Which political party would be toughest on crime?

Looking across the political spectrum I am wondering whether any of the mainstream parties have a particularly tough stance on crime? If they do, is there any direct evidence of this?

suicide_circus

Depends on the type of crime

Kermit.de.frog

Well, SF for example, want to abolish the special criminal court which is the only mechanism of ensuring jurors are not intimidated or worse by gangland thugs.

Plumbthedepths

suicide_circus wrote: »

Depends on the type of crime

Depends on who commits the crime, Travellers nothing to see move along. Students fine them , expel them etc. Politicians were frothing at the mouth to condemn students , whereas with the Travellers...... silence.

Eric Cartman

SF toughest on what the army council consider crime
PbP toughest on thought crime and hurt feelings
Everyone else just props up a really soft justice system, won't point out the elephants in the room and refuse to deal with the lack of prison spaces in Ireland and a judge who routinely lets paedophiles away with their crimes.

Timberrrrrrrr

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Well, SF for example, want to abolish the special criminal court which is the only mechanism of ensuring jurors are not intimidated or worse by gangland thugs.

Or terrorists.

Terry136

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Looking across the political spectrum I am wondering whether any of the mainstream parties have a particularly tough stance on crime? If they do, is there any direct evidence of this?

Well we all know Sinn Fein has been very tough on the crimes of the British in our country in the last 50 years.

Beechwoodspark

Whatever about the likes of FF,FG, SF, soc Dems Labour etc (lot of ppl would call them all very weak on crime)

Some of the smaller parties like Aontu, the National Party, Identity Ireland, Renua would claim to be “strong” on law and order issues.

Maybe worth a look if you are looking for a tough on crime type of political party to get behind

Floppybits

Deleted User wrote: »

Looking across the political spectrum I am wondering whether any of the mainstream parties have a particularly tough stance on crime? If they do, is there any direct evidence of this?

Depends on whether the person commiting the crime wears a suit or a tracksuit. Also after the comments of the person who will take over as Minister for Justice it seems to be ok to commit a crime as long as it is in the states interest.

Government buildings

None of them. That's why women aren't safe on the street, scumbags causing havoc everywhere. No hope for this country.

biko

I'm sure you can find some fringe party that claims to be tough on crime but none of the established parties seems to want to crack down on crime very much.

endacl

Depends what you define as crime. PBP etc would jail duh bankurrzz and tax income to the point where industry would grind to a halt. There’d be no tax base left to fund the public service, so that’d collapse too. We’d all be back to living in hedges, which would be cool because, well, property is theft, isn’t it?

They’d eliminate property and industry, and ‘crime’ would become moot, as we’d all be in survival mode. Their voter base would be pi55ed off though as no taxes and public service means they’d have to sort out their own bit of hedge themselves instead of having it provided free of charge.

They’d probably expect their bit of hedge to be clipped free of charge too...

Eric Cartman

biko wrote: »

I'm sure you can find some fringe party that claims to be tough on crime but none of the established parties seems to want to crack down on crime very much.

this is the problem , its really easy to be billy big balls on crime when you've no chance of being elected. , Tom Morrissey of the PD's was the last politician I could think of who had balls on crime while in office

Terry136

Government buildings wrote: »

None of them. That's why women aren't safe on the street, scumbags causing havoc everywhere. No hope for this country.

Women not safe on the streets? You've been watching too much sky news the last few days buddy

Terry136

Terry136 wrote: »

Women not safe on the streets? You've been watching too much sky news the last few days buddy

Wasn't a woman stabbed in the neck and died a few weeks back?

Us Irish have such short memories...

dan1895

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Whatever about the likes of FF,FG, SF, soc Dems Labour etc (lot of ppl would call them all very weak on crime)

Some of the smaller parties like Aontu, the National Party, Identity Ireland, Renua would claim to be “strong” on law and order issues.

Maybe worth a look if you are looking for a tough on crime type of political party to get behind

Surely the National Party are more interested in committing crime than preventing it.
Illegal gatherings, attacking people with timber wrapped in a flag, online bullying, harassment and racism etc etc

Witcher

Deleted User wrote: »

Wasn't a woman stabbed in the neck and died a few weeks back?

Us Irish have such short memories...

Yeah a young lad was stabbed to death too

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/man-35-expected-to-be-charged-in-connection-with-josh-dunne-killing-1.4471406?mode=amp

Are men 'not safe on the streets'?

Witcher

Witcher wrote: »

Yeah a young lad was stabbed to death too

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/man-35-expected-to-be-charged-in-connection-with-josh-dunne-killing-1.4471406?mode=amp

Are men 'not safe on the streets'?

Another kid in critical condition this morning. Perhaps not?

Beechwoodspark

dan1895 wrote: »

Surely the National Party are more interested in committing crime than preventing it.
Illegal gatherings, attacking people with timber wrapped in a flag, online bullying, harassment and racism etc etc

I said they and the other smaller parties I listed “claim” to be tough on crime. I’m not endorsing them.

Mad_maxx

as said already , depends on what kind of crime

i see most of the left wing parties getting busy when the new " hate crime " bill is passed

Yamanoto

Labour will be tough as hell on hate speech.

Priorities.

Government buildings

Terry136 wrote: »

Women not safe on the streets? You've been watching too much sky news the last few days buddy

No woman feels safe. This is the truth for years. It's not men that's the problem. It's the light sentencing.

Government buildings

I'm a man, able to take care of myself, and I am wary on the streets. How must a woman feel?

The government aren't looking after us. In general, no serious punishment.

Paulzx

All Irish political parties are tough on crime..............................until the first twitter post condemning the fascist police state that is Ireland where every minority known to man (can i say man?) is discriminated against and not mollycoddled enough.

Then the same politician can't fall over himself (or herself or itself or feck it i give up) quick enough to prove how right on and tolerant they are of everything from muggers to bank robbers and how all "crime" is actually societies fault and not the individual who commited it.

So no, our politicans are not tough on crime and this comes purely from the fer of being "called out" on media.

briany

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Whatever about the likes of FF,FG, SF, soc Dems Labour etc (lot of ppl would call them all very weak on crime)

Some of the smaller parties like Aontu, the National Party, Identity Ireland, Renua would claim to be “strong” on law and order issues.

Maybe worth a look if you are looking for a tough on crime type of political party to get behind

Think you'd be trading one problem for another if you let the likes of Justin Barrett slither into power.

boombang

I always feel FG fancy themselves as the part of law and order and as such have an appeal to me, however, I have a feeling that in reality they're soft on white collar crime and aren't particularly interested in reforming the legal system in any way that would harm lawyers.

briany

None of the main parties may be that hard on crime because they've looked at the big picture and decided that crime isn't enough of an issue to build a political platform around. It's been on Liveline before, and probably will be again,

"Joe, my house was broken into last night. They took the TV, the stereo, the jewellery and the dog. The gards have done nothing. What is this country coming to?"

and

"Joe, I was cycling along the canal when a bunch of barely adolescent boys jumped out, kicked lumps out of me and stole my bike and wallet. The gards are doing nothing about this. What is the country coming to?

And incidents such as these are hugely emotive, particularly because they are innocent people falling foul of ne'er-do-wells with seemingly little punishment for the offender, but the problem is that the incidents don't happen frequently enough to enough people to form any kind of electoral mandate, and the anger in those hearing those stories doesn't really seem to last or come to the fore of their mind when election time rolls around. We all seem to be much more worried about taxes and house prices.

ThunbergsAreGo

briany wrote: »

None of the main parties may be that hard on crime because they've looked at the big picture and decided that crime isn't enough of an issue to build a political platform around. It's been on Liveline before, and probably will be again,

"Joe, my house was broken into last night. They took the TV, the stereo, the jewellery and the dog. The gards have done nothing. What is this country coming to?"

and

"Joe, I was cycling along the canal when a bunch of barely adolescent boys jumped out, kicked lumps out of me and stole my bike and wallet. The gards are doing nothing about this. What is the country coming to?

And incidents such as these are hugely emotive, particularly because they are innocent people falling foul of ne'er-do-wells with seemingly little punishment for the offender, but the problem is that the incidents don't happen frequently enough to enough people to form any kind of electoral mandate, and the anger in those hearing those stories doesn't really seem to last or come to the fore of their mind when election time rolls around. We all seem to be much more worried about taxes and house prices.

When there seems to be weekly stories of someone with "hundreds of convictions" it does happen often enough, it just rarely makes local/national news.

Established parties are too busy making excuses for criminals for their to be any consequences.

Mad_maxx

Government buildings wrote: »

No woman feels safe. This is the truth for years. It's not men that's the problem. It's the light sentencing.

it has never been a safer time to be a woman in ireland than today

ignore the hysteria , even in North Korea , the state cant wipe out murder by one citizen against another.

jrosen

I don’t think any of them.

Mike Murdock

None.

bonzothedog

Sinn Fein, ni ceapaim.

boombang

Never understand why it's not more of an electoral issue. Big selling point for me.

Terry136

Mad_maxx wrote: »

it has never been a safer time to be a woman in ireland than today

ignore the hysteria , even in North Korea , the state cant wipe out murder by one citizen against another.

Some might say in the whole world but it's not good enough for the feminists.

One of the left-wing parties as they'd start to address the issues that lead to criminality.

What do posters mean exactly, when they want political parties to be 'tough on crime'?
What would they expect them to do?

blackvalley

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

When there seems to be weekly stories of someone with "hundreds of convictions" it does happen often enough, it just rarely makes local/national news.

Established parties are too busy making excuses for criminals for their to be any consequences.

NONE. is the answer to the original post.
" Hundreds of convictions " for an individual probably means multiples of hundreds of court appearances and all of the lovely " legal fees " that land at the snout of those currently gorging from that particular trough .
That means that mainstream political parties will never do anything to annoy their buddies in that profession.
On the other side those parties who see multiple offenders always as " Victims " have absolutely no interest in coming down hard on what is the cannon fodder of the legal system . :rolleyes:

Mules

Renua. They proposed bringing in a 3 strikes law for offenders.

HBC08

briany wrote: »

None of the main parties may be that hard on crime because they've looked at the big picture and decided that crime isn't enough of an issue to build a political platform around. It's been on Liveline before, and probably will be again,

"Joe, my house was broken into last night. They took the TV, the stereo, the jewellery and the dog. The gards have done nothing. What is this country coming to?"

and

"Joe, I was cycling along the canal when a bunch of barely adolescent boys jumped out, kicked lumps out of me and stole my bike and wallet. The gards are doing nothing about this. What is the country coming to?

And incidents such as these are hugely emotive, particularly because they are innocent people falling foul of ne'er-do-wells with seemingly little punishment for the offender, but the problem is that the incidents don't happen frequently enough to enough people to form any kind of electoral mandate, and the anger in those hearing those stories doesn't really seem to last or come to the fore of their mind when election time rolls around. We all seem to be much more worried about taxes and house prices.

I think you'll find traveller crime in rural areas particularly is becoming a very strong issue for a lot of voters in these areas.
We saw that clown Peter Casey go from 2% to 23% when he mentioned it.Imagine a capable and somewhat genuine politician/party grasping that nettle,they would get massive support.

Mules

Mules wrote: »

Renua. They proposed bringing in a 3 strikes law for offenders.

Reducing it from the current 73 strikes law.

Mules

Deleted User wrote: »

Reducing it from the current 73 strikes law.

Exactly

AndrewJRenko

Mules wrote: »

Renua. They proposed bringing in a 3 strikes law for offenders.

How's the 3 strikes law working out as a deterrent in other countries?

AndrewJRenko

HBC08 wrote: »

I think you'll find traveller crime in rural areas particularly is becoming a very strong issue for a lot of voters in these areas.
We saw that clown Peter Casey go from 2% to 23% when he mentioned it.Imagine a capable and somewhat genuine politician/party grasping that nettle,they would get massive support.

Didn't do him much good in the general election in Donegal

ThunbergsAreGo

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Reducing it from the current 73 strikes law.

Has it been reduced?

Mules

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

How's the 3 strikes law working out as a deterrent in other countries?

Badly. Deterrent doesn't seem to work for some people. I remember reading something about IRA punishment beatings of drug dealers. The dealers knew well what would happen to them if they were caught, but they still did it. Young fellas still went in to the drug business. I think it's because some people have a very low risk perception. At the same time you can't have the lads with 73 convictions out strolling around the place. A punishment in between kneecapping and 73 strikes perhaps

Thelonious Monk

boards.ie and the journal is an echo chamber of people (men) who bang on about political parties needing to be tough on crime and immigration and all of these things.
If they were such a vote winner why don't any parties put this out in their manifesto, a much harsher sentencing and prison system that I'm sure you'd all love? No one would vote for that sh*t or see it as progressive.
I think the Garda are pretty useless sometimes but generally Ireland is really safe, including Dublin city centre.

.anon.

Deleted User wrote: »

One of the left-wing parties as they'd start to address the issues that lead to criminality.

I don't want to see those issues being addressed. I want to see a party getting tough on crime because I get off on seeing scum (i.e. poor people whose accents don't sound like mine) being punished. The problem with addressing those issues is that it would result in fewer crimes, which would result in less of a need for punishment.

Black and white answers only, please.

briany

Mules wrote: »

Badly. Deterrent doesn't seem to work for some people. I remember reading something about IRA punishment beatings of drug dealers. The dealers knew well what would happen to them if they were caught, but they still did it. Young fellas still went in to the drug business. I think it's because some people have a very low risk perception

The risks have always been high when you you're a drug dealer. If not the law, then other drug gangs, or even groups such as the IRA, who became sort of drug dealers themselves in latter years. So, what makes a young man take up all that risk? There are incentives there, as well, such as lots of fast money and notoriety. In the same way as there are thousands and thousands and thousands of jobbing actors who want to get to Hollywood, there are thousands and thousands and thousands of young men who fancy rising through the ranks of the criminal underworld up the level of Daniel Kinahan, living the high life in Dubai. In either case, few make it all the way, but it doesn't seem to stop them from trying.

Thelonious Monk

People want to buy drugs, so we're always going to have drug dealers. The law doesn't matter. I mean they could always try a different approach to the war on drugs, which fails in every single country.

Mules

Mules wrote: »

Badly. Deterrent doesn't seem to work for some people. I remember reading something about IRA punishment beatings of drug dealers. The dealers knew well what would happen to them if they were caught, but they still did it. Young fellas still went in to the drug business. I think it's because some people have a very low risk perception. At the same time you can't have the lads with 73 convictions out strolling around the place. A punishment in between kneecapping and 73 strikes perhaps

The IRA only punished dealers that failed to cough up the money, any dealers who handed over money was allowed to continue their business.

So, what do posters want from a 'tough on crime' party?

Mules

bubblypop wrote: »

The IRA only punished dealers that failed to cough up the money, any dealers who handed over money was allowed to continue their business.

So, what do posters want from a 'tough on crime' party?

Later iterations yes but not the provisionals.