Comments by "Dale Crocker" (@dalecrocker3213) on "" video.

So it's OK for laws designed to save lives at sea to be abused in order to facilitate illegal immigration is it?
4
Sound advice too.
4
@IshtarNike No, I'm one of those idiots who believes that the best way to be saved from drowning is not to pay 5,000 euros to cross the channel in a rubber boat. (And the poor sods only get full bed and board and £45 a week spending money.)
2
So you are comparing Jewish children under the Nazis with economic tourists with smartphones and bank accounts are you?
2
When a law is created for a particular purpose and is then abused for another purpose, then that law may justifiably be amended. That is all that is happening here.
2
@Dutch1961 Which is why steps are being taken to prevent the abuse of such laws.
1
@atomiccritter6492 Then who?
1
@hamishf7444 Not really. The dinghies are rarely sinking - if ever - just overcrowded. This law will enable other boats and ships to warn the occupants that they are legally forbidden to rescue them and that they had better turn back. If they don't then their fate is in their own hands.
1
@Dutch1961 So what?
1
@petergaskinuk-1785 I return to the point. If these people are deliberately putting themselves in danger they are undermining the reasons why such laws and conventions were drawn up in the first place. It is an abuse and should not be tolerated.
1
@syriuszb8611 These people are not drowning and they have denied themselves the status of asylum seekers because they have not sought asylum in the nearest available country. They are economic opportunists who believe they can find a better and more rewarding life in the UK than elsewhere. The trouble is such opportunities are becoming increasingly rare in this country. Britain may arguably have a duty to protect the interests of British passport holders from abroad, but it has no duty to sustain the impossible dreams of Libyans, Afghanis and Iraqis etc who have be conned into believing that this is the promised land.
1
@hamishf7444 Yeah, but they don't know for sure any more that we're going to save them, do they? Instead of taking them on board all potential rescuers need is a loudhailer through which to tell them that it is now illegal for them to be rescued and they had better turn back. If they're in the water it would be a different story of course, but they never are. At the moment maritime regulations oblige the coastguard and the immigration service to act as taxis. It is a blatant misuse and now it will thankfully be halted.
1
@peterebel7899 The only person drowning here seems to be you - in a sea of foolish metaphors.
1
@sigiriya5149 You show great imagination. Perhaps the British fishermen might show some ingenuity and ship the immigrants around to Norfolk from where they may be enslaved as fruit and vegetable pickers, of which we are suffering a great shortage at present.
1
@peterebel7899 Am I to take it then that only those fleeing the horrors of the European Union are eligible for asylum in our wonderful country?
1
@sigiriya5149 Well if they choose to leave on a "last in, first out" basis I can see no reason to prevent them. Mind you, drowning the Channel would certainly indicate considerable lack of foresight. We would be best rid of such types.
1
@elwynjones763 The people traffickers who deliberately place their customers at risk by putting them to sea in overcrowded rubber dinghies.
1
@firebollocks Of course not. The rescue services will continue to rescue people in genuine distress but are now able to warn migrants that they may not help them, and that they should turn back to France.
1
@syriuszb8611 It's time the coastguard stopped providing a taxi service on the behalf of international criminals. It's as simple as that.
1
@sigiriya5149 As I said, nobody is drowning. And at least you admit that those seeking our shores are the fittest and the best. It's a shame they are not brave enough to remain in their shithole countries and work and fight to improve them, isn't it? Bugger the peasants, eh?
1
@sigiriya5149 The British were the first nation in the world to make slavery illegal and to send its navy out to intercept slave ships. Britain's wealth is built upon innovation, skill, hard work and courage.
1
@hamishf7444 I was merely suggesting that shouting at them is a preferable alternative to taking them on board.
1
@franciscouderq1100 Are you French by any chance? You are certainly pompous enough.
1
@thomaswilga735 What a startingly original idea.
1
@gurkslunga So I go around dragging people out of bed in the middle of the night and putting them in concentration camps do I?
1
@carltaylor4942 Patel's family, who had British passports, were forcibly ejected from Uganda by a maniac. Do you not see the difference?
1
That other loveable left wing loonie Max Robespierre is today featuring the fact that food is rotting in the fields due to lack of labour to harvest it. I think I can see a sort of solution here......
1
How about when people have deliberately put themselves into mock distress in order to illegally enter a country? These laws are being abused and when good laws are abused it poses a threat to the very purpose for which those laws were created.
1
The chief fault with your argument is that in all the examples you mention the "scapegoats" were actually resident in the country at the time. You blame the Tories for all the country's ills I expect. What's the difference?
1
@timelwell7002 Credit must go where credit is due and blame apportioned with caution. Conflating issues in order to arrive at a simple, broad stroke, black and white solution gets us nowhere. There are too many immigrants in the UK, plain and simple. Resources planned according to projections made in the 1970'sand 80's are incapable of dealing with the influx. Restrictions are necessary and attempts to illegally evade such restrictions must be curtailed. I concede your point about the government; it's just that too many people seem to regard the Tories with the same rabid hatred with which the Germans regarded the Jews, or the Turks for the Kurds. This hatred is not returned. Tories regard their political opponents with a kind of bemused contempt as a general rule. Mind you, if socialism goes down the current wokeist path and replaces workers' rights with the dangerous nonsense of intersectionality, identity politics and so on things might change quite rapidly.
1
But when this convention is being used to facilitate illegal immigration, do you not think some amendment is needed?
1
@gwendolinegoetz9224 But the rubber boat arrivals are economic tourists, not starving Irish peasants. They pay between up to 20,000 euros for the trip, including 5,000 for their seat on the dinghy. Many are wearing trainers costing a couple of hundred Euros and they sometimes use their expensive cellphones to film themselves throwing their credit cards and identification documents into the sea. Not quite the same thing, is it?
1
@gwendolinegoetz9224 I imagine the people smugglers will respond to this by handing out sharp knives to puncture the dinghies, just to be on the safe side. The deep reasons for economic migration are many and complex - as indeed are the reasons for a nation's decline into poverty and chaos.
1