Murder rate in London higher than in New York for the first time

[Finnegan]

Poor areas with poor education spawning high crime. Its not really all that shocking. 

 

The crime drops when areas are "gentrified" and money is pumped in and all the hipsters and yuppies show up but then nobody gives a toss about the original residents that become priced out of the area. 

 

You can do all the stop searches you want, you can up the police presence and make every citizen from Croydon to Tottenham walk through metal detectors on every street but if you don't do anything about the social mobility in the worst areas then the likelihood of crime is going to be there. 

 

I could be wrong but I don't think Cobham, Beaconsfield or Esher have problems with gang knife murders and I don't think that's a coincidence. 

 

[Webbo]

2 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

Poor areas with poor education spawning high crime. Its not really all that shocking. 

 

The crime drops when areas are "gentrified" and money is pumped in and all the hipsters and yuppies show up but then nobody gives a toss about the original residents that become priced out of the area. 

 

You can do all the stop searches you want, you can up the police presence and make every citizen from Croydon to Tottenham walk through metal detectors on every street but if you don't do anything about the social mobility in the worst areas then the likelihood of crime is going to be there. 

 

I could be wrong but I don't think Cobham, Beaconsfield or Esher have problems with gang knife murders and I don't think that's a coincidence. 

 

Its a chicken and egg situation though. Does poverty cause crime or does crime cause poverty? Would you want to set up a business in an area where you thought your premises would be vandalised, your car keyed or you'd be mugged on the way home? Would you employ someone from a rough area if you assumed they'd have an attitude problem?

[Finnegan]

4 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Its a chicken and egg situation though. Does poverty cause crime or does crime cause poverty? Would you want to set up a business in an area where you thought your premises would be vandalised, your car keyed or you'd be mugged on the way home? Would you employ someone from a rough area if you assumed they'd have an attitude problem?

 

It's not chicken and egg at all. 

 

Poverty causes crime. 

 

 

Edit, before someone gets pedantic: the kind of crime in question. I imagine the kids on the estate aren't about to be done for electoral or corporate fraud. 

[Innovindil]

28 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

It's not chicken and egg at all. 

 

Poverty causes crime. 

 

 

Edit, before someone gets pedantic: the kind of crime in question. I imagine the kids on the estate aren't about to be done for electoral or corporate fraud. 

So if poverty causes crime, does that mean everyone currently/previously in poverty are now currently/previously criminals? 

[Finnegan]

2 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

So if poverty causes crime, does that mean everyone currently/previously in poverty are now currently/previously criminals? 

 

[ozleicester]

Sadly the reason that the NYC crime rate dropped is, (and i hate to say it) due to Donald Trump and his mates, buying up the poor parts of NYC in the 80s and chasing/pricing the poor out of the city.

[Webbo]

48 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

It's not chicken and egg at all. 

 

Poverty causes crime. 

 

 

Edit, before someone gets pedantic: the kind of crime in question. I imagine the kids on the estate aren't about to be done for electoral or corporate fraud. 

You've not really answered my point. Would you set your business up in a rough area? If you had the choice of employing someone from Hand Avenue or Knighton who would you pick?

[Innovindil]

9 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

I'll take that as a no. 

 

So there must be another reason outside of poverty that people become criminals. 

 

Point stands for "poorer education" too. 

 

If everyone in the area is dealing with the same situation but having a different outcome, it must be about more than that, surely. 

[Finnegan]

21 minutes ago, Webbo said:

You've not really answered my point. Would you set your business up in a rough area? If you had the choice of employing someone from Hand Avenue or Knighton who would you pick?

 

I didn't really answer it because you missed it. You're talking about the value of an area, not the poverty of the people in it. Like I said, when you improve the value of an area (and yes, lots of people set up businesses in poorer areas because the rent is cheap, that's how gentrification starts) you just force out the original residents who can't afford to be there anymore. 

 

As for employing someone from Braunstone over Knighton, I think you're flagging up your own prejudices there. I don't think many prospective employers judge the estates their applicants live on above their qualifications, no? 

 

The question is the qualifications and education provided on Hand Avenue vs Knighton but then I don't think you're quite talking an enormous difference in area there compared to say Cobham and Wood Green. 

 

17 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

I'll take that as a no. 

 

So there must be another reason outside of poverty that people become criminals. 

 

Point stands for "poorer education" too. 

 

If everyone in the area is dealing with the same situation but having a different outcome, it must be about more than that, surely. 

 

Cigarettes cause cancer. Not every smoker has cancer. Causation doesn't mean 100% uptake, that's just bonkers. Are you seriously denying any correlation between poverty and crime? I can't really be arsed to sit here Googling for you to have a debate that I really don't give that much of a toss about but give it a go and you'll find about a zillion pages of statistical evidence. 

[Webbo]

3 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

I didn't really answer it because you missed it. You're talking about the value of an area, not the poverty of the people in it. Like I said, when you improve the value of an area (and yes, lots of people set up businesses in poorer areas because the rent is cheap, that's how gentrification starts) you just force out the original residents who can't afford to be there anymore. 

 

As for employing someone from Braunstone over Knighton, I think you're flagging up your own prejudices there. I don't think many prospective employers judge the estates their applicants live on above their qualifications, no? 

 

The question is the qualifications and education provided on Hand Avenue vs Knighton but then I don't think you're quite talking an enormous difference in area there compared to say Cobham and Wood Green. 

 

 

 

It's not my prejudice, my dad was from Hand Avenue originally. There is unconscious prejudice in everyone though, not always unjustified. People with expensive cars always think twice before parking in a rough area because they know there's a fair chance it'll get keyed, would you want to commute to that area everyday?

[Finnegan]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

It's not my prejudice, my dad was from Hand Avenue originally. There is unconscious prejudice in everyone though, not always unjustified. People with expensive cars always think twice before parking in a rough area because they know there's a fair chance it'll get keyed, would you want to commute to that area everyday?

 

Right because poor areas have a higher level of petty crime, generally speaking. 

 

What I'm confused about is how that rich man parking his BMW in a rough area helps the people living there out of poverty? 

[Webbo]

Just now, Finnegan said:

 

Right because poor areas have a higher level of petty crime, generally speaking. 

 

What I'm confused about is how that rich man parking his BMW in a rough area helps the people living there out of poverty? 

If you own a successful business you'll probably own a nice car. So would you set up a business in an area where you couldn't park your car, where you were always looking over your shoulder on the way out in case you were mugged?

 

Tbh it's probably a bit of both and that creates a viscous circle. Blaming poverty alone won't change anything though.

[Babylon]

3 hours ago, ozleicester said:

Bugger, i lost all of my eloquent a useful comments....:( 

 

The "law" doesn't target one group... the police do. Stop and seacrh will impactt almost entirley on the black community which will do nothing to end the problem, it may even exacerbate it. 

 

The domestic abuse "epidemic" is affecting the white community (almost twice as many white women as ethnic), but im not hearing suggestions that police sit outside pubs and question every white bloke as he leaves, checking for his mental state and likleyhood to kill or beat his partner.

Pretty sure that's because people in other communities are far less likely to report the abuse.

[Babylon]

3 hours ago, ozleicester said:

A mild inconvenience i should think. and they can tell when the piss head is a danger.

How?

 

I get your analogy, but it's a bloody terrible one.

[Innovindil]

25 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

I didn't really answer it because you missed it. You're talking about the value of an area, not the poverty of the people in it. Like I said, when you improve the value of an area (and yes, lots of people set up businesses in poorer areas because the rent is cheap, that's how gentrification starts) you just force out the original residents who can't afford to be there anymore. 

 

As for employing someone from Braunstone over Knighton, I think you're flagging up your own prejudices there. I don't think many prospective employers judge the estates their applicants live on above their qualifications, no? 

 

The question is the qualifications and education provided on Hand Avenue vs Knighton but then I don't think you're quite talking an enormous difference in area there compared to say Cobham and Wood Green. 

 

 

Cigarettes cause cancer. Not every smoker has cancer. Causation doesn't mean 100% uptake, that's just bonkers. Are you seriously denying any correlation between poverty and crime? I can't really be arsed to sit here Googling for you to have a debate that I really don't give that much of a toss about but give it a go and you'll find about a zillion pages of statistical evidence. 

Not at all. There is definitely a link between poverty and crime. I just believe that instead of it being a direct cause in the way you'd imagine, it's used more of an excuse.  How many criminals do we see stand before a court saying something along the lines of "It's not my fault, I was abused/poor/led astray". I'd say the majority of the time, they are no worse off than others who have been successful without crime. 

 

Instead of providing people with a defeated attitude before they have tried, we should be providing them with the attitude that anyone can make it. 

 

Fill the newspapers with success stories, there are plenty enough. Instead of papering the front pages with what are essentially people's failures. 

[Wortho]

I think that the useless Mayor has a lot to answer for. Virtually ending stop and search has a lot to do with it. Mayor Khan is more interested in installing gender-free toilets.

[Strokes]

Did anyone watch the bbc documentary on moped gangs and acid attacks? 

It was quite eye opening and tbf kind of backs up @Finnegan‘s pov.

Inside Britain's Moped Crime Gangs: www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p05x9kfp via @bbciplayer

[Voll Blau]

1 hour ago, Innovindil said:

Not at all. There is definitely a link between poverty and crime. I just believe that instead of it being a direct cause in the way you'd imagine, it's used more of an excuse.  How many criminals do we see stand before a court saying something along the lines of "It's not my fault, I was abused/poor/led astray". I'd say the majority of the time, they are no worse off than others who have been successful without crime. 

 

Instead of providing people with a defeated attitude before they have tried, we should be providing them with the attitude that anyone can make it. 

 

Fill the newspapers with success stories, there are plenty enough. Instead of papering the front pages with what are essentially people's failures. 

Well, that's mitigation for you. People found guilty of something (whatever their background) will likely say/be told to say whatever their legal help thinks will get them a more lenient sentence.

 

I'm not sure good news only newspapers are really the way forward either - for one thing they're rarely a viable business model and aren't exactly likely to reach those they need to anyway. Investment in good mentoring schemes and social work at a local level is far more likely to inspire and get results.

[z-layrex]

Work in London, it's an absolute shit heap and it's getting worse every year. My friend was mugged in Camden after a night out Sunday morning. It used to be so safe.

[Babylon]

2 hours ago, Finnegan said:

Poor areas with poor education spawning high crime. Its not really all that shocking.

How much do you think someones ethnicity, well not ethnicity lets say background can play a part in whether they are more likely to turn to crime?

 

White, black, asian etc can all come from poor backgrounds. Are you less likely to turn to crime being Asian because statistically you're more likely to come from a home with both parents, very often with grandparents in the home. Some stats I found from about a decade ago said 48% of black carribbean households were single parent compared to 36% black african, 10% Indian, 12% Pakistani, 22% White.

 

Growing up the asian lads I knew were hardly allowed out. There was a huge emphasis from their parents on working hard and succeeding at school (and they pretty much all did as well) and bettering themselves. The lads were scared shitless of doing anything wrong because of the shame it brought the family. That's something I don't see so much from white families, unless you come from quite a well off background where the parents then seem more willing to push their kids.

 

Is that sort of attitude still prevalent in the asian community, or is it lost more and more with each generation that's been in this country?

 

Because if their attitude to family and education means they are less likely to turn to crime, despite being brought up in poor areas, it might give an idea of the deep rooted issues communities face.

[Guest Col city fan]

6 hours ago, James. said:

It feels less safe here than it has ever has. I still think you are highly unlikely to be a murder victim unless you are involved in gangs but regardless it's the threat of other violence / crime which becomes more of an issue for the general public - things like muggings, thefts, etc all of which certainly feel as if they are more prevalent nowadays.

 

There is a certain brazenness / complete lack of giving a shit that embodies a lot of young people - the value they place on their own life and others seems at an all time low. And I think that comes from a variety of factors - reduced funding for police and youth work must be a big part of it. And then the desensitising nature of social media probably also having an impact. But it's complex and to be frank I have no idea what the answers are.

 

Crime (alongside air pollution) were two of the big reasons we have decided to move away from the city after living here for nearly 14 years.

 

 

I’m of the opinion that this thing about ‘young people not giving a shite’ is as it always was.... it’s generally about parenting.

I can remember as far back as when I was a kid and there were ‘gangs’ about then or ‘tough kids with reputations’ who you knew to steer clear of or you’d get a good hiding. Many a time I used to walk home from secondary school and use a different route if I’d been tipped off that ‘so and so’ was about.

And many of my lads mates (he’s now 23) are seriously good lads. Pleasant, respectable, earning, polite and with morals.

I think you’re right about reduced funding for police and certainly about youth work. What kept me entertained as a kid was attending the local youth club attached to the Church and we had a great time, particularly playing football.

If anything, I think many kids these days are more confident now than ever and actually aware of others around them. What HAS changed are the methods used nowadays to intimidate by those wanting to do so. When I was a youth, the worst we could get was a good kicking. Nowadays, it can be a lot more serious.

[Nick]

The lure of executive scooter crime is on the up.

[Guest Col city fan]

29 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

The lure of executive scooter crime is on the up.

I'm sure you're right!

Who wouldn't want one of these?!

[Nick]

22 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

I'm sure you're right!

Who wouldn't want one of these?!

I’m going to have a stab at answering that with ‘the demographic of adult males.’

[Guest Col city fan]

Just now, Swan Lesta said:

I’m going to have a stab at answering that with ‘the demographic of adult males.’