• jimbolauski@lemm.eeOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    How is that a flaw? Texas is very much involved in this issue.

    Texas’ crime data only counts illegal aliens who have already been caught and fingerprinted by the Department of Homeland Security.

    Prove to me that there any significant difference in crime rates between documented immigrants an

    You couldn’t provide sources to back up your claim now you make new claims and instead of backing them up you ask that I do. The socio-economic difference in those two groups alone is going to show a difference. illegals commit murders at a 30% higher rate then the rest of the population. 4 of your 5 studies showed legal immigrants had lower crime rates than the rest of the population.

    https://cis.org/Report/Misuse-Texas-Data-Understates-Illegal-Immigrant-Criminality

    • PizzaMan@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Texas’ crime data only counts illegal aliens who have already been caught and fingerprinted by the Department of Homeland Security.

      So what?

      You couldn’t provide sources to back up your claim now you make new claims and instead of backing them up you ask that I do.

      No, you made an implicit claim that there is a difference in crime rates between immigrants and undocumented immigrants. Support it.

      illegals commit murders at a 30% higher rate then the rest of the population. 4 of your 5 studies showed legal immigrants had lower crime rates than the rest of the population.

      https://cis.org/Report/Misuse-Texas-Data-Understates-Illegal-Immigrant-Criminality

      Crazy, it’s almost like adding prisoners to the count increases the rates. Go with something peer reviewed next time.

      • jimbolauski@lemm.eeOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        No, you made an implicit claim that there is a difference in crime rates between immigrants and undocumented immigrants. Support it.

        You tried to pass of studies on immigrant crime rates as illegal immigrant crime studies and got caught.

        Crazy, it’s almost like adding prisoners to the count increases the rates. Go with something peer reviewed next time.

        Adding prisoners to the rate that were not added initially. They’re correcting the rate.

        See the problem with the only source you could find on illegal immigration crime is that Texas does not count illegals in their rate unless they’ve all ready been identified as illegals. Your study is comparing identified illegals to unidentified illegals and legals.

        • PizzaMan@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          You tried to pass of studies on immigrant crime rates as illegal immigrant crime studies and got caught.

          Are you going to catch me breathing next? Like I already said, this point is irrelevant, as you have yet to prove a difference in rates between immigrants and undocumented immigrants.

          Adding prisoners to the rate that were not added initially. They’re correcting the rate.

          No, they’re adding prisoners to the rate only for one group. They’re fucking up the numbers.

          • jimbolauski@lemm.eeOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            You tried to pass off studies of legal immigrats as illegal immigrants, got caught and now demand that I prove that they are different because you know you can’t find any studies to support that claim.

            No, they’re adding prisoners to the rate only for one group. They’re fucking up the numbers.

            They are moving misidentified prisoners from one group to another. Illegals in prison for a crime in 2012 that were not identified as illegals but were later identified move from the legal group to the illegal group. Are you claiming legals were misidentified as illegals?

            • PizzaMan@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              You tried to pass off studies of legal immigrats as illegal immigrants, got caught and now demand that I prove that they are different because you know you can’t find any studies to support that claim.

              Go learn what a null hypothesis is and come back to me.

              Are you claiming legals were misidentified as illegals?

              No. I’m saying they’re only giving the immigrants the “counting prisoners” treatment. They’re not treating immigrants and citizens equally in their “analysis”.

              • jimbolauski@lemm.eeOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                Go learn what a null hypothesis is and come back to me.

                How do you think the null hypothesis applies?

                No. I’m saying they’re only giving the immigrants the “counting prisoners” treatment. They’re not treating immigrants and citizens equally in their “analysis”.

                You’ll have to explain what you mean by the “counting prisoners” treatment. How do you think they are not treating immigrants and citizens equally in their analysis?

      • jimbolauski@lemm.eeOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        In the article 11 studies are listed under the Controversial reports section the one I provided is not one of them.

        • Celestial6370@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          In this visual aid you are Charlie Brown and the CIS is Lucy you trusted their methods and acumen after they yanked the football 11 times.

          • jimbolauski@lemm.eeOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            It’s right to be suspicious but with out any proof that this study if flawed you falling into an ad hominem logical fallacy.