egafd.com

Sam Slater wrote:

> Ha......you were wrong so it must be the statistics.
>
> Except, crime is down right across the western world. As much
> as I'd like to, you can't blame Thatcher for the crime
> statistics in France, Canada or Denmark.

All democracies who have a vested interest in crime going down or at least crime statistics going down.


> And even if it had risen, many more crimes being detected due to
> better police work

When they can be bothered to investigate, that is




and technological advances, and willingness
> to report crimes much more when it comes to domestic and sexual
> abuse (children and adults), racial crimes and general
> violence. Despite all these things, crime levels have, overall,
> decreased.

Which is why we (and I believe America) have more people in prison than ever before...


>
> Of course, the perception of crime has gone up, and I'd like to
> wager there's a strong correlation with the rise of 24 hour
> news channels.
>
> But then Dave the butcher at my local says it's all bollocks,
> so he must be right.

I would wager Dave has more contact with people than you do and hears their tales of woe...
>
>

[quote]All democracies who have a vested interest in crime going down or at least crime statistics going down.[/quote]

And all opposing parties, and the media outlets who align themselves with them have a vested interest in rubbishing such crime statistics. Except both Guardian, Independent, Times and Telegraph alike have never questioned the findings. Maybe because it really is going down.

[quote]When they can be bothered to investigate,[/quote]

So you agree. Good. We're not only better at detecting crimes now, but detecting when the police mess up.

[quote]Which is why we (and I believe America) have more people in prison than ever before...[/quote]

This is more to do with a higher proportion of offenders sentenced to prison, longer terms and a declining parole rate, among other things. Not to do with a rise in crime. It is well documented.

[quote]I would wager Dave has more contact with people than you do and hears their tales of woe...[/quote]

Dave's like you. He's been taken in by the 24 hour news culture we live in, where there's a peado round every corner and a mugger lurking in every shadow.

Sam Slater wrote:

> [quote]All democracies who have a vested interest in crime
> going down or at least crime statistics going down.[/quote]
>
> And all opposing parties, and the media outlets who align
> themselves with them have a vested interest in rubbishing such
> crime statistics. Except both Guardian, Independent, Times and
> Telegraph alike have never questioned the findings. Maybe
> because it really is going down.

Or because they know it's pointless and none of their readers believe the official figures anyway. On the subject of figures ? take school exams. The pass rate goes up every year but does anyone apart from the teaching unions and government spin doctors actually believe that children are getting more intelligent? The CBI and major companies (Tesco, M&S) as well as universities have complained that children are leaving school in need of remedial training in English and Maths. Yet the figures would suggest that we are breeding a nation of geniuses. This is obviously not true so why should anyone believe that crime figures are coming down.

>
> [quote]When they can be bothered to investigate,[/quote]
>
> So you agree. Good. We're not only better at detecting crimes
> now, but detecting when the police mess up.

No, the police aren't messing up, merely not doing the job we pay them for. They should have a large presence on the street to deter crime since they are pretty useless at solving crimes. How much money was spent on the Jill Dando case and we still don't know who killed her or why? How much money is wasted (still) on the Madeleine McCann investigation? When the lovely Helen Flanagan was burgled recently, what did the police do? As far as I'm aware, they haven't caught them yet but they did station a policeman outside her now former home. Why? What use was he? The police wouldn?t do it for people who aren?t famous or rich, and it doesn?t help solve the crime or stop a future one. It just rubs in the awkward fact that, once a crime is committed, a policeman isn?t really much use. Prevention is their job, and they won?t do it.

>
> [quote]Which is why we (and I believe America) have more people
> in prison than ever before...[/quote]
>
> This is more to do with a higher proportion of offenders
> sentenced to prison, longer terms and a declining parole rate,
> among other things. Not to do with a rise in crime. It is well
> documented.

Hmm a declining parole rate? Apart from the 49 who have life sentences, almost everyone gets out after serving half (or less) of their sentence. Over 30 killers killed again after being freed from prison between 2000/1 and 2010/11, statistics show. One in nine murderers is freed from prison after serving fewer than ten years of a life sentence. 275 convicted murderers were released during 2010 and 2011. Of these, 32 served fewer than ten years. Four served fewer than eight years, seven served fewer than nine. It is also the case that 35 people, who had been convicted of homicide, killed again after being released, surely the indefensible deaths of innocents caused by deliberate state action. Dr Rodger Patrick, a former Chief Inspector in the West Midlands Police, has been researching the manipulation of crime data for many years. During this time, police performance has been politically important ? any politically sensitive statistic will be manipulated. This sits alongside the well-known ?Bikini Effect?, noted by Sovietologists in the 1960s, under which the official interest in deception is so great that ?What the figures conceal is more interesting than what they reveal?. This is used to deflate the level of *reported crime*. You will note that it is *reported* or *recorded* crime that is said to have fallen in the figures leaked at the weekend. This is crime actually fed into the records by police forces, who have compiled the figures themselves. It is different from the levels of crime recorded by the British Crime Survey, an opinion poll of the over-16s which has considerable faults (not least that it leaves out so many young people, who are often victims of crime). Older figures, of arrests and convictions, are simply not comparable with either of these measures, as police are often reluctant to make arrests for "minor" crimes because of the appalling bureaucracy they must then suffer; because those arrested are often not charged by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), when they would have been in the days when police took such decisions;and because a lot of prosecutions fail or are dropped ; and because a growing number of offences are dealt with by ?Out of Court Disposals? including (largely unpaid) fines, farcically feeble ?restorative justice? and non-punitive actions such as probation or community service orders. Some social scientists have in any case estimated that around half of all robberies and of theft from the person are never reported to the police at all, probably because the items are uninsured and the hope of detection is very small. Dr Patrick quotes Hans de Bruijn, an expert on performance measurement, saying that any system of performance management can be threatened by the activity known as ?gaming? , generally accepted as one of the failings of the Soviet centrally planned economy?. What this means is that , seeking to meet targets, those involved will distort the figures to please their political or other masters.

>
> [quote]I would wager Dave has more contact with people than you
> do and hears their tales of woe...[/quote]
>
> Dave's like you. He's been taken in by the 24 hour news culture
> we live in, where there's a peado round every corner and a
> mugger lurking in every shadow.

I don't believe there is a paedo (note spelling) around every corner nor every other corner. I believe the chances of a child being molested by a stranger are tiny. I don't believe there is a mugger in every shadow either... And nor do I watch 24-hour news... Apart from that, spot on.

[quote]Or because they know it's pointless and none of their readers believe the official figures anyway. On the subject of figures ? take school exams.[/quote]

Ah...so first all the governments around the world were in it together in lying to their citizens about crime levels and now all the newspapers of these countries know it's pointless to reveal the truth. They think telling us about MP's expenses is believable; telling us about MPs' relationships with other news corporations who were involved with phone hacking or giving money to the police was also believable; all the things published in newspapers from wikileaks was believable, as is this current data regarding our privacy and the NSA..........you think newspapers think we'll believe all this, but nothing about crime levels apart from official figures? Oh, Essex Lad........

As the the exams: I'm pretty sure it's been reported that exams have become easier which would affect pass rates.

[quote]No, the police aren't messing up, merely not doing the job we pay them for. They should have a large presence on the street to deter crime since they are pretty useless at solving crimes. How much money was spent on the Jill Dando case and we still don't know who killed her or why? How much money is wasted (still) on the Madeleine McCann investigation? When the lovely Helen Flanagan was burgled recently, what did the police do? As far as I'm aware, they haven't caught them yet but they did station a policeman outside her now former home. Why? What use was he? The police wouldn?t do it for people who aren?t famous or rich, and it doesn?t help solve the crime or stop a future one. It just rubs in the awkward fact that, once a crime is committed, a policeman isn?t really much use. Prevention is their job, and they won?t do it.[/quote]

You talk as if there was a time when someone was burgled, they were caught within a few hours, or murderers never got away with it. Things are much better now, Essex Lad.......you're just older, paranoid and more cynical.

[quote]Hmm a declining parole rate? Apart from the 49 who have life sentences, almost everyone gets out after serving half (or less) of their sentence. Over 30 killers killed again after being freed from prison between 2000/1 and 2010/11, statistics show. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16638227 One in nine murderers is freed from prison after serving fewer than ten years of a life sentence.[/quote]

Hey, if you want to argue with me about releasing killers back onto our streets then you're wasting your time. I agree with you. But you're looking at something very specific. Overall, sentences are longer and there are declining parole rates. And I don't know why you bothered linking to a BBC news article because you said yourself that the newspapers and media aren't interested in printing the truth when it comes to crime. Or is it a case of only believing articles that back up your own pre-conceived ideas about the world and 'poppycocking' the stuff that doesn't? You, essentially cherry-pick to reassure yourself you're right and you're tying yourself in knots here to defend your own views.

[quote]I don't believe there is a paedo (note spelling) around every corner nor every other corner. I believe the chances of a child being molested by a stranger are tiny. I don't believe there is a mugger in every shadow either... And nor do I watch 24-hour news... Apart from that, spot on.[/quote]

You don't watch the news? Too busy on Twitter, that's your problem !laugh!

Sam Slater wrote:


> You don't watch the news? Too busy on Twitter, that's your
> problem !laugh!
>
No, I said I don't watch 24-hour news channels...

Lol. Never been on twitter. Not guilty m'lud....