With the Biden administration hauling in millions of “newcomers” (the latest euphemism for illegal aliens) from booming economies like Venezuela, Senegal and Haiti, we seem to be getting a Kate…
The PNAS study you cited has the same flaw, it’s using Texas data for illegal immigrant status.
How is that a flaw? Texas is very much involved in this issue.
… study about immigration and crime not illegal immigration
Prove to me that there any significant difference in crime rates between documented immigrants and undocumented immigrants (beyond the occasional misdemeanor of illegal entry that half the time isn’t even always a part of this).
How is that a flaw? Texas is very much involved in this issue.
Texas’ crime data only counts illegal aliens who have already been caught and fingerprinted by the Department of Homeland Security.
Prove to me that there any significant difference in crime rates between documented immigrants an
You couldn’t provide sources to back up your claim now you make new claims and instead of backing them up you ask that I do. The socio-economic difference in those two groups alone is going to show a difference. illegals commit murders at a 30% higher rate then the rest of the population. 4 of your 5 studies showed legal immigrants had lower crime rates than the rest of the population.
Texas’ crime data only counts illegal aliens who have already been caught and fingerprinted by the Department of Homeland Security.
So what?
You couldn’t provide sources to back up your claim now you make new claims and instead of backing them up you ask that I do.
No, you made an implicit claim that there is a difference in crime rates between immigrants and undocumented immigrants. Support it.
illegals commit murders at a 30% higher rate then the rest of the population. 4 of your 5 studies showed legal immigrants had lower crime rates than the rest of the population.
No, you made an implicit claim that there is a difference in crime rates between immigrants and undocumented immigrants. Support it.
You tried to pass of studies on immigrant crime rates as illegal immigrant crime studies and got caught.
Crazy, it’s almost like adding prisoners to the count increases the rates. Go with something peer reviewed next time.
Adding prisoners to the rate that were not added initially. They’re correcting the rate.
See the problem with the only source you could find on illegal immigration crime is that Texas does not count illegals in their rate unless they’ve all ready been identified as illegals. Your study is comparing identified illegals to unidentified illegals and legals.
You tried to pass of studies on immigrant crime rates as illegal immigrant crime studies and got caught.
Are you going to catch me breathing next? Like I already said, this point is irrelevant, as you have yet to prove a difference in rates between immigrants and undocumented immigrants.
Adding prisoners to the rate that were not added initially. They’re correcting the rate.
No, they’re adding prisoners to the rate only for one group. They’re fucking up the numbers.
You tried to pass off studies of legal immigrats as illegal immigrants, got caught and now demand that I prove that they are different because you know you can’t find any studies to support that claim.
No, they’re adding prisoners to the rate only for one group. They’re fucking up the numbers.
They are moving misidentified prisoners from one group to another. Illegals in prison for a crime in 2012 that were not identified as illegals but were later identified move from the legal group to the illegal group. Are you claiming legals were misidentified as illegals?
You tried to pass off studies of legal immigrats as illegal immigrants, got caught and now demand that I prove that they are different because you know you can’t find any studies to support that claim.
Go learn what a null hypothesis is and come back to me.
Are you claiming legals were misidentified as illegals?
No. I’m saying they’re only giving the immigrants the “counting prisoners” treatment. They’re not treating immigrants and citizens equally in their “analysis”.
Go learn what a null hypothesis is and come back to me.
How do you think the null hypothesis applies?
No. I’m saying they’re only giving the immigrants the “counting prisoners” treatment. They’re not treating immigrants and citizens equally in their “analysis”.
You’ll have to explain what you mean by the “counting prisoners” treatment. How do you think they are not treating immigrants and citizens equally in their analysis?
Do the “plenty of other studies” have the same flaw? Are they looking at illegal immigrant crime or just immigrant crime?
The PNAS study you cited has the same flaw, it’s using Texas data for illegal immigrant status.
The Oxford Handbook of Crime and Criminal Justice was a study about immigration and crime not illegal immigration
The criminal justice essay was about immigrant crime not illegal immigrant crime.
The Cross-city evidence on the relationship between immigration and crime was not a study about illegal immigration and it used data from the 1980s.
Institutional Completeness and Crime Rates in Immigrant Neighborhoods was a study on immigration not illegal immigration.
Some people say PNAS is huge and has given them a lot of pleasure.
How is that a flaw? Texas is very much involved in this issue.
Prove to me that there any significant difference in crime rates between documented immigrants and undocumented immigrants (beyond the occasional misdemeanor of illegal entry that half the time isn’t even always a part of this).
Texas’ crime data only counts illegal aliens who have already been caught and fingerprinted by the Department of Homeland Security.
You couldn’t provide sources to back up your claim now you make new claims and instead of backing them up you ask that I do. The socio-economic difference in those two groups alone is going to show a difference. illegals commit murders at a 30% higher rate then the rest of the population. 4 of your 5 studies showed legal immigrants had lower crime rates than the rest of the population.
https://cis.org/Report/Misuse-Texas-Data-Understates-Illegal-Immigrant-Criminality
So what?
No, you made an implicit claim that there is a difference in crime rates between immigrants and undocumented immigrants. Support it.
Crazy, it’s almost like adding prisoners to the count increases the rates. Go with something peer reviewed next time.
You tried to pass of studies on immigrant crime rates as illegal immigrant crime studies and got caught.
Adding prisoners to the rate that were not added initially. They’re correcting the rate.
See the problem with the only source you could find on illegal immigration crime is that Texas does not count illegals in their rate unless they’ve all ready been identified as illegals. Your study is comparing identified illegals to unidentified illegals and legals.
Are you going to catch me breathing next? Like I already said, this point is irrelevant, as you have yet to prove a difference in rates between immigrants and undocumented immigrants.
No, they’re adding prisoners to the rate only for one group. They’re fucking up the numbers.
You tried to pass off studies of legal immigrats as illegal immigrants, got caught and now demand that I prove that they are different because you know you can’t find any studies to support that claim.
They are moving misidentified prisoners from one group to another. Illegals in prison for a crime in 2012 that were not identified as illegals but were later identified move from the legal group to the illegal group. Are you claiming legals were misidentified as illegals?
Go learn what a null hypothesis is and come back to me.
No. I’m saying they’re only giving the immigrants the “counting prisoners” treatment. They’re not treating immigrants and citizens equally in their “analysis”.
How do you think the null hypothesis applies?
You’ll have to explain what you mean by the “counting prisoners” treatment. How do you think they are not treating immigrants and citizens equally in their analysis?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Immigration_Studies?wprov=sfla1 Literally the second paragraph talks about the unreliability of this organizations studies
In the article 11 studies are listed under the Controversial reports section the one I provided is not one of them.
In this visual aid you are Charlie Brown and the CIS is Lucy you trusted their methods and acumen after they yanked the football 11 times.
It’s right to be suspicious but with out any proof that this study if flawed you falling into an ad hominem logical fallacy.