MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Silence This VOICE Before it Speaks, Donald Trump!

The president's proposed Victims of Immigration Crime Engagement demonizes people already at the margins of society.

Georgetown BookstoreGeorgetown BookstoreGive it up for President Trump: He delivered a serious speech in a serious tone on serious topics.

The entire speech laid out without apology his vision of a country built around what Steve Bannon calls "economic nationalism"; it's all about building trade barriers, physical walls, and cultural moats between the United States and the rest of the world. How many men will die that Trump is made great? That remains to be seen, but his "historic" increase in defense spending and his oft-repeated commitment to destroying ISIS suggests that he won't be a non-interventionist when it comes to foreign policy.

The most memorable moment in his speech to me came when, after demonizing immigrants (especially illegal ones), he announced his plan for what he called VOICE:

I have ordered the Department of Homeland Security to create an office to serve American Victims. The office is called Voice — Victims of Immigration Crime Engagement. We are providing a voice to those who have been ignored by our media and silenced by special interests.

There are so many mendacious falsehoods embedded in this it is hard to know where to start. Trump lives in an apocalyptic America, where the streets run red with the blood of the innocent. You'd hardly know from listening to him that crime rates—for violent crime and property crime—remain historically low (even after recent upticks). In addition to the non-crime wave is the fact that immigrants are less likely than native-born Americans to commit crimes. As a recent study (written up at Reason by Ronald Bailey) puts it:

...immigrants are less likely to commit serious crimes or be behind bars than the native-born, and high rates of immigration are associated with lower rates of violent crime and property crime.

Those aren't alternative facts—that's just reality. Contrary to the fever dreams of nativists such as Trump, very few migrants, whether here legally or not, move to America to embark on a life of crime. Because their status is tentative, it makes all the sense in the world that they will stick to the straight and narrow.

Are people who have been victimized by immigrants "silenced by the special interests" or ignored by the media? It's difficult even to grasp what Trump might be talking about, but the nightly news rarely misses an opportunity to showcase crimes, especially murders or lethal accidents, committed by immigrants (especially illegal ones). Yet such coverage masks not just the reality that immigrants are less prone to crime than natives but also that so-called Sanctuary Cities, in which police only inquire about a person's legal status when given a warrant by immmigration agents, are safer than comparably sized cities. San Francisco, for instance, is safer than Columbus and Indianapolis. This too makes sense: Most crime is a local matter and the main reason that police in a given city push for "sanctuary" rules is because otherwise immigrants won't come forward to report crime or give information.

People who move to America for work or to find freedom aren't in any way a problem. They pay taxes, do jobs Americans won't do, and are barred from virtually all forms of means-tested transfer payments (this is especially true of illegal immigrants); the only tax-financed stuff they get is K-12 education for their kids (who are often citizens) and emergency medical care. Those are costs and should be dealt with. But low-skilled immigrants don't displace native workers to a significant degree or lower their wages, either. More important, they exemplify the spirit of a country that likes to call itself a Shining City on a Hill, a beacon of hope, opportunity, and promise for all the world to see. This is the reason why 80 percent of Americans, including a majority of Trump supporters, want to give even illegals a path to citizenship.

Scapegoating immigrants via new federal agencies, crackdowns at checkpoints, and halving the number allowed in is not simply at odds with how most of us feel, it's rooted in a wilful denial of basic facts about crime, unemployment, and other issues. That's no way to usher in a "new chapter of American greatness."

Related:"The GOP Is Wrong about Sanctuary Cities"

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Chip Your Pets||

    after demonizing immigrants (especially illegal ones)

    Where did he demonize legal immigrants?

    ...immigrants are less likely to commit serious crimes or be behind bars than the native-born

    When you include legal immigrants. What about illegal immigrants as a group? The fact you are equivocating to avoid that topic indicates the picture isn't as rosy.

    high rates of immigration are associated with lower rates of violent crime and property crime.

    Correlation != causation

  • american socialist||

    Yea this was a poorly written article imo. A giant strawman by adding in all immigrants. Trump isnt against legal immigration

  • Sam Haysom||

    Even if he were what's wrong with a bureau committed to investigating immigrant crime- demanding that guests to this country be law abiding is like super common sense.

  • Bob K||

    1. New Bureaucracy.
    2. Crime is a state issue
    3. How does a local police dept identify immigrant crime from non immigrant crime? He catches/identifies the culprit so at what point would this bureaucracy even be useful?

  • Sam Haysom||

    Also "natives" is doing a lot of work in this case. Illegal immigrants commit vastly more crimes on average than do white natives. Illegal immigrants only look law abiding when compared to the unfortunate level of criminality in the black community.

  • Sevo||

    "...Illegal immigrants commit vastly more crimes on average than do white natives...."

    Gee, Sam, I'm guessing you're blowing smoke out your ass as you commonly do.
    Prove me wrong; give me a cite which shows "Illegal immigrants commit vastly more crimes on average than do white natives".
    Or STFU.

  • Sam Haysom||

    Crime figure are published by several organizations you are welcome to consult them. You won't like what you find, but honestly I have less than zero interest in doing your work for. Frankly Im looking for a conservative movement shed of libertarians so why should i even try to persuade you.

  • Sevo||

    Sam Haysom|3.1.17 @ 12:00AM|#
    "Crime figure are published by several organizations you are welcome to consult them."

    Sam, you seem to be confused here.
    YOU made the claim. YOU back it up, or you could just STFU.
    Your choice Sam; provide evidence or admit you're an ignoramus. Have at it...

  • chemjeff||

    I have actually tried to find crime statistics concerning illegal immigrants, and I have largely come up empty. This is presumably because (a) tracking whatever illegal immigrants do is difficult, since they are illegal after all and make it difficult to track them, and (b) many jurisdictions don't publish official statistics concerning their illegal population, either because they can't or they won't. All I have found are studies about all immigrants, both legal and illegal, and then trying to separate the legals from the illegals via some statistical scheme. The statistics do indeed say that the immigrant population (both legal and illegal) have a lower crime rate than the native-born. And it's not just a little lower - it's a lot lower. See this for instance.

    So if Sam here has some statistics about what specifically the illegal immigrant crime rate is, then it would be a valuable addition to the discussion.

  • Sidd Finch v2.01||

    > click on Cato Shikha's article
    > ctrl+f white
    > one link
    > about one city
    > link is dead

    Great job, Jeff.

  • chemjeff||

    So I presume you did not read the rest of the article, which has tons of links to actual academic studies. Instead you only did the most cursory search to try to find a racial angle to the connection between immigration and crime. Good job! Perhaps you would be more at home at a place like Breitbart where you can be told on a daily basis via anecdote and scare-mongering that those dirty brown people from south of the border are criminals and rapists.

  • Sidd Finch v2.01||

    Also "natives" is doing a lot of work in this case. Illegal immigrants commit vastly more crimes on average than do white natives. Illegal immigrants only look law abiding when compared to the unfortunate level of criminality in the black community.

    This is the comment your link was supposed to rebut you dumb fuck.

  • ||

    Alternative for missing link:

    Rethinking Crime and Immigration

  • Sidd Finch v2.01||

    Thanks for the link, which is utter horseshit.

    In particular, first-generation immigrants (those born outside
    the United States) were 45 percent less likely to commit violence
    than third-generation Americans, adjusting for individual,
    family, and neighborhood background
    . Second-generation
    immigrants were 22 percent less likely to commit violence than
    the third generation. This pattern held true for non-Hispanic
    whites and blacks as well. Our study further showed living in
    a neighborhood of concentrated immigration was directly associated
    with lower violence (again, after taking into account a
    host of correlated factors, including poverty and an individual's
    immigrant status
    ). Immigration thus appeared "protective"
    against violence.

    Nowrasteh: Sampson looked at Chicago and found that Hispanic immigrants were far less likely to commit a violent criminal act then either black or white native Chicagoans

    Do you see now why I call him Cato Shikha?

  • marshaul||

    I see you failing to make any actual arguments, and instead relying entirely on tribal predispositions. If it's wrong to compare like with like in this instance, surely you can articulate a compelling reason why this is so.

  • susan845||

    Oh heck. Just do an inmate search of your city jail. If you're in California you'll find +90% Hispanic names on the inmate roster in a city with 49% Hispanic population. Illegals? Second or third generation? Don't know, don't care. I just know to be careful when a Hispanic man walks onto my property looking for work (an excuse to scope it out), which they always do if they see you in the yard, soon followed by a little property crime with tools, bikes, stuff missing. Creepy!
    I'll be interested in the VOICE stats and the victims should get some help if our government can't do a better job doing the one and only thing they're hired to do: keeping us safe. Irks me how many overlapping agencies we have checking on all aspects of the safety of our food. Every waitress has to take food safety tests now and they don't even prepare it! And it's not one time monitoring; it's constant.
    I've never gotten food poisoning but I've been robbed at least 2 dozen times.
    We should put at least that much scrutiny on the people entering our country.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    All of the Cato studies cited by reason compare crime rates of 'similar' sub groups. So Hispanic immigrants with less than a high school education have lower rates of crime than Native hispanics with less than a high school diploma. Which a) completely ignores the fact that both have higher crime rates than the national average, and higher again than the largest sub-group - honkies with some college education.

  • marshaul||

    Right, but if (lack of) education is the biggest predictor of criminal behavior (it is), then these are precisely the control we need to observe whether any differences are caused by their being immigrants, as opposed to simply by their being less well-educated.

    Sure, immigrants are often less educated, and poor education causes a higher rate of criminality. But it's also the single easiest thing to fix about new immigrants.

    Far from trying to hide that fact, these statistics are quite clear on the importance of education in all this. It would seem to me that the other side is the one trying to diminish the role of education, by systematically implicating everything (race, ethnic background, political leanings) but.

  • VG Zaytsev||

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Sure, immigrants are often less educated, and poor education causes a higher rate of criminality. But it's also the single easiest thing to fix about new immigrants.

    The children of immigrants have a higher rate of crime than the immigrants themselves, so no it is not an 'easy thing to fix'.

  • Careless||

    Given that the bare minimum is two (illegal entry or visa fraud plus identity theft/illegally working)... I do not believe he has a tough case to prove.

  • MWG||

    "Illegally working"...

    Think about that for a moment.

  • Sevo||

    Careless|3.1.17 @ 12:39AM|#
    "Given that the bare minimum is two (illegal entry or visa fraud plus identity theft/illegally working)... I do not believe he has a tough case to prove."

    So, Sam should be right on top of it, right, Sam?
    Sam?
    Sam?
    You can forget it; Sam pulled that out of his ass.

  • Presskh||

    From FOX News:

    "Compared with their 3.5% of the population, the percentage of illegals committing the number of crimes are as follows:

    13.6 percent of those sentenced for all committed crimes in the country
    12 percent of murder sentences
    16 percent of trafficking sentences"

    You can make your own judgement as to how this might compare with crimes committed by whites alone. Also, this is from FOX, if that makes a difference to you.

  • wareagle||

    Where did he demonize legal immigrants?

    this is a constant Nick-ism, the refusal to separate legal from illegal. And if a few illegals commit some crimes, that's how it goes.

  • Chip Your Pets||

    You're giving him too much credit. He switches which immigrant group he's talking about based on which one makes his narrative look better.

  • marshaul||

    No, it's just that the distinction is meaningless. Always has been.

    Compliance with a particular law has virtually nothing to do with a person's ethical standards, legal standing (3 felonies a day and all that), or anything else.

    Simply because immigration law matters to you does not mean it automatically matters to every other decent person. It's entirely possible that a person could come here with nothing but decent intentions, but also having an attitude of "fuck the government".

    In fact, I would say that this is not only possible, it's essentially the only way it happens. No decent person comes to, or lives in America, and thinks largely good things about government or its laws.

  • BambiB||

    Personally, I think we should give each criminal alien on "free" deportation.

    Any who subsequently return for any reason should be immediately executed.

  • Sam Haysom||

    Criminal enforcement in general on the margins of society because that's were most criminals come from.

    And how does the distorted beyond all recognition "facts" about immigrat criminality make any difference what so ever- guests should be required to act better than hosts. Every misdeed by an immigrant is an additional marginal crime that need not have happened- this is a fact. The fact that natives (and of course this includes second and third generation Hispanic immigrants who commit vastly more crime than white Americans) commit crime has no bearing on whether or not the brazen behavior of a segment of immigrants needs to be curbed.

    Let's be honest if cops were laughingly bragging they would never face the consequences of their actions like two recent drunk driving illegal immigrant killers Reason would be sperging out- look at it from that perspective the skepticism that Reason has for cops well the majority of Americans have a similar skeptism towards illegal immigrants.

  • SIV||

    San Francisco, for instance, is safer than Columbus and Indianapolis.


    What else would you expect from a sundown city like Sa francisco?

  • SIV||

  • Sevo||

    Which, of course, says nothing regarding your bullshit about 'sunset cities'.

  • Chip Your Pets||

    I assume you're referring to the 6% stat vs 28% for the other two cities?

  • Chip Your Pets||

    Funny that Nick chose San Fran instead of Oakland. Wonder why?

  • SIV||

    Nick hates Black people.

  • susan845||

    I can't imagine the illegal population (by %) is too big in SF as the rent within the city limits is outrageously high. The foreigners in the city are mostly tech workers...I read that the H-1Bs fill 75% of the tech jobs in Silicon Valley just south of SF. Like my brother-in-law, for one; rents in the Marina in SF.

  • Roland Blunt||

    "They pay taxes"

    Here is the breakdown from that study:

    "According to ITEP's estimates, which do not count federal taxes, undocumented immigrants paid $11.6 billion in state and local taxes in 2013. This includes:

    $7 billion in sales taxes,
    $1.1 billion in income taxes, and
    $3.6 billion in property taxes."

    This is for an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants. So approx $63/month per illegal in sales tax.

    While in contrast, there is approx. $25 billion/year sent back to Mexico, straight out of the local economy.

    Certainly seems like a win-win

  • Sevo||

    "This is for an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants. So approx $63/month per illegal in sales tax.
    While in contrast, there is approx. $25 billion/year sent back to Mexico, straight out of the local economy."

    I'll bet 'non-sequitur' is not in your vocabulary.

  • Sam Haysom||

    How is that a non-sequitor it puts just how little tax they pay in contrast with the huge amounts of money that are taken out of the American economy.

  • Sevo||

    Sam Haysom|3.1.17 @ 12:02AM|#
    "How is that a non-sequitor..."

    Sam, I'm going to give you a gift here, no charge: One has no relationship to the other whatsoever.
    Now that's all you're going to get for free, so I suggest you sit down and think about that. It is obvious it comes as a surprise to you.

  • Roland Blunt||

    Are you saying that the 25 billion sent back to Mexico would not have gone back into the local economy resulting in higher sales taxes paid?

  • Sevo||

    Roland Blunt|3.1.17 @ 12:12AM|#
    "Are you saying that the 25 billion sent back to Mexico would not have gone back into the local economy resulting in higher sales taxes paid?"

    Are you saying people spending their money as they chose rather than paying taxes are somehow not doing their duty?
    Just checking on how much you think I should pay in taxes; you seem to have an opinion about such matters.

  • Roland Blunt||

    Well obviously you should be taxed at 100%...since you asked.

  • Sevo||

    Roland Blunt|3.1.17 @ 12:20AM|#
    "Well obviously you should be taxed at 100%...since you asked."

    Is this a clear admission that you're an ignoramus or some sort of supposed sarc that is meant to be read in a 'meta' context?
    Regardless, the numbers paid in taxes and spent as the parties please remain non-equivalent.

  • Roland Blunt||

    "Are you saying people spending their money as they chose rather than paying taxes are somehow not doing their duty?"

    Nobody said anything about 'duty'. Nick specifically cited paying taxes as a reason undocumented immigrants "aren't in any way a problem".

    "the numbers paid in taxes and spent as the parties please remain non-equivalent"

    They are most definitely related. Undocumented immigrants who come here to work specifically, spend as little money as possible in order to send home the most money possible. The 'benefit' of undocumented immigrants paying $7 billion/year in local sales tax is negated by the removal of $25 billion/year in remittances.

    Calling someone names certainly exposes who you are, what you think and how you treat other people.

  • susan845||

    good reply

  • MWG||

    RB is apparently a localist. He only spends his money in his town at local shops that only produce and sell Merican made products for the good of the State.

  • Roland Blunt||

    Yes, because only local shops that sell locally made products charge sales tax...

  • MWG||

    "$25 billion/year sent back to Mexico, straight out of the local economy."

    Again, I'm assuming it's safe to assume you'd never take your money "straight out of the local economy", right?

  • Roland Blunt||

    Didn't realize Nick was citing me as an example of not adding costs to society. Going to go back and reread and look for my name. Thanks for the heads up.

  • Sevo||

    I doubt he's citing you particularly, just that sort of ignorance in general. But let us know.

  • Daily Beatings||

    The remittances effect the current account as this is considered an import with the corresponding goods. What does Milton Friedman think of this? Hint: It has to do with the Friedman Rule.

  • Daily Beatings||

    ... that should be "without the corresponding goods".

  • Roland Blunt||

    Nick specifically linked to this study to prove undocumented immigrants pay taxes and therefore are less of a burden ( "aren't in any way a problem" in his words). However, the tax study does not show that.

  • Sevo||

    Roland Blunt|3.1.17 @ 12:31AM|#
    "Nick specifically linked to this study to prove undocumented immigrants pay taxes and therefore are less of a burden ( "aren't in any way a problem" in his words). However, the tax study does not show that."

    OK, show that they are.
    So far, you've done nothing of the sort.

  • Roland Blunt||

    Oh Sevo. You certainly are the master debater.

    An undocumented immigrants total yearly tax burden is approx. $700.

  • marshaul||

    Jesus fucking Christ. Remunerative compensation does not represent value lost to the American economy (even if they send that remuneration back to Mexico), it represents value added. How much more economically illiterate could you possibly be?

  • Roland Blunt||

    Yes, yes. I understand at a Macroeconomic level, an increase in remittances represents value added. However, as undocumented immigrants send more money back to their home countries in the form of remittances, they spend less locally. This results in a smaller local consumer base and lower local sales taxes paid.

    This is what I am addressing. Sales Taxes. This is what Nick used as an example of how undocumented immigrants are not burdening the local economies and that is what I am addressing.

    Even if remittances are a value add at the Macroeconomic level, locally they have a larger negative impact on locally owned businesses and locally produced goods within smaller communities.

  • Roland Blunt||

    Wiley Miller is entertaining. Always try to fit him into conversation.

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    It's well known that once an immigrant becomes an American citizen they are subject to a law forbidding them from sending money back to family in the old country.

    Derp.

  • Roland Blunt||

    It is a well known fact that undocumented immigrants who come here to work do not plan long term for living in the US and therefore are not saving or investing their money to provide for a future for their children or themselves in this country. Undocumented immigrants live as light as possible because they plan on going back to Mexico to be with their families and live their lives as Mexican citizens.

  • marshaul||

    It is a well known fact that Mexicans operate as a hive mind.

  • widget||

    Denmark, after scuttling mass immigration policies, has less than 4% unemployment. The rest of Europe has four times that, at least. But the rest feel better.

    What, exactly, is the problem Reason-libertarians have with a labor shortage? Owners might have to pay employees more?

  • Sevo||

    "What, exactly, is the problem Reason-libertarians have with a labor shortage?"

    One a result of gov't actions? Why do you ask?

  • widget||

    Government actions can be bad, and I'll grant that is more often the case than not. But a government of the people who elected it has at least a fiduciary responsibility not to spluge the states wealth away on lost causes.

  • Sevo||

    widget|3.1.17 @ 12:11AM|#
    "Government actions can be bad, and I'll grant that is more often the case than not. But a government of the people who elected it has at least a fiduciary responsibility not to spluge the states wealth away on lost causes."

    Your assumptions seems to justify your arguments; not a good arrangement.
    How about you tie some of your claims to some results and then tell us how those might affect the US. I'm seeing arm-waving.

  • widget||

    We already did that, you have the religion, not me.

  • Sevo||

    widget|3.1.17 @ 12:23AM|#
    "We already did that, you have the religion, not me."

    Thank you; you have now proven your stupidity and I can now ignore any comment you post.
    Fuck off.

  • Red Rocks Baiting n Inciting||

    That's because Sevo doesn't have to send his kids to majority-immigrant schools, with all the wonderful dysfunction that tends to accompany them.

  • Social Darwinist||

    Nick – I'm going to use one of your cited sources, pay taxes (https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-03-01), to dispel a few myths about ILLEGAL immigrants.

    First – they pay taxes – according to the article only 50% pay income taxes. By implication, that means 50% do not pay income taxes. Serious question – how does an illegal alien pay income taxes and contribute to Social Security if they do not have a SSN?

    Second – they do jobs Americans won't do – the article states "A separate Pew study found that about a third of such immigrants were employed in service positions, while 15 percent worked construction and extraction jobs and another 14 percent worked in production, installation and repair professions. About 13 percent were believed to work in sales, office and administrative support roles, while another 13 percent held professional, management or business and finance positions." So Americans won't work service, construction, extraction, production, installation, repair, sales, office, administrative support, professional, management, business and finance jobs? Just what jobs are Americans willing to work?

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    In Alabama, Legal Immigrants Wanted for Dirty Jobs

    Well, they sure don't want to cut up food for frozen dinners when those jobs open up.

  • Red Rocks Baiting n Inciting||

    Well, sure, if they think someone else is going to do it instead.

    The "they do the jobs Americans won't do!" line is predicated on the assumption that those jobs wouldn't get done if they weren't here.

  • marshaul||

    "Well, sure, if they think someone else is going to do it instead.

    The "they do the jobs Americans won't do!" line is predicated on the assumption that those jobs wouldn't get done if they weren't here."

    What the fuck? People take jobs out of a sense of duty, now?

  • susan845||

    Foster Farms is a big employer here. I had 2 employees, regular white dudes, who also worked at the processing plants mucking with the guts. It's a shame that too many people define these jobs as beneath consideration for anyone but a "Mexican"; a rather snobbish point of view. And I have a middle-aged, white, sister-in-law that works as a housekeeper in a Las Vegas hotel. These people see it as work and a paycheck to raise their family. There is honor in that. (Sister-in-law spent 4 weeks touring Europe last year, so pay must have been OK)

  • Social Darwinist||

    While you might be correct that Americans, those who have become citizens, were not willing to work these chicken processing jobs, refugees, legal residents, filled the jobs. That's the real point isn't it? It's not that we must have illegal aliens to do these jobs when we have legal residents willing to do them.

  • Centralized Mind||

    Dude keep your reasoning out of Reason, don't you know that's just for show?

  • Social Darwinist||

    Sorry. I just expect that if an author cites something to bolster their points, then the cited work will actually support their view not contradict it. What was I thinking?

  • Social Darwinist||

    Third - they are barred from virtually all forms of means-tested transfer payments (this is especially true of illegal immigrants); the only tax-financed stuff they get is K-12 education for their kids (who are often citizens) and emergency medical care - the article quotes a Heritage Foundation report, "In 2010, the average unlawful immigrant household received around $24,721 in government benefits and services while paying some $10,334 in taxes." Sounds like they are receiving more than just K-12 and emergency medical. Also this would indicate there is a net drain on government services from this sector of the population.

  • widget||

    ...immigrants are less likely to commit serious crimes or be behind bars than the native-born, and high rates of immigration are associated with lower rates of violent crime and property crime.

    OK, let's go over this again for the upteenth time.

    Blacks commit a lot of crimes. They are demographically on the left end of bell curve in this regard. God love them, but that's true the world over. Everyone knows that, including most blacks, but leather-jacketed social simpletons like Nick Gillespie do not.

    When you take blacks out of the equation, immigration to a predominantly white European settling results in a small net crime increase when the immigrants are Mestizo and small decrease if the immigrants are Asian.

  • Bra Ket||

    Yeah I'd notice Trump isn't complaining quite so much about Canadian illegals, or trying to build a wall on that border. Or for that matter blocking visas from safe, war-free countries. If people are going to make these kinds of sweeping assumptions and sweeping counter arguments, they just walk everyone right into a compromise, such as not blocking "all immigrants", just certain higher-crime groups.

  • Templeton||

    Are you attributing to race what could be attributed to something else, say class/poverty? When Germany finally unified crime in (West) Germany increased do to the influx of (white) east Germans.

  • SFC B||

    Illegal immigrants commit less crime than citizens. Illegal immigrants who commit crimes are sometimes not charged with the crime because, being illegal, it is difficult to prove who they are and/or prosecuting them would expose them to deportation which the administrations of some sanctuary cities believe is too harsh a punishment.

    So, basically, crime by illegal immigrants is a known unknown because several jurisdictions with, presumably, large populations of immigrants, including illegal ones, refuse to make a good-faith effort to take the steps necessary to make such information known.

    As long as the State of California makes it their policy to subvert the laws of the US regarding immigration any statistic on illegal immigration needs to be taken with a LD50 dose of salt.

  • Longtobefree||

    Articles that conflate legal and illegal immigration should be ignored.
    But since I logged in, here is one point; ALL illegal immigrants commit a crime. Not all legal residents or citizens commit a crime. So the comparison is 100% to less than 100 %. Illegals commit more crime.
    So there is no need to hunt down a bunch of links, active or not. Just think it through.

  • JWatts||

    Here's is the Federal BOP statistics by country of origin:

    https://goo.gl/CWI7H8

  • JWatts||

    You'll note that Guatemalans are such a small group that they don't show up.

    However, Columbians are 0.9% of Federal Prisoners and yet make up on 0.34% of the US population. Cuban's are also around 0.35% of the US population but make up 0.7% of the Prison population.

    Nationality FP US pop
    Columbia 0.9 0.34
    Cuban 0.7 0.35
    Dom Rep 0.9 0.30
    Mexican 14.2 10.7

    I suspect that study was cherry picking the best sub-group it could find.

  • C. S. P. Schofield||

    Imhaven't read this article. Skimmed it, not read it. I'm totally turned off by a Libertarian magazine calling for the President to silence anybody.

    Is Trump's view of illegal immigrants real? it doesn't matter. The side saying "these people much be silenced" are in the wrong.

  • marshaul||

    LOL

    You realize the VOICE in question is a government agency, right?

  • C. S. P. Schofield||

    So what? I'm saying that a call for silence is a red flag.

  • Memory Hole||

    People are saying this VOICE thing has parallels to Nazi Germany and the way the German media sensationalized and agrandized crimes that were committed by Jews.

  • C. S. P. Schofield||

    People are so busy comparing Trump,to,a,certain Austrian paperhanger that when he DOES start rounding people up and gassing them, nobody will believe it.

  • Red Rocks Baiting n Inciting||

    Well, if this really is The New Nazi Germany, then logically you'd have an obligation to take up arms against such a vicious regime and ensure it gets torn down by force as quickly as possible, right?

  • Bra Ket||

    Wouldn't the lesson from history be to not do that unless you wanted to get murdered too?

  • Longtobefree||

    Maybe I watched a different presidential speech, or maybe I can no longer read English, but President Trump (in the speech I watched) said he was going to create a unit to help crime victims. Relative crime statistics, and their relative correctness, were not in the speech, just in the article.
    I completely missed the part where some group got demonized.

  • C. S. P. Schofield||

    Y'know, a lot of what happened in the election just past is the voters, in large numbers, told the two party establishments that they were tired of the same old party establishment bushwa. The Democrat voters went for Sanders, and the Democrats establishment thought they knew better, and the the Democrat voters stayed home rather than vote for Hillary "I should be wearing an orange jumpsuit" Clinton. And the Republican voters were sick of being patted on the head and told that their concerns weren't real or nice, and so we have Trump.

    Now, everything Reason has to say in defense of illegal immigrants ay be true (though I have doubts). But the cold facts are that if all the self-styled smart people don't stop lecturing the Trump voters about how stupid and wrong they are, in four years they are going to come out with ANOTHER resounding "FUCK YOU" and we'll have Trump for another term.

    The voters have said they don't like llegal immigrants being given a bye. Maybe from an economic and moral POV tey are wrong. But they are the sovereign. And when the King is wrong, he's still the King.

  • LifeStrategies||

    You say "immigrants are less likely to commit serious crimes or be behind bars than the native-born" but are you confounding crime by illegal immigrants with crime by legal ones? Legal immigrants are here because they obeyed the immigration laws. By definition, illegal immigrants have NOT obeyed the law.

    But will you even bother to address and correct your deception in response to this comment, Nick Gillespie?

    VOICE is aimed at illegal immigrants only - NOT legal ones - which makes your article seriously deceptive. See:

    http://dailysignal.com/2017/03.....mmigrants/

    I'm disappointed - this is a great example of Reason publishing your deceptive fake news. Reason used not to stoop to such deceptive tactics and deserves better...

  • rageon||

    Americans are 8 times more likely to be killed by a cop than by a foreign terrorist. When do victims of police violence get their "voice"?

  • williamd||

    There are Lawyers all over the place willing to jump on a police violence case. Who do you sue when some drunk Illegal runs over your loved one? Act like you have a brain.

  • williamd||

    Is he counting the first crime they committed by breaking into our country?

  • williamd||

    When it comes to our borders, this mag should rename it'self from Reason, to Utopian Fantasy.

  • GThayer||

    Mr. Gillespie,

    I am happy the writers at Reason understand the immigration issue and take the proper perspective. Open borders, reform of social programs.

    Common Sense is lacking in the policy arena. Around the globe our government's representatives and bureaucrats are seen as endlessly mired in Washington's sad state. Socialism (US version = spend, borrow) is the sad state. Property is gradually becoming controlled by the state. On the political spectrum, this is the realm of the left, which ironically is aligned, however, with the right's reactionaries (religion); military interventionists residing on both ends of the spectrum.

    I hope Reason's staff will continue writing with a classical liberal bent. Yet, recognize common sense leads one, if he can, to stay out of the mire.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online