Edinburgh Stabbing Incident (Thread bans in OP)

What are you talking about? All we've heard about Bouchaker is his dementia, neurocognitive disorder, brain tumor. Mental health has been posited from day one, hence the delays to his trial.

Amazing what you can think is true when you just make everything up.

I don't know why this has to be portrayed as a binary argument that if you are against migrants committing crimes you are OK with non migrants committing crimes and vice versa.

I would say the vast, vast majority of people don't want racist attacks or discrimination against people because of their skin colour, ethnicity or religion. It is wrong if Jewish people are attacked because they are Jewish, wrong if Muslim people are attacked for being Muslim, wrong if Black people or Asian people are being attacked for being Black or Asian, it is wrong if women and girls are attacked because they are female. That is basic decency, and most people would feel like this.

This man was carrying out deranged assaults against muslims. He was thankfully apprehended and his background is being investigated for terror links. I would expect this for any crime that could be linked to an idealogy.

The reason people feel more relatively and openly displeased when migrants commit crimes as opposed to born citizens is that migrants are there at the grace of the accepting country. Born citizens are our problem no matter what. There is a higher expectation that people who migrate to a country should assimilate and obey that country's laws. This is particularly so when a migrant who enters a country is a recipient of welfare and assistance with accommodation. In that case they are a burden on the taxpaying residents of a country, and of course there is an expectation that they should be law abiding when in receipt of such supports. These expectations are felt more keenly, at times like things, with rising inflation, cost of living and the realisation that increasing asylum seekers numbers are placing greater strain on housing, education and medical resources.

These feelings are not racist, and are in fact commonplace worldwide when resources are squeezed. We see this in South Africa, and there has been similar sentiments observed in Niger and Nigeria with a perception that more supports were available to cross border migrants than those internally displaced across greater distances within the same country.

I don't think the law abiding nature of anyone is ever a story regardless of background. Law abiding should be the default expectation of everyone.

Most people feel however that we are stuck with our own criminals, we don't feel we should export more.

I don't understand what the point of this bizarre question is.

I'm not blaming immigrants for anything.

I'm saying it's natural for people to feel more aggrieved if an immigrant commits crimes than someone who was ordinarily resident in the country. That sense of aggrievement is especially pronounced in cases like Pushka and the current case before the courts, were people feel they were making no economic contribution to the country, could have legally been deported, which would have not only have saved money but would have prevented terrible crimes being committed.

I'm not the one bringing race into this either, that is you.

Men would commit more violent crimes than women, agreed. This is partly why I support same sex spaces for women in areas of vulnerability like prisons, refuges, changing facilities (I also support it for reasons of privacy and dignity).

Since both the ordinarily resident population of a country and immigrants would contain men I'm not certain why you are discussing men as a separate population to immigrants.

Unless you want to restrict the rights of men in general, which to me would be a serious infringement of civil liberties. Perhaps, recognising that men are more violent than women you want to restrict or police migration of men into the country?

Obviously there are general measures which can be taken to reduce crime rates, which is why I support increasing police resources, increasing numbers of prison places, vastly increased drug and alcohol rehabilitation as well as more resources into combatting organised crime such as trafficking, money laundering, sexual exploitation, organised robberies and drug dealing/importation.

It's such an insane point he's trying to make, very difficult to address but not for the reasons he thinks. No doubt he believes he's landed on some all time gotcha, but it's more akin to just rubbing poo all over his face mid debate and sitting there with a big smug grin as everyone backs away as he shouts "WOULD YOU AGREE?"