Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Is Crime in Great Britain, Canada Australia greater than USA?

Discussion in 'Legal' started by mountainclmbr, Jan 10, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. mountainclmbr

    mountainclmbr Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2003
    Messages:
    1,289
    Location:
    On top of a mountain in Colorado
    My wife is debating with me about effects of gun control. Is the crime rate per capita greater in Canada, Great Britain and Australia worse than in the USA or is the rate of change just worse. Any references?
     
  2. antsi

    antsi Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,398
    Generally speaking, the US has had higher murder rates while Great Britain has had higher rates of overall violent crime (which includes assaults, rapes, armed robberies, etc., in addition to murder). The John Lott article linked below has hyperlinks to many original documents that demonstrate these numbers (these UK numbers are cited in the context of debating about gun control in Canada).

    Of particular interest is how crimes committed with guns rose in the UK and Australia after they enacted draconian gun control laws.

    It is also interesting to look at the fact that these two countries are islands (which complicates matters for people smuggling guns in from other countries) and that they have less civil liberties and less restrictions on security/police forces... and still, they can't keep guns out of their countries. If gun bans don't work in the UK and Australia, they sure aren't going to work here.

    Another good resource for gun control debates is the recent study by the United States Centers for Disease Control which found no evidence that gun control laws have any effect on reducing crime rates.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/lott200508190817.asp

    August 19, 2005, 8:17 a.m.
    Canada Blames Us
    Gun-control folly here, up north, across the pond...

    By John R. Lott Jr.

    If you have a problem, it's often easier to blame someone else rather than deal with it. And with Canada's murder rate rising 12 percent last year and a recent rash of murders by gangs in Toronto and other cities, it's understandable that Canadian politicians want a scapegoat. That at least was the strategy Canada's premiers took when they met last Thursday with the new U.S. ambassador to Canada, David Wilkins, and spent much of their time blaming their crime problems on guns smuggled in from the United States.

    Of course, there is a minor problem with the attacks on the U.S. Canadians really don't know what the facts are, and the reason is simple: Despite billions of dollars spent on the Canada's gun-registration program and the program's inability to solve crime, the government does not how many crime-guns were seized in Canada, let alone where those guns came from. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police reported in late July that they "cannot know if [the guns] were traceable or where they might have been traced." Thus, even if smuggled guns were an important problem, the Canadian government doesn't know if it is worse now than in the past.

    Even in Toronto, which keeps loose track of these numbers, Paul Culver, a senior Toronto Crown Attorney, claims that guns from the U.S. are a "small part" of the problem.

    There is another more serious difficulty: You don't have to live next to the United States to see how hard it is to stop criminals from getting guns. The easy part is getting law-abiding citizens to disarm; the hard part is getting the guns from criminals. Drug gangs that are firing guns in places like Toronto seem to have little trouble getting the drugs that they sell and it should not be surprising that they can get the weapons they need as well.

    The experiences in the U.K. and Australia, two island nations whose borders are much easier to monitor, should also give Canadian gun controllers some pause. The British government banned handguns in 1997 but recently reported that gun crime in England and Wales nearly doubled in the four years from 1998-99 to 2002-03.

    Crime was not supposed to rise after handguns were banned. Yet, since 1996 the serious-violent-crime rate has soared by 69 percent; robbery is up 45 percent, and murders up 54 percent. Before the law, armed robberies had fallen 50 percent from 1993 to 1997, but as soon as handguns were banned the robbery rate shot back up, almost to its 1993 level.

    The 2000 International Crime Victimization Survey, the last survey completed, shows the violent-crime rate in England and Wales was twice the rate of that in the U.S. When the new survey for 2004 comes out later this year, that gap will undoubtedly have widened even further as crimes reported to British police have since soared by 35 percent, while those in the U.S. have declined 6 percent.

    Australia has also seen its violent-crime rates soar immediately after its 1996 Port Arthur gun-control measures. Violent crime rates averaged 32-percent higher in the six years after the law was passed (from 1997 to 2002) than they did in 1995. The same comparisons for armed-robbery rates showed increases of 74 percent.

    During the 1990s, just as Britain and Australia were more severely regulating guns, the U.S. was greatly liberalizing individuals' abilities to carry firearms. Thirty seven of the fifty states now have so-called right-to-carry laws that let law-abiding adults carry concealed handguns after passing a criminal background check and paying a fee. Only half the states require some training, usually around three to five hours. Yet crime has fallen even faster in these states than the national average. Overall, the states in the U.S. that have experienced the fastest growth rates in gun ownership during the 1990s have experienced the biggest drops in murders and other violent crimes.

    Many things affect crime: The rise of drug-gang violence in Canada and Britain is an important part of the story, just as it has long been important in explaining the U.S.'s rates. (Few Canadians appreciate that 70 percent of American murders take place in just 3.5 percent of our counties, and that a large percentage of those are drug-gang related.) Just as these gangs can smuggle drugs into the country, they can smuggle in weapons to defend their turf.

    With Canada's reported violent-crime rate of 963 per 100,000 in 2003, a rate about twice the U.S.'s (which is 475), Canada's politicians are understandably nervous.

    While it is always easier to blame another for your problems, the solution to crime is often homegrown
     
  3. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    Blaming someone else for your self-inflicted problems is usually a sign of intellectual and moral immaturity. It's perfectly understandable in small children.
     
  4. McCall911

    McCall911 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2004
    Messages:
    1,617
    Location:
    Alabama
  5. mbs357

    mbs357 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2004
    Messages:
    1,621
    Location:
    Vienna, VA
    This looks to be a good info thread.
    *saves*
     
  6. Oldtimer

    Oldtimer Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Messages:
    370
    Do a search for "United Nations". I don't have the link handy, but they recently came out with a study of world crime that was VERY interesting! One particular statement in that study was something along the lines of "A tourist is safer on the streets of New York City than London, England"
     
  7. HankB

    HankB Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Messages:
    5,226
    Location:
    Central Texas
    There was a "study" completed a few years ago purporting to illustrate the effects of differing gun laws in the USA and Canada by comparing murder rates in Seattle and Vancouver.

    Sure enough, murder rates in Seattle were noticeably higher than those in nearby Vancouver, leading the researcher to conclude that, yes indeed, "lax" gun laws in the USA caused more murders.

    But then people began reviewing his research, and a demographic breakdown revealed something very interesting: each city was about 3/4 "non-Hispanic Caucasian" with a similar economic profile, and during the years the study encompassed the murder rate in this group was actually about 1% lower in Seattle than it was in Vancouver!

    Now, 1% is statistically insignificant, but it demonstrates that in the predominant group, differing gun laws made no measurable difference whatsoever in murder rate.

    What was politically unpalatable was the revealed fact that all the difference in murder rates occured in the minority communities, which were quite different. (Vancouver's was heavily Oriental and Amerindian, Seattle's wasn't.)

    So the "study" basically vanished - gun control advocates simply stopped using it.

    A 20-year study of murders in Chicago revealed that while 3/4 of murderers were prior offenders, about 2/3 of murder victims were ALSO known criminals. So if Chicago is typical, murder victims tend to be concentrated in a particular demograpic group, i.e., the criminal element. (If you don't associate with criminals, your chances of being murdered are much lower than if you hang out with bad guys.)

    As for Britain, there have been a number of threads about this - the general consensus is that while it's difficult to get a handle on "real" numbers for comparison because of differences in the way crimes are reported/recorded in the two countries, the USA had a higher murder rate and - probably - a higher rape rate than Britain. Again, in the US, the "victims" tend to be concentrated in the criminal community, but Britain's victims are apparently more broad-based. Britain's assault, robbery, and burglary rates are higher than those in the USA, and in a given year, the typical Brit is more likely to be the victim of some serious crime than is the average Yank.
     
  8. agricola

    agricola Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    1,928
    Location:
    Office of the Holy Inquisition, Vatican City
    antsi,

    The UK does not have a higher rate of rapes than the US. Rape is an under-reported phenomenon worldwide, but the available data (contained in several threads here and on TFL) evidences that our rate is lower than yours.

    Also John Lott is hardly a reliable source on this issue, its better to either do your own work or use someone who has not demonstrated time and time again a use of wildly misleading / false statistics to evidence his theories. Tim Lambert exposes his latest claim over on his blog -

    http://timlambert.org/2006/01/cherrypicking-4/

    mountainclimbr,

    Identifying gun control as a factor that affects crime rates is a bit of a mistake, especially when one looks at the UK. Colin Greenwood, a pro-gun chap, ex Police Officer and an expert who is considerably more valid than either Lott or Joyce Lee Malcolm, states that the firearms legislation in England and Wales has had no effect on the crime rate in those countries; nor could it, given the circumstances (especially since 1989 and 1997):

    http://www.pierrelemieux.org/greenwood-citizen.html
     
  9. jacobtowne

    jacobtowne Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    272
    Location:
    New England
    In the latest issue of the American Rifleman (which see), Scotland is listed as the most violent nation in the developed world.
    Some time ago, AR (I don't recall which issue), said that according to UN stats., London was one of the most violent cities.
    JT
     
  10. TheEgg

    TheEgg Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    1,363
    Good quote, Agricola.

    Every non-biased research effort that I have seen comes up with the same result, time after time:

    There is no evidence in existence that shows that any kind of gun control legislation impacts the crime rate. Period.
     
  11. iapetus

    iapetus Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2003
    Messages:
    614
    Location:
    UK
    The Telegraph published an (opinion) article about UK crime statistics last week:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2006/01/02/do0202.xml

    In essence, the crime statistics (in the opinion of the journalist) have been messed around so much that they are effectively meaningless. (The soaring violent crime rate being in part the result of "Violence" being defined to include simple pushing and shoving - not the sort of thing people normally envisage when the media screams "Violent Crime Soars").

     
  12. cbsbyte

    cbsbyte Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,978
    Location:
    Cradle of Liberty
    As stated above Gun bans/restrictions have no real effect on the crime rate. Criminals will have access to guns no matter if the general population has them or not. Hence the term criminal. Gun bans are just postering for politicans to make it look like they are doing something without really addressing the real issues regarding crime. At this time, In the USA, people are starting to see the flaws in gun bans or severe restrictions (even in states like Mass) and see the benfits of allowing licensed citizens to own firearms to protect themselves. Studies have shown that across the country crime rates are going down even in states with 'lax' gun laws.
     
  13. McCall911

    McCall911 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2004
    Messages:
    1,617
    Location:
    Alabama
    Re: Seattle, WA and Vancouver, BC

    I checked that site I posted earlier http://www.homefair.com/homefair/calc/crime.html?type=to

    and found the per-capita crime rate (according to their source, that is) somewhat higher in Vancouver than in Seattle:

    ************ Seattle, Washington Vancouver, Canada
    Robberies ----------- 264 ------------------ 412
    Rapes -------------- 30 ------------------- 83
    Homicides -------------- 6 --------------------- 5
    Aggravated Assaults -- 390 ------------------- 815
    Motor Vehicle Thefts-- 1584 ----------------- 1244
    Crime Lab Index ------- 158 ------------------ 247


    Interesting: The fortunately low homicide rates for both cities, but the higher (reported) rates of assault and rape for Vancouver.

    P.S. FWIW, I'm not picking on Canada, but I find the higher statistic for Robberies in Vancouver to be noteworthy.
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2006
  14. Mk VII

    Mk VII Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Messages:
    1,045
    Location:
    England
    Is that the Killias study? Heavily relied on here to justify the pistol ban.
     
  15. antsi

    antsi Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,398
    Re-read the original post, please. I didn't say the UK has a higher rate of rape. I said the UK has a higher rate of overall violent crime, which includes a number of crimes like rape, armed robbery, assault, and so on in addition to murder.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page