nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Margaret Cash steals €300 worth of clothes from Penneys and aftermath/etc!

jjmcclure

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/homeless-mumofseven-margaret-cash-appears-in-court-over-stealing-300-worth-of-clothes-from-penneys-37434491.html

Where are RTE now?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Graniteville

tuxy wrote: »

I understand how that court case went for her as it was reported in the papers.
But how did she claim to an interviewer that stealing from someones house is harmless but doing the same in Penny's was stupid?

Travellers don't see shoplifting as theft.

A traveller from Drogheda was on radio last year and claimed he was not into criminality...

...Except for a bit of robbing from shops.

I actually despise them.

[Deleted User]

Graniteville wrote: »

Travellers don't see shoplifting as theft.

A traveller from Drogheda was on radio last year and claimed he was not into criminality...

...Except for a bit of robbing from shops.

I actually despise them.

sure they’re just making up the difference of what the gubberment aren’t giving them the craters

Calhoun

wexie wrote: »

Of course it does and of course it will.

No that's not the argument, the argument is that punishment alone doesn't stop people from committing crimes, it just makes them more serious about not getting caught.

How about a crime preventing model of society? Or at least a preventing of reoffending?

Look at the countries with the lowest crime rates (in the West that is, don't start bringing up KSA or something like that, nobody wants to go to that model) are they locking people up more and longer and under more brutal conditions? Or are they looking at why people are committing these crimes and trying to address those issues?

And believe me it's not that I don't think there are a lot of people out there that need punishing, it's just that it's been proven time and time again it doesn't actually achieve anything long term. Look at how many young scrotes come before the courts, they get a suspended sentence, slap on the wrist and back to the same life they came from. No additional support, no education. They're sure as hell not getting it at home either. They're likely to end up being old scrotes raising a new generation of young scrotes unless something new gets tried.

(I'm probably a bit of an oddity in supporting this because I also still believe there are people that just can't be helped to be better people and I'd be quite happy to dump them all in a prison colony on one of the Islands but I do think that the majority of people can somehow be taught to be better. )

How do you implement a crime preventing model of society, and what do you do if citizens threaten and practice violence and don't want to change because they have a culture built around it?

How is justice seen to be served to victims do we just forget them or do we bring in a huge compensation model?

Finally as for support for scrotes, where is the consequences? we have all been raised to understand actions have consequences when do we teach those or are we just accepting now that we just cant help our behavior.

wexie

Calhoun wrote: »

Finally as for support for scrotes, where is the consequences? we have all been raised to understand actions have consequences when do we teach those or are we just accepting now that we just cant help our behavior.

You or I have, do you really think some of those feral scrotes running amok in the estates around the country have had the benefit of strong and consistent parenting? What about those 'parents' (I use the word in the loosest sense imaginable) with umpteen convictions, do you really think they are teaching their children right from wrong? And if so do you think their sense of right and wrong fits in with what you or I would consider to be right and wrong?

I'm not arguing that there shouldn't be any consequences for poor behaviour, not even remotely.

What I'm trying to say is that it has been proven time and time again, all over the world by many many scientists that punishment alone doesn't achieve anything positive.

If you have kids (or a dog even) think of how you treat them, when they do something wrong or make a mistake do you punish them? And then do you follow it up by explaining why? Showing them what they can do to not be punished again and then reward the wanted behaviours?

Now imagine how they would start acting if you only punished them.

If you genuinely believe that we should keep the system we have and just need more prison spaces with more people in them I'm not likely to change your mind and that's fine I guess. But I guarantee you it wouldn't make things better, it would make things worse.

Here are some articles about a prison in Norway, which looks pretty much like a holiday camp, people would probably be outraged here it's so open and cushy, yet somehow magically they manage to achieve a recidivism rate of 16%, possibly the lowest in the world.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-18121914
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-18135537/norway-s-self-sufficient-community-prison

And as much as I feel (note how I don't say believe) that many many of the scrotes that go through our legal system deserve a good beating to within an inch of their lives, I'd be quite happy to forgo that sense of vengeance if we could get to a point where only 16% (or 20 or 30) of them go back to their old ways.

endacl

I’m down with that.

If we can beat the recidivists. Frequently.

Fiery mutant

wexie wrote: »

the argument is that punishment alone doesn't stop people from committing crimes,[/SIZE]

This is the part I don’t get. Prison is supposed to be punishment. It’s obvious criminals these days don’t fear prison, and sure why would they with all they get in there.

But at least if they are in there, they can’t commit crimes out in open society.

It should never be the case that people have 20 or 30 convictions, let alone 80 or 100.

It should be the case that once your conviction level reaches a certain number, your sentences increase. So if you have say 5 convictions, you should get an extra 2 years added to any sentence after that for serial reoffending. 10 convictions and you get an extra 5 years for each.

wexie

Fiery mutant wrote: »

This is the part I don’t get. Prison is supposed to be punishment. It’s obvious criminals these days don’t fear prison, and sure why would they with all they get in there.

But at least if they are in there, they can’t commit crimes out in open society.

It should never be the case that people have 20 or 30 convictions, let alone 80 or 100.

It should be the case that once your conviction level reaches a certain number, your sentences increase. So if you have say 5 convictions, you should get an extra 2 years added to any sentence after that for serial reoffending. 10 convictions and you get an extra 5 years for each.

I know and I agree, there is absolutely no excuse for people with that many convictions to ever again get a suspended sentence or 25% knocked off their time.

But like I said, punishment alone doesn't change anything, yes it stops them from committing crimes while they are in prison, which is great, what we should also be looking to do is stopping them from committing crimes when they come out of prison and that is not happening.

Personally I think what we need is a system with stricter sentences (none of this suspended or concurrent sentence bollox, combined with mandatory rehabilitation (of whatever form is appropriate for that particular prisoner), if you don't want to engage, that's fine, then you're not getting your 25% off, come back again....we're increasing your sentence. And again and again and again.

wexie

Calhoun wrote: »

How do you implement a crime preventing model of society, and what do you do if citizens threaten and practice violence and don't want to change because they have a culture built around it?

How is justice seen to be served to victims do we just forget them or do we bring in a huge compensation model?

Finally as for support for scrotes, where is the consequences? we have all been raised to understand actions have consequences when do we teach those or are we just accepting now that we just cant help our behavior.

Here's a thought for you Calhoun.

Think of an estate that's notoriously bad somewhere, whichever one you want.

Would you say that ONLY scrotes grow up there or is there perhaps the odd one that slips through the net and goes on to be a normal, non criminal life like the rest of us?

Now....what would you say the main difference is between those people? Grew up in the same estate, probably attended the same schools, had the same facilities available to them, may even have hung out together growing up.

Yet one goes on to live a productive life without being a drain on society and the other doesn't.

Why would that be? Do you think it's as simple as some people are just born bad?

blanch152

wexie wrote: »

You or I have, do you really think some of those feral scrotes running amok in the estates around the country have had the benefit of strong and consistent parenting? What about those 'parents' (I use the word in the loosest sense imaginable) with umpteen convictions, do you really think they are teaching their children right from wrong? And if so do you think their sense of right and wrong fits in with what you or I would consider to be right and wrong?

I'm not arguing that there shouldn't be any consequences for poor behaviour, not even remotely.

What I'm trying to say is that it has been proven time and time again, all over the world by many many scientists that punishment alone doesn't achieve anything positive.

If you have kids (or a dog even) think of how you treat them, when they do something wrong or make a mistake do you punish them? And then do you follow it up by explaining why? Showing them what they can do to not be punished again and then reward the wanted behaviours?

Now imagine how they would start acting if you only punished them.

If you genuinely believe that we should keep the system we have and just need more prison spaces with more people in them I'm not likely to change your mind and that's fine I guess. But I guarantee you it wouldn't make things better, it would make things worse.

Here are some articles about a prison in Norway, which looks pretty much like a holiday camp, people would probably be outraged here it's so open and cushy, yet somehow magically they manage to achieve a recidivism rate of 16%, possibly the lowest in the world.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-18121914
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-18135537/norway-s-self-sufficient-community-prison

And as much as I feel (note how I don't say believe) that many many of the scrotes that go through our legal system deserve a good beating to within an inch of their lives, I'd be quite happy to forgo that sense of vengeance if we could get to a point where only 16% (or 20 or 30) of them go back to their old ways.

Punishment alone may not achieve anything positive, but it is also true to say that the lack of punishment in cases such as Margaret Cash also fails to achieve anything positive and in fact, makes things worse.

While you can argue that locking up someone for 10 years doesn't prevent them reoffending when they are let loose, if they are continually offending while on the loose, then society has been saved 10 years of their continuous criminality.

Someone referenced the 80k cost of incarceration compared to the 50k cost of her benefits, that forgets the cost of criminal damage, the innocent people affected by crime. the training of her children to a life of crime etc.

wexie

blanch152 wrote: »

Punishment alone may not achieve anything positive, but it is also true to say that the lack of punishment in cases such as Margaret Cash also fails to achieve anything positive and in fact, makes things worse.

Of course, and that's not what I'm arguing at all.

I think doing even just one would be an improvement over what we have now.

But ideally we need to be doing both (in appropriate measures) at the moment we seem to be doing neither :mad:

Dakota Dan

DavidLyons_ wrote: »

I hope people aren’t suggesting Peter Casey is wrong. That would be deluded.

He’s dead right, I hope you aren’t one of the sheeple that will vote for him because of what he said.

Gravelly

Dakota Dan wrote: »

He’s dead right, I hope you aren’t one of the sheeple that will vote for him because of what he said.

I will be voting for Peter Casey. I'd like to think I'm not a "sheeple" and I have logical reasons for doing so:

He is the only candidate for president (or, in fact, for any public office in Ireland) that has come out and said what the majority of the population actually think - if we reward this behaviour with votes, it will encourage other candidates in other elections to tell the truth also - currently too many lying weasels or PC automatons are being rewarded by lying or covering up the truth. It will be better for the future of the country if truth is rewarded.
He is probably the only candidate who has any hope (slim and all though it might be) of beating Higgins. Higgins, to me, personifies much of what is wrong with Ireland as a country - a fake socialist, who says one thing while doing another, and someone who has never done a real days work in his life.
The office of president is meaningless anyway, so if we are going to test the waters by putting a guy who says it like it is in office, this is a good place to trial the concept.
If Casey wins, it is a black eye for the cosy consensus that exists in Irish political circles - shaking the foundations of that can only be for the good of the country long term.

Gwen Cooper

Gravelly wrote: »

I will be voting for Peter Casey. I'd like to think I'm not a "sheeple" and I have logical reasons for doing so:
[*]He is the only candidate for president (or, in fact, for any public office in Ireland) that has come out and said what the majority of the population actually think - if we reward this behaviour with votes, it will encourage other candidates in other elections to tell the truth also - currently too many lying weasels or PC automatons are being rewarded by lying or covering up the truth. It will be better for the future of the country if truth is rewarded.

[*]He is probably the only candidate who has any hope (slim and all though it might be) of beating Higgins. Higgins, to me, personifies much of what is wrong with Ireland as a country - a fake socialist, who says one thing while doing another, and someone who has never done a real days work in his life.

[*]The office of president is meaningless anyway, so if we are going to test the waters by putting a guy who says it like it is in office, this is a good place to trial the concept.

[*]If Casey wins, it is a black eye for the cosy consensus that exists in Irish political circles - shaking the foundations of that can only be for the good of the country long term.

*whispers in an apocalyptic voice* Trump

Paddy Cow

wexie wrote: »

Here are some articles about a prison in Norway, which looks pretty much like a holiday camp, people would probably be outraged here it's so open and cushy, yet somehow magically they manage to achieve a recidivism rate of 16%, possibly the lowest in the world.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-18121914
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-18135537/norway-s-self-sufficient-community-prison

And as much as I feel (note how I don't say believe) that many many of the scrotes that go through our legal system deserve a good beating to within an inch of their lives, I'd be quite happy to forgo that sense of vengeance if we could get to a point where only 16% (or 20 or 30) of them go back to their old ways.

The Norway prison is not what it seems. They have a 16% recidivism because the people sent there are carefully selected and are the type of person who is likely to want to rehabilitate. If they were achieving those kind of stats with scumbags who didn't give a sh!te and just saw jail time as the cost of business, then I'd be impressed. They don't have a 16% recidivism rate across the board, which is what some people seem to think.

Gravelly

Gwen Cooper wrote: »

*whispers in an apocalyptic voice* Trump

If I had a vote in America, I would have voted Trump. He has delivered a healthy economy and more jobs. Airy-fairy ideas of wrongthink against transexuals, comparisons to nazis because he doesn't play the PC game, and all that nonsense is fine for academics and the chattering classes to worry about, but for most people who have families to raise and bills to pay, that stuff is meaningless.

Lollipops23

Gravelly wrote: »

If I had a vote in America, I would have voted Trump.

Well bully for you. America is the laughing stock of the world.

Gravelly

Lollipops23 wrote: »

Well bully for you. America is the laughing stock of the world.

Sure it is :rolleyes:

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Gwen Cooper wrote: »

*whispers in an apocalyptic voice* Trump

Is it any wonder people are voting right wing? You can’t sneeze these days without offending someone. God forbid you actually speak about real life troubles you might have had with travellers or point out when we have thousands of people in b and bs and asleep on the streets that we are incapable of helping migrants? Unless we give each of them a cardboard box as they get off the plane. We’re living in a world where it’s wrong to question anything, give someone who is unwilling to work as much money as we can, ensure the unemployed are better looked after than low paid workers, don’t assume someone’s gender, it’s offensive to refer ton someone as male or female, I mean we’re at a stage where people are sUggesting we be allowed alter actual birth certs. The left have ensured that in their bid for acceptance, and tolerance, it’s only a small proportion of society that can voice their opinions, and everyone else is supposed to bend over backwards to accommodate those opinions.

Edgware

Lollipops23 wrote: »

Well bully for you. America is the laughing stock of the world.

Thats why there are hundreds of thousands trying to get in there.
How many are queuing to get in to Rusia, Saudi Arabia or Venezuela?

Donald Trump

Gravelly wrote: »

If I had a vote in America, I would have voted Trump. He has delivered a healthy economy and more jobs. Airy-fairy ideas of wrongthink against transexuals, comparisons to nazis because he doesn't play the PC game, and all that nonsense is fine for academics and the chattering classes to worry about, but for most people who have families to raise and bills to pay, that stuff is meaningless.

Don't forget the murder of journalists.

That is, as long as the state responsible doesn't make a mess of the cover up

stuff.hunter

Gravelly wrote: »

If I had a vote in America, I would have voted Trump. He has delivered a healthy economy and more jobs. Airy-fairy ideas of wrongthink against transexuals, comparisons to nazis because he doesn't play the PC game, and all that nonsense is fine for academics and the chattering classes to worry about, but for most people who have families to raise and bills to pay, that stuff is meaningless.

well said, Ireland needs someone like him badly as all what our govt does is looking after illegals, 'refugees' and so on ...hard working class getting screwed from all directions

VinLieger

Gravelly wrote: »

I would have voted Trump. He has delivered a healthy economy and more jobs. A

He's delivered neither of these.

Unemployment has been on a steady downward trend since 2010 thanks to Obama, Trump has simply not screwed that up.

As far as a healthy economy goes he's exploded the national debt with his tax cuts for the uber wealthy.

No doubt you'll try and quote the stock market is booming or other nonsense while not understanding the stock market is zero indication of a healthy economy

Gravelly

VinLieger wrote: »

He's delivered neither of these.

Unemployment has been on a steady downward trend since 2010 thanks to Obama, Trump has simply not screwed that up.

As far as a healthy economy goes he's exploded the national debt with his tax cuts for the uber wealthy.

No doubt you'll try and quote the stock market is booming or other nonsense while not understanding the stock market is zero indication of a healthy economy

I hear the above all the time - strange that Obama couldn't do a thing when he was president, but now apparently he's delivering jobs and growth 2 years after he left office

Whatever the reason, the current growth and jobs situation in America is good for most Americans, if that's Trumps doing, or he's just lucky, well, as Napoleon said "I'd rather have a lucky general than a good one"

super_furry

I love popping in here every few days and seeing what you're all on about.

Somehow it always seems to circle back to Trump and Obama and the whole 'YOU'RE THE REASON TRUMP WON!'

Boom_Bap

super_furry wrote: »

I love popping in here every few days and seeing what you're all on about.

Somehow it always seems to circle back to Trump and Obama and the whole 'YOU'RE THE REASON TRUMP WON!'

Word on the street is that Trump actually grabbed Cash by the p*ssy and he got US citizenship for her kids to all vote for him in the election. Then he Stormy'd her into silence.

gwalk

Boom_Bap wrote: »

Word on the street is that Trump actually grabbed Cash by the p*ssy and he got US citizenship for her kids to all vote for him in the election. Then he Stormy'd her into silence.

Be like sticking his arm into the grand canyon

[Deleted User]

Boom_Bap wrote: »

Word on the street is that Trump actually grabbed Cash by the p*ssy and he got US citizenship for her kids to all vote for him in the election. Then he Stormy'd her into silence.

I’m surprised he had a hand left afterward.

Gravelly

RaichuMGS wrote: »

I’m surprised he had a hand left afterward.

He definitely wouldn't have a watch.

mikhail

gwalk wrote: »

Be like sticking his arm into the grand canyon

He does have small hands, but come on...

punisher5112

More posts about cash.....

Anyone any new inputs into the internet by hers truly????