Saturday, February 17, 2007

Comparisons between Britain and here

Saw this article the other day and started to write about it, but the more I wrote the more frustrated I got, and I gave up. Happily, Kevin took on the task and gives us this take on it.

Today, I found a comment from JR in my response to Elmer, and since I hadn't looked at his place for a while I clicked over and found- among other things- this post with a couple of good links. Went to the one at Classically Liberal and, along with other good information, this quote from Professor Joyce Malcolm on the contrast in homicide numbers:
“The murder rates of the U.S. and U.K. are also affected by differences in the way each counts homicides. The FBI asks police to list every homicide as murder, even if the case isn't subsequently prosecuted or proceeds on a lesser charge, making the U.S. numbers as high as possible. By contrast, the English police "massage down" the homicide statistics, tracking each case through the courts and removing it if it is reduced to a lesser charge or determined to be an accident or self-defense, making the English numbers as low as possible.”

There's been an ongoing problem here in the U.S. in which someone yells about the number of homicides involving firearms here compared to other places, but ignores the total number of homicides(apparently being beaten to death or stabbed doesn't count) in order to say "We need more gun-ban laws!" This quote points out that along with total numbers, you've got to look at how the homicide numbers are figured; if someone is slanting the way of counting deaths to cut down the number counted as murders, you can't trust their figures for the truth. Which makes it harder to argue the point, because sometimes you can't find the actual(true) numbers.

This is much like someone only counting use of a firearm in self-defense as 'real' if the victim shoots: it ignores the huge percentage of cases where the bad guy either finding out the intended victim is armed or having the arm aimed at him sends him away. So by counting it this way they can say "There are very few cases of self-defense with a gun". Dishonest as hell, but they use it anyway.

No particular point in this, just blowing off steam. I'm tired of reading Brit commenters saying they just haven't passed strict enough laws and the police don't have enough power over people and that's why things are bad, and calling us cowboys and vigilantes because we hold that the right of self-defense includes the right to use a weapon if needed.

No comments: