LEGO,

No, actually. I spent the last half of my address to you dealing specifically with your “evidence”.

<<You spent all of your last post standing on your dignity, and wrote nothing on the topic under discussion.>>

I’ll also note, too, that the only heckling going on here has been from o sung wu and his petulant personal attacks. Funny you don’t mention that.

<<I know that you want to run me around in circles with your links, like you did with the Tim Flannery quote...>>

My response to which still remains unchallenged. (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=17494#309589)

<<If you do not want to write reasoned arguments supporting whatever vague premises you are implying...>>

So what are these other "premises" you speak of now? Or is this another question of mine you're not going to answer?

<<I have submitted four examples [of crime rising]…>>

Thus my point about cherry picking. But let’s take a look at them anyway…

<<…armed robbery…>>

No, that’s been declining. (http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current%20series/facts/1-20/2013/1_recorded.html (see Table 1 and Figure 3), http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/4510.0~2014~Main%20Features~Robbery~12)

<<…disproportionate and serious ethnic criminal behaviour…>>

You actually haven’t provided any evidence for this. Even if you had though, it wouldn’t be evidence of an overall rise in crime, but merely evidence of what you have stated above.

<<…hand gun shootings…>>

You provided evidence of a rise in one area, in one city, over the period of five years ending 15 years ago. That’s not evidence of an overall rise. That’s cherry-picking.

<<…and graffiti.>>

Since the ‘50s? Yeah, I’m happy to take that on your amateur anecdotes. Have you got any data showing recent trends though (e.g. the last twenty years)? It could be declining now for all we know.

<<In every case I have provided both hard and "anecdotal" evidence to support my claim.>>

You mean "and/or". Cherry-picked data is not “hard evidence” either.

<<Other than moaning that crime is not rising, and demanding that I do all the work and prove that it is rising...>>

No, I provided you with the stats before. Now I've provided you with even more to not look at or cry conspiracy over.

Continued…

…Continued

<<…you have not submitted any evidence to support your IMPLICATION that crime is not rising.>>

Yes, I did. In my very first post to you on this thread. (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=17534#310115)

I’ve stated outright that the overall crime rate is on the decline too. No implications necessary.

<<You have grudgingly conceded that sociologist Lucy Sullivan was right when she said in her book that armed robbery was rising.>>

When did I do that?

<<You have not commented on the NSW BCS&R report that handgun crime rose after the gun buyback.>>

Actually, I did. See my last paragraph to you in my last post.

<<You have said previously that you think that the degree of ethnic criminal behaviour is exaggerated...>>

Where did I say that? Time you started providing links to all these things I’m apparently saying/implying.

Fat chance, eh?

<<...whereas I have provided hard evidence to support my premise...>>

No, as I pointed out earlier, you cherry-picked. “Hard evidence” would span over a much longer period and include recent data, and data that controlled for all the difficulties in obtaining stats on crime and ethnicity. Your data didn’t even specify ethnicity. For all we know, Caucasians could have been responsible for most of the crime. Your data only specified an area with a lot of immigrants.

<<...and will wonder what planet today's "criminologists" come from.>>

Do you actually think graffiti is a bellwether crime? (Homicide actually is because of its relatively stable rate, the fact that homicides don’t go undetected, and the fact that there is no confusion/argument over what constitutes a homicide.)

One thing criminologists do note, with regards to graffiti, is the fact that it’s the most visible crime of all. So it’s no wonder that an amateur with very little in the way of facts, such as yourself, cites it as an example of an alleged rise in crime overall.

o sung wu,

By “move on”, I meant progress further than we have, not leave. I have so much more I want to get to but LEGO’s stuck on repeat. I’ve been contemplating giving him a rebuttal myself.

To AJ

Thank you for your figures which showed actual crimes for assault, sexual assault, kidnapping, homicide, and robbery from 1996 to 2012.

Assault up, sexual assault up, kidnapping up, robbery down, and homicide down.

According to Sullivan, there were only nine convictions for rape or attempted rape in the whole of Australia in 1923. By 1996 the figure was 116,105. Given that Australia's population in 1923 was only a quarter of what it is today, that still represents an incredible rise from a time when Australia had practically no gun laws, to today's strict gun laws.

At least you have proven that strict gun laws cause rape.

The figures you submitted show a very significant rise in the crime of kidnapping from 1996 (478) to 212 (636). Could I submit that before the advent of Asian immigration into Australia, the crime of kidnapping was almost non existent?

Assault slightly up, and robbery slightly down from the 1996 figures. But robberies in 1996 were at historically high levels. In 1993, robberies were four times the 1964 rate, so a very slight decline is does not alter the fact that robberies are still four time higher than in 1964. That is a very significant rise.

Homicides are down. The reason for that has nothing to do with less people being shot at or stabbed. It has everything to do with the fact that more people are surviving potentially fatal injuries. Mobile phones, ambulances with life support equipment manned by trained paramedics in video contact with surgeons, improved medical techniques, much improved diagnostic equipment ,and improved infection fighting drugs, have all played a part in reducing homicides. According to the NSW BCS&R fact sheet, "shoot with intent" crimes increased from 1995 to 2000.

It is hard to give accurate figures for ethic related crime, because in 1993, the motley collection of ethnic lobby groups successfully lobbied the Federal Labor government to prevent the ABS from keeping or collating any statistics related to ethnic crime. Why would they ethnic leaders do that, AJ?

Think real hard.

Welcome back, LEGO. Unfortunately, I fear that your return from lies and misrepresentation will only be short lived.

<<Thank you for your figures which showed actual crimes for assault, sexual assault, kidnapping, homicide, and robbery from 1996 to 2012.>>

Until 2014 for robbery, actually. Here are the figures showing the downward trend continue to 2014 for street crimes: http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/4510.02014?OpenDocument.

<<Assault up, sexual assault up, kidnapping up, robbery down, and homicide down.>>

Correct, and overall, those figures show a downward trend (you’ll note too, that, earlier, I mentioned assault is up (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=17534#310115)).

There are far also far more crimes than just those. Motor vehicle theft, for example, is also down (http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/4510.02014?OpenDocument, http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/second+level+view?ReadForm&prodno=4510.0&viewtitle=Recorded%20Crime%20-%20Victims,%20Australia~2014~Latest~22/07/2015&&tabname=Past%20Future%20Issues&prodno=4510.0&issue=2014&num=&view=&).

And they’re just conventional street crimes. We haven’t even gotten to white collar crime yet. That’s when things get MUCH trickier, and there’s not as many “ethnics” there to blame either.

<<According to Sullivan, there were only nine convictions for rape or attempted rape in the whole of Australia in 1923. By 1996 the figure was 116,105.>>

That’s why I mentioned the factors that Sullivan had not accounted for. I also haven’t claimed that crime is down from then. However, I have mentioned the world is a less violent place overall than it was then.

<<…that still represents an incredible rise from a time when Australia had practically no gun laws, to today's strict gun laws.>>

Guns aren’t usually required for sexual assault. This is a non sequitur.

<<At least you have proven that strict gun laws cause rape.>>

This is the Post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. Is it any wonder you’re so bad at interpreting statistics?

<<Could I submit that before the advent of Asian immigration into Australia, the crime of kidnapping was almost non existent?>>

You could, and you may even be right. But you need evidence. Our hunches aren’t good enough by themselves.

<<Homicides are down … [because] more people are surviving potentially fatal injuries.>>

So why is the attempted homicide rate declining too?

Continued…

…Continued

<<According to the NSW BCS&R fact sheet, "shoot with intent" crimes increased from 1995 to 2000.>>

One type of homicide, in one state, in that itty bitty time frame again? Do you understand what cherry picking is?

<<Why would they ethnic leaders do that, AJ?>>

I can think of a couple of reasons. Firstly, the figures are unreliable because police and courts in most jurisdictions don’t record ethnicity, and only do so sporadically when they do. Prison data contains country of birth, but it’s not much good to us anymore being the back end of the criminal justice system, and many people of different ethnicities are still born in Australia. Police data would be far more accurate, but even then, different reporting policies and procedures, across different jurisdictions; along with issues of both the over-policing and under-policing, would render the data highly unreliable.

Secondly, raw data has the potential to create a fear and loathing if they show higher rates when the explanations for those higher rates not understood (as we’ve demonstrated (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=15856&page=0, http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16259&page=0).

But I'm just speculating here. Since you seem to know more about it, could you link me to some further information? I can't find anything. I've tried Google searches, Google Scholar searches, and I've searched 1993's legislative changes and Hansard records for "Australian Bureau of Statistics" and couldn't find what you were talking about there either. I'll need more information to refine my searches.

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. But the incidences of all types of crime are still many times higher than that period of Australian history when firearms laws were almost non existent. 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.

Your statistics have shown that the ever the rising incidences of notoriously ethnic related crimes like kidnappings, home invasions, street shootings, and terrorism, 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. Crimes like kidnapping were almost non existent before the advent of large scale Asian immigration, and you know it. 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. Street shootings have probably declined because the NSW Police's Middle Eastern Organised Crime unit is the State's largest, and all that to police Muslims who make up only 2.3% of Australia's population. Terrorism is down, probably because we seem to have exported some of our most devoutly religious Muslims to Syria.

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.

Nice bit of dodging you did with the question of why ethnic leaders tried to hide the extent of ethnic related crime. The most obvious answer was, of course, that they were desperate to hide the extent to which multiculturalism was creating a tidal wave of crime. Instead of banning firearms, we would be better of banning Muslims, Pacific Islanders, Lebanese, Romanians, and Vietnamese.