Support NeoGAF

[IdreamofHIME]

Instead of the money spent on trying to deport them, they should have spent it making a rocket to stuff them in and fired right into the Sun.

 

[Agent Gibbs]

People who choose to remain dual nationals do so, so they can be afforded the rights of both countries and freely travel between them enjoying those rights - effectively they are hedging their bets to ensure a better deal for them personally and retain the option to live in either country at their whim.
Its quite possible to refuse your dual nationality and accept one country over the other, doing so has no impact on your own personal identity, it just effects your legal status

So whilst some may see it as unethical to deport people and revoke their secondary citizenship (which as others note has specific terms on its application), the people who are choosing to retain dual citizenship do so to retain options, so why is it so unfair that governments also retain the options to take advantage of how people choose to have their citizenship?

I understand both sides of these arguments and its very difficult not to let the nature of the crimes they were convicted of cloud my judgement on this (its absolutely abhorrent and the Rochdale issue is still on going as this is 47 girls out of a supposed 1000 abused by men in Rochdale) but I think that whilst its not entirely the best case scenario there has to be some sort of deterrent to people (who choose to have dual nationality) over breaking the oath of citizenship in any country, otherwise they would make use of their dual nationality and flee (as one of the gang did before he was put on trial)

Now I want to add its rather disingenuous to frame this in anyway to be because they are brown, I've yet to see anyone claim that or anything remotely similar, what they have said is that people who have emigrated to a country and hold dual citizenship are open to be returned to their own country AFTER they have completed a sentence - I'd damn well hope that if we are doing such, that if the perpetrator of a serious/heinous crime is a dual British/American, British/Swiss, British/South African, British/Taiwanese that they too would have the option open to them to be deported to their respective country of Origin. This isn't about colour, if you want to claim anything claim Xenophobia, don't say its race, I think Brexit has proven its more Xenophobia than anything else

 

[Derwind]

Well, OK, suppose that 100 people want to enter. We can guess that 5 of them will commit serious crimes. It's unfortunate but you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs and so on and so on.

Current policies mean that 20 of them are allowed in meaning that there is a 1% chance of something awful happening. But that person can be kicked out. That's not fair so the law changes.

So the law changes and there is a big backlash saying that the entry standards needs to be raised because that 1% chance event happened twice. In order to crack down on that risk the only option is to make naturalisation a tougher process. Politicians feel that 0.25% risk means less risk to their seats so now 5 people are allowed in. 15 people are not allowed in, in case 1 of them has to be sent back.

I'd much rather you increase whatever examination or hoops or vetting you want a person to go through to become a citizen of your country, than a citizenship with a little Asterix on it.

Don't call me a citizen unless you're willing to afford me all the rights of being a citizen of a country not partial rights.

Edit; Sorry if I'm coming off a little heated, I'm really invested in this sort of Topic. I am not attempting be an apologist to the monsters in the OP.

 

[Mega]

Natural-born citizen should take an oath too, else they should be deported to Australia. We don't want any scum who don't uphold the flag and the Queen in our country!

I would agree with you if natural-born citizens had an original home country to which they could be returned. British citizens born in Britain have no origins or ties to Australia and sending them there would be as random and senseless as sending them to Argentina, Israel, Senegal, Thailand, etc. Those countries have no reason to take in deported criminals and deal with the expenses of handling them.

Maybe there could be a compromise that after x number of years of crimeless behavior in your new home country, you can no longer be deported as your ties to your previous home country are too far removed and severed. If you've only been here for 6 months or a few years and you commit a horrible crime (not a petty crime like shoplifting, but something like this pedophile group or going on a mass murder spree), it would demonstrate a clear unwillingness to uphold the new citizenship oath and serve as a strong case that the criminal be deported because they had no intent on being an integrated and upstanding citizen.

 

[More Fun To Compute]

I'd much rather you increase whatever examination or hoops or vetting you want a person to go through to become a citizen of your country, than a citizenship with a little Asterix on it.

Don't call me a citizen unless you're willing to afford me all the rights of being a citizen of a country not partial rights.

Edit; Sorry if I'm coming off a little heated, I'm really invested in this sort of Topic. I am not attempting be an apologist to the monsters in the OP.

Well this is the direction of the extreme vetting policy of Trump. And with that you have to assume that the only way to 100% make sure that someone is incapable of Islamic terrorism is by being 100% sure that they are not Islamic. We start to leave the realm of political sleaze into the realm of dangerous ideology.

 

[Derwind]

Well this is the direction of the extreme vetting policy of Trump. And with that you have to assume that the only way to 100% make sure that someone is incapable of Islamic terrorism is by being 100% sure that they are not Islamic. We start to leave the realm of political sleaze into the realm of dangerous ideology.

Oh I know but I'd personally rather a stringent immigration process than being consider a citizen* rather than a full citizen with full rights as a citizen.

I don't want to have the thought in the back of my mind that having spent let's say 20-30 years of my life living in a particular country as a citizen with all that having a life entails (owning property, getting married, building a business/career) and then the next day being shipped off to a country I may not even have any ties to (if I immigrated as a child).

And unless your justice system is fool proof, the chance that I could be shipped off whilst also being innocent of whatever crime that I'm accused of is not acceptable to me.

Please don't call me a citizen, if you are willing to accept that fate for me in the name of "greater good".

Either I'm 100% bound to your country or call me something other than a citizen.

 

[More Fun To Compute]

Oh I know but I'd personally rather a stringent immigration process than being consider a citizen* rather than a full citizen with full rights as a citizen.

I don't want to have the thought in the back of my mind that having spent let's say 20-30 years of my life living in a particular country as a citizen with all that having a life entails (owning property, getting married, building a business/career) and then the next day being shipped off to a country I may not even have any ties to (if I immigrated as a child).

And unless your justice system is fool proof, the chance that I could be shipped off whilst also being innocent of whatever crime that I'm accused of.

Please don't call me a citizen, if you are willing to accept that fate for me in the name of "greater good".

Either I'm 100% bound to your country or call me something other than a citizen.

I believe that you could legally do this by revoking your citizenship in your country of origin. If you hold 2 passports you are not 100% bound to one country. Making somebody stateless is legally and politically harder at least in theory.

Anti terrorism laws strip away all sorts of rights and it might just depend on what the home secretary is willing to sign off. Situation is rotten when it comes to potential miscarriages of justice based on classified information that the press can't even report on. If you can have your passport just cancelled then to be totally safe you would have to never leave the country.