Where's the deterrent for shіthead scumbags in society?

El_Duderino 09 · 25-04-2019 11:49AM

Panthro wrote: »

It's all dáta collection for a blog she's writing on.
Ignorant men etc etc etc.

Where did you get any of that from? A blog on ignorant men? Crikey that's a dreadful chip on your shoulder.

You're wrong on every point in that statement (not that you asked). I'm not collecting data, I don't write a blog, I'm not a woman and I didn't even consider the gender of the posters.

But your reply was fascinating.

El_Duderino 09 · 25-04-2019 11:55AM

El_Bee wrote: »

Congratulations, once again you've derailed the thread with nitpicking and splitting hairs. I'm baffled as to why you are like this, but I'll give you an answer before I block you, it's about taking the worst elements of society OUT of society, giving society a break from them, 10 years is a nice break for the victims of crime, but you obviously begrudge them even that, and that is why we are where we are.

I've simply asked posters what would be an appropriate sentence and how they arrive at their conclusion. If that's enough to derail the discussion then it suggests the conclusions aren't very well thought out.

Again you're back to defending the arbitrary number of 10 years. Why 10? Why not 12 or 15 or 17 or 8 or 7 or 5. Why jot just lock people up for ever?

Have you even thought about what you're saying or have you literally just picked a number out of the air and decided to defend it?

suicide_circus · 25-04-2019 11:58AM

We are trying to follow the "Norse" model of sentencing and prisons.

In Norway they give light sentences and the inmates live in great conditions with loads of rehabilitation and counselling etc and they find this reduces repeat offending.

Irish people and society are very different from Scandinavians. One size does not fit all.

The legal profession here have dropped all pretence of honour and dignity and are now openly and flagrantly exploiting the free legal aid and personal injury systems for their own greasy gain while literally putting the public at risk and making ireland a worse place to live.

El_Duderino 09 · 25-04-2019 11:59AM

I know you'll find this baffling but Im actually more Interested in the victims and preventing people becoming victims by reducing crime in the first place.

Locking people up is the most basic and unthinking thing to do. It does nothing for the victim or the criminal. It removes then from the streets for a while then they're back out to commit more crime.

Do none of you have any Interest in reducing crime rather than just waiting for crime to happen so it can be punished?

Franz Von Peppercorn · 25-04-2019 11:59AM

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

OK. I'm not sure you understand the question I'm asking. Why is 5 years too small and 20 too large?

What's the purpose of the prison sentence in your opinion and how is that purpose achieved by serving 10 years in prison?

The main purpose of all legal systems is in fact retributive. The second most important thing is deterrence. Rehabilitation would be a good thing but is a side affect. Also a rehabilitative system on its own is open to locking people up indefinitely.

What does retributive justice mean? It isn't revenge. Revenge is personal. The state intervenes and stops revenge happening, and when law and order breaks down vigilantes or feuds break out.

What it means is that somebody, judged to be guilty impartially by the state and not emotionally by his victims, pays proportionately for his or her crimes even if he or she is not really a threat anymore. A rapist who is now incapacitated sexually ( for whatever reason) would be jailed under a retributive system but not under a rehabilitative system, as he is now incapable of rape. An old man who isn't a threat who nevertheless has a history of sexual abuse, would also be jailed if enough evidence was found. Neither of them would avoid jail in a retributive system even if they showed genuine remorse, or engaged in restoration, whatever that could be.

Deterrence works into this as well, as longer sentences can obviously deter criminals, and the State has a moral duty to stop 80 year olds being terrorised.

Franz Von Peppercorn · 25-04-2019 12:01PM

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I know you'll find this baffling but Im actually more Interested in the victims and preventing people becoming victims by reducing crime in the first place.

You have literally said nothing concrete to this effect.

Locking people up is the most basic and unthinking thing to do. It does nothing for the victim or the criminal. It removes then from the streets for a while then they're back out to commit more crime.

Basically you don't want a justice system. You don't even give an alternative here. Just don't lock people up.

Do none of you have any Interest in reducing crime rather than just waiting for crime to happen so it can be punished?

Absolutely.

Mad_maxx · 25-04-2019 12:05PM

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Like I said, I'm sure you won't like the research.

So if you're going to dismiss the research without so much as considering it (very convenient) then how are you going to determine what actually works?

I've no interest in the views of ideological leftists who arrogantly believe they know what's best in these circumstances, the left have written policy re_ delinquency this past several decades and its been an abject failure

Mad_maxx · 25-04-2019 12:08PM

Jane98 wrote: »

I totally agree. As a secondary school teacher, I have become more and more concerned in recent years with what seems to be an increase in the number of students I meet who aspire to a life on the dole and nothing more. Many of these students make the job of a teacher a difficult one as they have no interest in learning, turn up to class with no pens, copies etc and expect them to be given to them by the school for free because everything else they get is given to their families for free. It is truly worrying. Many of the parents do not engage with the school too.

I also think it's time we modernised our social welfare system so that people have to give something back in return for benefits. There is a huge disincentive for many in our society to take responsibility for themselves and their families. A fit and healthy 18 year old should not be handed money to sit on their arse. We are pushing the pension age for people who have worked all their lives up and up but a fit and healthy 18 year old can get free money.

Left wing backed government policy is the root cause of this rotten feckless culture, an ideology of viewing endless victims where people are powerless to even behave to a minimal level of decency

We must demand more of our citizens and increasing child benefit is no substitute for espousing two parent families, the left have cheered on the downgrading of the traditional family unit.

Far more people were poor fifty years ago yet the country did not have communities of feral delinquents all over the nation

Franz Von Peppercorn · 25-04-2019 12:19PM

Mad_maxx wrote: »

I've no interest in the views of ideological leftists who arrogantly believe they know what's best in these circumstances, the left have written policy re_ delinquency this past several decades and its been an abject failure

More upper class liberals than the old school left.

One of the reasons for this is there is less crime in rich areas, and one of the reasons for that is there are more police in rich areas. I know this because I see more police activity in the leafy north Dublin county town I live in than I saw in the north city working class estate I grew up in. Even now if rowdy kids from working class estates turn up here and do what they do in those estates (be rowdy, occasional gangs of shoplifters, etc) a few paddy wagons turn up while in their own backyard the police are as rare as hens teeth.

The criminals are aware of this too which is why the attacks on the old are on the old and poor, not the old and rich though the latter have more money or jewellery hanging about.

Panthro · 25-04-2019 12:23PM

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Where did you get any of that from? A blog on ignorant men? Crikey that's a dreadful chip on your shoulder.

You're wrong on every point in that statement (not that you asked). I'm not collecting data, I don't write a blog, I'm not a woman and I didn't even consider the gender of the posters.

But your reply was fascinating.

When in doubt.. deflect.

Classic El_Duderino.

dundalkfc10 · 25-04-2019 12:26PM

One way Dundalk can get rid of scum roaming the streets, robberies etc is BRING THE RA BACK TO SORT THEM OUT!

I bet a good % of people around here would agree

Hal3000 · 25-04-2019 12:29PM

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

More upper class liberals than the old school left.

One of the reasons for this is there is less crime in rich areas, and one of the reasons for that is there are more police in rich areas. I know this because I see more police activity in the leafy north Dublin county town I live in than I saw in the north city working class estate I grew up in. Even now if rowdy kids from working class estates turn up here and do what they do in those estates (be rowdy, occasional gangs of shoplifters, etc) a few paddy wagons turn up while in their own backyard the police are as rare as hens teeth.

The criminals are aware of this too which is why the attacks on the old are on the old and poor, not the old and rich though the latter have more money or jewellery hanging about.

Agree, coupled with the simple fact that criminals know it'll be most likey a supsended sentence or short custodial sentence for their crimes, and there is no political party willing to tackle the issue. This provides these thugs with a buffet of criminal opportunities up and down the country. We now need a strong repeal like movement to overhaul our lenient justice system.

El_Duderino 09 · 25-04-2019 01:04PM

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

You have literally said nothing concrete to this effect.

Basically you don't want a justice system. You don't even give an alternative here. Just don't lock people up.

Absolutely.

I never said I want no justice system. I also never said I don't lock people up. Instead of assuming what I think, you could simply ask what I think. That's what I've done with the posters here and it's genuinely fascinating to see what people think and how deep (or shallow) the logic behind it is.

You could keep assuming what I think but as we've seen from your assumption above that I think "just don't lock people up" and the fool who thought I was a woman collecting data for my blog about ignorant men (4 assumptions and all 4 were wrong).

reg114 · 25-04-2019 01:05PM

Crock Rock wrote: »

I just walked past a car parked outside a takeaway. There was a GPS on the dashboard, still illuminated.

As I walked past the car, filthy scum who were congregating nearby walked over and attempted to open the door. Just at that moment, the owner of the car who it turned out was a delivery driver appeared out of the door of the takeaway and ran them.

I'm sure if he hadn't appeared or there wasn't anyone else around, then they probably would have smashed the window to retrieve the GPS because there'd be absolutely no consequences for them.

Why is there no consequences for being scum vermin in Ireland?

To answer your question there is very little deterrent because there is no political will. Time Square Manhattan in the 80s was a cesspit of porn shops pimps pushing drugs and petty crime,very different from the epicentre of tourism and glitz that it is now and that was primarily to the then Mayor Guiliani tackling the antisocial behaviour with a zero tolerance policy. The cops put so much pressure on the criminals they eventually left the area, this coupled with a policy of dissuading adult shops and attracting legitimate family friendly retailers to the area all resulted in the Time Square you see today.

Irish politicians seem to live in the dark ages when it comes to being in any way proactive about anything. I can think of literally only 3 incidences in the last 30 years when the body politic in this country demonstrated forethought and were applauded, 1 The plastic bag ban 2. The cigarette ban in workplaces 3. the decision to hold the same sex marriage referendum.

As the policing authority report published only today suggests, the gardai in this country are falling shockingly short of reaching even basic targets when it comes to crime detection. When they do attempt to prosecute a crime they come up against a victorian judiciary that is simply out of touch. The judiciary in turn are provided little guidance by legislation which is also wholly insufficient and outdated. The very notion that anyone should benefit from remittance off their custodial sentence because of 'good behaviour' is utterly ridiculous. In fact everyone factors in remittance in advance of any sentence even beginning. Sentences thus are too lenient and the criminals know this. How many times have we read about some junkie before the courts for the 98th time and he then gets a suspended sentence because he he grew up with no father figure? Nonsense.

The capital city in the country is a fraction of the population of Manhattan and should be easy to police but the gardai themselves could be described in one word, apathetic.

The penal system itself is no deterrent. The notion that you have access to a tv in jail is laughable. The notion that there is unfettered access to drugs in jail is ludicrous. I laugh when I see former Mountjoy Governor in the media spouting his advice, especially given he presided over an epidemic of drugs within his own facility. Prisoners should fear prison and not see it as a glorified hotel. Commit murder in this country and you're free in 10 years at the most, do the same in the states and you're talking a whole life sentence or the death penalty. The irony is that the Irish population is so much smaller and offenders are so much more docile than their American counterparts primarily because of the lack of guns. Crime should be so much more under control here than it is.

El_Duderino 09 · 25-04-2019 01:07PM

Mad_maxx wrote: »

I've no interest in the views of ideological leftists who arrogantly believe they know what's best in these circumstances, the left have written policy re_ delinquency this past several decades and its been an abject failure

Lol. Without even reading the research or knowing anything about the authors your able to make those assertions with such confidence. Wish I had that kind of confidence!

But you didn't answer the question which was if you dismiss the research, then how do you figure out what works and what doesn't?

minikin · 25-04-2019 01:14PM

Evict them and if they’re homeowners demolish their homes... any little scrote dealing drugs or being a general scummer loses their or their parents home.

Plenty of advance notice - applies to crimes committed 1 month after a nationwide campaign - be an anti-social asshole and it impacts directly on you or your family.

Fair warning.

begbysback · 25-04-2019 01:17PM

reg114 wrote: »

To answer your question there is very little deterrent because there is no political will. Time Square Manhattan in the 80s was a cesspit of porn shops pimps pushing drugs and petty crime,very different from the epicentre of tourism and glitz that it is now and that was primarily to the then Mayor Guiliani tackling the antisocial behaviour with a zero tolerance policy. The cops put so much pressure on the criminals they eventually left the area, this coupled with a policy of dissuading adult shops and attracting legitimate family friendly retailers to the area all resulted in the Time Square you see today.

Irish politicians seem to live in the dark ages when it comes to being in any way proactive about anything. I can think of literally only 3 incidences in the last 30 years when the body politic in this country demonstrated forethought and were applauded, 1 The plastic bag ban 2. The cigarette ban in workplaces 3. the decision to hold the same sex marriage referendum.

As the policing authority report published only today suggests, the gardai in this country are falling shockingly short of reaching even basic targets when it comes to crime detection. When they do attempt to prosecute a crime they come up against a victorian judiciary that is simply out of touch. The judiciary in turn are provided little guidance by legislation which is also wholly insufficient and outdated. The very notion that anyone should benefit from remittance off their custodial sentence because of 'good behaviour' is utterly ridiculous. In fact everyone factors in remittance in advance of any sentence even beginning. Sentences thus are too lenient and the criminals know this. How many times have we read about some junkie before the courts for the 98th time and he then gets a suspended sentence because he he grew up with no father figure? Nonsense.

The capital city in the country is a fraction of the population of Manhattan and should be easy to police but the gardai themselves could be described in one word, apathetic.

The penal system itself is no deterrent. The notion that you have access to a tv in jail is laughable. The notion that there is unfettered access to drugs in jail is ludicrous. I laugh when I see former Mountjoy Governor in the media spouting his advice, especially given he presided over an epidemic of drugs within his own facility. Prisoners should fear prison and not see it as a glorified hotel. Commit murder in this country and you're free in 10 years at the most, do the same in the states and you're talking a whole life sentence or the death penalty. The irony is that the Irish population is so much smaller and offenders are so much more docile than their American counterparts primarily because of the lack of guns. Crime should be so much more under control here than it is.

In short
1) apply zero tolerance to move criminals from one area to another
2) apply same logic to crime as the smoking ban
3) take away prisoner remission for good behavior
4) take away tv from prisoners
5) somehow do what no other prison in the world has achieved and eradicate drugs from prisons

See any problem here?

Franz Von Peppercorn · 25-04-2019 01:19PM

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I never said I want no justice system. I also never said I don't lock people up. Instead of assuming what I think, you could simply ask what I think. That's what I've done with the posters here and it's genuinely fascinating to see what people think and how deep (or shallow) the logic behind it is.

I’ve asked you numerous times. You have no proposals. You ask questions about what should be done with the perps on the recent case and when I give you an answer you then ask why 10 and not 5, implying that any period of lock up is purely arbitrary. The last sentence is a slight put down (we are to infer that everybody’s logic except yours is shallow? The opposite in fact).

You could keep assuming what I think but as we've seen from your assumption above that I think "just don't lock people up" and the fool who thought I was a woman collecting data for my blog about ignorant men (4 assumptions and all 4 were wrong).

We are still not actually getting what you think concretely think on specific cases.

It’s also not my or other poster’s job here to work out what you think, why do you need a question at all? Every time someone mentions locking people up you have scorned the idea. You keep saying there’s a better way. There are no concrete examples but you are clearly hostile to incarceration, while also hostile to people thinking you are hostile to incarceration.

But here goes. What should happen to the gangs terrorising old folks when caught.

The fact that you are responding to me and including in your reply what someone else might have said is typical of your misdirection. Again it’s a logical fallacy, somebody got four things wrong about you, I also said something about you, so therefore I am wrong.

Edit.

Actually you said this.

Locking people up is the most basic and unthinking thing to do. It does nothing for the victim or the criminal. It removes then from the streets for a while then they're back out to commit more crime.

And yet apparently it’s a misrepresentation to say you are opposed to locking people up.

Hal3000 · 25-04-2019 01:19PM

reg114 wrote: »

To answer your question there is very little deterrent because there is no political will. Time Square Manhattan in the 80s was a cesspit of porn shops pimps pushing drugs and petty crime,very different from the epicentre of tourism and glitz that it is now and that was primarily to the then Mayor Guiliani tackling the antisocial behaviour with a zero tolerance policy. The cops put so much pressure on the criminals they eventually left the area, this coupled with a policy of dissuading adult shops and attracting legitimate family friendly retailers to the area all resulted in the Time Square you see today.

Irish politicians seem to live in the dark ages when it comes to being in any way proactive about anything. I can think of literally only 3 incidences in the last 30 years when the body politic in this country demonstrated forethought and were applauded, 1 The plastic bag ban 2. The cigarette ban in workplaces 3. the decision to hold the same sex marriage referendum.

As the policing authority report published only today suggests, the gardai in this country are falling shockingly short of reaching even basic targets when it comes to crime detection. When they do attempt to prosecute a crime they come up against a victorian judiciary that is simply out of touch. The judiciary in turn are provided little guidance by legislation which is also wholly insufficient and outdated. The very notion that anyone should benefit from remittance off their custodial sentence because of 'good behaviour' is utterly ridiculous. In fact everyone factors in remittance in advance of any sentence even beginning. Sentences thus are too lenient and the criminals know this. How many times have we read about some junkie before the courts for the 98th time and he then gets a suspended sentence because he he grew up with no father figure? Nonsense.

The capital city in the country is a fraction of the population of Manhattan and should be easy to police but the gardai themselves could be described in one word, apathetic.

The penal system itself is no deterrent. The notion that you have access to a tv in jail is laughable. The notion that there is unfettered access to drugs in jail is ludicrous. I laugh when I see former Mountjoy Governor in the media spouting his advice, especially given he presided over an epidemic of drugs within his own facility. Prisoners should fear prison and not see it as a glorified hotel. Commit murder in this country and you're free in 10 years at the most, do the same in the states and you're talking a whole life sentence or the death penalty. The irony is that the Irish population is so much smaller and offenders are so much more docile than their American counterparts primarily because of the lack of guns. Crime should be so much more under control here than it is.

Well said. It's totally achievable to have a safer country, but it needs a brave - new political party to tackle the issues.

bullpost · 25-04-2019 01:29PM

Hal3000 wrote: »

Well said. It's totally achievable to have a safer country, but it needs a brave - new political party to tackle the issues.

reg114 wrote: »

To answer your question there is very little deterrent because there is no political will. Time Square Manhattan in the 80s was a cesspit of porn shops pimps pushing drugs and petty crime,very different from the epicentre of tourism and glitz that it is now and that was primarily to the then Mayor Guiliani tackling the antisocial behaviour with a zero tolerance policy. The cops put so much pressure on the criminals they eventually left the area, this coupled with a policy of dissuading adult shops and attracting legitimate family friendly retailers to the area all resulted in the Time Square you see today.

Irish politicians seem to live in the dark ages when it comes to being in any way proactive about anything. I can think of literally only 3 incidences in the last 30 years when the body politic in this country demonstrated forethought and were applauded, 1 The plastic bag ban 2. The cigarette ban in workplaces 3. the decision to hold the same sex marriage referendum.

As the policing authority report published only today suggests, the gardai in this country are falling shockingly short of reaching even basic targets when it comes to crime detection. When they do attempt to prosecute a crime they come up against a victorian judiciary that is simply out of touch. The judiciary in turn are provided little guidance by legislation which is also wholly insufficient and outdated. The very notion that anyone should benefit from remittance off their custodial sentence because of 'good behaviour' is utterly ridiculous. In fact everyone factors in remittance in advance of any sentence even beginning. Sentences thus are too lenient and the criminals know this. How many times have we read about some junkie before the courts for the 98th time and he then gets a suspended sentence because he he grew up with no father figure? Nonsense.

The capital city in the country is a fraction of the population of Manhattan and should be easy to police but the gardai themselves could be described in one word, apathetic.

The penal system itself is no deterrent. The notion that you have access to a tv in jail is laughable. The notion that there is unfettered access to drugs in jail is ludicrous. I laugh when I see former Mountjoy Governor in the media spouting his advice, especially given he presided over an epidemic of drugs within his own facility. Prisoners should fear prison and not see it as a glorified hotel. Commit murder in this country and you're free in 10 years at the most, do the same in the states and you're talking a whole life sentence or the death penalty. The irony is that the Irish population is so much smaller and offenders are so much more docile than their American counterparts primarily because of the lack of guns. Crime should be so much more under control here than it is.

" Commit murder in this country and you're free in 10 years at the most, do the same in the states and you're talking a whole life sentence or the death penalty. " - And yet the murder rate is much higher in the States so what does that tell us?

Sultan of Bling · 25-04-2019 01:45PM

bullpost wrote:

" Commit murder in this country and you're free in 10 years at the most, do the same in the states and you're talking a whole life sentence or the death penalty. " - And yet the murder rate is much higher in the States so what does that tell us?

It tells us that if they had the same setencing structure for murder as they do over here, their murder rate would be 10 times worse.

El_Duderino 09 · 25-04-2019 01:59PM

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

I’ve asked you numerous times. You have no proposals. You ask questions about what should be done with the perps on the recent case and when I give you an answer you then ask why 10 and not 5, implying that any period of lock up is purely arbitrary. The last sentence is a slight put down (we are to infer that everybody’s logic except yours is shallow? The opposite in fact).

We are still not actually getting what you think concretely think on specific cases.

It’s also not my or other poster’s job here to work out what you think, why do you need a question at all? Every time someone mentions locking people up you have scorned the idea. You keep saying there’s a better way. There are no concrete examples but you are clearly hostile to incarceration, while also hostile to people thinking you are hostile to incarceration.

But here goes. What should happen to the gangs terrorising old folks when caught.

The fact that you are responding to me and including in your reply what someone else might have said is typical of your misdirection. Again it’s a logical fallacy, somebody got four things wrong about you, I also said something about you, so therefore I am wrong.

Edit.

Actually you said this.

And yet apparently it’s a misrepresentation to say you are opposed to locking people up.

It is a misrepresentation to say I'm opposed to locking people up. I'm completely opposed to the motion that simple locking people up is a good solution.

I've said numerous times that my main focus would be on the factors that lead to crime and addressing them to prevent and reduce crime. the victims and society would be my other main concern. Obviously incarceration is part of the equation

But if the question is how long a prison sentence would have a real impact on crime them I think you're simply asking the wrong question. If someone leaves prison as a drug addict then it doesn't matter whether they've served a week or a decade in prison. They'll most likely be back committing crime before long. So what's the solution? Longer sentences for the crimes they commit or deal with the drug problem (both drug addiction and the factors that cause people to start using drugs in the first place)

There might not be the same satisfaction for you as the focus would be on preventing crime rather than just punishing people after they commit crimes and create victims.

That's what I think.

Re making assumptions about me; the assumptions you mm are about me were demonstrably wrong. You said I think we should just not lock people up which I didn't say and dont think. You're wrong assumption added to the 4 wrong assumptions by the other poster shows how it would be much better to just ask what I think. Which you clearly took on board because you asked my view.

El_Duderino 09 · 25-04-2019 02:07PM

Sultan of Bling wrote: »

It tells us that if they had the same setencing structure for murder as they do over here, their murder rate would be 10 times worse.

Lol.

So what are the factors about America that makes it so much more violent?

reg114 · 25-04-2019 02:11PM

bullpost wrote: »

" Commit murder in this country and you're free in 10 years at the most, do the same in the states and you're talking a whole life sentence or the death penalty. " - And yet the murder rate is much higher in the States so what does that tell us?

It tells us they have more guns than they have people , north of 300 million guns at last count.

bullpost · 25-04-2019 02:13PM

reg114 wrote: »

It tells us they have more guns than they have people , north of 300 million guns at last count.

Ok , so the murder rate is not linked to deterrents , but more to the availability of weapons?

James Brown · 25-04-2019 02:14PM

"what's the point?"
There's your societal problem in a nutshell.
You treat poor people like sh*t, their neighborhoods are rife with drugs and criminality. The government(s) couldn't care less once it's NIMBY. They see crappy minimum low wage jobs and rents they can't afford and owning a home is a fantasy. They grow up in that, likely bail out of school often with disinterested teachers as early as they can, if they go at all and fall into the cycle, because what's the point of doing anything else? Not supporting it just saying it's not as straight forward as one kid going to university or getting a job with good prospects OR deciding to be a scumbag hassling people in town.
The legal system is jaded because it tackles symptoms not causes. Nobody tackling causes.

riemann · 25-04-2019 02:23PM

Matt Barrett wrote: »

"what's the point?"
There's your societal problem in a nutshell.
You treat poor people like sh*t, their neighborhoods are rife with drugs and criminality. The government(s) couldn't care less once it's NIMBY. They see crappy minimum low wage jobs and rents they can't afford and owning a home is a fantasy. They grow up in that, likely bail out of school often with disinterested teachers as early as they can, if they go at all and fall into the cycle, because what's the point of doing anything else? Not supporting it just saying it's not as straight forward as one kid going to university or getting a job with good prospects OR deciding to be a scumbag hassling people in town.
The legal system is jaded because it tackles symptoms not causes. Nobody tackling causes.

Absolute horse****.

It all comes down to parenting and personal responsibility.

I have a few friends from what what would be considered tough areas. With a good family upbringing they were able to go to college and better themselves.

reg114 · 25-04-2019 02:26PM

begbysback wrote: »

In short
1) apply zero tolerance to move criminals from one area to another
2) apply same logic to crime as the smoking ban
3) take away prisoner remission for good behavior
4) take away tv from prisoners
5) somehow do what no other prison in the world has achieved and eradicate drugs from prisons

See any problem here?

1. Zero tolerance actually dissuaded criminals from prospering in the area full stop. It worked for New York, it can work for Dublin or any other area

2. The smoking ban was simply an illustration of where an irish gov had done something that was positive and that was applauded, its a rare occurrence

3. absolutely deny prisoners remission, do the crime , do the time. If you misbehave your sentence should be lengthened NOT shortened because you managed to act like an adult while serving your time

4. Absolutely take away any form of prison entertainment. Prison is punishment, its not a holiday camp at the tax payers expense. Who pays for the tv ? You do. Who pays for the TV subscription ? You do. Reform should be in the form of education, schooling and psychiatric assistance, not sitting on your backside watching Jeremy kyle until your sentence is done. Id bring in chain gangs myself. Recidivists has zero respect for the rule of law or for the tax paying law abiding citizens who pay for them to languish in prison if they actually are sent to prison.

5. Of all the places in the country a prison should be the most secure of facilities. If drugs manage to get into a prison, the governor and staff of the prison should be held accountable. To accept that 'the war on drugs' cant be won even inside state controlled institutions is pathetic and lazy.

reg114 · 25-04-2019 02:33PM

bullpost wrote: »

Ok , so the murder rate is not linked to deterrents , but more to the availability of weapons?

I gave the penalty for murder as an extreme example of the penal system in the States. Most crimes in the States are punished with longer sentences than in Ireland was my point. It could be argued that America could have an even higher rate of murders if sentencing was based on the lax Irish model.

lalababa · 25-04-2019 02:46PM

dxhound2005 wrote: »

When Child Benefit (Childrens Allowance) was introduced in 1944, the payment was only for the third child and subsequent children. Nothing for the first two. Reverting to this or something similar would easier than sterilisation. Back in those days families in general were much larger, despite the lack of generous welfare schemes.

Would it not be better to have children s allowance for the 1st two only?? Also ...with petty type crime would a slight cut to their Dole in lue of a fine and abit of community service be the way to go? Another thing I was self employed for along time and found it v. difficult to get even a basic donkey work type job and when I did I was working with people just outa prison, it seemed to me they got the job easier than me!

Where's the deterrent for shіthead scumbags in society?

Comments