Stabby ! Can Trump's 'nasty person' be London's 'Mare ? Or a Knight-Mayor

We can all look at graphs etc and it seems most agree it's getting ridiculous since mass unchecked immigration.

Wheather some of the libtards disagree with that is up to them.

What is irrefutable, is that the animal who attacked these people came here in a lorry, illegally and was allowed to stay.

If he hadn't been allowed to come here after arriving in the back of a lorry; then we would not have dead a seriously injured people.

The libtards will still debate that fact I bet.
 
We can all look at graphs etc and it seems most agree it's getting ridiculous since mass unchecked immigration.

Wheather some of the libtards disagree with that is up to them.

What is irrefutable, is that the animal who attacked these people came here in a lorry, illegally and was allowed to stay.

If he hadn't been allowed to come here after arriving in the back of a lorry; then we would not have dead a seriously injured people.

The libtards will still debate that fact I bet.

'libtards' lol.

The good thing with 'graphs etc' is that they're objective and they know a lot more than you or I do. So you can absolutely think 'it's getting ridiculous', but that thought would be subjective and not supported by data. It's not really for 'most to agree' what violent crime rates are doing - it's a matter of fact.

I agree with you that our asylum system is unfit for purpose and that deportations should be considerably easier.
 
'libtards' lol.

The good thing with 'graphs etc' is that they're objective and they know a lot more than you or I do. So you can absolutely think 'it's getting ridiculous', but that thought would be subjective and not supported by data. It's not really for 'most to agree' what violent crime rates are doing - it's a matter of fact.

I agree with you that our asylum system is unfit for purpose and that deportations should be considerably easier.
That was point I thought we could agree on.
Pretty straightforward for everyone to see.

How much faith can be put in government figures is debatable.

I prefer to see the pictures of the people and ethnicity after crimes have been committed.

This I have more faith in.

That said the government did put out (surprisingly) a list recently; showing crimes per country of origin.

Let's say it didn't look good for the divisity is our strength brigade.

But I would still be skeptical of it because the government are involved.

It's probably worse than they said and they are throwing us a bone. Lol
 
Last edited:
That was point I thought we could agree on.
Pretty straightforward for everyone to see.

How much faith can be put in government figures is debatable.

I prefer to see the pictures of the people and ethnicity after crimes have been committed.

This I have more faith in

Even acknowledging what you say re government data, I don't see how you can make a case that the part in bold is a more reliable method of concluding anything.
 
Even acknowledging what you say re government data, I don't see how you can make a case that the part in bold is a more reliable method of concluding anything.
If I don't trust the government, which I have good reason not to. Then it is certainly a more reliable way of getting answers.

I did add another point to my last post with the government showing there is a problem with foreigners commiting more crime.

I might add crime per capita.

I hope unlike James O Brian you know what means.
 
If I don't trust the government, which I have good reason not to. Then it is certainly a more reliable way of getting answers.

I did add another point to my last post with the government showing there is a problem with foreigners commiting more crime.

I might add crime per capita.

I hope unlike James O Brian you know what means.

I don't agree in bold - you can only ever have visibility on a tiny percentage of cases, and nowhere near enough to draw meaningful conclusions. There's also obviously huge scope for bias to influence such a subjective method of assessment.

I think we're conflating two points here - my argument is that the whole 'London has fallen' narrative around crime and lawlessness in the city is grossly exaggerated, as evidenced by the data.

At a glance, I would agree that data also supports your suggestion that on average foreigners are more likely to commit crime, but I'd guess I think there's a little more nuance to that than you do.
 
I don't agree in bold - you can only ever have visibility on a tiny percentage of cases, and nowhere near enough to draw meaningful conclusions. There's also obviously huge scope for bias to influence such a subjective method of assessment.

I think we're conflating two points here - my argument is that the whole 'London has fallen' narrative around crime and lawlessness in the city is grossly exaggerated, as evidenced by the data.

At a glance, I would agree that data also supports your suggestion that on average foreigners are more likely to commit crime, but I'd guess I think there's a little more nuance to that than you do.

with regard to London, a lot of people have their phones stolen. Bike gangs etc. Stabbings, acid attacks.

Growing up we didn't have anywhere near the amount of crime we now have.

It's not just different cultures coming in with their own ways of commiting crime.
there are more nasty people of all nationalities.
 

with regard to London, a lot of people have their phones stolen. Bike gangs etc. Stabbings, acid attacks.

Growing up we didn't have anywhere near the amount of crime we now have.

It's not just different cultures coming in with their own ways of commiting crime.
there are more nasty people of all nationalities.

Yes, we did - that's entirely my point, which I've backed up with data. It also marries my experience living in the city.
 
I don't agree in bold - you can only ever have visibility on a tiny percentage of cases, and nowhere near enough to draw meaningful conclusions. There's also obviously huge scope for bias to influence such a subjective method of assessment.

I think we're conflating two points here - my argument is that the whole 'London has fallen' narrative around crime and lawlessness in the city is grossly exaggerated, as evidenced by the data.

At a glance, I would agree that data also supports your suggestion that on average foreigners are more likely to commit crime, but I'd guess I think there's a little more nuance to that than you do.
"Tiny percent of cases"

I think most of the murders committed in London/Britain are generally well publicised.
So I can see names and faces.

Ok, let's just say I use my method for the worst crime, murder.

Then it's not a tiny percentage
 
"Tiny percent of cases"

I think most of the murders committed in London/Britain are generally well publicised.
So I can see names and faces.

Ok, let's just say I use my method for the worst crime, murder.

Then it's not a tiny percentage

There were 550 murders in the UK last year - sorry but there's no way you can do any serious analysis on that volume based on what makes it to the papers.
 
That's not at all what I said.

The point is they only cover a small percentage of the 500+ murders that take place, and so using that as the basis to conclude anything is obviously flawed.
Poppycock. As is the notion that all big cities have more stabbings. Do you know what ? they also have more...
- bicycles
- millionaires
- mars bars
- Yorkshire Terriers....

....than any small village. It doesn't excuse the awful trend of stabby violence in London over the last few decades. I wonder what the correlates of all this stabby violence are ? type of nylon underwear worn by the attacker ? what football team they support ? other ?
 
Poppycock. As is the notion that all big cities have more stabbings. Do you know what ? they also have more...
- bicycles
- millionaires
- mars bars
- Yorkshire Terriers....

....than any small village. It doesn't excuse the awful trend of stabby violence in London over the last few decades. I wonder what the correlates of all this stabby violence are ? type of nylon underwear worn by the attacker ? what football team they support ? other ?

Not what I said - I said on average, violent crime is consistently more common in urban cities, compared with rural areas, which is obviously true. I'm amazed such an obvious thing has been so contested.

The data suggests that knife crime in London is decreasing, but it's much easier to stick your fingers in your ears and froth.
 
conjugate the verb correctly, dear boy. "the data suggest"

were they data you got from the office of Sadiq ? or were they from the BBC ?

Tokyo, Japan has proportionately ( or by any other measure) way way less violent crime than Port au Prince, Haiti.


If you want to ignore data because it points to you being wrong, that's entirely up to you - as I said, fingers in ears, froth.

You don't need to keep trawling the internet for bizarre exceptions (I'm not even sure this one is an exception lol) to what is a very, very obvious reality - violent crime is more common in urban cities than rural areas. Your continued denial of this is getting rather silly.

How do violent crime rates in rural Japan compare with Tokyo?

How do violent crime rates in rural Haiti compare with Port au Prince?
 

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top