Sure, I understand that Twisted - that's why it's often young men, because they are inherently safer in the process: but in the particular case of the man I cited, I am afraid I still think it's craven to leave your wife and small children in danger like that.
I know it's not a walk in the park, flying to France and then getting to Calais, and then taking your chances - of course not. But even in the UK, the process isn't quick, and as I say, family reunification tends to be years, not months. That's years, when the Taliban who have threatened the lives of your family, could target your unprotected wife and children.
I'm always surprised that the asylum process across Europe isn't more standardised, actually, given how processual the EU are about everything else. I wouldn't want to be in need of refuge anywhere, but the UK is definitely one of the least bad options, as ironic as that sounds. People I work with are always praising the UK as being one of the least racist countries in Europe (which, in the beginning, used to make me fall off my chair 
) and is certainly more stable than many, and with a better "system". And of course, many, many people have English as an additional language - so again, I see why people would prefer here than France. But I do see it as an issue (not from an immigration perspective, but from a human rights' perspective) that there isn't equality in treatment across the Union: there's very basic standards for human dignity, after all, and France is not the only place that these aren't met. The reason will be to do with money and not making it comfy for people to come- I get that: but no matter their legal status, people have the right to having their basic human rights met - food, shelter, clean water etc