "The price of hiring or buying a gun has come down because there
>are more guns circulating."

Because they are allowing illegal immigrant gangs to bring them in,
mostly from the former Soviet Union and it's lost satellites!! That's
where the steep increase in crime is coming from, as the direct result
of impotence in the face of uncontrollable immigration - which is not
unique to the UK!!

>Handgun crime has soared past levels last
>seen before the Dunblane massacre of 1996 and the ban on the weapons
>that followed.

When the figures were already minimal, and the massacre was carried
out by one man who was a mental case. It was a rare 'one-off' Will!!

>The ban on ownership of handguns was introduced in 1997.

Which meant precisely bugger all to the vast majority of the
population, who didn't own or carry guns anyway.

>It was hoped that the measure would reduce the number of handguns
>available to criminals.

If criminals want guns then criminals will get guns. I've told you
before many times, most gun crime is limited to fairly recent
immigrant gang warfare, which passes un-noticed by the rest of the
population.

>According to internal Home Office statistics,
>however, handgun crime is now at its highest since 1993.
>--THE DAILY TELEGRAPH (LONDON), 2/24/02

The Telegraph is on a 'right-wing' crusade on law and order at the
moment, in order to attempt to embarrass the incumbent pseudo
socialist government, and like most newspapers is attempting mainly to
sell newspapers!!

You are as usual Will, spouting ill-informed, bigoted, biased and
xenophobic crap, which does you no credit. You have a golden
opportunity in this forum, if you are really interested in the British
way and purpose, of exchanging views with people that actually live
here and know exactly what is going on!!

John HUDSON
November 25th 04, 03:44 PM
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 09:41:10 -0500, Will Brink
> wrote:

>In article >,
> "the guvnor" > wrote:
>
>> "Will Brink" > wrote in message
>>
>> > The lobbyists have also argued that if guns were restricted
>> > in America, civil liberties in the U.S. would have the same degree of
>> > protection that they have in Britain. The lobbyists are absolutely
>> > right.
>>
>> Homicides:
>>
>> Los Angeles 592
>> New York 489
>> Chicago 485
>> London 199
>>
>> Less guns, less dead people...
>
>Wrong, here's the facts:
>
>American vs. European Crime Rates
>
>A German lawyer, in response to another blog entry (German Justice: 2
>Days Per Murder), repeated the common European belief that the United
>States has a much higher crime rate than major European countries. The
>facts are quite different...
>
>[UPDATE 8/15/2003 - For sources, see end of article]
>
>
>Here are Interpol 2001 crime statistics (rate per 100,000):
>
>* 4161 - US
>* 7736 - Germany
>* 6941 - France
>* 9927 - England and Wales
>
>
>Thus the US has a substantially lower crime rate than the major European
>countries!
>
>Here are the Interpol 1995 crime statistics (rate per 100,000):
>
>* 5278 - US
>* 8179 - Germany
>* 6316 - France
>* 7206 - England & Wales
>
>
>Hence the trend in the US is towards a lower crime rate, while the trend
>in Europe (except Germany) is towards an increasing crime rate.
>
>It is true that we (USA) have a high murder rate, mostly of criminals
>killing criminals, but a distressingly large number of people killing
>their spouses in anger, and the rate of "stranger killings" is rising.
>
>However, the homicide rates have been dropping dramatically as we have
>been increasing penalties:
>
>Homicide Rate/100,000 by Date in US:
>
>* 1980 - 10.2
>* 2000 - 5.5
>
>
>
>Also, our murder rate is high largely due to the multicultural nature of
>our society. Inner city blacks, members of a distinct subculture, have a
>vastly higher criminal and victim homicide rate than our society as an
>average:
>
>Homicide Offender Rate/100,000 by Race in US (2000):
>
>* 3.4 - White
>* 25.8 - Black
>* 3.2 - Other

As usual Will, you haul spurious and meaningless statistics out of
your ample posterior, in an effort to prove whatever it is you are
currently attempting to prove, which at the moment is what a dreadful
country the UK is!!

Well is doesn't wash old chum; there are only 60 million of us and
most of us don't ever experience crime of any sort, let alone gun
crime!!

Lordy
November 26th 04, 11:19 AM
Will Brink > wrote in
:

> Point being, the UK is a
> great and noble country, but you should get your own house in order
> before whining about the US or making stupid claims.

Its a bit disengenious for you to /start/ the "Brit-bashing" thread that
makes the claims, and when someone responds (with facts and figures
only) you reply with the above? What is that all about?

You first post article said ...

<quote>
> "American homicide rates are based on initial data, but British
> homicide rates are based on the final disposition." Suppose that three
> men kill a woman during an argument outside a bar. They are arrested
> for murder, but because of problems with identification (the main
> witness is dead), charges are eventually dropped. In American crime
> statistics, the event counts as a three-person homicide, but in
> British statistics it counts as nothing at all. "With such differences
> in reporting criteria, comparisons of U.S. homicide rates with British
> homicide rates is a sham," the report concludes.
</quote>

I just posted links relating to this (most links were from American
sites)

>> http://gangresearch.net/Globalization/guggenheim/london.html
>> http://gangresearch.net/Globalization/guggenheim/fourcities.html

You could more than double (almost triple) the "reported" London
homicide rate before its on par with NY (And NY is one of your best of
the big cities, London one of our worst). To seriously suggest this is
because 50-66% of homicides in London go unreported is both incredible
and laughable.

Just facts and figures. No emotive bull****, and no sources as blatantly
biased as yours, that I can see.

--
Lordy

Lordy
November 26th 04, 12:04 PM
Lordy > wrote in
:

> Will Brink > wrote in
> :
>
>> Point being, the UK is a
>> great and noble country, but you should get your own house in order
>> before whining about the US or making stupid claims.
>
> Its a bit disengenious for you to /start/ the "Brit-bashing" thread
> that makes the claims, and when someone responds (with facts and
> figures only) you reply with the above? What is that all about?
>

Opps I didnt notice this was a subject change from
"The American way of life..."
to
"Britain:From Bad to Worse"

So I conceed any argument in that respect, and have ZERO interest in
looking at the originating thread. In fact its time to crank up a few
filters on this group. Its just getting out of hand these days....

Score -9999
Guns
American (no disrespect to American people just the threads)
US / USA
Democrat
Republican
troops

Score +9999
Here are the jpgs the group requested




--
Lordy

Esca
November 26th 04, 06:31 PM
"Shaun" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 09:41:10 -0500, Will Brink
> > wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > "the guvnor" > wrote:
> >
> >> "Will Brink" > wrote in message
> >>
> >> > The lobbyists have also argued that if guns were restricted
> >> > in America, civil liberties in the U.S. would have the same degree of
> >> > protection that they have in Britain. The lobbyists are absolutely
> >> > right.
> >>
> >> Homicides:
> >>
> >> Los Angeles 592
> >> New York 489
> >> Chicago 485
> >> London 199
> >>
> >> Less guns, less dead people...
> >
> >Wrong, here's the facts:
> >
> >American vs. European Crime Rates
> >
> >A German lawyer, in response to another blog entry (German Justice: 2
> >Days Per Murder), repeated the common European belief that the United
> >States has a much higher crime rate than major European countries. The
> >facts are quite different...
> >
> >[UPDATE 8/15/2003 - For sources, see end of article]
> >
> >
> >Here are Interpol 2001 crime statistics (rate per 100,000):
> >
> >* 4161 - US
> >* 7736 - Germany
> >* 6941 - France
> >* 9927 - England and Wales
> >
> >
> >Thus the US has a substantially lower crime rate than the major European
> >countries!
>
> Using a system that classes a murder in New York as equiverlent to
> stolen bicycle in Paris.
>
> Which is very useful for hiding the fact in terms of serious crimes
> (rape,muder,serious assault, and crimes involving guns) the US has
> much higher rates
>

actually, you are wrong

there are two accepted classification for serious crimes in the US.

Part I and Part II offenses

they include various serious felonies, like murder, felonious assault, rape,
robbery, burglary, etc

it is simply a fact that england has a MUCH higher crime rate (for serious
crime as well) than the US

it is also a fact that the US has a much higher MURDER rate

it is also fallacious to think that guns cause our higher murder rate

all sorts of cultural differences account for this difference.

consider this. japanese citizens (in japan) have a very low homicide rate,
but a suicide rate that is much higher than ours

japanese americans (even where guns are readily available) have a very low
homicide rate (very close to the japanese rate) and a very high suicide rate
(ditto).

one DIFFERENCE. while the murder rates and suicide rates are the same
(roughly), the USE of firearms in both types of incidents are much higher

because they are available

however, the availability OF guns, has not changed the basic cultural
reasons why people who are in the japanese culture (whether in US or in
japan) tend to kill themselves quite often, but not others

all sorts of comparisons can be made like this, in terms of CULTURE, but the
point is clear. (also note that in states that passed CCW laws, the most
obvious example being fla, homicide rates generally go DOWN, despite the
much greater proliferation of guns). it is NOT our high gun ownership rates
that causes our high murder rate. even michael moore, to his credit, did
not imply that in his movie bowling for columbine

it is ridiculous example of shoddy thinking (even for a social scientist) to
make the conclusion that more guns = more crime

the causality is not established.

whit

> >
> >Here are the Interpol 1995 crime statistics (rate per 100,000):
> >
> >* 5278 - US
> >* 8179 - Germany
> >* 6316 - France
> >* 7206 - England & Wales
> >
> >
> >Hence the trend in the US is towards a lower crime rate, while the trend
> >in Europe (except Germany) is towards an increasing crime rate.
> >
> >It is true that we (USA) have a high murder rate, mostly of criminals
> >killing criminals, but a distressingly large number of people killing
> >their spouses in anger, and the rate of "stranger killings" is rising.
> >
> >However, the homicide rates have been dropping dramatically as we have
> >been increasing penalties:
> >
> >Homicide Rate/100,000 by Date in US:
> >
> >* 1980 - 10.2
> >* 2000 - 5.5
> >
> >
> >
> >Also, our murder rate is high largely due to the multicultural nature of
> >our society. Inner city blacks, members of a distinct subculture, have a
> >vastly higher criminal and victim homicide rate than our society as an
> >average:
> >
> >Homicide Offender Rate/100,000 by Race in US (2000):
> >
> >* 3.4 - White
> >* 25.8 - Black
> >* 3.2 - Other
>
> So in summary, the US has a lower muder rate if we remove the people
> most likely to offend, but don't apply the same rational to other
> countries.

Will Brink
November 26th 04, 09:40 PM
In article >, "Esca" >
wrote:

> "Shaun" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 09:41:10 -0500, Will Brink
> > > wrote:
> >
> > >In article >,
> > > "the guvnor" > wrote:
> > >
> > >> "Will Brink" > wrote in message
> > >>
> > >> > The lobbyists have also argued that if guns were restricted
> > >> > in America, civil liberties in the U.S. would have the same degree of
> > >> > protection that they have in Britain. The lobbyists are absolutely
> > >> > right.
> > >>
> > >> Homicides:
> > >>
> > >> Los Angeles 592
> > >> New York 489
> > >> Chicago 485
> > >> London 199
> > >>
> > >> Less guns, less dead people...
> > >
> > >Wrong, here's the facts:
> > >
> > >American vs. European Crime Rates
> > >
> > >A German lawyer, in response to another blog entry (German Justice: 2
> > >Days Per Murder), repeated the common European belief that the United
> > >States has a much higher crime rate than major European countries. The
> > >facts are quite different...
> > >
> > >[UPDATE 8/15/2003 - For sources, see end of article]
> > >
> > >
> > >Here are Interpol 2001 crime statistics (rate per 100,000):
> > >
> > >* 4161 - US
> > >* 7736 - Germany
> > >* 6941 - France
> > >* 9927 - England and Wales
> > >
> > >
> > >Thus the US has a substantially lower crime rate than the major European
> > >countries!
> >
> > Using a system that classes a murder in New York as equiverlent to
> > stolen bicycle in Paris.
> >
> > Which is very useful for hiding the fact in terms of serious crimes
> > (rape,muder,serious assault, and crimes involving guns) the US has
> > much higher rates
> >
>
> actually, you are wrong
>
> there are two accepted classification for serious crimes in the US.
>
> Part I and Part II offenses
>
> they include various serious felonies, like murder, felonious assault, rape,
> robbery, burglary, etc
>
> it is simply a fact that england has a MUCH higher crime rate (for serious
> crime as well) than the US
>
> it is also a fact that the US has a much higher MURDER rate
>
> it is also fallacious to think that guns cause our higher murder rate
>
> all sorts of cultural differences account for this difference.
>
> consider this. japanese citizens (in japan) have a very low homicide rate,
> but a suicide rate that is much higher than ours
>
> japanese americans (even where guns are readily available) have a very low
> homicide rate (very close to the japanese rate) and a very high suicide rate
> (ditto).
>
> one DIFFERENCE. while the murder rates and suicide rates are the same
> (roughly), the USE of firearms in both types of incidents are much higher
>
> because they are available
>
> however, the availability OF guns, has not changed the basic cultural
> reasons why people who are in the japanese culture (whether in US or in
> japan) tend to kill themselves quite often, but not others
>
> all sorts of comparisons can be made like this, in terms of CULTURE, but the
> point is clear. (also note that in states that passed CCW laws, the most
> obvious example being fla, homicide rates generally go DOWN, despite the
> much greater proliferation of guns). it is NOT our high gun ownership rates
> that causes our high murder rate. even michael moore, to his credit, did
> not imply that in his movie bowling for columbine
>
> it is ridiculous example of shoddy thinking (even for a social scientist) to
> make the conclusion that more guns = more crime
>
> the causality is not established.

In fact, would you not say that it has been proven there is no
causality?
>
> whit
>
> > >
> > >Here are the Interpol 1995 crime statistics (rate per 100,000):
> > >
> > >* 5278 - US
> > >* 8179 - Germany
> > >* 6316 - France
> > >* 7206 - England & Wales
> > >
> > >
> > >Hence the trend in the US is towards a lower crime rate, while the trend
> > >in Europe (except Germany) is towards an increasing crime rate.
> > >
> > >It is true that we (USA) have a high murder rate, mostly of criminals
> > >killing criminals, but a distressingly large number of people killing
> > >their spouses in anger, and the rate of "stranger killings" is rising.
> > >
> > >However, the homicide rates have been dropping dramatically as we have
> > >been increasing penalties:
> > >
> > >Homicide Rate/100,000 by Date in US:
> > >
> > >* 1980 - 10.2
> > >* 2000 - 5.5
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Also, our murder rate is high largely due to the multicultural nature of
> > >our society. Inner city blacks, members of a distinct subculture, have a
> > >vastly higher criminal and victim homicide rate than our society as an
> > >average:
> > >
> > >Homicide Offender Rate/100,000 by Race in US (2000):
> > >
> > >* 3.4 - White
> > >* 25.8 - Black
> > >* 3.2 - Other
> >
> > So in summary, the US has a lower muder rate if we remove the people
> > most likely to offend, but don't apply the same rational to other
> > countries.
>
>
>

--
Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

PostHoc
November 26th 04, 11:38 PM
Will Brink > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Esca" >
> wrote:
>
> > "Shaun" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 09:41:10 -0500, Will Brink
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >In article >,
> > > > "the guvnor" > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> "Will Brink" > wrote in message
> > > >>
> > > >> > The lobbyists have also argued that if guns were restricted
> > > >> > in America, civil liberties in the U.S. would have the same
degree of
> > > >> > protection that they have in Britain. The lobbyists are
absolutely
> > > >> > right.
> > > >>
> > > >> Homicides:
> > > >>
> > > >> Los Angeles 592
> > > >> New York 489
> > > >> Chicago 485
> > > >> London 199
> > > >>
> > > >> Less guns, less dead people...
> > > >
> > > >Wrong, here's the facts:
> > > >
> > > >American vs. European Crime Rates
> > > >
> > > >A German lawyer, in response to another blog entry (German Justice: 2
> > > >Days Per Murder), repeated the common European belief that the United
> > > >States has a much higher crime rate than major European countries.
The
> > > >facts are quite different...
> > > >
> > > >[UPDATE 8/15/2003 - For sources, see end of article]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Here are Interpol 2001 crime statistics (rate per 100,000):
> > > >
> > > >* 4161 - US
> > > >* 7736 - Germany
> > > >* 6941 - France
> > > >* 9927 - England and Wales
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Thus the US has a substantially lower crime rate than the major
European
> > > >countries!
> > >
> > > Using a system that classes a murder in New York as equiverlent to
> > > stolen bicycle in Paris.
> > >
> > > Which is very useful for hiding the fact in terms of serious crimes
> > > (rape,muder,serious assault, and crimes involving guns) the US has
> > > much higher rates
> > >
> >
> > actually, you are wrong
> >
> > there are two accepted classification for serious crimes in the US.
> >
> > Part I and Part II offenses
> >
> > they include various serious felonies, like murder, felonious assault,
rape,
> > robbery, burglary, etc
> >
> > it is simply a fact that england has a MUCH higher crime rate (for
serious
> > crime as well) than the US
> >
> > it is also a fact that the US has a much higher MURDER rate
> >
> > it is also fallacious to think that guns cause our higher murder rate
> >
> > all sorts of cultural differences account for this difference.
> >
> > consider this. japanese citizens (in japan) have a very low homicide
rate,
> > but a suicide rate that is much higher than ours
> >
> > japanese americans (even where guns are readily available) have a very
low
> > homicide rate (very close to the japanese rate) and a very high suicide
rate
> > (ditto).
> >
> > one DIFFERENCE. while the murder rates and suicide rates are the same
> > (roughly), the USE of firearms in both types of incidents are much
higher
> >
> > because they are available
> >
> > however, the availability OF guns, has not changed the basic cultural
> > reasons why people who are in the japanese culture (whether in US or in
> > japan) tend to kill themselves quite often, but not others
> >
> > all sorts of comparisons can be made like this, in terms of CULTURE, but
the
> > point is clear. (also note that in states that passed CCW laws, the
most
> > obvious example being fla, homicide rates generally go DOWN, despite the
> > much greater proliferation of guns). it is NOT our high gun ownership
rates
> > that causes our high murder rate. even michael moore, to his credit,
did
> > not imply that in his movie bowling for columbine
> >
> > it is ridiculous example of shoddy thinking (even for a social
scientist) to
> > make the conclusion that more guns = more crime
> >
> > the causality is not established.
>
> In fact, would you not say that it has been proven there is no
> causality?

i think, it's tough to prove that sort of negative.

i won't rely on the oft-quoted meme "you can't prove a negative". because
it's wrong.

you CAN, in some cases.

I can prove that there is not a 600 cubic foot giant emu in my right sock,
for instance.

but you gotta be here for the proof.

whit

> >
> > whit
> >
> > > >
> > > >Here are the Interpol 1995 crime statistics (rate per 100,000):
> > > >
> > > >* 5278 - US
> > > >* 8179 - Germany
> > > >* 6316 - France
> > > >* 7206 - England & Wales
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Hence the trend in the US is towards a lower crime rate, while the
trend
> > > >in Europe (except Germany) is towards an increasing crime rate.
> > > >
> > > >It is true that we (USA) have a high murder rate, mostly of criminals
> > > >killing criminals, but a distressingly large number of people killing
> > > >their spouses in anger, and the rate of "stranger killings" is
rising.
> > > >
> > > >However, the homicide rates have been dropping dramatically as we
have
> > > >been increasing penalties:
> > > >
> > > >Homicide Rate/100,000 by Date in US:
> > > >
> > > >* 1980 - 10.2
> > > >* 2000 - 5.5
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Also, our murder rate is high largely due to the multicultural nature
of
> > > >our society. Inner city blacks, members of a distinct subculture,
have a
> > > >vastly higher criminal and victim homicide rate than our society as
an
> > > >average:
> > > >
> > > >Homicide Offender Rate/100,000 by Race in US (2000):
> > > >
> > > >* 3.4 - White
> > > >* 25.8 - Black
> > > >* 3.2 - Other
> > >
> > > So in summary, the US has a lower muder rate if we remove the people
> > > most likely to offend, but don't apply the same rational to other
> > > countries.
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/
>
>

John HUDSON
November 27th 04, 12:21 AM
On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 16:44:23 -0500, Will Brink
> wrote:

>In article >,
> (arkarda) wrote:
>
>>
>> And with semi automatic weapons you can not
>> only take out your intended target
>> but a whole field of bystanders as well.
>>
>> arkarda
>
>Interesting statements. Too bad they're all wrong.

As is all of your repetitively bigoted crap Will!!

>
>EDMONTON JOURNAL
>Britain proves gun control is wrong: Gun crime nearly doubled after
>law-abiding Brits surrendered their handguns
[...]

>
>It is entirely likely that some of the increase in the past five years
>has stemmed from an increased confidence among criminals that ordinary
>citizens almost certainly have no guns in their homes.

Utter rubbish as the British population has never had guns in their
homes in modern history.

>
>But it is unlikely the handgun ban accounts for all or even most of the
>increase. France has had a similar upward spike in robberies over the
>past five years without banning guns. France, too, now has a violent
>crime rate at or above the Americans', with the exception of murder.
>
>For some reason, no one in the industrialized world murders one another
>like Americans. However, in most other categories of violent and
>property crime, the rest of us are catching up.
>
>The likely causes of Britain's crime wave (and France's and Germany's
>and the Netherlands' and so on) are illegal immigration, drug wars and
>extremely lenient treatment of convicted criminals.

Which is what I have been telling you for years now!!

Have a great weekend Will - you know I will!! ;o)

David Cohen
November 27th 04, 01:26 AM
"PostHoc" > wrote
>
> i won't rely on the oft-quoted meme "you can't prove a negative". because
> it's wrong.
>
> you CAN, in some cases.
>
> I can prove that there is not a 600 cubic foot giant emu in my right
> sock,
> for instance.

Like the poor bird would survive the smell. Your right sock would kill BOTH
of Schroedenger's cats!

David