I'm sure others will make a similar point, but while agreeing that the
"truth" is important for sensible political discussion , we should remember
that Home Office figures tend to reflect reported crime not actual crime
levels. These reports are then interpreted by local officers as being or not
being racial crimes. There is as a result considerable scope for
inaccuracies and drawing of spurious conclusions.
I am reminded of a recent exercise in Yorkshire that put Police back on the
beat in rural villages. Instead of crime being reduced, newspapers reported
that crime had risen and concluded that the experiment had failed to curb
crime. Of course what had happened is reported crime had increased, probably
because it was easier to report minor offences direct to the policeman in
the street instead of phoning or calling into the (not so) local police
station.
I wonder if the comparative figures for white and non-white racist attacks
might be subject to similar reporting related problems.
David Symes
email: [log in to unmask]
Tel: 0114 2303145
-----Original Message-----
From: email list for Radical Statistics [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Alan Truelove
Sent: 19 April 2004 02:27
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Lying about racial crime statitics
Statements regarding racial crime in England & Wales in recently
distributed election material are clearly correct (even though collection
of such statistics by the Govt. appears to have stopped in 2000)
(a) Roughly twice as many racial crimes are inflicted on whites as on non-
whites. (See figures for 1995 and 1999
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs/s95race00.pdf
(click on Ch 8; bottom left of page)
The 1995 figures (victim assessing race of perpetrator) show that 143,000
crimes were committed by whites, and 238,000 by non-whites. Assuming for
the moment that one person commits one crime in this dataset, this means
that 0.27% of whites committed such a crime, and 7.3% of non-whites.
I would be interested in comments; but the Govt and BBC should give over
from implying (even in weasel word terms) that the above is not correct.
One can understand the Govt. suppressing the collection of statistics for
political reasons, as befits a 3rd-world shambles like the UK. (This would
never be permitted by the scientific community in the US, for example).
But the BBC should be ashamed of itself - as also the British press that
routinely ignores non-white crime. E.g. the murder of the Manchester
soldier 22-year-old Lee Martin beaten to death by anti-white (presumably
Muslim) racist thugs according to, & mentioned solely in, a small article
on p.3 Manchester Evening News, April 7. (Not even to be found in its
archives)
It is a responsibility of the Statistical community to make sure that
vital information of this kind, which clearly could have a direct effect
on forthcoming elections, is not concealed or fudged.
Alan Truelove 3444 Surrey Ln Falls Church Va 22042 & Canterbury. 571-242-
0153(US).
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
*******************************************************
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
*******************************************************
|