DS Forums

 
 

more scum that shouldn't be here


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Yesterday, 11:35
Andrue
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Brackley, UK
Posts: 16,649
The sooner we leave the EU the better. We can then re-establish border controls and keep these undesirable people out of our county.

This is why people voted to leave. It's not about the money, it's about having effective control of our borders and keeping such undesirable people out.
Exactly how would the UK be able to keep him out? They would have to know he's a criminal.
And this is why the vote went the way it did. Ignorance and poor thinking.

If anything being in the EU (or a future version of it) could make things safer by ensuring that such information is readily available and freely exchanged. The only change that Brexit will do is make it harder to gain access to European criminal history.

And even then - having a criminal record should not prevent you from entering this country. Not in the kind of Britain where I want to live. I believe in a free and open country and besides - we have enough violent offenders of our own. Taking in a few more from overseas isn't going to make that much difference.

People kill. All nationalities do. Keeping 'Johnny Foreigner' out is not going to reduce the UK murder rate.
Andrue is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old Yesterday, 11:45
fruitloop27
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: London- I come in peace :D
Posts: 2,641
How could he be given only 12 years for beheading someone??
fruitloop27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 12:06
Chris Frost
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 6,447
This is why we need to get out of the EU, as they are completely losing the plot.

Why in the name of God and Jesus Christ, was he allowed out after 7 years, when he's beheaded someone? It's literally beyond my comprehension.
Being either in or out of Europe won't make a blind bit of difference if the criminal history of a traveller isn't available from the origin country.

It could be argued that this wold be the sort of thing that's easier to change if we stayed in the EU. I certainly don't see an argument that it would be any easier to change after we leave.

The other question is whether we - the UK provide this sort of information to other countries? Do you know? Have a think about all them British crims sunning themselves in Spain, the south of France and elsewhere on the Med. This sort of thing cuts both ways, and we can't go shouting the odds if our own house isn't in order.
Chris Frost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 12:16
planets
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: goo goo ka choo
Posts: 25,473
Being either in or out of Europe won't make a blind bit of difference if the criminal history of a traveller isn't available from the origin country.

It could be argued that this wold be the sort of thing that's easier to change if we stayed in the EU. I certainly don't see an argument that it would be any easier to change after we leave.

The other question is whether we - the UK provide this sort of information to other countries? Do you know? Have a think about all them British crims sunning themselves in Spain, the south of France and elsewhere on the Med. This sort of thing cuts both ways, and we can't go shouting the odds if our own house isn't in order.
Well any small conviction for drugs etc can result in refused entry to the United States.
planets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 12:26
Andrue
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Brackley, UK
Posts: 16,649
Well any small conviction for drugs etc can result in refused entry to the United States.
Do they actually check though? It's possible that the UK and US freely exchange such information but I'm sceptical.

I know that when you apply for a visa if you have a criminal record (even for a something like drunk driving) you have to go to their embassy for an interview. It's possible that US immigration have full access to UK criminal records and consequently when your passport is scanned they might be flagged up. But if - as I suspect - it's more down to the visitor choosing to admit the offence when they apply for the visa then it's not much of a deterrent.

And if such a thing is possible for sure it will be bidirectional. If you're happy for UK immigration to have access to EU criminal histories are you sure you are happy for the reverse to be true?

In any case I still don't want to live in a country where people are excluded just because they've spent time in prison or convicted of an offence.
Andrue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 12:29
planets
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: goo goo ka choo
Posts: 25,473
Do they actually check though? It's possible that the UK and US freely exchange such information but I'm sceptical.

I know that when you apply for a visa if you have a criminal record (even for a something like drunk driving) you have to go to their embassy for an interview. It's possible that US immigration have full access to UK criminal records and consequently when your passport is scanned they might be flagged up. But if - as I suspect - it's more down to the visitor choosing to admit the offence when they apply for the visa then it's not much of a deterrent.

And if such a thing is possible for sure it will be bidirectional. If you're happy for UK immigration to have access to EU criminal histories are you sure you are happy for the reverse to be true?

In any case I still don't want to live in a country where people are excluded just because they've spent time in prison or convicted of an offence.
It wouldn't be an issue for me as i've never beheaded anyone.
planets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 13:01
Chris Frost
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 6,447
Well any small conviction for drugs etc can result in refused entry to the United States.
Exactly, it's a point I made earlier in this thread. So there's both a precedent and a mechanism in place to flag up certain catalogues of offence and offender.

The question then is why crims with a conviction for premeditated murder and a disposition towards violence aren't flagged in the same way. Oh cynical me, it wouldn't be because drugs have detection targets attached whereas stopping someone who poses an actual physical risk isn't actually measured against some Whitehall list... oh no, that can't possibly be the reason.

It doesn't change the counter argument for exiting Europe though. Whether we are in or out makes no difference unless we enact something to add this protection.
Chris Frost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 13:22
Brandy211
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 766
What?

How can you only get 7 years for that?
It was the Dutch Justice system that sentenced him for the beheading.

He served 7 years for it.

People can get longer than that for robbery here.
If he had committed a beheading here, I doubt he would have been free for many years.
Brandy211 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 13:31
Brandy211
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 766

And if such a thing is possible for sure it will be bidirectional. If you're happy for UK immigration to have access to EU criminal histories are you sure you are happy for the reverse to be true?

In any case I still don't want to live in a country where people are excluded just because they've spent time in prison or convicted of an offence.
People have been denied visas in the US & Canada for far less.
There was a woman who had lived in Canada for many years who was thrown out when it was discovered she had a shoplifting offence in the UK.
Even though offence would have been spent many years before.

It would depend on the offence. I would be quite happy for murderers to be excluded. Beheading someone isn't the same as a minor conviction.
He could have moved in next door to you!
Brandy211 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 13:34
SaturnV
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,614
And this is why the vote went the way it did. Ignorance and poor thinking.

If anything being in the EU (or a future version of it) could make things safer by ensuring that such information is readily available and freely exchanged. The only change that Brexit will do is make it harder to gain access to European criminal history.

And even then - having a criminal record should not prevent you from entering this country. Not in the kind of Britain where I want to live. I believe in a free and open country and besides - we have enough violent offenders of our own. Taking in a few more from overseas isn't going to make that much difference.

People kill. All nationalities do. Keeping 'Johnny Foreigner' out is not going to reduce the UK murder rate.
That is the kind of philosophy that lead to the majority wanting to leave.
People don't want to live in your kind of Britain.
No need to import any criminals, just because we already have some is no reason to welcome more.
SaturnV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 13:34
Rekekah_Carter
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 130
I very much doubt it. Human rights is not the issue here.
Certainly not the poor woman's who was beheaded! 7 years is a complete insult to her and her poor family.
Rekekah_Carter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 14:02
Andrue
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Brackley, UK
Posts: 16,649
It wouldn't be an issue for me as i've never beheaded anyone.
Who says it would be restricted to that?

For reference here's what the US says:

"We do not recommend that travelers who have been arrested, even if the arrest did not result in a criminal conviction, have a criminal record, certain serious communicable illness, have been refused admission into, or have been deported from, the United States, or have previously overstayed under the terms of the Visa Waiver Program, attempt to travel visa free under the Visa Waiver Program. The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act does not apply to US visa law and spent convictions,regardless of when they occurred will have a bearing on a traveler’s eligibility for admission into the United States."

If such a scheme were in place it's likely that your entire criminal history would be available. And maybe even your medical records.
People have been denied visas in the US & Canada for far less.
Indeed, and it's sad that they do it. It doesn't mean we have to emulate their behaviour though.
It would depend on the offence. I would be quite happy for murderers to be excluded. Beheading someone isn't the same as a minor conviction.
He could have moved in next door to you!
Meh. So could any number of home grown murderers.
Andrue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 14:08
Galaxy266
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,763
That is the kind of philosophy that lead to the majority wanting to leave.
People don't want to live in your kind of Britain.
No need to import any criminals, just because we already have some is no reason to welcome more.
I couldn't agree more!
Galaxy266 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 14:11
planets
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: goo goo ka choo
Posts: 25,473
Who says it would be restricted to that?

For reference here's what the US says:

"We do not recommend that travelers who have been arrested, even if the arrest did not result in a criminal conviction, have a criminal record, certain serious communicable illness, have been refused admission into, or have been deported from, the United States, or have previously overstayed under the terms of the Visa Waiver Program, attempt to travel visa free under the Visa Waiver Program. The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act does not apply to US visa law and spent convictions,regardless of when they occurred will have a bearing on a traveler’s eligibility for admission into the United States."

If such a scheme were in place it's likely that your entire criminal history would be available. And maybe even your medical records.
Why is it restricted to someone who has beheaded someone and then been free to commit further assaults in additional countries? Because that's the topic of this thread and what people are commenting on. People aren't commenting on a case where someone who had chickenpox when they were 12 has been refused a visa.

I don't have a criminal history so it wouldn't be relevant to me.
Had I beheaded someone, got a minimal sentence, then decided to travel around Europe attacking members of the police and airport staff with hammers, I would think it reasonable for my right to free movement to be questioned and/or curtailed.
planets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 14:12
Andrue
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Brackley, UK
Posts: 16,649
That is the kind of philosophy that lead to the majority wanting to leave.
People don't want to live in your kind of Britain.
No need to import any criminals, just because we already have some is no reason to welcome more.
I couldn't agree more!
We didn't import this one. We just weren't able to exclude him. There's a difference and it's that 'presumed innocent until proven guilty' philosophy that I want to protect. If you want to live in a country where people are punished on the assumption that they will do something bad then you better had leave. He was a free citizen travelling on a legitimate passport.
Andrue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 14:26
worzil
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 911
And this is why the vote went the way it did. Ignorance and poor thinking.

If anything being in the EU (or a future version of it) could make things safer by ensuring that such information is readily available and freely exchanged. The only change that Brexit will do is make it harder to gain access to European criminal history.

And even then - having a criminal record should not prevent you from entering this country. Not in the kind of Britain where I want to live. I believe in a free and open country and besides - we have enough violent offenders of our own. Taking in a few more from overseas isn't going to make that much difference.

People kill. All nationalities do. Keeping 'Johnny Foreigner' out is not going to reduce the UK murder rate.
Dont be silly.
If an immigrant kills someone in the UK that is one more on the murder rate if he was not her that would be one less.
Now tell me how many people have been purposely killed in the UK by immigrants or their descendants you can start with the london tube bombings.
worzil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 14:28
Rekekah_Carter
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 130
We didn't import this one. We just weren't able to exclude him. There's a difference and it's that 'presumed innocent until proven guilty' philosophy that I want to protect. If you want to live in a country where people are punished on the assumption that they will do something bad then you better had leave. He was a free citizen travelling on a legitimate passport.
I totally disagree. Someone who has committed such a heinous crime should not automatically be allowed to travel to where they want. This one, as many of them do, went on to commit another violent crime.

Yet again, our government depts show their ineptness.
Rekekah_Carter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 14:34
Andrue
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Brackley, UK
Posts: 16,649
Dont be silly.
If an immigrant kills someone in the UK that is one more on the murder rate if he was not her that would be one less.
Now tell me how many people have been purposely killed in the UK by immigrants or their descendants you can start with the london tube bombings.
I'm not the one being silly. This was a free citizen travelling on a legitimate passport who quite rightly was allowed to enter the country. We do not live in a country where people are assumed to be dangerous (not quite - the terrorists and the government seem to gradually winning the battle, sadly). That's not what Britain is supposed to be about. Britain is supposed to be about waiting to see before judging people.

And none of this has anything to do with a lack of control at our borders due to EU membership. This unfortunate incident could have happened with someone from any country in the world. It is simply not routine (and likely not possible in most cases) for UK border staff to research the criminal history of everyone who presents their passport. The attempt to link this to the EU is just typical of the kind of incendiary drivel that newspapers like the Daily Fail love to publish.

The best thing to learn from this sorry incident is never to buy a newspaper. Especially not a rag like the Daily Fail.
Andrue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 14:38
planets
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: goo goo ka choo
Posts: 25,473
We do not live in a country where people are assumed to be dangerous (not quite - the terrorists and the government seem to gradually winning the battle, sadly).
I'm not sure I understand this comment. He wasn't "assumed" to be dangerous, he was convicted of beheading someone. Do you not consider beheading someone dangerous?
He then went on to attack several people with hammers. Is attacking people with hammers also not dangerous?
planets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 14:52
Galaxy266
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,763
We didn't import this one. We just weren't able to exclude him. There's a difference and it's that 'presumed innocent until proven guilty' philosophy that I want to protect. If you want to live in a country where people are punished on the assumption that they will do something bad then you better had leave. He was a free citizen travelling on a legitimate passport.
Well, as it happens, I haven't actually murdered anyone!

Why, on earth, should I leave the country I was born in?
Galaxy266 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 14:53
anne_666
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 30,172
I'm not the one being silly. This was a free citizen travelling on a legitimate passport who quite rightly was allowed to enter the country. We do not live in a country where people are assumed to be dangerous (not quite - the terrorists and the government seem to gradually winning the battle, sadly). That's not what Britain is supposed to be about. Britain is supposed to be about waiting to see before judging people.

And none of this has anything to do with a lack of control at our borders due to EU membership. This unfortunate incident could have happened with someone from any country in the world. It is simply not routine (and likely not possible in most cases) for UK border staff to research the criminal history of everyone who presents their passport. The attempt to link this to the EU is just typical of the kind of incendiary drivel that newspapers like the Daily Fail love to publish.

The best thing to learn from this sorry incident is never to buy a newspaper. Especially not a rag like the Daily Fail.
And as usual their drivel is out there now and being believed. I'm sure Farage has to be one of their advisers.
anne_666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 14:53
jjwales
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,412
Certainly not the poor woman's who was beheaded! 7 years is a complete insult to her and her poor family.
Agreed, but still nothing to do with human rights.
jjwales is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 15:27
GusGus
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 615
I'm not the one being silly. This was a free citizen travelling on a legitimate passport who quite rightly was allowed to enter the country. We do not live in a country where people are assumed to be dangerous (not quite - the terrorists and the government seem to gradually winning the battle, sadly). That's not what Britain is supposed to be about. Britain is supposed to be about waiting to see before judging people.

And none of this has anything to do with a lack of control at our borders due to EU membership. This unfortunate incident could have happened with someone from any country in the world. It is simply not routine (and likely not possible in most cases) for UK border staff to research the criminal history of everyone who presents their passport. The attempt to link this to the EU is just typical of the kind of incendiary drivel that newspapers like the Daily Fail love to publish.

The best thing to learn from this sorry incident is never to buy a newspaper. Especially not a rag like the Daily Fail.

It would be interesting to know exactly how it would be proposed to stop this man and others like him from entering the UK. It looks as if he had served his time (short as they may have been but that is another issue)l, and was a free man. Under the current legislation he was free to travel in the EU
Even if that changes after Brexit how is it then to be judged and administered. People like Nelson Mandela were convicted criminals/terrorists, would they be denied entry here?
GusGus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 16:16
Happ Hazzard
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chesterfield, Derbyshire
Posts: 1,639
We should not be letting anyone in unless they can prove they do not have a criminal record in any country, and anyone even tangentially connected with another country that commits a crime should be deported immediately. No ifs, no buts, no appeals, just out.
Happ Hazzard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 16:19
SaturnV
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,614
We didn't import this one. We just weren't able to exclude him. There's a difference and it's that 'presumed innocent until proven guilty' philosophy that I want to protect. If you want to live in a country where people are punished on the assumption that they will do something bad then you better had leave. He was a free citizen travelling on a legitimate passport.
I don't so why the strawman? Who are you arguing with?
The issue is that he was free to come here merely by owning a passport. That should not be the case. There should also be a requirement to have a clean criminal record (barring very petty things would be reasonable).
SaturnV is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:02.