Discussion about this post

User's avatar
JMButler's avatar

Is it uncharitable to wish that these members of the judiciary/sentencing council might suffer ill treatment from some of the people that they stupidly allow to remain illegally in this country?

I long to see a prominent person actually experience the issues that the rest of us have. Why they think they and theirs will be exempt from the eventual fallout is a mystery. Gated communities won't save them; they'll have to go outside sometime.

In fact they should be made to listen to the victim impact statements when these b***s reoffend, as they undoubtedly will.

What a ridiculous message to send to the UK population at large. Clearly they're all 'captured' and useless.

Expand full comment
Stuffysays's avatar

The thing I keep thinking is - why are judges and quangos and lawyers etc deciding how to implement a law? I mean, if you enter the UK illegally then you have broken the law which says you can only enter through legal means (passport, visa etc). There is a punishment attached to the breaking of that law. So surely the representatives of that law merely have to agree that you broke it. There should be no mitigating circumstances allowed. If you break the law and get caught and are found to have broken it then you should simply accept the punishment laid down. If you have reasons you don't want to go to prison or be deported then don't break the law!

Am I being particularly dumb here? Isn't the law meant to be blind? Why would the law take into consideration that you had a rough time illegally travelling through France and across the Channel? Why doesn't the Justice Minister disband this bunch of wacky Guardian readers? Why is everything so complicated? And why are stupid, racist, unjust and unrealistic ideas from middle-class lefties always called "progressive"? They are the exact opposite!

Expand full comment
5 more comments...

No posts