As much as I would love to discuss the pros and cons of different compilations of Swedish crime statistics, I think people are in danger of not seeing the woods for the tress here.
Even if immigration led to more crime – and that is far from certain – it would still be worth it because the moral imperative overwrites the risk. Right wingers ask us to tolerate far higher levels of risk all of the time in favour of their pet causes.
Compare an America where we have sensible – read: any – gun control to the America we have now. But we put up with the America we have now because of the (ridiculous and anachronistic) principle of the Second Amendment. Far more people die from loose gun laws that allow mentally ill people or people on no fly lists to buy guns than from immigration. There were 15,809 homicides by firearm in America in 2015, against the 14 deaths by Islamic terror (and in deathly cross pollination these were killed by legally purchased firearms.) There were 15,809 homicides by firearm in America in 2015, against the 14 deaths by Islamic terror (and in deathly cross pollination these were killed by legally purchased firearms.) This is their version social justice, far more deleterious than that held on the left and yet ours is supposedly “societal suicide”.
It is especially egregious that people tolerate one but not the other because America destabilised the Middle East with its foreign policy. Why is it that the same Americans who are so quick to take credit for the glories of their country, are the same to deny any responsibility at all when it does something bad – and all the while lecture us about “accountability”? I believe it’s “My Country Right or Wrong”, not “My Country When It Suits Me”. And yet we who would wish to bear the burden are decried as snowflakes, while those who shirk it with hysteria and hyperbole idealise themselves as modern day, rugged frontiersmen.