There are more citizens than immigrants of course so we have to consider that in the statistics. But because the majority of people are citizens the threat will statistically come from the citizens in many cases.
Who is more likely to commit a crime against you? Your neighbor. Most crimes committed are not interracial but by someone of your own race. So if it works this way for crime, we can look at terrorism and if the statistics are similar to the crime statistics then the risks would be similar.
I haven't dug deep into the statistics to prove with certainty but I think policy should be set by statistics and not feelings.
And which neighbor is more likely to hurt you: the one who has lived in your neighborhood for many years (or even generations) or the one who has just moved in and feels alienated and without any roots?
Human emotions don't originate from random speculations - they are deeply rooted in past experiences and might carry wisdom accumulated thorough many generations. Dismissing them as baseless prejudice is not smart.
Fear of foreigners, even if unsupported by statistical data, is part of human wisdom.
Statistically speaking most crimes are committed by people you know. Fear of foreigners if unsupported by the statistics is definitely irrational so cannot be considered "wisdom". It's human ignorance if the statistics do not support it.
Chances are if you've been a victim of a crime it wasn't a foreigner who did it. If we look at serial killers, or robbers, or rapists, do they tend to be foreigners? Don't get me wrong, foreigners do commit crimes but often it's against their own group.
I think the opposite: it's human ignorance (and also arrogance) to throw away thousands of years of human evolution just because you've computed some statistical data.
Statistics help but it's just a tool, just as your brain helps but it's just a tool.
I guess I only believe in the science, in reason, and in pragmatic ethics. If it's not evidence based then it's not objective. I mean every human has their feelings about anyone else and should we all make our critical decisions about what the laws should be based on how we feel about others?
I mean what if some of us don't like obese people and make laws which are discriminatory against people who are obese? I mean if emotions are setting the laws then ethically speaking if we follow what you just said (emotivism) then it's not even wrong because laws wouldn't have to be justified by actual evidence.
I rely on statistics because I know my brain is limited and can be wrong.
Nobody suggests that the legal system should be based on emotions. That's absurd.
What I criticize however is shaming people for expressing their fears of foreigners. Or rubbing statistical data into their faces to shut them up. Openness has to come from inside, cannot be enforced upon people.
Distrust to a different race is a healthy behavior shaped by thousands of years of evolution. You cannot override it easily with the rational part of your brain.