WTF?--- News hot off the press that makes you say--- WTF?

[CiaranM]

now maybe i'm f**king missing something, but didn't this c*nt Polanski ply a 13 year old girl with alcohol and drugs and then rape her up the a*s ???

so why exactly should they not sling this f**king child rapist into jail ??

Not that I defend the guy, but the victim (now a happily married mother of 3) dropped the charges long ago after a settlement and doesn't want to go through the publicity of a trial, for the sake of family and herself.

not to judge her motives but she has settled some time ago for undisclosed damages in a civil case !!!!

also the action is not being taken by the girl (now a woman), but by the state !!

also there is no need for another trial as he has already pleaded gulity to sex with a minor .... however he might have to stand trail for breaching bail and refusing to attend his court case.

[bigKus]

Thai bride of tax advisor who stole £2m from old woman gambles it away

William Franklin, a tax advisor who stole more than £1.8million from an elderly woman, lost most of it when his Thai bride gambled it away in Bangkok.

Read more

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/6232754/Thai-bride-of-tax-advisor-who-stole-2m-from-old-woman-gambles-it-away.html

[Dave40]

Gary Glitter had talent?????????????????????????????

Rock N Roll Part 2

[LakeGeneve]

Pretty sad indictment for the future.

Abuse of elderly on the rise 1/10/2009

Abuse of the elderly is reaching alarming levels with their children and their children's spouses making up the main culprits, a study has found. The Social Development and Human Security Ministry yesterday reported on a Prachabodi Centre survey, saying it was likely the children were unaware of what they were doing.

The survey of 50,058 senior citizens aged over 60 found 37% were physically abused by their own children. The children's spouses abused another 30% and other relatives were responsible for 13% of the attacks. The children were guilty of 36% of the incidents of mental abuse, followed by relatives with 25% and government officials with 3%.

The survey was undertaken to raise awareness of senior citizens ahead of International Day for the Elderly today.

The Prachabodi Centre, which comes under the ministry, set up a hotline in 2005 for people to report abuse.

Almost 7,000 of 80,000 problems reported to the centre related to the elderly. "More than 90% of the cases were reported by their neighbours, and most old people had experienced some form of abuse at home by their children," centre chief Jeerawat Chanhom said.

Suvinee Wivatvanit, of the nursing faculty at Chulalongkorn University, said many people were not aware of the problems facing their ageing parents with some even denying the problems existed. "The elderly mostly suffer mental abuse such as being insulted and threatened in ways that cause emotional pain, followed by the feeling they are being neglected," Ms Suvinee said.Her studies found the main problems encountered by the elderly are ignorance by children, sexual harassment, theft and physical and mental abuse.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/24808/abuse-of-elderly-on-the-rise

[LakeGeneve]

:shock:

AUSTRALIA INNINGS (target 258)

1745: Sorry, that last comment bigging up Clarke, Haddin, Bracken and Symonds was from Kevin in Oz, not Matt in Preston. England's team is out on the field, but so are a huge number of flying ants (they look like months, but Simon Mann on TMS assures us they're flying ants. (Collective noun for a large number of flying ants, anyone?) The Aussie batsmen take one look at the situation, and after speaking to the umpires, everyone walks off! I can't believe my eyes -

FLYING ANTS STOP PLAY!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/cricket/england/8279351.stm

[GoodKarma]

Strong alcoholic drinks to be banned at Russia's duty free shops. - pravda

Russian law-enforcement agencies start to get involved in the anti-alcohol campaign, which President Dmitry Medvedev announced. The sales of strong alcohol beverages at bars and restaurants of Moscow airports will be banned. Prosecutors will probably ban the sales of alcohol at duty free stores ? they are currently looking for legal reasons to substantiate the endeavor, The Vedomosti newspaper wrote.

Law-enforcement agents have become frequent guests at restaurants and bars of Moscow airports recently. They visit the shops for inspections making references to the Law about the State Control of Production and Circulation of Alcohol. Article 16 of the law bars the sale of alcohol beverages (stronger than 15 percent) in public places and in places containing sources of heightened danger, to which airport particularly refer.

The inspections are finished at Sheremetyevo Airport, but continue at Domodedovo and Vnukovo. Restaurants have 60 days to correct their mistakes. If the sale of strong alcohol continues, the shops will be closed for three months.

Prosecutors do not mind limiting alcohol sales at duty free stores, but they have not found the legal reasons for it yet. Selling alcohol on board passenger liners is not forbidden, they are not included on the list of places of public gatherings and sources of heightened danger.

Dmitry Medvedev stated August 12 that he was gasping at the number of bottles of vodka which the Russians drink. He said that he was going to struggle against drunkenness in Russia, although, he added, he would not be practicing ?foolish bans.?

Russian deputies have already prepared a package of anti-alcohol bills that is ready to be submitted to the State Duma. However, the authorities have not offered anything serious. Several Federation Council officials only said that the government could restrict the sale of alcohol to pregnant women, require IDs when selling alcohol to young people, or ban the sale of alcohol to those individuals who look like alcohol addicts

[beej]

Russians are going to REALLY ******* love that!!!!!

[beej]

Russians are going to REALLY ******* love that!!!!!

[GoodKarma]

Russians are going to REALLY f*cking love that!!!!!

im sure they will beej..some things you read just seem surreal when I read this article -- it didn't seem real or register-- this is happening in russia of all places...lol.. :idea:

-------------------------

-------------------------

Former radio exec. wins lotto prize during embezzlement case. -Kansas city.com

The Associated press

A former Kansas radio executive who admitted that he embezzled to support an addiction to scratch-off lottery tickets won a $96,000 lottery prize.

Prosecutors say the prize money will go toward paying restitution to Paul W. Lyle's former employer, American Media Investments.

Lyle pleaded guilty Thursday to felony theft for embezzling an estimated $88,000 from American Media.

It was during his preliminary hearing Sept. 21 that Lyle was notified he had won a prize in a second-chance lottery drawing. The prize includes a boat, cash and tickets to a NASCAR race at the Kansas Speedway.

Lyle will be sentenced Nov. 30.

His conviction carries a sentencing range of five to 17 months in jail or prison. But prosecutors say Lyle likely will get probation because he has no previous felony convictions.

Recording womens rears is not necessarily illegal in Florida. - Tampa Bay online

TAMPA - Krishna Ajvalia told Hillsborough County Sheriff's deputies he just couldn't resist recording women inside a Tampa Target store last month.

Security cameras recording inside the store on Sept. 10 show Ajvalia, 30, hiding his video camera inside his jacket while he follows behind women, shooting their backsides.

"I saw a couple of decent looking women and had this feeling come over me. I got like a drunk feeling and I couldn't control myself," Ajvalia told deputies in a statement.

One woman, talking on a cell phone, is oblivious that's she's being recorded by Ajvalia, who is standing just feet away.

Assistant State Attorney Pam Bondi called his actions "reprehensible."

"It's clear from watching the first woman, that she didn't know that she was being videoed by this guy," said Bondi. "It's a shame you can't just be shopping in a store and feel secure, that you have to look behind you for a person like that."

Security staff inside the Target on Bruce B. Downs noticed Ajvalia inside the store and called the sheriff's office.

Deputies arrested Ajvalia for video voyeurism, but the charges were later dropped. Bondi said his actions do not meet Florida's voyeurism statute.

"To be a crime, the filming must be done in a place where someone would have an expectation of privacy, such as a bathroom or a dressing room, or the filming must be done through or underneath someone's clothing," she said.

Alyssa Zavaglia is a senior at the University of South Florida. She shops at that Target location at least once a week. She said she's surprised to learn videotaping without permission is legal.

[Bruce551]

Dangerous waters?

Published: 4/10/2009 at 12:00 AM

Newspaper section: News, Postbag

The article in last Sunday's Spectrum, ''A shift of focus in Pattaya'', is yet another rosy portrayal and whitewash of the real Pattaya. I was treated for two eye infections after swimming in waters off Pattaya beaches. The doctor who treated me said she treats two or three patients a day, locals and tourists alike, for the same problem.

The water is so polluted and the bacteria count so high that she wonders why no one does anything about it.

I trained a pair of binoculars on a few boats offshore at night from a friend's beachfront condo - both fishing and pleasure craft. The people on these boats throw bags of garbage overboard, within 500 metres of the beach. These plastic bags sink to the bottom. Some break, depositing their trash along the beach. Others stay on the bottom, and stepping on them is a most revolting experience.

Complaints to the local health department have failed. I challenge the Ministry of Health to publicly respond to this letter. So far the ministry has said or done nothing, and neither have businesses in the area nor the Tourist Authority of Thailand. Rest assured, however, that word is out on the internet, and tourists worldwide are now becoming more aware of the health risks they take when coming to Pattaya.

Jack Gilead

Prachin Buri

[beej]

Judge accused of sex with inmates

The trial of a former US judge accused of having sex with male inmates in exchange for leniency is set to start in Mobile, Alabama.

Herman Thomas, 48, denies the charges, which include sodomy, kidnapping, extortion, sex abuse and assault.

Wouldn't expect anything less!!!

[Stramash]

Zoologists finally bored of saving frankly useless Pandas

Zoologists today finally gave up trying to save the planet?s few remaining Giant Pandas, declaring the endeavour, ?utterly pointless?.

The Giant Panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) is native to Central and Southwestern China and has for many years been the most visible of the planet?s endangered species.

There are approximately 1,500 left in the wild, with a further 266 living in captivity, though that number is expected to drop now conservationists are completely bored of them.

Pointless

?There?s really no point in helping them really,? said zoologist Professor Dwayne Shultz of The American Institute for Things That Need Saving.

?The Panda is simply not a sustainable species.?

?They?re black and white for a start, yet they live in a green jungle for God?s sake.?

?And their diet consists of eating 30 pounds of the least nutritious plant in the entire jungle, every single day.?

The world?s zoos have spent millions on their efforts to grow the Panda population over the last 30 years, to little or no effect.

?Pandas just aren?t interested in sex. Even the really kinky stuff.?

?Do you know how difficult it is to get a female panda into a basque??

?I?d rather spend my time saving an animal that had even a passing interest in chasing tail.?

Calling time

?If we?re brutally honest we should have given up a long time ago, it?s just that they?re so damned cute.?

?It?s like looking at a big fat albino who?s been repeatedly punched in the face.?

When told of the news, Chi Chi Jnr, the son of London Zoo?s most famous Panda, merely shrugged his shoulders and continued slowly munching bamboo.

(n.a)

[eagle]

Onion ?

[Stramash]

Onion ?

the UK equivalent - newsarse

love Onion too though...

[Mister Moobs]

Russians are going to REALLY f*cking love that!!!!!

im sure they will beej..some things you read just seem surreal when I read this article -- it didn't seem real or register-- this is happening in russia of all places...lol.. :idea:

Next up.

Beer sale is banned in Germany.

What a bunch of "do gooder" nonsense.

[Mister Moobs]

Britain is now the crime capital of the West

England and Wales now top the Western world's crime league, according to United Nations research.

The UN Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute reveals that people in England and Wales experience more crime per head than people in the 17 other developed countries analysed in the survey.

The findings are expected to cause further embarrassment to the Prime Minister, Tony Blair, who has pledged to have street crime under control by September.

This week, the Home Office will publish its White Paper outlining radical reform of the criminal justice system, in part to curb spiralling street crime and to punish more offenders. Government sources confirmed to the IoS that the reforms will also include empowering judges to tell rape-trial jurors about a defendant's previous convictions.

In the UN study, researchers found that nearly 55 crimes are committed per 100 people in England and Wales compared with an average of 35 per 100 in other industrialised countries.

The UN study analysed Home Office crime statistics for England and Wales and also carried out telephone interviews with victims of crime in the 17 countries surveyed, including the US, Japan, France and Spain.

England and Wales also have the worst record for "very serious" offences, recording 18 such crimes for every 100 inhabitants, followed by Australia with 16.

y'all might wanna invest in some personal protection

[Mister Moobs]

Britain's youngest known crime suspect ? aged three

A three-year-old boy has become the youngest known suspect in a British criminal inquiry after he was investigated by police over alleged disorder and vandalism.

Officers from Strathclyde police visited the toddler?s home this summer after receiving a complaint of damage to household property.

The youngster is one of 10 children aged five and under who have been investigated since May for a variety of alleged crimes, including sexual offences.

Related Articles

*

We pay dearly for our belief that evil can be cured

*

Schoolboy attackers 'had food laced with cannabis'

*

Torture attack brothers were being sought by police

*

Schoolboys plead guilty to sadistic torture attack

The youngest offender in England and Wales was a six-year-old arrested in Bedfordshire on suspicion of robbery in June.

Details of the suspects? cases were disclosed in documents obtained under freedom of information laws, and have caused concern among crime campaigners, who believe they demonstrate further evidence of Britain?s deepening social problems.

Chris Grayling, the shadow home secretary, said: ?This is a clear manifestation of the first signs of offending.

?These instances underline the very deep social problems we have in some parts of the country. It is part of the very complex picture we call broken Britain.?

None of the children referred to can be prosecuted or held in custody because they are below the age of criminal responsibility.

In England and Wales, the age of criminal responsibility is 10, while in Scotland, where the three-year-old was investigated, the age is eight ? the lowest in Europe.

Figures disclosed this month show that more than 6,000 offences have been committed in Britain by children under 10 over the past three years.

These include nine-year-olds accused of rape and eight-year-olds believed to have caused grievous bodily harm. Other alleged offences included possession of knives, assaults, theft and burglaries.

Yep, 'bout what I expected... :wink:

[Mister Moobs]

Gun Control's Twisted Outcome

Restricting firearms has helped make England more crime-ridden than the U.S.

On a June evening two years ago, Dan Rather made many stiff British upper lips quiver by reporting that England had a crime problem and that, apart from murder, "theirs is worse than ours." The response was swift and sharp. "Have a Nice Daydream," The Mirror, a London daily, shot back, reporting: "Britain reacted with fury and disbelief last night to claims by American newsmen that crime and violence are worse here than in the US." But sandwiched between the article's battery of official denials ? "totally misleading," "a huge over-simplification," "astounding and outrageous" ? and a compilation of lurid crimes from "the wild west culture on the other side of the Atlantic where every other car is carrying a gun," The Mirror conceded that the CBS anchorman was correct. Except for murder and rape, it admitted, "Britain has overtaken the US for all major crimes."

In the two years since Dan Rather was so roundly rebuked, violence in England has gotten markedly worse. Over the course of a few days in the summer of 2001, gun-toting men burst into an English court and freed two defendants; a shooting outside a London nightclub left five women and three men wounded; and two men were machine-gunned to death in a residential neighborhood of north London. And on New Year's Day this year a 19-year-old girl walking on a main street in east London was shot in the head by a thief who wanted her mobile phone. London police are now looking to New York City police for advice.

None of this was supposed to happen in the country whose stringent gun laws and 1997 ban on handguns have been hailed as the "gold standard" of gun control. For the better part of a century, British governments have pursued a strategy for domestic safety that a 1992 Economist article characterized as requiring "a restraint on personal liberty that seems, in most civilised countries, essential to the happiness of others," a policy the magazine found at odds with "America's Vigilante Values." The safety of English people has been staked on the thesis that fewer private guns means less crime. The government believes that any weapons in the hands of men and women, however law-abiding, pose a danger, and that disarming them lessens the chance that criminals will get or use weapons.

The results ? the toughest firearm restrictions of any democracy ? are credited by the world's gun control advocates with producing a low rate of violent crime. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Lewis Powell reflected this conventional wisdom when, in a 1988 speech to the American Bar Association, he attributed England's low rates of violent crime to the fact that "private ownership of guns is strictly controlled."

In reality, the English approach has not re-duced violent crime. Instead it has left law-abiding citizens at the mercy of criminals who are confident that their victims have neither the means nor the legal right to resist them. Imitating this model would be a public safety disaster for the United States.

The illusion that the English government had protected its citizens by disarming them seemed credible because few realized the country had an astonishingly low level of armed crime even before guns were restricted. A government study for the years 1890-92, for example, found only three handgun homicides, an average of one a year, in a population of 30 million. In 1904 there were only four armed robberies in London, then the largest city in the world. A hundred years and many gun laws later, the BBC reported that England's firearms restrictions "seem to have had little impact in the criminal underworld." Guns are virtually outlawed, and, as the old slogan predicted, only outlaws have guns. Worse, they are increasingly ready to use them.

Nearly five centuries of growing civility ended in 1954. Violent crime has been climbing ever since. Last December, London's Evening Standard reported that armed crime, with banned handguns the weapon of choice, was "rocketing." In the two years following the 1997 handgun ban, the use of handguns in crime rose by 40 percent, and the upward trend has continued. From April to November 2001, the number of people robbed at gunpoint in London rose 53 percent.

Gun crime is just part of an increasingly lawless environment. From 1991 to 1995, crimes against the person in England's inner cities increased 91 percent. And in the four years from 1997 to 2001, the rate of violent crime more than doubled. Your chances of being mugged in London are now six times greater than in New York. England's rates of assault, robbery, and burglary are far higher than America's, and 53 percent of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 percent in the U.S., where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners more than the police. In a United Nations study of crime in 18 developed nations published in July, England and Wales led the Western world's crime league, with nearly 55 crimes per 100 people.

This sea change in English crime followed a sea change in government policies. Gun regulations have been part of a more general disarmament based on the proposition that people don't need to protect themselves because society will protect them. It also will protect their neighbors: Police advise those who witness a crime to "walk on by" and let the professionals handle it.

This is a reversal of centuries of common law that not only permitted but expected individuals to defend themselves, their families, and their neighbors when other help was not available. It was a legal tradition passed on to Americans. Personal security was ranked first among an individual's rights by William Blackstone, the great 18th-century exponent of the common law. It was a right, he argued, that no government could take away, since no government could protect the individual in his moment of need. A century later Blackstone's illustrious successor, A.V. Dicey, cautioned, "discourage self-help and loyal subjects become the slaves of ruffians."

But modern English governments have put public order ahead of the individual's right to personal safety. First the government clamped down on private possession of guns; then it forbade people to carry any article that might be used for self-defense; finally, the vigor of that self-defense was to be judged by what, in hindsight, seemed "reasonable in the circumstances."

The 1920 Firearms Act was the first serious British restriction on guns. Although crime was low in England in 1920, the government feared massive labor disruption and a Bolshevik revolution. In the circumstances, permitting the people to remain armed must have seemed an unnecessary risk. And so the new policy of disarming the public began. The Firearms Act required a would-be gun owner to obtain a certificate from the local chief of police, who was charged with determining whether the applicant had a good reason for possessing a weapon and was fit to do so. All very sensible. Parliament was assured that the intention was to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals and other dangerous persons. Yet from the start the law's enforcement was far more restrictive, and Home Office instructions to police ? classified until 1989 ? periodically narrowed the criteria.

At first police were instructed that it would be a good reason to have a revolver if a person "lives in a solitary house, where protection against thieves and burglars is essential, or has been exposed to definite threats to life on account of his performance of some public duty." By 1937 police were to discourage applications to possess firearms for house or personal protection. In 1964 they were told "it should hardly ever be necessary to anyone to possess a firearm for the protection of his house or person" and that "this principle should hold good even in the case of banks and firms who desire to protect valuables or large quantities of money."

In 1969 police were informed "it should never be necessary for anyone to possess a firearm for the protection of his house or person." These changes were made without public knowledge or debate. Their enforcement has consumed hundreds of thousands of police hours. Finally, in 1997 handguns were banned. Proposed exemptions for handicapped shooters and the British Olympic team were rejected.

Even more sweeping was the 1953 Prevention of Crime Act, which made it illegal to carry in a public place any article "made, adapted, or intended" for an offensive purpose "without lawful authority or excuse." Carrying something to protect yourself was branded antisocial. Any item carried for possible defense automatically became an offensive weapon. Police were given extensive power to stop and search everyone. Individuals found with offensive items were guilty until proven innocent.

Hasn't seemed to have improved much over the years.... :shock:

[Mister Moobs]

Britain named as one of Europe's crime hotspots

· Survey finds highest rate of burglary in the EU

· Assaults and hate crime also near top of league

Britain has the highest rate of burglary in the European Union and is also nearly top of the league for assaults and hate crime, according to a recent survey.

The EU crime and safety survey names the UK as a "high crime country" and says the risk of becoming a victim of the 10 most common crimes is, with the exception of Ireland, the highest across the European Union.

London also emerges as the "crime capital of Europe" with the likelihood of becoming a victim - mostly of a range of petty crimes - said to be higher than all other EU capitals and even higher than cities such as Istanbul and New York.

The findings will dismay Home Office ministers who boast that the 35% fall in crime in Britain since 1995 has brought the risk of becoming a victim down to its lowest level for 40 years.

The survey acknowledges that crime has fallen in the UK since it peaked in 1995, but says it has not dropped as fast as crime rates across the rest of the EU.

The UK is named alongside Ireland, Estonia, the Netherlands and Denmark as the crime hotspots of Europe with crime victim rates that are at least 30% higher than the EU average.

It does, however, contain some positive news for Britain, saying that there is an extremely low chance compared with many other EU countries of becoming a victim of attempted bribery, while consumer fraud is not a cause for concern. It adds that despite the poor crime record British residents are reasonably happy with the performance of the police and are not overly concerned about burglary or safety on the streets.

The survey, carried out by Gallup Europe for the UN crime prevention agency and funded by the European Commission, says that no single factor can explain the drop in crime across Europe over the past 10 years but that a fall in the proportion of young males and improved security measures such as burglar and car alarms are probably more influential than tough sentencing policies or rising prison populations.

Its says that "sentencing policies in Europe as a whole are considerably less punitive than in the US and yet crime is falling just as steeply in Europe as it is in the US". The authors add that Britain and Ireland stand almost alone in Europe in jailing persistent burglars rather than using community service orders to punish them.

The findings of the survey, organised by the UN's crime justice research institute and based on polling representative samples in 18 EU countries about their experience of crime, show the UK to be one of the most protected countries in Europe but with a crime rate way above the average.

They show Britain: · has the highest level of assaults involving threats but not violence in the EU, with 5% of the public saying they have been a victim of assault

· is the most burgled country in the EU, with 3% saying their homes have been broken into

· has a high level of hate crime - 3% - and above-average rate of hate crimes that occur within the immigrant population

· has a high risk of theft from cars - 5% compared with EU average of 3.5%

· has an above-average level of pickpocketing and personal theft - one of only three countries in the EU, with Ireland and Estonia, to be above the average level.

The comparison of crime rates in individual capitals and major cities shows the 32% of the residents of London have been a victim of 10 categories of offences ranging from assault to sexual harassment to burglary. The comparable figures were 18% for Istanbul and 23% for New York.

But the Home Office minister Tony McNulty disputed the survey's findings, saying there were concerns about its quality. He said the report failed to recognise that burglary had fallen by 55% since 1997 in England and Wales.

The survey prompted the Liberal Democrats home affairs spokesman, Nick Clegg, to claim that Britain was now the "sick man of Europe" when it came to crime: "The government should ask itself why the prisons are at bursting point and yet the level of several crimes are still higher than elsewhere in the EU. The present strategy must be rethought urgently."

In numbers

30% The percentage above the EU average of crime victim levels in Britain

3% The percentage of British respondents who say their homes have been burgled

5% The risk of car crimes in the UK, well above the EU average of 3.5%

* Print thisPrintable version

* Send to a friend

* Share

* Clip

* Contact us

* larger | smaller

Email

Close

Recipient's email address

Your first name

Your surname

Add a note (optional)

Your IP address will be logged

Share

Close

* Digg

* reddit

* Google Bookmarks

* Twitter

* del.icio.us

* StumbleUpon

* Newsvine

* livejournal

* Facebook

* Mixx it!

Contact us

Close

* Report errors or inaccuracies: [email protected]

* Letters for publication should be sent to: [email protected]

* If you need help using the site: [email protected]

* Call the main Guardian and Observer switchboard:

+44 (0)20 3353 2000

*

o Advertising guide

o License/buy our content

UK news

* Crime ·

* Immigration and asylum

Politics

Society

* Prisons and probation

Related

1 Aug 2007

Courts still handing out jail terms despite ministry pleas

4 Jun 2007

Criminals convicted by police jurors to appeal to law lords

26 Jan 2007

Child pornography case ruling angers critics

10 Jan 2006

Q&A: antisocial behaviour

Strangely enough, I see a pattern. :twisted:

[garlic]

Gun Control's Twisted Outcome

Restricting firearms has helped make England more crime-ridden than the U.S.

On a June evening two years ago, Dan Rather made many stiff British upper lips quiver by reporting that England had a crime problem and that, apart from murder, "theirs is worse than ours." The response was swift and sharp. "Have a Nice Daydream," The Mirror, a London daily, shot back, reporting: "Britain reacted with fury and disbelief last night to claims by American newsmen that crime and violence are worse here than in the US." But sandwiched between the article's battery of official denials ? "totally misleading," "a huge over-simplification," "astounding and outrageous" ? and a compilation of lurid crimes from "the wild west culture on the other side of the Atlantic where every other car is carrying a gun," The Mirror conceded that the CBS anchorman was correct. Except for murder and rape, it admitted, "Britain has overtaken the US for all major crimes."

In the two years since Dan Rather was so roundly rebuked, violence in England has gotten markedly worse. Over the course of a few days in the summer of 2001, gun-toting men burst into an English court and freed two defendants; a shooting outside a London nightclub left five women and three men wounded; and two men were machine-gunned to death in a residential neighborhood of north London. And on New Year's Day this year a 19-year-old girl walking on a main street in east London was shot in the head by a thief who wanted her mobile phone. London police are now looking to New York City police for advice.

None of this was supposed to happen in the country whose stringent gun laws and 1997 ban on handguns have been hailed as the "gold standard" of gun control. For the better part of a century, British governments have pursued a strategy for domestic safety that a 1992 Economist article characterized as requiring "a restraint on personal liberty that seems, in most civilised countries, essential to the happiness of others," a policy the magazine found at odds with "America's Vigilante Values." The safety of English people has been staked on the thesis that fewer private guns means less crime. The government believes that any weapons in the hands of men and women, however law-abiding, pose a danger, and that disarming them lessens the chance that criminals will get or use weapons.

The results ? the toughest firearm restrictions of any democracy ? are credited by the world's gun control advocates with producing a low rate of violent crime. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Lewis Powell reflected this conventional wisdom when, in a 1988 speech to the American Bar Association, he attributed England's low rates of violent crime to the fact that "private ownership of guns is strictly controlled."

In reality, the English approach has not re-duced violent crime. Instead it has left law-abiding citizens at the mercy of criminals who are confident that their victims have neither the means nor the legal right to resist them. Imitating this model would be a public safety disaster for the United States.

The illusion that the English government had protected its citizens by disarming them seemed credible because few realized the country had an astonishingly low level of armed crime even before guns were restricted. A government study for the years 1890-92, for example, found only three handgun homicides, an average of one a year, in a population of 30 million. In 1904 there were only four armed robberies in London, then the largest city in the world. A hundred years and many gun laws later, the BBC reported that England's firearms restrictions "seem to have had little impact in the criminal underworld." Guns are virtually outlawed, and, as the old slogan predicted, only outlaws have guns. Worse, they are increasingly ready to use them.

Nearly five centuries of growing civility ended in 1954. Violent crime has been climbing ever since. Last December, London's Evening Standard reported that armed crime, with banned handguns the weapon of choice, was "rocketing." In the two years following the 1997 handgun ban, the use of handguns in crime rose by 40 percent, and the upward trend has continued. From April to November 2001, the number of people robbed at gunpoint in London rose 53 percent.

Gun crime is just part of an increasingly lawless environment. From 1991 to 1995, crimes against the person in England's inner cities increased 91 percent. And in the four years from 1997 to 2001, the rate of violent crime more than doubled. Your chances of being mugged in London are now six times greater than in New York. England's rates of assault, robbery, and burglary are far higher than America's, and 53 percent of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 percent in the U.S., where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners more than the police. In a United Nations study of crime in 18 developed nations published in July, England and Wales led the Western world's crime league, with nearly 55 crimes per 100 people.

This sea change in English crime followed a sea change in government policies. Gun regulations have been part of a more general disarmament based on the proposition that people don't need to protect themselves because society will protect them. It also will protect their neighbors: Police advise those who witness a crime to "walk on by" and let the professionals handle it.

This is a reversal of centuries of common law that not only permitted but expected individuals to defend themselves, their families, and their neighbors when other help was not available. It was a legal tradition passed on to Americans. Personal security was ranked first among an individual's rights by William Blackstone, the great 18th-century exponent of the common law. It was a right, he argued, that no government could take away, since no government could protect the individual in his moment of need. A century later Blackstone's illustrious successor, A.V. Dicey, cautioned, "discourage self-help and loyal subjects become the slaves of ruffians."

But modern English governments have put public order ahead of the individual's right to personal safety. First the government clamped down on private possession of guns; then it forbade people to carry any article that might be used for self-defense; finally, the vigor of that self-defense was to be judged by what, in hindsight, seemed "reasonable in the circumstances."

The 1920 Firearms Act was the first serious British restriction on guns. Although crime was low in England in 1920, the government feared massive labor disruption and a Bolshevik revolution. In the circumstances, permitting the people to remain armed must have seemed an unnecessary risk. And so the new policy of disarming the public began. The Firearms Act required a would-be gun owner to obtain a certificate from the local chief of police, who was charged with determining whether the applicant had a good reason for possessing a weapon and was fit to do so. All very sensible. Parliament was assured that the intention was to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals and other dangerous persons. Yet from the start the law's enforcement was far more restrictive, and Home Office instructions to police ? classified until 1989 ? periodically narrowed the criteria.

At first police were instructed that it would be a good reason to have a revolver if a person "lives in a solitary house, where protection against thieves and burglars is essential, or has been exposed to definite threats to life on account of his performance of some public duty." By 1937 police were to discourage applications to possess firearms for house or personal protection. In 1964 they were told "it should hardly ever be necessary to anyone to possess a firearm for the protection of his house or person" and that "this principle should hold good even in the case of banks and firms who desire to protect valuables or large quantities of money."

In 1969 police were informed "it should never be necessary for anyone to possess a firearm for the protection of his house or person." These changes were made without public knowledge or debate. Their enforcement has consumed hundreds of thousands of police hours. Finally, in 1997 handguns were banned. Proposed exemptions for handicapped shooters and the British Olympic team were rejected.

Even more sweeping was the 1953 Prevention of Crime Act, which made it illegal to carry in a public place any article "made, adapted, or intended" for an offensive purpose "without lawful authority or excuse." Carrying something to protect yourself was branded antisocial. Any item carried for possible defense automatically became an offensive weapon. Police were given extensive power to stop and search everyone. Individuals found with offensive items were guilty until proven innocent.

Hasn't seemed to have improved much over the years.... :shock:

ready...aim...fire!

[Mister Moobs]

UK cops combating alien crime gangs

Nearly 2,600 drug smugglers, people traffickers and fraudsters have been prosecuted by new joint United Kingdom Border Agency and police teams since April 2008, Border and Immigration Minister Phil Woolas stated in a report obtained by the National Association of Chiefs of Police.

These prosecutions were highlighted at the first joint UK Border Agency (UKBA) and Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) conference on Monday.

Almost 300 police officers were assigned to UKBA Immigration Crime Teams across the country working to identify and disrupt organized immigration crime including human trafficking, fraud and forgery. Since April this year more than a million US dollars have been seized, helping to further disrupt criminal operators.

Woolas also outlined a greater push toward using immigration laws to target known foreign national criminals who are alleged to be involved in more serious offences including gang and knife crime.

?When people come to live in the UK they enter into a deal: to work hard and play by the rules to earn their right to stay. Those who choose to commit crimes break that deal and must be removed," he wrote in a report obtained by NACOP.

?As Al Capone found out, you only need one conviction to bring down a criminal house of cards. Immigration powers can prove the solution to prosecuting and removing foreign criminals from the UK," he stated.

The UK Border Agency is responding to local community needs as a law enforcement agency. Our frontline staff work collaboratively with police, local authorities and government agencies. We are creating a hostile environment for organized criminals who prey on vulnerable immigrants and taking action against individuals who break the law, according to police officials.

Officers and representatives from UKBA the Police, the Serious Organized Crime Agency and the UK Human Trafficking Agency met in Birmingham to discuss strategic and tactical action to combat criminal activity including hubs for shared intelligence gathering, surveillance techniques and forensic support with key aims of disrupting and removing offenders.

Chief Constable of North Yorkshire Police and ACPO lead for immigration Grahame Maxwell stated: ?Immigration is a key concern to the community and the work carried out through the joint UK Border Agency and Police partnerships has sent a clear message to those foreign criminals who think they can flout our immigration laws - if you are committing a crime you will be caught and you will be removed from the UK.

?By working together we have been able to co-ordinate our efforts to weed out those who cause the most harm in our communities," he added.

Officials at the conference discussed several cases and initiatives including Operation Oxbridge, undertaken in May 2008 which foiled Britain's biggest ever visa scam, whereby thousands of students gained entry to the UK with fake documents.

Also, a senior university employee and his ex-wife are alleged to have made and sold fraudulent university degree certificates to foreign nationals. Prices ranged between $1000 and $2000. The university employee had a fetish for sadomasochism, and vulnerable females were allegedly encouraged to indulge his needs as part-payment for the certificates.

At the same time, bogus introduction letters were allegedly supplied to individuals to gain student visas to enter the UK by deception. The ex-wife allegedly used her contacts in the local community to find people who wanted to buy the certificates and documents. Spreadsheets containing the names of several hundred foreign nationals were recovered. Both have been charged with conspiracy to commit fraud.

In 2008, nearly 5,400 foreign national prisoners were deported and more than 67,000 people were removed or voluntarily departed.

About what I thought would be happening...

[Mister Moobs]

ready...aim...fire!

Boom!

lol

[Stramash]

Recorded crime in Scotland has fallen to its lowest level in almost 30 years, official statistics have revealed.

Official figures showed the total number of crime reported to police forces fell to 377,433 in 2008-09.

Violent crimes, sexual offences and vandalism fell, while theft and fraud increased slightly.

Ministers welcomed the figure, but Labour said it was only a 2% drop on the previous year and claimed ministers were losing the war on crime.

The report, from Scotland's chief statistician, showed the overall crime rate was the lowest since 1980.

All eight police forces recorded a drop, ranging from a marginal fall in the Northern area and Lothian and Borders to an 11% decrease in Dumfries and Galloway.

Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill welcomed the figures - but warned against complacency over crime.

He said: "For the second year in a row, crime in Scotland is down to the lowest level in nearly 30 years. With record numbers of police officers tackling crime and serving our communities, this government is working to make Scotland safer and stronger."

There were a total of 12,612 violent crimes in 2008-09, a 2% drop on the previous year, while sexual crimes fell by 3%, from 6,552 to 6,331.

Within the indecency group, recorded cases of rape and attempted rape fell by 9% to 963.

But Scottish Labour justice spokesman Richard Baker said Scotland was not making enough progress on tackling crime.

"The SNP soft-touch agenda on crime and justice isn't working when we see only a 2% drop in Scotland in crime - a very small decrease indeed, whereas in England and Wales we've seen a 5% drop," he said.

'Conservative policy'

The Conservatives' Gavin Brown urged ministers to move away from their presumption against jail terms of six months or less, while saying his party could claim credit for the drop in crime.

"These figures are moving in the right direction," he said, adding: "The government's main policy for justice was to put 1,000 extra police on the beat - pushed by the Scottish Conservatives.

"Without that, who knows what would have happened with these stats."

Elsewhere, the figures showed "crimes of dishonesty" increased slightly to stand at 167,812 cases - the first rise for a decade.

Recorded cases of vandalism, including fire-raising and malicious mischief, decreased by 7% to a total of 109,430.

And other recorded crimes, including drug offences, crimes against public justice and offensive weapons offences, decreased marginally to a total of 81,248.

The clear-up rate for all recorded crimes in 2008-09 was 49% - the highest in 20 years - compared with 48% the previous year, while the clear-up rate for non-sexual violent crimes increased from 62% to 64%.

But crimes of indecency were less likely to be solved, with a drop of 4% to 68% in the clear-up rate.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

now not only do we have the same firearms controls as the rest of UK, but tighter controls on airguns.

So, Charlton, how does that argument fit in? Or do we have to prise an answer from your cold, dead hands?

:wink:

[Mister Moobs]

I just copied and pasted links from Brit and other papers.

Aside from that, there is this:

"Lies, damned lies, and statistics" is part of a phrase attributed to the 19th Century British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli,

[Mister Moobs]

"Lies, damned lies, and statistics" is part of a phrase attributed to the 19th Century British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli, among others, and later popularized in the United States by, among others, Mark Twain: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." The statement refers to the persuasive power of numbers, the use of statistics to bolster weak arguments, and the tendency of people to disparage statistics that do not support their positions. The phrase is not found in Disraeli's works nor is it known within his lifetime and for years afterward. Many coiners have been proposed. The most plausible, on current evidence, is Charles Wentworth Dilke (1843-1911).