A well regulated Militia
POSTED BY: AnthonyT
UPDATED: Friday, July 25, 2025 19:29
VIEWED: 8277
PAGE 7 of 7
Quote:This is getting tiresome. This was not shown, you SAID that it was the case I disagreed and asked you to back it up, something you still have not done despite re-iterating your original statement several times since, often alluding to some sort of endorsement from me.
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
In a prolonged argument with Citizen, it was eventually shown that England has a higher rate of crime, including violent crime, than the US. But the US has a higher murder rate.
The United Kingdom has chosen to trade lives for crime. In the US, we seem to be trading crime for lives.
The following statement brings us closer to what we agreed:
Quote:
More people die here. More people are accosted there.
[[]EDIT[]]
I.e. people have fights here, people are murdered there.
[[]/EDIT[]]
I'd like to see some evidence that we really do have more people (per capita) accosted than in the states before I completely sign off on it, but until then I'm confident that 'violent crime' over here means most often someone gets a few bruises and in the US it means someone gets a wake.
Murders involving guns here are so rare they always make the national papers, in fact most non-domestic knife murders do to, something that leads people who read the Sun's sensationalist news to believe that murder using deadly weapons is on the increase, something which couldn't be further from the truth.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
"I had a rose named after me and I was very flattered. But I was not pleased to read the description in the catalog: 'No good in a bed, but fine against a wall'." -- Eleanor Roosevelt.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
The following statement brings us closer to what we agreed:
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More people die here. More people are accosted there.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Which would actually indicate that the UK is trading crime for lives and the US lives for crime, not vice versa.
I'd like to see some evidence that we really do have more people (per capita) accosted than in the states before I completely sign off on it, but until then I'm confident that 'violent crime' over here means most often someone gets a few bruises and in the US it means someone gets a wake.
Murders involving guns here are so rare they always make the national papers, in fact most non-domestic knife murders do to, something that leads people who read the Sun's sensationalist news to believe that murder using deadly weapons is on the increase, something which couldn't be further from the truth.
Citizen, I fail to see where you are disagreeing with me? We both agree that we have more death from crime here, and that you have more crime there.
We trade crime for lives (give up quantity of crime in exchange for receiving larger quantity of lives lost.)
You trade lives for crime (give up quantity of lives lost in exchange for larger quantity of crime.)
Perhaps you misunderstood me, since we are in agreement over the facts?
--Anthony
"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Here is the article we discussed before:
Gun Control’s Twisted Outcome
Restricting firearms has helped make England more crime-ridden than the U.S.
By Joyce Lee Malcolm
On a June evening two years ago, Dan Rather made many stiff British upper lips quiver by reporting that England had a crime problem and that, apart from murder, "theirs is worse than ours." The response was swift and sharp. "Have a Nice Daydream," The Mirror, a London daily, shot back, reporting: "Britain reacted with fury and disbelief last night to claims by American newsmen that crime and violence are worse here than in the US." But sandwiched between the article’s battery of official denials -- "totally misleading," "a huge over-simplification," "astounding and outrageous" -- and a compilation of lurid crimes from "the wild west culture on the other side of the Atlantic where every other car is carrying a gun," The Mirror conceded that the CBS anchorman was correct. Except for murder and rape, it admitted, "Britain has overtaken the US for all major crimes."
In the two years since Dan Rather was so roundly rebuked, violence in England has gotten markedly worse. Over the course of a few days in the summer of 2001, gun-toting men burst into an English court and freed two defendants; a shooting outside a London nightclub left five women and three men wounded; and two men were machine-gunned to death in a residential neighborhood of north London. And on New Year’s Day this year a 19-year-old girl walking on a main street in east London was shot in the head by a thief who wanted her mobile phone. London police are now looking to New York City police for advice.
None of this was supposed to happen in the country whose stringent gun laws and 1997 ban on handguns have been hailed as the "gold standard" of gun control. For the better part of a century, British governments have pursued a strategy for domestic safety that a 1992 Economist article characterized as requiring "a restraint on personal liberty that seems, in most civilised countries, essential to the happiness of others," a policy the magazine found at odds with "America’s Vigilante Values." The safety of English people has been staked on the thesis that fewer private guns means less crime. The government believes that any weapons in the hands of men and women, however law-abiding, pose a danger, and that disarming them lessens the chance that criminals will get or use weapons.
The results -- the toughest firearm restrictions of any democracy -- are credited by the world’s gun control advocates with producing a low rate of violent crime. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Lewis Powell reflected this conventional wisdom when, in a 1988 speech to the American Bar Association, he attributed England’s low rates of violent crime to the fact that "private ownership of guns is strictly controlled."
In reality, the English approach has not re-duced violent crime. Instead it has left law-abiding citizens at the mercy of criminals who are confident that their victims have neither the means nor the legal right to resist them. Imitating this model would be a public safety disaster for the United States.
The illusion that the English government had protected its citizens by disarming them seemed credible because few realized the country had an astonishingly low level of armed crime even before guns were restricted. A government study for the years 1890-92, for example, found only three handgun homicides, an average of one a year, in a population of 30 million. In 1904 there were only four armed robberies in London, then the largest city in the world. A hundred years and many gun laws later, the BBC reported that England’s firearms restrictions "seem to have had little impact in the criminal underworld." Guns are virtually outlawed, and, as the old slogan predicted, only outlaws have guns. Worse, they are increasingly ready to use them.
Nearly five centuries of growing civility ended in 1954. Violent crime has been climbing ever since. Last December, London’s Evening Standard re
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
No we're not, I thought I stated that clearly now, then and a number of times in between, which is why I am asking, I have asked and I continue to ask for some sort of corroborating evidence that proves there is more violent crime in Britain.
I’m not talking about some article in the tabloid press; I’m talking about the actual figures.
The agreement came in that in Britain confrontations are less likely to end in death, it did not come in the way your spinning it that in Britain there is more violent crime.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
"I had a rose named after me and I was very flattered. But I was not pleased to read the description in the catalog: 'No good in a bed, but fine against a wall'." -- Eleanor Roosevelt.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sorry, Citizen.
I thought we were in agreement on the basic idea that you had more crime and we had more death.
Unfortunately, not being a statistician, I don't have access to raw data. I can only find articles about the data, like this one:
Britain, Australia top U.S.
in violent crime
Rates Down Under increase despite strict gun-control measures
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: March 2, 2001
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Jon Dougherty
© 2001 WorldNetDaily.com
Law enforcement and anti-crime activists regularly claim that the United States tops the charts in most crime-rate categories, but a new international study says that America's former master -- Great Britain -- has much higher levels of crime.
The International Crime Victims Survey, conducted by Leiden University in Holland, found that England and Wales ranked second overall in violent crime among industrialized nations.
Twenty-six percent of English citizens -- roughly one-quarter of the population -- have been victimized by violent crime. Australia led the list with more than 30 percent of its population victimized.
The United States didn't even make the "top 10" list of industrialized nations whose citizens were victimized by crime.
Jack Straw, the British home secretary, admitted that "levels of victimization are higher than in most comparable countries for most categories of crime."
Highlights of the study indicated that:
The percentage of the population that suffered "contact crime" in England and Wales was 3.6 percent, compared with 1.9 percent in the United States and 0.4 percent in Japan.
Burglary rates in England and Wales were also among the highest recorded. Australia (3.9 percent) and Denmark (3.1 per cent) had higher rates of burglary with entry than England and Wales (2.8 percent). In the U.S., the rate was 2.6 percent, according to 1995 figures;
"After Australia and England and Wales, the highest prevalence of crime was in Holland (25 percent), Sweden (25 percent) and Canada (24 percent). The United States, despite its high murder rate, was among the middle ranking countries with a 21 percent victimization rate," the London Telegraph said.
England and Wales also led in automobile thefts. More than 2.5 percent of the population had been victimized by car theft, followed by 2.1 percent in Australia and 1.9 percent in France. Again, the U.S. was not listed among the "top 10" nations.
The study found that Australia led in burglary rates, with nearly 4 percent of the population having been victimized by a burglary. Denmark was second with 3.1 percent; the U.S. was listed eighth at about 1.8 percent.
Interestingly, the study found that one of the lowest victimization rates -- just 15 percent overall -- occurred in Northern Ireland, home of the Irish Republican Army and scene of years of terrorist violence.
Analysts in the U.S. were quick to point out that all of the other industrialized nations included in the survey had stringent gun-control laws, but were overall much more violent than the U.S.
Indeed, information on Handgun Control's Center to Prevent Handgun Violence website actually praises Australia and attempts to portray Australia as a much safer country following strict gun-control measures passed by lawmakers in 1996.
"The next time a credulous friend or acquaintance tells you that Australia actually suffered more crime when they got tougher on guns ... offer him a Foster's, and tell him the facts," the CPHV site says.
"In 1998, the rate at which firearms were used in murder, attempted murder, assault, sexual assault and armed robbery went down. In that year, the last for which statistics are available, the number of murders involving a firearm declined to its lowest point in four years," says CPHV.
However, the International Crime Victims Survey notes that overall crime victimization Down Under rose from 27.8 percent of the population in 1988, to 28.6 percent in 1991 to over 30 percent in 1999.
Advoc
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Here's another one I found:
Crime and Justice in the United States
and in England and Wales, 1981-96
Highlights
Bureau of Justice Statistics, US Dept of Justice
Whether measured by surveys of crime victims or by police statistics, serious crime rates are not generally higher in the United States than England. (All references to England include Wales.) According to 1995 victim surveys -- which measure robbery, assault, burglary, and motor vehicle theft -- crime rates are all higher in England than the United States (figures 1-4 of the report beginning on page 1). According to latest (1996) police statistics -- which measure incidents reported to police of murder, rape, robbery, assault, burglary, and motor vehicle theft -- crime rates are higher in England for three crimes: assault, burglary, and motor vehicle theft (figures 5-10). The 1996 crime rate for a fourth crime (robbery) would have been higher in England than the United States had English police recorded the same fraction of robberies that came to their attention as American police (figure 15).
The major exception to the pattern of higher crime rates is murder, although the difference between the two countries has narrowed over the past 16 years (below, and figure 5 of the report).
Firearms are more often involved in violent crimes in the United States than in England. According to 1996 police statistics, firearms were used in 68% of U.S. murders but 7% of English murders, and 41% of U.S. robberies but 5% of English robberies.
Since 1981, an offender's risk of being caught, convicted, and sentenced to incarceration has risen in the United States for all six measured crimes (murder, rape, robbery, assault, burglary, motor vehicle theft) but has fallen in England for all but murder (figures 43-48).
U.S. crime rates -- whether measured by surveys of crime victims or by police statistics -- generally fell in the early 1980's, rose thereafter until around 1993, and then fell again (figures 1-10). For most U.S. crimes (survey estimated assault, burglary, and motor vehicle theft; police-recorded murder, robbery, and burglary), the latest crime rates (1996) are the lowest recorded in the 16-year period from 1981 to 1996. By comparison, English crime rates as measured in both victim surveys and police statistics have all risen since 1981. For half of the measured English crime categories, the latest crime rates (1995 for rates from victim surveys; 1996 for rates from police statistics) are the highest recorded since 1981 (figures 1-10).
As a result of different crime trends in the two countries --
the U.S. robbery rate as measured in the victim survey was nearly double England's in 1981, but in 1995 the English robbery rate was 1.4 times America's (figure 1)
the English assault rate as measured in the victim survey was slightly higher than America's in 1981, but in 1995 the English assault rate was more than double America's (figure 2)
the U.S. burglary rate as measured in the victim survey was more than double England's in 1981, but in 1995 the English burglary rate was nearly double America's (below, and figure 3 of the report)
the English motor vehicle theft rate as measured in the victim survey was 1.5 times America's in 1981, but in 1995 the English rate for vehicle theft was more than double America's (figure 4)
"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Repeat after me ... google is my friend, google is my friend ....
the International Crime Victim Survey
http://ruljis.leidenuniv.nl/group/jfcr/www/icvs/
Criminal Victimisation in Eleven Industrialised Countries; Key findings from the 1996 International Crime Victims Survey
http://www.unicri.it/wwd/analysis/icvs/pdf_files/summary162.PDF
AUTO THEFT
The risk of having a car stolen was highest in England and Wales (3% of owners had a theft), Scotland (2.2%), and the USA (2.1%).
Thefts from cars (luggage, radios, car mirrors etc) were highest in England and Wales (10% of owners had one or more theft), Scotland (9%), France (8%) and the USA (8%).
BURGLARY
The proportion of households who had a completed or attempted burglary was highest in England and Wales (6%), Canada, the Netherlands, and the USA (all 5%).
CONTACT CRIME
Contact crime comprises here robbery, assaults, and sexual assaults (against women only). The highest risks were in England and Wales and the USA: over 3% were victimized
OTHER
There was a residual category of other crimes: vandalism to cars, thefts of motorcycles and bicycles, theft of personal property, offensive sexual behaviour, and threats. They are pooled together since most are seen as not very serious.
Taken as a whole, those in the Netherlands were hardest hit (26% experienced one or more incident in 1995), followed by those in England and Wales (23%) and Switzerland (21%).
In Scotland, France, Northern Ireland and England and Wales, half of the crimes reported in the ICVS were targeted at cars.
In the USA and Canada, burglaries comprised a bigger proportion of all crimes than elsewhere.
Contact crime, together with threats and offensive sexual behaviour, made up nearly a quarter of crime incidents on average. But proportionately more (contact) crime incidents in Finland, the USA, and Austria were of this type.
-----------------------------
In sum, 'crime' rates doesn't equal violent assaults. Much of the 'crime' in England is petty vandalism of autos. (Citizen, maybe the loss of your mirror was no accident!)
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Elon Musk indicates his new political party will be pro-gun, pro-bitcoin: 'The Second Amendment is sacred'
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/elon-musk-indicates-his-new-political
-party-pro-gun-pro-bitcoin-second-amendment-sacred
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME