What's wrong with Britain: London murder rate overtakes New York's - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Crime and prevention thereof. Loopholes, grey areas and the letter of the law.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14902167
Victoribus Spolia wrote:I wouldn't put it past them....but only for white people.

If you are a jihadist returning from your distinguished service to ISIS and you want to buy a shit-ton of fertilzer between your posts calling for the beheading of westerners on facebook (no problem).

If you are a white veteran of Her Majesty's armed forces and want to bring attention to Muslim propagated molestation rings in your country (and also happen to be carrying a plastic spoon)....you could be thrown into prison for the rest of your life. :lol:


We could do without this massively ignorant and sensationalist non-sense in on-topic forums.
#14902169
Rich wrote:Oh really I'm so ignorant I didn't know that. What percentage of cars coming in from New Hampshire are searched? Is it more than 50%? Is there a border fence with New Hampshire and Vermont?

Your selective quotation does not make you look credible, it merely makes you look like a cherry picker. No response is due because you do not show such respect so I shall reciprocate with my own disrespect, and just say that you are merely pushing an agenda, which is obviously the case.
#14902172
noemon wrote:We could do without this massively ignorant and sensationalist non-sense in on-topic forums.


Couple of questions:

1. Have Any ISIS fighters been permitted to return to the United Kingdom?

2. Have not even the Police admitted fear of investigating Muslim molestation rings due to being charged with racism?

Is any of this true at all?
#14902188
noemon wrote:No they are not


So nothing in this article whatsoever is true at all?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/h ... 17811.html

Thousands of Isis fighters have already returned to their home countries amid confusion over the number of foreign jihadis remaining in the dwindling caliphate, a new report has found.

Research by The Soufan Centre estimated that at least 425 British Isis members have so far returned to the UK – the largest cohort in Europe.

But there are fears many have “disappeared” from the view of security services, who will not publicly confirm how many returnees have been jailed or are being tracked.

Out of countries for which data was available, only Turkey (900), Tunisia (800) and Saudi Arabia (760) had larger numbers of returning foreign fighters, according to the study.

Of the 850 people known to have travelled to warzones in Syria and Iraq from the UK, around 100 are women and 50 are children.

Richard Barrett, the author of the report, said: “As the so-called Islamic State loses territorial control of its caliphate, there is little doubt that the group or something similar will survive the worldwide campaign against it so long as the conditions that promoted its growth remain.

“Its appeal will outlast its demise, and while it will be hard to assess the specific threat posed by foreign fighters and returnees, they will present a challenge to many countries for years to come.”

Mr Barrett said former fighters’ attitudes to Isis varied dramatically between those who rejected the group, became disillusioned, or were forced to retreat in battle.

He warned: “While it will be hard to assess the specific threat posed by foreign fighters and returnees, they will present a challenge to many countries for years to come.”

The analyst, who has worked for British security services and the UN’s counter-terrorism branch, said all 5,600 former Isis members who have returned to 33 countries pose some degree of risk.

“States have not found a way to address the problem of returnees,” Mr Barrett added. “Most are imprisoned, or disappear from view. There will be a need for more research and information sharing to develop effective strategies to assess and address the threat.
#14902195
You can not implement gun control at a city or state level. The British Isles is an experiment in extreme gun control. Both Britain and Eire operate extreme gun control. Britain and Eire are each other's only land border. To achieve the same level of gun control in the United States you'd also need to enforce extreme gun control on Canada, Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Belize and Panama. The British Isles is the flag ship for gun control and it seems to have been a complete and humiliating failure.
#14902198
@Victoribus Spolia The Soufan centre is not the British government. Your ridiculous claims that the UK endorses, promotes and welcomes ISIS militants remains the screeching hysteria that it is regardless of your attempt to turn it into a serious claim just because some British passport holders have allegedly found themselves back. Doubling down and changing the goal posts while being off-topic at the very same time. Next you will be crying victim tears with mathematical precision. Pretending that your earlier post is anything but a poor trolling attempt does not really raise anyones expectations.
#14902205
noemon wrote:Your ridiculous claims that the UK endorses, promotes and welcomes ISIS militants


I never said any of that (in bold). I said that ISIS members have returned to the United Kingdom (which is TRUE) and used that point, in an intentionally satirical manner, to contrast to the British Government's obviously extreme censoring campaign against innocuous voices from the Right. To me, and many others, this seems to show a strange double-standard on the part of the British Government. It has seemingly allowed ISIS members back into the country, but won't allow Lauren Southern in?

That is dumb and no psuedo self-righteous attempt at an apologetic will undermine this reality.

EDIT: following added later.

noemon wrote:Pretending that your earlier post is anything but a poor trolling attempt does not really raise anyones expectations.


I think if I use hyperbole it should be obvious that I was being somewhat tongue-in-cheek, you are the one who got all butt-hurt over it acting like this thread has been the pinnacle of academic posting and not just one long series of cynical posts.

Also, I don't give a rip about anyone else's expectations. I believe in bringing back feudalism, so i'm sorta used to people not taking me seriously. :lol:

If I am violating forum rules (posting off-topic? etc), then just delete my post or whatever, but bear in mind that I was only responding to your provocation. Nothing more, and nothing less.
#14902209
There is no such reality and pity for those who actually believe that the British state considers British ISIS militants more welcome than a foreign white racist youtuber. Obviously different rules and circumstances apply for British people and different for foreign agent provocateurs but this is a discussion you should be having in Gorkiy instead of trying to infest ontopic forums with offtopic nonsense. In fact this conversation will be moved later when I get to my computer. The fact here is that the British state has laws that remove citizenship from those confirmed to be enemy combatants.
#14902210
noemon wrote:who actually believe that the British state considers British ISIS militants more welcome than a foreign white racist youtuber.


Once again, I never said "welcomed" those are your words and not mine.

Fact is, a bunch of ISIS militants have been "permitted" to reenter the United Kingdom and a "white racist youtuber" was not allowed in. This is retarded.

Which, like I said, Lauren Southern is hardly a "racist" by far-right standards, she is more libertarian than anything, she is very innocuous with her opinions.....but by UK standards she is probably in the same class as Adolf Hitler.

I just don't get it, the UK has gone nuts with its social media policies and censorship policies and has been weak on issues pertaining to Islamic populations. In fact, this is one of the reasons many in the UK supported Brexit in the first place, because of concerns regarding Islamic immigration.

Also, you keep saying this is off-topic, but how is this not relevant to crime rates in London? Obviously the issues pertaining to London crime-rates includes islamic populations and its policies regarding those populations. This sub-topic is entirely relevant.

However, as the PoFo Tsar, you are free to do as you wish with these exchanges and I will respect that.

I do believe in hierarchy after all ;)
#14902216
One (collective) holds a British Passport and the other doesn't VS. The UK can't just not grant them entry because they don't want them in. The same would apply if they held US passports btw.

The only issue here is why they weren't arrested or traced when returning. I suspect this is down to austerity cuts and the fact they were low profile fighters. Not because the UK are ISIS sympathisers.
#14902250
Rich wrote:To achieve the same level of gun control in the United States you'd also need to enforce extreme gun control on Canada, Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Belize and Panama. The British Isles is the flag ship for gun control and it seems to have been a complete and humiliating failure.
:lol: That's rich. Canada has gun control and not the problems that the USA has. Your statement is asinine to the extreme. It's far easier to control country borders, than State borders, and you know it.

Japan has great gun control. Canada does, as well. Australia and many others, as well. America is the country with the most problems, and it stems from the idea that gun ownership is a right, and not a privilege. You're just making up excuses for lack of action on gun control, that has been proven effective.
#14902254
Victoribus Spolia wrote:Once again, I never said "welcomed" those are your words and not mine.

Fact is, a bunch of ISIS militants have been "permitted" to reenter the United Kingdom and a "white racist youtuber" was not allowed in. This is retarded.


You forgot 2 key words, British nationals and foreigners are not the same thing. One would expect that you would be praising the UK for forbidding agent provocateurs from operating in the country and you would be calling more of this for both whites and Islamists. For a state to remove ones citizenship and bar entry to the country obviously the process is different than doing the same to a foreigner. It requires irrefutable evidence before a court of law for nationals which is a process while for foreigners the standards are far lower. Is that something that bothers you?

Also, you keep saying this is off-topic, but how is this not relevant to crime rates in London? Obviously the issues pertaining to London crime-rates includes islamic populations and its policies regarding those populations. This sub-topic is entirely relevant.


So you are saying that unless the British state starts imposing different “policies” to its own nationals of a different religious persuasion, that is unless Britain endorses racism on an institutional level then all crimes will be attributed to Muslims and Britain’s inability to quarantine them as a group. This is not just off-topic but quite a sinister thing to promote.
#14902283
noemon wrote: One would expect that you would be praising the UK for forbidding agent provocateurs from operating in the country and you would be calling more of this for both whites and Islamists.


Why do you say that?

noemon wrote:Is that something that bothers you?


It bothers me in that it reveals the problem with the definition of national identity and citizenship based on the social contract.

Citizenship in the west has increasingly become more about residence in a certain geographical point controlled by a certain state and less about ethno-cultural and religious identity (natural identity).

It is contrary to common-sense, that the current state of affairs would obtain: A member of the British common-wealth (she is Canadian), WASP background, advocating western ideals, would be forbidden entry into the UK for expressing political opinions on youtube videos, but Muslims, often of middle-eastern descent, who fought for ISIS against coalition forces (that include the United Kingdom) would be permitted reentry or were not sufficiently vetted.

If you are saying that this situation is purely because Lauren Southern is merely a member of the commonwealth; whereas, the ISIS fighters were technically British citizens.....that makes the situation all the more asinine.

This is the reason why the Far-Right has called into question liberal notions of what it means to be "British" or "European." Because for the first time in ages, the immigration policies of the west have made that definition seemingly contrary to the thinking of the common man.

If a Somali ISIS fighter is British while Lauren Southern is a foreigner, then there is something seriously wrong with our definitions.

That is besides the fact that the issue itself seems to show a lack of reasonable priorities. The true foreigners, these unassimilating immigrants, are given passes that seem quite baffling, whereas those of true British descent have to watch what they say on social media in fear of police action.

To anyone with a sense of justice left, this situation should appear nutty.

Thats all that I am pointing out. I find it surprising that someone as common-sense as you would see this as "sensationalist trolling." Its a legit concern among many Americans and Brits and it should be addressed and not merely dismissed. Rarely is collective anxiety entirely unfounded, even if elements of it are.

noemon wrote:So you are saying that unless the British state starts imposing different “policies” to its own nationals of a different religious persuasion, that is unless Britain endorses racism on an institutional level then all crimes will be attributed to Muslims and Britain’s inability to quarantine them as a group.


Well, I am an Anarcho-Capitalist now, so I don't necessarily think these issues are entirely soluable by governments; however, I will at least say this: Racial profiling is completely rational. If a certain demographic has grossly disproportionate rates of crimes, they should be given special attention by authorities in equal proportion.

If you have an animal destroying property and getting into your garbage, you are going to set traps for the species that is suspected based on their known behaviors.

Thus, you will set traps for raccoons or cats....not bunny rabbits.

That is the problem, if you fear being labeled as racist so much that you won't focus on the demographic in proportion to their criminal contribution, you have lost all hope of really solving the problem.

In the United States, 63% of all crimes are committed by 1% of the populations which is isolated to just a handful of urban areas. These crimes are committed by a certain demographic primarily. So, would it be more rational to address those people, based on what common characteristics they share, or just restrict the rights of everyone, even to the point of restricting the rights of individuals to discuss the common characteristics of these 1%?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3969807/

A scientific method, the method of a lab worker, a trapper, or a salesman, would be to target the common characteristic and address it. This is manifestly not how the west is dealing with this issue and the public knows it.

This is not sensationalism, this is mere observation.

If that makes me a racist. So be it.

But the rise of the Far-Right in the west in the last ten years didn't happen because everything was "just fine," and if that is not the sort of governments we want making a come back, then perhaps we should discuss their concerns instead of dismissing them.
#14902304
Victoribus Spolia wrote:Why do you say that?

Nevermind.

If you are saying that this situation is purely because Lauren Southern is merely a member of the commonwealth; whereas, the ISIS fighters were technically British citizens.....that makes the situation all the more asinine.

This is the reason why the Far-Right has called into question liberal notions of what it means to be "British" or "European." Because for the first time in ages, the immigration policies of the west have made that definition seemingly contrary to the thinking of the common man.

If a Somali ISIS fighter is British while Lauren Southern is a foreigner, then there is something seriously wrong with our definitions.

That is besides the fact that the issue itself seems to show a lack of reasonable priorities. The true foreigners, these unassimilating immigrants, are given passes that seem quite baffling, whereas those of true British descent have to watch what they say on social media in fear of police action.

To anyone with a sense of justice left, this situation should appear nutty.

Thats all that I am pointing out. I find it surprising that someone as common-sense as you would see this as "sensationalist trolling." Its a legit concern among many Americans and Brits and it should be addressed and not merely dismissed. Rarely is collective anxiety entirely unfounded, even if elements of it are.


You have presented no single argument that the rise of knife-crimes in London is because of UK tolerance to ISIS militants, nor have you presented any argument that it is because of citizenship laws permitting Muslims to be citizens. You keep ranting some nonsense about some foreigner being barred entry into the UK for inciting inter-ethnic hatred and somehow this means that we should all permit foreigners from breaking the law just because they are white and refuse Muslims from citizenship just because they are Muslim. You started posting such nonsense in a satyrical manner but now you are actually being serious which makes it even more ridiculous and sinister than before.

If that makes me a racist. So be it.


One expects from you basic honesty in that arguing that people should be discriminated based on their religion is in fact the very definition of racism.

But let me tell you this, this will be the last time that I am indulging you in this off-topic non-sense, I give the benefit of the doubt to people from whom I expect to have a rational conversation with, and hence why I have not deleted or moved your off-topics but unless you present an argument that this is indeed down to Islamist militants being tolerated by the UK police and in turn committing knife-crimes, your rants are not just sensationalist garbage but the very definition of off-topic.
#14902351
No end to the bloodshed: Boy, 16, fights for his life after being stabbed on London street as the capital hits TWELVE murders in three weeks and becomes deadlier than New York

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... treet.html

"Every day there's someone getting hurt or killed. Can't wait to move away from this hopeless, horrific, disastrous place."

London vs NYC (both 8 million population). In London: Burglary 6 times higher. Rape 3 times higher. More murders is London now too. The NYPD has introduced a zero tolerance approach to low-level crime and has flooded problem areas with patrols.


Image
#14902355
noemon wrote:You have presented no single argument that the rise of knife-crimes in London is because of UK tolerance to ISIS militants, nor have you presented any argument that it is because of citizenship laws permitting Muslims to be citizens. You keep ranting some nonsense about some foreigner being barred entry into the UK for inciting inter-ethnic hatred and somehow this means that we should all permit foreigners from breaking the law just because they are white and refuse Muslims from citizenship just because they are Muslim. You started posting such nonsense in a satyrical manner but now you are actually being serious which makes it even more ridiculous and sinister than before.


Are knife crimes in London disproportionately committed by ethnic minorities in comparison to the ethnic British population of the United Kingdom...yes or no?

noemon wrote:One expects from you basic honesty in that arguing that people should be discriminated based on their religion is in fact the very definition of racism.


Well, religion isn't the same as race, but setting aside that, I really don't understand this sentence because of its grammatical structure. So are you saying i'm a racist because I argued that by simple statistical analysis a policy of profiling based of proportion to criminal contribution would be rational?

noemon wrote:But let me tell you this, this will be the last time that I am indulging you in this off-topic non-sense, I give the benefit of the doubt to people from whom I expect to have a rational conversation with, and hence why I have not deleted or moved your off-topics but unless you present an argument that this is indeed down to Islamist militants being tolerated by the UK police and in turn committing knife-crimes, your rants are not just sensationalist garbage but the very definition of off-topic.


Well, I don't think its only Islamic immigrants, that would be unfair to the black community in London which also commits a disproportionate amount of crime to their numbers as % of all Brits. Likewise, I never specifically said that it was returning ISIS fighters who were the ones doing all the knifing....That would be absurd.

Once again, I think you are being bit emotional about all this. I make some satire, then you get butt-hurt about it and try to make it into a debate over something I never specifically argued for.

If you wanted to address what my satire was arguing for, if it could be called an argument at all, it would be merely in agreeing with another poster on this same thread who jokingly said that Britain should next move to ban knives and naughty thoughts.

Thus, the argument that would've been made by me would be this: the UK has a problem with enforcing stupid laws (like censoring social media) instead of dealing with actual problems (such as Islamic immigrants with Jihadist sympathies). I also implied in my satire that the people that would end up suffering from a ban on knives, would be law abiding anglo-saxon protesant brits more so than blacks and muslims, and for the same reason this would be so in the United States with a gun ban. Those who commit crimes rarely possess their weapon legally and rarely care if that was a crime anyway.

It is well known that blacks and muslims commit a disproportionate amount of the crimes (Arab-Muslims are classified as "asians" in British statistics FYI).

Figures from the Office for National Statistics showed that in 2007 an estimated 10.6 percent of London's population of 7,556,900 were black.[25] Evidence shows that the black population in London boroughs increases with the level of deprivation, and that the level of crime also increases with deprivation, such that "It is clear that ethnicity, deprivation, victimisation and offending are closely and intricately inter-related".[26]

In June 2010, through a Freedom of Information Act request, The Sunday Telegraph obtained statistics on accusations of crime broken down by race from the Metropolitan Police Service.[n 2] The figures showed that the majority of males who were accused of violent crimes in 2009–10 were black. Of the recorded 18,091 such accusations against males, 54 percent accused of street crimes were black; for robbery, 59 percent; and for gun crimes, 67 percent.[27] Robbery, drug use, and gang violence have been associated with black people since the 1960s.[28] In the 1980s and 1990s, the police associated robbery with black people. In 1995, the Metropolitan Police commissioner Paul Condon said that the majority of robberies in London were committed by black people.[29]

Street crimes include muggings, assault with intent to rob, and snatching property. Black males accounted for 29 percent of the male victims of gun crime and 24 percent of the male victims of knife crime.[27] On sex offences, black men made up 32 per cent of male suspects. Similar statistics were recorded for females. On knife crime, 45 percent of suspected female perpetrators were black; for gun crime, 58 percent; and for robberies, 52 percent.[30]

Operation Trident was set up in March 1998 by the Metropolitan Police to investigate gun crime in London's black community after black-on-black shootings in Lambeth and Brent.[31]

Between April 2005 and January 2006, figures from the Metropolitan Police Service showed that black people accounted for 46 percent of car-crime arrests generated by automatic number plate recognition cameras.[32]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_ ... ed_Kingdom

Labour MP David Lammy last week revealed the results of an independent review into the treatment of Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) individuals in the criminal justice system. One of the most shocking findings was that Muslims account for 15 per cent of Britain’s prisoners – a 50 per cent increase since ten years agodespite being under 5 per cent of its population.

The obvious question is “why?” Why the disproportionality? Why the rise? Well, the review already considered the answer on your mind: terrorism offences. But since only 175 convictions have taken place between 2001-2012 it perplexedly proclaimed, “we simply do not know” why Muslims are overrepresented in prison.


https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/la ... 37746.html

So are muslims and blacks overrepresented in criminal statistics. YES.

Was the migrant crisis and its debate in the Brexit movement based on native concerns over the behavior of muslims? YES.

If a particular groups shows a tendency, as a group, to criminal behavior, would it be statistically rational to focus on that group? YES.

You are free to refute any one these claims and they are absolutely relevant to the article and are absolutely not hysterical sensationalism.

To say that Muslims and Blacks commit a greatly disproportionate amount of crime relative to their population in the UK is like saying that bears shit in the woods or that the Sky is blue.

I don't think that is sensational at all. Please explain to me how I have been "sensational?"
#14902357
Image

We are talking about dozens of murders per month from January to March and New York last year had nearly double the number of murders than London. At the end of this year, London's murder rate would be lower than that of New York. Moreover, these incidents occurred outside the City of London and Greater London is much bigger than New York. Greater London covers 1,572 km2 (607 sq mi) with a population of over 8,000,000.

February marked the first month in history books that London had more murders than the American city with a total of 15 homicides. Out of the 15 killed, nine were aged 30 or younger.

In March, there were 22 murders, which is likely to match if not beat out New York's numbers.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -days.html
Last edited by ThirdTerm on 02 Apr 2018 20:14, edited 1 time in total.

PragerU is the worst place to get information on[…]

EU-BREXIT

Our dear and beloved GB has finally left us after […]

The Next UK PM everybody...

Do any of you actually live in the UK? Just wonder[…]

See, now that’s a dialogue! Touché Denmark.