Perhaps; perhaps not. Seems to me that a wall is a fundamental part of such a plan. So why not just fund it? Unless of course they do not really want a wall. Order out of chaos is the mantra of the new world order which includes not only Dems but Repubs as well.
'includes a Wall or Steele Barrier' Was he asking if they would approve all the money he wants for a barrier the full length of the border? Pelosi said, 'No', to that question.
The source is a report from the Crime Prevention Research Center, used a previously untapped set of data from Arizona that detailed criminal convictions and found that illegal immigrants between 15 and 35 are less than 3 percent of the state’s population, but nearly 8 percent of its prison population. And the crimes they were convicted of were, on the whole, more serious, said John R. Lott Jr., the report’s author and president of the research center.
Your link is a biased opinion piece which exaggerates the "small error" which was already noted in the report. "While it is possible that some of the convicts who are listed as US-born and as either undocumented or documented immigrants renounced their citizenship or never had their citizenship claimed for them, it is also possible that there are data errors. Even if all these cases are in error, the number of cases is still small and they don’t appreciably alter the results."
Your source and my opposing source......
John Lott is an academic fraud, and was busted lying about having his work published in a peer review journal, among other things.
That's a blog that analysed the results from the report based solely on a "small error" which I already pointed out was addressed in the report. The author is biased because he self-described himself as a radical advocate for open borders to and from the United States. He's open to immigration but appears not to differentiate between legal immigration and illegal immigration, but generalises them both by choice.
It is a blog though. It also thanks Vox for supporting the blog if you actually read the opinion piece you claim to have read, and Vox is an ultra-liberal news feed. It's probably worse than CNN; another reason to call the blog opinion piece biased.
I’m sorry, but people interested in the truth have to be willing to read more than a paragraph. I already pointed out that Lott lied about being published in a peer-reviewed journal.
All you have demonstrated is that you have an opinion on the man rather than the subject which you seem to refuse to address. It's called an ad hominem argument.
Is there an echo in here? YES! It even says it is a BLOG. Crikey, it's like pulling teeth.
Sigh, the report is directly associated with the results obtained from the Arizona Department of Corrections data from the '80s to 2017. If there is another study that is contrary to these results I'm all ears. So far all I've seen is "Lotts a fraud" and "It's not a blog!"
The Cato institute is an incredibly well known and respected (on the right) libertarian think tank that probably existed before blogs did. They have a blog on their website where they publish articles. I’m guessing you’d never heard of Cato before?
Let me try this again. The source you provided is a blog. The blog is an analytical opinion on the "small error" which was already addressed in the report.
No, it is an ad hominem argument you are appealing to because you are defaming John Lott's reputation as an academic based on his conclusions gathered from the data on a completely irrelevant issue — guns; And of all things using another blog/opinion piece to refute the results of the report which is a non-sequitur. If you want to challenge the legitimacy of the report, give me two or more studies that put into question John Lotts assessment of the data covered from 1985 to 2017.
This is called 'shifting the goalposts'. The issue is the data compiled from the Arizona Department of Corrections. Keyword: ARIZONA. And no one was talking about immigration but illegal migrants committing more crimes than natural born US citizens in Arizona. Try to differintiate between illegal and legal. I know you guys on the left often generalise the two as the same.
Perhaps "Oldmantook" would care to enlighten the rest of us as to how the "well-being and safety of the citizenry" and "common sense" is being served given that the White House has been informed by the FBI Agents Association that approximately 40% (5000) of the nation's 13000 FBI special agents, intelligence agents and other staff have currently "furloughed" and sent home!
Let's see...do you lock you car doors? Do you lock your house? Do you take whatever security measures possible to ensure your safety? People have fences and gates around their dwellings. Same thing with the wall. Porous borders are an open invitation to illegals.
Sure - no problem informing those such as yourself. Have you never contemplated short-term sacrifices necessary for long-term gain? I suppose you never made short-term sacrifices in your life in order to reach a more permanent long-term gain in your life? As a result of Congress' lack of cooperation, short term furloughs are necessary to produce the desired long-term result. Comprende?
