Sorry cryst, not quite true anymore. If you were over 21 before 2002 & held a full GB license, then yes you can. A 7.5t vehicle is now classed as a Class 4 LGV(as is anything 5t & over).

I'm a blind man, i'm a blind man, now my room is cold,
When a blind man cries, Lord, he feels it from his soul.
[Link]

The Krays were notorious because their crimes were relatively rare.

Today, the Krays would not even be famous ( nor infamous ). Their story would be swallowed up in the crimewave of Croydon, London or whereverthef..ck.

Kayla did Anfield & Old Trafford

I am not in denial I am just looking at the data.

Correlation does not imply causation is not an excuse, it’s a central tenet of statistical logic.

Immigration causes crime (direct causation), crime causes immigration (reverse causation), immigration and crime are both caused by something else, immigration causes crime and crime causes immigration (cyclic causation), there is no connection between immigration and crime therefore the correlation is a coincidence.

I agree that it is very important to seduce the cause of something before we can seek t change it.
As Aristotle wrote, "we do not have knowledge of a thing until we have grasped its why, that is to say, its cause”.

Regarding crime figures, they have clearly fallen and they continue to fall.
You suggest that the methods of collecting and interpreting data have changed.
That may well be true but there is no date available that shows crime rising.

[Link]

In relation to homicide.

This link shows that homicide has been falling since all records began.

[Link]

In the UK in 2017 the last year for which complete data is available there were 355 homicides.
In 1990 there were 614 homicides, in 1995 there were 574 homicides, in 2000 there were 466 homicides and in 2010 there were 398 homicides.

Out of interest in 2017, the 355 homicides compares to 2,678 road deaths, 5,777 suicides and 179,856 cancer deaths.

Just to be clear I love Japan. I love the people, the culture, the food and the language. In general the Japanese tend to be rather xenophobic. And as is not uncommon they are most antagonistic towards Koreans, the people that are culturally closest to them. Westerners are generally admired but there is an underlying sense that they also find western attitudes rather coarse.

There is, however, a growing realisation especially amongst the young who are facing an enormous tax burden to support an ageing population, that without immigration the country will cease to function.

Without immigration, in 60 years the country will be near enough empty. If you want to look at some really frightening data check out the birth rate in Japan. The population has been falling since 2015 and nothing other than immigration will arrest this.

[Link]

As someone with an economics background, Stirling's understanding and use of statistics to try and support his arguments makes me want to weep.

There's no point though - he's a lost cause. There will always be something he tries to use to shoehorn in to fit his ideology no matter how tenuous or statistically illiterate.

The statistics are there provided from the home office on homicides and it can't be faked unlike other stats.

They go back to 1898.....it can be deliberately shown so that a comparison can be made pre and post immigration.

Yet you don't address the statistics that prove a considerable increase in murder rates since the first wave of immigrants grew into adults with its mostly increases to this day......considerably higher rates than the population. These relative increases will also show the same for other violent crime.

It's not just the immigration importation of significantly different cultures, it's social liberalism on families (family breakup/missing fathers) and I suspect that increases in wealth inequality also plays a role....though the stats show different rates for different groups there also and that's even controlled for wealth if you bother to look.

Also I have to say, your waffle over causation doesn't hide the fact that often correlation is the cause. That fallacy is there only as a correct ballast against faulty assumptions. It is not there to dismiss the obvious.

The evidence is so overwhelmingly against you that it just comes across as a leftist defending the ideology because you know that your fellow denialists are watching.

Edited by Stirlingsays (13 Sep 2021 5.16pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)