Exactly. They should be put in concentration camps or something. The children are little delinquents too, they should go too. We should also create an organization that hires highly motivated individuals without proper background checks, often animous against the group they're supposed to police, give them lousy training and let them run amok without oversight or punishment for abuse of authority, who cares anyways? They shouldn't have crossed the border, those pesky criminals. Asylum? Not our problem. Criminals don't deserve it. Send them down to be murdered or whatever.
Criminals don't pay taxes, don't contribute to communities as far as I know. That's a quite positive outcome for the "illegal" immigration given the history of the US's destabilization of southern countries. You could advocate for a better country, yet you decide to punch down. That's quite telling, not much has changed in the United States compared to the 19th century.
Exactly, so otherwise assuming the title is correct (absent the crime of illegal entry), it would seemingly be incorrect when factoring in illegal entry crimes
Well, if a study decides to use a made up partisan propaganda term like "undocumented immigrant", which is a phrase which holds zero legal weight, has historically never existed until recent years, and which was created by and forced into the lexicon by political activists, it instantly invalidates the study in my mind. The people manipulating language to better serve their goals usually aren't the good guys. I instantly just assume the opposite of whatever the study is trying to say is likely true and move on.
Local man refutes science because it disagrees with his beliefs. "I know I'm right, it's {X entity} trying to brainwash us".
Historically women couldn't vote, and black people were segregated and worse. I guess those things were "created and forced into the lexicon by political activists" terms back them I guess.
The core thing is that one term humanizes a group of people that contributes to communities, pay taxes, the other dehumanizes them and opens the gate to justifying well, criminalization and prosecuting. You decided to choose the later.
AI tells gullible man something, gullible man tells intelligent man, intelligent man laughs at gullible man, gullible man gets angry at intelligent man
Undocumented migration itself is a crime. On its face the study is incorrect.
Exactly. They should be put in concentration camps or something. The children are little delinquents too, they should go too. We should also create an organization that hires highly motivated individuals without proper background checks, often animous against the group they're supposed to police, give them lousy training and let them run amok without oversight or punishment for abuse of authority, who cares anyways? They shouldn't have crossed the border, those pesky criminals. Asylum? Not our problem. Criminals don't deserve it. Send them down to be murdered or whatever.
Criminals don't pay taxes, don't contribute to communities as far as I know. That's a quite positive outcome for the "illegal" immigration given the history of the US's destabilization of southern countries. You could advocate for a better country, yet you decide to punch down. That's quite telling, not much has changed in the United States compared to the 19th century.
The first sentence of the article: “no evidence that rising numbers of undocumented immigrants are linked with violent crime.”
Exactly, so otherwise assuming the title is correct (absent the crime of illegal entry), it would seemingly be incorrect when factoring in illegal entry crimes
Well, if a study decides to use a made up partisan propaganda term like "undocumented immigrant", which is a phrase which holds zero legal weight, has historically never existed until recent years, and which was created by and forced into the lexicon by political activists, it instantly invalidates the study in my mind. The people manipulating language to better serve their goals usually aren't the good guys. I instantly just assume the opposite of whatever the study is trying to say is likely true and move on.
Local man refutes science because it disagrees with his beliefs. "I know I'm right, it's {X entity} trying to brainwash us".
Historically women couldn't vote, and black people were segregated and worse. I guess those things were "created and forced into the lexicon by political activists" terms back them I guess.
The core thing is that one term humanizes a group of people that contributes to communities, pay taxes, the other dehumanizes them and opens the gate to justifying well, criminalization and prosecuting. You decided to choose the later.
Studies are total bullshit study finds
Local man says science is wrong. "It doesn't align with my beliefs, so it's wrong. The {insert imaginary animous entity} controls science", he says.
AI tells gullible man something, gullible man tells intelligent man, intelligent man laughs at gullible man, gullible man gets angry at intelligent man