UK vs US Gun Control & Crime Statistics?

[woodybrighton]

also as America and the UK vary vastly comparing south central or a Detroit slum with the Sussex countryside. or comparing nice bit of Arizona with a rough bit of Camden London.
There was a TV feature where they took a rural beat officer from sussex and swapped with a Washington DC police officer.
The US copper had a hard time coping with the quiet.

As UK guns can only be carried for sport and not self defense there ownership and any relevance to crime is minimal.
you will probably find less crime in areas of high gun ownership but thats because
it will be the rural areas so a lot less people.
lots of guns in the highlands of Scotland but not many people less crime no point being a crack dealer in the middle of nowhere.

 

[TooTaxed]

Looking solely at deaths by gun is meaningless as there are many other ways of causing deaths. What is significant is the total level of types of crime, before and after the restrictions were enacted. Here you will find that...regardless of the country...if restrictive gun laws are enacted, total crime rises. That was the case in Australia, Canada (when I lived there, there was lots of "slicing and dicing"), various Eureopean nations, and in areas of the U.S. where restrictive gun laws were enacted. I would be rather surprised if England was different. Check gun-free Japan's total crime rates!

Conversely, when restrictions are relaxed and more people have access to guns, total crime decreases. One of the clearest examples is when American states enact "concealed carry" laws...in every case I have been able to research, crime has decreased, as criminals are reluctant to "do their thing" with potentially armed victims.

As a side note, all of the American massacres have occurred at advertised gun-free areas. The crazy people simply want to shoot as many helpless people as possible before someone with a gun shows up to stop them. Several similar mass murders have been cut short because someone close had a personal gun...including one at a university, where a professor hurredly retrieved his gun from his car, and a church where a lady had a licensed concealed carry pistol.

 

[notorious]

Why you trying to bring facts into an emtional argument? The Antis don't want the truth to mess up their preconceived notions.

 

[SuperNaut]

You can't compare crime statistics between the U.K. and the U.S. The population numbers, size, homogeneity, culture, history, etc are far too different. Despite White Rabbit's attempts to draw any meaningful conclusions based on the numbers, the separate data points may be there but the comparisons aren't valid.

Long and short; apples and walnuts.

I do enjoy the typical blithe Brit hypocrisy, chiding us for talking about something of which we know little, but then marching forward to do the same exact thing. What else can you tell us about our own country White Rabbit?

I am rapt.

 

[notorious]

The Brits do import a lot more of our culture than we do of theirs. They are also laughing their collective socialist arses off that we are paying for their royal Beckham family in American dollars.

At least most of us know better than to buy their cars except for our most illustrious segment, the gangster rapper, who love the Bentleys, and we know how intelligent they are as a group.

 

[TooTaxed]

NOTORIOUS, you are so right!

It's interesting that the NRA hasn't needed to do its own studies regarding gun issues...they almost entirely quote studies performed by the anti-gun groups gained through the Freedom of Information Act...information not publicized by the anti-gun groups because it didn't support their views! To verify this, simply brouse the NRA-ILA's article files...as I did when preparing for a debate.

 

[SuperNaut]

From what I understand the Police in England dont carry firearms.

This is actually a myth perpetuated by wishful thinking and active ignorance on the part of many residents of Ol' Blighty. Some police don't carry firearms, but the nostalgic idea of the bobbie fondling his little club and sighing weakly through a whistle is long gone. Well, long gone as any method of law enforcement anyway, what happens when they get home is anybody's guess.

I have several Brit friends and they were constantly telling me how none of their police were armed. That is until the last time I was in London and started pointing out that all the cops wore HK side-arms and there were many that were also carrying full-auto MP5's. My friends seemed quite surprised, I guess the police have armed quietly, so as not to alarm the subjects. The only time I didn't see armed cops was way out in Avebury. I'm guessing that in Brixton the cops would be carrying RPG's, but very politely and discreetly of course.

 

[notorious]

It's interesting that the NRA hasn't needed to do its own studies regarding gun issues...they almost entirely quote studies performed by the anti-gun groups gained through the Freedom of Information Act...information not publicized by the anti-gun groups because it didn't support their views! To verify this, simply brouse the NRA-ILA's article files...as I did when preparing for a debate.

Why waste membership money when the antis already spent their money to find info which support our position? This is beautiful!

Also, as for the continued cry against American cops... we are the most underarmed and over-controlled police in the world. American police has very little authority relatively speaking. Try anything overseas on the level of what you can get away here in America and you will see police brutality and abuse in vivid technicolor, at least until you black out from the beating.

Heathrow and Gatwick airports all have cops walking around openly with full-auto MP5s and SA-80s but if we American cops even break out an AR to respond to an active shooter, some hippie will file a complaint because he felt intimidated by the para-military police wielding the EBR which disrupted his peaceful aura of mediation that he gained after reading Guru Mararishi's latest book and smoking some weed.

 

[wuchak]

Pretty good paper on this from 2003 by Gary Mauser. It's titled, The Failed Experiment: Gun Control and Public Safety in Canada, Australia, England and Wales. http://www.fraserinstitute.org/commerce.web/product_files/FailedExperimentGunControl.pdf

 

[4Freedom]

I am sad the European members of this board are trying to infuse socialism here. I know there is some great British members who are aware of the situation and advocating private gun ownership and freedom. There is also plenty of Americans who are communists and socialists and want turn America into the next Cuba.

I am a bit tired, so I won't post any actual statistics, but let me clarify something to the EUropean memberse who are boasting of the super low crime rate compared to USA:
1. Majority of those people murdered in USA are minorities, and amongst those it is mainly people of Black and Latino descent.

2. Majority of gun crimes occur in inner cities, that have very strict gun laws. For example, Detroit, Washington DC, Chicago, New York have very strict gun laws, stricter than England, perhaps, and also amongst the highest violent crime rates in the world.

3. In areas with higher number of gun owners, crime statistics are equal or below that of most European countries, including England.

4. Culture vs. Gun Ownership is the Main Culprit in Gun Crimes. Switzerland has the most liberal gun laws in Europe and also the lowest amount of violent crime. Compare its murder rates to Socialist England.

5. England's crime rate is skyrocketing and illegal weapons are becoming in greater supply. Did anyone here about the boxing champion from Nigeria who was shot point blank in the face by another nigerian man in a London club? So much for "Gun Control".

6. Mass Immigration of foreigners from impoverished regions who are involving themselves in criminal activities are responsible for increase in EUropean crime rates. Also, smuggling of illegal arms into European countries is increasing, threatening the civilian population who is unarmed. More and more people in European cities are feeling threatened by immigrants. Yet they do not support Gun Control, they are brainwashed into thinking only criminals buy guns legally.

7. Gun laws are meant to protect the populace from government coups or unscrupulous takeover by corrupt government regime.

To you Europeans/British who think your system is successful, here is an example of other so-called successful societies who removed gun rights from their citizens:
1. Nazi Germany

2. Communist Soviet Union

3. Communist Castro (Cubans are amongst the most oppressed slaves in the world). No More Revolution for them!

4. Uganda under Idi Amin.

5. Tutsis in Rwanda disarmed by Hutu government. (It was bands of armed Tutsis rebels who prevented the mass extermination of their race.)

6. British India (To Keep The British Subjects Weak and still enforced today by the current Indian government). These laws worked wonders in the Mumbai Massacre.



So, before you make your conclusions based on some statistics you pulled from a website, a bunch of numbers you swear by, do a little deeper analysis and try to assess the situation in its entirety. I am sorry to say that EU/UN all has a funny way of ahdering to a fallible statistical figures versus a practical, well researched facts.

Bottom line is, gun control won't work in USA. Now that England and other European countries are filling up with impoverished people from other countries who are turning to crime, they will see their socialist system of government control to fail them. Another thing you can take into account is that the crime rate in USA is falling in many cities, except those hoarded with minorities, some who are involved in gang culture, whereas the crime rate in European cities are skyrocketing.

Food for thought.

Bonjour and Cheers my European Mates!

 

[woodybrighton]

regular police are not armed and those that do mostly carry semi automatic carbines.
I'd imagine most areas with high gun ownership tend towards the more rural areas as in the UK therefore tend to have lower crime rates anyway.
Can't get my head around banning guns in city's surrounded by gun shops just seems truly odd.

 

[Bo_Nidle]

I am a UK Police officer of some 22 years and have always been a staunch advocate of the arming of the Police in this country in the same manner as the rest of the planet and the right of UK citizens to own guns. This makes me something of a heretic in the eyes of some but the former idea carries more support within the rank and file "street" officers than the hierarchy, press and Government would have you believe. Unfortunately they have the power, not us. However 98% of British Police officers have absolutely no clue whatsoever as to how firearms function or what they are capable of and are given no training at all in this area. They can neither load a weapon or more importantly make one safe. The level of ignorance is staggering and the Police prefer to keep it that way.

British Police officers are NOT armed as a matter of routine with some exceptions: Officers engaged on Airport security, Diplomatic/Royalty protection.

To provide some degree of response in the event of an armed incident on the street then we have what are called, at least in my force, "Armed Response Vehicles" or "ARV's".These are crewed by two "Authorised Firearms Officers" or "AFO's" these are officers trained in the use of firearms. These officers have access within their vehicles to two Sig 228 9mm handguns, two Hk MP5's also in 9mm, and a Remington 870 shotgun which is usually deployed to dispatch errant livestock. These weapons are kept in the rear of the vehicle in a locked safe. They can only be deployed with the express authorisation of a Senior officer unless the AFO's are under immediate and direct threat. 3 ARV's are on duty at any one time, one North of the county, one central, one south. A minimum of two ARV's MUST be deployed to any armed incident so the first ARV has to wait for the second ARV to meet up with them before going forwards......still with me?

In the event of a more serious incident such as an armed robbery stake-out, siege etc then the Tactical Response Team can be deployed. This is the rough equivalent of SWAT in the USA. They have the same weaponry as the ARV's with the addition of Sako .243 sniper rifles and Sig 551 assault rifles in 5.56mm NATO calibre. All rifles/carbines are semi-auto only. These officers are deployed from a central HQ.

So what is the result of this setup? If an armed incident occurs then the normal unarmed patrols are sent to the scene with instructions to "contain it". How unarmed officers are supposed to "contain" an armed criminal has never been satisfactorily explained to me. We are given the usual 2wear your vests and have an escape route" order.(This covers the officer in charge from a legal standpoint should things go awry)We then await the two ARV's. I have waited up to two hours for them some times.

Eventually the AFO's go forwards to the scene and more often than not find the suspect has escaped in the interim period.

To give a real life example of this farcical situation this is areal incident and I was there: One evening on one of our more unruly council estates (I think you call them "Projects"?) a group of local scumbag juveniles were creating their usual misery for a local resident.The resident loses his temper and storms out with a rifle (probably an air rifle but we cannot be sure) and tells them to leave in no uncertain terms. An "armed incident" is called and I was sent as part of the containment. We wait over an hour for the ARV's to turn up. They do and deploy with permission to arm. Calls are made to the mans house with no response. Eventually, after 4 hours, two AFO's carrying Mp5's and a ballistic shield move slowly forwards to the house and post a letter asking the occupant to surrender himself at the local police station in the morning. We are all then ordered to withdraw. And that was it.

I'm not making that up. It happened 2 years ago and it is not an isolated incident.

The fact is that the UK is a country that would rather see its criminals with guns than its Police. Police senior officers would much prefer to have an officer shot than a criminal as the repercussions from a criminal shot last for years sometimes.The press are all over it, there are inquests, court cases which could show the Force in a poor light.All in all its a PR nightmare. However when an officer is shot it's in the press for about two weeks, it provides sympathetic PR and then its forgotten about.

I'm afraid the UK Police are clinging to an unarmed tradition that should have ended about 40 years ago.

 

[Odd Job]

Bo Nidle, nice to have you here, welcome to THR!

To give a real life example of this farcical situation this is areal incident and I was there: One evening on one of our more unruly council estates (I think you call them "Projects"?) a group of local scumbag juveniles were creating their usual misery for a local resident.The resident loses his temper and storms out with a rifle (probably an air rifle but we cannot be sure) and tells them to leave in no uncertain terms. An "armed incident" is called and I was sent as aprt of the containment. We wait over an hour for the ARV's to turn up. They do and deploy with permission to arm. Calls are made to the mans house with no response. Eventually, after 4 hours, two AFO's carrying Mp5's and a ballistic shield move slowly forwards to the house and post a letter asking the occupant to surrender himself at the local police station in the morning. We are all then ordered to withdraw. And that was it.

That had me laughing like a zebra with a shot of novacaine in his lip. I fully believe that (which is unfortunate for us here in the UK).

Question about the current C019 weapons: I was under the impression they were using G17s in 9x19 with BAE truncated round nose ammo. In rifles I thought they were using semi auto G36 and for precision work, Blaser or accuracy international rifles in .338 Lapua Magnum. At least that was the case a few years ago when C019 gave us a presentation in a ballistics course.

 

[woodybrighton]

all police forces get to choose there own weapons.
sussex police had probably still has some automatic suppresed MP5'S as far as the coppers who demonstated them to us. The reason they have them was they were part of the package or the sales person was wearing a short skirt

 

[C-grunt]

The statistics are very skewed because of how they are reported. In my almost 2 years as an officer for Phoenix PD (5th largest city in the US now I believe) I have seen many self defense uses with a firearm. Another thing is a big portion of our homicides here is of Mexican immigrants and the "coyotes" ie...human smugglers. These poor illegals get brought over and then held at ransom by the coyotes for more money. If the families cant make the cut, which is more than most families in Mexico make in a year, they get killed.

Also the coyotes and drug smugglers are killing each other off to hi-jack each others loads. There is a HUGE drug war going on in northern Mexico right now and its spilling across the border.

All of these get put into our statistics and therefor cant be compared with the UK.

I dont know how it is in the UK, but here in the US most of our murdered citizens are not exactly "innocent". Theres a big difference if some meth addict gets shot because he tried to jack his dealer and some sweet old lady who is murdered for her diamond ring. There is FAR FAR more instances of the first kind than the latter.

Crime is a social disorder, not something brought about by an object. Hondas dont cause accidents, bad drivers do.

 

[woodybrighton]

there were 73 murders by gun out of a population of 60 million and 412 assualts with weapons.
the rest of the 10000 odd offences were robbery poession etc
Or we have criminals who are really really bad shots
police reckon 60% of incidents are air soft springers though mostly referred to as ball bearing guns to make them sound scary and lethal

 

[Bo_Nidle]

To Odd_Job: With regards to the Met Police unit, I think its actually SO19, I can only comment on what I have seen on the news recently. I have seen them with G36C carbines and G17 pistols. As to the sniper weapons or ammunition I do not know. Our guys use 9mm SJHP rounds.

I visited the Force Armoury recently and took the opportunity to have a nosey around. They have some interesting kit. They had an MP5SD which surprised me as it is primarily an offensive rather than defensive weapon by virtue of its function, I also examined an M1 Garand, 357 Desert Eagle, LLama .44 mag Commanche (?) AK47 from Yemen of all places, and a semi-automatic Uzi that was handed in in the post Hungerford rifle ban by a legitimate shooter. I was surprised as I was just a rookie at the station it was surrendered at and recall it being handed in. I was the one who showed the older officers how to make it safe some 20 years earlier.
They also had an HK Mp7 on test at the armoury.Now that is a nifty bit of kit!

Even our firearms officers have very limited knowledge when it comes to weapons. They know the gear they carry alright but when faced with something out of the norm then they tend to get a bit lost. We had a Luger handed in a couple of years ago and the AFO's arrived to make it safe and then decided to field strip it for some reason. They then could not reassemble it. When I, a lowly patrol officer, showed them how, they were most put out!

 

[notorious]

Even our firearms officers have very limited knowledge when it comes to weapons. They know the gear they carry alright but when faced with something out of the norm then they tend to get a bit lost. We had a Luger handed in a couple of years ago and the AFO's arrived to make it safe and then decided to field strip it for some reason. They then could not reassemble it. When I, a lowly patrol officer, showed them how, they were most put out!

Bo Nidle, very nice to have you here.

I truly feel for you guys and the comical ARV/AFO program. Driving around with guns in the box and having to ask permission to deploy is a joke. I am surprised more officers in UK aren't assaulted or hurt. Are there any incidents where the AFOs get overpowered and their guns taken from them by criminals? To me it would just seem that they are just a roving armory for criminals who can get the drop on them.

Do the AFOs also turn in their guns after duty hours, I assume? In Hong Kong, where you guys ruled for a while, every patrolman walked around with a revolver (SW MP10 .38 special) tethered to his duty belt. I think now they have Glock 19s, but off-duty, they all turn in their guns to the station and go home unarmed. Guess what the criminals do who had a vendetta to settle? They just conveniently waited for the cops to get off work and then ambush them on the way home. Guess who has the most guns in HK? The triads do.

I think I saw some YouTube with Aussie cops too. They were fighting with a gangbanger and had a bunch of cops tangled up and they didn't have truncheons or guns or tasers, just pepper spray. Of course, 1 cop sprays, all the other cops cough and drop. Pity.

I truly give it to you guys, I don't know if I can handle the job if I had to wear a target... I mean uniform, and not have a means of protecting myself in the performance of my duties.

 

[Shung]

Such an interesting read Bo Nidle !!! thank you very much.

I feel for you ! being a cop in GB really desserve some respect ! the rules they are forcing you to follow are just ridiculous.

My next armed robbery will be in the UK though

 

[woodybrighton]

to be fair there is not a vast number of guns out there. compared to what the media like to portray.
73 fatal shootings
839 murders total
compared to 1200 fatal shootings in california alone.

 

[Mk VII]

Are there any incidents where the AFOs get overpowered and their guns taken from them by criminals?

No, it's never happened. (Has happened in Northern Ireland. Ruger revolver taken from feloniously slain officer turned up in several terrorist murders but that wasn't the motive for the slaying)

Do the AFOs also turn in their guns after duty hours, I assume?

Yes, they do. Off duty they have no more powers in that respect than anyone else (being a cop buys you very few favours here)

Here's a recent discussion on the subject http://coppersblog.blogspot.com/2009/01/honestly-held-belief.html

 

[ar10]

can't really compare the two UK 58 gun murders out of a population of 60 million
9000 odd offenses some of those would be a crime in the US.
caught with 4 handgun rounds in the states your won't be going to jail here you will for a long time.
Our rights to defend our selfs were removed in 1920 so the UK has been disarmed for nearly 100 years
handguns were banned for all but target shooting years and years ago

Disarming England began long before that. I think, but not sure, it really began in the 1400's by the ruling king to subjugate the general population of Scots and Irish from raising armies to attack the King of England.
A lot of the American Constitution, 2nd Amendment, was based on what the British ruling class had done to their subjects during that time.

 

[notorious]

to be fair there is not a vast number of guns out there. compared to what the media like to portray.
73 fatal shootings
839 murders total
compared to 1200 fatal shootings in california alone.

Out of the 1,200... at least 1,100 or more are easily dispo'ed by gang on gang or accidents or police shooting criminals... and then the rest are true crimes where criminals shot an innocent man.

 

[woodybrighton]

ar10 we did have the righ to to bear arms in our bill of rights 1600 ok protestants only at first but later catholics got the chance as well
obviously not baptists or methodists you can't trust just anybody
however way you cut it Cal had more deaths due to shootings than the UK had murders total. and population of california is half that of the UK.

not that that really proves anything.

gun murders in the UK are pretty rare and a lot are gang related

 

[Gungnir]

If you look at the FBI who did a study on this. Per Capita the US is a more violent society than the UK.

However, one thing that the FBI study did find, was that gun control laws in the UK was not preventing gun crime. Between 1997 and 2006 gun crime in the UK rose by 400% post the Dunblane bans. When I find the link again I'll post it. These included armed robbery as well as illegal possession, murder, etc.

The problem I see is that if gun crime rose by 400% in the almost 10 years from a virtually complete ban of gun ownership in the UK (I'm and ex-pat, so I know that it's almost impossible to have any kind of firearm, beyond a 12 Gauge). It proves the point that Gun control fails to stop gun crime.

In addition to this, Violent and property crimes have also risen in the subsequent years both proceeding the '97 ban, and subsequently, from 1993 through to 2001 (when I came to the US) I had personal experience of this with a burglary per year while in the UK. Comparatively over the same period Crime rates in the US have stayed consistent or fallen slightly.

What makes it worse is that in many cases in particular burglary, it's so common place that the last 3 times I was burgled, the police didn't even come to investigate, but just gave me a crime number so I could claim on my house contents insurance. I know there are UK LEO's on here, and I'm sure that they're busy, but that did not give me any sense that they were really interested and I was the victim in that situation. If I were the perpetrator I'd be laughing all the way to my fence.