Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Another light sentence handed down by the courts

13567…10

Comments

  • #62
    NorthStars
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,120 ✭✭✭NorthStars


    jobbridge4life wrote: »
    Killing them would be more effective.

    And cheaper....


  • #63
    Gringo180
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,204 ✭✭✭Gringo180


    Should be put in the back of a van and giving the same treatment he dished out to his victim.


  • #64
    Sand
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,280 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    jobbridge4life wrote: »
    ...but

    (I hate being hated in threads but here we go again)

    All of these ancillary facts that you mention are disproportionately associated with illegal activity and even more so coming before the courts and entanglement in the justice system. Obviously it can be used as 'get out of jail free card' but at the same time are we to ignore that fact? And if we do will it mean more peace and justice or just arbitrary incarceration?

    Honestly IDK but I think the evidence EVIDENCE regarding mass incarceration is fairly conclusive at this point.

    It will hardly be arbitrary if it is based on a crime being committed and proven.


  • #65
    eviltwin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    jobbridge4life wrote: »
    ...but

    (I hate being hated in threads but here we go again)

    All of these ancillary facts that you mention are disproportionately associated with illegal activity and even more so coming before the courts and entanglement in the justice system. Obviously it can be used as 'get out of jail free card' but at the same time are we to ignore that fact? And if we do will it mean more peace and justice or just arbitrary incarceration?

    Honestly IDK but I think the evidence EVIDENCE regarding mass incarceration is fairly conclusive at this point.

    Plenty of people, a majority, with a similar background don't end up doing what this scrote did. I could just about understand it if he was doing something for profit because he was skint but he ran at a bloke and kicked him in the head....How does a tough life minimise that?


  • #66
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    NorthStars wrote: »
    And cheaper....

    Assuming an 'efficient' system.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    cloud493
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,835 ✭✭✭✭cloud493


    He said he would like to continue with his drug treatment programme as he only really gets into trouble when he is intoxicated.

    Christ, boggles the mind.


  • #68
    the_syco
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,310 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    jobbridge4life wrote: »
    What if that is worse for us all in the long term? Other jurisdictions have enjoyed 'law and order' rhetoric loving politicians who promised more and longer custodial sentences with harsher conditions and they are now facing the ruinous impact of that dogma. Surely we should be asking what works? Not what satisfies our immediate desire for retribution.
    It doesn't rehabilitate them, but it does give them a reason why not to do it.
    jobbridge4life wrote: »
    Do you have an non-anecdotal evidence to verify that?
    52 convictions and no time spent in jail would generally mean that no prison time for convictions is not working.
    jobbridge4life wrote: »
    Obviously it can be used as 'get out of jail free card' but at the same time are we to ignore that fact? And if we do will it mean more peace and justice or just arbitrary incarceration?
    Yes, we should ignore their background. And yes, they will be scumbags that attack people when they get out of the prison again, but they are scumbags who attack people regardless, so it may deter some scumbags from doing something stupid.


  • #69
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    Sand wrote: »
    It will hardly be arbitrary if it is based on a crime being committed and proven.

    But even that, unfortunately, can be entirely arbitrary. Take for instance the discrepancies between the criminalisation of black youth in america for drugs crimes vs white youth. Both engage in illegal drug consumption at roughly equal rates... care to take a guess which group are caught, convicted and incarcerated at wildly higher rates?

    The same can be said re drug crime in European countries between higher/middle class youth and their poorer compatriots.


  • #70
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    eviltwin wrote: »
    Plenty of people, a majority, with a similar background don't end up doing what this scrote did.

    I have heard this line argument plenty of times and I sympathize with it. At the end of the day however when boiled down to its essentials, it is little more than survival of the fittest argument. It also nullifies the other negatives that tend to go along with the same deprivation statistics, for instance familial breakdown, domestic violence, sexual violence, child abuse activity. Not everyone in a particular 'class' of individuals needs to suffer the same thing for it to become a class trait. It is beyond wonderful that a few individuals born into homelessness have become billionaires but that doesn't in anyway invalidate all the evidence that demonstrates the huge disadvantage that those born into homelessness face.
    eviltwin wrote: »
    I could just about understand it if he was doing something for profit because he was skint but he ran at a bloke and kicked him in the head....How does a tough life minimise that?

    There could be a literally endless list of reasons but I won't pretend to be a sociologist or psychologist. As a criminologist it is well established fact that the behavior we witness and are raised to accept as 'normal' is very often the same criminal behavior we replicate.


  • #71
    eviltwin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    jobbridge4life wrote: »
    I have heard this line argument plenty of times and I sympathize with it. At the end of the day however when boiled down to its essentials, it is little more than survival of the fittest argument. It also nullifies the other negatives that tend to go along with the same deprivation statistics, for instance familial breakdown, domestic violence, sexual violence, child abuse activity. Not everyone in a particular 'class' of individuals needs to suffer the same thing for it to become a class trait. It is beyond wonderful that a few individuals born into homelessness have become billionaires but that doesn't in anyway invalidate all the evidence that demonstrates the huge disadvantage that those born into homelessness face.



    There could be a literally endless list of reasons but I won't pretend to be a sociologist or psychologist. As a criminologist it is well established fact that the behavior we witness and are raised to accept as 'normal' is very often the same criminal behavior we replicate.

    It's a handy excuse though isn't it? It doesn't make it easier for the victim.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    Pinch Flat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,779 ✭✭✭Pinch Flat


    I alway find these stories peculiar. Plenty of room for people who don't pay TV licences, fail to have dog licences or other relatively minor offences. Yet there's no room for these sociopathic scumbags. Strange.


  • #73
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    the_syco wrote: »
    It doesn't rehabilitate them, but it does give them a reason why not to do it.

    That would be the same thing, with respect. My argument is that punishment and fear based approaches tend to be ineffective unless, as I have already said, they are as extreme as involving the death penalty (only for comparatively minor crimes) or other forms of torture.
    the_syco wrote: »
    52 convictions and no time spent in jail would generally mean that no prison time for convictions is not working.

    I haven't suggest 'no time spent in jail' as an effective remedy for anything.
    the_syco wrote: »
    Yes, we should ignore their background. And yes, they will be scumbags that attack people when they get out of the prison again, but they are scumbags who attack people regardless, so it may deter some scumbags from doing something stupid.

    Whats a scumbag? Before you answer you might want to consult the thread on whether teddy boy is the new fashion.


  • #74
    obezyana
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,498 ✭✭✭obezyana


    mynamejeff wrote: »
    neck tattoos really say a lot about a person dont they ......

    And what do neck tattoos say about a person?


  • #75
    shamrock2004
    Closed Accounts Posts: 603 ✭✭✭shamrock2004


    Let's not forget this beauty who randomly stabbed 2 people off grafton street (while out on bail) for absolutely no reason and knocked the bollox out of one of the victim's girlfriend while at it. The judicial system then buys him a punch bag to help him with his aggression.

    http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/violent-thug-given-punchbag-in-cell-to-curb-aggression-29918940.html

    I also sympathise with the gardai who go through all the hoops preparing case files to only then have some bat **** crazy judge throw it all back in the garda's and victim's face with a suspended sentence / bail condition


  • #76
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,461 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    jobbridge4life wrote: »
    That isn't evidence, its an anecdote and as the saying goes, the plural of anecdote is not evidence its anecdotes.

    Look I am not saying that a custodial sentence would have been inappropriate in this instance I am simply stating that the foaming at the mouth, lock em all up and throw away the key is universally a disaster. We need a nuanced calm response.

    Who is foaming at the mouth now ? I simply stated non custodial sentencing has clearly been no deterrent. The amount you see with 50 odd previous and getting away.


  • #77
    sdanseo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 9,299 ✭✭✭sdanseo


    It's true that there's a fine line between allowing someone a chance to reform themselves and locking them away. If we veer too much toward the latter we'll end up like the US with 2% of the population behind bars.

    This, on the other hand, and some of the incidents mentioned above are so far beyond that fine line that it's a speck in the distance. Government needs to look at a review of sentences like this, even a six month sentence behind bars would do more to act as a deterrent than a three-year suspended one.


  • #78
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,461 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    jobbridge4life wrote: »
    ...but

    (I hate being hated in threads but here we go again)

    All of these ancillary facts that you mention are disproportionately associated with illegal activity and even more so coming before the courts and entanglement in the justice system. Obviously it can be used as 'get out of jail free card' but at the same time are we to ignore that fact? And if we do will it mean more peace and justice or just arbitrary incarceration?

    Honestly IDK but I think the evidence EVIDENCE regarding mass incarceration is fairly conclusive at this point.

    What arbitrary about committing crime of a serious nature and getting jail for it ? Jails are supposed to be there to keep dangerous people out of the population. Not for shoplifters not for fines.


  • #79
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    eviltwin wrote: »
    It's a handy excuse though isn't it? It doesn't make it easier for the victim.

    I'm glad you raised that point. What does make it easier for the victim?


  • #80
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    darkpagandeath wrote: »
    Who is foaming at the mouth now ? I simply stated non custodial sentencing has clearly been no deterrent. The amount you see with 50 odd previous and getting away.

    And what amount is that?


  • #81
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    darkpagandeath wrote: »
    What arbitrary about committing crime of a serious nature and getting jail for it ?

    I've already disposed of that point. Sentencing can be arbitrary.
    darkpagandeath wrote: »
    Jails are supposed to be there to keep dangerous people out of the population. Not for shoplifters not for fines.

    That is a value statement. Plenty of shopkeepers would view shoplifters as dangerous. Plenty of those who refuse to pay their fines are.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    jobeenfitz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,486 ✭✭✭jobeenfitz


    jobbridge4life wrote: »
    I'm glad you raised that point. What does make it easier for the victim?

    If I was the victim it would make me a lot happier to see the bastard getting locked up! Maybe the victim should get some say in the sentence?


  • #83
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,461 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    jobbridge4life wrote: »
    And what amount is that?

    Now one is just being pedantic, None custodial sentencing in Ireland has been 0% effective in the reduction of crimes of this nature.


  • #84
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    jobeenfitz wrote: »
    If I was the victim it would make me a lot happier to see the bastard getting locked up! Maybe the victim should get some say in the sentence?

    Would it? We might think it would but there is evidence that victims don't primarily gain happiness from the level of suffering enforced on their aggressors.

    Personally though if for instance one of my sisters (fingers crossed, praise jesus, through salt over my shoulder) were attacked I know I'd want to end those who perpetrated it.


  • #85
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,461 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    jobbridge4life wrote: »
    I've already disposed of that point. Sentencing can be arbitrary.



    That is a value statement. Plenty of shopkeepers would view shoplifters as dangerous. Plenty of those who refuse to pay their fines are.

    Yes to their profits, Not to there person. I would wager someone that kicks a person in the head is more of a danger than someone that only ever robbed clothes and been none violent.


  • #86
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    darkpagandeath wrote: »
    Now one is just being pedantic, None custodial sentencing in Ireland has been 0% effective in the reduction of crimes of this nature.

    You have no evidence, peer reviewed evidence to verify that. Not a bit.


  • #87
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,461 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    jobbridge4life wrote: »
    You have no evidence, peer reviewed evidence to verify that. Not a bit.

    :pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac:


  • #88
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    _Kaiser_ wrote: »
    Completely agree.. however, as long as we have a society that shirks all personal responsibility whenever possible - blaming "someone else" or the "system" or a "disadvantaged upbringing" (as was used by the Defence per the OP's link) it's going to continue.

    Yet despite this, many of the same people who express shock and disgust at such a case and sentence, are then the first to be calling for the legalisation of so-called "harmless" drugs. Yup, makes sense! :rolleyes:

    Because some people can take drugs and/or get plastered on booze without assaulting people. Let them do what they want and lock up the rest. If you assault people when intoxicated it means that you have a violent disposition to begin with and that your "normal" disposition is a facade.


  • #89
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,461 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    Because some people can take drugs and/or get plastered on booze without assaulting people. Let them do what they want and lock up the rest. If you assault people when intoxicated it means that you have a violent disposition to begin with and that your "normal" disposition is a facade.

    I have managed my whole life no matter how drunk, To not batter the face off someone or kick them in the head. Maybe as I was brought up correctly and I am also not a Scumbag.


  • #90
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    darkpagandeath wrote: »
    :pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac:

    To quote Kate Nash...


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    darkpagandeath wrote: »
    I have managed my whole life no matter how drunk, To not batter the face off someone or kick them in the head. Maybe as I was brought up correctly and I am also not a Scumbag.

    Indeed - blaming the availability of drugs for violent incidents is ridiculous. If someone becomes violent just because their inhibitions are lowered, they have a crappy personality to begin with. You shouldn't need those inhibitions to stop you stealing someone's stuff, or helping your friend get away with mugging someone else.


Advertisement
Advertisement