Britain MUST take in more refugees

Scroll to see replies

As you acknowledged a few pages ago, this applies to pretty much every group of people so it's a complete red-herring. The relevant question is NOT whether the absolute number of crimes committed will increase given the rise in the population (it certainly will, there's no such thing as a "risk-free" event as anyone who knows a thing or two about risk analysis will tell you), but whether the refugees will have higher incidents of crime per capita than the native populace. The answer is no; generally refugees tend to have lower crime rates than other groups. But even if the crime rate is higher within a group (i.e. black people), I don't think that would justify a blanket ban on black immigrants. https://debunkingdenialism.com/2015/11/27/the-poisonous-mms-analogy-metastasizes-to-the-syrian-refugee-crisis/

I think the media, while not totally guilty, is not entirely innocent in terms of perpetuating a climate of fear. I find it hilariously absurd that the nation which was responsible for plundering across the globe is suddenly petrified of helping refugees.

However, the point still stands that this is not a racial group. This is a mixed group, of which a small percentage are extremists. I looked at the article and I understand that a sweeping generalization is definately not what we need, especially the alienation generated. On the other hand, the point still stands that within this mixed group of immigrants, there are extremists and those who will become extremists. If you think of how many terrorists have, after attacking, been mentally disturbed, with schizophrenia and the like, and then you compare that to the refugees, you could get an idea of how many POSSIBLY could become radicalised (schizophrenics for instance believe in something that is outside of the normal expected belief, so they probably can be easily manipulated to believe that they will spend eternity in Jhanna or that they will be rewarded for their death etc.).

I almost completely agree with your risk analysis idea, although I disagree on the fact that the refugee groups will have a much lower crime rate. Because of the fact that religious extremism has become so popular, the crime rates will probably go up with refugee groups, as extremists can use a Viet Cong tactic and "blend in" with a populace who are running for their lives. The "peanut" and M&M analogies work on some level as they basically describe the problem, although I think that a more accurate description would be you have 1 million M&Ms(with 100000 which you have to eat first(priorities, those refugees who seem to desparately want to get in, and will get in no matter what). Now, any number of those M&Ms could be poisoned, and poisoned with a toxin which may or may not gradually seep out into other clean M&Ms, or ma just go entirely; personally, I would say 0.05 or 0.001. Those people could be anywhere, and are probably more likely to be in the first 100,000 you have to eat. No matter how small the proportion, there are still people who will radicalise and be radicalised; it's a changing figure, and when applied to a mixed group (cultures and backgrounds), it doesn't really work very well. But it gets the message across; if we do let refugees into the country, we do open ourselves up to a large risk of extremism and radicalisation.

Finally, please don't use a country's outdated ideology against a country. Just because years ago Britain was Imperialistic and an awful ruler, treating the Commonwealth very poorly, doesn't mean that there are any remnants of that nowadays. We don't plunder anymore, and we haven't for a long time. A country's history shouldn't be used against it in an argument. With that logic you may as well say "I find it hilarious that a country which destroyed Russian villages and killed many Russian people causing a massive amount of homeless refugees is suddenly taking in refugees" when talking about Nazi Germany. Also, please let me make this clear; I do not care what race or religion someone follows, I don't care about that sort of thing.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 241

Duck10101

sorry my final point being that you can't use a historical period against a country as it is just outdated and irrelevant to the present culture.

Reply 242

Dodgypirate

Original post by Duck10101

sorry my final point being that you can't use a historical period against a country as it is just outdated and irrelevant to the present culture.

Paragraphs please.

Reply 243

Duck10101

Original post by Dodgypirate

Paragraphs please.

Sorry:/

Reply 244

ForgetMe

Except, how many of them are actual refugees and how many just benefit migrants.. I only know one reason why they all would want to come to the UK and it starts with a B :erm: