Where's the deterrent for shіthead scumbags in society?

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.

Left wing media would go to town on any party who produced a plan to tackle delinquency, they tore strips off Leo for saying he wanted to " prioritise those who rise early"

Leo of course backed down, nothing will change until some sort of vaguely right leaning media outlet emerges, the left control the narative

riemann wrote: »

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.

So do I. Can you or they say the same generally for the 'tough' area? Why was it 'tough', built on a hill was it? Too much competition for a spot in UCD?
It's like that ar*ehole Bill Cullen thinking people could make millions if they worked hard enough just because he did.

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Left wing media would go to town on any party who produced a plan to tackle delinquency, they tore strips off Leo for saying he wanted to " prioritise those who rise early"

Leo of course backed down, nothing will change until some sort of vaguely right leaning media outlet emerges, the left control the narative

Because Leo was pig ignorant to say such a thing. It suggests anyone having a tough time likes to take it handy. Also it takes any accountability away from his caretaker mismanagement.
Left wing media? Would this be RTE, The Indo or the Times?

Handy way of dismissing news you don't like I suppose.

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.

Can't ever happen. Because tackling the symptoms while ignoring the causes will change absolutely nothing.

Hal3000

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Can't ever happen. Because tackling the symptoms while ignoring the causes will change absolutely nothing.

It actually can with a strong leader. Look at NYC as an example.

"Violent crime in New York City has been dropping since 1991 and, as of 2017, is among the lowest of major cities in the United States"

riemann wrote: »

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.

That stats would suggest that's not horse sh1te. Crime is more common in poor areas for lots of reasons which unfortunately can't be written off as horseshyte.

I wasn't from a poor area. I grew up in the countryside with lots of freedom and opportunity to do things. I knew everyone in the village and everyone knew me. We learned the importance of community and what happens when someone in the community is hurt through crime. "Ill tell your mother would be enough to deter lots of bad behaviour"

I'd agree that parenting has a lot to do with it but opportunity and resources like time and money are also important in parenting. I was very lucky with my parents being great. I was brought up with the expectation that I would get a good education and get a career.

Those advantages are really significant And I had absolutely no control over them. They're absolutely no result of anything I have done but I benefit from them.

reg114 wrote: »

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.

Do you ho early think habitual criminals sir down and do a cost benefit analysis in advance of committing a crime? This is complete fantasy stuff. But it does demonstrate how little some people know about crime.

The government is stuck between two stools because they news to satisfy the man man in the street who thinks the only thing to do is lock people up, with the fact that locking people up is really expensive and ultimately doesn't make anything better except take one single criminal off the street for a short while. Meanwhile there are plenty more criminals.

It both very expensive and almost useless. Like trying to hold back the tide with a pitch fork. Can't blame the government when the electorate has the attitude you see in this thread.

Lux23

El_Bee wrote: »

Literally clown world, is there an AGM for Judges or any kind of event where they're in the same place together at any point? Asking for a friend.

Nothing to do with the Judges, it was the Guards who said they didn't have a case. Or the DPP maybe.

lalababa

Hal3000 wrote: »

It actually can with a strong leader. Look at NYC as an example.

"Violent crime in New York City has been dropping since 1991 and, as of 2017, is among the lowest of major cities in the United States"

How did they manage that? A zero tolerance , 3 strikes and you are out was it?

Hal3000 wrote: »

So how come New York seem to be able to do it ?

Sure. If you're willing to do something as draconian as 3 strikes and spend the rest of your life in prison, then they or a drop in crime.

At least it gets rid of the arbitrary 10 year magic sentence some posters were sticking to earlier.

Thats such an expensive policy to lock someone up for 3 petty crimes. It's incredible that you'd support that and show absolutely no interest in finding out what causes crime and want to address those issues to prevent crime in the first place.

bullpost

Hal3000 wrote: »

So how come New York seem to be able to do it ?

Its all relative - The murder rate there is much higher than Ireland as a whole, though closer to the Dublin rate.

Hal3000 wrote: »

So how come New York seem to be able to do it ?

Hal3000 wrote: »

It actually can with a strong leader. Look at NYC as an example.

"Violent crime in New York City has been dropping since 1991 and, as of 2017, is among the lowest of major cities in the United States"

They policed Times Square better, more importantly society began to prosper, less poor, less criminality. More cops may help prevent crime but more arrests doesn't mean less crime.

Sultan of Bling

El_Duderino 09 wrote:

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

Guns and ammo, a lots of it.

Sultan of Bling wrote: »

Guns and ammo, a lots of it.

Is that it? Just down to guns? So would we see similar violence rates in other countries with similar amounts of guns?

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Because Leo was pig ignorant to say such a thing. It suggests anyone having a tough time likes to take it handy. Also it takes any accountability away from his caretaker mismanagement.
Left wing media? Would this be RTE, The Indo or the Times? Handy way of dismissing news you don't like I suppose.

All of the media here are on the left, rte is overtly leftist

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Can't ever happen. Because tackling the symptoms while ignoring the causes will change absolutely nothing.

Of course you ( like all leftists) assume you know exactly what the " cause" is.

So much so that you have been doubling down on your abject failure for the past three decades.

Panthro

I think someone's on a wind up.
Which is totally out of character..

Hal3000 wrote: »

Ok so let's just keep letting them back out to reoffend until we find this magical prevention solution that you keep suggesting. Until then I hope none of these guys on their path to englightment cross you.

Nothing magical about what I've suggested. It would take skills, research and resources.

As an example I suggested treating the drug problem instead of just locking up and releasing drug addicted petty criminals and waiting for them to commit more crimes and create more victims. I'm not sure why you think that's magical.

Hal3000

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Nothing magical about what I've suggested. It would take skills, research and resources.

As an example I suggested treating the drug problem instead of just locking up and releasing drug addicted petty criminals and waiting for them to commit more crimes and create more victims. I'm not sure why you think that's magical.

You're totally on a wind up and now and changing your argument to an argument about drug addiction. I never mentioned locking up drug addicts. Not sure where you got that from?? I suggested 3 strike system or harsher sentencing. You suggest treatments - prevention and resources / research. I really wonder would you argue so hard if your life was ruined by crime ? You're born for politics with your - I'm all for it but not in my backyard attitude.

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Of course you ( like all leftists) assume you know exactly what the " cause" is.

So much so that you have been doubling down on your abject failure for the past three decades.

Neither that poster or me have said we know exactly whet the cause is. How have you missed that?

I've said we should find out what works. Ironically the people who Dogmatically stick to the 'sentences should be longer' are the ones who claim to know the solution.

El_Bee

Lux23 wrote: »

Nothing to do with the Judges, it was the Guards who said they didn't have a case. Or the DPP maybe.

The article in the evening herald expanded on the situation regarding the scumbag walking, the judge was given letters from his mother saying that he was a good boy, I wish I was joking.

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Of course you ( like all leftists) assume you know exactly what the " cause" is.

So much so that you have been doubling down on your abject failure for the past three decades.

As a communist, you seem to think the cause of someone shooting somebody else is pulling the trigger and we need look no further.

If you think 'the left' has been running things for the last 30 years you've got problems with direction.

imme

Society tolerates bad behaviour, that's why we have it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05VnrzX4ilQ

Matt Barrett wrote: »

As a communist, you seem to think the cause of someone shooting somebody else is pulling the trigger and we need look no further.

If you think 'the left' has been running things for the last 30 years you've got problems with direction.

The left have been behind policy, who officially makes the call - signs off is irrelevant

ToddyDoody

cannotlogin wrote: »

Anyone else read that as "what's the detergent for scum?"

FYI... Cillit BANG.

mad muffin

I like Australia’s way of dealing with foreign born scum

Mad_maxx wrote: »

The left have been behind policy, who officially makes the call - signs off is irrelevant

I hear this excuse a lot. We have FF/FG ruling the roost for decades looking after their own. Mismanaging tax payer money and currently making crises worse. Refusing to build social housing, opting for hotels and paying rent to private landlords, project cost over runs they don't know how, why, what about, despite it being their job, free diners with contractors looking for government contracts, sweet siteserv deal at a loss to the tax payer still under investigation...but because crime is bad it's People before profit or some other party averaging 1% who control the reins and poor FF/FG merely sign off due to pressure...would you ever cop on.

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I hear this excuse a lot. We have FF/FG ruling the roost for decades looking after their own. Mismanaging tax payer money and currently making crises worse. Refusing to build social housing, opting for hotels and paying rent to private landlords, project cost over runs they don't know how, why, what about, despite it being their job, free diners with contractors looking for government contracts, sweet siteserv deal at a loss to the tax payer still under investigation...but because crime is bad it's People before profit or some other party averaging 1% who control the reins and poor FF/FG merely sign off due to pressure...would you ever cop on.

Government ( central or local) have no interest in building houses, the percentage of local authority tenants in arrears is circa 30% despite the incredibly modest rent charged, no chance of them being evicted either, the HAP option is the cheaper policy, its left to the private landlord to deal with problem tenants, county councils avoid work like the plague, they don't want dealing with freeloaders who wreck their free homes and don't want to pay even 30 quid per week for a roof over their heads