>Message: 1 >Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 17:29:45 -0600 >From: "Peter Boucher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Gun Crime Down in Britain
>http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crime/guncrime/index.html >"Contrary to public perception, the overall level of gun crime in this >country is relatively low - less than half of 1% of all crime recorded >by the police - and in the year ending 31 March 2003, there was: >* a 16% reduction in homicides involving firearms >* a 13% reduction in robberies involving firearms >Even so, we have seen an unacceptable rise in gun crime over recent >years, and are doing everything we can to tackle it. Why bother with expending specific effort on "gun crime" when it is already so low? The real question is what has happened to the overall violent crime rate. Criminals won't risk a stiff sentence for a "gun crime", if they know can get by without a gun. If most of citizenry is disarmed, then criminals have less need for a gun. Again the real question is, does a disarmed citizenry lead to more or less violent crime, everything else being equal? A related question is how much of this "gun crime" consists of violations of gun control laws, and not the use of a gun in what would otherwise still be a crime, such as robbery, unjustified homicide, rape, and so forth? Do real criminals end up pleading to a lesser charge (i.e. without the "gun" aspect), thus lowering the apparent "gun crime" rate, while otherwise peaceable citizens in violation of obscure "weapons laws" drive up the apparent "gun crime" rate? _______________________________________________ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
