Easy solution to Englands insane crime rates

[Flopper]

Crime is going through the roof in England. My suggestion for an almost immediate huge drop in crime would be to revisit Rule 303.

The intentional homicide rate in the UK is less than a fifth of what it is in the US so I guess you think the US should do the same.

Troll, now where did I mention homicide? I said crime.

Let's get this straight. You're are suggesting open session on criminals, that is shooting them down without any type trial because that is what Rule 303 implies. The only reason that crime in Britain is high compared to the US is because they include minor crimes such peeing in a public place in sex crime, housebreaking in burglary, and threats of bodily harm as assault. Serious crimes such rape and murder are much higher in the US.

Wrong you loon they DO NOT include peeing in public as a violent crime yet England Wales and such have the highest Violent crime rate of all the civilized nations.

The definition of a violent crime is not the same in the US as it is Britain; it's an apples and oranges comparison. However, if we compare violent crimes with the same definition, the statistics are quite different. Take for example, intentional homicide. The US rate 4.88 vs. 92 in the UK, 5.3 times as great as in the UK.

"The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports defines a ‘violent crime’ as one of four specific offenses: murder and non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault." By contrast, "the British definition includes all ‘crimes against the person,’ including simple assaults, all robberies, and all ‘sexual offenses,’ as opposed to the FBI, which only counts aggravated assaults and ‘forcible rapes.’ "

Peeing in public is a sexual offense in the UK because it is considered indecent exposure. In the US, it depends on the reason.

Social media post says U.K. has far higher violent crime rate than U.S. does
List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia

 

[miketx]

Crime is going through the roof in England. My suggestion for an almost immediate huge drop in crime would be to revisit Rule 303.

The intentional homicide rate in the UK is less than a fifth of what it is in the US so I guess you think the US should do the same.

Troll, now where did I mention homicide? I said crime.

Let's get this straight. You're are suggesting open session on criminals, that is shooting them down without any type trial because that is what Rule 303 implies. The only reason that crime in Britain is high compared to the US is because they include minor crimes such peeing in a public place in sex crime, housebreaking in burglary, and threats of bodily harm as assault. Serious crimes such rape and murder are much higher in the US.

Shooting criminals in the commission of a felony is bad? No wonder libs bring us so much crime.

 

[miketx]

Fail. Weapons like that do not exist, but the horde of scum destroying England, and Europe, does.

There's probably millions of these in storage over there. Pass them out.

 

[miketx]

A well armed populace is a major deterrent to crime.

 

[Flopper]

Crime is going through the roof in England. My suggestion for an almost immediate huge drop in crime would be to revisit Rule 303.

The intentional homicide rate in the UK is less than a fifth of what it is in the US so I guess you think the US should do the same.

Troll, now where did I mention homicide? I said crime.

Let's get this straight. You're are suggesting open session on criminals, that is shooting them down without any type trial because that is what Rule 303 implies. The only reason that crime in Britain is high compared to the US is because they include minor crimes such peeing in a public place in sex crime, housebreaking in burglary, and threats of bodily harm as assault. Serious crimes such rape and murder are much higher in the US.

Shooting criminals in the commission of a felony is bad? No wonder libs bring us so much crime.

The answer depends on whether you believe society should be ruled by laws or violence. Vigilante justice which is what you're describing is basically a bad idea.

 

[miketx]

Crime is going through the roof in England. My suggestion for an almost immediate huge drop in crime would be to revisit Rule 303.

The intentional homicide rate in the UK is less than a fifth of what it is in the US so I guess you think the US should do the same.

Troll, now where did I mention homicide? I said crime.

Let's get this straight. You're are suggesting open session on criminals, that is shooting them down without any type trial because that is what Rule 303 implies. The only reason that crime in Britain is high compared to the US is because they include minor crimes such peeing in a public place in sex crime, housebreaking in burglary, and threats of bodily harm as assault. Serious crimes such rape and murder are much higher in the US.

Shooting criminals in the commission of a felony is bad? No wonder libs bring us so much crime.

The answer depends on whether you believe society should be ruled by laws or violence. Vigilante justice which is what you're describing is basically a bad idea.

The law says people have a RIGHT to defend themselves and their property. So shooting criminals is within the law. Now YOU feel free to bend over for them and let them steal rape and rob YOU blind!

 

[Flopper]

The intentional homicide rate in the UK is less than a fifth of what it is in the US so I guess you think the US should do the same.

Troll, now where did I mention homicide? I said crime.

Let's get this straight. You're are suggesting open session on criminals, that is shooting them down without any type trial because that is what Rule 303 implies. The only reason that crime in Britain is high compared to the US is because they include minor crimes such peeing in a public place in sex crime, housebreaking in burglary, and threats of bodily harm as assault. Serious crimes such rape and murder are much higher in the US.

Shooting criminals in the commission of a felony is bad? No wonder libs bring us so much crime.

The answer depends on whether you believe society should be ruled by laws or violence. Vigilante justice which is what you're describing is basically a bad idea.

The law says people have a RIGHT to defend themselves and their property. So shooting criminals is within the law. Now YOU feel free to bend over for them and let them steal rape and rob YOU blind!

So you are now changing your basic premise that shooting someone committing a crime is not a bad thing to shooting a person in defense of your life and property is not a bad thing. That's completely different. Defending your life and property has been recognized as a fundamental right in all civilized societies. However, there is no universal agreement as to the degree of force allowed in that defense. A man running toward you swinging an ax would certainly be justification for lethal force. However using lethal force to stop a blind man in a wheel swinging his cane at you would probably not be dreamed justifiable.

 

[miketx]

Troll, now where did I mention homicide? I said crime.

Let's get this straight. You're are suggesting open session on criminals, that is shooting them down without any type trial because that is what Rule 303 implies. The only reason that crime in Britain is high compared to the US is because they include minor crimes such peeing in a public place in sex crime, housebreaking in burglary, and threats of bodily harm as assault. Serious crimes such rape and murder are much higher in the US.

Shooting criminals in the commission of a felony is bad? No wonder libs bring us so much crime.

The answer depends on whether you believe society should be ruled by laws or violence. Vigilante justice which is what you're describing is basically a bad idea.

The law says people have a RIGHT to defend themselves and their property. So shooting criminals is within the law. Now YOU feel free to bend over for them and let them steal rape and rob YOU blind!

So you are now changing your basic premise that shooting someone committing a crime is not a bad thing to shooting a person in defense of your life and property is not a bad thing. That's completely different. Defending your life and property has been recognized as a fundamental right in all civilized societies. However, there is no universal agreement as to the degree of force allowed in that defense. A man running toward you swinging an ax would certainly be justification for lethal force. However using lethal force to stop a blind man in a wheel swinging his cane at you would probably not be dreamed justifiable.

Excellent defense of criminals. However I have changed nothing. What yo are doing is the time worn tactic of deflecting and and twisting what was said. All I say is that shooting criminals with A 303 will reduce Englands crime. Now, troll on....

 

[Flopper]

Let's get this straight. You're are suggesting open session on criminals, that is shooting them down without any type trial because that is what Rule 303 implies. The only reason that crime in Britain is high compared to the US is because they include minor crimes such peeing in a public place in sex crime, housebreaking in burglary, and threats of bodily harm as assault. Serious crimes such rape and murder are much higher in the US.

Shooting criminals in the commission of a felony is bad? No wonder libs bring us so much crime.

The answer depends on whether you believe society should be ruled by laws or violence. Vigilante justice which is what you're describing is basically a bad idea.

The law says people have a RIGHT to defend themselves and their property. So shooting criminals is within the law. Now YOU feel free to bend over for them and let them steal rape and rob YOU blind!

So you are now changing your basic premise that shooting someone committing a crime is not a bad thing to shooting a person in defense of your life and property is not a bad thing. That's completely different. Defending your life and property has been recognized as a fundamental right in all civilized societies. However, there is no universal agreement as to the degree of force allowed in that defense. A man running toward you swinging an ax would certainly be justification for lethal force. However using lethal force to stop a blind man in a wheel swinging his cane at you would probably not be dreamed justifiable.

Excellent defense of criminals. However I have changed nothing. What yo are doing is the time worn tactic of deflecting and and twisting what was said. All I say is that shooting criminals with A 303 will reduce Englands crime. Now, troll on....

You're the one that changed your basic premise that shooting someone committing a crime is not a bad thing by tacking on in defense of live and property.

 

[miketx]

Shooting criminals in the commission of a felony is bad? No wonder libs bring us so much crime.

The answer depends on whether you believe society should be ruled by laws or violence. Vigilante justice which is what you're describing is basically a bad idea.

The law says people have a RIGHT to defend themselves and their property. So shooting criminals is within the law. Now YOU feel free to bend over for them and let them steal rape and rob YOU blind!

So you are now changing your basic premise that shooting someone committing a crime is not a bad thing to shooting a person in defense of your life and property is not a bad thing. That's completely different. Defending your life and property has been recognized as a fundamental right in all civilized societies. However, there is no universal agreement as to the degree of force allowed in that defense. A man running toward you swinging an ax would certainly be justification for lethal force. However using lethal force to stop a blind man in a wheel swinging his cane at you would probably not be dreamed justifiable.

Excellent defense of criminals. However I have changed nothing. What yo are doing is the time worn tactic of deflecting and and twisting what was said. All I say is that shooting criminals with A 303 will reduce Englands crime. Now, troll on....

You're the one that changed your basic premise that shooting someone committing a crime is not a bad thing by tacking on in defense of live and property.

Oh man shut up! All you vicious trolls do is talk out your asses.

 

[JQPublic1]

A well armed populace is a major deterrent to crime.

No it isn't. Especially homicides.... An armed populace only puts more guns in the hands of crooks who steal them from idiots who don't secure them properly.

 

[miketx]

A well armed populace is a major deterrent to crime.

No it isn't. Especially homicides.... An armed populace only puts more guns in the hands of crooks who steal them from idiots who don't secure them properly.

And you are lair.

 

[skye]

England is long gone....England is globlalist territory.....poor lost long gone England....

New World Order ....Globlalist waste land....

bye bye England!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


bye bye

 

[Marion Morrison]

.303 take care of many problems. Lee Enfield approved.

Them Mauser n .06 rounds, though.

 

[JQPublic1]

A well armed populace is a major deterrent to crime.

No it isn't. Especially homicides.... An armed populace only puts more guns in the hands of crooks who steal them from idiots who don't secure them properly.

And you are lair.

A lion lives inside of me but I am not a LAIR. Maybe you were attempting to call me a liar instead. But if you can't even spell the word right... you're too dumb to understand why the US murder rate is ridiculously higher than that of the UK.
The difference is in the USA the accessibility to weapons makes it easier to settle differences with firearms than it does in the UK.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Crime is going through the roof in England. My suggestion for an almost immediate huge drop in crime would be to revisit Rule 303.

A well armed populace is a major deterrent to crime.

No it isn't. Especially homicides.... An armed populace only puts more guns in the hands of crooks who steal them from idiots who don't secure them properly.

And you are lair.

A lion lives inside of me but I am not a LAIR. Maybe you were attempting to call me a liar instead. But if you can't even spell the word right... you're too dumb to understand why the US murder rate is ridiculously higher than that of the UK.
The difference is in the USA the accessibility to weapons makes it easier to settle differences with firearms than it does in the UK.

Sounds like it sucks to be a subject.

 

[JQPublic1]

.303 take care of many problems. Lee Enfield approved.

Them Mauser n .06 rounds, though.

For a while it might, until the thugs start stealing them and using them on YOU!

 

[miketx]

.303 take care of many problems. Lee Enfield approved.

Them Mauser n .06 rounds, though.

For a while it might, until the thugs start stealing them and using them on YOU!

Classic gun banner crime lover fantasy.

 

[Marion Morrison]

.303 take care of many problems. Lee Enfield approved.

Them Mauser n .06 rounds, though.

For a while it might, until the thugs start stealing them and using them on YOU!

Not likely to happen. I'm a bad, bad man. They can't do eet if they're ventilated, dumbass.

 

[DOTR]

Crime is going through the roof in England. My suggestion for an almost immediate huge drop in crime would be to revisit Rule 303.