Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Enough

Options
135678

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,632 ✭✭✭ART6


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    It could also be an argument for burning them at the stake. Before you say that there's an argument for something, you need to determine whether or not it's a good argument for it, and whether there are better arguments for the alternatives.

    If what you want is to derive satisfaction from the suffering of others, fair enough; but if you want to reduce the likelihood of a prisoner re-offending, then you need to get over your ill-founded disdain for the people who actually study these issues, and realise that rehabilitation works much, much better than punishment.

    I grant you, rehabilitation doesn't satisfy the visceral desire some people have to see others suffer, but I'm not convinced that's a good argument against it.

    Much though I would not wish to contest the opinions of a Boards administrator (yes, I would!), I at least don't demand burning anyone at the stake however attractive that seems for the moment. What I do require is that the people whom I elect to represent me apply the basic tenants of civilisation and government -- the protection and peace of the people. I expect them to put before me a reasoned and concise policy to deal with the issues that face us as a community without political and meaningless soundbites. As an individual I don't have the answers to all of these issues, which is why I rely upon the consensus of the views of the majority in general elections and hope for the (rare) occurrences when the views of the majority will be listened to.

    "Rehabilitation" in our prison system has of course clearly worked, as has our criminal justice system. What is the rehabilitation of a couple of years (suspended) in a holiday camp for someone who has decided that it is more remunerative to prey on the sheep than to actually work for his money? What is the "rehabilitation" of someone who has beaten a pensioner to the ground to steal his pension only to be given a community service order that he will ignore? What is the "rehabilitation" of a Garda who has stuck his neck on the line to apprehend a violent criminal, and been injured in the process, only to see that criminal be released with a slap on the wrist to go with his other fifty or so convictions?

    Okay so. I am just Joe Public and am uninformed but opinionated. I have a disdain for the people who actually study the issues? Fine, so when are all of these studies of the experts going to deal with the problem?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,859 ✭✭✭bmaxi


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    It could also be an argument for burning them at the stake. Before you say that there's an argument for something, you need to determine whether or not it's a good argument for it, and whether there are better arguments for the alternatives.

    If what you want is to derive satisfaction from the suffering of others, fair enough; but if you want to reduce the likelihood of a prisoner re-offending, then you need to get over your ill-founded disdain for the people who actually study these issues, and realise that rehabilitation works much, much better than punishment.

    I grant you, rehabilitation doesn't satisfy the visceral desire some people have to see others suffer, but I'm not convinced that's a good argument against it.

    Visceral desire, eh. So you equate any desire to see justice done with some sort of primeval blood lust?
    I would put the success rate of rehabilitation among habitual criminals on the same level as a dentist treating hens for tooth decay. As regards looking on psychologists with disdain, you have to look at their spectacular failures, John Gallagher and Ernest Saunders are two that spring to mind, people who have hoodwinked these supposed experts to escape the full rigours of the law. Quacks.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,859 ✭✭✭bmaxi


    djpbarry wrote: »
    I don't accept that they are pampered. Ever been inside a typical prison cell in Ireland - it ain't pleasant.
    It’s obvious you are completely unaware of the conditions in Irish prisons and I don’t really see the point in continuing the discussion until you at least try and inform yourself of the facts. For example, many Irish prisons have serious drug problems, so guys who committed relatively minor crimes go in to serve their short sentence and they emerge as junkies – to whose benefit is that?

    Well, as you seem to be well informed perhaps you can enlighten me, that is if you can bring yourself down to my level to discuss it of course.
    How are these drugs and the means to administer them getting into supposedly secure institutions? Why are they not picked up in the "systematic searches" that are "routinely" carried out in these same institutions. Why are sniffer dogs not finding them?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,632 ✭✭✭ART6


    djpbarry wrote: »
    I don't accept that they are pampered. Ever been inside a typical prison cell in Ireland - it ain't pleasant.
    It’s obvious you are completely unaware of the conditions in Irish prisons and I don’t really see the point in continuing the discussion until you at least try and inform yourself of the facts. For example, many Irish prisons have serious drug problems, so guys who committed relatively minor crimes go in to serve their short sentence and they emerge as junkies – to whose benefit is that?

    They come out as junkies? Did someone force feed them cocaine? If I am imprisoned for not paying my TV license do I come out as a druggie? Prison cells are not supposed to be pleasant.


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,114 ✭✭✭✭jmayo


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Correct. Hence the argument for rehabilitation.
    djpbarry wrote: »
    Well, that’ll be why the Irish prison system was heavily criticised in a recent Council of Europe report.

    http://www.cpt.coe.int/documents/irl/2011-03-inf-eng.htm
    So rehabilitation is impossible, is it? There are absolutely no examples of reformed criminals?
    How about by reforming them? That way they rejoin society and pay taxes.

    Ok rather than reply to all the ones rabitting on about rehabilitation let me ask you to answer a few questions.

    Hands up anyone who thinks that gerard barry (the guy that kicked a guy to death in Eyre Square, committed multipe rapes and raped and murdered Mauella Reido) should be allowed out ever again ?
    Let me ask those of the save them brigade "would you want him living on your road?"

    Hands up who thinks that larry murphy should have been allowed out after 10/12 odd years after he had been found to steal a car, kidnap, multiple rape and attempt the murder of his victim and then refuse any therapy ?
    Why did he get remission ??
    Oh wait is was his first offense.
    Does the seriousness of the offense not matter, because trust me it damm well matters to the victim.
    Who the christ came up with the idea that you automatically get remission ?

    There are countless other major reoffenders.
    Every other day we hear about the assassination of someone known to the Gardaí who it turns out has a list of convictions as long as your arm.
    Are we meant to continously waste resources trying to rehabilitate them ?
    Why are multiple offenders excused, allowed out on bail and get remissions on sentences.

    I have often quoted the cases of two other multiple killers who have served time, done some rehabilitation and yet killed again once they are allowed out.

    Why the fook can't some people get into their heads that rehabilitation is a waste for some and that those of us who want tougher sentences, no bail, etc don't mean that some guy who committed his first minor offense should be shackled in a dungoen for life ?

    To show the rediculousness of it, you get TV license evaders getting jailtime and the likes of the six in the Tipperary incident getting bail.
    It is a joke.
    Some prisoners/offenders may be rehabilitated, but why waste time and money on those who have carried out very serious crime and/or reoffended ?
    And why go light on those who have reoffended.
    Remember many of their victims never got a second chance.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,859 ✭✭✭bmaxi


    hmmm wrote: »
    Prisons aren't expensive because of "pampering". They are expensive because they are run by the public service, with exorbitant salaries and all the other associated bonuses and pensions that go with this.

    As for the original point, we can't afford a guard on every street. What we can do is make sure that proper sentences are handed out, and that criminals with multiple convictions are put away for a long time. So, raise it with politicians the next time you see them, and don't go off on some vague rant about bondholders.

    Perhaps we should follow the example of the UK and privatise them. Group Four made such a good job of that that the government felt compelled to re-nationalise them. It's easy to run prisons on a shoestring when you can't manage to keep anybody in them. :):):)


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,792 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    ART6 wrote: »
    Okay so. I am just Joe Public and am uninformed but opinionated.
    Realising it is a good start.
    I have a disdain for the people who actually study the issues?
    I didn't accuse you of disdain for anyone.
    bmaxi wrote: »
    Visceral desire, eh. So you equate any desire to see justice done with some sort of primeval blood lust?
    You're confusing justice with revenge. You've given no indication that you think we should punish people in order to make society safer; you've only indicated that we should punish people because you feel they deserve to be punished.

    If you can produce some evidence that making people do harder time will reduce recidivism rates more effectively than making a genuine effort to rehabilitate them, please do so.
    As regards looking on psychologists with disdain, you have to look at their spectacular failures, John Gallagher and Ernest Saunders are two that spring to mind, people who have hoodwinked these supposed experts to escape the full rigours of the law. Quacks.
    Andrew Wakefield is a fraud and a liar. Does that mean that we should ignore everything that doctors have to say?
    jmayo wrote: »
    Why the fook can't some people get into their heads that rehabilitation is a waste for some and that those of us who want tougher sentences, no bail, etc don't mean that some guy who committed his first minor offense should be shackled in a dungoen for life ?
    Rehabilitation may be wasted on some, but that is a piss-poor argument for replacing any attempt at rehabilitation with tougher punishment for all offenders. If the only lesson people learn in prison is that society doesn't consider them worthy of being treated like a decent human being, why are people surprised when people leave prison and don't act like decent human beings?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,454 ✭✭✭Icepick


    bmaxi wrote: »
    Firstly, I thing the OP is being naive in assuming that living in a small isolated community
    There is no such a thing as an isolated community in (mainland) Ireland. It's not the 18th century any more.


  • Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    Icepick wrote: »
    There is no such a thing as an isolated community in (mainland) Ireland. It's not the 18th century any more.

    Meh. It's relative.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,859 ✭✭✭bmaxi


    [QUOTE
    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Realising it is a good start. I didn't accuse you of disdain for anyone.



    You don't lend any weight to your argument by being condescending.

    oscarBravo wrote: »

    You're confusing justice with revenge. You've given no indication that you think we should punish people in order to make society safer; you've only indicated that we should punish people because you feel they deserve to be punished.




    I didn't decide they deserved to be punished, the courts decided that, that's why they're in prison. My argument is that in a lot of cases the punishment doesn't fit the crime

    oscarBravo wrote: »


    If you can produce some evidence that making people do harder time will reduce recidivism rates more effectively than making a genuine effort to rehabilitate them, please do so. Andrew Wakefield is a fraud and a liar. Does that mean that we should ignore everything that doctors have to say?

    How do you suggest I do that when that sort of regime doesn't exist in Ireland. I'm sure if I produced it from another country, you'd deem it irrelevant.



    [QUOTE=oscarBravo;88643779

    Andrew Wakefield is a fraud and a liar. Does that mean that we should ignore everything that doctors have to say?

    [/QUOTE]

    Comparing doctors and Psychologists is not apples and apples. Medical misdiagnoses will, in time, manifest themselves physically, the same cannot be said of psychiatric misdiagnoses.


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Rehabilitation may be wasted on some, but that is a piss-poor argument for replacing any attempt at rehabilitation with tougher punishment for all offenders. If the only lesson people learn in prison is that society doesn't consider them worthy of being treated like a decent human being, why are people surprised when people leave prison and don't act like decent human beings?

    We tend not to lock up decent human beings for serious crime


  • Advertisement
  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,792 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    bmaxi wrote: »
    I didn't decide they deserved to be punished, the courts decided that, that's why they're in prison. My argument is that in a lot of cases the punishment doesn't fit the crime
    You're still talking about punishment. You're expressing no interest whatsoever in the question of how best to protect society. All you are talking about is retribution. If vengeance makes society less safe, well, that's just the price of a pound of flesh.
    How do you suggest I do that when that sort of regime doesn't exist in Ireland. I'm sure if I produced it from another country, you'd deem it irrelevant.
    You could start by comparing recidivism rates in the US - a country where prison is pretty much about nothing whatsoever but the sort of punishment you advocate - with those in Norway, which almost certainly fits your idea of bleeding heart PC liberalism.

    If, that is, you're interested in making society safer.
    Comparing doctors and Psychologists is not apples and apples. Medical misdiagnoses will, in time, manifest themselves physically, the same cannot be said of psychiatric misdiagnoses.
    So society would be better off without psychiatrists and psychologists? We should go back to the good old days when we locked people with mental illness away for life?
    We tend not to lock up decent human beings for serious crime
    It's probably fair to say that we release a lot fewer decent human beings from prison than we lock up in the first place.

    But hey: as long as they're being punished, it's all good.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 47,226 CMod ✭✭✭✭Black Swan


    ART6 wrote: »
    I am not sure whether you are asking your first question as a moderator...
    ART6 wrote: »
    Much though I would not wish to contest the opinions of a Boards administrator (yes, I would!)...
    MOD REMINDER: The positions of these members on boards had nothing to do with the content of their posts or the topic of this discussion. In the future please refrain from making such references: Focus on the post content, and not the person.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,632 ✭✭✭ART6


    Black Swan wrote: »
    MOD REMINDER: The positions of these members on boards had nothing to do with the content of their posts or the topic of this discussion. In the future please refrain from making such references: Focus on the post content, and not the person.

    My apologies. It was not my intention to offend either poster. PM sent.

    Anyway, latest news on this item is that the three men responsible have been arrested. Well done AGS!


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    ART6 wrote: »
    Anyway, latest news on this item is that the three men responsible have been arrested.

    So, arrested in short order, as I suggested.

    Not roaming the countryside with impunity, as you suggested.

    Are you going to admit you were wrong?

    Vote Fine Gael?


  • Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    ART6 wrote: »
    My apologies. It was not my intention to offend either poster. PM sent.

    Anyway, latest news on this item is that the three men responsible have been arrested. Well done AGS!

    In fairness some posters do get confused about moderators and admins.

    Just a general note, you'll see the category they mod under the tag moderator on the left.

    Mods can post as normal users and participate in a discussion, mod requests and actions are usually posted in bold so that users can differentiate from normal posting.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,632 ✭✭✭ART6


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Realising it is a good start. I didn't accuse you of disdain for anyone.

    You're confusing justice with revenge. You've given no indication that you think we should punish people in order to make society safer; you've only indicated that we should punish people because you feel they deserve to be punished.

    If you can produce some evidence that making people do harder time will reduce recidivism rates more effectively than making a genuine effort to rehabilitate them, please do so. Andrew Wakefield is a fraud and a liar. Does that mean that we should ignore everything that doctors have to say?

    Rehabilitation may be wasted on some, but that is a piss-poor argument for replacing any attempt at rehabilitation with tougher punishment for all offenders. If the only lesson people learn in prison is that society doesn't consider them worthy of being treated like a decent human being, why are people surprised when people leave prison and don't act like decent human beings?

    Going by your user name and by the knowledge displayed by your posts I imagine that you are involved in law enforcement (I am not asking -- it's none of my business :)). If that's so then I expect that you know much more about the subject than I do. My limited knowledge is sadly only that obtained from the media, and that is not usually a good source. So, I would be happy if rehabilitation worked, and possibly in many cases it does although the evidence seems to me to be that in many other cases it doesn't. Perhaps, though, there is one significant barrier to its doing so -- for example, if someone is sentenced and serves time for a violent armed robbery, is rehabilitated and released, how does he then support himself as a responsible member of the community? Who is going to employ him given his record? Is rehabilitation simply the first step without any follow up? What actually happens afterwards?
    So, arrested in short order, as I suggested.

    Not roaming the countryside with impunity, as you suggested.

    Are you going to admit you were wrong?

    Vote Fine Gael?

    Well, they managed, I am told, to attack three shops in the area and were not caught until the following day. That is not a criticism of the Gardai, who clearly didn't hang about in this case! However, the point of my first and later posts was that the public perception seems to be that violent armed robbery of shops and family homes is on the increase, and the justice minister's response is to close 100 rural Garda stations.

    Of course I have no means of knowing whether or not this particular crime would still have been committed if there had been a Garda station in our village, but I can't help wondering if their knowledge that the nearest one was on the other side of the city something like ten miles away gave them some comfort. Anyway, it is not just a matter of how many small stations there are, but more a case of resources. I would argue that we need a better resourced Gardai, with significantly more of them. If, for example, the robbers knew that there were Garda patrol cars out on the roads in numbers and might quickly turn up anywhere, they might have pause for thought. My (limited) perception is that this government and its predecessor has taken the opposite approach and, if so, has failed in its duty to the public.

    So no, I am not yet going to "admit that I was wrong" on the strength of this particular case. I will happily do so when I see evidence that the problem of violent armed crime is being addressed. That doesn't necessarily mean draconian punishments or flogging at the stake (tempting though that might be for some crimes :rolleyes:), or the end of rehabilitation since I can believe that there are a number of complex issues involved. I just am not convinced by endless ministerial sound bites and little else. And I won't be voting for FG, or Labour, or FF at the next election since I have no faith in any of them.


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    ART6 wrote: »
    However, the point of my first and later posts was that the public perception seems to be that violent armed robbery of shops and family homes is on the increase, and the justice minister's response is to close 100 rural Garda stations.

    Your original point was that armed gangs are roaming with impunity and it's time for us citizens to kill them ourselves instead of relying on the guards.

    Paranoid nonsense.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,892 ✭✭✭spank_inferno


    So in a nutshell.

    There was a couple of burglaries down in Waterford.

    Therefore the country is in anarchy & we must arm ourselves.

    2days later burglars arrested & I suppose the country is no longer going to the dogs.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,632 ✭✭✭ART6


    Your original point was that armed gangs are roaming with impunity and it's time for us citizens to kill them ourselves instead of relying on the guards.

    Paranoid nonsense.

    Okay, have it your way! Perhaps I am paranoid when I read of families and elderly citizens being targeted in their homes by increasingly violent criminals. Do those criminals roam with impunity? I can only go by what I read or hear in the media. What happened here in Waterford only demonstrates the efficiency of the local Gardai, but it doesn't change my opinion of what is happening nationwide.

    And in case of doubt, I don't particularly want to arm myself to defend my home and my family. I don't have an urge to kill a robber. I believe that the protection of the people from them is the responsibility of the state. I don't want to wake up in the middle of the night to face two or more men armed with guns and knives and to face the sheer terror of knowing that I must resist when I don't have the skills to do so. I don't want to discover that the lady employed to look after our rural village shop in the absence of the owner for half an hour has been threatened by two armed thugs to the extent that she is so traumatised that she will never feel comfortable there again.

    So putting aside your suggestion that my opinions are paranoid nonsense -- an accusation that I find insulting-- I remain to be convinced that this issue nationwide is being properly addressed.


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    ART6 wrote: »
    Okay, have it your way! Perhaps I am paranoid

    Can't say fairer than that!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,632 ✭✭✭ART6


    Can't say fairer than that!

    I reserve any comment, although I am sorely tempted.:mad:


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    bmaxi wrote: »
    How are these drugs and the means to administer them getting into supposedly secure institutions? Why are they not picked up in the "systematic searches" that are "routinely" carried out in these same institutions. Why are sniffer dogs not finding them?
    Hang on a second – I thought you didn’t give a damn about the well-being of prisoners? Now you want to expend resources to make sure they don’t have access to drugs?
    bmaxi wrote: »
    Comparing doctors and Psychologists is not apples and apples. Medical misdiagnoses will, in time, manifest themselves physically, the same cannot be said of psychiatric misdiagnoses.
    Psychopathy, for example, is often misdiagnosed:
    http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/law-enforcement-bulletin/july-2012/psychopathy-an-important-forensic-concept-for-the-21st-century


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    jmayo wrote: »
    Why the fook can't some people get into their heads that rehabilitation is a waste for some...
    I don’t recall anyone arguing otherwise?


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    ART6 wrote: »
    However, the point of my first and later posts was that the public perception seems to be that violent armed robbery of shops and family homes is on the increase, and the justice minister's response is to close 100 rural Garda stations.
    Contrary to popular belief, crime generally is on the decrease: http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/documents/crimejustice/2010/qnhscrimeandvictimisation2010.pdf
    ART6 wrote: »
    I don't want to wake up in the middle of the night to face two or more men armed with guns and knives and to face the sheer terror of knowing that I must resist when I don't have the skills to do so.
    Nobody does, but of course, the probability of you being faced with such a situation is extremely low. In 2010, 3% of houses experienced burglaries and about half of the time, the property was occupied at the time of the incident. In 95% of cases, no weapon was used, so, if we ignore the fact that burglaries are far more likely in urban areas than rural, the chances of you being faced with armed burglars in your home in any 12-month period is about 1 in 1,300. For the purposes of comparison, you’ve a roughly 1 in 3,000 chance of being struck by lightning at some point during your life.


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,114 ✭✭✭✭jmayo


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Rehabilitation may be wasted on some, but that is a piss-poor argument for replacing any attempt at rehabilitation with tougher punishment for all offenders.

    The problem is that a lot of our sentencing is cr**.
    Remember the ex garda who now sits on the bench, who decided that sex offenders should get suspended sentences if they pay off their victims, while on the other hand a garlic smuggler, who is repaying his import duties, gets consecutive sentences.

    Hell larry murphy didn't get consecutive sentences.

    Across the board tougher sentences are needed for serious criminals and particularly repeat offenders.
    oscarBravo wrote: »
    If the only lesson people learn in prison is that society doesn't consider them worthy of being treated like a decent human being, why are people surprised when people leave prison and don't act like decent human beings?

    Ahh the poor pets.
    You don't seem to quiet get the fact that some of them are not decent human beings and once they have crossed the line they should lose the right to be treated as such.
    Some people do not deserve the label of being an animal nevermind that of a human being.

    What about the victims, are they worthy of consideration, are they worthy of being treated as decent human beings, because in our system the victims are often shabbily treated and forgotten apart from being added as another statistic ?
    So, arrested in short order, as I suggested.

    Not roaming the countryside with impunity, as you suggested.

    Are you going to admit you were wrong?

    Vote Fine Gael?

    What's the bet that they are going to be out on bail and free to roam the country ?
    Your original point was that armed gangs are roaming with impunity and it's time for us citizens to kill them ourselves instead of relying on the guards.

    Paranoid nonsense.

    Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean you are necessarily wrong.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 296 ✭✭BillyBoy13


    ART6 wrote: »
    We can now resist them provided that we only use "reasonable force" when those of us who are not trained in the military or the Gardai would not know what "reasonable force" is.

    Reasonable force is a pretty straight forward concept. People seem to think if someone robs your house you have an automatic right to assault them.

    2 wrongs don't make a right.

    Just because he breaks the law by breaking into your house doesn't automatically give you the right to break the law too.

    For example, you hear a noise one night, you creep down the stairs and see there's that hateful little 15 year old from the across the street and hes looking through the press in your living room.

    You quietly pick up a baseball bat, creep up behind him he doesnt even realise you are there. Then you hit him as hard as you can across the head and when he falls down you start stamping on him. Even though hes unconscious you still continue to hit him with the bat.

    You broke just about every bone in his body, organ damage etc... you leave him within a hair of his life and 8 months later he finally gets out of hospital but is paralysed from the neck down and has to eat soup for the rest of his life.

    That wasn't self defense. That was an assault pure and simple. There is no way, in that scenario you can claim you were reasonably defending yourself.


    Yes he broke into your house. Yes you are mad/pissed off/absolutely raging but that doesnt give you the green light to assault him.


    ART6 wrote: »
    Is smacking a knife-wielding intruder over the head with an axe reasonable force Mister Shatter?

    There is no one size fits all answer regarding reasonable force. It depends on the circumstances...

    Perhaps someone runs into your shop demanding the money from the till, you give it to him, he runs out the door with the money. As soon the door closes behind him you run out to the store room grab the axe and give chase. You finally catch him almost a kilometer down the road and then you buried the axe in his skull and killed him.

    Or maybe he was robbing your house one night, you hear a noise and go down stairs. He charges at you with with the knife shouting and screaming and then you picked up the axe and hit him with it.


    One of those examples is reasonable force the other one is assault... I'll leave you to figure out which ones which.


  • Registered Users Posts: 391 ✭✭Naz_st


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Rehabilitation may be wasted on some, but that is a piss-poor argument for replacing any attempt at rehabilitation with tougher punishment for all offenders.

    I think it would be hard to argue that rehabilitation (or attempted) is not a good idea when it comes to a justice system, but I'm curious about this:

    1) How does the current prison service actually pro-actively provide rehabilitation? (Genuine question, I don't know enough about it, I mean are there educational programs prisoners are made to go on, requirements on understanding victims and their impacts, etc)? I don't mean to say that there aren't former prisoners who are now reformed, but what about their stay in prison actively helped to rehabilitate them?

    2) Rehabilitation takes time surely? From reports about "50 previous convictions etc", it would imply that offenders are not spending time actually in prison, so no rehabilitation can occur? Or they are spending very little time in prison, same outcome?

    The second point is the key issue for me - I'm happy to have a rehabilitation-focused prison service (rather than simply locking up for punishments sake) if criminals who were convicted actually spent time in prison being rehabilitated...


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    jmayo wrote: »
    Ahh the poor pets.
    You don't seem to quiet get the fact that some of them are not decent human beings and once they have crossed the line they should lose the right to be treated as such.
    You and others don’t seem to quite get the fact that most criminals in Ireland are not psychopathic, paedophilic rapists. Arguing against rehabilitation on the grounds that some criminals are beyond help is like arguing against law enforcement because some criminals are never caught.


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,114 ✭✭✭✭jmayo


    BillyBoy13 wrote: »
    Reasonable force is a pretty straight forward concept. People seem to think if someone robs your house you have an automatic right to assault them.

    2 wrongs don't make a right.

    Just because he breaks the law by breaking into your house doesn't automatically give you the right to break the law too.

    For example, you hear a noise one night, you creep down the stairs and see there's that hateful little 15 year old from the across the street and hes looking through the press in your living room.

    You quietly pick up a baseball bat, creep up behind him he doesnt even realise you are there. Then you hit him as hard as you can across the head and when he falls down you start stamping on him. Even though hes unconscious you still continue to hit him with the bat.

    You broke just about every bone in his body, organ damage etc... you leave him within a hair of his life and 8 months later he finally gets out of hospital but is paralysed from the neck down and has to eat soup for the rest of his life.

    That wasn't self defense. That was an assault pure and simple. There is no way, in that scenario you can claim you were reasonably defending yourself.


    Yes he broke into your house. Yes you are mad/pissed off/absolutely raging but that doesnt give you the green light to assault him.

    There is no one size fits all answer regarding reasonable force. It depends on the circumstances...

    Perhaps someone runs into your shop demanding the money from the till, you give it to him, he runs out the door with the money. As soon the door closes behind him you run out to the store room grab the axe and give chase. You finally catch him almost a kilometer down the road and then you buried the axe in his skull and killed him.

    Or maybe he was robbing your house one night, you hear a noise and go down stairs. He charges at you with with the knife shouting and screaming and then you picked up the axe and hit him with it.

    One of those examples is reasonable force the other one is assault... I'll leave you to figure out which ones which.

    I think you need to stop watching Quentin Tarantino movies. ;)
    You have gone to an extreme which actually rarely if ever happens.

    You are disregarding the type of breakin/robberies that are sadly all too common enough in rural Ireland.
    Those are the ones where people breakin to a house with elderly people and proceed to tie them up, beat them and almost torture them to extract some money from them.

    Do you suggest the elderly victims do nothing if they have a chance to protect themselves.
    A number of years ago I recall an incident in Galway where some such lowlifes broke into an eldlerly farmer one night.
    He told them he had a gun and would shoot them if they came into the bedroom.
    They did and he shot at one of them and hit him.
    He fled but ended up in hospital.
    If the farmer had blown his head clear off I think it was justified.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 13,114 ✭✭✭✭jmayo


    djpbarry wrote: »
    You and others don’t seem to quite get the fact that most criminals in Ireland are not psychopathic, paedophilic rapists. Arguing against rehabilitation on the grounds that some criminals are beyond help is like arguing against law enforcement because some criminals are never caught.

    And it appears you and others think that prision should be some sort of readjustment centre where punishment never comes into it.
    Ah shure being there is punishment enough, so might as well give them all the comforts of a hotel.

    Ever hear of the carrot and the stick approach.

    Where is the use in rehabilitation when it is the persons 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc time in prison ?
    Where is the use of rehabilitation for someone that hasn't shown an ounce of genuine remorse for an awful crime they have committed ?


Advertisement