- Joined
- Aug 1, 2014
- Messages
- 26,719
- Reaction score
- 6,278
- Location
- California
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
They were among the nation’s top priorities for deportation, criminals who were supposed to be sent back to their home countries. But instead they were released, one by one, in secret across the United States. Federal officials said that many of the criminals posed little threat to the public, but did little to verify whether that was true.
It wasn’t.
A Globe review of 323 criminals released in New England from 2008 to 2012 found that as many as 30 percent committed new offenses, including rape, attempted murder, and child molestation — a rate that is markedly higher than Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials have suggested to Congress in the past.
They reoffend at around half the rate that American convicted criminals do. Is that what you were looking for?
Hey a little quick Googling seems to show Casper is right! :dohThey reoffend at around half the rate that American convicted criminals do. Is that what you were looking for?
Good catch!They reoffend at around half the rate that American convicted criminals do. Is that what you were looking for?
Hey a little quick Googling seems to show Casper is right! :doh
Their recidivism rate is 30%, and U.S. citizen's is over 60%?
This seems to be what I'm seeing.
Well, you asked for our thoughts, and that's mine.The story didn't assert that immigrant criminals have a higher recidivism rate than non-immigrants.
The story states that ICE's numbers are not correct concerning recidivism amongst immigrant criminals.
This is the 2nd straw man attempt on this thread.
Well, you asked for our thoughts, and that's mine.
So what are your thoughts?
What are you trying to convey by posting this article?
Hey a little quick Googling seems to show Casper is right! :doh
Their recidivism rate is 30%, and U.S. citizen's is over 60%?
This seems to be what I'm seeing.
Sounds perfectly fair to me.Thanks Chomsky, maybe I misread your intentions, and you're one of the fairest posters here so.
My intentions were just to share the story, as I don't honestly believe that government crime statistics are correct. I know that would make me a wingnutter in some circles, but I think most gov agencies have a vested interest in underreporting crime/crime statistics.
They reoffend at around half the rate that American convicted criminals do. Is that what you were looking for?
Well, to be accurate the article specifies "immigrants", making no note of "legal" or not.Why in the world would they let illegals who have been convicted of a crime roam our streets in the first place? Send them home, make sure that their home country knows what they've done, and let them deal with it.
Alright, the math may seem to work, but let's not get carried away now! :lamoOr, better yet: If their recidivism rate is half that of American criminals, let's trade: Keep one of our bad guys and we'll keep one of yours. I'd be wiling to bet that would discourage our domestic bad guys if the could wind up in a prison in Mexico, Guatemala, or some such place.
more right wing demonizing
Well, to be accurate the article specifies "immigrants", making no note of "legal" or not.
But yeah, I'm with you: You're here as a visitor or in a pre-citizenship phase, and you break the law. I'd send you back if I had the choice, though I might differentiate between petty offenses and more serious or violent crime.
Alright, the math may seem to work, but let's not get carried away now! :lamo
Why in the world would they let illegals who have been convicted of a crime roam our streets in the first place? Send them home, make sure that their home country knows what they've done, and let them deal with it.
Or, better yet: If their recidivism rate is half that of American criminals, let's trade: Keep one of our bad guys and we'll keep one of yours. I'd be wiling to bet that would discourage our domestic bad guys if the could wind up in a prison in Mexico, Guatemala, or some such place.
It does almost no good to "send them home", they come right back in the first chance they get. Remember the Kate Steinle shooting? It bolstered support for Trump. Steinle was the young woman who was shot in the back by illegal immigrant Francisco Sanchez, while walking with her father in a tourist area of San Francisco.
Sanchez had been deported 5 times previously to Mexico, and was on probation in Texas, which failed to deport him after releasing him. Sanchez had 7 felony convictions in the US before he killed Steinle.
Deporting people to Mexico isn't effective.
We also have plenty of Good Americans in Prisons for exactly the same things, all you are proving is that bad men come from all backgrounds.
We also have plenty of Good Americans in Prisons for exactly the same things, all you are proving is that bad men come from all backgrounds.
I don't get you. Good Americans are in prison for what?
What a lame cop out excuse of an answer.
Chew on this.....the difference is that US citizens are subject to US law and held to a higher degree of responsibility. it may not be right, but it is what it is.
They can't hide behind a border after shooting your sister in the back.
ILLEGAL immigrants, since they are not US citizens, are often deported back to their own country rather than facing prosecution.
Which is a joke on our legal system and puts LEGAL US citizens at risk.
You make is sound as though ILLEGALS have the RIGHT to come here and commit crimes against US citizens with impunity and without recourse.
The "good" is Satire, ignore it and maybe you will get it.
So what you are saying is that:Oh, OK. You may have misunderstood what I was trying to get across.
I wasn't saying that Mexicans are bad, or that they are more likely to be criminals.
I was illustrating how easy it is for a Mexican National with a lengthy criminal history to reenter the United States after being deported. Francisco Sanchez was deported 5 times, and should have been deported a 6th time.
Yet after all of that, he snuck back into the country. Now he is a burden to taxpayers, who will spend $47,000 a year to keep him locked up for the rest of his life.
Sounds perfectly fair to me.
And I agree.
I'm also blown away to see the recidivism gap too - who woulda' thunk it?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?