<!--quoteo(post=1717487:date=Jul 15 2009, 11:06 PM:name=asmodee)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (asmodee @ Jul 15 2009, 11:06 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1717487"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->BTW I'm not familiar with the Daily Mail, so I don't know what type of site it is. The reason I posted the link is that it was the first match referencing the report that I actually read since I couldn't find the link to the report itself.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Take, for example, <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196941/The-violent-country-Europe-Britain-worse-South-Africa-U-S.html" target="_blank">your 'citation'</a>, first it claims "<i>In the decade following the party's election in 1997, the number of recorded violent attacks soared by 77 per cent to 1.158million - or more than two every minute.</i>" Did you, perhaps, notice that they were so kind as to ease our reading by omitting "per year" from the claim? How nice of them to shorten the line by two words! They also mentioned "<i>two every minute</i>" though, which heavily implies it <b>is</b> per year. Mathematically it works out, but the lack of explicit statement is nice an ambiguous - how unpatronising!
If you then move a but farther down the page, you may see a chart of values... it looks pretty unprofessional (how can you be inconsistent about anti-aliasing on a letter-by-letter basis? Shoddy image editing if you ask me), but do you notice it lacks any mention of time frame? And how its data 'source' is very generic and, in fact, if you look it up on the European Comission's website, it's nigh-on impossible to find. All ring alarm bells in my head that the data has been not mildly but <i><b>heavily</b></i> modified to fit their claims. No time frame other than the research potentially being "since labour got into power." But the Daily Mail being accurate is a childish dream to assume.
And-- bah I'm tired I want to sleep I can continue this later.
I hate to merely skim on what's wrong with that article but I'm tired and wish to go to bed...
KassingerShades of greyJoin Date: 2002-02-20Member: 229Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1717487:date=Jul 16 2009, 04:06 AM:name=asmodee)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (asmodee @ Jul 16 2009, 04:06 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1717487"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Our societies our different. I go back to the justice system. Yours probably works. Ours takes violent criminals and gives them slaps on the wrists and then takes marijuana users and keeps them in jail. It's completely rediculous. If you ignore the crimes that involve guns, we still have a rediculously high crime rate. Add in the fact that if guns were completely removed from society (somehow), then some of the crimes that involved guns would still be committed.
You can even look at just murder rates. Best I can find for DK is 0.98 murders per 100k population. Murders in the US that DON'T INVOLVE GUNS is still 3x that murder rate. We have a problem regardless of the presense of guns and the fact that ignoring all crimes regarding guns we still have a high crime and murder rate is evidence of that.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Being both an American and a Norwegian, I believe it's more of a cultural thing than to do with the justice system. If anything, Scandinavian justice is several times as lenient as back in the US, but Scandinavia suffers of socialism and severe egalitarianism, so there are not enough desperate poor people to do our crime.
If you don't have a job, you get 10,000 USD in welfare money, and this guy in the papers who killed his stepson only got 6 years, and it will probably be less with good behaviour.
AbraWould you kindlyJoin Date: 2003-08-17Member: 19870Members
<!--quoteo(post=1717494:date=Jul 15 2009, 11:32 PM:name=briktal)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (briktal @ Jul 15 2009, 11:32 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1717494"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So you'd expect to be convicted of murder or something similar for that?
~~Sickle~~<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I havn't been arrested before, I couldn't tell.
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1717501:date=Jul 15 2009, 07:08 PM:name=Kassinger)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kassinger @ Jul 15 2009, 07:08 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1717501"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->suffers of ... severe egalitarianism, so there are not enough desperate poor people to do our crime.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> *twitch*
Comments
edit: dobbeltpost, yes.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So you'd expect to be convicted of murder or something similar for that?
~~Sickle~~
Imagine a society that is stupid. Imagine this society is so stupid they are too stupid to come up with their own uninformed, biased, ignorant opinions. This is the society for which the Daily Mail caters. Imagine a newspaper with no shame, no qualms and no morals about what they will write about, and not in the good way, such as the acerbic wit of caustic criticism or the hilarious bluntness of the blasé. No, these people have <i><b>literally no standards of professionalism</b></i>.
Take, for example, <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196941/The-violent-country-Europe-Britain-worse-South-Africa-U-S.html" target="_blank">your 'citation'</a>, first it claims "<i>In the decade following the party's election in 1997, the number of recorded violent attacks soared by 77 per cent to 1.158million - or more than two every minute.</i>" Did you, perhaps, notice that they were so kind as to ease our reading by omitting "per year" from the claim? How nice of them to shorten the line by two words! They also mentioned "<i>two every minute</i>" though, which heavily implies it <b>is</b> per year. Mathematically it works out, but the lack of explicit statement is nice an ambiguous - how unpatronising!
If you then move a but farther down the page, you may see a chart of values... it looks pretty unprofessional (how can you be inconsistent about anti-aliasing on a letter-by-letter basis? Shoddy image editing if you ask me), but do you notice it lacks any mention of time frame? And how its data 'source' is very generic and, in fact, if you look it up on the European Comission's website, it's nigh-on impossible to find. All ring alarm bells in my head that the data has been not mildly but <i><b>heavily</b></i> modified to fit their claims. No time frame other than the research potentially being "since labour got into power." But the Daily Mail being accurate is a childish dream to assume.
And-- bah I'm tired I want to sleep I can continue this later.
I hate to merely skim on what's wrong with that article but I'm tired and wish to go to bed...
You can even look at just murder rates. Best I can find for DK is 0.98 murders per 100k population. Murders in the US that DON'T INVOLVE GUNS is still 3x that murder rate. We have a problem regardless of the presense of guns and the fact that ignoring all crimes regarding guns we still have a high crime and murder rate is evidence of that.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Being both an American and a Norwegian, I believe it's more of a cultural thing than to do with the justice system. If anything, Scandinavian justice is several times as lenient as back in the US, but Scandinavia suffers of socialism and severe egalitarianism, so there are not enough desperate poor people to do our crime.
If you don't have a job, you get 10,000 USD in welfare money, and this guy in the papers who killed his stepson only got 6 years, and it will probably be less with good behaviour.
~~Sickle~~<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I havn't been arrested before, I couldn't tell.
*twitch*