Syniks
21-07-2005, 16:06
Ok, 1st, it's hard to find a more "anti-gun" country than England. But look at the way the BBC reports "gun crime" vs. the way the US media reports "gun crime"... In particular, look at the way they gramatically define causality:
Violent offences top million mark
Violent offences in England and Wales reached record levels in 2004-5 with police recording one million crimes - up 7% from the previous year.
Police figures show 1,035,046 violent incidents against the person, excluding sexual offences and robberies.
Total recorded crime fell 6% to 5.6m incidents, but gun crime was up 6%.
Minister Hazel Blears stressed overall crime fell, saying the apparent rise in violent crime merely reflected better reporting and recording of offences.
Ms Blears, a Home Office minister, also told the BBC that the separate British Crime Survey, which interviews people to ask if they have been crime victims, showed a decrease in violent crime.
But shadow home secretary David Davis said the police figures were "further evidence that the government continues to fail on violent crime".
"With violent crime continuing to spiral out of control, it beggars belief that the government's only response is to unleash 24-hour drinking on our town and city centres," he added in a reference to proposed drink law changes.
<SNIP>
The police figures show there was a 20% fall in burglary and a 17% drop in car thefts. There were just under 11,000 gun crimes, up 6%, and 73 people were killed with guns over a 12 month period - five more than the previous year.
Sexual offences rose by 17% to 61,000 but this was said to be partly down to reforms of sex crime laws and efforts by police and politicians to encourage more victims to come forward.
<SNIP>
Crime survey
The government has also published the British Crime Survey, based on interviews with 45,000 people, which suggests violent crime is down 11%.
Home Secretary Charles Clarke said he was "extremely encouraged" by the "very positive" figures in the British Crime Survey - which the Home Office regards as more accurate.
"Although the BCS records an 11% decrease in violent crime, I recognise that this remains an issue of concern for many people and the increase in police recorded violent crime contributes significantly to the fear of crime," he said.
The BCS estimates there were 10.8 million crimes in the year, although crimes against businesses and the under-16s are excluded.
Another estimate of crime in England and Wales published three weeks ago by the Home Office suggested there were 14.7 million crimes committed against children and adults in England and Wales in 2003-04.
Mr Clarke highlighted the government's Violent Crime Reduction Bill which he said would give new powers to police and local authorities to tackle violent criminals "and ensure they are effectively punished".
"We have made significant progress on violent crime, but I accept that more needs to be done and the government is determined to achieve further reductions," he said. http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/uk_politics/4700575.stm
Note the bolded text. In the US, the media insists on printing the nonsequiter "killed by guns" Since the guns themselves, as inanimate objects, cannot be an actor in any rational sense, the only reason for the continued use of the word "by" must be political.
The use of "by" implies that the human holding the tool is somehow not responsible. By making the tool more (semantically) responsible than the Human, it sets up an illigitimate cognitive correlation between the tool and the action, lending emtional credence to the idea that removing the tool (guns) will remove the action (violence).
There is a strong political theme in the US of non-personal responsibility for criminality and the concomitant desire to "ban" the tools that have been assigned that responsibility.
Maybe it's just a grammar thing (preserving the Queen's English and all,) but I find it fasinating that the "anti gun" British are less biased in their reporting of "gun crime" than their US counterparts.
Violent offences top million mark
Violent offences in England and Wales reached record levels in 2004-5 with police recording one million crimes - up 7% from the previous year.
Police figures show 1,035,046 violent incidents against the person, excluding sexual offences and robberies.
Total recorded crime fell 6% to 5.6m incidents, but gun crime was up 6%.
Minister Hazel Blears stressed overall crime fell, saying the apparent rise in violent crime merely reflected better reporting and recording of offences.
Ms Blears, a Home Office minister, also told the BBC that the separate British Crime Survey, which interviews people to ask if they have been crime victims, showed a decrease in violent crime.
But shadow home secretary David Davis said the police figures were "further evidence that the government continues to fail on violent crime".
"With violent crime continuing to spiral out of control, it beggars belief that the government's only response is to unleash 24-hour drinking on our town and city centres," he added in a reference to proposed drink law changes.
<SNIP>
The police figures show there was a 20% fall in burglary and a 17% drop in car thefts. There were just under 11,000 gun crimes, up 6%, and 73 people were killed with guns over a 12 month period - five more than the previous year.
Sexual offences rose by 17% to 61,000 but this was said to be partly down to reforms of sex crime laws and efforts by police and politicians to encourage more victims to come forward.
<SNIP>
Crime survey
The government has also published the British Crime Survey, based on interviews with 45,000 people, which suggests violent crime is down 11%.
Home Secretary Charles Clarke said he was "extremely encouraged" by the "very positive" figures in the British Crime Survey - which the Home Office regards as more accurate.
"Although the BCS records an 11% decrease in violent crime, I recognise that this remains an issue of concern for many people and the increase in police recorded violent crime contributes significantly to the fear of crime," he said.
The BCS estimates there were 10.8 million crimes in the year, although crimes against businesses and the under-16s are excluded.
Another estimate of crime in England and Wales published three weeks ago by the Home Office suggested there were 14.7 million crimes committed against children and adults in England and Wales in 2003-04.
Mr Clarke highlighted the government's Violent Crime Reduction Bill which he said would give new powers to police and local authorities to tackle violent criminals "and ensure they are effectively punished".
"We have made significant progress on violent crime, but I accept that more needs to be done and the government is determined to achieve further reductions," he said. http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/uk_politics/4700575.stm
Note the bolded text. In the US, the media insists on printing the nonsequiter "killed by guns" Since the guns themselves, as inanimate objects, cannot be an actor in any rational sense, the only reason for the continued use of the word "by" must be political.
The use of "by" implies that the human holding the tool is somehow not responsible. By making the tool more (semantically) responsible than the Human, it sets up an illigitimate cognitive correlation between the tool and the action, lending emtional credence to the idea that removing the tool (guns) will remove the action (violence).
There is a strong political theme in the US of non-personal responsibility for criminality and the concomitant desire to "ban" the tools that have been assigned that responsibility.
Maybe it's just a grammar thing (preserving the Queen's English and all,) but I find it fasinating that the "anti gun" British are less biased in their reporting of "gun crime" than their US counterparts.