A. Immigrants were responsible for some murders and rapes and other crimes
B. They had to be present in the country to commit these proximal acts
C. Had they not been present, the murders, rapes, and other crimes perpetrated would not have been committed by them in the country
D. There would have been less crime and the immigration system would not have caused harm to the actual domestic population.
The crime rates of citizens vs immigrants is informative in terms of helping determine policy adjustments in terms of country of origin and specific cultural concerns but it doesn’t change the fact that the immigration system is doing harm to the domestic population which it should rightfully otherwise protect and benefit and be sustainable in the service of all it does.
Nobody owes a violent, unstable refugee or criminal migrant (legal/economic, illegal etc) a fox in the henhouse situation. Doesn’t matter what they’ve been thru, it seems like there’s not even an in the alternative where they are mitigated and supervised until they can demonstrate they belong or removed before they can take root by causing harm.
Edit: by the way this can actually lead to citizens committing crimes of desperation because they can’t find housing or employment or any other necessary. We don’t have infinite resources but there is infinite profit potential for those encouraging this mandate.