hedgehog

Seems to be an interesting difference in opinion between the police and the government over the crime figures. Police say violent crime is up 12% while the government say it has fallen!

I note with interest that the government crime survey, which seems to question 10,000 people about their experiences of crime and then extrapolate from there, doesn't include various categories of violent crime. These just happen to be the trivial ones "including murder and rape, retail crime, drug taking, or offences in which the victims were aged below 16." (Take from BBC News)

Interesting how the government manipulate the statistics to try and support what appears to me to be an extremely dodgy position. Does anyone actually believe them that violent crime has fallen?

OllyK

Of course not, which is why the Government base their statment on a survey that looks at people perceptions rather than face the hard cold facts of the actual number of crimes reported to the Police. The government of course claim that the increase is due to better reporting methods and so more people are now reporting the crimes than before

Does any of this flannel sound at all familiar?? Road safety justification perchance?? using an intentionally twisted survey to try to show that people were in favour of speed cameras. Given choices like:
Would you
a) Like more speed cameras
b) Be happy to see an increas in the number of child road deaths
It was pretty obvious what the outcome was going to be

The fact that the 2 have very little correlation is besides the point, give somebody 2 choices and make one of them much worse than the one you want people to pick and you will always get the result you want.

_Meridian_

iTrader: (1)

OK, so given the majority of crime is never reported, how would YOU collect the data? One interesting factoid: the official stats now define something as a crime if someone thinks it is - even if no action is taken because it's obviously a stupid complaint.


M

boomer

One of the reasons that crime isn't increasing as much as it would is because people are taking far more measures to protect themselves - house alarms, black-jax, metal gates on front doors, immobilisers... stuff that WE pay for - not the government (through extra police funding).

Thus the crimes that do happen tend to be more serious - e.g. burglary/violence to steal cars. Oh, and they are still increasing in number!

And isn't it pathetic that in the same breath that the police say that crimes are currently increasing by 12% - they set targets to reduce crime by 5% for next year

mb

_Meridian_

iTrader: (1)

No, the police say reported crime increased by 12%, which is not the same thing, or even close. If 100 people are victims last year, but only ten report, whereas this year twenty report, but out of only fifty victims; that's a 100% increase in reported crime, but a 50% drop in real crime.

Everyone agrees that the crime survey is way more accurate than the official stats because less figure manipulation goes on.


M

hedgehog

Make that "everyone" except for me in the mean time. Everyone, including me, might consider murder to be a crime of violence for example and yet the current government exclude it from their figures.

This reminds me of the unemployment figures under Thatcher. As I recall Thatcher changed the way they were calculated almost every month to try and make them look less depressing.

Even if more people are reporting crime I see no reason why the number of crimes should reduce and yet the number of people willing to report crime should magically increase by such large numbers all in one important, for the government, year. I could easily see that this might vary by a few percent from year to year but I can't see in excess of 12% more crime victims suddenly decide to report crime last year after years of keeping quiet. With the government claiming to be tough on crime, an election coming up and the government trying to convince people that rising crime is all in their mind it seems a bit of a coincidence that all of a sudden loads of people should decide to report crimes therefore artifically increasing the crime rate.

Everyone, including me, smells a rat here. They lie about Iraq, they lie about speed cameras, they lie about crime figures and I wouldn't trust them to sit the right way around on a toilet.

boomer

It doesn't matter whether it is reported, actual, invented, huttoned, butlered or whatever crime - if the response to the statistics that are going up by 12% is to set a target of going down by 5% - they are fighting a seriously losing battle!!!!!

Oh, and please exclude me from "everyone" as well

mnb

the moose

OK, how much of an increase in crime have you PERSONALLY (i.e not reported in a paper, seen on TV, heard about at work) known of?

I'll tell you - I don't know anyone whose house has been broken into in the last year. I know of one (failed) car theft. I've not heard of an assault (other than a husband-wife problem with one of my staff). A fair few have been done for speeding.

So I find the Daily Mail "crime wave sweeps Britain" reporting kind of strange. Maybe I live in an ivory tower (but South Herts isn't exactly paradise) or my friends, family, acquaintances and work colleagues are just astonishingly lucky, but I'm not aware of a crime increase.

Sure, I'd be wary of wandering through Moss Side at night, but then I always would. And it's probably true to say that more guns are used, but again, who are they used on? Usually criminal vs criminal conflicts, which is exactly the same (albeit on a smaller scale) than it was in the 1950s.

The one are where I'm aware of more crime is in public order - my town seems to have a nastier edge to it on Friday nights because of the relatively recent advent of the 'bar strip', where 20 or so pubs try to out-do each other with cheap drinks and there's inevitably fighting as a result come midnight. I've certainly witnessed more of these scuffles than in prior years and months, though I suppose the best way to measure these is to go to an A&E unit and wit for the walking wounded to come through the doors from midnight on.

boomer

the moose

Well here is some first-hand experience of crime - not rumours, not from a friend of a friend, but my personal experience!!

I have lived in my house, which is in a decent urban area, for 19 years - since 1985. During the first 12 years (under Tory rule) i experienced no personal crime whatsoever.

In November 1998 i had an attempted break-in, where three youths jemmied a small window open, but failed to actually enter (due to other window locks). It is likely that they were after the keys to my MGF, but luckily they failed. As a result of this attempt, which was reported to the police, i substantially increased my house security.

So, barely a year after Bliar took office, i was the victim of a crime!!

In September 2002, two scum (see Scoobynet1 if you don't believe me) attempted to break-in, but were scared off by my alarm (fitted due to the earlier incident).

In April of this year, three scum (see Scoobynet2) tried to break-in - and after failing decided that it would be a laugh to slash three of my tyres (and then burgle my neighbours car).


So, the Tories gave me 12 years of peace of mind.

Bliar has given me 6 years which have been directly affected by crime (three times), plus the fear of crime (wasn't that a pledge to be reduced as well?) as i have had to spend my time, my money, and at my inconvenience of livestyle to try to prevent it happening. Notice that the interval between crimes is also decreasing!!!

Oh, and to top it all, the September 2002 incident was never officially recorded (as in a crime reference number), because trying doors, climbing fences, trespassing in gardens, peering through windows and being caught on video at 01:00am is not, technically, illegal

And as for directly knowing other people who have been hit by crime - off the top of my head, Super Slider and greg.g have both had their Imprezas stolen - good friends who i have been on many a Scooby camping trip with. As you will have read recently, Greg's was by a violent day-light car-jacking resulting in actual bodily harm. Several other friends have had very close calls!


Don't even start me on gun crime ... remind me how long ago, legal, inspected and licenced citizens were banned from owning handguns?? Did the ban help


Crime is more serious, more sophisticated, more frightening - at the same time as the police and the courts seem to have less power to deal with it

So yes - recent crime figures are a load of manipulated, irrelevant bollocks!!!

mb

The Zohan

According to our chief constable burglaries in Northampton are up 25%.

The figure do not include crimes against young people such as robbery - mobile phones, etc.

There are lies, damn lies, great big whoppers and there are statistics.

From my own experience i do not believe crime is going down.

On r5 tonire one of the presenters reported a broken car window to her local Police who where less than interested.

I am not laying this at the Police's feet at all.

hedgehog

I heard it reported that two thugs who tried to take a blokes car and who killed him in the process were sentenced today to 7 years!

When you consider that they have probably been held for the best part of a year then it is likely that they have a further 2 years to do. Two years hardly seems like a reasonable sentence for killing someone, they should be removed from society full stop.

This raises the interesting question of who is at fault. It is hard to blame the police as why should they bother catching real criminals when the sentences are trivial and when they are under political pressure to persecute motorists. In the end it looks to me like a politically correct minority are driving the government ( and i don't think the Tories were any better with crime to be honest) towards creating a class that are "below" the law. Those of us with an investment in society and with some respect for the rule of law are going to be made to pay for these "real" criminals and we can easily see this happening with the current persecution of motorists.

Prince Popeye

'According to our chief constable burglaries in Northampton are up 25%.'

But rest assured northants traffic coppers are committed to catching the motorist doing 55 mph on the silverstone bypass. B*stards

Brit_in_Japan

READ the report people, it says that violent crime has increased by 12% but that overall crime figures have reduced by 5%.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3914289.stm

Arguements about how the statistics are gathered are perfectly valid discussion points, but don't base arguements on misquoted statistics.

An important question is why is the UK becoming a more violent society.

Leslie

I think the open letter from the chief constable from Notts was very revealing, probably as accurate an account as you will get and diametrically opposite to what the Government is claiming.

I am not "everyone" either.

Les

tiggers

boomer,

While I sympathise with you over your experiences at the hands of criminals I think to pin the blame solely on the Labour government in the way you do is being overly simplistic. To me your post smacks more of you fitting your dislike of the current government to relate to what happened to you.

I have had two attempted burglaries at my current residence both while the Tories were in power , but even I (with my complete and utter contempt for Margaret and her cronies) am not naive enough to think that as no more burglaries, attempted or otherwise, have occurred at my home since Labour came to power that everything is fine now as regards law and order.

In your case I could equally ask what did the Tories do such that the people who committed the crimes against you became so disaffected with society whilst growing up in the 'Thatcher years' that they turned to a life of crime. Silly isn't it?

Crime needs sorting out and should not be used as a political 'football' between the various governments and the police forces or the populous come to that.

tiggers.

Prince Popeye

If we actually had a deterrent then maybe ppl would think twice about committing crime. Bring back capital punishment. In the long run this would save lives. Hopefully paedos would think twice about molesting/killing if they knew they'd be on the end of a noose? Also abolish remand. Over 75 ppl are murdered each year by prisoners given a 2nd chance. Mental asylums should be reintroduced to keep the sickos off the street. Kids sent to tough boot camp if they commit crime.

instead the loony liberals have given the criminal the upper hand

_Meridian_

iTrader: (1)

The murder rate per head of population in this country has hardly changed since WW2, yet the death penalty was abolished in (IIRC) 1969. The death penalty is certainly not a deterrent to murder (compare the murder rates in US states with and without and it's clear that the two aren't related. As for imposing it for other crimes, in the eighteenth century you could be hanged for over 400 different offences, including theft of an object worth more than 6 shillings. Guess what? Yep, all the evidence suggests crime was rampant.

The main problem is detection rates: crims don't think "I'd better not do this because it means ten years in chokey" they think "I'd better wear gloves so I don't get caught". Which they won't. As for murders, the DP certainly won't work because murders mainly fall into two categories:

1) 80% are "spur-of-the-moment". No thought was involved so how can anything deter it?

2) The rest are mainly planned with the express intention of not being caught. Again, the person is expecting to get away with it so no punishment will deter.

Yet again someone seems to be advocating simplistic (and wrong) solutions for a complex (social) problem.

M

Leslie

I wonder where you get your figures from Meridian. We are up to two murders a day now, violent crime is increasing seriously. Criminals have no compunction in carrying out vicious assaults while committing dreadful crimes. In years gone by, people did not beat up or kill elderly people while trying to steal their life savings! in those days a murder was front page news because of its comparative rarity.

What we are saying Tiggers is that crime is getting worse and that nothing significant to prevent it seems to have happened in recent years. Fine words maybe but no positive action. We see criminals getting away due to their "Human Rights" while if you are silly enough to defend yourself you are more likely to wind up as tha accused instead.

Its all very well defending your darling Tony, but lets see something done for the good of the innocent bystander for once.

tiggers

Leslie,

Get off your high horse and read what I wrote. I am not defending 'my darling Tony' (sic) I am simply saying that arguing between governments, police etc. doesn't make a jot of difference to the problem.

Crime may well be on the increase, but the problem is not as simple as which party is in power. The fact is crime was at an unacceptable level in the 80's and crime is at an unacceptable level now - whether it is worse now than then is really irrelevant.

Crime needs sorting out and probably needs a joint initiative from all parties, the police and the courts - not the political point scoring we have now.

tiggers.

boomer

Sorry if it came across as playing "political football" (i had consumed a can or two of fruit juice - you know, the ones with apples in ).

What gets me really angry is the lies that we are being told - how things are getting better, when they are patently not . If it was Michael Fartillo saying the same crap as BlindGit, i would still be pssied off!

The level of security and protection that i pay for (alarms, trackers, CCTV, immobilisers, razor-wire - ok, kidding about the razor-wire ) has increased substantially over the years - which should reduce the likelyhood of crime. But this is not the case in reality - maybe due to the lack of "bobbies on the beat" etc.

For the government to then spout that everything is hunkydory, and there are 50,000 extra police (filling in forms back at the station ) is taking the p1ss!!!!

It's not just the lies that are the problem - it is the government ignoring/not accepting the destruction of the fabric of our society - and that will take a very long time to put right!

mb

tiggers

No worries boomer - the old 'falling down' water can be a tongue loosener sometimes can it not?

Now that I do agree with. Unfortunately the fabric of our society has been being ripped away for years and no government including this one seems to want to admit it or do something about it.

It's very sad as like you say it won't be a quick fix.

tiggers.

hedgehog

It does seem to me that instead of eliminating crime the government are trying to eliminate the victims of crime in order to make the problem seem to go away. I don't think this is a party specific thing either as both Labour and the Tories seem to have similar positions on crime, if hidden under different words.

There is no question that the death penalty is a tricky subject but perhaps we should aim for a situation where those who murder someone are removed from society on a permenant basis. Then this raises the equally tricky question of someone like Tony Martin who took reasonable action to eliminate a threat to his safety and property but who was persecuted by our system for his actions and branded a murderer. Clearly there should be laws to support such actions but, again, this raises problems of where the line is drawn.

I also think the the "3 strikes and you are out" policy has some merit, if only because it might encourage police to attempt to capture some criminals in the knowledge that given time they will meet with a worthwhile "punishment."

I put "punishment" in quotes because, as has been suggested, punishment may not have any impact upon many criminals. This is the reason that I believe they must be removed from society on a permenant basis. If punishment doesn't discourage them then, instead of calling for less punishment as the do-gooders do, we should be putting them where it doesn't matter because they will never again present a problem to society.

Fundamentally we need to de-criminalise people defending their own lives and property and we need to lock up, permenantly, those who engage in serious crime. Society should be allowed to vote on what constitutes "serious" crime and to protect the criminals human rights the list of serious crimes should be made available. Get done for 3 of them and you never see the light of day again. Perhaps there should be a further list of "very serious" crimes to which the "3 strikes" rule doesn't apply; do it once and society never sees you again.

This is all pretty extreme stuff, not what you want in an ideal society at all. However, what part of society is ideal when thugs stealing someone's car can kill him and only get a few years in jail while it is likely that if the motorist had killed the thugs in self defence then he might have spent a very long time indeed in jail. He would also have lost his job, income, house, family etc. while the thugs, with no investment in normal society, will come back out and go back to stealing cars while we pay for their benefits.

Chip

Tiggers,

How could you!

Chip.

harvey

iTrader: (48)

"roll on the next election"
I agree 100%. Blair and his cronnies are taking the P1michael. Amongst other things just look at how they put things over. Any news that may be controversial, findings from Butler or appointment of Mandleson for instance is leaked as a possibility a couple of days before official confirmation by which time the impact is lessened.
Anyway you do not swich on the news anymore. You switch on to hear the spin and press releases.
The sad thing is, what do we have as an alternative to the current shower?

hedgehog

That is what worries me. Labour have lost their way, if they ever had it, and there is no one else that you could possibly vote for.

As others have said the BNP could do as well as anyone else. Any vote for Labour is basically a vote against the Tories rather than actual support for Labour.

Maybe we should form a motorists party with policies based upon common sense values?

harvey

iTrader: (48)

Let us start "The Common Sense Party" Our aims are to make the best decisions and judgements for U.K.Ltd. This means we only support and advocate decisions that are in the best interests of the population as a whole. Cronnyism, protection of cloistered interests and undue concern for perpetrators of crime as opposed to victims stops now.

hedgehog

Great idea. I'd say we will not win the next election, but we will win the one after that.

CSP has a reasonable ring to it, might suck some people into thinking they are voting for a TV programme for example.

Now, how do you set up a political party?

tiggers

Sorry mate, it just kinda slipped out

tiggers.

apples24

iTrader: (1)

you realise that most of the figures clamied are actually clear ups by the police, ie convicted custodial criminals clear up crimes for no extrs penalty, or if charged with a crime admit others and there taken into consideration when in court, ie not actually prosicuted for them,. itd another pr stunt

the system sucks... simple