Foreigner crimes in Japan (split from Japan Bashing)

[gaijinalways]

Many Japanese believe that the severest Japan bashing is based on more than the economic/social/etc. issues at hand. In fact, the major newspapers implied, at the height of the Japan bashing frenzy, that anti-Japanese racism was a big part of it. I think I would agree with that.

And your evidence for this comes from......

I would think lot of the things in the Japanese media point to the opposite conclusion. Look at the reporting of 'foreign' crime in Japan. Even though the percntage of foreign crime is low (and lower than Japanese based as a percntge of the population living here), it is reported approximately 2.5 times more than Japanese caused crimes (guess that lets the Akihabara killer off the hook, maybe not:p). Oh, but it's not racist, just biased I suppose.

[caster51]

Even though the percntage of foreign crime is low (and lower than Japanese based as a percntge of the population living here),

atrocious crime of foreigner is so high
http://www.wafu.ne.jp/~gori/diary3/20060310hanzai.html

basicaliy ,zero percntage of foreign crime is usual in foreign country, right?
Please link statistics with a statistical problem...

[anomouse]

Regarding foreign/Japanese crime rates in Japan, I've never seen a fair and accurate comparison in foreign media (eg. the bloomberg article claiming that Japanese crime rates are higher). Numbers are manipulated to suit their purpose.

[Glenski]

true, anomouse. Caster, keep that in mind.

Heck, even the Okinawa web site created by Japanese has stats in favor of U.S. military but they think the stats show otherwise.

But let's not go down that OLD road again, folks, ok?

[anomouse]

true, anomouse. Caster, keep that in mind.

Heck, even the Okinawa web site created by Japanese has stats in favor of U.S. military but they think the stats show otherwise.

Did you take my post to mean something else? I'm not saying Japanese crime rates are higher, the bloomberg article says that, which is clearly manipulated in favor of foreigners. (You can check back the original stats.)

[Glenski]

Did you take my post to mean something else? I'm not saying Japanese crime rates are higher, the bloomberg article says that, which is clearly manipulated in favor of foreigners. (You can check back the original stats.)
anomouse,
You make it sound like "manipulated" means falsely portrayed, when it is not.

Foreigners DO have a lower percentage of crime than the locals, and it is falling. The Japanese NPA just doesn't want you to know that.

What I meant with the reference to the Okinawa site was, I laugh at that site because it was set up by Okinawans to show that foreigners commit "more crimes" than the locals, but it shows just the opposite.

[anomouse]

anomouse,
Foreigners DO have a lower percentage of crime than the locals, and it is falling.
First, this statement does not mean anything when FOREIGNERS could mean different things..(illegal immigrants/visitors/tourists/residents etc from wealthy/poor countries) Comparing apples and oranges.

Second, local criminals don't justify foreign criminals.

[gaijinalways]

http://http://www.debito.org/?p=1372 (http://www.debito.org/?p=1372)

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8V30PFO0&show_article=1

This is for 2007 from the Kyodo news.

Of the 35,800 cases, 25,753 cases were violations of the criminal code, down 6.2 percent from the previous year, while 10,047 cases were violations of special law, such as immigrant control and refugee recognition act, down 20.7 percent, according to the NPA.

So 1/3 are legal violations Japanese can't make in Japan, because Japanese don't need a passport or visa to stay in Japan. In addition, these figures seem to include foreign visitors, even though they are technically not residents.

Now we just need the Japanese figures.

caster51 postedbasicaliy ,zero percntage of foreign crime is usual in foreign country, right?

Says who?

[anomouse]

The Kyodo news article is about the statistics of foreign visitors, not residents, Mixing different types of foreigners (with different nationalities, backgrounds, status) and averaging them out doesn't mean anything. You can find more detailed statistics in official papers.

Regarding the special law, there seems to be a misunderstanding. The law doesn't just target foreigners. Japanese can also get arrested when they illegally employ foreigners without proper visas.

Also, remember, if one is staying in a country without a proper visa, everything he does in that country is illegal, even simply working and living is difficult without a proper visa, I don't understand the tendency here to trivialize visa violations.

[Glenski]

First, this statement does not mean anything when FOREIGNERS could mean different things..(illegal immigrants/visitors/tourists/residents etc from wealthy/poor countries) Comparing apples and oranges.You are just being silly with wealthy/poor countries in your "comparison".

The stats are pretty much here. Overall crime by foreigners is going down.
http://www.npa.go.jp/english/seisaku5/20071019.pdf
Since the figures only go to 2006, here's an article for 2007 data.
http://www.japanprobe.com/?p=1110
And, another.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8V30PFO0&show_article=1
The second one does not include permanent residents, but they only make up 300,000 in 2004, out of the 2 million total foreigners here, or roughly 10% of them.

Besides, a third of foreign crime is visa-related. Hardly a violent offense. But the NPA won't tell you that up front, only that "crime" numbes (not percentages) are going up.

Second, local criminals don't justify foreign criminals.I don't understand this statement. What are you trying to say here?

[gaijinalways]

The Kyodo news article is about the statistics of foreign visitors, not residents, Mixing different types of foreigners (with different nationalities, backgrounds, status) and averaging them out doesn't mean anything. You can find more detailed statistics in official papers.

No it's both, except for permanent residents, as Glenski already noted.

Regarding the special law, there seems to be a misunderstanding. The law doesn't just target foreigners. Japanese can also get arrested when they illegally employ foreigners without proper visas.

Immigration laws don't target regular citizens. Employing illegal workers falls afoul of employment laws, a whole other matter.

[anomouse]

I'm saying that comparing local crimes with the crimes of foreign visitors (of all kinds) is absurd. Bring in more tourists from developed countries, and the "foreign crime rates" will drop, but it doesn't make the country safer overall.

Violent or not, a crime is a crime, and it needs to be addressed.

gaijin, Immigration law says that employing foreigners without a valid visa is a punishable offense, foreigner or not. The law also addresses other offenses like human smuggling. The law isn't just about foreigners.

http://law.e-gov.go.jp/htmldata/S26/S26SE319.html

Lastly, this isn't a foreign crime thread, and you've said enough about it for several years in the past threads. (You two never grow up.)

[gaijinalways]

No, but it brings up a continual 'foreigner bashing' employed in Japan, which is related to a discussion of Japan bashing. It's a honest criticism, and you don't care for it and are trying to twist out of it with semantics.

Japanese themselves can't be prosecuted for visa violations in Japan. There are no two ways around it.

Both foreign companies and Japanese companies can be prosecuted for violating labor laws concerning hiring illegals.

I don't see how you can try to compare the two issues.

[Glenski]

I'm saying that comparing local crimes with the crimes of foreign visitors (of all kinds) is absurd.Ok, that's clear enough. I don't know why you think that way, but let's read on...

Bring in more tourists from developed countries, and the "foreign crime rates" will drop, but it doesn't make the country safer overall. Your logic escapes me here about the drop in foreign crime rate.

Violent or not, a crime is a crime, and it needs to be addressed.Now you way just the opposite (I think) to the first statement I quoted above.

Just what the heck are you trying to say, Anomouse?


gaijin, Immigration law says that employing foreigners without a valid visa is a punishable offense, foreigner or not.True, but it's practically the only immigration law other than human trafficking that involves the local citizenry.

Lastly, this isn't a foreign crime thread,It has evolved into one, in part, stemming from comments on the peak of Japan-bashing "frenzy" (Ocean Dude's words), and gaijinalways' reply about how reports on foreign crime stats are racist and/or misleading. That was almost a week ago, and you perpetuated the idea, so why stop it now? It's still a part of the topic. Do you think that foreigners have no right to bash Japan with regards to the so-called crime stats against foreigners?

(You two never grow up.)[/QUOTE]Can we dispense with the juvenile lambasting here? Save it for PMs.

[FrustratedDave]

It has evolved into one, in part, stemming from comments on the peak of Japan-bashing "frenzy" (Ocean Dude's words), and gaijinalways' reply about how reports on foreign crime stats are racist and/or misleading. That was almost a week ago, and you perpetuated the idea, so why stop it now?
A very hypocritical statement due to the fact that this thread has moved on a tangent , although I agree with you on some things being talked about even if it were not to be be a part of the OP's original intent of the post. I wish you had this kind of veiw for other threads too, as it would make me want to discuss things more deeply.

[anomouse]

Foreign crime stats isn't racist. Hanzai hakusho also counts immigration law violations by Japanese nationals abroad.

http://hakusyo1.moj.go.jp/en/53/nfm/n_53_2_1_6_1_0.html
http://hakusyo1.moj.go.jp/jp/54/nfm/n_54_2_1_5_1_0.html

17,534,565 Japanese nationals went abroad in 2007. Hanzai hakusho reports 529 cases of Japanese crimes abroad (604 Japanese nationals involved), of which 84 cases were immigration-related violations. Racist against Japanese because the locals can't commit the same crime?

Is trespassing a crime in your country? It is irrelevant that the owner of the property himself cannot be prosecuted for trespassing when someone else intrudes.

You don't need to reply me. I'm sick of your repetitiveness. You actually have nothing to say.

Anyway all illegals should go to the USA.

[Glenski]

Dave,
Why do you see my statement as hypocritical? Yes, I don't like people going off on tangents, if that is what you meant, but this was not a real tangent IMO. Shrug.

Foreign crime stats isn't racist.Depends on who presents them.

You can keep the "illegals" that aren't American citizens, anomouse. The USA doesn't want them. Sounds more like you are shifting the topic to America-bashing now.

Your stats on Japanese travelers and their crimes is rather pointless here. I thought the whole point was to show that the way Japan treats its foreign crime stats is very poor, perhaps even racist in nature (example: the NPA declaring that foreign crime is on the rise when it actually isn't). What's the point in bringing up stats on crimes that J tourists commit? You make a very confusing "argument".

[FrustratedDave]

Dave,
Why do you see my statement as hypocritical? Yes, I don't like people going off on tangents, if that is what you meant, but this was not a real tangent IMO. Shrug.


My point is that I felt the same way about voting in the legal rights thread. Just like this ,it is not dirrectly related to the orignal post but does have some relevance when you you take it in the context of the thread. So why can you say that in a Japan bashing thread that crime stats have relevance when you disagreed with the voting tangent? Don't worry ,I see the relation in this thread as I did in the voting thread.

So I guess what I am trying to say is that if you don't see a problem then should that be basis enough for other thread to be regarded as off topic. More so I would hope you would keep a more open mind when threads do sway from the OP.

[Glenski]

You took the voting issue far beyond the human rights stance. Glad to see you actually defined it as a tangent.

Crime stats that are made up by the police department against foreigners is discrimination just to get them a bigger budget. Clear enough?

Open mind? It's plenty open. I would just rather keep threads from going off-topic. You apparently can't see the difference.

[FrustratedDave]

Crime stats that are made up by the police department against foreigners is discrimination just to get them a bigger budget. Clear enough?

Open mind? It's plenty open. I would just rather keep threads from going off-topic. You apparently can't see the difference.

Where is this made up crime stats? Show me one instance where the government lied about foriegn crime numbers?

As for off topic, foriegne crime in a Japan bashing thread is just as off topic as the legal voting rights in a foriegn leagls rights thread. Both can be linked to thread each thread in some way so I don't mind the discussion. It is all down to ones perception and yours frequently seems to be right "in your eyes".

And if you don't want to see threads go off topic I suggest you follow your own advise and maybe look at things from a different perspective.

[Glenski]

Try this on for size. Look past the name of the author.
http://www.debito.org/japantimes100402.html
http://www.debito.org/ihtasahi121502text.html

And, more with quotes from the articles.
http://www.j2fi.net/2008/02/11/japans-high-foreign-crime-rate-explained/
Crimes Committed in 2006 by Japanese Nationals (Population: 127,700,000)

* Murders: 1,309
* Assaults: 76,303
* Rapes: 1,948
* Other: 2,050,850

Crimes Committed in 2006 by Foreign Nationals (Residents: 2,100,000)

* Murders: 61
* Assaults: 47
* Rapes: 34
* Other: 40,615

That’s quite a bit of “Other” on the side of foreign nationals, so let’s see a breakdown of those numbers.

* Traffic Offenses: 22,390
* Overstay Visa: 9,211
* Arson: 71
* Various Thefts: 8,943

Yep, that’s right. Overstaying a visa or getting a speeding ticket is viewed no different than robbing a bank, killing a few people in the process and stealing a car to escape. It seems the Japanese statisticians don’t differentiate between a crime and an offense. This is the true reason behind the foreign crime “problem” in this country.

I agree that overstaying a visa is illegal and should be punished accordingly, but to lump it together with murder and theft does little to promote Japan’s image

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Japan/FK13Dh01.html
Over the past two decades, crimes committed by foreigners have never exceeded about 4% of all crime in Japan, and typically the yearly average has been between 2% and 3%. Foreigners currently make up just over 1% of Japan's total population, so they are only slightly over-represented in the figures. Despite this, the police, lawmakers and the media have focused on foreign crime as if it were one of the most serious issues facing Japan. For example, five of the 16 annual Police White Paper policy reports published between 1987 and 2003 took crimes committed by foreigners as their main theme.

http://www.japanprobe.com/?p=5742
While the number of felony and major misdemeanor crime allegations decreased, the number of SOFA personnel arrested dramatically increased. According to Okinawa Prefectural Police statistics, 36 SOFA personnel were arrested during the first six months of this year.

That’s 11 more than the same period last year, an increase of 44 percent.
(snip)
Stars and Stripes emphasizes that these numbers may appear high, but they actually reflect a low crime rate. The per-capita crime arrest rate for US military personnel was half the rate of Okinawa prefecture’s general population. [last line buried in the article]

http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=64013&archive=true
(related story, interesting quote)
When a columnist for the Japan Times examined crime statistics for the prefecture in February, he said he was shocked to learn the per capita arrest rate for SOFA-status Americans on Okinawa was half the rate of the prefecture’s general population.

http://www.debito.org/TheCommunity/communityissues.html#police
http://www.debito.org/ihtasahi121502text.html

This, however, is my favorite page. Made by Okinawan government itself, this one table itemizes the crimes committed by SOFA status Americans from 1972 to 2001. (I don't know why it has not been updated.) It shows the number of cases and number of arrests for a variety of crimes, but the kicker is that it actually shows what PERCENT OF THE TOTAL ON OKINAWA was committed by these Americans. Pretty puny percentages (1.7 and 5.3, respectively). So, over a 30-year period, the enormous outrage in Okinawa over crimes committed by military personnel has been blown seriously out of proportion just because the offenders were foreign and high-profile. Do you get that part of the news reported, though? Nope.
http://www3.pref.okinawa.jp/site/view/contview.jsp?cateid=14&id=666&page=1

[pipokun]

It seems the Japanese statisticians don’t differentiate between a crime and an offense. This is the true reason behind the foreign crime “problem” in this country.

Your assumption is simply wrong.
You know the differences between Keiho han (violating the penal code) and Tokubetu ho han (offenses violating immigration law and/or traffic). And the official statistics use different data for each.
So it is your problem after all.

About the SOFA personnel
Again, it is unfair to compare the crimes between people with the public official visa status and the locals.

It was a big news that a young SDF soldier with his tank driver license was arrested for riding a motor bike without the bike license off-base. But if the minor offense were by the SOFA people, he/she must be protected under the SOFA.

*snip
"Murder" in Japan includes "attemped murder". So it does not mean that over 1000 people are killed every year.
This is a bit slight differences between the US and Japan.

[Glenski]

pipokun,
Those were not my comments. Those were quotes from the links. Obviously, you didn't care enough about the topic to read them. Sheesh. Thanks for nothing.

Again, it is unfair to compare the crimes between people with the public official visa status and the locals.Why? Japan does it. That's why I brought it up.

It was a big news that a young SDF soldier with his tank driver license was arrested for riding a motor bike without the bike license off-base. But if the minor offense were by the SOFA people, he/she must be protected under the SOFA.That doesn't mean minor offenses are unreported in the news. In fact, they are. It's that notoriety thing again. You just proved it with your reference. Now, why do you think it was so all-fired important to put that on the news, when so many others have done the same thing yet get no coverage?

"Murder" in Japan includes "attemped murder". So it does not mean that over 1000 people are killed every year.
This is a bit slight differences between the US and Japan.What's your point?

[pipokun]

...
Why? Japan does it. That's why I brought it up.


Not Japan, but the people incl. you did the interpretation to prove the lower crime rate of the public officials related to SOFA.
What Japan does is just to show the data.

This, however, is my favorite page. Made by Okinawan government itself, this one table itemizes the crimes committed by SOFA status Americans from 1972 to 2001. (I don't know why it has not been updated.)

http://www3.pref.okinawa.jp/site/contents/attach/14811/statistics200803.pdf

I don't know the reason why they don't translate it into English, either. Just refer to the page 86 and 87 above to satisfy your interest.

What's your point?
Nothing in particular, but it is interesting to know the differences between the two countries.

[riermman]

#21 You are citing numbers from a random blog, but they are inaccurate.

Re: SOFA crime statistics.
They are off-base crime statistics. The Japanese police has nothing to do with anything going on on-base. Remember, the US military members are off-base only on weekends, and they still commit many crimes. This is embarrassing. Average Japanese are off-base 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The comparison seems a bit skewed.

Also remember, the crimes by SOFA members are controversial, because they are in Japan for security reasons. Their status DOES matter in this case.

[Glenski]

pipokun wrote: Again, it is unfair to compare the crimes between people with the public official visa status and the locals.

I replied: Why? Japan does it. That's why I brought it up.

pipokun responded: Not Japan, but the people incl. you did the interpretation to prove the lower crime rate of the public officials related to SOFA.
What Japan does is just to show the data.

Wrong, pipokun. The Japanese NPA shows the data in its own way (numbers of crimes instead of percent per capita), and that is a false interpretation, not merely showing the data.

Re: the Okinawa site stats on crime for 1972-2001
Pipokun wrote: I don't know the reason why they don't translate it into English, either. Just refer to the page 86 and 87 above to satisfy your interest.What the heck are you talking about? The stats page I linked was totally in English. Thanks for nothing.

I wrote: What's your point?
pipokun wrote: Nothing in particular, but it is interesting to know the differences between the two countries.More useless response.

riermann wrote:
They are off-base crime statistics. The Japanese police has nothing to do with anything going on on-base. Remember, the US military members are off-base only on weekends, and they still commit many crimes. This is embarrassing. Average Japanese are off-base 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The comparison seems a bit skewed.I understand what you are trying to say here. Time spent in the general public and all. Still, you are making the same mistake as the Japanese, by using number of crimes instead of percentage per capita. The military still wins out, but as you and I both pointed out, they lose in image because of the publicity since they are (the point of this thread, mind you.....) foreigners.

Oh, and I apologize for showing blog stats, but I was trying to reply quickly here. Where can we find the accurate ones you seem to know?

[pipokun]

Wrong, pipokun. The Japanese NPA shows the data in its own way (numbers of crimes instead of percent per capita), and that is a false interpretation, not merely showing the data.

More useless response.


Again, it is your false interpretation. The data also show the increase of coming foreigners as well as the definition of them, foreigners except
a) permanent residents (incl. the special permanent residents)
b) SOFA people
c) People with unknown resident status

What the heck are you talking about? The stats page I linked was totally in English. Thanks for nothing.
I am talking about the intentional misleading and/or reluctance of updating data. So far, I've never heard that the activists fairly mention the recent trend, decrease of crime in Japan.

[Glenski]

Pipokun,
It is not my interpretation that is in dispute here. The NPA is the one who interprets the data in the tables. It is they who tell the public misleading information.

Are the numbers of foreigners rising? Yes.
Is the percentage of crimes committed by foreigners larger than those by locals? No. But the police will not put things that clearly. They merely say that "foreign crime is on the rise" and cite numbers of crimes, not percentages, which is more accurate. Misleading.

So far, I've never heard that the activists fairly mention the recent trend, decrease of crime in Japan.Then, that only nails the coffin shut on what I wrote earlier. You never read any of the links by Debito, Japan's leading human rights activist, did you?

Please, moderators, wherever you are. Do we have to stand for such insipid remarks that merely prolong the agony of this thread and make it more useless than it really is?

[pipokun]

Pipokun,
It is not my interpretation that is in dispute here. The NPA is the one who interprets the data in the tables. It is they who tell the public misleading information.
Are the numbers of foreigners rising? Yes.
Is the percentage of crimes committed by foreigners larger than those by locals? No. But the police will not put things that clearly. They merely say that "foreign crime is on the rise" and cite numbers of crimes, not percentages, which is more accurate. Misleading.


Just take a look at the table 2-18 below.
The misleading interpretation by the NPA you might say clearly shows you the significant increase of coming foreign population.

http://www.npa.go.jp/hakusyo/h19/honbun/pdf/19p02000.pdf

I know the increased coming foreigners include innocent travelers, young or old, and your interpretation of the statistical population includes them, right? So I brought up the similar argument like anomouse above before, that is, the Japanese behavior in other countries, but I don't know why you pointed it out as a pointless argument.

When you use "foreigner" in your interpretation, you want to use it as big statistical population as possible.
But unfortunately, your interpretation, "much more non-Japanese here in Japan", does not account for the stable or gradually increase of non-Japanese imprisonment rate around 8%.
http://www.moj.go.jp/TOUKEI/t_k02.html

*snip
You never read any of the links by Debito, Japan's leading human rights activist, did you?
I am not for or against Debito, but he must be great for all non-American people if he would do the same mysterious behaivors to roam around for nothing, shoot photoes of airport security staffs, and record their conversation. I want to study how to speak English modestly.

If someone is a human right activist here, I hope he/she should reveal more about the reason why even Japan Communist Party strongly opposes the coming Human Right Law by the ruling LDP and Komeito, and maybe DPJ.
I don't need any human rights for myself, but I do want to see a bit transparency and fairness in the due procedure.

[Glenski]

Just take a look at the table 2-18 below.
The misleading interpretation by the NPA you might say clearly shows you the significant increase of coming foreign population.Since you don't read my links, why should I read yours?

I don't know why you pointed it out as a pointless argument.Because it is not related. The topic at hand is discrimination of foreigners based on their crimes (and those of locals) in Japan.

When you use "foreigner" in your interpretation, you want to use it as big statistical population as possible.
But unfortunately, your interpretation, "much more non-Japanese here in Japan", does not account for the stable or gradually increase of non-Japanese imprisonment rate around 8%.You lost me. What is the relevance here?

I am not for or against Debito, but he must be great for all non-American people Why do you exclude Americans?

...if he would do the same mysterious behaivors to roam around for nothing, shoot photoes of airport security staffs, and record their conversation.You have a very narrow view, if that what it is, of what he does.

If someone is a human right activist here, I hope he/she should reveal more about the reason why even Japan Communist Party strongly opposes the coming Human Right Law by the ruling LDP and Komeito, and maybe DPJ.
I don't need any human rights for myself, but I do want to see a bit transparency and fairness in the due procedure.WAY off topic! Please start your own thread on this.

[riermman]

Percentage per capita seems low just because the US military members are exempt from the jurisdiction of the local law most of the time. The statistics is tricky.

[pipokun]

Since you don't read my links, why should I read yours?
Just take a look at the table 2-18 below.
The misleading interpretation by the NPA you might say clearly shows THE PUBLIC the significant increase of coming foreign population.

*minor correct* sorry for my English
http://www.npa.go.jp/hakusyo/h19/hon...f/19p02000.pdf (http://www.npa.go.jp/hakusyo/h19/honbun/pdf/19p02000.pdf)

You don't need to read the link above, for I just use the statistics as you may think it would cause the misleading. The interpretation is by Debito or you after all.


The topic at hand is discrimination of foreigners based on their crimes (and those of locals) in Japan.

If you call the statistics discriminatory, what is your unfairness that intentionally ignores the data in the same statistics.

riermman The statistics is tricky.
Right.

[Glenski]

Percentage per capita seems low just because the US military members are exempt from the jurisdiction of the local law most of the time.
How do you figure? They are obliged to follow any and all laws on and off base at all times.

The simple fact is, the stats are not that "tricky". Percentage per capita is the only fair way to compare locals with SOFA foreigners.

If you call the statistics discriminatory, what is your unfairness that intentionally ignores the data in the same statistics.I guess you didn't read any of the previous thread, did you? Sigh.

[riermman]

#33
You are either ignorant or dishonest. Check out the sofa agreement. (notice the terms such as exclusive jurisdiction, primary jurisdiction, etc)

[Glenski]

riermman,
Could you be polite and use my name? I use yours.

I object to being called dishonest. As for ignorant, I am aware of certain exemptions for people with SOFA:

ARTICLE IX.
2. Members of the United States armed forces shall be exempt from Japanese passport and visa laws and regulations. Members of the United States armed forces, the civilian component, and their dependents shall be exempt from Japanese laws and regulations on the regis-tration and control of aliens, but shall not be considered as acquiring any right to permanent residence or domicile in the territories of Japan.

and

ARTICLE XII.
7. Members of the civilian component shall not be subject to Japanese laws or regulations with respect to terms and conditions of employment.

But, don't you think this says it all? (emphasis is mine)
ARTICLE XIV.
Persons, including corporations organized under the laws of the United States, and their employees who are ordinarily resident in the United States and whose presence in Japan is solely for the purpose of executing contracts with the United States for the benefit of the United States armed forces, and who are designated by the Government of the United States in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 2 below, shall, except as provided in this Article, be subject to the laws and regulations of Japan.

8. Japanese authorities shall have the primary right to exercise jurisdiction over the persons and their employees referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article in relation to offenses committed in Japan and punishable by the law of Japan. In those cases in which the Japanese authorities decide not to exercise such jurisdiction they shall notify the military authorities of the United States as soon as possible. Upon such notification the military authorities of the United States shall have the right to exercise such jurisdiction over the persons referred to as is conferred on them by the law of the United States.

not to mention this...
ARTICLE XVI
It is the duty of members of the United States armed forces, the civilian component, and their dependents to respect the law of Japan and to abstain from any activity inconsistent with the spirit of this Agreement, and, in particular, from any political activity in Japan.

and let's not forget the bulk of ARTICLE XVII
(b) the authorities of Japan shall have jurisdiction over the members of the United States armed forces, the civilian component, and their dependents with respect to offenses committed within the territory of Japan and punishable by the law of Japan.

(b) The authorities of Japan shall have the right to exercise exclusive jurisdiction over members of the United States armed forces, the civilian component, and their dependents with respect to offenses, including offenses relating to the security of Japan, punishable by its law but not by the law of the United States.

Here's what I'm using as the basis, in case anyone else is interested.
http://www.niraikanai.wwma.net/pages/archive/sofa.html

[pipokun]

If my cousin currently working in the US were arrested and sentenced, he would be categorized into "non-U.S. citizen and Asian". He is just a Japanese salaryman willing to climb up the corporate ladder back in Japan, though.

Arrests by Race, 2006
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_43.html
White
Black
American Indian or Alaskan Native
Asian or Pacific Islander

U.S. citizens and non-U.S. citizens sentenced in U.S. District Courts under the U.S.
http://www.albany.edu/sourcebook/pdf/t5352007.pdf
U.S. citizens
non-U.S. citizens

Then what do you think, Glenski, are the differences between race/citizen and non-citizen used in the US and foreign visitors (coming foreigners I used above) in Japan?

Needless to say, "foreign visitors" in the misleading J statistics or coming foreigners I used above do not include permanent residents or the SOFA people. And so far, no statistics by race.

Rather hard to find the perfect statistics or category to satisfy all, isn't it?

[Glenski]

Why bother comparing situations with the USA?

Race? Mixed bag and too hard to qualify in this world of globalization and mixing of blood. How about nationality, which is already part of the links I've provided? But you'd know that if you had read them!

[Glenski]

Interesting how this thread has moved a second time, now to a Society forum. Why isn't it listed in the Serious Discussions thread?

[orochi]

Interesting how this thread has moved a second time, now to a Society forum. Why isn't is listed in the Serious Discussions thread?

This site has way too many forums.

[Emoni]

Interesting how this thread has moved a second time, now to a Society forum. Why isn't is listed in the Serious Discussions thread?

What is it with wanting to put everything in the Serious Discussion section lately?

[wheehee3]

(a) The military authorities of the United States shall have the primary right to exercise jurisdiction over members of the United States armed forces or the civilian component in relation to

* (i) offenses solely against the property or security of the United States, or offenses solely against the person or property of another member of the United States armed forces or the civilian component or of a dependent;
* (ii) offenses arising out of any act or omission done in the performance of official duty.

These offenses are excluded from the Japanese criminal stats. (ii) is regardless of on-base, off-base.

(c) The custody of an accused member of the United States armed forces or the civilian component over whom Japan is to exercise jurisdiction shall, if he is in the hands of the United States, remain with the United States until he is charged by Japan.

[pipokun]

I am sorry that it is true that the English translation lacks the blue bar graph meaning the total number of visiting foreigners in the original below.
But the original table clearly shows the trend which proves much more non-Japanese visitors here. And the original interpretation mention the recent trend about the internationalization or globalization in Japan.

図2-18
外国人入国者数及び来日外国人犯罪検挙状況の推移
Table2-18
Number of visiting foregners and
total number of foreign visitors, arrested foreign visitors (penal code offenses and special law offenses)
http://www.jref.com/forum/picture.php?albumid=102&pictureid=725

Who the police wants to mislead at the table?

It seems to me that the original post here wanted to say that the ordinary Japanese would be misled by the notorious, discriminatory or biased statistics. But I don't know how many Japanese would read only the English translation without reading the original table.

[Glenski]

Who the police wants to mislead at the table?Government officials who give them money to work on. General public. Correct me if I'm wrong, but many times this information is given out sparingly by the NPA just to make statements that the NPA wants to make, instead of providing the whole story for complete accuracy and scrutiny. [/QUOTE]

[pipokun]

Mizuho Fukushima is an ultra-liberal chairperson of Social Democratic Party Japan.
She presented a question about the crimes related foreigners in Japan 5 years ago. She also shared the idea like Glenski, Debito and me, "Crime and Foreigner".
Since she is a lawyer, she is not stupid (hopefully), but is just forgetful because the former chairperson was officially granted the existence of SDF and the US force in Japan. But if I remember correctly, she brings back the anachronism, "no SDF, no US force, YES, THE ARTICLE 9"


Question
http://www.sangiin.go.jp/japanese/joho1/syuisyo/157/syuh/s157002.htm
Official Answer
http://www.sangiin.go.jp/japanese/joho1/syuisyo/157/touh/t157002.htm


Reference: The overall crime rate in Japan
347558/126,155,000*100
0.27%
http://www.npa.go.jp/hakusyo/h15/html/E3001010.html

TABLE 2-1 (from the official answer): Permanent residents incl. special permanent residents
http://www.sangiin.go.jp/japanese/joho1/syuisyo/157/touh/stimage/t15700203.gif

5199/713,775*100
0.72%
The permanent residents were 713,775 in total.
http://www.moj.go.jp/PRESS/030530-1/030530-1.html

All rates above are related to the penal code offenses, not including offenses related to the special laws such as immigration-related for the purpose of fairness. (pipo)

It is up to you to increase the denominator by adding the innocent tourists or expats in order to claim "FEWER NON-JAPANESE CRIME RATE THAN THE JAPANESE".

All I can say is:
that the police does not publicize any specific data in their crime reports, even though some might claim the reports would mislead the public;

that all police reports I read added boring phases such as "the increased non-Japanese, internationalization, globalization", we actually have the great trend of the more non-Japanese visitors here;

that the safety is not guaranteed without cooperation from all parties, Japanese or non-Japanese; and

that I did/do/will not vote for SDPJ.