Disgusterous

Author Topic: Third 'keep anti-intruder weapon'  (Read 5916 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Misunderstood

  • Guest
Re: Third 'keep anti-intruder weapon'
« Reply #15 on: July 17, 2007, 12:52:25 PM »
I really must wade into this thread as I too feel pretty strongly about it.

I gaze in wonder week after week, month after month and year after year at the ?declining crime rate? and I can?t help but wonder where on earth they get their figures from.  As has already been said the prisons are bursting with offenders with literally hundreds if not thousands of offenders being ?let off? because either there is no room for them or too little evidence of simply not enough effort being brought to bear on what the police themselves now describe as a fairly low priority crime with low expectations of a result.  What have all these prisoners done, if not robbing?  Failed to pay their Council Tax?

Because in the vast majority of cases they fail to catch the offenders, they are less likely to bring any resources to bear and so sends the message that burglary has replaced car theft as the safe option where the potential rewards are high but the actual risks are low ? not least because most householders are too afraid to take any retaliatory action for fear of prosecution or the comfort of being armed and knowing that the house would not have access to any serious weapons, but also in the knowledge that the police mostly won?t be bothered to actually investigate it unless you happen to be someone seriously important.
 
In short, burglary is almost encouraged. Most people are out working during the day and thieves know that, so the vast majority of burglars are now on the day shift working civilised hours, I have knowledge of subtle burglars that take only a little at a time and treat that house as a cash machine.  An awful lot of those people assume that they are getting forgetful and never realise they are being robbed until something of theirs surfaces elsewhere to blow the scam.

Another point well worth mentioning is where people have been cleaned out in a robbery and claim on their insurance only to find that a month later the original robbers return knowing that the house will be full of brand new stuff just waiting to be taken and not much chance that the victims have got around to serial numbers and pictures.  The realisation that they have been under tabs by criminals and lined up for a scheduled hit is more than most honest people can bear.  It is little wonder that folk are becoming traumatised by it. And they risk losing insurance cover as well!

I have always taken precautions and have been robbed ? in different places - six times to date!
If that is any kind of average then it points to literally millions of robberies per year even if only a small percentage of people are robbed as the records claim, and that in itself is a very serious state of affairs of which I suspect, is not of great importance to the powers-that-be who would much rather occupy the police for more high profile state security tasks ? and looking for celebrity cats!      

There are hundreds of houses around where I live and we have one police officer here with a few guests to help out from time to time.  We are lumbered with two PCSO?s that won?t attend any ?event? that may end in confrontation and knock off at midnight.  Useful!

In fact I believe the crime figures about as much as I believe the unemployment figures or the inflation figures, Massage the figures and everybody will calm down and stop yelling about things that are not important.
I don?t know ANYBODY that has never been burgled.  At least once!  It is the major topic of conversation wherever I go, that and the stark fact that we are forbidden by law to do anything about it.

It is a great black cloud hanging over the country and will surreptitiously destroy (what?s left of) our society along with divisions and immigration - all issues that need to be given their proper recognition - and stop pretending that we are all idiots.
 
Or just maybe we are, just for putting up with it.   noooo:

Offline Marley's Ghost (Imbiber of Spirits)

  • Fool Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4917
  • Reputation: 0
  • What a dead end job . .
Re: Third 'keep anti-intruder weapon'
« Reply #16 on: July 17, 2007, 01:18:37 PM »
 drumroll:

Well said! I have, in the past, worked in the crime arena, and can confirm the steps they take to 'calm down' or allay peoples fears without actually doing a damned thing about it!

When it comes to actually doing something about a crime which is reported to them, unless it involves either celebrities or motoring, then they basically do jack-shit. Unless, as has been pointed out, you have actually done something about it yourself in your role as victim, in which case they'll be round to dish out tea and sympathy to the miscreant prior to banging you up and throwing away the key!

It strikes me the only crime they are interested in is that of being a victim.
"Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end." 

Well, someone had to say it!

Offline Uncle Mort

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 22222
  • Reputation: 2
Re: Third 'keep anti-intruder weapon'
« Reply #17 on: July 17, 2007, 01:22:41 PM »
I guess you might say I feel quite strongly about this ??.

I am very sorry to read of your experience which must have been truely horrendous.

However, personalising the issue doesn't take away the fact that even when given the chances of it happening are very small, 4 out of 5 people still say they feel scared in their own home at night.

I don't feel a need to take any extra precautions to secure my home. Even when I lived in North London (where I was burgled) I still made no additional changes to the house.

Statistically I was unlucky to be burgled, just like winning the lottery would be lucky. I don't live my life fearing one or expecting the other to happen.




Offline Snoopy

  • Administrator
  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 54191
  • Reputation: 0
  • In the Prime of Senility
Re: Third 'keep anti-intruder weapon'
« Reply #18 on: July 17, 2007, 02:18:25 PM »
It is a fact that those who get burgled are likely to be burgled again within three months. the felons reckon that's about long enough for you to have made your insurance claim and bought all new items so they come back for them.
I used to have a handle on life but it broke.

Offline Barman

  • Administrator
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 155309
  • Reputation: -50
  • Since 1960...
    • Virtual Pub!
Re: Third 'keep anti-intruder weapon'
« Reply #19 on: July 17, 2007, 02:41:06 PM »
I really must wade into this thread as I too feel pretty strongly about it.

I gaze in wonder week after week, month after month and year after year at the ?declining crime rate? and I can?t help but wonder where on earth they get their figures from.  As has already been said the prisons are bursting with offenders with literally hundreds if not thousands of offenders being ?let off? because either there is no room for them or too little evidence of simply not enough effort being brought to bear on what the police themselves now describe as a fairly low priority crime with low expectations of a result.  What have all these prisoners done, if not robbing?  Failed to pay their Council Tax?

Because in the vast majority of cases they fail to catch the offenders, they are less likely to bring any resources to bear and so sends the message that burglary has replaced car theft as the safe option where the potential rewards are high but the actual risks are low ? not least because most householders are too afraid to take any retaliatory action for fear of prosecution or the comfort of being armed and knowing that the house would not have access to any serious weapons, but also in the knowledge that the police mostly won?t be bothered to actually investigate it unless you happen to be someone seriously important.
 
In short, burglary is almost encouraged. Most people are out working during the day and thieves know that, so the vast majority of burglars are now on the day shift working civilised hours, I have knowledge of subtle burglars that take only a little at a time and treat that house as a cash machine.  An awful lot of those people assume that they are getting forgetful and never realise they are being robbed until something of theirs surfaces elsewhere to blow the scam.

Another point well worth mentioning is where people have been cleaned out in a robbery and claim on their insurance only to find that a month later the original robbers return knowing that the house will be full of brand new stuff just waiting to be taken and not much chance that the victims have got around to serial numbers and pictures.  The realisation that they have been under tabs by criminals and lined up for a scheduled hit is more than most honest people can bear.  It is little wonder that folk are becoming traumatised by it. And they risk losing insurance cover as well!

I have always taken precautions and have been robbed ? in different places - six times to date!
If that is any kind of average then it points to literally millions of robberies per year even if only a small percentage of people are robbed as the records claim, and that in itself is a very serious state of affairs of which I suspect, is not of great importance to the powers-that-be who would much rather occupy the police for more high profile state security tasks ? and looking for celebrity cats!      

There are hundreds of houses around where I live and we have one police officer here with a few guests to help out from time to time.  We are lumbered with two PCSO?s that won?t attend any ?event? that may end in confrontation and knock off at midnight.  Useful!

In fact I believe the crime figures about as much as I believe the unemployment figures or the inflation figures, Massage the figures and everybody will calm down and stop yelling about things that are not important.
I don?t know ANYBODY that has never been burgled.  At least once!  It is the major topic of conversation wherever I go, that and the stark fact that we are forbidden by law to do anything about it.

It is a great black cloud hanging over the country and will surreptitiously destroy (what?s left of) our society along with divisions and immigration - all issues that need to be given their proper recognition - and stop pretending that we are all idiots.
 
Or just maybe we are, just for putting up with it.   noooo:

Agreed,

Based on any sense of common knowledge the crime statistics bear as much similarity with reality as the inflation statistics.

The statistics also show (I had a quick look on the ?tinterweb this morning) that there are more policemen so everything is okay and we have no need to fear crime. Except we all know that the policemen simply aren?t on duty at our police stations where they used to be or on the beat or has been pointed out more than once on this thread contactable by telephone late at night?. Strange.  rubschin:
Pro Skub  Thumbs:

Offline Landlady

  • Fool Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2896
  • Reputation: 0
Re: Third 'keep anti-intruder weapon'
« Reply #20 on: July 17, 2007, 03:03:10 PM »
I guess you might say I feel quite strongly about this ??.

I am very sorry to read of your experience which must have been truely horrendous.

However, personalising the issue doesn't take away the fact that even when given the chances of it happening are very small, 4 out of 5 people still say they feel scared in their own home at night.

I don't feel a need to take any extra precautions to secure my home. Even when I lived in North London (where I was burgled) I still made no additional changes to the house.

Statistically I was unlucky to be burgled, just like winning the lottery would be lucky. I don't live my life fearing one or expecting the other to happen.




Perhaps when posting my contribution I didn?t explain clearly enough that despite this having happened personally to us (in I would agree perhaps an unusually intrusive and frightening manner surpassing most opportunist burglary occurrences experienced) I did not accept that because of this unfortunate experience I:

Would lie down and be a quivering wreck for the rest of my life. No way is some little shit in a hoodie going to send me onto the Valium, EVER!  cussing:
 
Needed to re-fortress the barricades immediately (although I did think about installing some type form of eletrical current to fry the little bastard?s balls if they dared try it again) and we actually lived in the same property ? for a while on my own ? for a further 9 month plus period without taking any additional unlawful security measures. *Barman made me put back the kitchen knife in its rightful place pronto when he found out it was under my pillow.

My personal opinion on why more and more people are stating that they ?feel scared in their own home at night? isn?t because they are over-reacting to too much viewing Crimewatch or are generally just namby pamby but because they do truly see:

Crime (whatever type, it doesn?t matter it is still crime) happening to more and more people they personally know and care about.

Criminal acts increasing against the old/young and vulnerable ? some of the reported instances actually make me cry. 

The youth population apparently turning their acquisition of a criminal record (doesn?t matter for what crime really does it) into the latest ?designer badge? accessory must have. 

The spiralling increase in drugs and alcohol abuse in the young.

I know this factor might sound stupid to some but I believe it to be true ? teenage girls now being as foul mouthed, tanked or drugged up and equally violent as their male counterparts, sometimes worse. Let?s just consider what lovely offspring these nubile ladies will be bringing to the next generation shall we. noooo:

The decline of what was once called the ?work ethic? in the young (and other poncers of any age, creed or nationality) who believe the benefits system is there to be milked and that it is their god given right to do so  cussing:


If I have offended anyone with my two rant posts  Banghead then I do sincerely apologise ? perhaps I am a tad bitter on this topic after my personal burglary experience.

Okay that?s enough from me ? Sorry in advance this time before I hit the send key  redface:

Offline Uncle Mort

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 22222
  • Reputation: 2
Re: Third 'keep anti-intruder weapon'
« Reply #21 on: July 17, 2007, 03:42:13 PM »
No need to apologise, this is the place to rant.

Quote from: Landlady
No way is some little shit in a hoodie going to send me onto the Valium, EVER!

and I certainly agree with that sentiment.  happ096

But (sorry, there's always a 'but' with me  confused:) is crime on the increase? or is just the way it's reported now, sensationalised by the media causing a perception that there is an increase?

From the Home Office ~ British Crime Survey data




 
« Last Edit: July 17, 2007, 03:44:19 PM by Uncle Mort »

Offline Barman

  • Administrator
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 155309
  • Reputation: -50
  • Since 1960...
    • Virtual Pub!
Re: Third 'keep anti-intruder weapon'
« Reply #22 on: July 17, 2007, 03:47:33 PM »
Inflation
June: CPI down to 2.4%, RPI at 4.4%



Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

 lol:  happy001 lol:  happy001 lol:  happy001 lol:  happy001 lol:  happy001 lol:  happy001 lol:  happy001 lol:  happy001

Lies, damned lies and statistics IMHO.  whistle:
Pro Skub  Thumbs:

Offline Uncle Mort

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 22222
  • Reputation: 2
Re: Third 'keep anti-intruder weapon'
« Reply #23 on: July 17, 2007, 04:10:23 PM »
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

 lol:  happy001 lol:  happy001 lol:  happy001 lol:  happy001 lol:  happy001 lol:  happy001 lol:  happy001 lol:  happy001

Lies, damned lies and statistics IMHO.  whistle:


 ::) (with apologies to Berek)



Misunderstood

  • Guest
Re: Third 'keep anti-intruder weapon'
« Reply #24 on: July 17, 2007, 04:27:57 PM »
I have become annoyed with this discussion and done some research myself into the apparently irreconcilable statistics cited by UM against the reality expressed by others of a much higher probability.

The result confirms that there are lies, damned lies and statistics.  As usual!

Looking to the tables published by the British Crime Survey I note that 1998  saw a significant change in the ways crimes are recorded, and this fundamental change occurred again in 2002.
The dates of these changes matched curiously with the start and end of the ?statistic bubble? or crime wave recorded between those dates.

The statistics that are presented can distort the perception of what they are really saying; statistics can be manipulated to present the desired view whilst still essentially telling the truth, they can subtlety distort in ways such as stretching or compressing timeline to give a graph a more visually impacting picture which doesn?t stand close scrutiny, but the whole purpose a graphs is to be visually impacting, an overview almost. 

A very significant factor is concealed in bare statistical presentation and lies in the perception of actuality.   One might be tempted to say only three-quarters of a million domestic burglaries occurred in 2006, on the face of it, really not much to get worried about.  On a population level of around 56,000,000 it represents a one in seventy-four chance of being burgled.   
But as most people live in family units of about four that translates into a 18 to 1 chance of having their (our) homes burgled ? THIS YEAR.

What the graph is indicating is, that it is recording crime figures year over year since 1988 (in my chart) and noting trends over time, that is, it observes rises and falls in occurrences and doesn?t add them up.
So, whilst it may be statistically true that there is a 1:18 chance of it happening this year, it also records that there has been nearly 53 million burglaries committed since 1988 which also means that ? statistically ? everyone is likely to have been robbed 3 or 4 times each during the last two decades. 
This fits pretty well with public experience and perception.

The other point being, that despite the chances of being burgled during the next year is 1:18 the chances of being burgled during the next 20 years changes rather dramatically to 4:1.  That is the likelihood of being burgled four times in twenty years unless some fundamental changes take place in the meantime.

Seeing as they are crowing about falling crime rates I wouldn?t hold my breath.

Offline Marley's Ghost (Imbiber of Spirits)

  • Fool Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4917
  • Reputation: 0
  • What a dead end job . .
Re: Third 'keep anti-intruder weapon'
« Reply #25 on: July 17, 2007, 05:05:06 PM »
No need to apologise, this is the place to rant.

Quote from: Landlady
No way is some little shit in a hoodie going to send me onto the Valium, EVER!

and I certainly agree with that sentiment.  happ096

But (sorry, there's always a 'but' with me  confused:) is crime on the increase? or is just the way it's reported now, sensationalised by the media causing a perception that there is an increase?

From the Home Office ~ British Crime Survey data




 

As I pointed out earlier, I have some experience in the crime arena having earned a crust at it (not crime, but trying to do something about it) and can confirm what Bouncer points out. They are just playing wth the numbers to make them look good.

I'll give you an example from fairly recently (I'll try and find a link to it and edit it in here if I can)

One school boy got sponsorship for an activity from some 50+ people. He then did what he was trying to do and they coughed up the sponsor money. However, he FAILED to hand it to the organisation it was intended for. Plod got involved and he got done.

How many crimes did plod record as solved?


Any guesses anyone?





One - the boy perpetrating fraud on the organisation?





NO!



50+ some since they say that he perpetrated fraud on 50+ sponsors.



So, they clear up 50+ or so crimes in one hit.


Guess, now, which crime would be recorded as having been committed?


Get the picture? This is a direct result of managing crime by targets. Clear up rates are the new God. That's why motorists are such a popular target. All those pictures on the Gatsos? Each one a cleared up and solved crime.


Then there are all the crimes people don't bother to report as they know that they'll do jack-shit anyway?


I could go on, but my piss is starting to boil.
"Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end." 

Well, someone had to say it!

Offline Uncle Mort

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 22222
  • Reputation: 2
Re: Third 'keep anti-intruder weapon'
« Reply #26 on: July 17, 2007, 08:27:59 PM »
Here is the British Crime Survey graph for domestic burglary:



It shows Bouncer's 750,000 burglaries in 2005-6 but totalling up 1988 - 2006 (by eyeball) gives a figure of about 25m rather than 53m total burglaries cited.

The National Statistics site gives the average household size of 2.7 persons rather than 4. It doesn't include retired people who would probably have households under a two average so it's possible to have a figure closer to half of Bouncer's 4. This would translate as about 1 in 30 chance of a household being burgled in this year.

So we're already down to one or two burglaries per household in the past two decades.

It's also worth noting that based on the 1997 report just under half were failed attempts and in 75% of actual break-ins was anything taken. (although I realise from our hosts experience that could be worse)

So you could say that in the past twenty years you probably didn't have anything stolen from your home.

Misunderstood

  • Guest
Re: Third 'keep anti-intruder weapon'
« Reply #27 on: July 17, 2007, 11:45:40 PM »
Here is the British Crime Survey graph for domestic burglary:



It shows Bouncer's 750,000 burglaries in 2005-6 but totalling up 1988 - 2006 (by eyeball) gives a figure of about 25m rather than 53m total burglaries cited.

The National Statistics site gives the average household size of 2.7 persons rather than 4. It doesn't include retired people who would probably have households under a two average so it's possible to have a figure closer to half of Bouncer's 4. This would translate as about 1 in 30 chance of a household being burgled in this year.

So we're already down to one or two burglaries per household in the past two decades.

It's also worth noting that based on the 1997 report just under half were failed attempts and in 75% of actual break-ins was anything taken. (although I realise from our hosts experience that could be worse)

So you could say that in the past twenty years you probably didn't have anything stolen from your home.

You strike me as someone willing to accept the statistics at face value - as expected.  So they don't include the elderly eh?  Well, around where I live the elderly tend to live in semi-sheltered accommodation where there are usually some two to three hundred people amassed, and - had become such a concentrated crime area that they spent several millions of pounds making them like concentration camps.  It is universally acknowledged that the elderly are prime targets for robberies because a) they tend to hoard jewellery and other valuables and b) keep the money available hidden around the house and c) are of very likelihood of offering resistance if caught.

Sure, My figures were largely guesswork - I didn't get a grant to fabricate the fabric of gloss that government departments do and I don't have the time- but you know full well that if I were to spend serious time investigating the system of crime reporting it would be rubbished.

My figure of just shy of 33 million (Yeah I exaggerated and said 53 million - so sue me) burglaries were quite simply adding up the governments own figures - you should try it.  They also exclude minors.  and claim statistically (when they are looking for child funding) a third of the population are minors. so add the elderly in group occupation and children to the equation and your 2.7 seems to swing back closer to my estimation (Theirs too when arguing Council tax figures) but hey who's counting!

They don't seem to be accounting for all the mega-multi occupancy of immigrant households that usually number up to ten to twenty per household - not to mention those that aren't really here are they? - or the multiplicity of flats in a single house rated as a single household.

The 2.7 average figure was delivered to Parliament in a Rover 75.  the population was slightly different then. We should all try to keep up.

You only have to look around to see that it is rubbish,  Whether one should be afraid or not is a separate issue;  but in my time spent out and about, I have yet to meet anyone that has not been burgled at some time - not even you!

in accepting their wonderfully low yearly average of 800,000 robberies of - just - domestic burglaries to realise that in ten years there were at least 8,000,000 and 16,000,000 in twenty and unless there are some really unlucky people out there, that is more than enough to go around the households of the whole population's - including the so-called minorities of the old and the young that put together are the majority - at least when they are banging the pensions drum - they (we) are.

I said 1988 - I meant 1981  redface:

1981         790,000
1982         950,000
1983      1,000,000
1984      1,100,000
1985      1,150,000
1986      1,200,000
1987      1,220,000
1988      1,250,000
1989      1,300,000
1990      1,350,000
1991      1,500,000
1992      1,600,000
1993      1,750,000
1994      1,750,000
1995      1,740,000
1996      1,650,000
1997      1,600,000
1998      1,500,000
1999      1,400,000
2000      1,300,000
2001      1,220,000
2002         980,000
2003      1,000,000
2004         950,000
2005         780,000
2006         733,000
2007      

      32,763,000

 How many households are there in this country?
« Last Edit: July 17, 2007, 11:58:07 PM by Bouncer »

Offline Barman

  • Administrator
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 155309
  • Reputation: -50
  • Since 1960...
    • Virtual Pub!
Re: Third 'keep anti-intruder weapon'
« Reply #28 on: July 18, 2007, 02:23:02 AM »
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

 lol:  happy001 lol:  happy001 lol:  happy001 lol:  happy001 lol:  happy001 lol:  happy001 lol:  happy001 lol:  happy001

Lies, damned lies and statistics IMHO.  whistle:


 ::) (with apologies to Berek)

But these are the same government lies ?statistics? that you rely on for the crime figures?

Quote from: National Statistics Online
CPI annual inflation ? the Government?s target measure ? was 2.4 per cent in June, down from 2.5 per cent in May.

The main downward pressure on the CPI annual rate came from average gas and electricity bills which continued to fall this year but rose 12 months ago. There were also large downward effects from cigarettes, where last year?s price increases were not repeated this year, and from audio-visual equipment and related products, with prices falling by more than a year ago, particularly for digital cameras, hi-fi equipment, televisions and pre-recorded DVDs.

Small downward effects also came from a range of other products including personal care appliances and products; insurance premiums; and books, newspapers and stationery.

Including high-tech appliances in the ?shopping basket?, things that people may only buy every five years is surely a cynical government ploy to artificially reduce the inflation figures?

Check out 2.4% and everything seems rosy yet we all know that the things that really count ? mortgage repayments, council tax, food, fuel, etc. ? cost significantly more.
Pro Skub  Thumbs:

Offline Uncle Mort

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 22222
  • Reputation: 2
Re: Third 'keep anti-intruder weapon'
« Reply #29 on: July 18, 2007, 08:39:38 AM »
My figures were largely guesswork

My figure of just shy of 33 million (Yeah I exaggerated and said 53 million - so sue me)

I said 1988 - I meant 1981 


 eeek: