working out? Not real well.
Britain's violent crime record is worse than any other country in the European union, it is revealed today.
Official crime figures show the UK also has a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S. and even South Africa - widely considered one of the world's most dangerous countries.
But, but, handguns are BANNED! That makes them safer!!
In the decade following the party's election in 1997, the number of recorded violent attacks soared by 77 per cent to 1.158million - or more than two every minute.
Well, apparently not.
The figures, compiled from reports released by the European Commission and United Nations, also show:
* The UK has the second highest overall crime rate in the EU.
* It has a higher homicide rate than most of our western European neighbours, including France, Germany, Italy and Spain.
* The UK has the fifth highest robbery rate in the EU.
* It has the fourth highest burglary rate and the highest absolute number of burglaries in the EU, with double the number of offences than recorded in Germany and France.
But it is the naming of Britain as the most violent country in the EU that is most shocking. The analysis is based on the number of crimes per 100,000 residents.
In the UK, there are 2,034 offences per 100,000 people, way ahead of second-placed Austria with a rate of 1,677.
And how's that compare to us?
The U.S. has a violence rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, Canada 935, Australia 92 and South Africa 1,609.
That's a flat amazing number; more than four times as many violent offenses per capita in the UK than here.
The figures, compiled by the Tories, are considered the most accurate and up-to-date available.
But criminologists say crime figures can be affected by many factors, including different criminal justice systems and differences in how crime is reported and measured.
Legitimate points. Which brings back the fact that the British government has been caught- more than once- fiddling the numbers to make things look not-so-bad; I'm tempted to say "Of COURSE they're going to try to reduce the impact of this."
There follows various "This is not as bad as it looks" stuff, including
'Violent crime in England and Wales has fallen by almost a half a peak in 1995 but we are not complacent and know there is still work to do. That is why last year we published 'Saving lives. Reducing harm. Protecting the public. An Action Plan for Tackling Violence 2008-11'.'
Like that "we are not complacent and know there is still work to do"; sets the proper tone of "We are going to save you. We haven't yet, and crime is awful, but we Published a Plan!"
And, on the 'reasons why', they have this:
Experts say there are a number of reasons why violence is soaring in the UK. These include Labour's decision to relax the licensing laws to allow round-the-clock opening, which has led to a rise in the number of serious assaults taking place in the early hours of the morning.
I'd say that's a symptom, not a cause; people who obey the law and give a crap about others' lives don't jump on somebody just because they can drink late. But, for the 'experts' and government, I guess it beats blaming people who commit crimes and idiots who don't hold those people responsible for their actions.
There are a number of factors involved in these numbers, but I do keep coming back to the fact that a country where, not that long ago,
It was common for subjects of the Crown to own arms,
It was common to put a pistol in your pocket when going out for the days business or an evening out,
Crime was low. Violent crime REALLY low,
is now a country where
Owning a firearm is highly restricted and gets you treated as a presumed criminal,
Using a weapon of ANY kind in self-defense, even in your own home, gets you arrested,
And crime, including violent crime, is HIGH.
Just noticed Kevin saw the same article, and gives it his treatment.