I overall decided to change my thesis up about how there is no big relationship between the increase of crime with immigration. This is basically what I was trying to state before in my first thesis, trying to explain crimes that immigrants participated in but overall didn’t have a huge relationship to the increase of crime. I feel focusing on immigrant crimes and compared to native born american crimes is stronger for my paper because my artifacts and sources provide a lot more information on that rather than my original idea. Let me know what you think!
Thesis: According to The Abstract of Immigration Report, there was no relationship that immigrants increased crime in the early 20th century. However, by analyzing different age groups of immigrants, economic status of these groups as well as the specific crimes these different groups committed, I have realized that each subgroup has less of an impact on crime than we would have imagined. This was important because increases in crime rates are always blamed on the immigrants, which is not the case.
Thesis: According to The Abstract of Immigration Report, there was no relationship that immigrants increased crime in the early 20th century. However, by analyzing different age groups of immigrants, economic status of these groups as well as the specific crimes these different groups committed, I have realized that each subgroup has less of an impact on crime compared to native born americans. This was important because it shows native born americans are more likely to commit crimes and that immigration did not increase crime in the early 20th century
These are my two thesis’s I want to work with. I overall want to show that even though crime didn’t increase because of immigration. In my paper I want to compare crime rates ect to native born americans. So overall, I want to argue that there was no relationship to the increase of crime because of immigration. I also want to have a comparison factor to native born americans.
I’m not sure on which thesis to use or to maybe re-work both of my thesis ideas. Im submitting it how it is
Below is my original thesis that you said would be good for this assignment
“Until now I never understood the relationship that immigrants in the early 20th century had on overall crime levels in the US. However, by analyzing different age groups of immigrants, economic status of these groups as well as the specific crimes these different groups committed, I have realized that each subgroup has participated in different types of crimes as well as the severity of crime during the early 20th century. This was important because it added to the already rising crime levels in the US during the early 1900’s.”
Here is some paragraph ideas that I want to work with to try to show my thesis
According to the abstract of Immigration, it states that “There is no satisfactory evidence has yet to be produced to show that immigration resulted in an increase of crime disproportionate to the increase in adult population”. It also states that “Immigration has made changes in the character of crime in the United States”. Native born Americans in conclusion showed tendencies to commit more serious crime than immigrants. However, American born children of immigrants formed a larger proportion of the immigrant population, especially 17 to 18 year olds. Any age range after that, it was more common to see native born americans in prison, which could be a factor to immigrants taking their jobs ect. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2831353/
Paragraph one: Before immigrants started their long journey to the USA, crime was already on the rise. Crime was on the rise again during these times. These crimes mostly revolved around city life, gang violence, organized crime and murder, gambling, prostitution and manslaugther. This also didnt help that police men were starting to gain more power, which caused an onslaught of murder and crimes. Also, crimes were being committed due to the fact the living conditions were poor and unsanitary, which can be looked at as the broken windows theory. The broken windows theory basically states if something is broken and not replaced, then more “windows” will be broken which will cause an uproar of crime. During the 1900’s, cities were begging to be developed, and with the soon arrival of immigrants, a lot of people lived in poverty and they had to do anything to try to survive these harsh environments. Even after immigrants came, crime was on the rise because of the National Prohibition Act. This act stated that all manufacturing, selling and consuming of alcohol would be banned. This lead to a 24% increase of crime during the 1920’s to 1933. Overall, crime was already on the rise before and after Immigrants traveled to the United States to seek a better life. This doesn’t mean however, immigrants had no contribution to crime. (I will add more to this in future to come, this is just an outline of some ideas I could focus on.) https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa157.pdf
Immigrant Nationality and Crime= Here is where I am going to focus on different crimes immigrants committed/arrest rates.
Even though immigration did not have an impact on the increase of crime in the 20th century, it doesn’t mean that immigrants are in the clear. Immigrants still have a relation to crime, since there has been different percentages of crimes committed/arrests by different Immigrant groups. According to my article and bar graph from The Abstract of Immigration Report, different nationalities were committing different crimes and getting arrested because of them. According to my graph under my gallery page, nationality groups such as Lithuanian, Slavonian, Italian and Polish were more likely to be arrested for crimes such as all offenses of personal violence in comparison to native born American groups. This could be because of the racial tendencies that these groups suffered which made them a bigger target or because they simply committed the crime. Most of these cases are from second generation immigrants, meaning immigrants who had kids. This only took place in Chicago, where crime was more relevant. Overall native born Americans were more likely to be arrested for crimes. (This could be my counter argument for example and then ill use evidence I listed below to prove how this data could represent such a small proportion). Most arrests were native born Americans in their 40s for major crimes and for minor crimes mostly fell under “second generation” immigrants. In conclusion looking at this graph, these crimes immigrants were arrested for fall under second generation immigration. When comparing immigration as a whole, native born americans were more likely to be convicted of a crime than first generation immigrants. When looking at table 11 from The abstract of immigration, it shows a table from new york’s court from 1901 to 1908. This table shows that when looking at the country of birth, the United states by far dominates the categories of gainful offenses, offenses of personal violence, offenses against public property, offenses against chastity and unclassified offenses. However, we can argue that second generation immigrants are more prone to crimes than first generation immigrants (depending on the nationality)
Age differences= Here I am going to talk about immigration and crime rates depending on the factor of age. Overall, first generation immigrants were much less likely to get arrested compared to native born Americans. The only difference is that kids from 17-18 years of age that are immigrants are more likely to commit crimes than compared to any other age group of native born americans.
Economic= Throughout the time Immigrants were coming to the United States, the economy was growing. More and more people started to live in the major US cities, which caused more and more crime to be committed. Since jobs were being taken by Immigrants since they were more willing to work for a cheaper price, native born americans started to commit more crimes since they needed a source of innocence
Gabriel, B. (2020, June 5). Riots in the 60s. Synonym. Retrieved November 9, 2021, from https://classroom.synonym.com/riots-60s-12781.html.
Moehling, C., & Morrison, A. P. (2009, November). IMMIGRATION, CRIME, AND INCARCERATION IN EARLY TWENTIETH-CENTURY AMERICA. Proquest. Retrieved
November 9, 2021, from https://www.proquest.com/docview/222949532?pq-origsite=primo&accountid=9970.
Moehling, C., & Piehl, A. M. (2009, November). Immigration, crime, and incarceration in early twentieth-century America. Demography. Retrieved November 9, 2021, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2831353/.
Thornton, M. (1991, July 17). Alcohol prohibition was a failure – Cato Institute. Cato Institute Policy Analysis No. 157: Alcohol Prohibition Was a Failure. Retrieved November 9, 2021, from https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa157.pdf.
Gabriel, Brian. “Riots in the 60s.” Synonym, 5 June 2020, https://classroom.synonym.com/riots-60s-12781.html.
Moehling, Carolyn, and Anne Morrison Piehl. “Immigration, Crime, and Incarceration in Early Twentieth-Century America.” Demography, Population Association of America, Nov. 2009, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2831353/.
Moehling, Carolyn, and Anne P Morrison. “IMMIGRATION, CRIME, AND INCARCERATION IN EARLY TWENTIETH-CENTURY AMERICA.” Proquest, Nov. 2009, https://www.proquest.com/docview/222949532?pq-origsite=primo&accountid=9970.
Thornton, Mark. “Alcohol Prohibition Was a Failure – Cato Institute.” Cato Institute Policy Analysis No. 157: Alcohol Prohibition Was a Failure, 17 July 1991, https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa157.pdf.