Gun and knife murders up in UK... so much for gun bans preventing murders lol

5.56X45mm

5.56X45mm

Milforum Mac Daddy
I was listening to the BBC news and a story came on about all the murders in London: apparently there is a real gang mentality amongst the kiddies and the BBC said
the murders where being blamed on rap music, etc .. with close to 100 murders in the last
18 months. Interesting enough they are all killing each other with knives and it was reported that many kids and adults all carry knives to protect themselves.
and that knife crimes where on the increase. So there you have it. Banning guns does not stop murders

They even had a "Knife Amnesty Program" where everyone turned in there evil knives
but it had no effect.... sound familiar?

parents are buying body armor for the kids ....
smiley_abused.gif
icon_smile_clown.gif

www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1552956.ece


news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6464853.stm



oh yeah and gun crime up too since ban:


www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2317307.ece
 
And yet the official figures say differently.

Crime in England and Wales 2006/07

Offences involving firearms

Provisional statistics are available for police recorded crimes in 2006/07 involving firearms other than air weapons (referred to as ‘firearm offences’ in the remainder of this section).
  • Firearms are taken to be involved in an incident if they are fired, used as a blunt instrument against a person, or used in a threat. Most offences involving a firearm are violent crimes and more than half (55%) occurred in just three metropolitan forces: London, Greater Manchester and the West Midlands.
  • In 2006/07 there were a provisional 9,608 firearm offences recorded in England and Wales, a 13% decrease on 2005/06, and the lowest number recorded since 2000/01.
  • There was a significant increase in the number of firearm offences recorded between 1998/99 and 2001/02, though figures may have been partially influenced by some forces implementing the principles of the National Crime Recording Standard prior to its national introduction on 1 April 2002.
  • The increases have slowed since 2001/02, and the 2006/07 fall is the first since 1997/98.
  • 3% of most serious offences of violence against the person (other than homicide) involved firearms in 2006/07, down from 4% in 2005/06. In terms of numbers of offences, there was a 16% fall from 760 to 635 offences.
  • Less than half of 1% (0.4%) of other violence against the person offences involved firearms in 2006/07 the 3,690 offences recorded representing a 22% decrease from 2005/06.
  • Firearms were used in 58 homicides, 9 offences (or 18%) more than the 49 recorded in 2005/06. In addition, 3 homicides involving the use of air weapons were recorded in 2006/07, making a total of 61 firearms homicides (including air weapons) for the period.
  • There were 3,891 firearm robberies in 2006/07, a 4% decrease from the previous year. Firearms were used in just under 4% (3.8%) of all robbery offences recorded by police.
  • Handguns were used in 4,144 offences during 2006/07, 11% (or 527 offences) fewer than in 2005/06. Shotguns were used in 608 offences, a 5% decrease from the previous year.
  • There were 413 firearm offences that resulted in serious injury in 2006/07, a 13% decrease over 2005/06. The number of slight injuries decreased by 23% to 2,528 from 2005/06. 41% of these slight injuries were caused by imitation weapons (some of which fire plastic pellets).
  • Imitation weapons were used in 2,493 offences in 2006/07, 24% or 782 offences fewer than in the previous year after substantial increases since 1999/00. BB guns/ soft air weapons accounted for four fifths (83%) of these offences.
Further analysis of 2006/07 firearm offences will be published when full data is available early in 2008.
Use of weapons in violent incidents

It is currently not possible to identify offences involving the use of weapons other than firearms from national police recorded crime statistics. Figures for serious wounding involving knives and other sharp instruments from 2007/08 onwards will be presented in future volumes.
Weapons were used in 24% of all BCS violent crimes in 2006/07 a similar proportion to 2005/06 BCS (2%, the apparent difference is not statistically significant).
The most common types of weapons used were knives (used in 7% of all BCS incidents of violence), hitting implements (6%), and glass or bottles (5%). The use of different types of weapons has remained similar between 2005/06 and 2006/07 BCS.

Source: Home Office Statistical Bulletin: Crime in England and Wales 2006-07 (published)

http://www.connected.gov.uk/facts/guncrime/index.html


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Heres another one for you...... from http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crime-victims/reducing-crime/gun-crime/

Gun crime

Gun-related crime kills, maims and intimidates, and is frequently linked to gang activity and the illegal drugs trade in the UK. We are committed to tackling gun crime to ensure the safety and security of all British citizens.
A snapshot of gun crime

Contrary to public perception, the overall level of gun crime in England and Wales is very low – less than 0.5% of all crime recorded by the police.
Facts & figures
  • The number of overall offences involving firearms fell by 13% in 2006/07 compared to the previous year.
  • Firearms were involved in 566 serious or fatal injuries in 2006/07, compared to 645 the previous year - a drop of 12%.
  • The number of armed robberies involving guns dropped by 3%
  • There were 13% fewer serious and fatal injuries related to gun crimes in 2006/07.
  • The number of reported crimes involving imitation guns dropped by 15% in 2006/07.
  • The number of reported crimes involving air guns dropped by 15% in 2006/07 over 2005/06.
(Source: Crime in England and Wales 2006/07; Homicide, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence 2006-07.)
 
Last edited:
Not entirely sure I would read too much into what David Leppard has to say on things, this is the same man that suggested that an ex-leader of the Labour party, Michael Foot was a KGB agent and now makes his living writing books and editorials.
 
Last edited:
Are you saying that this report is untrue - are you dissing all the contributors to it? Or are you simply relying on good old character assassination to discredit the viewpoint?



David Leppard

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

David Leppard is a British journalist and former editor of The Sunday Times investigative unit, the Insight team. He is the author of books on the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, the Waco siege, and Special Branch, the British counter-terrorism and national-security police. He was responsible for a 1995 story suggesting Michael Foot, the former leader of the Labour party, had been an agent for the KGB. This later proved to be incorrect and the paper apologised. This was however a rare glitch in an otherwise impressive record.
Leppard was nominated as Journalist of the Year in the 1990 British Press Awards.


There you have it, straight from your dear old Wiki. I believe his record stands up well compared with that of our slippery government. Ex agents of the KGB is a very shadowy subject here, and one about which there is still great speculation.

There is no reason to dismiss this report in such cavalier fashion.

Regarding youth crime and knife-crime, please see the links on my post 25 - George Orwell thread.
 
Last edited:
Ah we are already at attempted insult stage I see well sorry but you are not going to drag me into another of your thread killing cyclic arguments, I am always amused by how the very same people that deride the media for its bias and inaccuracies jump to its defense when it suits their argument.

For the record I am saying I would not take to much notice of an editorial (his opinion) written by a man that is clearly not unbiased.

So I will leave you to it and wait to see what others have to say on the matter.

PS. It can hardly be character assassination if I am right and you post says I am:
- He was responsible for a 1995 story suggesting Michael Foot, the former leader of the Labour party, had been an agent for the KGB. This later proved to be incorrect and the paper apologised.

- He is the author of books on the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, the Waco siege, and Special Branch, the British counter-terrorism and national-security police.

So get your last word in on the matter so that others can become involved without the tit for tat nonsense that these things deteriorate into.
 
Last edited:
As always, the insult stage is introduced by yourself. Perhaps you would remind me of when I have ever derided the media. I believe that you yourself hold the 'cyclic' title, so perhaps you would like to like to give that old cliche a rest. Allow me to point out that this is a political discussion thread, where folk are supposed to present their views and are not supposed to let others go unchallenged.
This ain't the "There were ten in the bed and the little one said 'roll over, roll over'. So they all rolled over and one fell out" club, yet - as I understand it.

I assume that by 'thread killing' you mean when I happen to present a view which does not agree with your own, or one that you are at a loss to oppose. I see thread killing as trying to shut people up so that they go unheard. For my part, I always try to encourage others to join in robust debate . The more the merrier, that's what we are here for.

And we have to be able to agree to disagree, and we shouldn't act the diva, continually crying 'foul'.

I have no wish to claim the 'last word'; don't blame me if that is how the cookie crumbles, my opinion is always up there to be shot down; so, please, be my guest.

I assume that by 'tit for tat nonsense' you refer to opposing views, whereas I am referring to the report in question and your attempt to dismiss articles by David Leppard as unworthy. The Wiki quotation certainly says otherwise, and you were very selective in this respect.

The article and the writer did not deserve to be disrespected in such cavalier fashion ; this is a very serious matter under discussion.


(The memoirs of the russian KGB defector Oleg Gordievsky , published by The Times, was at the centre of the Michael Foot spy affair:-

http://www.timeout.com/london/features/333/3.html

In 1995, an article in The Sunday Times, under the headline "KGB: Michael Foot was our agent", alleged that the Soviet intelligence services regarded Foot as an 'agent of influence', named as 'Agent Boot'.
. The article was based on the paper's serialisation of KGB defector Oleg Gordievsky's memoirs.

.http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990CE2DE1638F933A15751C0A963958260

As Wiki made clear, this was the only 'blemish' on David Leppard's distinguished career.)



And now, back on topic, here is another example of what our police are up against , politically,on our streets:-


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=567032&in_page_id=1770
 
Last edited:
even in my rather quiet area, kids are carrying knives... i consider myself above this, but only because if i ever got knifed all me family and friends would find them and tear them limb from limb...
 
But is carrying knives anything new?
As kids we used to carry all sorts of items (knives, screwdrivers etc.) depending on where were were going.

The major problems with arming everybody are:
A) Not everyone is looking for a fight so regardless of how heavily armed they are they will not fire first which puts them at a major disadvantage. Thats the really nifty thing about fights with weapons, the winner is usually the person who uses them first not necessarily the person using them in defense.

B) Arming people will not stop criminals because they understand point A above but what it will do is start an arms race as they work to regain the advantage. (Ask yourself if you are going to rob someone possibly armed with 9mm are you going to take a .22)

C) Take a close look at the people you deal with each day (school, work, in vehicles, on the street) do you seriously want them armed?

There is a lot to be said for shooting as a sport and means of fun and relaxation (I have a collection of firearms and love hunting so I am not anti-gun by any means) but just as you don't wear your footy boots while driving you don't need to be wielding a gun either.

Another thing to consider is that there are huge amounts of research and development going into the production of non-lethal weapons around the world to equip law enforcement why would we be doing this if we thought the answer was to load up the general public with lethal weapons?
 
Last edited:
A) Why do such weak-minded individuals have a weapon in the first place?
B) Some criminals are crazy and will start a gunfight. Most want your money, not action.
C) Yes, it would actually make me feel better. Except for a few certain individuals.

All I know is I'm definitely getting a 10mm Auto pistol for self-defense when I turn 21, alon with some thorough training to ensure I can handle it well.
 
MontyB... you live in a different nation with a different culture. Here in the US of A we are proud that we can defend ourselves. This great nation was founded on the principle of armed citizenry fighting a tyrannical government and gaining their freedom. It's our skill as marksmen and our arms that have kept us free from a despotic government.

In the United States of America, if you look at the crime stats you will see something. The States with the least amount of reported violent crimes usually are also the States that have the most liberal gun laws. While States with a higher crime rate has more restricted gun laws.

Washington DC and Chicago have a very high violent crime rate. Murder and Rape are very high. They are both major cities with a very large population. Miami is also a major city with a very large population. Yet we have a lower crime rate then the two listed cities. Why? Because in the State of Florida it is legal for the citizenry to own and carry a firearm on the person for self defense. In Chicago you cannot carry a firearm and are severely restricted from owning firearms. In Washington DC it is against the law to own a pistol after 1976 and if you wish to own a long arm you must have it disassembled and you cannot move it from room to room without Police Authority.

In fact, because of that there is a Case in the United States Supreme Court over that very issue and if the Washington DC is legal.

Self Defense is a right. Period. Sadly in today's world you have firearms, knife, and other weapons that criminals use. But why should you or I, the law abiding be restricted in our ability to defend ourselves? Our armed forces use the same level of force in it's self defense against it's enemies. Why should the people be restricted from using the same level of force against the criminals?


They should not. In 1987, when the State of Florida passed the Shall Issue Conceal Weapon Permit. People said that Florida and Miami would be a wild west shoot out. In fact they were dead wrong. The crime rate in Florida dropped like a rock being thrown from the Empire State Building.

Is everyone out there capable of defending themselves. I'm not talking about whether they can do it physically. I mean can they do it or are they cowards. Yes, some people are cowards and you know what. A knife of firearm in their possession would do them no good. Why? Because they are cowards and they cannot stand up for themselves. Sadly that is what the criminal scum of society preys on. The weak and timid.

But when you give someone that is not a coward the tools to defend themselves then I 100% believe that doing so is the correct course of action.

I've meet 5'1" 110lbs women that are meaner then junkyard dogs. They can kick ass and take names. But if you have them face off a 6'2" 250lbs guy. It would be a easy fight. She'd fight with all of her worth but the guy would win. Why would you restrict her from having a tool to defend herself with?

911 is a great thing. Call it and the police will be there in 5 minutes. Trust me.... it takes me five minutes to respond to a call. I cannot be everywhere at once and a lot can happen in five minutes.

protectiontm7.png


God Created Man, But Samuel Colt made them equal.

Owning firearms is not just about recreational shooting or hunting. It's also about self defense from a unjust government to protecting one's self or one's family from criminal threats.
 
major liability said:
A) Why do such weak-minded individuals have a weapon in the first place?
Click to expand...

Because creating an environment where people have to be armed to feel safe gives them little option, arm themselves or become even less secure.

B) Some criminals are crazy and will start a gunfight. Most want your money, not action.
Click to expand...
Depends how you look at it, I would suggest that people use a weapon in crime to give them the advantage and will do whatever it takes to maintain that advantage, so what is the next step after pointing a gun in a robbery?


C) Yes, it would actually make me feel better. Except for a few certain individuals.
Click to expand...
Weird I don't know 90% of the people I encounter in a day, most are probably quite normal but they aren't the problem, the problem is the fraction of that 90% that are not normal but haven't been picked up by the system.

All I know is I'm definitely getting a 10mm Auto pistol for self-defense when I turn 21, alon with some thorough training to ensure I can handle it well.
Click to expand...
Personally I would be questioning the merits of a society where I felt I needed a 10mm Auto pistol to feel safe myself.


5.56X45mm said:
Owning firearms is not just about recreational shooting or hunting. It's also about self defense from a unjust government to protecting one's self or one's family from criminal threats.
Click to expand...

Umm I don't have an unjust government, it might be incompetent but not unjust and I really hate to say it but if my government does come after me it will be backed by a police force and army and no amount of guns will help me in that case.

As far as protecting myself and family from criminal threats goes once again I would question the social standards of any nation that requires its private citizens to arm themselves to give the illusion of safety (and unless you are prepared to be proactive in the use of your gun all you have is the illusion of safety).

But you are right we live in different worlds, I can use my common sense and avoid trouble I don't need Samuel Colt to do it for me.
 
Last edited:
This debate has been somewhat misled. The important point is not whether the number of firearm related crimes is going up, it is the number of firearm related crimes per capita. If you compare the rate in UK with that of the US, it's not surprising that the rate is rising, with figures as low as they have, it could hardly go much lower, the same cannot be said for the US.

spx_file001-2.gif


It's all rather pointless. Usually the criminals can afford better weaponry than the honest citizen, so all that happens when the citizens arm themselves, is that the criminals arm themselves even better.

Also the criminal is the person who chooses the time and place of the crime putting the best armed citizen at a distinct disadvantage. Knowing that his target is probably armed, only makes the criminal more likely to shoot first then snatch the money.

I'm sure we've had this debate before.

I must agree with Monty regards defending oneself from the government. That's a highly romanticised view and would never work. There have been lots of persons in the past who disagreed with government policy, and decided to duke it out with Uncle Sam, all of them are either dead or in the pokey, and will be there for a long, lonnnnggg time.

If the general public get too uppity, the Government will just completely bypass the Jail option and shoot you on sight. You've seen these movie clips on YouTube of the Iraqi insurgents getting brassed up with 30mm rounds?.... Just substitute yourself for the insurgent and you'll get the idea of how you would be handled. It might be great fun for the first ten minutes, then your worries will all be solved.

Believe me, as hopeless as it seems, you've a lot got more chance at the ballot box when it comes to arguing with the Government.
 
Last edited:
I don't need armament to feel safe (coming from a 16-year-old who has good experience of the "streets" today)

i've been battered a couple times, and if i'd have been armed i wouldn't have come better off either time. they'd have mobbed me, either at the time or later on. As it was, i took the punches and walked off okay. However, if i'd have been fighting for someone i care for, i'd be more lethal than any weapon. It's not a matter of weaponry, it's a matter of how much you care for what you're defending.
 
We have to think of crime, violent crime, murder etc. in real terms, and 'it could hardly be lower' is obviously not a sensible approach. Are the figures rising? Is the situation on the streets dangerous; is it getting worse? These are the problems we have to wrestle with. Here, we have children armed with powerful weapons shooting children. Gangs, particularly associated with drugs, using children as hit-men because they are to a large degree outside the full force of the law.

Liverpool and London have been examples, and it is good to see that the police are re-acting.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1021022/Police-forces-zero-tolerance-strategy-slashes-crime-Liverpool.html
 
Last edited:
All else aside, it appears that this "news" is 3 - 4 years out of date for firearms offences, with the official figures from the Home Office clearly showing a DROP in firearm related crime every year since 2004, dropping 5 - 10% per annum.

spx_file002-3.gif
 
Last edited:
I don't need a 10mm Auto to feel safe where I live. I just want one, because I enjoy shooting as well as long walks in to the woods, and there are a lot of bears and some mountain lions around here. I wouldn't shoot a bear unless he was charging me (usually they just stare and walk away), but mountain lions will go after you just for a meal so you always aim for instant incapacitation.

But like I said, I don't need it to feel safe. I go all throughout the woods (and bad parts of Poughkeepsie and New Haven) unarmed. Prospective robbers can tell just by looking at me that I probably have less money than they have in their pockets in my savings account. :)

I just like the idea of being able to employ lethal force from a distance. 10mm Auto is my favorite because it was designed from the ground-up for the FBI to be a "one shot stopper," though anyone can tell you shot placement is the most important factor. It's especially handy if the guy who comes after you is not after money, but blood. Or I could load 230gr. hardcast rounds for protection from wildlife. The fact that it has a very flat trajectory out to 100 yards also makes it great fun at the range.

As a side note, nothing pisses me off more than the liberal who assumes that you were in a bad neighborhood putting yourself in jeopardy if you get robbed/killed/raped. That's simply stupid. Criminals don't operate with borders, they pick targets of opportunity and stalk a huge area... at least the ones I've had the displeasure of talking to.

Most pro-gun people will say that guns actually prevent crimes, but in fact I think they increase the number of killings. But it is necessary. Not everything can be perfect and orderly in any human society, and restricting the rights of the lawful because of the actions of the criminal is not something I can ever support.
 
Is simple. A perfect society cannot be achieved. There will always be that glitch in the system. It's just the matter of whether the glitch is constructive or destructive.
 
Yeah, also for clarification I was not saying that legal firearms would increase crime, actually I believe it would cause a decrease. But you will of course see an increase in crimes of passion if everyone is armed. Like I've said in other threads, I don't think America as we know it can survive if our soldiers are the only ones willing to make sacrifices for freedom. If all you want is total security, this isn't the country for you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top