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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Constitutional Convention, What's going to change?

  • 07-03-2014 12:14pm
    #1
    Engine No.9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,128 ✭✭✭


    I'm not very political so imagine my surprise when I found myself here. But I saw a thread referencing the constitutional convention and it got me thinking... is it going to make a difference? What's going to change?

    I'm not going to speak for the entire demographic of Irish people and their views about what they want to happen but from my own perspective, the areas I want to see changed are all in the area of justice.

    Minimum sentences for violent offences drastically need to be increased. All to often I hear stories of rapists (in my opinion the most heinous crime behind murder) getting the likes of 4 years and shaking my head in disbelief at the leniency of this. Similar for murder but they only get 15 or so years. Murder really needs to carry a minimum term of life.

    There's no incentive for criminals to change their behaviour as the penalties just aren't severe enough.

    Another thing that irks me is barristers. Why the need? Why does somebody retain the services of a solicitor only for their day in court to have said solicitor sit idly by and watch a barrister argue the case. It just seems redundant.

    Like I said, I'm not political nor am I legal so I hope to be corrected if any of my points/assumptions are invalid. Is this the spirit of the Constitutional Convention or is that just another redundancy that's not going to affect any real change!?


Comments

  • #2
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    pajopearl wrote: »
    I'm not very political so imagine my surprise when I found myself here. But I saw a thread referencing the constitutional convention and it got me thinking... is it going to make a difference? What's going to change?

    I'm not going to speak for the entire demographic of Irish people and their views about what they want to happen but from my own perspective, the areas I want to see changed are all in the area of justice.

    Minimum sentences for violent offences drastically need to be increased. All to often I hear stories of rapists (in my opinion the most heinous crime behind murder) getting the likes of 4 years and shaking my head in disbelief at the leniency of this. Similar for murder but they only get 15 or so years. Murder really needs to carry a minimum term of life.

    There's no incentive for criminals to change their behaviour as the penalties just aren't severe enough.

    Another thing that irks me is barristers. Why the need? Why does somebody retain the services of a solicitor only for their day in court to have said solicitor sit idly by and watch a barrister argue the case. It just seems redundant.

    Like I said, I'm not political nor am I legal so I hope to be corrected if any of my points/assumptions are invalid. Is this the spirit of the Constitutional Convention or is that just another redundancy that's not going to affect any real change!?


    None of those issues are relevant for the Constitution.

    They are relevant for the Dail and T.D.s.


  • #3
    Engine No.9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,128 ✭✭✭Engine No.9


    Godge wrote: »
    None of those issues are relevant for the Constitution.

    They are relevant for the Dail and T.D.s.

    I have to wonder why, aside from fobbing me off, that when I raised these issues at the last general election canvass, the candidates told me it would be dealt with in the Constitutional Convention!?


  • #4
    The_Minister
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭The_Minister


    pajopearl wrote: »
    I have to wonder why, aside from fobbing me off, that when I raised these issues at the last general election canvass, the candidates told me it would be dealt with in the Constitutional Convention!?

    Because he was fobbing you off; neither of those are constitutional issues.

    Also, barristers are litigation specialists; in effect, the existance of barristers allows any solicitor firm, no matter how small, to access a wealth of legal knowledge that they would have no access to otherwise; barristers give the little guy some chance of challenging the big guy. They also add an element of independence and objective assessment to a case. Without barristers the practice of litigation would quickly become an oligopoly.

    Your mistake is thinking that barristers only run the case in Court; barristers are involved every step of the way, drafting pleadings, advising on tactics and law, conducting negotiations etc. You just wouldn't always see them.


Advertisement