can anyone verify this?

[gejohnston]

A friend of mine sent me this link. Since I don't have any contacts in the British government, nor am I an expert on their crime reporting statistics. In fact, I'm not even an Anglophile beyond enjoying working with the RAF a few times.

If this is true, think of the ramifications for discussing gun control in general. How are each country reporting their murder rates and are they comparable to how the US does it?
Take for example, this tidbit.

Since 1967, homicide figures for England and Wales have been adjusted to exclude any cases which do not result in conviction.

and cites a paper written by former Met PD official Colon Greenwood on Parliament's website. It not only says that Jack the Ripper's crimes would not be included by the Home Office statistics. It also begs the question, does the increase in this chart mean "more murder" or "better police work and forensics resulting in more convictions"?



Here is the point he is making

The murder rate in the UK according to US standards is double or higher than their reported rate. It may be impossible to produce an actual apples to apples comparison number from official sources. It is not 15% of the US rate.

My question is, when we make these international comparisons with numbers from Wikipedia, is either side making "apples and apples" comparisons?
the link
http://rboatright.blogspot.com/2013/03/comparing-england-or-uk-murder-rates.html

[krispos42]

1. How do they count murders with no suspect?

If the bobbies find somebody stabbed a dozen times, but never have a suspect, how is that classified?

Seems ridiculous on its face.

[gejohnston]

2. apparently, the Home Office doesn't

report it, hence my reference to Jack. However the death register would might list them as "death by assault", or "violent deaths of interest to the police" by a corner's inquest but not defined as murder by the Home Office.

Kind of like the Japanese counting the murdered victims of murder/suicides as involuntary suicides.

Does seem ridiculous on its face, but truth is often stranger than fiction. That is why I ask.
When someone defends John Lott's hypothesis using UK as an example, I'm sure someone will mention this.
But this includes only England and Wales, not UK as a whole. What does Scotland and ULSTER do?

[Kang Colby]

3. That subject has long been verified.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199900/cmselect/cmhaff/95/95ap25.htm

In England, a murder isn't a murder unless there has been a conviction. With a sub 50% clearance rate, their violent crimes are under reported.