LEGO,

There IS actually a statistically significant decline.

<<The only thing which your statistics have indicated, AJ, is that in the last twenty years, the exponentially rising incidences of many types of crime in Australia which began in the 60's, have plateaued.>>

You’re also forgetting about those all-important factors that I mentioned earlier regarding Sullivan’s data. Reporting rates of crimes, and the number of acts that we regards as criminal, were increasing at the same time crime in the data Sullivan used was (though not at the same rate) and continue to rise as the overall crime rate slowly decreases, indicating that the real crime rate is actually declining much faster than even the figures that I linked you to indicate.

The best way to account for the crimes not recorded is to compare the reporting rates with the results of victimisation surveys done over the decades. The following three articles discuss this and the effects that is has on recorded crime rates:

http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/conferences/outlook99/indermau.pdf
http://www.ccc.qld.gov.au/research-and-publications/publications/cjc/crime-victims-surveys-in-australia-conference-proceedings.pdf
http://aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi061.pdf

There’s a lot of reading there, I know. But no-one said learning about this stuff was easy. Contrary to what you think, it takes a bit more than just using one’s common sense to understand this stuff. Take your time though, due to my workload over the next couple of months, my responses may be significantly delayed anyway.

<<Begin your graphs in the mid sixties when firearms were still freely available, and extrapolate them to last week, and despite the recent plateauing of some types of crime statistics, the trend is still up.>>

See above.

<<Your statistics have shown that the ever the rising incidences of notoriously ethnic related crimes … are also showing promising signs of beginning to ebb. But they are still a long way above what they were in the mid 20th Century, when guns were everywhere, and almost everybody had a white face.>>

See above.

Also, I’m willing to go with that. I haven’t argued that crime has dropped since then.

Continued…

…Continued

I’ve simply argued against with your assertion that crime is on the rise, and that the world is going to pot.

<<Crimes like kidnapping were almost non existent before the advent of large scale Asian immigration, and you know it.>>

No, I don’t know that and for the reasons stated above. I suspect kidnapping is up though, because there are a lot more disgruntled, separated parents now than there used to be.

<<The word "home invasion" was coined specifically to denote the armed robbery of Asian households, because Asians do not trust banks, and they prefer to keep large amounts of cash in the family home.>>

Your perception of the problem of ethnic youth gangs is blown way out of proportion (http://aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi167.pdf). This is what the bombardment of graphic images from a 24-hour news cycle does to one’s perception of reality. Your paranoia regarding other ethnicities, and need to believe they’re inferior, doesn’t help.

<<Street shootings have probably declined because ... Terrorism is down, probably because...>>

All assumptions. If we could just make assumptions the way you do, using your "common sense", then there wouldn't be a need for an entire science devoted to studying crime. Nothing is monocausal. Every phenomenon we observe, every individual instance of crime, and every decision made in the process of a crime, is the result of a complex interplay of many factors.

<<Your claim that the world was a more violent place in 1923 is interesting, but what it has to do with Australian rape statistics you did not explain.>>

I didn’t mean to suggest there was a connection. That followed from the sentence that immediately preceded it.

<<Nice bit of dodging you did...>>

Hey, I’ve mentioned several times, in the discussions that I last linked to, that some immigrant groups tend to have higher rates of offending (although those doing the offending are still a small minority of their group). I even alluded to that in my second point. I was simply explaining why those figures would concern them.

I’m still waiting on some further information on that, by the way.

Hi AJ, I thought you had gone missing in action?

I realise that Lucy Sullivan's book, which clearly demonstrated that crime in Australia was extremely low when Australian's were armed to the teeth, (and very poor) is an excruciating embarrassment to you. And you have to dream up any lame excuse to suppress the her inconvenient truths. What was it again? Oh, yes, she is a sociologist, and sociologists can't read data or plot graphs. But her book will not go away, and unless you can dream up some way to "homogenise" the raw data from the Commonwealth year books, then you have the problem, not me.

Now, you seem to be loading me up with homework, maybe it is about time I did the same to you. I expect you to read The 2001 US Surgeon general's report on Television Violence and it's Effects on Children.

http://profiles.nlm.nih.gov/ps/access/NNBCGY.pdf

Television and violence essay.

http://cursor.org/stories/television_and_violence.htm

Joint Statement on the Impact of Entertainment Violence on Children

Congressional Public Health Summit July 26, 2000

http://www2.aap.org/advocacy/releases/jstmtevc.htm

Bit of heavy reading there, but you must read it. There will be a test.

On your assertion that you do not agree that the world is going to pot, "see above."

Science has already judged that violence in the media impacts on real life violence. My premise is, and always has been, that the rising incidences of serious crime in the western world is a consequence of three factors, the importation of very violent ethnic groups who have very violent cultures, and the cultural conditioning of young people by the media to think that violent and criminal behaviour is acceptable behaviour, coupled with a breakdown in family socialisation making kids more vulnerable to this media inspired anti social programming.

On the subject of the influence of media violence on real life violence, the American Psychological Association's submission in the historic Joint Statement to Congress began "The scientific debate is over." (see above) And "There is absolutely no doubt, that the increased level of TV viewing, is correlated to the increasing acceptance of aggressive attitudes and increased aggressive behaviour."

Continued

The American Medical association's submission on violent media stated 'the link between media violence and real life violence has been proven by science, over and over again."

Back to ethnic crime. I don't know why you even bother to deny that ethnic crime is a primary reason why crime today is so much higher than when there were no gun restrictions at all. All you are doing is destroying your own credibility with any readers who pick up a newspaper or watch the TV news every day. Now, we were discussing kidnapping, and that term usually denotes the forcible abduction of a person for the purpose of forcing a relative to pay a ransom. This was a crime almost unheard of in Australia before the importation of Asian immigrants. The only kidnapping that I can even remember was the famous Graham Thorne kidnapping, where even notorious crime bosses like Abe Saffron aided the police to help solve the crime.

Your attempt to portray kidnapping as simply a problem of disgruntled parents, is disingenuous, and clearly displays the lengths that you will go to hide from the fact that the immigration of particular ethnic groups has created new types of crime that we have never had to deal with before.

What disingenuous excuse are you going to come up with to explain terrorism, AJ, Which you know is almost exclusively a product of Muslim immigration? Just write "see above" and hope that the facts will go away?

Now, we get down to the last of your post and we see the rather incredible statement by you that you have admitted "several times" that some ethnic groups have higher incidences of criminal behaviour. Ummm, no. That is the first time I have ever seen you admit that. Although, I can see that you don't have any choice. Only a moron could keep claiming there is no link between ethnicity and crime. I suppose you decided that your previous position was untenable, and you had to retreat to a more defensible position?

There have been many claims that the Gun Laws have stopped any mass shootings in Australia and that therefore they are a success.

The Lyndt Cafe and Monis proved that they are a failure.
All the ingredients were there for a massacre.

Monis had a firearm - the laws didn't stop him from acquiring it.

Monis' firearm was prohibited by the gun laws - he still got it.
his firearm was illegally modified - the gun laws didn't stop the modification.

Monis didn't have a firearms licence - he didn't comply with the gun laws.

Monis took hostages - the gun laws didn't stop him.

Monis murdered one person - the gun laws didn't stop him.

Monis had it in his power to murder many more people - the gun laws didn't stop him, he was stopped by men with guns.

Anyone care to refute the above?

Agreed.

Also, would he or the Port Arthur murderer have committed their terrible crimes if they had not been guaranteed world-wide personal attention and endless publicity by a tabloid media that unduly and wrongly sensationalises them and their crimes?

No-one is asking for censorship, but one could hardly use the words responsible and ethical in connection with the sensationalist and 'got-ya' reporting by the tabloids, including regrettably the publicly-funded ABC, (or always accurate and balanced!).

Mind you, can anything better be expected of a media that routinely publicise intimate details of celebrity suicides, images of flooding blood on pavement, bodies, seriously injured victims with underwear showing and so on?

Or a political protest party like the Greens who deliberately post and maintain wrong information on their site, the example here being the false claims that Monis was licensed (the media) and had a registered gun (the media and the Greens - all untrue and completely without factual basis) that bring the NSW police (who denied the claims immediately) into disrepute.

Has that wrong information on the Greens site been removed as yet and if not, why not?