While Illegal Aliens Kill and Rape, Bogus Crime ‘Studies’ Ideology Still Blunt Solutions

Time for border enforcement hawks to disengage with this intellectually fraudulent sham debate and find this new approach

Advocates of a borderless United States – those who will do or say anything to unleash and maintain a torrent of unimpeded illegal mass border migration – demand that Americans deny an especially resonate outcome: illegal border crossers who murder, kill with drunk driving, rape, rob and beat their hosts.

In their arguments for unmitigated releases into the country of illegal border-crossing strangers, libertarian and progressive liberal pro-illegal immigration, anti-border enforcement activists always point to “studies” that compare illegal alien criminality to U.S. citizen criminality and then conclude that Americans commit as much or more than the illegal immigrants.

Media writers and pundits on the open-borders side parrot the “studies” to deflect detention and deportation proposals that would reduce illegal alien crime on grounds that the main danger to address are U.S. citizen criminals and, while you’re at that, let the border flows continue unimpeded since that population is less worrisome.

“No, Illegal Migrants Aren’t Fueling a Crime Wave,” reads the June 26 headline of a Bloomberg column by Justin Fox in a typical argument against illegal immigration enforcement.

“Migrant Crime Wave Not Supported by Data, Despite High-Profile Cases,” the headline of a February 15 New York Times report states in another one undermining recent demands for border enforcement.

“Ironically, studies indicate that immigrants commit less crime than U.S.-born individuals, and advocates have been pushing for less detention for years,” wrote Michael Lukens, Executive Director at the Capital Area Immigrants’ Rights Coalition, in a February 20 letter to the editor in The Washington Post. “Instead of alarmist tactics, ICE [U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement] should be looking at the devastating impacts of detention and releasing immigrants because it is the right thing to do.”

As complicit in this redirection are Republican border hawks and many on the right who abhor unimpeded illegal border immigration because they frequently engage the citizens-versus-illegal-aliens comparison, ever trying to challenge, counter, and undermine the crime comparison studies.

But what opponents of unmitigated mass migration must finally be made to realize, especially now that illegal alien crime is figuring largely for the November 5 presidential election, is that the door their adversaries opened for them leads up a fake stairwell.

The citizen-illegal alien comparison is invalid at the jump and, because it is once again often cited, a different approach is necessary.

An invalid apples-to-rocks comparison

The notion that policy thinkers and media pundits must compare the measured crime rates of citizens and illegal aliens – it’s unclear who initially devised it – has no foundation in academic science because the two compared groups are not similar enough.

Here is why: Illegal immigrants – and not ever American citizens and legal residents – are uniquely subject to an elaborate, expansive, and lawful government deportation and detention apparatus that Congress built to block and remove them from the country, in some part, so that they are not present to commit crimes. The same apparatus, of course, cannot touch American citizens who will commit crimes.

To restate the seemingly obvious, illegal aliens blocked at the border or who are quickly removed from the country cannot inflict any harm on American inhabitants because they are not present. That means every single crime committed by an illegally present immigrant should never have happened, was avoidable, preventable, and unnecessary whereas the Department of Homeland Security detention and removal machine cannot prevent a single American citizen crime. The United States, unfortunately, has no such choice but to contend with its criminal citizens before, during and after every crime they commit.

What this means is that all crimes committed by illegal aliens amount to a 100-percent net-gain burden on American society and its criminal justice system that was always largely preventable and unnecessary.

These differences between the two groups amount to an insurmountable Grand Canyon for purposes of comparison, apples-to-rocks, thus invalid for any academic study at the jump.

The libertarian and progressive liberals who created and purveyed the citizen-versus-illegal immigrant crime rate comparison debate should be called out for their campaign of misdirection or, if you will “gas-lighting.”

The misdirection campaign has always neutralized deserved political backlash against the highly resonate problem of 100 percent unnecessary extra crime that illegal aliens commit in the United States and stunted political momentum for policy remedies that would reduce both. By design, the mass illegal immigration and its associated 100 percent extra crime victimization continue while those who either favor or disfavor illegal immigration fruitlessly wage battles over a totally invalid proposition.

A different approach is long overdue.

The comparison stands discredited anyway but…

Border enforcement hawks have done much to discredit the studies that conclude American citizens commit more crime than illegal aliens. For instance, the Center for Immigration Studies has found that the activist-academics who favor unimpeded illegal immigration have misused data to undercount criminal alien crime. (See Misuse of Texas Data Understates Illegal Immigrant Crime and Continued Misuse of Texas Crime Data)

But as this 2024 presidential campaign period shows, efforts to engage the comparison debate have done little to suppress its continued impact of nullifying momentum for policy change. Mass media outlets still default to the original ruse at a time when a new approach to this discussion is most needed at this key time in the American political cycle, presenting an opportunity for the polity to rise up on good information and demand a halt to the mass border incursions that fuel 100-percent unnecessary net increases illegal alien crime.

Even though they have done a laudable job at discrediting the original studies, border enforcement advocates should disengage from further such distracting attempts and call out the comparison studies as the mendacious intellectual sham they are, on grounds that the two groups are too different to be compared. They must parry every citation of the studies and re-direct to the correct policy discussion, which is the extent to which current American leadership uses existing border enforcement law to block, detain, and deport. They must argue that all illegal alien crime is a 100 percent net addition to America’s crime problem, no matter what the rates per alien are, and that American citizen crime rates are irrelevant to the discussion of a solution to that.

They must only ever argue that blocking, detaining and deporting illegal aliens are the main levers that enable or prevent illegal alien crime in the United States. Most Americans will instinctively understand that this objective truth is on their side.

No one on either side of this policy issue should ever again engage in this immoral sham, but border enforcement hawks should parry and thrust elsewhere.

Graves that need never have been dug

Having said all of this, the comparison “studies” ruse was useful in one important regard; it surfaced rare data that establishes a rare and important measure of this preventable illegal immigrant crime. The data used in them comes from the only U.S. state that has tracked its unnecessary, all-net-gain illegal immigrant crime for years: Texas.

Border enforcement advocates should use this rare data set, not to compare the incomparable but, rather, to emphasize that it was entirely a net total – preventable – addition to overall U.S. crime. The Texas data should be used to emphasize a need for the United States to protect its citizens by exercising existing deportation and detention requirements embodied in the Immigration and Naturalization Act.

America may never know the extent to which alien crime that will result from the three-plus years of the Biden border crisis, which has ushered into the country at least seven million strangers as of this writing. Most local, state and federal agencies will not log immigration status of criminals.

But the Texas Department of Public Safety tracks the immigration status of suspects who are booked into local jails through a program that submits fingerprints to the FBI for criminal history and warrant checks, and to DHS. The agencies return immigration status information on those whose fingerprints were already on file (which is not all of them).

From the resulting Texas statistics, we catch a sound partial glimpse at the vaster sea of nationwide blood and carnage that was up to 100 percent preventable and unnecessary, of murder, rape, child abuse, burglary, felony theft, drug trafficking, alien smuggling and drunken driving manslaughter.

Between June 1, 2011 and June 30, 2024, these 437,000 criminal aliens (308,000 classified as illegal) were charged with more than 533,000 unnecessary extra criminal offenses that should never have happened.

Those included 997 homicide charges (resulting in 498 convictions as of June 2024), 1,245 kidnapping charges (resulting in 354 convictions), 6,744 sexual assault charges (resulting in 3,537 convictions), 7,763 sexual offense charges (resulting in 3,537 sexual offense convictions), and 6,560 weapons charges (resulting in 2,138 weapons convictions). Texas includes another category called “All Other Offenses,” which tallies 298,912 (and 103,265 convictions).

The Texas data reveals hundreds of dead people who should be alive, thousands of sexual assault and sexual offense victims who should never have suffered the trauma, and tens of thousands of assault charges involving victims who would not have been hurt.

The Texas data shows that criminal aliens took up police time and clogged up the American justice system that could have been more dedicated to American criminals. Thousands of drugs, burglary, robbery and weapons charges need not have jammed the Texas criminal justice systems at taxpayer cost.

In all, more than 32,000 people identified by DHS as living in the country illegally were imprisoned in Texas.

But the number of criminal illegal aliens appears to be a highly undercounted one even when a state like Texas is working hard at the tally. We know this because the Texas program found that another 10,748 illegal aliens since 2011, whose immigration status hadn’t been federally determined at the time of their arrests, were only later determined to be illegally present when they were sent to Texas state prisons. There must be far more.

Among them were prisoners serving time for 134 more unnecessary, preventable homicides.

The graves of all their dozens of dead victims are real even as nary any of them have drawn national media attention like a mere few have lately.

The bamboozlers bear responsibility for tragedies that deportation would have prevented. Far too often, the preventable violence is exceptionally brutal, scenes from the most extreme horror movies in volumes far too numerous to catalogue here.

The huge scale of seven or ten million foreign national strangers allowed to enter the United States in three years means the size of the criminal class among them must be historically large as well. All their crime will be 100 percent extra on top of U.S. citizen crime and potentially reducible by up to 100 percent in with the exercise of lawful detention and deportation.

Far fewer bad things will happen if Americans finally slam closed the wrong door with its fake stairwell.

Related Topics:#IllegalAliens #ToddBensman CrimeStudiesIdeology IllegalImmigrantCrime

Up Next

The Flood Of Energy Absurdities Never Slows

Don't Miss

Biden to propose term limits, new code of ethics for the Supreme Court: report

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Bill would prevent congressional members from trading stocks

Energy / 23 mins ago

Trump signs executive orders to help nuclear industry in U.S.

National / 10 hours ago

Talk is cheap, Mister Prime Minister

Addictions

News For Those Who Think Drug Criminalization Is Racist. Minorities Disagree

Published on May 20, 2025

Todayville

A Canadian poll finds that racial minorities don’t believe drug enforcement is bigoted.

By Adam Zivo

[This article was originally published in City Journal, a public policy magazine and website published by the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research]

Is drug prohibition racist? Many left-wing institutions seem to think so. But their argument is historically illiterate—and it contradicts recent polling data, too, which show that minorities overwhelmingly reject that view.

Policies and laws are tools to establish order. Like any tool, they can be abused. The first drug laws in North America, dating back to the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, arguably fixated on opium as a legal pretext to harass Asian immigrants, for example. But no reasonable person would argue that laws against home invasion, murder, or theft are “racist” because they have been misapplied in past cases. Absent supporting evidence, leaping from “this tool is sometimes used in racist ways” to “this tool is essentially racist” is kindergarten-level reasoning.

Yet this is precisely what institutions and activist groups throughout the Western world have done. The Drug Policy Alliance, a U.S.-based organization, suggests that drug prohibition is rooted in “racism and fear.” Harm Reduction International, a British NGO, argues for legalization on the grounds that drug prohibition entrenches “racialized hierarchies, which were established under colonial control and continue to dominate today.” In Canada, where I live, the top public health official in British Columbia, our most drug-permissive province, released a pro-legalization report last summer claiming that prohibition is “based on a history of racism, white supremacy, paternalism, colonialism, classism and human rights violations.”

These claims ignore how drug prohibition has been and remains popular in many non-European societies. Sharia law has banned the use of mind-altering substances since the seventh century. When Indigenous leaders negotiated treaties with Canadian colonists in the late 1800s, they asked for “the exclusion of fire water (whiskey)” from their communities. That same century, China’s Qing Empire banned opium amid a national addiction crisis. “Opium is a poison, undermining our good customs and morality,” the Daoguang emperor wrote in an 1810 edict.

Today, Asian and Muslim jurisdictions impose much stiffer penalties on drug offenders than do Western nations. In countries like China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Singapore, and Thailand, addicts and traffickers are given lengthy prison sentences or executed. Meantime, in Canada and the United States, de facto decriminalization has left urban cores littered with syringes and shrouded in clouds of meth.

The anti-drug backlash building in North America appears to be spearheaded by racial minorities. When Chesa Boudin, San Francisco’s former district attorney, was recalled in 2022, support for his ouster was highest among Asian voters. Last fall, 73 percent of Latinos backed California’s Proposition 36, which heightened penalties for drug crimes, while only 58 percent of white respondents did.

In Canada, the first signs of a parallel trend emerged during Vancouver’s 2022 municipal election, where an apparent surge in Chinese Canadian support helped install a slate of pro-police candidates. Then, in British Columbia’s provincial election last autumn, nonwhite voters strongly preferred the BC Conservatives, who campaigned on stricter drug laws. And in last month’s federal election, within both Vancouver and Toronto’s metropolitan areas, tough-on-crime conservatives received considerable support from South Asian communities.

These are all strong indicators that racial minorities do not, in fact, universally favor drug legalization. But their small population share means there is relatively little polling data to measure their preferences. Since only 7.6 percent of Americans are Asian, for example, a poll of 1,000 randomly selected people will yield an average of only 76 Asian respondents—too small a sample from which to draw meaningful conclusions. You can overcome this barrier by commissioning very large polls, but that’s expensive.

Nonetheless, last autumn, the Centre for Responsible Drug Policy (a nonprofit I founded and operate) did just that. In partnership with the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, we contracted Mainstreet Research to ask over 12,000 British Columbians: “Do you agree or disagree that criminalizing drugs is racist?”

The results undermine progressives’ assumptions. Only 26 percent of nonwhite respondents agreed (either strongly or weakly) that drug criminalization is racist, while over twice as many (56 percent) disagreed. The share of nonwhite respondents who strongly disagreed was three times larger than the share that strongly agreed (43.2 percent versus 14.3 percent). These results are fairly conclusive for this jurisdiction, given the poll’s sample size of 2,233 nonwhite respondents and a margin of error of 2 percent.

Notably, Indigenous respondents seemed to be the most anti-drug ethnic group: only 20 percent agreed (weakly or strongly) with the “criminalization is racist” narrative, while 61 percent disagreed. Once again, those who disagreed were much more vehement than those who agreed. With a sample size of 399 respondents, the margin of error here (5 percent) is too small to confound these dramatic results.

We saw similar outcomes for other minority groups, such as South Asians, Southeast Asians, Latinos, and blacks. While Middle Eastern respondents also seemed to follow this trend, the poll included too few of them to draw definitive conclusions. Only East Asians were divided on the issue, though a clear majority still disagreed that criminalization is racist.

As this poll was limited to British Columbian respondents, our findings cannot necessarily be assumed to hold throughout Canada and the United States. But since the province is arguably the most drug-permissive jurisdiction within the two countries, these results could represent the ceiling of pro-drug, anti-criminalization attitudes among minority communities.

Legalization proponents and their progressive allies take pride in being “anti-racist.” Our polling, however, suggests that they are not listening to the communities they profess to care about.

Our content is always free – but if you want to help us commission more high-quality journalism,

please consider getting a voluntary paid subscription.

Subscribe to Break The Needle

Business

Breaking: Explosive FBI Warning—CCP, Iran, and Mex-Cartels Partnering in Canada to Move Fentanyl and Terrorists Into U.S.

Published on May 18, 2025

Todayville

Sam Cooper

Patel’s warning echoes The Bureau’s exclusive reporting on a criminal convergence linking CCP-backed chemical suppliers, Iranian proxies, and Mexican cartels operating through Vancouver superlabs

In an explosive Sunday interview that will place tremendous pressure on Prime Minister Mark Carney’s new Liberal government, FBI Director Kash Patel alleged that Mexican cartels, Chinese Communist Party operatives, and Iranian threat actors have forged a new axis of criminal cooperation, using Canada’s porous northern border and the Port of Vancouver—not the southern Mexican border—as their preferred entry point to flood fentanyl and terror suspects into the United States.

“In the first two, three months that we’ve been in the seat under Donald Trump’s administration, he has sealed the border,” Patel told Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo. “He has stopped border crossings. So where’s all the fentanyl coming from? Still? Where’s the trafficking coming from still? Where are all the narco traffickers going to keep bringing this stuff into the country? The northern border. Our adversaries have partnered up with the CCP and others—Russia, Iran—on a variety of different criminal enterprises. And they’re going and they’re sailing around to Vancouver and coming in by air.”

Patel asserted that adversarial regimes—including Beijing and Tehran—are now working in tandem on “a variety of different criminal enterprises,” and exploiting what he called the “sheer tyranny of distance” on America’s northern frontier, where vast terrain and lax enforcement in Canada have allegedly enabled fentanyl pipelines and terrorist infiltration.

Pointing directly at Carney’s government, Patel continued:
“Now we’re focused on it and we’re calling our state and local law enforcement partners up [at the northern border]. But you know, who has to get to step in is Canada—because they’re making it up there and shipping it down here.”

The FBI director’s warning—posted on the White House’s X account— follows exclusive reporting by The Bureau and a newly released 2025 threat assessment from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, which, for the first time, officially flags Canada as an emerging threat node in the North American drug supply chain.

As The Bureau reported earlier this week, the DEA highlighted the dismantling of a fentanyl “super laboratory” in October 2024 in Falkland, British Columbia—a mountainous corridor between Vancouver and Calgary—as an emerging threat in fentanyl trafficking targeting the United States. Sources pointed to the same converged threat network—China, Iran, and Mexico—mentioned today by FBI Director Kash Patel.

“According to these sources,” The Bureau reported Friday, “the site forms part of a broader criminal convergence involving Chinese, Mexican, and Iranian networks operating across British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, and Quebec. The Bureau’s sources indicate that the Falkland facility was connected to Chinese chemical exporters sanctioned by the United States Treasury, Iranian threat actors, and operatives from Mexican drug cartels.”

In his remarks today, Patel appeared to directly link this criminal convergence to terrorist infiltration.
“And I’ll give you a statistic that I gave to Congress that nobody was paying attention to,” Patel added. “Over 300 known or suspected terrorists crossed into this country last year, illegally… 85 percent of them came in through the northern border.”

Patel also appeared to turn up the political pressure on Ottawa, alluding to President Trump’s recent controversial statements about Canada—which became a flashpoint in the federal election, with many voters embracing the Liberal Party’s campaign framing Carney as a bulwark against Trump.

“I don’t care about getting into this debate about making someone the 51st state or not,” Patel said, referencing Trump’s remarks. “But [Canada] are a partner in the north. And say what you want about Mexico—but they helped us seal the southern border. But facts speak for themselves. It’s the [northern] border that’s open.”

The Bureau will continue to follow this story in the coming week.

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Subscribe to The Bureau