Illegal Immigration

[BCP1928]

They are more toward the Democratic Socialist than they are toward Communism. I think there are far fewer neo-liberals in the Democratic party than you believe.

Maybe so, but the big guns still are. Obama, for instance.

 

[HARK!]

Certain sectors of our economy benefit from having migrant workers

...and certain legitimate businesses go out of business; when they have to compete with illegal competitors, who pay even more illegals low ball wages, under the table.

 

[eclipsenow]

Ive already told you the studies are bogus and Ive told you why.

Your attempts at brushing aside these studies are humorous exercises in magic hand waving words.
I'm sad that you seem to believe them.
You have not even looked at the studies to see how they gathered their data - and whose data is being analysed

I wouldn't say that illegals create more crime.

They don't - they work had, generated GDP for America, and generate LESS crime than American born citizens.

I would say every illegal is a criminal. Which can't be of the native born.

Incorrect again. The USA ratified the UN protocol on refugees and is bound under international law to process them with all due diligence to determine their claim for asylum. Anyone with half a teaspoon of compassion should watch some of the documentaries about people feeing Central America after their coffee crops failed and they could not pay 'protection' money to the local mafia. Their teenage daughters are being captured and sold into the sex trade - and then Donald Trump accuses the families fleeing these situations of being rapists and terrorists and scum and 'poisoning the blood'. All they want is their daughters back. All they want is to mourn what they have lost, work hard, be safe, and protect their remaining children. Then masked men turn up and grab them and split apart their families in some cases! And the Christian right celebrate this atrocity?

You simply cannot call them illegal until they have been properly and fairly processed. I do not think that's going to happen under Donald Trump's privatised ICE-army system where the financial incentive is to grab and nab people and keep them behind bars.

The international legal position on this matter is clear. The US must permit entry and afford refuge to anyone it has recognised as a refugee or to whom it has granted asylum. Moreover, it cannot return any person to a country where she or he may suffer torture or other persecution. No ifs, no buts, no qualifications on national security.​

​

Merkel will have reminded Trump that the United States is a party to the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees. This prescribed the continuing application of the 1951 Convention relating to the status of refugees which was adopted to address the aftermath of World War II. That original convention was agreed in Geneva so it is sometimes referred to as the Geneva Convention.​

​

As the US voluntarily accepted the 1967 protocol to the refugee convention, it is legally obliged to implement it. Despite Trump’s personal complaints about these “rules”, all other states party to the protocol and convention can legitimately expect the US to comply – hence the expressions of dismay from other heads of state as Trump announced his executive order...​

​

..."Owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it."​

​

States can recognise that refugee status either when the person presents themselves to the state seeking sanctuary (such as at an embassy, airport or port) or when the person enters a state illegally then seeks sanctuary. The US has a longstanding system of recognising refugees before they travel to the country (such as in refugee camps) through the US Refugee Admission Programme. Once in the country, refugees can be expelled on grounds of national security but they should be allowed to seek refuge elsewhere before being deported.​

Comment: The Geneva Convention for beginners and world leaders

Writing for The Conversation, Professor Rhona Smith explains the guiding principles of the Geneva Convention.

www.ncl.ac.uk

 

[rjs330]

Your attempts at brushing aside these studies are humorous exercises in magic hand waving words.
I'm sad that you seem to believe them.
You have not even looked at the studies to see how they gathered their data - and whose data is being analysed

Actually I have. And I told you why the studies are not reliable. Just like all the transgender studies that were touted by transactivists were bogus. Just cause there is a study that says one thing doesn't mean there arent fatal flaws in it. The research in the immigration study has big flaws. The biggest being what I said.

They don't - they work had, generated GDP for America, and generate LESS crime than American born citizens.

They work illegally and drive down wages by working for less. There is no reliable evidence they generate less crime.

Incorrect again. The USA ratified the UN protocol on refugees and is bound under international law to process them with all due diligence to determine their claim for asylum. Anyone with half a teaspoon of compassion should watch some of the documentaries

If tgey meet the criteria I have no problem with keeping them here. However the VAST majority of them do not meet the criteria. They lied to get in. Just because some of these folks have legitimate claims doesn't mean all if them do. Thats your mistake. Having your emotions manipulated by by stories to the point you seem to think they all deserve to get in. The fact is the vast majority don't. Those that do, I'm happy to help.

The international legal position on this matter is clear. The US must permit entry and afford refuge to anyone it has recognised as a refugee or to whom it has granted asylum. Moreover, it cannot return any person to a country where she or he may suffer torture or other persecution. No ifs, no buts, no qualifications on national security.

Not every single person who crosses the border illegally claims refugee status. They have no right to be here. They should be deported.

Merkel will have reminded Trump that the United States is a party to the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees. This prescribed the continuing application of the 1951 Convention relating to the status of refugees which was adopted to address the aftermath of World War II. That original convention was agreed in Geneva so it is sometimes referred to as the Geneva Convention.

I would like to see this agreement revoked. WWII ended a ling time ago. It was a different time. Now any Tom, Dick, or Harry can claim asylum and they have to be let in and go through the system. Taking advantage of it even though they good and well know they dont meet the criteria. They just lie to get in knowing they will be here for years. Have children born here and then have people who's emotions can be manipulated, like you, call for them to stay. You are being manipulated.

I won't be. Someone who actually meets the criteria I'm happy to help. But we shouldnt be patsies for the rest.

 

[ralliann]

I dont think thats true. Becauae we dont actually keep track across America who is illegal and who is not when they are arrested. There are states who have laws against it. Also we know that many illegals wont report crime because they are illegal. I know that is used all the time, but it cannot be used as it is not good research.

Secondly, even IF it is true, that has NOTHING to do with the fact that they are STILL illegal and arw breaking the law by being here and should be deported. If not, then the immigration laws are meaningless.

And we know, they release Antifa, BLM, and illegal immigrant criminals back out on the streets. The stats are fake. I was just listening to a reporter who was attacked by Atifa in Portland. She was covering Antifa's attacks on ICE at at one of their facilities there. The police were right there and did not respond. Stats are a joke.

 

[ralliann]

Actual studies show “illegals” commit less crime​

From 2019:​

"most studies have shown that illegal immigrants tend to commit less crime than the native born"
Gonzalez, Benjamin; Collingwood, Loren; El-Khatib, Stephen Omar (2019). "The Politics of Refuge: Sanctuary Cities, Crime, and Undocumented Immigration". Urban Affairs Review. 55: 107808741770497. doi:10.1177/1078087417704974. S2CID 32604699.

From 2020:​

We make use of uniquely comprehensive arrest data from the Texas Department of Public Safety to compare the criminality of undocumented immigrants to legal immigrants and native-born US citizens between 2012 and 2018. We find that undocumented immigrants have substantially lower crime rates than native-born citizens and legal immigrants across a range of felony offenses. Relative to undocumented immigrants, US-born citizens are over 2 times more likely to be arrested for violent crimes, 2.5 times more likely to be arrested for drug crimes, and over 4 times more likely to be arrested for property crimes. In addition, the proportion of arrests involving undocumented immigrants in Texas was relatively stable or decreasing over this period. The differences between US-born citizens and undocumented immigrants are robust to using alternative estimates of the broader undocumented population, alternate classifications of those counted as “undocumented” at arrest and substituting misdemeanors or convictions as measures of crime.
Light, Michael T.; He, Jingying; Robey, Jason P. (December 2, 2020). "Comparing crime rates between undocumented immigrants, legal immigrants, and native-born US citizens in Texas". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 117 (51): 32340–32347. Bibcode:2020PNAS..11732340L. doi:10.1073/pnas.2014704117. PMC 7768760. PMID 33288713.
Comparing crime rates between undocumented immigrants, legal immigrants, and native-born US citizens in Texas - PMC

From 2024​

"A range of studies by academics and think tanks have shown that immigrants do not commit crime at a higher rate than native-born Americans. A more limited universe of studies specifically examine criminality among immigrants in the US illegally but also find that they do not commit crimes at a higher rate."
Hesson, Ted; Rosenberg, Mica; Hesson, Ted; Rosenberg, Mica (July 16, 2024). "Trump says migrants are fueling violent crime. Here is what the research shows". Reuters. Retrieved July 28, 2024.

The Police in sanctuary cities are told to stand down. The liberal officials have been doing this for years now. They do it so persons can come onto social media and make your kind of arguments. Your studies are fake. The way to fix this is to vote them out and put officials in that will do their job.

 

[Pommer]

The Police in sanctuary cities are told to stand down. The liberal officials have been doing this for years now. They do it so persons can come onto social media and make your kind of arguments. Your studies are fake. The way to fix this is to vote them out and put officials in that will do their job.

Dismissing evidence (studies) with an assertion “Your studies are fake”, should ought to be backed up with more than the assertion itself.

 

[rjs330]

Dismissing evidence (studies) with an assertion “Your studies are fake”, should ought to be backed up with more than the assertion itself.

I have backed it up. The thing is there are things out there that say why the studies are not accurate. However, I've learned a lesson on this. Don't bother. You know, I seriously wonder why im still on this forum. I don't think anyone here has changed anyone else's mind on any subject. We aee all so locked into our worldviews that its all but impossible to alter anyone else's opinion.

When I first joined I was hoping to have good discussions and find common ground and meet reasonable people. I have found that not to be true. In fact this board has really solidified in my mind how far gone the left is. When we have people who say its just fine that men invade women's spaces and get naked with them and that people should be punished for not using someone's pronouns and that its okay the children be medicalized to become rhe opposite sex, its a lost cause.

The Democrats shut down the government and people blame the Republicans, not matter who is in power or who is governing. We see riots in the streets, law enforcement being attacked, the desire to flaunt the laws and ignore law in place, to prosecute their opponents which has ALL been started by democrats I give up.

Ive actually become more nasty and frustrated over all of it. I think the straw rhats really broke the camels back for me eas Charlie Kirks death. I liked Charlie and watched his debates now and then. I wasn't a follower or wasn't consistent. But when he got killed and I watched the left attack him and blame him, that was enough.

Im seriously thinking about just leaving this board. I dont like how frustrated I'm becoming. I'm thinking I can find better things to do than to argue with people.

 

[BCP1928]

...and certain legitimate businesses go out of business; when they have to compete with illegal competitors, who pay even more illegals low ball wages, under the table.

Which, aside from a few show raids, is still going on.

 

[eclipsenow]

Actually I have. And I told you why the studies are not reliable.

Yes - you said:

"I dont think thats true. Becauae we dont actually keep track across America who is illegal and who is not when they are arrested. There are states who have laws against it. Also we know that many illegals wont report crime because they are illegal. I know that is used all the time, but it cannot be used as it is not good research."

This is so vague as to be meaningless. What does "across America" mean? At the national level? You might even be correct about that - I'll have to double check. But these studies are more specific.

EG: The study by Light & He uses TEXAN STATE data with specific definitions in a specific time and place. I'm mean - this study is from PNAS for crying out loud! The classification is based on information from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and ICE - it's quite specific and not as vague and fluffy as your magic hand waving suggests!

We make use of uniquely comprehensive arrest data from the Texas Department of Public Safety to compare the criminality of undocumented immigrants to legal immigrants and native-born US citizens between 2012 and 2018. We find that undocumented immigrants have substantially lower crime rates than native-born citizens and legal immigrants across a range of felony offenses. Relative to undocumented immigrants, US-born citizens are over 2 times more likely to be arrested for violent crimes, 2.5 times more likely to be arrested for drug crimes, and over 4 times more likely to be arrested for property crimes. In addition, the proportion of arrests involving undocumented immigrants in Texas was relatively stable or decreasing over this period. The differences between US-born citizens and undocumented immigrants are robust to using alternative estimates of the broader undocumented population, alternate classifications of those counted as “undocumented” at arrest and substituting misdemeanors or convictions as measures of crime.​

They work illegally and drive down wages by working for less.

Imagine that instead of spending "$45 billion for detaining immigrants - more than it received in the last 15 years combined" (on what is basically a demagogue's photoshoot) America spent a fraction of that in processing asylum claims and then even liberalising some rules around 'economic migrants' with significant hardships. They would be legalized - and as the studies above DO show - are generally so grateful to the new host country that they commit LESS crime - as we HAVE established.

(The statistics do not lie - even though you try to shew them away.)

If tgey meet the criteria I have no problem with keeping them here. However the VAST majority of them do not meet the criteria.

Evidence? You're good at the big bold assertions thing - but not so much with supplying evidence.

First - there could indeed be quite a high number of 'economic migrants' fleeing horrible poverty - rather than the strictest definitions of 'refugee' status.

Second - you could have a point in that studies about THESE definitions could be wildly interpretative depending on the biases of the agency producing them. As opposed to the quite clear definitions of "Documented" vs "Undocumented" immigrant crime above. Although I suspect the most 'agenda driven' studies will actually be by those MAGA agencies or 'experts' hired by the current administration to prove their point. This could be quite difficult to get to the bottom of!

Third - ever read the Old Testament? About how to treat 'aliens' in the land? Gleaning laws? Concerns for poverty? The general ethic of love your neighbour - and who does the neighbour turn out to be in the Good Samaritan story?

They lied to get in. Just because some of these folks have legitimate claims doesn't mean all if them do. Thats your mistake. Having your emotions manipulated....

... Have children born here and then have people who's emotions can be manipulated, like you, call for them to stay. You are being manipulated.

First - children born in the USA are citizens.

Second - you keep telling me WHY I'm wrong without proving THAT I'm wrong. That's a Bulversim - something CS Lewis argued was the great logical error of our time. Stop trying to psychoanalyse me - someone you've never met - to explain to me WHY I'm motivated to ignore your assertions when you have not really contributed any data. I will try to resist Bulverising you and patronising you by explaining your emotions and motives to you - if you will please extend to me the same courtesy. (I don't think I've done that yet - but sometimes I write late and I tend to be a little crankier after dark. So apologies if I already have done something like that.)

Third - I happen to have a bit of a Social Sciences background. It was a while ago - and not a full degree. (Just a 2 year Advanced Diploma - which I topped.) I have been involved in researching how to research - in analysing surveys and questionnaires for leading questions - and am aware that some aspects of the Social Sciences can be quite issue driven and warped. I'm also a bit clued in to how they do this. I'm no expert - and it's been a while - and I burned out horribly in child protection work decades ago. But I'm aware. Just letting you know - as your magic hand waving above wouldn't get a pass mark in some of the classes I took.

 

[HARK!]

Which, aside from a few show raids, is still going on.

I agree that this administration needs to stop playing footsie, and step up their game.

The American voters have spoken.

 

[Valletta]

As @HARK! said "The American voters have spoken." Those here illegally will be removed, those who self-deport will have a chance to become American citizens. The move by the Biden administration, letting in 10 to 20 million people, so many millions not vetted or improperly vetted, created a disaster that this administration is cleaning up. A lot of people were exploited as a result of Biden administration policies, and I feel sorry for them. But we can't set a precedent of letting any group violate our border laws and swamp the nation with illegals in order to win future elections.

 

[BCP1928]

Yes, Biden let in too many, but that's the point: they were let in. That does not make them criminals and there is no reason to treat them as such.

 

[HARK!]

Yes, Biden let in too many, but that's the point: they were let in. That does not make them criminals and there is no reason to treat them as such.

They broke in illegally.

If Biden ignored his duty to execute the law; that doesn't negate the law.

 

[BCP1928]

They broke in illegally.

Not all of them. Many were in fact let in. Don't you remember, for example, the kerfluffle when Border Patrol cut the wire that theTexas authorities had put up? In any case, according to the law, people who sneak in and claim asylum were legally allowed to remain.

If Biden ignored his duty to execute the law; that doesn't negate the law.

You mean legally allowing them to remain in the country?

 

[GoldenBoy89]

They broke in illegally.

If Biden ignored his duty to execute the law; that doesn't negate the law.

Not too different from the January 6ers being pardoned by the president.