Reply With Quote
Open borders or else.
that reasoning could also be used to support things like single child laws, eugenics, sterilization, etc.
the fact that a higher volume of crime is committed in bigger populations ins't a sound argument to eliminate a certain sect. especially if the one you're looking at (illlegal immigrants) commit crimes at a lower rate than the rest of the population.
Open borders or else.
italian citizen
BBC is covering it. What more wall to wall coverage is he crying for
Those are violations of human rights. Big difference.
Yes, from illegals specifically. But it would not reduce the chances of an American citizen being harmed by a violent/irresponsible act in general, since illegals don't commit crime at a higher rate than American citizens. That's the argument Trump and Co. are using, and it's dishonest. The more robust argument might be citing the fact illegals are less likely to carry auto-insurance than citizens, so even though your risk is no different from getting in an accident caused by an illegal or citizen, the odds the former won't have insurance is greater.
my point is that what you're saying is a terrible rationalization and is not a sound argument for deportation of illegal immigrants. the only logical outcome is a demand for the US population to decrease, and not necessarily the population of illegal immigrants. unless you do something to curb fertility rates of american citizens, the US population is going to continue to grow, regardless of what we do with illegal immigrants. its an ineffective solution for a dishonest problem.
They'd be better off just flatly stating, "I'm against illegal immigration because it's against our laws." The Trump tactic of "they commit more crime (they don't), therefore restricting illegal immigration makes American citizens safer," is an example of fear-mongering dehumanization. "Beware the other." Trump should just spin it, "I don't care if the illegal is a cartel member from Mexico or a PhD from Sweden, everyone, no matter where you're from, who you are, or what you do must legally follow our laws." But framing it like that won't rile up "the base." For his propaganda to have any teeth, those brown people from down there have to be generalized as murderers, rapists, and drug dealers, as you stand in front of sobbing mothers.
Look how ing scared you are.
Trust me, you are far less likely to be attacked than people who leave their house. Try not to be so scared all the time. You'll be happier.
"illegal immigration"
... except it seems that the majority arriving recently are LEGAL asylum seekers, seeking safety for their hole countries that the American Empire created over the last 100 or so years.
They had safety in Mexico.
Assuming that both commit violent crimes at the same rate, and assuming that Latinos have a higher birth rate than whites, wouldn't decreasing illegals eventually lower total violent crime? Not even taking into account that we might be entering a period of finite job creation and that increasing population (regardless of where they come from) might increase crime?
decreasing any sect population would decrease total crime. once you start diving into fertility rates, your argument is basically pro-eugenics at that point imho. until we reach a point where we are so overpopulated to the point where resources are a concern, its not a worthwhile solution imo
"fertility rates"
a fundamental concern of misogynist white male supremacists: white women as incubators of white people
"The Non-Euro-Whites Will Not Replace Us"
I hear you. And I haven't thought about eugenics enough to even form much of an opinion. I certainly wouldn't endorse along racial lines. At some point, I think it should be up for discussion. But maybe limited resources/disease/fertility rates etc. solve the issue before it gets to that point.
Go tell that to the Angel moms. Tell them about the probabilities and statistics. You're a monster.
I'll play devil's advocate here. As I appreciate your point, it is: compared to other American citizen's, illegal immigrants are no less or more prone to commit a crime against an American. So, pulling random numbers just to illustrate the point, let's say 1 out of every 1000 American citizens is a criminal who will commit a homicide. In a city of 99,000 people, that means 99 murders. Let's say the city council is debating on whether to be a sanctuary city or not - and the proposal on the floor is whether to accept 1000 illegals. I know, it's silly, but I'm teasing out a point.
Wouldn't bringing those illegals into the city raise the murder rate by 1%? In other words, going by the percentages, your point is valid. But I think you're ignoring the argument that stricter borders leads to less immigrants overall which leads to less murders (assuming the scenario above). Put otherwise, the percentages may be the same, but a decrease in the overall amount of immigrants would necessarily result in a decrease of criminals, right?
Like I said, devil's advocate. I'm just teasing out a point.
, just saw this.
More devil's advocate: isn't there a distinction between decreasing a sect of the population vs. disallowing growth? And a distinction between decreasing certain sects of (violence-prone) citizens vs. restricting overall population growth through closing borders?
I see your point, Michel Foucault, and agree with it.
That would be as insensitive as talking about lightning statistics a family who lost their son to a lightning strike, so I wouldn't do that, but it doesn't make the stats less true.
Speaking of grieving parents, have you ever gotten around to talking to Seth Rich's family, you useless ?
Lotta good that’ll do.
Small Texas Town Terrorized By Cartel Members, Resident Begs for Border Wall
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...r-border-wall/
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions