Cutting dole for criminals

Kermit.de.frog

Why is the dole not cut for people that commit criminal acts and get convictions while on social welfare?

Paul Williams mentioned this a few weeks back on the Late Late Show. He said the "bastards" (in this case it was people robbing houses in the country) are "worried about their dole" so he recommended it should be cut.

Seems simple enough? Get a conviction and have your dole either cut by x amount or stopped completely.

It would provide a lot more stick against those involved in serious crime and reassurance for tax payers.

Skylinehead

And if they're not on the dole?

kupus

sounds good to me,

El Horseboxo

Skylinehead wrote: »

And if they're not on the dole?

Fire them and put them on the dole.

Nodin

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Why is the dole not cut for people that commit criminal acts and get convictions while on social welfare?

Paul Williams mentioned this a few weeks back on the Late Late Show. He said the "bastards" (in this case it was people robbing houses in the country) are "worried about their dole" so he recommended it should be cut.

Seems simple enough? Get a conviction and have your dole either cut by x amount or stopped completely.

It would provide a lot more stick against those involved in serious crime and reassurance for tax payers.

Yep, cutting the amount of money they have will really help them avoid repeat offences when they get out.

Kenny Bania

Skylinehead wrote: »

And if they're not on the dole?

Put them in jail or do whatever was going to be done anyway. The cutting of dole would be in addition.

kupus

Skylinehead wrote: »

And if they're not on the dole?

ha haha good one . I needed a good oul laugh

Would it not simply increase the chances of them stealing...just being a lot more careful about it when it's the only source of income?

mass_debater

Would not work as a deterrent, doubt it's legal as a punishment

Atlantic Dawn

It shouldn't be cut, instead the cost of the damage or theft they did should be given to their victim at a rate of 30% of their dole each week until it is repayed, this would be a weekly reminder to them of their crime.

Carlos Orange

Maybe I'm just old fashioned but could we not just put them in jail.

Nodin

kupus wrote: »

ha haha good one . I needed a good oul laugh

You might read up on some that have been caught involved in drugs over the last few years.

Realt Dearg Sec

So what do you think they're likely to do with no aces to legal money? Go down to aldi and get a job? Or go down to aldi and clear the registers?

Kermit.de.frog

Nodin wrote: »

Yep, cutting the amount of money they have will really help them avoid repeat offences when they get out.

Didn't take long!


So you are afraid of scumbags basically and thus they should be given your money while continuing to engage in crime that might one day have an affect on you?

Mesrine65

Boards.ie very own muppet crusader, fighting a one man crime spree in our fair city :P

Menas

The ties between social welfare and the justice system are bad enough as things are. There are cases of people in prison still getting the dole because the two dont talk together!

Nodin

psinno wrote: »

Maybe I'm just old fashioned but could we not just put them in jail.

Presumably he means on top of the jail sentence, after its served.

Skylinehead

Kenny Bania wrote: »

Put them in jail or do whatever was going to be done anyway. The cutting of dole would be in addition.

But that's "double punishing" someone because they're unemployed. European courts will strike that down pretty quickly.

Saipanne

Ironically, increasing it would be more effective.

Realt Dearg Sec

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Didn't take long!


So you are afraid of scumbags basically and thus they should be given your money while continuing to engage in crime that might one day have an affect on you?

It's just not clear how this measure disincentivises crime? Are they more or less likely to commit another crime in this situation? Is your objective to reduce crime, or to get some slightly pointless revenge.

By the way Paul Williams is a total and utter tool.

Red Kev

They could start by knocking €30-50 a week off the dole to pay back their free legal aid, or to pay any fines.

Nodin

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Didn't take long!


So you are afraid of scumbags basically and thus they should be given your money while continuing to engage in crime that might one day have an affect on you?

*snicker

Yeah, absolutely.

Let's run this through again. They steal for money a lot of them. They do their time, they get out, and on top of their sentence, they now have to get by (crime free) on a reduced scratcher, while trying to get a job with a criminal record and possibly drug habit. Whats the obvious thing that's going to happen there?

Realt Dearg Sec

Red Kev wrote: »

They could start by knocking €30-50 a week off the dole to pay back their free legal aid...

there's something wrong with that sentence, but I just can't put my finger on what.

Sam Kade

psinno wrote: »

Maybe I'm just old fashioned but could we not just put them in jail.

Do you know how much it costs to keep a prisoner in jail for a year?
90k last time I checked, old fashioned or not that's a hefty sum.

Kermit.de.frog

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

pointless revenge.

.

I just believe people should be punished effectively in this country if they commit crime. Not about revenge.

There are people living in absolute terror every night of the week in estates across Ireland. Try telling them why little scrotes and their parents should be getting state support.

steddyeddy

Yea maybe but what if they're not on the dole? I think inheritance and other assets should be hit too. Charlie Haughy and his family robbed the taxpayer and the state of large sums of money. Now his children are going to the best schools and the family own an island. We need a criminal assets division of revenue.

Kermit.de.frog

Red Kev wrote: »

They could start by knocking €30-50 a week off the dole to pay back their free legal aid, or to pay any fines.

Free legal aid is another thing that could be looked at!

Realt Dearg Sec

steddyeddy wrote: »

Yea maybe but what if they're not on the dole? I think inheritance and other assets should be hit too. Charlie Haughy and his family robbed the taxpayer and the state of large sums of money. Now his children are going to the best schools and the family own an island. We need a criminal assets division of revenue.

He's talking about poor people eddy. You know, scrotes...

Iwasfrozen

Sam Kade wrote: »

Do you know how much it costs to keep a prisoner in jail for a year?
90k last time I checked, old fashioned or not that's a hefty sum.

Time to start cutting costs in prison then.

steddyeddy

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

He's talking about poor people eddy. You know, scrotes...

Ah not people like the Viper or the general then.

Sunnyisland

steddyeddy wrote: »

Yea maybe but what if they're not on the dole? I think inheritance and other assets should be hit too. Charlie Haughy and his family robbed the taxpayer and the state of large sums of money. Now his children are going to the best schools and the family own an island. We need a criminal assets division of revenue.

Ah but this thread is not about good criminals like above and others like them,this is about the bad criminals who are on the dole, the cheek of ya.

Carlos Orange

Sam Kade wrote: »

Do you know how much it costs to keep a prisoner in jail for a year?
90k last time I checked, old fashioned or not that's a hefty sum.

If you get me an itemised list of costs I'm sure I can cut that down fairly easily.

frozenfrozen

It's so strange that people stand up for scumbags on this website. Where are these people when a story comes out about pensioners being tied up and beaten half to death in their own home? Can there only be one kind of criminal in your small minds?

mynamejeff

Skylinehead wrote: »

But that's "double punishing" someone because they're unemployed. European courts will strike that down pretty quickly.

no its punishing some one for breaking the law ,

not every one who is on the dole is a criminal you know

people choose to be criminals fine let them pay the price

meeeeh

frozenfrozen wrote: »

It's so strange that people stand up for scumbags on this website. Where are these people when a story comes out about pensioners being tied up and beaten half to death in their own home? Can there only be one kind of criminal in your small minds?

I would love to think that cutting dole would work but in reality it would only mean more pensioners getting their heads bashed.

Skylinehead

mynamejeff wrote: »

no its punishing some one for breaking the law ,

not every one who is on the dole is a criminal you know

people choose to be criminals fine let them pay the price

Person on dole is criminal.

Jail + dole cut

Person employed is criminal

Jail + ?

How is that not double punishment?

corner of hells

frozenfrozen wrote: »

It's so strange that people stand up for scumbags on this website. Where are these people when a story comes out about pensioners being tied up and beaten half to death in their own home? Can there only be one kind of criminal in your small minds?

I don't think anyone is standing up for criminals , they're pointing out that cutting peoples welfare or removing it forces them further into poverty , creating greater issues in society creating a destitute group of individuals.

frozenfrozen

meeeeh wrote: »

I would love to think that cutting dole would work but in reality it would only mean more pensioners getting their heads bashed.

I absolutely agree I'd say the only option is educating the next generation of potentially scumbag children.

Our justice system is essentially opt-in. if some scumbag lives their life in a way where they have nothing to lose, worst case scenario they go to a jail at great expense to the tax payer and once they get out they return to ruining everyone else's life.

frozenfrozen

corner of hells wrote: »

I don't think anyone is standing up for criminals , they're pointing out that cutting peoples welfare or removing it forces them further into poverty , creating greater issues in society creating a destitute group of individuals.

I was referring to people talking about white collar criminals vs 'true' criminals on the dole or whatever **** they're trying to peddle.

cutting dole isn't an option it would just lead to more crime

Iwasfrozen

frozenfrozen wrote: »

I was referring to people talking about white collar criminals vs 'true' criminals on the dole or whatever **** they're trying to peddle.

cutting dole isn't an option it would just lead to more crime

We could always cut off their hand. Saudi Arabia is a **** hole but they have very little theft.

Skylinehead

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Saudi Arabia is a **** hole

Correct. Moving swiftly on from Saudi bloody Arabias penal code...

oceanid

Menas wrote: »

The ties between social welfare and the justice system are bad enough as things are. There are cases of people in prison still getting the dole because the two dont talk together!

Do you not have to present ID to collect dole?

Realt Dearg Sec

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

We could always cut off their hand. Saudi Arabia is a **** hole but they have very little theft.

Of rather have some theft and not live in an oppressive ****hole. Each to their own.

cerastes

Sam Kade wrote: »

Do you know how much it costs to keep a prisoner in jail for a year?
90k last time I checked, old fashioned or not that's a hefty sum.

last I heard it was 50k, well what are the basics,
you need a secure building, high capacity, better economy of scale.

Skylinehead wrote: »

Person on dole is criminal.

Jail + dole cut

Person employed is criminal

Jail + ?

How is that not double punishment?

No earnings, that plus jail means both are equal.
I find it hard to believe dole is paid to prisoners intentionally so, essentially being put in prison means the dole will be cut for at least that duration anyway.

The thing is, it seems many of our criminals are un-reformable and should be locked away, permanently if need be for the good of society.
Primarily I'm talking about violent offenders, but especially those that repeat and career criminals that commit less serious offences but do so continually, like known burglars, this has an effect on costs for decent people.
It seems like it's policy to have a revolving door system, as it looks like a nice earner for the legal profession in terms of continued business and it solves the problem of trying to find the funds to build and run a new prison.
So I find it strange when I hear people say it costs X to keep a prisoner, both that and the cost of free legal aid must be known, I think there is an obvious solution when the costs are all compared.

Essentially the free legal aid is constant cost and maintenance, put that into building and running a prison and programs to reform inmates.
I suggest, taking whats given to the legal profession and build a prison as the revolving door system isnt reforming prisoners. Prison shouldn't be easy, but it should be about reform, education, training for early exit. If you dont want to reform or do anything, no opportunity to get out early.

If you get out early and commit an offence, back in for the full term. If you end up having more offences, particularily serious ones like violence then, your next stint should not have a reduced term or early release or it should be limited to a certain amount.

What are the costs to run a prison, design, build, heat, maintain, the more prisoners you have to fill the place the cheaper it gets per head and the less staff and maintenance you will need, to a point.


Some people just aren't fit to be in society, so if you are constantly committing crimes, then put them away for a long time, eventually with limited options for release.

Iwasfrozen

Skylinehead wrote: »

Correct. Moving swiftly on from Saudi bloody Arabias penal code...

Very little theft however. And very little chance of re offence.

Menas

oceanid wrote: »

Do you not have to present ID to collect dole?

Only when you are required to sign on.

LeBash

Kermit.de.frog wrote:

Why is the dole not cut for people that commit criminal acts and get convictions while on social welfare?


Paul Williams mentioned this a few weeks back on the Late Late Show. He said the "bastards" (in this case it was people robbing houses in the country) are "worried about their dole" so he recommended it should be cut.


Seems simple enough? Get a conviction and have your dole either cut by x amount or stopped completely.


It would provide a lot more stick against those involved in serious crime and reassurance for tax payers.

Well if you cut the dole it gives them more reason to steal. They have even less money.

Here's a mad way of dealing with it. When they get convicted, put them in jail. Anything bar a misdemeanour should be time in jail. And after X number of the same misdemeanour, jail. Why should anyone who is law abiding have to put up with criminals of any kind walking around on the streets with 1 or 1000 convictions.

Most of us pay big taxes, so if we cut the fat out there should be plenty of money to make people a guest of the state. Plus make the convicts work to amass the sum of money it costs to keep them there. Basically it would be a self sufficient system that actually puts structure in the life of people who actually need it. When the do gooders give out, put the released cons into the areas where they are from because I'm sick of looking a scumbags walking around North Inner City.

KomradeBishop

Tabloid hack suggests tabloidy solution to tackling criminals shocker.

sonny.knowles

If we increased their dole payments then they wouldn't need to go out robbing money to feed their poor families.

Edit:

Sorry, some PC troll just hacked my account and posted the crap above.

Knee capping the scrotes would learn them.

steddyeddy

It's a ridiculous suggestion. People like drug dealers or racketeers don't rely on the dole. An effective criminal assets division is needed. I'll say it again Haughey's family own an island.

corner of hells

LeBash wrote: »

Well if you cut the dole it gives them more reason to steal. They have even less money.

Here's a mad way of dealing with it. When they get convicted, put them in jail. Anything bar a misdemeanour should be time in jail. And after X number of the same misdemeanour, jail. Why should anyone who is law abiding have to put up with criminals of any kind walking around on the streets with 1 or 1000 convictions.

Most of us pay big taxes, so if we cut the fat out there should be plenty of money to make people a guest of the state. Plus make the convicts work to amass the sum of money it costs to keep them there. Basically it would be a self sufficient system that actually puts structure in the life of people who actually need it. When the do gooders give out, put the released cons into the areas where they are from because I'm sick of looking a scumbags walking around North Inner City.

Is there a misdemeanour grade of crime in Ireland ? I thought that was the States , I think they have only misdemeanour and the felony grade.