This argument is inane. Yes it's additional crime, but the more people means the less you are likely to be the victim of a crime if the per capita goes down, even if the absolute number goes up. I mean, this shouldn't even be a point of contention it's like completely basic stuff. If the pool gets bigger, yet a certain population of that increasing pool commit less crime then that population is preferrable if crime is the only outcome you are inquiring. Besides that, the net amount of immigrants from Mexico has been decreasing for the last few years and that's actually a problem, With emmigration and immigration you need a certain amount of people in your country to sustain yourself.
I'm not talking about the English who settled, I'm talking about the Irish, German, Italian, Polish, Scandinavian and so on who immigrated in extremely large numbers during the late 1800s and early 1900s. If you go back one or two generation only about 10% of Americans can be traced to the founding fathers and that's only like 300 years ago. Look up the demographical ancestry of your own country.
That article is laughable. It's an opinion piece by a contributor, and if you check the sourcing it goes to an obscure webpage called "corruption watch" which has articles that looks worse than Breitbart. It also uses itself as the source for its "articles" which should be a giant red flag. The statistics on immigration crime has been gone through countless times on here and you're free to look for it.
