Summary
Immigration policies are often at the forefront of public debate whenever an act of terror or a crime involving mass casualties like the Las Vegas shooting happens. Invariably, two factions dominate such debate, one calling for stricter immigration laws and liberal gun control laws while the other supports stricter gun control laws and liberal immigration laws. Due to the partisan nature such debate usually involves, participants are normally biased and this affects the objectivity of their arguments. This paper seeks to address the issue of violent crime in the society and to determine whether illegal immigration is related to violent crime. By determining if the two are correlated, it will be easier for policy makers and those involved in the immigration debate to argue more objectively. It will also lead to immigration policies that are based on facts and not fear, anger or other emotions.
Background information
The Las Vegas mass shooting, which was the largest mass murder in US history, has once again brought the debate on immigration policies to the forefront of public debate. This has been the result of media, civil rights and immigration activists, labor union members and other opinion makers as well as the public taking different views on the shooting. Those supporting more stringent immigration policies are claiming the shooting were encouraged by the existence of sanctuary cities that provide refuge to immigrants (Golshan, 2017). Those opposed to more stringent immigration policies are instead blaming the shooting on lax gun control laws and claiming the move for more stringent immigration laws and policies is not justified.
Supporters of tougher migration laws have been arguing that even with tighter gun control policies, the Las Vegas attack would still have taken place. Additionally, a republican senator has claimed that the shooting was a result of the cropping up of sanctuary cities, which are essential cities where federal immigration regulations and laws are not enforced in their entirety by the local law enforcement agencies. The senator, James Inhofe, asserted that lax gun laws and control was not the cause of the shooting but rather the existence of sanctuary cities. He asserted that this results in a culture of lawlessness, which is responsible for mass shootings.
One of the cases being used to support the argument is the mass shooting that took place in Orlando at the Pulse nightclub. The mass shooting, which until the Las Vegas shooting were the worst in the recent history of the US, were carried out by a Muslim and resulted in a call for stricter immigration laws from a sizable segment of the population. Most of those calling for more stringent immigration policies are usually Republicans, making them more likely to support any immigration policies deemed to be more restrictive and oppose any gun control measures considered more limiting.
Liberal media, civil rights and immigration activists and minority leaders have been at the forefront of calling for more stringent gun control measures and fighting the push for more stringent immigration policies. For example, immigration activists and advocates like the A.C.L.U. have vowed to fight the immigration policies and laws being pushed by the Trump administration such as the rescission of DAPA (Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents), which was put in place during the Obama administration.
Those opposing stricter immigration laws have called into question the reaction of the president in response to the Pulse mass shootings where he was vocal in calling for stricter immigration laws and the Las Vegas mass shooting where the only thing the president has said was that it was not the right moment to get into the debate of gun control. Most of the supporters of tighter gun control measures and more liberal immigration policies are Democrats. This makes them more likely to fight any immigration policies deemed as being more restrictive and support any gun control measures considered more limiting.
Arguments for
One of Trump’s major campaigning points was the issue of illegal immigration and the threats that illegal immigrants pose to American communities. This was especially true whenever he was campaign consisted of a mostly white audience. The association of violent crimes and illegal immigration was mostly from conservative politicians, opinion makers and media although there was not much data offered.
Those who link illegal immigration typically rely on stereotyping in order to support their arguments. For example, in supporting the call for stricter immigration policies, Trump cited cases where violent crimes were committed against Americans by illegal immigrants. Yet despite being on the forefront of fighting against illegal immigration and linking it to increased violent crimes, only 40% of the American population think illegal immigration is linked to increased violent crime while 58% don’t (Cox, 2017). Of those, 57% of those who think it is linked to violent crime and 41% of those who don’t think they are linked are Republicans. Meanwhile, 24% of Democrats think illegal immigration and increase in crime are correlated while 74% don’t think the two are related.
Argument against
Those opposed to stricter illegal immigration argue that there is no relationship between illegal immigration and increase in crimes within the local communities. In support of their argument, they too have used particular incidences in order to further their cause. This are mainly cases where illegal immigrants have actively helped in preventing a crime or in the identification and apprehension of criminals.
Their strongest argument however is that crime statistics don’t show any correlation between illegal immigration and increase in crime (Nowrasteh, 2015). A study carried out in California showed that in communities where there was an influx of a large number of immigrants recently, there was an actual reduction the rate of violent crimes as well as property crimes. Police chiefs in sanctuary areas have also questioned the stricter enforcement of immigration laws and have been reluctant to implement them. This is because they fear that the enforcement of the laws will result in increased crimes in their communities.
Contradictions
Various contradictions exist when the issues of illegal immigration and violent crimes are concerned. The most damaging is the unproven linkage of illegal immigration with violent crime. In sanctuary areas, local law enforcement personnel have better relations with the local people including illegal immigrants. This leads to better cooperation between the two and more effective community policing initiatives. Stricter enforcement of illegal immigration leads to illegal immigrants avoiding authorities and resorting to crime as they cannot move freely in order to make their livelihoods. Conversely, those born in the country are more likely to commit crimes compared to immigrants (Johnson, 2008, p. 6). This is despite immigrants being considered as more likely to commit crimes.
Another contradiction is that illegal immigrants are the rejects of their homelands and bring nothing but misfortune with them. The state of Michigan puts the number of major contributors to its economy who are foreign-born at more than 600,000 under a Republican governor (State of Michigan, n.d., p. 2). It is therefore unfair to term all immigrants as a nuisance and rejects.
Policy recommendations
Stricter immigration policies as a result of increased crime should be reexamined. This is due to the statistical significance of lower crime rates in the face of an increase in illegal immigrants in the local communities. More study and research should be carried out to determine the relationship between sanctuary areas and crime rates in the area as well as the results of enforcing stricter illegal immigration laws. This will form a framework from which to determine illegal immigration in relation to crime rates.
Personal opinion
More needs to be done to determine the effects of illegal immigration into the country as well as on local communities. There is a tendency to have a knee-jerk response to immigration policy guided by populist and emotional politics. A careful consideration of the effects of migration will form the basis on which factual dialogue on the issue can be carried out.
References
Cox, D. (2017, July 8). Few Americans say immigrants increase crime in local communities. Retrieved from https://www.prri.org/spotlight/trump-immigration-reform-immigrants-committing-crime-local-communities/
Golshan, T. (2017, October 3). Republican senator blames the culture of sanctuary cities for mass shootings. Retrieved from https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/3/16412100/republican-sanctuary-cities-las-vegas-shooting-inhofe
Johnson, H. P. (2008). Crimes, corrections and California: what does immigration have to do with it.
Nowrasteh, A. (2015, July 14). Immigration and crime – What the research says. Retrieved from https://www.cato.org/blog/immigration-crime-what-research-says
State of Michigan. (n.d.). The contributions of new Americans in Michigan.