The Glade 4.0

"Turn the lights down, the party just got wilder."
It is currently Sat Nov 23, 2024 4:22 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 147 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 10:58 am 
Offline
The Dancing Cat
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 2:21 pm
Posts: 9354
Location: Ohio
You cannot report what proportion of a population commits crimes when you don't know what the total size of that population. Has anyone seen a hard number anywhere saying there are XXX number of illegal immigrants?

Everything is speculation, but regardless of proportions, even one illegal resident committing a crime is one too many.

_________________
Quote:
In comic strips the person on the left always speaks first. - George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 11:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 10:36 am
Posts: 3083
Khross wrote:
100% of Illegal Immigrants are criminal. As such, it's pretty undeniably true they commit crime at a higher rate than the general population. Now, we can quibble over the rate over OTHER crimes, but illegally entering the country is a crime.


Aye, as I said to Mus, I'm granting the initial illegal entry is a crime, but that's not what I, or anyone else, is really talking about when they say illegal immigrants commit more/fewer crimes than Americans.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 11:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 10:36 am
Posts: 3083
Screeling wrote:
So basically it's a baseless assertion that draws a connection based on similar heritage that ignores a major difference in ethics to begin with. Gotcha.


No, I'm just not going to waste a bunch of time Googling stats and studies that you guys are going to read in bad faith and then pick apart anyway. I've been down that road too many times here. The numbers are easy to come by if you're genuinely interested. If you're not, feel free to assume I'm making sh*t up.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 11:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:59 am
Posts: 3879
Location: 63368
RangerDave wrote:
Khross wrote:
RangerDave wrote:
The reality is that immigrants, both legal and illegal, commit crimes at a lower rate than American citizens...
That's a pretty bold claim.


The stats are pretty undeniable regarding legal immigrants. With regard to illegal immigrants, though, I grant that my statement was overly confident. It's obviously hard to get solid stats on what is, by definition, a semi-hidden population group. That said, most of the stats I've seen suggest the claim holds for illegals as well. It's a pretty easy Google for anyone that wants to check.

http://www.gao.gov/htext/d05646r.html
Quote:
The briefing slides in enclosure I address each of our three questions.
In summary, for our study population of 55,322 illegal aliens, we found that:

* They were arrested at least a total of 459,614 times, averaging about 8 arrests per illegal alien. Nearly all had more than 1 arrest. Thirty-eight percent (about 21,000) had between 2 and 5 arrests, 32 percent (about 18,000) had between 6 and 10 arrests, and 26 percent (about 15,000) had 11 or more arrests. Most of the arrests occurred after 1990.

* They were arrested for a total of about 700,000 criminal offenses, averaging about 13 offenses per illegal alien. One arrest incident may include multiple offenses, a fact that explains why there are nearly one and half times more offenses than arrests.[Footnote 6] Almost all of these illegal aliens were arrested for more than 1 offense. Slightly more than half of the 55,322 illegal aliens had between 2 and 10 offenses. About 45 percent of all offenses were drug or immigration offenses. About 15 percent were property-related offenses such as burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and property damage. About 12 percent were for violent offenses such as murder, robbery, assault, and sex-related crimes. The balance was for such other offenses as traffic violations, including driving under the influence; fraud--including forgery and counterfeiting; weapons violations; and
obstruction of justice.

* Eighty percent of all arrests occurred in three states--California, Texas, and Arizona. Specifically, about 58 percent of all arrests occurred in California, 14 percent in Texas, and 8 percent in Arizona.


http://www.time.com/time/nation/article ... 75,00.html
Quote:
Indiana University economist Eric Rasmusen has culled figures from a 2005 GAO report on foreigners incarcerated in Federal and state prisons to calculate that illegal immigrants commit 21% of all crime in the United States, costing the country more than $84 billion.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 11:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 5:44 pm
Posts: 2315
Honestly, even if it is true, remember that both legal and illegal immigrants face a very high risk of deportation if they are caught committing a crime. The illegals because they'll be found to be illegal, and the legals because it's surprisingly easy to get deported for even minor crimes. Being convicted of a class-A misdemeanor gets a lot of legal immigrants deported, it doesn't even need to be a felony.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 11:06 am 
Offline
Deuce Master

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:45 am
Posts: 3099
RangerDave wrote:
Screeling wrote:
Republican politicians, well, some at least, continue that dynamic because they're just as incensed about that fact as the people who voted for them.


I don't know why you guys seem so convinced that Democrats are purely cynical operators, playing the race card for their own electoral gain, yet you're so resistant to the idea that Republicans might be just as cynically manipulating their (white) base on the same racially charged issues. I mean come on! If there's any universal truth we can all agree on here, it's that politicians of all parties are manipulative, soulless bastards, right?

I will concede this point if you're talking about McCain and also my Federal House Rep Giffords, but she's a Democrat. My other Senator, Jon Kyl btw, I do trust on this issue. All my state house/senate reps have been passionate about this issue as well (hello SB-1070). I don't really follow other states' elected officials all that much so I can't comment.

_________________
The Dude abides.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 11:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 10:36 am
Posts: 3083
Uhh, Taskiss, the study population in that GAO report was illegal immigrants already in jail for committing a crime. Not exactly a representative sample of the population as a whole! And the rest of that Time article cites studies showing exactly the opposite conclusions from the Rasmusen study.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 11:18 am 
Offline
The Dancing Cat
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 2:21 pm
Posts: 9354
Location: Ohio
Taskiss wrote:
Quote:
The briefing slides in enclosure I address each of our three questions.
In summary, for our study population of 55,322 illegal aliens, we found that:

About 45 percent of all offenses were drug or immigration offenses


Interesting "category".

_________________
Quote:
In comic strips the person on the left always speaks first. - George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 11:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:59 am
Posts: 3879
Location: 63368
RangerDave wrote:
Uhh, Taskiss, the study population in that GAO report was illegal immigrants already in jail for committing a crime. Not exactly a representative sample of the population as a whole! And the rest of that Time article cites studies showing exactly the opposite conclusions from the Rasmusen study.

Yes, they're already being totally supported by US tax dollars...

You wanted figures, I showed figures. Of course there will be conflicting reports.

You post info supporting your liberal advocacy positions and I post ones more conservative. What about that do you think is more or less disingenuous?

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 12:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:27 am
Posts: 2169
RangerDave wrote:
I don't know why you guys seem so convinced that Democrats are purely cynical operators, playing the race card for their own electoral gain, yet you're so resistant to the idea that Republicans might be just as cynically manipulating their (white) base on the same racially charged issues. I mean come on! If there's any universal truth we can all agree on here, it's that politicians of all parties are manipulative, soulless bastards, right?


The hypocrisy of this statement is a bit over the top RD, considering the statements you made in this very thread about Republican actions for the last X decades, as if it was all one sided.

That said, I believe most (can't say all anymore since someone just returned) understand, and have expressed, statements expressing that politicians main goal is to get (re)elected, and whatever device they can use to do so will be implemented, so its a bit odd you seem to think otherwise.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 12:11 pm 
Offline
Evil Bastard™
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:07 am
Posts: 7542
Location: Doomstadt, Latveria
RangerDave wrote:
I don't know why you guys seem so convinced that Democrats are purely cynical operators, playing the race card for their own electoral gain, yet you're so resistant to the idea that Republicans might be just as cynically manipulating their (white) base on the same racially charged issues. I mean come on! If there's any universal truth we can all agree on here, it's that politicians of all parties are manipulative, soulless bastards, right?
And, yet, you continue to give the failed policies of the current Congress and Executive Administration a pass. More to the point, I asked you this question: how do you reconcile the century of Democratic Party history between 1850 and 1950? I mean, really, that kind of thing matters.

_________________
Corolinth wrote:
Facism is not a school of thought, it is a racial slur.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 12:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 10:36 am
Posts: 3083
Ladas wrote:
The hypocrisy of this statement is a bit over the top RD, considering the statements you made in this very thread about Republican actions for the last X decades, as if it was all one sided.


Not sure why this thread is getting under your skin so much, Ladas. You and I don't usually butt heads much. My earlier statements were specifically related to Rori's comment that he didn't know why Republicans have such a bad rep among immigrants and minorities. Hence the focus. I freely admit Dems use racial/tribal appeals from the opposite side. *shrug*


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 12:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 10:36 am
Posts: 3083
Khross wrote:
More to the point, I asked you this question: how do you reconcile the century of Democratic Party history between 1850 and 1950? I mean, really, that kind of thing matters.


Sorry, missed that question. You mean with regards to race - i.e. how do I reconcile the idea of Dems being the party of minority interests today when they were the party of segregation for most of their history?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 12:23 pm 
Offline
Evil Bastard™
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:07 am
Posts: 7542
Location: Doomstadt, Latveria
RangerDave wrote:
Khross wrote:
More to the point, I asked you this question: how do you reconcile the century of Democratic Party history between 1850 and 1950? I mean, really, that kind of thing matters.
Sorry, missed that question. You mean with regards to race - i.e. how do I reconcile the idea of Dems being the party of minority interests today when they were the party of segregation for most of their history?
Yes, actually, since even contemporary behavior indicates they aren't for real minority interest.

_________________
Corolinth wrote:
Facism is not a school of thought, it is a racial slur.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 12:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:27 am
Posts: 2169
RangerDave wrote:
Not sure why this thread is getting under your skin so much, Ladas. You and I don't usually butt heads much. My earlier statements were specifically related to Rori's comment that he didn't know why Republicans have such a bad rep among immigrants and minorities. Hence the focus. I freely admit Dems use racial/tribal appeals from the opposite side. *shrug*

Actually, the only reason I'm following this thread is out of interest of the debate thus far, nothing else. Nothing has "gotten under my skin", but some of your comments I think are odd, considering the audience you have been addressing and I think some of your "historical" tracing to modern actions is stretching it, and over simplified. In particular the comment I address with the comment of hypocrisy. Now, perhaps you are taking more a one sided approach to the topic in response to what you perceive is one sided commentary from the other posters, but considering the expressed viewpoints of most of the people responding to you, that comment that suggests everyone else only thinks the other side appeals to voter emotion for party gain is odd.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 1:04 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
RangerDave wrote:
Screeling wrote:
Republican politicians, well, some at least, continue that dynamic because they're just as incensed about that fact as the people who voted for them.


I don't know why you guys seem so convinced that Democrats are purely cynical operators, playing the race card for their own electoral gain, yet you're so resistant to the idea that Republicans might be just as cynically manipulating their (white) base on the same racially charged issues. I mean come on! If there's any universal truth we can all agree on here, it's that politicians of all parties are manipulative, soulless bastards, right?


Because you're misconstruing the issue. Republicans don't need to cynically manipulate white voters based on racial issues because the Democrats doing it obviates the need. The Republicans capitalize on the frusteration, resentment and outrage, sure, but they don't need to create it. The Democrats do it for them.

That's the basic difference. The Republicans may be capitalizing on white resentment of affirmative action and the like, but the bottom line is that the Democrats advocacy of such programs is what creates that resentment, not Republican politics. If the Democrats stopped pusing affirmative action, it would go away. The Democrats, however, figure they get more mileage out of pushing racial inequality and calling opposition to it racism than they would by depriving Republicans of that source of resentment.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 1:07 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Xequecal wrote:
Honestly, even if it is true, remember that both legal and illegal immigrants face a very high risk of deportation if they are caught committing a crime. The illegals because they'll be found to be illegal, and the legals because it's surprisingly easy to get deported for even minor crimes. Being convicted of a class-A misdemeanor gets a lot of legal immigrants deported, it doesn't even need to be a felony.


What the **** has this got to do with anything? Of course they do; they're either guests here, or they're here illegally.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 2:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 10:36 am
Posts: 3083
Khross wrote:
RangerDave wrote:
Khross wrote:
More to the point, I asked you this question: how do you reconcile the century of Democratic Party history between 1850 and 1950? I mean, really, that kind of thing matters.
Sorry, missed that question. You mean with regards to race - i.e. how do I reconcile the idea of Dems being the party of minority interests today when they were the party of segregation for most of their history?
Yes, actually, since even contemporary behavior indicates they aren't for real minority interest.


I think it comes down to the Dems' internal fight with and ultimate rejection of the Dixiecrat wing of the party in the Civil Rights and subsequent desegregation era. As the cultural trends I mentioned (feminism, civil rights, immigrant rights, etc.) grew, the Democratic leadership and liberal opinion-makers consciously decided to align the party with the forces of change. That doesn't absolve the party of its prior sins, necessarily, but it did establish the narrative going forward. Also, it's important to note that this move wasn't wholly contrary to the Dems' historical sympathies. They had always positioned themselves as the party of the lower classes, fighting against the rich and powerful. When cultural identities became more salient in the 60s, it was kind of a natural progression for the Dems to tweak their perception of who the "lower classes" were. Now, whether or not the policies that followed were all truly "good" for minority interests is debatable, but the general perception that modern Dems are on the side of minorities has been cemented as a result.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 2:38 pm 
Offline
Deuce Master

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:45 am
Posts: 3099
Incidentally, if you want to see video footage of IA's, you can check out this website: http://www.secureborderintel.org/

A friend of mine placed a couple of the cameras in Tucson.

_________________
The Dude abides.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 2:57 pm 
Offline
Evil Bastard™
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:07 am
Posts: 7542
Location: Doomstadt, Latveria
So, pure apologetics and continued misrepresentation. For someone lamenting the "cynicism" of the "Republicans" (which is to be read "not Democrats") on this forum, I find it ironic that your defense of reality is glaring revisionism and excision of the past you don't want to honestly address, RangerDave.

_________________
Corolinth wrote:
Facism is not a school of thought, it is a racial slur.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 3:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 10:36 am
Posts: 3083
So correct my errors, Khross. What is the alternate narrative that you think more accurately captures what happened and better explains the current reputations of the parties?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 3:05 pm 
Offline
Evil Bastard™
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:07 am
Posts: 7542
Location: Doomstadt, Latveria
RangerDave:

Nah, I'm not going to "correct your errors" because, as Taskiss demonstrated in this very thread, you're "not concerned with the facts" as they are.

_________________
Corolinth wrote:
Facism is not a school of thought, it is a racial slur.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 3:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 10:36 am
Posts: 3083
*shrug* Ok.

In the future though, do me the courtesy of not asking direct questions if your only response to my answer is going to be snark. I tire of wasting my time responding to bad faith inquiries from you.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 3:17 pm 
Offline
Evil Bastard™
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:07 am
Posts: 7542
Location: Doomstadt, Latveria
RangerDave wrote:
*shrug* Ok.
Well, let's look at this thread and establish why your position isn't credible. You made this claim:
RangerDave wrote:
The stats are pretty undeniable regarding legal immigrants. With regard to illegal immigrants, though, I grant that my statement was overly confident. It's obviously hard to get solid stats on what is, by definition, a semi-hidden population group. That said, most of the stats I've seen suggest the claim holds for illegals as well. It's a pretty easy Google for anyone that wants to check.
Said claim made in response to questions on the veracity of this statement:
RangerDave wrote:
The reality is that immigrants, both legal and illegal, commit crimes at a lower rate than American citizens...
So, we have 2 bare assertions contradicted by this post by Taskiss: Click Here. Incidentally, your only response to that post is the following:
RangerDave wrote:
Uhh, Taskiss, the study population in that GAO report was illegal immigrants already in jail for committing a crime. Not exactly a representative sample of the population as a whole! And the rest of that Time article cites studies showing exactly the opposite conclusions from the Rasmusen study.
Now, you claim the Rasmussen "study" is internally contradictory, but you still won't go so far as to defend your own statement. In fact, you use a variant of the common knowledge defense, despite taking no measure and making no effort to indicate that what you contend is common knowledge is actually true. In fact, you specifically state you will not do so here:
RangerDave wrote:
No, I'm just not going to waste a bunch of time Googling stats and studies that you guys are going to read in bad faith and then pick apart anyway. I've been down that road too many times here. The numbers are easy to come by if you're genuinely interested. If you're not, feel free to assume I'm making sh*t up.
So, tell me why I should be interested in correcting your historical errors when you have repeatedly demonstrated in this thread no desire to change your understanding or knowledge of the discussion at hand?

Finally, no one asked a bad faith question. I asked you why you so willingly and conveniently overlooked the historical reality of the Democratic Party of the United States for the 100 years prior to the Civil Rights Era. Indeed, the only person posting in bad faith, as I have AMPLY demonstrated using your own posts, is yourself. If you wish for me to stop wasting your time, then proceed to do the following:

1. Defend your positive assertions.
2. Demonstrate a willingness to concede your position when it is demonstrated to be wrong.
3. Demonstrate a willingness to source your claims when asked.

As you have vehemently refused to do any of these things in this thread, your posts are little more than false claims to tu quoque fallacies.

_________________
Corolinth wrote:
Facism is not a school of thought, it is a racial slur.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 3:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 10:36 am
Posts: 3083
Dude, you always write the longest posts saying absolutely nothing of substance about your own views or the subject at hand. It's truly impressive, in a "how to argue on the internet" kind of way.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 147 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 262 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group