The most violent countries - Europe - Think the USA has the most violent crimes?

[SUBMAN1]

Think again. The U.S. has a violence rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents. I wonder if this has anything to do with the lack of guns over there? :D 100% chance.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/07/02/article-1196941-05900DF7000005DC-677_468x636.jpg

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196941/The-violent-country-Europe-Britain-worse-South-Africa-U-S.html

-S

[Stealhead]

Hmmm. What are they considering a viloent crime? Could say assult be a viloent crime?Like simply getting punched that is violent but over all not to0 bad. Something seems off about the other nations look at Luxemburgthe 2001 population was 439,539 something seems off here but brit media is well known to be very tabloidy so i dont think you can trsut this chart I am sure that they went in a boosted the numbers here.

Also western europe is suffering from an influx of illegal arms(being used by crimnals) this is something what his name should comment on jimbuna he says he is a police man and he is from England.

Why in the hell are they counting South Africa and Canada? Two nations that are not even in the same part of the globe and not member of the EU.

I think there are several 3rd world nations that have appaling violent crime rates when you consider that the US has what 300 million folks in it ours is not very high.

[Tribesman]

Think again
Yeah right , the Daily Mail.

[Rilder]

Yeah I'm pretty sure the daily mail is about as factual as the history channel. :rotfl:

[Tribesman]

In this world there are lies, damn lies and statistics...then there are Daily Mail statistics

[XabbaRus]

Hmm you quote from the Daily Fail.....

You do know that that newspaper is two steps to the left of the BNP?

This is a newspaper whose sole aim is to misread and mispublish statistics and facts in order to try and shock people into demanding the government change the UK back to the 1950's.

They moan how bad the UK is but ironically it is with their crap articles and reporting that the UK looks worse than it actually is.

[antikristuseke]

Next time, quote Sunday Sports...

[Takeda Shingen]

The Daily Mail makes Fox News look like a hippy commune. I wouldn't be so quick to cite them.

[Jimbuna]

Yeah right , the Daily Mail.

In this world there are lies, damn lies and statistics...then there are Daily Mail statistics

Next time, quote Sunday Sports...

The Daily Mail makes Fox News look like a hippy commune. I wouldn't be so quick to cite them.

ROFLMAO :rotfl:Great comments guys :yeah:

If you believe the above statistics then your obviously aware every Police Officer in England is heavily armed, carrying more firepower than your average Police Officer abroad. :doh:

I'd be far more interested in seeing figures from a reputable source plus another set mapping out the number of deaths as a result of violent crime from said countries. :hmmm:

Not one of your better posts Sub but one worthy of invoking debate which is what I suspect is/was your intention :03:

[AVGWarhawk]

See what happens when Jim retires from the force. :down: Get back to the beat Jim.:nope:

[Letum]

It's idiocy to attempt to compare violent crime statistics.
Different countries count violent crime in very different ways, record it in
different ways and publish it in different ways.

One country may count threatening behavior as a violent crime, another
may not. There is no standard.
Further more, in some countries one does not go to the police if one is
punched outside a bar, whilst in other countries one does. Countries
with a violent culture do not police violent crime as much.

Murder/manslaughter statistics are a much better way of comparing
countries as the definition of killing is much more universal.

[GoldenRivet]

Hmmm. What are they considering a viloent crime? Could say assult be a viloent crime?

the legal definition of "violent crime" is: any crime in which the offender either uses, or threatens to use violence against the victim(s) so yes "assault" (the threat of the use of violence) is a violent crime.

Like simply getting punched that is violent but over all not to0 bad.

Getting punched in the face (or any other part of your body) also referred to as "Battery" in many jurisdictions is considered a "violent crime"... yes you are right... being punched in the face is not too bad - as opposed to being stabbed in the scrotum... its all relative, violent crime by definition is violent crime no matter what the offense may be so long as there is the use or threat of use of violence / bodily harm.

one could argue... "is not all crime violent?"

technically speaking... no.

for example, blackmail is a crime, its evil... but not considered "violent" by any sense of the definition as it pertains to law.

for example "I know your banging your secretary and i have video, give me $3,000 per month out of the company finances or ill tell your wife and show her the film?"

nobody has technically threatened physical injury or bodily harm to the "victim" therefore this is not a violent crime.

as for why the south africa and canada stats were included - i dont really know.

but you can be sure that almost every form of statistical media out there is skewed to favor the author's viewpoint.

im sure that from a relative standpoint, the crime rate in all civilized nations of the world is pretty much the same as far as ratio of criminal activity per 100,000 people is concerned - at least if the ratio is reduced to the lowest common denominator im sure anyone would find that the crime rate expressed in such a format would yield some very similar numbers.

[antikristuseke]

Murder statistics per capita seem to differ wildly.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita

[GoldenRivet]

Murder statistics per capita seem to differ wildly.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita

yep... i would expect to see many in one place and few in another... however, globally speaking... the ratio of violent crime per 100,000 people would be relatively universal i would think.

sure, there will be a few places that really screw up the curve, but for the most part - fairly universal ratios i would guess.

[OneToughHerring]

for example, black male is a crime, its evil... but not considered "violent" by any sense of the definition as it pertains to law.

Eh...wat?

[Torplexed]

I think Golden Rivet meant blackmail (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackmail). ;)

[GoldenRivet]

I think Golden Rivet meant blackmail (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackmail). ;)

hahahahahaha

there you go... corrected

i guess i didnt realize it was spelled that way

[Jimbuna]

See what happens when Jim retires from the force. :down: Get back to the beat Jim.:nope:

LOL :DL

I'm now classed officially as a 'pensioner'....someone in receipt of a pension, but not the type usually awarded to a recognised person of pensionable age (in state pension terms) :hmmm:



Murder/manslaughter statistics are a much better way of comparing
countries as the definition of killing is much more universal.

Right on the money Letum :yeah:

Come on Sub...lets be having you :know:

[Morts]

flame bait

[CastleBravo]

It's idiocy to attempt to compare violent crime statistics.
Different countries count violent crime in very different ways, record it in
different ways and publish it in different ways.

One country may count threatening behavior as a violent crime, another
may not. There is no standard.
Further more, in some countries one does not go to the police if one is
punched outside a bar, whilst in other countries one does. Countries
with a violent culture do not police violent crime as much.

Murder/manslaughter statistics are a much better way of comparing
countries as the definition of killing is much more universal.

I see what you mean.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/wear/8021185.stm

[Schroeder]

flame bait
What else did you expect?;)

[SUBMAN1]

The reason for the flame bait is to turn the thread into what it is not.

All I see above is someone throwing out the source of the article, not the source of the information as the reason to discount it. The source of the information is not the DailyMail.

So I'm waiting for someone to disprove the information.

BTW, the definition of violent crime is even across the EU and America. So while the same thing may not apply for an undeveloped country, it does for all others.

So, who is the first to disprove this? Let me guess, NONE OF YOU CAN! :D

-S

PS. Can we get back on track? Or do we have to start a brand new thread on the subject?

[OneToughHerring]

BTW, the definition of violent crime is even across the EU and America. So while the same thing may not apply for an undeveloped country, it does for all others.

How about you prove that statement first.

[SUBMAN1]

How about you prove that statement first.

Sorry. No need to. I asked for you to prove mine first. Read the report if you feel like seeing what countries define what as violent.

-S

[Biggles]

I wonder if this has anything to do with the lack of guns over there? :D 100% chance.


You are 100% sure this would be the reason? Would you please give us proof/information that supports your view in this matter?

[GoldenRivet]

How about you prove that statement first.

its fact.

not all nations have the same laws.

Assault - wherein you threaten the use of violence

Battery - wherein you USE violence

they both might be considered a violent crime in Country "A"

but in country "B" - assault might not be considered a "violent crime" by their legal definitions.

[SUBMAN1]

its fact.

not all nations have the same laws.

Assault - wherein you threaten the use of violence

Battery - wherein you USE violence

they both might be considered a violent crime in Country "A"

but in country "B" - assault might not be considered a "violent crime" by their legal definitions.

Those are the definitions used in the USA, though most people assume assault is physically hurting that person. All of the EU as far as I understand have the same definition.

-S

[OneToughHerring]

Sorry. No need to. I asked for you to prove mine first. Read the report if you feel like seeing what countries define what as violent.

-S

You're asking other people to disprove your empty statements? How about you prove the US isn't the most violent western industrialised nation.

[Biggles]

Let's see what wikipedia says about the matter of murder rates:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

["Homicide rates per 100,000 population by region and subregion, 2004"[

North America, 6.5 (rate)

Europe, 5.4 (rate)

[SUBMAN1]

You're asking other people to disprove your empty statements? How about you prove the US isn't the most violent western industrialised nation.

Join the discussion about it instead of making misleading accusations. Its called - being constructive.

-S

[GoldenRivet]

Those are the definitions used in the USA, though most people assume assault is physically hurting that person. All of the EU as far as I understand have the same definition.

-S


you are correct... however - on a global scale, the definition of various crimes may vary slightly.

[Biggles]

Yes for this thread is really constructive...what is the purpose of this thread again? I cannot see a clear starting point at the first post, from which we can discuss anything of importance/relevance to anything.

[SUBMAN1]

Yes for this thread is really constructive...what is the purpose of this thread again? I cannot see a clear starting point at the first post, from which we can discuss anything of importance/relevans to anything.

Using that definition, we can see Biggles classifies any thread on Subsim to be irrelevant.

-S

[Biggles]

Using that definition, we can see Biggles classifies any thread on Subsim to be irrelevant.

-S

No. More often than not the poster tries to prove a point while inviting people to discuss it. I see nothing here but a random statement and then little progress to clear up the questions that arises.

[CastleBravo]

You're asking other people to disprove your empty statements? How about you prove the US isn't the most violent western industrialised nation.

It is impossible to prove a negative. Just saying. Perhaps it would be easier to prove the premise wrong.

[SUBMAN1]

No. More often than not the poster tries to prove a point while inviting people to discuss it. I see nothing here but a random statement and then little progress to clear up the questions that arises.

For the first page maybe. I am not trying to prove a point either. I made a statement, but that has little to do with the what the post is about - violent crime in the western world. Read the title again. Am I not allowed to throw out a comment about it? Sheesshhh. The post Nazi is back.

-S

[OneToughHerring]

Join the discussion about it instead of making misleading accusations. Its called - being constructive.

-S

That's something you're not doing.

[SUBMAN1]

That's something you're not doing.

What? By trying to get it back on track? You my friend are trying to derail it.

-S

[Biggles]

You still haven't answered my question back on post #26:

You are 100% sure this would be the reason? Would you please give us proof/information that supports your view in this matter?

Should I expect an answer or should I forget it?

[Schroeder]

So, who is the first to disprove this? Let me guess, NONE OF YOU CAN! :D
Let's see. Your embassy over here says that the current violent crime rate in the US is 20 crimes per 1000 citizens.: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/viort.htm

The police in the UK registered 1,158,957 violent crimes in 2007 . http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/crime/documents/violent_crime.pdf
1,158,957 divided by 60,578,000 people equals in a rate of: 0.0191316 cases per citizen or 19.1316 cases per 1000 citizens.

As the European police report indicates the UK numbers are outstandingly high in western Europe. In countries like Germany with strict weapon restrictions the crime rate is much lower. We have only 217,923 crimes for ca. 82,000,000 people equalling in a crime rate of 2,6 violent crimes per 1000 people.

[SUBMAN1]

You still haven't answered my question back on post #26:

You are 100% sure this would be the reason? Would you please give us proof/information that supports your view in this matter?

Should I expect an answer or should I forget it?

I made a suggestion. Maybe you should study it? Post Nazi.

-S

[Biggles]

Maybe you should stop calling people for Post Nazis and give a proper answer? Never mind, I don't care anymore...

[SUBMAN1]

Let's see. Your embassy over here says that the current violent crime rate in the US is 20 crimes per 1000 citizens.: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/viort.htm

The police in the UK registered 1,158,957 violent crimes in 2007 . http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/crime/documents/violent_crime.pdf
1,158,957 divided by 60,578,000 people equals in a rate of: 0.0191316 cases per citizen or 19.1316 cases per 1000 citizens.

As the European police report indicates the UK numbers are outstandingly high in western Europe. In countries like Germany with strict weapon restrictions the crime rate is much lower. We have only 217,923 crimes for ca. 82,000,000 people equalling in a crime rate of 2,6 violent crimes per 1000 people.


Firearms are allowed in Germany. Not even cops can take their firearms home in the UK. BTW, where is Germany on this list?

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Maybe you should stop calling people for Post Nazis and give a proper answer? Never mind, I don't care anymore...

Thats good, because I lost interest in your posts a long time ago when you forbid me from making comments in my posts.

-S

[OneToughHerring]

I made a suggestion. Maybe you should study it? Post Nazi.

-S

What's next Subman1?

"[article on obscure tabloid]ELVIS SEEN ON MARS[/article on obscure tabloid]

Prove me he's not there!?!1!11eleven!1"

[SUBMAN1]

Looks like you can carry in Germany too:

Firearms carry permits entitle licensees to publicly carry legally owned weapons, loaded in a concealed or non-concealed manner. A mandatory legal and safety class and shooting proficiency tests are required to obtain such a permit. Carry permits are usually only issued to persons with a particular need for carrying a firearm. This includes licensed hunters, law-enforcement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law-enforcement) officers, security personnel and persons living under a raised threat-level like celebrities (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celebrity) and politicians (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician).


The weapons law does not apply to military use of weapons within the Bundeswehr (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundeswehr).


The identity card of German troops contains a term allowing them carrying weapons. Nevertheless, issuance of guns and especially ammunition is also very strictly controlled within the armed forces.

[SUBMAN1]

What's next Subman1?

"[article on obscure tabloid]ELVIS SEEN ON MARS[/article on obscure tabloid]

Prove me he's not there!?!1!11eleven!1"

Thanks for proving my point of you Trolling and trying to derail the thread.

-S

[Biggles]

I forbid you? I can't recall I ever did...oh well, since you're so sure then I guess you're right.

[SUBMAN1]

Firearms rules for Germany:

A number of criteria must be met before a firearms ownership license is issued:


age of consent (18 years for rimfire calibers/21 years for higher calibers) (§ 4 WaffG)
trustworthiness (§ 5 WaffG)
personal adequacy (§ 6 WaffG)
expert knowledge (§ 7 WaffG) and
necessity (§ 8 WaffG) (Necessity is automatically assumed present for licensed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunting_license) hunters (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunting) and owners of a carry permits (Waffenschein)).

Persons who are


convicted felons
have a record of mental disorder or
are deemed unreliable (which includes people with drug or alcohol addiction histories and known violent or aggressive persons)

are barred from obtaining a firearms ownership license.

[Schroeder]

Firearms are allowed in Germany. Not even cops can take their firearms home in the UK. BTW, where is Germany on this list?

-S
Yes there are weapons, but you must have a special license to be allowed to have one ( and not everyone gets one, you must have a special reason to own one) and even then you mustn't carry them around with you, have to lock them in a steel locker separated from ammunition. So there is no way you can use them for self defence. That is why I pointed out the low German crimes numbers.

[Thomen]

Looks like you can carry in Germany too:

Not really. Permits to own a weapon does not mean you are allowed to carry.
But is is a pain in the behind to get a permit in the first place. Nowdays, you even need a permit for weapons that can only shoot blanks.

[CastleBravo]

In much of Europe only the criminals have firearms. Either before or after a firearm is aquired. But I digress, what is the definition of violent crime in the various European countries? That seems to me to be a good starting point. If one really wants to clear this all up.

[SUBMAN1]

Not really. Permits to own a weapon does not mean you are allowed to carry.
But is is a pain in the behind to get a permit in the first place. Nowdays, you even need a permit for weapons that can only shoot blanks.

I figured it would be hard, but hunters is on the list?

-S

[Letum]

the definition of violent crime is even across the EU and America.

:rotfl:
The definitions of violent crime are not even standardized in the different
countries within the UK, let alone Europe and the US.

The last (controversial) set of changes to the violent crime definition in
England are not used in Scotland. Other EU countries have utterly different
recording methods and parameters.

[SUBMAN1]

:rotfl:
The definitions of violent crime are not even standardized in the different
countries within the UK, let alone Europe and the US.

The last (controversial) set of changes to the violent crime definition in
England are not used in Scotland. Other EU countries have utterly different
recording methods and parameters.

What are they?

One thing you will notice in the report is that they counted the same crimes across the board. We should find out if this was used to determine the numbers for the various countries.

-S

[Thomen]

I figured it would be hard, but hunters is on the list?

-S

And thats about all thats on the list of private persons. And even those have a lot of restriction on how, what, when and where they are allowed to transport, carry, maintain and secure their firearms.

As Schroeder said, it is virtually impossible to use them for self defense thanks to those restrictions and regulations.

[XabbaRus]

The reason for the flame bait is to turn the thread into what it is not.

All I see above is someone throwing out the source of the article, not the source of the information as the reason to discount it. The source of the information is not the DailyMail.

So I'm waiting for someone to disprove the information.

BTW, the definition of violent crime is even across the EU and America. So while the same thing may not apply for an undeveloped country, it does for all others.

So, who is the first to disprove this? Let me guess, NONE OF YOU CAN! :D

-S

PS. Can we get back on track? Or do we have to start a brand new thread on the subject?

Subman if you knew anything about anything with the daily mail then the source of the information ie the Daily Mail is enough to discredit the statistics AS PRESENTED BY THE DAILY MAIL.

Noone here is discrediting the source of the information. But you haven'tpulished that and so we can't see how it is broken down. Jimbuna here is a recently retired police officer of the UK police so if anyone here was going to accept and agree with the Daily Mail's article I'm sure he would.

So given it is the Daily Mail then I would say it is misleading. Letme find the source of their information and look at the breakdown and what is counted as violent crime, and as someone says look at the murder/manslaughter rates and you will get a better picture.

Something I have noticed with you subman is that you seem to enjoy taking a swipe at the UK from time to time....why is that?

[SUBMAN1]

And thats about all thats on the list of private persons. And even those have a lot of restriction on how, what, when and where they are allowed to transport, carry, maintain and secure their firearms.

As Schroeder said, it is virtually impossible to use them for self defense thanks to those restrictions and regulations.

It must mean you guys are just more courteous than the rest of Europe as a whole. :D

-S

[Thomen]

It must mean you guys are just more courteous than the rest of Europe as a whole. :D

-S

Nah.. we still got fists, knives, swords, axes, clubs and cars. :D

[XabbaRus]

In Britain, an affray is considered a violent crime, while in other countries it will only be logged if a person is physically injured.

OK so this is an example from the article that the same crime can be seen in two different ways.

Also this report was compiled by the Tories with their own spin on as we are coming up for an election within the year and the Tories want to make as much mud as possible stick to Labour.

[OneToughHerring]

look at the murder/manslaughter rates and you will get a better picture.

Agreed.

This wiki-link gives a broad overlook at the subject of "intentional homicide" which I think covers both murder and manslaughter. However the definitions of murder/manslaughter/homicide may vary from country to country.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_rate

[SUBMAN1]

Subman if you knew anything about anything with the daily mail then the source of the information ie the Daily Mail is enough to discredit the statistics AS PRESENTED BY THE DAILY MAIL.

Noone here is discrediting the source of the information. But you haven'tpulished that and so we can't see how it is broken down. Jimbuna here is a recently retired police officer of the UK police so if anyone here was going to accept and agree with the Daily Mail's article I'm sure he would.

So given it is the Daily Mail then I would say it is misleading. Letme find the source of their information and look at the breakdown and what is counted as violent crime, and as someone says look at the murder/manslaughter rates and you will get a better picture. The source is on the side of the graphic, and none here has discredited it other than to say it was from the DailyMail so it must not be true garbage. Problem is, I can bet these guys have been all over the web to try and disprove it yet they can't, so they only throw out their fairly funny opinions.

BTW - this isn't only murder/manslaughter. You are narrowing the scope. This is me visiting Europe and getting robbed, beaten / assaulted, you name it. You guys have it rough I tell you. My chances of getting caught in a violent crime in the UK is nearly 5 times higher than here! That is crazy! Your answers are to install more cameras, but crime just goes up.

And last, I disagree with you about the DailyMail. I've heard that baseless argument countless times here before yet have yet to see one article that debunks whatever it was they were reporting. No one has shown one thing! Imagine that? I get the feeling that it is a case of the DailyMail reporting the truth most of the time and these guys can't take the truth. I want to start seeing articles that counter the DailyMail instead of 'its the Daily Mail so it can't be true' type osterich head in the sand posts I have seen lately. Everyone has an opinion. Few ever have proof here. SHOW ME THE PROOF! :salute:

Something I have noticed with you subman is that you seem to enjoy taking a swipe at the UK from time to time....why is that?

Only their exorbitant crime and crazy politics that are based on Political Correctness until it kills you mentality. It's just so foreign to me. Outside of that, you won't find much from me.

BTW - Someone needs to bring back Steed! :yeah: I miss him.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Agreed.

This wiki-link gives a broad overlook at the subject of "intentional homicide" which I think covers both murder and manslaughter. However the definitions of murder/manslaughter/homicide may vary from country to country.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_rate

Quit trying to narrow the scope. This is violent crime as a whole.

-S

[OneToughHerring]

Quit trying to narrow the scope. This is violent crime as a whole.

-S

Link to said statistics?

[SUBMAN1]

Man, have you been reading the thread? You are in, lets pick one tiny part and make us look better mode. This has nothing to do with one type of crime. This has to deal with any violence on a whole. I understand you want to make the UK look better somehow, but you really can't. I understand that is your motivation. What you should really be looking for is a way to fix the problem and then pressure your officials to make a change.

-S

[Fincuan]

*sigh*

Ok I'll bite.

The statistics Subman posted are from this Eurostat report:
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-SF-09-036/EN/KS-SF-09-036-EN.PDF

For those who don't bother reading through all of it, and I can't blame you for that, on page 11 it specifically says the statistics are unsuited for direct comparisons between countries due to, among other things, differences in data gathering.

[SUBMAN1]

...For those who don't bother reading through all of it, and I can't blame you for that, on page 11 it specifically says the statistics are unsuited for direct comparisons between countries due to, among other things, differences in data gathering.

I think you are right. I read a UK report not long ago in where they changed the way they gathered data in an attempt to make crime figures go down.

There is a thread on that somewhere in this GT forum.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Check this:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/5712573/UK-is-violent-crime-capital-of-Europe.html

...The Home Office says there has been a downtrend in overall violence for the past decade.

But last October it emerged that levels of violent crime in England and Wales had been underestimated for more than a decade because of a blunder in recording methods.

Ministers admitted that some police forces had not been recording offences of grievous bodily harm with intent as serious violent crime. When the offences were included violent crime figures immediately increased by a fifth....
-S

[Tribesman]

Too funny.
Well done Subman, you not only show your ignorance on laws and firearms regulations , but you even post articles to back you up that completely destroy your position.
Like....
comparisons of crime data between countries must be viewed with caution because of differing criminal justice systems and how crimes are reported and measured.
Check this eh?




This has to deal with any violence on a whole
Yeah right.
If I was to call you a c*** and you reported it to the police in America or Britain which would class it as a violent crime?

[XabbaRus]

This is me visiting Europe and getting robbed, beaten / assaulted, you name it. You guys have it rough I tell you.

And how often has that happened?

Look I live in the UK and yes on a Saturday night things can get out of hand. I'm not denying that we have a drink problem in the country. However on the countless times I and my mates have been out in the UK for a drink hitting the clubs etc I have never been started on, beaten up, threatened or anything else for that matter. From my observations those who got beaten up were looking for it. I'm not saying you were but you are painting a picture from a paper which you think is spot on with its reporting because it sits with your view of the world, its politics matches yours.

You are not listening to people who live in the UK and experience life here everyday. Just the same as us europeans making comments about US society based on a few statistics represented in whatever light the medium reporting wants.

[CastleBravo]

I can understand how long held beliefs can cause issue. But it is more important to question those beliefs, isn't it?

[jumpy]

lol Tribesman, amusing analogy.

Regarding the rest of this topic, I thought for a moment that I was reading a daily mail article... :yawn:

I'd have thought it was a fallacious and delusive idea that statistics on crime, gathered using contrastingly differing means, could have any continuity when comparing the national crime figures of different countries. Not only does such an argument have no common ground with its own statistical evidence, but attempting to prove such a unity only serves to further highlight the disparity upon which it is based in the first place!

...just like a Daily Mail article :yeah: :sunny:

[Tribesman]

I can understand how long held beliefs can cause issue. But it is more important to question those beliefs, isn't it?
True, but when things are looking down people cling to their old reliable long held beliefs no matter how silly they may seem and try to justify the clinging to those dearly held things in ever wilder fashions.
As you new President said small town people cling to guns and god when things are looking bleak .
So leaving aside that Submans knowledge of firearm legislation is as woefully inadequate as his knowledge of various legal systems it does raise the question .
After.....I wonder if this has anything to do with the lack of guns over there?...can we look forward to a nice bible topic?

[jumpy]

And last, I disagree with you about the DailyMail. I've heard that baseless argument countless times here before yet have yet to see one article that debunks whatever it was they were reporting. No one has shown one thing! Imagine that? I get the feeling that it is a case of the DailyMail reporting the truth most of the time and these guys can't take the truth. I want to start seeing articles that counter the DailyMail instead of 'its the Daily Mail so it can't be true' type osterich head in the sand posts I have seen lately. Everyone has an opinion. Few ever have proof here. SHOW ME THE PROOF!

If I didn't already know you were not a britisher, then this last would have told me everything I needed to know about your knowledge of british newspapers and thus exposing your lacking british nationality. No criticism implied there.

I'm sure in the good ol' us of a, there are certain things that everyone understands, either from a cultural, political or regional point of view.

Just so here; like The Sun newspaper is a comic with 'tits out for the lads' on page 3, so the Daily Mail is an alarmist tabloid with a health bias towards 'dixon of dock green', that no-one with any sense who lives in the UK takes all that seriously. Examples of such newspaper nonsense include 'they're taking all our jobs' articles about immigration and knee-jerk sensationalism about the pervasive influence of radical islam in the UK. Articles which, like any good tabloid in the business of selling news papers, are written with that thought firmly in mind and aimed at a target market of those who think themselves above the base contents of The Sun and Daily Sport, yet belie their origins with their base and easily led ideas about such heady topics as immigration, crime, terrorism, politics etc.
You do have tabloids in the US, don't you? And most people with en education or a reasoning mind recognise them as such, or like sarcasm, is the punchline completely missed over the water there?

Sorry if that comes across a bit harsh, but any Brit with half a brain when confronted with a source of information peddled by the Daily Mail, will either laugh or dismiss it, scornfully, out of hand. That's just the way it is; no justification is required, it's a truism.

[Tribesman]

lol Tribesman, amusing analogy.

More amusing due to the relevance.
I am going to be in England next week . If I called someone a "dumb wingnut conspiracy theorist" over there and they reported it to the police that would count as a violent crime in their statistics as verbal insults constitute a violent crime in their new methodology.
It matters not if any charges of harrasment were actually levelled by the CPS it would still be on the chart.

So take a typical friday night in Newcastle.
Two groups of maggots start slagging each other at throwing out time
Dutiful bobby on the closing time beat keeps a record of events in case it kicks off.
Nothing happens and the maggots go their seperate ways...how many violent crimes has that policeman just recorded ?

As for the anology. This afternoon there was two English fellas in the pub plus three other Irish lads who had spent years over there. In the course of talk the C word came up and its amazing application in England as a word for good friends.
So if I was to say " oi oi you old c*** " it could be a normal greeting or be reported as a violent crime.

[jumpy]

That's the legacy of Nulabours stance of 'tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime' policy stance, which omits the key element of 'being seen to be tough on the causes of crime' which is another matter altogether.

[Tribesman]

That's the legacy of Nulabours stance of 'tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime' policy stance,
Hold on, "tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime" is a meaningless Thatcher era soundbite.
Just because NuLab repeat it it only shows that that they really are ThatcherLite.

[jumpy]

Perhaps so, but it shows them for what they are all about, doesn't it? Certainly if you look back over the last 12 years of labour government and their 'improvements' regarding crime and how (as you pointed out) figures are obtained. My addendum of 'being seen to be doing something' holds truth for many politicians, but especially this lot of wastrels.

[XabbaRus]

I don't think there are many tabloids as we know them in America, at least not while I was living there.

The only one that comes to mind is the National Enquierer and that is just made up stuff....

[Jimbuna]

Good grief chaps!....is this debate still going on? :o

Much safer to debate the hot topics here as opposed to some pub or street corner :hmmm:

Makes me feel kinda glad I'm just a simple pensioner now :DL

[TarJak]

Makes me feel kinda glad I'm just a simple pensioner now :DLSounds like you need a new avatar:

http://www.opednews.com/populum/uploaded/the-old-codger-23441-20081003-1.jpg

:D

[Jimbuna]

Sounds like you need a new avatar:

http://www.opednews.com/populum/uploaded/the-old-codger-23441-20081003-1.jpg

:D

Now don't you go setting your lip up sonny

http://www.freefever.com/animatedgifs/animated/men141.gif

[Rilder]

Scuse me, sir, let me just get off your lawn. :88)

[Contact]

UK leads ? Black pudding is to blame! :rotfl:

[clive bradbury]

An explanation of the British statistics - all old news, really:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article640550.ece