UK Street Crime Rise Blamed on iPods 799
CNET reports that the British Government today attributed the country's 22% rise in street crime to iPod robberies. This has hit CNET close to home. Guy Cocker, a CNET (Gamespot) journalist based in London, was mugged last week. The muggers held 'a semi-automatic weapon to the back of Cocker's head and told him, "we're taking all your stuff"'. CNET's solution to the problem is suggestions on how to conceal your iPod from attackers. These include 'The gaffer tape method,' 'The Coke can method,' and 'The Christopher Walken method.'
Re:Bloody Bad Math! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:The Solution (Score:2, Informative)
Re:The Solution (Score:3, Informative)
No they wouldn't. You see, over here (UK) we have a bill called the Human Rights Act. What it boils down to is that if you commit a crime then you can avoid jail because it's dangerous and infringes on your Human Rights.
This also means that you could sue the police for shooting you.
Re:Thank god in a contry (Score:5, Informative)
The number of guns (and related crime) in the UK is steadily increasing year on year, however thankfully the numbers are still small. The lack of guns in the UK might go some way to explaining the fact that 'only' (ie still far too many) 46 gun related murders occured last year (that figure comes from the same report) in the whole of the UK.
Steve.
Re:Weapon? (Score:1, Informative)
Don't ask to see it:
totally likely: Get mugged
Ask to see it:
quite likely: Mugger runs
quite likely: Mugger beats you up, get mugged
unlikely: Mugger shows you a gun, get mugged
quite likely: Mugger shows you something that looks enough like a gun to fool you, get mugged
unlikely: Mugger shows you a bad fake, you can try you chances at beating him up if you fancy them
very unlikely: Mugger kills you
Probably not worth asking, depends if you actually have any valuables on you etc. Also, it shows that a knife is a much smarter weapon for a mugger to carry, they're easy to get hold of and still pretty nasty.
Missed the obvious (Score:3, Informative)
Why didn't they mention two most important steps you can take to prevent this kind of thing:
Re:Magnets?? (Score:2, Informative)
It is quite some time since the UK had steel cans. Can't speak for the rest of Europe however...
Re:Magnets?? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:a light touch with the clue stick (Score:5, Informative)
What happens in a fist/knife fight? You can fight, or you can run (well, most of the time). What happens in a gun fight? You let the bullets fly. Shooting first is best, as every cowboy western duel has taught us. Guns are almost a 100% guarantee that more situations will come down to an actual fight, and that more people will be hurt. If they have the drop on you, you're equally SOL if you have a knife at your throat or a gun at your head. Yes, some hardened criminals have guns around here as well - but they're usually after bigger fish than the few dollars in your pocket. Your average street thug or wacko doesn't have a gun - and if they do they're very much so wanted by the police. "Shots fired" actually get real attention here, and with modern communication you can expect the cops to arrive in a timely fashion.
What happens in a fist/knife fight when it is a 300 lb rapist versus a 100 lb girl? Guns are equalizers, they give anyone, man, woman, elderly, the ability to defend themselves. An armed society is a polite society. Anyone who has a concealed carry permit can tell you that being armed increases ones awareness to not get in such a situation where you might have to defend yourself. Most criminals don't have a death wish and don't want to get shot. Over 4 million times per year, armed citizens use their weapons to defend themselves from criminals. In the vast majority of these cases, the criminal flees once they see their target is armed.
The world has moved on since the Dark Ages. Your (or any other witnesses) cell phone is a more powerful tool than the gun in almost every situation. There are really extremely few situations where you would have time to pull out a gun, and where the gun would be more efficient than the police. Either you have no time at all and would be shot, or you have run off, barricaded or hidden yourself somewhere and the police will arrive in time. It was a different time when you could be all alone on the farm in the countryside, and noone would help if you screamed off the top of your lungs.
There are a few problems with relying on the government to protect you. Firstly, the average response time for a 911 call can be 5 minutes or higher. A criminal can mug you, rape you, or break into your house in far less time. If someone attacks you on the street, you won't have time to call 911 and wait for help. The idea that you could run and barricade yourself until the police come to rescue you is both rediculous and dangerous. There have been many cases where someone heard an attacker breaking into their house, they called the police, but they never came. Most famously, in 1981, this happened to three women who were brutally and repeatadly raped [healylaw.com] in their Washington D.C. home because the police never came. They sued the city, but the courts ruled that the police are not required nor responsible to respond or help any invididual, their duty is only to protect the public at large, meaning to catch and punish the criminal after they already robbed/raped/killed you.
Do you own a fire extinguisher in your home? I assume you do, because it is a tool that can be used to save your life and your property. You could just rely on 911 and call them for even small fires that you could put out yourself. But then again, a small fire could grow and burn your entire house down before the firefighters arrive.
2) Guns protecting "the people" from the government Sure, a bunch of guys with handguns could be the core of an army in 1776 or thereabouts. Maybe even well into the 19th century. Look around, there's fighter jets, bombers, tanks, artillery, mechanised infantry, machine guns, destroyers and battleships. Hundreds of thousands of men like that died on a single day in WWI, they'd last even shorter today. The closest thing they could mount to a defense would be trying to lead a guerilla war, but they couldn't hold any ground. Any armed revolution that wa
Re:Weapon? (Score:3, Informative)
Some piece of information on the refered username (Score:4, Informative)