[extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Gun control [was Re: the road tohell]

Mike Lorrey mlorrey at yahoo.com
Sun Apr 4 16:06:22 UTC 2004

--- Steve Davies <Steve365 at btinternet.com> wrote:
> In response to this the British Crime Survey was started in 1981.
> It is the result of a survey carried out every other year by the
> Office of Population Censuses and Surveys, of a large and
> representative sample of the general public. The basic question
> is "Have you personally been the victim of a crime in the
> last 12 months ?" Might explain why homicide isn't there? :)

Homicide victims include more than just the dead person, family members
are also victims, as they've been robbed of their family member.

> The figures from the BCS are actually more accurate than the Home
> Office stats because they are less affected by the 'Dark Figure'
> problem. 

No, not really. The state steals my money every week as 'taxes'. To me
that is theft, and therefore a crime. The state doesn't think so. I
would report it as a crime on such a survey if given a chance, one
theft for each paycheck. Similarly, anti-capital types would claim they
were ripped off by various commercial enterprises. In Britain, in
particular, if you prevent a robber from stealing your property, he
will report your act as 'stealing' from him. If you defended yourself
from a criminal, your act of defense is reported by the criminal in
crime surveys as a 'crime'.

The Survey asks if you THINK you were a victim of a crime. It does
nothing to test the perception of crime for validity.

Now, what I find so incredibly amusing here, is that you are asserting
the greater validity of a crime survey vs reported crime indexes, when
you, and those others claiming British crime has gone down, do not
attach similar credence to crime surveys conducted here in the US WRT
defensive gun use. Surveys show 2-2.5 million defensive gun uses per
year. If you are going to demand one survey is accurate, you must
accept that the other is also accurate.

Another amusing thing is the whole point you are missing:

If the British Crime Index crime rates are already 2-8 times higher
than those here in New Hampshire, and BCS crime rates are 2-3 times
higher than Index crimes, and even with a moderate drop in BCS crime
rates, they are still MANY times higher than rates here in NH, then it
only REINFORCES my original point.

> The nonsense Mike refers to of counting all crimes perpetrated by
> one offender on a given day as a single crime (so long as they're
> in the same 'class' - there are five 'classes') stopped this year,
> in response to pressure from the EU (that's why there appears to
> be a big increase in certain types of crime in the last six months).

I counted 2003 statistics. The Home Office only stopped this policy in
Jan, 2004.

> It wasn't new, the Home Office has been recording crime in this
> daft way since the 1920s. If you look at the more accurate BCS
> figures the pattern is that there has been a decline in most kinds
> of property crime since 1995.

The property crime rate there is still many times higher than it is

> However there has been a big rise in violent crime over the same
> period (proportionally it remains the case that the great majority of
> crime is property offences of various kinds). As well as a big rise
> homicide, there's been an even bigger one in common assault,
> aggravated assault, assault and battery, wounding and robbery.
> Britain's per capita rates for these kinds of crime are now higher
> than the US rates and much higher than the rates for historically
> low crime regions such as New England.

Northern New England, sir. Crime rates in New York, Massachusetts and
Rhode Island are on par with other high gun control areas of the US.
NH, VT, and ME crime rates have been lower than our neighbors for a
very specific reason.

> Part of this is cyclical - violent crime rises during periods of
> economic growth and declines during slumps (property crime has the
> opposite pattern) but the increase is well above the historic trend.
> Another reason is the disastrous effects of the 'War on drugs' -
> the case in Salford may have been a 'business dispute' - we had a
> fatal shooting of that kind just around the corner from where I
> live, a couple of streets away. The other reason is the one alluded
> to, not so much control of guns (that has been strict ever since
> it was introduced in 1922)

While registration was instituted in 1922 (which coincides with the
beginning of the great rise in violent and property crime in Britain
all through the 20th century), it is the near-total gun ban instituted
in the mid 1990's, as well as the policy that makes it a crime to
defend one's self, even in one's home, with what limited firearms are
available, that have resulted in the truly significant rise in reported
crime. The rise in reported crime also includes law abiding people
defending themselves who are criminalized by the system.

I would say that the likely cause of the dovetailing of reported vs
survey crime rates in Britain is likely a result of the ubiquitous
surveillance being instituted: a crime recorded by police on video is
definitely going to be reported by the police, if only to help increase
next year's budget, while a property owner who is surrendered to the
total lack of respect for private property in Britain won't report an
unobserved theft because he or she knows the police will never do
anything to retreive his or her property, and may even cite the
property owner for not properly securing his or her property, thus
'abetting' crime.

Some individuals may be reporting more crime if only because they want
more police cameras viewing their property.

> as the way the historic right of self-defense has
> been construed in ever more limited terms in the last ten years,
> regardless of what you use. The pressure for this does NOT come
> from politicians btw, it comes from the professionals of the CJS
> (lawyers, judges, prosecutors, police). The final factor is the
> unbelievable ineptitude and incompetence of
> the police and other law enforcement agencies. You would not believe
> how bad it is until you've experienced it yourself.

I believe it. Our police are bad enough here. This is why we are,
hopefully, going to strip them of the authority to control and be aware
of who can carry concealed. They can't even administer the licensing
process legally as it is today.

"Police are not required to know the law." - Judge Cirone, Lebanon
District Court, NH, September, 2003

Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway 

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list