Is It True?: Immigrant Crime Rate is Lower than Native Population
Feb 19, 2017 21:41:43 #
Put simply, this is false. Even without looking at the studies to see if the Mainstream Media was telling the truth, logic would clearly tell you the opposite. This "fact" was, unfortunately, fake news. Fake news is considered many things these days. CNN's Don Lemon would have you believe that fake news is a news story that a journalist writes to "intentionally deceive the audience" and the journalist "knows" he's doing wrong. Really? CNN's definition is, in itself, worded to deceive. Why? Because, they were caught putting out a fake news story intended to deceive but, they believed they were right to do it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SxHOLWiUnA
When CNN was caught, they gave a half-hearted correction and called it unintentional:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moTwSy94k1Y
Did CNN do the right thing here? Many might say yes but, I would say no. Misleading the public, whether for personal good reasons or bad, is wrong and even more wrong for professional journalists. This should never have been aired if it couldn't have been aired with the truth. This isn't what makes CNN dangerous and an "enemy of the American people" though. What makes them dangerous is that they have continued to use these self justifications and beliefs for far more gray areas, and it isn't just CNN, CNN is just the largest one that does this. A multitude of other major media outlets have been doing. They fail to adequately research a story before putting it out there, they purposefully edit stories, change the dialog of what's being said, or outright lie based on their bias but, they don't believe it's wrong. Journalists are going to make mistakes but, the "mistakes" being made these days are so prevalent and numerous that it's obvious many of them aren't mistakes. CNN used to be called "The Most Trusted News Network" before Fox made it their motto. No one trusts them anymore. The question is how did the major media outlets get to this position? The answer is this: they started believing political party propaganda. Before the 1960's, the democrat party was literally the party of the racists, they championed that position. When they flipped positions, they automatically began calling the Republican party the party of the racists simply because the south turned republican after the Democratic party switched. Ultimately, things turned for the better in the 1960's. The Democratic party has always been the party of special rights for special groups while the Republican party has always been about life, liberty, unity, and the pursuit of happiness for all. African Americans needed more rights in the 1960's because of the governmental racism of the south while the institutional racism in the south needed to be eliminated. The Democratic party broadened their scope of special groups while the Republican party began the process of de-institutionalizing and eliminating racism in the south. This, however, allowed the Democratic Party to place an unjust and disgusting title upon the Republican party. The term "racism" took on a different meaning. Because many in the Mainstream Media were Democrats, they began to believe their party's false propaganda. But, I digress. Logic proves this current mantra to be a lie. The majority of illegal immigrants coming into the US are poor. This demographic is at a much higher risk of being involved with a crime for that reason. Not only that, the penalties for an American who commits a crime are higher than the penalties for an illegal immigrant. Not only that, entering the US illegally already shows a lack of respect for US law. There have been multiple instances of fake news by the Mainstream Media lately. For anyone interested, I can give you plenty of examples. But, if you still need proof that this was fake news perpetrated by the Mainstream Media, here it is:
Every Pro-Immigration Claim Is A Lie
Ann Coulter
In the wake of Kate Steinle's murder at the hands of an illegal immigrant, mass immigration advocates have begun a campaign of lies in defense of their cheap labor. "Studies show," they say, that immigrants commit LESS crime than the native population.
Inasmuch as the vast majority of post-1970 immigrants -- legal immigrants -- are poor, non-white and come from countries with far worse crime rates than our own, that's at least counterintuitive.
The main evidence cited in support of the claim that immigrants commit less crime than Americans is a moronic point about cities with a lot of immigrants seeming to have low crime rates. Check and mate, Mr. Trump!
The "New York sure seems safe to me!" argument is like the "Saturday Night Live" sketch of Bill O'Reilly arguing that New York has more people than California.
Bill O'Reilly: You also say that California has more people than any other state. I say New York state has more people -- tell me where I'm wrong!
Thomas Woodward: (confused) Um ... well ... Bill ... actually, California is the most populous state.
Bill O'Reilly: I don't know, counselor. I live in New York, and I walk down the streets every day, and there's people everywhere! You can't move! You know what I mean? Last week, I was in California, went to the beach in Malibu. Nobody! Practically empty. So, for my money, New York's got more people. Probably New Jersey, too.
Thomas Woodward: Well, Bill, your own experience notwithstanding, each of the last four censuses has clearly shown --
Bill O'Reilly: Sorry, counselor, not buying it! Not buying it!
Thomas Woodward: Bill, I swear to you, California is our largest state!
Bill O'Reilly: Look, Mr. Woodward, you've got your opinion. I've got mine. We're not gonna settle this tonight.
That's a comedy sketch. But now we're getting it as a serious argument in defense of mass immigration from the Third World.
Reason magazine boasts, for example, that El Paso, Texas, has a large Hispanic population and yet El Paso "is among the safest big cities in America."
In fact, however, El Paso's "safe city" ranking is based on an outdated FBI crime index that includes only eight crime categories, excluding such crimes as drunk driving, narcotics offenses and weapons violations. When the FBI's more complete crime index is used, El Paso has a higher crime rate than the national average.
The reason crime has plummeted around the nation in the last few decades is aggressive policing, increased prison sentences and the expansion of concealed carry permits. (All policies currently being jettisoned by liberals.)
According to The New York Times, the drop in crime in New York City during Giuliani's first two years as mayor alone accounted for 35 percent of the reduction in the national crime rate.
The second main line of attack on the idea that immigrants are committing prodigious amounts of crime are the apocryphal "studies."
The two researchers whose work is cited over and over again for the proposition that immigrants are less criminal than Americans are Alex Piquero, criminology professor at the University of Texas at Dallas, and Bianca Bersani, sociology professor at the University of Massachusetts, Boston.
Pew cites their studies -- and everyone in the media cites Pew, leading to headlines like these:
"UT Dallas prof finds immigrant kids less likely to commit serious crimes, re-offend" -- The Dallas Morning News
"UMass Boston Prof: Stereotype of 'Criminal Immigrant' Doesn't Hold Up" -- Targeted News Service
"Surprise! Donald Trump is wrong about immigrants and crime" -- The Washington Post
Curiously, we are never shown the actual studies, but simply told -- with some heat -- "studies show!"
I looked up some of these alleged studies this weekend. They're all hidden behind ridiculous Internet paywalls. I was often only the sixth person to read them.
It turns out that neither Piquero nor Bersani compared immigrant crime to "the overall population" -- as the British Guardian recently claimed in an article purporting to prove Donald Trump wrong. Rather, they compare immigrants' crime rate to the crime rate of America's most criminally inclined subgroups.
Thus, for example, once you get past the paywall, you will find that Piquero and Bersani's joint study, "Comparing Patterns and Predictors of Immigrant Offending Among a Sample of Adjudicated Youth," used as its base group "adolescents who were found guilty of a serious offense."
THAT'S NOT A REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE OF AMERICANS! It's a representative sample of teenagers who are convicted criminals.
Similarly, professor Bersani's oft-cited, but never-read study, "An Examination of First and Second Generation Immigrant Offending Trajectories," looked at a population group that included "an over-sample of Hispanic and African-American youth."
Instead of immigrants who are less crime-prone than our native blacks and Hispanics, we were hoping for immigrants less criminal than our Norwegians.
True, as Bersani explains, "because many immigrants initially settle in disadvantaged environments and are exposed to a number of crime-inducing risk factors, their experiences may be similar to many native-born minorities -- particularly the African-American population."
But here's an idea: How about NOT taking in immigrants who are poor, uneducated, come from dysfunctional families and settle in disadvantaged environments?
Amazingly, Bersani's study also produced this startling result: There is very little difference in crime rates between young native whites and blacks. Why no headlines about that? Instead of looking at "studies," how about we just count the number of immigrants arrested, convicted and imprisoned in America?
Even if the immigrants' crime rate were the same as "the overall population" -- and it's not -- we're supposed to be admitting immigrants who are better than us, not "six of one, half dozen of the other."
Why? Because we're picking them. If the food in your refrigerator is rotten, you don't go out and buy more rotten food on the grounds that it's no more rotten than the food you already have. This is the new food you're picking and you're paying for.
Instead, we're bringing in legal immigrants -- forget illegals -- who are way more criminal than us, notwithstanding phony studies no one bothers to read.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SxHOLWiUnA
When CNN was caught, they gave a half-hearted correction and called it unintentional:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moTwSy94k1Y
Did CNN do the right thing here? Many might say yes but, I would say no. Misleading the public, whether for personal good reasons or bad, is wrong and even more wrong for professional journalists. This should never have been aired if it couldn't have been aired with the truth. This isn't what makes CNN dangerous and an "enemy of the American people" though. What makes them dangerous is that they have continued to use these self justifications and beliefs for far more gray areas, and it isn't just CNN, CNN is just the largest one that does this. A multitude of other major media outlets have been doing. They fail to adequately research a story before putting it out there, they purposefully edit stories, change the dialog of what's being said, or outright lie based on their bias but, they don't believe it's wrong. Journalists are going to make mistakes but, the "mistakes" being made these days are so prevalent and numerous that it's obvious many of them aren't mistakes. CNN used to be called "The Most Trusted News Network" before Fox made it their motto. No one trusts them anymore. The question is how did the major media outlets get to this position? The answer is this: they started believing political party propaganda. Before the 1960's, the democrat party was literally the party of the racists, they championed that position. When they flipped positions, they automatically began calling the Republican party the party of the racists simply because the south turned republican after the Democratic party switched. Ultimately, things turned for the better in the 1960's. The Democratic party has always been the party of special rights for special groups while the Republican party has always been about life, liberty, unity, and the pursuit of happiness for all. African Americans needed more rights in the 1960's because of the governmental racism of the south while the institutional racism in the south needed to be eliminated. The Democratic party broadened their scope of special groups while the Republican party began the process of de-institutionalizing and eliminating racism in the south. This, however, allowed the Democratic Party to place an unjust and disgusting title upon the Republican party. The term "racism" took on a different meaning. Because many in the Mainstream Media were Democrats, they began to believe their party's false propaganda. But, I digress. Logic proves this current mantra to be a lie. The majority of illegal immigrants coming into the US are poor. This demographic is at a much higher risk of being involved with a crime for that reason. Not only that, the penalties for an American who commits a crime are higher than the penalties for an illegal immigrant. Not only that, entering the US illegally already shows a lack of respect for US law. There have been multiple instances of fake news by the Mainstream Media lately. For anyone interested, I can give you plenty of examples. But, if you still need proof that this was fake news perpetrated by the Mainstream Media, here it is:
Every Pro-Immigration Claim Is A Lie
Ann Coulter
In the wake of Kate Steinle's murder at the hands of an illegal immigrant, mass immigration advocates have begun a campaign of lies in defense of their cheap labor. "Studies show," they say, that immigrants commit LESS crime than the native population.
Inasmuch as the vast majority of post-1970 immigrants -- legal immigrants -- are poor, non-white and come from countries with far worse crime rates than our own, that's at least counterintuitive.
The main evidence cited in support of the claim that immigrants commit less crime than Americans is a moronic point about cities with a lot of immigrants seeming to have low crime rates. Check and mate, Mr. Trump!
The "New York sure seems safe to me!" argument is like the "Saturday Night Live" sketch of Bill O'Reilly arguing that New York has more people than California.
Bill O'Reilly: You also say that California has more people than any other state. I say New York state has more people -- tell me where I'm wrong!
Thomas Woodward: (confused) Um ... well ... Bill ... actually, California is the most populous state.
Bill O'Reilly: I don't know, counselor. I live in New York, and I walk down the streets every day, and there's people everywhere! You can't move! You know what I mean? Last week, I was in California, went to the beach in Malibu. Nobody! Practically empty. So, for my money, New York's got more people. Probably New Jersey, too.
Thomas Woodward: Well, Bill, your own experience notwithstanding, each of the last four censuses has clearly shown --
Bill O'Reilly: Sorry, counselor, not buying it! Not buying it!
Thomas Woodward: Bill, I swear to you, California is our largest state!
Bill O'Reilly: Look, Mr. Woodward, you've got your opinion. I've got mine. We're not gonna settle this tonight.
That's a comedy sketch. But now we're getting it as a serious argument in defense of mass immigration from the Third World.
Reason magazine boasts, for example, that El Paso, Texas, has a large Hispanic population and yet El Paso "is among the safest big cities in America."
In fact, however, El Paso's "safe city" ranking is based on an outdated FBI crime index that includes only eight crime categories, excluding such crimes as drunk driving, narcotics offenses and weapons violations. When the FBI's more complete crime index is used, El Paso has a higher crime rate than the national average.
The reason crime has plummeted around the nation in the last few decades is aggressive policing, increased prison sentences and the expansion of concealed carry permits. (All policies currently being jettisoned by liberals.)
According to The New York Times, the drop in crime in New York City during Giuliani's first two years as mayor alone accounted for 35 percent of the reduction in the national crime rate.
The second main line of attack on the idea that immigrants are committing prodigious amounts of crime are the apocryphal "studies."
The two researchers whose work is cited over and over again for the proposition that immigrants are less criminal than Americans are Alex Piquero, criminology professor at the University of Texas at Dallas, and Bianca Bersani, sociology professor at the University of Massachusetts, Boston.
Pew cites their studies -- and everyone in the media cites Pew, leading to headlines like these:
"UT Dallas prof finds immigrant kids less likely to commit serious crimes, re-offend" -- The Dallas Morning News
"UMass Boston Prof: Stereotype of 'Criminal Immigrant' Doesn't Hold Up" -- Targeted News Service
"Surprise! Donald Trump is wrong about immigrants and crime" -- The Washington Post
Curiously, we are never shown the actual studies, but simply told -- with some heat -- "studies show!"
I looked up some of these alleged studies this weekend. They're all hidden behind ridiculous Internet paywalls. I was often only the sixth person to read them.
It turns out that neither Piquero nor Bersani compared immigrant crime to "the overall population" -- as the British Guardian recently claimed in an article purporting to prove Donald Trump wrong. Rather, they compare immigrants' crime rate to the crime rate of America's most criminally inclined subgroups.
Thus, for example, once you get past the paywall, you will find that Piquero and Bersani's joint study, "Comparing Patterns and Predictors of Immigrant Offending Among a Sample of Adjudicated Youth," used as its base group "adolescents who were found guilty of a serious offense."
THAT'S NOT A REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE OF AMERICANS! It's a representative sample of teenagers who are convicted criminals.
Similarly, professor Bersani's oft-cited, but never-read study, "An Examination of First and Second Generation Immigrant Offending Trajectories," looked at a population group that included "an over-sample of Hispanic and African-American youth."
Instead of immigrants who are less crime-prone than our native blacks and Hispanics, we were hoping for immigrants less criminal than our Norwegians.
True, as Bersani explains, "because many immigrants initially settle in disadvantaged environments and are exposed to a number of crime-inducing risk factors, their experiences may be similar to many native-born minorities -- particularly the African-American population."
But here's an idea: How about NOT taking in immigrants who are poor, uneducated, come from dysfunctional families and settle in disadvantaged environments?
Amazingly, Bersani's study also produced this startling result: There is very little difference in crime rates between young native whites and blacks. Why no headlines about that? Instead of looking at "studies," how about we just count the number of immigrants arrested, convicted and imprisoned in America?
Even if the immigrants' crime rate were the same as "the overall population" -- and it's not -- we're supposed to be admitting immigrants who are better than us, not "six of one, half dozen of the other."
Why? Because we're picking them. If the food in your refrigerator is rotten, you don't go out and buy more rotten food on the grounds that it's no more rotten than the food you already have. This is the new food you're picking and you're paying for.
Instead, we're bringing in legal immigrants -- forget illegals -- who are way more criminal than us, notwithstanding phony studies no one bothers to read.
Feb 19, 2017 22:31:11 #
Sounds like a fake news headline to me. Sorry, you won't convince me that's factual. I realize Chicago might skew the numbers, but not the rest of the country. Meant to garner sympathy?
Feb 19, 2017 22:36:55 #
Chameleon12 wrote:
Put simply, this is false. Even without looking at the studies to see if the Mainstream Media was telling the truth, logic would clearly tell you the opposite.
And whose logic is telling you this? Why would you think people would come to this country solely so they could commit crime? Is that what the immigrants who made up your family did? Mine didn't. Might I suggest that, that which you call logic is nothing more than your predisposition towards bigotry not someone else's predisposition towards crime...
Feb 20, 2017 08:04:49 #
PeterS wrote:
And whose logic is telling you this? Why would you think people would come to this country solely so they could commit crime? Is that what the immigrants who made up your family did? Mine didn't. Might I suggest that, that which you call logic is nothing more than your predisposition towards bigotry not someone else's predisposition towards crime...
Tell that to the Cartel members....you know all those drug smugglers. They travel to this country SOLELY to commit crime(s).
Feb 20, 2017 08:21:27 #
no propaganda please
Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun
PeterS wrote:
And whose logic is telling you this? Why would you think people would come to this country solely so they could commit crime? Is that what the immigrants who made up your family did? Mine didn't. Might I suggest that, that which you call logic is nothing more than your predisposition towards bigotry not someone else's predisposition towards crime...
Until recently people who wanted to come to America were vetted before getting permission. In many cases they had to have an American sponsor. Yes, within that group the crime rates were undoubtedly low. Todays ILLEGAL aliens are entirely a different story, and that is the group that people are concerned about, not the legal immigrants from 1920. Why don't you use some common sense for a change? Oh I know, that does not suit your socialist agenda.
May 14, 2017 19:36:56 #
DML51 wrote:
Sounds like a fake news headline to me. Sorry, you won't convince me that's factual. I realize Chicago might skew the numbers, but not the rest of the country. Meant to garner sympathy?
Which part do you not believe? I'm sorry, I covered multiple areas instead of sticking to one topic.
May 14, 2017 20:22:37 #
PeterS wrote:
And whose logic is telling you this? Why would you think people would come to this country solely so they could commit crime? Is that what the immigrants who made up your family did? Mine didn't. Might I suggest that, that which you call logic is nothing more than your predisposition towards bigotry not someone else's predisposition towards crime...
Wow, every single time you write a retort, you think of the absolute stupidest reason for why someone might come to their conclusion instead of actually reading what they wrote. The percentage of illegal immigrants who come to a county solely to commit a crime is low. In fact, the only illegal immigrant group who typically does that are the drug dealers and the sex traffickers. Have you even considered why Donald Trump received a larger percentage of the Hispanic vote than Mitt Romney or John McCain did? It's not because of his nationalist beliefs. It's because they are beginning to identify with many of the things he has been saying. Illegal Immigrants receive lower wages than legal immigrants. Because of that, they are poorer and are at a higher risk for succumbing to crime in order to supplement their living. Illegal immigrants already break the law by living here, and yet, some of them have to because they have no other choice. However, increasingly dangerous circumstances have led even many illegal immigrants see the wisdom in tougher immigration laws. That's because many illegal immigrants fled south and central America to escape deadly neighborhoods and deadlier neighbors. They sought a safer place to raise their children, a place less likely to cause their children to die or succumb to gang life in order to get ahead. By encouraging lax immigration laws, Democrats are also making their neighborhoods more dangerous because, there is a higher percentage of bad neighbors who are coming here now too. Not only that but, the steady influx of illegal immigrants is preventing any rise of wages for those who were forced to come here out of necessity. Democrats have lost touch with Hispanics and the current situation. Only by supporting tougher immigration laws AND a faster path to citizenship can Democrats stop the hemorrhaging outflow of immigrants that has begun within the Democratic Party. Democrats need to stop seeing immigrants as just another voting bloc.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.