This time next year, President Trump moves back into the Whitehouse...

[Count Steer]

Military grade was what I had in mind. Lethal, precise, silent and no worries about the beaten zone behind the target. Pulse will do, but needs to deliver significant power on the target, sufficient to vaporise it would be ideal. Hence the 50 kW.

Bloody seagulls needs lesson.

Just remember not to stare into a laser with your remaining eye...

Reminds me. I nearly didn't get the job where I was playing with lasers because I'm red/green colour blind. The old giffer in charge thought I might not be able to see the laser beams. I'd already resigned my old job.

(They dragged me all the way from North Wales back to London to see the company doctor for an eye test. After comprehensive testing we agreed, yes, I'm red/green colour blind and no, there's absolutely no problem seeing red, green or any other sort of beam - well, UV, IR or X-ray laser beams might be an issue, but then they would be for everyone else too They paid expenses for the trip too. Then, when I was working with them they paid for me to go to a Harley Street eye specialist to make sure I'd suffered no retinal damage every year...I could have gone to the local opticians!).

[Horse]

the RNLI only rescued 108.

What's the 'only' mean?

That they should have saved more, or 'only 108 people who might have drowned'?

[irie]

...
The RNLI, and the volunteers who work for them , should not have to rescue migrants coming across the channel - but the government and border force refuse to take any affirmative action.
...

What "affirmative action" should be taken and what would its outcome be?

[Mr Moofo]

...
The RNLI, and the volunteers who work for them , should not have to rescue migrants coming across the channel - but the government and border force refuse to take any affirmative action.
...

What "affirmative action" should be taken and what would its outcome be?

If the Home Office started to speed up the process of screening migrants cases so that they actually got around to rejecting significant numbers then there would be a knock on effect.
If the government actually started doing something about the stealth numbers coming in which far exceed those coming in boats
Other than that, I would suggest that ask the Home Office and Border Force

[MrLongbeard]

If you’ve been refused asylum but you’re still eligible for support
You’ll be given:
Blah blah blah, free stuff

Should the correct answer not be a free ride out of the country.

[Yorick]

If you’ve been refused asylum but you’re still eligible for support
You’ll be given:
Blah blah blah, free stuff

Should the correct answer not be a free ride out of the country.

Of course. But in the meantime they should be treated properly

[MrLongbeard]

If you’ve been refused asylum but you’re still eligible for support
You’ll be given:
Blah blah blah, free stuff

Should the correct answer not be a free ride out of the country.

Of course. But in the meantime they should be treated properly

I don't disagree, but time from refusal being issued to deportation should be measured in weeks, preferably no more than 1

[Yorick]

Should the correct answer not be a free ride out of the country.

Of course. But in the meantime they should be treated properly

I don't disagree, but time from refusal being issued to deportation should be measured in weeks, preferably no more than 1

Can we have a restart with Welsh and gingers?

[MrLongbeard]

Of course. But in the meantime they should be treated properly

I don't disagree, but time from refusal being issued to deportation should be measured in weeks, preferably no more than 1

Can we have a restart with Welsh and gingers?

No, but we can relocate Hadrian's wall south a bit, so it runs completely east to west on a slight diagonal passing through Nottingham and Stoke on Trent

[irie]

...
The RNLI, and the volunteers who work for them , should not have to rescue migrants coming across the channel - but the government and border force refuse to take any affirmative action.
...

What "affirmative action" should be taken and what would its outcome be?

If the Home Office started to speed up the process of screening migrants cases so that they actually got around to rejecting significant numbers then there would be a knock on effect.
If the government actually started doing something about the stealth numbers coming in which far exceed those coming in boats
Other than that, I would suggest that ask the Home Office and Border Force

Lots of "ifs" is absolutely not "affirmative action"!

[Mr Moofo]

What "affirmative action" should be taken and what would its outcome be?

If the Home Office started to speed up the process of screening migrants cases so that they actually got around to rejecting significant numbers then there would be a knock on effect.
If the government actually started doing something about the stealth numbers coming in which far exceed those coming in boats
Other than that, I would suggest that ask the Home Office and Border Force

Lots of "ifs" is absolutely not "affirmative action"!

I am not a professional civil servant. That said, they don't seem to have a clue either. The affirmative action - speed up the process, take responsibility for it working correctly and actually have a viable plan.

There are plenty of Oxford and Cambridge alumni in those hallowed corridors who are much clever than I. The problem seems to be a civil service actively working against the government.
Or else they could just talk bollocks for then next 3 months and leave it for Kier Starmer and his chums to sort. And then crow from the opposition benches.

[Cousin Jack]

There are plenty of Oxford and Cambridge alumni in those hallowed corridors who are much clever than I. The problem seems to be a civil service actively working against the government.
Or else they could just talk bollocks for then next 3 months and leave it for Kier Starmer and his chums to sort. And then crow from the opposition benches.

The Home Office have a long and not-very-illustrious history of having a Civil Service view of what the law should be, and trotting a very slightly revised version out whenever a political opportunity arises to do so. They have done so on Firearms law for decades, it would not surprise me in the least if they are working behind the scenes to scupper stuff like the Rwanda law. Not that I am in favour of the Rwanda thing, I think it is stupid, but I am even less in favour of the Home Office over-riding democratic(ish) process.

[Yambo]

I apologise for going off topic but what actually is the Rwanda thing?

Is it deport illegal immigrants to Rwanda then if they turn up again in Dover, let them in because of their determination?

[Mr. Dazzle]

Rwanda thing = re-export failed asylum seekers to Rwanda permanently.

It'd certainly be an interesting case wouldn't it? Formerly deported person turns up at Dover a second time

[JamJar]

the RNLI only rescued 108.

What's the 'only' mean?

That they should have saved more, or 'only 108 people who might have drowned'?

It means the right wing allegation of being a "taxi" service is a lie as the vast majority of people coming here on small boats do not get brough here by the RNLI.

[Cousin Jack]

The RNLI uphold the international rule of Safety Of Life At Sea. ALL vessels have have a duty to assist a vessel in danger, regardless of who they are.

[Mr. Dazzle]

"The sea does not take sides", as they say.

[Mr Moofo]

Rwanda thing = re-export failed asylum seekers to Rwanda permanently.

It'd certainly be an interesting case wouldn't it? Formerly deported person turns up at Dover a second time

There are plenty of migrants who make the trip several times "escorting" others
Never worked out how they get back to France - but the info came from the Coastguard

[Mr Moofo]

There are plenty of Oxford and Cambridge alumni in those hallowed corridors who are much clever than I. The problem seems to be a civil service actively working against the government.
Or else they could just talk bollocks for then next 3 months and leave it for Kier Starmer and his chums to sort. And then crow from the opposition benches.

The Home Office have a long and not-very-illustrious history of having a Civil Service view of what the law should be, and trotting a very slightly revised version out whenever a political opportunity arises to do so. They have done so on Firearms law for decades, it would not surprise me in the least if they are working behind the scenes to scupper stuff like the Rwanda law. Not that I am in favour of the Rwanda thing, I think it is stupid, but I am even less in favour of the Home Office over-riding democratic(ish) process.

The Home Office seem to have a long history of not actually doing anything. Whilst it is their boss that should make it happen, there seems tp be a very strong civil service political streak in stalling what they don't think is correct. Apparently the Civil Service don't believe in democracy either.

[Count Steer]

There are plenty of Oxford and Cambridge alumni in those hallowed corridors who are much clever than I. The problem seems to be a civil service actively working against the government.
Or else they could just talk bollocks for then next 3 months and leave it for Kier Starmer and his chums to sort. And then crow from the opposition benches.

The Home Office have a long and not-very-illustrious history of having a Civil Service view of what the law should be, and trotting a very slightly revised version out whenever a political opportunity arises to do so. They have done so on Firearms law for decades, it would not surprise me in the least if they are working behind the scenes to scupper stuff like the Rwanda law. Not that I am in favour of the Rwanda thing, I think it is stupid, but I am even less in favour of the Home Office over-riding democratic(ish) process.

The Home Office seem to have a long history of not actually doing anything. Whilst it is their boss that should make it happen, there seems tp be a very strong civil service political streak in stalling what they don't think is correct. Apparently the Civil Service don't believe in democracy either.

Yebbut, governments come and go and the Civil Service is the 'continuity candidate' that actually operates the machinery of state and have to keep stuff running so no wonder they resist knee jerk political change/stop politicians* doing something stupid. We see what happens to businesses when every new boss wants to make a mark and jumps into yet another reorganisation.

They're just another handy whipping boy to point fingers at when ideas don't actually work in practice.

* Who may actually never have run anything more complicated than a bath.