PoliCHARTZ - Thread of U.S. Politics & the Presidential Election

[Final-Fan]

Kasz216 said:

Final-Fan said:

Kasz216 said:
(1)A ratio of LEGAL citizens yes.

Aside from which the raw number would be down... and this is important since immigrants aren't limited to their own populations.  Illegal aliens don't just stay to themselves

I mean what's not easy to get about that?

(2) Every Illegal alien that's here creates an increase in the raw number in crime... and in term increases the risk for legal citizens.  It's a perfectly fine point.

The actual rate is irrelvent... since having a lower crime rate doesn't = less crimes... and if there were less legal illegal immigrants there wouldn't be more legal ones.

(3) I mean think to yourself.  Which would you rather have in your city.  The same crime rate?  Or a higher crime rate... yet less crimes committed?

(1) Good point.  But even if the TRUE crime ratio is different from the apparent one, the other point still stands.

(2) Wrong.  See (3)

(3) If there's a higher crime rate, then there is a higher probability that any individual person, e.g. me, will be a victim of that crime.  So by that reasoning I would want the lower crime rate.  Of course, my individual probability of being victimized is not a simple function of the crime rate, but my answer makes at least as much sense as your question IMO.

I think your wrong there... because it's not a simple function. 

1) How many people are going to rob poor illegal aliens who have nothing?

2) In targetted crimes.  The vast majority are committed by peole you know.  Illegal aliens are usually fairly segregated from regulars...  IE "I'm going to rob someone".  So your chances of getting hit by a targetted crime aren't likely.

3)  This leaves un targetted crimes.  Drunk Driving, etc... which which would increase your chances... since these are "at the wrong place" type crimes.

(1) Do poor people actually get robbed less than not-poor people? 

(2) True

(3) I still don't get why removing a low-crime-rate segment of the population wouldn't result in a greater risk for myself of getting hit by an untargeted crime.  All those illegal immigrants are potential targets as well.  The drunk might hit them!  You're taking away my human shield!  (Unless they are also victimized less by untargeted crimes to the same degree.)

P.S.  I'm treating untargeted crime as a random event hitting individuals of the population.  Obviously in real life it's not TRUE randomness but if I'm grossly wrong please explain why, because that could be at the heart of this difference of opinion.