ruhe

correct me if i am wrong, but your 'aggrivated burglary' example seems flawed to me, and i am pretty sure that now breraking and entering into the home is actyually classed and sentenced as a violent crime (even if no violence occurs) because of the potential for violence. no a rule change like that would inflate the violent crime stats, would it not? instead, you seem to be suggesting that such changes make the stats lower. this does not make sense to me.

and the BCS does contact a cross seciton of the population, that is the whole point. I think that we are in agreement that recorded crime figures are sketchy, if for no other reason than laws keep changing and therefore the measurement is not consistant or comparable with previous years (a few things, like murder rates, are the exception).

this is why the bcs was invented, and why academics, and officilas see it as the most accurate reflection of crime trends.

so, you still fail to make an adequate case for what the british crime survey, which surveys unreported crime and experience of crime through surveys and interviews of the population has continually showed decreasing crime, and that people are less likely to be the victims of crime.

so, my question still stands:

continually decreasing crime levels and experience of crime according to the BCS, yet increasing fear of crime?

how do you explain that without taking into account media scaremongering.

don't think you can.

User Comments / Have Your Say

The opinions and views expressed in the above comment are purely those of the writer and in no way reflect the opinions or views of the Daily Express website, the Daily Express newspaper or Northern And Shell Media Publications. We accept no responsibilty legal or otherwise for the accurancy or truth of this comment.