|
|
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: | K wrote: | ^ Maybe one problem is that a family gets citizenship and then a few years pass and the children commit crimes but are still officially juveniles?
(I don't know. Just wondering.) |
Same problem as any children of Australian citizens committing crimes, no? |
David, did you read the context of the question, i.e. Mugwump's suggestion of "indefinite leave to remain, subject to ongoing good character"? |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
Yes, sorry, I see what you mean by ‘problem’ now. Unless Mugwump’s suggesting that the parents be deported because of their children’s actions, I’m not sure how ‘indefinite leave to remain’ rather than a path to citizenship would be preferable. _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere
|
Post subject: | |
|
i actually think holding parents responsible for the actions of their juveniles for quite a few things is a bloody good idea. Deliberate damage to property, stealing, just imagine how much cheaper insurance could be, and how much prettier the world might be if someone held the little arseholes to accountability. Why do ferals think its ok to smash someone for no reason? steal someones hard earned? someone taught, or didnt teach, those ferals basic morality, common decency. _________________ You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
Post subject: | |
|
I've known lovely parents who have little monster children, or even one bad and some good kids. Sometimes people are just born arseholes and punishing parents for the actions of their children isn't fair at all.
My mum was good with discipline but I still went and did some less than legal things as a kid that she had no idea about. |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere
|
Post subject: | |
|
there is always exceptions to the rule, there is also a lot of feral Ł$%$ers and uninterested parents out there - just go watch a few young teens out shopping or out to lunch and listen to the way they talk to their parents, and also the way some parents talk to their kids. Respect seems to be out of fashion.
this naughty corner bullshit is not helping! _________________ You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
Wokko wrote: | I've known lovely parents who have little monster children, or even one bad and some good kids. Sometimes people are just born arseholes and punishing parents for the actions of their children isn't fair at all.
My mum was good with discipline but I still went and did some less than legal things as a kid that she had no idea about. |
Well said, Wokko. Guilt by association is no way to run a society. And yes, sometimes even the best parents have children with issues; it’s no “exception that proves the rule”, just evidence that nobody can determine how their child will turn out. _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007 Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: | Yes, sorry, I see what you mean by ‘problem’ now. Unless Mugwump’s suggesting that the parents be deported because of their children’s actions, I’m not sure how ‘indefinite leave to remain’ rather than a path to citizenship would be preferable. |
No, that’s certainly no what I suggested. Guilt by association offends the most basic sense of justice. But I can see some merit in deferring citizenship in favor of ILR until the third generation, rather as they do in Germany for gastarbeiters. A better alternative, perhaps, would be conferring citizenship for the second generation at the age of 30 subject to no criminal record. The second gen often seems to be the one at risk of terrorism or serious violent crime.
Oh and ILR would be a “path” to citizenship at some defined point. What we have now is a teleportation to citizenship across all generations without any character test. _________________ Two more flags before I die!
Last edited by Mugwump on Tue Jan 30, 2018 9:01 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007 Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
Post subject: | |
|
I agree with TP that some parents deserve a good metaphorical kicking for their irresponsibility, but I don’t think there is much that can be done about it unless they are themselves complicit in unlawful acts or guilty of downright neglect, and there are laws about that already. _________________ Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007 Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
Post subject: | |
|
think positive wrote: | i actually think holding parents responsible for the actions of their juveniles for quite a few things is a bloody good idea. Deliberate damage to property, stealing, just imagine how much cheaper insurance could be, and how much prettier the world might be if someone held the little arseholes to accountability. Why do ferals think its ok to smash someone for no reason? steal someones hard earned? someone taught, or didnt teach, those ferals basic morality, common decency. |
Yes, it is breathtaking to even contemplate the cost of crime. From police, to hospitals, to alarms, insurance, security guards, cyber specialists and various restoration works, to victim psychotherapy. That’s why it is a pity we have done so much to foster it in the last fifty years. That great fraud John Lennon wrote “imagine no possessions”. Imagine minimal crime, instead, and you get a little closer to genuine humanism. _________________ Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
Mugwump wrote: | David wrote: | Yes, sorry, I see what you mean by ‘problem’ now. Unless Mugwump’s suggesting that the parents be deported because of their children’s actions, I’m not sure how ‘indefinite leave to remain’ rather than a path to citizenship would be preferable. |
No, that’s certainly no what I suggested. Guilt by association offends the most basic sense of justice. But I can see some merit in deferring citizenship in favor of ILR until the third generation, rather as they do in Germany for gastarbeiters. A better alternative, perhaps, would be conferring citizenship for the second generation at the age of 30 subject to no criminal record. The second gen often seems to be the one at risk of terrorism or serious violent crime.
Oh and ILR would be a “path” to citizenship at some defined point. What we have now is a teleportation to citizenship across all generations without any character test. |
Would you really countenance deporting people to a country they may never have actually seen or lived in? And would that country even take them, unless they held dual citizenship? _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007 Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: | Mugwump wrote: | David wrote: | Yes, sorry, I see what you mean by ‘problem’ now. Unless Mugwump’s suggesting that the parents be deported because of their children’s actions, I’m not sure how ‘indefinite leave to remain’ rather than a path to citizenship would be preferable. |
No, that’s certainly no what I suggested. Guilt by association offends the most basic sense of justice. But I can see some merit in deferring citizenship in favor of ILR until the third generation, rather as they do in Germany for gastarbeiters. A better alternative, perhaps, would be conferring citizenship for the second generation at the age of 30 subject to no criminal record. The second gen often seems to be the one at risk of terrorism or serious violent crime.
Oh and ILR would be a “path” to citizenship at some defined point. What we have now is a teleportation to citizenship across all generations without any character test. |
Would you really countenance deporting people to a country they may never have actually seen or lived in? And would that country even take them, unless they held dual citizenship? |
Firstly, it is very rare for a country to strip citizenship from someone who does not renounce it, or adopt another citizenship. I believe there are UN rules about this.
Secondly, would I countenance it ? Of course, or I would not have written it. I have very little sympathy for those who commit serious violent crime. I have even less sympathy for those who commit violent or repeated crime when they have extra reason to be grateful for the precious and generous opportunity that was offered to them and to their families.
Why be so morally absolute when it comes to protecting the rights of those who choose to make war upon society, and so undemanding when it comes to protecting the rights of innocent citizens to live in peace ? _________________ Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
Dave The Man
Joined: 01 Apr 2005 Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
Post subject: | |
|
These Bloody Fearals last Night Robbed a Cancer Widdel Women.
They need to kick them out of the Country.
Never take Refugee's from Sudan Again _________________ I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
Post subject: | |
|
Oh a web page. |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
Post subject: | |
|
Yep, Martha and Rose should **** right off, the other two can pay back the victims and go to jail. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
|
|