Murder Rate In London...

[Starlight]

Not-America will see a rise in break-ins and violent crime when it becomes apparent that you are not allowed to fight back.

The law has pretty much always been that way, so there won't be a 'rise' in such crimes.

An Oklahoma prosecutor said Monday no charges will be filed against a 23-year-old man who fatally shot three teenage intruders in his home[COLOR=#2A2A2A][FONT=proxima-nova], but that the woman who drove them there is being charged with first-degree murder.

That seems atrociously unjust, and I guess is a good example of why people in general shake their heads at the idiocy of the US red states.

I'll take America thank you!

I am sad to hear you place so little value on people's lives. One of my (evangelical Christian) friends here commented to me that he thought the major difference in culture between the US religious conservatives and the rest of the Western world was how little value you guys place on human life. I think he is probably right.

[Littlejoe]

The law has pretty much always been that way, so there won't be a 'rise' in such crimes.

Not according to this article published in January of this year (2018), it says violent crime is rising and it's accelerating in the UK at least.

That seems atrociously unjust, and I guess is a good example of why people in general shake their heads at the idiocy of the US red states.

I am sad to hear you place so little value on people's lives. One of my (evangelical Christian) friends here commented to me that he thought the major difference in culture between the US religious conservatives and the rest of the Western world was how little value you guys place on human life. I think he is probably right.

I value human life, but, when you threaten my family, you put yours in danger. I hope to NEVER have to use a gun with deadly force to defend myself, my family or my property...but people in my house in the middle of the night? There's no telling what their plans are. They are demonstrating their disdain for life, liberty and/or property.

I see you ignored the example of non-lethal use of a weapon. What would you have advised my sister if she had lived in NZ? I guess my point of your ability to defend yourself due to size and/or ability allows you to dismiss the possibility of danger to yourself. Yes?

[Teallaura]

And now, in London a 78 year old man is arrested for killing a burglar who broke into his house in the middle of the night, by stabbing him to death. The facts are not all in, it's still unclear whether the stabbing was from the screwdriver or a bladed weapon of some kind. But, in but the initial read is he tackled a burglar in the kitchen who was armed with a screw driver, and the man stabbed. Later collapsed in the street and was DOA.

So, in London, you can't even defend your home and family against burglars??? You are just supposed to let them come in and steal whatever they want and let them peacefully leave? I'm gobsmacked. I just hope this isn't where we are headed in America.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-break-in.html

This is possibly why. Note the times.

A Scotland Yard spokesman said: 'At 00:45hrs on Wednesday, 4 April, police were called by a homeowner to reports of a burglary in progress at an address in South Park Crescent, Hither Green SE6, and a man injured.
'The 78-year-old resident found two males inside the address. A struggle ensued between one of the males and the homeowner. The man, aged 38, sustained a stab wound to the upper body.
'London Ambulance Service took the injured male

, who was found collapsed in Further Green Road, SE8, to a central London hospital. He was pronounced dead at 03:37hrs.'
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz5Bkf9dEEm
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[seer]

I'll take America thank you!

yep...

[Starlight]

violent crime is rising and it's accelerating in the UK

That's disappointing to hear and I hope that trend reverses. Your original suggestion that there might have been a law change related to self-defense remains incorrect.

I see you ignored the example of non-lethal use of a weapon. What would you have advised my sister if she had lived in NZ?

Your sister would not be able to own a gun in New Zealand: Anyone who says they want a gun for self-defense purposes when they were applying for a gun license would be automatically declined. If she was actually licensed to own a gun for hunting purposes, and used a gun in the manner you suggested (threatening another human with it), her gun license and her gun would surely be revoked.

My advice to anyone here who finds an intruder in their home would be, in order: call the police, shut and lock/barricade her door, hide, and if personally attacked then defend themselves with whatever's to hand if necessary.

I guess my point of your ability to defend yourself due to size and/or ability allows you to dismiss the possibility of danger to yourself.

I think you're obsessively paranoid and fearful. Crime is an incredibly infrequent occurrence and it's a waste of time being concerned about it and silly to spend time psyching yourself up freaking out about the possibility of it. If your neighborhood is actually very dangerous, then move to somewhere that isn't. Otherwise, live your life happily and don't dwell on worst-possible outcomes.

[Roy]

So, in London, you can't even defend your home and family against burglars??? You are just supposed to let them come in and steal whatever they want and let them peacefully leave?

No.

I'm gobsmacked.

And gullible.

[Starlight]

So, in London, you can't even defend your home and family against burglars??? You are just supposed to let them come in and steal whatever they want and let them peacefully leave?

No.

My understanding is that English law and custom requires all visitors to one's home to be offered tea and biscuits. Presumably this applies to burglars too?

[Mountain Man]

Given huge budget cuts by the current Tory PM whilst Home Secretary- resulting in the loss of around 21,000 police officers- as well as huge cuts to the social budget over the last few years this is hardly surprising.

I find it curious that you want to place the blame anywhere but on the people committing the crimes.

[Starlight]

I find it curious that you want to place the blame anywhere but on the people committing the crimes.

The subject of the discussion was differences in murder rates between New York and London as well as recent changes in the crime rate in London. When there are different crime rates in different locations or different times, it makes sense to ask what factors are different that are leading to those different crimes rates. And insofar as political policies can be seen to affect those rates, then the politicians (and people who vote for them) are responsible for those policies.

Whereas it is outright dumb to say "criminals are bad people and there's nothing to be learned nor any policy changes that can help", or "humankind is all sinful, hence crime", because those things run contrary to the observed facts that there are different rates of crime in different locations and different times. Unless the theology being suggested posits changes in the rate of human sinfulness in different times and places, or gives some reasons as to why different numbers of people in different cities at different times would be 'bad people', it's not at all interesting as a hypothesis to explain the observed evidence.

Simply saying the criminals are bad and placing the blame on the criminals for making 'bad choices' (apart from not being consistent with differences in the crime rates between locations/times) is also morally problematic insofar as it lets you skate free of your own moral obligations to help make your society better. If criminals do what they do because "they're bad people" then that's a very convenient excuse for you to do nothing to fix it, and to pretend you have no blame in the matter. Whereas if you were to acknowledge that there are social and societal factors that affect how many people end up committing crimes, then you would have to realize and acknowledge that it is the collective choice of society (and hence of all of us as individuals in the aggregate) to set society up in a certain way, such that a given number of people end up becoming criminals. Blaming "them" (the criminal) is a very convenient way of avoiding taking any responsibility yourself.

[Mountain Man]

One way, in fact a very effective way to formulate policy is to figure out who is committing the crimes. If there's a specific demographic that is more likely to commit violence, like London's rising Muslim population, then that's where you focus your resources.

[EvoUK]

One way, in fact a very effective way to formulate policy is to figure out who is committing the crimes. If there's a specific demographic that is more likely to commit violence, like London's rising Muslim population, then that's where you focus your resources.

You think the spike in violent crime over the discussed months in London is due to Muslims?

[Sparko]

Yes.



The number of murders in London is about 3 times lower than New York, and the cities are pretty much the same size in population. There's been a few recent murders in London which has pushed the this-month statistics higher than NY, however it evens out and so far this year in total there's been more murders in NY than London, as per usual.


Actually there are different types of knifes and some are a lot easier to kill people with than others. I'm not a knife expert, but the basic differences seem to be:
1. Stabbing vs cutting - Does it have a sharp point on the end that it can be stabbed into someone (weapon), or does it have a blunt point and a sharp side that can be used for cutting things (kitchen)?
2. Double-sided vs single-sided - Kitchen knives only need a single side to be sharp for cutting, but a knife that is sharp on both sides makes a better weapon.
3. Potential concealment - When using a knife as a weapon, it is optimal if it can be hidden easily right up to use and flicked out suddenly, so knives with 'flick-blades' etc make better weapons than kitchen knives that are just carried in your hand or very awkwardly hidden under clothing.

It is probably worth banning the types that are more appropriate as weapons than for the kitchen. i.e. ban stabbing knives, double-sided knives, and easily-concealable knives. As previously discussed, here in New Zealand such knives are banned. So, yes, you can have a knife ban to get rid of murder weapons, and kitchen knives don't actually make great murder weapons - they have the possibility of killing but are more likely to injure rather than kill and would probably lose to a baseball bat in a fight.

Christianity has been wrong for 2000 years? Not really surprising. Are you really implying that a nuclear weapon isn't any more dangerous than a kitchen knife, and that giving every single person in the world a nuke would be no different to giving every single person a kitchen knife? Does the implement really make no difference?

[Sparko]

Arrested isn't the same as prosecuted and found guilty. If you kill someone then it's unsurprising that police would want to arrest you and have a long talk about it at the very least.

Furthermore, under the laws of not-America, you can't just kill someone. Them being in your house doesn't give you the right to kill them, that's still murder. Someone doing something wrong doesn't give you a blank check to kill them, that would still be murder. Unlike America, the rest of the Western world actually values life, and doesn't let people murder others at the drop of a hat. There's no 'stand your ground' laws allowing you to shoot someone dead if they encroach on your space, and the police don't kill anyone they see. The self-defense exception to a murder charge requires that only "reasonable force" be used.

Right, how are you to know if a burglar means you harm or not when they break into your home in the middle of the night? The danger is implied. That is why most states in America have the "stand your ground" laws. Someone breaking into your home while you are there is a danger to your life.

Now you can't kill someone who is out on the street breaking into your car. That is not a threat to your life. But if they come into your home, it is a danger to your life.

[Sparko]

The law has pretty much always been that way, so there won't be a 'rise' in such crimes.

That seems atrociously unjust, and I guess is a good example of why people in general shake their heads at the idiocy of the US red states.

.

No, we place great value on life: The people who are being attacked. When armed people break into your house with you in it, that is an attack. Their lives are not more valuable than your own.

I am sad to hear you place so little value on people's lives. One of my (evangelical Christian) friends here commented to me that he thought the major difference in culture between the US religious conservatives and the rest of the Western world was how little value you guys place on human life. I think he is probably right

Complaining about the value of human lives is hypocritical coming from someone who supports abortion and infanticide.

[Mountain Man]

You think the spike in violent crime over the discussed months in London is due to Muslims?

I'm sure it's just a coincidence. No, really.