Yep. They have fled a country because they will be tortured for reason X. They then seek asylum because they will be tortured for reason X. This nation happily grants asylum, but, we ask one small thing, be law abiding and there will not be a problem, we will even supply you with everything you need. Asylum seeker breaks the laws of the nation they sought asylum in, then they wonder why they get sent back to torturous nation.
This is basic parenting skills, carrot and stick.
You always struck me as intelligent, don't let yourself down now.
I'm being more of a Devil's Advocate here than anything else. I'm on the fence with it.
I think the best way to moralise the problem away is to say that you have Pete and Phil. Phil has a dodgy liver, if he starts drinking again he'll die. Pete has no problems, he can take a drink if he likes. That's not fair but it's the way it is.
As for refugees then I think that's the way we need to look at it. We need to be clear to them that if they break the law and it'd be more than just a minor thing then it's back to the Sudan, and they'll get it up 'em.
The other difficulty is as Castiel said children... if someone comes here and starts a family do we deport them and their family... If we don't then we're basically saying start a family ASAP to secure your stay, if we do then it's another step in the unpleasant direction.
I don't think it's ideal, but we're dealing with an imperfect situation. Were it ideal we'd have the resources to imprison and rehabilitate them. If you look at it another way... we don't go out and rescue people from oppressive regimes, so sending people back to them isn't too far different.
As for the EU side of it I cannot think of any way around it short of leaving the EU - which I'm in favour of doing anyway.
One final point, it's the petty criminals, the lazy thieves, drug dealers etc we need to be worried about rather than Abu Hamzas. Also the illegals who will work off the books. He got all the headlines while he was only one person.
