Comment on Record 128 people cross Channel in one small boat
Flax_vert@feddit.uk 3 days agoExcept there’s not one person crossing in a small boat who is a good person.
I mean this is such an outrageous statement that I will not engage with you further than to say this:
These are clearly desperate people. In my view there is nothing so inherently great about Britain that it is worth paying tens of thousands of pounds to get into it on a death dinghy.
There are no good and bad people, no good and bad immigrants. You’ve bought into a lie.
In my view there is nothing so inherently great about Britain
There is, we’ve got a great welfare system and healthcare system, lack of corruption, good opportunities and high levels of tolerance. We are a great country.
These are clearly desperate people… it is worth paying tens of thousands of pounds to get into it on a death dinghy.
This is just outright illogical and doesn’t make a lick of sense. There in some cases is less risk and definitely more reward to taking a dinghy than there is to speeding, drunk driving, driving without a seatbelt, cycling without a helmet, etc. People do that all of the time. Whenever someone causes an accident by speeding, do we apply the same logic? “Your honour, he was clearly desperate. Nobody would risk their life like that for no reason”. Of course not. I’m not singling out countries for any reason, but in India it’s normal for people to just sit on top of trains. I’ve seen videos in other countries where if the bus is full, people just hang off. People scale buildings. Even here in the UK people put their lives at great risk building bonfires every year by scaling them without any safety equipment. People definitely do risky things all of the time, often for fun or to save minutes of time.
The dinghies are coming from france. It’s a safe country. There’s no way this is done out of desperation at all. Any desperation that is there isn’t enough to warrant breaking the law.
Lack of corruption! Have you been living under a rock?
Okay, how about this. You and your mates are on holiday in Australia. You see on the news that zomg! Britain has been taken over by the Shakiras! It’s now under Shakira law!!!
You try to get a flight home, but the flight terminates in France. The shakiras threaten to kill or imprison anyone who tries to get into Britain.
Your mate Barry pulls you aside and tells you a bunch of them are going to get on a dinghy tonight to Ireland. Ireland has already said no more refugees, but he knows a way to smuggle you in. You’ve got some cousins there, you can stay with them and maybe find a job.
You’ve got the choice. Stay in France where you don’t know anyone and can’t speak the language.
Or take a risk and get the dinghy to Ireland where you can speak the language and have family and have a greater chance at getting a job.
Would you stay in France because it’s “safe” and condemn any Brits trying to make it to their family in Ireland? Would you rat out your mate Barry because he must be a bad person for wanting to live somewhere he can adjust to more easily? For wanting to have family or friends to support him?
I’m a British citizen, and British Citizens have right of abode in Ireland. So I’ll wait until there’s an opportunity to take a legitimate boat or aeroplane to Ireland.
I’m curious what you consider the legal routes for entry are for asylum seekers and refugees?
Most asylum seekers have entered the UK legally, it’s just that a change of circumstances means they cannot return home. There are also some people who may stow away or use a forged passport to get on a plane to the UK from an unsafe country. Probably not as sound, but still legitimate.
Also, resettlement schemes, if any are held. But if they aren’t held, this doesn’t automatically entitle people to break in illegally. They happen on our terms.
The issue is whenever you come here from a safe country. That’s not fleeing war. That’s just acting entitled and showing disregard for our nation. The type of person who does this is likely to show disregard in other ways, too.
So the legal routes are:
The issue is whenever you come here from a safe country. That is not fleeing war.
Apart from that there is no legal obligation on refugees to stop in the first safe country, this also would mean we should not have accepted any Ukrainian refugees, they must have travelled through Poland and other safe countries to get here so by your definition they are now a problem as they are no longer fleeing war.
Apart from that there is no legal obligation on refugees to stop in the first safe country,
Yeah, and that’s my point. That whole law is stupid and needs to be repealed.
this also would mean we should not have accepted any Ukrainian refugees,
We accepted them via a resettlement scheme. If there wasn’t a resettlement scheme, then they shouldn’t have come here.
Resettlement schemes exist generally to fulfill responsibilities (such as with Hong Kong) or to take a load off of our neighbours (such as Ukraine, or ones that happened with Syrians ages ago in the EU days)
Kuori@hexbear.net 8 hours ago
people like you should be shot in the streets