Asian sex abusers to be stripped of UK citizenship and deported

Asian-born sex abusers will be stripped of their UK citizenship and deported at the end of their sentences under a new Home Office drive, The Independent can reveal. Theresa May, the Home Secretary, is planning to significantly increase her department’s use of legal powers that allow serious criminals with dual nationality to have their British citizenship withdrawn, Whitehall sources say.
Until now, the powers have predominately been used to remove the UK passports of terrorists and terrorist sympathisers.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/asian-sex-abusers-to-be-stripped-of-uk-citizenship-and-deported-a6896051.html

Good move but we must make them suffer first.
Send their familiz as well.

about time too

She is announcing that she might start to do something that should already be happening!!!

Better late than never tommy....

Lib lab con have had plenty of time to be doing what should already be happening... but instead they have presided over the creation of a system that now doesn't do what should already be happening...

Asian-born sex abusers will be stripped of their UK citizenship

What about the rest of the sex abusers? They get to remain citizens, don't they?

So these people are being punished more than the average sex abuser, because they're "Asian-born."

So the UK thinks its pedos are better than other countries' pedos? Actually, I'm not surprised at all.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Asian-born sex abusers will be stripped of their UK citizenship

What about the rest of the sex abusers? They get to remain citizens, don't they?

So these people are being punished more than the average sex abuser, because they're "Asian-born."

So the UK thinks its pedos are better than other countries' pedos? Actually, I'm not surprised at all.

I am sure if we could they would be sent away, but those British born cannot have their birth right taken away

Foreigners, they lose their right to stay

Why should the country keep them, after them have come here and then abused the rights of others?

My view would be anyone that comes to this country signs a contract. If you break that contract, just like in any job, you then have to leave

Its that simple

Child sex offenses is just about the most heinous crime to people and I really doubt anyone gives a stuff if anyone foreign also then gets booted out

Its called tough shit and good riddance no matter their ethnicity

In fact what you should be telling me, is why we should not be able to deport any foreign criminal?
If they abuse the rights of others, then they also lose the right to stay in this country

Same rule should apply to anyone coming to this country

Its not a second punishment, as why should they then be allowed to stay when they have abused others in that country

Anyway Ben your nation does the same

Among the various crimes that can make a non-citizen of the United States deportable are so-called aggravated felonies. Someone who is in the United States with a visa or a green card (lawful permanent residence), and who commits an aggravated felony, can be removed or deported. Figuring out which crimes are aggravated felonies is, however, not always easy.


http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/us-immigration/aggravated-felony-get-non-citizen-removed-deported.html

Didge wrote:Anyway Ben your nation does the same

Among the various crimes that can make a non-citizen of the United States deportable are so-called aggravated felonies. Someone who is in the United States with a visa or a green card (lawful permanent residence), and who commits an aggravated felony, can be removed or deported. Figuring out which crimes are aggravated felonies is, however, not always easy.


http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/us-immigration/aggravated-felony-get-non-citizen-removed-deported.html

Oh, I guess that makes it OK then

Stormee wrote:Good move but we must make them suffer first.
Send their familiz as well.

So if you commit this kind of crime, should your whole family be punished?

Or do you just reserve that for the immigrants?

Didge wrote:Anyway Ben your nation does the same

Among the various crimes that can make a non-citizen of the United States deportable are so-called aggravated felonies. Someone who is in the United States with a visa or a green card (lawful permanent residence), and who commits an aggravated felony, can be removed or deported. Figuring out which crimes are aggravated felonies is, however, not always easy.


http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/us-immigration/aggravated-felony-get-non-citizen-removed-deported.html

That's for non-citizens.

Where's the law for naturalised citizens?

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:Anyway Ben your nation does the same

Among the various crimes that can make a non-citizen of the United States deportable are so-called aggravated felonies. Someone who is in the United States with a visa or a green card (lawful permanent residence), and who commits an aggravated felony, can be removed or deported. Figuring out which crimes are aggravated felonies is, however, not always easy.


http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/us-immigration/aggravated-felony-get-non-citizen-removed-deported.html

Oh, I guess that makes it OK then

I fail to see a reason why its not okay

Again why should a country keep someone who has come here to commit crime?

Article 15.

(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/

Doesn't say you have to be born here to have citizen rights.

I'm off partying but Uk law might be the same.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Didge wrote:Anyway Ben your nation does the same

Among the various crimes that can make a non-citizen of the United States deportable are so-called aggravated felonies. Someone who is in the United States with a visa or a green card (lawful permanent residence), and who commits an aggravated felony, can be removed or deported. Figuring out which crimes are aggravated felonies is, however, not always easy.


http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/us-immigration/aggravated-felony-get-non-citizen-removed-deported.html

That's for non-citizens.

Where's the law for naturalised citizens?

http://www.dawn.com/news/379148/new-law-allows-deportation-of-naturalized-us-citizens

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Asian-born sex abusers will be stripped of their UK citizenship

What about the rest of the sex abusers? They get to remain citizens, don't they?

So these people are being punished more than the average sex abuser, because they're "Asian-born."

So the UK thinks its pedos are better than other countries' pedos? Actually, I'm not surprised at all.

The difference here is where can you deport British born to?   With dual nationality, two passports, anyone committing crimes can be deported back to their own country.   This is how it should be.   You don't come into a host country and commit crimes like that and expect to stay.   Every country would do that, not just the UK.

HoratioTarr wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

What about the rest of the sex abusers? They get to remain citizens, don't they?

So these people are being punished more than the average sex abuser, because they're "Asian-born."

So the UK thinks its pedos are better than other countries' pedos? Actually, I'm not surprised at all.

The difference here is where can you deport British born to?   With dual nationality, two passports, anyone committing crimes can be deported back to their own country.   This is how it should be.   You don't come into a host country and commit crimes like that and expect to stay.   Every country would do that, not just the UK.

Quite honestly I would put them through a commercial meat mincer, I hate the filthy Bs irrespective of their nationaliitiz.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Asian-born sex abusers will be stripped of their UK citizenship

What about the rest of the sex abusers? They get to remain citizens, don't they?

So these people are being punished more than the average sex abuser, because they're "Asian-born."

So the UK thinks its pedos are better than other countries' pedos? Actually, I'm not surprised at all.

Theresa May, the Home Secretary, is planning to significantly increase her department’s use of legal powers that allow serious criminals with dual nationality to have their British citizenship withdrawn, Whitehall sources say.

So if British-born citizens are stripped of their British citizenship, where do you suggest they're deported to?

You'll find that the US is quite fussy about who they let in. Are you saying that your criminals are better than anyone else's criminals?

We should take over an island somewhere and use it as a penal colony, send scum there to fend for themselves.
Look how the early Americans worked, died and settled.

Didge wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:Anyway Ben your nation does the same

Among the various crimes that can make a non-citizen of the United States deportable are so-called aggravated felonies. Someone who is in the United States with a visa or a green card (lawful permanent residence), and who commits an aggravated felony, can be removed or deported. Figuring out which crimes are aggravated felonies is, however, not always easy.


http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/us-immigration/aggravated-felony-get-non-citizen-removed-deported.html

Oh, I guess that makes it OK then

I fail to see a reason why its not okay

Again why should a country keep someone who has come here to commit crime?

Who says they came to your country to commit a crime? Maybe they thought they were going to turn their lives around.

Anyway, depriving citizenship seems to be about the most harsh non-corporeal punishment I can imagine, and the fact that UK-born pedos aren't uprooted from their nation as punishment or subjected to something similarly harsh, while non-UK born pedos are, seems to have a streak of bigotry running through it.

yeah , yeah...


and you wonder why?

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:


I fail to see a reason why its not okay

Again why should a country keep someone who has come here to commit crime?

Who says they came to your country to commit a crime? Maybe they thought they were going to turn their lives around.

Anyway, depriving citizenship seems to be about the most harsh non-corporeal punishment I can imagine, and the fact that UK-born pedos aren't uprooted from their nation as punishment or subjected to something similarly harsh, while non-UK born pedos are, seems to have a streak of bigotry running through it.

They cam here.
They committed a crime.
They abused the rights of another sexually and they were a minor.
Why should I give a fuck if they are going to turn their life around, when they have ruined the life of some child forever.
Great they want to do the right thing, that is not going to give back the life of the one sexually abused is it?

Their sentence is for life, just as the damage done is for life of the victims

They have no right to remain no matter if they want to make amends, their even being here is enough to frighten that person again for their whole life, just knowing they are free.#

So the question to ask you Ben, why is it you give not one fucking thought in regards to the victim here?

Do they matter less than the one that abused them?

Should they not be free to know that person will never be allowed to be in this country?

I think that is something we should grant every victim

of course. we Could be absolutely "even handed" and just hang em all


I mean many on here would hang the guy that just looked at pictures, the same as they would the one who ACTUALLY raped a 3yo


OH...and Ben...they are NOT being "uprooted from their nation...." It ONLY applies to those who have dual nationality...so they have their original home nation to be sent back too....
If it happens that that is not such a pleasant place....kinda ...tough...should have thought about that before CHOOSING to break the law......

Didge wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Who says they came to your country to commit a crime? Maybe they thought they were going to turn their lives around.

Anyway, depriving citizenship seems to be about the most harsh non-corporeal punishment I can imagine, and the fact that UK-born pedos aren't uprooted from their nation as punishment or subjected to something similarly harsh, while non-UK born pedos are, seems to have a streak of bigotry running through it.

They cam here.
They committed a crime.
They abused the rights of another sexually and they were a minor.
Why should I give a fuck if they are going to turn their life around, when they have ruined the life of some child forever.
Great they want to do the right thing, that is not going to give back the life of the one sexually abused is it?

Their sentence is for life, just as the damage done is for life of the victims

They have no right to remain no matter if they want to make amends, their even being here is enough to frighten that person again for their whole life, just knowing they are free.#

So the question to ask you Ben, why is it you give not one fucking thought in regards to the victim here?

Do they matter less than the one that abused them?

Should they not be free to know that person will never be allowed to be in this country?

I think that is something we should grant every victim

bloody 'ell...the man "gets it", he sees the light.....

Yeah grumpy bear you were impressed with the reply, admit it?

You guys should stop pretending that I'm saying not to punish foreign-born sex criminals who have UK citizenship.

What I'm saying is that it seems unfair to punish your citizens who were born in other countries more than you punish your citizens born in your own country for the same crime.

Is that so hard to understand? It's like you're saying the same crime is somehow worse if the person wasn't born in the UK, and that it warrants more punishment.

And if it helps the victim so much to know their abuser will never be allowed to return to the UK, why not figure out a way to "deport" them all?

Why do the victims of UK-born pedos not deserve that, while the victims of foreign-born pedos do?

You seem to fail to understand what kind of crime this and again your only concern is not for the victim but the criminal

Yes it is fair when you think in regards to the victim.
We cannot remove every nonce born to this country but we can those foreign born, to make the victims lives that much easier knowing they are banned from this country

Have you for one second even begun to imagine what hell the victims of abuse go through?

How the fuck is it again you do not consider again what is best for them?

If that means removing foreign criminals from these lands, then that is part of the price they pay for disrespecting the country that open its doors to them. They abused that welcome in ever shape and form

They should rightly go

Didge wrote:You seem to fail to understand what kind of crime this and again your only concern is not for the victim but the criminal

Yes it is fair when you think in regards to the victim.
We cannot remove every nonce born to this country but we can those foreign born, to make their lives that much easier knowing they are banned from this country

Have you for one second even begun to imagine what hell the victims of abuse go through?

How the fuck is it again you do not consider again what is best for them?

If that means removing foreign criminals from these lands, then that is part of the price they pay for disrespecting the country that open its doors to them. They abused that welcome in ever shape and form

They should rightly go

Again, I'm not calling for anybody not to be punished. Frankly, I think that what we know about these people suggests they should be removed from society (through imprisonment) for life. That's not the best we can do for the victims -- free counseling would be nice, too -- but it's appropriate.

I'm just asking why being born in a different country should make you subject to a harsher punishment for committing the same crime as a native. The only variable here is country of origin, and people with a different country of origin are being punished more, apparently, for that and that alone.

Nobody seems to be able to articulate a good reason for punishing foreign-borns more harshly than native-borns.

they HAVE some where else to go...like HOME

why should our tax payers pay to keep em here we pay enough for our own......

Yes they fucking should suffer more by being deported.
They were welcomed again and they broke that trust by abusing it breaking the law.
Why then should any country continue to keep that person?
They should not because that person deceived them

So fuck your stupid views on what is fairer, this has nothing to do with fairness because again your whole thought process again does not give a fuck about the victim
What is fair to them Ben?
Seriously you tell me what is fair to allow a person to stay in this country when they can be asked to leaqve?
You tell that to the victims face why you thinks its unfair their abuser should remain because you hold some daft and idiotic regressive views?

Didge wrote:Yeah grumpy bear you were impressed with the reply, admit it?

May you live in interesting times"

Lord Foul wrote:they HAVE some where else to go...like HOME

why should our tax payers pay to keep em here we pay enough for our own......

Your own? I thought these people were British citizens ... ?

So foreign-born UK citizens don't really have full citizenship anymore. I kind of saw that coming anyway. What I'd be interested in knowing is if any white Canadian, American or Australian-born UK citizens will ever be deported.

Way to go, UK -- you just created a whole underclass of "citizens."

FYI: you can still have dual nationality and be born here.

But anyway, I'm going to defend Ben: the law should apply equally, for all citizens.

What I find ironic is that many of the "emotional posters" on here usually complain when the law is not applied equally. That's why lawyers and judges usually prosecute the law using rational thought and not emotions.

Yes, the abused suffers a "life sentence". But then give a life sentence to all citizens.

Again Ben goes off the least important point

Whether they were once British citizens

What are you going to tell me next Ben, we should not remove the rights of criminals and allow them into society without any jail time?

You seem to think because a person comes here where the country opens its doors to them, that the country should then look later in life when that person is old. That is how you want the country to repay a criminal, but looking after them when they are old, when they never did as much as any other citizen actually born here, where their parents paid into the system.

You seem to hold this view that we cannot have variance in he law.

We do on crimes and who commits them and so can we have on sentencing

Again your whole thought process Ben is built around rehabilitation.
That though fails every time to factor in the victim and what they have to live through

Fuzzy Zack wrote:FYI: you can still have dual nationality and be born here.

But anyway, I'm going to defend Ben: the law should apply equally, for all citizens.

What I find ironic is that many of the "emotional posters" on here usually complain when the law is not applied equally. That's why lawyers and judges usually prosecute the law using rational thought and not emotions.

Yes, the abused suffers a "life sentence". But then give a life sentence to all citizens.

It's hard not to get emotional when talking about child abuse. People get upset and sometimes take positions that defy logic.

Also, I'm coming at this as an American -- we have the guarantee of equal protection under the law. The implication is that the law applies in the exact same way to anyone who is a legal citizen, and as far as I can tell, you either are a British citizen or you're not.

Any state act of stripping someone of citizenship should be reserved for treason. You start using it as some form of "bonus punishment" and you're no longer treating all citizens equally.

Didge wrote:Again Ben goes off the least important point

Whether they were once British citizens

What are you going to tell me next Ben, we should not remove the rights of criminals and allow them into society without any jail time?

You seem to think because a person comes here where the country opens its doors to them, that the country should then look later in life when that person is old. That is how you want the country to repay a criminal, but looking after them when they are old, when they never did as much as any other citizen actually born here, where their parents paid into the system.

You seem to hold this view that we cannot have variance in he law.

We do on crimes and who commits them and so can we have on sentencing

Again your whole thought process Ben is built around rehabilitation.
That though fails every time to factor in the victim and what they have to live through

You're just strawmanning now, I have said over and over that criminals should be punished.

What I'm also saying is that when you grant someone citizenship, you grant them the same rights as all other citizens. You enter into a covenant to treat them as though they were native-born British, and this policy violates the covenant, creating a special class of punishment that is based solely upon nation of origin.

Oh dear the old emotive others are that way to get out of answering near 9 out of ten of my points

You are coming from this Ben with only one care and that for the criminal and not the victim

That is shocking

The victim should come first

If part of that sentence means losing your rights to be here, then the victim should have a say in that

Or do you deny that they should?

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:FYI: you can still have dual nationality and be born here.

But anyway, I'm going to defend Ben: the law should apply equally, for all citizens.

What I find ironic is that many of the "emotional posters" on here usually complain when the law is not applied equally. That's why lawyers and judges usually prosecute the law using rational thought and not emotions.

Yes, the abused suffers a "life sentence". But then give a life sentence to all citizens.

It's hard not to get emotional when talking about child abuse. People get upset and sometimes take positions that defy logic.

Also, I'm coming at this as an American -- we have the guarantee of equal protection under the law. The implication is that the law applies in the exact same way to anyone who is a legal citizen, and as far as I can tell, you either are a British citizen or you're not.

Any state act of stripping someone of citizenship should be reserved for treason. You start using it as some form of "bonus punishment" and you're no longer treating all citizens equally.

Spot on about the bonus punishment.

This is why laws in the hands of politicians pandering to the emotions of the public is not right.

Didge wrote:Oh dear the old emotive others are that way to get out of answering near 9 out of ten of my points

You are coming from this Ben with only one care and that for the criminal and not the victim

That is shocking

The victim should come first

If part of that sentence means losing your rights to be here, then the victim should have a say in that

Or do you deny that they should?

Sure, let the victim decide the punishment. That sounds like a civilized way to run your country ...

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:Again Ben goes off the least important point

Whether they were once British citizens

What are you going to tell me next Ben, we should not remove the rights of criminals and allow them into society without any jail time?

You seem to think because a person comes here where the country opens its doors to them, that the country should then look later in life when that person is old. That is how you want the country to repay a criminal, but looking after them when they are old, when they never did as much as any other citizen actually born here, where their parents paid into the system.

You seem to hold this view that we cannot have variance in he law.

We do on crimes and who commits them and so can we have on sentencing

Again your whole thought process Ben is built around rehabilitation.
That though fails every time to factor in the victim and what they have to live through

You're just strawmanning now, I have said over and over that criminals should be punished.

What I'm also saying is that when you grant someone citizenship, you grant them the same rights as all other citizens. You enter into a covenant to treat them as though they were native-born British, and this policy violates the covenant, creating a special class of punishment that is based solely upon nation of origin.

Stop talking shit and answer my questions

I could not care when you grant citizenship, where you hold some backward view on
Again your views have no consideration for the victim

Start there and think what is best for them

Then answer my questioins

Try again

Didge wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:Again Ben goes off the least important point

Whether they were once British citizens

What are you going to tell me next Ben, we should not remove the rights of criminals and allow them into society without any jail time?

You seem to think because a person comes here where the country opens its doors to them, that the country should then look later in life when that person is old. That is how you want the country to repay a criminal, but looking after them when they are old, when they never did as much as any other citizen actually born here, where their parents paid into the system.

You seem to hold this view that we cannot have variance in he law.

We do on crimes and who commits them and so can we have on sentencing

Again your whole thought process Ben is built around rehabilitation.
That though fails every time to factor in the victim and what they have to live through

You're just strawmanning now, I have said over and over that criminals should be punished.

What I'm also saying is that when you grant someone citizenship, you grant them the same rights as all other citizens. You enter into a covenant to treat them as though they were native-born British, and this policy violates the covenant, creating a special class of punishment that is based solely upon nation of origin.

Stop talking shit and answer my questions

I could not care when you grant citizenship, where you hold some backward view on
Again your views have no consideration for the victim

Start there and think what is best for them

Then answer my questioins

Try again

What's best for the victim is that their abuser have no further contact with society. Now, you have committed to imprisoning those citizens of your country who commit crimes like this, have you not, in the UK?

Well, foreign-born citizens are still citizens, and they should be, in a fair country, punished the same way all other citizens are.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:Oh dear the old emotive others are that way to get out of answering near 9 out of ten of my points

You are coming from this Ben with only one care and that for the criminal and not the victim

That is shocking

The victim should come first

If part of that sentence means losing your rights to be here, then the victim should have a say in that

Or do you deny that they should?

Sure, let the victim decide the punishment. That sounds like a civilized way to run your country ...

Let the victim have a say your ignorant regressive moran

Did I say decide or have a say?

This is what is the matter with you regressive idiots, you invent lies to things not said

Now are you going to admit you just lied and tried to deceive?

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:


Stop talking shit and answer my questions

I could not care when you grant citizenship, where you hold some backward view on
Again your views have no consideration for the victim

Start there and think what is best for them

Then answer my questioins

Try again

What's best for the victim is that their abuser have no further contact with society. Now, you have committed to imprisoning those citizens of your country who commit crimes like this, have you not, in the UK?

Well, foreign-born citizens are still citizens, and they should be, in a fair country, punished the same way all other citizens are.

Well foreign born citizens can lose also their right to stay

You offer no reason why they should

I offer one for the sake of the victims, that they know they will never have to face them again

You offer up regressive bull

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:Again Ben goes off the least important point

Whether they were once British citizens

What are you going to tell me next Ben, we should not remove the rights of criminals and allow them into society without any jail time?

You seem to think because a person comes here where the country opens its doors to them, that the country should then look later in life when that person is old. That is how you want the country to repay a criminal, but looking after them when they are old, when they never did as much as any other citizen actually born here, where their parents paid into the system.

You seem to hold this view that we cannot have variance in he law.

We do on crimes and who commits them and so can we have on sentencing

Again your whole thought process Ben is built around rehabilitation.
That though fails every time to factor in the victim and what they have to live through

You're just strawmanning now, I have said over and over that criminals should be punished.

What I'm also saying is that when you grant someone citizenship, you grant them the same rights as all other citizens. You enter into a covenant to treat them as though they were native-born British, and this policy violates the covenant, creating a special class of punishment that is based solely upon nation of origin.

however you conveniently choose to ignore the fact that THEY chose to ignore any covenant FIRST

also Australia has tghios sensible policy....the deported a brit paedo who had been there many years .....back here...fair does to em....

Article 7.

All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Article 7 universal declaration of human rights

http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/

Didge wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:Oh dear the old emotive others are that way to get out of answering near 9 out of ten of my points

You are coming from this Ben with only one care and that for the criminal and not the victim

That is shocking

The victim should come first

If part of that sentence means losing your rights to be here, then the victim should have a say in that

Or do you deny that they should?

Sure, let the victim decide the punishment. That sounds like a civilized way to run your country ...

Let the victim have a say your ignorant regressive moran

Did I say decide or have a say?

This is what is the matter with you regressive idiots, you invent lies to things not said

Now are you going to admit you just lied and tried to deceive?

Hey, a little ways up you can see yourself saying that I don't think about the victims of child abuse, and a little above that again, and a little above that, and then if you go a little farther up, and then a few posts before that ...

I've been doing a pretty good job of staying rational and impersonal even as you and others accuse me of pandering to pedophiles on the basis of where they were born.

You don't realize that this policy actually creates a protected class of pedophiles immune to the harshest punishment your country can deal out for the crime, solely on the basis of national origin.

All are equal before the law, accept that is not true is it zack
Children are different before the law, so nothing is equal, its based on subjective views we hold on groups of people.
That means if there is variance there can also be for those foreign born

Didge wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

What's best for the victim is that their abuser have no further contact with society. Now, you have committed to imprisoning those citizens of your country who commit crimes like this, have you not, in the UK?

Well, foreign-born citizens are still citizens, and they should be, in a fair country, punished the same way all other citizens are.

Well foreign born citizens can lose also their right to stay

You offer no reason why they should

I offer one for the sake of the victims, that they know they will never have to face them again

You offer up regressive bull

Considering equality before the law is a fundamental of liberalism, you are being the regressive. Lol!