Margaret Cash steals €300 worth of clothes from Penneys and aftermath/etc!

ParkRunner · 21-10-2018 8:12am

NIMAN wrote: »

The bleeding hearts won't accept that though.

They'll be shouting about how its putting people in poverty, affecting the kids of the criminals etc.

At least the criminal would be going in with their eyes wide open, two strikes and you better stop or else your kids will suffer too

ThunbergsAreGo · 21-10-2018 8:17am

tuxy wrote: »

So we should enable these people to be in a position to bankrupt the state?
Do you think the likes or Mrs. Cash give a **** about going to prison or any consequences to her actions?

So you think there should be no consequences for people breaking the law if it costs the state more money or they are mothers???

I think losing her kids might be one of the few things that would impact her. It would be a consequence of her actions.

The judge might as well gave reached into his pocket and paid the "fine" for her.

tuxy · 21-10-2018 8:18am

ParkRunner wrote: »

Maybe 3 strikes should lead to a 10% reduction in all social welfare support for 2-3 years. At least then criminality would lead to some penalty

The penalty would be the encouragement to engage in even more criminality activity to fund their lifestyle; Since the seems to get some satisfaction for such illegal activity how is it a punishment?

I've sat in court and seen people out of prison for a day to sit another offence taken against them by the DPP, another 3 months added to a 6 months sentence while they smirk and make joke with their friends, it;st just a day out for them. The same as if you or I decided to book an overnight stay in hotel with a few mate an all inclusive package with food and board provided.
I was ignorant to the attitude at the time as prison sounded like a scary place to me but to many it's an option of an easy life, without a care in the world.

tuxy · 21-10-2018 8:22am

naughtb4 wrote: »

So you think there should be no consequences for people breaking the law if it costs the state more money or they are mothers???

Of course there should be consequences but to the criminals involved prison is not considered a negative consequences. And unforgettably I have to admit I've no idea what would be an adequate consequence.

tuxy · 21-10-2018 8:25am

naughtb4 wrote: »

I think losing her kids might be one of the few things that would impact her. It would be a consequence of her actions.

Who would we inflict these children on, they were already expelled from a charity summer camp back in July. Can you imagine the chaos they would cause if separated for their beloved mother?

21-10-2018 8:28am

Neyite wrote: »

The last time I went into Pennys I spent 80 quid. The bag of stuff I got for that amount was MASSIVE.

How did she manage to carry €321 euros worth?

She brought the 7 kids to help.

21-10-2018 8:40am

Deleted User wrote: »

She brought the 7 kids to help.

You mean to teach them how to earn a living...

mikemac2 · 21-10-2018 8:44am

In six months we’ll be discussing someone else

Between Mrs Cash, the Aussie in Apollo House and the sad case of Jonathan Corrie I hope the media do a little digging before selecting the next person for their front pages

Journalists doing investigations, not much of that anymore

The homeless charity CEO’s aren’t blameless either

Sacrolyte · 21-10-2018 9:42am

topper75 wrote: »

I don't know how the guberment could do their jobs more 'right'.

Wow. Peter Casey is getting my vote.

JeffKenna · 21-10-2018 10:00am

Seriously, anyone with 38 convictions should be in jail.

gmisk · 21-10-2018 10:02am

Sacrolyte wrote: »

Wow. Peter Casey is getting my vote.

Great, fair play, how is he planning on fixing this issue as president ?

21-10-2018 2:09pm

So, travellers want to maintain their heritage. How does that work?

100 years ago, it was normal for couples to have large families. Now 2 seems normal.
100 years ago, it was normal for mothers to stay at home and rear their children and care for the house. Now, many mothers work while paying someone else to care for their kids and housework is fitted in on days off.
100 years ago, it was normal for farmers to plough their land using a horsedrawn plough. Nowadays it’s done by tractor and multi bladed plough.
100 years ago, tinkers used horses to draw their caravans. Now they use vans or cars, while horses seem to be used exclusively for sulky racing.

Where does culture come in? When did weddings with huge dresses become their culture? Or the massive first communion dresses?

When did it become their culture to see nothing wrong with helping themselves to the property of others, mainly from the settled community?

IvySlayer · 21-10-2018 2:12pm

Someone who has 38 previous convictions is not fit to be a parent.

And these are the known ones.

omega man · 21-10-2018 2:28pm

gmisk wrote: »

Great, fair play, how is he planning on fixing this issue as president ?

He can’t. However he is opening up an overdue debate regarding our bloated entitlement culture. We need a grown up discussion where opinions aren’t countered with accusations of bitterness, hate or racisim. I believe he speaks for the silent majority.

Odelay · 21-10-2018 5:02pm

omega man wrote: »

He can’t. However he is opening up an overdue debate regarding our bloated entitlement culture. We need a grown up discussion where opinions aren’t countered with accusations of bitterness, hate or racisim. I believe he speaks for the silent majority.

A lot of people are saying they will vote for him. There isn't much he can do but it will highlight how aggrieved people feel about being milked while others do nothing to contribute.

Effects · 21-10-2018 6:43pm

JeffKenna wrote: »

Seriously, anyone with 38 convictions should be in jail.

37 of those are traffic convictions. And all received while getting the kids to school. So not really crimes as such.

Sure you can hear her on 98fm on Friday, where she didn't mention these as she thinks they don't count as crimes.

Effects · 21-10-2018 6:45pm

IvySlayer wrote: »

Someone who has 38 previous convictions is not fit to be a parent.

And these are the known ones.

There are no undisclosed convictions.
I presume you are talking about crimes, of which there are undoubtedly many that went without prosecution.

punisher5112 · 21-10-2018 7:23pm

Effects wrote: »

37 of those are traffic convictions. And all received while getting the kids to school. So not really crimes as such.

Sure you can hear her on 98fm on Friday, where she didn't mention these as she thinks they don't count as crimes.

Will you ever cop onto yourself....

All getting kids to school you are having a laugh.

She was living in tallaght at the time.

If I have no insurance or nct I don't drive it's a simple as that.

end of the road · 21-10-2018 7:46pm

ParkRunner wrote: »

Maybe 3 strikes should lead to a 10% reduction in all social welfare support for 2-3 years. At least then criminality would lead to some penalty for those those depending on social support & would make them reconsider getting involved in criminality, while attaching some sense of value to what they receive

it's unlikely that this would make them reconsider getting involved in criminality, or attach some sense of value to what they receive, unfortunately.

NIMAN wrote: »

The bleeding hearts won't accept that though.

They'll be shouting about how its putting people in poverty, affecting the kids of the criminals etc.

ultimately the mythical bleeding hearts would be right.

ParkRunner wrote: »

At least the criminal would be going in with their eyes wide open, two strikes and you better stop or else your kids will suffer too

and that's all that would happen, the kids would suffer. nobody else. i wouldn't be surprised if that turned out to be a breach of human rights and international law, as i'd imagine it would technically constitute collective punishment.

gmisk wrote: »

Great, fair play, how is he planning on fixing this issue as president ?

well first of all he's going to.

ah no wait.

ThebitterLemon · 21-10-2018 8:14pm

punisher5112 wrote: »

Will you ever cop onto yourself....

All getting kids to school you are having a laugh.

She was living in tallaght at the time.

If I have no insurance or nct I don't drive it's a simple as that.

Spot on, and where do you stop...?

“Sure your honor I’ve no tax or insurance and coz life’s so hard I’d a few drinks before getting in the car and driving the kids to school”!!

It’s always someone else’s fault, no personal responsibility, what are we becoming?

TbL

Bowlardo · 21-10-2018 8:36pm

-first three kids full child allowance in cash
-4th should be 50% child allowance in cash and the remaining claimed via tax back(you only get if your are actually working)
-5th child 25% cash child allowance and 75% reclaimed in tax
-6th child nada nothing.

We have to implement this very soon. Anyone born after 2020 this rule should apply to. There is probably some human rights bollocks prevents this but i’m Not sure how human rights.

end of the road · 21-10-2018 8:43pm

Bowlardo wrote: »

-first three kids full child allowance in cash
-4th should be 50% child allowance in cash and the remaining claimed via tax back(you only get if your are actually working)
-5th child 25% cash child allowance and 75% reclaimed in tax
-6th child nada nothing.

We have to implement this very soon. Anyone born after 2020 this rule should apply to. There is probably some human rights bollocks prevents this but i’m Not sure how human rights.

whatever about human rights preventing it, i'd imagine it's possible non-viability would definitely prevent it?

Spanish Eyes · 21-10-2018 8:49pm

Bowlardo wrote: »

-first three kids full child allowance in cash
-4th should be 50% child allowance in cash and the remaining claimed via tax back(you only get if your are actually working)
-5th child 25% cash child allowance and 75% reclaimed in tax
-6th child nada nothing.

We have to implement this very soon. Anyone born after 2020 this rule should apply to. There is probably some human rights bollocks prevents this but i’m Not sure how human rights.

Sounds very fair to working people actually.

Excluding those who are carers or are disabled obv. and cannot work.

But it will never get beyond anything really. There will be too much angst from the poverty brigade, you cannot leave children starving and so on, but there are no incentives to sort that at the moment are there? Good suggestion though.

mynamejeff · 21-10-2018 8:50pm

end of the road wrote: »

whatever about human rights preventing it, i'd imagine it's possible non-viability would definitely prevent it?

no it wouldnt

punisher5112 · 21-10-2018 8:55pm

I would love to have a politician that will actually call a spade a spade but I honestly don't think we will ever have one.

I heard the green parties rating is on the up.

How they still exist is beyond me.

Cash and her humongous family will cost us tax payers and absolute fortune.

fritzelly · 21-10-2018 9:03pm

Bowlardo wrote: »

-first three kids full child allowance in cash
-4th should be 50% child allowance in cash and the remaining claimed via tax back(you only get if your are actually working)
-5th child 25% cash child allowance and 75% reclaimed in tax
-6th child nada nothing.

We have to implement this very soon. Anyone born after 2020 this rule should apply to. There is probably some human rights bollocks prevents this but i’m Not sure how human rights.

No reason why it can't be instituted. Child benefit here is something like double in the UK, in Germany I believe its related to tax benefit.
Hey if you wanna spawn a football team then pay for it yourself

byhookorbycrook · 21-10-2018 9:04pm

Effects wrote: »

37 of those are traffic convictions. And all received while getting the kids to school. So not really crimes as such.

Sure you can hear her on 98fm on Friday, where she didn't mention these as she thinks they don't count as crimes.

I think you'd find it is a crime. And what about the one in Wexford with the stolen goods? This woman is doing nothing to further the cause of the travellers, she's a public manifestation of why many travellers are, at best, distrusted and often feared.

spookwoman · 21-10-2018 9:12pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Sounds very fair to working people actually.

Excluding those who are carers or are disabled obv. and cannot work.

But it will never get beyond anything really. There will be too much angst from the poverty brigade, you cannot leave children starving and so on, but there are no incentives to sort that at the moment are there? Good suggestion though.

Should be across the board, too many people in the world and just because someone is a carer, disabled or cannot work shouldn't mean different rules.
If somene cannot afford to have children they shouldn't have them. If they cannot afford to have children and then complain they cannot afford to feed and clothe them the only person to blame is themselves.

21-10-2018 10:20pm

spookwoman wrote: »

Should be across the board, too many people in the world and just because someone is a carer, disabled or cannot work shouldn't mean different rules.
If somene cannot afford to have children they shouldn't have them. If they cannot afford to have children and then complain they cannot afford to feed and clothe them the only person to blame is themselves.

Easy for you to say when I’m going to guess you’re neither disabled nor a Carer.

All Seeing Eye · 21-10-2018 10:23pm

Cash will have no excuses in future when the free abortions are brought in. Could be one of the unintentional benefits of the abortion referendum.

21-10-2018 10:23pm

All Seeing Eye wrote: »

Cash will have no excuses in future when the free abortions are brought in.

I don’t think there’s a traveller alive who’d have an abortion

AlekSmart · 21-10-2018 10:25pm

Effects wrote: »

37 of those are traffic convictions. And all received while getting the kids to school. So not really crimes as such.

Sure you can hear her on 98fm on Friday, where she didn't mention these as she thinks they don't count as crimes.

I wonder if your benign gaze would continue had Ms Cash crashed into your vehicle,whilst "getting her kids to school" ?

21-10-2018 10:26pm

AlekSmart wrote: »

I wonder if your benign gaze would continue had Ms Cash crashed into your vehicle,whilst "getting her kids to school" ?

Of course it wouldn’t have. When the consequence falls on the ignorant they soon change their tune.

All Seeing Eye · 21-10-2018 10:26pm

Tadeo Mysterious SailboatMGS wrote: »

I don’t think there’s a traveller alive who’d have an abortion

Should be brought in as law if your on benefits. After 2 or 3 kids you get no more money and you can have a free abortion if you want.

21-10-2018 10:27pm

All Seeing Eye wrote: »

Should be brought in as law if your on benefits. After 2 or 3 kids you get no more money so you can have a free abortion.

yeah I don’t think that’s going to happen. As well as the fact that’s an abhorrent view. Just because two people aren’t sensible enough to use protection doesn’t warrant an abortion.

All Seeing Eye · 21-10-2018 10:31pm

Tadeo Mysterious SailboatMGS wrote: »

yeah I don’t think that’s going to happen. As well as the fact that’s an abhorrent view. Just because two people aren’t sensible enough to use protection doesn’t warrant an abortion.

She doesn’t have to have an abortion but she won’t be getting anymore money. She could take an innovative approach and get a job to pay for the kids just like a lot of other people.

end of the road · 21-10-2018 10:31pm

All Seeing Eye wrote: »

Should be brought in as law if your on benefits. After 2 or 3 kids you get no more money and you can have a free abortion if you want.

removing the child benefit after a certain amount of children is unlikely to achieve your goal. children will still be had and those children would suffer undue hardship i'd imagine.

All Seeing Eye · 21-10-2018 10:34pm

end of the road wrote: »

removing the child benefit after a certain amount of children is unlikely to achieve your goal. children will still be had and those children would suffer undue hardship i'd imagine.

Still an incentive for Cash and her Ilk not to have loads of kids that we have to pay for. Maybe free abortion is not such a bad thing after all. It might save the tax payer a few quid.

spookwoman · 21-10-2018 10:36pm

Tadeo Mysterious SailboatMGS wrote: »

Easy for you to say when I’m going to guess you’re neither disabled nor a Carer.

I am on disability due to long term illness, I chose not to have children because I cannot afford to have them.

end of the road · 21-10-2018 10:37pm

All Seeing Eye wrote: »

She doesn’t have to have an abortion but she won’t be getting anymore money. She could take an innovative approach and get a job to pay for the kids just like a lot of other people.

well no she couldn't as not a chance would any employer take her on. nor would i blame them for not doing so given she shows no remorse for her actions.

All Seeing Eye wrote: »

Still an incentive for Cash and her Ilk not to have loads of kids that we have to pay for. Maybe free abortion is not such a bad thing after all. It might save the tax payer a few quid.

i'd imagine it's not one bit of an incentive, given large families exist in countries where child benefit isn't even a thing. there will be no savings, large families are quite likely to remain an occurrence, all be it small as currently.

punisher5112 · 21-10-2018 10:38pm

She has never looked for work so no point saying anyone wouldn't or would take her on. People would have to be looking for work.

All Seeing Eye · 21-10-2018 10:40pm

end of the road wrote: »

well no she couldn't as not a chance would any employer take her on. nor would i blame them for not doing so given she shows no remorse for her actions.

i'd imagine it's not one bit of an incentive, given large families exist in countries where child benefit isn't even a thing. there will be no savings, large families are quite likely to remain an occurrence, all be it small as currently.

Negative thinking on your part. If she wasn’t getting paid extra for each kid there is no way she would now have 7 kids especially in the Ireland of today that isn’t controlled by the Catholic Church. I’m sure most of the countries you are referring don’t have free abortions.

All Seeing Eye · 21-10-2018 10:42pm

punisher5112 wrote: »

She has never looked for work so no point saying anyone wouldn't or would take her on. People would have to be looking for work.

Why would she ever even think of working when she knows from her earliest days that this countriy rewards uncontrolled breeding by the welfare class.

punisher5112 · 21-10-2018 10:46pm

All Seeing Eye wrote: »

Why would she ever even think of working when she knows from her earliest days that this countriy rewards uncontrolled breeding by the welfare class.

Eh did you read my post¿¿¿

mikeym · 21-10-2018 10:48pm

She gets more money a week than most of us through benefits.

And she has to resort to thieving.

All Seeing Eye · 21-10-2018 10:50pm

punisher5112 wrote: »

Eh did you read my post¿¿¿

She would be forced to look for work if it was in her interest to especially if she had extra kids that the welfare was not paying for. Something like the American system. Under the system I propose she could just stay with 2 kids and get her benefits and this would mean great savings for the tax payer over the current situation. If she did have an accident she could avail of a free abortion which the tax payer would gladly pay for.

tayto lover · 21-10-2018 10:53pm

All Seeing Eye wrote: »

Why would she ever even think of working wXhen she knows from her earliest days that this countriy rewards uncontrolled breeding by the welfare class.

She wouldn't work. She comes from a long line of non-workers.

end of the road · 21-10-2018 10:55pm

punisher5112 wrote: »

She has never looked for work so no point saying anyone wouldn't or would take her on. People would have to be looking for work.

ah come on. she has quite a number of convictions and that's just 1 issue with her.

All Seeing Eye wrote: »

Negative thinking on your part. If she wasn’t getting paid extra for each kid there is no way she would now have 7 kids especially in the Ireland of today that isn’t controlled by the Catholic Church. I’m sure most of the countries you are referring don’t have free abortions.

it's practical thinking rather then negative thinking. if she wasn't getting paid extra for each kid, it is still possible she may have them anyway. i would be surprised if free abortion would make much of, if any difference to this issue.

end of the road · 21-10-2018 10:58pm

All Seeing Eye wrote: »

She would be forced to look for work if it was in her interest to especially if she had extra kids that the welfare was not paying for. Something like the American system. Under the system I propose she could just stay with 2 kids and get her benefits and this would mean great savings for the tax payer over the current situation. If she did have an accident she could avail of a free abortion which the tax payer would gladly pay for.

the american system doesn't prevent large families, or prevent people from having children they can't afford, from what i understand.
the system you propose is based on wishful thinking rather then reality and practicality, from what i can see.

All Seeing Eye · 21-10-2018 11:00pm

Simple then if she has extra kids the tax payer won’t be paying for them and yes I suppose that is wishful thinking the way things are now. On a practical level I do hope the regime of free abortions will help the situation around the country where welfare families are having kids they can’t afford.

Margaret Cash steals €300 worth of clothes from Penneys and aftermath/etc!

Comments