VCgraph

British Gun Ban of 1997 led to Huge Spike in Violent Crime

SOURCES > *Updated* Please note it is a multiple page excel document.

Some notes on the Data:

*The way the two countries measure crime is different so this isn’t a scientific comparison. The primary purpose is to show trends. See the sources for a very specific break down of what is counted as violent crime.

*There are some definition changes that happened around the time of the UK gun ban and in 2002 that affect the numbers. I have included additional data sets that measure the crime rates with non-violent exclusions and rates that account for definition changes.

Researched and Created by Charity McDonald.

  • Pingback: The American Engineer()

  • Dan

    You are extraordinarily prejudice in your view about gun prohibition.

    In order to promote your prejudice you have attempted to make a case against prohibition of guns by comparing violent crime statistics in the UK after the 1997 handgun ban but not those involved in just firearms, most specifically handguns.

    I refer you to detailed statistics with respect to firearm crimes throughout England and Wales at the following site:

    http://www.gun-control-network.org/GF05.htm

    This relates solely to firearm crimes. You will clearly see that handgun crime has reduced from a peak in 2001/2 of 5874 crimes to just 2651 during 2011/2. You will see further reductions with regard to crimes committed involving shotguns and other weapons.

    The effect of any restrictive change in the law will inevitably lag as illegal guns remain in existence.

    However you will clearly see from the statistics that there is a clear and substantial reduction in firearm crime as a result of banning handguns.

    The plan in the US is to ban assault weapons, ones that will multiply injuries and deaths. Why would anyone need an assault weapon for domestic use?

    It is said that ‘guns don’t kill people, people kill people’. That is a conservative absurdity because people with guns kill people.

    • http://www.theamericanengineer.com/ Charity

      Obviously crime with guns went down because in a little island nation like the UK when they were banned it became much more difficult to get one. It doesn’t matter though. The gun ban didn’t reduce crime by any measure. So what was the point of the ban? What is the point of infringing our 2nd amendment rights? The left always cry’s for our guns because removing them would make our children safer or would reduce the amount of homicides. That is absolutely false. I don’t care if gun homicides are slashed to 5% of what they were before if the overall homicide rate stays the same or, in the UK’s case, actually increases.

      • Dan

        You say: ‘The gun ban didn’t reduce crime by any measure’. If you read the correct stastics in my link you will see that firearm crime fell by 50% not just your 5%!!!!!

        Of course a ban on assault weapons would reduce not just child deaths but all multiple deaths in one single event.

        There is little worse that prejudice struggling to find spurious facts to support it…

        …The death rate caused by firearms fell by 50%! What are you talking about it increased?!

        • http://www.theamericanengineer.com/ Charity

          The over all homicide rate increased in the years following the ban.

          Way to completely misquote me. You are dishonest as usual.

          • Dan

            You said (and I repeat): ‘I don’t care if gun homicides are slashed to 5% of what they were before’…

            …that’s what you said! I can’t misquote what you actually said!

            To then go on to a totally unrelated statistic makes your evaluation a nonsense. There could be any number of reasons why the completely separate matter of ‘violent crimes’ may have increased. Violent crimes are not just gun crimes. You have described ‘violent crimes’ to include ‘violence against the person, sexual offences, and robbery’.

            Here is the full UK Home Office definition of ‘Violent Crime’:

            http://tinyurl.com/d8w5c3u

            Within violent crimes just 20% are carried out with a weapon of ANY sort, of which just 1 (ONE) is carried out specifically with a firearm (defined as pistol, rifle, shotgun, airgun, air rifle, and any gun which could not be identified). Here is the detail at the foot of the above linked page:

            Nature of violent crime (Microsoft Excel file – 348kb) (open page 7.8).

            The statistics that I have previously provided ARE purely GUN crimes. That is the matter under debate! NOT violent crimes!

            GUN crimes have fallen by 50% in the UK since the handgun ban. That is the ONLY related statistic that is relevant.

            So if you are going to make a headline statement in support of a prejudice, PLEASE ensure that you have the CORRECT FACTS to back it up.

            I would be grateful of your apology in stating that I misquoted you and that I’m being in ANY way dishonest.

          • http://www.theamericanengineer.com/ Charity

            You left out the “if” and the entire last part of that sentence. You’re either dumb as rocks or astoundingly dishonest.

            Do you not care about all the people in England and Wales that got killed without guns? Do you not care that they were unable to defend themselves? Is murder okay with you as long as they don’t use a gun?

          • Dan

            How very christian!

            If you open a debate about banning certain firearms you can only judge the success of that action by evaluating the statistics that directly relate to it. Flying off into quoting spurious, unrelated statistics that you think might support your prejudice in the eyes of the unwary or equally predisposed is deception. You also instantly lose the argument.

            Banning hand guns in the UK has led to a 50% reduction in firearm homicides. The numbers directly relating to that fact verify it.

          • http://www.facebook.com/john.o.mcdonald John Othniel McDonald

            Dan, apparently it seems lost on you that folks are getting robbed more often because they don’t fear the property owner in Britain – so long as their are less gun crimes other crime is okay? As they say the only a liberal is just a conservative who hasn’t been mugged yet.

          • hobnob25

            I note you’ve blocked me as Dan. That’s a sure sign that you’ve lost your argument and you’re simply immersed in your prejudice and not up for factual and evidence based debate. The same goes for your daughter who did the same on Twitter against me when SHE made the error claiming that Hitler was an atheist when indeed he wasn’t. That action was basd on another prejudice that all atheists are evil, which indeed we’re not.

            Anyway moving on!

            What isn’t lost on me is that you and your family are orientated towards dogmas and will do almost anything to pervert facts in order to support and enhance your prejudices.

            Conversely, I have no preformed views. I look at prime evidence and decide matters upon that information.

            You will see from my comments above that I have highlighted the irrelevance
            of the headline statement because ‘violent crimes’ do not include homicides. However it makes for a good, but misleading, headline if you have a preformed view of banning guns.

            There is a problem here with methodology.

            I have found no prime evidence that states violent crime has increased 230% since the 1997 firearm ban in the UK, the main tenet of this debate.

            The following document provides information on all ‘violent crimes’ in England and Wales between 1981 and 2011/12 and comes from the Office for Official Statistics. If you refer to the graph Figure 3 on page 10 of the following document:

            http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_298904.pdf

            Here is a direct link to that graph:

            http://tinyurl.com/cbfsfoe

            What it ACTUALLY shows is all violent crimes fell post 1997. In fact violent crime has consistently fallen since a peak around 1995. These aren’t my made-up figures. They are official government statistics.

            I repeat! I can find no evidence that ‘violent crime’ figures went up after the 1997 handgun ban. Can you please advise the source from which it is stated there was an increase in violent crimes of 230%? That is unless you take notice of a ‘little factoid’ quoted by ranting and raving Alex Jones, a man incapable of reasonable and reasoned debate.

            Allow me to make another point. In your prejudice you have stated that ‘folks are getting robbed more often because they don’t fear the property owner in Britain’. May I refer you to the above document again and a pie chart within that document that apportions the main types of ‘violent crimes’. It’s on page 5 and is Figure 1:

            http://tinyurl.com/cqdps4b

            You will see that ALL ROBBERIES account for just 12% of ‘violent crimes’, the ones you assign so incorrectly to those ‘that don’t fear the property owner’! Just 12%! Foks are not getting robbed more often!

            Yours is simply more prejudice with absolutely no basis in fact.

            I trust you will grow up and have the good grace to accept others’ argument without slamming the door in their faces.Contempt for others is not a good attribute and certainly not christian.

          • danbuoy

            I note you’ve now blocked me as Dan as well as Hobnob25.

            I would have hoped as a Republican christian you would have upheld the right to free speech even if you didn’t happen to agree with my argument.

            Let me repost with what may have been considered trivial and ‘rude’ to the over sensitive.

            You will see from my comments above that I have highlighted the irrelevance of the headline statement because ‘violent crimes’ do not include homicides. However it makes for a good, but misleading, headline if you have a preformed view of banning guns.

            There is a problem here with methodology.

            I have found no prime evidence that states violent crime has increased
            230% since the 1997 firearm ban in the UK, the main tenet of this debate.

            The following document provides information on all ‘violent crimes’ in England and Wales between 1981 and 2011/12 and comes from the Office for Official Statistics. If you refer to the graph Figure 3 on page 10 of the following document:

            http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_298904.pdf

            Here is a direct link to that graph:

            http://tinyurl.com/cbfsfoe

            (It should also appear in a box below)

            What it ACTUALLY shows is all violent crimes fell post 1997. In fact
            violent crime has consistently fallen since a peak around 1995. These aren’t my made-up figures. They are official government statistics.

            I can find no evidence that ‘violent crime’ figures went up after the 1997 handgun ban. Can you please advise the source from which it is stated there was an increase in violent crimes of 230%? That is unless you take notice of a ‘little factoid’ quoted by ranting and raving Alex Jones, a man incapable of reasonable and reasoned debate.

            Allow me to make another point. In your prejudice you have stated that
            ‘folks are getting robbed more often because they don’t fear the property owner in Britain’. May I refer you to the above document again and a pie chart within that document that apportions the main types of ‘violent crimes’. It’s on page 5 and is Figure 1:

            http://tinyurl.com/cqdps4b

            (It should also appear in a box below)

            You will see that ALL ROBBERIES account for just 12% of ‘violent crimes’! You have just vehemently asserted all these robbers were overwhelming the unarmed householder because they ‘don’t fear the property owner’ any more!

            A paltry 12%! Folks are NOT getting robbed more often!

            I trust you will have the magnanimity to retain all my posts and accept my arguments as a contribution to the debate rather than a hostile intrusion.

    • Guest

      You say: ‘The gun ban didn’t reduce crime by any measure’. If you read the correct stastics in my link you will see that firearm crime fell by 50% not just your 5%!!!!!

      Of course a ban on assault weapons would reduce not just child deaths but all multiple deaths in one single event.

      There is little worse that prejudice struggling to find spurious facts to support it…

      …The death rate caused by firearms fell by 50%! What are you talking about it increased?!

  • dan_dy_dan

    This is now the THIRD time (Dan, hobnob25, danbuoy and now dan_dy_dan) that I’ve been blocked by the ‘christian’ hosts of this site, Charity and John McDonald.

    My apparent ‘crime’? Posting opposing views to the hosts and supporting the argument banning firearms in the US. An argument based on secure primary EVIDENCE.

    It’s worth noting:

    Connecticut’s Senate on Wednesday approved sweeping new restrictions on weapons and large-capacity magazines, a response to last year’s deadly Newtown elementary school shooting that would give the state some of the country’s tightest gun control laws.

    http://tinyurl.com/cr83vcq

    Common sense and intelligence prevails in a State that has recently suffered a deplorable firearm massacre!

    The notion of free speech and debate has little value here! The hosts conveniently forget that the US and the UK have fought side by side in the name of freedom of speech on many occasions.

  • dan_dy_dan

    It’s interesting to note that the factually inaccurate headline remains on this site despite the primary evidence I have provided to the contrary.

    It would be christian to state the truth would it not?

  • aPLWBinAK

    You might enjoy this video. It’s a 15 yr old girl testifying at the Maryland state legislature about anti-gun laws, and she does an awesome job…it’s got a lot of views in just a week… http://youtu.be/L_-N9_tnWBo