Film, Media & TV1 min ago
Recorded crime falling - Actual crime going up
18 Answers
Some politicians REALLY annoy me. Just seen Jacqui Smith on TV with a big smile on her face crowing about how RECORDED crime is going down.
Note she says it is RECORDED crime that has gone down.
THE REASON FOR THIS IS THAT MANY PEOPLE CANNOT FIND ANYONE TO RECORD A CRIME WITH.
Also the capture rate for criminals is so low in many cases it is not worth reporting it.
We used to have a small local police station, but they closed it down, and I rarely see a Bobby on the beat, so
I could not record a crime even if I wanted to.
So you silly woman, dont crow about reducing RECORDED crime. All you have done is make it more difficult to actually RECORD a crime, and in many cases not even WORTH recording it , so these figure are bound to go down.
The ACTUAL crime figures are higher than ever.
Note she says it is RECORDED crime that has gone down.
THE REASON FOR THIS IS THAT MANY PEOPLE CANNOT FIND ANYONE TO RECORD A CRIME WITH.
Also the capture rate for criminals is so low in many cases it is not worth reporting it.
We used to have a small local police station, but they closed it down, and I rarely see a Bobby on the beat, so
I could not record a crime even if I wanted to.
So you silly woman, dont crow about reducing RECORDED crime. All you have done is make it more difficult to actually RECORD a crime, and in many cases not even WORTH recording it , so these figure are bound to go down.
The ACTUAL crime figures are higher than ever.
Answers
1 to 18 of 18
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by vehelpfulguy. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Your last sentence kind of ruins your argument.
If you're suggesting that recorded crime is a meaningless statistic because we have no idea of how many unrecorded crimes there are, fine. But on what grounds can you say that actual crime is going up?
Where are you getting your figures from? Is it just a feeling? Or are people reporting crimes to you, instead of the police?
If you're suggesting that recorded crime is a meaningless statistic because we have no idea of how many unrecorded crimes there are, fine. But on what grounds can you say that actual crime is going up?
Where are you getting your figures from? Is it just a feeling? Or are people reporting crimes to you, instead of the police?
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Of course any claim along the lines made by vhg will be apocryphal. Simply by definition unreported crime cannot be quantified reliably. However, a few things from my experiences may help.
As part of some work that I do I come into contact with police officers, witnesses and victims. Speaking to many victims it is clear that an incident has to be quite serious before they consider reporting the matter to police. Their reasons are many and various, but an enduring thread is that the police are simply too difficult to contact except via 999. Many less serious incidents do not warrant emergency attendance and most responsible people do not tie up the emergency lines unnecessarily. Their difficulties in making a report of a non-serious nature are such that many of them cannot be bothered. Often these less serious incidents escalate (particularly in domestic violence and anti-social behaviour situations) and this escalation may have been avoided if earlier non-emergency intervention was easier to come by.
To reinforce this a little, it is accepted by the Home Office that domestic violence victims suffer an average of 14 assaults before reporting the matter. Five years ago this figure was about 10.
There has been a large rise in the past two years (27% last year alone) in credit card and kindred fraud. Eighteen months ago the police stopped dealing with this type of crime and now will not record it.
Finally, today�s announcement was accompanied by another from the Home Secretary which said a Red Tape �czar� was to be appointed to enable police officers to spend more time on the streets. If crime is falling as we are told, why should this be necessary? Indeed, in any other government department, a fall in workload might be accompanied by fall in staff numbers. So I suppose that since the police have less crime to solve, we can see a reduction in the number of officers.
As part of some work that I do I come into contact with police officers, witnesses and victims. Speaking to many victims it is clear that an incident has to be quite serious before they consider reporting the matter to police. Their reasons are many and various, but an enduring thread is that the police are simply too difficult to contact except via 999. Many less serious incidents do not warrant emergency attendance and most responsible people do not tie up the emergency lines unnecessarily. Their difficulties in making a report of a non-serious nature are such that many of them cannot be bothered. Often these less serious incidents escalate (particularly in domestic violence and anti-social behaviour situations) and this escalation may have been avoided if earlier non-emergency intervention was easier to come by.
To reinforce this a little, it is accepted by the Home Office that domestic violence victims suffer an average of 14 assaults before reporting the matter. Five years ago this figure was about 10.
There has been a large rise in the past two years (27% last year alone) in credit card and kindred fraud. Eighteen months ago the police stopped dealing with this type of crime and now will not record it.
Finally, today�s announcement was accompanied by another from the Home Secretary which said a Red Tape �czar� was to be appointed to enable police officers to spend more time on the streets. If crime is falling as we are told, why should this be necessary? Indeed, in any other government department, a fall in workload might be accompanied by fall in staff numbers. So I suppose that since the police have less crime to solve, we can see a reduction in the number of officers.
No because the fear of crime is going up
Obviously the best way to combat this is for higher visibilty of police on the streets hence a red tape Czar.
The other thing is that although I have not seen figures to this effect it's quite possible that crime is going up in some areas whilst the overall crime figure is falling.
There is a strong tendency for London media types to assume that if it's true for London it's true for the whole country.
London is what 10% of the country? Adding in Manchester, the West Midlands Liverpool and Glasgow I doubt you get to 25% of the country.
It doesn't mean there's not a problem - especially if you live there. But it also explains how crime can fall whilst fear of crime can rise.
Obviously the best way to combat this is for higher visibilty of police on the streets hence a red tape Czar.
The other thing is that although I have not seen figures to this effect it's quite possible that crime is going up in some areas whilst the overall crime figure is falling.
There is a strong tendency for London media types to assume that if it's true for London it's true for the whole country.
London is what 10% of the country? Adding in Manchester, the West Midlands Liverpool and Glasgow I doubt you get to 25% of the country.
It doesn't mean there's not a problem - especially if you live there. But it also explains how crime can fall whilst fear of crime can rise.
I have not looked at the figures in detail yet, jake, but I believe they show that, apart from one or two categories, reported crime in London has fallen.
Greater London accounts for 1.2% of the area of England, (About 620 of 50,300 sq. miles).
More importantly (for it is people who commit crimes, not geographical areas) it is home to about 12.5% of the population (roughly 7million out of 56 million).
Looking at last year�s knife crimes, 35% (7,428 of 20,985) occurred in London.
The England �average� is one knife crime per 2,668 people. The London �average� is one per 942 people. The rest of the country�s average is one per 3,169.This proves conclusively (!) that Londoners are more than three times more likely to encounter a knife wielding assailant than elsewhere. What these figures were last year I don�t know.
Greater London accounts for 1.2% of the area of England, (About 620 of 50,300 sq. miles).
More importantly (for it is people who commit crimes, not geographical areas) it is home to about 12.5% of the population (roughly 7million out of 56 million).
Looking at last year�s knife crimes, 35% (7,428 of 20,985) occurred in London.
The England �average� is one knife crime per 2,668 people. The London �average� is one per 942 people. The rest of the country�s average is one per 3,169.This proves conclusively (!) that Londoners are more than three times more likely to encounter a knife wielding assailant than elsewhere. What these figures were last year I don�t know.
My hubcaps were stolen from the car while it was parked outside (not cheap aftermarket things but centres for alloy wheels) P11ssed off I call the police to report the crime. Told someone would be in touch in 48 hours. Thought that was as far as it would go. Twenty minutes later PC at the door. He said he was there to take 'initial notes and do HOUSE TO HOUSE ENQUIRIES!' Thinking it was a windup I played along and suggested he get SOCO involved. Within half an hour forensics van outside trying to get prints. Next day a third officer came to take full statement.
I wonder if I have used up my entire allowance of police resources for the rest of the decade?
Oh, and the result - my caps are still on the missing list. Interpol have been informed.
I wonder if I have used up my entire allowance of police resources for the rest of the decade?
Oh, and the result - my caps are still on the missing list. Interpol have been informed.
The reason that the figures go down but the perception that crime is getting worse is because of headlines like this
14,000 knife victims a year
Independent on Sunday, 6 July 2008
Knife violence in Britain is far worse than official statistics suggest, with almost 14,000 people taken to hospital for injuries caused by knives and other sharp weapons last year.
If you look at the actual stats, you discover that the figure includes not only attacks but also accidental injuries from knives and other sharp implements. If one looks only at assaults with sharp objects (stabbings to you and me) the figure for the UK halves to about 7,000.
But you would be forgiven for being scared to go out for fear of being knifed if you believed the headline.
14,000 knife victims a year
Independent on Sunday, 6 July 2008
Knife violence in Britain is far worse than official statistics suggest, with almost 14,000 people taken to hospital for injuries caused by knives and other sharp weapons last year.
If you look at the actual stats, you discover that the figure includes not only attacks but also accidental injuries from knives and other sharp implements. If one looks only at assaults with sharp objects (stabbings to you and me) the figure for the UK halves to about 7,000.
But you would be forgiven for being scared to go out for fear of being knifed if you believed the headline.
The most reliable estimate on crime which includes unreported crime is the British Crime Survey.
Before I get the inevitable 'oh, it's HO statistics and therefore unreliable' - the fact is that the govt. very rarely fabricates statistics. The reason for this is that if they did, they'd get caught due to the presence of numerous interest groups and outside organisations. And before I get the inevitable 'ur so naive lolz', I don't say the govt. doesn't try and put a spin on things - they just don't do it through outright fabrication (it's usually through playing up 'positive' stats and playing down 'negative' ones).
Anyway, HO reports which include the findings of the BCS actually show moderate increases (and decreases in places) or what's common is no significant statistical change on the previous year. The most recent one is 2006-07 (WARNING: .pdf - here- obviously they can't do 2007-08 yet).
Interestingly, violence by strangers seems to have remained pretty steady since the mid-90s.
That's a summary, granted, but I couldn't be bothered to slog through all gazillion volumes of the main report. If you are - they're available in lots of nice links here
Before I get the inevitable 'oh, it's HO statistics and therefore unreliable' - the fact is that the govt. very rarely fabricates statistics. The reason for this is that if they did, they'd get caught due to the presence of numerous interest groups and outside organisations. And before I get the inevitable 'ur so naive lolz', I don't say the govt. doesn't try and put a spin on things - they just don't do it through outright fabrication (it's usually through playing up 'positive' stats and playing down 'negative' ones).
Anyway, HO reports which include the findings of the BCS actually show moderate increases (and decreases in places) or what's common is no significant statistical change on the previous year. The most recent one is 2006-07 (WARNING: .pdf - here- obviously they can't do 2007-08 yet).
Interestingly, violence by strangers seems to have remained pretty steady since the mid-90s.
That's a summary, granted, but I couldn't be bothered to slog through all gazillion volumes of the main report. If you are - they're available in lots of nice links here
vehelpfulguy
Is it this particular politician you don't beieve or is it any politician? Would you be able to accept anything politicians say if it doesn't accord with your world view, are you ever able to change your mind when provided with information.
It doesn't sound like it reading your post, it seems you have made your mind up and refuse to believe what is said. However it might not be palatable for you, but all the rational evidence, rather than personal biases all indicate that crime is falling. Saying something isn't true doesn't make it so.
Is it this particular politician you don't beieve or is it any politician? Would you be able to accept anything politicians say if it doesn't accord with your world view, are you ever able to change your mind when provided with information.
It doesn't sound like it reading your post, it seems you have made your mind up and refuse to believe what is said. However it might not be palatable for you, but all the rational evidence, rather than personal biases all indicate that crime is falling. Saying something isn't true doesn't make it so.
As its so difficult to work out what the statistics mean why not use factual figures that are undisputable. That is the number of people in prison.... The argument that they are locking up more minor offenders don't wash as the opposite seems true.
As our jails are full and they are even talking about building more to cope I can only presume the number of convicted criminals is on the rise!
As our jails are full and they are even talking about building more to cope I can only presume the number of convicted criminals is on the rise!
65% of people said they thought rates had gone up nationally. But the same proportion again thought crime had fallen locally.
In other words, people believe what they read in the papers rather than what they see with their own eyes (let alone what the government tells them). Exactly why are people so eager to believe everything they see in the papers and so eager NOT to believe politicians? Do they believe papers haven't got an agenda, or something?
In other words, people believe what they read in the papers rather than what they see with their own eyes (let alone what the government tells them). Exactly why are people so eager to believe everything they see in the papers and so eager NOT to believe politicians? Do they believe papers haven't got an agenda, or something?
1 to 18 of 18
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.