This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
One city has a population of 100,000 and 500 violent crimes per year.I disagree, and I'd bet that the victims and their loved ones would as well.
I'd be glad to discuss it leaving out the fact that just by being here they are illegal. Truthfully.....don't care how they got here, if they haven't broken any other laws, fix it so they get some resolution. Now aside from that if you're a criminal, I am 100% behind getting them out of here and improving the border security.
If we deported everyone in Texas, crime in Texas would immediately plummet to zero.
The moon has zero illegal immigrants and zero crime.
So the one where an average person has a 67% greater chance of being a victim of a violent crime is safer?
Thank you. We're actually closer to each other's POV than people might suppose. I have no trouble deporting actual criminals- after they serve whatever prison sentence they deserve. I can't get behind taking a murderer or a rapist and simply sending them over the border. That seems wrong to me.
No, the one where fewer people are victims of a violent crime is.
I call BS! Ton's of space crap is pulled into the sun, and I seriously doubt any of it has a legal right to be there.
Whether its this issue, gun control, drone attacks, etc, any time you ask the family of victims they're going to give you an emotional, angry response, and who can blame them? But the rest of us shouldn't make policy based on those emotions.
RBM said:
It isn't ridiculous at all. It is rational.
Where did I say we should make policy based strictly on this?
Yeah, okay.
Arguments like this make no sense to me. The RATE of crime is the only thing that matters. If immigrants commit crimes at a substantially higher or lower RATE, that's a good argument for or against. But your logic here implies that even a single crime could/should be used in the discussion.
What is meant by "more crime really isn't an issue as long as the new people aren't increasing the rate"? Doesn't this fall into the category of "more crime"?
Serious question. If American prison (roof, bed, 3 meals) is better than the hell hole they came from, why incentivize their crime in the U.S.?
As long as population increases, pure numbers of victims also increase. That has nothing to do with immigration itself, as this is the natural result of a larger population. BUt if immigrants commit violent crime at a significantly lower rate, then admitting more of them would make us SAFER on aggregate. (To be honest, my suspicion is that they do little to move the rate in either direction and all of the discussion about crime is a red herring. There are better arguments both for and against immigration than the crime stats.)
Agree to disagree. I want to see fewer victims of crimes, not just a lower rate. Again, that doesn't mean we use that as the sole or primary criteria for enacting policy (not just immigration policy, by the way), but it matters IMO. Other things besides the rate of crime matter as well, like severity, etc.
I see your point. It is certainty an issue for those effected.
When I said it isn't really an issue, I thought it was an implied that I meant "it isn't really an issue that needs to be a driver of public policy decisions". Of course all crime matters to the victims. And we should certainly have empathy for them and expect that the perpetrators will be brought to justice.
Agree to disagree. I want to see fewer victims of crimes, not just a lower rate. Again, that doesn't mean we use that as the sole or primary criteria for enacting policy (not just immigration policy, by the way), but it matters IMO. Other things besides the rate of crime matter as well, like severity, etc.
But you realize the number of victims don't decrease. They're just displaced to a country you likely don't care about.
Agree to disagree. I want to see fewer victims of crimes, not just a lower rate. Again, that doesn't mean we use that as the sole or primary criteria for enacting policy (not just immigration policy, by the way), but it matters IMO. Other things besides the rate of crime matter as well, like severity, etc.
We need to allow more guest workers because we need what they bring to the labor force.
Sorry I missed this, but just to address: there's no hypocrisy because whatever the Obamas did that required Secret Service funding- including a $4 million trip- still allowed the Secret Service to stay within their allotted budget. This is not true of Trump- the Secret Service requires approximately $60 million extra per year on top of the existing budget.jerry jones said:
).
