9 ms·

I don't see the point of these orders. Muslim immigrants commit fewer crimes than natives. [1] http://www.nber.org/papers/w13229.pdf http://www.nber.org/paper

by tabeth 10y ago

I don't see the point of these orders. Muslim immigrants commit fewer crimes than natives. [1] http://www.nber.org/papers/w13229.pdf http://www.nber.org/papers/w13229.pdf [2] https://www.cato.org/blog/immigration-crime-what-research-says https://www.cato.org/blog/immigration-crime-what-research-sa...

howeyc 10y ago
These kinds of reactions (the order) are rarely based on logic and sound reasoning.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
simplehuman 10y ago
Pointing out facts is like bringing a toothpick to a sword fight.
- unixhero 10y ago
  As you know. Trump has has ended reality; words have no meaning now, and numbers doesn't have meaning either.
- WalterSear 10y ago
  http://mindblog.dericbownds.net/2017/03/crony-beliefs.html http://mindblog.dericbownds.net/2017/03/crony-beliefs.html
gambiting 10y ago
The point is to have someone to point to and blame them for issues. It doesn't matter that the data doesn't actually prove anything here. He's just rallying people behind that idea that America is under attack and everyone should be on alert and ready to accept whatever the government does in order to protect "freedom".
nerdponx 10y ago
1) It occupies the news cycle while other freedoms are eroded quietly. 2) Eventually people will be tired of outrage in general, at which point the executive branch can do whatever it wants.
Jtsummers 10y ago
Politics, fear-mongering, "terrorism", promises to his supporters during the campaign.
t3soro 10y ago
We don't want more Muslims. Do you understand? Ca suffit.
defen 10y ago
> Muslim immigrants commit fewer crimes than natives. That's a non-sequitur, as this order isn't targeted at "Muslim immigrants". Furthermore, the categories "Muslim immigrants" and "natives" both contain substructure. That means that a simple comparison between the two can be misleading. Please note I'm merely pointing out a flaw in your argument, and not taking a side on whether the order is a good or bad idea.
- Daddy_cat 10y ago
  > as this order isn't targeted at "Muslim immigrants" Not sure whether you're acting naive to prove a point, but the countries represented aren't majority Muslim by accident - they were picked for a specific reason. Not to mention, Trump himself alluded to a "Muslim Ban" with a similar structure before, as did multiple aides. He's run on a platform of xenophobia. It's not a stretch whatsoever to make that point - everyone understands why the poster is labelling it that way. The implication that the person that posted is injecting ideology into that comment is ironic, since willfully choosing to ignore the political context of the ban is just as bad. > the categories "Muslim immigrants" and "natives" both contain substructure Yes, all language does. >not taking a side on whether the order is a good or bad idea You're taking a side by turning a blind eye to the ideological ramifications and context of the ban. "I'm just playing devil's advocate" is always problematic because it purports that injecting something dangerous like this into the conversation "doesn't count".
  - defen 10y ago
    > Not sure whether you're acting naive to prove a point, but the countries represented aren't majority Muslim by accident - they were picked for a specific reason. My point was that there are 50 Muslim-majority countries. So if you want to argue against the ban, argue that visitors / immigrants from those countries commit less crime than "natives", rather than arguing that Muslim immigrants in general commit less crime than natives. >> the categories "Muslim immigrants" and "natives" both contain substructure > Yes, all language does. The point here being that different "native" demographic groups commit crimes at different rates; and I'm guessing it's likely that different "Muslim" immigration groups commit crimes at different rates. e.g. approximately 1% of Chechen immigrants to the USA are terrorist bombers.
dorfsmay 10y ago
Currently racism/religion-ism has a greater emotional impact than environment, clean water etc... This gives the media and people a bone to chew on, and something to be satisfied about with each revision, feeling like they are accomplishing something while the Trump administration is gutting the US environmental framework with little opposition.
- kjcharles 10y ago
  It's not a zero-sum game. By all means raise attention to the environmental issues but being against this does not mean there's no attention being paid to other issues.
jcranmer 10y ago
Trump promised in his campaign that he would ban Muslim immigration, because radical Islamic terror. Someone apparently got through to Trump that a Muslim ban wouldn't pass constitutional muster, so the ban was "tailored" as an emergency ban for the purposes of terrorism. If you look at the mass casualty incidents since 9/11, only at best ~50% of them were instigated by immigrants, let alone Muslim immigrants. A leaked DHS report apparently concludes that even most of those immigrants who did commit terrorism were radicalized post-entry, although this should have been the reasonable assumption of anyone who cast a cursory glance at the evidence. The exclusion of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, UAE, Pakistan, and now Iraq, as well as the inclusion of Iran on the list (Iran's support of terrorism is pretty much limited to proxies whose targets are limited to Middle Eastern governments (including Israel) and have no inclination to carry out attacks in the US or Europe) indicate that the set of targets is chosen less for which countries are liable to produce terrorists and more for which countries the US government doesn't like. As I've pointed out in the past, the number of terrorists who might be stopped by a travel ban like this is probably 0 and maybe as high as 2. The number of people for whom this would be the tipping point in their radicalization is probably between 0 and 10. This may create more terrorism than it catches.
- nojvek 10y ago
  I just hope students who have come for a legit purpose of studying don't get caught up in the mess. But I've been really giving thought to what I can do as an average citizen to make the slightest change in public policy.
  - jcranmer 10y ago
    They already have. That's why so many universities were outspoken about the ban, and many states filed amici briefs on behalf of the state universities.
  - Jtsummers 10y ago
    In 2002 many of my classmates from Middle Eastern countries were not able to return after going home for the summer. This is going to create a similar issue for many students.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
Mikeb85 10y ago
Make this claim about a place like France with a strait face (Muslims make up 10% of the population, and 70% of prison inmates, not to mention most of the crime). Yes, in the US and Canada immigrants, refugees and Muslims generally assimilate well. Because we have limits and take the best of these groups. But this claim is a bad debate tactic since Muslims commit crimes at a higher rate in many other countries. Now of course part of this is due to rebellious youth who can't integrate into a fairly closed culture, but countries which have taken in large amounts of Muslim immigrants quickly haven't always fared so well...
- Jtsummers 10y ago
  > Muslims make up 10% of the population, and 70% of prison inmates, not to mention most of the crime Substitute "black" for Muslim and this is the basis of a great deal of racist beliefs and policies in the US. The important question isn't who is in prison, and who is committing crimes, but why. Being Muslim (or Black) doesn't naturally incline someone to be a criminal. Something in the society at large is leading to either higher rates of conviction for the same crimes (the case in the US, harsher punishments for black offenders than whites for the same crimes), or an economic situation that leaves criminal activity as the only apparent or more economically beneficial choice for members of these groups.
  - Mikeb85 10y ago
    And I covered this in my post (last paragraph). It doesn't matter though - witness the rise of ultra-right populism in continental Europe, Brexit and Trump. And crime IS mostly an economic phenomenon, poor expected outcomes in life lead to high crime rates. But there is a link to high migration rates as well (if the economy can't absorb the new workforce quick enough, it leads to problems). The problem is, the moral dilemma ceases to matter when a majority of the population (you can call them dumb, racist, whatever, but they're part of society) votes in someone to 'solve' the problem. There is a point where feelings and morality don't matter as much as practicality.
  - SamReidHughes 10y ago
    > Being Muslim (or Black) doesn't naturally incline someone to be a criminal. How do you know this? It might. I'd bet being Muslim inclines somebody to not be a criminal for some types of crimes, in fact, so I wouldn't categorically dismiss the idea that religion affects criminality. Also as has been well-discussed here, crime rate differences are still present in non-economic crimes and your attempts to explain the situation fall flat. It's a story you're making up, badly, and to talk about this stuff with that kind of certainty is a bad look. The truth is, we don't know.
alphonsegaston 10y ago
Reason and facts hold no sway over xenophobic ideology. It's purpose is to rally power around the persecution of a scapegoat, just like an archaic religion.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
synicalx 10y ago
Care to explain the massive increase in crime in Germany then? [1] https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7470/germany-migrants-crime https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7470/germany-migrants-cri...

by tabeth 10y ago

howeyc 10y ago

These kinds of reactions (the order) are rarely based on logic and sound reasoning.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

simplehuman 10y ago

Pointing out facts is like bringing a toothpick to a sword fight.

unixhero 10y ago
As you know. Trump has has ended reality; words have no meaning now, and numbers doesn't have meaning either.
WalterSear 10y ago
http://mindblog.dericbownds.net/2017/03/crony-beliefs.html http://mindblog.dericbownds.net/2017/03/crony-beliefs.html

gambiting 10y ago

The point is to have someone to point to and blame them for issues. It doesn't matter that the data doesn't actually prove anything here. He's just rallying people behind that idea that America is under attack and everyone should be on alert and ready to accept whatever the government does in order to protect "freedom".

nerdponx 10y ago

1) It occupies the news cycle while other freedoms are eroded quietly. 2) Eventually people will be tired of outrage in general, at which point the executive branch can do whatever it wants.

Jtsummers 10y ago

Politics, fear-mongering, "terrorism", promises to his supporters during the campaign.

t3soro 10y ago

We don't want more Muslims. Do you understand? Ca suffit.

defen 10y ago

> Muslim immigrants commit fewer crimes than natives. That's a non-sequitur, as this order isn't targeted at "Muslim immigrants". Furthermore, the categories "Muslim immigrants" and "natives" both contain substructure. That means that a simple comparison between the two can be misleading. Please note I'm merely pointing out a flaw in your argument, and not taking a side on whether the order is a good or bad idea.

Daddy_cat 10y ago
> as this order isn't targeted at "Muslim immigrants" Not sure whether you're acting naive to prove a point, but the countries represented aren't majority Muslim by accident - they were picked for a specific reason. Not to mention, Trump himself alluded to a "Muslim Ban" with a similar structure before, as did multiple aides. He's run on a platform of xenophobia. It's not a stretch whatsoever to make that point - everyone understands why the poster is labelling it that way. The implication that the person that posted is injecting ideology into that comment is ironic, since willfully choosing to ignore the political context of the ban is just as bad. > the categories "Muslim immigrants" and "natives" both contain substructure Yes, all language does. >not taking a side on whether the order is a good or bad idea You're taking a side by turning a blind eye to the ideological ramifications and context of the ban. "I'm just playing devil's advocate" is always problematic because it purports that injecting something dangerous like this into the conversation "doesn't count".
- defen 10y ago
  > Not sure whether you're acting naive to prove a point, but the countries represented aren't majority Muslim by accident - they were picked for a specific reason. My point was that there are 50 Muslim-majority countries. So if you want to argue against the ban, argue that visitors / immigrants from those countries commit less crime than "natives", rather than arguing that Muslim immigrants in general commit less crime than natives. >> the categories "Muslim immigrants" and "natives" both contain substructure > Yes, all language does. The point here being that different "native" demographic groups commit crimes at different rates; and I'm guessing it's likely that different "Muslim" immigration groups commit crimes at different rates. e.g. approximately 1% of Chechen immigrants to the USA are terrorist bombers.

dorfsmay 10y ago

Currently racism/religion-ism has a greater emotional impact than environment, clean water etc... This gives the media and people a bone to chew on, and something to be satisfied about with each revision, feeling like they are accomplishing something while the Trump administration is gutting the US environmental framework with little opposition.

kjcharles 10y ago
It's not a zero-sum game. By all means raise attention to the environmental issues but being against this does not mean there's no attention being paid to other issues.

jcranmer 10y ago

Trump promised in his campaign that he would ban Muslim immigration, because radical Islamic terror. Someone apparently got through to Trump that a Muslim ban wouldn't pass constitutional muster, so the ban was "tailored" as an emergency ban for the purposes of terrorism. If you look at the mass casualty incidents since 9/11, only at best ~50% of them were instigated by immigrants, let alone Muslim immigrants. A leaked DHS report apparently concludes that even most of those immigrants who did commit terrorism were radicalized post-entry, although this should have been the reasonable assumption of anyone who cast a cursory glance at the evidence. The exclusion of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, UAE, Pakistan, and now Iraq, as well as the inclusion of Iran on the list (Iran's support of terrorism is pretty much limited to proxies whose targets are limited to Middle Eastern governments (including Israel) and have no inclination to carry out attacks in the US or Europe) indicate that the set of targets is chosen less for which countries are liable to produce terrorists and more for which countries the US government doesn't like. As I've pointed out in the past, the number of terrorists who might be stopped by a travel ban like this is probably 0 and maybe as high as 2. The number of people for whom this would be the tipping point in their radicalization is probably between 0 and 10. This may create more terrorism than it catches.

nojvek 10y ago
I just hope students who have come for a legit purpose of studying don't get caught up in the mess. But I've been really giving thought to what I can do as an average citizen to make the slightest change in public policy.
- jcranmer 10y ago
  They already have. That's why so many universities were outspoken about the ban, and many states filed amici briefs on behalf of the state universities.
- Jtsummers 10y ago
  In 2002 many of my classmates from Middle Eastern countries were not able to return after going home for the summer. This is going to create a similar issue for many students.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

Mikeb85 10y ago

Make this claim about a place like France with a strait face (Muslims make up 10% of the population, and 70% of prison inmates, not to mention most of the crime). Yes, in the US and Canada immigrants, refugees and Muslims generally assimilate well. Because we have limits and take the best of these groups. But this claim is a bad debate tactic since Muslims commit crimes at a higher rate in many other countries. Now of course part of this is due to rebellious youth who can't integrate into a fairly closed culture, but countries which have taken in large amounts of Muslim immigrants quickly haven't always fared so well...

Jtsummers 10y ago
> Muslims make up 10% of the population, and 70% of prison inmates, not to mention most of the crime Substitute "black" for Muslim and this is the basis of a great deal of racist beliefs and policies in the US. The important question isn't who is in prison, and who is committing crimes, but why. Being Muslim (or Black) doesn't naturally incline someone to be a criminal. Something in the society at large is leading to either higher rates of conviction for the same crimes (the case in the US, harsher punishments for black offenders than whites for the same crimes), or an economic situation that leaves criminal activity as the only apparent or more economically beneficial choice for members of these groups.
- Mikeb85 10y ago
  And I covered this in my post (last paragraph). It doesn't matter though - witness the rise of ultra-right populism in continental Europe, Brexit and Trump. And crime IS mostly an economic phenomenon, poor expected outcomes in life lead to high crime rates. But there is a link to high migration rates as well (if the economy can't absorb the new workforce quick enough, it leads to problems). The problem is, the moral dilemma ceases to matter when a majority of the population (you can call them dumb, racist, whatever, but they're part of society) votes in someone to 'solve' the problem. There is a point where feelings and morality don't matter as much as practicality.
- SamReidHughes 10y ago
  > Being Muslim (or Black) doesn't naturally incline someone to be a criminal. How do you know this? It might. I'd bet being Muslim inclines somebody to not be a criminal for some types of crimes, in fact, so I wouldn't categorically dismiss the idea that religion affects criminality. Also as has been well-discussed here, crime rate differences are still present in non-economic crimes and your attempts to explain the situation fall flat. It's a story you're making up, badly, and to talk about this stuff with that kind of certainty is a bad look. The truth is, we don't know.

alphonsegaston 10y ago

Reason and facts hold no sway over xenophobic ideology. It's purpose is to rally power around the persecution of a scapegoat, just like an archaic religion.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

synicalx 10y ago

Care to explain the massive increase in crime in Germany then? [1] https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7470/germany-migrants-crime https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7470/germany-migrants-cri...