I caught the PM news headlines this evening on BBC Radio 4 and they were feverishly retailing the notion that crime is at an all-time low in England and Wales. There was a consistent stream of government friendly sound-bites from the PM gang suggesting that it is only our “perceptions” about crime that we now have to fear. The BBC breathlessly relates that Home Secretary Jacqui Smith is “extremely pleased” at this welcome “news”. I wonder if she is related to the Jacqui Smith who announced that she would not feel safe walking the streets of London after dark? Perhaps crime has tumbled since she said that back in January?
RELAX – CRIME IS GOING DOWN.
Bookmark the permalink.
Martin,
“2. Prisons. No if crime were falling the prisons would be empty, not full.”
Well you can keep asserting that till you’re blue in the face but the facts point in the other direction. Crime is way down in the US yet (“because”?) it has the highest incarceration rates in the Western world.
As George Will noted last month: “Listening to political talk requires a third ear that hears what is not said. Today’s near silence about crime probably is evidence of social improvement. For many reasons, including better policing and more incarceration, Americans feel, and are, safer. The New York Times has not recently repeated such amusing headlines as “Crime Keeps on Falling, But Prisons Keep on Filling” (1997), “Prison Population Growing Although Crime Rate Drops” (1998), “Number in Prison Grows Despite Crime Reduction” (2000 ) and “More Inmates, Despite Slight Drop in Crime” (2003).
Your NYT-type attitude to imprisonment, plus the fact that you keep changing the point at issue, makes me think you are in fact a closet leftie.
Rgds,
Y
This part of the government machine that tells us that inflation is either 3.8% (RPI) or 4.6% (CPI): who believes that either of these figures bear any relation to the real inflation suffered in the UK? Another part of the government machine tells us that crime has fallen. A third part of the state apparatus – the BBC – tells us that the present government has performed the miracle of the age and delivered an unprecedented decrease in crime.
At the very least we should be sceptical about “feelgood” statistics released by any government but particularly this one. At the very least the BBC should not act merely as a passively supportive transmission belt for this kind of information. Even so, the BBC has a choice: either it releases these statistics without comment or, if it feels the urge to comment, it should draw attention to possible limitations or contradictions in the statistics (a la “jon” further up this thread). Instead the BBC opts to be an uncritical cheerleader for the Home Office and wails (when the figures appear to attract almost universal disbelief) that the great unwashed (ie those of us who are not readers of the Guardian and Independent) have no idea how really well our police and government are performing.
It’s 3.8% (CPI) and 4.6% (RPI) of course.
The graph in this piece shows the correlation between increasing prison population and falling crime.
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/centreright/2008/02/there-was-a-gui.html
A little true story that shows why the people now distrust the police.
A senior magistrate, who at the time was chair of his town council received a complaint from a resident about young gentlemen driving their motor carriages at excessive speed through the cobbled main street. The magistrate brought this up with the local sergeant at the next council meeting and the sergeant promised to take action. The next morning the police caught 48 motorists speeding at one end of the town as people went to work, including a number of council workers; this was proudly announced as a major success at the following council meeting. When asked by the magistrate if the sergeant really thought that this was dealing with the original problem; the sergeant replying that he did not; however, he had no available staff at night so the problem would never be dealt with.
Yaffle: That’s nonsense. Suppose you had a crime rate of zero. Would the prisons be full or empty?
Let me put it another way. If everyone obeyed the Highway Code how many people would have points on their licence? None of course.
I fear the subject is to complicated for you.
Those on here who say crime goes down if prisoners go up, please email government mps and lib dim mps to explain this.
It has become a mantra in parliament, akin to AGW, that prison sentancing has no effect on crime.
Martin, the bbc spent the whole day ripping apart one little tory tax announcement.
Martin
It depends on how you look at human nature.
If you believe that human beings can be perfect and that there is an achievable utopia then the prisons would be empty; however, if you believe that human beings can never be perfect and that we will all make mistakes (and indeed that some are inherently evil) then for a zero crime rate the prisons would be full, in fact we would all be living in them.
My point about prisons is this. According ot he various crime stats pumped out by the Goverment and spun by the BBC crime has been falling massivly since 1995. That’s 13 years. I would accept that in the early years you might see an increase in prisoners. but after 13 years the prison population has almost doubled. If there is so little crime, where are all these convicts coming from?
Oh hang on, something like 13,000 of them are foreigners we can’t deport.
Oh the BBC forgot to mention that.
As mentioned above, the BBC and liberals tell us prsion doesn’t work so the idea that locking people up reduces crime goes rigt against the liberal views of Nu Labour and the BBC.
The reality is crime is NOT falling. Why do we have the Police overwhelmed in our town and city centres on a Friday and Saturday night with endless fights and assaults? Or perhaps the Police are making that up as well for extra resources?
It’s all bollocks. The public know it and the smart ones here know it as well.
Only the liberals in the media/BBC don’t see it, or perhaps they do, but don’t care?
What I want to see are these stats pulled apart and find out WHY there is a difference between crime and the opinion of the public.
Why not pick an area where crime is supposed to have fallen and go and ask everyone who lives there is that’s the case or perhaps they just don’t report it or go out at night or have better security and so on?
THEN I might be persuaded that the figures are accurate.
Who audits these crime stats?
Martin,
There’s no point in discussing this further, as facts drawn from the real world don’t seem to interest you.
Y
Peregrine: Presumably you’d also agree that having exam stats showing nealry every child is passing their GCSE’s is also nonsense?
No one fails in exams? What does that prove?
What if we had a no fail rate for the driving test? Would everyone assume that we’re all good drivers?
It’s political nonsense.
If you had NO crime you’d have no need for prisons.
If criminal activity, in particular violent and sexual crime is falling (and usually it’s those offences that get automatic prison sentances) then you’d see the prison rate fall.
Fact is we don’t even send many criminals to prison these days that should go. If the government were to lock up all those that would have been locked up automatically say 30 years ago, I just wonder how many people we’d have in prison then?
150,000? Would we think crime is falling then if the prisons were that full?
Yaffle: Yep your’e at it again. Typical Beeboid. When you can’t win an argument you go off in a strop.
I heard a most peculiar report on the crime figures in yesterday’s radio Four PM programme.
First, a beeboid (it may have been Mark Easton, I didn’t catch his name) came on to say crime was definitely down….we could trust the figures….yes, really folks crime rates have genuinely fallen.
Then a Tory MP came on. The MP said he’d taken the Home Office figures to the most senior statistician in the House of Commons Library, who’d told him that the methods of reporting had changed so much that you couldn’t make any meaningful comparisons between this year and previous years…. the figures certainly didn’t ‘prove’ any drop in crime….it was all smoke and mirrors.
I suppose you could say the item was balanced in the end – you did get an alternative view.
But isn’t it a weird way to establish balance – getting a BBC correspondent to mouth the government’s lies, and then get in an opposition MP to knock all the beeboid’s/NuLab’s skittles down?
PaulS: Nothing new. Easton is up the bum of Broon and co and makes no apology for it.
As I’ve been trying to point out to Beeboids like Yaffle, there is a clear disconnect between these figures and what public opinion shows.
Why? Shouldn’t the BBC be picking over these figures and how they come about?
For example. How does the British Crime Survey gather data?
Street interviews? If so people often give the shortest answers they can (and can often forget previous incidents) just because they want to get on with their shopping or whatever. I’m one of those that NEVER stops for these clipboard assains in the street. So how do they know they are getting a representative sample?
Do they send out a questionnaire? If so how do they decide who gets one?
Oh and many people who are victims of crime may have reading and writing difficulties so don’t complete the form. Is the form sent out in 50 languages?
I could go on. The first place to start is HOW the data is collected.
I also notice Easton defended the BCS by saying that although it didn’t collect data from under 16’s it was “his” opinin that didn’t matter as it wouldn’t change the figures much!!!!
Brilliant. Shithead Mark Easton says so. What next will he be reading out official Nu Labour press releases like Marr did?
Martin
The improvement in exam pass rates is not only due to the changes in the exams themselves (limited curriculum, continuous assessment, a move away from “hard” subjects etc) but also improved teaching and (believe it or not)harder work by pupils.
Speak to any parent of a successful pupil and you will find amazement at the level of homework and effort children put into their studies.
It remains true, however, that universities are bemoaning the quality of some of the students they are receiving, but this is hardly surprising as the majority of the new students wouldn’t have qualified for a place in a poly twenty years ago.
Back to crime and prison. If one assumes that there is a resevoir of criminality within any population then as part of that resevoir is channelled into prisons then the crime rate will fall.
Peregrine | 18.07.08 – 2:01 pm
The improvement in exam pass rates is not only due to the changes in the exams themselves … but also improved teaching
I think you may be looking at this through rose tinted specs.
I read something the other day (I’ll try and find the ref and post it later) which reported on a very interesting experiment.
The brightest pupils at one of the country’s top performing academic schools (St Paul’s?? Dulwich College???) were given the same exam papers that kids their age had taken back in the seventies.
They couldn’t do them. The marks were appalling. Yet these really were the clever kids – all tipped to get straight As and to go to top universities etc.
Absolute proof, in my view, that the exams are much easier today and the bar has been deliberately lowered.
PaulS: When I did my maths and physics O & A levels back in the 1970’s we were not even allowed to use a slide rule in the exams. Log tables were the only thing allowed.
Are teachers and kids really brighter these days? It’s not very likely is it? I don’t see thousands of Stephen Hawkings being churned out of the local ‘bog standard Nu Liebour comp’
I had some excellent teachers at school.
However, year on year the pass result stayed the same because they adjusted for it.
If one year the paper had some easier questions on it and more people scored higher grades, they would adjust the marking so the levels at which a pass, B or A grade kicked in was raised. If the pass rate went down because of harder questions, they lowered the grade levels.
They did this for decades. It’s gone now I believe, so if you make the questions easier more people will pass.
But is that being truthful to people?
Crime is falling.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7513416.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7512920.stm
Mark Easton tells us so. Oh he also tells us that ‘Traktor’ production is at its highest for decades and that the Soviet Union will live for 1000 years.
The British Crime Survey (BCS)interviews 47,000 people,however it omits victims under 16 years of age.Thus 122,008 woundings,79,457 robberies,55,858 thefts against 11-15 olds are not included.(2003 figures,last available)
Interesting that the BBC does not quote the Civitas research, which concludes there are some 11 million more crimes a year.
The BBC picking the result that makes the government look good.
Peregrine/Martin
Found it… sorry some of my details were wrong, but the gist of the argument still valid:
This month a new book, called simply The O Level Book: Genuine Exam Questions from Yesteryear, is published. It contains O-level papers dating back to the 1950s. In the foreword, Martin Stephen, high master of one of Britain’s top boys’ schools, St Paul’s in London, writes: “Back then O-levels were proud to be difficult. It was a stinkingly hard, fact-based exam.”
To test out • once and for all • whether GCSEs really are easier than the old-style O-levels we asked a group of five GCSE pupils at Brighton College, East Sussex, to take maths and English papers from the book under test conditions. The results were striking.
Not one of the five teenagers is expected to achieve lower than a B grade in the GCSEs they completed a few days ago and several of our guinea pigs are predicted to score a string of As and A*s.
Yet according to Louise Kenway, Brighton College’s deputy headmistress, who marked the O-level tests they sportingly sat for us on Wednesday, only two of the five pupils achieved a pass mark in the two-hour O-level maths paper; the rest failed.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/education/article4275054.ece
I am aware that the link between the grades and the percentile of pupils has been broken and that exams have changed. My own experience back in the early ‘80s was that exams were becoming easier even then (we sat mocks that included papers going back to the ‘50s!). But it wasn’t that the questions were harder rather that the curriculum was becoming more focused. The introduction of continual assessment has also had a strong effect as this measures hard work rather than understanding of a subject.
What I am trying to say is that the effect of increasing grades will be owing to both beneficial natural improvement (and there is evidence that IQ levels have risen) and changes to the measurement system.
The same will apply to crime rates. There have been changes to the measurement system, which makes most analysis worthless, but there have been changes to the types of crimes and their frequency as well. Car crime is down significantly, as is burglary (imprisoning just 1 burglar can have a major effect on crime levels in a small community), but other crimes are on the increase.
PS I was talking about A levels – GCSEs aren’t comparable with O levels and weren’t meant to be. They were a deliberate decision to dumb down exams so that CSE pupils wouldn’t feel “excluded”.
The piece about crime and ststistics is apalling as it shows just how low the country has fallen.
Think about it, if you lived in a bear garden with violence and death becoming the norm,you wouldn`t be bothered to report small or medium crimes.
But if you lived in a village where nothing ever happened, then one day apples were stolen from an orchard, it would be big news.
Cime statistics and the BBC. As accurate as reading tea leaves.
“..and there is evidence that IQ levels have risen…”
Really? There’s no evidence of that on most Council estates or in Parliament.
I know it may be hard to believe, especially if you look at Parliament.
Some details here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect
If peoples perception of crime is high, it`s probably because crime is high.
People dont want to suffer from crime. Someone might say that they live in a nice area with a low crime rate,but nobody boasts about living in an area with a high crime rate.Companies and people dont buy security devices because they would rather spend their money on that instead of other goods or services. In fact it actually takes a lot to get people to adapt to rampant crime.
Original Robin: The left have form on this. Most people think petrol and diesel costs are too high. However, Twats of the Earth keep spining the story line that motoring is cheaper in real terms than 30 years ago.
Like anyone gives a shit about what costs were like 30 years ago.
We have hundreds more taxes to pay now than we did 30 years ago. But the left and the BBC forget that.
From Al-BBC headlines this morning…certainly no evidence here of a breakdown in law ‘n order…
“Mob attacks officers over litter
“Two police officers were attacked by a mob in south London after they asked a 15-year-old girl to pick up her litter.
One officer was dragged to the ground and kicked while the other was bitten by a girl who jumped on his back.
Up to 30 people took part in the attack, which happened in North End, Croydon, on Wednesday afternoon”
Another classic example of how our police are vanishing….four years ago in the West End of London we had our car stolen. It was 2 in the morning and we went to West End Central Police Station to report the theft. Now remember this is the station that serves the busiest section of London on a weekend night. WE entered the station…not a police uniform in sight…we went up to the desk and an extremely aggressive Nigerian woman who we could barely understand took down our details. It took us half-an-hour to finally let her know what had happened and in that time we didn’t see a single cop. God help any poor sod running in there hoping to find sanctuary from a gang attack.
The reality is , in any repeat of the 1980 riots, the police would be overwhelmed but Al-BBC would have us believe NuLab’s lies that everything is just dandy.
Some years ago (but still in the lifetime of the NuLiebour government) my car was damaged during the night, while parked outside my house.
I went down to the Police Station next day to report the details. PC Plod kept me waiting for about 45 mins. as the reception area wasn’t fully staffed.
When someone became available, I reported what occurred and a form was filled in.
After this, I was requested to bring along my car insurance and driving licence (something I’d neglected to do thinking it wasn’t necessary to report the incident).
So, the net result was two time-consuming visits to the cop shop by me as Plod made sure the victim (me) was entitled to have a car and no arrests made. They never examined the damaged car at either visit.
No doubt had the offender actually been apprehended, he would have been cautioned and released in probably less time then I spent in the police station reporting the affair.
Experiences like this surely contribute to the non-reporting of stolen items like mobile phones.
As for crime going down – my aunt (in her late 60s) has been mugged twice in the last three years, both times by non-indigents. This was her first experience of being the victim of such offences. For the first six decades of her life she wasn’t robbed, then twice in three years.
Bit of bad luck that don’t you think?
Anonymous | 18.07.08 – 7:14 pm
my aunt (in her late 60s) has been mugged twice in the last three years, both times by non-indigents.
Your aunt was mugged by rich people?
Amazing.
Right on cue, Lisa Jardine (one of the cardinal fools de nos jour ) is being wheeed out on R4 to deliver her ‘Point Of View’.
We should believe the government’s traktor produktion figures. There is no increased risk of knife crime. It is all a conspiracy whipped-up by journalists (she didn’t actually say ‘Right wing’ but you know she was thinking about the conservative press.)
It isn’t just that I could, almost word for word, have scripted her trite little two penn’orth contribution to the debate. It’s also the bone-grinding inevitability of BBC ensuring its fellow Guardianistas are the only voices allowed on air (at our expense) to pretend that the social experiment they have conducted since the end of WWII has been a success.
Socialist ‘liberalism’ has failed and all the lies in the world won’t save it now, Ms Jardine.
GC Cooper
Funny you should say what Lisa Jardine’s point of view was – it is identical to Kevin Marsh, editor of the BBC College of Journalism:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2008/07/moral_panic.html#commentsanchor
As one of the comments says, his view has been lifted straight out of the Guardian. I don’t think we need anymore proof of the left wing liberal bias at the BBC – it’s endemic, and getting worse by the day as Labour sink. The Conservatives must go for the kill in 2010 when they get in. This really is the end game for the BBC. If Labour loses, the BBC are gone.
Martin,
You asked:
“For example. How does the British Crime Survey gather data?”
If you check this link out you will find the answer to your question.
Click to access bcs0607tech1.pdf
The design, methodology and fieldwork is quite complex. If I am not mistaken, it is a mix of face to face interviews and self-completion questionaires.
BMRB also included a boost for younger people (16-24) and ethnic minorities to get more reliable data for those sub-groups.
More detail in the document.
All this discussion about how the data was collected and opinion polls and everything else doesn’t seem to address the main issue. I’m with those who contend that none of this is relevant if people don’t report crime. If people don’t report crime for certain reasons, then logically they’re not going to be any more likely to participate in police or government polls or questionnaires.
Let’s face it: if somebody doesn’t bother reporting a crime these days, it’s most likely for one of three reasons:
1. The police won’t do anything, it’s a waste of time, etc.
2. The crime victim is an illegal immigrant, or lives with illegal immigrants, and doesn’t want to get involved with the police.
3. The crime victim has his own problems with the law, and doesn’t want the hassle.
In my experience, an increasing number of crime victims fall under this category.
Does this sound familiar to any of our resident policemen (current or retired)?
This is what the BBC thinks:
“Think about it for a moment: the only explanation for the sudden rise in carrying knives is that young men who didn’t use to carry them do so now. The least likely reason for that is that they have become ‘evil’. The most likely is that some set of ‘nudges’ have persuaded otherwise balanced, law-abiding young men that it’s OK to arm themselves. ”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2008/07/moral_panic.html#commentsanchor
Knife crime has only recently become prominant, due to the increase in murders. Where is the proof that these young knife carriers were once law-abiding citizens?
The BBC are quick at “interviewing” young thugs to try and get their slant on how to tackle the problem, but have you ever heard them talking to parents?
Here is one Londener who knows where the problem lies – but she is a Christian so not to be trusted.
“Why this vicious cycle and what can be done to break it?
This is an important double-barrelled question. Britain has fallen into this vicious circle I say due to many reasons. First the lawmakers have taken control and discipline away from the parents by threatening them with court appearances, prison terms etc if they indulge in corporal punishment at home. This is also the case at schools. Also many parents just don’t have the time to know what their wards are getting into as they are so busy trying to make ends meet in our very expensive society. Some are just not there for the children and many would rather their children stay out and away from home for the sake of “peace” and Sanity at home and to quell the endless arguments and fights at home. The government have not helped either for they have given the children too much power, cushioning them unnecessarily with a “softly softly” approach to their behaviours and attitudes. Empowering children while “depowering” the parents surely would lead to role reversals. Lastly London has become a very diverse and multi cultural society and with this comes some of the evils of different societies.”
http://www.africanloft.com/london-knife-crime-epidemy/
Hi David
I am not sure how you assert that people won’t state that they were victims of a particular crime during a survey even when they did not report it to the police.
This is especially true for the first point you raise.
What is your experience based on that you can assert, that an increasing number of crime victims fall under those three categories?
Criminals are sent to jail for 5 minutes before being parolled so that they can offend again.
So, given the above how can the jails be full to overflowing if crime is falling? Jails so full that Beaks are being told not to send offenders there?
Can someone from the State Broadcaster explain that slight inconsistency to me?
Re: anonymous @ 7:48
According to my dictionary “indigent” means poor or needy as an adjective and “a needy person” as a noun.
My interpretation of “non-indigent” would be someone who isn’t very poor, rather than simply “rich”.
Looking at the British Crime Survey (BCS) I think it is clear where the reported reduction in violent crime comes from. See the link to the survey, and take a look at the graph on page 23 of the PDF.
Click to access 17_07_08_crime_statistics_200708.pdf
We see a very large fall in the “acquaintance” and “domestic” categories against a flat trend in “mugging” and almost flat for “stranger”.
It seems clear to me that, based on the data, the BBC should be applauding the fall in domestic violence, and maybe questioning groups claiming for more money because they believe domestic violence is on the increase. Or at least examining the hidden nature of this violent domestic crime to see if the BCS adds up.
Based on the data, the BBC should NOT be questioning perceptions on “mugging” as defined by the British Crime survey, or “knife crime” in the media. In fact, according to the BCS (page 90 on the PDF), the number of muggings has remained relatively stable over the entire period from 1981, and the use of weapons was unchanged between 06/07 to 07/08 (page 91).
Given factors that others have highlighted, such as the BCS excluding younger victims in their questioning, it is easy to see that “mugging” could actually be increasing. It is impossible to say anything other than “it has remained the same” without further investigation.
The BBC should be questioning the government on why the figures are flat and may, in reality, be increasing; given the government’s spending and supposed priorities on policing.
But I can’t see that they are taking any of these angles, and it is hard for me to conclude that they are impartial in doing so.
Yaffle
If you still believe in the British Crime Survey and the Recorded Police figures – I would advise you to read this
“..the drug users who drive the crime figures are committing a mass of offences which are statistically invisible. Specifically, repeated surveys of drug users in custody show that easily their most common property crime is shoplifting (50% of their offences in most surveys); and, beyond that, most drug users fund their habit by selling drugs, whether to friends or strangers. And, in both cases, these offences are almost entirely invisible to police records (they are recorded only when they are detected); and completely invisible to the British Crime Survey (they have no adult victims)”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2003/jul/10/ukcrime.prisonsandprobation
And this was in the Guardian in 2003.
The problem is there are falls in crime such as burglary and car crime – but the problem has gone elsewhere and the British Crime Survey cannot measure this shift.
I listened to Gorgeous George Galloway’s Mother of All Talkshows on Talksport last night. Yes, he’s vile, but the show was interesting because of the many callers (not from obviously Tory areas) who were so openly sceptical of the Government’s (and al-Beeb’s) angle on crime figures.
Ok, Talksport gets a lot of right-wingers calling in, but Galloway’s show has (in BBC’s eyes anyway) a more representative (i.e. quite a few lefties) audience.
No one believes the Government or the BBC when they try and force the crime-is-falling meme down our throats.
People’s own daily experience tells them the opposite.
I really do think the scales have fallen from the eyes of people who voted for Blair the last three times, plus the BBC is falling fast in people’s esteem.
I think we can see light at the end of the tunnel as far as the BBC is concerned. A party promising to rid the nation of the BBC would get a fair hearing.
Why pay for TV licences in this era of pay per view TV, Youtube, the web and blogs? It’s ridiculous.
Hey BBCites – your gravytrain days could be coming to an end. Time to brush up those CVs.
I thought “hate” and “thought” crimes, allegedly against Muslims were out of control.
I’m sure I heard that on the BBC.
“If the Liberal press is to be believed, nobody has ever been stabbed – ever” (Rod Liddle).
[Preamble to his article]:
“Rod Liddle imagines the hoodie at home, allegedly innocent of any wicked intent, arming himself with a Stanley knife only because of the supposed alarmism of the right-wing media.”
http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/features/839881/if-the-liberal-press-is-to-be-believed-nobody-has-ever-been-stabbed-ever.thtml
Nobody believes the figures, and with good reason.
If you’ve been a victim of credit card fraud the police aren’t interested. They merely tell you to report it to your bank. They don’t record it as a crime.
Had your mobile phone pinched? Well unless you have the IMEI number the police won’t be interested. It won’t be recorded as a crime.
Been mugged at knifepoint? Well unless the mugger specifically said “give me your money or I will stab you” then the police will only recorded as a theft, not robbery (i.e. theft with violence). Even if you have had a knife held to your throat, unless the mugger verbally threatened to use it then it is ignored as part of the crime.
The government, the police, and now the BBC, all seem to be working from some common script to persuade the public that what they can see with their own eyes simply isn’t happening.
gunnar | 18.07.08 – 10:22 pm |
I am not sure how you assert that people won’t state that they were victims of a particular crime during a survey even when they did not report it to the police.
This is especially true for the first point you raise.
What’s giving you trouble? If people don’t want to report crime to the police, or go to the authorities for anything, why would they open up to those same authorities to answer questions about stuff they didn’t want to tell them in the first place?
What is your experience based on that you can assert, that an increasing number of crime victims fall under those three categories?
Everywhere I have lived from the age of 5 until this very moment, I have been among illegal aliens. I grew up in Arizona, and have lived in LA, and currently Manhattan. There have been extremely large numbers of illegal aliens in all three places, and I have lived and worked amongst them. I know all too well how that segment of society works and behaves. I know people today who have lived illegally in the US for about 15 years, but somehow got a legal Social Security card early on, and have worked legally and paid taxes the entire time. Yet, they do not report crime, and I don’t have to tell you why. These are college-educated people, by the way.
An increasing percentage of the population of New York LA, Arizona, and Great Britain are illegal aliens (or immigrants who come here legally, but then stay long after their paperwork expires, which amounts to the same predicament). They don’t get involved with the police, and they don’t participate in the census. And let’s not forget that the vast majority of illegal residents are not college-educated, and indeed are not very savvy at all about the law or the way things work. Those people are even more likely to hide from questionnaires and surveys and the like, because they don’t know any better. “The Man” is “The Man”, as far as they know, even if there is no connection between the man at the door and anyone who might arrest them for something.
Three of the neighborhoods in which I have lived (and the other side of Broadway from where I live now) contained a criminal element. Mostly low-level dope dealers and bootleg DVD sellers, amongst a majority of working-class families. It’s mostly Hispanic, and almost all of them have at least one illegal relative living with them and working in the local shops which I frequent. I’ve lived here for over 10 years, and have friends who grew up here. I’m not making any assumptions based on hearsay. I know what I’m talking about.
Maybe it’s not popular in your local council estates yet, but over here we have the unpleasant, but unfortunately popular theme of “Don’t Snitch”. This means that “in the ‘hood”, the cops are the enemy, and one does not inform on one’s own kind, full stop, even if the local drug dealer killed your cousin during an altercation. Variations on this theme play out in all neighborhoods which are overloaded with wastoids and thugs and low-level street hoods. This attitude leads to a drastic reduction in reported crime.
Combine all of the above with the fact that where I grew up, the police had one of the lowest crimes-solved rate in the entire country. They wasted money on mounted posses to bust prostitutes, and have legions of parking ticket vultures and speed traps and road blocks on holiday weekends to look for drunk drivers or people with a broken tail light. But they do not solve many actual crimes. Nobody bothered reporting much at all.
There was an armed robbery in the lobby of my very own apartment building on Tuesday night. There’s a prominent video camera and everything. Do you think the cops did anything other than take a report from the Chinese delivery guy who got robbed? They haven’t come to my door yet, and they haven’t been in the building at all since then as far as I know. I should add that I live on the ground floor, and the lobby is basically my front porch. This crime won’t be solved, and most of these robberies don’t get reported. That’s what the people who run all the local delis and take-out places tell me.
Instead the police did go to the trouble to hassle my friend and me when we were in the park where I live, just because we were off the path. They got pissed off because they thought they were going to bust a couple of stoners smoking in the park (they have quotas to fill), and instead found two well-kept men picking wineberries for our families. They were doing similar useless activities a few years ago when a young woman was killed in the park by a stalker – one who had been reported to the police several times already. So mostly nobody reports small crimes, because the police make it clear they have better things to do.
Does this sound familiar to you? It sure sounds like a certain southern county in England where I have friends.
Are you starting to see where I’m coming from now?
I agree with the BBC that peoples perception of current affairs may be wrong. Look at their own perception of saying the public thinks the BBC is good value.
Hi David P,
Many thanks for your answer.
You write:
“What’s giving you trouble? If people don’t want to report crime to the police, or go to the authorities for anything, why would they open up to those same authorities to answer questions about stuff they didn’t want to tell them in the first place?”
The BCS is run by BMRB, a market research company. Respondents are interviewed by researchers, rather than the police and responses are anonymous.
Further above, many people rightly stated, that not all crime gets reported. Are you saying that people would not state that they were victims of crime in a survey? Surely, some men may not report being beaten up by their wifes, but for sure, a substantial amount of unreported crime should surface during such an interview.
Also, part of the survey is self-completion, which may make it easier for some victims to note down personal assaults, etc. that have happened to them.
You are perhaps right, that illegal immigrants may not participate in the survey. Since it is asking about being a victim of crime, some may still do. Who knows.
However, crimes committed by illegal immigrants should still be captured to a large degree in the BCS, afterall, british people are being told that illegal immigrants are a nasty bunch of people fleecing and robbing brits in their sleep.
In that light, your personal experiences in the US are interesting, but have nothing to do with the BCS, as the aim of the study is to uncover crime, reported or not.
gunnar | 19.07.08 – 10:29 pm |
Are you saying that people would not state that they were victims of crime in a survey? Surely, some men may not report being beaten up by their wifes, but for sure, a substantial amount of unreported crime should surface during such an interview.
My whole point is that they probably would not, and I’ve tried to explain why. I don’t believe that a substantial amount of reported crime would be revealed.
However, crimes committed by illegal immigrants should still be captured to a large degree in the BCS, afterall, british people are being told that illegal immigrants are a nasty bunch of people fleecing and robbing brits in their sleep.
I thought that was the Travelers. Seriously, though, why would the illegal residence of the perpetrators be revealed in the study? Do victims of crime usually know the the legal status of their attackers? And if you’re talking about illegal immigrant-on-illegal immigrant crime, my contention is that they’d keep their mouths shut in the first place, so I don’t buy that either.
In that light, your personal experiences in the US are interesting, but have nothing to do with the BCS, as the aim of the study is to uncover crime, reported or not.
Nice moving of goal posts. You ask what personal experience I have to back up my statements, then when I relate my personal experience, you say that’s irrelevant anyway. My experiences are very similar to those of friends and acquaintances in Britain (except for the growing up around illegal immigrants part). There are also several similarities to comments made by UK residents on this very blog. So it’s rather relevant after all.
Hi David P
“My whole point is that they probably would not, and I’ve tried to explain why. I don’t believe that a substantial amount of reported crime would be revealed.”
I assume you meant to write “unreported crime”. In that light, my response.
Are you really saying that people would not state that their car had been broken in during a survey, even when they did not bother to report it?
“I thought that was the Travelers. Seriously, though, why would the illegal residence of the perpetrators be revealed in the study? Do victims of crime usually know the the legal status of their attackers? And if you’re talking about illegal immigrant-on-illegal immigrant crime, my contention is that they’d keep their mouths shut in the first place, so I don’t buy that either.”
You misunderstood my point. Respondents will state the crimes happened to them, regardless of the legal status of criminal. However, by doing this, the crimes committed by illegal immigrants should enter the count.
Obviously, if illegal immigrants are not part of the survey, they will not report crimes against them, which could come from people with varying status.
“Nice moving of goal posts.”
You are right there. Sorry for the flippant remark.
From the Telegraph:-
“Separate figures obtained by the Tories’ shadow police reform minister David Ruffley showed that there had been a 21 per cent increase in the numbers of homicides in the past decade, from 609 in 1997 to 734 in 2006/07. ”
Now I tend to put more faith in murder rates as an indicator of crime trends, because they [1] report a serious crime that we all care about [2] don’t tend to be under-reported – we notice if someone has been murdered [3] are not heavily influenced by things such as insurance companies changing policy and forcing people to report crime to the police before paying out [4] are not influenced by police attitudes which in turn are influenced by pay deals in the pipeline and so on [5] are not easily influenced by politicians [6] are sufficiently public but few in number that an individual that disbelieved the figures could compile a list of known murders from the local press and check the figures for themselves.
This barometer is still not absolutely perfect, because sometimes there are changes to the definition of the term “murder”, or because the population has grown. In this case, however, I think we can safely say that there has indeed been a significant increase in very serious crime, and surveys that claim otherwise must prove their credentials before I would have any faith in them.