I know about DBS checks btw for my job.
ALPHABETICAL FOOD AND DRINK (Jan 26)
Sign up to Gransnet Daily
Our free daily newsletter full of hot threads, competitions and discounts
Subscribe
I’ve pinched this question from James O’Brian. And to me it is obvious, - they are fascists - talking about replacing the police with paramilitaries and bringing back the death penalty as well as shoot f….g immigrants has huge echoes of 1930s Germany.
So why would you vote for him?
I know about DBS checks btw for my job.
Oreo
Growstuff if the Head of the school had only known about Huntley’s past ( and he did check) he would never have appointed him to work in the primary school.
Probably not, but he would still have had access to those girls via his girlfriend. It was nothing to do with the school.
It also very much depends on the nature of the crimes.
We don’t need people working in many situations where a check on their past is impossible to carry out.
Oreo
A DBS check means finding out if the person has a criminal record or is on the sex offenders list or has anything that an employer should know about.It doesn’t stop offending as we don’t know what a person will do but is a fair indicator .
Not necessarily. There are two levels of DBS check. A standard DBS doesn't show "spent" convictions. Only an enhanced check shows "spent" convictions and those are only required for employees working with vulnerable people.
Growstuff if the Head of the school had only known about Huntley’s past ( and he did check) he would never have appointed him to work in the primary school.
Many crimes are "spent" after a few months or years and don't show up on a standard DBS check, which is all that is required for many jobs. Even if somebody has a minor conviction, an employer can ignore it if he/she doesn't think it will impact on the safety of clients.
maddyone
I’m off to watch Corrie now
Yeah, very sensible of you, and I must get ready for work.😃
A DBS check means finding out if the person has a criminal record or is on the sex offenders list or has anything that an employer should know about.It doesn’t stop offending as we don’t know what a person will do but is a fair indicator .
Good post (again) Dickens
You nailed it
I’m off to watch Corrie now 
maddyone
Additionally, there was only one Soham murderer school caretaker, but every single caretaker working in a school across the country, and every other person across the country who works in a school, needs a DBS!
It was pointless anyway.
It wouldn't have made any difference to the Soham murders. Ian Huntley didn't have access to those girls because he had access to them via his job. His girlfriend, who was the one who knew the girls, didn't have a criminal record.
Nobody is talking about allowing unchecked people to work with vulnerable people in, for example, schools or care settings.
Agree absolutely Dickens.
maddyone
zakouma66
*GNHQ deleted message*
Really not a reasoned argument.
Sad.
But your arguement wasn't reasonable? Why choose that person as an example? Do you honestly believe a DBS makes people safe? Really?
maddyone posts...
Wyllow asylum seekers cannot do voluntary work because they need to be cleared as safe to be around other people. They would need a DBS check which would be impossible to achieve because many do not have documentation, or they come from countries that would not cooperate with the UK anyway. Are the Taliban going to give a reference for an Afghanistani or Iran for an Iranian? How would we know they were safe? It’s not so long since an Afghanistani threw acid in a young woman’s face. Whilst most won’t do this, how do we know who might or might not? That’s why they’re not allowed to do voluntary work.
I think that in an effort at rationality and reasonableness - people (I don't just mean the posters on here) are ignoring a fundamental principle of human nature, which is I believe part of the survival instinct, and that is - for want of a better word - vigilance, or maybe that inner sense that prompts people to be cautious.
If I'm not making much sense, let me put it this way. Violence against women by men is something we're all aware of. But, the majority of men do not attack women. The majority of women going about their daily lives will not suffer violence at the hands of a man. Yet - nearly all women are afraid, especially when out and about in the evening. If they're not afraid, they are cautious.
In a sense, the minority of men who assault women - make victims of us all, because of the perception we have, and because of the randomness of many of these attacks on women. Because we don't know if that man walking behind us along the street is one of the minority.
And I think this, in essence, is what is happening vis-à-vis immigrants who arrive via the boats. And I think that's maddyone's point. It does happen, it has happened - it's unpredictable, random - and that makes us wary, cautious, of immigrant males, some of whom originate from cultures which don't subscribe to our modern, Western social liberalism. It's unfortunate, unfair, and irrational to view all as potential attackers or rapists, but because of our perception that they might be - we are wary. We all become potential victims in theory.
The evil of Farage and some of the candidates standing for Reform, is that he and they play on these natural fears and insecurities in order to garner support.
And the other problem of course is that anyone who does take an intelligent and coherent approach to the issue, is regarded as a 'woke leftie' who ignores the wishes of the 'silent majority' and wants to welcome all immigrants with open arms.
That's where we're at, and I don't see much change in the future.
Mt61
Kandinsky
Mt61
I wouldn’t waste your time talking sense on this board, they’d be happy if a 5000 illegals arrived by small boats every day. They think it’s a wonderful thing.They haven’t got the foresight to realise the consequences
Who are ‘they’?
None of the posters expressing calm, well informed views on the need to protect our borders are indicating they’d ’be happy if 5000 illegals arrived by small boats every day. The think it’s a wonderful thing ‘
By all means have a different view but the least you can do is express that with accurate reference to those of us who don’t share your views
Well said maddyone 👏🏻👏🏻
Additionally, there was only one Soham murderer school caretaker, but every single caretaker working in a school across the country, and every other person across the country who works in a school, needs a DBS!
zakouma66
*GNHQ deleted message*
What are you on about now?
What exactly is full on racism?
GNHQ deleted message
Really not a reasoned argument.
Sad.
Kandinsky
Mt61
I wouldn’t waste your time talking sense on this board, they’d be happy if a 5000 illegals arrived by small boats every day. They think it’s a wonderful thing.
They haven’t got the foresight to realise the consequences
Thank you Doodledog and I know I’m not racist too.
I used a the example of a terrible crime, not because I think all immigrants are likely to commit such a crime, but because it was an example of why volunteers need to be vetted. I was then told that the example was only one, to which I gave another. All volunteers, not just asylum seekers, need to be vetted. I worked in a school before I retired, which had an intake of children from many countries and cultures, and of course, many white children. We had staff from all cultures who spoke many languages and who helped us with the children who needed that additional support whilst learning English. Of course all staff were ‘official’ but we also had asylum seeker families. We had many volunteers too, but they all had to have a DBS before they could help. We couldn’t have allowed any volunteer, whatever their skin colour or culture, to work in the classrooms without the necessary document.
If volunteers are to work in a role without the DBS, then clearly they can’t work with children or vulnerable people. This is my point. The DBS is a necessity whatever colour, faith, or culture a person is. I’m white, British born. I had to have a DBS, renewed three yearly. After the Soham murders, the range of people required to have a DBS was widened. Note I chose an example of a white criminal on this occasion, because it is relevant. It’s relevant because it was that case caused the need for DBS to be widened.
Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.
Oh give it a rest!
Oreo
If only one unchecked immigrant throws acid over a woman it’s one too many.
Oh yeah, those crazy unchecked immigrants. They are everywhere throwing acid.
Why do they need to get to Britain, after coming through all those countries- any particular reason? I woke up a long time ago, thanks very much
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join the discussion, watch threads and lots more.
Register now »Already registered? Log in with:
Gransnet »Get our top conversations, latest advice, fantastic competitions, and more, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter here.