http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-14189216
An interesting bit of news, here. This man, Andrew Dawson, was out of prison on license for murder, and murdered two other people. Both adult men, both in their own homes, both stabbed to death. Completely ignoring the issue of a life sentence meaning a few years before you're free to kill again, perhaps if these innocent Derby men had had firearms in their homes they could have defended themselves from this killer? He was only armed with knives. Even a simple revolver, of the type once commonly carried in the UK for self-defence, would have been enough to deal with him.
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
"Statistics Do Not Reflect Crime Drop"
An interesting article here, from the Northampton Chronicle & Echo, our local newspaper for Northampton:
http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/crime/statistics_do_not_reflect_crime_drop_say_northamptonshire_police_1_2874084
Some interesting comments there. I quite agree that crimes like graffiti and broken windows have a real effect on the people involved. Graffiti in the public areas of a block of council flats is not only ugly, it's evidence of people, probably young people, basically out of control. Doing what they want without regard for anyone else or the law of the land. If they're breaking windows as well they're clearly not bothered about property crimes. Are these the same sort of people who commit muggings and "happy slap" attacks?
Mr Frost at the local constabulary also says that reported burglaries and domestic crimes are down. We know that that doesn't mean they're not happening, it means they're not reported. Apart from insurance purposes how many people bother to report crimes like these? Will you even get a police officer attend to take a statement, never mind a SOCO visit?
I don't think the local police are being quite honest with us. The comments on this article suggest others feel the same, especially if the police website doesn't mention incidents people are observing and aware of. What's happening in these incidents that they don't want us to know about?
http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/crime/statistics_do_not_reflect_crime_drop_say_northamptonshire_police_1_2874084
Some interesting comments there. I quite agree that crimes like graffiti and broken windows have a real effect on the people involved. Graffiti in the public areas of a block of council flats is not only ugly, it's evidence of people, probably young people, basically out of control. Doing what they want without regard for anyone else or the law of the land. If they're breaking windows as well they're clearly not bothered about property crimes. Are these the same sort of people who commit muggings and "happy slap" attacks?
Mr Frost at the local constabulary also says that reported burglaries and domestic crimes are down. We know that that doesn't mean they're not happening, it means they're not reported. Apart from insurance purposes how many people bother to report crimes like these? Will you even get a police officer attend to take a statement, never mind a SOCO visit?
I don't think the local police are being quite honest with us. The comments on this article suggest others feel the same, especially if the police website doesn't mention incidents people are observing and aware of. What's happening in these incidents that they don't want us to know about?
Introduction
Hello, and welcome to the first post of the Arm Britain regional blog for the East Midlands. My name is Dave, I'm from Derby but currently live in Northampton with my wife. I believe passionately in the right to keep and bear arms and want to see this restored to the people of the United Kingdom. In this blog I'll be highlighting and commenting on news stories from around the East Midlands region that pertain to crime, self-defence, shooting or firearms-related issues in general.
I think if you ask most anyone in this country you'll find there's a perception of rising crime, including domestic crime like burglary, and violent crimes like mugging, rape and common assault. The reality of the situation is hard to get at, since we all know officially-published statistics don't always tell the full story. Just like the with statistics the previous Government trotted out to show that unemployment was down, when in reality all they'd done was make it harder to get Jobseeker's Allowance, and moved people off JSA onto other benefits, we know the crime figures are massaged to show just what Westminster wants us to believe. If they want to show that violent street crime is down they re-classify assault as some make-believe issue like "anti-social behaviour" and omit it from the crime statistics. Equally, the British Crime Survey only looks at a sample of the population and then uses maths to make up its own statistics. It also uses perceptions, asking questions like "do you feel in danger in your own home?" playing into media fear-mongering tactics.
I also think that if you ask anyone in this country they'll tell you they believe that a burglar or intruder in someone else's home shouldn't have any protection from the law. We all remember the case of the burglar who successfully sued a householder for compensation when he cut himself on the broken glass left behind after breaking through the kitchen window. We're also well aware that if we injure a burglar we face prosecution for assault. It seems to me that people are sick of such madness in this country. Contrast this to Singapore, where any injury sustained during the commission of a criminal offence is deemed, legally, to be self-inflicted. Including death. If you die while commiting a crime in Singapore, your death certificate reads "suicide."
Leading on from this, I think that, when asked, a majority of people would agree with allowing householders to use any weapon available to defend themselves and their families from intruders. Currently the law allows the very-loosely defined "reasonable force" to be used for self-defence, and takes a very dim view of anyone stepping across that blurred line. Smack a burglar in the face when he's coming at your with a knife, and you're ok. Hit him when he's on the floor after your first punch, and you're not ok - even if he's stirring and you want him to stay where he is. The line is not only blurred, it's pretty arbitary, and none of the jurors or the judge who'll try your guilt or innocence were there to see what happened. This law needs to change. Let the law say that, like in Singapore, anything that happens to you when engaged in criminal activity is your own fault. I call that both fair and just.
I think if you ask most anyone in this country you'll find there's a perception of rising crime, including domestic crime like burglary, and violent crimes like mugging, rape and common assault. The reality of the situation is hard to get at, since we all know officially-published statistics don't always tell the full story. Just like the with statistics the previous Government trotted out to show that unemployment was down, when in reality all they'd done was make it harder to get Jobseeker's Allowance, and moved people off JSA onto other benefits, we know the crime figures are massaged to show just what Westminster wants us to believe. If they want to show that violent street crime is down they re-classify assault as some make-believe issue like "anti-social behaviour" and omit it from the crime statistics. Equally, the British Crime Survey only looks at a sample of the population and then uses maths to make up its own statistics. It also uses perceptions, asking questions like "do you feel in danger in your own home?" playing into media fear-mongering tactics.
I also think that if you ask anyone in this country they'll tell you they believe that a burglar or intruder in someone else's home shouldn't have any protection from the law. We all remember the case of the burglar who successfully sued a householder for compensation when he cut himself on the broken glass left behind after breaking through the kitchen window. We're also well aware that if we injure a burglar we face prosecution for assault. It seems to me that people are sick of such madness in this country. Contrast this to Singapore, where any injury sustained during the commission of a criminal offence is deemed, legally, to be self-inflicted. Including death. If you die while commiting a crime in Singapore, your death certificate reads "suicide."
Leading on from this, I think that, when asked, a majority of people would agree with allowing householders to use any weapon available to defend themselves and their families from intruders. Currently the law allows the very-loosely defined "reasonable force" to be used for self-defence, and takes a very dim view of anyone stepping across that blurred line. Smack a burglar in the face when he's coming at your with a knife, and you're ok. Hit him when he's on the floor after your first punch, and you're not ok - even if he's stirring and you want him to stay where he is. The line is not only blurred, it's pretty arbitary, and none of the jurors or the judge who'll try your guilt or innocence were there to see what happened. This law needs to change. Let the law say that, like in Singapore, anything that happens to you when engaged in criminal activity is your own fault. I call that both fair and just.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)