Are We Too Soft In This Country? ........

Roar87 said:
No being in this country is not a right for people who aren't British citizens, it's a privilege that can and should be revoked if people break the law.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree. I'm not against deporting foreign criminals, rather arguing that due process should be allowed to take place before deportation.

V F said:
Lots of crazy/mental people are in prisons that shouldn't even be there but they shut all the mental hospitals down.

It'll never happen.
Click to expand...

Nothing's perfect but legal aid does and will help. Just because occasionally it also helps people that may have committed crimes you don't like doesn't mean it shouldn't be accessible to all. That's the point I'm making.

dowie said:
sadly we don't have access to a crystal ball to really determine how much of a threat they pose... anyone facing deportation after being found guilty is potentially a 'threat' I'm not sure we have the ability legally to simply keep people locked up after they've completed their sentence simply because they've chosen to appeal being deported... in fact it would be cheaper to deport them surely?
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but again nothing is perfect and if done right the threat is minimal. If we don't acknowledge that then where do we draw the line?

There are many murderers that have not been convicted because there was reasonable doubt about whether they committed a murder. Some of them subsequently reoffended. There aren't many arguing that we should reduce the level of proof for convictions to that of civil cases, so less "get away with it", and to protect others for example.

In the same way the small chance that someone may reoffend between being released from prison and their deportation appeal being heard should also be be measured by that metric. Allow due process, rather than just caring about cost. Just because some take the **** doesn't mean we should forfeit the right for everyone.
 
Amp34 said:
Perhaps, but again nothing is perfect and if done right the threat is minimal. If we don't acknowledge that then where do we draw the line?

There are many murderers that have not been convicted because there was reasonable doubt about whether they committed a murder. Some of them subsequently reoffended. There aren't many arguing that we should reduce the level of proof for convictions to that of civil cases, so less "get away with it", and to protect others for example.

In the same way the small chance that someone may reoffend between being released from prison and their deportation appeal being heard should also be be measured by that metric. Allow due process, rather than just caring about cost. Just because some take the **** doesn't mean we should forfeit the right for everyone.
Click to expand...

you can still allow due process and deport them... they've not prevented from making an appeal, just they won't be in the country or posing a threat

frankly deporting ought to be preferable to your other suggestion that they simply remain locked up past their sentence
 
Commit a crime get sent home. It can't get any easier.

Want to come into the UK from an EU member state and have committed a crime in your home country then you should be refused entry. Do you really think everyone coming in via some airport is checked?
 
scorza said:
Oh look another one: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4601376/Judge-rules-unfair-deport-sex-offender.html
Court of Appeal rules we can't deport a paedo refugee, who attacked a 13 year old girl, back to Zimbabwe because it wouldn't "be fair" to him. Oh and I especially love this bit:
Click to expand...

I wouldn't trust the Daily Mail (or most newspapers) to accurately report on any major court case. Even in instances where they have no intention of misleading, they often miss key points or fail to report on the nuances of the judgement.
 
Last edited:
Amp34 said:
If they're still a threat then keep them in prison, if they are not considered a threat and released then what's the issue of letting them stay in the country for another few months while their appeal is processed?
Click to expand...


the fact so many just vanish when waiting for thier apeal as they know theyll lose.
 
Tunney said:
I wouldn't trust the Daily Mail (or most newspapers) to accurately report on any major court case. Even in instances where they have no intention of misleading, they often miss key points or fail to report on the nuances of the judgement.
Click to expand...
"Justice must be done, and it must be seen to be done"
 
amigafan2003 said:
Those that would trade freedom for security will deserve and have neither.

Also, did you know Britain wrote the echr? What you're asking for is akin to wanting to magna carter rescinded.
Click to expand...
Scorza doesn't believe people should have basic human rights or privacy. Why do you think he'd care about the magna carter being ripped up?
 
scorza said:
...and, as Juan Rico put it in Starship Troopers (the book), when reminiscing about the execution of a child rapist and murderer from his platoon:

"That old saw about "to understand all is to forgive all" is a lot of tripe. Some things, the more you understand the more you loathe them."
Click to expand...

I don't think quoting something that was intentionally written to satirise gung-ho right-wing nationalism does your position any good. :p
 
krooton said:
I don't think quoting something that was intentionally written to satirise gung-ho right-wing nationalism does your position any good. :p
Click to expand...
I don't believe Heinlein wrote the book satirising gung-ho right-wing nationalism, I've read the book, which is still recommended reading for the USMC and US Army, and didn't get that message at all. Indeed wikipedia suggests he wrote it as a critique of 1950s America where he thought a lack of discipline would lead to moral decline (an judging by where we are today, he was right). You're possibly thinking of the film, which though enjoyable as junk food for the brain, bears little resemblance to the book - the director, Paul Verhooeven says he didn't actually read the book, but got an intern to read it for him and explain to him what it was about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom