To send them home? (trigger warning grooming gangs)

What aboutery? Surely the definition of whataboutery is never mind that the majority of child sex crimes are committed by white males, what about the 7% that is committed by Asians.

It’s not whataboutery it’s asking you to treat all child exploitation equally because to not do so looks racist.

Hi @Errors I have read it and I’m interested in the topic. I’ve engaged with the thread a few times. But I think the language in places is incendiary and hyperbolic. It is a small number of posters. I think it’s inappropriate for mumsnet and it helps no one.

Threads will only be deleted if they break Mumsnet's T&C not because PP disagree with their content

Not agreeing and not being racist aren't mutually exclusive - it's possible to do both

Yes good idea, let’s delete a whole conversation because YOU have decided that it is racist. Will you be on hand to personally and single handedly moderate every thread on here seeing as you are the sole authority on the subject? After all, it is your views alone that we should all use as a yardstick with which to measure conversation against, right?

I get so sick of people trying to get things deleted that they don’t agree with. Read it or don’t. But don’t try and stop other people from discussing it.

Fair enough. I have relations whose version of doomsday prepping is a spiral of anxiety about their sons being conscripted into the next war, so I guess that would feed into my opinions somewhat.

Agree

The usual test of loyalty is which side one would support in cricket or football

A war seems rather extreme

If there was a war and you were in one of those countries I would be surprised if you got a choice. Wars are not actually about personal moral agreement, they’re kind of nasty that way.

And it’s a bit Hobbesian, but I still have a certain faith in the nation state as a provider of stability. You live somewhere, work and make your social contribution there, pay your taxes there, and the nation state provides safety and if you’re lucky some perks like healthcare.

Interesting info, it looks like refugee status is most secure in terms of staying

Your post re fraud and status made me think of the acid attacker I wonder what would have happened there wrt deportation or not

Just a question if one of the victims has gone on to commit crimes do you really think it would be fair to dehumanise her further?

I think you need to just simply remove Pakistani men, and just change it to men. The media is very clever at making it appear that it's one race over another. You referring to 2.7% of the population. 90% of SA victims, it tends to be people that the child knows. I would suggest fearing your inner circle and the nice man who you would never suspect. This whole post is ridiculous.

Under some circumstances a person can be deprived of British citizenship on the grounds that it was obtained by deception or fraud, including if the applicant stated he was of good character when he was not (for example, because he was a rapist in his spare time).

There are two different issues here:
(1) Prisoner transfer;
(2) Deportation.

The first depends upon an agreement being in place. There was an agreement between the UK and Pakistan in about 2008, and a small number of prisoners were transferred to Pakistan. Part of any such agreement is that the transferred prisoner will serve the term in prison in the receiving country, and several of the transferred prisoners were released early in Pakistan, so it was suspended in 2010.
Another agreement was signed in 2018, and suspended again in 2019. As far as I'm aware, it's still suspended, but I've not looked at it recently.

The second applies to "grooming gangs" in the same way as any other crime; the deportation provisions relating to non-EU citizens under the UK Borders Act 2007. Deportation applies after the prison term is served. Any non-EEA citizen who has been sentenced to 12 months' custody or longer, or whose deportation is conducive to the public good, will have a deportation order made against him unless one of the exceptions to deportations apply. If the sentence is 1-4 years, the private life exception is that the person must show lawful residence in the UK for at least half his life AND that he is integrated into the UK AND that there would be very significant obstacles to his integration in the UK. The family life exception is a parental relationship with a British child or child living in the UK for 7 years or more / or a British / settled partner, AND that it would be “unduly harsh” for the child /partner to go with the deported person, AND that it would be unduly harsh for the child / partner to remain in the UK if the Appellant were to be deported.

If more than a 4 year sentence, there must also be very compelling circumstances, one of the above exceptions is not enough.

If a person faces a well-founded fear of persecution (essentially, is a refugee) or there is a real risk of inhumane and degrading treatment, he can't be deported either.

If the person is of Pakistani origin but has become a British citizen he can't be deported at all. In a few cases, the SSHD has deprived some of the grooming gang convicted Defendants of British nationality.

Oh shut up with the whataboutery

It's bad no matter who bloody does it come on!

Except home office figures show more white grooming gangs than ethnic grooming gangs. This thread is particularly focused on Asian grooming gangs, particularly of Pakistani origin. There is no harm in discussing these issues but we need to treat the whole issue not just the ethnocentric bits of the problem.

The issue wasn’t caused by the grooming gangs, it was caused by authorities who were too cowardly to grasp the nettle and deal with the issues. Combine this with attitudes from police and social workers who seemed to give up on the victims because they were looked on as “that type of girl.” Grade A misogyny.

I have dual nationality. Actually I sort of have triple nationality with one of them being a reduced rights type of nationality. If there was a war I'd support the nation that I morally agree with whether I am their national or not. What a strange question!!

Look, lots of crimes have gang elements, and no one seems to find it a problem to understand that organized crime has some especially problematic elements that need to be addressed specifically.

Its's also very common for organized crime of all kinds to be based around a common ethnicity. This is well understood in policing and it's an important element to understand in order to deal with the criminal gangs.

So no, they can't really treat all sex crimes as if they were the same, because they aren't.

My inclination is that when people who are not yet citizens should commit crimes they should be sent back to their homeland. That being said there are places where I think it would be immoral to do that.

However - once people have been granted citizenship, I think that's absolute, unless they can be shown to have done so fraudulently. That's what citizenship is essentially, it means you are now to be treated as if you were born in that place, and can't just be removed because you commit a crime or any other reason.

Which is why it should not be given out without care.

I suppose you could argue that someone granted citizenship while being actively criminal was behaving fraudulently, I don't know what kind of legal standing an idea like that might have.

Why does their colour, nationality even matter? And nonsense about it being cultural.

My issue is why does the punishment not fit the crime? One of the ring leaders received a sentence of 6 years which is bs in itself and then was out in 2.5!

Quite frankly everyone involved from the police, social services, councils etc all viewed these girls as being deserving of and even responsible for the abuse they received are you going to blame that on a culture that is alien to you too?

Yes they are but no more than white males, the point is your focused on the crimes of the brown people, the fact that white males do as much or more of that time in proportion to their number seems to escape your attention. I’m not saying you turn a blind eye to the white offenders but you definitely think that if the horrific crime is perpetuated by a brown person make it worse. That means you think white sex offenders are somehow more acceptable?

I know that some cultures have shitty attitudes to women and ours is one of them. I work in an almost exclusively male environment and rape jokes aren’t unusual. It wasn’t that long ago that I heard grown men would say “old enough to bleed, old enough to …….”(you know the rest of that phrase).

The process by which many people are 'granted' citizenship is being born in the country. It's very difficult to strip anyone of citizenship in relation to their country of birth.

But in the majority of these cases, the men involved were not 'granted' citizenship. They were born British. And there are laws around leaving someone stateless.

Less than 5% of child abuse cases involved grooming gangs in 2023 and of this 5%, two thirds were online crimes.
Still too many yes I agree but it is not hundred and thousands of cases.
Legimitate concerns relate to the behaviour of a minority of Muslim men.
This thread is essentially racism in the guise of free speech. It’s time Mumsnet HQ took this and similar threads down.

If we can grant someone citizenship then we should also be able to take them away.

A couple of Pakistani child rapist gang leaders from Rotherham denounced their Pakistani citizenship before we could deport them, as our "justice" system took too long. What a joke.

Sexual predators? Goes without speaking doesn't it?