Brexit: Now What? Part II

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

They're foreign and therefore suspect

Wellthat would be the obvious conclusion to jump to but id like to see if we can analyse the point and logic without going off on yet another tangent.

Ill not hold my breath.

 

[Airfix]

Im not following your logic.

You argued for totally free movement. In a post.

Totally free movement is not logical.
Some people are dangerous to the point that need to have their freedoms taken away from them by prison.

The Eu has prisons too. So thats not the difference.

So the EU realises sometimes there has to be a border between one person and another, albeit in the form of a prison wall. But unfortunately the EU does not seem to comprehend that some people are trafficking guns drugs and people across the whole Schengen region.

And sometimes dangerous criminals are using freedom of movement to avoid capture after committing murder.
However much people may laud Europol, if you don't even know what country someone is in, it makes it very difficult to find them.

Why do you believe we need borders between Brussels and paris to prevent things but not between Cardiff and Newcastle? Whats the difference?

What's the difference ? Paris and Belgium are in different sovereign states which each currently still have their own separate police forces and idiosyncracies.

When someone has to provide documentation at a border crossing and they're wanted for a major crime, it becomes easier to apprehend them.

 

[abaddon]

You argued for totally free movement. In a post.

Totally free movement is not logical.
Some people are dangerous to the point that need to have their freedoms taken away from them by prison.

Strawman. Nobody proposed totally free movement.

So the EU realises sometimes there has to be a border between one person and another, albeit in the form of a prison wall. But unfortunately the EU does not seem to comprehend that some people are trafficking guns drugs and people across the whole Schengen region.

Strawman. Schengen only proposes freedom of movement internally. External borders must still be secured.

And sometimes dangerous criminals are using freedom of movement to avoid capture after committing murder.

Strawman. No evidence provided. This was still easy before Schengen.

However much people may laud Europol, if you don't even know what country someone is in, it makes it very difficult to find them.

Strawman. Before there was any Schengen you couldn't know what country anyone was actually in.

What's the difference ? Paris and Belgium are in different sovereign states which each currently still have their own separate police forces and idiosyncracies.

Red herring. Before Schengen that was also still true

When someone has to provide documentation at a border crossing and they're wanted for a major crime, it becomes easier to apprehend them.

Strawman. The plethora of unprotected routes renders this moot.

Now, when are you about to close up your porous borders? What are you waiting for?

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

What's the difference ? Paris and Belgium are in different sovereign states which each currently still have their own separate police forces and idiosyncracies.

When someone has to provide documentation at a border crossing and they're wanted for a major crime, it becomes easier to apprehend them.

The rest of your post was off-topic to this question. OK lets look at this bit.

Paris and Belgium are separate sovereign states. This is true. But I fail to see how this impacts the question. This poses no practical difference as far as i can see.

Different police forces? Different laws? You can say the same about Scotland and England.

Yes I can see that having to pass a border crossing probably is an opportunity for apprehending a criminal (Assuming they are not clever enough to avoid it) but this is an equally good argument for having border crossings between Wales and England or between Croydon and London or between East London and West London.

In the EU it's fairly normal that carrying ID is mandatory anyway and people can be asked to produce it any time. There's no real need for border crossings to enforce something if it can be enforced anywhere at any time.

In fact, since the UK has no ID card it would make MORE sense to have a border between cities in the UK to check people.

So I'm still none the wiser as to what you see as being the difference and what you think borders are adding in one situation that they wouldn't add in the other.

 

[Andy_Ross]

What's the difference ? Edinburgh and London are in different sovereign states which each currently still have their own separate police forces and idiosyncracies.*

How secure were the borders between Belgium, France and Germany before Schengen? Those forests around the Ardennes were always porous. Hitler got an army through undetected, twice.

 

[abaddon]

In the EU it's fairly normal that carrying ID is mandatory anyway and people can be asked to produce it any time. There's no real need for border crossings to enforce something if it can be enforced anywhere at any time.

Just to single that one out. for reasons unexplained, the UK has always had a problem with the notion of any form of national ID.

Surely, Brexit will entail that? A requisite national ID will at a stroke eliminate the majority of illegals. And render the remainder to being found in short order. Brexiteers didn't figure that one out either. Nor the fact that any such attempt will perforce drive fakery. And before anyone gets on a high horse, the UK already has an ongoing problem with fake two pound coins so close to appearing real that national ID would be a doddle.

Once again the lack of any brexiteer plan at all is exposed.

 

[Craig B]

So the EU realises sometimes there has to be a border between one person and another, albeit in the form of a prison wall. But unfortunately the EU does not seem to comprehend that some people are trafficking guns drugs and people across the whole Schengen region.

And sometimes dangerous criminals are using freedom of movement to avoid capture after committing murder.
However much people may laud Europol, if you don't even know what country someone is in, it makes it very difficult to find them.

This is all so nonsensical as to be beyond comment. Should we limit freedom of movement from England to Scotland and Ireland because criminals pass from one Country to another? Should we set up borders between Yorkshire and Lancashire because drug peddlers and people traffickers pass from one county to the other?

Should we have "internal passports" you have to show when buying a railway ticket from London to Newcastle or Glasgow to Aberdeen, because gangsters often make these journeys for nefarious purposes? (Stalin introduced such passports in the Soviet Union in the 1930s.) All these objections have been pointed out to you, but here is the most devastating one of all. If you want the countries of the EU to imprison their populations and control their movements (as in the pre-1989 Warsaw Pact states) why on earth leave the EU? If the UK initiates Article 50 it will lose all influence over any changes in EU policy it may want to introduce! Does that make sense?

 

[The Don]

Just to single that one out. for reasons unexplained, the UK has always had a problem with the notion of any form of national ID.

As I understand it, it's a throwback to cultural memories of WWII, possibly with a whiff of "Ve vant to see your papers !!!" from old war movies.

Surely, Brexit will entail that? A requisite national ID will at a stroke eliminate the majority of illegals. And render the remainder to being found in short order. Brexiteers didn't figure that one out either. Nor the fact that any such attempt will perforce drive fakery. And before anyone gets on a high horse, the UK already has an ongoing problem with fake two pound coins so close to appearing real that national ID would be a doddle.

Yeah ? well over here that's being portrayed as the EU's fault as well. Apparently criminals in the Eurozone have got good at forging the 2€ coin and have exported that expertise to the UK

Once again the lack of any brexiteer plan at all is exposed.

Of course not but that's what happens when you're driven by dogma...

 

[Darat]

Just to single that one out. for reasons unexplained, the UK has always had a problem with the notion of any form of national ID.

...snip...

It's a tad more nuanced than that - we have many kinds of nationally acceptable ID - passports, driving licences, birth certificates and so on. What we don't have is any requirement to carry any such ID with us and we do not have to unless it is part of due process prove who we are to the state.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

It's a tad more nuanced than that - we have many kinds of nationally acceptable ID - passports, driving licences, birth certificates and so on. What we don't have is any requirement to carry any such ID with us and we do not have to unless it is part of due process prove who we are to the state.

Nor do we need to have any let alone produce it.

It wasnt that long ago we didnt have photo driving licenses until we switched to ... drum roll.... eu style photo id

 

[Airfix]

What's the difference ? Edinburgh and London are in different sovereign states

No they aren't.
The United Kingdom is the sovereign state, Scotland and England are both part of the same sovereign state.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom with a common border authority and the UK's Police Force has commonality of information technology systems and law.

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, commonly known as the United Kingdom (UK) or Britain,[nb 8] is a sovereign state in Europe. Lying off the north-western coast of the European mainland, it includes the island of Great Britain (the name of which is also loosely applied to the whole country), the north-eastern part of the island of Ireland, and many smaller islands.[9] Northern Ireland is the only part of the UK that shares a land border with another sovereign state—the Republic of Ireland.[nb 9] Apart from this land border, the UK is surrounded by the Atlantic Ocean, with the North Sea to its east, the English Channel to its south and the Celtic Sea to its south-southwest, attributing to it having the 12th longest coastline in the world. The Irish Sea lies between Great Britain and Ireland. With an area of 242,500 square kilometres (93,600 sq mi), the UK is the 78th-largest sovereign state in the world and the 11th-largest in Europe. It is also the 21st-most populous country, with an estimated 65.1 million inhabitants.[10] Together, this makes it the fourth most densely populated country in the European Union.

That is why I used the phrase sovereign state.

A question, do you lock your doors at night ?

 

[Andy_Ross]

It's £1 coins that get widely forged not £2 coins.

 

[MCel58]

No they aren't.
The United Kingdom is the sovereign state, Scotland and England are both part of the same sovereign state.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom with a common border authority and the UK's Police Force has commonality of information technology systems and law.


That is why I used the phrase sovereign state.

A question, do you lock your doors at night ?

Scotland does not have the same legal system or laws as the rest of the U.K. it has a separate police force.
Also from Wikipedia
" The United Kingdom, judicially, consists of three jurisdictions: (a) England and Wales, (b) Scotland and (c) Northern Ireland.[4] There are important differences between Scots Law, English law and Northern Irish law in areas such as property law, criminal law, trust law,[7] inheritance law, evidence law and family law while there are greater similarities in areas of national interest such as commercial law, consumer rights,[8] taxation, employment law and health and safety regulations.[9]

Examples of differences between the jurisdictions include the age of legal capacity (16 years old in Scotland, 18 years old in England and Wales),[10][11] the use of 15-member juries for criminal trials in Scotland (compared with 12-member juries in England and Wales) who always decide by simple majority,[12] the fact that the accused in a criminal trial does not have the right to elect a judge or jury trial,[12] judges and juries of criminal trials have the "third verdict" of "not proven" available to them,[13][14] and the fact that equity was never a distinct branch of Scots law.[15]"

Plus
"There are also differences in the terminology used between the jurisdictions. For example, in Scotland there are no Magistrates' Courts or Crown Court but there are Justice of the Peace Courts, Sheriff Courts and the College of Justice. The Procurator Fiscal Service provides the independent public prosecution service for Scotland like the Crown Prosecution Service in England and Wales and the Public Prosecution Service in Northern Ireland"

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom with a common border authority and the UK's Police Force has commonality of information technology systems and law.

You are all for integration provided its in the UK but not when it's in Europe?

But you still haven't explained the difference.

 

[Craig B]

A question, do you lock your doors at night ?

Is that a requirement of "UK law" enforced by the "UK Police Force"?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scots_law
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_Scotland

The Act of Union 1707 merged the Kingdom of Scotland and the Kingdom of England to form the new Kingdom of Great Britain. Article 19 of the Act confirmed the continuing authority of the College of Justice, Court of Session and Court of Justiciary in Scotland.[30] Article 3, however, merged the Estates of Scotland with the Parliament of England to form the Parliament of Great Britain, with its seat in the Palace of Westminster, London. Under the terms of the Act of Union, Scotland retained its own systems of law, education and Church (Church of Scotland, Presbyterian polity), separately from the rest of the country.​

 

[Amazer]

You are all for integration provided its in the UK but not when it's in Europe?

But you still haven't explained the difference.

If anything that sounded like great argument for even more European integration.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

[The Don]

A question, do you lock your doors at night ?

More straw and/or false equivalency

Not locking doors is the equivalent to not having a police force rather than having checks at internal boundaries. I guess the closest analogy involving locked doors would be something like, "do you lock all the internal doors in your house at night ?".

Friends who were burgled a few years ago and are (IMO over) cautious do, but no-one else I know does. Even they don't lock the toilet doors from the outside.

To instate (or re-instate) border checks, first I think you need to demonstrate that they'd be effective. In the case of borders in Benelux or between France and Benelux, France and Germany and so on there are so many crossings that, unless you build a wall all the way along the border, the "bad guys" will still slip through whilst law abiding travelers will be inconvenienced. even with a wall there's no guarantee of effectiveness.

 

[The Don]

It's £1 coins that get widely forged not £2 coins.

True, but the forging of £2 coins has been in the news the last few days

 

[Craig B]

More In the case of borders in Benelux or between France and Benelux, France and Germany and so on there are so many crossings that, unless you build a wall all the way along the border, the "bad guys" will still slip through whilst law abiding travelers will be inconvenienced. even with a wall there's no guarantee of effectiveness.

And if you do want these walls to be built on the continent, why on earth would you wish to leave the EU and therefore give up all right to a say in the matter?

 

[Klimax]

More straw and/or false equivalency

Not locking doors is the equivalent to not having a police force rather than having checks at internal boundaries. I guess the closest analogy involving locked doors would be something like, "do you lock all the internal doors in your house at night ?".

Friends who were burgled a few years ago and are (IMO over) cautious do, but no-one else I know does. Even they don't lock the toilet doors from the outside.

To instate (or re-instate) border checks, first I think you need to demonstrate that they'd be effective. In the case of borders in Benelux or between France and Benelux, France and Germany and so on there are so many crossings that, unless you build a wall all the way along the border, the "bad guys" will still slip through whilst law abiding travelers will be inconvenienced. even with a wall there's no guarantee of effectiveness.

And then one can ask Hungary how their barrier against refugees worked out...