London is safe... really...

Status
Not open for further replies.

tyme

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
2,550
Location
Novalis
I guess it's good that there are no guns, since they might reduce the robbery/assault rate and increase the homicide rate.

http://www.thisislondon.com/news/articles/5949100?source=Evening Standard

164 muggings a day in London
By Hugh Dougherty, Home Affairs Correspondent, Evening Standard
28 July 2003

The extent of street crime in London is revealed in new figures showing there are 164 muggings in the capital every day.

A report by independent watchdogs shows that, although street crime has come down from its record high levels of early 2002, it is still higher than at any other time in recent history.

It will say that the massive effort to reduce muggings and robberies, involving hundreds of thousands of hours of police time, has produced only a 15 per cent reduction in London.

Scotland Yard figures show that Lambeth is the worst of the 32 boroughs for street crime and that, per head of population, Richmond-is the least dangerous.

The full report - published tomorrow by Her Majesty's Inspectors of Constabulary, Probation and Prisons - is the first independent evaluation of the street crime initiative announced by Tony Blair and Home Secretary David Blunthem a valuable asset they can easily sell.

It is expected to show that the first six months of the police campaign against street crime - when officers got out of their cars and went on the beat in mugging hotspots - produced a steady fall to an average of 163 muggings a day. But there was a rise in the next six months, leading to the average for the year being 164.

The report will also warn that the clear-up rate for street crime is still too low. In London only 9.04 per cent of all street crimes were classified as "cleared-up" last year, far lower than the 14 per cent average for all crimes, but a rise from the 2001-2 figure of 8.7 per cent.

Fewer than one in 10 street robberies in London end with someone being charged or cautioned, the worst figure in the country. And, despite the rise in the clearup rate, the fall in numbers of street crimes meant fewer crimes were classifiedas cleared up and fewer muggers went to prison in 2002-3 than in 2001-2.

Scotland Yard figures show that, although street crime fell by 36 per cent in Lambeth from April last year to March 2003, residents stand a one in 51 chance of being mugged each year, compared with a one in 488 chance in Richmond.

Boroughs that were not part of the street crime initiative had much smaller falls in muggings - and in the case of Islington, Hammersmith and Fulham and Merton suffered increases.

Although the total fall in London was 15 per cent, Haringey, Ealing, Hillingdon, Havering, Wandsworth and Greenwich had falls in single figures, possibly because resources were concentrated on the worst affected areas, mainly Southwark, Lambeth, Westminster, Camden and Hackney, where falls ranged from 15 per cent to 36 per cent.
 
In London only 9.04 per cent of all street crimes were classified as "cleared-up" last year, far lower than the 14 per cent average for all crimes, but a rise from the 2001-2 figure of 8.7 per cent.
Do my eyes deceive me??? Are these cretins really saying that the London police actually DO NOT "clear up" (I assume this means "solve") 86% of all crimes committed there?

You know, if my local PD and Sheriff's Dept. couldn't solve 86% of crimes committed in this area, the citizens would tar and feather them, the State Police would be called in to take over, and probably the big-wigs in those departments would be investigated for criminal collusion!

:banghead: :fire: :cuss:
 
Do my eyes deceive me??? Are these cretins really saying that the London police actually DO NOT "clear up" (I assume this means "solve") 86% of all crimes committed there?

You know, if my local PD and Sheriff's Dept. couldn't solve 86% of crimes committed in this area, the citizens would tar and feather them, the State Police would be called in to take over, and probably the big-wigs in those departments would be investigated for criminal collusion!
Even DC, the worst example of police work in the USA that I know of, still solves somewhere in the 50th percentile of all violent crimes that take place there. (55% against murders, as I recall.)
 
Cheery old England...

Good thing the people in London are unarmed. there just might be alot of dead badguys to deal with. Note that it was never mentioned what the weapon of choice may be for the English robber, I believe alot of them may be armed, but, it would be bad press to admit the ne'er do wells have guns and the citizens don't.

[Duplicate article reference deleted.]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Come on now, everyone knows that the Britons are perfectly safe because they have no guns. This must be some mistake, there can't possibly be gun crime in the land of no guns....can there?
 
Ya know, while I agree that the foolish ban on private ownership of firearms has greatly contributed to Britian's crime problems, there are other factors at work there that we should be cognizant of. The cradle to grave welfare system, rampant influx of citizens from the old empire, high unemployment and a legal system that considers criminal activity some sort of faux pas and not as an affront to society deserving strict sanction.

This country could be in the same boat in the future. Just look at:

1. the recent squawking about giving tax refunds to people who didn't pay taxes (in my book, if the Govenrment sends you money that you never had before, that's welfare).

2. Continuing pushing for amnesty for illegal immigrants 9something we have done 2x before) and expanding use of the un-regulated ID card issued by the various Mexican Embassies and Consulate as a valid ID in the USA).

3. Rising unemployment rates.

4. Recent squealing by the ACLU and other liberal groups that there are too many people in prision and we should find other ways to deal with criminals. Which means don't jail 'em, pat 'em on the heads and make them promise to be good.

I will bet that as we get closed to the sunset of the AWB, you will see increased pressure to increase regulation and confiscation of privately owned firearms.

That's my 2 cents worth. Well, maybe more like 25 cents worth.
 
what a delightful way of spinning a huge fall in street crime into a negative news story - sstill, i guess positive news doesnt sell papers.

preacherman the situation is somewhat different in a city of seven million people, and in any case that was the clear-up rate for street crime; last I checked the clear-up rate for murders was around 80-90%
 
The crime rate in England could possibly be further reduced by advising world travlers and tourist to avoid England as being too dangerous to consider as a destination for business or vacation.

Less victims less crime = More guns less crime. :rolleyes:

Giant
 
I had been assured this forum was not partisan and was open-minded.

Firstly, the poor clear up rate is for all crimes. Not for murder alone.

Secondly, the US's own statistics give the likelihood of being murdered in the US as more than five times higher, with firearms involved in over two thirds of homicides.

But I know what your response to that will be ''you can't compare the two cultures'', but is that not exactly what this thread is doing as it suits your argument.

I am no ''gun-grabber'', if your constitution says it then that's fine, it's all legal and above board and you are all sensible adults I am sure. I am sure this post will get me labelled a ''liberal and a red'', and that's fine (neither are exactly true of course).
 
Murder rates are higher in the U.S., I don't think anyone's disputing that. The disturbing trend is that things are quickly becoming worse in the UK, and if the trend continues, the murder rate will be worse in the UK within 3-5 years. (Your stat about 5x more likely to be murdered in the US has fallen, now it is in the realm of 3x. Thus the discussion.) I don't think anyone is calling the US "utopia," in regard crime, please see my previous discussion regarding DC, our fine nation's capital city. Understand though that you are 3x more likely to get mugged in London than you are in NYC, and that is a depressing thought indeed.

However, if you really want:

St Johns, you LIBERAL RED you! ;)
 
if your constitution says it then that's fine, it's all legal and above board and you are all sensible adults I am sure

You fail to understand. Legality is not the point.

Self defence (and the means for such) is a basic human right and therefore not subject to the whims of legistators.

Our Constitution enumerates such rights...it doesn't convey them.

Every Brit enjoys the same human right. The only difference is that, as subjects, they are persecuted for exercising that right.

Unfortunate...and, in my opinion, further evidence of the decline of a once great country.
 
Secondly, the US's own statistics give the likelihood of being murdered in the US as more than five times higher, with firearms involved in over two thirds of homicides.

My tactics instructor at the Academy pointed out that if the United States excluded such gun-control Utopias as DC, Newt Yack City, Chicago, Boston, etc. from the statistics we'd have one of the lowest murder rates in the world.

There's a lesson there somewhere.

LawDog
 
Hey I thought the UK used all these cameras to watch the streets 24/7 so that the crime rate would be low, which is usually touted as a model for the U.S. So if the cameras don't watch for crime what DO they watch for?
 
" I very rarely contradicted statements of this kind, as I found it less trouble, and infinitely more amusing, to let them pass; indeed, had I done otherwise, it would have been of little avail, as amongst the many conversations I held in America respecting my own country, I do not recollect a single instance in which it was not clear that I knew much less about it than those I conversed with."
Mrs. Trollope, 'Domestic Manners Of The Americans' (1832)
 
A question to our friends across the pond-how exactly do you feel about not having the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of your home and person?
 
The issue isn't, or rather shouldn't be, US vs UK, but rather more vs. less gun control. That is to say, the relative value of the policies in question. Given UK crime information (and US crime rates in areas with UK-style gun control) there certainly doesn't seem to be any correlation between more laws restricting firearm ownership and reductions in crime.

As has been pointed out earlier, if you exclude areas with UK-style gun control, the US crime rate (including murders) becomes rather low. But you've got to watch out for those crazy statistics; The Economist published a study that found that actual victimization rates for all categories of crime (including violent crime) were higher in the UK than they were in the US. ;)

And indeed, the logic of the whole idea is daft... that somebody willing to risk life in prison for murder will be bothered in the slightest by picking up a piddling weapons charge along the way. :rolleyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top