Well, Well, Looky Here.

You know how the gun-control libs are always pointing to Great Britain as evidence that private ownership of guns should be banned?  “They banned guns and their crime rates are low!” goes the argument.

Well, that is not true.  For years, anecdotal evidence has pointed to a different conclusion: that crime is rampant in Britain but is severely underreported by law enforcement, thereby skewing the statistics downwards. 

Check this article out: 3 million crimes a year—2 million of them violent crimes—are left out of the annual British Crime Survey because of a cap on reporting of crimes.  From the linked article: “If anyone interviewed for the survey says they have been targeted more than five times a year, the sixth incident and beyond are not included in the BCS.”

Without the use of this nifty little trick, the rate of violent crime would be 82% higher. Eighty-two percent.  The rate of acquintance violence would be 156% higher; domestic violence 140% higher; burglary 20% higher; vandalism 24% higher; and robbery 7% higher.

Dr. Theodore Dalrymple has written (brilliantly) on this topic a number of times (for example, here, here, and here).

Aside from the bald-faced dishonesty, what strikes me about this is the idea that so many citizens of the UK are crime victims over 5 times in a single year.  Can you imagine?  Even in America’s inner cities that would considered high: anywhere else in the U.S., it would be considered astronomically high.

It’s a lot harder to repeatedly victimize people who can defend themselves.  Utter defenselessness and weakness should not be a condition forced upon free citizens by their government.

~ by lewdandlascivious on June 26, 2007.

7 Responses to “Well, Well, Looky Here.”

  1. Preaching to the choir here — but EXCELLENT reporting! Keep the truth coming forth.

  2. “because of a cap on reporting of crimes”

    Well that is what we need, a cap on crime. I say we report no more than ten rapes, murders, and robberies. Why ten? Well I like even numbers.

  3. You know, I thought that quotas were bad, where cops have to give out a certain number of speeding tickets. It’s actually worse to say that there’s no more than a certain number of crimes being committed. That’s just absurd.

    Putting this in perspective: they leave out 3 million crimes per year – and there’s 59 million people in England. That means that the police IGNORE a crime that happens to every twenty people every single year.

  4. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1440764.stm

    In the two years following the handgun ban, gun crime in the UK ROSE by 40%. Now you are telling me that figure may be under-inclusive? Heck, with stats like that, I’d rather go to Baghdad than London!

  5. The phony use of statics for political purposes has a very long history. This is yet another example of dishonesty for the molding of social values by the elitist’s that fear the common person being able to defend themselves from oppression. Be that outright criminal, or from a government.

  6. If you take the guns from the people, the only people with guns will be the bad guys. After they get all the guns from the bad guys they can have mine. guns don’t kill people do.

    michael mckenna the patriot

  7. Michael and Patrick, your comments together pretty much sum it up. If we don’t have the right to defend our own lives, we have no meaningful rights at all. It’s no coincidence that genocide is usually preceded by the disarming of the populace. If they want my guns, they’ll have to kill me for them: that’s one hill I’m perfectly willing to die on.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: