With enough undocumented immigrants, we can reduce crime rate to zero

“Is There a Connection Between Undocumented Immigrants and Crime?” (NYT):

Areas with more unauthorized migration appeared to have larger drops in crime, although the difference was small and uncertain.

For undocumented immigrants, being arrested for any reason would mean facing eventual deportation — and for some a return to whatever danger or deprivation they’d sought to escape at home.

According to Mr. Adelman and his team, however, the impact of undocumented immigrants is probably similar to what the research indicates about immigrants over all: They tend to bring economic and cultural benefits to their communities.

In other words, a true flood of the undocumented should reduce crime to zero!

Why don’t other countries figure this out and outbid us for these valuable folks who “bring economic and cultural benefits”? Citizens of Canada are not as smart as the writers and editors at the New York Times, which is why there are no Airbus A380s picking up caravans in Central America and bringing them to clean up the grittiest neighborhoods of Toronto and Montreal? (does Vancouver have any grit?)

14 thoughts on “With enough undocumented immigrants, we can reduce crime rate to zero

  1. I’m.convinced these absurd snippets are done on purpose to generate attention around the publication and as the result increased hits and ad revenue. The more outrageous the claimm is the better. This used to be the domain of the ‘yellow’ press and trolls on the USENET. Too bad some people buy this stuff at the face value

  2. In other words, a true flood of the undocumented should reduce crime to zero!

    Are questioning the study’s conclusions?

    • I didn’t bother to dig through this particular article, but in general what’s going on with these claims is black ethnic cleansing. The immigrants have higher crime rates than Americans overall, but much lower than blacks in urban neighborhoods, who are displaced by the immigrants.

      They disingenuously fail to account for the rural regions where historically nobody locked their doors, but now have big crime problems driven by immigration and migrant labor.

    • I want to know how any of these studies account for the fact that illegal immigrants are much less likely to report crimes against them. Most crimes are likely committed by the other illegal immigrants that they live and work near (just as most crimes in any group are committed by the people who are near and familiar. This is constantly cited in anti-ICE contexts, ala “We can’t let the police work with ICE because then the immigrants would not work with the police”. But then it gets forgotten when pro-immigrant crime stats are needed.

  3. The NYT is highlighting that threatening undocumented immigrants with deportation reduces crime. Shame on the NYT for supporting President Trump’s policies! Is some person who just walked into the NYT newsroom without proper credentials writing these articles?

  4. Vancouver is many years into a drug epidemic. Crime has been rising steadily for some time.

    For example:

    61.98/1000 property crimes in VAN vs 15/1000 in NYC.

    7.87/1000 violent crimes VAN vs 5.85/1000 NYC.

  5. It used to be that news is limited to few hours a day and is told as-is in black-and-white without any opinion or drama added to it. What we have now is “opinions” being sold as “news” to score points and rating.

    Whats more, our clueless citizens are unable to distinguishes between “news” and “opinions” or subjective reporting. Here is a study on this topic [1] but don’t expect it to make it to the news room or be taken seriously by our clueless citizens. And if that wasn’t enough, our “elected” politician are doing the same and letting publicly funded news reporting to also use opinion and subjective reporting. Just spend some 30 min in the morning listen to NPR’s interviews reporting and you will see in a 3 min interview how subjective their questions are.

    [1] https://phys.org/news/2019-05-journalism-subjective.html

    • I think with access to YouTube and information on the internet people probably now have a more accurate view of the world. So for example in the past people like Jordan Peterson or Ben Shapiro would have been labeled right wing lunatics and ignored whereas now you can watch them yourself and reach your own conclusions. I think it is the formerly mainstream media like the NYT that have moved far to the left in order to maintain subscribers, who want to see a certain view of the world. The purpose of reading e.g. the NYT is not so much for news but rather to validate a certain view of the world.

    • This number is really disturbing. We need to change the public laws and federal statutes to get it down ASAP.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.