Most Helpful Customer Reviews
102 of 103 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
What Happened to the Peaceful Kingdom?, August 9, 2002
This review is from: Guns and Violence: The English Experience (Hardcover)
Americans I know tend to think of Britain as a peaceful, crimefree place. My British friends tend to think of America as a crime-ridden Hell. Statistical data published in the last couple of years, amusingly, reveals that they're both one hundred eighty degrees wrong. This book explores what happened on the British side of the pond. Historically, of course, Britain has had low crime rates. One aspect of the story that Malcolm traces is the evolution of gun ownership (stimulated by invention and ever cheaper gun prices and restricted, over the course of the 20th century, by ever harsher government regulation)and the relationship of gun ownership to crime. The skinny is this: Britain had low crime rates as long as it had high levels of private gun ownership. As the state has made private ownership illegal, crime has skyrocketed. Another strand Malcolm illuminates is the changing nature of British law enforcement. Britain only acquired policemen in the modern sense in the middle of the nineteenth century, under the leadership of Sir Robert Peel (hence the nickname "Bobbies"). Prior to that time, the general public was expected to -- and did -- assist in the apprehension of lawbreakers. The general public was, of course, armed to the teeth. And (see above) Britain had low crime rates. But since the introduction of professional police, the British government has increasingly tried to grant itself a complete monopoly on the use of force. Not only has it progressively made private gun ownership illegal (no one here can own pistols anymore, and it's pretty difficult to get a permit to own a rifle, even for sport), it has also eroded, almost into nonexistence, the traditional British right to self-defense. Witness the 1999 case of Tony Martin, a farmer in an isolated area whose home had previously been burgled. Two professional burglars broke into his home, and he shot them, killing one. Guess who got life imprisonment? That's right, the farmer. Malcolm's writing is lucid and pleasant and her exposition thorough. ...
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
43 of 45 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
The other shoe drops, January 10, 2004
This review is from: Guns and Violence: The English Experience (Hardcover)
As some one who has lived in NYC for 12 years, and just returned from a year in England, I was astonished by how much more violent crime exists in that seemingly placid country. As Professor Joyce Malcom describes, robbery, burglary, assault and motor vehical theft in England have risen far higer (per 1000 population) than in the United States since the mid 1990s. This in spite of the fact that to minimize this shocking increase in violent crime, the British government has re-ordered the way crime statistics are collected. Car thefts are no longer investigated by Police; you call them to report a theft; they give you a report number for the insurance company. (A man called the police to report he was witnessing his car being stolen, and if they hurried over, they could catch the theft. They were "too busy.") What is most fascinating about Prof. Malcolm's book is what you can read between the lines. The wilful blindness of anti-gun people has become so overwhelming, that it induces the most bizarre behavior in these otherwise intelligent people. As she amply demonstrates, it is just not possible to find ANY statistics put out by the anti-gunners that are not flawed, misleading, or just plain false. This strange belief has become an unquestioned religion to many, and opposition is not simply a different opinion, it is heresey. Malcom relates how in 1966 a gun shot 3 policemen with a handgun, causing the British Home Secretary Jenkins slap on the public a new ban on shotguns!! (Handguns were already illeagal.) The book is rather long detailing the history of gun use in Great Britain, but the second half paints a surprising picture of the rapid decline of public safety in almost perfect sync with a draconian reversal of previously liberal gun laws. Malcom makes an interesting effort to compare US crime statisitics with those of England, but, given our culture where more than half the population own guns--this is often a stretch. Nevertheless, this book will certainly be the other shoe to the rancorous gun debate going on int he US, and should do much to buttress the fact that more guns do seem to result in less crime.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
35 of 36 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Excellent study of the failure of Gun Control, July 6, 2005
This review is from: Guns and Violence: The English Experience (Hardcover)
For anyone who is interested in the subject of gun control I heartily recommend "Guns and Violence: The English Experience" by Joyce Lee Malcolm. It is a scholarly and, to my American ears, dispassionate and comprehensive examination of the history and effects of English gun control efforts throughout the the centuries. In so doing, the authoress is not afraid to puncture many myths.
English police historically didn't need to carry guns because England was so peaceful? Well, not exactly... Actually, the reason English police were originally unarmed was because the idea of the government having a civilian police force at all was, literally, a revolutionary idea. There was, at that time, a real fear that the people would rise up in armed rebellion at the very thought of the government having a uniformed force that could be used against them. It was to relieve these fears that the police were expressly forbidden to carry firearms. But everybody else had guns! Don't believe me? Read Sherlock Holmes. The bad guys had guns. Dr. Watson had his old (privately purchased) service revolver. Holmes, who had no official standing whatsoever, had a revolver. The only ones who didn't have guns were the Metropolitan Police (although Inspector Lestrade was often known to illegally carry a pistol).
England is remarkably free of violent crime? It was indeed . . . at the end of the Nineteenth century! However, at that time, guns were widely available and commonly carried by the population at large. So much so that, when a gang committed the unheard of crime of armed robbery in London, the unarmed Police were able to borrow four pistols from passersby in order to give chase to the bandits. Since this period was the most peaceful and crime free era in English history I suppose we should, by typical anti-gun logic, immediately disarm all police forces in the United States.
Going back to the Middle Ages, England had higher levels of violence before firearms were invented. At the same time that firearms were slowly introduced, levels of violent crime gradually fell to an all time low. The authoress doesn't propose a one to one correlation here, as there are too many other possible factors to make this claim (although I suspect there is more of a connection here than the book is willing to state). But clearly, the increasing proliferation of firearms cannot be said to have created a corresponding increase in violence.
The beginning of the 20th century saw both gradual increases of restrictions on firearms ownership, and increases in violent crime. The end of the last century saw a complete ban on private possession of firearms, and a virtual explosion in the rate of violent crime immediately following that ban. Today England, Wales and Australia have the tightest restrictions on firearms of any Western Democracies. Guess which three Western Democracies have the highest violent crime rates? Go on, you'll never guess (hint: today you are eight times more likely to be a victim of violent crime in London than you are in Detroit or Chicago).
But what I found most appalling is that England today has everything that the anti-gun crowd has ever asked for (and is still trying to get here in the USA). Complete registration of all firearms, followed not long after by the complete confiscation of all firearms (the latter effort being remarkably unsuccessful, as most firearms were never turned in, and the supply of illegal guns has never shown even the slightest indication of drying up). When all privately held firearms were finally banned, the rate of gun crimes jumped up immediately and is still climbing. English private citizens are currently forbidden to carry not just firearms, but literally anything that could be used as a weapon for self-defense (after all, if we don't do anything to make the nice criminals mad, they won't hurt us. Alas, the criminals have not shown any tendency to co-operate in this non-aggression pact). People who have defended themselves have been more severely prosecuted than those who attacked them.
England today is a an anti-gunner's dream come true. But it is increasingly becoming a nightmare for those living in that gun-free Utopia. In spite of official efforts to downplay the statistics and under report the "official" numbers of crimes, the truth is becoming so obvious that it cannot be denied. If you're arguing with somebody about gun control, then you don't need to make any claims about what you think might happen if the people are disarmed. England has provided us with living proof of what does happen when law-abiding people are unable to defend themselves. And also what happens when uninformed voters rely on the government to protect them instead of standing up for the right to protect themselves.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
