Mmmm. I'd be interested to see what happens when you have the international comparison separate out drug- and gang-related stuff. Of course, the devil's in the details of how such things are categorised.
Nod. Though, as the NFU spokesman pointed out, that still shows that badgers play a part in the spread of TB among cattle, just that culling them isn't the solution.
It's entirely statistics, but not very many statistics, sadly. There are a lot of unanswered questions.
For example, they show the trend from 1982 to 2002 in reported firearms offences, then, without explanation, figures that might be quarterly, might be monthly for just four isolated months of the year, or might be year-on-year figures for four points through the year. Those latter figures for the year 2000 don't match the ones in the graph above.
On the next page we're given figures for gun killings across various nations. So now we have an international comparison on gun killings and two contradictory UK trends over time for gun crime, but no international gun crime comparison or UK trends in gun killings figures. Why?
Then we're told what percentage of robberies are gun robberies, but not what percentage of gun crime robberies constitute.
Then we're told that these figures (seem to) include imitation firearms, but not air guns. Why?
There seems to be no trend in police injuries and deaths in gun crimes, except that 1994 and 95 were bad years.
So what are these figures supposed to show, again? So much data, so little information.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ewx
(no subject)
Date: 2003-11-05 11:13 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2003-11-05 11:24 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2003-11-05 12:31 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2003-11-05 12:38 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2003-11-05 12:41 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2003-11-06 04:12 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2003-11-06 04:29 am (UTC)For example, they show the trend from 1982 to 2002 in reported firearms offences, then, without explanation, figures that might be quarterly, might be monthly for just four isolated months of the year, or might be year-on-year figures for four points through the year. Those latter figures for the year 2000 don't match the ones in the graph above.
On the next page we're given figures for gun killings across various nations. So now we have an international comparison on gun killings and two contradictory UK trends over time for gun crime, but no international gun crime comparison or UK trends in gun killings figures. Why?
Then we're told what percentage of robberies are gun robberies, but not what percentage of gun crime robberies constitute.
Then we're told that these figures (seem to) include imitation firearms, but not air guns. Why?
There seems to be no trend in police injuries and deaths in gun crimes, except that 1994 and 95 were bad years.
So what are these figures supposed to show, again? So much data, so little information.