Scumbags stalk the streets because there's no place for them in jail.

conorhal · 21-06-2010 03:44PM

No wonder the scumbags laugh, 30% of prisoners sent to Mountjoy are automatically released upon processing. Prison isn't much of a deterrent if all you have to do is sigh your name (or 'X') and walk back out the door (probably to mug another granny)

Bring back flogging I say!!! Huzzah!

I reckon a bare assed flogging in the middle of De Square in Tallaght while all your mates laughed at you would be a million times more effective deterrent to general scumbaggery then sitting around in St. Patrick’s Institution playing pool, watching Sky Sports, and swapping drugs with your mates....

Odysseus · 21-06-2010 03:47PM

OutlawPete wrote: »

The Governor of Mountjoy who recently retired stated that almost all cells are overcrowded.

There was a docu on RTE years back and it showed one of the tiny windowless basement cells that was barely fit for one person and it had four single mattresses strewn on the floor.

I keep reading that the place is like a hotel, but anytime that I see the conditions being shown on TV, they seem to be anything but.

Well anytime I'm in there it sh!t. Even the areas for professional visits are terrible in m/joy. I have to say those who make the hotel claim in my experience have never been within the walls of any prison.

People sh!te on about making the environment worse, I'm all for the punishment side, but without a rehab element your going no where fast. Someone on protection is likely to be locked up 23hrs of the day with at least 3+ others. One prisoner was killed in his cell while in protection a few years ago, that is casts a poor light on the State.

I have no problem with people doing jail time if the crime they committed dictates that; however, just punishment will not solve anything. People can go on about liberals and tbh I would not hold liberal viewpoints, but what I think is worse is those who have no sense of the state of our jails talking b0llocks about something they have never seen.

18% on TR doesn't sound that high to me tbh.

Odysseus · 21-06-2010 03:50PM

Naos wrote: »

Who gives a f**k. What do they expect? They broke the law, they can sleep 10 to a tiny cell for all I care.

First part fair point. On the second part if one of your family was to end up an addict and in jail which can happen to any family, I wonder if you would hold the same view.

PCPhoto · 21-06-2010 03:52PM

this is the one topic I cant understand the other arguement..... why do these criminals feel the need to break the laws of civilised society ?

why are drugs allowed into prison ? - if someone has a habit, let them go cold turkey, let prison give them the opportunity to turn their lives around, the amount of criminals that blame drink/drugs for their behaviour is ridiculous.

I've been the victim of crime - it completely destroys your confidence, you become paranoid that the person will return or that they are watching you and theres nothing you can do, I spent the better part of 12months virtually reclusive - I would goto work and straight home, I didn't socialise, lost contact with friends, had no contact with people once I got home until I went to work the next day.... weekends were spent sitting indoors.

Career criminals are the scum of the earth and they are not properly punished for their crimes, the laws are too soft so they repeat ...and repeat and repeat.

Anyone with more than 5 criminal convictions should not be allowed receive any state benefits, anyone with more than 10 criminal convictions should get a mimimum of 10yrs for ANY criminal offence.

This automatic remission is a joke - judge gives a person 10yrs automatically thats now 8yrs and could be even shorter if they are on good behaviour.

What do they do when they get out .... they go straight back to their theiving/robbing/assaulting scumbag ways.

* just a side note but single mothers/parents allowance should be limited to max 2 children payments..... if ya dont learn your lesson the first time...and second time.... no way the government should use my tax money to help pay for your child for a third time.

rockmongrel · 21-06-2010 03:53PM

super_furry wrote: »

Surely boards law would have to invoke someone using the word 'scumbags', then following it up with a hysterical rant.

True, there will be some kinks to work out...
Three pre-requisites maybe
1) Hysterical rant on problem.
2) Some remark on "pinko liberals" or "commies"
3) SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!

Odysseus · 21-06-2010 03:58PM

PCPhoto wrote: »

this is the one topic I cant understand the other arguement..... why do these criminals feel the need to break the laws of civilised society ?

why are drugs allowed into prison ? - if someone has a habit, let them go cold turkey, let prison give them the opportunity to turn their lives around, the amount of criminals that blame drink/drugs for their behaviour is ridiculous.

Do you not have some professional experience in this area? Or am I mistaking you for someone else. If you have you will know that there is no one answer to the first question, and the second one is just as complex.

You want to deny people the right to drug treatment whilst in the care of the state, because that is what forced cold turkey equates to? Addiction is about much more than the chemical of abuse.

Overheal · 21-06-2010 03:58PM

PCPhoto wrote: »

explain to me WHY ?

they are in prison because they didn't respect the laws of this country (repeatedly in many cases) .... they continually abuse the legal system, the social welfare system and have no consideration for the effect their "crime" has on someone elses life.

people who are sent to prison should not have human rights while they are in prison - but once released should be permitted into society without prejudice (except kiddy fiddlers and rapists - they shouldnt be allowed out)

if someone commits a crime and is sentenced to jail the sentence should be something to deter them from re-offending, allowing criminals to socialise amongst themselves - even if it is within the confines of a prison - is simply wrong.

CRIMINALS GOTO PRISON FOR A PUNISHMENT - NOT A TEA PARTY WITH OTHER CRIMINALS.

Because they're still Human, if Human Criminals. Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights explicitly covers inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment.

You are overreacting and being irrational about this. They are not allowed to exercise all of their human rights while they remain a prisoner. For example, They are not given leave to exercise a Human's article 13 right to freedom of movement within their state's borders. And by being prisoners, they have already abandoned Article 1, "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood." But note that this article is not binding or indicative that they lose all of their Human Rights by abandoning Article 1. See also, article 14.

The Declaration of Human Rights goes to quite a few lengths to cover criminality clauses.

mikom · 21-06-2010 04:03PM

bluewolf wrote: »

I don't think not paying the tv licence or defaulting on debt is enough to warrant those conditions...

aDeener wrote: »

how many are currently in prison as a result of that?

The Irish Independent reports:
3,500 jailed for not paying fines
Louise Hogan and Shane Phelan – Irish Independent
A MASSIVE 3,500 people were jailed last year for failing to pay court-ordered fines — including more than 60 who ignored fines for not having a TV licence.
And despite chronic overcrowding in the country’s jails, the number of people who are put behind bars for minor offences is set to soar even further this year.
New figures obtained by the Irish Independent reveal there has been a jump of more than 150pc in the numbers jailed for failing to pay fines since 2007.
At least 62 of those jailed in the past year were thrown in prison for failing to pay court fines imposed for not having the €160 television licence.
That figure has doubled since 2006, when just 31 were jailed for this offence.

PCPhoto · 21-06-2010 04:04PM

Odysseus wrote: »

PCPhoto wrote: »

this is the one topic I cant understand the other arguement..... why do these criminals feel the need to break the laws of civilised society ?

why are drugs allowed into prison ? - if someone has a habit, let them go cold turkey, let prison give them the opportunity to turn their lives around, the amount of criminals that blame drink/drugs for their behaviour is ridiculous.

Do you not have some professional experience in this area? Or am I mistaking you for someone else. If you have you will know that there is no one answer to the first question, and the second one is just as complex.

You want to deny people the right to drug treatment whilst in the care of the state, because that is what forced cold turkey equates to? Addiction is about much more than the chemical of abuse.

if you are talking about giving someone medication which they require...no problem.

if you are talking allowing drugs in so the prisoners wont riot .... I have a problem.

if you are talking about giving someone a required amount of methadone to feed their addiction - I have an issue.... why not use the time they have inside to assist them in "getting off the gear" .... so by the time they go out of prison they no longer see drugs as an escape from normality of life.

yes - many criminals are addicted to drugs - but the time in prison should be used to ween them off, failure to follow the strict drug rehab would result in staying longer in prison .... in which case ALL long term prisoners would be drug free when released and would be in more of a position to re-integrate into society, short term prisoners (in which I mean those that cannot be weened off drugs before their sentence ends... can hopefully be weened down to a lesser addiction)

Overheal · 21-06-2010 04:06PM

So the state is paying thousands of euros in tax dollars per month to incarcerate people for failing to pay a €150 annual license fee.

Fantastic logic.

PCPhoto · 21-06-2010 04:06PM

heres another story for you all:

an example of the career criminals we're talking about"

A “professional burglar” who had an up to €2,000 a day drug habit has been jailed for five years, with the final two years suspended, for a number of burglaries committed over a three year period.

Dean Phelan (20) of Poddle Close, Crumlin pleaded guilty at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court to seven burglaries on dates between December 2006 and May 2009 at locations across the city.

Garda Declan O’Connor told Ms Una Tighe BL, prosecuting, that most of the burglaries were committed during the night when the house owners were asleep.

Most of the items taken were electrical goods such as televisions, laptops and cameras, which Phelan admitted he stole to sell on to feed his drug habit.

In two of the burglaries Phelan took the car keys and drove off in the owners’ vehicles.

Ms Sandra Frayne BL, defendin,g said Phelan was “drinking vodka and taking sleeping tablets,” when he had committed the burglaries.

The 20 year old became addicted to heroin and crack cocaine from the age of 16 and spend most of his life in and out of institutions.

Judge Patrick McCartan said Phelan had “perfected the art of burglary” as the owners were not disturbed bar on two occasions.

“You are a persistent thief and were spending up to €2,000 a day on your drug habit which indicates to me you must have been a particularly busy and active thief in order to meet this dependency.”

“You come from a good family and there are no explanations as to why you chose this route.”

Judge McCartan noted that Phelan has taken active steps to deal with his addictions and said on sentencing him that people need to “live with some degree of ease and comfort that they won’t be disturbed in their own homes.”

judges comments say it all really !!!

PCPhoto · 21-06-2010 04:08PM

Overheal wrote: »

So the state is paying thousands of euros in tax dollars per month to incarcerate people for failing to pay a €150 annual license fee.

Fantastic logic.

I dont know of anyone who has been jailed for not paying licence fee...its simple a scare tactic used (ok...there was a lady last year in the courts - think it was non payment of some fine imposed by the courts she was jailed for.... but from my understanding she was given plenty of time to pay but refused.)

*I'm open to correction on that tho

Overheal · 21-06-2010 04:09PM

PCPhoto wrote: »

heres another story for you all:

an example of the career criminals we're talking about"

judges comments say it all really !!!

OK.

Not sure where you were going with that.

Odysseus · 21-06-2010 04:10PM

mikom wrote: »

The Irish Independent reports:
3,500 jailed for not paying fines
Louise Hogan and Shane Phelan – Irish Independent
A MASSIVE 3,500 people were jailed last year for failing to pay court-ordered fines — including more than 60 who ignored fines for not having a TV licence.
And despite chronic overcrowding in the country’s jails, the number of people who are put behind bars for minor offences is set to soar even further this year.
New figures obtained by the Irish Independent reveal there has been a jump of more than 150pc in the numbers jailed for failing to pay fines since 2007.
At least 62 of those jailed in the past year were thrown in prison for failing to pay court fines imposed for not having the €160 television licence.
That figure has doubled since 2006, when just 31 were jailed for this offence.

Clearly the TV licence one is OTT, but in a good number of those cases based merely on my experience, I would say they deserved jail time. I see a lot of cases where its not about one fine its about a number of them over a prolonged time. In those cases I agree with jail time, chances where given often repeated ones and ignored, in those cases its a choice. I have often had people tell me they would rather do the short amount of jail time rather than pay the fine.

It's a sticking attitude, that translates to "rather than pay the fine for my crime, I would rather cost the tax-payer even more money by making them pay for my care".

Overheal · 21-06-2010 04:11PM

PCPhoto wrote: »

I dont know of anyone who has been jailed for not paying licence fee...its simple a scare tactic used (ok...there was a lady last year in the courts - think it was non payment of some fine imposed by the courts she was jailed for.... but from my understanding she was given plenty of time to pay but refused.)

*I'm open to correction on that tho

Mikom just posted the reference - 60 have been jailed for not paying those tv licenses.

Odysseus · 21-06-2010 04:12PM

I wouldn't really see that case as a career criminal, more of a repeat offender. Depends on the definition you use but.

mikom · 21-06-2010 04:15PM

PCPhoto wrote: »

I dont know of anyone who has been jailed for not paying licence fee...

I don't know anyone with AIDS.....

ScumLord · 21-06-2010 04:16PM

PCPhoto wrote: »

Anyone with more than 5 criminal convictions should not be allowed receive any state benefits, anyone with more than 10 criminal convictions should get a mimimum of 10yrs for ANY criminal offence.

The problem I see with that is now the criminal basically has nothing left but crime. They don't deserve the money true enough but taking it away from them means they either have to get a job (most unlikely) or just commit more crime.

That's why we need rehabilitation to fix the problem, as far as I can see all everybody wants is revenge and persecution. While that may give some temporary satisfaction to the masses it won't fix the problem and by all accounts only makes things much, much worse.

Overheal · 21-06-2010 04:19PM

Overheal wrote: »

So the state is paying thousands of euros in tax dollars per month to incarcerate people for failing to pay a €150 annual license fee.

Fantastic logic.

Seriously. Eddie Halvey's out on a Suspended Sentence for vehicular manslaughter the way I see it, and He's the one that should be in that cell, not some Joe Schmoe who didn't pony up €150 for an annual tv fee. a fee which btw, is completely bogus. Or the repeat conviction Stabby McStabberson from last week.

/out, ima rant.

Naos · 21-06-2010 04:27PM

bluewolf wrote: »

I don't think not paying the tv licence or defaulting on debt is enough to warrant those conditions...

Well firstly, why have they not paid their tv license in spit of ample warnings?

I'd sympathise with the second providing they did everything they could to pay.

OutlawPete wrote: »

Me.

For what reason?

Abrasax wrote: »

Prisoners are entitled to human rights, too.
10 to a cell would never pass, so it's a moot point.
http://www.iprt.ie/contents/1469

Why are prisoner numbers at an all time high now?

I wasn't suggesting they should sleep 10 to a cell.

Odysseus wrote: »

First part fair point. On the second part if one of your family was to end up an addict and in jail which can happen to any family, I wonder if you would hold the same view.

If a member of my family was an addict and did something to land them in jail such as robbing someone, then they would have to learn their lesson.

I'd still love them and help them change for the better, but it would not, I would like to think, lead me to believe they should be treated differently to any other thief.

Spudmonkey · 21-06-2010 04:29PM

Overheal wrote: »

Seriously. Eddie Halvey's out on a Suspended Sentence for vehicular manslaughter the way I see it, and He's the one that should be in that cell, not some Joe Schmoe who didn't pony up €150 for an annual tv fee. a fee which btw, is completely bogus. Or the repeat conviction Stabby McStabberson from last week.

/out, ima rant.

Both yourself and PCPhoto are arguing over two completely different scenarios. If ye are going to discuss the leniency of prison sentances, at least choose the same typecast.

Not drug addicted criminals versus those with overdue televisions licenses. Thats apples and oranges stuff!

Overheal · 21-06-2010 04:35PM

Spudmonkey wrote: »

Both yourself and PCPhoto are arguing over two completely different scenarios. If ye are going to discuss the leniency of prison sentances, at least choose the same typecast.

Not drug addicted criminals versus those with overdue televisions licenses. Thats apples and oranges stuff!

Not really.

Like ScumLord basically already said, imprison criminals that need imprisoning. Potheads and TV license dodgers do not. Heroin addicts stealing up to €2k a week or more to service an addiction? Lock em in. Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon with a history of previous convictions? In the slammer, son.

Spudmonkey · 21-06-2010 04:55PM

Overheal wrote: »

Not really.

Like ScumLord basically already said, imprison criminals that need imprisoning. Potheads and TV license dodgers do not. Heroin addicts stealing up to €2k a week or more to service an addiction? Lock em in. Aggravated assault with a deadly weapon with a history of previous convictions? In the slammer, son.

I'm not sure if yer arguments are all that different. Fair enough fine those who do not pay TV licences. But what happens when they keep refusing to pay?

Ye both have the same opinion on those who are repeat offenders.

Greyfox · 21-06-2010 04:57PM

PCPhoto wrote: »

why not use the time they have inside to assist them in "getting off the gear" .... so by the time they go out of prison they no longer see drugs as an escape from normality of life...failure to follow the strict drug rehab would result in staying longer in prison

Good point, I think it's riddiculous that cold turkey is not forced on addicted prisoners as part of their sentence, the benifits are obvious

If it was been addicted to heroin that causes somebody to commit a crime surely the first thing that should be done is get the person off heroin. But instead like other contries we allow criminals to continue to use drugs so they they will be less hassle to manage.

rantyface · 21-06-2010 05:10PM

We don't have the money to lock more people up. It already costs a lot of money considering there is little to benefit from it. People are already paying taxes through their teeth, and we can barely afford to support elderly people, our education system is awful, our universities are broke, our roads are disintigrating...

Would you all propose increasing taxes or cutting back on healthcare and education in order to lock people up, and benefit nobody (except maybe the criminal if he does "learn a lesson" but that's unlikely)?

Have you ever really been the victims of crime? I was mugged and sexually assualted on a train and I was quite happy with the resolution.

Overheal · 21-06-2010 05:11PM

Greyfox wrote: »

Good point, I think it's riddiculous that cold turkey is not forced on addicted prisoners as part of their sentence, the benifits are obvious

Are you a PhD in Internal Medicine?

My reading of Cold Turkey is that its much more dangerous than weening, as it can cause the body to enter shock, seizures, etc. and in some cases, even death.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroin_withdrawal

ScumLord · 21-06-2010 05:23PM

Spudmonkey wrote: »

I'm not sure if yer arguments are all that different. Fair enough fine those who do not pay TV licences. But what happens when they keep refusing to pay?

Well if you don't have a license for your car your banned from the road so I guess the best thing is to ban them from owning a TV. Get the TV inspector and a guard to call around at some random interval and if a TV is found on the premises it's destroyed. It just seems so wrong to send someone to prison for not having a license that RTE has no right to make you pay for in the first place as they too are breaking EU licensing laws.

Abrasax · 21-06-2010 05:32PM

My understanding is that people who refuse to pay fines/TV licences tend not to spend too much time locked up, a day or two at most, despite the length of time to which they are sentenced.
I'd love to get a break down of the statisitcs. Are the record number of prisoners due to more people defaulting on fines or are other crimes making up the numbers.
What crimes have the 18% on TR committed?

Mike 1972 · 21-06-2010 06:19PM

Naos wrote: »

Who gives a f**k. What do they expect? They broke the law,

Show me someone who reckons theyve never broken the law and Ill show you a self deluded hypocrite.

genericguy · 21-06-2010 06:55PM

orourkeda wrote: »

Does this problem really have a solution or do we have to accept the fact that crime is just a lifestyle choice for some people?

yep, there're no diseases that cause crime, it's not a crime gene, it's not because of eating too much macdonalds, it isn't the fault of the headshops and i'll be damned if i don't know some extremely upstanding members of society whose parents were cnuts.

long story short, some people are just pricks.

new prisons should be four walls and a roof, no cells, no pool tables, no tv and no heroin. upon entry, the offence one someone has committed and their sentence should be broadcast over a tannoy to the rest of the population - see how many of the bastids are so quick to head back in then.

Scumbags stalk the streets because there's no place for them in jail.

Comments