What should be done about illegal immigration?

When I heard the joke "Why don't Mexicans and blacks have kids together? -Because they don't want sons who are too lazy to steal" , I thougt the Mexicans were supposed to be the lazy ones, according to the stereotype. This thread has made me think: Was it the other way around?

Please answer this very serious question.

(Hi, dis!)

0 Replies

Organized urban crime in the United States was invented by Irish immigrants. They were soon facing serious competition from the European Jews and the Chinese who followed them, and both were eventually supplanted by the Italians.

Virtually every distinguishable immigrant group, identifiable by skin color, nationality, language or religion, whenever it was concentrated in sufficient numbers to be a visible competitor to other groups has had more or less the same things said about them. All of this is convincing evidence, to me, that what is observed has everything to do with the situations of the observer and his subject, and very little to do with the innate characteristics of those so observed.

0 Replies

fbaezer wrote:

When I heard the joke "Why don't Mexicans and blacks have kids together? -Because they don't want sons who are too lazy to steal" , I thougt the Mexicans were supposed to be the lazy ones, according to the stereotype. This thread has made me think: Was it the other way around?

Please answer this very serious question.

(Hi, dis!)

Mexicans only steal as payback for the estados unidos swiping half of mexico during the WAR which renders the question to be sociological; poor peole tend to commit more crimes than the rich or middle class and many mexicans in amerika are a missed paycheck away from the welfare cheese. It must be acknowledged however, tht embezzlement in ultimately the bigger crime, gabacho embezzlement is light-skinned and most often protestant, greater financial rewards and book/movie deals. True pachucos are from tejas (El Paso) noted by their speaking Calo reather than spanglish. On the other hand low-riders, originated in Espanola New Mexico. I call all my best friends (ok, if I actually had any friends)"beaners" 'cause they know I hate P.C. and realize that I just love their frijoles.

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Foxy, suggesting mexican immigrants are prone to crime is bigoted, whether it be in a discussion of borders or not. I've seen no credible evidence that suggests illegal aliens are anymore prone to violent crime than anyone else. Neither have you. Pretending you have, because it will support your selfish desire to not share you country with them is bigotry.

And here is not only an enormous straw man but one carrying so many red herrings I don't even know where to start. I have to believe, at this point, that like eBrown, your refusal to make any distinction between immigrants who come legally and people who are here illegally is intentional.

You will be able to find many quotes of mine in which I have praised immigrants as often being more industrious, law abiding, responsible, and patriotic than some of our homegrown citizens.

You will be able to find many quotes of mine in which I have explained some of my background which both as vocation and avocation has included helping people come to the United States and helping them go through the process of qualifying for citizenship. I think probably the majority of these have been Hispanic. Are you being intentionally obtuse ignoring these facts while calling me racist?

What about the Chavezes, Melendrezes, Lujans, and Jaramillos and Ortegas in my own family, some of which are first generation immigrants. Are you being intentionally myopic when you accuse me of 'not wanting to share my country' while you ignore these? (And I didn't even get into the Italians which include first and second generation immigrants.)

I challenge you to find a single quote of mine that says, implies, infers, or even suggests that Mexican immigrants are prone to crime. I challenge you to find a single quote of mine that says, implies, infers, or even suggests that ANY immigrants from anywhere are prone to crime.

Now repeat after me. LEGAL IMMIGRATION IS GOOD and NOBODY IS OBJECTING TO LEGAL IMMIGRATION. THE PROBLEM IS WITH THOSE, FROM ANYWHERE--NOT JUST MEXICO--WHO ARE IN THE COUNTRY ILLEGALLY.

ILLEGAL IS NOT THE SAME THING AS LEGAL.

And then please provide a rational rebuttal to the many sources posted that refers to the disproportionate amount of violent crime and property crime committed by people who are in this country ILLEGALLY. None of these target Mexicans specifically either nor do they reference legal immigrants in any way. You appear to be thoroughly disingenuous as well as extremely annoying when you try to make this into a racist issue.

As long as that is your only ammunition, we aren't going to get anywhere.
_________________
--Foxfyre

I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I?-
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference

0 Replies

Oversight, Foxy Embarrassed

... not Strawman. Please substitute Illegal Alien anywhere you see Mexican immigrant. Were that intentional; it would indeed be a straw man. It wasn't, so clinging to one tiny error is hardly a comprehensive response. Correct the error (please), and your response in its entirety is null and void.

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

I call all my best friends (ok, if I actually had any friends)"beaners" 'cause they know I hate P.C. and realize that I just love their frijoles.

No me digas beaner,
Mr. Puñetero
Te sacaré un susto
por racista y culero.
No me llames frijolero,
Pinche gringo puñetero.
Chingao!!
:wink:

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Oversight, Foxy ... not Strawman. Please substitute Illegal Alien anywhere you see Mexican immigrant. Were that intentional; it would indeed be a straw man. It wasn't, so clinging to one tiny error is hardly a comprehensive response. Correct the error (please), and your response in its entirety is null and void.

Null and void? How so? My response stands as written and is entirely accurate. I will accept that you might have said "illegal alien" instead of "Mexican immigrant' had you thought about it, but after so many of your posts where you keep harping on the racist angle, I find your correction here a bit dubious, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt on this one post. I resent very much being called racist when I support policies that give us control over who will and will not be here illegally. You have to twist and distort what is said to make that into anything even remotely racist. And you have not corrected any of that.

Again, if we cannot have the discussion without the liberals playing the race card, there will be no possibility of a meeting of minds, compromise, or anything even close to a solution.

If you believe I am racist, so be it. You advocate all attempt at rational debate and the discussion is over. If you do not believe I am racist, a correction of your previous statements is still due.
_________________
--Foxfyre

I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I?-
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

0 Replies

Foxfyre,

Let me explain it to you.

We are all reacting because you made posts that seem to imply that illegal immigrants are more likely to commit violent crimes than other people living in the United States.

This is a good example of defamation.

If you didn't make defamatory comments, people wouldn't be talking about racism.

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

Foxfyre,

Let me explain it to you.

We are all reacting because you made posts that seem to imply that illegal immigrants are more likely to commit violent crimes than other people living in the United States.

This is a good example of defamation.

If you didn't make defamatory comments, people wouldn't be talking about racism.

Rational people would post a credible rebuttal to those arguments presented by those who have done the research eBrown. Irrational (or dishonest) people attack the messenger or try to deflect the discussion by defaming somebody else.

I am of the school that thinks it is extremely dangerous to have a climate in which serious issues cannot be addressed and discussed and the discussion won't happen if you're playing the race card instead of considering the posted facts at face value. If you have reason to believe that you are right that illegals do not disproportionately commite more crime than the legal population, put your evidence out there. I haven't been able to find such evidence and I have looked. But I have been wrong in the past and I certainly could be wrong about this. How about showing me the reality instead of playing the race card in an attempt to shut people up?

0 Replies

I don't necessarily think you are racist, Foxy. I think you repeat racist arguments, which you pick up by reading heavily biased sources. I've watched you make ridiculous assertions and contradictory statements, and duck, bob and weave your way around every attempt to illuminate them. You, yourself in an example broke the law, but logic dictates that since the law wasn't one protecting people or property, it didn't make you anymore likely to break laws protecting people or property. The same goes for illegal border crossers... but somehow you make a distinction there... and refuse to explain your hypocrisy. What conclusion should I draw from your steadfast refusal to address this hypocrisy? It is no secret the brown man makes up the vast majority of the illegal border crossers, and these are the people you deny that the exact same logic we all agree applies to you. What should I think about that? I do not ?'advocate all attempt at rational debate and the discussion is over' (time to get out your dictionary again). This is just another bob and move technique to avoid addressing your blatant hypocrisy.

0 Replies

Foxfyre, I am afraid the burden of proof in on your side... although there are credible studies that suggest that illegal immigrants commit fewer violent crimes on average.

You don't understand defamation.

Defamation is destructive because it very purpose is to promote fear and hatred. This is why it is so closely tied to racism (and why one of the most prestegious anti-racism groups is called the Anti-Defamamtion league).

When you claim there is a tie between illegal immigrants and violent crime... the consequence of this is that people gain an irrational fear of illegal immigrants. This makes a rational discussion LESS likely.

There is a good reason that many of us are saying that parts of the rhetoric from you side is racist. It is because it is uses exagerrated and false claims designed to provoke fear.

You are in complete denial on this. But, it makes no sense to post defamatory arguments and then act all surprised when people suggest you may be crossing the line into racism.

You are playing the race card card to avoid dealing with our real objections to your arguments.

0 Replies

Toward an Analytic Framework for Assessing and Guiding Theory, Research, and Policy, Daniel P. Mears, Sociological Perspectives, Vol. 44, No. 1 (Spring, 2001), pp. 1-19.

From the abstract:

Quote:

If media accounts are to be believed, immigration to the United States is a primary cause of increased crime rates. Review of recent anticrime policies targeting immigrants would lead one to the same conclusion. Yet most empirical research suggests precisely the opposite conclusion: many immigrant groups consistently demonstrate significantly lower crime rates than do native populations.

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

I don't necessarily think you are racist, Foxy. I think you repeat racist arguments, which you pick up by reading heavily biased sources. I've watched you make ridiculous assertions and contradictory statements, and duck, bob and weave your way around every attempt to illuminate them. You, yourself in an example broke the law, but logic dictates that since the law wasn't one protecting people or property, it didn't make you anymore likely to break laws protecting people or property. The same goes for illegal border crossers... but somehow you make a distinction there... and refuse to explain your hypocrisy. What conclusion should I draw from your steadfast refusal to address this hypocrisy? It is no secret the brown man makes up the vast majority of the illegal border crossers, and these are the people you deny that the exact same logic we all agree applies to you. What should I think about that? I do not ?'advocate all attempt at rational debate and the discussion is over' (time to get out your dictionary again). This is just another bob and move technique to avoid addressing your blatant hypocrisy.

You don't see any difference between the person who jogs the wrong way for half a block or pushes the speed limit and somebody who drives drunk or steals cars for joy riding? Is the drunk more or less likely to hurt somebody than the guy exceeding the speed limit by a few mph? Is the joy rider more or less likely to steal a car for real than is the guy who takes a chance on a short wrong way shortcut?

If you can't see the distinction between these I simply don't know what to tell you

And if people in the country illegally are proportionately committing more serious crime than the population as a whole, how is this not a legitimate observation devoid of any racial overtones whatsoever? On what basis do you dispute this? Show me any source I've posted that suggests that race is even remotely a factor in that. Tell me how a person's legal status and the social implications of illegal status should not be a legitimate topic in the debate over immigration policy.

And then tell me whether you do or do not want any immigration policy at all.

Why are you so afraid to look at this objectively?
_________________
--Foxfyre

I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I?-
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

0 Replies

Correcting my above quoted title: "The Immigration-Crime Nexus: Toward an Analytic Framework for Assessing and Guiding Theory, Research, and Policy."

Link for access via JSTOR:
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0731-1214(200121)44%3A1%3C1%3ATINTAA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-P

0 Replies

Foxy, you speed. IAs speed too. How is it any different when he does it? Americans drive drunk. IAs drive drunk too. How is it any different? Your hypocrisy, which you've yet to address is that when an American commits a violation not against people or property (like you), they ARE NOT more likely to commit crimes against people or property. Yet, when an IA commits a violation not against people or property (like border crossing), they ARE more likely to commit crimes against people or property. Stop dancing and address this hypocrisy head on.

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Foxy, you speed. IAs speed too. How is it any different when he does it? Americans drive drunk. IAs drive drunk too. How is it any different? Your hypocrisy, which you've yet to address is that when an American commits a violation not against people or property (like you), they ARE NOT more likely to commit crimes against people or property. Yet, when an IA commits a violation not against people or property (like border crossing), they ARE more likely to commit crimes against people or property. Stop dancing and address this hypocrisy head on.

I think the kid who breaks into somebody's house is far more likely to be a burglar at some point than is the kid who would not break into somebody's house for any reason. I think the person who commits petty theft has less conscience about committing more serious theft. I think the person who drives drunk is far more likely to hurt somebody than somebody who does not. I think the person who torments or abuses animals is more likely to hurt other humans than is the person who is kind to animals. I think certain kinds of crime, such as jaywalking, are not even remotely an indicator of inclination to violate the property or persons of others.

But yes, the person who speeds innocuously and gets away with it is far more likely to speed again than is the person who doesn't want a second ticket. Once you get tagged for jaywalking, you're much more likely to walk a few extra yards to the crosswalk next time. I guarantee you that after I changed the date on a parking ticket and got caught, I never EVER did that again. Not getting caught can be sweet, however, and is often not an incentive to not repeat the behavior.

The person who crosses a border illegally and suffers no significant consequences is far more likely to do so again, and encourage others to do so, than is the one who finds the experience to be unpleasant.

I will agree however, that entering the country illegally is not automatically a forecast of more criminal activity.

You should agree that there are also far too many people entering the country illegally who have no problem at all being involved in serious criminal activity.

I'm not sure, but I would bet a steak dinner that there is proportionately a lower violent crime rate among legal immigrants than there is in the whole population of the USA. I would bet tthe same steak dinner that there is proportionately a higher violent crime rate among illegal immigrants than there is in the whole population of the USA.
_________________
--Foxfyre

I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I?-
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

0 Replies

Foxy wrote:

I will agree however, that entering the country illegally is not automatically a forecast of more criminal activity.

<snip snip>

I would be tthe same steak dinner that there is proportionately a higher violent crime rate among illegal immigrants than there is in the whole population of the USA.

These two comments are interesting in themselves.

The question is WHY do you believe there is "proportionately a higher violent crime rate among illegal immigrants than there is in the whole population of the USA."

There is no credible evidence that this is the case-- and much of the evidence you have posted is wrong.

My objection to this is that it is defamation.

The purpose is to spread fear and hatred of illegal immigrants which goes far beyond one's objection to border crossing.

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

Foxy wrote:

I will agree however, that entering the country illegally is not automatically a forecast of more criminal activity.

<snip>

I would be tthe same steak dinner that there is proportionately a higher violent crime rate among illegal immigrants than there is in the whole population of the USA.

These two comments are interesting in themselves.

The question is WHY do you believe there is "proportionately a higher violent crime rate among illegal immigrants than there is in the whole population of the USA."

There is no credible evidence that this is the case-- and much of the evidence you have posted is wrong.

My objection to this is that it is defamation. The purpose is to spread fear and hatred of illegal immigrants which goes beyond one's objection to border crossing.

When you can get off your liberal accusations that defame people who you try to accuse of defaming people, ebrown, we can have a discussion. Until then, I find your broken record playing of the racism card really annoying and tiresome.
-_________________________________
--Foxfyre

I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I?-
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

What should be done about illegal immigration?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know