The Slippery Slope Of The Kate Steinle–Mollie Tibbets Immigration Argument

Brian Brady Brian Brady 6 Comments

Share

Kate Steinle was killed in 2015 in San Francisco by an illegal immigrant. Mollie Tibbetts, an Iowa student, went missing last month and found dead this week, allegedly at the hand of an illegal immigrant. Many conservatives are using these deaths as talking points for more robust immigration enforcement and/or stricter immigration laws.

The talking point goes something like this: “If we had more robust immigration enforcement/laws, Kate Steinle and Mollie Tibbetts would be alive today.”

Now, substitute “gun control laws” for “immigration enforcement/laws.” Uh oh, you just made the gun grabbers’ argument by using their oft repeated fallacious argument of composition.

You can ban all guns and ban all illegal immigrants but bad guys are going to get guns and kill people. As Marco Rubio said, “you can pass all the laws you want but criminals will ignore the law.”

I’m not arguing FOR open borders. I agree that our current immigration laws need to be enforced, our borders need to be strengthened, and future immigration should be based on merit rather than presence. I am CERTAINLY not arguing for gun control.

I am asking conservatives to avoid the same fallacious arguments liberals make.

Share

Comments 6

  1. It’s an undeniable fact that there would be fewer murders in America if we could magically remove all undocumented immigrants.

    The ignorant will stop reading here, the rest of you can continue.

    It’s also an undeniable fact that there would be fewer murders in America if we somehow eliminated all the black people. The same would be true if we wiped out all of the Irish, or the Democrats, or the Jews. In fact, Germany made this argument by highlighting out of context crimes by Jews to build support for their insane policies.

    The argument relies on a confusion of the concepts of correlation and causation. All else being equal, the number of murders roughly correlates with population. If you remove any significant chunk of the population, you will reduce the number of murders. Incedently, you will also reduce the number of acts of kindness, the number of great teachers, the payment of taxes, and the laughter of children by roughly the same amount, because every population group has these things.

    What you won’t really affect is the Murder Rate, which represents murder frequency as a factor of population. The murder rate represents your and my actual chances of getting killed or knowing someone who does.

    Don’t fall for it. You are smarter than Fox News and President Trump think you are. You understand how they are trying to manipulate you.

  2. And if you wanted to reduce the murder RATE, the best thing you could do would be to simply remove all males between the ages of 15 and 35.

    Whether it is immigration, gun control or another issue, people with a political point of view will always be able to take one data point and draw a seemingly convincing graph.

  3. Yet when there is a murder event you hear idiocy like “we’re not sure if it’s terrorism because we haven’t seen the skin color yet” (actual Fox “news” quote). Crime rates of immigrants, legal or otherwise are lower than the general population. I find it interesting but not at all surprising that we interned the Japanese AMERICANS and took their property but did nothing to the German Americans. I’m sick and tired of right wing hacks screaming to the world that anyone who doesn’t bow down to the new Fuhrer is for open borders. The borders were open at the behest of MONEY. The lobby folks representing various industries that profit from cheap and compromised labor bought and paid for non-enforcement. You see, it’s a win-win for right wingers. They get their money AND they blame “the left” for open borders.

  4. Post
    Author

    “we interned the Japanese AMERICANS and took their property but did nothing to the German Americans”

    Tecnically untrue. 250,000 German-Americans were put on a “watch list” during WW1 and 11,000 Germans were interned during WW2. This pales in both size and concentration to what the US Government did to Japanese-Americans but it did happen.

    “The borders were open at the behest of MONEY. The lobby folks representing various industries that profit from cheap and compromised labor bought and paid for non-enforcement. ”

    True by half. Victor Davis Hanson wrote a book called Mexifornia which outlines why the money men in both political parties want open borders.

  5. Do you know any “liberals” who openly advocate for “open borders”? The reason our laws have not been enforced was at the behest of lobbyist for various industries. Republicans have always gotten a win-win. They get the cash and then blame the bleeding heart liberals for the result, using the Hitlerian tactic of “all your problems are because of non-white invaders”. Read some editorials from 130 years ago. The same arguments were made (crime, culture,etc) about the Irish.

  6. Post
    Author

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *