Talk:Illegal immigration to the United States

Template:USPP

The comic

http://www.diggersrealm.com/mt/illegal_alien_comic_book/GuiaDelMigranteMexicano.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.48.114 (talk) 19:16, 6 April 2010 (UTC) Note that it does not have the statement in it that the article attributes to it about Mexico not approving of illegal immigration to the US -19:52, 6 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.48.114 (talk)

The text you deleted said:

• However, on the last page of the comic book, it is clearly stated the Mexican government doesn't promote illegal crossing at all and only encourages visits to the U.S. with all required documentation.

The source says:

• A comic-book-style "Guide for the Mexican Migrant" being distributed by the government bears a bright-yellow disclaimer at the end of its 36 pages. It reads, in part: "This consular protection guide does not promote the crossing of Mexicans without the legal documentation required by the United States; its objective is to inform about the risks involved."

If you can find a better wording then do so, but it's close enough that there was no need to delete it outright.   Will Beback  talk  20:34, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

If you look at the comic book (which I linked to above), this statement does not exist.-20:54, 6 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.48.114 (talk)

Look at the comic book again. The statement is indeed printed (in Spanish) on the back cover (facing the front cover in the linked PDF). The translation above is accurate. Plazak (talk) 01:10, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Might be useful for the article

Snopes [1] has shown the stats and list various news sources where they come from, and how the information is gathered. Which things common said are true or not, and which ones have sources. Dream Focus 05:07, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Inclusion of Mex-Am point-of-view

Well, I will go ahead and make a few points here on the talk page, since none of the edit warring parties seem inclined to do so.

1. Cityside Seraph, without getting into the question of whether "Mexican-American.org" is a WP:RS, you would help your cause and reduce controversy if you could find a little bit more mainstream publication to source your points from. Given the controversiality of the subject, I wouldn't think that would be too difficult. If I were a betting man, I'd say you could probably find something in the San Francisco Chronicle for example. You might even be able to find same in a major metropolitan daily within Arizona, which I would think of as a especially good source given the context.
2. Schrandit, I agree with your point about the nationwide decline in crime rates. If you can source that, I would think the relevant statement in the article could be nicely rewritten something along these lines:

• Despite having the largest population of illegal immigrants in the U.S., the city of Los Angeles has experienced the same dropping crime rates as other major U.S. cities during the 1990s and 2000s.

—Rnickel (talk) 22:23, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for starting this thread, Rnickel. I agree with your points.   Will Beback  talk  22:27, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Here are a couple that popped up off google, I can do a more refined search if there is a need. - Schrandit (talk) 18:38, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

• U.S. crime falls despite prolonged recession
• Crime Rates Shown to Be Falling
• New research reveals historic 1990s US crime decline

I just restored that material before I noticed that this discussion was ongoing. This is why edit warring is bad. Fortunately, I've found this LA Times article that indicates that "both sides, whether for or against increased immigration, agree that immigrants tend to commit fewer crimes than native-born Americans."--Cúchullain ^t/c 13:41, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Let's use the L.A. Times then. "Mexican-American.org" really doesn't look like a reliable source.   Will Beback  talk  13:58, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

It's more even-handed, too, describing what each side says about regarding the crime statistics.--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:11, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

"Even-handedness" isn't one of the main criteria for sources. See WP:V and WP:RS. I can't find anything about that website. It's not clear if there's even another page besides that article. Can you find out anything about it?   Will Beback  talk  15:14, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

I was referring to the LA Times article as being more evenhanded. The LA Times is certainly a reliable source.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:38, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Great, then let's use it instead of the mysterious "Mexican-American.org" website.   Will Beback  talk  15:44, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

I'd like the sentence to be rephrased to reflect the ambiguity of the causation, as well as stale nature of the data. - Schrandit (talk) 16:22, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm afraid that summation is overly rosy and far from uncontested.

1. Illegal Immigration: Drugs, Gangs and Crime
2. The Illegal-Alien Crime Wave
3. Illegal aliens murder 12 Americans daily
4. Border States Deal With More Illegal Immigrant Crime Than Most, Data Suggest
5. Illegal Immigrant Crime Numbers Released

I haven't reviewed these sources, they were just google's top hits but the issue is heavily contested and very murky, I am afraid the Mex-Am article is intentionally misleading. I also don't Dupnik's quote is needed. - Schrandit (talk) 15:03, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Schrandit, your continual deletion of the article written by Tito Rodriguez in the mexican-american.org site appears to be somewhat, well, let's say.. dubious in motive itself. When looking at the "References" listed for this article (which are quite a bit more than the norm) it's very obvious that there's a lack of inclusion of the viewpoints from the Mexican-American community itself - which BTW is heavily and directly affected by the illegal immigration problem more so than any other population minus the immigrants themsleves. When I see a list of nearly "200 references" in an article about illegal immigration in the United States and don't see even one reference to an article from the Mexican American community that's more than a shame, it's completely irresponsible and discriminating. It is an exclusion which in this case is not acceptable. Also, before you or another attempts to label me as a Mexican, a liberal, or a contentious type individual in any way, know that I'm not. I'm just as proud and American as anyone else. I actually still believe in the importance of a diversity in opinion for many matters. Regarding the deletion of the Los Angeles trends in crime, they are highly releveant and also somewhat different than the national norm. What is similar are the declines in property and violent crime rates this decade throughout the nation. What is different is that Los Angeles has been experiencing this type of decline since the early 90's (not the national trend) and also while it's illegal immigrant population had continued to swell. The illegal "Mexican" immigrants moving into other parts of the nation has been more recent and primarily from this millenium on. I would appreciate it if you could find some additional sources for inclusion to these references instead of deleting the only Spanish surnamed individual in all of the references listed in the article. Increasing the public's access to more information and sources can only be good for the national debate irrespective of whatever side one may be on. With all due respect, you just might be doing yourself a favor as well, since your reputation appears to be growing as a party who is biased against only certain types of leanings and/or references alone. Please keep the information included intact. I'd also appreciate it if you care to respond here in this talk as opposed to taking more action in public first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.74.77.238 (talk) 18:21, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I have no idea who, or what you are, nor would it matter. I would appreciate it if your would refrain from generalizations about me. The Mexican-America.org citation is beging excluded because it is not a reliable source and the conclusions it draws are questionable. The assertion that the national origin of the author has anything to do with it is laughable. - Schrandit (talk) 19:03, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I am a 4th generation German/English/Swiss/Dutch/French American married to a Guatemalan also of European descent. For forty years, my father had Texan and Mexican Latino employees work on his farm, and our family's best friends were Texan Latinos. I know undocumented immigrants from numerous countries as well as immigrants from many countries. During this turbulent time when hate groups are polarizing our country for political reasons, I would hope that I could read something unbiased and informative in what is fast becoming a replacement for World Book Encyclopedia. When I opened an encyclopedia prior to "Wiko", I expected it to be factual and unbiased. This coverage, however, is but a hair better than some of the hate rhetoric that I've read from the worst of groups. To be an author of such a charged issue, one would need to be a scholar of diplomacy and extremely knowledgeable on the issues. The person in the above paragraph who very nicely pointed out that this article is biased and lacking, was vicously attacked. This was very immature and uncalled for. This article needs help from people who understand the issues and can enlighten and shed light to the reasons why there is the issue. Nothing has been mentioned about the fact that American policy against Latinos and Mexicans has been extremely racist resulting in racist and unjust immigration laws. I was particularly enlighted by the "chaining" idea. Instead of summarizing that all immigrants miss their families and try to get them to join them (my cousin moved to S.C. and now the entire family of 3 siblings and their mother live there...this is humanness not illegal immigrant chaining), the article took on this attitude that there was some sort of conspiracy by illegals. Nothing was explained from their persective. Nothing of the human plight caused by American corporate and military intervention in Central America causing inhuman and unlivable living conditions....the poverty and starvation. Nothing was mentioned of the huge demand for unskilled labor during the 90s and early 2000. Nothing was mentioned about the insatiable American appitite for drugs putting some Mexican cities at the hands of violent drug cartels. The aguement was made that illegal immigration is greater than legal immigration, but this is untrue. Nothing was mentioned that it is customary for any State Department to help its citizens abroad or preparing to go abroad. The police in my city tell the immigrants to go to their consulates in Chicago and get such identification. Instead of seeing the Mexican informational DVDs as a conspiracy theory that the Mexican gov't is forcing people to migrate to the US, this fact could have been omitted because it is irrelevant to the issue and is only included to incite hate. All countries try to help their citizens to help them abroad. There is such information for Americans going abroad. Nothing was mentioned about how Americans can go to Mexico or Central America on vacations, yet the reverse is untrue. Nothing was mentioned of the true role of the coyote or how horrid the trip is or how many thousands die each year. People ride like cattle in semis for days, walk through blistering desert without water for three or four days. They are so tired and their feet so blistered, no one does this for fun. They know that the trip is very dangerous. The coyotes can't be trusted. They are indentured servants when they arrive and have to work double jobs for years to pay off the $6k fee to the coyote who provides no food, water, or sleep. Their lives are hell. Nothing was said of the discrimination they face, how they live in the shadows, how they can't drive or go anywhere. Most of them are from such innocent beginnings and had no idea what they were getting into when they came here. They leave spouses, parents, and children. They leave their whole world because of the same reason my ancestors arrived. They were starving and were exceptional people who needed an opportunity. They love the United States and only want the best and to be with the best. There was not heart to this article...no humanness. Who are you? And what gives you the authority to write this? BTW, the jux

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.228.88.195 (talk) 05:50, 19 June 2010 (UTC) 

Canada-US border

Why no mention of the Canada-US border in the discussion? Multiple notable examples of illegal immigration into the US from Canada exist, with Canadians coming to the US to work illegally historically a common practice. The article reflects the current ethnic bias which accepts illegal immigration of WASPS but not of non-WASPS. Mulp (talk) 20:28, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Good point. You seem to be the person to add such a section. Plazak (talk) 21:10, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

There are give or take 11 million illegal immigrants who came here via the mexican border. There are maybe, maybe 60,000 here from Canada. Lets keep it all in perspective. - Schrandit (talk) 03:20, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

agreed. it should be mentioned, but also should be stated its miniscule compared to illegal immegration from mexico. 69.115.204.217 (talk) 12:49, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Demographics by States

This is now the current values in 2010, the old References are outdated and was made in 2000.

http://www.npg.org/CAPS.html Statment; illegal population: a range of 2.47 million to 4.8 million, with a median figure of 2.8 million - up from 1.7 million in 1994. The 4.8 million "high" estimate, based on California's assumed 24% share of the overall illegal population, implies a national illegal population of 20 million.

More References are saying there are more then 30 millon for a high number in the US (Glenn Beck and his guest Allen ..(FBI))Stating it could be higher.

Please go to Table 2; and table 3. here at this website http://www.npg.org/CAPS.html

4. Border Patrol local 2544, covering most of Arizona, stated on its website (www.local2544.org) in July 2005 that by many estimates there were 15 to 20 million illegal aliens in the US, with the number increasing everyday because of insecure borders. See also: Christian Science Monitor, May 16, 2006

5. The full reports appear in "How Many Illegal Aliens are In the US?", The Social Contract, Summer 2007 and at www.thesocialcontract.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.126.146.202 (talk) 06:35, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I have made edits to this article citing credible sources for the information I added. However, all the information I put in has been deleted. CyberEditor (talk) 04:09, 26 July 2010 (UTC)