Is Ireland's justice system lenient?

hezarkani

Or is it the norm for other European nations/countries around the world? I've lived in Africa (South Africa), North America (US, Canada) and Europe (Ireland, UK). I must say that Ireland's system is pretty progressive.

Sure it has its faults but it's far better than the U.S system or South African system. Living in Johannesburg like any developing city, it's a totally different way of life. You don't just worry about some teenage scumbags robbing you. It's constant paranoia that doesn't leave you. I was advised by an expat never to wear jewellery/have electronics while walking, don't walk at night, don't leave valuables in your car when walking away and always have a guard dog to protect you at night from burglaries. This is on a different level to what most people in this country experience.

SA has a harsh justice system but crime is still as high as ever. Living in the U.S. was much safer and you definitely don't get teens mugging you, but they've implemented 'housing segregation' that's created ghettos which are far unsafer than Ballymun, Tallaght. Even with their high incaceration rates, crime in impoverished areas continues to remain high.

I think we should implement a model like the Scandinavians. They have prisons and a justice system which could be described as a 'cakewalk' but from my Irish friends who have lived in Norway, it's far safer than here.

Start a poll OP.

Im neutral tbh.

Scuid Mhór

hezarkani wrote: »

Or is it the norm for other European nations/countries around the world? I've lived in Africa (South Africa), North America (US, Canada) and Europe (Ireland, UK). I must say that Ireland's system is pretty progressive.

Sure it has its faults but it's far better than the U.S system or South African system. Living in Johannesburg like any developing city, it's a totally different way of life. You don't just worry about some teenage scumbags robbing you. It's constant paranoia that doesn't leave you. I was advised by an expat never to wear jewellery/have electronics while walking, don't walk at night, don't leave valuables in your car when walking away and always have a guard dog to protect you at night from burglaries. This is on a different level to what most people in this country experience.

SA has a harsh justice system but crime is still as high as ever. Living in the U.S. was much safer and you definitely don't get teens mugging you, but they've implemented 'housing segregation' that's created ghettos which are far unsafer than Ballymun, Tallaght. Even with their high incaceration rates, crime in impoverished areas continues to remain high.

I think we should implement a model like the Scandinavians. They have prisons and a justice system which could be described as a 'cakewalk' but from my Irish friends who have lived in Norway, it's far safer than here.

Yes, far too lenient with the result that it’s damaging communities, keeping money flowing in a circular way within the legal profession, and offering no rehabilitation to repeat offenders who are allowed to terrorise law abiding citizens or worse without real repercussion.

Lmkrnr

Is it cheaper to have people out then in. I can't get my head around the light sentencing.

A case in the USA i came across where the culprit's were only giving a few years for killing an Uber eats driver. Two young black girl's who after killing him were only worried about leaving her phone in the car. Watch the video its around the net.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9437615/Two-teenage-girls-accused-car-jacking-killing-Uber-Eats-driver-reach-plea-deal.html

That's very soft sentencing.

Ireland's justice system in and off itself is not too lenient. It's the lack of support services around it that's the issue.

con747

Just say you were from a broken home have a drink problem and ended up on drugs. Always works in Ireland. :rolleyes:

Lmkrnr

con747 wrote: »

Just say you were from a broken home have a drink problem and ended up on drugs. Always works in Ireland. :rolleyes:

Its doesn't matter what u say aslong as u tick a box. You have a headline sentence that will always be chipped away at by the culprit's. If you look at sentences and appeals you will see how it works from historical cases. Being remorseful even if thought most don't mean it means another %off. First offence %off ect.

One prominent Irish judge is very lenient when it comes to a specific crime...

mcmoustache

Deleted User wrote: »

One prominent Irish judge is very lenient when it comes to a specific crime...

I'd say most of us know exactly who you're on about.

mcmoustache

mcmoustache wrote: »

I'd say most of us know exactly who you're on about.

And of course there's nothing suspicious at all about his or her behaviour.

Martin Nolan lol. Why the eggshells. Every ****e sentence he dishes out is there for all the public to see.

Pauliedragon

I think if you speak to people in most Western countries there's a lot of people who think they have a soft justice system.

Atlantic Dawn

If you are an upstanding citizen who has a job and never been in trouble with the law before and have no violin story in your background the justice system in this country is usually not very leniant when compared to a case of someone with 50 previous convictions.

Leinster90

Anyone can make a mistake and those with say between 1 and 5 convictions should be forgiven and helped to get back on the right track.

However, those with 50+ convictions are obviously no-hopers and the objective should be to get them off the streets until they are too old and weak to be a threat to society. There should be a multiplier effect for previous convictions when it comes to sentencing.

That being said, we would need more prisons and a two-tier prison system. One section for those who want to turn themselves around and are most deserving of resources, and another for the no-hopers where they would get the bare minimum until they are so feeble that they are released.

These policies would have a dramatically positive effect on society, making it safer and better for the overwhelming majority of residents.

jmayo

There are needless horrific deaths thanks to our very lenient justice system.

Some of the most famous ones are visitors to our shores Manuela Riedo and Bettina Poeschel, but there are also natives like Nancy Nolan and Sylvia Roche Kelly.

These deaths could all have been prevented if the murdering scum had been in jail for the crimes they had already committed and if there wasn't a fooking joke of bail laws in this country.

And in two of these cases the judges that allowed them free should be struck off for gross negligence.

Atlantic Dawn

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

If you are an upstanding citizen who has a job and never been in trouble with the law before and have no violin story in your background the justice system in this country is usually not very leniant when compared to a case of someone with 50 previous convictions.

The chance cards in the Irish version of Monopoly:

"You miscalculated the tax on your garlic imports, do not pass Go, go directly to jail"
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-17320460


"You accidentally stabbed stabbed someone, ah sure you didn't mean it, have a suspended sentence on us".

https://www.independent.ie/regionals/fingalindependent/news/suspended-sentence-for-skerries-man-after-stabbing-27769617.html

Leinster90

Leinster90 wrote: »

Anyone can make a mistake and those with say between 1 and 5 convictions should be forgiven and helped to get back on the right track.

However, those with 50+ convictions are obviously no-hopers and the objective should be to get them off the streets until they are too old and weak to be a threat to society. There should be a multiplier effect for previous convictions when it comes to sentencing.

That being said, we would need more prisons and a two-tier prison system. One section for those who want to turn themselves around and are most deserving of resources, and another for the no-hopers where they would get the bare minimum until they are so feeble that they are released.

These policies would have a dramatically positive effect on society, making it safer and better for the overwhelming majority of residents.

A friend and I were getting a taxi to McCarran airport in Las Vegas. Our driver was a lady and we were chatting to her. She mentioned her son had just been sent to jail for a 5 year stretch. We were curious and asked what he'd done. He was caught with some weed when he was 16. When he was 18 he stole a car, and most recently he stole a DVD from a shop and was caught. Nevada operates the three strike rule, so the third conviction meant a minimum sentence of 5 years.

We were discussing it in the bar waiting for the flight and agreed it sounds very harsh but also agreed, how f&%king stupid do you have to be to steal a DVD when you already have 2 convictions, and a 3rd means jail.

Meanwhile in Ireland, we have lads wondering around with 50+ convictions and havn't spent a day in prison.

There is surely a happy medium. If 3 convictions is too low, can we agree that after 10 convictions they should see 2 years in prison?

.42.

Ireland's justice system is not lenient, Its inconsistent.

X breaks the law and gets a suspended sentence
Y breaks the same law and goes to Prison

GhostyMcGhost

Davion Little Poltergeist wrote: »

Martin Nolan lol. Why the eggshells. Every ****e sentence he dishes out is there for all the public to see.

His one exception, Garlic Man

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

There is surely a happy medium. If 3 convictions is too low, can we agree that after 10 convictions they should see 2 years in prison?

^^^^^^^^ this.

baldshin

Let's not forget that many judges, on occasion, let people buy their way not only out of imprisonment, but even convictions by means of charitable donations. Absolutely ridiculous and in no way is justice applied in these scenarios.

Cilldara_2000

Deleted User wrote: »

The chance cards in the Irish version of Monopoly:

"You miscalculated the tax on your garlic imports, do not pass Go, go directly to jail"
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-17320460


"You accidentally stabbed stabbed someone, ah sure you didn't mean it, have a suspended sentence on us".

https://www.independent.ie/regionals/fingalindependent/news/suspended-sentence-for-skerries-man-after-stabbing-27769617.html

First quote. The article does not give off the vibe that this was a miscalculation. It was fraud plain and simple. I'm glad he was put away for it in a country which is notoriously soft on white collar crime.

The second article, reading it down, it's not necessarily that bad. Seems like two friends having a row that went too far.

Like most other people, I don't like reports of scumbags with multiple convictions terrorising people in viscous assaults and burglaries etc. Up in court and getting off with more light sentences. At some point these people have to put away for society's safety. I'm all for rehabilitation, education and so on but it can't be at the expense of the safety of ordinary law abiding people.

Leinster90 wrote: »

Anyone can make a mistake and those with say between 1 and 5 convictions should be forgiven and helped to get back on the right track.

However, those with 50+ convictions are obviously no-hopers and the objective should be to get them off the streets until they are too old and weak to be a threat to society. There should be a multiplier effect for previous convictions when it comes to sentencing.

That being said, we would need more prisons and a two-tier prison system. One section for those who want to turn themselves around and are most deserving of resources, and another for the no-hopers where they would get the bare minimum until they are so feeble that they are released.

These policies would have a dramatically positive effect on society, making it safer and better for the overwhelming majority of residents.

Agreed on the multiplier concept. It doesn't completely tie judges hands like, say, three strikes in US, but would still force them to up the ante on scumbags.

Obviously though such approaches require more prisons. How does everyone feel about paying for these?

kapisko1PL

hezarkani wrote: »

Or is it the norm for other European nations/countries around the world? I've lived in Africa (South Africa), North America (US, Canada) and Europe (Ireland, UK). I must say that Ireland's system is pretty progressive.

Sure it has its faults but it's far better than the U.S system or South African system. Living in Johannesburg like any developing city, it's a totally different way of life. You don't just worry about some teenage scumbags robbing you. It's constant paranoia that doesn't leave you. I was advised by an expat never to wear jewellery/have electronics while walking, don't walk at night, don't leave valuables in your car when walking away and always have a guard dog to protect you at night from burglaries. This is on a different level to what most people in this country experience.

SA has a harsh justice system but crime is still as high as ever. Living in the U.S. was much safer and you definitely don't get teens mugging you, but they've implemented 'housing segregation' that's created ghettos which are far unsafer than Ballymun, Tallaght. Even with their high incaceration rates, crime in impoverished areas continues to remain high.

I think we should implement a model like the Scandinavians. They have prisons and a justice system which could be described as a 'cakewalk' but from my Irish friends who have lived in Norway, it's far safer than here.

Maybe not so much for the adults but for the general feral teen population I certainly believe it is!

baldshin

Cilldara_2000 wrote: »

Obviously though such approaches require more prisons. How does everyone feel about paying for these?

The cost of prison expansions would likely be offset by the dramatic drop in costs of free legal aid from the inevitable follow up crimes committed if not imprisoned.

Cilldara_2000

baldshin wrote: »

The cost of prison expansions would likely be offset by the dramatic drop in costs of free legal aid from the inevitable follow up crimes committed if not imprisoned.

I think you're vastly overestimating what's spent on legal aid: https://www.thejournal.ie/legal-aid-spend-ireland-3296584-Mar2017/

baldshin

Cilldara_2000 wrote: »

I think you're vastly overestimating what's spent on legal aid: https://www.thejournal.ie/legal-aid-spend-ireland-3296584-Mar2017/

Fair enough. I'll revise that to somewhat offset! Increased prison spaces would also free up a huge amount of Garda hours wasted on repeat offenders, enabling a much better policing service to communities, as an aside.

gary550

GhostyMcGhost wrote: »

His one exception, Garlic Man

Yeah he took exception to garlic man, even going so far as to say "it gives me no pleasure to jail a decent man" while handing down an astronomical sentence :pac:

Meanwhile you have the most heinous deplorable people in front of him and he gives them suspended sentences for sickening crimes.

I think the problem with the Irish system is the lack of standardised sentences irregardless of aggravating circumstances. That would stop the "hard upbringing" or "tough situation", "moment of madness" or "drug and alcohol problems" excuses being used to justify a more lenient sentence.

I'd also propose anyone with child abuse images be sentenced to 13+ years minimum - no negotiation or suspending in part either.

Actual child abusers to 25+ years with no leeway for suspending part.

Same for rape or sexual assault too 25+ years with no leeway for anything other than a full and whole custodial sentence.

If when released they commit the same crime again and are convicted - whole life order with no hope of ever being released.

yoke

baldshin wrote: »

The cost of prison expansions would likely be offset by the dramatic drop in costs of free legal aid from the inevitable follow up crimes committed if not imprisoned.

Spaces in prisons could be freed up if we allowed people to volunteer for hard labour for a reduction in time served, which would in turn allow for tougher sentencing overall.

Lowering social welfare payments for repeat offenders might be another option.

Yet another one might be to impose large fines instead, and if they cannot pay, then arrange for it to be taken out of their estate/paycheck/social welfare bill/location of council house if they are housed by the council and have no estate.

Varik

Deleted User wrote: »

A friend and I were getting a taxi to McCarran airport in Las Vegas. Our driver was a lady and we were chatting to her. She mentioned her son had just been sent to jail for a 5 year stretch. We were curious and asked what he'd done. He was caught with some weed when he was 16. When he was 18 he stole a car, and most recently he stole a DVD from a shop and was caught. Nevada operates the three strike rule, so the third conviction meant a minimum sentence of 5 years.

We were discussing it in the bar waiting for the flight and agreed it sounds very harsh but also agreed, how f&%king stupid do you have to be to steal a DVD when you already have 2 convictions, and a 3rd means jail.

Meanwhile in Ireland, we have lads wondering around with 50+ convictions and havn't spent a day in prison.

There is surely a happy medium. If 3 convictions is too low, can we agree that after 10 convictions they should see 2 years in prison?

Shoplifting isn't generally a felony, and a quick google say it needs to be over $650 previously and $1200 today to become one. Unless by DVD she meant cow, or gun in which case it's always a felony. The minimum is 5 years to max 20, but it's discretionally and doesn't have to be applied at all.


3 would be fine it we had it limited to the equivalent of 3 violent felonies as it is in most states.

Would add a 2 strike for one particular situations, if someone is banned for driving and then drives **** them.

yoke

yoke wrote: »

Spaces in prisons could be freed up if we allowed people to volunteer for hard labour for a reduction in time served, which would in turn allow for tougher sentencing overall.

Lowering social welfare payments for repeat offenders might be another option.

Yet another one might be to impose large fines instead, and if they cannot pay, then arrange for it to be taken out of their estate/paycheck/social welfare bill/location of council house if they are housed by the council and have no estate.

Jail should really be for removing someone who is a threat to society from the streets. For non-violent offences, community service would be a good option.

Garlic man should have been banned from running a business and given 6 months community service. Not 6 years in jail. Meanwhile Whacker got a suspended sentence for his vicious assault because theres no prison room.

Varik

Varik wrote: »

Shoplifting isn't generally a felony, and a quick google say it needs to be over $650 previously and $1200 today to become one. Unless by DVD she meant cow, or gun in which case it's always a felony. The minimum is 5 years to max 20, but it's discretionally and doesn't have to be applied at all.


3 would be fine it we had it limited to the equivalent of 3 violent felonies as it is in most states.

Would add a 2 strike for one particular situations, if someone is banned for driving and then drives **** them.

First off, I'm just relaying the story the lady told me.

From: https://www.shouselaw.com/

Nevada law defines shoplifting as intentionally stealing items from a retail establishment. The crime is formally referred to as larceny. The degree of larceny depends on the value of the stolen merchandise. Taking less than $1,200 worth of items is misdemeanor petty larceny. Taking $1,200 or more is prosecuted as the more serious crime of felony grand larceny.

Penalties

Petty larceny is a misdemeanor in Nevada. It carries a maximum of six months in jail and $1,000 in fines plus restitution. However, judges rarely impose jail for a first-time offense.

This was his third offense, so maybe the judge figured it appropriate to jail him.

Harsh, yes. But compare it to here with stuff like: https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/more-than-50-convictions-in-just-six-years-26500265.html

starkid

as another poster said its more that its inconsistent. But i think when we have people walking around with convictions numbering in the hundreds its also fair to say its lenient.

There's a whole host of issues around it. Take the idea of jails and that type of punishment not being a solution, for instance. People bang on about Norway and how perfect and progressive places like that are etc. Norway has a whole host of tough measures around release, legal fees, tagging, coummunity punishment and monitoring.So its not as black and white saying jails are not the answer. The reality is without their harsh system, the US would be far far worse, at least until they fix their social issues. Here in Ireland theres a tonne of issues around thinking that every person is fixable and deserves all their rights, even when they've basically forfeited them. One easy one to spot in the city centre is a major lack of visible proactive policing. If you don't want prisons or a proper police force, well then you're going to have to get something else.

A lack of any kind of electronic tagging. A lack of cctv. A lack of community policing. A lack of fines. Easy access to all sorts of free legal aid Ad infinitum. A huge social issue and inequality bang in the middle of the city centre compared to other capital cities. A very vocal fragmented left wing opposition in bedded in the very same communities. When was the last time you heard Mary Lou really speak out on some of these issues (seeing she's the td for the NIC)? she won't cause its her core base.

Its not just one thing. Its a whole host of problems. Within ten years i reckon we'll be paying a heavy price as much of Irish society gets even wealthier (relative to the dark days of say pre 1992) and ordered, and a select few get completely marginalized and disenfranchised. Many different parts of the capital will be no go zones for the average punter. In saying that it will be a long cycle for the gangs on their bikes to get to certain areas.

gary550

gary550 wrote: »

I'd also propose anyone with child abuse images be sentenced to 13+ years minimum - no negotiation or suspending in part either.

So someone inadvertently downloads child abuse images and they're off to the Joy for 13 years? That doesn't seem very just.

Your other proposals are equally flawed.

jmayo

yoke wrote: »

Spaces in prisons could be freed up if we allowed people to volunteer for hard labour for a reduction in time served, which would in turn allow for tougher sentencing overall.

Lowering social welfare payments for repeat offenders might be another option.

Yet another one might be to impose large fines instead, and if they cannot pay, then arrange for it to be taken out of their estate/paycheck/social welfare bill/location of council house if they are housed by the council and have no estate.

Fines are a joke.
A lot of the time the ones meant to pay it are on social welfare and then offer to pay a few quid a week and the judge agrees to this.

The real crazy thing here is our population has dramatically increased.
Thus our school numbers have increased, our college places have increased, our hospital numbers have increased.
Granted the Irish way is to only increase them when facing no place to put people.

Everything bar jails have eventually tried to keep pace with population growth.
Our level of violent crime has increased dramatically and any of the do gooders that drags out some stat saying otherwise is twisting the truth.
Anyone old enough to remember the 1980s could atest to how long the likes of the Malcolm MacArthur case was top of the headlines.
Granted there were the political connections to the case, but it was still shocking for the entire country.
And yes we were used to republicans killing and to Northern Ireland daily atrocities.

Nowadays a violent murder, hell multiple murder is almost taken for granted unless it is particularly heinous like the Hawe case in Cavan.

And I would reckon someone can cherry pick how the murder rate has not dramatically increased over the years, because they chose to only go back as far as mid 2000s where it was very high and how it has gone down since.
But if go back further you will see it has increased.

The other thing that I bet can skew the figures is the number of cases which has only resulted in a manslaughter conviction, which is often a complete joke of a finding.

It often looks like you would have needed to have taken out an ad in the local paper stating your intentions before a verdict of murder is brought in.

yoke

I think you mean that “the current way that fines are done is a joke”, and giving the example of the couple of quid a week being taken out of a social welfare payment.

What would you say to a €100,000 fine for mugging someone, to be paid off by hard labour, ie. building a road to the value of €100,000 over the period of say 1 year?
Or alternatively, to raising the €100,000 by kicking you out of your south Dublin council house and relocating you to Mayo, thus generating €100,000 which the state can use for other things?
Or, if you own your own house, then attaching the €100,000 bill to your estate, and forcing a sale?

Based on a person I talked to who was in prison before for a short time, they weren’t deterred by prison at all, said it was like a school reunion where they met all their old mates from childhood. Anything’s got to be better than that, as a deterrent.

jmayo

yoke wrote: »

I think you mean that “the current way that fines are done is a joke”, and giving the example of the couple of quid a week being taken out of a social welfare payment.

What would you say to a €100,000 fine for mugging someone, to be paid off by hard labour, ie. building a road to the value of €100,000 over the period of say 1 year?
Or alternatively, to raising the €100,000 by kicking you out of your south Dublin council house and relocating you to Mayo, thus generating €100,000 which the state can use for other things?
Or, if you own your own house, then attaching the €100,000 bill to your estate, and forcing a sale?

Hey you can keep your Dublin skangers where they are and stop trying to foist the problems off on someone else.

You remind me of those who are really in favour of asylum seekers and travellers because they will never have to deal with the after effects.

I have no problem with hefty fines if they are paid.
What is the use of fining someone 5,000 nevermind 100,000 when they will only be repaid in €10 weekly installments.

And yes hard labour and real community service I wholeheartedly agree with.

yoke

jmayo wrote: »

You remind me of those who are really in favour of asylum seekers and travellers because they will never have to deal with the after effects.

Asylum seekers and Travelers are not criminals, and should not be treated as criminals.

Ive been friends with an asylum seeker before and have directly witnessed how they added value to this society, so I’ve dealt with the “after effects” of asylum seekers.

I’ve also dealt with travelers, and while I’ve had a couple of negative experiences, I’ve had far more positive experiences with them too, if we’re keeping stats. I wouldn’t hesitate to deal with someone just because they were a traveler.

How many asylum seekers have you known personally?

How many travelers have you done business with?

I’m not saying there aren’t any criminals among them, but there are plenty of criminals and chancers among the general population too. We should be focusing on criminals when dealing out punishment rather than tarring everyone with the same brush, it’s much more effective when you actually selectively punish those that have been “bad”..

.42.

They should simply remove the Grey area of the law and replace it with 0 tolerance

Law > Break Law > Penalty

Remove the if and buts and make it mandatory penalties.

Mike Murdock

.42. wrote: »

Ireland's justice system is not lenient, Its inconsistent.

X breaks the law and gets a suspended sentence
Y breaks the same law and goes to Prison

Judicial discretion.

It needs to be abolished.

Mike Murdock

jmayo wrote: »

There are needless horrific deaths thanks to our very lenient justice system.

Some of the most famous ones are visitors to our shores Manuela Riedo and Bettina Poeschel, but there are also natives like Nancy Nolan and Sylvia Roche Kelly.

These deaths could all have been prevented if the murdering scum had been in jail for the crimes they had already committed and if there wasn't a fooking joke of bail laws in this country.

And in two of these cases the judges that allowed them free should be struck off for gross negligence.

Worse still in the Manuela case, the mother****er that raped and killed her was out on bail for raping another foreign girl.

A sick joke.

gary550

Yakov P. Golyadkin wrote: »

So someone inadvertently downloads child abuse images and they're off to the Joy for 13 years? That doesn't seem very just.

Your other proposals are equally flawed.

There is a difference between inadvertent and deliberate. How many people do you see in front of the courts who were caught with 2 or 3 child abuse images on their phones or computers? - Very little is your answer there.

People are usually caught with thousands for which the punishment for is absolutely abysmal.

As for my other proposals they might be equally flawed in your opinion but I'd rather a rapist or murderer be locked up for vastly longer sentences than to get out and do it again.

Varik

baldshin wrote: »

Fair enough. I'll revise that to somewhat offset! Increased prison spaces would also free up a huge amount of Garda hours wasted on repeat offenders, enabling a much better policing service to communities, as an aside.

I think you were right the first time.
The free legal aid would only be the money associated with the defence and the Legal Aid Board's costs to provide that.

As said the guards, the DPP, and all the costs a trial actually involves with all the people required. Look at the total costs that get reported in the news for any big civil action.

The damage to our society averted, and portion of the population taking a different route and becoming something other than a drain on everyone else.

Geuze

In terms of leniency, I always think of Eamon Lynch.

480+ convictions


https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-foyle-west-38768312#:~:text=A%20drunk%20driver%20with%20483,in%20County%20Donegal%20in%202012.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/mother-says-donegal-driver-who-killed-son-fooled-court-1.2954214


I would love to know what would happen to somebody in FR, DE, IT, ES if they behaved like Eamon Lynch?

jmayo

yoke wrote: »

Asylum seekers and Travelers are not criminals, and should not be treated as criminals.

Ive been friends with an asylum seeker before and have directly witnessed how they added value to this society, so I’ve dealt with the “after effects” of asylum seekers.

I’ve also dealt with travelers, and while I’ve had a couple of negative experiences, I’ve had far more positive experiences with them too, if we’re keeping stats. I wouldn’t hesitate to deal with someone just because they were a traveler.

How many asylum seekers have you known personally?

How many travelers have you done business with?

I’m not saying there aren’t any criminals among them, but there are plenty of criminals and chancers among the general population too. We should be focusing on criminals when dealing out punishment rather than tarring everyone with the same brush, it’s much more effective when you actually selectively punish those that have been “bad”..

Ah bless.
I take it you haven't been watching much news lately then. :rolleyes:


I think we have found the undertstatement of the year here folks ...

How many travelers have you done business with?

I’m not saying there aren’t any criminals among them,

jmayo

Mike Murdock wrote: »

Worse still in the Manuela case, the mother****er that raped and killed her was out on bail for raping another foreign girl.

A sick joke.

Ehh you are wrong.
Sadly I know too much about that bast***.

He was brought in for assaulting and trying to strangle his girlfriend.
The Gardai asked to judge not to give him bail, because his girlfriend was afraid of him and he was the prime suspect in the rape of the French girl.

But he was and within two months had raped and killed Manuela Reido.

Oh and he was already convicted of leading a gang that kicked a poor guy to death in Eyre Square and had been in jail for manslaughter.

The biggest piece of scum to have walked the streets of Galway.

gmisk

Geuze wrote: »

In terms of leniency, I always think of Eamon Lynch.

480+ convictions


https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-foyle-west-38768312#:~:text=A%20drunk%20driver%20with%20483,in%20County%20Donegal%20in%202012.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/mother-says-donegal-driver-who-killed-son-fooled-court-1.2954214


I would love to know what would happen to somebody in FR, DE, IT, ES if they behaved like Eamon Lynch?

https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/serial-offender-eamonn-lynch-tried-9808361
.... Christ...

Honestly what can you do with someone like this? It would be worth the cost to just have them in jail for life

Hqrry113

yoke wrote: »

Asylum seekers and Travelers are not criminals, and should not be treated as criminals.

Ive been friends with an asylum seeker before and have directly witnessed how they added value to this society, so I’ve dealt with the “after effects” of asylum seekers.

I’ve also dealt with travelers, and while I’ve had a couple of negative experiences, I’ve had far more positive experiences with them too, if we’re keeping stats. I wouldn’t hesitate to deal with someone just because they were a traveler.

How many asylum seekers have you known personally?

How many travelers have you done business with?

I’m not saying there aren’t any criminals among them, but there are plenty of criminals and chancers among the general population too. We should be focusing on criminals when dealing out punishment rather than tarring everyone with the same brush, it’s much more effective when you actually selectively punish those that have been “bad”..

It's street wise NEVER to deal with travellers, there might be one or two decent ones no doubt.

Hqrry113

There are some cases where I think the system is too lenient but I think our justice system is on the right track, generally the people in prison belong there rather than people who are not bad people getting locked up or people on the verge of being bad people getting locked up for a short time and then that pushes them over the edge and turns them into bad people, that then starts a cycle of having far more scumbags out and about that were created by harsh sentencing rather than giving them a second chance.

juno10353

I believe that the youths who are behaving mob style, creating havoc on Dart line, in parks, etc, assaulting others, stealing bikes scooters, mobiles etc, should be charged and made do highly visible community service. They should be cleaning the parks, removing graffiti, helping tidy towns volunteers, etc. All in high viz jackets.

Cilldara_2000

juno10353 wrote: »

I believe that the youths who are behaving mob style, creating havoc on Dart line, in parks, etc, assaulting others, stealing bikes scooters, mobiles etc, should be charged and made do highly visible community service. They should be cleaning the parks, removing graffiti, helping tidy towns volunteers, etc. All in high viz jackets.

But their human rights would be violated!

Infini

[Deleted User] wrote: »

A friend and I were getting a taxi to McCarran airport in Las Vegas. Our driver was a lady and we were chatting to her. She mentioned her son had just been sent to jail for a 5 year stretch. We were curious and asked what he'd done. He was caught with some weed when he was 16. When he was 18 he stole a car, and most recently he stole a DVD from a shop and was caught. Nevada operates the three strike rule, so the third conviction meant a minimum sentence of 5 years.

We were discussing it in the bar waiting for the flight and agreed it sounds very harsh but also agreed, how f&%king stupid do you have to be to steal a DVD when you already have 2 convictions, and a 3rd means jail.

Meanwhile in Ireland, we have lads wondering around with 50+ convictions and havn't spent a day in prison.

There is surely a happy medium. If 3 convictions is too low, can we agree that after 10 convictions they should see 2 years in prison?

US system is the opposite of ours in a sense, ours comes down too light on some of them while the US is akin to a legalised slave system that throws people into jail for minor crimes when it would be alot easier to rehabilitate them.