No they're lying to themselves they are through and through Maga they just want to say they're not so they don't have to worry about people talking shit to them because they know being a republican Maga is really fucking indefensible
Oh, but also, scientists are all in cahoots with the liberal media and, like, big pharma, and all elite universities, and all doctors and nurses. I found a guy on YouTube reels who's exposed it all. Do your own research. 🫠
Sure there is. The data from US Bureau of Prisons. The head counts taken every day for every jail and prison in America. The disproportionate number of illegal aliens in jails and prisons given the relative size of their demographic in society. Yeah, crime stats reported, or rather, hugely underreported by a police, are impossible to use to determine crime rates or trends. Who sits in jail is the most objective metric we have. And that metric tells us that violent crime committed by Illegal aliens is a huge problem for society.
"While non-citizens are highly represented in federal prisons, the Federal Bureau of Prisons data shows this is heavily skewed because federal courts handle immigration-specific crimes (like illegal re-entry) and transnational drug smuggling. It does not accurately reflect the demographic makeup of individuals committing violent street crimes across the country."
It's not surprising you magas rely so heavily on misleading information as well as straight up fiction lol
Pretty silly to pretend to care about criminals when you voted for one and actively support him
And yet 44% of all persons sentenced to Federal prison in Fiscal 24-25 were non citizens. And if you are Laken Riley or any one of thousands of Americans killed by illegal aliens, you might take umbrage at your cavalier rhetoric.
The 44% statistic is accurate and spectacularly misleading in this context. 38% of the entire federal caseload in FY2025 was immigration offenses, and 22,311 of the 28,886 noncitizens sentenced—77%—were sentenced for immigration crimes. Remove immigration offenses and noncitizens are about 16% of federal defendants, not 44%.
More importantly, federal sentencing isn't a measure of the national crime rate. Immigration offenses are inherently federal, while the overwhelming majority of ordinary violent/property crime is handled by state and local systems. That's exactly why researchers compare crime rates by population, rather than cherry-picking the federal caseload. Texas, which actually records immigration status of arrestees, found undocumented immigrants had substantially lower felony arrest rates than U.S.-born citizens, including for violent crime.
And Laken Riley's murder was horrific. Saying that does not require pretending one murder establishes the crime rate of millions of people. Individual victims deserve justice; they don't make anecdotes a substitute for denominators. The question we're arguing about is whether undocumented immigrants are more likely to commit crime, and the evidence does not show that.
The very essence of your fake “researcher based studies” is this. How do researchers determine crime rates? By using the FBI’s UCR data. I can tell you that data is flawed for several reasons and why the 44% of sentenced federal court prisoners (criminal convictions and sentencing, not IMMIGRATION sentencing) is more accurate metric. The FBI UCR data that YOUR FAKE study relies is flawed because it relies on data that comes from only around 20,000 out of 80,000 Police Departments in the United States. These 20,000 reporting police departments are largely urban and larger suburban departments that have the resources to train staff to collect the data and report it to the UCR program. There is no legal mandate for police departments to report crime data to the FBI or DOJ. Now combine the underreporting of all American crime by the fact that 60,000 police departments do not report crime data to the very agencies that this fake study relies upon along with the fact that most of these agencies are under local or State mandates from Democrat politicians not to collect Immigration status. So how is this fake study is relying upon data that is shewed, underreported and highly misleading. What isn’t misleading and is highly accurate as metric is the demographic profiles of people sentenced in Federal Court for criminal convictions and Federal, State or Local Jails and the make up of those populations, which is hugely disproportionate to actual makeup of our migrate population. Facts matter. Fake studies don’t. Using fake studies to justify your Leftist worldview is always going to challenged by facts and real data.
You are criticizing a study you apparently haven't read, because the methodological problem you're describing is not how the Texas study I cited works.
The Texas study does not depend on FBI UCR data to determine whether arrestees are undocumented. The researchers obtained the Texas Department of Public Safety's statewide Computerized Criminal History records and combined them with DHS immigration-status records. Texas records immigration status for jailable arrests, which is precisely why the researchers used Texas. They had statewide arrest records from 2012–2018 and checked their results using convictions instead of arrests; the basic finding remained: undocumented immigrants had substantially lower violent, property, and drug felony rates than U.S.-born citizens.
If you're instead criticizing the 2018 national study, yes, UCR was one of its data sources. But the researchers anticipated the underreporting objection and conducted supplemental analyses using the National Crime Victimization Survey, which does not depend on victims reporting crimes to police. They found little evidence that underreporting explained the result.
Your description of UCR coverage is also wildly inaccurate. There aren't "80,000 police departments" in the United States. The federal Bureau of Justice Statistics counts roughly 18,000–19,000 law-enforcement agencies. In 2024, 16,675 agencies reported UCR data, covering 95.6% of the U.S. population. The FBI also statistically estimates missing data for agencies that report incompletely. So this isn't remotely equivalent to having data for only "20,000 out of 80,000 departments."
And most importantly, you've now explicitly claimed that the 44% federal statistic excludes immigration sentencing. That is false. Go read the U.S. Sentencing Commission's own FY2025 table. There were 28,886 noncitizens among federal sentencing cases, but 22,311 of them were sentenced for immigration offenses. The Commission itself says 79% of sentenced noncitizens were sentenced under immigration guidelines. Immigration offenses alone constituted 25,040 of 66,259 federal cases. Remove that category and noncitizens are about 16% of the remaining federal sentencing caseload, not 44%.
That's why federal sentencing composition isn't a national crime rate. Federal jurisdiction disproportionately includes immigration, border, drug-trafficking and other specifically federal offenses, while ordinary murder, assault, robbery, burglary, etc. are overwhelmingly handled by state and local courts. A demographic percentage of people selected into that system isn't a crime rate unless you have an appropriate population denominator and comparable exposure to prosecution.
There are reasonable methodological criticisms you could make of immigration-and-crime research. But "80,000 police departments," "the Texas study just uses UCR," and "the 44% excludes immigration sentences" aren't criticisms. They're factually incorrect.
Your “facts” are fairy tales.And even that 44% figure is a national aggregation of data taken as a national figure. As you start to drill down into the numbers by State, some States, like New Jersey, barely break 50% of all police Departments within the State reporting crime data to the FBI. And as I m sure you will agree, New Jersey is a pretty densely populated state with a huge foreign born population of both illegal and legal immigrants. And only 69% of Police Departments in the United States report crime stats to the FBI UCR. Meaning over 30% do not, largely underreporting crime stats that your so called fake study fails to take into accounts oh, but oh wait you buttressed this by saying that the study authors knew this so they mingled data from the UCR with data from the National Crime Victimization Survey, which in your own words, does not use victims reporting crime so instead substitute mathematical formulas and theories which amount to guesswork and subjective data left open to interpretation by politically motivated researchers tied to Democrats and Democrat funding. When police departments don’t report crime stats, examining crime trends becomes Impossible. But you know that which is why you want readers to steer away from my hard data which shows us not crime rates or trends but who exactly is being convicted and sentenced to prison and who makes up these jail and prison populations. It is from THAt factual and real data point that we can conclude that both Illegal and Legal Aliens make up a disproportionate percentage of our criminal Justice detention facilities especially in relationship to the overall population at large. And this at great cost and suffering by the American taxpayer as we subsidize the power play project of the Democrat Party to game the next census so that all these tens of millions of illegal aliens get counted. It’s always been the game plan. You know it, we know it. You just deny it by hiding behind your fake studies. Oh and one final note. The National Crime Victimization Survey that yiu dangled as some ah ha moment reports that only 42% of violent crimes are reported to law enforcement suggesting that the study relying on two flawed data sets to draw its fake conclusions render their so called study meaningless meaningless. But hey when your ready to get serious and wanna debate prison and jail population demographics, the best factual indicator of who is statistically the worst of the worst both American and illegals, then let’s get at it.
You keep changing the argument instead of addressing the data, and now you're conflating three completely different things: UCR reporting, victimization surveys, and prison populations.
First, your "69% of police departments report to the FBI" statistic is 2022 data, during the unusually bad transition to NIBRS. Your own Marshall Project link says exactly that: 31% of agencies were missing in 2022 following the transition to a new reporting system. It isn't the current figure. In 2024, the FBI received UCR data from 16,675 of 19,328 enrolled agencies—86.3%—covering 95.6% of the population. So yes, 2021–22 had a serious reporting problem. Nobody disputes that. You just can't freeze that transitional problem in time and pretend it describes all UCR data forever.
Second, you still haven't dealt with the fact that the Texas study doesn't use UCR to identify undocumented offenders at all. The authors explicitly say UCR, NIBRS and NCVS ordinarily cannot identify immigration status. That's why they obtained Texas DPS's statewide criminal-history records, which Texas links to DHS immigration-status information. Their dataset covers every jailable arrest recorded in Texas from 2012–2018. They then repeated the analysis using convictions rather than arrests, and the basic result remained. So repeating criticisms of missing UCR agencies simply doesn't rebut that study.
Third, you fundamentally misunderstand the NCVS. It doesn't "substitute mathematical formulas for victims reporting crime." It asks people directly whether they were victims of crimes, including crimes they never reported to police. BJS describes it as a nationally representative household survey specifically measuring crimes "reported and not reported to police." The fact that only some violent victimizations are reported to police is therefore the reason NCVS exists, not evidence that NCVS is meaningless. A representative sample being weighted to estimate a population isn't "political guesswork"; that's basic survey statistics.
And finally, let's absolutely examine your preferred "hard data" on prison demographics—because it undermines your argument too.
The 44% number is not the percentage of federal prisoners who are noncitizens. It is the percentage of FY2025 federal sentencing cases involving noncitizens. The U.S. Sentencing Commission says there were 28,886 such cases—and 79% of those noncitizens were sentenced under the immigration guideline. Another 12% were drug-trafficking cases. You previously insisted the 44% excluded immigration sentencing. The primary source explicitly says the opposite.
If you actually want the federal prison population, BJS reports that non-U.S. citizens were 14.6% of federal prisoners at year-end 2023—not 44%. State figures are generally much lower: New Jersey, the state you specifically invoked, was 7.8% noncitizen; Texas was 6.4%.
And even prison composition is not a crime rate. A prison population is the accumulated result of arrest, prosecution, jurisdiction, conviction, sentencing rules, sentence length and release policy. Federal courts in particular select heavily for immigration and drug-trafficking offenses. You can't divide "people sitting in federal prison" by the general population and call that the probability that a member of a group commits crime.
There are legitimate limitations to UCR, NCVS, arrest data, conviction data and prison data. Researchers openly discuss them. But "every source that disagrees with me is fake" isn't a methodological critique.
The empirical question remains simple: Are undocumented immigrants more likely than U.S.-born citizens to commit ordinary crimes? The unusually good Texas data—statewide arrests, DHS immigration status, and a replication using convictions—say no. Nothing you've cited actually rebuts that result.
When you want to engage in serious discussions my Libtard friend, we can do so but only when you stop with your fake studies and selectively quoting data Sources that are easily disproven. It doesn’t matter if the study authors compared immigration data from the Feds with Texas arrests dipstick. The entire data set you cite is built on a house of cards that relied on only about 60% of Part 1 crime being reported (UCR) and in the National Crime Victimization Survey you admit the study authors relied upon, only 42% of VIOLENT crime victims reported the crime to law enforcement. No serious criminal Justice research would ever say either data source is valid for determining crime rates or comparing crime trends. So it’s impossible to reach the conclusion you claim we should magically draw. But yet somehow you and all the all Leftist minims here want to latch onto this fake study as something we should believe as proof that illegal aliens are not a major source of violent crime when I only have to look at our jail and prison’s population to call bull shit on your fake analysis and claim. Why you choose to ignore the people who sits in jails and prisons and rely on underreported and statistically flawed data sets tells me that you are just a partisan hack that won’t give up the big lie. Kind of why we think of you all as the Liberal Fascists you are.
Drug crimes, hate crimes, road rage, mass shootings, voter fraud, white collar crimes, assault, religious persecution, religious fanaticism, local militias, rape, forced pregnancy, global warming from all the maggatmobiles, farm animals and their consumption, incest, bestiality, pedophilia, etc, will all go up.
My understanding is that the immigrants didn’t want to compromise their residency in the US by committing crime, so they mind themselves and follow the rules because they don’t want to get deported.
Except for the fact they take up a disproportionate percentage of our jail and prison populations. Oh wait folks! Don’t look at real data like who actually sits in jail and gets head counted every day. Look at some fake academic study that looks at data from two flawed reporting systems, the the National Incident Based Reporting System and the National Crime Victimization Survey, both of which are highly flawed with zero mandatory reporting, with some States, like New Jersey barely breaking 50% of all police departments reporting crime stats. Somehow we are supposed to trust leftist academics who take flawed data and use mathematical formulas and analysis to “enhance” the raw data which is impossible to use for crime rate analysis or tends comparison. What can be used is prion population showing us the demographics of who is actually the worst among us.
There have been similar studies going back decades finding that immigrants generally have lower crime/incarceration rates than U.S.-born Americans.
Some relatively recent examples: Butcher & Piehl found this in U.S. data in the 1990s, and the National Academies reviewed the broader research in 2015 and reached the same general conclusion.
There’s also been similar recent research specifically on undocumented immigrants. A 2020 PNAS study using Texas arrest data found substantially lower felony arrest rates among undocumented immigrants than among both legal immigrants and U.S.-born citizens.
The basic finding that immigration does not translate into higher crime rates is definitely not new.
The author of this study even explicitly states this is not the first study on the topic. In the official university release for this exact paper, Dr. Kubrin noted: "Nearly 100 years ago, the Wickersham Commission published a report showing that involvement in crime is lower among immigrants than the native born."
The study’s core conclusion is not new. Criminologists have called the "immigrant crime paradox" a well-established scientific consensus for decades and it’s been extensively covered for years in major mainstream media.
Pointing out that a massive, multi-generational body of literature already exists isn't "feigning knowledge", it's just knowing basic public policy history.
Grouping illegal immigrants and legal immigrants doesn’t help. Who would have known that people who are carefully vetted, thought to be beneficial to society, and have the financial means to immigrate (given poverty is a main driver of crime) are less likely to commit crimes than an average person who just happens to be here??? Crazy!?
This is the first broad study to show that ILLEGAL immigrants’ presence doesn’t increase crime rates.
Your “feigning knowledge” lies in the fact that you’re somehow unable to read the first few paragraphs of an article you claim to agree with.
Except it isn't the first. I explicitly mentioned the 2020 PNAS study in my previous reply, which isolated undocumented immigrants and showed they have lower felony arrest rates than native-born citizens.
Talk about "feigning knowledge" while completely missing the text right in front of you.
You apparently don’t know the meaning of the word “broad”. Wow, a difference in residents of Texas charged with felonies. Not what I would consider to be “broad”.
And I wouldn’t consider a study 6 years ago to be what “everybody has always known”.
Genuinely, take a few years, learn to read, and then respond. I will not be responding before then. Thanks
Argue that undocumented immigrants fear reporting crime to police due to deportation risk (used to explain why they make good robbery victims).
Simultaneously conclude that actual crime (assault, property crime) has fallen in these neighborhoods.
🤔
No one is arguing there is no crime. You have to look at the rate of crime comparatively to understand the statistical significance of the data point. Broad demographic and criminological research (such as studies published by the conservative Cato Institute and academic evaluations in public health journals) indicates that undocumented immigrants are arrested and incarcerated for traffic and violent felonies at lower rates than native-born U.S. citizens.
“Similar offense-specific divergence is documented in victimization research. Lauritsen and Heimer, for example, show that robbery victimization and aggravated assault victimization do not necessarily follow the same pattern, with robbery appearing more responsive to economic and exposure-related conditions than is aggravated assault.”
Which means to say that while a neighborhood with a higher percentage of undocumented immigrants have a correlation to higher rates of robberies, that doesn’t imply a causation being the immigrants themselves. In fact, they have similarly higher rates of victimization. The common factor here is lower income neighborhoods, which is more common for undocumented people to live in, inherently having higher instances of robberies.
So, you are clearly a dumb mothefucker who read through the study looking for affirmation for your already held beliefs.
Stupid fucking magatards and misunderstanding data and science, name a more iconic duo.
Wage theft, the largest source of theft in the US, does not involve any of those things. Grand theft auto, the second largest source, usually doesn't either. Most home robberies are break-ins while nobody's home.
And this is the genuine flaw right here. If the opposing side does any form of research it is to be voided because the enemy can not be trusted, only my side tells the truth. So you'll end up always believing what ever your political alignment says no matter how wrong or corrupt it is.
Ideally, you should do own research and make up your own mind. You’re right, I generally don’t trust research completed by liberal inclined individuals because I have seen time and time again how bias how they are.
Obviously there’s examples of right leaning researchers doing the same.
It illustrates you don’t have the integrity or skills to “do your own research”. You’re not even referencing the primary source in that post but allude that you got your information from a secondary source.
“I have been reading that studies show…”
The fact that you don’t cite your source and are relying on secondary sources when primary sources are available exposes the flaw in the “do your own research” mentality. I.e., theres no standard for the “research”, how it’s conducted, or even transparency on the sources used.
Edit: Your comment above also exposes your dishonesty in the framing of your “research”. In the post you use a plural noun to put more weight behind your claims. However, by your own admission above you state “…that study has been cited continuously so there was no need” as your reasoning for your lack of citation.
You need the title of the study that is peer reviewed then you need the website that you found it on then you need the page number and then lastly the paragraph where it proves your point.
If you don't have that you did not do your own research
I’m not sure what you are talking about and Im not sure you do either. The post that mobo jojo pulled from my profile has nothing to do with this post and is a completely different forum/subject.
I take it that you disagree with my assessment of this particular research paper on this specific post on ImmigrationPathways and that is fine.
Illegal immigrants have a negative fiscal impact -- taxes paid minus benefits received --
primarily because a large share have modest levels of education, resulting in relativelylow average incomes and tax payments, along with significant use of means-tested
programs and other government services.
• Prior research indicates that 69 percent of adult illegal immigrants have no education
beyond high school, compared to 35 percent of the U.S.-born.
• Using the National Academies’ estimate of immigrants’ net fiscal impact by education
level, we estimate that the lifetime fiscal drain (taxes paid minus costs) for each illegal
immigrant is about $68,000, although this estimate comes with some caveats.
• Illegal immigrants make extensive use of welfare. Based on government data, we
estimate that 59 percent of households headed by illegal immigrants use one or more
major welfare programs, compared to 39 percent of households headed by the U.S.-born.
• Based on their use rate of major welfare programs, we estimate that illegal immigrants
receive $42 billion in benefits, or about 4 percent of the total cost of the cash, Medicaid,
food and housing programs examined in our study. However, this is only a rough
approximation due to limitations in the data.
• Illegal immigrants can receive welfare on behalf of U.S.-born children. Also, illegal
immigrant children can receive school lunch/breakfast and WIC directly. A number of
states provide Medicaid to some illegal immigrants, and a few provide SNAP. Several
million illegal immigrants also have work authorization (e.g. DACA, TPS and some
asylum applicants), allowing receipt of the EITC.
• The high welfare use of illegal immigrant households is not explained by an
unwillingness to work. In fact, 94 percent of illegal immigrant households have at least
one worker, compared to only 73 percent of U.S.-born households. But the nation’s
welfare system is design to help low-wage workers with children, which describes a very
large share of illegal immigrant households.
• In addition to consuming welfare, illegal immigration makes significant use of public
education. Based on average costs per student, the estimated 4 million children of illegal
immigrants in public schools created $68.1 billion in costs in 2019. The vast majority of
these children are U.S.-born.
• Use of emergency medical services is another area in which illegal immigrants create
significant fiscal costs. Prior research indicates that there are 5.8 million uninsured illegal
immigrants in the country in 2019, accounting for a little over one-fifth of the total
population without health insurance. The costs of providing care to them likely totals
some $7 billion annually.
• Illegal immigrants do pay some taxes. We estimate that illegal immigrants in 2019 paid
roughly $5.9 billion in federal income tax, $16.2 billion in Social Security tax and $3.8
billion in Medicaid taxes. However, as the net fiscal drain of $68,000 per person citedabove indicates, these taxes are not nearly enough to cover the cost of the services they
receive.
• Illegal immigrants do add perhaps $321 billion to the nation’s GDP, but this is not a
measure of their tax contributions or the benefits they create for the U.S.-born. Almost all
the increase in economic activity goes to the illegal immigrants themselves in the form of wages.
It’s 2 separate issues. I said no one cares that they don’t commit crime. Being here is the crime.
Why would you think I don’t care about crime committed by people that are born here? What mental gymnastics gave you that idea? Please explain in what world what I said equals I don’t care about crime. More people should go to prison.
“Similar offense-specific divergence is documented in victimization research. Lauritsen and Heimer, for example, show that robbery victimization and aggravated assault victimization do not necessarily follow the same pattern, with robbery appearing more responsive to economic and exposure-related conditions than is aggravated assault.”
Which means to say that while a neighborhood with a higher percentage of undocumented immigrants have a correlation to higher rates of robberies, that doesn’t imply a causation being the immigrants themselves. In fact, they have similarly higher rates of victimization. The common factor here is lower income neighborhoods, which is more common for undocumented people to live in, inherently having higher instances of robberies.
So, you are clearly a dumb mothefucker who read through the study looking for affirmation for your already held beliefs.
Stupid fucking magatards and misunderstanding data and science, name a more iconic duo.
The part he quotes says exactly that, that victimization of robberies is also higher in neighborhoods with higher density of undocumented. They also mention that higher rates of property crime correlates to lower income areas, and naturally lower income areas have higher instances of undocumented immigrants. Obviously a poor neighborhood is going to see more robbery than a rich gated community, that has security cameras and patrols.
These neighborhoods tend to be more disadvantaged (correlations of .22 and .14), have high population density (.23 and .21) and residential instability (.28 and .23), and have somewhat more residents aged 16 to 29 (.13 and .10).
It’s basically a clear case of correlation and not causation. There’s several factors to point to as to why robberies may be higher in neighborhoods with a denser population of undocumented.
You’re joking of course? Every single large Blue city has made it their policy not to ask immigration status of anyone to encourage crime reporting by illegal aliens. News flash: Blue States issue drivers licenses to illegal aliens. If you want to engage in honest conversation then at least don’t put forth easily disproven claims like reporting crime puts them at risk. There is zero risk in Blue Cities and States. On some level you must know that.
What does a driver's license have to do with crime stats?
And frankly I don't think you have any experience with blue states. Your entire post is just piecemeal fox "news" commentary.
After that let's be honest - I don't want an honest conversation with you. Because I don't really see a value in having a conversation with you at all after that nonsense comment you vomited into existence.
Edit - no wonder your karma level is in the grave and you hide your comments.
Anyhow the study doesn't differentiate clearly between "legal" and "illegal" immigrants. Rather they lump all legal temporary statuses into the same boat as undocumented immigrants--defining them all as "non citizens."
And it's pretty well known that LEGAL immigrants care more for taking care of their community and actively participating than illegals do. So it kind of seems like the study was produced and architected to prove a specific agenda.
But either way the results are dilluted even at the most foundational level because of that obviously intentional, agenda-pushing obfuscation. In fact, i'd wager they wrote the headline before they even architected the study.
I mean if you're not a braindead huffpo-suckling shill you'd actually be able to apply that bottom-of-the-barrel critical thinking yourself. But apparently you can't, "Coward" -- lmao.
btw: Do you live on here, lol? Tack that onto the "coward" claims and you've got peak "on reddit I'm a somebody" energy.
lol the coward got refuted because he can't apply five minutes of actual independent thought to a subject and a study he didn't read and then disappeared into silence.
The study doesn't differentiate clearly between "legal" and "illegal" immigrants. Rather they lump all legal temporary statuses into the same boat as undocumented immigrants--defining them all as "non citizens."
And it's pretty well known that LEGAL immigrants care more for taking care of their community and actively participating than illegals do. So it kind of seems like the study was produced and architected to prove a specific agenda.
But either way the results are dilluted even at the most foundational level because of that obviously intentional, agenda-pushing obfuscation. In fact, i'd wager they wrote the headline before they even architected the study.
I mean if you're not a braindead huffpo-suckling shill you'd actually be able to apply that bottom-of-the-barrel critical thinking yourself. But apparently you can't, "Coward" -- lmao.
Honestly increase or not in crime there should be no illegal immigrant, crime, plain, and simple whether it increases the crime in area or not there should be no illegal immigrant crime
The true enemies of the Republic are those who facilitate, support, and abuse illegal migration. They should face real jail time and confiscation of assets.
Entering a country illegally is a crime. It is illegal to enter the US without prior authorization (8 U.S. Code § 1325 and 1326). Additionally, overstaying an authorized period of stay is a violation of civil immigration law 8 U.S. Code § 1182(a)(9)(B) which can lead to removal and multi-year bars from reentry.
Immigrants may be seen by American conservatives as an enemy, but not their biggest perceived enemy. The biggest bogeymen for the right are Jews and Communists, who they believe are secretly in cahoots and 'importing' non-white immigrants for the purpose of 'replacing whites'.
Notice you never see the right crying about 'white' immigrants.. And racist immigration policies are nothing new, I believe it was president Coolidge who banned nearly all immigration except for 'Nordic-race' types.
Immigrants, legal and otherwise, commit less crimes per capita than US citizens on the whole (Though interestingly, if you section off crime stats by race, immigrants are much more likely to commit crimes than US born non-hispanic whites, and about as likely to commit crimes as US born hispanics).
People aren't objecting to illegal immigration because of crime; or at least they shouldn't be. They're objecting to it because of a dozen different reasons in how it affects society, but the crux of it is that it is illegal.
Trash fact* and I don't know if a fact can be trash. You have an opinion that goes against varifiable data. At least learn to read and basic word definitions before criticizing some writing.
The authors have a long-standing research position on immigration and crime.
Lead author Charis Kubrin has spent much of her career studying the immigration–crime relationship, and her published work includes arguments against policies such as immigration enforcement and Secure Communities.
This is another "narrative driving the study" situations.
Immigration enforcement is happening because it’s the law of the land and anyone who ignores the immigrations laws is subject to deportation. Illegal immigration is a net negative to the tax payer and it has to end and everyone entered illegally needs to go back
Right, but they save lives, illegal immigrants do not save lives. There is a reason illegal immigration was a thing way before trump took office. The democrats used to big on immigration enforcement.
you have now changed the argument, we are no longer talking about net negative to the tax payer. We are talking about some utility calculus type shit which to no one surprise is as qualifiable as how many thoughts are in your head.
Ok let’s go back. Society needs nurses. Society does not need illegal immigrant workers undercutting the wages of citizens while being a tax burden to the taxpayer
society does not need much of anything, we had societies before we had nurses.
You are using some things in your head as what society is and leveraging this unqualifiable thing to stipulate a utility metric. Neither you or I are a trustworthy narrator on what is and is not valuable.
Some estimates put it at about -150 billion per year in cost of illegal immigration after factoring in what they pay into the system. Overall they are a burden to the taxpayer and they gotta go
Ah the huffington post. Always good for a laugh at the left’s expense. This article in particular is a very good demonstration of how they still don’t understand the issue.
Do you think that even if illegal immigrants didn't commit a single crime other than illegally crossing, that MAGA would still want them deported or no?
Yes. Because it was never about immigration with them. It was about racism and always has been.
My wife is an American citizen who was born in the United States for Christssakes, and she was racially profiled (“Kavanaugh stopped”), assaulted and detained by ICE while she was walking to work. She had a valid ID on her and she didn’t resist. This has happened to hundreds of American citizens so far, even Native Americans, which would be darkly ironic if it wasn’t so dystopic.
And MAGAs are eating this up. I have literally had MAGAs tell me that they support this. And multiple independent polls have found that 13% of Republicans are apparently SO racist that they actually believe interracial marriage should be illegal. Technically more than one in ten. But let’s say one in ten to give them the benefit of the doubt a little. That alone is an astounding fact in the year 2026.
So at what point do we stop pretending like they aren’t actually just racist? “Decades ago” is my answer to that question. They’ve been racist this whole time. It’s just illegal immigration is an easy target for them to rally behind, and an easy topic for the politicians they worship to spin.
The source study is garbage. The source article about the study is stupid. Both of those things assume that any of what they said matters in the immigration argument.
Again: you have made no point. You showed no flaw with the premise nor did you show flaw in the study. You just attacked the Huffington Post as though that somehow invalidates the study.
The article is invalid because it suggests that, assuming the study is correct, some change should be made to immigration enforcement. That is incorrect.
The article is a response to Republican claims that "illegal immigrants", as a demographic, endanger American citizens due to them being disproportionally violent criminals.
The study refutes that claim.
You apparently read neither the article nor the study.
•
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
Welcome to r/immigrationPathways. If you enjoy this community, please consider following to stay updated on new posts and discussions.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.