[News] Increased risk of being randomly horrifically attack while out and about

[portlock seagull]

There definitely IS an increased risk, and it almost certainly IS due to underfunding of related care and services.

The risk to you, as you go about your business, has increased though, from infinitesimal to slightly-less-infinitesimal.

Or drugs. I blame illegal drugs, and anything promoted by capitalist system that may be legal but is morally bankrupt and fuels addiction eg See dopesick

Funding for care to pick up broken pieces is very much after horse has bolted, and it’ll never be enough.

Basically, there but for the grace of god goes everyone of us.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Or drugs. I blame illegal drugs, and anything promoted by capitalist system that may be legal but is morally bankrupt and fuels addiction eg See dopesick

Funding for care to pick up broken pieces is very much after horse has bolted, and it’ll never be enough.

Basically, there but for the grace of god goes everyone of us.

Drugs are certainly often a factor, yes.

 

[Stat Brother]

That's a bit unfair. Pointlessly pissy, in fact

Why?
It's a sensational thread title to which I and just about everybody else have said doesn't really have any validity.
Which in turn is pretty much the dictionary definition of The Mail OnLine's content.

Are you going to reply?

Why is my post "pointlessly pissy" while all the others saying the same perfectly ok?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Why?
It's a sensational thread title to which I and just about everybody else have said doesn't really have any validity.
Which in turn is pretty much the dictionary definition of The Mail OnLine's content.

Sensational? Not my take. The thread title is surely in imaginary inverted commas, and was ironically referencing the likely reaction of some, by way of initiating debate. As an expert in nuance yourself I was surprised you hadn't realized. I wasn't remotely mislead into thinking this was a 'why O why' thread.

And I am not reading post after post saying the thread title doesn't have any validity. Rather some very thoughtful comments about perception and reality, revealing surprisingly few instances of confirmation bias. Which is I'm sure what the OP wanted. Even I haven't gone in in studs up on 13 years of tory misrule. It is a lot more nuanced than that.

So having a go about he thread title . . . . seems a bit.....and makes me raise one eyebrow Probably on a par in terms of pointlessness as me pointing it out

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Are you going to reply?

Why is my post "pointlessly pissy" while all the others saying the same perfectly ok?

Patience dear boy. I have replied!

 

[nicko31]

There definitely IS an increased risk, and it almost certainly IS due to underfunding of related care and services.

The risk to you, as you go about your business, has increased though, from infinitesimal to slightly-less-infinitesimal.

Youth services have been decimated under Tories, sadly a lot of young men don't have a father figure

 

[Insel affe]

I've met numerous people who's view of mental health illness is "Well they just need to get over it". Depression is a good example - incredibly difficult to deal with if you have it ( and I have had it ) and people just saying "Well you need to go for a good walk each day and you'll feel happier" show a complete lack of understanding of the condition.

Ah, you have met my wife then.

 

[portlock seagull]

Youth services have been decimated under Tories, sadly a lot of young men don't have a father figure

Yet every young man has a father, so not all the Tories fault.

 

[Stat Brother]

Sensational? Not my take. The thread title is surely in imaginary inverted commas, and was ironically referencing the likely reaction of some, by way of initiating debate. As an expert in nuance yourself I was surprised you hadn't realized. I wasn't remotely mislead into thinking this was a 'why O why' thread.

And I am not reading post after post saying the thread title doesn't have any validity. Rather some very thoughtful comments about perception and reality, revealing surprisingly few instances of confirmation bias. Which is I'm sure what the OP wanted. Even I haven't gone in in studs up on 13 years of tory misrule. It is a lot more nuanced than that.

So having a go about he thread title . . . . seems a bit.....and makes me raise one eyebrow Probably on a par in terms of pointlessness as me pointing it out

The title is a simple blunt statement of fact without a single grammatical cue to suggest otherwise, a fact I challenged as did most other comments after mine and yet I get singled out in quite a snide fashion.


As this isn't the thread for a back and forth on this that's me done.

 

[nicko31]

Yet every young man has a father, so not all the Tories fault.

You can debate the rights and wrongs of one parent families, but the fact is youth services were a lifeline for some.

For the Tories it was an ideological decision to cut them, it was all part of austerity. We are now living with the fallout

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

I saw a documentary, which claimed, and this may or may not be true, that you're statistically less likely to suffer a violent death, wherever you are in the world than at any point in human history. Whether you take, 1 year, 10 years, 100 years 1000 years ago, your chances of avoiding an end like this are better than they have ever been.

What has changed is social media makes these things more visible (though I guess this is far from uniform) and we're more able to humanise the victim, which is positive, but people are bad at working out the chances of this happening to themselves or their family.

 

[herecomesaregular]

As horrifying as this recent case is, your thread title is doing a lot of heavy lifting - A little too Mail OnLine.

I don't take offense, I should perhaps have put a question mark in there or a "perception". i was contemplating while in the park with the dog after a sleepless night. no need to be a bellend mate (you strike me as an old codger who has never met anyone with serious mh issues but I'm undoubtedly wrong by assumption eh? mustn't assume must we). btw I have never read the Daily Mail but I have been a victim of mindless unprovoked violence in the past and I have worked with many people who have been violent (usually when having undiagnosed or unmedicated paranoid schizophrenia at the time before i met them). Thoughts also clouded by empathy for recent victims (I mean imagine just walking to school as a 14 year and suddenly being slain by sword ffs) plus current dealings with the police re a homeless man causing criminal damage while entering a perceived empty property behind us. It's been frustrating trying to engage the police and I've spoken calmly twice to the chap who was agitated (but not aggressive) and rambling about being a legal representative of the named owner (garbage of course, he's just read the post after entering). I certainyl don';t demonise the homeless nor the mentally ill. anyway, on reflection it has made me think more about sudden acts of violence in recent times (will this chap knife me if i go to calmly talk to him etc etc). Thanks for all the comments so far. Crack on.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

The title is a simple blunt statement of fact without a single grammatical cue to suggest otherwise, a fact I challenged as did most other comments after mine and yet I get singled out in quite a snide fashion.


As this isn't the thread for a back and forth on this that's me done.

I'm not letting you have the last word.

And I thought your comment was snide.

I was pleased when you came back to NSC after a layoff. I though all that 'stat-bore' stuff was inappropriate. It was clear it was affecting you.

So whatever your getting from laying into the OP, and now me, fill your boots.

You're going on ignore.

 

[Stat Brother]

I don't take offense, I should perhaps have put a question mark in there or a "perception". i was contemplating while in the park with the dog after a sleepless night. no need to be a bellend mate (you strike me as an old codger who has never met anyone with serious mh issues but I'm undoubtedly wrong by assumption eh? mustn't assume must we). btw I have never read the Daily Mail but I have been a victim of mindless unprovoked violence in the past and I have worked with many people who have been violent (usually when having undiagnosed or unmedicated paranoid schizophrenia at the time). Thoughts also clouded by empathy for recent victims (I mean imagine just walking to school as a 14 year and suddenly being slain by sword ffs) plus current dealings with the police re a homeless man causing criminal damage while entering a perceived empty property behind us. It's been frustrating trying to engage the police and I've spoken calmly twice to the chap who was agitated (but not aggressive) and rambling about being a legal representative of the named owner (garbage of course, he's just read the post after entering). I certainyl don';t demonise the homeless nor the mentally ill. anyway, on reflection it has made me think more about sudden acts of violence in recent times. Thanks for all the comments so far. Crack on.

No offence was meant, but for obvious reasons that kind of sensationalising title to a serious, yet incredibly rare event, is another troubling trend that has become 'normal'.
Naturally I can't just say that and have to use a glib side eye instead!

 

[herecomesaregular]

Sensational? Not my take. The thread title is surely in imaginary inverted commas, and was ironically referencing the likely reaction of some, by way of initiating debate. As an expert in nuance yourself I was surprised you hadn't realized. I wasn't remotely mislead into thinking this was a 'why O why' thread.

And I am not reading post after post saying the thread title doesn't have any validity. Rather some very thoughtful comments about perception and reality, revealing surprisingly few instances of confirmation bias. Which is I'm sure what the OP wanted. Even I haven't gone in in studs up on 13 years of tory misrule. It is a lot more nuanced than that.

So having a go about he thread title . . . . seems a bit.....and makes me raise one eyebrow Probably on a par in terms of pointlessness as me pointing it out

thanks for your comments HTW, nowadays I am immune to NSC criticisms and often i might post without going over in great detail exactly what I'm writing, forgetting of course that some member on here will critique it immediately. i prefer to still think as NSC as "comments down the pub" perhaps off the cuff and perhaps not thought fully through indepth, rather than a bloody thesis for peer critique before publishing! .

 

[herecomesaregular]

No offence was meant, but for obvious reasons that kind of sensationalising title to a serious, yet incredibly rare event, is another troubling trend that has become 'normal'.
Naturally I can't just say that and have to use a glib side eye instead!

Wasn't meant to be sensationilist but I can see how it may come across. I am just over worrying and I feel utter horror for that poor young schoolboy, as I did for those two lovely young people wandering home, and those three men in the park all stabbed, seems a lot of it but yes must remember that statistically more unlikely than ever nowadays. But kin hell, imagine being in wrong place and wrong time still. Probably should have a nap now.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I saw a documentary, which claimed, and this may or may not be true, that you're statistically less likely to suffer a violent death, wherever you are in the world than at any point in human history. Whether you take, 1 year, 10 years, 100 years 1000 years ago, your chances of avoiding an end like this are better than they have ever been.

What has changed is social media makes these things more visible (though I guess this is far from uniform) and we're more able to humanise the victim, which is positive, but people are bad at working out the chances of this happening to themselves or their family.

You are quite right. To add, when it comes to risk perception humans are notorious for gaming it to suit their desires. On top of that they can also do it to suit their prejudices. It would be easy for me, someone who loathes the last several tory governments, to say things are getting worse because of them. They certainly are in some obvious areas. However psychotic killers....I doubt it.

This is from 2016 in that right wing tory supporting paper, the, er, Guardian:

Number of killings by mental health patients falls

Study suggests that improved NHS care could be behind fall in number of homicides but suicide increases

www.theguardian.com

Recent national homicide data do not show an increasing trend in overall homicides.

Homicide in England and Wales - Office for National Statistics

Analyses of information held within the Home Office Homicide Index, which contains detailed record-level information about each homicide recorded by police in England and Wales.

www.ons.gov.uk

 

[Giraffe]

London knife crime 2024 | Statista

Knife crime in London has increased significantly in recent years, reaching a peak in 2019/20, and remaining at high levels since then.

www.statista.com

So in short knife crime in London peaked at over 15,000 offences in the 12 months to 31st March 2020, then dropped dramatically to just over 10,000 (presumably covid related when we were all getting needled instead). It has risen every year since and the 12 months to 31st March 2023 are at 12,786.

So on the rise again, but not as bad as at it's peak.

 

[Giraffe]

I do think it feels worse though because of social media. More images shared etc.

 

[Stat Brother]

Wasn't meant to be sensationilist but I can see how it may come across. I am just over worrying and I feel utter horror for that poor young schoolboy, as I did for those two lovely young people wandering home, and those three men in the park all stabbed, seems a lot of it but yes must remember that statistically more unlikely than ever nowadays. But kin hell, imagine being in wrong place and wrong time still. Probably should have a nap now.

Of course none of it bears thinking about.

For me very, very low down on the list of 'what's wrong with the world' is perfectly summed up with how you start that reply.
'wasn't meant to be sensationalist' and 'I am just over worrying'.

You're entitled to be over worried by something that just won't happen, by virtue of the sensationalist reporting which follows such events.

That said if the events that are far more likely to do us horrific damage were actually sensationalised when reported, I doubt any of us would step out of our homes (soon to be called death traps) so maybe it's for the best, after all.