Views, opinions and reactions....

[kenpoworks]

...to this point of view from a different discipline........

Contrary to popular perceptions there is no crime wave in the UK. According to the Home Office statistical publication, "Crime in England and Wales 2003/04" crime rates in the UK have declined dramatically in the last 10 years. Notwithstanding, two thirds of the public thought crime had increased in the last two years and one third thought the rise was substantial (see link http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/crimeew0304.html). Hmmm! Might be something to do with the media?

There is an abundance of statistics and expert analysis on crime and it is very difficult to establish any causal connection with such things as gun control or differing approaches to punishment for offenders. It all seems to come down to culture. We just moved from El Paso, Texas to Maryland and before that lived in Australia. El Paso is the third safest city in America and we felt safer there than we did in Sydney. This is despite El Paso being one of the poorest cities in the US. Initially I put this down to the Hispanic or Mexican culture but the closer I looked the more of a mystery it became. Just next door in Ciudad Juarez (Mexico) the murder rate was astronomical. This is largely attributed to drug trade there.

In international comparisons one of the things which really stands out is America's homicide rate. More than three times that in the UK and six times that in Japan (see http://www.aic.gov.au/conferences/outlook99/mouzos.html) The FBI estimates two thirds of US homicides are committed with firearms (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/guns.htm). This compares with only 14% of Australia's much lower proportion of homicides. My conclusion, Americans are much more ready to reach for a gun when emotions run high. I don't wish to make light of a serious topic, but if I had to choose I would prefer burglars to use boiling water rather than guns. Interestingly, one survey found that less than 20% of US prison inmates purchased their guns over the counter. Most acquired their firearms from friends, family or obtained them on the street or by other illegal means.

Personally I do believe in strict punishment for violent crimes, if only because it usually provides some consolation to the victim.

Finally, I can't let the "L" word go by without comment. I am greatly amused by Americans' use of the word 'liberal'. It is a form of labeling conservatives use in an attempt to discredit people who disagree with their views. In Australia it is a term of pride used by conservatives to describe themselves. Both groups would do well to read the dictionary definition (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=liberal) which I think covers the values espoused by this country's founding fathers. .......

Rich

 

[Bammx2]

I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to say here.

Granted...I am not the most educated man on the planet,
but I do disagree with anything "statistical" since most of it is untrue.
For instance,I personally have NEVER been asked for ANYTHING "stat" related and neither has a single person I have ever known in 39 years.
I left the states and moved to the UK 4 1/2 years ago and it that time period, guns crime has tripled almost every year since I have been here.
"Stats" wise...in 2003 we had approxomately 11,000 shootings in the US.
Population of apprx.270 million.
The same year...the UK had 28 shootings a day.
10,220 for a population of approx. 60-65 million.
UK has the US beat hands down per capita for gun crimes according those "stats".
I have lived in several different places in the UK and crime has been fairly phenomenal.
My biggest complaint is the fact a criminal can use a knife to kill and rob with,but a law abiding citizen can't carry a pocket kinfe for any reason what so ever without being treated the exact same as a career criminal.
Here in the UK...you get arrested for you MIGHT do...not what you have done.
Psychic police?! I think not.
The problem with "stats", both here and the US is the fact that people don't report things as much as liked. Why should they?
It has turned out the police are either too busy,too over whelmed, or just don't care.
Media a propaganda machine?! I think so!

Please forgive me if you think I am trying to argue with you or debunk you in anyway, I am always interested in peoples opinions on these matters and you given me a little more info I can read up on.

I thank you:asian:

 

[kenpoworks]

Just like you "I am always interested in peoples opinions" thanks for your interesting response.

Rich

Ps I realise that I did not make it quite as clear as I should have, but what was posted at the start of the thread are not my opinions but those copied from another site.

 

[Michael Billings]

This thread, while interesting and relevant to today's world, does not belong in Kenpo - General. I am moving it into the study where you may get more posts.

-Michael Billings
-MT Super Moderator-

 

[Flatlander]

Just like you "I am always interested in peoples opinions" thanks for your interesting response.

Rich

Ps I realise that I did not make it quite as clear as I should have, but what was posted at the start of the thread are not my opinions but those copied from another site.

Thank you for clarifying that, it's important to credit your sources.

I'm interested in what specific topic you were trying to address here. It seems to me that there are a number of directions that this discussion could go.

 

[Ray]

Contrary to popular perceptions there is no crime wave in the UK. According to the Home Office statistical publication...

I've given a little thought to the perception of crime. When I was a teen-ager near Los Angeles, I was aware of gang activity that took place in my city. I was aware of drug use/abuse that went on among my peers and many of the older people I hung out with. A girl that I went to school with put a bullet through her hand when she was playing with her boyfriend's gun (he was a gang member; we were all about 16 at the time).

As an adult in a different metropolitan area during the 1980's, I was aware of criminal activity committed by people I knew. During the same period I got involved with the martial arts and hung with people who committed no crime (to speak of; maybe parking tickets); after I got a part time job arresting shoplifters, I became aware of "many" people who shop-lifted and committed fraud.

Now my desires and activities give me little opportunity to associate with people who are committing overt criminal acts. But I know it goes on even in the small community in which I live.

In each case, my perception of the crime rate was based upon what I saw first-hand. I guess it's like the old saying: when your neighbor is out of work, it's a recession; when you've lost your job it's a depression.

Statistics are good tools; sometimes they are mis-used or mis-understood. There are a lot of reasons why statistics show crime going down while the populace believes the opposite.

 

[Ray]

Finally, I can't let the "L" word go by without comment. I am greatly amused by Americans' use of the word 'liberal'. It is a form of labeling conservatives use in an attempt to discredit people who disagree with their views. In Australia it is a term of pride used by conservatives to describe themselves. Both groups would do well to read the dictionary definition (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=liberal) which I think covers the values espoused by this country's founding fathers. .......

While the word "liberal" has some definitions that describe good characteristics, it has other meanings in social and political settings; not to mention fiscally liberal vrs socially liberal and so on.

The best explanation of the politcal spectrum from conservative to liberal was: At the extreme left is Stalin; at the extreme right is Hitler; somewhere near the center are GW Bush and Hillary Clinton with Clinton a little to the left of Bush. Liberals frame their thoughts differently than conservations, such as in the abortion debate: "Right to Choose" versus the "Murdering the unborn." No one that I've met thinks that it's a good thing to kill fetuses; on the other hand, no one I've met thinks it's a good idea to force a woman to carry a child she doesn't want; they just disagree on how best to implement solution.

An explanation of the fiscal sprectrum given to me was: The left (fiscal liberal) wants to feed the hungry by taking the money from the rich and giving it to the poor; The right (fiscal conservative) wants to feed the hungry by helping them get jobs and earn it for themselves. That's too oversimplified to be true, but it does give a shadowy indication of the differences. Keynesian economists would believe that tatics like tax breaks (to stimulate the economy) would result in more jobs; An extension of that would be the Reagan tax break to business which provided a "double bump" in economic stimulation; On the other side, you have people who want to force everyone to pool resources to benefit all (socialism), and that too fails.

 

[heretic888]

Statistics are good tools; sometimes they are mis-used or mis-understood. There are a lot of reasons why statistics show crime going down while the populace believes the opposite.

Actually, there's one primary reason: a good chunk of the populace thinks their anecdotal "evidence" trumps publicly-verifiable, peer-reviewed, scientific data...

Oh, and incidentally, over one-third of the populace also thinks evolutionary theory is a big load of poo-pooh...

And, that global warming isn't a real threat...

But, WMDs in Iraq are...

You get the picture.

As far as statistics go, there's a saying: "Stastistics don't lie, but liars can do statistics."

 

[Gray Phoenix]

I agree that "Liberal" and "Conservative" are nothing more than labels that really do not describe the philosophical beliefs espoused by either group. I do have a large amount of statistics training and yes, depending on the statistical population looked at for the purposes of a particular study, the parameters can be fixed to make any point of view valid. Its all W.A.R. marketing. ie, We Are Right.

Since this thread is focused on law, I will leave you with this: Only those who would choose to obey the law are effected by it.

:readrules :enfo: When dealing with the violent criminal, the law is a great tool for those who cart away your body.

 

[Ray]

Actually, there's one primary reason: a good chunk of the populace thinks their anecdotal "evidence" trumps publicly-verifiable, peer-reviewed, scientific data...

Oh, and incidentally, over one-third of the populace also thinks evolutionary theory is a big load of poo-pooh...

And, that global warming isn't a real threat...

But, WMDs in Iraq are...

You get the picture.

Well, the picture's just a little hazy still. But it's starting to look like you'd pick Hillary Clinton to win over Condie Rice in Celebrity Death Match.

 

[Gray Phoenix]

Republicans and Democrats.

Conservatives and Liberals.

One wants to influence your behavior in the name of God and/or decency, the other wants to restrict your behavior in the name of the State and the Prolitariat.

Thus the reason I'm a Libertarian. If Iwant to drive my Turbo Diesel Hummer down to the local Choke and Puke so I can eat a rare double chili cheese burger dipped in bacon grease, while reading a dirty magazine I should be able to do so with out somebody trying to tax me for it.

On the other side, I should have the right to stand on the side walk and preach the Good Word to everyone I meet.

The Bottom Line: It is not the right of the collective to dictate my life to me, so long as I dont hurt or defraud anyone.

And If I do, then I'm sure my good friends in the MA community will give me the beating I would deserve.:rofl:

 

[Ray]

The Bottom Line: It is not the right of the collective to dictate my life to me, so long as I dont hurt or defraud anyone.

I agree. But it wouldn't even be so bad if the whole collective could agree on what to force us to do. It's all the good points made by deeply concerned people (both liberal and conservative) that cause me to have multiple personality syndrome.

And If I do, then I'm sure my good friends in the MA community will give me the beating I would deserve.

I don't know that I've ever admitted to deserving a beating. I'm sure I must have deserved one. Deserved ones don't hurt as much as undeserved beatings.

 

[heretic888]

I agree that "Liberal" and "Conservative" are nothing more than labels that really do not describe the philosophical beliefs espoused by either group.

Actually, they do. And, contrary to popular belief, "liberal" and "conservative" (which are not synonyms for "Democrat" and "Republican", by the way) mean something very particular.

"Liberalism", very briefly, simply refers to an ideological orientation whereby an individual believes the cause and solution to human suffering is largely (if not entirely) external in origin. In other words: fix the environment, you fix the individual. This has its origins in philosophical arguments from the Age of Reason, and perhaps the most extreme example is Marxism.

"Conservatism", by contrast, simply refers to an ideological orientation whereby an individual believes the cause and solution to human suffering is largely (if not entirely) internal in origin. In other words: fix the individual, you fix the environment. This has its originins in religious beliefs more than 3,000 years old (ranging from Buddhist "samsara" to Hindu "maya" to Platonic "tomb of the soul" to Catholic "original sin"), and perhaps the most extreme example is traditional fascism and theocracy.

I do have a large amount of statistics training and yes, depending on the statistical population looked at for the purposes of a particular study, the parameters can be fixed to make any point of view valid. Its all W.A.R. marketing. ie, We Are Right.

If you do actually "have a large amount of statistics training", then you would know that biased sampling (i.e., sampling that was not randomly assigned) is a sign of a poor usage of statistics. It is not a problem with statistics per se, but with the individual conducting the study (whether intentional or not).

Its up to the discerning critical thinker to assess each study itself, and see if there is any bias or fallacies present.

 

[heretic888]

Well, the picture's just a little hazy still.

Not really. Many policies and strategies are the result of people relying on their personal ideologies and "experiences" in lieu of peer-reviewed, randomly-sampled, scientific data. Bias doesn't even come into the picture for most people, as they are already convinced of the universal applicability of their anecdotes.

But it's starting to look like you'd pick Hillary Clinton to win over Condie Rice in Celebrity Death Match.

Ummmm..... sure.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Among the many problems with the "libertarian," viewpoint, there's this: you are not alone on the planet.

Your Turbo Diesel Hummer was made by human labor. Your chili cheese was too, and so were the roads you tooled along in the gigantic, irresponsible monstrosity.

What's as much, the pollution and use of resources affects others; when your coronaries clot shut, others have to join in to help rescue your tail.

And let's not even get into the moral questions such claims raise...

 

[Gray Phoenix]

I would have to agree with almost all of what heretic888 has said. I do understand that statistics with specialized sampling are obviously biased. When one group is trying to prove a point I believe they intentionally skew the results in their own favor. People are rarely out to prove themselves wrong. And I like the definitions posted on Conservatives and Liberals. Thats about as close to the truth as I've seen. Regardless of what side of the isle you sit on, thats a fair critque.

As to the "problems" associated with Libertarianism, I'd have to blind deaf and dumb not realize I'm not alone on the planet. This is where capitalism comes in. If a person or group, doesnt like my big ugly Hummer, or the smog it generates, you are wholly free to develop a clean burning alternative and offer it at a lower price. Until then, I'm gonna drive what I want, since I can trade degrees of the labor I have produced for products others have produced. Thus the creation of wompum.

As far as others running to my aide, when my arteries stop doing their job, if I cant afford the bill, then I die. Simple as that. I am not asking the public to spend their hard earned dollars on me and my "irresponsible" behaviors. I like everyone else, am responsible for myself. It may sound harsh, but its fair. Living in a "free" society, means that I have the fredom to do what I want and how I want, but I must also accept the consequences of my actions. Meaning in addition to the possibility of success, I must also realize that should I fail, I die. It would be unfair for me to expect the welfare state to pick up my tab.:asian: