Quantcast
Locked: Rioting Breaks Out In Sweden

Forums - Politics Discussion - Rioting Breaks Out In Sweden

Aura7541 said:
Peh said:

I'm not making the claim. I don't agree with Slimebeast's claim that the children of immigrants will be as criminal as their parents. As his source says, that the children of immigrants are less open to criminal activities. Meaning, they do not "largerly inherit" their parents behaviour in the spoken context of criminal activity. Like I already stated: "Nothing indicates that these children display a clearly higher tendency towards crime participation than the generation of their parents. On the contrary."

Though the problem still remains that children immigrants have a larger tendency to commit youth crimes than native children. It also largely depends on their upbringing. This part is important:

"If residential segregation is allowed to continue at the same time as more and more children of immigrants are excluded from the labour market, there is a real risk that criminality will increase in the long-term within this population group."

I never argued against this. That's why I told you to re-read the posts.



Intel Core i7 8700K | 32 GB DDR 4 PC 3200 | ROG STRIX Z370-F Gaming | Nvidia RTX 2080 Ti 11GB VRAM | Asus PG27UQ gaming on 3840 x 2160 @120 Hz GSYNC HDR| HTC Vive Pro :3

Reached PC Masterrace level.

Around the Network
VGPolyglot said:
Slimebeast said:

No.

47% are "Swedes"

13% are immigrants with a Swedish passport (citizenship)

40% are immigrants without a Swedish passport.
-------
= 100% long term inmates.

So where are the children of immigrants?? They're counted in the 47%.

Why do you put quotation marks in there? It's the Swedish government/court that determines whether their nationality is a Swede, much in the same way that they determine who is a criminal. If we can dispute that they're Swedes, then we can also dispute that they're criminals.

It's not something from a court or a government, it's data from prison authorities.

Listen to what Im saying. In those 47% are included the children of immigrants. You may think they are Swedes, the Swedish fucking-whatever may think they are Swedes, BUT I DONT COUNT ALL OF THEM AS ETHNIC SWEDES. I've been arguing and explaining this for several pages now.

I make a separation between immigrants, immigrant offspring and ethnical Swedes, because all those groups are statistically distinguishable from each other when it comes to criminal behaviour. And"immigrant children" as a statistical entity is strongly related to the integration problems, the occurence of crime and problems with mass immigration and the transformation of Swedish society.



Peh said:
Aura7541 said:

Though the problem still remains that children immigrants have a larger tendency to commit youth crimes than native children. It also largely depends on their upbringing. This part is important:

"If residential segregation is allowed to continue at the same time as more and more children of immigrants are excluded from the labour market, there is a real risk that criminality will increase in the long-term within this population group."

I never argued against this. That's why I told you to re-read the posts.

I know you didn't argue against it. That was just me emphasizing what's more important.



VGPolyglot said:
Slimebeast said:

Of course.

Just like it's done in research and in official statistics all over the world. You see, the offspring largely inherit the behaviour of their parents.

To me somebody who is born here but is ethnically foreign and behaves very un-Swedish is not a Swede whatsoever. Fuck no.

(but even if we strictly count only immigrants, they sure as hell don't commit only 1% of crime, they'd still reach at least 30% or more).

So, even if they have Swedish citizenship, you don't consider them Swedish because of their skin colour?

Why do you keep twisting his words?. where in his post did he say anything about Skin colour??.



Slimebeast said:
VGPolyglot said:

Why do you put quotation marks in there? It's the Swedish government/court that determines whether their nationality is a Swede, much in the same way that they determine who is a criminal. If we can dispute that they're Swedes, then we can also dispute that they're criminals.

It's not something from a court or a government, it's data from prison authorities.

Listen to what Im saying. In those 47% are included the children of immigrants. You may think they are Swedes, the Swedish fucking-whatever may think they are Swedes, BUT I DONT COUNT ALL OF THEM AS ETHNIC SWEDES. I've been arguing and explaining this for several pages now.

I make a separation between immigrants, immigrant offspring and ethnical Swedes, because all those groups are statistically distinguishable from each other when it comes to criminal behaviour. And"immigrant children" as a statistical entity is strongly related to the integration problems, the occurence of crime and problems with mass immigration and the transformation of Swedish society.

If they were so statistically distinguishable, then why didn't it distinguish them?



Around the Network
Peh said:
Slimebeast said:

Do you know what a "conclusion" of a scientific study is? It's a section where ths writer is free to interpret and speculate about his findings. This is in all scientific studies.

You are citing from it, and that conclusion is worded in relation to a strawman that never existed.

"to a certain extent, exaggerated. " exaggerated by whom exactly? It doesn't say.

"very prone" according to whom? It doesn't say.

These are not fact statements, they're value statements. You have to understand that the authors are leftists who's interest it is to downplay the findings.

I already told you, the study proves that children of immigrants (what I called offspring) are clearly overrepresented versus ethnic Swedes.

But you also forget what I claimed in the sentence by me that you originally quoted, it was me addressing VGPolygot where he questioned that "immigrant offsrping" is a target of study in crime science. I have clearly demonstrated that it is in fact a relevant object to analyze.

"You have to understand that the authors are leftists who's interest it is to downplay the findings."

You have provided the source, not me!

How can you deny your own source which should support your claim. You make no sense, at all!

I provided a source to prove that I'm not talking out of my ass. It doesn't mean that you are able to disprove my claim by citing anything from the source, and from the highly subjective author's conclusion section at that (the segment which is included in all scientific studies, which you seem unaware of. Go to university dude).

Fuck I am wasting so much valuable time here on basics.



zero129 said:
VGPolyglot said:

So, even if they have Swedish citizenship, you don't consider them Swedish because of their skin colour?

Why do you keep twisting his words?. where in his post did he say anything about Skin colour??.

It's very obvious what he means by immigrant background, especially when he's specifically referring to Middle Eastern people here, and when he mentioned blacks not being ethnically French in another thread beforehand.



VGPolyglot said:
Slimebeast said:

It's not something from a court or a government, it's data from prison authorities.

Listen to what Im saying. In those 47% are included the children of immigrants. You may think they are Swedes, the Swedish fucking-whatever may think they are Swedes, BUT I DONT COUNT ALL OF THEM AS ETHNIC SWEDES. I've been arguing and explaining this for several pages now.

I make a separation between immigrants, immigrant offspring and ethnical Swedes, because all those groups are statistically distinguishable from each other when it comes to criminal behaviour. And"immigrant children" as a statistical entity is strongly related to the integration problems, the occurence of crime and problems with mass immigration and the transformation of Swedish society.

If they were so statistically distinguishable, then why didn't it distinguish them?

But they were clearly distinguishable.

Why are you doing this?

I get irritated from having to correct you on elemental facts all the time.



Slimebeast said:
VGPolyglot said:

If they were so statistically distinguishable, then why didn't it distinguish them?

But they were clearly distinguishable.

Why are you doing this?

I get irritated from having to correct you on elemental facts all the time.

OK then, how many of the 47% were children of immigrants? Does it distinguish them? Show me where it does.



Alright, I think this thread has gone out of hand. There are some good points both sides are making, but I don't see a conversation. I see a shouting match. I'm going to lock the thread and talk it over with the mod team because this week has been really bad when it comes to political threads.