DS Forums

 
 

more scum that shouldn't be here


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Yesterday, 18:04
Chris Frost
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 6,447
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.
Whoa there horsey. There's a surprising number of people who are reformed criminals or just had a misspent childhood who would fall foul of your kind of rules. Let's be sensible; you can't tar everyone with the same brush. Take John McAvoy as a recent example. This was a hardened criminal from the same family as men responsible for Brink Matt. He is now a world record holder in indoor rowing IIRC, and he is aiming for a triathalon record. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/triathlon...-to-become-th/
Chris Frost is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old Yesterday, 18:12
Sharon69er
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Romford
Posts: 276
I very much doubt it. Human rights is not the issue here.
It is though, it's his human right as an EU citizen to freely move to another member state without check for a criminal record, that can only be done if a crime is later committed in the state he's moved to.

In the EU's eyes a member state's knowledge of a criminal record could hinder any chance of becoming a resident which is his human right.
Sharon69er is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 18:26
Rekekah_Carter
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 130
Whoa there horsey. There's a surprising number of people who are reformed criminals or just had a misspent childhood who would fall foul of your kind of rules. Let's be sensible; you can't tar everyone with the same brush. Take John McAvoy as a recent example. This was a hardened criminal from the same family as men responsible for Brink Matt. He is now a world record holder in indoor rowing IIRC, and he is aiming for a triathalon record. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/triathlon...-to-become-th/
Good for him. He's done well for himself, but, if you commit a crime, particularly one as heinous as this one, you have to accept that maybe there will, and should, always be price to pay for it.
Rekekah_Carter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 18:35
blueblade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,202
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.
Are you for real? Sticking up for a murderer.

The guy is a clear and present danger to the public. He beheaded a woman, served just 7 years for it, and is only 34. Of course he shouldn't be allowed in. We should have been notified that he had a serious criminal record.

How you can say it's incendiary drivel is beyond me. If his crime had been committed in this country, he would still, quite rightly, be in prison.

Thanks to the Mail we have the truth about a murderer being allowed in to our country. Obviously, you would prefer that the issue be covered up.
blueblade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 18:44
blueblade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,202
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.
100% agreed.
blueblade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 18:48
RobinOfLoxley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Devon
Posts: 12,829
How you can say it's incendiary drivel is beyond me
I see it more as Shit-Stirring Tosh, myself, specifically designed to whip up hysteria.
RobinOfLoxley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 18:52
blueblade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,202
I see it more as Shit-Stirring Tosh, myself, specifically designed to whip up hysteria.
If you're saying it's a lie, please produce the evidence.
blueblade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 20:13
Chris Frost
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 6,447
Good for him. He's done well for himself, but, if you commit a crime, particularly one as heinous as this one, you have to accept that maybe there will, and should, always be price to pay for it.
Of course they should expect to pay for their crimes if convicted. That's not really up for debate. The fact is that this guy did his time. You or I or anyone else might view the sentence as unusually lenient; I can't believe that 7 years served is justifiable, but I'm not the Dutch courts so it's really none of my business.

I do think though that once the time has been served then the debt to society has been paid. Having said that, I also think that in specific cases that justify it then there should be some mechanism to flag a traveller as a potential risk. To me this is one of those cases.
Chris Frost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 20:33
Dotheboyshall
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 9,307
Do they actually check though? It's possible that the UK and US freely exchange such information but I'm sceptical.
If you apply for a US visa then you have to have a criminal record check, many people however just rely on an ESTA and lie when they are asked about "crimes of moral turpitude"
Dotheboyshall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 20:37
Chris Frost
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 6,447
Are you for real? Sticking up for a murderer.

The guy is a clear and present danger to the public. He beheaded a woman, served just 7 years for it, and is only 34. Of course he shouldn't be allowed in. We should have been notified that he had a serious criminal record

How you can say it's incendiary drivel is beyond me. If his crime had been committed in this country, he would still, quite rightly, be in prison.
No, I don't believe Andrue is "sticking up for a murder " as you put it. He's sticking up for the general principles that our society is built around. There's an important difference, but obviously it's a bit lost on you.

You're focusing on the individual - and yes, to my mind too what he did is a heinous crime and if it was me he'd be left to rot in jail. However, neither you nor I are the Dutch legal system, so if their view that 7 years served was sufficient then that's just how it is.

Until such time as there's a change in the Law and the systems are put in place to flag up exceptional cases such as this then he will be treated the same as everyone else. That's the point. It's the principle that Andrue is defending, and to my mind quite rightly so too.

Thanks to the Mail we have the truth about a murderer being allowed in to our country. Obviously, you would prefer that the issue be covered up.
That's complete rubbish. The Mail had no more clue about this guy's intentions to travel than anyone at passport control or the Foreign Office. All they did was pick up the story and run with it adding the normal incendiary language that DM articles often use to rile up Little Englanders, and nothing more than that.
Chris Frost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 21:02
blueblade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,202
No, I don't believe Andrue is "sticking up for a murder " as you put it. He's sticking up for the general principles that our society is built around. There's an important difference, but obviously it's a bit lost on you.

You're focusing on the individual - and yes, to my mind too what he did is a heinous crime and if it was me he'd be left to rot in jail. However, neither you nor I are the Dutch legal system, so if their view that 7 years served was sufficient then that's just how it is.

Until such time as there's a change in the Law and the systems are put in place to flag up exceptional cases such as this then he will be treated the same as everyone else. That's the point. It's the principle that Andrue is defending, and to my mind quite rightly so too.
I can see the principle you allude to, and I appreciate that as the law is currently framed, it is "legal". My point - which is evidently lost on you - is that the law is not fit for purpose in allowing such a dangerous individual in, without an adequate check for past criminal behaviour.

Given that there is almost total foaming at the mouth paranoia over checking someone before they teach or work with kids, you'd really honestly think the checks for someone like this guy would have been a tad more thorough. Well I would anyway.

Andrue's post certainly came across to me as a stout defence of the current system and those who dared criticise it were idiots who didn't have a clue what they were on about. As the current system allows an obviously extremely dangerous individual into the country virtually unchecked, such a supercilious stance, seriously pisses me off.


That's complete rubbish. The Mail had no more clue about this guy's intentions to travel than anyone at passport control or the Foreign Office. All they did was pick up the story and run with it adding the normal incendiary language that DM articles often use to rile up Little Englanders, and nothing more than that.
It's not rubbish at all. If I hadn't read that article I'd have had no idea about this character being allowed in. So get off your high horse about "Little Englanders" and drop the condescension.

Well, done the Mail - once again justifying your popularity and bringing important matters to our attention. The lefties hate you for it, but I love you for it. Keep up the great work
blueblade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 21:14
blueblade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,202
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.
Well thankfully it's not the kind of Britain where most of us want to live. Whilst I don't have an issue with most who have committed petty non violent crimes, I have a serious problem with maniacal jihadists who behead people, coming in.

I'm not sure what your position on murderers coming into the country is, but you singularly failed to draw any distinction between criminal types in your post above.

You really aren't as smart as you tout yourself, and others are not as stupid as you imagine.
blueblade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 21:35
Chris Frost
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 6,447
I can see the principle you allude to, and I appreciate that as the law is currently framed, it is "legal". My point - which is evidently lost on you - is that the law is not fit for purpose in allowing such a dangerous individual in, without an adequate check for past criminal behaviour.
The Law as it stands fits the vast majority of travellers, so from that point of view it is "fit for purpose ". That's not to say that things can't be improved, but that's the case with so many bits of Law and legislation.

Given that there is almost total foaming at the mouth paranoia over checking someone before they teach or work with kids, you'd really honestly think the checks for someone like this guy would have been a tad more thorough. Well I would anyway.
The point is that as the Law currently stands there are no requirements for checks AFAIK. So it's not a question of being more thorough, there just isn't the mechanisms in place to check the backgrounds of every single traveller (which is what it would take unless the Law was changed to include a "risk register") and still maintain the volumes of travellers passing through all the UK's ports of entry.

Andrue's post certainly came across to me as a stout defence of the current system and those who dared criticise it were idiots who didn't have a clue what they were on about. As the current system allows an obviously extremely dangeous individual into the country virtually unchecked, such a supercilious stance, seriously pisses me off.
I can understand you being pissed off. What I would say is that there's a lot of people posting in this thread who haven't really considered the logistics involved in providing the sort of security checks required to catch an individual like this with any degree of certainty.

It's not rubbish at all. If I hadn't read that article I'd have had no idea about this character being allowed in.
That's precisely the point. This guy had already got in, so you're allowing the DM to get you angry about something that's already happened, and that you have no control over, and they have no control over, and that there's no chance of it being changed by you or by them. So really you're pissing in the wind. If you hadn't read the article or this thread he'd have still got in and you'd have been none the wiser but perhaps a little less aggravated.


So get off your high horse about "Little Englanders" and drop the condescension.

Well, done the Mail - once again justifying your popularity and bringing important matters to our attention. The lefties hate you for it, but I love you for it. Keep up the great work
It's not condescension to point out they're pressing your buttons. Nor is it condescending to point out that DM readers fit a certain mould.

If you really want to change the system then the first step is to contact your MP. Depending on the response you get it might also be worth starting an online petition. All you need is 10,000 signatures and it forces the Government to respond. I suspect though that the vast majority of people reading that DM story will have a good old grumble, and maybe talk about it for a couple of days, and then do.... precisely nothing..... because there'll be something else to get upset about. On and on goes the vicious cycle and the DM sells its newspapers. Who has won; you or them? I know who I'd bet on.
Chris Frost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 22:50
jra
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 40,632
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.
We don't really need the EU to provide information about EU serious criminals. That's where INTERPOL could take over the reigns, if they don't already. Besides, my reasons for voting for Brexit go a lot further than because of incidents like this.
jra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 23:00
GusGus
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 615
Of course they should expect to pay for their crimes if convicted. That's not really up for debate. The fact is that this guy did his time. You or I or anyone else might view the sentence as unusually lenient; I can't believe that 7 years served is justifiable, but I'm not the Dutch courts so it's really none of my business.

I do think though that once the time has been served then the debt to society has been paid. Having said that, I also think that in specific cases that justify it then there should be some mechanism to flag a traveller as a potential risk. To me this is one of those cases.

Trump has apparently been invited next year to meet and stay with the Queen
Given the allegations floating around from various ladies is the Queen at risk?
GusGus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 23:05
mickmars
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 1984
Posts: 7,098
Exactly how would the UK be able to keep him out? They would have to know he's a criminal.
They would do in a post Brexit world if he had to apply to live in Britain,his criminal record check would flag up like a firework display
mickmars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 23:11
muggins14
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: The Pit of Despair
Posts: 50,126
Trump has apparently been invited next year to meet and stay with the Queen
Given the allegations floating around from various ladies is the Queen at risk?
I don't think she's his type.
muggins14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 23:15
mickmars
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 1984
Posts: 7,098
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.
Indeed, and it's sad that they do it. It doesn't mean we have to emulate their behaviour though.Meh. So could any number of home grown murderers.
Whoa there horsey. There's a surprising number of people who are reformed criminals or just had a misspent childhood who would fall foul of your kind of rules. Let's be sensible; you can't tar everyone with the same brush. Take John McAvoy as a recent example. This was a hardened criminal from the same family as men responsible for Brink Matt. He is now a world record holder in indoor rowing IIRC, and he is aiming for a triathalon record. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/triathlon...-to-become-th/
Yes.lets let anyone in,criminals included just in case they might possibly qualify for the Olympics

Perhaps even stage a CrimOlympics at Wembley Stadium - Where murderers and bank robbers can compete for medals

the 200 metres being chased by a copper would be a TV ratings winner
mickmars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 23:25
NorthernNinny
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Manchester
Posts: 15,094
No doubt the bleeding hearts will be along to explain why his human rights are more important than those who encounter him.

This quote says it all really -
Time of stress for my client....

You wonder how some people sleep at night.
NorthernNinny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 23:40
Chris Frost
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 6,447
Trump has apparently been invited next year to meet and stay with the Queen
Given the allegations floating around from various ladies is the Queen at risk?
I think Trump prefers 'em a bit younger....... Quite a bit younger, in fact.
Chris Frost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 23:47
Chris Frost
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 6,447
They would do in a post Brexit world if he had to apply to live in Britain,his criminal record check would flag up like a firework display
If he was applying to live.......but not if planning to visit.

If it wasn't for this recent incident then the guy would still be under the radar. Oh, and Brexit has sod all benefit. It's not the magic pill you imagine.
Chris Frost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 23:50
Chris Frost
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 6,447
Yes.lets let anyone in,criminals included just in case they might possibly qualify for the Olympics

Perhaps even stage a CrimOlympics at Wembley Stadium - Where murderers and bank robbers can compete for medals

the 200 metres being chased by a copper would be a TV ratings winner
Oh FFS.... is that what you really think? (despite the winkie).

[sigh] You credit people with a bit of intelligence and then they go out of their way to prove you were mistaken in your belief
Chris Frost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 00:14
Brandy211
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 766
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.
But he wasn't innocent.

He had been convicted and sentenced for beheading someone.

In this country if he had ever been set free for that crime, he would have had a life sentence and his movements monitored for the rest of his life.
He may also have had restrictions preventing him from travelling abroad, due to the nature of the crime.

If he didn't adhere to his parole conditions he would have been recalled to prison.

I'm no expert, but I reckon he would have got around 25 years or so for that offence here.

In my opinion, he shouldn't have been free. Especially as he dosent seem to have been rehabilitated & the sentence for beheading given & served, is absolutely ridiculous.
Brandy211 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 00:15
jra
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 40,632
Are you seriously suggesting that border agency staff check the history of every single person travelling in to the UK? Good luck with that, you'll effectively close the boarders to all travellers as it would take hours for each person, and that's presuming that records exist for non-EU travellers.
It might come to that and as modern electronic technology advances it should be easier to have a worldwide common shared database of all known dangerous criminals.
jra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 00:22
Brandy211
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 766
There are restrictions on paedophiles travelling abroad, so why not on someone who has beheaded someone?
Brandy211 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:19.