While rates get a lot of press, it sidesteps an important issue. If an immigrant wasn't here, they couldn't commit a crime here. It's not like someone here would step in and commit that crime in the would-be immigrant's place.
I mean, the reason people look at rates is because immigrants are also potential victims. So what matters from your point of view is your likelihood of being the victim just because there are more people around due to more immigration doesn’t necessarily mean your own likelihood of being attack has increased if the rate remains the same. Indeed, if it were otherwise, it would lead to strange results like suggesting that we should perhaps fight population growth because it increases the likelihood of being attacked. Since there are more potential criminals. In reality, you have to also take into account the increased number of potential victims spreading out each individual victim’s likelihood of being attacked.
True but rates are important for understanding the costs and benefits of migration. For example high-skilled immigrants offend at very low rates while also working. Without looking at rates you might conclude they have increased crime by offending at those very low rates, but that is probably not a very useful bit of information to have when considering the net benefit.
I think this is an excellent article, but kind of misses Why people were looking at overall crime rates, the point of those studies or at least the point I took away from them is that hysterical claims that the actual streets of Europe have certainly become way more unsafe, and you can’t leave your home without fearing being attacked are wrong, whether that is because immigrants are not more likely to commit crime or because there’s just a few of them is an interesting question, but not the point of those studies which were mostly to show that the overall situation has not changed significantly in response to present immigration. Of course, I could be wrong about this, but this is generally my experience when I hear people bring up those studies.
“In the United States, undocumented immigrants report crimes against them less often, as do Hispanic victims when immigration enforcement raises fears of deportation.” – Glad you brought that point up.
In the United States, a small percentage of the population commits a large percentage of the crime. I assume that is also true for immigrant criminal behavior. The difference being that if an immigrant commits crimes, they can be deported, so that takes a lot of future crime off the streets compared to native criminal populations, who go to jail for a limited time and when released, commit more crime.
I would anticipate more crime in European countries with immigrants in closer proximity to Africa, just because the cultural differences between the natives and immigrants are so sharp. I would expect less crime from Hispanic immigrants coming to the United States, seems like cultural assimilation is easier.
Have there been any studies on the behavioral differences of communities when a large infusion of immigrants move in? Behavioral changes may tell us something about the rise or drop in crime in that area. Example, more or fewer people using public spaces, more or less investment in home security, more or less overall community engagement, more or less people going out at night, etc.
While rates get a lot of press, it sidesteps an important issue. If an immigrant wasn't here, they couldn't commit a crime here. It's not like someone here would step in and commit that crime in the would-be immigrant's place.
I mean, the reason people look at rates is because immigrants are also potential victims. So what matters from your point of view is your likelihood of being the victim just because there are more people around due to more immigration doesn’t necessarily mean your own likelihood of being attack has increased if the rate remains the same. Indeed, if it were otherwise, it would lead to strange results like suggesting that we should perhaps fight population growth because it increases the likelihood of being attacked. Since there are more potential criminals. In reality, you have to also take into account the increased number of potential victims spreading out each individual victim’s likelihood of being attacked.
True but rates are important for understanding the costs and benefits of migration. For example high-skilled immigrants offend at very low rates while also working. Without looking at rates you might conclude they have increased crime by offending at those very low rates, but that is probably not a very useful bit of information to have when considering the net benefit.
I think this is an excellent article, but kind of misses Why people were looking at overall crime rates, the point of those studies or at least the point I took away from them is that hysterical claims that the actual streets of Europe have certainly become way more unsafe, and you can’t leave your home without fearing being attacked are wrong, whether that is because immigrants are not more likely to commit crime or because there’s just a few of them is an interesting question, but not the point of those studies which were mostly to show that the overall situation has not changed significantly in response to present immigration. Of course, I could be wrong about this, but this is generally my experience when I hear people bring up those studies.
Derononcourt, AER:
"Analysis of various measures of neighborhood quality suggest
that urban decline followed the Great Migration. Destinations exhibit higher murder
rates, and local governments increased investment in police..."
“In the United States, undocumented immigrants report crimes against them less often, as do Hispanic victims when immigration enforcement raises fears of deportation.” – Glad you brought that point up.
In the United States, a small percentage of the population commits a large percentage of the crime. I assume that is also true for immigrant criminal behavior. The difference being that if an immigrant commits crimes, they can be deported, so that takes a lot of future crime off the streets compared to native criminal populations, who go to jail for a limited time and when released, commit more crime.
I would anticipate more crime in European countries with immigrants in closer proximity to Africa, just because the cultural differences between the natives and immigrants are so sharp. I would expect less crime from Hispanic immigrants coming to the United States, seems like cultural assimilation is easier.
Have there been any studies on the behavioral differences of communities when a large infusion of immigrants move in? Behavioral changes may tell us something about the rise or drop in crime in that area. Example, more or fewer people using public spaces, more or less investment in home security, more or less overall community engagement, more or less people going out at night, etc.