AIBU to think migrant sex crime data should be published? And to wonder why Labour are blocking the release of that data?

[Fabiansrule]

Labour Blocks Release of Migrant Crime Data

'Victims of serious crimes and their families have joined forces to demand that the Labour government publish detailed data on offences committed by foreign nationals, accusing ministers of withholding information that is “clearly and legitimately in the public interest”.

Among the signatories are victims of high-profile sexual offences and families of murder victims. One signatory is a 14-year-old victim of a sexual assault in Epping allegedly committed by an illegal immigrant, in the same Essex town where asylum seekers were housed at the controversial Bell Hotel.
Fiona Goddard, a survivor of rape-gang grooming who has campaigned publicly about her experiences, has also signed the letter.

Eight relatives of Rhiannon Whyte, a hotel worker murdered by a Sudanese national, are also among those backing the demand.'

https://europeanconservative.com/articles/news-corner/labour-blocks-release-of-migrant-crime-data/

@5MinuteArgument

Why are so many people against transparency on this issue? It's like they fear the worst.

I don't think anyone is against transparency. In fact, the total opposite. What we need is data showing sex crimes committed by ALL people. Not just migrants. Therefore total transparency.

We have plenty of young, poor men who you (rightly) point out pose high risks to society and particularly women and girls due to their elevated risk of committing violent and sexual crimes.

The question is why we’d want to import thousands more people in this particularly high risk category - young, poor men - who also have additional risks attached which make their risk per capita even higher e.g. being away from any family in a foreign country and having been raised in misogynistic cultures with completely different laws and social norms, having experienced trauma, etc (all of which make them even higher risk than our home grown poor, white males).

Why should women and children in the UK be subjected to elevated risks to their safety by allowing tens of thousands of people to move to the UK who pose the highest possible level of risk to women and children based on their characteristics?

And why should the data which is would allow us to quantify that risk be allowed to be repressed and withheld, in what purports to be democratic country?

Of course it should. But there'd a big crowd on MN who would say the data is all fake

Yes, this is what I was thinking too.

Women are most likely to be killed by a current or former partner.

@poetryandwineyes, statistically most women are more likely to be abused by someone they know (although, in reality, in my own life and job, I personally am more likely to be attacked violently by a person who is not known to me - this is not complacency about my husband, but the reality of my own risk profile).

I think you must not have a mathematical or logical background though, because this doesn’t actually prove anything. The fact that someone known to me is more likely to attack me statistically doesn’t mean that increasing my risk of being violently attacked by a stranger materially is immaterial to me. These are, in effect, different categories of risk from males, both of which I deserve to be informed about and protected from.

So you wanted statistics but won’t even look them up when they’re freely available to you.

You need to spend less time on social media and being brain washed by your algorithm and more time looking up factual data.

That’s exactly what the MOJ was ordered by the ICO to release, and the MOJ refused to comply with the order and is appealing it on spurious grounds.

@biwi remeber a few years ago apparently some investigation in parliament said the public couldn't handle the truth on sex abuse figures? .

See my posts on the tube attacker.

Why add more ? Why add more and worse and those undocumented and with backgrounds we don't know ...see my post on the sudanse national who was rejected by France and got in via boats. A woman was stabbed 30 times with a broken bottle ?

I’m interested in this process. If you’re not then up to you.

On every thread why are there the same posters again and again defend these men?

Because we have British men which abuse women we should accept men from even worse nations where even more women are abused?

The issue isn’t about the proportion of rapes committed by people of each nationality as that would be meaningless unless you assess this data against the proportion of the population with that nationality. I.e. what matters is the relative risk, the likelihood of offending per person of that nationality, to reflect the risk that a specific individual is likely to pose and expose that these risks are far, far higher for people of some nationalities than others per the detailed data from Denmark, Germany, Sweden etc. I fail to see any reason why you’d expect the data from the UK to show something completely different. Why do you think the MOJ is refusing to release it?

Elders but maybe welders also!

No one is defending violent men.

But we’re not stupid enough to be brainwashed into thinking that immigrants are the problem when the data shows that they’re not.

Well they have been a problem for some, hence the names of the victims in the op that you’re overlooking.

@EveningSpread but women and girls are dead because of illegal immigrants ? Is that statistic any consolation to them or their families ?

But again what use would this data be?

If it shows that Indian men have higher rates of committing sexual crimes, then it is going to be Indian women and other nationalities marrying into Indian families that are at higher risk.

If it shows that illegal immigrants are more likely to commit sexual crimes - then it will be the female illegal immigrants that are most at risk.

It doesn’t matter what nationality or place of birth you look at, the statistics still show that if you’re SA or raped it is only 10% likely to be a stranger.

Incredible isn't it.

No I’m not joking.
We have enough rapes going on which you yourself are saying, so why try to speak up in favour of increasing those number of rapes putting more women and children in danger.
The nothing to see,look over there angle you and others use is not working.

Exactly. The government don't want to publish the stats on crimes committed by ALL people. They are afraid of what the stats will reveal. If the stats are anything like those revealed by Sweden, Denmark and Germany they have good reason to be concerned.

'I think you must not have a mathematical or logical background though, because this doesn’t actually prove anything. The fact that someone known to me is more likely to attack me statistically doesn’t mean that increasing my risk of being violently attacked by a stranger materially is immaterial to me. These are, in effect, different categories of risk from males, both of which I deserve to be informed about and protected from.'

Quite. Logic is desperately missing from so many of the 'but white british men rape more! one is more likely to be raped by a known person!' people.. It's worrying that so little logic exists. Though I wonder if it's more an agenda as opposed to a real belief.

An op many posts above (I'm catching up on posts from the last few hours, I read it but can't find it now) posted something regarding taking into account background 'variables' ref rapists.

Something along the lines of but some of these (undocumented unknown) rapist men have come from such terrible backgrounds, they are young men these variables need to be considered. etc

I'm sorry what? No. Morality is objective. Rape is wrong. It doesn't make it better to consider oh well Of Course! He's a young man from Afghanistan, of course he's more likely to rape, it's not his fault. it's his culcha, and or it's his traumatic experiences! they made him do it. Poor little sausage. Do me a favour. Just no. Nope.

There is so much data coming from other European countries, why don't we join the club?

Yes yes you are.

Yeah, I just can’t understand what goes through their minds that they are standing up for more rapists and killers, same names every thread.

Ah there you are, op. I asked you a couple of questions earlier which you perhaps missed. The most interesting (to me) was why you used several distinct terms interchangeably in your original post. Why was that?

Usually the most obvious answer is the right one..