1. The article seems to have a couple contradictions -- though that could be based on me not properly reading the article or the article not providing necessary support information.
2. First contradiction - the article starts out with this quote:
Dozens of people have been killed in the past two years in attacks in the capital Stockholm and other big cities by gangs that are mostly from run-down suburbs dominated by immigrants.
But then later states:
. . . official statistics show no correlation between overall levels of crime and immigration.
You have murders due to gangs in areas dominated by immigrants, but there is no correlation between overall levels of crime and immigration. Those two statements don't seem to align. Though that last statement might need to be parsed. They state overall levels of crime, which I read as including crimes other than just murder.
3. Second contradiction - the article states there is no correlation between crime and immigration and that murder rates have remained flat. And yet the article provides figures that seem to contradict those statements. In 2017, those killed via shootings doubled to 19 in Stockholm. In Malmo, there have been 9 deaths via shootings compared to 21 in the prior 2 years. It should be noted that we're only though June 2018, so it looks like Malmo is well on its way to surpassing the death totals in 2016 and 2017.
One has to admit that those murder rates look low when compared to those in the US. Also, maybe Reuters is looking at things as a percentage of population when talking about rates. So yes, maybe rates are low, but doubling of absolute numbers is significant -- even if it doesn't nudge the rates much.
Question: has murder rates increased in run-down suburbs, but decreased in wealthier parts? That would explain why murder rates are flat even though Reuters mentioning the doubling of absolute murders in Stockholm and Malmo, driven by gangs.
No comments:
Post a Comment