What a shocking decision

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DryCleaning

We arent discussing the victims. And I agree, the victims should be central to any discussion

---

The victims never get discussed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

they did their crimes here, they should be punished here to the full extent of the law.
They have UK citizenship and no Pakistan citizenship currently - why would Pakistan want a bunch of paedos being sent there, this isn't the 1700 we don't have penal colonies any more

---

Bring back hanging for them

Just for them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William Treseder

The victims never get discussed.

---

For good reason

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Canton Kev

What’s your point? Every crime should be punished with life in prison?

---

No the point is that us brits get all foamey mouthed and hostile about child abuse yet equally shocking and damaging crime ? ....ah well he's done his time , rehabilitate him etc etc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rudy gestede

Which bit of British law allows citizenship to be revoked then?

I want them punished by the full extent of the law and they are. I’m not defending them I’m defending the law. No one in here is defending peadophiles they are just saying you can’t just revoke the citizenship of someone and just deport them, otherwise why not just deport every criminal?

What the **** has roe vs wade and the American Supreme Court got to do with this? :hehe: what a reach ffs

---

I though you knew the law.......

The Home Office has the power to deprive someone (of British Citizenship) under Section 40 of the British Nationality Act 1981 on the grounds of:

Fraud
False representations or concealment of a material fact
Because it is conducive to the public good

The Home Office can deprive British Citizenship if it would be conducive to public good. It will be in the public interest because the Applicant may be involved with:

Terrorism
Espionage
Serious organised crime
War crimes
Or unacceptable behaviours

The Home Office cannot deprive someone under the Conducive to Public Good test if it means that the person will become Stateless.

(Sorry Leningradcowboy I missed your post before I wrote this, should have replied to yours)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DryCleaning

The mark of a civilised society is how it treats its criminals.

---

imagine a white mass rapist of school girls being released into a white working class area, not sure they would be over tolerant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DryCleaning

Wasn't that superceded by the 2009 act?

---

I got my information from the site of a firm of solicitors who deal with deportation issues which still refers to the 1981 act so I would guess not

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DryCleaning

You'll no doubt be aware that a state cannot remove citizenship under international law.

Should we just ignore the laws we don't like?

---

Shouldn't your first line read that it cannot remove citizenship if it leaves them stateless?

Unless I am reading this wrong, it does seem a bit of a loophole that you can renounce your secondary citizenship to avoid deportation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pedro de la Rosa

For good reason

---

I should have said justice for the victims rarely gets discussed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William Treseder

The victims never get discussed.

---

We're discussing them now.

What would you like to say?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

Unless I am reading this wrong, it does seem a bit of a loophole that you can renounce your secondary citizenship to avoid deportation.

---

It does seem a loophole that we're deporting someone from their primary citizenship to their secondary country. Why should we make them our problem? Can you imagine if Pakistan tried to send their criminals here?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pedro de la Rosa

It does seem a loophole that we're deporting someone from their primary citizenship to their secondary country. Why should we make them our problem? Can you imagine if Pakistan tried to send their criminals here?

---

Yeah I can see that argument too. As usual this all boils down to what is the purpose of prison sentences. If the public don't trust people to be rehabilitated when they leave prison then the system has failed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DryCleaning

We're discussing them now.

What would you like to say?

---

For what it’s worth, I believe anyone (of any colour or ethnicity), that grooms children for sexual exploitation, or takes part in any sexual assault on children, and are caught and found guilty, should be locked away for the rest of there life, in a secure unit, with no chance of release.
Are you with me DC ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William Treseder

For what it’s worth, I believe anyone (of any colour or ethnicity), that grooms children for sexual exploitation, or takes part in any sexual assault on children, and are caught and found guilty, should be locked away for the rest of there life, in a secure unit, with no chance of release.
Are you with me DC ?

---

That's never going to happen . Child sexual killers usually don't come out , the rest , unless we are going to spend millions on keeping them inside serve lesser sentences

Wether that's right is another matter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William Treseder

For what it’s worth, I believe anyone (of any colour or ethnicity), that grooms children for sexual exploitation, or takes part in any sexual assault on children, and are caught and found guilty, should be locked away for the rest of there life, in a secure unit, with no chance of release.
Are you with me DC ?

---

It's hard to argue against, but I'd prefer a chance of parole, as it gives hope of rehabilitation.

Although I'm not sure a convicted paedophile can be rehabilitated.

I'm torn, if I'm honest

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DryCleaning

It's hard to argue against, but I'd prefer a chance of parole, as it gives hope of rehabilitation.

Although I'm not sure a convicted paedophile can be rehabilitated.

I'm torn, if I'm honest

---

They can but many cannot and that's the problem

I remember listening to radio 5 one early morning . A guy admitted he had a sexual interest in children but was under treatment and had never offended . I mean there is clearly a huge difference between him and a serial sex offender but society wants them all hanged .

People have had sexual thoughts towards children since time began . It's never going to stopped , perhaps it's a fault in the brain , who knows . But there has to be a sensible policy towards treating .....or imprisoning these people . A lot of the people who cry wolf over child abuse are completely unhinged in other ways themselves .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

They can but many cannot and that's the problem

I remember listening to radio 5 one early morning . A guy admitted he had a sexual interest in children but was under treatment and had never offended . I mean there is clearly a huge difference between him and a serial sex offender but society wants them all hanged .

People have had sexual thoughts towards children since time began . It's never going to stopped , perhaps it's a fault in the brain , who knows . But there has to be a sensible policy towards treating .....or imprisoning these people . A lot of the people who cry wolf over child abuse are completely unhinged in other ways themselves .

---

aren't the 'map' pushing for a stripe on the alphabet flag? it's just another expression of sexuality

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by + the native hipster

aren't the 'map' pushing for a stripe on the alphabet flag? it's just another expression of sexuality

---

It's clearly not though

Being attracted to other men or other women if you are gay is normal

Adults attracted to adults

But men in their thirties wanting to have sex with children who are not sexually developed

It's totally abnormal and nothing to do with sexuality