Peter Mcverrys support for syringe criminal.

Hal3000

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

No, I'm talking about the twentieth century and the previous one. The murder rate is back around what it was in the early 1980s, after falling dramatically since the early-mid noughties.

We're nowhere near as violent as we were in the 19th century, from where most people have drawn their support for a Victorian model of justice.

The countries with the world's lowest rates of violent crime are social democracies. A rule of thumb is the less income inequality, the greater the social supports, the less crime you'll see.

Grand !! So we will keep plugging away at the old suspended sentences and hopefully things work out !

Hal3000

Hal3000 wrote: »

Grand !! So we will keep plugging away at the old suspended sentences and hopefully things work out !

The guy in this case got three years in prison though.

It's starting to seem like it's a waste of time trying to discuss what's been shown as effective vs the policies that just result in more victims. Some people only want retribution and don't seem to care about the victim tally.

weldoninhio

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

The guy in this case got three years in prison though.

It's starting to seem like it's a waste of time trying to discuss what's been shown as effective vs the policies that just result in more victims. Some people only want retribution and don't seem to care about the victim tally.

But three prison years is only 2 years and 3 months, which is half the problem.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades!

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

No, I'm talking about the twentieth century and the previous one. The murder rate is back around what it was in the early 1980s, after falling dramatically since the early-mid noughties.

We're nowhere near as violent as we were in the 19th century, from where most people have drawn their support for a Victorian model of justice.

The countries with the world's lowest rates of violent crime are social democracies. A rule of thumb is the less income inequality, the greater the social supports, the less crime you'll see.

My parents grew up in a time of much lower street crime, and more civil order. My grandmother grew up in great poverty, from a tenement, and no social supports. That said, my grandfather’s family owned the tenements. There were no social supports, life in inner city Dublin was hard, but people generally brought up their families to behave very well and aspire to better. Street crime was very low, and social order generally very good when my parents grew up. There was always the human predilection for dreadful things like pedophilia, and of course the appalling hypocrisy of religious/society regarding women pregnant outside of wedlock. But there was overall less of a burden of day to day crime, obviously because there was no drug scene.

Norway is a very safe country with generally very low levels of street crime. The prisons there are better than many holiday camps, and oddly, at least for their society, it seems to work in having much less repeat crime. It used to be a poor country, pre oil era, but for a long time it has had a lot of social equality. It’s a place I know reasonably well, and many people live in small houses, but have a great overall quality of life with many distractions, not least the enormously beautiful surroundings with lots of natural diversions and not much onshore industrialization. They all speak at two languages fluently and have excellent educational standards. Lots of resources to fall back on.

Ireland has succumbed to drugs culture to the extent that it is affecting society to an uncomfortable extent. There are second or third generations of addicts which are causing most of the level of criminal annoyance, even if it is nothing compared to USA etc. we don’t want to get near their statistics so must seek ways to discipline our own society into being a more enjoyable one for all. I grit my teeth in saying whatever it takes, let’s do it, but tread carefully so as not to reward bad behaviour whilst most of us do our utmost to uphold the law.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

My parents grew up in a time of much lower street crime, and more civil order. My grandmother grew up in great poverty, from a tenement, and no social supports. That said, my grandfather’s family owned the tenements. There were no social supports, life in inner city Dublin was hard, but people generally brought up their families to behave very well and aspire to better. Street crime was very low, and social order generally very good when my parents grew up.

The only statistics I've been able to get a hold of on crime in early 20th century ireland indicates that it was a much more violent place, at least in urban centres. At the turn of the 20th century, Ireland had a higher murder rate than it has today. No statistics were collected in relation to domestic violence but can we even begin to imagine how bad it was? Alcoholism was practically an epidemic, and street brawls, or 'riots' seem incredibly common based on newspaper reports of the times. It may be an exaggeration to say that Dublin's Monto was the prostitution capital of Europe, but prostitution was certainly rampant there, and seems to have happened in plain sight.

There was recently an excellent radio documentary about what a dangerous places the Tenements were, which I can't find a working link for, but I did come across this article on 'Animal Gangs' in places like Dublin's North Inner City.

https://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/the-animals-who-prowled-1930s-dublin-26878497.html

I suspect a lot of elderly people look back on their own childhood experiences with rose-tinted glasses, either because they were genuinely sheltered from crime, or because it's human nature to dwell more heavily on the problems of the present than the past.

Either way, as a yardstick, if I were a youngfella walking the streets of the North Inner City back then, I don't think I'd feel particularly safe. I certainly wouldn't display in public that era's equivalent of an iPhone (a pocket book?). Whereas these days, for all the doom, when I lived in the city centre recently, I used to go jogging up around Summer hill or down Townsend Street, which supposedly are places of great mortal and moral danger today.

I used to sit by the Custom House or the Docks at night and smoke fags and think about the world and boards.ie and Joe Duffy and what's it all about. I wouldn't have been so blasé about my surroundings during the 1930s.

Hal3000

[Deleted User] wrote: »

My parents grew up in a time of much lower street crime, and more civil order. My grandmother grew up in great poverty, from a tenement, and no social supports. That said, my grandfather’s family owned the tenements. There were no social supports, life in inner city Dublin was hard, but people generally brought up their families to behave very well and aspire to better. Street crime was very low, and social order generally very good when my parents grew up. There was always the human predilection for dreadful things like pedophilia, and of course the appalling hypocrisy of religious/society regarding women pregnant outside of wedlock. But there was overall less of a burden of day to day crime, obviously because there was no drug scene.

Norway is a very safe country with generally very low levels of street crime. The prisons there are better than many holiday camps, and oddly, at least for their society, it seems to work in having much less repeat crime. It used to be a poor country, pre oil era, but for a long time it has had a lot of social equality. It’s a place I know reasonably well, and many people live in small houses, but have a great overall quality of life with many distractions, not least the enormously beautiful surroundings with lots of natural diversions and not much onshore industrialization. They all speak at two languages fluently and have excellent educational standards. Lots of resources to fall back on.

Ireland has succumbed to drugs culture to the extent that it is affecting society to an uncomfortable extent. There are second or third generations of addicts which are causing most of the level of criminal annoyance, even if it is nothing compared to USA etc. we don’t want to get near their statistics so must seek ways to discipline our own society into being a more enjoyable one for all. I grit my teeth in saying whatever it takes, let’s do it, but tread carefully so as not to reward bad behaviour whilst most of us do our utmost to uphold the law.

We've also succumbed to people who think we need to better understand the reasons why a man attacks someone with a blood filled syringe and while we figure this out we will release him back into society.

Hal3000

Hal3000 wrote: »

We've also succumbed to people who think we need to better understand the reasons why a man attacks someone with a blood filled syringe and while we figure this out we will release him back into society.

nobody has claimed that, you're resorting to countering made-up arguments now.

Hal3000

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

No, I'm talking about the twentieth century and the previous one. The murder rate is back around what it was in the early 1980s, after falling dramatically since the early-mid noughties.

We're nowhere near as violent as we were in the 19th century, from where most people have drawn their support for a Victorian model of justice.

The countries with the world's lowest rates of violent crime are social democracies. A rule of thumb is the less income inequality, the greater the social supports, the less crime you'll see.

You could argue that countries such as China have a lower violent crime rate because of the severity of sentences - death penalty...

Hal3000

My final point. I've nothing against McVerry. He's doing good work. What I have a problem with is violent repeat offenders and the state having sympathy for them. There is plenty of help out there now, a lot more than before plus social welfare to assist with an income. These repeat violent offenders couldn't give a flying crap about being a positive member of society / community. Watch this space ! 10 years from now same problems if not worse. We need to get tough on violent crime and that's a reality no political party or several members here want to face.

Hal3000

Hal3000 wrote: »

You could argue that countries such as China have a lower violent crime rate because of the severity of sentences - death penalty...

That wouldn't really make sense though, because countries which impose the death penalty tend to have high rates of violent crime.

There are European countries with lower homicide rathes than China, although all EU states have outlawed the death penalty.

Perhaps nowhere is this more stark than in the US, where murder rates are highest in states who retain the death penalty.

There is not a shred of evidence that supports the idea that the death penalty deters violent crime. Low homicide rates are internationally associated with social democracy, and not countries who impose the Death Penalty.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades!

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

The only statistics I've been able to get a hold of on crime in early 20th century ireland indicates that it was a much more violent place, at least in urban centres. At the turn of the 20th century, Ireland had a higher murder rate than it has today. No statistics were collected in relation to domestic violence but can we even begin to imagine how bad it was? Alcoholism was practically an epidemic, and street brawls, or 'riots' seem incredibly common based on newspaper reports of the times. It may be an exaggeration to say that Dublin's Monto was the prostitution capital of Europe, but prostitution was certainly rampant there, and seems to have happened in plain sight.

There was recently an excellent radio documentary about what a dangerous places the Tenements were, which I can't find a working link for, but I did come across this article on 'Animal Gangs' in places like Dublin's North Inner City.

https://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/the-animals-who-prowled-1930s-dublin-26878497.html

I suspect a lot of elderly people look back on their own childhood experiences with rose-tinted glasses, either because they were genuinely sheltered from crime, or because it's human nature to dwell more heavily on the problems of the present than the past.

Either way, as a yardstick, if I were a youngfella walking the streets of the North Inner City back then, I don't think I'd feel particularly safe. I certainly wouldn't display in public that era's equivalent of an iPhone (a pocket book?). Whereas these days, for all the doom, when I lived in the city centre recently, I used to go jogging up around Summer hill or down Townsend Street, which supposedly are places of great mortal and moral danger today.

I used to sit by the Custom House or the Docks at night and smoke fags and think about the world and boards.ie and Joe Duffy and what's it all about. I wouldn't have been so blasé about my surroundings during the 1930s.

My father was born in 1922, his grandfather owned a large proportion of the tenements of the inner city. The grandfather’s mother started the business when her own husband, a shopkeeper, died aged 33 from severe alcoholism. She had to rely on her wits to feed the family and saw an opportunity in “vacant possession” and built up an empire of property. The family acquired lots of buildings and owned Ierne Ballroom and lots of stores etc. my Dad’s own father hated the business of collecting rents from poor people, and the business fell apart. My father, a gentle sort of man, used to be sent as a teenager to do a little of this rent collecting in the inner city and although he didn’t approve of it and turned towards doing work for V de P instead, he always told me it was not at all unsafe, not the way he said it had gone when I was pulled down onto the street at the Five Lamps crossing the road, after which I learned to carry anything I valued in a dirty looking bin bag as the latter was what was left in my hand (ironically I had transferred all my stuff of worth into it when going through the area!).

My mother’s father vouched to remain a lifelong teetotaller after seeing so many extremely drunken people attend Glasnevin Cemetery during funerals (not his abstemious family, but generally speaking) and he said the behaviour and conduct was appalling around Phibsboro where so many funeral goers would gather. Things improved in that respect during my mother’s growing up 1920 onwards.

El_Duderino 09

Sam Quentin wrote: »

Jaysizzzzzz I don't know,.just think he shuda got more than 3 years inside.
How many years do you think he should spend in prison?

I don’t know. I didn’t claim to know. If you’re claiming you know what’s appropriate - 7 years with 2 suspended- then it should be easy to say how you came to that conclusion.

It’s honest of you to say you don’t know, but then why would you suggest a sentence if you don’t know why you suggested it?

Odhinn

Hal3000 wrote: »

You could argue that countries such as China have a lower violent crime rate because of the severity of sentences - death penalty...

Unfortunately the Chinese have been known to take statistics they don't like and change them. The US has harsher sentencing, the death penalty in many places, yet still has a higher rate of crime.

El_Duderino 09

Hal3000 wrote: »

Maybe some day we can all join hands in this wonderful social uptopia of yours. They've had decades to figure this stuff out. They can't !!

Chortle chortle chortle. If you think what I’ve suggested in that post is what we’ve been doing for decades, then you either don’t understand what was in the post or you don’t have a clue about what we’ve been doing for the last few decades.

I’m not sure if you’re being serious or not.

Trouble about prison is that they meet their own type inside and reinforce their own criminality. Yes, punishment should never be light, but I think they should be both made work physically to redress their crime as well as possible, to get educated for future employment and fulfillment, and educated to develop pride and dignity, and respect the dignity of everybody else. I think this is kind of what they do in likes of Norway. Punishment needs to reinforce good behaviour, not bad, even if we feel they deserve the worst treatment.

begbysback

Hal3000 wrote: »

You could argue that countries such as China have a lower violent crime rate because of the severity of sentences - death penalty...

You could also argue that China prevents the flow of freedom of information, and does this for its own governmental benefits - therefore any statistical reports originating from the same source can be taken with a pinch of salt

Odhinn

Odhinn wrote: »

Unfortunately the Chinese have been known to take statistics they don't like and change them. The US has harsher sentencing, the death penalty in many places, yet still has a higher rate of crime.

The USA has in addition to our drugs, needles and knives, the freely available GUN, which can be used to inflict death and misery, with little thought and effort, from quite some distance from the victims.

I think too, that countries with the Gun in the mixture, have not only criminally minded people who resort to their use, but people with mental health issues and naturally fiery temperaments (like myself!) who could pick up, in s moment of pique, a freely available nearby gun and turn on self and/or others. I remember a neighbour (who was from rural Ireland) who was a good friend of my father, used to keep the old family shotgun in case a violent burglar ever entered the house. My Dad convinced him to get rid of it as he suffered from occasional depression and was most likely to turn it on himself as well as risking ending up in jail in the event of using it during such a break-in, which never happened. The only burglar at that time on our road ended up unconscious with a chair over his head, thrown down by a little old lady from the upstairs landing.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The USA has in addition to our drugs, needles and knives, the freely available GUN, which can be used to inflict death and misery, with little thought and effort, from quite some distance from the victims.

Actually, I often think about how easy it is to own a gun in ireland. My siblings and I got our certs (allowing us to go shoot vermin, usually rats or crows) when we were about 14 or 15 and then could own a gun from the age of 16. I'm pretty sure that hasn't changed.

The process sounds more arduous than it actually was. It was easier to get a full gun licence than it was to apply to fill out the UCAS form (college applications) at the same time, although maybe that's because we lived on a farm.

The only big difference here is that there's a great carefulness about guns ingrained in people. You'd never go into your own yard without breaking your gun. Well you might, but someone would give you a bollocking.

Anyway, that's a bit of a tangent, but our lack of gun violence seems more cultural than anything else. I once read an article saying we have the strictest gun laws in Europe -- that doesn't bode well for Europe, if so.

(PS I no longer have a gun and I'm sorry for shooting vermin, don't come at me!)

Galwayguy35

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I think most of us are. But...


... Every adult knows that monsters don't exist.

An alarmingly high number of addicts are themselves victims of physical or sexual abuse. For some reason, when we hear of a violent attack, we'd have nothing but sympathy to hear that the victim became a nervous wreck who couldn't leave the house, and maybe developed an addiction.

But in the same breath, we lack sympathy for an addict who probably also was a victim of some kind of physical or sexual violence, and probably had a miserable childhood. This is somewhat natural, but it's cognitive dissonance.

There are some violent criminals who can be fairly described as bad people, out and out, with no logical explanation for their addictions. But those people are needles in one big dysfunctional haystack.

And a lot of people who suffer abuse go on to be decent productive members of society.

Having a bad childhood is no excuse for hurting innocent people just going about their daily lives.

You might be singing from a different hymn sheet if some addict stuck a dirty needle in your neck if you didn't give him your phone and money.

Galwayguy35

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

And a lot of people who suffer abuse go on to be decent productive members of society.

Having a bad childhood is no excuse for hurting innocent people just going about their daily lives.

You might be singing from a different hymn sheet if some addict stuck a dirty needle in your neck if you didn't give him your phone and money.

I'd sooner hand him my phone and my wallet than any kind of reasoning skills. The evidence is crystal clear that high social-supports are associated with the safest countries in the world.

There's nothing to gain from mounting a high horse and declaring what human beings 'should' be like. We have to look at crime at a population level across various countries and ask "What works?" and "What doesn't work?"

Pursuing retribution, poverty, and a lack of social support is a policy that absolutely will result in a lot more victims getting hurt.

the_syco

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

No, monsters don't exist.

I don't know why some think it's helpful to dehumanise violent criminals. Maybe it's a primitive hangover that operates to stigmatise an individual. But we have the legal process to make outsiders of them now.

I'm guessing it's easier to think that the monster is not a normal human being. It's also easier to throw a "monster" into the oven.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I'd sooner hand him my phone and my wallet than any kind of reasoning skills.

Likewise. I'd get them back easily enough afterwards when I bounce something heavy off their head.

pinkyeye

Does anyone here actually think that if Peter McVerry wasn't around that all the addicts would disappear?

Way I look at it is if he gets 5% of his clientele clean then he's doing good.

I heard a radio interview the other day which stated that the heroin addict population now are much older than in the 80's which is surely a good thing as it suggests that something is working?

Oxter

Perhaps its time to use the same policy as in the Phillippines - the police shoot addicts anf dealers on sight. So far 5,000 killed.

This has promoted a lot of addicts there to detox.

Odhinn

Oxter wrote: »

Perhaps its time to use the same policy as in the Phillippines - the police shoot addicts anf dealers on sight. So far 5,000 killed.

This has promoted a lot of addicts there to detox.

Designating any section of society "fair game" and bereft of the same rights as the rest of us is what resulted in the horrors of the industrial schools and mothers homes in this state, and occassionally genocide in others.

Oxter

Odhinn wrote: »

Designating any section of society "fair game" and bereft of the same rights as the rest of us is what resulted in the horrors of the industrial schools and mothers homes in this state, and occassionally genocide in others.

Victims of crime have rights too.

Anerican systen of 3 convictions and life?
That would stop the repeat offenders.

pinkyeye

pinkyeye wrote: »

Does anyone here actually think that if Peter McVerry wasn't around that all the addicts would disappear?

Way I look at it is if he gets 5% of his clientele clean then he's doing good.

I heard a radio interview the other day which stated that the heroin addict population now are much older than in the 80's which is surely a good thing as it suggests that something is working?

I have heard from a friend working in Dublin 10 area that there are currently generations of drug addicts and n’er do wells who have brought up a current batch of children to be truly antisocial even violent and physically injurious towards adults going about their daily work. Somebody I know lives there too, settled during a long spell of general decency in the area, but it’s not nice for her either as she couldn’t really afford to buy elsewhere. Local teachers can’t really attempt to teach anything as there is zero parental support with very isolated exceptions.

I used to work in Dublin 8/12, where there was a great cross section of classes, religions and races. You had children from “the flats”, and likes of Brian Dobson & family, all living in very close proximity, with the children and parents mixing on many levels, and some very decent schools, with the result that I saw many of the most disadvantaged succeed very well. There is a great cohort of ambitious people, parents eager for their children to achieve, parents taking further education themselves in the many outlets nearby, and a good strong body of”Old Dubliners” in the mix, including the Protestant working class who might have worked in Guinness”. One of the overall Young Scientist winners is in the area.

Odhinn

Oxter wrote: »

Victims of crime have rights too.

Anerican systen of 3 convictions and life?
That would stop the repeat offenders.

It doesn't though. Neither does the death sentence. Humanity is a perverse beast best not analysed through strict logic alone.

Oxter

“The defence also presented a letter from Fr Peter McVerry saying that Reilly was stable and doing well in his drug rehabilitation”



Peter Mcverry in my eyes is a hypocrite who loves the limelight.

Giving a letter in court to support a scumbag who held up a women with a syringe

Can’t stand the man and his self righteous attitude.[/quote

The letter stated facts about the man being in rehab. What is self rightious about that?

McVerry has helped a lot of homeless.
Have you?

Wheeliebin30

Oxter wrote: »

“The defence also presented a letter from Fr Peter McVerry saying that Reilly was stable and doing well in his drug rehabilitation”



Peter Mcverry in my eyes is a hypocrite who loves the limelight.

Giving a letter in court to support a scumbag who held up a women with a syringe

Can’t stand the man and his self righteous attitude.[/quote

The letter stated facts about the man being in rehab. What is self rightious about that?

McVerry has helped a lot of homeless.
Have you?

Yes.

I pay 21k a year in tax which some goes to homeless charities including Mcverrys.

Next question?