The Criminal States of America

Criminal Justice Degree Hub
Produced By Criminal Justice Degree Hub

America's Rap Sheet

Criminal Justice Degree Hub

"Gun deaths and injuries" is not equivalent to "crime"

Andrew Goddard (Colin's Dad)  Says:

OK folks, lets try to break one really bad habit: "gun deaths and injuries" is not equivalent to "crime". While many gun deaths and injuries are a result of crime or criminal acts, not all crimes are gun deaths and injuries. Crime rates, even violent crime rates, cannot be substituted in arguments for gun death or injury rates. GVP folks do NOT concentrate their efforts on crime, so why use that term in our arguments. Exit soapbox!

Another gun responsibility advocate responded:

I get that from the gun guys on my blog all the time. They try to send me links to articles about crime in general to prove some point. They don't get that we are talking about deaths and injuries. Or maybe they do. They just don't want to talk about that part of it.

Because if you add the "non-criminal" gun injuries and death--then the number skyrockets. It also puts paid to the things being "safe". But gun guys can't be serious saying that guns aren't dangerous/

Of course, some of the gun guys get the difference, but they don't have credible stats to use in their favour unless they stay with the broader "crime" category. On the other hand, people who want gun control don't give a damn if owning guns reduces bicycle theft or public graffiti etc. - it's the dead and injured that rile them!

Anyway, it's all semantics with the gun guys. Technically guns are not dangerous - if you put a gun in a metal cage it will sit there till it rusts away and never hurt anyone, so guns are not dangerous! Yes. that's a facile argument, because that is not how guns are used, but the gundamentalists will stand by that semantic argument.

The problem is that no matter how you want to try and change the topic: a firearm is a weapon with its purpose being to kill or cause serious bodily injury when used correctly.  If they were not lethal 9or at least harmful) there wouldn't be the power associated with the things.

False Argument: Gun Ownership is Up Therefore Crime is Down

Opposing Views

The number of violent crimes reported to police decreased 3.8 percent last year to 1.2 million, the fifth straight year of declines, the FBI announced Monday. 

Meanwhile, the total number of property crimes reported to law enforcement agencies went down by 0.5 percent to 9 million, the ninth consecutive year that figure has fallen.

The FBI’s data showed that the South accounted for 41.3 percent of violent crime, while the West accounted for 22.9 percent. The Midwest claimed 19.5 percent of the cases and the Northeast, 16.2 percent.

The pro-gun blogs are ablaze with a false interpretation of this report. Crime is down while gun ownership is up, they keep repeating. The obvious inference is that BECAUSE gun ownership is up, crime is down. Often it's more than an inference.

This is one of their fundamental misconceptions, the idea that more guns means less violence.

The proof of their fallacy is in the geographic breakdown. The South, which has a high concentration of gun ownership, accounts for 41% of the violent crime.  The Northeast, which has a much lower concentration of gun ownership, accounts for only 16.2%.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.

Self-policing and Crime at the Occupy Protests

This addresses the problems with homeless and drug addicts, others, who are NOT PART of the protests mingling with protesters. Some of the more pertinent sections are near the end.  Cross posted from Penigma.

From MSNBC.com:Sex assault arrest highlights security concerns at 'Occupy' protests

By Miranda Leitsinger, Senior Writer and Editor, msnbc.com

NEW YORK -- Highlighting growing security concerns at “Occupy” protests around the country, a 26-year-old man has been arrested and charged with sexual abuse of a woman at the encampment near Wall Street where the movement was born.
Tonye Iketubosin, a Brooklyn resident, was arrested late Tuesday and remained in custody Wednesday while the incident was investigated, police said. He had been working in the encampment's kitchen.
The Wall Street Journal reported that police were investigating an alleged attack by Iketubosin on an 18-year-old woman from Massachusetts. The woman told police she accepted his offer to let her sleep in his tent while he went to work at the kitchen early Saturday, but later returned and raped her, the newspaper quoted an unidentified law enforcement official as saying. Charges were pending.
Iketubosin allegedly groped a 17-year-old woman days before that incident, on Oct. 24. He has been charged with third-degree sexual abuse in that case, the newspaper reported.
Brendan Burke, 41, of Brooklyn, who helped start the “Occupy Wall Street” security team, said there had been three or four assaults since the protest began on Sept. 17 committed by two men.
In such cases, he said, protesters “go straight to the police.”
Burke said the security team, which consists of up to ten members and has help from outside groups to help keep the site safe, has non-violent measures for handling aggressors, including encircling them and shouting them down. A community watch group, akin to neighborhood watch, also monitors the site overnight, he said.
“People forget this is the middle of the street,” Burke said. “All walks of life are in here, so it’s not like a bunch of crazy people are in this park. But there is an element in this park that is eating free food, living in tents and being subsidized by the movement. It’s one of the weak parts of the movement, but it’s changing. … It’s just a thing everyone’s working out as we go along.”
He said the protesters attempt to integrate such interlopers into the movement when possible.
“We have also a track record of including troubled kids into the fray of working groups …  and  becoming part of the movement,” he said.
Protesters find allies in ranks of the wealthy
Security issues have bubbled up at some “Occupy” sites around the country in recent weeks.
“Occupy Boston” is looking at measures to deal with taking troublemakers out of the camp, protester Ravi Mishra, 25, said Tuesday. There have been no reports of sexual assault, though they have had to deal with people who are rowdy, drunk or have substance abuse problems, he said.
Some people who were not really a part of the movement have shown up and gotten “up to no good,” Mishra said.
“We’re doing our best to navigate, you know, both sides of the line,” he said. “On the one hand, we want to make sure that we’re not being exclusive by any means, on the other hand, we do understand that there is ... a degree of realism that we have to take with these issues.”
Old guard back in the trenches at "Occupy" protests
“Occupy Dallas” also has had a few security issues arise with people coming to the camp who were not associated with the movement, protester Michael Prestonise wrote in an email.
“Our position is one that might run counter to the continued accusations of our movement primarily consisting of hippies and freeloaders,” he said. “We actively work with the police to enforce the law.”
Prestonise said the protesters had dealt with theft by announcing stolen items at “general assemblies” and conducted their own investigations in some cases. A fire watch team also coordinates security and organizes shifts to maintain an all-night safety patrol, he said.
Both Occupy Boston and Wall Street have tents for women only. Burke said the camp is safe, but people should not think it’s a crime-free zone.
“There’s a myth about this … that it’s not every day America,” Burke said. “We’re just Americans doing our constitutional right. It doesn’t mean that there is a magic spell that will protect you from crime.”

So, who needs a gun?

An attempted rape of woman was stopped by ex-Marine in Queens. Ex-marine,Bryan Teichman, saw a man pulling his victim, an Asian woman in her 30s into some bushes off the Cross Island Parkway. Teichman yelled at the man to stop causing the suspect to flee.

Investigators described the suspect as white, between 45-50-years-old, standing about 5-foot-11 and weighing roughly 220-pounds with salt-and-pepper hair and was wearing denim shorts and a red t-shirt.

Teichman said he felt he did what anyone would do in that situation.

More CCTV, Less crime!

What if the solution to crime is simple and doesn't lead to accidental injury or death?

CCTV is beginning to proliferate in urban areas: whether they are governmental cameras, or ones owned by private citizens. In 2006, there was an estimated 4.2m CCTV cameras in Britain - about one for every 14 people. It was said that you couldn't travel across country without being on some form of CCTV.

And they are very useful at solving crimes. For example, the Rian Thal murder was caught on the CCTV cameras of her condo complex. The first arrest happened within 4 days of the crime. The crime was solved in a week.

Likewise, UK rioters were caught and prosecuted based upon CCTV footage.

My street has at least two privately owned cameras, which is why I am writing this. One of the cameras was useful in convicting the burglars who broke into another neighbour's house. There was a time stamped video of the crime.

What gets better is that cameras can send their images to multiple, remote locations. That means the robber would need to know where the remote locations were to prevent the video from being saved. CCTV footage that was saved remotely helped convict some crooked Philadelphia Cops.

Ultimately, it's hard to deny the photographic witness's testimony. And criminals hate witnesses.

Read more:

• Britain is 'surveillance society
• In the Petabyte Age of Surveillance, Software Polices
• Surveillance Society: New High-Tech Cameras Are Watching You

The Straight Dope: Have Great Britain's restrictive gun laws contributed to the rise in violent crime?

It should be noted that the methodologies in collecting crime statistics between the US and UK are different and do not have a 1:1 correlation. The latest British Crime Survey (BCS) said there had been a "notable" drop in theft, burglary and fraud.

From The Straight Dope

November 5, 2004

Dear Cecil:

I read an article claiming that as weapon-control laws in England become ever tighter, the crime rate is increasing--that over the past 80 or so years the British government has enacted policies making it harder for individuals to carry any kind of weapon for self-defense, with the result, it was claimed, that you are now six times more likely to be mugged in London than in New York. In addition, you can receive a stiff sentence for defending yourself even if a burglar has invaded your home. One case cited was that of Tony Martin, who lived alone in a rural area. He had been robbed six times before. Mr. Martin's home was broken into again, and he shot and killed one burglar and wounded the other. He was jailed for harming the burglars and later was denied parole because he posed a danger to burglars. Given that the author was an American, and the article in a somewhat conservative periodical, I wondered how much spin had been put on the facts. Is England indeed becoming a haven for burglars while aged pensioners cower in their cottages?

— ZCamelopardalis, via e-mail

Complicated topic. We proceed in our usual methodical manner:

(1) No doubt about it, crimewise the UK has pretty much gone to the dogs. Violent crime jumped by two-thirds between 1998 and 2003. Crime is higher in the UK than the U.S. in every category except rape and murder.

(2) Some say Britain's increase in crime is a result of disarming the populace. One advocate of this view is U.S. history professor Joyce Lee Malcolm, author of the article you saw as well as the book Guns and Violence: The English Experience (2002). Malcolm claims the British government has virtually eliminated the right to self-defense.

(3) Whatever Malcolm may think, there's no direct correlation between weapons restrictions and crime. As she points out, the UK began requiring gun permits in 1920 and in 1953 prohibited the carrying of concealed weapons, even things like Mace. While a slow rise in the UK crime rate began in the mid-1950s, the rate didn't increase sharply until the 80s. Handguns were banned altogether in 1997.

(4) The Tony Martin case, a cause celebre in Britain, may not be as clear-cut as some claim, but it's still pretty outrageous. The eccentric Martin lived in a dilapidated Norfolk farmhouse with only three rottweilers for company. One night in 1999 the place was broken into by Brendan Fearon, 29, and Fred Barras, 16, both of whom had long criminal records. Martin claims he heard a noise, grabbed a shotgun, headed downstairs, had a flashlight shone in his face, and began shooting. The following afternoon Barras was found dead in the garden; the wounded Fearon was arrested nearby. Martin was convicted of murder and given a mandatory life sentence, but an appeals court reduced the charge to manslaughter on grounds of mental illness. Martin was denied parole, in part because probation officers feared he would shoot additional burglars; he's out now. Fearon, who did time for burglary, was granted legal-aid funding to sue Martin, although the suit failed. OK, the burglars weren't armed, Martin had previously expressed a hatred of Gypsies (Barras was one), and Barras was shot in the back, but many Americans would say: Come on--it was dark and they were in the guy's house.

(5) Although it's an exaggeration to say there's no right to self-defense in Britain, the law there is more restrictive and, in contrast to typical U.S. practice, cuts you no slack if you're defending your home. UK householders who injure a home invader are often hauled up on charges (although they may be acquitted), whereas in the U.S. more commonly you'll get a pass. Malcolm claims that because UK crooks don't fear disarmed householders, half of burglaries there take place while someone is home, a much larger fraction than in the U.S. Not so--close analysis of the data suggests "hot" burglary rates in the two countries aren't dramatically different.

(6) Rising crime in Britain surely has a lot to do with the lousy economy. From 1974 to 1999 the UK unemployment rate averaged more than 10 percent. It's lower now, but a lot of antisocial behavior became entrenched during that time. Soccer hooliganism is one example; I'd say crime in general is another.

(7) A case can be made that folks in the UK are too nice for their own good. In reading parliamentary transcripts and such you're struck by how exasperatingly fair-minded and decent everyone is--not just the lefties, either. One detects little appetite for the draconian measures that some believe have reduced crime in the U.S., notably the harsh sentencing laws that have given us one of the highest imprisonment rates in the world. If present trends continue, though, no doubt the Brits will learn to be assholes just like us.

— Cecil Adams

British Crime Initiatives: the Knife exchange

WARNING--DO NOT WATCH IF EASILY OFFENDED!

This bulletin from The News At 4.37 introduces a brand new scheme which will eradicate knife crime forever. Weapons are exchanged for something a lot less harmful, but equally threatening...

Perhaps, the US can adopt a similar scheme for firearms.

I'm sure JadeGold would approve:

Why is Crime Dropping?

Link sent in by Laci the Dog

The BBC reports on ten possible explanations. Somehow they didn't even mention more guns equals less crime. Here's my favorite.

There is a controversial theory put forward by economist Steven Levitt that the increased availability of legal abortion after the Supreme Court ruling in 1973 on Roe v Wade meant that fewer children were born to young, poor, single mothers. This, says the theory, stopped unwanted babies in the 1970s and 80s from becoming adolescent criminals in the decades that followed. But some of his peers have questioned whether the evidence really supports the theory.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

Crime Rates Going Down

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/05/27/property-crimes-rise-in-places-you-wouldnt-expect/?ncid=webmail

For those of you who keep asserting you need to carry weapons because of crime.

Arnold Gettin' Tough on Crime

This is a good start. The only problem is gun availability continues. The last legitimate owner of those guns should be answering questions, hard questions.

Nearly 80 parolees were arrested and more than 20 weapons seized during what was billed Thursday as the largest sweep of its kind in the history of Los Angeles County.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

Las Vegas Undercover

Are police sting operations unfair to criminals? I mean, how far should the police be allowed to go to entice people to commit crimes?

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The Biggest Gangster

Meet Semion Mogilevich.

Arming the Teachers, That's the Answer (part II)

Today the New York Times reports on the situation in Harrold Texas. As we discussed before, teachers in the north-Texas town are encouraged to carry concealed weapons to class at the local high school. The driving force behind the program is David Thweatt, school superintendent.

The school board in this impoverished rural hamlet in North Texas has drawn national attention with its decision to let some teachers carry concealed weapons, a track no other school in the country has followed. The idea is to ward off a massacre along the lines of what happened at Columbine High School in Colorado in 1999.

Even in Texas, with its tradition of lenient gun laws and frontier justice, the idea of teachers’ taking guns to class has rattled some people and sparked a fiery debate.

“I’m not exactly paranoid,” Mr. Thweatt said. “I like to consider myself prepared.”

Some residents and parents, however, think Mr. Thweatt may be overstating the threat. Many say they rarely lock their doors, much less worry about random drifters with pistols running amok at the school. Longtime residents were hard-pressed to recall a single violent incident there.

The title of this post is slightly facetious. "Arming the teachers" is not what the school board is doing. (Thanks Nomen for pointing that out.) What they're doing is giving teachers who are already licensed to carry weapons permission to do so. There are even additional requirements placed upon them, special anti-ricocheting ammunition, special training by a private security company.

The point is that permitting the teachers to be armed, regardless of the probability of an attack, is sending the wrong message. It may work in the short run, but long term it will move us backwards to a time in our history when violence and lawlessness was the order of the day. It brings to mind visions of the old West in cowboy movies we all grew up with. Wasn't the answer to that chaotic period to introduce laws and law enforcement? Wasn't it to encourage education and cooperation? Wasn't it to move away from this very thing, everybody being armed and at the ready for a gunfight? Why would we want to move backwards towards the type of society we struggled to outgrow 150 years ago?

I'm wondering if it really is a macho thing. Anyone who's ever handled a gun, and liked it, can understand that there's a tremendously exhilarating sense of power involved. I say it's wrong to play with that power, to bring it into our daily lives. That's what we have law enforcement people for. We should keep the guns for hunting and target shooting and collecting, if that's what you like. But, bringing them into our everyday lives is only going to exacerbate the crime problem in the long run.

What do you think?