Why do we allow this to go on?

kult

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

Yeah, just like id scream for the death penalty for littering :rolleyes:.

Punishment to fit the crime.

good punishment for littering would be picking up rubbish for the day in the city centre , done dusted

Stavros Murphy

cloud493 wrote: »

Moore street is terrible, a lot of that area is, tend to avoid it.

I love Moore st, loads going on. Don't get the whole "I hate it, it's a kip" thing. Same for O'Connell st - it's alive. None of your sanitised High St crap. Proper commerce, complete with scobies.

For all anyone knows, yer wan Miss Kicky could be from Blackrock. My sis's have shops in the city center and the pains are the junkies and the D.South kids out robbing. Seriously.

monflat

Hitchens wrote: »

Just imagine a class full of that bunch every day :eek:

Yea imagine that job and being a prison officer would be the worst in my opinion.
But sure its probably inevitable that both professions will have came into contact with some of these scumbags over their lives

monflat

Hitchens wrote: »

Just imagine a class full of that bunch every day :eek:

Yea imagine that job and being a prison officer would be the worst in my opinion.
But sure its probably inevitable that both professions will have came into contact with some of these scumbags over their lives

kult

monflat wrote: »

Yea imagine that job and being a prison officer would be the worst in my opinion.
But sure its probably inevitable that both professions will have came into contact with some of these scumbags over their lives

Russian guards love their job in jails:D;-) no stress no problems it's not a holiday camp:)

foggy_lad

pickarooney wrote: »

Is this a concise way of telling us she won't finish out a sentence?

She was released without charge/even a slap on the wrist

vitani wrote: »

I'm probably going to get screamed at for being a bleeding heart now, but what I wonder is what the hell happened to turn a 15 year old into such a vicious little cow.

Knowing that she can do what she wants when she wants and all that will ever happen is cases will be dropped because of the expense yet all the while she will cost the state millions between probation and welfare as well as Guards and court costs and also all the other do-gooder stuff like sending her on a holiday etc.

Of course she should be punished for what she did, but as well as locking people up, something needs to be done to tackle the problem at the other end. I don't know what that is though. Do we tackle it through schools? Do we break up the 'ghettoes' that are forming in certain areas? Do we reform the welfare system? There's tons of kids out there that could have a chance if they were brought up differently, but instead, they're going to grow up to be just like that 15 year old.

Stop any and all state payments to her and her family. they will soon reign the bltch in!

thinks too much wrote: »

There is no way in any proper justice system that any person even a 15 year old girl should get away with a crime like that. Unfortunately as many other posters have said there is a huge amount of money to be made off such criminality. On top of this you have the civil rights crowd standing firm behind those committing the crimes and no one to represent the victims. If you go down and sit in the Central criminal courts and watch how our system works you would be amazed at what goes on.

Even now there is a raft of agencies getting invoved to help out the girl who committed this crime to see how they can help her and turn her into a good law abiding citizen. By the time this does get to a court there will be that many social services, psychological and welfare reports and not to mention a letter from her local parish priest saying how she had a terrible upbringing etc that she will probably serve no time for this.

Stop throwing money at people like this, don't spend another cent on her and her family until her debt to society and to those two shop assistants is paid in full!

cynicalcough

Yes ingenious, take all an any economic support away from marginalised families so that the only means they have to survive is to commit crime. What could possibly go wrong?

I find it baffling that a thread which should be about being repulsed by a horrendous act of violence has led to a bunch of (presumably) adult men salivating over the prospect of the violence they would like to inflict on a 15 year old girl.

DildoFaggins

cynicalcough wrote: »

Yes ingenious, take all an any economic support away from marginalised families so that the only means they have to survive is to commit crime. What could possibly go wrong?

I find it baffling that a thread which should be about being repulsed by a horrendous act of violence has led to a bunch of (presumably) adult men salivating over the prospect of the violence they would like to inflict on a 15 year old girl.

This generally always happens with these type of threads but I couldn't care less about their feelings towards that scum,nice that you added salivating to the comment trying to get on the high and mighty bollox.

At the end of the day the knackers rule lolireland maybe when a scumbag attacks someone you know and they get scott free I wonder would you have the same thoughts as many people in generally have towards these "things".

Arbiter of Good Taste

cynicalcough wrote: »

Yes ingenious, take all an any economic support away from marginalised families so that the only means they have to survive is to commit crime. What could possibly go wrong?

I find it baffling that a thread which should be about being repulsed by a horrendous act of violence has led to a bunch of (presumably) adult men salivating over the prospect of the violence they would like to inflict on a 15 year old girl.

So you are saying that the only options are welfare or crime. What about a job? And don't even bother saying it's not that easy. True, at the moment it is not, but during the boom years we had less than 4 per cent unemployment - that is judged as full employment. So it's not always difficult. Yet these problems never seem to go away.

cynicalcough

DildoFaggins wrote: »

This generally always happens with these type of threads but I couldn't care less about their feelings towards that scum,nice that you added salivating to the comment trying to get on the high and mighty bollox.

At the end of the day the knackers rule lolireland maybe when a scumbag attacks someone you know and they get scott free I wonder would you have the same thoughts as many people in generally have towards these "things".

Apologies, your first paragraph makes absolutely no sense to me so I am unable to address it.

To answer your second point I live in a so called 'deprived' area, my house has been robbed and in the past year I have walked past two murder scenes bring my two year old to his crèche so I understand (possibly more than some on here) the impact of crime and antisocial behaviour on ordinary working people.

Nonetheless I would never refer to another human being as a 'thing' or sit at home on a website fantasising about flogging them, forcibly having their children adopted or putting a bullet in their head. Because cruelty and violence disgusts me in all it's many forms.

sillyoulfool

cynicalcough wrote: »

Nonetheless I would never refer to another human being as a 'thing' or sit at home on a website fantasising about flogging them, forcibly having their children adopted or putting a bullet in their head. Because cruelty and violence disgusts me in all it's many forms.

+1

No Pants

It's not just a Dublin thing, there are scumbags all around the country, with a concentrated amount in Dublin. Nothing that a coordinated Zyklon cannister through a few thousand letterboxes at four in the morning wouldn't solve.

cynicalcough

Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »

So you are saying that the only options are welfare or crime. What about a job? And don't even bother saying it's not that easy. True, at the moment it is not, but during the boom years we had less than 4 per cent unemployment - that is judged as full employment. So it's not always difficult. Yet these problems never seem to go away.

Absolutely not either welfare or crime but as you admit it is not easy to find work at the moment and I find it extremely naive to assume that by revoking welfare from families who have become dependant on if means that they will suddenly all be going out to secure mainstream employment, pay their taxes oh and also all the legal fees and damages associated with the criminality of family members. Why did no one think of this sooner because there's no way that wouldn't happen.

carlmango11

cynicalcough wrote: »

Yes ingenious, take all an any economic support away from marginalised families so that the only means they have to survive is to commit crime. What could possibly go wrong?.

This is such a stupid, demonstrably incorrect opinion. Poverty does not cause crime. That's a pathetic excuse that naive fools use to defend the horrible acts of the worst people in our society.

Crime rose during the celtic tiger and fell during the recession. Some of the richest cities in the richest part of the US have massive homicide rates.

Ordinary people don't decide to commit crime because they don't have enough money. Scumbags do. And even then, in the vast majority of cases (particularly in this country) violent crime is not committed out of desperation or even economic gain. It's committed by socio-paths with no sense of morality or empathy, just because they want to.

If anything, crime causes poverty.

cynicalcough

carlmango11 wrote: »

This is such a stupid, demonstrably incorrect opinion. Poverty does not cause crime. That's a pathetic excuse that naive fools use to defend the horrible acts of the worst people in our society.

Crime rose during the celtic tiger and fell during the recession. Some of the richest cities in the richest part of the US have massive homicide rates.

Ordinary people don't decide to commit crime because they don't have enough money. Scumbags do. And even then, in the vast majority of cases (particularly in this country) violent crime is not committed out of desperation or even economic gain. It's committed by socio-paths with no sense of morality or empathy, just because they want to.

If anything, crime causes poverty.

With respect I never suggested poverty causes crime though it is undoubtedly a contributory factor in economic crime like shoplifting, mugging, burglary ect. My point was that for families who are already engaged in criminality then leaving them without even basic resources to survive is not going to lead spontaneous reform

Are you familiar at all with the concept of relative deprivation which is the widely accepted explanation for increasing crime rates in times of prosperity such as the Celtic tiger era. Would be interested in your thought on this.

Also agree wholeheartedly that crime cause poverty in terms of increasing distance from the workforce and barriers to reintegration for those convicted of offending in particular those who have served prison sentences.

carlmango11

cynicalcough wrote: »

Are you familiar at all with the concept of relative deprivation which is the widely accepted explanation for increasing crime rates in times of prosperity such as the Celtic tiger era. Would be interested in your thought on this.

Yeah, I would agree that inequality is a large factor in crime rates but I still maintain that most violent crime in this country isn't committed for financial gain. I think cutting welfare payments is a suitable way of dealing with a lot of repeat offenders because most of them aren't attacking people in the streets because they don't have enough money. I think with people like that, money is the only incentive we have (besides jail obviously). I don't believe cutting their payments would increase crime rates

Stavros Murphy

DildoFaggins wrote: »

This generally always happens with these type of threads but I couldn't care less about their feelings towards that scum,nice that you added salivating to the comment trying to get on the high and mighty bollox.

At the end of the day the knackers rule lolireland maybe when a scumbag attacks someone you know and they get scott free I wonder would you have the same thoughts as many people in generally have towards these "things".

LOL. Feck off. They do in their shyte. They get kicked from pillar to post, have crap lives and feck all opportunities. They're an annoyance at best. They rule nothing. A few (and I feel for them) pensioners fretting, some shopkeepers getting grief and keeping the gards busy. Rule? Yeah, grand, if you say so.

cynicalcough

Well that's a lot more measured than your previous response to my 'stupid' opinion. Financial sanctions possibly could be looked into but my response that you quoted was in reaction to a suggestion that we remove all social protection payments from those who have a relative involved (or in this case suspected of involvement) in crime. Maybe you'll agree that my opinion was not stupid and that this would be an unwise approach.

cynicalcough

That last post was for carlmango, incidentally you also mentioned that a more likely explanation than the economic one is that these people are 'scumbags' or Sociopaths. Would be interested to hear how this mental illness (the definition of which is still debated among psychiatrists) is so concentrated in certain areas of the city/country which also coincidentally suffer from economic deprivation and social exclusion. Do you think these issues are as a result of the innate prevalence of sociopathy in these particular areas?

OhHiMark

kult wrote: »

Go and protect right of Mr Breivik, he murdered 77 people, but yet again, people and families who members were killed by him pay taxes to keep him well. What a great civilization.... just great... It would be babraric to send him to a death sentence...

Why do you keep going back to a straw man argument? I've already said that yes, I would leave Breivik alive. I would never kill anyone because I think it's fundamentally wrong, and you're lowering yourself to the killer's level if you do. Yes, it would be barbaric to send him to a death sentence. We are fundamentally never going to come to a consensus because you find the idea of not killing Breivik abhorrent and I find the idea of killing him abhorrent.

OhHiMark

kult wrote: »

Go and protect right of Mr Breivik, he murdered 77 people, but yet again, people and families who members were killed by him pay taxes to keep him well. What a great civilization.... just great... It would be babraric to send him to a death sentence...

What it comes down to is that you feel you have the right to decide who dies. I might be simplifying there and by 'you' I may mean a jury, but why do 12 random people get to decide if a person lives or dies?

OhHiMark

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

Yeah, just like id scream for the death penalty for littering :rolleyes:.

Punishment to fit the crime.

Answer the question. At what point is the death penalty appropriate? Kicking someone unconscious? Kicking someone in the ribs? punching someone? It might seem like a strawman argument, but it's not.

If you decide that some manner of assault deserves the death penalty, then you have to decide the exact level of assault that deserves the death penalty. If kicking someone unconscious does, and slapping someone doesn't, what is the exact level of assault that deserves death?

DildoFaggins

Stavros Murphy wrote: »

LOL. Feck off. They do in their shyte. They get kicked from pillar to post, have crap lives and feck all opportunities. They're an annoyance at best. They rule nothing. A few (and I feel for them) pensioners fretting, some shopkeepers getting grief and keeping the gards busy. Rule? Yeah, grand, if you say so.

You must live in Russia.

OhHiMark

carlmango11 wrote: »

This is such a stupid, demonstrably incorrect opinion. Poverty does not cause crime. That's a pathetic excuse that naive fools use to defend the horrible acts of the worst people in our society.

Crime rose during the celtic tiger and fell during the recession. Some of the richest cities in the richest part of the US have massive homicide rates.

Ordinary people don't decide to commit crime because they don't have enough money. Scumbags do. And even then, in the vast majority of cases (particularly in this country) violent crime is not committed out of desperation or even economic gain. It's committed by socio-paths with no sense of morality or empathy, just because they want to.

If anything, crime causes poverty.

How incredibly middle class of you. How convenient it is that so many sociopaths have sociopathic children. How odd that a phenomenon unseen anywhere else in the world is seen in Ireland. Who knew that sociopathy was hereditary?

OhHiMark

I would put a large amount of money on stinkymunkey not answering my question about what level of assault deserves death.

DildoFaggins

OhHiMark wrote: »

I would put a large amount of money on stinkymunkey not answering my question about what level of assault deserves death.

Obviously it would be unprovoked aggravated assault with intention to cause serious bodily injury or worse.

OhHiMark

DildoFaggins wrote: »

Obviously it would be unprovoked aggravated assault with intention to cause serious bodily injury or worse.

No, you need to be specific. You're talking about taking someone's life, this is very important. If you think that assault deserves the death penalty, you need to be very clear about what assault deserves it. Otherwise you leave it open for people to call for the death penalty if someone punches someone in the head outside a nightclub.

Pinch Flat

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/netherlands/9719247/Amsterdam-to-create-scum-villages.html

There's acres and acres if waste ground in the docklands where persistently offending scumbags could be housed cheaply and out of the way. Perhaps a new prison as well for the more dangerous ones. Self contained methodone, social services and other clinics that these people need . Self contained scum bag ghettos where they can live their own life style away from people who want to live their lives in a civilised fashion.

It's pointless trying to reason with these scumbags, their parents or families. They are a breed apart and need to be treated as such.

suicide_circus

There is a word missing from this discussion. Justice. Justice needs to be done and to be seen to be done. In this case, financial compensation for the victim - deducted over time from this girls parents sw payments and when this girl turns 18, deducted from her sw payments.
A full review of this girls home life needs to carried out and possibly move her into state care. This girl needs a curfew for a year enforced with an electronic ankle braclet.
I dont advocate brutality or revenge but the lack of consequences and justice does a disservice to society, the victim and even this girl.

DildoFaggins

OhHiMark wrote: »

No, you need to be specific. You're talking about taking someone's life, this is very important. If you think that assault deserves the death penalty, you need to be very clear about what assault deserves it. Otherwise you leave it open for people to call for the death penalty if someone punches someone in the head outside a nightclub.

Well it's clear it would be attacks to the head with foreign objects and/or group attacks on an individual involving serious kicks to the head or hits with blunt weapons,punching someone outside a nightclub in the head is more along the lines of a fine/short prison sentence unless said person suffered brain injuries then it would be more severe but not a death penalty.