Ukip

[MK Shrimper]

Farage said he'll resign in he doesn't get elected in Thanet?

If ever there was a reason to vote Tory, that's the one.

 

[callan]

Ever heard of objective evidence? :smile:

What your stats tell us is crime has fallen....that doesn't mean that immigrant crime hasn't risen.

 

[londonblue]

Farage said he'll resign in he doesn't get elected in Thanet?

If ever there was a reason to vote Tory, that's the one.

Beat me to it!

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

What your stats tell us is crime has fallen....that doesn't mean that immigrant crime hasn't risen.

I'm sure you remember Karl Popper's theory of falsifiability.

In order to disprove a theory eg that all swans are white, what you don't do is go out and find a lot of white swans.What you do do is go out and find a single black swan.

QED.

 

[londonblue]

What your stats tell us is crime has fallen....that doesn't mean that immigrant crime hasn't risen.

But immigrant crime will definitely have risen since the baseline used by TUIB (the 1980s) was before large scale immigration. Therefore that statistic wouldn't really mean anything.

The only thing you can really do is what TUIB has done, and that is look at overall crime numbers in an objective way.

 

[londonblue]

I'm sure you remember your Karl Popper.

In order to disprove a negative theory eg that all swans are quite what you don't do is go out and find a white swan.What you do do is go out and find a single black swan.

QED.

You can't prove a negative.

Off topic, but this is exactly why conspiracy theories never die: because they always ask people to prove their theory didn't happen.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

You can't prove a negative.

Off topic, but this is exactly why conspiracy theories never die: because they always ask people to prove their theory didn't happen.

Notice that I'd edited my post to take account of this, presumably while you were writing your reply.

 

[callan]

I'm sure you remember Karl Popper's theory of falsifiability.

In order to disprove a theory eg that all swans are white, what you don't do is go out and find a lot of white swans.What you [B]do do[/B] is go out and find a single black swan.

QED.

You want me to do, do?

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

You want me to do, do?

No,just to do.:winking:

 

[Bielzibubz]

But government stats aren't objective are they. They're manipulated to fit whatever argument they happen to be peddling at any given time. Just like the one's you like to quote from The Gaurdian and just like the one's in papers from the opposite end of the political spectrum such as The Mail and Express. And that's the very reason I don't quote them, and neither should you. Personal experience and listening to those with personal experiences of situations is far more valuable and reliable than opinions in print based on an agenda.

The point about the crime figures and the fact that just because the proportion of overall crime may be down doesn't necessarily mean that the figures for certain crimes are'nt up and continue to rise in certain areas of the country, especially since we're talking about the last decade or so, not the last three or four. The very reason I singled out certain crimes such as ATM fraud, personal burglary (pick pocketing) prostitution (or pimping to be more precise) etc etc.

You carry on scouring the tabloids and broadsheets (well, one only really but we'll let that slide) for the information to base your opinions on and I'll carry on having personal conversations with those that live and work in the front line of policing :thumbsup:

 

[callan]

But immigrant crime will definitely have risen since the baseline used by TUIB (the 1980s) was before large scale immigration. Therefore that statistic wouldn't really mean anything.

The only thing you can really do is what TUIB has done, and that is look at overall crime numbers in an objective way.

Are we then therefore left with the conclusion that both TUIB and Bielzibubz are correct ?
TUIB is correct that overall crime is down, whereas Bielzibubz is correct that immigrant crime has increased.

 

[londonblue]

Are we then therefore left with the conclusion that both TUIB and Bielzibubz are correct ?
TUIB is correct that overall crime is down, whereas Bielzibubz is correct that immigrant crime has increased.

Maybe, but it would have been impossible for immigrant crime to have fallen. Which means it's completely irrelevant. The real issue is are we more or less likely to be the victim of crime, and the answer is (based on the figures) less likely, which surely is a good thing.

 

[callan]

Maybe, but it would have been impossible for immigrant crime to have fallen. Which means it's completely irrelevant. The real issue is are we more or less likely to be the victim of crime, and the answer is (based on the figures) less likely, which surely is a good thing.

However we are more likely to be a Victim of Immigrant Crime (based it's increased as per your above), which is surely a bad thing and relevant.

 

[londonblue]

However we are more likely to be a Victim of Immigrant Crime (based it's increased as per your above), which is surely a bad thing and relevant.

Not IMO. As I said given that the numbers given by TUIB are baselined before large scale immigration it would be impossible for the numbers not to have risen.

I'm more concerned about whether I'm likely to be the victim of crime, and the numbers suggest I'm less likely. IMO all criminals are lowlifes. I don't care if a lowlife came from abroad or not, they're still a lowlife.

 

[Benfleet A1]

You want me to do, do?

Only if you can't find a black swan, then use a dodo.

 

[Bielzibubz]

Not IMO. As I said given that the numbers given by TUIB are baselined before large scale immigration it would be impossible for the numbers not to have risen.

I'm more concerned about whether I'm likely to be the victim of crime, and the numbers suggest I'm less likely. IMO all criminals are lowlifes. I don't care if a lowlife came from abroad or not, they're still a lowlife.

You are far more likely to be a victim of ATM fraud perpetrated by an organized Eastern European immigrant crime gang than you were ten years ago. You are far more likely to a victim of a crash for cash insurance fraud crime organized and perpetrated by an Eastern European gang than you were ten years ago. Violent crime, including domestic, against females is rife among the Eastern European immigrant community.

 

[londonblue]

You are far more likely to be a victim of ATM fraud perpetrated by an organized Eastern European immigrant crime gang than you were ten years ago. You are far more likely to a victim of a crash for cash insurance fraud crime organized and perpetrated by an Eastern European gang than you were ten years ago. Violent crime, including domestic, against females is rife among the Eastern European immigrant community.

I'm more likely to be the victim of ATM fraud regardless of where the lowlife is from because card readers are more readily available than they were 10 years ago.

I'm more likely to be the victim of ATM fraud by an Eastern European that I was 10 years ago because there are more Eastern Europeans here now.

However, I'm still less likely to be the victim of any crime than I was previously, and it is that that I care about.

 

[Bielzibubz]

You miss the point completely. I really can't see the point in discussing or debating with your or TUIB. Your both so blinkered as to what's going on around you it's actually quite sad. Hey how, never mind. Perhaps we'll come back in a few years and go over these posts see where we are then.

 

[maninasuitcase]

You are far more likely to be a victim of ATM fraud perpetrated by an organized Eastern European immigrant crime gang than you were ten years ago. You are far more likely to a victim of a crash for cash insurance fraud crime organized and perpetrated by an Eastern European gang than you were ten years ago. Violent crime, including domestic, against females is rife among the Eastern European immigrant community.

Exactly how much more likely? I am asking this as a serious question?

I have tried to find some independent figures to either back or disprove you assertion so I didn't want to take anything from a newspaper of either side of the political divide.

I have found some recent Oxford University research which you can have a look at yourself. From what I can gather, a rising immigrant population has a minimal effect on crime figures in that area, and depending on where the people come from, it can even fall by a small amount. This suggests that the number of bad eggs in a population is pretty similar across many nationalities including the English.

http://www.migrationobservatory.ox....ion-and-crime-evidence-uk-and-other-countries

 

[londonblue]

You miss the point completely. I really can't see the point in discussing or debating with your or TUIB. Your both so blinkered as to what's going on around you it's actually quite sad. Hey how, never mind. Perhaps we'll come back in a few years and go over these posts see where we are then.

It's amazing how people say that when they run out of good arguments. After all, the same can be said of you, and your stance. You are so blinkered against immigrants you refuse to accept that maybe they, on the whole, are actually not the issue you want them to be.