To think the UK and France should not be sued for manslaughter over migrants drowning?

[OneRuleForThem]

A humanitarian group are suing the two countries saying they left migrants to drown. AIBU to think this isn’t right? I don’t think either “left” anybody to drown and they need to realise that getting on an inflatable boat packed to the rafters and attempting to cross the Channel isn’t a good idea.

How many of you have bothered to get to know any refugees and listened to what they have been through and what they want for their lives? Until you have done that, until you have sat in a room with someone who has made that choice and you have listened to them firsthand, I don't think you are qualified to discuss this topic

You realise that anyone like myself who absolutely thinks that people should be safe and rescued and helped should also not comment due to your ‘rule’

Headoverhead. Thank you - some sensible comments at last.

@rrhuth

How many of you have bothered to get to know any refugees and listened to what they have been through and what they want for their lives? Until you have done that, until you have sat in a room with someone who has made that choice and you have listened to them firsthand, I don't think you are qualified to discuss this topic.

I hate these threads. Those who think we shouldn't help are a disgrace and the views expressed sometimes make me wish karma really was a thing.

It is unfortunately a function of democracy that the general public has to have an opinion on topics that they're not qualified to comment on. Most of us would love to not comment, and just enjoy drinking our tea, but we can't do that.

'Refugees' themselves are not a homogenous mass. I have worked with them across several countries and in different contexts. The majority of refugees are resettled in neighbouring countries anyway, and certainly not in Europe. What's similar is that people have a glorified image of certain countries - are willing to risk everything to go there, aren't disabused of that notion and then when they get there realise it's not what they were told. Britain has a reputation for being more welcoming/diverse, better benefits, but also easier to stay even if your claim is denied, to go underground (as there's no national ID here). Many come and find that it's not so great after all. Of course something are true like language being easier (also translators etc being easier to find) but life here isn't easy.

This isn't limited to refugees. A lot of people from my home country come to the U.K for university, planning never to return. Thinking that it's easy to get a job in the UK, there's lots of opportunity here, schools hospitals and the social structure is great. Our country doesn't have things like benefits.
Many end up returning eventually after realising that they'd need to save umpteen years to buy a house, it takes ages to get an NHS specialist appointment and many state schools are crap.

And these are people who have full access to the internet obviously but you don't really get it until you've gone there yourself.

People shouldn't be left to drown, of course. But they shouldn't be encouraged to make the journey. Blaming governments for letting people drown is a sticking plaster. It's not addressing the true issue.

The RNLI never ignore distress calls in British waters. In French waters they are the responsibility of the French rescue services. Many are economic migrants who are not fleeing war zones. The UK have given sanctuary to many families fleeing war and for that we should be very proud. Anyone else should apply through legal processes to live here rather than try to enter illegally, at their own risk. So no, we should not be sued if they unfortunately lose their lives trying to enter illegally

@RufustheFloralmissingreindeer

How many of you have bothered to get to know any refugees and listened to what they have been through and what they want for their lives? Until you have done that, until you have sat in a room with someone who has made that choice and you have listened to them firsthand, I don't think you are qualified to discuss this topic

You realise that anyone like myself who absolutely thinks that people should be safe and rescued and helped should also not comment due to your ‘rule’

Always a topic that makes me very angry.

Absolutely sick of the ignorant shits who have never once spoken to anyone in this situation talking absolute crap.

There are some moral absolutes. Knowingly leaving people to drown is wrong.

@TractorAndHeadphones I never said refugees were a homogenous mass - that is exactly why people should meet a few before spouting shit.

rrhuth

Don’t disagree with any of your post

It just irritates me when people say you shouldn’t comment on something you haven’t experienced

Means even positive comments shouldnt be made

Plus mumsnet would have to shut 🤔

[quote rrhuth]@TractorAndHeadphones I never said refugees were a homogenous mass - that is exactly why people should meet a few before spouting shit.[/quote]
Ah, but they could meet the 'sensible' refugees who agree that Channel crossing ones are risking lives unnecessarily (yes, I have met quite a few who think this), or the ones who aren't very pleasant/grateful to have been saved.

Not necessarily going to change people's opinions are they, probably solidify them in fact.

" A spokesperson for the French Maritime Prefecture said its rescuers investigate every call that they receive and that an inquiry was underway into the calls received that night.

"Sometimes we receive hundreds of calls in a night, each call is dealt with, and we have to work out which boat they are referring to," said Veronique Magnin.

Callers sometimes express a preference to be rescued by the British, she said. However, this would not change the legal obligation for France to act.

The British coastguard declined to comment on Utopia 56's legal complaint. It said that on November 24, it had received more than 90 alerts from the Channel area including 999 emergency calls.

"Every call was answered, assessed and acted upon, including the deployment of search and rescue resources where appropriate," it said. "

Not unreasonable to think that, although calls were made, without an accurate position it's not easy to deploy rescue services. And if they're getting such high numbers of calls (and especially without a position fix) immediate rescue mightn't be possible. Although tragic I don't know what help suing is going to do?

@RufustheFloralmissingreindeer

rrhuth

Don’t disagree with any of your post

It just irritates me when people say you shouldn’t comment on something you haven’t experienced

Means even positive comments shouldnt be made

On some topics people should just shut the fuck up.

I don't profess to know much about women who are in refuges for example - I defer to those who do know. I don't know much about victims of CSA - I defer to those who do know.

Sometimes the appropriate comment if you don't know about things is 'I don't understand why they come' and then listen.

On the question posed by the OP - whether the governments should be sued - IMO it is reasonable to try to challenge this legally. The law is there to be used, the courts can decide if it is a) a reasonable case and b) whether there was wrongdoing. People who do not want to use the law to challenge a government can get to fuck too!

My views are that sometimes “A person may cause evil to others not only by his actions but by his inaction, and in either case he is justly accountable to them for the injury.” - and so this seems a good case to pursue legally to see what the verdict is.

@rrhuth

On the question posed by the OP - whether the governments should be sued - IMO it is reasonable to try to challenge this legally. The law is there to be used, the courts can decide if it is a) a reasonable case and b) whether there was wrongdoing. People who do not want to use the law to challenge a government can get to fuck too!

My views are that sometimes “A person may cause evil to others not only by his actions but by his inaction, and in either case he is justly accountable to them for the injury.” - and so this seems a good case to pursue legally to see what the verdict is.

Yes - it will be interesting to see how far it goes.

Mill's Harm principle is interesting. 100% accountability but 0% responsibility.

This is a story about four people named Everybody, Somebody, Anybody and Nobody. There was an important job to be done and Everybody was sure that Somebody would do it. Anybody could have done it, but Nobody did it. Somebody got angry about that, because it was Everybody’s job. Everybody thought Anybody could do it, but Nobody realized that Everybody wouldn’t do it. It ended up that Everybody blamed Somebody when Nobody did what Anybody could have.

If distress calls were made and ignored and if there was avoidance due to claimed Ng boat nor in their territory when they were, I don't know if this was the case, but if it was, then yes, one r both were responsible

Both the French & the British are jumping up and down saying it's dangerous, don't try to cross.

The immigrants ignore the pleas and the warnings, sneak past the French police and launch in the dark. They are often too small to be seen on radar, most are grossly overladen, they have no comma, no lights and the channel is a big busy place.

Any lawsuits should be against the people traffickers.

My point still remains

You are telling everyone whether their comments are positive or negative to ‘shut the fuck up’

And I’m fairly sure that if the thread was just full of detractors you’d complain that no one was sympathetic…because all the sympathetic people are keeping quiet

Quite Obviously I’m going to leave this now because I don’t want to derail

@RufustheFloralmissingreindeer

My point still remains

You are telling everyone whether their comments are positive or negative to ‘shut the fuck up’

And I’m fairly sure that if the thread was just full of detractors you’d complain that no one was sympathetic…because all the sympathetic people are keeping quiet

Quite Obviously I’m going to leave this now because I don’t want to derail

No, you're perfectly right and again the BBC use this technique of course when they do human interest stories they pick the ones likely to elicit the best reactions

having actually worked with refugees I don't have a blanket 'ye everyone should be let in where they want' policy any more. I used to have a more permissive stance being an immigrant myself so quite strangely it's gone in the opposite direction

If just a couple of boats are discouraged from crossing by this tragedy, the net saving of life may outnumber the 27 tragic deaths.

@TractorAndHeadphones it's criminal because it's against the law? International law (SOLAS) places a duty on all ships to attempt to rescue people in danger at sea.

Considering how many people as a country we've raped, enslaved, robbed and murdered over the years, it's good to see all the heartless racists are still alive and well.

Maybe the UK government should set up a safe way they can apply for asylum en-route in say France, if they get rejected they then could apply for other countries.

We take in 1/10th of the asylum seekers of any other EU country, but then we are a heartless bunch on self-seeking racists that voted for brexit and Johnson.

Lets hope they win the cast

@RufustheFloralmissingreindeer

My point still remains

You are telling everyone whether their comments are positive or negative to ‘shut the fuck up’

And I’m fairly sure that if the thread was just full of detractors you’d complain that no one was sympathetic…because all the sympathetic people are keeping quiet

Quite Obviously I’m going to leave this now because I don’t want to derail

Is there never a topic where you think you should pipe down? There are many where I think I should pipe down (I gave some examples above).

@Georgeskitchen

The RNLI never ignore distress calls in British waters. In French waters they are the responsibility of the French rescue services. Many are economic migrants who are not fleeing war zones. The UK have given sanctuary to many families fleeing war and for that we should be very proud. Anyone else should apply through legal processes to live here rather than try to enter illegally, at their own risk. So no, we should not be sued if they unfortunately lose their lives trying to enter illegally

Which legal process is that? not sure it exsists currently thats part of the problem.

And whats wrong with economic migrants if they want to come and work bring it on, we are desperately short of workers and that problem is going to get a lot worse over the next few years considering we have an ageing population, low birth rate and have told all the Europeans to fuck off. someones going to need to wipe your arse in the future.

rruth well I do some work with refugees so am I allowed to comment?

Ime the people are often lovely, the system however is a total shit show and leaves the most vulnerable in their home countries while the well off and fit fight to the front of the queue to get to the UK. It's not cheap to pay people traffickers!

Wrt to suing the rescue services, sure, go after the people risking their own lives to help those at sea and ignore the people traffickers, the French police not making any effort to stop people, politicians in both countries who won't put in any policies that could actually help the situation....

@rrhuth

How many of you have bothered to get to know any refugees and listened to what they have been through and what they want for their lives? Until you have done that, until you have sat in a room with someone who has made that choice and you have listened to them firsthand, I don't think you are qualified to discuss this topic.

I hate these threads. Those who think we shouldn't help are a disgrace and the views expressed sometimes make me wish karma really was a thing.

I work with two people who came to the UK and claimed asylum, one is an Iraqi Kurd, the other is a Bosniak from Kosovo. They do not represent all refugees or asylum seekers, they will in no way represent economic migrants. They suffered war, seeing friends and family killed in front of them, they fled in utter fear for their lives. They both claimed asylum in the first safe country they arrived in, for both that ended up being Greece. They then came to the UK through the EU scheme (of which we are no longer part).

They are both of the view that those crossing the Channel are utterly insane, France is safe and would look after them, probably better than the UK would look after them. I support the UK accepting genuine refugees, I support us joining joint international schemes for managing the distribution of genuine asylum seekers. That does not mean I think it is a good think to allow, or even encourage unofficial immigration, asylum shopping, or undocumented economic migration.

I agree that there needs to be a better way to manage asylum claims and to discourage economic migration, to protect asylum seekers, I don't see that discouraging people from crossing the Channel in inflatable boats is a bad thing, I don't see France as some hellhole that people need to flee.

The legal question is whether the RNLI have a “duty of care” towards these people. I would say no. They are a charity who do their best not a service like the ambulance service. The volunteers put their own lives at risk going out in rough seas and placing a professional duty of care on them is not reasonable and will discourage future volunteers.

I would say the same about Mountain rescue teams. When people choose to do risky activities and get into trouble that requires help from other’s who are volunteering and taking a risk themselves they are very lucky to get that help. It’s not a right.