Pleased to see that you approve of my unbiased post; authoritarians would of course jump to accept the 'unbiased' (he-he) figures from the bodies appointed by The Home Office to bend perceptions. But reality is a different matter and happily the British public have at last woken up and has spoken at the ballet box, with a loud and positive voice.

I will help you with this one.


Would you believe it - the BCS is not the last word.

It does not include any of the below listed figures:-

Crimes against businesses
Crimes where there is no direct victim (such as possession of drugs)
Crimes against victims younger than 16 (it is considered inappropriate to survey child victims of crime in a general household survey)
Crimes that have involved deaths, like homicide (as the victims cannot be interviewed)
Crimes against pensioners !!!.


It cannot tell you what is happening in your neighbourhood. And the most vulnerable are not included.

***Note -
The British Crime Survey (BCS) is an in-home survey, run by the Home Office, that measures the amount of crime in England and Wales by asking people aged 16 and over, living in private households, about crimes they have experienced in the last ....................

Here's another take I would prefer ahead of anything put forward by our current Government scoundrels:-



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m.../31/do3101.xml


And yes, I do know that this is the man who wrote this :-

"the United Kingdom's authority as a sovereign nation has been greatly eroded, our democratic traditions trashed, and the make-up of our society put through the mangle of enforced multiculturalism - all without anything so vulgar as a plebiscite. Like geese being prepared for the production of foie gras, we are having stuffed down our throats that which we do not wish to swallow: the rough corn of Labour's determination to make its changes irreversible. If we dare to complain, we're told that it's good for us."[



BTW, MontyB - I was seriously interested to see that you do, in fact, approve of the use of guns to protect one's own home. I would suggest that that is at the heart of the matter.('beaten up again' thread, registered members only, 6 hours ago.)

I approve of the use of guns appropriate to the level of control you have of the area, at home I know who has the right to be there and who shouldn't, I know the lay out of the land and where and how I can use a firearm to cause the least collateral damage (neighbours etc.).

I seriously doubt I can say the same thing about wandering the streets armed which is why I do not believe arming the population in public is a good idea and why I do believe this area is best left to those trained for the job aka the police.

As far as my personal feelings on guns well they are just another implement in my collection, if I want to chop down a tree I will use an axe or saw, if I want to build something I will use a hammer and if I want to shoot something I will use a gun, I collect firearms and have all of the appropriate licenses to do so but unlike some on the board I am not evangelistic about them.

In terms of protection I seriously doubt the value of the firearm, certainly in the right circumstances they are very effective but in the wrong circumstances they make matters a hell of a lot worse and as I have said before if you live in a society where you need to be able to kill to feel safe then you need to seriously look at the quality of that society.

That just about matches my old position here, in the days when it was do-able. Seems a reasonable enough approach; I don't think I need add to this thread at the moment. I'm just sore at the weoponry in the hands of criminals here at present. I will chase any government in the same way, regardless of colour, if they disregard the electorate. I was at the core of the the removal of the conservative local power at the last local election over such dismissive considerations, and I exhort my constituentcy to hold politicians at all levels to account at the ballot box.

As far as America is concerned, they have their traditions and freedoms to consider and are of course reluctant to give up hard won positions. How do their differring comparisons from state to state measure up? All I have been able to offer is our experience here, for what it is worth.

Every country has a different set of problems when it comes to gun control, Countries like America, Canada and Australia can be days away from the nearest Police station and if there can be a great need of guns even if it it is to control wild animals. In Britain you would only be a short journey time from a police a station, now I wont say that they will turn up but in theory any way they are quite close

Very good point Le - our comparative situations are opposite ends of the scale.