We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
The ups and downs of murder Glenn Reynolds has an interesting article with links on violent crime. US murder rates have continued to drop over the last ten years and are now at the lowest seen since the 1960’s.
Meanwhile, as we have seen in the last week, murder in the UK has been skyrocketing. One of the linked articles also reports something many of us have predicted. If cheap guns cannot be bought, they will be manufactured.
It turns out that is exactly what is happening in the UK. It is not as if gunsmithing were a high technology endeavour. Is there anyone out there who truly believes hand-made items manufactured in 16th century London workshops cannot be built to much higher standards in a 21st Century London garage?
Where there is a customer, there’s a way.
PS: An interesting thought struck me whilst off in the shower… we may be on the verge of a new generation of experimental and creative armourers here in the UK.
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
My rough back of the envelope calculations still have the US rate at almost 4 times the all time high which, this year, will include all of Harold Shipman’s victims.
Gun crime has increased, and we are warned will have increased a little more in the current figures, but as a percentage of crime in the UK it is a very very low one, something like 0.01% of all reported crime. It makes the media though, which means we hear all about it.
This gun crime issue has popped up on a number of occassions. Does anybody have any reliable data comparing general murder rates, gun deaths and gun related crime statistics per 100,000 of population between the US, UK and Australia. Its hard to get a fair view on what is the media hype and what the reality is.
I’m certain there are such figures in the US, and that is what these trend figures are based on. The baselines for different countries may well be different even given the identical availability of identical weaponry. There are indeed cultural differences. Still the trends are important. UK murders have been going up drastically the last few years while those in the US have been falling.
To put this in perspective, the US levels are now down near those of when I was a teenager, at which time murder was something spectacular and more often seen on Perry Mason than in the Pittsburgh Press… and almost unheard of in my small home town of Coraopolis. The rates were even lower when I was a child. As I read it, the 40 year low puts it back to around the time at which some spectacular murders made the news. The Chicago nurses, the guy at the Texas tower…
It will be interesting to see if US rates continue to decline to those of the pre-1960’s. Crime and violence were very uncommon back then. Neighbors walked in your unlocked front door past the unremarkable gun cabinet in the livingroom or the hall way back in those times 🙂
I do regret I never get the Winchester .22 advertised in Boys Life back then…
The murder rate in the UK is IMHO mainly down to the policy of Diversity (of quality), that has claimed that we need to have compassion for those poor Jamaican gansta’s and their equal but different “culture”.
We have merely imported the problem. Another victory for communism-lite!
UK murders have been going up drastically the last few years while those in the US have been falling.
Drastically? They’ve leapt by over 200 in the last year but that was including all of Shipman’s victims over 15 years in one year’s figures. The trend has been up but I wouldn’t say it was drastic.
To put this in perspective, the US levels are now down near those of when I was a teenager, at which time murder was something spectacular and more often seen on Perry Mason than in the Pittsburgh Press…
To put it in perspective, those rates are still around 4 times the UK rate where murder is something spectacular and pretty much guarenteed to make the national news. A phemomina my wife found rather weird when she moved to the UK from RSA.
> I’m certain there are such figures in the US, and
> that is what these trend figures are based on.
> The baselines for different countries may well be
> different even given the identical availability of
> identical weaponry. There are indeed cultural
> differences. Still the trends are important. UK
> murders have been going up drastically the last
> few years while those in the US have been
> falling.
It seems to me as if American gun rights advocates are trying to have it both ways here. First they say higher homicide rates in the U.S. are not due to widespread gun use; they can be attributed to “cultural differences”. On the other hand, it’s always a sure sign gun control isn’t working when American crime rates are dropping while those of other many other Western nations are increasing!
—
From memory (=I used to argue this with Johann Opitz on the Usenet a decade ago), the main difference between the U.S. and other nations is the disproportionate number of people killed by guns. The number of people (per capita) stabbed or beaten to death was roughly the same in the U.S. as in Canada, Italy and other nations on the list. I’ll see if I can find the stats on my old hard drive somewhere…
MARCU$
Steve Bowles asks:
“This gun crime issue has popped up on a number of occassions. Does anybody have any reliable data comparing general murder rates, gun deaths and gun related crime statistics per 100,000 of population between the US, UK and Australia. Its hard to get a fair view on what is the media hype and what the reality is. ”
The best stats site is probably NationMaster.com, which inter alia contains comparable figures on crime thorughout the world.
Try it here. The only shortcoming in this otherwise excellent information source is that it does not (yet) contain trendlines.
Surry for this non sequitur party crash, Dale. But time is of the essence, and you can never trust email..
Could you have Perry contact me if he and Adriana would like a pow-wow with Alan Bock, and the rest of the editoral board at The Orange County Register. The US’s formost libertarian metropolitan daily newspaper.
If I’m going to make it happen, I have to get the gears turning in the next couple of days.
Sorry, the crime section of NationMaster.com is here.
Dale Amon argues that “murder in the UK has been skyrocketing.”
Well, scaremongering statistics may also have been ‘skyrocketing’!
The 64000 dollar question is really: who are the victims? Naturally, it is always a tragedy when innocent citizens are slain. However, not all citizens are innocent.
As long as most murderees are themselves low-life criminals (e.g. gang members), the murderers may actually be doing society a favour. At any rate, when one gang of thugs slays another gang of thugs, I take a little holiday in my heart.
In such cases, perhaps the killers should even be remunerated as bounty-hunters.
I’m less sanguine, and sanguinary, than Charles Copeland about gangland murders.
For gangsters murder is a means of competition and lifestyle choice–they are being rewarded for it already or they wouldn’t bother. There will be more where they came from while the conditions they thrive in continue.
However pleasing it is when a thug goes out of business–regardless of cause–gang murders are a symptom of gangsterism not a cure for it.
NationMaster.com is very interesting, thx for the link.
Comparing the US to the UK, looks like robberies per capita is about 25 percent or so higher than in the UK. And your almost twice as likely to be burgled in the UK than in the USA.
On the other hand the rapes per capita figures show the incidence of rape to be much higher in North America (0.32 per 1000 in the US, 0.75 per 1000 in Canada! and 0.14 per 1000 for the UK – which is the highest rape rate in Europe apparently). And the murder rate appears to be five times higher in the US than in the UK.
Seems to me the question is, then, are you willing to see a tiny murder rate double to a larger but still tiny figure, in exchange for a reduction in the rates of far more common but less serious crimes? Would you rather live in the US with a higher chance of being murdered or raped (but still a slim chance) or the UK where your more likely to be burgled (and the chance is high enough to be a problem for you personally)?
Are you a gambling man? 😉
Bleah, the robbery rate is 25 percent higher in the UK, not as written above.
Stepping away from the bong.
Here’s a list I dug from my files. It’s a few years old and comes from something called the CDC Survey – to my shame I can’t remember what the hell this body is, which rather detracts from its credibility, but the figures look believeable – and Dave will notice that they tend to support his position, at first sight…
The figs are gun deaths per 100,000 of population, and they include suicide & accidents – which in the UK account usually for something like 55% of gun-related deaths.
United States 14.24
Brazil 12.95
Mexico 12.69
Estonia 12.26
Argentina 8.93
Northern Ireland 6.63
Finland 6.86
Switzerland 5.31
France 5.15
Canada 4.31
Norway 3.82
Austria 3.70
Portugal 3.20
Israel 2.91
Belgium 2.90
Australia 2.65
Slovenia 2.60
Italy 2.44
New Zealand 2.38
Denmark 2.09
Sweden 1.92
Kuwait 1.84
Greece 1.29
Germany 1.24
Hungary 1.11
Ireland 0.97
Spain 0.78
Netherlands 0.70
Scotland 0.54
England/Wales 0.41
Taiwan 0.37
Singapore 0.21
Mauritius 0.19
Hong Kong 0.14
South Korea 0.12
Japan 0.05
Some would say the very low Japanese figure supports their policy of extremely stringent gun control, amounting almost to a total ban; but there’s N.Ireland right up close to the top, and of course NI’s controls are in most ways even more onerous than in mainland UK.
The article linked to from Instapundit is, interestingly, from The Guardian – one of the most shrill & insistent voices for banning handguns following Dunblane, and one of many who insisted that taking handguns away from the law-abiding would mysteriously take them “off the street,” or “out of circulation”, even though the number of legally-owned guns stolen was and remains very small, with an even smaller number subesequenly being used in crime. Subsequently of course, such media voices and politicians engaged in post hoc modification of their statements, and said they never actually predicted a fall in gun crime, simply that the ban would stop something like Dunblane happening again…
Dave is right to point out that UK gun crime should be viewed in the context of a society that is thankfully largely free of armed crime, but he cannot deny its having substantially increased; the Guardian’s “10,000 firearms incidents” includes an awful lot of trivia, such as kids waving toy guns, cats being wounded with air rifles and so on; but it’s a fact that as gun control laws have tightened, gun crime has increased many times over in less than a century.
As for DIY guns, I suspect the article exaggerates: there are huge numbers of illegal guns around, many of them from former WarPac nations, and restoring blank-firers or deactivated guns is no simple task. However, as CNC machine tools get more sophisticated and cheaper, they’re going to nullify gun laws increasingly…
To get a real look at crime in the US you may have to go to a state by state comparison, since sentencing and gun laws vary considerably. Also it’s hard to get statistics on crimes prevented by legal gun carriers.
I’m not to sure that you are going to see a marked increase in underground arms manufacturing in the UK. The world is awash in pistols and there is an awful lot of coastline. Generally if you can get drugs in, you can get arms in. It’s kind of a three corner trade, money for drugs for guns for money, etc. At least this was the way it was in Houston during the 80’s. As a side note, some consider it easier to make a submacine gun from scratch than a pistol.
Last Toryboy picks up an example that shows why one has to be cautious with crime statistics.
Rape in the US is often treated very differently from here: a substantial proportion of their rape convictions are for “statutory rape” where one party is underage (18 in most states) but actually consenting. Normal behaviour can put you in jail for a long time, if you are unlucky with your jurisdiction.
Policy here (though it seems to be becoming more severe under pressure of the paedophile panic) and in most of Europe, is not to charge such cases unless there’s a complainant potential victim or other circumstances–such as a big age difference or relationship implying other influence–that might lead one to doubt willing consent.
Given that cultural factors also influence complaints, and the States is such a varied place, it’s pretty hard to compare one’s risks with the UK, however the crime is defined.
Murder (or perhaps murder plus manslaughter) is a little easier to compare, since there’s somewhat less room for doubt whether death has occurred.
Dale,
As regards the point you make that “US murder rates have continued to drop over the last ten years and are now at the lowest seen since the 1960’s.”
One fascinating explanation is that growth in abortion rates may be one of the main causes, gruesome though it may be. The hypothesis was first advanced by leading US economist Steven Levitt in 1999. See his discussion on Salon with VDARE’s Wunderkind Steve Sailer here.
BTW, for more brilliant Steve Sailer stuff, go here.
Tony H,
The ‘CDC survey’ you refer to is probably the work of the Centres for Disease Control. But the NationMaster.com data are far more exhaustive and reliable. Here are the murder per capita rates data (sorry about the indentation) for the top 62 countries:
1. Colombia 0.65 per 1000 people
2. South Africa 0.5 per 1000 people
3. Jamaica 0.33 per 1000 people
4. Venezuela 0.33 per 1000 people
5. Russia 0.2 per 1000 people
6. Mexico 0.13 per 1000 people
7. Lithuania 0.1 per 1000 people
8. Estonia 0.1 per 1000 people
9. Latvia 0.1 per 1000 people
10. Belarus 0.1 per 1000 people
11. Ukraine 0.09 per 1000 people
12. Papua New Guinea 0.09 per 1000 people
13. Kyrgyzstan 0.09 per 1000 people
14. Thailand 0.08 per 1000 people
15. Zimbabwe 0.08 per 1000 people
16. Zambia 0.08 per 1000 people
17. Moldova 0.08 per 1000 people
18. Seychelles 0.07 per 1000 people
19. Costa Rica 0.06 per 1000 people
20. Poland 0.06 per 1000 people
21. Georgia 0.05 per 1000 people
22. Uruguay 0.05 per 1000 people
23. United States 0.05 per 1000 people
24. Bulgaria 0.04 per 1000 people
25. Armenia 0.04 per 1000 people
26. Yemen 0.04 per 1000 people
27. India 0.04 per 1000 people
28. Azerbaijan 0.03 per 1000 people
29. Finland 0.03 per 1000 people
30. Dominica 0.03 per 1000 people
31. Slovakia 0.03 per 1000 people
32. Romania 0.03 per 1000 people
33. Portugal 0.02 per 1000 people
34. Malaysia 0.02 per 1000 people
35. Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of 0.02 per 1000 people
36. Mauritius 0.02 per 1000 people
37. Hungary 0.02 per 1000 people
38. Korea, South 0.02 per 1000 people
39. Slovenia 0.02 per 1000 people
40. Iceland 0.02 per 1000 people
41. France 0.02 per 1000 people
42. Czech Republic 0.02 per 1000 people
43. Australia 0.02 per 1000 people
44. Canada 0.02 per 1000 people
45. Chile 0.02 per 1000 people
46. United Kingdom 0.01 per 1000 people
47. Italy 0.01 per 1000 people
48. Spain 0.01 per 1000 people
49. Germany 0.01 per 1000 people
50. New Zealand 0.01 per 1000 people
51. Tunisia 0.01 per 1000 people
52. Netherlands 0.01 per 1000 people
53. Norway 0.01 per 1000 people
54. Denmark 0.01 per 1000 people
55. Ireland 0.01 per 1000 people
56. Indonesia 0.01 per 1000 people
57. Switzerland 0.01 per 1000 people
58. Greece 0.01 per 1000 people
59. Hong Kong 0.01 per 1000 people
60. Japan 0.01 per 1000 people
61. Saudi Arabia 0 per 1000 people
62. Qatar 0 per 1000 people
Source: NationMaster.
Charles, your data has Saudi Arabia, home of honor killings and other savory practices, as 0 per 1000. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA…why is it again that this data is better?
Tell you what. I’ll keep my guns and you British keep your total handgun ban. I wager you will suffer from violent crime–and remain a victim.
I’ll not deny there’s been an increase in gun crime, which must be adjusted for “fake” incidents like Tony mentions and the real stuff.
I suspect that the increase, however, would have occured with or without the Dunblane ban which was a typically silly piece of “popular” politics.
Of course, the regulations places on handguns before the ban were pretty severe and I understand there were only 50,000 registered handgun owners in the UK, including, AFAIR, Thomas Hamilton.
Gun crime has increased, I suspect, because the supply has increased in conjunction with prohibition on drugs. Dealing with that would help dramatically, I suspect it would also affect petty robbery theft rates too.
Afred, NationMaster’s absolute figures for Saudi Arabia were 105 murders for the year 2000. I suppose honor killings aren’t included. And no doubt for 2001 they will have omitted the World Trade Center.
If you have any better sources than mine, I’d be delighted to learn about them.
Source: NationMaster.
Charles,
Do you have a view on whether firearm usage among (mostly young) black criminals is the product of a particular social pathology, normally considered Jamaican in origin, or of the known high propensity towards violence in black populations in general? I half suspect that the Jamaican drug trade is no more than the conduit into society for what, in any case, was bound to develop in time. But I am conscious that this is a speculative position and may be unsafe.
It’s quite possible that the majority of honor killings aren’t committed with guns. None of the honor killing cases I’ve read about were gun related.
CBK
According to the US Department of Justice, the US homicide rate hit a big peak in 1933 – the last year of Prohibition – and thereafter declined precipitously even though the US economy remained firmly in the toilet.
The Prohibition peak was almost indistinguishable from those occuring in 1980 and 1991.
Murder rate graph here
The more recent dropoff, of course, can’t be explained by the end of the new Prohibition, since, of course, that hasn’t yet occured. I’d pin it down to increased incarceration rates and liberalized concealed carry laws. But, it’s definitely worth trying since it may produce additional drops, and finally enable people to live in cheaper neighborhoods without risking their lives.
Trying to tease me, Guessedworker?
Well, I can never resist the bait, so here goes …
Very briefly, young male Jamaicans are presumably “reverting to type” when they pursue a career of crime. My hypothesis is that as long as they constitute a small minority in a basically Caucasian society, their more civilised Western environment probably has a decriminalising effect on their behaviour. But once a certain ‘critical mass’ is reached, their propensity to crime may skyrocket. Hope I’m not bullshitting.
Recommended reading:
J. Philippe Rushton’s “Race and crime – an international dilemma”: here.
John Woods’ “Race and criminal cowardice”: here.
Guessedworker,
I’m counting that as a troll by proxy… I don’t know whether to applaud or boo.
As an individual, the more crime I see around me, the more likely I would like to legally own and carry a gun. Not [i]less[/i].
A great many Americans like guns. A great many Americans take the Bill of Rights very seriously, including the 2nd Amendment, or especially the 2nd Amendment, as the case may be.
A great many Americans are a little rough around the edges, and do not think a forceful reaction to certain provocations is wrong. A great many Americans tolerate a level of crime above that of more controlled societies because they will not accept the controls in the first place.
A great many Americans who believe that force is acceptable under certain circumstance join our armed forces. A great many Americans would agree with the idea expressed in the phrase, “No worse enemy, no better friend, than a US Marine.”
A great many Americans have tried, some unto death, to explain all this to you before. A great many Americans will, if push comes to shove, be happy to explain it to you again, if necessary.
A great many Americans truly do hope you have been paying attention, this time.
A troll, Guy? I thought libertarians defended all freedom of speech.
The question is: are we discussing the inefficacy of the post-Hungerford legislation or the current upsurge in gun crime. If it’s the latter, the principal issue is drug violence aka Jamaican violence aka black violence. On that basis I don’t think I’m trolling at all. And, judging from the delightful equivalence in your comment, neither do you.
Charles,
I had read John Wood’s piece but didn’t bookmark it. I am very pleased to read it again. Many thanks for that.
The big one, of course, is: will our Afro-Caribbean population develop a similar incidence of criminality to Afro-Americans? John Wood clearly indicates that this is already in the making. Assuming that gun culture spreads beyond its Jamaican origins we will witness an ineluctable slide into increasing and increasingly vicious crime by black perps. In that event, repeal of the post-Hungerford legislation will have no useful purpose beyond pleasing libertarians and shooting folk. But the American experience descibed by Glen Reynolds is a potential beacon of hope.
As Palmerston said, lies, damn lies, and statistics. I was wondering how Canada’s rape rate was so absurdly high, it wasnt exactly something I figured was a problem in Canada…
A friend of mine recently theorized that a good deal of the reduction in the US gun homicide rate is due to the reduction in the fatality rate (29% drop 1993-1998, according to http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5002a1.htm), much of which is in turn attributable to the spread of well-equipped trauma centers in urban areas. IOW, the story is really more people are surviving being shot, not fewer people being shot. That’s not entirely true, as far as I can tell from the cdx report, since the non-fatal rate also dropped, but it does seem to be part of the story.
American gun crime statistics are unreliable since they have been spun by the gun control lobby. It is note worthy to note that areas with strict gun control laws have much higher rates of crime commited with guns, and higher murder rates than areas that have right to carry permits.
In the UK the issue shouldn’t focus on murders but rather crime with guns. This rate has skyrocketed to the point where you have a higher rate in London (per 100,000) than in law abbiding, peace loving NYC (or Soddom on the Hudson).
Most Brits who visit me here are amazed that the right to own weapons is just that a right. It is not a priveledge given by the government. One lesson of the revolution was that if the people are not armed the government can do anything. Besides, what sort of government fears weaspons in the hands of its citizens. Certainly Hitler and Stalin did.
> A friend of mine recently theorized that a good
> deal of the reduction in the US gun homicide rate
> is due to the reduction in the fatality rate (29%
> drop 1993-1998,
> much of which is in turn attributable to the
> spread of well-equipped trauma centers in urban
> areas. IOW, the story is really more people are
> surviving being shot, not fewer people being shot.
Sounds a lot like the Finnish situation to me. Over here, most homicide victims are stabbed to death. There has been a slight reduction in knife related homicides since the mid-1990s, but this is only because the doctors are able to save more lives.
> American gun crime statistics are unreliable
> since they have been spun by the gun control
> lobby.
As if the National Rifle Association’s spin-meister statisticians were any better… The real problem, though, is isolating the impact of gun-related law x from the countless other factors which affect crime rates. For example, it is often being claimed that conservative “get tough on crime” policies are responsible for the drop in crime rates, yet Japanese crime rates are much, much lower yet they have far fewer police officers on the street. Does this mean the U.S. should put a few unarmed smiling policemen in kiosks in Watts and Harlem, like the Japanese do in Tokyo? Of course not.
—
Guns are actually quite common in Finland (more than 3 million firearms in a country of 5 million). Obtaining a legal permit isn’t that hard if you want to (simply join a shooting club) yet gun related crime rates aren’t high because we do not have the same “gun culture” as in the States.
> It is note worthy to note that areas with strict
> gun control laws have much higher rates of
> crime commited with guns, and higher murder
> rates than areas that have right to carry permits.
Again, you have to look at demographic factors. Crime rates in DC would hardly be the same as in rural Virginia even if the same permissive gun ownership standards were in universal use. I understand there is a significant difference between Vancouver and Seattle, Toronto and Detroit in terms of gun-related deaths. The Canadians attribute this to strict gun laws (gun checks at the border?) but there may be other contributing factors.
> One lesson of the revolution was that if the
> people are not armed the government can do
> anything.
You mean like in Iraq? It seems firearms have always been common there, yet it sure didn’t prevent Saddam from rising to power.
MARCU$
For a better example of how gun ownership is no Holy Grail as far as cutting crime is concerned, I direct you to Africa, where kids with undescended testicles have AK47s, ideal for Home DeeFence.
Africa is not a model of law and order.
I personally am inclined to think that gun control has a negligible effect on crime rates, when compared with other, more important factors. Like a competent, respected police force.
Since Africa was brought up, I would like to point out that if African-Americans were removed from the homicide statistics, or indeed if they had the same homicide rates as others in the US, our statistics would be quite close to the UK’s. For instance, blacks in the US only comprise about 12 to 13 percent of the population, but are responsible for fully half of the homicides. Correcting the homicide problem in that demographic alone would go a long way to reducing the homicide rate in the US.
This points out the main problem with gun control in general: It isn’t about the guns, homicide and crime in general are in a large part cultural. Those of Japanese extraction in the US have murder rates similar to their bretheren in Nippon, despite enjoying MUCH greater access to firearms. Similarly, those of European descent in the US have rates basically similar to that of their counterparts in Europe.
Blacks in America may or may not have similar rates to those in Africa (it is notoriously hard to get good crime statistics from that continent), but at least part of the problem has to be attributable to a violent inner-city culture, exacerbated by the drug trade.
As for making firearms by hand, it really isn’t that hard. It can be done completely by hand (my father once built a flintlock completely with hand tools, using no prefabricated parts, just to see if he could do it), and is still done that way in parts of Pakistan and Afghanistan. If you have access to a drill press, a grinder, and a bandsaw, quite a serviceable firearm can be made. If you want to get fancy, having a lathe helps. Only basic metalworking skills are needed. And, of course, in the final analysis all it takes to turn a shotgun into a very lethal handgun is a hacksaw.
ToryBoy
Whether or not (widespread) gun ownership might be effectual in cutting crime – not many people think of it as a Holy Grail, surely – comparisons with Africa are not very useful. Africa is an anarchic basket case beset by tribalism, and its social conditions are not to be compared with W.Europe or N.America. I agree with your belief that gun control probably has a negligible effect re gun crime – cf my brief summary (above) of the conclusions drawn by investigations in three jurisdictions into its effectiveness.
How do you propose to institute a “competent, respected police force” and what conditions might it have to meet in order to have a significant effect on crime?
Tony,
How about considering a modern first world city like Johanesburg, most of the population are armed for protection. I’d certainly want a gun if we moved there or Durban.
That doesn’t, however, seem to affect crime rates. Most of the people I know put more faith in a private armed tactical team and improved home security.
Well Dave, I recommend you subscribe to that excellent S.African firearms journal “Magnum” for frequent updates on the state of play re gun controls, defensive use of sidearms in Jo’burg (& elsewhere), and so on. Interesting stuff, if scary: on the one hand there are large numbers of ex-terrorists (Whoops! that’s “freedom fighters”) who are heavily armed with automatic weapons, and who seem to account for an awful lot of the violent crime, and the regime seems unable or unwilling to deal with them firmly. On the other, there is continuing pressure from the SA government to restrict gun-ownership rights by the largely white & Asian property-owning and business classes. It’s sort of a gross caricature of the UK situation, with criminals having ready access to (illegal) firearms while the law-abiding types are hampered at every turn.
Yes, I know Jo’burg residents especially tend to occupy fortified homes – though this often fails to help them against determined assailants – but large numbers of SA citizens, in the city and the country, rely upon weaponry to defend themselves against the violent banditry that plagues them.
Anyway, as I said, Africa – even these relatively “civilised” bits – bears litle relation to our own relatively peaceable territory.
I think “regime” is a hard word for one of the few actually elected governments in Africa that has actually been through 2 peaceful democratic power transfers. Short term the place is a mess, long term, my wife and I are thinking of buying a second home there – I wouldn’t mind something near the Cape.
The key thing is even a well armed population, generally well trained in using arms (the majority of white males over 28 will have been in the military) can’t stop determined criminals. Given the mix of crime in the UK I can’t see an armed population making much of a positive difference.
Bill,
You’ve made my earlier point much more effectively than I managed to do.
I don’t think anyone is in a position to fully answer your interesting question as to whether Afro-American lethality equates to or refers genetically to its sub-Saharan African concomitant. There are two variables that frustrate a definitive conclusion.
The first is that Afro-Americans have, for well-understood reasons, a substantial loading of European genes. Among hereditarians these are considered the primary explanation for their higher average IQ. Anyone seeking to make a genetic reference, therefore, between murder rates in black America and, say West Africa must make due allowance.
Secondly, cultural forms that developed over tens of millenia in West Africa are the true expression of its population’s physical and psychological adaptation to that very part of the world. It is to be expected that this population, removed not only to a different environment but into the culture of a profoundly different people, will exhibit social pathologies.
Dave,
Don’t do it. The Cape is stunning, it’s true. But the only two friends I have there have been, respectively, held at gun point by black assailants three times and twice.
My personal experience runs very counter to some of these comments. I have worked, lived and partied with Carribean immigrants in NYC who became US citizens. They are some of the hardest working, smartest, entrepreneurial people I’ve dealt with.
Particularly the Haitians. One generation and they are becoming doctors, lawyers, scientists, heads of business’s…
Dale,
That is why any hereditarian will stress the variations within races. The issue is not one of individuals but of races and of averages.
That said, the issue of race is central to the issue of rising gun crime. You cannot dispute Home Office statistics and, if you hve not already done so, I urge you to check out Charles Copeland’s excellent link to that effect.
Guessed,
That is, sadly a fact of life across South Africa. Why my wife and about a million others have got out of dodge over the last decade.
OTOH you can minimise your risks. But unlike the UK, it is a place I *would* consider owning guns.
I went to both the sites listed by Charles Copeland and the information was shocking, but completely consistent with my anecdotal experience. There is a libertarian answer to this which we can gin up to fit the liberal penchant for group responsibility. Let’s slap a tax on any community who has a crime level greater than the national norm! The libs want group rights; let’s give them group responsibilities as well. Then libertarians will have a reason to applaud the collection of information on race and the people who would be suffering from the extra taxation might have a greater incentive to a) do what they could to diminish their racial group’s crime stats, and b) think about moving someplace else where they don’t get hit with collective responsibility for their racial group’s antisocial activities.
err, looks like this is getting to be a dangerous topic of conversation, in a world where black masking tape is deemed racist, therefore must be renamed pvc insulating tape, one must be very wary of racist *implications*, whether intended or not, there are laws, and with them lawyers.
I noticed Bill asking for comparisons between inner-city USA and Africa in murders. I have some here between similar-sized cities in the US, South Africa and Latin America:
Los Angeles, USA (Pop. 3.7m) 656
Chicago, USA (Pop. 2.8m) 645
Durban, South Africa (Pop. 3.2m) 2,178
Cape Town, South Africa (Pop. 3.0m) 2,541
Caracas, Venezuela (Pop. 4.6m) 2,335
Cali, Colombia (Pop. 2.6m) 2,661
Medellin, Colombia (Pop. 2.8m) 4,933 (gargantuan!!!!!!)
Per 100,000:
Los Angeles 17
Chicago 23
Durban 68
Cape Town 84
Caracas 50
Cali 102
Medellin 176
I compared cities which are within twice the population of each other for genuine accuracy. For example, Washington D.C has often been claimed to have a higher/similar murder rate to that of Rio de Janeiro but Rio is 20 times the size of D.C.!!!! What I’m saying is that, although they have had a similar murder rate over the last dozen or so years, the most dangerous parts of Rio are much more violent than the worst parts of Washington.
One only has to compare the level of mass-killing in Rio (relatively well reported by Latin American standards) to that of Washington. Washington simply doesn’t compare, which is why I use the criteria I mentioned above. The bigger a populace, the more likely a murder rate will level out. Sorry if I waffled on a bit, I hope it helps.
Looking through the comments, what was all that rubbish about the US marines? They’re not particularly well-trained or lethal troops at all. Anyway the statistics above were all from 2002. There’s a lot of rubbish about America and how bad crime, gun violence etc. is (Los Angeles in particular has an absurd reputation). True, the murder levels are a lot better than 10 or 12 years ago but are they still amongst the worst in the world? Here’s the peak statistics for some similar-sized cities:
Los Angeles, USA (1992, Pop. 3.4m) 1,095 (32 Per 100,000)
Chicago, USA (1992, Pop. 2.7m) 943 (34 Per 100,000)
Cape Town, South Africa (2002, Pop. 3.0m) 2,541 (84 Per 100,000)
Durban, South Africa (1994, Pop. 2.6m) 2,969 (114 Per 100,000)
Cali, Colombia (1994, Pop. 2.0m) 3,149 (157 Per 100,000)
Medellin, Colombia (1992, Pop. 2.1m) 6,804 (324 Per 100,000)
I’m curious about Durban’s figures though, until I acquired these figures recently I always got the impression that Durban’s murder rate went up since 1994 not down! Also it’s apparent that historically, Durban is clearly more violent than Cape Town yet CT has a far worse reputation! Anyway Medellin is and always has been the world’s most violent city by a significant margin.
Also reading through the comments I would like to say that South Africa and many Latin American countries have much higher murder levels with, or without, firearms. The comparison between the US and Brazil in particular was very inaccurate. Sorry if I’m boring you. Thanks.
Guessedworker:
What the fuck? How do completely African people who live in North America have any European genes? Thats the first screwy thing i saw about your comment. And the second thing, even if they did, how would you say that it makes them smarter just because they have European genes? Try and show me even one study that says Europeans are smarter than Africans… Don’t even try and bring up phrenology, it was proven false over a century ago. So… what the hell do you mean by this? Even if what you said was true, Africans with their so called ‘less iq’ than African Americans commit less murders anyhow. Shouldn’t ‘smarter’ people know not to kill?
“In the UK the issue shouldn’t focus on murders but rather crime with guns. This rate has skyrocketed to the point where you have a higher rate in London (per 100,000) than in law abbiding, peace loving NYC (or Soddom on the Hudson).”
Do I detect sarcasm? Because crime in New York is as low as it was in the ’60s. It’s not just statistics; the level of safety is tangible even in neighborhoods that were considered off-limits only a decade or so ago. It’s not 1991 anymore.
P.S.: There’s only one “D” in “Sodom.” Why do so many fundies like to relate to allude to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah when they can’t spell the names of one, or even either, city?
At the end of the day, far more people are still murdered with guns in New York than in London every year (about 8 times as many I believe). These are two cities that are similar in size. The reality is that New Yorkers are far less likely to report incidents with guns that don’t involve death because they’re used to much higher levels of violence.
Being held up and robbed with a ‘gun’ without a shot being fired simply isn’t a big deal in NY – it is in London. It amazes me at how many people just go along with the ‘London is more dangerous and has more gun crime than NY’ argument.