Friday, August 27, 2004

Current events and crimes

As the Olympics draw into their last few days, and the nationalistic fervour of “counting medals” reaches its climax, without in any way denigrating the performance of any athlete from any nation I want to talk about something else.

In the very limited circles of the ‘Net that I float round in there is always someone who has the latest “stir”, either in favour of or against the American Constitution Second Amendment and “the right to bear arms”. There has probably been more crap posted on both sides of this particular matter than any other (with the possible exceptions of abortion and religion generally, but I do not think that the latter qualifies as it is generally far to general to be specific).

But I am not going to talk directly about the right to bear arms, either.

Last night, the crime statistics for New Zealand 2003 were released by the Police.

The news report

The Police release...

The Herald article touches briefly on possible causes for the reduction as espoused by members of government and opposition. I have no firm idea of the validity of those reasons but the fact that NZ currently has unemployment below 4% (5% is the OECD “full employment ratio”) is probably a very good lead.

Right, like I like doing, let’s tie these together.

What is the rate of homicide (I interpret that to include murder, the American second degree murder, and manslaughter) in other countries expressed as a rate per million population.

NZ has just dropped from 14.25 to 11.358 homicides per million population.

Why do I need to own a gun? To defend myself? From what?


Oh, yes. By the same measure we have won 1 medal - OK, 0.988 medals - per million at these Olympic Games with possibly 1 more to come. Equally as pleasing is the number of times that l'il ol' NZ has placed in the top 10 in events.

Hame and Bevan - you ROCK!!!

3 comments:

Al said...

Freedom to do something doesn't imply the need to do so, nor a duty to do it.

The great saint of the pro-gun movement here, John Lott, says that the biggest factor in reducing crime (that he studied) is keeping bad guys off the streets. The right to carry concealed guns is actually a distant second, though not statistically insignificant.

I don't remember him saying anything about employment rates, but I'm with you in believing that to be an even bigger factor. The self-esteem gained by the knowledge that you're making an honest living, I think, curbs many people's criminal tendencies.

Congratulations on the medal(s).

The probligo said...

Al, I am sure that you appreciate that I was not making any suggestion on the need / requirement to carry arms.

I made the point...why do I need a gun? I do not need one unless I carry something heavy enough to stop the bus that is going to run me over because there is a far greater chance of that happening than me being murrdurred in me bed - with or without a gun.

I grew up in the times of this country's "cradle to grave" socialism. It worked. It also failed because the demands of the system outstripped society's ability to pay. I am not too sorry to see it go, believe me.

But, is there a continuum that runs the other way - too little help for those in need?

Al said...

Maybe you should carry around a concrete barrier for those times when you have to step into traffic.

You realize that you're advertising for people like me to move our families into your neighborhood, bringing our problem children with us. That's how wonderful areas get ruined.

Though, I'm sure my girls would never bother anyone, and my stepsons would never visit us there.