More immigrants = less crime

[zinfamous]

And therein lies the rub...some of our "intellectuals" here obviously "think" otherwise.

perhaps I am mistaken, but it appears that that is simply your perception of reality.

 

[werepossum]

Did you notice how the article started with people blaming illegal immigrants for crime, then "debunked" that belief with studies about LEGAL immigrants from India, Trinidad, and China?

I'm a legal immigrant from Trinidad, and the criminals at my middle school (yes they were already criminals) were illegal Mexicans and black kids from the ghetto.

I noticed that. Legal aliens almost certainly will have a lower crime rate than our natural-born citizens, but this little piece is obviously pushing illegal immigration.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

perhaps I am mistaken, but it appears that that is simply your perception of reality.

Do you have a better perspective than "simply your perception of reality"? Please do share.

 

[shortylickens]

I noticed that. Legal aliens almost certainly will have a lower crime rate than our natural-born citizens, but this little piece is obviously pushing illegal immigration.

Folks used to call me crazy when I said there were pro-illegal people in America but every year that goes by it seems more and more obvious.

 

[shira]

Legal immigrants having less crime is just obvious. They were rich enough to come here, patient enough to wait in line. It speaks well to their position in society. They aren't impoverished peasants who couldn't even read or write their own language.

You keep evading the issue: Legal immigrants produce less crime than existing American citizens. One can therefore conclude that if reducing crime in America is a major objective, we should relax our standards for legal immigration. The right, in contrast, wants to make it even harder to legally get in.

 

[Jaskalas]

Nothing you wrote is particularly unique to the US.

10s of millions of impoverished peasants, many of whom that couldn't even read or write their own language is not a problem Canada is dealing with. We are.

First generation immigrants the world over do not assimilate into their new country particularly well, and most of them tend to be poor.

Granted about the poor bit, but the LEGAL immigrants are certainly not comparable to the poverty of their illegal counterparts. It is worse for those who only have the clothes on their back, and the lack of education their origins did not provide.

Legal immigrants are more educated. This provides them better opportunities and thus easier / richer lives. Less poverty driven crime.

Their children, and their children's children assimilate into society just fine. Not only is that the case in the whole world today, it has been the case in the US for most of its history.

The United States is a history of the invader conquering the natives and displacing them. From Native Americans to the Southwest and Texas.

Far as assimilation is concerned, 10s of millions, grouped together and alienated, are more than enough to take majority control of multiple states and form their own country. They support each other. They do not need their host country. I say the sheer volume of their numbers is the only problem. They'd be fine if they were spread out, and not defining the very land they take.

The litmus test would be who has the influence, which group is defining and shaping the other. The immigrants, or the natives? America has a history of the immigrant taking control.

There are many aspects that lend themselves to crime, poverty being one of them. This study is saying that they have identified others as well, in this case ones that may lead to a reduction in crime.

I've already spoken of the merits of legal immigrants. There is no dispute there.

I've spent my entire adult life in areas with some of the greatest proportions of immigrants in the entire US. What a lot of people on here seem to think about US immigration doesn't square with any reality I have read about, or any reality that I have personally experienced.

I was born in, and lived in Southern California for 21 years. It transformed before my eyes in just a couple decades. While I lived a few years in Victorville I saw it transition to Spanish speaking illegal immigrant community. You might be surprised what just a fraction of ten million people can do to your local community.

Crime and violence in CA is quite high. It is riddled with poverty and gang wars. Not far from where I lived a neighbor was shot and killed in their front yard due to this exact issue. Don't try to tell me how lovely and peaceful the United States immigration policy is. It has brought a great deal of death and destruction to our country.

The problem only continues to grow worse.

 

[fskimospy]

I was born in, and lived in Southern California for 21 years. It transformed before my eyes in just a couple decades. While I lived a few years in Victorville I saw it transition to Spanish speaking illegal immigrant community. You might be surprised what just a fraction of ten million people can do to your local community.

Crime and violence in CA is quite high. It is riddled with poverty and gang wars. Not far from where I lived a neighbor was shot and killed in their front yard due to this exact issue. Don't try to tell me how lovely and peaceful the United States immigration policy is. It has brought a great deal of death and destruction to our country.

The problem only continues to grow worse.

I wouldn't be surprised at all, I spent the last 10 years of my life in San Diego. I have numerous friends who work for US Customs, and I've spent quite a lot of time on both sides of the border. Crime and violence is not quite high actually, it is almost exactly the median for the United States as a whole (rank 26 out of 50), and has been on a downward trend for two decades now, exhibiting an inverse trend with levels of immigration there.

Your arguments about the US having a history of the invaders taking over just doesn't hold water. It has a history of white people coming and conquering the indigenous people just the same as every other continent on earth basically. The US itself has had greater levels of immigration as compared to the population in the past, and the exact same arguments of being 'overwhelmed by immigrants' have been coming since the days of Ben Franklin. (literally) They have been false each and every time.

 

[ElFenix]

You keep evading the issue: Legal immigrants produce less crime than existing American citizens. One can therefore conclude that if reducing crime in America is a major objective, we should relax our standards for legal immigration. The right, in contrast, wants to make it even harder to legally get in.

what if the standard is what is keeping the riff raff out (well, not out, but you know what i mean)?

 

[WhipperSnapper]

More immigrants = more impoverished Americans = more crime.

Consider what happens to Americans who end up displaced from their jobs or who suffer wage depression. The less you have to lose by playing by the rules, the less you have to lose by becoming a criminal. (Hint, there's a reason why drug crimes and criminal gangs are much more rampant in poor areas.)

 

[Fern]

You keep evading the issue: Legal immigrants produce less crime than existing American citizens. One can therefore conclude that if reducing crime in America is a major objective, we should relax our standards for legal immigration. The right, in contrast, wants to make it even harder to legally get in.

This strikes me as logical falacy.

Those who migrate here legally, i.e. following the law and meeting requirements might be disinclined to commit crimes because of the very nature of the process. To therefor conclude that changing that process so more can hold the title of "legal" strikes me as a belief that it's the title, and not the process, that results in lower tendancies for crime.

Fern

 

[shortylickens]

More immigrants = more impoverished Americans = more crime.

Consider what happens to Americans who end up displaced from their jobs or who suffer wage depression. The less you have to lose by playing by the rules, the less you have to lose by becoming a criminal. (Hint, there's a reason why drug crimes and criminal gangs are much more rampant in poor areas.)

I dont wanna sound like an asshole but America was built by immigrants.
I'm not condoning illegal aliens. But legal immigration really isnt a big problem. They are too scared to start shit because they are being tracked and can get kicked out in an instant.
Illegals come and go as they please. And they dont pay taxes. And to stay here they make fake ID's and steal SSN's and sometimes that industry is enforced with violence.

 

[fskimospy]

More immigrants = more impoverished Americans = more crime.

Consider what happens to Americans who end up displaced from their jobs or who suffer wage depression. The less you have to lose by playing by the rules, the less you have to lose by becoming a criminal. (Hint, there's a reason why drug crimes and criminal gangs are much more rampant in poor areas.)

Yes, that is the conventional wisdom; the UCR that just came out however has turned that on its head somewhat. Crime in the US has continued its decline even during a recession that saw a great many Americans thrown into poverty that weren't there before.

 

[werepossum]

This strikes me as logical falacy.

Those who migrate here legally, i.e. following the law and meeting requirements might be disinclined to commit crimes because of the very nature of the process. To therefor conclude that changing that process so more can hold the title of "legal" strikes me as a belief that it's the title, and not the process, that results in lower tendancies for crime.

Fern

Excellent point.

 

[nobodyknows]

???

Maybe you need to post something to back that up because that sounds a little crazy, well unless you are confusing legal immigrants with illegal immigrants.

Parts is parts, right??

 

[nonlnear]

Is your xenophobia so virulent that you can't allow yourself to comprehend that the story is about LEGAL immigration?

The body of the article is clearly about legal immigration, but the introduction talks about illegal immigration, before switching - with no mention of any distinction - to talking about research about immigration as a whole. The original research is fine, but the article packaging the research to a wider audience (presumably not written by anyone with anything to do with the original article) is a deliberately deceptive bait-and-switch.

 

[woolfe9999]

The body of the article is clearly about legal immigration, but the introduction talks about illegal immigration, before switching - with no mention of any distinction - to talking about research about immigration as a whole. The original research is fine, but the article packaging the research to a wider audience (presumably not written by anyone with anything to do with the original article) is a deliberately deceptive bait-and-switch.

A word to the wise - almost every article I've ever seen written about a scientific study in some way oversimplifies if not grossly distorts the meaning of it. It's why I never bother with linked articles about scientific studies unless I can find the link to the study itself. Science reporting in American media is a joke.

 

[nonlnear]

A word to the wise - almost every article I've ever seen written about a scientific study in some way oversimplifies if not grossly distorts the meaning of it. It's why I never bother with linked articles about scientific studies unless I can find the link to the study itself. Science reporting in American media is a joke.

The Economist does a halfway decent job of repackaging research results to a broader audience, but pretty much every other media outlet I've seen does a shockingly terrible job of it as you say. As in not only making gross generalizations and other such errors of ignorance, but making specific claims that are totally unsubstantiated, or deliberately deceptive introductions/conclusions. I don't read much in the pedestrian media myself for these very reasons. Occasionally I brave the media morass as a sociological scouting trip rather than for the content itself. Being reminded every now and then what terrible journalism most people rely on helps me to keep a good sense of humor about the insanity of the world.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

I dont wanna sound like an asshole but America was built by immigrants. I'm not condoning illegal aliens.

Yeah, but the nation's population was much much smaller back then and we had, potentially, far more resources available per capita.

But legal immigration really isnt a big problem. They are too scared to start shit because they are being tracked and can get kicked out in an instant. Illegals come and go as they please. And they dont pay taxes. And to stay here they make fake ID's and steal SSN's and sometimes that industry is enforced with violence.

Immigration is a problem simply because it's resulting in a population explosion and decreasing the amount of resources-per-capita, which raises the price of those resources for everyone. The U.S. is already the world's third most populous country by a big margin (with Pakistan being in 4th place). Some demographers have projected that the U.S. population will explode to 450 million people around 2050--in our lifetimes.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Yes, that is the conventional wisdom; the UCR that just came out however has turned that on its head somewhat. Crime in the US has continued its decline even during a recession that saw a great many Americans thrown into poverty that weren't there before.

Which is a rather weird and counter-intuitive stat. Part of it might be age-demographics--there might be a dip in the percentage of Americans who are of the age where most crime occurs.

 

[lothar]

You keep evading the issue: Legal immigrants produce less crime than existing American citizens. One can therefore conclude that if reducing crime in America is a major objective, we should relax our standards for legal immigration. The right, in contrast, wants to make it even harder to legally get in.

Depends of what your definition of "relaxing our standards" is...

Would removing proficiency in the English language as a requirement for "legal immigration" lead to lower crime? You are relaxing the standard, sure but that would only lead to an increase in crime and not a decrease because they would have problems integrating into the American society similar to what the riff-raffs are doing in France and most of Europe.

 

[BoomerD]

The OP's "theory" doesn't work around here. It's the Mexican immigrants (legal and illegal) and their children who cause the most crime here. Car thefts, robberies, assaults, killings, drug manufacturing and sales, etc.

It seems like they just turn them out in the street to get into whatever trouble they choose...then wail like banshees when they get arrested...or killed...and scream "racism" because their children get arrested for being criminals...

 

[DucatiMonster696]

The entire process of legal immigration into the US requires you to keep a clean record. So the conclusions drawn on legal immigration is a big "Well DUH". Furthermore the suggestion that such processes that are involved in LEGAL immigration should be relaxed/lowered in the naive belief that it would lower crime rates amongst illegal immigrants is just laughable. To begin with the process and its ordeal in and of itself is the whole reason why LEGAL immigrants are less likely to commit a crime which would endanger their residency status or later their application for US citizenship.

 

[Inspector Jihad]

Yeah, but the nation's population was much much smaller back then and we had, potentially, far more resources available per capita.



Immigration is a problem simply because it's resulting in a population explosion and decreasing the amount of resources-per-capita, which raises the price of those resources for everyone. The U.S. is already the world's third most populous country by a big margin (with Pakistan being in 4th place). Some demographers have projected that the U.S. population will explode to 450 million people around 2050--in our lifetimes.

no. we need more immigration. just about every facet of america is made better by immigrants...from food to economics.

 

[shortylickens]

Immigration is a problem simply because it's resulting in a population explosion and decreasing the amount of resources-per-capita, which raises the price of those resources for everyone. The U.S. is already the world's third most populous country by a big margin (with Pakistan being in 4th place). Some demographers have projected that the U.S. population will explode to 450 million people around 2050--in our lifetimes.

I think illegal immigration is a worse problem cuz they have incentive to breed faster. And they ARE breeding faster. And their kids will be legal and they have so far been keen to not integrate with legit society.

I've seen it in every area that has a huge population of illegals and see it grow worse in the Virginia area every year (MD too).

 

[WhipperSnapper]

I was born in, and lived in Southern California for 21 years. It transformed before my eyes in just a couple decades. While I lived a few years in Victorville I saw it transition to Spanish speaking illegal immigrant community. You might be surprised what just a fraction of ten million people can do to your local community.

Crime and violence in CA is quite high. It is riddled with poverty and gang wars. Not far from where I lived a neighbor was shot and killed in their front yard due to this exact issue. Don't try to tell me how lovely and peaceful the United States immigration policy is. It has brought a great deal of death and destruction to our country.

The problem only continues to grow worse.

You would probably enjoy reading VDare.com.