|
Post by Mr Stabby on Sept 1, 2023 20:15:24 GMT
For the truely repentant this wouldn't be a issue - they most probably had already expressed their sorrow during the court proceedings. For those not truly repetant, honestly believe they are innocent, likely to be/have been sentenced to life in jail - they have nothing to loose and most likely will respond in a away that will only increase the victims/victims family stress, unless of course they are drugged / significantly restrained (spit gag etc) in which case this is will only increasing the financial burden on the tax payer for no meaningful gain. While I neither agree nor disagree with the general thesis here, the financial burden on the taxpayer of moving one individual prisoner from A to B to hear their doom is pretty insignificant compared to the £7 million a day spent on housing illegal immigrants.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Sept 2, 2023 6:24:13 GMT
For the truely repentant this wouldn't be a issue - they most probably had already expressed their sorrow during the court proceedings. For those not truly repetant, honestly believe they are innocent, likely to be/have been sentenced to life in jail - they have nothing to loose and most likely will respond in a away that will only increase the victims/victims family stress, unless of course they are drugged / significantly restrained (spit gag etc) in which case this is will only increasing the financial burden on the tax payer for no meaningful gain. While I neither agree nor disagree with the general thesis here, the financial burden on the taxpayer of moving one individual prisoner from A to B to hear their doom is pretty insignificant compared to the £7 million a day spent on housing illegal immigrants. 70% or so prove to be genuine refugees, so you need to revise that figure. Just calling them "illegal", ignoring international law, doesn't make it so.
|
|
|
Post by Aloysius on Sept 2, 2023 7:54:43 GMT
While I neither agree nor disagree with the general thesis here, the financial burden on the taxpayer of moving one individual prisoner from A to B to hear their doom is pretty insignificant compared to the £7 million a day spent on housing illegal immigrants. 70% or so prove to be genuine refugees Who passed through several safe countries before reaching Britain. Harsh but true.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Sept 2, 2023 8:20:56 GMT
While I neither agree nor disagree with the general thesis here, the financial burden on the taxpayer of moving one individual prisoner from A to B to hear their doom is pretty insignificant compared to the £7 million a day spent on housing illegal immigrants. 70% or so prove to be genuine refugees, so you need to revise that figure. Just calling them "illegal", ignoring international law, doesn't make it so. I think you'd find that most, if not all countries consider it to be illegal to enter that country in a way designed to avoid border controls.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Sept 2, 2023 8:38:59 GMT
I think you’ll find that legal entry is more of a problem. The number of language students who enroll in these private English schools get visas who are then entitled to bring there families over as well. If the country needs workers why not issue 2-3 year work visas?
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Sept 2, 2023 12:22:23 GMT
70% or so prove to be genuine refugees, so you need to revise that figure. Just calling them "illegal", ignoring international law, doesn't make it so. I think you'd find that most, if not all countries consider it to be illegal to enter that country in a way designed to avoid border controls. Getting over the border and claiming asylum isn't avoiding border controls.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Sept 2, 2023 12:24:47 GMT
70% or so prove to be genuine refugees Who passed through several safe countries before reaching Britain. Harsh but true. So we shouldn't be doing our share, having ripped off the resources of the planet across the world? Sorry, I forgot about the small minded island mentality.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Sept 2, 2023 12:38:42 GMT
Who passed through several safe countries before reaching Britain. Harsh but true. So we shouldn't be doing our share, having ripped off the resources of the planet across the world? Sorry, I forgot about the small minded island mentality. We live in the most densely crowded sizeable country in Europe which is so short of housing that young people have virtually no chance of ever escaping the rental trap. There are ways of helping which don't exacerbate that situation.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Sept 2, 2023 12:43:59 GMT
So we shouldn't be doing our share, having ripped off the resources of the planet across the world? Sorry, I forgot about the small minded island mentality. We live in the most densely crowded sizeable country in Europe which is so short of housing that young people have virtually no chance of ever escaping the rental trap. There are ways of helping which don't exacerbate that situation. Of course, it called "Building Council Houses". Lots of them. Then the cost of private rentals will drop too. Of course one shouldn't let facts get in the way of a poor argument. Most densely populated country in Europe is Monaco. We just have more dense people, as evidenced by Brexit. Even if one tries to be a smart arse and claim that Monaco is tiny, according to the World Atlas we are still number 8 behind Netherlands, Turkey and Belgium. I wonder how many refugees they have helped, comparatively.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Sept 2, 2023 12:56:31 GMT
We live in the most densely crowded sizeable country in Europe which is so short of housing that young people have virtually no chance of ever escaping the rental trap. There are ways of helping which don't exacerbate that situation. Of course, it called "Building Council Houses". Lots of them. Then the cost of private rentals will drop too. Of course one shouldn't let facts get in the way of a poor argument. Most densely populated country in Europe is Monaco. We just have more dense people, as evidenced by Brexit. Monaco isn't a sizeable country. It is smaller than the combined are of Hyde Park and Kensington Gardens. Or did you miss the word "sizeable"? Of course, you could take in a family of asylum seekers if you are that concerned.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Sept 2, 2023 12:59:38 GMT
Of course, it called "Building Council Houses". Lots of them. Then the cost of private rentals will drop too. Of course one shouldn't let facts get in the way of a poor argument. Most densely populated country in Europe is Monaco. We just have more dense people, as evidenced by Brexit. Even if one tries to be a smart arse and claim that Monaco is tiny, according to the World Atlas we are still number 8 behind Netherlands, Turkey and Belgium. I wonder how many refugees they have helped, comparatively. Monaco isn't a sizeable country. It is smaller than the combined are of Hyde Park and Kensington Gardens. Or did you miss the word "sizeable"? Of course, you could take in a family of asylum seekers if you are that concerned. You missed a bit. It was added immediately after posting the first bit.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Sept 2, 2023 15:50:40 GMT
I think the nederlands are more densely populated but hey.
|
|
|
Post by on Sept 2, 2023 16:26:43 GMT
Who passed through several safe countries before reaching Britain. Harsh but true. So we shouldn't be doing our share, having ripped off the resources of the planet across the world? Sorry, I forgot about the small minded island mentality. interesting argument. The empire strikes back? Whatever happens overpopulation (for whatever reason) is Bad News for most people. Something which is Bad News for most people should not be encouraged. . Yes some people do well out of it but they are a minority and need binning.
|
|
|
Post by brummieboy on Sept 3, 2023 16:56:28 GMT
Getting back to the victim statement thing, any attendance would no doubt be aacompanied by countless lawyers with yet more shekels to their coffers.
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Sept 3, 2023 18:55:34 GMT
While I neither agree nor disagree with the general thesis here, the financial burden on the taxpayer of moving one individual prisoner from A to B to hear their doom is pretty insignificant compared to the £7 million a day spent on housing illegal immigrants. 70% or so prove to be genuine refugees, so you need to revise that figure. Just calling them "illegal", ignoring international law, doesn't make it so. They are immigrants who entered illegally therfore they are illegal immigrants. 70% may make successful asylum applications but that doesn't change the facts before hand.
|
|