It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S.

page: 1
20
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 12:32 PM
link   

The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S.


www.dailymail.co.uk

Britain's violent crime record is worse than any other country in the European union, it has been revealed.

Official crime figures show the UK also has a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S. and even South Africa - widely considered one of the world's most dangerous countries.
(visit the link for the full news article)



+16 more 
posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 12:32 PM
link   
Here we have another piece of proof that gun control does not work. The poor British who were once able to defend themselves in the face of violent crime have long now been neutered and we can see the effects. The British people should organize and reinstate their right to keep and bare arms so that they might better protect themselves. If criminals knew their prey would likely fight back with lethal force I am sure crime rates would drop dramatically.

I feel fortunate that I live in the US where my basic right of self defense is recognized and I am able to carry a gun with me every day.

I am especially reminded of this today, on July 4th, commemorating the fact that we have a country (well at least we did have a free country at one point) that exists because folks finally got fed up enough with tyranny that they shot the b@stards, and today we still have the same ability.

Gun control is evil.

What say you all? Opinions for or against in the face of this hard data?

www.dailymail.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by merkaba93
 



Funny how they dont Compare gun deaths between the US and the UK.

Think you would see that in the US there are more gun related deaths than there is in the UK. Still there should be no guns allowed what soever in the UK.

But I do have to add, oks maybe certain parts of the UK, places are violent, but not every single city, town, village are violent. The report is misleading to say the least.

Oh and I await those who like to bash the UK coming in here and saying see Iran told you so


:lol

[edit on 4-7-2009 by Laurauk]

[edit on 4-7-2009 by Laurauk]



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Unless every-single crime was/is being committed with guns i won't bite your pro-gun bait...

you have to consider a lot of other factors like drugs, xenophobia, etc...

blaming it all on gun control is kind of ludicrous..

p.s - just because a bad gun control system doesn't work that does NOT mean GUN CONTROL will never work... we just need a better system..



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 12:43 PM
link   


But Police Minister David Hanson said: 'These figures are misleading.
Levels of police recorded crime statistics from different countries are simply not comparable since they are affected by many factors, for example the recording of violent crime in other countries may not include behaviour that we would categorise as violent crime.
.

I think this has more truth to it than the reports fromthe EU AND UN, which probably more holes in it than a cheese grator. Stats from other countries are completely different to that of the UK as a whole

[edit on 4-7-2009 by Laurauk]



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Wow, I would have thought for sure the US had the UK beat by a mile in regards to violent crimes. I would have to see what the poll considers a violent crime. Must be all those drunk football fans. Just kidding, the UK's fans aren't any worse than other countries.


+6 more 
posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 12:49 PM
link   
Gun ownership, even in the "glorious past" as you like to paint it, was never that big in the UK. We've never been a nation of gun fanatics, so it really isn't much of an argument to say we where "neutered", as there really wasn't much interest in the damned things anyway.

Also, bear in mind that this is the Daily Mail and as such, you can expect the report to be highlighting the most extreme side of things and painting a picture of a war-torn Basildon, or a Beirut-like Bognor...

EDIT: Also, Britain has never been that peaceful and tranquil anyway. There is a reason why the Police force was invented, you know....

Britain has always been a violent place and the British a particulary vicious group of people.

Although, it would seem alot of US posters think it's all Miss Marple, tea and scones, Pride and Prejudice nonsense....

[edit on 4/7/09 by stumason]



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by merkaba93
 


according to your link the homicide rate in the UK is 1.49 per 100,000. in the US in 2007 it was 5.9 people per 100,000.

basically, in the UK, where there just happens to be gun control, you are 3 times less likely to be killed.

so why would they want to relax gun control?



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 12:56 PM
link   
For all those of you who think that gun control has not contributed to the current crime rates, go to this thread and watch the video that is on it. It does shed some amount of light on the guns relating to crimes, as well as freedoms.



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 12:57 PM
link   
In Britain, an affray is considered a violent crime, while in other countries it will only be logged if a person is physically injured.

The more I dig around it looks like they're talking about a Gallup Europe survey among inhabitants of the European Union about their experiences with crime and law enforcement.

So actually it's a report on people's perception of crime not actual crime figures.
South Africans suffer more than 20,000 murders each year - compared with Britain's 921 in 2007
I'm happy to be proved wrong on this.

We have more laws to break in the UK than most other European countries, we lock more people up for minor misdemeanors, most European countries do not criminalise drug users like the UK does.



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 01:00 PM
link   
Because if the average citizen had guns we'd all be a lot safer!

I live in Manchester, sometimes nicknamed gunChester (UK) and yes there is a lot of violent crime, although the gun crime here is almost exclusively gang-related. Where I used to live (200 miles down South) the only gun crime was a guy that legally owned a shotgun who murdered his wife... now he might have stabbed her if he didn't have a gun, I guess we'll never know.

The thing is, even though there is a lot of violent crime you need to look at where it's occurring - is there anyone from the UK here that would want to go to their local town centre, bar/nightclub area on a Friday or Saturday night? I'm fairly young (32) and I avoid most of those places as much as possible, there are always drunken fights in the streets and riot vans to deal with all the drunks. There are a lot of muggings and the like as well, but guns would only make that worse.

Unfortunately, we're generally a stupid, drunken intollerant bunch.



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 01:01 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


I see your point about Americans thinking that everyone is Britain is dancing around in Pink Pajamas all day long. It isn't our fault, famous last words. Its the MSM in the US. I seriously grew up thinking, based on what I saw in the MSM, that every man in Britain was gay. Though now I realize that isnt true, it is only like half.


[edit on 4-7-2009 by grapesofraft]



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 01:02 PM
link   
And of course the solution will be MORE POLICE STATE. More laws, more restrictions, more harder sentences, more police getting away with beatings and murders... more corruption.

The biggest criminal in britain is the british government period.



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Here we have another piece of proof that gun control does not work. The poor British who were once able to defend themselves in the face of violent crime have long now been neutered and we can see the effects. The British people should organize and reinstate their right to keep and bare arms so that they might better protect themselves. If criminals knew their prey would likely fight back with lethal force I am sure crime rates would drop dramatically.


I really wonder if us having access to guns would make things much better. The real problem is angry chavs, those guys are randomly totally violent, and account for a lot of the crime figures in this country. If you legalized guns, most chavs would be the first in line to get some. Most normal people wouldn't want a gun.

Personally I wouldn't like to see a nation of chavs armed with handguns, them carrying "shanks" is bad enough.



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 01:08 PM
link   
Of course not forgetting the problems that we have with our police force being violent and the numerous recent cases.



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by merkaba93
 


We never had guns - some of us did - shotguns for sport and for the land - but no handguns and certainly no concealed carry legislation.

We do what we always did - a pick axe handle or cricket bat in the bedroom or a decent course in self defence



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 01:31 PM
link   
Having had the misfortune a few times in my life to be sourrounded by violent meatheaded lunatics, I can say that allowing anyone to have a bloody handgun is a really, REALLY bad idea. Right up there with giving a lit firework to a 2 year old. My work brings me into contact alot with guys from other countries, and yes across the pond they do have a somewhat 'quaint' veiw of what england / scotland / wales/ the irish are like lol.

We are an island nation and as such have a temperment to match it sometimes... we can be intollerant of others and seem to have grown an entire underculture since about 1980 that thrives on violence. (*cough* thatcher years! *cough*)

However....

Those people are still a small minority, one cause of such 'problem areas' is the under the table back handers local councelors got to 'import' bad families from other areas into theirs. Obviously as they didn't live there themselves they couldn't care less. No one saw the big picture that was going to obviously occur when you stick a load of violent brain dead thugs into one surburban aream,screw down the lid and apply some heat.

The majority of england is fairly peaceful and not riddled with crime or violent thugs in need of a brain donor. Most are nice people who simply like to get on with life and take no crap. I see this as a non story to 'inflame' the populous as is the penchant of that particular newpaper.

Wayne..



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 01:34 PM
link   
Thats really an eyeopener



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 01:34 PM
link   
So if I had a gun would I be able to walk the streets at night without fear of attack? Leave my windows open all day all year round? Leave my front door unlocked at night?

Oh, wait a minute, I do that already. That's what I like about England.



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Silk
 


You did have guns...
Times Online




In Britain we might recall the prolonged failure of armed police to contain the Hungerford killer, whose rampage lasted more than four hours, and who in the end shot himself. In Dunblane, too, it was the killer who ended his own life: even at best, police response is almost always belated when gunmen are on the loose. One might think, too, of the McDonald’s massacre in San Ysidro, California, in 1984, where the Swat team waited for their leader (who was held up in a traffic jam) while 21 unarmed diners were murdered.

Rhetoric about standing firm against terrorists aside, in Britain we have no more legal deterrent to prevent an armed assault than did the people of Mumbai, and individually we would be just as helpless as victims. The Mumbai massacre could happen in London tomorrow; but probably it could not have happened to Londoners 100 years ago.

In January 1909 two such anarchists, lately come from an attempt to blow up the president of France, tried to commit a robbery in north London, armed with automatic pistols. Edwardian Londoners, however, shot back – and the anarchists were pursued through the streets by a spontaneous hue-and-cry. The police, who could not find the key to their own gun cupboard, borrowed at least four pistols from passers-by, while other citizens armed with revolvers and shotguns preferred to use their weapons themselves to bring the assailants down.

Today we are probably more shocked at the idea of so many ordinary Londoners carrying guns in the street than we are at the idea of an armed robbery. But the world of Conan Doyle’s Dr Watson, pocketing his revolver before he walked the London streets, was real. The arming of the populace guaranteed rather than disturbed the peace.

That armed England existed within living memory; but it is now so alien to our expectations that it has become a foreign country. Our image of an armed society is conditioned instead by America: or by what we imagine we know about America. It is a skewed image, because (despite the Second Amendment) until recently in much of the US it has been illegal to bear arms outside the home or workplace; and therefore only people willing to defy the law have carried weapons.

In the past two decades the enactment of “right to carry” legislation in the majority of states, and the issue of permits for the carrying of concealed firearms to citizens of good repute, has brought a radical change. Opponents of the right to bear arms predicted that right to carry would cause blood to flow in the streets, but the reverse has been true: violent crime in America has plummeted.




top topics



 
20
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join