London Gun Crime Offences 2006 – 2012

Table of London Gun Crime Offences by Borough – 2006 – 2011

BOROUGH Gun Crime 2006-07 Gun Crime 2007-08 Gun Crime 2008-09 Gun Crime 2009-10 Gun Crime 2010-11
Barking and Dagenham 69 65 89 91 95
Barnet 73 99 97 109 73
Bexley 40 51 50 35 33
Brent 163 173 117 166 104
Bromley 62 74 82 75 61
Camden 58 66 64 127 50
Croydon 142 163 170 174 163
Ealing 135 148 98 118 108
Enfield 107 122 108 141 119
Greenwich 105 181 116 103 88
Hackney 149 173 141 182 104
Hammersmith and Fulham 66 85 55 62 85
Haringey 143 135 119 155 83
Harrow 39 58 62 49 46
Havering 52 41 41 43 45
Heathrow Airport 0 3 0 0 0
Hillingdon 60 73 74 72 73
Hounslow 52 72 71 50 55
Islington 100 89 78 106 52
Kensington and Chelsea 33 40 34 34 43
Kingston upon Thames 22 20 17 22 16
Lambeth 243 273 209 279 215
Lewisham 156 169 204 224 120
Merton 41 74 68 78 56
Newham 174 184 155 137 165
Redbridge 67 55 71 72 61
Richmond upon Thames 18 14 13 25 13
Southwark 254 219 195 226 212
Sutton 26 38 62 43 25
Tower Hamlets 98 83 65 89 53
Waltham Forest 131 141 135 142 149
Wandsworth 85 129 90 148 74
Westminster 71 119 72 83 70
TOTAL per financial year 3034 3429 3022 3460 2708

source MPS FOI 2012

Gun Crime Offences: Violence Against the Person, robbery, burglary and sexual offences in which a firearm (defined as a weapon covered by Firearms Acts 1968 to 1988 and excluding CS/pepper spray) are used.
Simple possession, without intent or lawful authority, is excluded (For example, when a police search results in a discovery of possession of a weapon). n.b Data includes where a gun was ‘threatened but not seen’ from April 2008 onwards.

This entry was posted in gun crime, murder and homicide, street violence. Bookmark the permalink.

26 Responses to London Gun Crime Offences 2006 – 2012

  1. Daemon says:

    When the teenage murders in London were really getting out of hand in 2007 and 2008 the people in the Black community said you had to stop the supply of guns in the uk. It was the availability of guns that was allowing kids to posture about, because they had such lethal weapons at their disposal. This was also driving the lethal use of knives because knowing someone may come back at you with a gun meant you had to take them down permanently.
    The large gun busts the police made nationally drove down the supply of guns and although there was a blip in 2010 the last 2 years has seen massive reductions in gun crime and gun availability.
    I don’t think that there is any surprise that teenage murders in London have gone up and down in line with gun crime offences. Less guns on our streets means less a sense of threat between young people, which in turn makes it less likely that a knife will have to be used lethaly.
    Serious youth violence is going up, knife crime is up, but the only two things really dropping fast is gun crime, and teenage murder. Over the last 3 years gun crime is down by a third and teenage murders by over half.
    Growing up in the inner city I know what its like when one of your contemporaries has a gun, it ups the ante of the violence from all. Everyone has to make out their more dangerous and lethal than the other even though that’s completely fake because as soon as you are seen as soft you are targeted.
    So while the Police in London may not have touched the overall knife crime statistics, despite the silly knife bins, stupid really as you can get a knife from your kitchen drawer. The Police and Judiciary have made their biggest impact by really cracking down on guns in the capital, I really believe that by reducing gun threat levels this has really changed the way knives are used as well.

  2. rob says:

    In others words

    The handgun ban only affected law abiding citizens, as most reports indicate. So the ban on handguns did not stop handgun crimes because of illegal importation supply of illegal hanguns, to concluded the ban on handgund was a total failure. As it still stands handgun crime is still higher than it was with the introduction of the droconian law. Well dine guys well done, so whats the next thing to be banned to win votes,

    • kase says:

      I’m all for getting rid of all the violent crime but that’s not possible. Chicago has some of the most restrictive gun control regulations in the US yet so far this year, 22+ have died by knife wounds.

      Let’s take away all the guns from the citizens? I’m pretty sure the criminals and crazy people are going to ignore those requests.

      The chain that owns the theater in Aurora where the massacre took place has a no-weapons policy, which oddly enough did not deter the shooter any more than Colorado’s strict laws against murder did. Irrational aggression is impossible to fully prevent.

      Two days ago, three elite special-operations U.S. Marines were shot to death in the southern Afghan province of Helmand. These are guys that expect to be shot at, they carry loaded weapons to dinner. At least 34 NATO troops have died this year in similar shootings. If trained special-ops military can’t eliminate crazy, that’s proof enough for me, we can’t either.

      Even with that unfortunate disposition, I will always want my right to at least try to defend myself and those around me.

      • Esra says:

        UK approx 35 gun murders a year, population 60 million.
        USA approx 11,000 gun murders a year, population 300 million.

        I know where I feel safer 😉

        • Gwen says:

          I am confused? The chart above says 2,390 gun crimes, 2011-2012 per financial year. You post 35 gun crimes. Is the chart above not correct?

          • Martin says:

            The difference is gun crimes are where a gun is seen or threatened -2390 in 2011/12. Very different from when a gun has actually been used to kill someone which I think is only 39 in England in Wales in 2011/12

        • charles says:

          Esra. Please give us all of the facts in the UK. For one thing the above chart is only of London and not the UK. Guns are banned and you still have serious gun crime. Please tell the American people the issue with knife crime and the domestic break in rate. Most of us Yanks (not me) will be shocked. Also, what does the 11,000 gun murders in the US include? What does the35 gun murders in the UK include? Police? self defense? suicide? The Brits always seem to ignore these significant little details

          • John H says:

            I will comment instead of Esra
            The main info on gun murders is on this page.

            In 2012 there were 44 gun murders in Britain (England Scotland and Wales) with a population of 61,370,912. Giving 0.72 gun murders per million population.

            When the discrepancy between both the homicide rate and gun homicide rate between the US and US is so enormous you don’t have to worry about the little details more the great big fat elephant sitting in the middle of the room!!

  3. Amy says:

    Hand guns are for the specific purpose at shooting at people nothing else. Who in their right mind thinks having weapons around for the sole purpose of killing people in a household is a good idea.

    • alan says:

      Amy, you may choose to only shoot at people, but that rather proves the point that it’s people rather than guns that are the problem. Me? I’ve always preferred target shooting rather than taking the life of another. Have you ever even handled a gun?

      • Paula says:

        Yea yea yea. Its bad people who kill people not guns.
        Bad people with guns can kill a lot more people than bad people without guns. Lets think about this – the 24 year old guy in Aurora, Colorado could get hold of a semi-automatic assault rifle, 2 pistols and a shot gun with 6000 rounds of ammunition. With these he killed 12 people and injured many more. Doya think he would have done this if he could only get hold of a knife… probably not, cowards like these like the odds stacked up on their side.

        So lets take this bad people, gun argument further. Plastic explosives don’t kill people, only bad people kill people….. can you see where this is going.
        It is about the effectiveness and efficiency to kill linked with quite a few nut cases who would love to do so. You wouldn’t sell plastic explosives at your hardware store even though everyone loves a big explosion. Because some nutter is going to use it to blow up lots of people.

        You gotta ask yourself, who are these people who like guns so much… and pretend its all about the sport of it. No they are drawn to the potential lethal nature of these devices and sense of power they get from it. Sounds to me like a bit of over-compensation.

        • Esra says:

          Paula you just summed it up beautifully.
          More American crazies killing children because mom thought having an assault rifle in the home was a great way to protect herself and her precious son Adam Lanza. Turns out little Adam kills his mom , 20 little kids and 6 adults.

          • Daniel K says:

            Remember it was a kid that did the killing, Also in the UK guns have to be kept in a gun safe and the amnunition in a second safe and the owner is the only one who knows where the keys or combo’s are kept. so that negates the not so right in the head kids getting any of my weapons. unlike the states where a lot of weapons are kept in glass fronted cabinates. If a foriegn national commits a crime in the uk should we imprison all foriegn nationsals in the uk…I THINK NOT

        • shawn says:

          Thank you, Thank you, Thank you. Great response.

        • Lisa says:

          And do you really think that criminals say that the law says NO? Let’s think about this, driving drunk is against the law, and does it stop people from driving drunk? No it sure doesn’t. Did it stop any of these murderers from entering a GUN FREE zone carrying weapons? No it sure didn’t. All those laws do is to keep the honest person honest, criminals and killers DO NOT CARE one whit what the law says. GUN FREE zones are like advertising to crazy criminals and killers, saying here ya go, no one here is able to stop you, come on in and do what you want. I want my children to feel safe going to school, I have no problem with staff being properly trained and certified carrying a concealed weapon to work with them, and protecting my child.

    • NhForLiberty says:

      You may have a very good reason to have the need to shoot someone in your house like a HOME INVADER that wants to kill and/or harm your children? There are justified reasons for the need of self defense… Let’s not be so Naive

  4. deejay appache says:

    Amy, I totally agree with you, there are so many cases where law abiding citizens with gun permits have killed innocent people including children, no human can be trusted with any killing weapons because it only takes a little mental trigger and humans are not in control, especially if they access to weapons, its like time bomb waiting to explode.

    I just lost my 25 year old nephew to gun crime on Monday 16th July 2012, he was shot point blank in head whilst sitting in his car and was victim of mistaken identity. I’m devastated with my loss and makes me angry with these kind of crimes on the up in UK, and only 2 weeks earlier my 14 year old son was knife robbed whilst travelling home from school. I’m in constant fear for my children, nephews and nieces growing up in London.

  5. Bill Gibbons says:


    The problem with guns bans is, they don’t work. When you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns. Criminals, by definition, have placed themselves outside of the law and therefore feel no compulsion or desire to obey the law. There will still be a supply of guns available in Britain from the continent, no matter how much you try to stop the flow. And the criminals will always have access to them. There is an estimated four million illegal guns circulating the UK, from 9mm pistols to AK 47 assault rifles and Ingram Model 10 machine guns.

    The recent horrific slaughter of innocent school children and six of their teachers in Newtown, Connecticut, only highlights stupidity of useless “gun free zones.” Such places end up becoming shooting galleries for criminals and crazies, who know full well that everyone at these locations will be defenceless.

    Remember in June 2010, when Derrick Bird drove around in Cumbria for 35 miles and shot 23 people before taking his own life? Britain’s unarmed police could stop him. By the time armed police units had assembled, had been issued their weapons, went through their briefings and awaited multiple levels of authorization before they could even move, twelve people were dead, including Bird by his own hand. Absolute madness.

    When pushed to tighten Britain’s already paranoid gun laws, prime minister David Cameron stated, “you cannot legislate against a switch being flicked inside someone’s head.”


    But Derrick Bird could have been stopped a lot sooner had the local police, or even some local citizens, had access to firearms and were able to shoot back. Their little tins of CS spray and aluminium batons were no match for Bird’s .22 rifle and 12 bore shotgun. All they could do was to scoot people out of the way and yell at others to “take cover.”

    So much for the only unarmed police service in the European Union.


    Go to YouTube and listen to the 911 calls made by terrified women in the USA. They were home alone when people were trying to break into their homes. It matters not whether the offenders were estranged spouses, ex-boyfriends, burglars, or just some nut case looking for a rape victim. Locked windows and doors did not stop them, barking dogs did not stop them, loud burglar alarms did not stop them, and the police were too far away to get their in time to stop them. All of those women are alive today because they had access to a gun in the house and were able to either hold their would-be attackers at bay until the police arrived, or had put a bullet in them when they attempted to continue with their attack, even at the point of a gun.

    We should NOT be afraid of the criminals. They should be afraid of US.

    Gun laws affect only those of us who obey the law. As for the criminals and the crazies, they just don’t care, nor will any amount of legislation stop them from continuing to shoot up places where large numbers of innocent people are gathered.

    • Esra says:

      I’m going to once more agree with Paula. Even the most gun loving nut job has a point where they think the kill power of personal weaponry is too much for a society where people are trying to live with one another in a relatively civilised way. Or does that point not come, so rocket propelled grenades and high explosives seem fair enough to protect you from a potential burglar or the state trying to impose some system of law and order.
      America and Americans will decide for themselves and rightly so. I am thankful that gun numbers and availability means the uk murder rate is in the hundreds not thousands and knives are the main weapon used because guns are still relatively hard to get hold of, by most people, despite speculation on easy access or high numbers by some.

      • Daniel K says:

        Esra you should listen to yourself “you prefer the hundred to die in the uk rather then the thousands in the states”Let’s take for instance many of these “houndreds in the UK” were committed by the same gangs, now lets take for instance that some of the”houndreds in the UK” were legally armed.
        How many would still be alive today?
        How many of the murdering criminals would be dead, maimed or serving life.
        It’s time to look a the bigger picture.
        Remember the two unarmed police women killed by illeagally held weapons and grenades.
        It’s time this government grew some big ones and let us protect ourselves and our families.

  6. Bill Gibbons says:

    I almost forgot: here are some UN gun crime statistics from 2008. Note that Columbia, Guatemala, Paraguay and even Zimbabwe are way ahead of the USA, in spite of having much smaller populations.

    Source: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 20008

    Rank Country Firearm homicide rate per 100,000 pop.
    1 Colombia 51
    2 Guatemala 18
    3 Paraguay 7
    4 Zimbabwe 5
    5 Mexico 4
    6 Costa Rica 3
    7 Belarus 3
    8 Barbados 3
    9 United States 3

    Rank Country % homicides with firearms
    1 Colombia 83
    2 Slovakia 82
    3 Guatemala 73
    4 Zimbabwe 66
    5 United States 65

    • mj says:

      It’s the RATE of gun crime per 100k population so the populations are irrelevant.

      You may think that having less gun crime compared to Colombia, Zimbabwe and other lawless underdeveloped countries is a great achievement, me not so much.

      How about a comparison with other developed nations?

      Citizens having arms doesn’t stop crime, it just means that the criminals escalate their use of violence. If you are going to rob a house where the occupants may well be armed then you make damn sure that you are well armed and prepared to use extreme violence to neutralise that danger, running away when disturbed may get you killed.

      If you know that the occupants are almost certainly not armed with guns then why turn a potential slap on the wrist for burglary into a potential multi-year jail sentence for aggravated burglary, GBH or manslaughter/murder?

      • Maria says:

        I have seen the statistics you speak of, from a UN study, the links in Wikipedia show the source. The numbers are not strictly gun homicides but include infanticide, euthanasia, etc. According to the Small Arms Survey 2007, there are 88 guns per 100 citizens in the U.S., the highest rate in the world. Second in line is Yemen, way down at 54 guns per 100 citizens.

  7. Bill Gibbons says:

    OK boys and gilrs,

    Whats the bottom line here? Criminals with guns kill people. How do we stop criminals with guns? Ban guns? Nope. How about more actual crime control? How about ensuring the law abiding citizens can actually defend themselves against criminals rather than continue to be victims?


    You want a comparison with “developed” countries? Why?

    The US has the highest gun ownership rate in the world – an average of 88 per 100 people, that # 1 in the world for gun ownership – and even the number two country, Yemen, has significantly fewer – 54.8 per 100 people. But the US does NOT have the worst firearm murder rate – that prize belongs to Honduras, El Salvador and Jamaica. In fact, the US is number 28, with a rate of 2.97 per 100,000 people. Puerto Rico tops the world’s table for firearms murders as a percentage of all homicides – 94.8%. It’s followed by Sierra Leone in Africa and Saint Kitts and Nevis in the Caribbean.

    My point is, they have much smaller populations that the USA, but more gun crime in relation to their populations. However, go ahead and tell anyone from those nations that there are not “civilized.” I felt safer sleeping in a village of former head hunters in the Congo forest that I did driving through a bad city neighbourhood in Florida. One had machetes and spears and the other place had guns. They can all be used to kill you pretty quickly. But the hospitality and courtesy that I was treated to by villers in the Congo who shared all they had with me, is a lesson for “gansta” neighborhoods in our biggest cities here in “civilized’ North America.

    Germany has some of the strictest gun laws in the world. Handguns are only on sale to those aged 18 or over, with heavier weapons restricted to those over 21. No weapon can be purchased legally without a firearms ownership licence, which is only available after a thorough background check. However, these restrictions did not prevent a 17-year-old former pupil of Albertville school in Winnenden from going on the rampage.
    This is not the first tragedy of its kind in Germany, which in recent years has seen several deadly encounters in its classrooms. In 2002 Germany’s worst school massacre took place in the eastern city of Erfurt, when a disgruntled ex-pupil shot dead 17 people, including himself. In 2006 an 18-year-old pupil in the north-western town of Emsdetten injured 37 people, then killed himself.

    On the other hand, in Switzerland every hopme has one or more military automatic weapons with ammunition. If you ever visit that beautiful, peaceful country, you will see shooting ranges all over the country, but only a few golf courses. If there is a Schuetzenfest in town, you will find rifles slung on hat racks in restaurants, and you will encounter men and women, old and young, walking, biking, and taking the tram with rifles over the shoulder, to and from the range. They stroll right past the police station and no one bats an eye.

    Looking at the stats going back to 1997, the Swiss Federal Police Office reported that there were 87 intentional homicides and 102 attempted homicides in the entire country. Some 91 of these 189 murders and attempts involved firearms (the statistics do not distinguish firearm use in consummated murders from attempts). With its population of seven million (which includes 1.2 million foreigners), Switzerland had a homicide rate of 1.2 per 100,000. There were 2,498 robberies (and attempted robberies), of which 546 involved firearms, giving a robbery rate of 36 per 100,000. Almost half of these criminal acts were committed by wait for it – non-resident foreigners – which is why one hears reference in casual talk to “criminal tourists.”

    Lets face the facts. Gun and crime will always be with us. So we can either place ever more restrictions on legal gun oweners who already obey the law, or get tough on the criminals and get them off the streets for a very long time.

    After all, who says we must continue to be vicitms?

  8. dave says:

    Idealism is a fantastic way to waste time, but violent people will be violent which whatever they can put in their hands to be violent with. Governments will NEVER get rid of their own weapons, other countries can not reasonably be expected to comply with foreign gun laws, freedom of choice is more important than the risk of tragedy-because without it we are not individuals, gun technology cannot be “unmade”, the UK has made mixed result gun laws and reduced some gun crime at both direct and mercurial cost to individuals, culture and national defense. UK is free for the few to dictate to the many but the US has long ago made sure that only a true majority should be able eliminate the right to keep arms. Anyone advocating other than a full country, inclusive, majority vote is necessarily in danger of being a little mini-dictator. I hate violence, especially covert political violence where the few wish to rule over the many. If you don’t agree with the majority in a democracy, you are wrong until you can convince a majority of the people you are right and if you do so with faulty logic, lies or if you circumvent this system by way of legal and political tricks– well that kind of person is still a wrong and evil jerk.

    • ArthurJ says:

      Never ceases to amaze me that people equate freedom with the freedom to buy guns, how about freedom from the tyranny of gun owners.
      The UK has had great results from its gun laws and we don’t trust people who use guns, so we try and make sure our police don’t have them either. As a consequence we don’t suffer the same murder rate, we don’t suffer the same level of police killing of crime suspects, we don’t have a fraction of the gun ownership, so don’t suffer the same amount of gun crime.

      We vote in our political leadership and we can vote them out. Many people say its a fixed system but we manage to get rid of our idiots eventually. Democracy has it faults but we elect people to represent us and those representatives take away our individual ability to shape our own destinies, this is sometimes right because we want them to represent something a bit better than our individual needs and impulses.
      We have a law and justice system for similar reasons, so we don’t act out from our impulses – if we all took the law into our own hands we would end up with revenge spiralling out of control and everyone dead. So we ask the police and judges to make decisions to protect us all, so we don’t just mete out justice as we see fit. Gun down people we think who have aggrieved us, slighted our dignity, have different views from us or look a bit different.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.