The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

Sanctuary City

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
group3m has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/16/2017 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 836 times Debate No: 101033
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)




What comes to mind when one hears the term sanctuary city? Is it a sanctuary for refugees and criminals? Perhaps a place where illegal emigrants don't have to face consequences? Enough misconceptions, a "sanctuary city" is nothing more than a county that chooses not to get involved in doing the jobs of federal agents and instead focuses on the safety of all citizens. "In 1979, the Los Angeles Police Department issued Special Order 40, which prohibits police officers from inquiring about the immigration status of people not suspected of crimes." (Tramonte, Lynn) Many more counties across America have adopted similar policies that benefit them from lower crime rates and a stronger economy.
For instance, counties that have similar policies to LA are safer and have a lower crime rate than counties that choose to enforce federal immigration law. Illegal immigrants are part of most communities in the U.S. and it"s beneficial for the police to cooperate with immigrants to make their city sanctuary and safe. Los Angeles Police Department's work hard to gain the trust and participation of all citizens. In return they have been able to keep crime rates low at an average of 35.5 fewer crimes committed per 10,000 people. The crime rate drops when larger central metro counties are compared, 65.4 fewer crimes per 10,000 people. The approach and focus of the people from these counties have created an environment where illegal immigrants feel safe to assist the police in protecting the whole community.
In addition, citizens from sanctuary cities are better off economically and have lower unemployment. A middles class citizen from a sanctuary city makes on average, $4,352.70 more than a non-sanctuary middle class citizen. Considering the whole population or only Caucasians, sanctuary cities have shown to have less unemployment. Poverty is also lower in sanctuary counties on average 2.3 percent lower. These are all signs of a strong economy. Tom K Wong, finds in his analysis that "When local law enforcement focuses on keeping communities safe, rather becoming entangled in federal immigration enforcement efforts, communities are safer and community members stay more engaged in the local economy." Police departments from sanctuary counties protect the whole community and have trust in the entire community which includes illegal immigrants.



Firstly, the definition of sanctuary cities, is “a city that shelters illegal immigrants” . We are not talking about (1) refugees who have been granted asylum officially or (2) immigrants who are officially a part of the state. But we are referring to violators of the law, who have overstayed their tenure or entered the country without papers. It is literally taking undue advantage of one's privilege of being a part of another nation. Therefore that is the basic principle/definition with which you must view this debate.

The argument that I wish to propose today is that citizens are worse off due to increasing crime rates. The rebuttal to your case regarding the idea that it reduces crime and makes it safer for individuals is integrated within my constructive.

==Crime rates==

Last year in July, Kate Steinle, 32, was shot dead at the promenade in San Francisco. The trigger was pulled by an undocumented immigrant. I am not trying to paint a picture that all illegal immigrants are bad. But this is one of the many examples of common crimes that undocumented immigrants commit.

Why are they more susceptible to commit crime?
I concede with your point that they are not able to access employment opportunities because of the fear of being deported. This means that they are worse off economically. Hence they are more inclined to commit crime or engage in criminal activities with gangs. Even worse the man who shot Kate was deported back to Mexico five times. He also had a record of criminal cases to his name.

Now moving on to the facts that support my claims:
(1) Almost 75% of those who were sentenced due to drug possession and dealing were illegal immigrants

(2) Illegal immigrants consisted of 13.6% of those sentenced for all committed crimes in the country and 12% of murder sentences

(3) There were 168.75 illegals imprisoned for every 100,000 illegals in New York, compared to 48.12 legal immigrants imprisoned for every 100,000 legal immigrants. Several other cities were faced with same conditions.

(4) According to the Immigrations and Customs enforcement, there is no proper data on the existing number of illegal immigrants but only regarding those in prisons and serving jail sentences.

(5) The rise in illegals crossing the border has fueled gang violence. Eg: The barbaric MS-13 gang has been recruiting young illegals, resulting in higher crime in the Washington, D.C area. In fact, Montgomery County in Maryland "has seen an unprecedented level of gang-related violence in the last 8 months - with illegal immigrant youth being responsible for 85 percent of street robberies," according to IJ Review. The horrors of MS-13 have extended to the Brentwood community in Long Island, NY, where the remains of a dead teenager was found for the fifth time in six weeks, likely the result of MS-13.

(6) Law enforcement is becoming increasingly difficult - Not only don't the cooperate with federal agents in deporting these individuals, but the local police also find it difficult to perform their duties. Mac Donald documents show how members of the LAPD were able to recognize known gang members, but couldn't do anything to apprehend them until they had committed a crime – despite the fact that they were illegals who repeatedly snuck back into the country. This is the case with other sanctuary cities as well.

(7) Jessica Vaughn of the Center for Immigration Studies found that in a nine-month timeframe in 2014, sanctuary cities shielded 9,265 illegals from deportation, 62 percent of which "had significant prior criminal histories" and 2,320 of them were subsequently rearrested for new crimes, according to Daniel Horowitz at Conservative Review.

Why are legal immigrants also worse off?

The police are not able to differentiate between illegals and legals. It is not only the police, but the public will also have the same distaste towards the legal immigrants also. They will feel that they are the result of all the crime in the country. This is because personal security is becoming an issue of concern and the public is unable to rationally distinguish between the legals and the illegals. Thus this also results in the formulation of worse immigration policies and far worse outcome for the legal immigrants also.
Why is crime bad for the citizens?
The state has an obligation to protect citizens from any kind of harms they may face as they are apart of the nation. Supporting illegal immigrants and not taking action to curb their crime is an act of directly harming the security of the people. Those living in sanctuary cities also do not have any responsibility to accept these kind of harms.

Conclusion: Illegals are more susceptible to commit crime thus endangering the lives of citizens in the cities too.

So until and unless you want to see more people being killed, homes being broken, gang wars becoming prevalent and an unsafe America will you support sanctuary cities. [Citations in comments]

Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by group3m 3 years ago
can you tell me which ones are debatable? The point to my argument is that people in such cities benefit from a stronger economy and lower crime rates, so yes I do think sanctuary cities are a good thing.
Posted by dipper 3 years ago
I see a lot of premises in there (most of them debatable) but no actual opinion. Can I assume from your context that your opinion statement is "Sanctuary cities are a good thing"? Or is there a deeper point you're going for?
This debate has 6 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.