foreveryoung Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 22 minutes ago, Davkaus said: To describe it as going a bit daily mail suggests it's over the top or an outrageous right wing view to think we shouldn't be deporting and refusing asylum to convicted criminals. Apparently you have to have served, between 1-4 years in the last 10 then you 'can' be refused asylum but not always. He apparently only got a suspended sentence for sex offences so cannot be refused. Insane rule I know, to think how many convicted criminals must be already here If that's true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 3 minutes ago, foreveryoung said: Apparently you have to have served, between 1-4 years in the last 10 then you 'can' be refused asylum but not always. He apparently only got a suspended sentence for sex offences so cannot be refused. Insane rule I know, to think how many convicted criminals must be already here If that's true. I can see how you'd not necessarily want to refuse because someone's had a minor motoring conviction or something. Violent offences should just be an immediate refusal imo. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 14 minutes ago, foreveryoung said: Apparently you have to have served, between 1-4 years in the last 10 then you 'can' be refused asylum but not always. He apparently only got a suspended sentence for sex offences so cannot be refused. Insane rule I know, to think how many convicted criminals must be already here If that's true. There’s some criteria for mandatory refusal Quote There are some grounds for mandatory and discretionary refusals related to criminality. A claim must be refused if the person has been convicted of a criminal offence in the UK or overseas for which they have received a jail sentence of 12 months or more, is a persistent offender, or has committed a criminal offence which caused serious harm. Serious harm is defined as “an offence that has caused serious physical or psychological harm to a victim or victims, or that has contributed to a widespread problem that causes serious harm to a community or to society in general”. Sexual offences are highlighted in this section of the guidance and if a person is on the sex offender register then their application will be refused on the grounds of serious harm. Quote As well as the mandatory refusals, the home secretary can refuse an application when a person has been convicted of a criminal offence in the UK or overseas for which they have received a custodial sentence of less than 12 months. In the case of this guy should never have been granted asylum so quite right that questions are being asked. link 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted February 3 Moderator Share Posted February 3 51 minutes ago, Genie said: There’s some criteria for mandatory refusal In the case of this guy should never have been granted asylum so quite right that questions are being asked. link Which version of the playing to the racist crowd Home Secretary allowed this person to remain in the country? You'd almost thing they were so busy talking shite about small boats to have missed this complete slam dunk for them. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 Quote Wholesale Falcon Quail & AI Equipment https://www.avianbreeding.co.uk/products/falcon-copulation-hats Does it need to be a hat though? Shades of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreveryoung Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 1 hour ago, bickster said: Which version of the playing to the racist crowd Home Secretary allowed this person to remain in the country? You'd almost thing they were so busy talking shite about small boats to have missed this complete slam dunk for them. We all know it's not the only one, the true figure is probably shocking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post bickster Posted February 3 Moderator Popular Post Share Posted February 3 1 hour ago, foreveryoung said: We all know it's not the only one, the true figure is probably shocking. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
will87 Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 Even if he hadn't had his 3rd application granted after finding Jesus, he'd likely still be in the country. Very few failed asylum seekers are actually removed nowadays, they'll just get a letter advising them to leave the country, which suprisingly tends to get ignored. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted February 3 VT Supporter Share Posted February 3 35 minutes ago, will87 said: Even if he hadn't had his 3rd application granted after finding Jesus, he'd likely still be in the country. Very few failed asylum seekers are actually removed nowadays, they'll just get a letter advising them to leave the country, which suprisingly tends to get ignored. We should just put them all on a aeroplane and send them somewhere overseas. Someone else's problem then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 (edited) 3 minutes ago, sidcow said: We should just put them all on a aeroplane and send them somewhere overseas. Someone else's problem then. In a case like this where we have a convicted violent offender and know their country of origin? Yeah, unironically this, and this is why we should be shit hot about knowing who we're letting in and where they're from Edited February 3 by Davkaus 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted February 3 Moderator Share Posted February 3 56 minutes ago, Davkaus said: In a case like this where we have a convicted violent offender Not sure you can actually state that as fact. His two offences were sexual assault and exposure, sexual assault doesn't need to be necessarily violent. In fact the sentence received is very much at the low end of the scale for the offence according to the sentencing guidelines (most likely category 3 with culpability B - the lowest point of the scale) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 39 minutes ago, bickster said: Not sure you can actually state that as fact. His two offences were sexual assault and exposure, sexual assault doesn't need to be necessarily violent. In fact the sentence received is very much at the low end of the scale for the offence according to the sentencing guidelines (most likely category 3 with culpability B - the lowest point of the scale) That is a fair correction - though he is towards the top of the range for that scale of offence. I'm pretty comfortable chucking all non-violent sexual assaulters into the bucket as well, but you are right to correct 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marka Ragnos Posted February 3 VT Supporter Share Posted February 3 7 hours ago, Davkaus said: To describe it as going a bit daily mail suggests it's over the top or an outrageous right wing view to think we shouldn't be deporting and refusing asylum to convicted criminals. Or … that there is widespread anger and interest across the board in the media, which is true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumstopdogs Posted February 4 Share Posted February 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted February 4 Share Posted February 4 1 hour ago, Brumstopdogs said: I think they'll be about as common as Google "glass holes" were 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted February 4 VT Supporter Share Posted February 4 There is nothing about the Vision Pro, or to be honest any VR headset, that makes me think it's the future. There is nothing gained from using a computer, like you use any computer, but via a headset. You gain nothing from walking around with an iPhone UI floating in space around you. It's something that might have limited specific use cases, like gaming or takes on 3d modelling. But even those are flawed - all of the gaming stuff, even the limited really high budget titles, run into the same issues of how to create satisfying experiences that utilise the VR capability without being gimmicky or awkward. It's not a product that will be ubiquitous, not everyone needs it and it's too 'outside of norm'. It's dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted February 4 VT Supporter Share Posted February 4 I remember in the pre-Walkman days, having conversations about how it would be great to be able to walk around outside, listening to your favourite records. The consensus was that, even if the technology became available, nobody would ever walk around the streets with headphones on, you'd feel like too much of a dick. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted February 4 VT Supporter Share Posted February 4 10 minutes ago, mjmooney said: I remember in the pre-Walkman days, having conversations about how it would be great to be able to walk around outside, listening to your favourite records. The consensus was that, even if the technology became available, nobody would ever walk around the streets with headphones on, you'd feel like too much of a dick. Yeah. I think it will catch on if the tech is good enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted February 4 VT Supporter Share Posted February 4 (edited) 15 minutes ago, mjmooney said: I remember in the pre-Walkman days, having conversations about how it would be great to be able to walk around outside, listening to your favourite records. The consensus was that, even if the technology became available, nobody would ever walk around the streets with headphones on, you'd feel like too much of a dick. Conversely I remember someone walking into McDonald's with one of those mobile phones with a handset attached to a brick size base unit by a chord. People today would piss themselves laughing but at the time it brought people to a standstill like no shiny iPhone ever will. Edited February 4 by sidcow 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted February 4 Moderator Share Posted February 4 1 hour ago, sidcow said: Yeah. I think it will catch on if the tech is good enough. Until someone steals everything that’s in your bag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts