comment: >
  
  May actually doing something good?!!
context: Theresa May... I haven't heard that name in long time... Wait it wasn't that long... Dear God its only been three years since she left, what the Hell all of this happened in three years? >
  
  
  Theresa May... I haven't heard that name in long time... Wait it wasn't that long... Dear God its only been three years since she left, what the Hell all of this happened in three years?
  
  She ran through wheat fields >
  
  Perhaps by 'the wheat fields' she meant 'the opium fracking fields'. >
  
  Ironically this law is being exploited by the human trafficking gangs. 
  All illegal immigrants need to do is claim they are victims of human trafficking to gain refugee status. Thus allowing the trafficking gangs to make a shit load more money because all their customers now have a full proof way to stay in the country after being smuggled in. >
  
  Full proof
  r/BoneAppleTea >
  
  It means a totally drunken policy. Full proof >
  
  Slainte >
  
  How would you prove you were a slave.
  " Oh hey there, clearly I was a slave look at this 1840s shackle hanging off my ankle" >
  
  
  For the first time, we will actually require a case worker to have objective evidence of modern slavery rather than just a suspicion.
  
  Theresa''s objection is that evidence takes time. And that those escaping may not be able to bring paper or evidence with them
  A reasonable counterpoint would be that final /permanent permission to stay in the UK may need more than suspicion or mere claim , and that the process does take time.
  As to what that evidence might be, that's a great question. IDK. Maybe evidence of how they were transported, that someone ekse was involved, other trafficked personnel, rent paid, even complaints, or identifications of clients.. passport withheld or other claims of confinement or economic coercion bearing out not sure. >
  
  "Rent paid" don't think they will be getting receipts.
  Everything else would be nothing more than accusation so it would be almost impossible to prove. >
  
  Question is who is arranging accomodation and how.. that's the lead the police would work on.
  
  impossible to prove
  
  Evidence != proof. Difference in degree and burden >
  
  Generally speaking, people need to do their own investigations and find their own proof. Actually relying on police to properly investigate and do their jobs when it's your life and future in the balance is pretty risky. >
  
  As long as the case worker has evidence, it needn't matter. The police have powers, and sometimes, resources, that can go beyond an ordinary person. The person involved has personal insight and motivation.. >
  
  Fuck the Tories and all those who voted for them >
  
  Yea! Vapid phrases no one is going to disagree with!
  Nature needs nurture.
  ​
  edit: Guys, I said a thing that is shallow and we can all agree with, unless we dont agree nature needs nurture. >
  
  You're being a dick, that's why you're getting downvoted >
  
  Yes, but you can’t have the help getting uppity ideas like having rights. >
  
  He’s a billionaire, he wants slaves, it makes him richer >
  
  Britain is fucked… good luck you guys