Priti Vacant has a plan, a deal with migrants plan.

[ChicagoBlue]

She wants to send migrants who arrive on our shores without permission to prison for 4 years.


The choice

Live in a war torn country, no house, no food, cold and no future

or

Live in a prison in the UK, a roof over your head, 3 meals a day, not as cold and nobody is going to shoot you dead.


As a migrant what do you choose?

Me, i take prison.

What SHOULD happen to “migrants without permission” (previously known as “illegal immigrants”)?

If there is no deterrence, why have a law? Why not open the border to all comers? What if your circumstance was not “Live in a war torn country, no house, no food, cold and no future”…do you still qualify? How do you know if the country was war torn, if they had a house, any food, were cold, or had any future, unless you have a legally approved process that gets all that information…IF that’s the threshold?

I’m not saying Patel is right or wrong, or that you are right or wrong. I’m asking, “Are those the two extreme choices, and if so, who decides and why, and what would YOU do differently?

Always looking to learn about how to solve the difficult questions of the last few millennia.

 

[mat]

Maybe train them up to be fruit pickers or lorry drivers? Would probably help the economy a bit more than banging them up for four years.

And prove migration benefits the country and economy on the whole?

Tories don't want that. They want an enemy for the media and the Gammonati to train their eyes on whilst she grabs more authoritarian powers through the policing act.

 

[blueparrot]

What SHOULD happen to “migrants without permission” (previously known as “illegal immigrants”)?

If there is no deterrence, why have a law? Why not open the border to all comers? What if your circumstance was not “Live in a war torn country, no house, no food, cold and no future”…do you still qualify? How do you know if the country was war torn, if they had a house, any food, were cold, or had any future, unless you have a legally approved process that gets all that information…IF that’s the threshold?

I’m not saying Patel is right or wrong, or that you are right or wrong. I’m asking, “Are those the two extreme choices, and if so, who decides and why, and what would YOU do differently?

Always looking to learn about how to solve the difficult questions of the last few millennia.

They aren't illegal immigrants, illegal immigrants are usually in the country and probably working without the authorities knowing.
How about you treat them with respect and the way you'd like to be treated in their circumstance until you find out their story then act accordingly.

 

[oldius]

What SHOULD happen to “migrants without permission” (previously known as “illegal immigrants”)?

If there is no deterrence, why have a law? Why not open the border to all comers? What if your circumstance was not “Live in a war torn country, no house, no food, cold and no future”…do you still qualify? How do you know if the country was war torn, if they had a house, any food, were cold, or had any future, unless you have a legally approved process that gets all that information…IF that’s the threshold?

I’m not saying Patel is right or wrong, or that you are right or wrong. I’m asking, “Are those the two extreme choices, and if so, who decides and why, and what would YOU do differently?

Always looking to learn about how to solve the difficult questions of the last few millennia.

Personally, I would welcome a world where people are free to live and work wherever they wish. We are citizens of the earth and where we are born is simply the luck of the draw.

There are 5.5m UK nationals living and working abroad, permanently, and I cannot stand the hypocrisy that says that is okay but we don't want them here.

 

[Vic]

What SHOULD happen to “migrants without permission” (previously known as “illegal immigrants”)?

If there is no deterrence, why have a law? Why not open the border to all comers? What if your circumstance was not “Live in a war torn country, no house, no food, cold and no future”…do you still qualify? How do you know if the country was war torn, if they had a house, any food, were cold, or had any future, unless you have a legally approved process that gets all that information…IF that’s the threshold?

I’m not saying Patel is right or wrong, or that you are right or wrong. I’m asking, “Are those the two extreme choices, and if so, who decides and why, and what would YOU do differently?

Always looking to learn about how to solve the difficult questions of the last few millennia.

They are not illegal immigrants, they are asylum seekers.

Wait till they cotton on to the extent of immigration from Hong Kong.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

They aren't illegal immigrants, illegal immigrants are usually in the country and probably working without the authorities knowing.
How about you treat them with respect and the way you'd like to be treated in their circumstance until you find out their story then act accordingly.

Without permission suggests they do not have the legal permission to enter.
Migrant - immigrant, pedantics.

What else do you have, other than snowflake outrage at word play?

Do you have an actual ANSWER, or are we going to deflect to the semantic sideshow?

You can call them anything you want. Call them “holidaymakers” for all I care.

I’m more interested in the solution to the “problem” they create, and if it’s NOT a problem, then let’s disband the UK Border Agency and have open borders and freedom of movement.

OR, is there another solution?

 

[meltonblue]

Create more safe routes of passage for asylum seekers looking to get to the U.K. and streamline the process for application.

 

[oldius]

Without permission suggests they do not have the legal permission to enter.
Migrant - immigrant, pedantics.

What else do you have, other than snowflake outrage at word play?

Do you have an actual ANSWER, or are we going to deflect to the semantic sideshow?

You can call them anything you want. Call them “holidaymakers” for all I care.

I’m more interested in the solution to the “problem” they create, and if it’s NOT a problem, then let’s disband the UK Border Agency and have open borders and freedom of movement.

OR, is there another solution?

I am interested in the use of the word snowflake as the most fragile around this issue seem to be those who are desperate to stop the dingies.

 

[blueparrot]

Without permission suggests they do not have the legal permission to enter.
Migrant - immigrant, pedantics.

You seem to be missing refugee in your list.

 

[oldius]

The saddest part, for me, is that this is being used because it is a vote winner. I cannot help but feel revulsion at that.