Finally some justice metted out

Sleepy

Y'know I was going to write a long response but then I saw this and realised there was little point in debating with someone who spends his time intentially misrepresnting what I'm saying.

Pot, you're black. Every argument you've put forth has been against a twisting of mine or someone else's words. You have yet to suggest a better alternative than anything I've suggested, choosing instead to try and pick holes in it because of some perception that unionisation guarantees a better run organisation. Guess what? We have a unionised prison service and it isn't working.

In excess of €60 million is being spent on overtime earnings for about 3,300 prison officers. That's an average over over 18 thousand euros a year in overtime. Given that the starting wage of a prison officer is just under €25k (when including their rental allowance) it's easy to see where we could afford another two thousand prison officers from (assuming a cost of hiring each guard at €30k per year). That's a 60% increase in numbers of staff.

Sources of figures:
http://www.careerdirections.ie/CDW3C/AccessDBAllCareerDetails.jsp?id=204#5
http://www.justice.ie/80256E01003A02CF/vWeb/pcJUSQ5XKNFT-en

What I will say is this sleepy, your ignorant anti union rants.

I'm assuming this non-sentence is some means of calling me ignorant?

We're a dirth of evidence that the kind of prison service delievered by a non unionised company, is a shoddy mess. It's called group four security in the UK.

Furthermore there are again that industries compelled to disband unions underperform and create a danger to their workers and the people they serve, in the british rail industry.

But sleepy here isn't going to let basic things like facts get in the way of his rants.

For example you've not proved that unions are compelling workers to work over 60 hrs (what you're going to work an xtra 20 hrs a week, for a tenner an hour and a chance to get shiv'd) You've not bothered to check to see if there isn't a shortage of qualifed workers that necessities guards to work the xtra hours. Once again not bothering to let facts get in the way of a posionous little rant.

You haven't shown how you get qualified candiates to provide a better service.

Can you see any 'positions available' notices regarding the prison service on our public jobs website? (https://www.publicjobs.ie/cand/joblisting_eng.asp show's all jobs currently available) No, neither can I. So can we really say that the overtime only exists because no-one else wants the job when we're not even giving people the opportunity to apply for the jobs? Can we hell.

It's really a joke and I've got better things to do with my time, to argue with someone who's made up their mind, and will just repeat themselves over and over again, without bothering to present anything to back up his assertions.

*deep sigh* I've offered logic, common sense, linkage and constructive suggestions as to how we could improve the current system. Hell, I've even conceeded a few points to MorningStar where his argument swayed my opinion.

You've defended unions without any substantial proof as to why they're necessary in a country with strong worker's protection legislation, objected to any changes anyone has suggested for the current system whilst decrying that same system yourself. offered an example of how one individual was reformed and refused any view on that example other than your own.

And you see me as the one entrenched in my opinion?

MorningStar

iguana wrote:

The society has a duty to care for it's weakest members - it's victims.

What you fail to understand is there was more than one victim of circumstance. A victim of crime does not make you the weakest memember of society. A rich man beaten up by a person who has not eaten in a week for food doesn't make the victim the weakest memember of society.

Unfortunately life is not black and white and you don't just get to help the people you think have the right attitude.

iguana

MorningStar wrote:

A rich man beaten up by a person who has not eaten in a week for food doesn't make the victim the weakest memember of society.

Are we talking about a rich man being beaten up by a hungry person or a woman who was visciously gang raped? In an attack lasting 45 minutes, including an attempt at anal rape, forced oral sex and threats that they would kill her partner. I was under the impression that it was the latter. Those two occurences are world's apart.

You are right the life is not black and white, so why are you trying to fit two completely different crimes into the same box?

And not to be facetious, but a man who can be beaten up by someone who hasn't eaten for a week has to be pretty weak in anyone's book.

(ok, that was facetious but your above comment deserved it!)

MorningStar

iguana wrote:

Those two occurences are world's apart.

You are right the life is not black and white, so why are you trying to fit two completely different crimes into the same box?

And not to be facetious, but a man who can be beaten up by someone who hasn't eaten for a week has to be pretty weak in anyone's book.

(ok, that was facetious but your above comment deserved it!)

In your opinion they are worlds apart but IMHO they can be a caused by same inequality in society. You leave sombody in a brutilised part of society and they will become brutal. To cover all examples of what a brutal life can cause and that a unfeed man can kill people look at the stories from the likes of concentration camps. There are lots of stories of gaurds been killed by single sickly inmates towards the end of the war. You can be facetious all you like but you need to have your facts and knowledge up to speed for that.

I feel the same outrage about the crime and victims but I also see that locking these people away for life will benifit nobody and cost more money than other alternatives.

ixoy

MorningStar wrote:

In your opinion they are worlds apart but IMHO they can be a caused by same inequality in society. You leave sombody in a brutilised part of society and they will become brutal.

Define "brutilised part of society". Is it an area with a particular income level threshold? Is there any evidence that these rapists were part of it? Is it psychological because poor parenting, etc., is not dictated by salary.

I feel the same outrage about the crime and victims but I also see that locking these people away for life will benifit nobody and cost more money than other alternatives.

I'm still wondering what these elusive alternatives are? You rejected my proposal of a form of "boot camps" - places which provide the rigorous discipline these youngesters lack and educate them about their crimes and with sufficient skills to help look after themselves post-detainment.

I've a feeling that you want to attack the cause, right? To try and ammend these social grievances that you perceive force people to act out? Any idea how you'd go about this? How you'd ammend social welfare to deal with these situations or the education system? Maybe a couple of rainbows in primary schools and group hug sessions? Or anything more concrete than that...

de5p0i1er

ixoy wrote:

I hope some of the ultra Boards liberals don't go on to try and defend their actions based on the defendant's ages...

I'm with you there but thoses feckers are always looking for something to moan about. They should be made suffer the same as the victims before there allowed to complain, that would shut them up.

Sleepy

de5p0i1er wrote:

I'm with you there but thoses feckers are always looking for something to moan about. They should be made suffer the same as the victims before there allowed to complain, that would shut them up.

No, it'd give them a reason to sue and wouldn't solve anything except your desire for revenge.

They need to be locked up and kept away from decent society for a long time, yes. There needs to be an process to ensure that if they are let out, they won't reoffend, torturing them isn't going to produce this result, just as it might be.