https://www.resetera.com/posts/11750995/
142 convictive rape judgments, a total of 6715 rape was reported.
All this tells me is that Sweden has a bad time prosecuting rape offenders, but it's easier if it's an immigrant.
Why is this thread premised on a racist, bad faith interpretation of the original article? Even the thread title omits this critical fact.
So the real issue here is apparently racism. And that suggesting that immigrants are overrepresented in the data is somehow a 'bad faith' interpretation.
Only it's not:
You can not therefore draw conclusions about all rapists based on the mapping. At the same time, the trend is the same as in previous investigations of suspected offenders, showing that people with foreign backgrounds are overrepresented.
I....I have no words...
They have a point, you can't look at conviction rates and extrapolate from there to how many crimes are committed and by whom.
There is a reason why conviction figures are used and not report figures. It is obviously far more murky using report figures. The quote from the article I used states correctly that you can't draw a conclusion on all rapists, but then goes on to say at the same time, based on previous reports, the trend does show an overrepresentation of immigrants. So whether or not we get an accurate reading from the conviction figures, the data still suggests an overrepresentation of immigrants.
The other thing is, this guy wasn't just pointing it out, he was claiming, from what seems like an assumption as far as I can tell, that the reason there is a overrepresentation in conviction figures was simply due to it being easier to convict immigrants. He then goes on to say the whole thing is racist and nothing more than a 'bad faith' interpretation.
It is one thing to point out the figures
may be misleading, it is another thing to suggest that it is actually racism that is the issue here.
