WebsterMark
Serious Thumper
Offline
SuzukiSavage.com Rocks!
Posts: 12841
Gender:
|
The most memorable portion of the address came when the president listed off a series of gruesome crimes committed by undocumented immigrants. He went into graphic detail, discussing the use of a hammer on one victim and the dismemberment of another. This, he argued, is why America needs a border wall: Undocumented immigrants are dangerous, and their entry must be blocked at all costs.
Except this is false. The data shows that undocumented immigrants are actually considerably less likely to commit crimes; states with more undocumented immigrants actually tend to have lower crime rates.
So you're calling truthful statements lies? Were those people murdered, yes or no?
Secondly, what data shows illegal aliens are less likely to commit crimes? This sounds like the "97% of scientist agree" or the "10% of the population is gay" claims. Both repeatedly proven false but the figures stick because they're repeated so often.
With California as a sanctuary state for example, how could anyone accurately calculate that figure? Is there a reliable method to determine if illegals commit crimes at a higher rate than the general population? Not sure. And does that matter? It is a fact people have been killed, robbed, raped, property crimes etc by someone who shouldn't even be in the country.
Let's view this as we would a work issue. Let's imagine I have two sets of problems, both related, but the root cause is separate. We'll call them problem 1 and problem 2. I can address problem 1 by making a procedural change. It might not be a 100% solution, but it will at least minimize the negative consequences of problem 1. Problem 2 is more complicated and is an ongoing issue.
Are you suggesting I not implement the procedural change to begin minimizing Problem 1 because I can't easily solve problem 2?
|