Conservative estimates on violence
Are the Tories being honest with their claims on violent crime? Last week, David Cameron told me that one reason he could justify the phrase "broken society" was because of "significant" increases in violent crime, notably gun and knife crime in Britain.
In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.
When I challenged him to produce the evidence, his party press office sent the BBC a list of statistics.
It emerges that the only way the Conservative leader can back up his claims is to ignore the klaxon warning attached to the statistics following changes in the way police record violent incidents in England and Wales.
Tory Central Office e-mailed this claim to me:
The document cited, however, includes this massive caveat:
And yet, that is exactly what Mr Cameron appears to do.
The NCRS wasn't some sneaky ministerial trick to massage violent crime figures. Quite the opposite: it made violent crime look much, much worse.
The Home Office had been accused of under-estimating violence for years because the decision as to whether an incident was a violent crime had been taken by police. So, for instance, a drunk with a fat lip staggers into a police station and claims that he has been the victim of assault. Under the old system, the desk sergeant might have offered a weary shrug and said that the police had better things to worry about.
After 2002, though, officers were obliged to record all incidents as violent crimes if the alleged victim said that is what it was. The aim was to stop police fiddling the figures and to get a better picture of violence. The obvious result was to send the statistics shooting up.
In 2002, there were 230,704 recorded incidents of "violence against the person with injury". The following year, the number recorded shot up to 372,124. Three years later, it had risen still further to 543,605.
Now, you might argue that the later figures are more reflective of the level of violent crime, but what you cannot do is compare one with the other to identify a trend. To do so may only reveal the effect of new counting rules, rather than any real change in the level of violence.
It might be frustrating for politicians who want to compare today's picture of violence with the situation when Labour came to power, but the independent officials who oversee and quality-check the stats are clear: you should not do it.
Fortunately, there is a measure of violent crime that has not changed in almost 30 years - the British Crime Survey. The BCS regularly asks 46,000 adults in England and Wales about their experience of crime in the previous year. This graph shows what people have been saying about violence over the past three decades. The story is of falling and then stable violence for over a decade.
The BCS is not perfect - until very recently it didn't interview 10-15 year-olds and, obviously, it cannot talk to victims of homicide. But 650 murders a year out of more than two million crimes would barely change the graph at all. And it is inconceivable that offences of violence against very young children are so numerous and increasing at such a rate that they change the story the figures tell.
Mr Cameron specifically mentioned increases in gun and knife crime - issues which he knows play directly into voters' fears that our country is becoming less safe. What is his evidence that either is getting worse?
Figures on knife crime in England and Wales have only been collected for a couple of years and the data so far suggests the number of offences is falling or stable. When we asked Tory Central Office to justify the claims on knives, a spokesperson sent us this:
The figures are plucked from the latest homicide figures for England and Wales [629Kb PDF] which contain a table dedicated to "apparent method of killing". The category the Conservatives select is "sharp instrument" (which includes glasses and bottles as well as knives) but does show an increase from 201 in 1998/9 to 255 in 2008/9.
Is this a story of escalating knife crime? Every murder is a tragedy, but homicide is at its lowest level for a decade and the figure for stabbings has been higher in six of the last 10 years. As the Conservatives concede, such murders actually fell 6% year-on-year.
Gun crime? Well, using the methodology they employ with knives, the homicide data reveals the fewest people were shot dead last year in the period since Labour came to power - 39 victims. It was 46 in 1998/99 and 96 in 2001/2.
On this occasion, however, the Conservatives select a different category. Here is what the Central Office e-mail argues:
Is this evidence of "significant" increases in gun crime? If one stands back to look at the whole picture, this is what one sees:
Even if one only focuses on the dark black line and ignores the crimes committed with air weapons, it is hard to justify a claim of a "significant" increase in gun crime.
The argument that "gun crime resulting in injury" has increased 104% again requires us to ignore the entreaties of the statisticians with regard to the changes in the counting system. Looking at the table below, one can see the numerical gymnastics the Conservatives have had to perform to reach their conclusion.
If one avoids the problem of the new recording system by comparing 2008/9 with 2002/3, the story of gun crime injuries is one of decline.
We are going to get a lot of this during the election - the use of what Winston Churchill called "political statistics".
It is a subject I talked about on Radio 4's More or Less programme last week (you can listen below or subscribe to the podcast) and, on your behalf, I intend to keep a gimlet eye on any numerical nonsense as we head for polling day.
In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.
I'm 
© 2012~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~49~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
You're right. Not a great point for Cameron to choose to discuss under the circumstances.
It seems the Tories are about to blow a massive poll lead by simply talking too much and coming up with a rash of policies where none were needed.
All they needed to do was say "look at this lot's dismal record - do you trust them to lead us out of the mess they created?". But no, they start desperate electioneering up to 5 months before the likely date, boring us to tears, and risking electoral apathy by May.
Perhaps he should change his name to David Kinnock, he's heading down the same road.
That said, he's probably right that Britain is "broken" as a society - the polarisation of communities due to immigration, the appalling eductational standard of many school leavers and the rights over responsibilities attitude of so many in the modern 'celebrity culture' are plain for all to see without recourse to mere statistics.
Simply point out that Labour have always been a disaster, quietly get back into Government and get it fixed.
Complain about this comment
all this gun crime revolves around?
A drugs supply
B drugs funding
C drugs control
D all of the above.
Complain about this comment
Nice to see some genuine anaylsis of spin that any of the parties might produce.
I really hope we see more of this type of challenging article being promoted in the run up to the election.
Whether Tory or Labour we all want to see a better society and such distortions are just plain wrong and potentially damaging.
Maybe we need a political equivalent to the Advertising Standards Authority who can ensure such Public Relations exercises are in the interest of the people, not the Political Leaders.
It just so happens the Conservative leader was bred on Public Relations so he should have known better.
Complain about this comment
As far as gun related crime is concerned As DC was referring to non air weapons the figures quoted in the box do support his statement. The fact that reporting of crime has changed undoubtedly makes a difference to minor crimes (even if they involve violence) but it is difficult to see why it should make a significant difference for gun crime - except possibly at the slight injury point, I find it impossible to believe that if a gun crime resulted in a stay in hospital it was not recorded both before and after the change in the way the stats were prepared.
But politicians quoting dodgy stats with strange starting dates - I can not think of any other politician that would do that apart from GB/Darling on economic stats
Complain about this comment
Hooray! Everything's just fine! I'd love to believe these figures, I really would. But if there's one thing that the last 25 years of government, by either party, has taught us, it is not to believe statistics. If we did, everyone over the age of about 35 would believe themselves to be utter dunces compared to the super-intelligent children educated in today's system that have a plethora of A grades. In fact they're so super-smart that we need an extra A* grade that we didn't have before. This is spite of the evidence all around us, and in my specific experience as an employer and ex-teacher.
I cannot challenge the violence statistics as I simply do not have the time, knowledge or information to do so. But I see society becoming more fractured in my own area, more violence and threat around where I live and work, and I think that there is an urgent need to tackle this. Claiming that Britain has been like this for the last 15 or so years and isn't getting demonstrably worse is hardly mitigation. We should be aiming for a better society - ours is considerably more 'broken' than comparable countries in near Europe. Are we really claiming that we are heading in the 'right direction'? Surely not.
My worry is that, like education, our politicians and social statisticians will be waving their spreadsheets and pointing at graphs, tables, and bar charts and reassuring us that everything is OK whilst Rome burns.
Complain about this comment
Hi Mark Easton
What about the unemployment figures?
The government frequently claims (unchallenged by anybody) that unemployment is not as bad as in the early 90s recession. But I think the official statistics show that the numbers claiming incapacity benefit have mushroomed since that time (and other things being equal, surely the proportion of folk that are incapacitated has remianed the same).
Complain about this comment
If only the official statistics could be believed. The method of recording crime in the first place is flawed and inaccurate, the figures are massaged at every level, recorded in different ways, and bear no relationship to actual committed crime. There are no records of the violent crimes not involving the police and no way of knowing how many go unreported in the sub culture that exists in this country below the law. Like every other statistic this government and it's agencies release, there tends to be a large deficit between the figures and the truth.
Complain about this comment
Up until a few years ago domestic violence was very rarely recorded by the Police, even very serious incidents that resulted in hospital treatment would be thought of as "just a domestic" and the Police wouldn't even take a statement.
These days almost every case of domestic abuse that is reported to the Police is investigated, or at the very least recorded, this would account for a large part of the increase in violent crime as domestic violence is one of the most common forms of violent crimes in our country.
Over the last few years schools have also started calling in the Police for fights amongst their pupils where one of the pupils has received an injury, even if it is just a black eye or cut lip, all of these incidents will be recorded as a violent youth crime.
Then there's the case of administrative detections, the Police will often get criminals to admit to previous crimes that the Police can then record as solved (therefore increasing their detection rate) in exchange for a reduced sentence. The book "Wasting Police Time" will give you a much better understanding of how and why this is being done, needless to say, it is also affecting our recorded crime statistics.
If I'm honest then I'd have to say that I feel safer now than I ever have done, walking the streets of many of our cities in the 1980's could be a very scary experience and something you would rarely, if ever, do alone. My local city centre (Liverpool) was a definite no-go area after dark and you'd only ever go out there if you were in a group, some of the outer areas such as Toxteth and Kensington were more like modern day Gaza than modern day Britain where gangs literally ran the area and your life was constantly at risk, while these problems haven't been solved completely they have been improved beyond all recognition and places like Toxteth are now a much safer and happier place to live or visit while the city centre has become one of the safest places in the area. It's got to the point now where most parents tell their 18-25 year old children to go out in the city centre instead of sticking to the local pubs and clubs as the city centre is so much safer these days.
While we still get isolated incidents, such as the tragic murder of Reese Jones, that are tragedies in themselves I've got to say that they are just that, isolated incidents. They are also directly linked to Prohibition.
Gangs use guns to take over an area to sell their drugs in.
They then use the profits to buy more guns.
They recruit young boys to carry the guns to protect themselves from prosecution.
These boys then start using these guns to settle the most minor of problems.
Other gangs then try to get hold of guns to protect themselves, or to take over another gang’s territory.
A couple of weeks of Wild West style shoot outs follow.
Whoever is left over consolidates their drug dealing base and the whole sorry cycle starts all over again.
If we legalised, regulated and taxed recreational drugs then within a year the drug dealers would be without their main supply of funds, they wouldn't be able to buy guns, or recruit children and most of these problems would start to go away.
Prohibition doesn't work and it is the source of most of our violent crime.
Anything else the government, or any political party, comes out with that doesn’t recognise this fact is just spin and electioneering and should be ignored as such.
Complain about this comment
and, on your behalf, I intend to keep a gimlet eye on any numerical nonsense as we head for polling day
I presume you mean this statement of intent to cover all of the parties?
Complain about this comment
I believe that we live in a "broken Society" because that's what newpapers tell us is happening in order to sell papers. Why is it that the communities most concerned with "immigration" are the ones with the least (or sometimes even zero)contact with immigrants? Because the papers tell us so. The former Home Secretary Jaqui Smith got into trouble misuing these same figures to show her "anti-knife campaign" was working when in fact the figures were falling anyway, and now DC is trying the same.
Complain about this comment
Lies, damned lies and general elections! Focus on dramatic violent crimes is the stock-in-trade of the media and it is the general perception of risk by the public is where I would like to see real stats. Perhaps there is a case for the BBC (+ others) to educate us on the probabilities of being on the receiving end of a crime. I suspect there is an enormous gap between perception and actual probabilities.
Complain about this comment
Nice to see the BBC finally stepping up to the plate and scrutinising political claims, shame it hasn't been doing this the last 10 years and more. Labour has corrupted the very language we speak and been allowed to get away with it with the BBC gleefully printing Labour claims of proposed Tory cuts as fact without any investigation. It seems the BBC now accepts that a spending cut means 'not increasing spending by quite as much as we propose to increase spending'.
Complain about this comment
#8, I tend to feel the opposite. I feel a lot less safe from violent crime now than I did 10 years ago.
I think that part of it that in the past I felt that the recipients of violent crime 'deserved it', gangs killed gang members, football holigans fought other holigans etc where now it feels like there is more random violent crime. You could be attacked because 'you looked at the wrong person the wrong way' or just being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
In the past I felt I could protect myself by not associating with the people that propgated the violence, but now I feel unable to take that action.
As for the statistics, DC can only use the statistics the government produces, if they only produce incomprensable data then he can only use it to try and prove the points many of us feel.
Complain about this comment
Who can argue that our society isn't broken? Trivialities over statistics aside, we have a society where a lone woman inside her own home with a small child is reprimanded by the police because she picked up a knife when she had prowlers on her property, yet gangs of hooligans can torment and abuse a family for months without anyone getting involved. Where defending yourself from hooliganism is quite likely to see you getting pinched, and the numbers of volunteers for working with children is ever declining because the government is busy trying to convince everyone there's a paedophile on every street corner.
Complain about this comment
Well said CommunityCriminal.
Cameron could always advocate the end of drug prohibition I suppose.
Oh, hang on. He used to advocate that - then he became leader of the tory party.
Complain about this comment
And well said General_Jack_Ripper.
Who wants less criminal gangs on our streets? I do - and that is why I advocate the end of prohibition.
Legalise drugs and we get to control the drugs rather than criminal gangs.
Complain about this comment
In the end it is not the statistics that matter it is how people feel about what the relevant politician is saying.
In my view the crime statistics are meaningless as a lot of people just ignore what is going on around them as it is safer. They also don't tell the police anything for fear of being arrested themselves.
I live in the country and crime has shot up in recent years but you never see a copper unless they are taking a shortcut to somewhere else: usually one to a car although I did see two in a car the other day. They will be complaining about overcrowding next.
Complain about this comment
You fall into the same trap you set for David Cameron. The abuse of statistics. Clearly Cameron's message resonates with a large section of the public. A failed attempt at nitpicking hardly affords the BBC any credit at all.
Complain about this comment
Anyone who wants to cut crime significantly need do only a few things;
1. Legalise, regulate & tax currently prohibited recreational drugs like Cannabis, Ecstasy & Magic Mushrooms and allow them to be regulated in a similar way as alcohol & tobacco.
2. Provide current Heroin (and similar substance) addicts with a free supply of Heroin & clean syringes until such time that they are ready to start a rehabilitation program.
3. Fund long term residential substance abuse rehabilitation centres & community support centres.
4. Make it a requirement that everyone convicted of a crime that results in a custodial sentence is required to complete a program of rehabilitation before their sentence starts if they are currently addicted to any substance. Time spent in rehabilitation would not count as part of their sentence.
5. Make it a legal requirement that all taxation received from the taxation of all recreational drugs (inc. alcohol & tobacco) is split equally three ways and is used to fund;
i. NHS rehabilitation services & other costs associated with drug use
ii. Education & preventative services
iii. Community policing
6. Fund an effective mental health service, including residential centres and stop sending mental health patients to prison as a cheap alternative to treatment
I doubt Mr Cameron has any of this in mind, in fact I doubt that the Conservatives will improve the situation at all as they are unable to admit that their policies on this subject are nothing but fluff and tabloid appeasement.
The UK isn't broken, I'd go so far as to say that people living in the UK are more secure, less likely to suffer from crime and living a much better life than the majority of people we share this world with, the problem is that most people have never seen what life is like for these people, except on TV.
I'd like some of those who accuse us of having a broken country to go spend a few weeks living in Jo'burg, Rio or Mumbai with their working classes and then come back and tell us how much better it is for them. Even in the U.S., Japan, France and other rich countries, if you go to the places where the poor people are living then you experience all of the same sorts of problems we have here and sadly, every now and then you get the odd extreme case like the one we have in the press at the moment.
Complain about this comment
All the violent crime, whichever numbers, do not add up to the damage done by the banks and financial services over the past two years, yet holding anyone accountable for these "crimes" is not on the agenda. This is also a distraction from addressing those issues which is of course what the bankers and politicans who made sure they could maintain their scams want. When the people see a banker go to jail people may have a different view about the application of law enforcement and justice.
Complain about this comment
I agree with Community Criminal. Its time to start adding up all the costs of the drug society and put pressure on the government to go after multinational banks that launder drug money. Banks are the sacred cow. Why, pray tell?
Complain about this comment
Pandatank and Watriler hit the nail on the head.
The perception of violent crime increasing (when in fact about the same levels as when labour was fist elected) has no doubt been hugely exacerbated by the coverage the tabloids and 24 hour rolling news give to every event. This is not to devalue those events in which violence has occurred, or that there are aren't long-lasting issues surrounding violent crime in this country, but the intense and often continued focus on events by certain media has lead to a perpetual sense that violence is ever present in all parts our society and nation. Something I believe didn't exist 10 years ago.
The media have perpetuated and milked this potentially never-ending story that will continually feed their schedules or columns. Another violent crime, another example of the increase in "Violent Britain" to exhaust. Of course this plays into Tories hands (as it would Labour if they were in opposition) allowing them to fan the flames of fear for their advantage. In turn the opportunity for progressive thinking and policies in tackling crime being advocated is suffocated, as each party produces macho, reactionary short-term initiatives and policies (for fear that they look weak against the tide of crime on our streets)that seem to only alienate and criminalise further. And round and round we go.
Complain about this comment
Having heard "experts" in crime reporting stating that figures show very little other than what politicians want us to hear, I suspect statistical analysis of anything is a pretty dumb place to start. The "experts" contend that "personal perception" is the greatest indicator of public concern over crime. It is reliable since the more people you know who have been victims of crime the greater the personal risk you also face.
However, I am more concerned over the way we monitor crime and civil law breaches. It would seem that there are far too many loopholes in the system and that means a lot of people do get away with "blue murder" without so much as a mention in despatches.
Complain about this comment
Mark,
This was good work on your part. I hope that David Cameron introduces some QA to his research department. That is, a competant person digs out the information and this is then checked and approved by competent persons before it is released. Please remember that all political parties have a funding problem and are almost working on charity budgets and not Home Office or BBC budgets (I appreciate that BBC budgets and staff have been cut significantly).
We should be careful when handling statistics. There was a spike in the homecide rate in 2002 and then a 40% fall. But on closer examination 16% of the homecides recorded in 2002 were down to Harold Shipman and therefore the statistics did not reflect what was happening in society as a whole. In at article in the Times dated 2/1/10 the Police admit that the murder rate has fallen to its lowest in 20 years but admit that this has been masively influenced by advances in medicine and the availability of mobile phones. The attack is reported earlier, medical services arrive three times quicker and are far more competent on arrival.
I am taking an energy company to the small claims court because they are trying to rob me of some £2,000. They get 14,000 complaints per month but it is not recorded as 14,000 crimes per month. Another energy company has been found to have cheated £100m from its customers by the energy watchdog but it doesn't appear in the crime statistics. The actions of these two energy companies alone would "double" the robbery statistics. I hope that my precedent of using the online small claims court will lead to others gaining justice.
I have to say that you are barking up the wrong tree. Yes the Conservative researcher in the 24/7 instant responce news world should not have been so quick to respond to your enquiries but the following is what we mean by Broken Britain:
(I hope that my statistics from the news media stand up better than the miserable 46,000 sample in the BCS that you take such heart from.)
1. Crime is heavily localised in places that you and I don't go. There are places that are Police no-go areas.
2. We have all heard about "Baby P" but it is not a once a year incident but 6 times per week.
3. There are 14,000 children excluded from school for very good reasons.
4. Some 10 years ago it was estimated that the cost of a truant was £2m over his lifetime. He leart bad ways and was in and out of the CJS. Several years ago 20% of white children in Bradford were truants. What will be the future cost to the taxpayer?
5. We have a prison population of 84,000 despite early release and halving sentences.
6. 1 in 10 of the Feltham young offenders is a psychopath.
7. 70% of prisoners have mental illness or learning difficulties, 70% cannot read and write and 70% are drug addicts. On the plus side, they are certainly easy to catch.
8. When we say "we will be tough on crime and the causes of crime" we effectively make criminals the poor victims of "the causes of crime". How wreckless.
9. When we hear about "happy slapping", burning people alive, hideous brutality by girls and boys, "we did it because we were bored" and all recorded on mobile phones and circulated to friends to challenge then to outperform.
10. In some of these localised areas a car is set on fire every night, the fire-brigade is called by the perpetrators and then the firemen are pelted with stones assembled in readiness. More than 50% of all 999 calls are hoax.
Mark. We are hearing about crimes the like of which we have never heard of prior to a decade ago and these may not show up in crime statistics because so many people in the areas in which they happen have keep themselves out of harms way by not going out of their house after dark. Self-imprisonment is keeping the numbers down. We aren't so much talking about Broken Britain as a whole but about what goes on everyday in areas where most of us don't know exist. When we use the word "broken" we are aluding to the fact that it is time to fix it. We will never fix it if we don't admit that it is broken.
Complain about this comment
As a serving officer I would just like to confirm that comparing official crime statistics over a period of more than 3 or 4 years is pretty pointless without doing a lot of research if you are looking to make valid conclusions from any apparent trends. The reason, simply that definitions of major crime groups change as result of numerous and constant Home office driven changes to definitions. Examples are legion but here's a few.
1) until a few years ago common assaults (lowest category of assault) weren't even counted, not some dastardly police conspiracy, it was the rule. Now they are and guess what, its effected the total and no prizes for how its affected the total.
2) what constituted serious violence ie GBH and GBH with intent was defined by what injuries officers could see ie if your injury looked like a GBH then that's what it was. Then Home Office changed the rule now its not only the injury but also given the victim or witness account police must now assess what catagory of injury the suspect meant to cause. As an example if someone kicks you on the head 2 or 3 times but you are fortunate to have little injury, old definition would be common assault or ABH ( Mid level assault) now officers are required to assess if the suspect intended serious assault and therefore this example is now an attempted GBH...hey presto..serious crime has just gone up.
3) as mentioned above domestic assaults are now recorded and rigorously investigated. Previously they weren't, again this wasn't a secret, police reflect the views of society as a whole and its not that long ago most people didnt think this was police business. If you think thats outrageous remember its not so long ago a man could not in law rape his wife.
They are loads of examples, basic point is that this government has fiddled with the statistics so much no-one should get exited about trends unless you have done a fair bit of pretty boring research first.
Complain about this comment
This is a direct response in agreement with Buck_Turgidson (comment 19).
Frequently when voicing their opinions about the state of the UK many respondents blithely lament the "third world" status of our country.
Having travelled to many of the places you mentioned and having seen the circumstances of life in countries such as Bolivia and Cambodia this analogy of the UK as a third world country somewhat sickens me.
You're right those that travel, speak, meet and engage with different places, cultures and people gain a much broader understanding, I firmly believe in the moderating aspect of travel, Britain isn't "broken," as a slogan it's far too simple, too expedient. There are many people in the UK who suffer, there are many that don't. Like all other developed countries the UK has problems, crimes and unique difficulties. However, those countries so frequently held as bastions of joy, virtue and perfection also have problems.
In summation, feel free to criticise the UK, there's plenty of reason, but before doing so try and gain a sense of perspective first, and don't, please, act to denigrate those ekeing out an existence by referring to the UK as a "third world country."
Complain about this comment
Mark, not for nearly the first time I was about to hold you to account yet again for putting so much weight behind statistics that you've presented as fact.
Thankfully others have gotten here before me this time. If you want to hear the turth about crime statistics, speak to the police, not the government. Metroplod at #25 summarises very eloquently just some of the ways that these stats are massaged to appease the government pen-pushers.
I remind you again - you don't get a true picture of the world by sitting at a desk and reading statistical reports.
I live local to the "devil-boys" incident, and I maintain the following outlook as I did when the case first emerged:
- To me, the surprising thing was that an incident such as this took so long to happen.
- The problem is the welfare system that actively encourages people to breed irresponsibly.
- Their mother has 8 children by 6 fathers, and there is nothing in place to discourage her from repeating every mistake she's made with future children by future fathers that led us to this tragic incident in the first place.
These are problems that need addressing in society and Labour have already proved that they have neither the inspiration or the determination to improve anything at all. One can only hope that DC can provide the positive change that we need.
David Lilley at #24 has some excellent practical suggestions but until we also allow the police to police instead of making them document their every move on behalf of government statisticians we will never get anywhere at all.
Complain about this comment
Definately a double dip recession if you can only get a 0.1% growth over christmas we stand no chance of a proper recover it's almost still recession.
Complain about this comment
LippyLippo wrote:
"ours is considerably more 'broken' than comparable countries in near Europe."
Rubbish !
Police injured in Paris riots - 2009
http://www.news24.com/Content/World/News/1073/16f080ce554e4faf8dd9626114e8c424/15-03-2009-04-08/Police_injured_in_Paris_riots
Italian outrage over Roma drowning photos - 2008
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/07/21/italy.drowning/index.html
Neo-Nazi crimes soar in Germany - 2009
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/5199129/Neo-Nazi-crimes-soar-in-Germany.html
Child abuse gang horrifies France - 2005
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4697747.stm
Irish abuse report is 'shocking' - 2009
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8058224.stm
Get out of your little bubble for once, the idea of our European neighbours living in some utopian society while we continue to fall further into crime and disorder is an absolute joke.
If you think that the UK is broken, or even worse than many of our European neighbours then you are living in a fantasy world, or you've got no knowledge or experience of what life is like in these other countries.
Complain about this comment
David Lilley wrote:
"We are hearing about crimes the like of which we have never heard of prior to a decade ago"
Just because you weren't hearing about them doesn't mean that they weren't taking place. I'd say that has far more to do with modern news organisations than it has to do with actual levels of crime.
The number of murders, manslaughters, and child killings in the UK has dropped by 17 per cent to a 20-year low yet reporting of these crimes in the media is at an all time high. People therefore become used to the idea that these crimes are happening all of the time and are becoming more frequent even though they're actually reducing in frequency.
The proportion of people who perceive an increase in crime nationally (75 per cent) is far higher than that which perceives an increase in crime locally (36 per cent). The difference is most stark for knife crime (93 per cent of people think there has been an increase nationally, compared with 29 per cent locally) and gun crime (86 per cent and 16 per cent, respectively), despite actual reductions in both these offences.
So just like the NHS, when you ask people what they think is happening nationally they all think that there has been a massive increase but when you ask them about their own personal experiences of what is happening in their local area you find that things are generally improving.
Somehow the media have convinced us that our personal experience is an exception and that outside of this things are really a lot worse, even though they aren't.
Complain about this comment
GJR your Liverpool area? if so you also hear of the constant gun crimes. I did a quick search for Liverpool shootings very interesting results especially amongst the younger generations.
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/tags/shooting/
1 every 2 weeks average.
Complain about this comment
Its odd because Cameron goes on about gun crime etc and says he wants to fix 'broken britian' but he has not mentioned once the cause of it.
Failed drugs policy based on the dismal american system.
So Dave wants to fix broken Britian? Well this would be a start:-
Decriminalisation of all drugs, legalisation of cannabis. Free injection clinics for heroin addicts and similar clinics to treat cocaine/crack and other stimulant addicts.
IF he does that violent crime as well as theft will reduce by at least 50% overnight, our prisons will empty, prostitution will dimish hugely also.
This has been shown to work in every country it has been done. The numbers prove this works.
So Dave should stop with the rhetoric about fixing broken britian until he is capable of growing a pair and fixing the cause of our situation.
Complain about this comment
CommunityCriminal
We get regular gang activity around here mate, being a port we're one of the main import locations for drugs coming into the country and as such we have several high profile gangs operating in the area who control the movement of these drugs.
This is the cause of much of our gun crime and most of the victims are members of these gangs who have regular fights over who gets to control what.
Reese Jones, the school boy who was tragically murdered not that long ago was part of the collateral damage we get sometimes because of this, he'd been mistaken for a member of a rival gang so one of the kids who was working for the local gang shot him.
There was a high profile case in the papers last week that is a good example of our most common form of gun crime, a known gangster was shot and murdered in the street by a group of other men in a targeted attack. The Police are investigating but the word on the street is that the victims gang had been trying to corner the cocaine market by offering reduced prices to the dealers, one of the other gangs took exception to this and therefore killed him to protect their profits. I don’t know how true this is but I’m sure it’ll all come out over the next few weeks.
Complain about this comment
Yer we had the gangs from the pool try to set up this side of the river mostly heroin but then we are a good target area around Seacombe way lots of coke n crack huge amounts of pills and not a great deal of cannabis well good quality anyway...
Complain about this comment
Good old Seacombe !
I was there visiting the Space Port recently, the improvements to the promenade are very nice and the ferry terminal is looking better than it has in years.
Are the council still dumping all of the crackheads from the area round your way ?
The last I heard they were moving them from Rock Ferry & Ellesmere Port down to the Seacombe/Eggremont area while they "regenerated" those areas.
I don't know why they keep doing that, it's never worked. You just end up moving the problem from one area to another and all of the improvements made end up getting trashed when they move them back in.
I'd heard there was a bit of a drought on with the Cannabis at the moment, but then the Wirral has always been a bad place for that with all of their teenage rocky dealers.
Isn't it strange just how many of the local problems are caused by Prohibition yet whenever you talk to the local politicians they can come up with 101 other reasons without ever admitting to the real underlying cause.
Complain about this comment
In respect of violent crime statistics, I thought that the famous "elephant in the room" was the question of whether their DECLINE across the Western world was to be explained by abortion i.e. so many unwanted pregnancies had been terminated that unwanted children were simply not there to commit crime. Any comments
Complain about this comment
Tell me about it we had windows fitted today poor window fitter had his drill nicked of the doorstep ... crack heads and heroin addicts everywere you turn. We are scum central atm.. unfair to call em that though but it does get your back up about the problem.
Complain about this comment
Not sure how your analysis explains this latest set of figures from the NHS:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7079485/Almost-500-people-a-day-in-casualty-after-an-assault.html
Almost 500 people a day 'in casualty after an assault', and that's likely to be understated.
Complain about this comment
I agree that the Conservatives should not use false statistics to make their point. Neither should Labour make similarly fake claims such as "the risk of being a victim is now the lowest ever".
Indeed, the Conservatives do not need to make false claims. They can simply point out that Labour has allowed crime to remain at a very high level. That is supported by both statistics and circumstancial evidence.
Furthermore, the Conservatives could highlight the absurdity of the current justice system, which for many represents a continual miscarriage of justice.
Just today, we hear about a rape committed by a 17-year-old while on bail for another rape. Another day, judges think it's appropriate to sentence the victims of a burglary for hurting one of the burglars. Another day, much is made of a 'life sentence' given to a criminal, read the small print to learn that a 'life sentence' actually means a few years. Another day, you read that thousands of offenders are let out of jail early due to lack of prison space. Another day, you learn that rapists are let off with a caution, or that committing 50+ robberies still does not result in jail time.
I think there are enough facts for the Conservatives in there.
Also, one could not conclude by looking at the statistics which you reproduce that crime has fallen, since a large part of crime is simply not reported to the police. Secondly, the number of crimes could be decreasing if people simply chose to go out less, and you would be wrong to suggest that there has been an improvement. Therefore, unless you can identify a general decline in crime and a specific change in policy to explain it (for example an increase in jailing, introduction of death penalty, decriminalisation of drugs, introduction of ASBOs or corporal punishment or whatever), then you cannot say anything about crime.
djlazarus, I totally agree that the welfare state is part of the problem. We encourage the poorest and most ignorant to have a lot of babies, and discourage the better off from having babies. Long term, it's a recipe for catastrophe. We should be doing the opposite, discourage the poor to have babies and encourage well-educated people with a stable income, but then watch the outcry from liberal-minded people.
Complain about this comment
David Cameroin's solution to "broken society" is for people to "hug a hoody"
Complain about this comment
Sorry, I know I'm a day late, but can anyone else hear the straining brass section as "The Entrance of The Gladiators" starts up in the background?
Its election time again and the same plethora of idiots that achieved A* in A-level statistics last year are obviously working for camp Cameron. And camp Brown etc. . .
What I can't believe is that they think we'll take them seriously again this time . . .
Or are we the idiots here?
Complain about this comment
There are a lot of people on this blog all saying that if we legalise drugs then all the crime associated with it would disappear. Well the health problems caused by drugs wouldn't disappear. The social problems caused by drug addiction wouldn't disappear. The safety implications of people on drugs wouldn't disappear. In fact as they was no barrier to consumption the number of users would increase massively. This is why drugs are banned.
And I know people will claim anyone who wants drugs can get them now so legalising them will have no effect on consumption. But this is like legalising bank robbery and claiming there wouldn't be a queue of people outside the local building society the next day with sawn-offs
Complain about this comment
Shaunie Can you provide evidence of this claim.
Can you show some information to say that the health harms of legal cannabis would increase as ALL evidence from around the world suggests health improves social well being improves crime falls.
The tougher the stance the higher the crime rate will be with drugs.
Policy on heroin has seen the UK go from 3000 registered addicts to 300.000+ and rising fast as powders become more acceptable amongst young people.
Cocaine use has sky rocketed while its purity has dropped for financial gain while increasing long term health issues mainly cancers.
Legalising would solve a lot of long term health issues with cocaine use.
Not many people seem to have noticed the change in the drugs industry with all this rubbish on the lethality of cannabis. Methadrone one of many that no one knows about.
A couple of months back I showed a CSO methadrone on the web he took notes and went back to show his bosses. quite a few officers told him he had spelt it wrong and it was methadone....until he showed them.If the law don't know yet the rest of the world or at least the partying part knows about it what else will follow in its wake and how long before the next substance can be banned. once we stem down this road we are lost to millions of drugs synthetically churned out for the enjoyment of the public.
Who do you want in control of this?
Government policies at this point in time support both profit made by the drug industry and the organised crime that they tell you they are being so tough on. Cannabis B in their world sent the message 'Longer prison terms' In the Easterners and corrie world of the general public this translated as a free for all on a very expensive plant as prices of herbal cannabis doubled over night.
Or do you think you can stamp it out and impose a set of moral values that everyone must adhere to.
Your ' But this is like legalising bank robbery and claiming there wouldn't be a queue of people outside the local building society the next day with sawn-offs'
That's not even in the same league of law People with 'MS' who grow their own are not gun wielding lunatics.
Complain about this comment
#42 Shaunie
"The social problems caused by drug addiction wouldn't disappear. The safety implications of people on drugs wouldn't disappear. In fact as they was no barrier to consumption the number of users would increase massively. This is why drugs are banned."
None of these issues can ever disappear and the current policy has made them increase massively.
But if you take a look at where such policies have been implemented the levels of users have dropped. It may surprise you to learn that the netherlands has considerably less cannabis smokers per head of population than the uk despite it being freely available and decriminalised.
It also has far fewer heroin addicts mainly because addicts are able to register as addicts and go and get free clinical injections, they are given help to quit if they choose or are allowed to continue there habit under supervision.
This is far better than have them running the streets robbing people desperate for a fix that they shakily jab in to their arms with a dirty needle.
Injection clinics particularly mean less aids (clean needles) less crime (free fixes) and less prositution (no junkie prostitutes) and it has been proven so in every country its applied, its also around 100K a year per addict cheaper than the current system.
Complain about this comment
Good analysis of the fast and loose attitude to election-time claims about crime, when truth becomes a victim in the mouths of politicians. For years Cameron was a PR man, a spin-doctor essentially. He'll have a record for this kind of thing as long as his arm.
Complain about this comment
Re @43 CommunityCriminal
Drug users are by their nature irresponsible people. They are quite happy to fund violent drug dealers and then make excuses blaming the government for making drugs illegal (which is of course the same as buying a stolen television from the same people and blaming the Theft Act).
Can you point to the social and health benefits of having millions of people whose entire life revolves around obtaining and using heroin, cocaine and crack ?
Claiming legalising drugs bring health benefits is like claiming alcoholism is more acceptable when people don't have to drink whisky from home made stills.
Complain about this comment
Shaunie Babes
Could you explain why Holland and Portugal both have;
lower rates of addiction
lower rates of associated health problems
lower rates of associated criminal activity
lower rates of usage
lower rates of social problems
In fact, lower rates of all of the problems associated with drugs than we have when they have decriminalised recreational drug use ?
Any evidence you could present would be appreciated as we've been discussing these issues for several years on various blogs and every single piece of evidence that appears proves that Prohibition causes many more problems than it solves.
Prohibition doesn't work and those who think it does are deluding themselves as well as inflicting huge social problems onto the rest of us.
Complain about this comment
Re @47
Portugal and Holland have a far lower underclass and inner-city populations. All social problems are lower in these countries. Its down to demographics not the law on drugs. It would be just as easy for me to quote the very low rates for Singapore whose drug laws make ours look incredibly liberal.
Now this statement that Prohibition doesn't work. Well what are the rates for alcoholism in Saudi Arabia compared to say France ? Or the rates of gun crime in the UK compared to the US ? Or the number of people you see wandering the streets with hand grenades in Mogadishu compared to Milton Keynes ? Could it be the lack of suppy has an effect on consumption ? Of course it does.
Anti-Prohibitionists like to delude themselves that if drugs were avaliable at the local supermarket all the addicts would simply give up, and non drug users wouldn't dream of trying them.
Complain about this comment
Shaunie Babes wrote:
"Anti-Prohibitionists like to delude themselves that if drugs were avaliable at the local supermarket all the addicts would simply give up, and non drug users wouldn't dream of trying them."
No-one has suggested that all addicts would give up or that non-users wouldn't try them so this is another baseless argument.
I also see you like to cling to the idea that these are the only two groups who exist, that people are either non-users or addicts; this is yet another fallacy put about the Prohibitionists. Regardless of the vast amount of evidence to the contrary they hate to accept that the majority of people who use drugs recreationally do so without any major long term problems. Just as there are far more responsible alcohol users than there are alcoholics, there are also far more responsible recreational drug users than there are addicts.
I would strongly disagree with your claims regarding the different demographics in Holland and Portugal, no two countries are exactly the same but both of these countries have very similar demographics to the UK but as you don't like that comparison how about you compare the trends that followed the decriminalisation in Holland and Portugal ? Both show conclusively that since decriminalisation all of the associated problems have reduced significantly.
"Now this statement that Prohibition doesn't work. Well what are the rates for alcoholism in Saudi Arabia compared to say France ?"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1160846.stm
It will be impossible to answer that question as Saudi Arabia doesn't publish such information but the above link will show that the idea of Saudi Arabia being a dry nation where no-one is drinking is totally untrue, Saudi Arabia still has problems with alcohol and their system of prohibition has failed to prevent people from drinking or becoming alcoholics.
Go to the Western zones and you'll see a surprising number of Saudi's drinking in the bars using fake I.D. or bribes in order to get their drink, last time I was there I was very surprised at just how many Saudi businessmen were getting drunk, as well as the amount of them doing lines of Cocaine in the toilets.
Then we've also got to make the point that you have questioned our comparisons of Britain & Holland/Portugal based on slight differences in demographics, yet you now want to use two nations with extremely different demographics to prove your point. I believe that's called hypocrisy.
"Or the rates of gun crime in the UK compared to the US ? Or the number of people you see wandering the streets with hand grenades in Mogadishu compared to Milton Keynes ? Could it be the lack of suppy has an effect on consumption ? Of course it does."
But prohibition has not stopped supply, has it ?
I can leave my home now and be back within an hour with a bag full of Cannabis, Ecstasy, Heroin, Crack and whatever other drugs I want, as well as a load of guns.
Not to mention the rather inconvenient fact that fire arms related crime has doubled in the UK during the last ten years even though most forms of firearms were banned in 1997.
Complain about this comment
Shaunie...you have a very powerful or very poor imagination.
Drugs like crack would be limited to clinics that's the whole point.
but with your poor imagination you see them on every street corner and in every supermarket, much like the corner of our road were we have had crack cocaine and heroin dealt openly for years. So its a reality for our community one that we work hard to change.So not only do we have to contend with illegal drugs crime and criminal damage we also have yourself supporting the continuation of this way of life.
As for the supply of drugs if you took the total number of retail outlets in the UK you wouldn't even come close to the number of dealers selling drugs in the UK.
As for funding organised crime well what can one say.
Take a plant with a value of nothing that produces thousands of seeds per plant.
Create a law against its use.
The plant gained a monetary value.
As money is now involved people have a commodity.
All we want is the control of that commodity taking out of criminal hands and the money put back in to the UK is that really so much to ask for?
again your referral to decriminalising burglary is funny and has little bearing on a victimless crime.
Drug users are by their nature irresponsible people.
yup only have to look at the Alcohol drug users to see this pushing their drug of choice on to their own children.
Complain about this comment
49. At 4:04pm on 29 Jan 2010, General_Jack_Ripper wrote:
"But prohibition has not stopped supply, has it ?
I can leave my home now and be back within an hour with a bag full of Cannabis, Ecstasy, Heroin, Crack and whatever other drugs I want, as well as a load of guns.
Not to mention the rather inconvenient fact that fire arms related crime has doubled in the UK during the last ten years even though most forms of firearms were banned in 1997."
So if prohibition doesn't work 100 percent it should be abandoned ?Should we legalise murder because a very tiny minority choose to kill people ? Of course we don't. Prohibition we never be completeley sucessful, however this doesn't mean we should fix a leak in the dam by blowing it up.
You may be able to get hard drugs and firearms but the average person without your criminal connections wouldn't have a clue, or decide not to risk arrest,robbery or violence. If crack was sold at Tesco the reverse would be true.
I was comparing US gun crime (where firearms are given away free with new cars!) to the UK situation where they are relatively tightly controlled. Even if you accept that firearm crime has doubled (which isn't true) it is trivial compared to the US.Oh and your claim most forms of firearms were banned in 1997 is wrong. Only breech loading handguns were banned which was less than 5% of all legally owned firearms at the time.
There are only two reasons why a recreational drug user would buy from criminals. Either they can't help themselves or don't care. Either way they are not the sort of people we should base our drugs policy on.
Complain about this comment
Why don't we rename this "Mark Eastons Labor party blog" like most BBC blogs the angle is always slanted to the left.I hope people can see the reality that England is sliding off to be a second world country.One of the causes of crime is the fact that every where you go you are being filmed by cctv it's utterly Orwellien.The socialists have been taxing and spending for what 16 years now,making people reliant on a corrupt political system for everything from jobs to health care.
Complain about this comment
#51. At 4:54pm on 29 Jan 2010, Shaunie Babes wrote:
"So if prohibition doesn't work 100 percent it should be abandoned ?Should we legalise murder because a very tiny minority choose to kill people ? Of course we don't. Prohibition we never be completeley sucessful, however this doesn't mean we should fix a leak in the dam by blowing it up.
You may be able to get hard drugs and firearms but the average person without your criminal connections wouldn't have a clue, or decide not to risk arrest,robbery or violence. If crack was sold at Tesco the reverse would be true."
I don't think you quite grasp the facts of the situation. I specifically don't get how you equate the consumption of drugs with murder?
For one thing the consumption of drugs in themselves do not harm anyone but the person consuming them, the society that person resides in dictates his subsequent behaviour.
You seem to think that drugs are hard to find for everyday people? Well the majority of the UK public lives in major conurbations and anyone who lives in those conurbations can go to certain areas and will be offered drugs in the same way you can go kerb crawling in certain areas.
So yes drugs ARE freely available and unregulated.
So you take that smack head and you have two choices:-
1. criminalise him in the way we are curently meaning he/she has to steal/sell themselves/deal.
or
2. You offer that addict a service where he can go and get given free heroin on site injected by a profesional. If he wants to give up the doctor can help wheen him off if he doesn't? Well at least he is taken care off and no longer has a need to steal etc.
This means prostitution, petty and organised crime diminish. When it comes to softer drugs like cannabis its a matter of persoinal choice but the evidence shows once legalised the associated organised crime disappears and the number of users decreases. It costs the UK economy around 100K a year for every heroin addict yet giving a addict a free supply of heroin costs 12K a year. Do the maths!
In every country these sorts of policies have been followed there has been a drastic reduction in many different crimes. In the Netherlands they have so few criminals they are closing prisons!
Complain about this comment
53. At 7:23pm on 31 Jan 2010, bigsammyb wrote:
"For one thing the consumption of drugs in themselves do not harm anyone but the person consuming them, the society that person resides in dictates his subsequent behaviour."
To suggest drugs only harm the user and not society is nonsense. If drugs were legal the following things would happen.
1. Drug addicts only care about their next fix. They are not motivated to find work or better themselves. Even if they do look for work no one in their right mind would employ them. Thus we'll have a massive increase in the number of unemployable benefit claimants. This harms society.
2. The NHS has to treat these drug addicts costing the state money and harming those who are genuinely ill. This harms society
3. Being irresponsible in their nature they'll do think such as drive cars while high. This harms society
4. Individuals and communities feel just as threated by smackheads as they do by drunken gangs. This harms society
5. No doubt these legal drugs will actually be taxed and regulated thus leading to a black market such as exists with cigarettes and perscription drugs. The drug dealers will not go away. This harms society.
6. Powerful criminal drug empires will spring up exporting the UKs legal dugs to places they are illegal. This harms society.
7 Children will gain access to drugs (as happens now with drink and cigarrettes). This harms society.
Complain about this comment
53. At 7:23pm on 31 Jan 2010, bigsammyb wrote:
" It costs the UK economy around 100K a year for every heroin addict yet giving a addict a free supply of heroin costs 12K a year. Do the maths!"
These maths assume the number of heroin addicts remain constant after it is made legal. Which isn't going to happen. The numbers of users will increase far more than this. Try multiplying 12K by the numbers of alcoholics.
Complain about this comment
Shaunie Babes
I don't quite understand why you feel they need to make predictions you have clearly made up off the top of your head.
There is tangable evidence for where these sorts of reforms have been carried out:-
Netherlands
Portugal
Greece
All of which have noticed a drastic reduction in ALL CRIME and a drastic reduction in ALL DRUG USERS.
Now you may think i should take your word for what you say but it is based on nothing more than your own deluded rantings.
Look at the numbers, you have no credible argument.
Complain about this comment
56. At 12:53pm on 01 Feb 2010, bigsammyb wrote:
"Shaunie Babes
I don't quite understand why you feel they need to make predictions you have clearly made up off the top of your head.
There is tangable evidence for where these sorts of reforms have been carried out:-
Netherlands
Portugal
Greece
All of which have noticed a drastic reduction in ALL CRIME and a drastic reduction in ALL DRUG USERS.
Now you may think i should take your word for what you say but it is based on nothing more than your own deluded rantings.
Look at the numbers, you have no credible argument."
You are actual aware that in these countries drugs are not legal ?
Drug Dealing is just as serious a crime as everywhere else.
A blind eye is turned to having small amounts of soft drugs, but it is still against the law and hard drugs are a big no-no. None of them has anywhere near the free access to the drugs that are currently legal.
You are basically claiming the equivalent of saying alcohol is legal but you can't sell it or have anything stronger than a shandy
Complain about this comment
Shaunie Babes wrote:
"You may be able to get hard drugs and firearms but the average person without your criminal connections wouldn't have a clue, or decide not to risk arrest,robbery or violence."
Oh yes, us retired teachers are the real criminal underworld in this country.
Nobody needs any sort of criminal connections to buy drugs, most schools have someone selling drugs, and we're not just talking about inner city schools here either, David Cameron was very nearly thrown out of Eton for drugs possession and one of his friends was thrown out for selling Cannabis to other pupils.
Almost every town in the country has someone selling drugs in it, very few of these people are what you'd describe as criminals, most of them are hard working & otherwise law abiding people who prefer a few spliffs to a few cans of beer and end up buying enough for their friends when they buy their own.
If you honestly believe that drugs aren't currently freely available to anyone who wants them then you have no idea about this issue at all.
If you believe people get arrested for buying drugs then you're so out of touch it is actually quite funny, you have to be a complete numpty or very, very unlucky to be arrested for possession of drugs as, for the most part, the Police ignore it.
"If crack was sold at Tesco the reverse would be true."
Who is proposing selling crack at Tesco ?
Here is your biggest problem, you're only able to think in terms of black and white but we live in a full colour world where there are almost infinite possibilities but as far as you're concerned people are either non-users or addicts and the solution is either Prohibition or an all out free for all.
Look at the suggestions given above, as well as those in the previous blogs regarding this topic and you can clearly see that this is not the solution people are proposing.
There is a clear distinction between recreational drugs like Cannabis & Ecstasy that are virtually harmless and seriously addictive hard drugs like Heroin and Crack, lumping them all together is illogical and counter productive.
There should therefore be different ways in dealing with the two different groups with recreational drugs being treated in a similar way to alcohol and tobacco and harder drugs being dealt with clinically.
Most of your myths surrounding drugs can be disproved here:
http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/
This page in particular has some good information:
http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/node/67
I'd also search Google for "Law Enforcement Against Prohibition", this is a group of law enforcement officers from community police officers up to DEA agents who between them have years of front line experience in dealing with the war on drugs and they've all come to the conclusion that Prohibition doesn't work, I tend to agree.
Complain about this comment
Shaunie Babes
Stop making stuff up and show us the Facts. everything you say is embedded in your own fearful imagination.
"To suggest drugs only harm the user and not society is nonsense. If drugs were legal the following things would happen.
1. Drug addicts only care about their next fix. They are not motivated to find work or better themselves. Even if they do look for work no one in their right mind would employ them. Thus we'll have a massive increase in the number of unemployable benefit claimants. This harms society.
2. The NHS has to treat these drug addicts costing the state money and harming those who are genuinely ill. This harms society
3. Being irresponsible in their nature they'll do think such as drive cars while high. This harms society
4. Individuals and communities feel just as threatened by smackheads as they do by drunken gangs. This harms society
5. No doubt these legal drugs will actually be taxed and regulated thus leading to a black market such as exists with cigarettes and prescription drugs. The drug dealers will not go away. This harms society.
6. Powerful criminal drug empires will spring up exporting the UKs legal drugs to places they are illegal. This harms society.
7 Children will gain access to drugs (as happens now with drink and cigarettes). This harms society."
In reply to No1
This is the situation we have now they have very limited treatment with limited outcomes none of them good, My own brother died a heroin addict so I know this to be a truth that is set in stone.
No 2 Alcohol drug abuse and Obese people cost the NHS far more than Drug addicts ever will in the next 100 years.
No 3 I think youll find this goes for every member of the public that drive and do something other while at the wheel of the car . Phones smoking drinking talking shouting at kids in the back listening to music changing radio stations all cause accidents and deaths. Alcohol being the main substance in intoxicated driving.
No 4 No individuals in communities don't feel afraid of the Heroin addicts, what they fear is the failure in law to fix the problem.
No 5 Can i just ask what planet you actually live on the drug industry is worth billions already the only result in state controlled drugs is a loss to organised crime.
No 6 Again you state what we already have big crime selling drugs world wide.
No 7 Drugs in the hands of children you say that like no children sell drugs use drugs make money from drugs. Where I live a lot of the dealers are 14-18 years old very few adults involved in street dealing.
Many countries are either decriminalising or legalising small quantities of personal drugs. this works in the countries favour it works in the community's favour. Also what you fail to see is that with control and state supply of drugs we could free up several prisons worth of small scale drug users, this in turn would allow for life sentences for dealers under a legal system of supply. rather than 6 months with good behaviour.
If you have the imagination to see all the rubbish you have spouted about legal drugs then try to imagine the enforcement that would be involved in such a thing instead of the free for all you hope for.
Also may I ask do you sell drugs to children as you seem very opposed to keeping them safe... just a thought.. as that's the end result of your mode of thought.
I'm actually surprised by the lack of thought... if a pit bull ran wild in your community harming people you would make sure there was suitable law to remove it.
The difference between those that want legal drugs is WE don't support our local dealer.
The people who want drugs illegal SUPPORT the local DEALERS.
Governments who support illegal drugs Support Terrorists, the funding of groups like the Taliban and AL qaeda. If they did not then heroin would be free to addicts to clean up the problem. but no they keep funding these groups and you actively support them Shaunie... in keeping this status quo....
Complain about this comment
From The Sunday Times January 31, 2010
Harry Browne: When it comes to drugs, we should all expand our minds
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article7009530.ece
Very interesting piece
Complain about this comment
Another good article CC, I particularly liked:
"As a result, substances that are useless — and sometimes worse — fill doctors’ prescription pads, not least in the field of psychiatric medicine, where whole categories of “disorder” have been dreamed up in order that they be medicated. It is probably not unusual, indeed, for a patient who has a “problem” with illegal drugs to be saddled by his doctor with a bigger problem in the form of prescription drugs."
Complain about this comment
Tough-on-drugs policy 'pointless':
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7557708.stm
"The argument always put forward against this (decriminalisation) is that there would be a commensurate increase in drug use as a result of legalisation," he said.
"This, it seems to me, is a bogus point: tobacco is a legal drug, whose use is declining, and precisely because it is legal, its users are far more amenable to government control, education programmes and taxation than they would be were it illegal."
Studies showed the market was already almost saturated with drugs, he said, and anyone who wished to purchase the drug of their choice could already do so.
Complain about this comment
GJR prescription meds are awful having taken a lot of the so called anti depressants and antipsychotics over the years I often wonder what people see in pills and powders any why they are taken for fun, still each to there own.
I rather think SB is a troll as they have yet to provide anything but nonsense to the debate.
Still SB, Gordo and A. JointSon will be pleased to know that cannabis dried up here on Fri/Sat none anywhere. Just lots of coke n pills various dubious powders... What has this country come to..??
Complain about this comment
58. At 2:27pm on 01 Feb 2010, General_Jack_Ripper wrote:
"Oh yes, us retired teachers are the real criminal underworld in this country.
Nobody needs any sort of criminal connections to buy drugs, most schools have someone selling drugs, and we're not just talking about inner city schools here either, David Cameron was very nearly thrown out of Eton for drugs possession and one of his friends was thrown out for selling Cannabis to other pupils."
Drug dealing is a crime, that makes anyone who does it a criminal. Who it is, or if you think it shouldn't be a crime is irrelevant. Anyone who obtains or sells banned drugs is a criminal. Cannabis users like to delude themselves that they only buy from "nice" people. But the more you go down the suppy chain the more you fund nasty criminals who make their money through other peoples misery and violence. Recreational drug users are no better than people who buy stolen goods knowing that it funds people who steal from pensioners.
Complain about this comment
Shaunie Babes wrote:
"Cannabis users like to delude themselves that they only buy from "nice" people. But the more you go down the suppy chain the more you fund nasty criminals who make their money through other peoples misery and violence. Recreational drug users are no better than people who buy stolen goods knowing that it funds people who steal from pensioners."
Just like people who buy cheap clothes on the high street like to delude themselves that they're buying from a nice company when the reality is that most of their clothes are made in sweat shops by slave or child labour ?
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/retailing/article4218347.ece
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2008/06/23/primark-child-labour-is-ethical-shopping-a-luxury-we-can-t-afford-115875-20617831/
Just like people who buy oil derivatives from companies who engage in ecological terrorism, support illegal rebel gangs and consistently flout national and international laws ?
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/news/exxon-is-wanted-for-outrageous
http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/chris-jarvis/innovative-thinking-corporate-volunteering/shell-admits-participation-terrorism
Just like people who buy products containing Palm Oil even though the companies who supply it are illegally destroying the Asian rainforests causing massive ecological damage as well as stealing land owned by native subsistence farmers ?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/3313623/Need-for-cheap-palm-oil-drives-deforestation.html
Just like people who buy consumer electronics that have been made in China, a nation that has so many faults it's hard to know where to begin ?
http://www.christusrex.org/www1/sdc/hr_facts.html
Just like people who buy factory farmed meat even though it requires the long term torture of animals ?
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_7542.cfm
Almost everything we buy has some ethical, ecological or legally dubious activity involved in its manufacture, distribution or retail process that often funds people or organisations that are purposely harming other people, causing misery, violence and suffering and/or breaking the law.
All your argument proves is that otherwise law abiding people are being forced into the hands of criminal organisations due to the government’s insistence of continuing with Prohibition.
If Cannabis were legal then we would have a multi-£billion industry that would generate £billions in taxation, provide thousands of jobs while also saving us £billions more in policing & legal costs with the added benefit of removing £billions from the black market and the criminal gangs who control it.
You can either sit here wringing your hands about the fact that ten million adults in the UK are regular smokers and complaining that they're funding criminal organisations or you can act like a mature, intelligent & responsible adult and provide those people with a legalised, regulated and taxed supply of their product that brings the industry out of the black market and into the mainstream market while also funding preventative education services, health services, law enforcement and addiction services.
Complain about this comment
S.B sorry m8 but you really are getting to be quite a comedian.
Drug dealing is a crime, that makes anyone who does it a criminal. Who it is, or if you think it shouldn't be a crime is irrelevant. Anyone who obtains or sells banned drugs is a criminal. Cannabis users like to delude themselves that they only buy from "nice" people. But the more you go down the supply chain the more you fund nasty criminals who make their money through other peoples misery and violence. Recreational drug users are no better than people who buy stolen goods knowing that it funds people who steal from pensioners.
That makes about 5.5 million people in the UK criminals 3.5 of them cannabis users 1.3 cocaine users not to mention the pills n powder brigades then almost ½ a million heroin addicts. You cant hold back this sort of consumerism. It will seep through the cracks of society at all levels corrupt governments and politicians.
Drug users buy an end product not our fault that the control is left in the hands its in. We seek a level playing field nothing more. As I've said before we are not the ones that maintain the status quo were people are victims of ill thought out laws.
This is how it should work with drugs.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8490490.stm
Control and regulation brings about good health and social well being nothing else will.
Anyway were all still waiting on some form of statistic or evidence that what you say is true so far you have just told people about the childish bogyman under the bed.
Complain about this comment
CommunityCriminal wrote:
"GJR prescription meds are awful having taken a lot of the so called anti depressants and antipsychotics over the years I often wonder what people see in pills and powders any why they are taken for fun, still each to there own."
I couldn't agree more !
I've seen several friends suffering with the side effects of anti-depressants and sadly two of them took their own lives after the drugs they were prescribed ended up giving them worse problems than they were suffering from due to their illnesses.
I'm no expert in this field but this seems a little strange to me as I was under the impression that the cure is supposed to make you better, not worse...
Complain about this comment
59. At 2:44pm on 01 Feb 2010, CommunityCriminal wrote:
"No 2 Alcohol drug abuse and Obese people cost the NHS far more than Drug addicts ever will in the next 100 years."
If several things cause an undersirable outcome it isn't an excuse for adding another one to the list.
"No 3 I think youll find this goes for every member of the public that drive and do something other while at the wheel of the car . Phones smoking drinking talking shouting at kids in the back listening to music changing radio stations all cause accidents and deaths. Alcohol being the main substance in intoxicated driving."
Again, because several things cause an undersirable outcome isn't an excuse for adding anther one to the list.
"No 4 No individuals in communities don't feel afraid of the Heroin addicts, what they fear is the failure in law to fix the problem. "
Oh, so heroin addicts are a problem to society. So we agree on something.
"No 5 Can i just ask what planet you actually live on the drug industry is worth billions already the only result in state controlled drugs is a loss to organised crime."
The result of state control is taxation, which organised crime will try undercut by smuggling. Instead of transit vans full of fags to be sold cheap in pubs it will be heroin.
"No 6 Again you state what we already have big crime selling drugs world wide."
So legalisation won't make any difference then
"No 7 Drugs in the hands of children you say that like no children sell drugs use drugs make money from drugs. Where I live a lot of the dealers are 14-18 years old very few adults involved in street dealing."
Legalising drugs and making sure there are tens of thousands more are treating drugs like trading cards is not progress
"I'm actually surprised by the lack of thought... if a pit bull ran wild in your community harming people you would make sure there was suitable law to remove it. "
If a pit pull ran wild in your community I'm sure you'd solve the problem by opening a pit bull breeding kennel and giving training in dog bite wounds.
Complain about this comment
"62. At 4:40pm on 01 Feb 2010, General_Jack_Ripper wrote:
Tough-on-drugs policy 'pointless':
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7557708.stm
"The argument always put forward against this (decriminalisation) is that there would be a commensurate increase in drug use as a result of legalisation," he said.
"This, it seems to me, is a bogus point: tobacco is a legal drug, whose use is declining, and precisely because it is legal, its users are far more amenable to government control, education programmes and taxation than they would be were it illegal."
Studies showed the market was already almost saturated with drugs, he said, and anyone who wished to purchase the drug of their choice could already do so. "
At least 23% of the population were told smoking will harm your health and kill you. They still chose to take it up. It's not a good idea to give them convenient access to other drugs and hope for the best.
Oh and tobacco users are so "amenable to government control, education programmes and taxation" Calais warehouses make a very nice living.
Complain about this comment
SB Pit-bulls or at least the type of breed we have now have no place in homes. As for dog fighting well I believe it should carry MASSIVE FINES and LONG TERM prison sentences.
Apart from the Drugs issue I'm what you would call a Law abiding citizen, In fact this evening our community group meets to discuss crime and disorder amongst other things, in fact drugs tend to occupy most meetings in one way or another. Police will be there local councilors will be there.
The current methods of drug control do not work in any way shape or form current justice fails at every turn MODA71 has become a joke. Banned substances also need supply control MODA 71 needs amending to allow the supply under licence of some controlled drugs while the rest are clinic only access. This is very much like assisted dying argument, excellent lecture last night. When the harm out ways the good you have to make change to re balance before its to late. It will soon be to late when it comes to drugs the tide is turning towards wholesale criminaly produced pharmaceuticals sold as anything but a drug.
Complain about this comment
70. At 5:15pm on 02 Feb 2010, CommunityCriminal wrote:
"The current methods of drug control do not work in any way shape or form.."
Just because people break a law doesn't mean the law is ineffective. You could use the same argument to claim that the Theft Act doesn't work, but we all know 5 seconds after it was repealed every shop in the country would be empty.
"Anyway were all still waiting on some form of statistic or evidence that what you say is true "
I'd love to compare the figures for a country where drugs are legal and unregulated, but I can't think of any with a functioning government
Complain about this comment
CommunityCriminal
http://newsrealblog.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/dont-feed-the-troll.jpg
Complain about this comment
"71. At 11:17am on 03 Feb 2010, Shaunie Babes wrote:
I'd love to compare the figures for a country where drugs are legal and unregulated, but I can't think of any with a functioning government"
Nobody has suggested 'drugs should be legal' people have suggested the system is reformed progressively.
But to take you up on that, what you just said doesn't make sense. You will not find any country in the world where drugs are legal and unregulated whether they have a functional government or not.
Its a contradiction in terms. If drugs are LEGAL then they are REGULATED. The problem people keep pointing out is in countries where drugs are illegal they are unregulated.
Please try and keep up. It does surprise me you continue to comment on this subject seeing as you have clearly been well and truly beaten by several people.
Complain about this comment
The spokeman on justice who says he would change the law to allow people to use whatever force necessary to defend themselves in their home against intruders is not fix to hold the office of justice and national security spokeman.
As the law stands, you are currently entitled to use reasonable force to defend yourself or others including in your home. An example of this is the Rose -v- Rose case. The father attacked his wife in the present of his son and the son thought his mother's life were in danger. Instantly, the son grab a gun and shot the father killing him. This was held by the court to be reasonable force in defence of self or another.
If you change the law to allow for revenge like some state in America, then what you will have is people inviting others into their home for the sole purpose of murdering them and hide behind any change in the law that allow for revenge type of actions.
Instead of trying to score points about the current debate as it relates to intruders, the party and the government should further review the current access to justice laws so that ordinary people gain better access to our civil courts. At present, the civil courts are corrupt against the less fortunate in society and is contributing to the widen class gap.
Complain about this comment
Carmarthenshire council leader's 'legalise heroin' call
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/south_west/8498231.stm
Seems more and more people are coming to the same conclusion.
Complain about this comment
CC
They're all coming out of the woodwork now:
http://www.mauitime.com/Articles-i-2010-01-14-72120.113117_David_Bratzer_and_Law_Enforcement_Against_Prohibition_Have_Fought_in_the_Trenches_of_the_War_on_Drugs_and_Want_to_End_It.html
Complain about this comment
There is a growing recognition around the world that the prohibition of drugs is a counterproductive failure. However, a major barrier to drug law reform has been a widespread fear of the unknown—just what could a post-prohibition regime look like?
For the first time, ‘After the War on Drugs: Blueprint for Regulation' answers that question by proposing specific models of regulation for each main type and preparation of prohibited drug, coupled with the principles and rationale for doing so.
http://www.tdpf.org.uk/blueprint%20download.htm
http://www.tdpf.org.uk/
Complain about this comment
Anthrax found in London heroin user
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8500743.stm
When this becomes an infectious disease in heroin users society is in for a culling. Lets face it you only need to find a form of organism like anthrax that can survive in spore form that's spreadable through contact with the user.
Imagine that in the sex trade.....
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS