Just as a matter of interest, how precisely have these 'liberal lefty tree huggers' engineered this general situation? What have they put in place?
Liam Byrne wrote: » We used to have corporal and capital punishment, and it worked; we went all soft and pretended it was a bad idea, and the current generation of scum are a million times worse.
asdasd wrote: » Its more what (............)State.
mernj wrote: » Ive lived in East Wall for the last 4 years, and we always had trouble with the same group of kids that were arrested for the murder. The guy suspected for shooting is my neighbour who Id say hi to most days, and was a ringleader in stoning our house, breaking our windows and denting our cars when we first moved to East Wall! luckily theyve left us alone for the last year after we rang the guards several times, spoke to the local shop owner, local butcher, head of residents association and the neighbours!!!! As far as I can see they target newbies, or people that are vulnerable / have had rows with, and if you react (which we regrettably did) they find it funny, and keep after you. Someone obviously had a word with them and they eventually left us alone. Went out after them a few times, and I was threatened that I wont have a car or a house if I didnt watch myself! ... and my neighbours were threatened by a nine inch knife! I just cant believe its the same groups of kids that have now killed someone - I just thought they were vandals, certainly not capable of murder!!......
Yet when sentences were horrendous for even minor offences, there was a higher rate of crime than now.
HAGI wrote: » i live on their road to didnt think any1 in east wall was capable of murder
asdasd wrote: » Its more what they oppose. The judicary, largely coming from the same elite classes as most liberals, has adopted the liberal stance of seeing victimisers as victims i.e. criminality is caused by poverty. This kind of nonsense can be disproven by a two year old. it is a class issue. the rich and upper middle classes can afford to be liberal, because street criminality is largely directed against the poor. Some parts of Dublin have 20 times more chance of a house being broken into than others, and they would be poor areas. ( which puts a lie to sociological cant about the system picking on "working class" criminals. If the criminal classes were popping out to Dalkey, abseiling from the chandelier ,whilst avoiding the dogs and lasers, to steal the rare diamond I , for one, would not give a ****. I bet sentences would be tougher, though). So the upper middle classes dont care. It is class war. They are prepared to hide behind faux-radicalism, and sanctimonious self-regarding claptrap about protecting the vulnerable. Clearly the working class old are more vulnerable than the criminal young, the single working man more vulnerable than the criminal gang, the gunless more vulnerable than criminal with the gun. About this they say nothing, and are prepared to allow entire Estates be controlled by criminals in case the criminals "human rights" be hampered, and if we make jail tougher they complain more, and if sentences go higher even more. why wouldnt they? Criminality doesnt affect them. Lack of concern about it is a proxy display of wealth. If it ever does affect the citizens of Dalkey to the same extent it affects the citizens of East Wall we will be living in a police State.
Nodin wrote: » ......only in respect of the firearm. 'Cider crazed youth' was a popular tabloideque expression at the time. I'm not suprised to see this thread has become the usual mixture of 'rosy past meets lynch mob'.
tech77 wrote: » Would this be a fair summary of the last few pages: 1) A good few posters, many from East Wall (or other areas affected by oppressive antisocial behaviour) who have to deal with this sh1t on a daily basis, crying out for harsher punishment of these scummers (knowing well that rehab/the softly-softly approach can only do so much). 2) a couple of liberal dissenters (with no real experience of the reality of antisocial scummers) espousing lofty ideals and tut-tutting at anything other than rehabilitation.
cougar1 wrote: » Oh yes I remember the days, so I do, the summers were longer, beautiful scorching days, it was bright till midnight, you could leave your doors wide open over night, the kids mowed your lawn for free, fantastic times....
cougar1 wrote: » ....you must think we are all living in a dream mate, 'cider crazed yoof' were nothing like the scummers now....
Terry wrote: » Right. Everyone here needs to calm down. Yes, there has been a murder, but throweing hissy fits here won't help. Please think before you post and if you are seeing red, then don't post. No more bebo links and no more alluding to the names of anyone who may or may not be involved.
When are the people of Ireland going to say "enough is enough", and protest outside the Dail over the indecicive bungling by the powers that be.
SpookyDoll wrote: » Yep, has tipping point not been reached here? I have to admit I am also more angry about this than I have been about anything in a long time. This was all so preventable. I would protest in a heartbeat too.
Darragh29 wrote: » It's an absolute fu*king outrage, there is no other way to describe it.
Zulu wrote: » Which would be what? Can anyone who suggest having the army on the streets please answer the questions: What would the Army do exactly? Just be a presence?? Would you give them the power to restrain people? Even arrest people?? Would you train the army in civil law so this would be legit? Or are you just looking for a uniformed vigilante group to be present?
Botany Bay wrote: » I know i'll be accussed of being irrational, ridiculous and immoral. But like the murder of the two Polish guys in Drimnagh. This case seems to resonate to the point where, killing the perpetrators is the only logical course of action. Consider it for just a moment. It's not a case of justice, revenge, or even some kneejerk reaction. If anything it's preventative. If this 13 year old, committed this murder, then he'll likely, in the event that he's convicted. Will serve a maximum of 12-15 years. I'd say he'd be out in about 10. He'll have most of his twenties ahead of him, and unlikely will have changed in any way. He'll probably commit or will have a tendancy to commit further crimes. He'll forever be a burden on society and a threat to many innocent civilians. So what is the point in keeping him alive??? I said at the time, that the 16 year old. Who murdered those two Polish guys, should get a death sentence. I still believe that, and would extend the same courtesy to the individual who killed that man last night. Regardless of what people may say. Two human lives are not equal. There are a great many human beings in society who contribute nothing but grief and misery to the rest. I fail to see why they should be kept alive.
dan719 wrote: » You want to execute a thirteen year old? Beyond words....:rolleyes:
dan719 wrote: » Ignoring the fact that I disagree with capital punishment in all cases,your willing to put to death a persom whom;is not legally allowed to drink or smoke in this state. not old enough to have a job, vote or claim state welfare. is neither physically or mentally developed Not only that but you happily ignore that the death penalty does not exist in Ireland. I reckon you should go back to dreaming up your twisted little punishments.
marcsignal wrote: » has it not been established that this 13 yr old boy is actually a 16 yr old ? I'm not going to comment on whether he should be strung up or not, but I will say i'm sometimes slightly amused by some of the reactions of some posters that would appear to lean to the left on these issues. I'd guess (and it's just a guess mind), that if this individual was a serial paedophile or rapist, the feminist left would want to cut his balls off without delay. If he was a right wing skinhead who torched a centre for Asylum Seekers and burned several of them to death as they slept, many of those leaning left would want him strung up from the nearest lamp post. Its just my observation, that peoples principles can sometimes be very 'wishy washy', depending on the circumstances.
Darragh29 wrote: » Look, I don't give a monkey's fu*k what his motives might have been or what his politics are.
Darragh29 wrote: » Look, I don't give a monkey's fu*k what his motives might have been or what his politics are. It doesn't matter to me. What does matter is the crime, nothing else, not his background or his drunken father who probably spends all day in the pub and all night smoking joints. We have become the biggest nation of serial apologists that now seeks to explain away everything that goes wrong, as being caused by social injustice and this that and the other. If you go down to any District Court in Dublin, you will see solicitor after solicitor getting on their feet like prostitutes, making up all sorts of excuses as to why their client did X, Y, or Z. You'll see their tracksuit wearing scumbag clients, who the state is paying for, smirking and laughing at the whole process before them, laughing at the solicitor defending them, laughing at the judge sentencing them, laughing at the public paying for the whole thing... How is anyone meant to have respect for society when this is what is going on???
Terry wrote: » Listen, I see where you're coming from, but you really need to tone it down a bit. Calling for heads to roll will not get your arguement across properly. Just calm down a little before posting again. Sorry if that seems condescending.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/24615175400ae675a1f589d8e5bd3285.svg)
