ireland has lowest prisoner rate in eu

Yep, i see we join the other crime hotspot countries like Finland, Denmark and Sweden in having low imprisonment rates. That's a bad group to be part of

We also have a total rate of crime that is about 4 times less per capita than the UK, despite them putting a lot more people per capita in jail.

Shacklebolt wrote: »

Yes lets replace crime with fascism I'm sure thats a good exchange.

How is what I suggested fascism?

Zero tolerance has been tried elsewhere and shown in many cases to work. If you don't commit a crime then you won't be affected.

What's wrong with eliminating prison sentences for minor crimes that aren't anti-social. I'm talking about possession of blow and small fraud cases and the like.

Banning prison visits? So what? Make prison harder and more of a deterrent.

Forcing children to complete their education would seem like a no-brainer to me. At least that way we can ensure that all school leavers have a decent level of literacy and numeracy that will help the country in the long run.

Corporal punishment may seem harsh, but it is a deterrent.

Compulsory community service would entail teenagers going out and helping in their communities to instil a sense of responsibility and pride. Seems like a good idea to me.

And what is wrong with forcing parents to actually make their kids respect the law? If someone's teenage son is going out and getting locked every other night, why shouldn't the law step in a tell them to get their act in order? You can't jail parents as that would hurt their children, better to sanction them with withdrawal of their little luxuries.

And the dole in this country is too high. Getting €200 a week for nothing is an incentive to stay at home and rot. I see nothing wrong in reducing dole payments to force people to look for work. Say to people we'll provide you with all your essential needs, but if you want cold hard cash you'll have to go out and earn it. Simple as that.

Fascism goes after the weak. The problem in Ireland isn't the weak, it's the lazy and bad people who just don't care about how their actions affect others. They just want to take what they want and let the rest of us pay for it.

thelordofcheese wrote: »

it doesn't work because nobody actually plans on getting caught. Also, you can take your "if your innocent you have nothing to fear" rethoric and shove it. It's wrong.

I fail to see how there are any disadvantages to a zero tolerance policy. I'm not advocating the defining of new crimes nor of changing the levels of evidence required to secure a conviction. What I am saying is that if a crime is committed and the Gardai have enough evidence to prosecute, then they should. No more cautions or anything like that, no more deals, no more deciding not to pursue cases that may be too difficult.

At the very least it would be hassle for those who commit lots of anti-social crime as they would be in the courts constantly, at best it would place a black mark on a persons criminal record and that may make them think twice before committing a more serious crime.

I would also state that "if your innocent you have nothing to fear" is not rhetoric. I am not proposing the changing of how convictions are gained, nor how the Gardai seeks to prosecute people. If the Gards abuse their power to hassle an innocent person, then the evidence will show this and the person concerned will still be able to take legal action just as they can now.

thelordofcheese wrote: »

Do you know why we let prisoners have visitors? Heres a hint - what happens to people in prisons where there are no visitors allowed? Think places like gitmo. We let people have visitors to act as a checks and balances against prisoner abuse.

In that case implement an idependent visitation organisation group whose purpose is to act an intermediary between prisoner and families and to protect the interests of prisoners.

thelordofcheese wrote: »

basic literacy and numeracy should be achieved well before leaving cert, and certainly if you havn't then sticking around for the finer point of shakespeare probably won't do you any good.
I fail to see your point.

My point that Ireland doesn't have a big manufacturing base, nor do we have the sorts of natural resources that can support he employment of a large number of skilled or semi-skilled people.

Basic numeracy and literacy is good. But I think it is better to educate our young to a point where they could start a business if they wanted or have no trouble undertaking a degree if they so wished. It's about giving the young people of Ireland the skills they need to find and even create skilled well paid jobs.

There is nothing to lose and everything to gain from knowing more about the world.

It also ensures teenagers can't drop out of school early and be on the streets all day causign trouble.

thelordofcheese wrote: »

No, not really. Or at all.

Maybe it does or maybe it doesn't, but a lot of people do support it. And let's be honest children were more afraid to speak back to teachers back when it was in use.

thelordofcheese wrote: »

Forcing people to do something will have the exact opposite effect, especially in teenagers.

Such a scheme of community service would be undertaken as part of a teenagers basic education. It would serve to let them know there is a world beyong their own family and that their actions have an impact on other people.

There has been a growing trend in the USA for schools to require students to take part in some form of community service as part of their education and the evidence so far has shown that students who take part in this service achieve better academic results and are less likely to commit crime. (This wikipedia page goes over the basics: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_learning)

thelordofcheese wrote: »

This is the stupidest fucking thing ever, i don't know what the hell you're even trying to argue, that the state should raise everyones child? What? How do you even begin to define metrics for 'respect of the law'?
Get out.

With all due respect I did not suggest that the state should raise everyone's child, far from it.

What I am trying to say is that when you bring a child in to the world you have to fulfil certain responsibilities, one of which is to bring your child up in a way that encourages them to not cause trouble for other people. You can bring them up anyway you like, you can have them do or believe anything you want, so long as they don't go hurting other people.

If through your deliberate actions or through a lack of care your child is engaging in anti-social behaviour then you then have no choice but to take action to ensure they cease such activity. If you cannot control your child then you should ask for help. If you refuse to take action or ask for help (if needed) then I think is perfectly acceptable for the state to take action to get you to fulfil your basic parental responsibilities.

The state should take no interest whatsoever in you or your child's life unless the child is engaging in criminal or anti-social behaviour.

And as for metrics to define 'respect for the law' there is no need. They already exist, if a child makes a habit of breaking the law then the state should be going to their parents and suggesting strongly that they should get their child under control. Parents can blame society, poverty and deprivation all they want, that doesn't stop them from simply telling their kids to behave.

Let's look at an example, An 8-year old primary school pupil of drops a massive f-bomb at his teacher and then tries to strike her all because she told him to stop flicking paint at other pupils. When the child's mother was called in, her response was to not to apologise, but to ask what on earth the teacher did to provoke that response. When told of the circumstances the mothers response was to say "Well, you shouldn't have told him off then". In circumstances such as this I would strongly suggest that the mother needs a lesson in teaching her child to understand responsibility. This actually happened to an ex-housemate of mine, it was typical of the sort of incident that made her give up teaching after only three years in the job.

jumpguy wrote: »

Irelands prison system is very bland...it doesn't differ. It's all medium security prison. For example, a person going in for something like fraud could be in the same security prison and same prison wing as a rapist or murderer! Then there's the overcrowding issue, so that's really why we have such a low prison rate.

This is an AH thread on criminal justice, stop talking sense.

What the figures DON'T record is that Ireland has the highest rate of foreign-born prisoners in the world! Over a third of those committed to prison in 2008 were not born here!! 31.2% of inmates are currently foreign-born (march 2009) with 21.4% of the total inmate population born in sub-saharan africa alone!

mike65 wrote: »

I prolly should have inserted a for those not able to tell I wuz joking.

What the fcuk is that? My eyes hurt.

Reading through these posts scares me. Am i the only one who thinks that punishments should be appropriate for the crime commited?

I'm sure if we executed tv licence evaders everyone would pay up.

yay! score one for 0 tolerance:rolleyes:.

Surely fairness has a place in the whole process?

We all know the law can be wrong. Politicians make laws, not supreme all-knowing beings.

They should get Manacles, chains, hard labour, porridge, bread and water. No bloody internet or television in their cells, no fkng midget scumbags like Gilligan thinking they're top dog or above the law. No more soft ride for these pricks who steal from or assault or rape or kill the decent people of this country. F uck the scum. They should get what they really deserve instead of being housed in luxury at our expense. Fukkit, drop them off on Rockall with a tent and some fishing equipment. and no bait.



/steps back and waits for pinko liberal onslaught about human rights, the very thing that the scum they defend took away from their victims.