Should the u.k let convicted peadophile gary glitter back in to the country?

Question

i's say dump him in shark infested waters and forget about him, what do people think?

Answer 1

if he has a u,k. passport, then the government cannot stop him  

Answer 2

He holds a british passport he is our problem, alas in his case we do also have to follow the laws of the UK.

At least if he is in the UK, he will have no chance to full fill his perverted aims.

We all know his face & know what scum he is.

Answer 3

yeah, he's a uk citizen, and we'd be fuming if someone ditched a piece of **** like him on us when he wasn't ours

although, if he accidentally fell from the plane on he way here, and died, i'm sure no more would be said about it.

Answer 4

Legally he is a Uk citizen and so entitled to come back. It would be illegal to keep him out.

Answer 5

He did his time, payed his debt to society. How are you going to tell a man, do 3 years in prison, but after not let him live a life.  3 years in a vietnamese prison is like a lifetime in a U.K. prison.

Answer 6

i say put all paedophiles on an island and let them bugger each other.

Answer 7

That's right take him back so we can spend thousands keeping an eye on him and the government can use him as a media interest to keep us away from the real problems facing the country!F**k the scumbag give him to the mothers of children that have been sexually abused.

Answer 8

I don't think he wants to does he? if he does god help him! he knows he will have no support here so that is why he doesn't want to come back.

Answer 9

We are obliged to do so. Human Rightism does not permit us to rid the world of him. But I'm sure California will take him.

Answer 10

Never mind Glitter there was some bloke who went to Oz when has was like 6, spent his life being a paedo and then they suddenly decided - uh, he's British now and dumped him on us too!

Answer 11

Hey, just shoot the beast in the head, problem solved. It would save alot in tax payers money.

Answer 12

Yes, it is better to have the beast where he can be observed rather than travelling the world picking his prey anonymously.

Answer 13

Home is where you go when nobody else wants you. He will eventually come back here and then be under restrictions because of his crimes.

He's a deluded, dangerous man, still thinking that he has done no wrong.  

Answer 14

put him in front of the firing squad, he wont be missed!

Answer 15

I'm not sure how it is in the UK, but here in the US, pedophiles are ROUTINELY beaten, stabbed, and sometimes killed in US prisons.

Prisoners... while thugs they may be.... often have kids of their own.   Going to prison in the US for a child rape/molestation is a 1-way ticket to VERY miserable existence.

Answer 16

I agree with the questioner!He should not be allowed anywhere near the shores of this country!

What ought to be done with him?He ought to be cast away on a desert island all by himself!Then perhaps; He will then think of the harm he has perpetrated against children!

To me he is just the scum of the earth!But!what gets my 'goat up' is!

This paedophile is getting all this column inches in media coverage!Yet!There are people out there quietly getting on with their lives serving the community like nurses,firemen,policemen!Yet they receive nothing in media attention!

Something may just be wrong here!

Answer 17

Once he has exhausted the goodwill of all the other countries, he is bound to land back in the UK. I hope that the authorities carry out extensive investigations into his time in the UK and consequently, chuck him in jail indefinately for being the horrible, slimey, s*x offender that he has shown us to be!!  

Answer 18

Paul Gadd has been convicted and sentenced.  He has served that sentence and has been released and deported by the Vietnamese authorities.  As he is a British passport holder he cannot be denied entry into this country.

As a convicted paedophile he will be required to sign the s*x offenders register and make the police aware of his domicile, just the same as others of his kind do in this country.  

It is us, the taxpayer who will pick up the bill for this as in all other cases and though not related, but still paid for by us, the likes of Maxine Carr, Mary Bell, Robert Thompson and Jon Venables and many others.

Were I ever to come across this individual balancing on a one legged stool with a rope around his neck tied securely to a beam, I suppose I might just slip and........................!  Certainly would not lose any sleep over it.

Answer 19

Just love the ''caring'' post who talked about how hard it must of been for him in a Vietnamese prison Poor baby He has never been to that part of the world with a little money they well bring in young girls for him I well never understand the liberal mind nor do I want too

Liberal well watch a under age s*x show an say ''I hope they have a heath plan for those girls and would like to see more girls of coloUr in there''

Answer 20

If we want the right to deport foreign criminals back to their homelands, we have to accept that it works both ways.

Glitter is a British citizen and therefore we have no option but to accept him back into our country.

Vile though he is, we do not have death by drowning or shark on the statute books even for murderers, so this would not be appropriate for Glitter.

EDIT: Neil T - who exactly is costing the taxpayer money? Is it Glitter, along with Maxine Carr, Mary Bell, Robert Thompson and Jon Venables, needing protection?

Or is it law abiding taxpayers, who cannot be trusted not to resort to violent vigilante action?

I have no time for these convicted criminals, neither do I feel it is my right or responsibility to visit acts of violence upon them.

It's a bit rich when the Mail and the Sun bleat on about the cost to the taxpayer of protecting these horrible people. Perhaps if these papers didn't keep stirring up the Orwellian hatred, such protection wouldn't be necessary? And if taxpayers could be trusted to act responsibly, perhaps protection wouldn't be needed?

Answer 21

He is a citizen

It is our duty to keep him in check.

So feeding people to the sharks is acceptable behaviour?

Paedophilia is not.

Where do you draw the line?

Answer 22

I would say they have a responsibility to do so, he is a UK citizen, moreover they should then take his passport off him and have him tagged permanently because as soon as the dust settles I think he will be at it again, so he can't or shouldn't be allowed to roam around the world trying to find some perverted sanctuary.

Your thoughts on his demise is pretty much the view of most people and I must say the more I think about what people like him do the more disgusted and angry I feel, but what is really going on here? is it due to a sociological throw back to what happened to these people as children as it seems to be always blamed on or is it an hereditary genetic fault, and what if anything is being done about it at the very first signs to prevent these people turning into the monsters we believe they are!!

Answer 23

If can not help but feel that there is a certain amount of hypocrisy here, for years we have been saying do as you will and we then complain when someone does. Do not misunderstand me I want him back as little or even less than you do, but we have no choice he is a British Citizen.

I do find the situation rather funny, a government minister opens her blo-dy great mouth  and alerts him   to what will happen if he returns -- No passport etc. so whilst until then he was content to return to UK we now have the ridiculous situation of foreign office staff begging him to return to UK when in fact nobody in UK wants him. Frankly I would likke to let him stew in his own juice. When you  think of  an ordinary citizen who gets into fairly minor trouble with local police and he probably won't see a member of consular or foreign office staff for love or  money. i can't be over sure of this because i have never benintrouble with the police here or abroad but it does fit the present day