[News] Arrest after shooting in St Leonard's.

[AmexRuislip]

Man arrested after reported shooting in St Leonards.


More >>>>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-43438980

 

[whitelion]

Two women shot dead at house in St Leonards - BBC News

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-43438980
Two women reported dead.

 

[spence]

That's awful news

 

[Stat Brother]

You just know someone in America will use this as a points scoring exercise.

 

[Eeyore]

You just know someone in America will use this as a points scoring exercise.

Or an idea.

 

[looney]

You just know someone in America will use this as a points scoring exercise.

Like its never used as a point scoring exercise on NSC when there is a shooting in the USA?


btw Hasn't gun crime risen 42% in the last year? In the UK.

 

[Buzzer]

btw Hasn't gun crime risen 42% in the last year? In the UK.

Yes and no. That figure comes from stats collated by the police rather than the ONS, who have cautioned against using that data to make statements about crime trends.

The stats are being heavily quoted as part of the Met PR to highlight police cuts so the figures will almost certainly be a worst case scenario. Also, the way the police record the gun crime is quite convoluted. It includes air guns, stun guns and fake guns. If there is any doubt as to whether a weapon used was a gun or not it will be recorded as a gun. Apparently, incidents involving guns being fired is increasing although still very low and half the time gang-related.

 

[Stat Brother]

[MENTION=28934]AmexRuislip[/MENTION]

No.

 

[AmexRuislip]

[MENTION=28934]AmexRuislip[/MENTION]

No.

Cheers [MENTION=435]Stat Brother[/MENTION]

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Two other women - including one who is pregnant - were led to safety by officers at the scene on Bexhill Road.

Police said the victims, aged 32 and 53, were known to the suspect

http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/1609..._two_women_shot_dead_at_house_in_St_Leonards/

 

[looney]

Yes and no. That figure comes from stats collated by the police rather than the ONS, who have cautioned against using that data to make statements about crime trends.

The stats are being heavily quoted as part of the Met PR to highlight police cuts so the figures will almost certainly be a worst case scenario. Also, the way the police record the gun crime is quite convoluted. It includes air guns, stun guns and fake guns. If there is any doubt as to whether a weapon used was a gun or not it will be recorded as a gun. Apparently, incidents involving guns being fired is increasing although still very low and half the time gang-related.

You dont get statistics. Regardless of how flakey or sharp the definition is a 42% increase is valid according to that standardisation.

Unless, like feminists like to do, you are comparing different definitions, Apples and pears for example.

 

[Buzzer]

You dont get statistics. Regardless of how flakey or sharp the definition is a 42% increase is valid according to that standardisation.

Unless, like feminists like to do, you are comparing different definitions, Apples and pears for example.

Well..I'm quoting the ONS about any conclusions drawn re. crime trends being invalid, so you're saying that they don't get statistics. That's the Office for National Statistics. Righto.

 

[looney]

Well..I'm quoting the ONS about any conclusions drawn re. crime trends being invalid, so you're saying that they don't get statistics. That's the Office for National Statistics. Righto.

You were not quoting but paraphrasing. Crime trends being unreliable which you allude to is not the same as invalid. They can still be seen as indicative.

 

[Tom Bombadil]

You dont get statistics. Regardless of how flakey or sharp the definition is a 42% increase is valid according to that standardisation.

Unless, like feminists like to do, you are comparing different definitions, Apples and pears for example.

Well he obviously gets them better than you do. He at least knows how to critique source and not to isolate data points.

 

[Buzzer]

You were not quoting but paraphrasing. Crime trends being unreliable which you allude to is not the same as invalid. They can still be seen as indicative.

No. They are not to be used as any sort of indication. The ONS made that very clear. No amount of sophism or pedantry regarding the definitions of invalid or unreliable will alter that. You want the quote verbatim? Here's the quote verbatim:

“While these figures are useful in giving an insight into the caseload of the police and how this is changing, they are not believed to provide a reliable measure of trends in violent crime,” the ONS report said. The ONS said that police-registered crime must be interpreted with caution, attributing much of the rise to changes in recording practices and increased confidence of victims in coming forward. Its preferred measure, the Crime Survey for England and Wales, gave a total of 10.6 million incidents, which was a fall of 10 per cent.

If you still believe, after that quote, that you can use the police figures as an indication of crime trends then you're saying that the ONS are wrong and that they do not understand statistics.

 

[Stat Brother]

A 42% increase from what to what?

 

[Da Man Clay]

Well..I'm quoting the ONS about any conclusions drawn re. crime trends being invalid, so you're saying that they don't get statistics. That's the Office for National Statistics. Righto.

You are missing the bit about gun and knife crime however which says:- “Police recorded crime showed continuing rises in a number of higher-harm violent offences that are not well-measured by the CSEW as they occur in relatively low volumes. This was most evident in offences of knife crime and gun crime; categories that are thought to be relatively well-recorded by the police.“

Knowing a fair bit about recorded crime and the CSEW - Gun and Violent crime has been pretty well recorded for a long time. It’s lesser offences where you get the disparity.

 

[Buzzer]

You are missing the bit about gun and knife crime however which says:- “Police recorded crime showed continuing rises in a number of higher-harm violent offences that are not well-measured by the CSEW as they occur in relatively low volumes. This was most evident in offences of knife crime and gun crime; categories that are thought to be relatively well-recorded by the police.“

Knowing a fair bit about recorded crime and the CSEW - Gun and Violent crime has been pretty well recorded for a long time. It’s lesser offences where you get the disparity.

I didn't miss it at all because despite the point you've highlighted, the ONS still issued that statement advising people not to draw any conclusions about crime trends from the police figures. If you've got issues with that, then you really need to take it up with the ONS.

 

[Da Man Clay]

I didn't miss it at all because despite the point you've highlighted, the ONS still issued that statement advising people not to draw any conclusions about crime trends from the police figures. If you've got issues with that, then you really need to take it up with the ONS.

“This was most evident in the relatively low volume offences such as knife crime (up 21% to a total of 37,443 recorded offences) and gun crime (up 20% to 6,694 recorded offences). The occurrence of these offences tends to be disproportionately concentrated in London and other metropolitan areas. While it is possible that improved recording and more proactive policing has contributed to this rise, it is our judgement that there have also been genuine increases.”

How about that one that does say the ONS believe gun and knife crime have genuine increases?

 

[Buzzer]

“This was most evident in the relatively low volume offences such as knife crime (up 21% to a total of 37,443 recorded offences) and gun crime (up 20% to 6,694 recorded offences). The occurrence of these offences tends to be disproportionately concentrated in London and other metropolitan areas. While it is possible that improved recording and more proactive policing has contributed to this rise, it is our judgement that there have also been genuine increases.”

How about that one that does say the ONS believe gun and knife crime have genuine increases?

You're being needlessly defensive here. I dare say that the ONS do believe that gun crime is increasing. It doesn't change the fact that the police figures quoting a 42% increase are, in the opinion of the ONS an unreliable source of information for tracking crime trends.

It's as simple as that. I'm not trying to argue that gun crime isn't going up nor am I saying that the police figures are necessarily wrong. I'm saying that the ONS have said that the figures are not a reliable indicator of crime trends.