England: Gun Crime Update

[JohnRich 4]

This news story is chock full of information:

How worried should we be about the extent of gun crime on our streets?

Semi-automatic weapons were banned in 1988 and handguns in 1998...

firearms murders rose by 18 per cent, from 49 to 58, between 2005-06 and 2006-07...

Injuries resulting from firearms offences more than doubled from 2,378 to 5,001 between 1998-09 and 2005-06.

75 per cent of victims of murders by firearms and other shootings come from the African-Caribbean community...

How many illegal weapons are there? The Government has no estimate, although it is clear that they are easy to obtain and becoming cheaper...

Source: Times Online

[DZJ 0]

It's also chock full of all sorts of other facts:

Quote

Why has the killing of Rhys Jones attracted so much publicity ?

Precisely because it so rare for a firearms murder to occur and even rarer for it to involve a child.

Emphasis added. Are firearms murders rare in the US?

Also:

Quote

The latest figures show that there was a 13 per cent fall in firearms offences, excluding air weapons, from 11,084 in 2005-06 to 9,608 in 2006-07.

Quote

But firearms offences resulting in serious injury fell by 13 per cent to 413 in 2006-07.

Quote

Not all firearms offences involve a real weapon. Imitations were used in 2,493 of the 9,608 crimes last year.

Quote

Bank and post office robberies have fallen by 65 per cent since 2001-02

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Are firearms murders rare in the US?

Nope. In fact they are far more frequent in the US than in England. But since gun crime is a reality in England, what should be the government's response?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

firearms murders rose by 18 per cent, from 49 to 58, between 2005-06 and 2006-07...

I think you're shooting yourself in the foot again, John. This numbers really hurt your message more than you help.

58 in all of England and Wales?

San Francisco alone has more this year, in a city of 750,000. And moving from 49 to 58 doesn't show a trend - SF bounces up and down around the 100 mark.

If you're going to fight for the 2nd, don't do it with blanks, please.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Nope. In fact they are far more frequent in the US than in England. But since gun crime is a reality in England, what should be the government's response?

oh!, ooh! I KNOW THIS ONE!!

HEALTHCARE and FREE HOUSING Programs

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[JohnRich 4]

Well I see that all the usual highly educated and intellectual arguments are coming forth (paraphrased):

"Oh yeah, well, as long as gun crime in England is lower than in the U.S., then it's not a problem. So there!"

Or there's always this one:

"We measure the effectiveness of England's gun control, not by comparing before and after statistics from England, but by comparing with statistics from America."

Sheesh.

As long as people can't get past their national pride and their egos, it's a waste of time to try and discuss the efficacy of gun control policies.

[Remster 30]

Quote

Well I see that all the usual highly educated and intellectual arguments are coming forth (paraphrased):

"Oh yeah, well, as long as gun crime in England is lower than in the U.S., then it's not a problem. So there!"

Sheesh.

As long as people can't get past their national pride and their egos, it's a waste of time to try and discuss the efficacy of gun control policies.

OK then... With its ban, England has much more control on gun murder rates then the US.

Remster

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

It's also chock full of all sorts of other facts

Since you went through it and cherry-picked all the nice stuff, perhaps it's only fair to go through it and produce the same kind of list of all the negative stuff, just for balance:

firearms murders rose by 18 per cent, from 49 to 58, between 2005-06 and 2006-07

in firearms offences, the overall trend in England and Wales and other industrialised societies is upward.

In 1989-99 the number of firearms offences, excluding those with air weapons, in England and Wales was about 4,500. They rose steadily to about 10,000 in 2001-02.

Injuries resulting from firearms offences more than doubled from 2,378 to 5,001 between 1998-09 and 2005-06.

Handguns are by far the most popular weapon and were used in 4,671 offences

Street robberies involving a firearm increased by 10 per cent to 1,439 in 2005-06 and by 17 per cent to 1,036 in shops.

illegal weapons...it is clear that they are easy to obtain and becoming cheaper. Guns can even be hired for an hour or an evening.

knives...They are more available and are the most common method of killing in England and Wales. You are about four times more likely to be killed with a knife than with a gun.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

With its ban, England has much more control on gun murder rates then the US.

Does not compute.

Gun murder rates in England are higher now than before the ban.

Gun murder rates in America are lower now, without a ban.

[Remster 30]

Quote

Quote

With its ban, England has much more control on gun murder rates then the US.

Does not compute.

Gun murder rates in England are higher now than before the ban.

Gun murder rates in America are lower now, without a ban.

I never said anything about before or after a ban. Murder rates are lower in the UK with a ban then in the US without one. Its pretty simple John.

Remster

[vortexring 0]

Nice to see a decent source John.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[SpeedRacer 1]

what about pointy sticks?

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[warpedskydiver 0]

Quote

Quote

firearms murders rose by 18 per cent, from 49 to 58, between 2005-06 and 2006-07...

I think you're shooting yourself in the foot again, John. This numbers really hurt your message more than you help.

58 in all of England and Wales?

San Francisco alone has more this year, in a city of 750,000. And moving from 49 to 58 doesn't show a trend - SF bounces up and down around the 100 mark.

If you're going to fight for the 2nd, don't do it with blanks, please.

Chicago has far more murders, and chicago has some of the strictest hangun laws in the USA.

It's a good thing they outlawed so many firearms now isn't it?

I bet the dead really liked that antigun laws protected them.

[rushmc 23]

Here kitty kitty kitty......




Said the 100 lbs bird to the cat....

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[nigel99 619]

John,
I think that you are focusing to tightly on the "ban" of firearms in the UK as the cause of rising crime.

I believe (& I don't follow these things closely) that in the US your per capita chance of being shot is higher than the UK. Therefore a ban MAY be working.

I also believe that most UK gun crime is committed by 16-30 year old black males. It is probably more likely that it is a social problem causing the growing murder rate. I would suggest that family breakdowns and music that glorifies killing to protect your "respect" and "honour" are of more influence than anything else. I don't think banning gangster rap would solve it though

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[Derekbox 0]

Every time a "study" shows one thing, the opposing side has a study which shows the opposite.

Here is my view. When criminals use firearms in high publicity criminal cases, everyone is up in arms to change the laws. Now either the criminals knew the gun laws and ignored them, or they didn't care about the laws and ignored them. Either way, you make the laws stricter and the criminals will continue to break the gun laws knowingly or ignorantly. The criminals only get punished when caught breaking the gun laws. But in the mean time, law abiding citizens are punished for the rest of there lives with the loss of there Constitutional rights.

Yes criminalizing guns reduces firearm availability, so gun crimes should decrease, but it violent crime persists regardless. It also seems to that general crime increases as criminals know they have victims that are legally inhibited from protecting themselves with firearms.

This is a local case that has our community in a heated discussion about firearms:

Quote

Allred plowed into Barwick's car outside Ruschak's home in Oviedo, broke in and shot him dead. He then walked into the bathroom, where Barwick was hiding, and shot her

Most people agree that if guns were illegal, these kids would not have been shot to death. I Agreed. But maybe clubbed to death, poisoned, Clubbed to death, ran over with a car, stabbed, etc etc etc (I picked all those links randomly). Or they assailant could have gotten a gun illegally (if guns were illegal) and still shot them. The gun does not enable the crime, the gun only enables another method of commiting the crime.

My point: a criminal breaks the law, and the community wants to change the laws that will end up damaging the freedoms of the law abiding citizen much more than it will damage the ability of someone to commit a haneous crime.

Thats all. I am a liberal. But I am VERY pro gun.

[Scoop 0]

Wheres the interesting recipe?

[CornishChris 5]

Warm Potato and Tuna salad with a Pesto Dressing

650g new potatoes, halved lengthways if large
2 tbsp pesto
4 tbsp olive oil
8 cherry tomatoes
175g can tuna
200g green beans, halved
couple of handfuls of spinach, preferably baby leaves, tear if larger

Put the potatoes in a pan of boiling water, bring back to the boil and simmer for 8-10 minutes until tender.

Meanwhile, mix the pesto and oil to make a dressing. Halve the tomatoes, drain and flake the tuna. Add the beans to the potatoes for the last 3 minutes of cooking time.

Drain the potatoes and beans and tip into a salad bowl. Stir in the spinach so that it wilts a little in the warmth from the vegetables. Season with salt and pepper. Scatter the tomatoes and tuna on top, drizzle with the pesto and gently toss everything together.

CJP

Gods don't kill people. People with Gods kill people

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Quote

Quote

With its ban, England has much more control on gun murder rates then the US.

Does not compute. Gun murder rates in England are higher now than before the ban. Gun murder rates in America are lower now, without a ban.

I never said anything about before or after a ban. Murder rates are lower in the UK with a ban then in the US without one. Its pretty simple John.

Go back and see message #6, indented paragraph #2.

If you think it's that simple, then you need more statistics classes.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

John, I think that you are focusing to tightly on the "ban" of firearms in the UK as the cause of rising crime.

Nope, I've never said that the ban caused the crime rise. People just like to presume that. I've said repeatedly all along, that there is no correlation, one way or the other, between gun laws and gun crimes. Gun crime happens despite gun laws.

Quote

I believe (& I don't follow these things closely) that in the US your per capita chance of being shot is higher than the UK. Therefore a ban MAY be working.

The key word is "may". And it proves false, as there are numerous international comparisons, which go both ways. There is no correlation...

Quote

I also believe that most UK gun crime is committed by 16-30 year old black males. It is probably more likely that it is a social problem causing the growing murder rate. I would suggest that family breakdowns and music that glorifies killing to protect your "respect" and "honour" are of more influence than anything else.

Ding ding ding! There you go. You finally got it. All of that was even hinted at strongly in the initial news story, but in all the puffery over national pride, no one could be bothered to recognize it. I'm glad that you managed to notice this true cause of gun crime. The key word is culture.

[Remster 30]

Quote

then you need more statistics classes.

BS John. If you want to CLAIM to use statistics, then you will need to control for other variables.

Remster

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Quote

then you need more statistics classes.

BS John. If you want to CLAIM to use statistics, then you will need to control for other variables.

You are the one not controlling variables, by comparing unlike countries, with different cultures, populations, ethnicities, laws, and darned near everything else.

If you want to control variables, you look only at England, both before and after the gun ban was passed. That holds all variables constant except for the one you are measuring. If you don't understand that this is the most appropriate way to measure something with statistics, then you need more statistics classes.

And by that analysis, the gun crime problem has grown worse, thereby proving that the gun ban has been ineffective at preventing gun crime.

Sheesh.

[Remster 30]

Quote

That holds all variables constant except for the one you are measuring.

Thats not what controlling for other variables means. Maybe you need a refresher in multiple variable regression analyis.

Edit

PS: John, I think my stats skills are passable, considering I just got an A on my graduate level Stats Analysis class.

Remster

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

If you think it's that simple, then you need more statistics classes.

Bringing me back to my point - 48 to 59 from one year to the next is probably not statistically valid.

So best be getting yourself there.

[Skyrad 0]

John, I don't think anyone could argue with any dispasionate logic that the firearms ban has done nothing to lower firearms related crime but also if they hadn't have banned the firearms there would still be no improvement in the crime figures. So other than the obvious point I just mentioned is there another point that you are trying to make?

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca