Proponents argue that this strategy would bolster national security by minimizing the risk of potential terrorists entering the country. Enhanced screening processes, once implemented, would provide a more thorough assessment of applicants, reducing the likelihood of malicious actors gaining entry. Critics argue that such a policy might inadvertently promote discrimination by broadly categorizing individuals based on their nation of origin rather than specific, credible threat intelligence. It may strain diplomatic relations with the affected countries and potentially harm the perception of the nation enacting the ban, being seen as hostile or prejudiced towards certain international communities. Additionally, genuine refugees fleeing terrorism or persecution in their home countries might be unjustly denied safe haven.
Statistics are shown for this demographic
Parish
Response rates from 71.7k UK voters.
Trend of support over time for each answer from 71.7k UK voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Trend of how important this issue is for 71.7k UK voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from UK voters whose views went beyond the provided options.
@9MRBJJF2yrs2Y
@9MKHCQ42yrs2Y
@BF4GD8H3 days3D
@BDZ7CS52wks2W
@BDWFZX93wks3W
@BDS7H3B4wks4W
@BDRBKGL4wks4W
@BDNV7K5 1mo1MO
Join in on the most popular conversations.
Based on 71.7k responses to this question.
These results come from iSideWith's ongoing political issues survey. We collect over a million responses per day, filter out duplicate and multiple submissions, and break the results down by political party, ideology, age, state, and census demographics (income, race, education, household).
iSideWith is non-partisan — we don't advocate for any party, candidate, or position. We report what the public tells us.
Writing about this issue? Use the live data and link back to the full results.