Author Topic: For Lazs: 2003 Crime Stats  (Read 3173 times)

Offline Ripsnort

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 27260
For Lazs: 2003 Crime Stats
« Reply #45 on: March 09, 2004, 09:31:54 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Naso
<---- Stare at Rip's signature......

Ok... nevermind.

:lol :rofl :p


I know, I know, tough to argue with facts and data staring you in the face, isn't it? ;)

Offline Naso

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1535
      • http://www.4stormo.it
For Lazs: 2003 Crime Stats
« Reply #46 on: March 09, 2004, 09:36:58 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Ripsnort
I know, I know, tough to argue with facts and data staring you in the face, isn't it? ;)


ROTFLMAO !!!

Yes! Yes! :aok

[serious mode on]

This 18-24 age range of the higher percentage is interesting.

A worse gun-handling education?

Maybe?

Moral issues?

[serious mode off]

Offline Dowding

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6867
      • http://www.psys07629.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/272/index.html
For Lazs: 2003 Crime Stats
« Reply #47 on: March 09, 2004, 09:43:03 AM »
Quote
I would guess that in countries with more than 10% blacks there is a higher percentage of crime amongst the blacks.


Look up 'arbitrary' in the dictionary and then explain where exactly that figure comes from.

Quote
you claim that I know very little about the rest of the world... I claim I know as much as you and... I claim that you know nothing about the U.S.


I don't claim to be an authority on the US. Never have done. You, on the other hand, wade into each and every discussion on guns (and some that aren't... or at least don't start out that way) with snipes at other countries like you know anything about them. Case in point; your comments recommending 'diversity' spotlight your ignorance.
War! Never been so much fun. War! Never been so much fun! Go to your brother, Kill him with your gun, Leave him lying in his uniform, Dying in the sun.

Offline Ripsnort

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 27260
For Lazs: 2003 Crime Stats
« Reply #48 on: March 09, 2004, 10:19:47 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Naso
ROTFLMAO !!!

Yes! Yes! :aok

[serious mode on]

This 18-24 age range of the higher percentage is interesting.

A worse gun-handling education?

Maybe?

Moral issues?

[serious mode off]


Drugs, gangs.

Offline beet1e

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7848
For Lazs: 2003 Crime Stats
« Reply #49 on: March 09, 2004, 01:45:47 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
yes... America is compossed of 40 tiny little states no bigger than say... england and.... 10 whopping big ones.
And the UK is about the size of the tenth of those whoppers. England itself (excluding Scotland, Wales and any islands) is, I believe, about the size of Illinois.

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
For Lazs: 2003 Crime Stats
« Reply #50 on: March 09, 2004, 02:21:10 PM »
If we lost a chunk the size of illinois... I doubt we would even notice.

dowding... having a little trouble understanding what you are trying to say.   Are you saying that england france and germany have populations of blacks that exceeed 10%?  or.. are you saying that the black homicide rate in the U.S. is not as claimed? or... are you saying that your blacks would never be as violent as ours even if the population of them % wise equaled ours?

lazs

Offline beet1e

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7848
For Lazs: 2003 Crime Stats
« Reply #51 on: March 09, 2004, 02:25:32 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
If we lost a chunk the size of illinois... I doubt we would even notice.
So it's the "tiny little islands" plus Scotland and Wales that transform an insignificant chunk to a total landmass which is on a par with Whopper US State #10?

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
For Lazs: 2003 Crime Stats
« Reply #52 on: March 09, 2004, 02:36:09 PM »
think of it this way beetle... think of yur whole island being a little  Mexican chiuauwa doggie laying sleeping in socialist bliss on a barcalounger chair.... Now think of the U.S as  a 350 lb guy who needs a place to sit and doesn't notice the aforementioned little doggie...

lazs

Offline Vulcan

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9913
For Lazs: 2003 Crime Stats
« Reply #53 on: March 09, 2004, 02:47:51 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Toad
Dowding, would you say that crime states across all nations generally show a relationship between areas of high population density and high crime.

IE: That the high density areas of New Zealand tend to have more crime and the same holds true in say... the US, Canada, UK, Germany, etc.?

Or are you saying no broad based comparisons can be valid?


Actually not necessarily. Wellington, the area that showed a crime increase (also where I live) isn't the highest population density area.

Also of note, the increase was in non-violent crime (burglaries and car thefts) - typically against property where no one was home/with the vehicle.  When a burglary is commited here the burglar usually flees the scene without any violence. So heres a question, if we had an abundance of firearms like the USA, would those burglars have been tempted to hit residence where the home owner was home?

Offline Ripsnort

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 27260
For Lazs: 2003 Crime Stats
« Reply #54 on: March 09, 2004, 03:40:43 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
think of it this way beetle... think of yur whole island being a little  Mexican chiuauwa doggie laying sleeping in socialist bliss on a barcalounger chair.... Now think of the U.S as  a 350 lb guy who needs a place to sit and doesn't notice the aforementioned little doggie...

lazs


:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl

Offline Dowding

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6867
      • http://www.psys07629.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/272/index.html
For Lazs: 2003 Crime Stats
« Reply #55 on: March 09, 2004, 03:41:15 PM »
I'm asking where the 10% figure comes from. It seems very arbitrary to me. To what precision do you define that number?
War! Never been so much fun. War! Never been so much fun! Go to your brother, Kill him with your gun, Leave him lying in his uniform, Dying in the sun.

Offline beet1e

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7848
For Lazs: 2003 Crime Stats
« Reply #56 on: March 09, 2004, 04:10:20 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
think of it this way beetle... think of yur whole island being a little  Mexican chiuauwa doggie laying sleeping in socialist bliss on a barcalounger chair.... Now think of the U.S as  a 350 lb guy who needs a place to sit and doesn't notice the aforementioned little doggie...

lazs
And think of Dixon as a steaming türd. Which isn't so far from the truth! :lol

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
For Lazs: 2003 Crime Stats
« Reply #57 on: March 09, 2004, 04:37:56 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Vulcan
Actually not necessarily. Wellington, the area that showed a crime increase (also where I live) isn't the highest population density area.


I didn't say highest, I said "high".

Wellington is not "rural", right?

I'm saying your cities overall have more crime than your countryside. I think this is pretty true across most industrialized countries?
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Vulcan

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9913
For Lazs: 2003 Crime Stats
« Reply #58 on: March 09, 2004, 07:49:35 PM »
Depends what you're talking about, if its compared on a per capita ratio then it could be debatable.

For example:
"The Central police district, which includes Palmerston North and Wanganui, recorded a 1.4 per cent drop in crime, from 34,934 offences in 2002 to 34,452, its seventh consecutive decrease since 1996. The drop per 10,000 population was 1.5 per cent. Palmerston North area commander Inspector Pat Handcock said the city had experienced a 0.7 per cent increase in crime in 2003 but had recorded a 6 per cent drop in total crime during the first month of 2004."

This is a primarily rural area, with a 0.7 per cent increase in crime in 2003. If you dug deeper into the figures I wouldn't be suprised if the rural crime rates were higher per head than the urban, especially in the violent crimes area. Most of our gun related crimes/murders occur in rural areas (where gun ownership is more prevelant).

To put Wellington in perspective, the population is around 300,000 (I think), to get into a rural area only takes 10-15 minutes drive from the city center to rural farmland.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2004, 07:53:08 PM by Vulcan »

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
For Lazs: 2003 Crime Stats
« Reply #59 on: March 09, 2004, 08:54:45 PM »
I think you just have to compare crimes within and beyond the city limits.

I think there's probably a higher crime rate in the city limits than outside of them.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!