Time for a zero refugee policy? - *Read OP for mod warnings and threadbans - updated 11/5/24*

The estimates I had seen but the number of arrivals this year at approx 20k.

But even at 30k, we'd be talking somewhere in the region of 170k arrivals over 20 years.

That would equate to about 3% of the current population. This 3%, according to AGS, are no more likely to be involved in crime, and according to the ESRI, have strong participation rates in the workforce.

Yet we see them blamed for everything from the housing crisis to soggy football pitches.

It just doesn't add up.

Sorry, I wasnt suggesting asylum seekers were more likley to commit crime.

My point was solely focused on the numbers arriving and that the govt had revised their projection to 25k to 30k this year for new arrivals, vs the 20k I think they were expecting at the beginning of the year.

The weekly peak at 600 in May doesnt appear to have been maintained.

30k per year would take less than 6 years to get to 170k though, no?

There were some reports shared earlier in the thread showing historically higher rates of suspected involvement in certain types of crime by IPAs in Germany anyway, I don't recall anything from Finland. One of those reports at least was quite clear that it's results were in no way suitable for making broader conclusions.

I'm not aware of anything at all suggesting 'IPAs are more likely than the native population to commit crime', and I think AGS have been quite clear on that in Ireland.

I agree, we've little choice but to follow the EU approach in these matters.

While I don't agree myself with the current migration pact I do think it's a step towards rejecting the existing failed hard-border approaches.

Overall though I wouldn't consider any of this a 'crushing reality'. EU membership has been of great benefit to Ireland and at least we've been spared the madness of some of the solo run efforts, UK's 'stop the boats' madness or Sweden's mandatory spying on friends and neighbors coming to mind.

None of it particularly stands out to be honest.

Cherry picking statistics like that tell very little without context.

How much are Iraqi men represented in demographic groups more likely to commit sexual offences? Are people living in accommodation centers more likely to be reported than domestic abusers? What constitutes a sexual offence? (in some countries catcalling is classified as a sexual offense, while I think it something that shouldn't be tolerated, I wouldn't categorize it in the same terms as sexual assault, rape etc)

One of these reports claimed IPAs were far more highly involved in 'fraud'. It sounds shocking until it emerged that 'fraud' in this case included public travel fare-dodging and the possibility that IPAs, like any newcomer might, simply didn't understand the payment system.

Cherrypicking is cherrypicking regardless of the crime or nationalities involved.

There's decades of studies on criminality from all sorts of perspectives. I can't think of any serious approach that would simply look at raw categorical figures like that and think job done, no more to say.

As for sexual assault figures, the report clearly looks more broadly at sexual offences. I'll assume you innocently misreported than Iraqi men are more likely to commit sexual assault and leave it to yourself to acknowledge your error. You also forgot to mention this qualifier from the report.

This only concerns suspected offences, which the police have moved to consideration of charges. This does not necessarily result in a charge or judgement. An offence committed by a casual acquaintance or a stranger is easier to report to the police than, for example, an offence committed by one’s spouse.

Comparing these type of figures is notoriously difficult across countries, regardless of whether it's Finland or not.

https://bra.se/bra-in-english/home/news-from-bra/archive/news/2020-09-30-difficult-to-compare-rape-statistics-in-european-countries.html

I'm not quite sure what you mean.

Are you suggesting that the people from a different cultural background, simply weren't used to not being sexually abusive?

What other reason would there be for a 13x over representation?

I'm saying that it's quite possible that people from other cultural backgrounds might be far more likely to be guilty of verbal harassment which would skew their representation in the overall category.

Then there's the other factors such as demographic overrepresentation, bias in reporting etc.

This is an old report but I think quite interesting as it shows Irish people as twice as likely to commit violent crime than people from other part of the world (including a middle eastern country), and Irish people as one of the most violent nationalities in the world.

https://www.aic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-05/tandi117.pdf

So you accept the fact that the mass importing of people from other cultural backgrounds will likely increase the risk of sexual assault (even if "only" verbal)?

Yet you still advocate for it?

Ok, I will "scale it back" to simply sexual harrassment.

Do you think that allowing thousands of undocumented men from cultures you agree would likely increase the amount of sexual harrassment claims from our citizens is a good or a bad thing?