I think I'm sensing a real confusion about how crime stats are compiled. They come from arrest records, crime reports and convictions, not from asking liars and criminals if they are liars and criminals.
True, much crime is unreported, but crime stats, just like any math or science, give us a fairly accurate understanding of the global picture. And when you combine crime stats with hundreds of years of culture studies, the picture is even greater. It's not about just asking questions. Because it is true. Many Gypsies will not tell the truth to outsiders. It is about actually living with them and studying their way of life, or coming from the culture oneself, like Ian Hancock, one of the foremost Gypsy researchers.
I know some distrust science or math but they can give an accurate enough picture that we rely on them to help us do things like cure disease, develop vaccines, track health trends and needs, etc. Same thing applies here.
As to placing anyone on a pedestal, how does it go from trying to clear up the serious negative stereotype that the Gypsy culture is based on crime, to vaulting an entire people as righteous?
If I was to say that vandalism is very low in Singapore and that crime rates overall are low there, am I putting them on a pedestal? If I say that the rates of child abductions by strangers is relatively low in Spain, am I putting the Spanish on a pedestal?
How about if I say that theft among the Amish is quite uncommon?
I mean, I don;t get the logic here. Some are saying that the Roma are immersed totally in crime, that it is a way of life for them all. Others bought into the hysteria that Gypsies were running around stealing white babies and thrusting them into a sex trafficking or adoption ring.
I am responding to that with actual facts. Compiled from actual data. It's not about saying they are great, sin free people. And a logical response to the stereotypes being refuted by math and evidence, does not seem to me to be, "Well, some crimes aren't reported!" Okay, but we are talking about whether the Gypsy culture is inextricably linked to crime and whether they are involved in large scale child trafficking operations involving non-Gypsy kids.
So let me be clear. Research and crime stats show the following:
1. Most Gypsies are not criminals.
2. The myth of the Gypsy child stealer, kidnapping non-Gypsy kids is just that: A myth. There has yet to be an actual, proven case of it. Including here.
3. Gypsies do not sell or tend to adopt their kids out of the culture. But, sometimes they are taken out and forcibly adopted. That happened a lot in Romania.
4. Some Gypsies have begun to be involved in sex trafficking or prostitution. But they do not prostitute themselves. A man or woman who would do such a thing would be cast out of the group.
5. Some Gypsies are involved in child trafficking, of their own kids to other Gypsies, in order to pay off debts or send money home to the family. These kids are then used to beg and steal. Again, there is no known case of Gypsies trafficking a non-Gypsy child. I mean, do you guys really think that poor women or corrupt hospitals, or orphanages or whatever, would deal with Gypsies? When there are so many people not living in huts they can deal with in illegal adoptions?
6. Gypsies are not saints. Some do commit crimes. But they do not tend to engage in violent crime involving outsiders. The crimes they tend to be involved in include bunco fraud scams and theft.
Have their ever been exceptions to these rules? I'm sure there have been isolated cases. But we are talking, again, about what the culture is based on and what large-scale crime operations they could be involved in.