UK Tops the US in Violent Crime by 25%

reply to post by ratcals

I think this is a fair distinction.

It would seem that the UK is more violent than the US which includes all types of violent crime.

So the question with regards to homicides should be how many homicides were committed in the US vs the UK.

We know that there were only "52" gun related murders, how about non-gun related murders?

Citizens Report.

Which concludes:

There were 640 Murders / Homicides in Britain (England, Scotland and Wales) in 2011/12 (10.43 per million population)

Of these 640 Murders / Homicides, 44 involved a gun or firearm as the main weapon. Gun murders in Britain in 2011/12 represent 6% of the murder cases, (0.72 gun homicides per million population).

So you see, the MAJORITY of murders in the UK are committed without the use of a gun which seems to be perfectly ok with Piers Morgan types.

Its just an issue when guns are involved... *insert crazy emoticon here*

ratcals
I don't see how you are going to be able to come up with any credible evidence to support your claim. Here are two that contradict it.

Gun crime by country

More evidence

I can do this all day, but I think you get the point.

These aren't very good counter arguments as they are statistically inaccurate. Indeed, every comment on that post is pointing this out. Not surprising coming from the Washington Post.

The "more evidence" link is also from the Washington Post.

reply to post by greencmp


What exactly makes them any more 'statistically inaccurate' than your sources?

reply to post by gladtobehere

There is also the issue of gang violence which, if removed from the equation, removes all doubt.

However, I made my stand on the statistics without removing the black on black illegal guns so I should go by them.

I am prepared to have my ignorance denied here but, I am not seeing valid data to support the dismissal of my assertion.

reply to post by greencmp


Is this any more statistically accurate?

The Guardian

reply to post by greencmp

Well, if we cherry picked crime stats, most of the gun crimes in the US are gang related as well.

What are you asserting?

Not even going to bother reading the thread as I am sick of explaining this.

Violent crime in the UK can involve a couple having a VERBAL argument.

Violent crime in the UK can involve someone shouting VERBAL abuse at you on the street.

Burglary gets classed as a violent crime even though there is no PHYSICAL VIOLENCE involved.

The list of non physical violent crimes recorded in the UK goes on and on and on.

The statistics are a load of bollocks, things that get classed as a violent crime in the UK wouldn't even be thought of as such, in ANY other country.

reply to post by gladtobehere


I liked your other link before you changed it. The one that showed this.




libertarianhome.co.uk...

As the graph shows, there are four US states with a lower murder rate than England & Wales, namely Hawaii, Vermont, New Hampshire and Rhode Island, and an additional six which are lower than Scotland, those being Minnesota, Iowa, Utah, Maine, Oregan and Idaho, with Wisconsin, Washington and South Dakota not far behind.

ratcals
AND STILL I'm calling the OP out. Yes, his first link sums up the UK having 25% more TOTAL crimes than the US. TOTAL crimes does not equal VIOLENT crimes. Get your facts straight.

Well, that was my point, not to compare gun homicides but instead violent crime. You are right to say that including car thefts in these figures obscures the data supporting my point.

It is worth noting that violent crimes such as assault victims 2.8% (UK) vs 1.2%(US) is where I came up with my initial "by far" title.

So, I really should change the title to 25% for crime and over 100% for assault but, now I am gunshy (no pun intended) on editing my posts.

greencmp

ratcals
AND STILL I'm calling the OP out. Yes, his first link sums up the UK having 25% more TOTAL crimes than the US. TOTAL crimes does not equal VIOLENT crimes. Get your facts straight.

Well, that was my point, not to compare gun homicides but instead violent crime. You are right to say that including car thefts in these figures obscures the data supporting my point.

It is worth noting that violent crimes such as assault victims 2.8% (UK) vs 1.2%(US) is where I came up with my initial "by far" title.

So you don't consider murder committed by youths a violent crime? Something the US is beating the UK by a margin of 58 times. How about murders with firearms. Is that violent enough for you? The US is beating the UK by a factor of 688 on that one.

The only statistics I saw where the UK was beating the US in what I consider to be violent crimes are assault. The UK is beating the US by 133 times more. The other was rape victims and the margin there is 125 times more with the UK leading.

Sure the UK is beating the US in other areas like bribes, drug offences, and piracy, but those are hardly violent.

ratcals
reply to post by greencmp

 

Is this any more statistically accurate?

The Guardian

No, for the reason I just elucidated above.

Wat!!!

Us lovely Brits more violent than the equally lovely Americans? Oh Dear! someone has found us out.

In the UK things are so bad regarding what someone can get arrested for that even kiddies spats in the playground can get your little angel a trip to the police station. Heaven help the police for when I went to school, especially if it was a competitive sport, they would be there for days were it not a long time ago.

gladtobehere
reply to post by greencmp

 

Well, if we cherry picked crime stats, most of the gun crimes in the US are gang related as well.

What are you asserting?

Not sure what the question is here, I mean that I didn't differentiate so, I must allow those statistics into the argument.

greencmp

ratcals
reply to post by greencmp

 

Is this any more statistically accurate?

The Guardian

No, for the reason I just elucidated above.

So you're only going to accept your sources as statistically accurate?

If that's the case then I'm removing myself from this discussion.

Not to mention I even used YOUR source in my last post to prove you wrong.

reply to post by greencmp

Definition of ‘violent crime’ has impact on numbers

According to the FBI, there are four crimes classified as “violent” in crime statistics: murder/non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery and aggravated assault.

The list does not include burglaries, which is considered a property crime in the U.S. but a violent crime in the U.K.

In addition to murder, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault and burglary, England and Wales classify domestic violence and all sexual offenses – not just forcible rape – as violent.

Scotland and Northern Ireland compile their own statistics and systems.

In England and Wales, sexual offenses and domestic violence contain a wide range of offenses and make up a significant part of the overall number of their violent crimes.

Sexual offenses include rape, sexual assault, sexual activity with children, soliciting prostitutes (but not prostitution itself), sexual threats, sexual touching and indecent exposure.

Domestic abuse, described as a form of “intimate personal violence,” includes the following: non-sexual emotional or financial abuse, threats, physical force, sexual assault and stalking carried out by a current or former partner or other family member.

Several other crimes that are classified as violent in the U.K. include vehicle theft, purse-snatching and bicycle theft.

In all, the definition of “violent crime” takes approximately six pages to thoroughly explain. It is found in a user guide to crime statistics published by the Home Office, a U.K. government department addressing crime.

Source

Also, read page 20 (Chapter 5) onwards of this Home Office guide (straight from the horses mouth, so to say)...........

You will see just how stupid it is to compare the UK to the US by figures alone.

User Guide to Home Office Crime Statistics

woogleuk
You will see just how stupid it is to compare the UK to the US by figures alone.

User Guide to Home Office Crime Statistics

Very good point and to add to it- WHO CARES??

ratcals

greencmp

ratcals
reply to post by greencmp

 

Is this any more statistically accurate?

The Guardian

No, for the reason I just elucidated above.

So you're only going to accept your sources as statistically accurate?

If that's the case then I'm removing myself from this discussion.

Not to mention I even used YOUR source in my last post to prove you wrong.

Please don't give up, you can win this if you can support your counter-argument.

It would be helpful to not be misleading though, what you call 'my source' was a mistake that I corrected in under 1 minute. Bravo to your attention and, since you presented it yourself, it is in the thread record as 'your source'.

Other than portions of my own research antithesis, you haven't brought much to the table.

The reason I had it in my thread preparation is because I do explore all the arguments.

greencmp

ratcals

greencmp

ratcals
reply to post by greencmp

 

Is this any more statistically accurate?

The Guardian

No, for the reason I just elucidated above.

So you're only going to accept your sources as statistically accurate?

If that's the case then I'm removing myself from this discussion.

Not to mention I even used YOUR source in my last post to prove you wrong.

Please don't give up, you can win this if you can support your counter-argument.

It would be helpful to not be misleading though, what you call 'my source' was a mistake that I corrected in under 1 minute. Bravo to your attention and, since you presented it yourself, it is in the thread record as 'your source'.

Other than portions of my own research antithesis, you haven't brought much to the table.

The reason I had it in my thread preparation is because I do explore all the arguments.

edit on 11-9-2013 by greencmp because: (no reason given)

I won't give up as long as you clarify what your original argument is?

Is it "UK Tops the US in Violent Crime by 25%" as stated in the thread title?

Or is it "guns reduce crime" as stated in your REVISED opening comment.

Also you will need to clarify what you consider a statistically accurate source. For some reason, as yet adequately explained, you shoot all mine down. Yet consider yours credible.

reply to post by ratcals

I won't give up as long as you clarify what your original argument is?

Is it "UK Tops the US in Violent Crime by 25%" as stated in the thread title?

Or is it "guns reduce crime" as stated in your REVISED opening comment.

Also you will need to clarify what you consider a statistically accurate source. For some reason, as yet adequately explained, you shoot all mine down. Yet consider yours credible.

Absolutely, can I infer from your comment that it would be ok to change the title from:

"UK Tops the US in Violent Crime by 25%"

to

"UK Tops the US in Violent Crime by 100%"? or back to the original title ""UK Tops the US in Violent Crime by far"?

Or is it "guns reduce crime" as stated in your REVISED opening comment.

This was not revised, only the links which were from my antithesis research.

greencmp
reply to post by ratcals

 

I won't give up as long as you clarify what your original argument is?

Is it "UK Tops the US in Violent Crime by 25%" as stated in the thread title?

Or is it "guns reduce crime" as stated in your REVISED opening comment.

Also you will need to clarify what you consider a statistically accurate source. For some reason, as yet adequately explained, you shoot all mine down. Yet consider yours credible.

Absolutely, can I infer from your comment that it would be ok to change the title from:

"UK Tops the US in Violent Crime by 25%"

to

"UK Tops the US in Violent Crime by 100%"? or back to the original title ""UK Tops the US in Violent Crime by far"?

Or is it "guns reduce crime" as stated in your REVISED opening comment.

This was not revised, only the links which were from my antithesis research.

edit on 11-9-2013 by greencmp because: (no reason given)

So what is the argument and what is considered a statistically accurate source?

Taken from this source.

In 2011 the UK reported 540 intentional homicides (1 per 100,00) and the US 14,612 (4.7 per 100,000).

Or isn't the United Nations Office on Drug and Crime (UNODC) considered statistically accurate?