Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Three convicted murderers working in Belfast shopping center.

Options
1…6781012

Comments

  • Options
    #272
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    CaptainInsano wrote: »
    Or get a dodgy friend to follow them.
    So they would have "dodgy friends" just sitting around outside their workplace, ready to take the call to pursue customers as soon as they left the shop? Seems a bit elaborate, would be more of an issue if they were repeat offenders for burglary and the like to be honest.


  • Options
    #273
    bucketybuck
    Registered Users Posts: 18,199 ✭✭✭✭bucketybuck


    Laois6556 wrote: »
    Hello, I've answered.

    No, you have not, and in multiple posts such as the one I have quoted you could have stated your answer ten times over. That you will not is quite telling.

    It is clear you are debating dishonestly and avoiding the very simple question. Your posts are really quite foolish, which is disappointing considering how many times you are posting to the thread.


  • Options
    #274
    CaptainInsano
    Closed Accounts Posts: 457 ✭✭CaptainInsano


    Billy86 wrote: »
    I don't recall being asked that question before in this thread, but I agree that proximity to their victims families could represent and issue, and that there wouldn't have been much of an argument against relocating the to other areas, even other counties, to create some distance.
    It wouldn't have been a story for the papers either. As bad a tactic it was, and it was a poorly written article, 3 murderers in one shop is something that I personally would like to know about.


  • Options
    #275
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    Laois6556 wrote: »
    You'll need to re-read those posts then.
    Done...


    Osarusan: do you want them to try and get some kind of job and leave some kind of normal life? Or are you happy for newspapers to harass them, 'out' them, and make it much less likely that they can get any kind of employment?

    You: Neither of those 2 options are great but the second one is preferable to the first.



    Me: So do you hope to pay for their dole for the rest of their lives, or do you hope to see an increase in crime?

    You: obviously neither.


  • Options
    #276
    Mr. CooL ICE
    Registered Users Posts: 17,515 ✭✭✭✭Mr. CooL ICE


    CaptainInsano wrote: »
    You said to be yesterday that I said these guys should be treated by mob rule. I'd like you to find the post where I said, seeing as you ignored me when I asked yesterday after repeatedly accusing me of saying these men shouldn't be allowed to work.

    I must have missed your reply and I don't recall accusing you of wanting a lynch mob. If you are referring to this post, then read it again:
    Because your opinion of how these criminals should be handled is emotively driven.

    The justice system has seen fit that they were sentenced, served their sentences and have been released. If the justice system was emotively driven, they would have been handled by a blood thirsty lynch mob. Luckily enough, society in this part of the world doesn't work like that.

    I did not accuse you of wanting a lynch mob in this post.

    Anyway, to answer your reply to that post...
    CaptainInsano wrote: »
    You obviously are completely unaware of my view point.
    You just saw me discussing a very specific topic about rehabilitation with a person who you agreed with earlier in the thread and assumed I was someone calling for these guys' heads, didn't you?

    Nope, not at all. If anything, my post was referencing Laois6556


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #277
    CaptainInsano
    Closed Accounts Posts: 457 ✭✭CaptainInsano


    Billy86 wrote: »
    So they would have "dodgy friends" just sitting around outside their workplace, ready to take the call to pursue customers as soon as they left the shop? Seems a bit elaborate, would be more of an issue if they were repeat offenders for burglary and the like to be honest.

    I'm just pointing out how easy it would be to do if they were so inclined. As was the discussion you were having.


  • Options
    #278
    Laois6556
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 624 ✭✭✭Laois6556


    bucketybuck wrote: »
    No, you have not, and in multiple posts such as the one I have quoted you could have stated your answer ten times over. That you will not is quite telling.

    It is clear you are debating dishonestly and avoiding the very simple question. Your posts are really quite foolish, which is disappointing considering how many times you are posting to the thread.

    I have answered. It's very clear but maybe you're getting confused with someone making up stuff that I've said.


  • Options
    #279
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    CaptainInsano wrote: »
    It wouldn't have been a story for the papers either. As bad a tactic it was, and it was a poorly written article, 3 murderers in one shop is something that I personally would like to know about.

    Don't get me wrong, it's a bit of a strange case. I would have no problem with the place refusing to hire all three together (or even to hire in the first place), what gets Mr with this story is that they knew all three had served ling stretches and we're definite at least one was for murder, but only fired them after this tabloid piece. The end result benefits nobody, unfortunately.


  • Options
    #280
    CaptainInsano
    Closed Accounts Posts: 457 ✭✭CaptainInsano


    bucketybuck wrote: »
    No, you have not, and in multiple posts such as the one I have quoted you could have stated your answer ten times over. That you will not is quite telling.

    It is clear you are debating dishonestly and avoiding the very simple question. Your posts are really quite foolish, which is disappointing considering how many times you are posting to the thread.

    Just go and find the post where he said it and stop cluttering the place up with your same question over and over! You're adding nothing to the debate yourself.


  • Options
    #281
    bucketybuck
    Registered Users Posts: 18,199 ✭✭✭✭bucketybuck


    CaptainInsano wrote: »
    It wouldn't have been a story for the papers either. As bad a tactic it was, and it was a poorly written article, 3 murderers in one shop is something that I personally would like to know about.

    Again, why is it a surprise that they were in the same shop? The pool of companies that will hire convicted murderers would be incredibly small I would imagine, for obvious reasons. This would only increase the likelihood that if a convicted murderer is going to get a job, that it is in the same place as another convicted murderer.

    More to the point, does it actually matter?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #282
    Qualitymark
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,824 ✭✭✭Qualitymark


    Billy86 wrote: »
    They would have to run out of the shop in pursuit of them in the middle of their shift to get anywhere with that though, and hope to be parked near them or able to get a taxi as soon as they left. Either that of try out every door I the surrounding area whenever they cut a key. It's just not realistic.

    Good thing murderers are so meticulous about keeping the rules on break times.


  • Options
    #283
    Mal-Adjusted
    Registered Users Posts: 3,578 ✭✭✭Mal-Adjusted


    Laois6556 wrote: »
    The off chance? Belfast isn't that big. First of all they get a very light punishment,

    I'm in Galway and Iv'e gone years without seeing people i know are here and this is a much smaller than Belfast. A city is a very easy place to get lost in.
    Laois6556 wrote: »
    the least that should happen when they're out is that they should be banned from the place where they murdered their victims, no matter how big or small that place is.

    Ban them from where,that neighborhood? Belfast? Northern Ireland? the U.K? What if a family member lives nowhere near where the crime took place?
    Laois6556 wrote: »
    If they're reformed characters they would understand this.
    You've brought this up a few times and it doesn't really hold water. Assuming they're reformed, a person still has to live. It's not really an option to hide away up the mountains for the rest of their lives.


  • Options
    #284
    bucketybuck
    Registered Users Posts: 18,199 ✭✭✭✭bucketybuck


    Laois6556 wrote: »
    I have answered. It's very clear but maybe you're getting confused with someone making up stuff that I've said.

    I have read all of your posts and cannot see an answer to the question. I do not believe you when you keep repeating that you have already answered.

    I respectfully ask that you take a few seconds in among your dozens of posts in this thread to answer the question asked.


  • Options
    #285
    Mr. CooL ICE
    Registered Users Posts: 17,515 ✭✭✭✭Mr. CooL ICE


    bucketybuck wrote: »
    I have read all of your posts and cannot see an answer to the question. I do not believe you when you keep repeating that you have already answered.

    I respectfully ask that you take a few seconds in among your dozens of posts in this thread to answer the question asked.

    Or even quote it. That would suffice, for me at least.


  • Options
    #286
    CaptainInsano
    Closed Accounts Posts: 457 ✭✭CaptainInsano


    Billy86 wrote: »
    Don't get me wrong, it's a bit of a strange case. I would have no problem with the place refusing to hire all three together (or even to hire in the first place), what gets Mr with this story is that they knew all three had served ling stretches and we're definite at least one was for murder, but only fired them after this tabloid piece. The end result benefits nobody, unfortunately.

    The company's stance was that they were unaware of their convictions and unaware or the location to the victim's families so they sacked them ie we are going to lose business now. They only positive now is that it might bring some relief to the family, maybe they'll get other jobs closer to the families, maybe they'll re offend. We'll just have to wait and see I suppose.


  • Options
    #287
    bucketybuck
    Registered Users Posts: 18,199 ✭✭✭✭bucketybuck


    Nicolas Cage wrote: »
    Or even quote it. That would suffice, for me at least.

    I dread to think what unrelated post he would quote and then claim was an answer to the question, before dodging the issue for another ten pages.

    The simple thing would be to quickly and clearly answer the question, that he will not do so speaks to his motives.


  • Options
    #288
    Laois6556
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 624 ✭✭✭Laois6556


    Billy86 wrote: »
    Done...


    Osarusan: do you want them to try and get some kind of job and leave some kind of normal life? Or are you happy for newspapers to harass them, 'out' them, and make it much less likely that they can get any kind of employment?

    You: Neither of those 2 options are great but the second one is preferable to the first.



    Me: So do you hope to pay for their dole for the rest of their lives, or do you hope to see an increase in crime?

    You: obviously neither.

    So why did you say that I want them hounded out of their jobs over earning a living. So you don't want them employed?
    I was given the choice between two options and asked what I hoped would happen. You just made up what you think or hoped I said.
    You lied in other words.


  • Options
    #289
    bucketybuck
    Registered Users Posts: 18,199 ✭✭✭✭bucketybuck


    CaptainInsano wrote: »
    They only positive now is that it might bring some relief to the family, maybe they'll get other jobs closer to the families, maybe they'll re offend. We'll just have to wait and see I suppose.

    The fact that these outcomes are now more likely than before hardly seems to be a positive.


  • Options
    #290
    CaptainInsano
    Closed Accounts Posts: 457 ✭✭CaptainInsano


    Nicolas Cage wrote: »
    Or even quote it. That would suffice, for me at least.

    Can you respond to my previous questions to you please? You being the one hounding people to quote posts.


  • Options
    #291
    Laois6556
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 624 ✭✭✭Laois6556


    Mal-Adjusted wrote: »
    I'm in Galway and Iv'e gone years without seeing people i know are here and this is a much smaller than Belfast. A city is a very easy place to get lost in.



    Ban them from where,that neighborhood? Belfast? Northern Ireland? the U.K? What if a family member lives nowhere near where the crime took place?


    You've brought this up a few times and it doesn't really hold water. Assuming they're reformed, a person still has to live. It's not really an option to hide away up the mountains for the rest of their lives.

    Galway is tiny!

    Ban them from where they committed their crimes, so Belfast in this case.

    Not up a mountain but not where they killed their victims for sure.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #292
    CaptainInsano
    Closed Accounts Posts: 457 ✭✭CaptainInsano


    bucketybuck wrote: »
    The fact that these outcomes are now more likely than before hardly seems to be a positive.

    In response to your previous post, the company supposedly doesn't hire serious offenders, hence my surprise. Are you really saying you wouldnt like to know if three murderers are working in your local shop? It really wouldn't bother you one bit? And how can you possibly say that these outcomes are more likely now? Do you not think it's more likely that they go further away where they are not known?


  • Options
    #293
    Laois6556
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 624 ✭✭✭Laois6556


    bucketybuck wrote: »
    I have read all of your posts and cannot see an answer to the question. I do not believe you when you keep repeating that you have already answered.

    I respectfully ask that you take a few seconds in among your dozens of posts in this thread to answer the question asked.

    A few pages back I said they should work in a different area to where they committed their crimes, I think that's easy enough to understand.


  • Options
    #294
    Mr. CooL ICE
    Registered Users Posts: 17,515 ✭✭✭✭Mr. CooL ICE


    CaptainInsano wrote: »
    Can you respond to my previous questions to you please? You being the one hounding people to quote posts.

    /sigh


  • Options
    #295
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    MOD

    "You're a liar"
    "I'm not lying, you are!"
    "No I'm not, you are!!"

    Jaysus lads give it a rest, keep it civil and on topic please


  • Options
    #296
    CaptainInsano
    Closed Accounts Posts: 457 ✭✭CaptainInsano


    Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

    Ban them from where,that neighborhood? Belfast? Northern Ireland? the U.K? What if a family member lives nowhere near where the crime took place

    They do live nearby. A move to a different county would probably suffice.


  • Options
    #297
    CaptainInsano
    Closed Accounts Posts: 457 ✭✭CaptainInsano


    Nicolas Cage wrote: »
    I must have missed your reply and I don't recall accusing you of wanting a lynch mob. If you are referring to this post, then read it again:



    I did not accuse you of wanting a lynch mob in this post.

    Anyway, to answer your reply to that post...



    Nope, not at all. If anything, my post was referencing Laois6556

    Apologies I missed it. But yeah that clears nothing up thanks, not sure why you'd quote me in reference to another poster. Don't see how my view is not based on logic, we seem to agree for the most part. I'll just assume you didn't read my posts. Back on topic anyway.


  • Options
    #298
    Mr. CooL ICE
    Registered Users Posts: 17,515 ✭✭✭✭Mr. CooL ICE


    CaptainInsano wrote: »
    Apologies I missed it. But yeah that clears nothing up thanks, not sure why you'd quote me in reference to another poster. Don't see how my view is not based on logic, we seem to agree for the most part. I'll just assume you didn't read my posts. Back on topic anyway.

    I quoted you in reference to another poster, because you were discussing another poster's opinion. So yes, I read your posts.


  • Options
    #299
    CaptainInsano
    Closed Accounts Posts: 457 ✭✭CaptainInsano


    Nicolas Cage wrote: »
    I quoted you in reference to another poster, because you were discussing another poster's opinion. So yes, I read your posts.

    You said I was emotively driven in how these men should be handled and not logical . How is wanting them to find work not logical?


  • Options
    #300
    Mal-Adjusted
    Registered Users Posts: 3,578 ✭✭✭Mal-Adjusted


    Laois6556 wrote: »
    Galway is tiny!
    that kinda reinforces my point.
    Laois6556 wrote: »
    Ban them from where they committed their crimes, so Belfast in this case.
    CaptainInsano wrote: »
    They do live nearby. A move to a different county would probably suffice.
    assuming they can get a job as easily in Fermannagh as they can in Belfast. like i said, a person still has to eat.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #301
    bucketybuck
    Registered Users Posts: 18,199 ✭✭✭✭bucketybuck


    CaptainInsano wrote: »
    They only positive now is that it might bring some relief to the family, maybe they'll get other jobs closer to the families, maybe they'll re offend. We'll just have to wait and see I suppose.
    bucketybuck wrote: »
    The fact that these outcomes are now more likely than before hardly seems to be a positive.
    CaptainInsano wrote: »
    And how can you possibly say that these outcomes are more likely now? Do you not think it's more likely that they go further away where they are not known?

    Its very possible that they go further away, however its equally as possible that they become more visible to the families. Don't forget, it wasn't the families that complained about having to see these guys every day, its very possible the families had no clue where they were at all. That situation could have remained, but instead we now have a non-zero chance that the murderers will end up closer to the families involved. I'm not convinced the staus-quo wasn't a better choice.

    CaptainInsano wrote: »
    In response to your previous post, the company supposedly doesn't hire serious offenders, hence my surprise. Are you really saying you wouldnt like to know if three murderers are working in your local shop?

    Would I like to know? Probably, yes, though I don't believe the knowledge would actually affect my life in any way. But thats a different question to whether I think they should automatically be sacked once I become aware of the fact they are convicted murderers. As I said previously, you can meet/pass by thousands upon thousands of convicted criminals in your lifetime and probably don't even know it.


Advertisement