Labour crime claims misleading

Its official then - they're lieing to us...

From the BBC

 

Here are the figures

Criminal Damage to a Dwelling - Down 4%
Criminal Damage to a Vehicle - Up 2%
Criminal Damage to a Building other than a dwelling - Down 7%
Arson - Down 5%
Other Criminal Damage - Down 3%

Burglary in a Dwelling - Down 7%
Burglary in a Building Other Than a Dwelling - Down 4%

Possession of a Controlled Substance - Up 27%
Trafficking in Controlled Drugs - Up 5%
Other Drug Offences - Down 26%

Fraud and Forgery - Down 17%

Robbery gave no percentile figures but seem to be going up

Sexual Assault on a Female - Down 7%
Other Sexual Offenses - Up 5%
Rape Against a Female - Up 3%

Vehicle Interference and Tampering - Down 7%
Theft From Shops - Up 5%
Other Theft and Handling - Down 6%
Theft From the Person of Another - Up 1%
Theft From a Vehicle - Up 1%
Theft of a Vehicle - Down 12%
Theft or Unauthorised Taking - Up 7%

More Serious Violence Against the Person - Down 4%*
Homicide - Down 12%
Death by Dangerous Driving - Down 2%
More Serious Wounding/Act Endangering Life - Down 4%*
Other More Serious Voilence Offences - Up 8%
Other Offences Against the Person - Up 1%

Violent Crime - Up 2%

Violent Disorder - Up 49%^
Other Offences - Down 1%


* This is where I had to work out the percentile shift myself
^ Site gave a possible reason for this as adding Asbo breaches into this catagory this year

 

Liarbor misleading people?????

nothing new here then, every word from them has to be checked, if a politician says "good morning" have a look at your watch.

 

I do apologize.

The Website

And if You don't trust my maths - goto the relevent page and work it out for Yourself - I would be interested in Your calculations

 

Despite the (BBC) report's bluster, it seems to say very little; Just some accusations of the government setting easy targets, and the increase in non-conviction offences. But has crime actually risen or fallen...?

I think the time and money spent on doing this piece of research would be better spent trying to explain the apparent divorce between the finding of the British Crime Survey (which indicates that crime has been falling and is at its lowest for a decade) and the public's perception of crime.

 

I could easily get ALL crime figures down within a year and save the taxpayer billions. It's quite simple really. Kill all heroin and crack addicts and anyone with a previous record for crime who is subsequently caught for commiting another crime. It would also be a crime for judges to let people off on technicalities.

 

Whilst some of your suggestions might well work, let's not forget that the British Crime Survey is not based on police arrest or conviction figures; it is based on a face-to-face survey asking members of the public whether they have experienced crime in the last year.

 

This came from a Sunday Times article. The most worrying statistic (I will try and find the link) is the number of convictions - it has plummeted. The number of cautions and fixed penalties has increased.

So yet again Labour promises are worth nothing.

 

You do surprise me SVEN! Quoting from the Home Office Website (er, I think run by this government) is somewhat misleading in itself, albeit probably one of the only sources available. Considering you are a Labliar mouthpiece, I don't know why I am surprised! Do you figures include the 24,000 crimes committed by UK nationals in Europe but not listed by the Home Office?

Do you figures take into account the shift in stats due to the policies of the Police to massage the detection rates as per Gummint requirements?

 

Amusingly, bearing in mind FJ's last post, we were discussing over a sherbet issues of the day on friday and came to human rights abuse in China. Like good liberals we sucked our teeth and said dear me. Then one of our number said "Hang on chaps, if the British government took all the crims round the back and slotted them, would any of us really care?"

A brief check around revealed that surprisingly, no, nobody could give a hoot if criminals were terminated with extreme prejudice. As long as our cars were unbroken into, our homes inviolate, our daughters likewise, more power to their elbow. Funny how five reasonable, pretty centrist guys can agree on that very quickly, whereas we would have debated restoration of the death penalty for murder to the nth degree...

So, FJ's suggestion is probably not a million miles from where the majority of the population secretly stand. Mmm nice.

 

Are You sure it is Labour and not the Police taking the easy way out?

Cautions mean less man hours investigating, ASBOs do not need the burden of proof.

If You as a manager had assets such as these, wouldn't You use them more and more.

And I believe that cautions were first introduced by the Tories, although if anyone knows different please tell me

 

I think that idea has already been discussed Fallschirmjager. I think it was called the '3 strikes and we kill your whole family' policy. I personally think it's a great idea based on the principles of Nature vs Nuture. If a cnut commits crimes regularly, he was obviously brought up wrong and the family is equally guilty. Sorry to go on, but at the same time, it would free up large amounts of affordable housing for those in need.

 

3 convictions per 100 is good odds by my maths, i think i will start of small then work up to murders, of course i wont speed anywhere thats the 3 convictions.