# Why are gangsters being informed their lives are at risk?



## Wishes (6 Oct 2012)

I find it absurd that gangsters and criminals alike are being informed by the authorities that their lives maybe at risk etc.  Why would the powers that be inform the criminal fraternity of their potential demise?  Why do we feel the need to protect the criminal?

The latest spat of deaths across the country involving drug overdoses have given way for our media to warn addicts about the lethal heroin that seems to be doing the rounds.  The last time I checked; such a substance was illegal in this country.  So why do we continue to nanny our addicts?

Some years ago a serious crime was committed against my friend and myself.  We were lucky to have survived the attack.  Not once were we informed that there were people in our community that were previously trialed for murder and that they could be a potential threat to OUR lives.  Why as two law abiding citizens were we not informed but yet the authorities will warn a gangster that he/she maybe an intended target.

I'm sorry about the rant but this is something I have been noticing  for some time.


----------



## RMCF (6 Oct 2012)

These people probably know their lives are in danger anyway, the nature of the activity they have got themselves mixed up in. I guess the Gardai probably feel they are their to serve and protect and have a legal requirement to inform citizens if they are at risk? I don't know.

The addicts are a different matter. Again probably in the State's interest to try to protect their people. Some may call it natural selection and if you want to inject illegal substances into yourself then you take whatever risks come with that. 

I can see why you would be angry that some scumbag did what they did to you, but you can hardly expect the Gardai to go around communities and say "just to let you know some rough bugger just moved into a gaff a few hundred yards from you, watch yourself". They would have to tell a large section of the country about people with criminal records.

But I understand your rant.


----------



## d2x2 (7 Oct 2012)

Recreational drug users, who were being warned about a recent batch of heroin, are usually not considered 'gangsters' or 'scumbags'. 

While I understand that you don't care about the lives of people you see as doing something wrong, this news hopefully saved a few lives and made people think about the risks. What about  young people out partying who may have been tempted to try heroin for the first time? Maybe that saved their lives and that would be enough to justify this public announcement in my eyes.


----------



## Leper (7 Oct 2012)

d2x2 said:


> Recreational drug users, who were being warned about a recent batch of heroin, are usually not considered 'gangsters' or 'scumbags'.
> 
> While I understand that you don't care about the lives of people you see as doing something wrong, this news hopefully saved a few lives and made people think about the risks. What about young people out partying who may have been tempted to try heroin for the first time? Maybe that saved their lives and that would be enough to justify this public announcement in my eyes.


 
I'm with d2x2 here. The last thing drug abusers need to be labelled is "gangsters and scumbags." These people need help, afterall they have a serious illness. We all deserve a chance with life. I bet you cannot find a drug addict who wants to be in the state he is like smokers dont want to smoke and given the hindsight option now would never have taken the first smoke.

I am a less lenient on criminals being warned by the Gardaí of imminent threats to their criminal lives. I dont know why the Gardaí warn criminals, but I reckon there is the chance of obtaining intelligence in the war against crime but to be honest I dont know.


----------



## Knuttell (7 Oct 2012)

You see that's the thing about smack heads and druggies,they are at best a nuisance at their worst they are standing in your living room ripping up cushions looking for cash,holding a blood filled syringe to a shopkeepers throat or robbing handbags in the street off little old dears on the way back from collecting their pensions.

Not a great deal of sympathy for them,even the stupidest of them must have realised heroin wasn't going to be a happy ever after ending for them.

As for the Gardai warning them?they should just leave them to it and spend as little resources as possible investigating the deaths of these animals.


----------



## oldnick (7 Oct 2012)

Knuttell - your post was callous. Unfortunately, I find myself agreeing with you.


----------



## Knuttell (8 Oct 2012)

oldnick said:


> Knuttell - your post was callous. Unfortunately, I find myself agreeing with you.



Thats because,like me,you live in the real world,stripped out of all that rose tinted,touchy feely,PC nonsense.


----------



## Wishes (8 Oct 2012)

I agree with Knuttell.  For anybody that disagrees, have you ever had your home broken into by a drug user?  

Heroin is illegal so yes users are criminals.


----------



## delgirl (8 Oct 2012)

Wishes said:


> Some years ago a serious crime was committed against my friend and myself. We were lucky to have survived the attack. Not once were we informed that there were people in our community that were previously trialed for murder and that they could be a potential threat to OUR lives. Why as two law abiding citizens were we not informed but yet the authorities will warn a gangster that he/she maybe an intended target.


This is why some credit is due to the tabloid papers that expose dangerous criminals in our midst along with photographs so we at least know what they look like.

The Sunday World, not a paper I would ever buy but got to read at the weekend, exposed [broken link removed] who is currently on holiday in Kinsale.  He is a repeat offender who has been jailed numerous times for similar crimes. 

I agree with you that we should know where these people are.


----------



## Purple (8 Oct 2012)

Wishes said:


> I agree with Knuttell.  For anybody that disagrees, have you ever had your home broken into by a drug user?
> 
> Heroin is illegal so yes users are criminals.


My house was broken into by drug users. They stole everything that wasn’t nailed down including my wife’s engagement ring and a broach that belonged to my grandmother. On a previous occasion I disturbed burglars while they were gathering our possessions, with my family asleep upstairs.
I don’t consider these people less than human and I don’t think their lives are worth less than mine. I also don’t think that they deserve to die for breaking into a house.
If a person’s life is in danger why would the police not let them know? It is their duty to prevent crimes and murder is a crime.


----------



## blueband (8 Oct 2012)

Purple said:


> My house was broken into by drug users. They stole everything that wasn’t nailed down including my wife’s engagement ring and a brooch that belonged to my grandmother. On a previous occasion I disturbed burglars while they were gathering our possessions, with my family asleep upstairs.
> I don’t consider these people less than human and I don’t think their lives are worth less than mine. I also don’t think that they deserve to die for breaking into a house.
> If a person’s life is in danger why would the police not let them know? It is their duty to prevent crimes and murder is a crime.


well said purple, for once i agree with you


----------



## Purple (8 Oct 2012)

blueband said:


> well said purple, for once i agree with you



We can't be having that now!


----------



## oldnick (8 Oct 2012)

Purple. You are clearly a better human being than I am -and from your many posts I know you are a decent guy.
I have no doubt that your life is worth far more than the person who invaded your home and stole everything.

Whilst I don't think death is an appropriate sentence for a non-violent crime of burglary, the fact is that, increasingly, hard-drug users are a danger to the life and health of  good honest people. And ,generally, are a threat to society as a whole. The hard-drug pushers are  even worse.

Should one not one defend  oneself, one's family and society against such dangerous scum ?

Part of that defence , in my (cruel and callous )opinion is that our guardians -the police - shouldn't divert their limited resources from protecting us in order to protect any single one of them.

Pluus, if  more of them were to die taking or selling drugs would this not have the beneficial effect of dissuading others to get involved with this vile business ?


----------



## Leper (8 Oct 2012)

I can remember a radio interview by the late Jonathan Philbin Bowman on being asked why he had sympathy with the person who mugged him in New York and he replied that the mugger needed the money more than he (JPB) did.

I am not trying to defend what heroin addicts do to supply their habit, but I am giving a perspective on the situation.  I dont believe a heroin addict wants to be a heroin addict and through some misguidance or whatever has found himself in the unfortunate position.  Very few of the crime lords are in the addicts position and seem largely to get away with their crimes.

The addicts need help not execution.  We all know that "execution" whether self inflicted or by the state was seldom a deterrent against serious crime. I am not saying that the addicts who conduct themselves in a criminal way should get away scott free either.


----------



## Knuttell (8 Oct 2012)

Leper said:


> I can remember a radio interview by the late Jonathan Philbin Bowman on being asked why he had sympathy with the person who mugged him in New York and he replied that the mugger needed the money more than he (JPB) did.



Bizarre in the extreme,what you have you hold, anyone attempting to help themselves to what is mine would find me less than forgiving or cooperative in their endeavour,I certainly would not be shrugging my shoulders and justifying their criminal activity.

Thats the problem with Irish society,well intentioned,politically correct liberals who haven't a clue about the dynamics of how things actually work or don't work in the real world,the real pity is many of them are the key influencers of our farcical judicial system.


----------



## DrMoriarty (9 Oct 2012)

Purple said:


> I don’t consider these people less than human and I don’t think their lives are worth less than mine. I also don’t think that they deserve to die for breaking into a house.


This is an affirmation of humanity and perspective, not the view of "politically correct liberals who haven't a clue about the dynamics of how things actually work". Well said, Purple.

Didn't know we had so many armchair "hang 'em and flog 'em" types on AAM. I hope none of your own sons and daughters ever becomes addicted to heroin.


----------



## Purple (9 Oct 2012)

oldnick said:


> Should one not one defend  oneself, one's family and society against such dangerous scum ?




If my life or the life of a family member or loved one was in danger I would have no hesitation in using force, up to and including killing someone, but that’s not what we are talking about. 
The reason the victims of crimes don’t determine the sentence is because they lack perspective. If someone attacked one of my children I’d want to kill them. That’s not proportionate but it’s understandable. Society cannot function without that proportionality and the state should not brutalise or kill it’s own citizens; It’s morally wrong and socially counterproductive.


----------



## Latrade (9 Oct 2012)

It turned from gangser scumbags to druggie scumbags pretty quickly, but at least the common ground is a complete lack of humanity.

Maybe the reason the Gardai alerted the gangster to the threats is that murder and a realistic threat of a murder is still a crime, no matter who is threatened or killed. So maybe it's kind of the thing, as guardians of the peace, that they have to prevent, you know, legally like. I'm no big city lawyer, but i would have thought that their charter extends to each and every citizen. I really, really do not want to live in a place where we empower the Gardai to determine who lives and who dies. But some do it turns out. 

Plus wouldn't it be great for another ganster scumbag to be shot down in front of his kid again like the last few? What better way to teach the guy who's now dead and doesn't know anything, than to continue the cycle of hatred and revenge by having an 11 year-old see their dad shot dead.

Plus isn't it much better that Gardai put their resources into preventing a murder than letting it be and us, the tax payer, footing the bill for the much more expensive murder investigation and inevtiable security at a funeral.

I completely agree about junkies though, it's true every single one of them deserves what they get and every single one of them is a criminal and will break into your house and probably muder your entire family for an X-Box or just a tin of tuna (in brine). I have absolutely no facts to back that up and in fact most actual evidence points to the complete opposite, but I choose to wish a very painful and slow poisoning on these people via tainted drugs because I'm sure everyone of them specifically chose to leave ordinary decent society of their own freewill in order to become a drug addict and a leach on my taxes. I mean sure, the inevitable rush to hospitalise and treat people, or just the effort of chucking their poisned stiff corpses into the back of a bin lorry, would cost infinitely more than simply warning them to be careful, that's not the point though, they hang around bus stops and streets and boardwalks and make me nervous.


----------



## Deiseblue (9 Oct 2012)

The Irish judicial system sets swingeing sentences on those found guilty of importing & distributing illegal drugs & takes a more benevolent view of those convicted of crimes associated with addiction to such drugs - an entirely correct stance in my view.

A generalisation I know - but heroin seems to traditionally have taken root in areas in our cities where due to the cumulative effects of poor educational standards , unemployment , isolation & desperation addiction has become rife.

Take a simple walk down Talbot Street where the sight of wrecked human beings should surely first provoke the thought - " God I'm glad that's not me " rather than " surely there must be some way of getting rid of these people "

As for warning criminals of death threats I also am of the view that law of the land & the upkeep of such law as applied by the Gardai applies to all citizens - radical I know !

I really would like to know when terms such as " well intentioned " , " politically correct " & " liberal " became pejorative terms ?


----------



## Purple (9 Oct 2012)

Deiseblue said:


> I really would like to know when terms such as " well intentioned " , " politically correct " & " liberal " became pejorative terms ?


You don't watch Fox News then


----------



## Deiseblue (9 Oct 2012)

Purple said:


> You don't watch Fox News then



Good one. 

I came across it once whilst on holidays in the US , I was in a bar & there was a fundamentalist preacher On the tv who was also a Senate representative who described Hurricane Katrina as God's revenge on New Orleans for the moral turpitude of that City & it's citizens.

I was laughing as I thought it was a comedy sketch from a programme such as Saturday Night Live - a rather disapproving patron pointed out to me that it was an item from Fox news !


----------



## Purple (9 Oct 2012)

Deiseblue said:


> Good one.
> 
> I came across it once whilst on holidays in the US , I was in a bar & there was a fundamentalist preacher On the tv who was also a Senate representative who described Hurricane Katrina as God's revenge on New Orleans for the moral turpitude of that City & it's citizens.
> 
> I was laughing as I thought it was a comedy sketch from a programme such as Saturday Night Live - a rather disapproving patron pointed out to me that it was an item from Fox news !



I used to post on an American based History forum frequented in the main by right-wing Republicans, the type that think that being a Creationist is a legitimate position to take scientifically. I was considered a liberal, left-wing socialist, almost a communist. They were Fox News fans.


----------



## oldnick (9 Oct 2012)

Yes, yes -the high moral ground is in an ideal world the way to go....
But pragmatism means it's not always possible.

For example, it'd be great to have an efficient, wellstaffed police force that can -in a humane but effective manner - handle all the nation's criminal problems -backed by the same high level of medical and social care to all citizens.

We don't have that.

So, until we do have that high level we must, perforce, allocate resources in ways that may not satisfy everyone. If police spend time,money and effort aiding and protecting drug-gang members then that time,money and effort is diverted from other duties.
That may be bad, but it is just a fact.

So, although "every one should be treated equally" (regardless, it seems ,whether they are vile murdering criminals or the old lady walking down the road) this just ain't possible. Pragmatism dictates that, rather than impossible desires, one should safeguard the innocent over the guilty , the good over the bad.

To a certain extent this is also the case with diverting medical/hospital resources from those suffering from a handicap, illness,accident to those who deliberately and constantly take drugs.

Sure, it would be great to treat everyone -including drug dealers and drug addicts - exactly the same. I would suggest until society can do this then individual members ,like some posters here, should do so. 
So, instead of Deiseblue saying the sight of the drug addicts "should provoke the thought I'm glad it's not me" would then read "how can I spend help them ?" 

I'm not one of those kind people. Perhaps some of you are. But if you're not then it doesn't behove you to mock those who take a harsher view which I believe is based on reality not, as some comments insinuate, intrinsic cruelty.


----------



## Purple (9 Oct 2012)

Oldnick, I think it comes down to this;



Latrade said:


> ItI really, really do not want to live in a place where we empower the Gardai to determine who lives and who dies.



I agree with Latrade on that point.


----------



## Latrade (9 Oct 2012)

oldnick said:


> For example, it'd be great to have an efficient, wellstaffed police force that can -in a humane but effective manner - handle all the nation's criminal problems -backed by the same high level of medical and social care to all citizens.
> 
> We don't have that.
> 
> ...


 
Not really a "fact" as such though is it because we don't know exactly the full extent of what resources were diverted and the costs and we don't know how that preventative step compares to the costs of doing nothing and having another death and a further escalation of violence. 

Of course, if someone innocent had been caught up in the cross-fire and injured and killed and it was then shown the Gardai had knowledge this was going to happen, well let's see what the discussion would be then.

Letting the criminals continue with their violence not only escalates the violence, but makes things much more dangerous for us ordinary decent type and the public at large. One was gunned down in the afternoon on a street in front of his kid, how much more dangerous to the public can we get? 



oldnick said:


> To a certain extent this is also the case with diverting medical/hospital resources from those suffering from a handicap, illness,accident to those who deliberately and constantly take drugs.


 
Just out of interest, how much medical support is diverted to drug users? How many disabled people have been refused or delayed treatement because a drug user was queuing up at the Merchant's Quay. Any spot check at an A&E will probably show that alcohol diverts more resources, closely followed by the A&E being used as a stop gap for people with mental illness due to complete lack of resources for appropriate mental health care....leading back to, in some circumstances, drug addiction.

Maybe the disabled person who was delayed in resources became disabled through an accident while drunk, maybe the ill person is ill because of smokin or alcohol abuse, it's hard to say with generalised statements what's what. 

I would say that given the allocation of funding and resources to drug treatment, it's probably not the greatest area of expenditure as it is and I'm fairly sure that there aren't too many people who see diverted medical help because of an accident to a drug addict (which is why they deliberately and consistenly take the drugs, an addiction).


----------



## Chris (9 Oct 2012)

Purple said:


> I agree with Latrade on that point.



I also agree, police forces are there to enforce law and prevent crime no matter who the potential victim. Here is an exert from the Garda oath:


> -I will faithfully discharge the duties of a member of the Garda Síochána with fairness, integrity, regard for human rights, diligence and impartiality, upholding the Constitution and the laws and according equal respect to all people,....



Notice that it says "to all people" and not "to all law-abiding people".

I remember a discussions with friends a good few years ago where the general attitude was that gangland shootings should not be stopped or prevented as it would result in less gangsters. I was ridiculed for claiming that if that type of violence went unhindered that it would spill over to the innocent public. Only a couple of weeks later an innocent plumbing apprentice was shot for being at the scene of a gangland shooting.

As for branding drug addicts as criminals I am very much opposed to that. We do not prohibit alcohol use and alcoholics are not deemed criminals per sé. I firmly believe that a lot of drug related crime would vanish if the drugs were at least decriminalised. When have you ever heard of alcoholics turning to burglary to feed their addiction. I guess that would be a topic for another thread though.


----------



## oldnick (9 Oct 2012)

Actually,Chris,I don't think many people would disagree with controlled legalisation of drugs . Even a flogger and hanger like me realises that the war is lost and it's better to control it legally. 
Hopefully, it would deprive the ganster-scum of their money, reduce the need for druggies to rob and generally save society a fortune (actually make society a fortune by taxing the stuff).
Also, both good people like Purple and cruel ones like me would both be happy.


----------



## MrMan (9 Oct 2012)

oldnick said:


> Actually,Chris,I don't think many people would disagree with controlled legalisation of drugs . Even a flogger and hanger like me realises that the war is lost and it's better to control it legally.
> Hopefully, it would deprive the ganster-scum of their money, reduce the need for druggies to rob and generally save society a fortune (actually make society a fortune by taxing the stuff).
> Also, both good people like Purple and cruel ones like me would both be happy.



You do realise that only yourself and like minded posters on this thread have referred to your views as cruel? I don't see the need to keep harping on about it.


----------



## Knuttell (9 Oct 2012)

Deiseblue said:


> I really would like to know when terms such as " well intentioned " , " politically correct " & " liberal " became pejorative terms ?



Have a look at England and see how "well intentioned" "political correctness" has served them,a Country in which putting up a Christmas tree in some Town centres is a no no for fear of offending minority Religious grouping who not content with that are demanding Sharia Law be introduced.

See now why these terms have become pejorative?


----------



## Latrade (9 Oct 2012)

Knuttell said:


> Have a look at England and see how "well intentioned" "political correctness" has served them,a Country in which putting up a Christmas tree in some Town centres is a no no for fear of offending minority Religious grouping who not content with that are demanding Sharia Law be introduced.
> 
> See now why these terms have become pejorative?



Well that's taken the debate to a new level. I presume we have a thread closer.

But before it is, no UK council has banned Christmas trees, one, Birmingham toyed with the idea of referring to the whole winter festival period (to accommodate the winter festivals of all cultures) as Winterville or something similar, but it still carried a Christmas tree, referred to it as a Christmas tree and even had banners and lights and decorations proclaiming Merry Christmas.

Even so, I'd take their good intentions of inclusion (as of yet the minor call of a very small fringe of fanatics to introduce Sharia Law , which actually is contrary to their teachings which tells them to leave an country of infidels...ho hum, has not been successful in overturning a good half century of UK Criminal Law and a good millennial of common law, if not two) over wanting the Gardai to not act on information that someone was about to be shot or to allow the death on mass of people addicted to drugs.


----------



## Knuttell (9 Oct 2012)

Latrade said:


> Well that's taken the debate to a new level. I presume we have a thread closer.



Oh Deary me,I have ventured off topic to illustrate to a previous poster why the terms mentioned have become pejorative in most peoples eyes,I see absolutely no need to be fretting about thread closers.


----------



## Deiseblue (10 Oct 2012)

Knuttell said:


> Oh Deary me,I have ventured off topic to illustrate to a previous poster why the terms mentioned have become pejorative in most peoples eyes,I see absolutely no need to be fretting about thread closers.



Your ill informed off topic illustration merely proved the lengths to which you will go to convince yourself of the pejorative nature of the terms mentioned - Christmas trees & sharia law in another jurisdiction !!


----------



## Knuttell (10 Oct 2012)

> Originally Posted by *Deiseblue*
> _*I really would like to know* when terms such as " well intentioned " , " politically correct " & " liberal " became pejorative terms ?_


 
Well you did ask Deseblue!!

Sorry if the answer wasnt to your liking,perhaps pm me one you would prefer and I will post it for you?


----------



## Firefly (10 Oct 2012)

Latrade said:


> I completely agree about junkies though, it's true every single one of them deserves what they get and every single one of them is a criminal and will break into your house and probably muder your entire family for an X-Box or just a tin of tuna (in brine).


 
Hi Latrade,
Usually I take a fairly dim view of drug addicts, but I think you are going a bit over-board here. 

Whilst I agree, technically, that they are committing crime by breaking into your house, I think it must be taken into account the state of their mind at the time. I've never taken drugs personally, but can only imagine that being hooked on something like heroin would be akin to the roving, walking-dead in 24 hours later. Your mind has been severely warped and your body is convulsing in order to get that next hit. I'm not even sure that this is taken into account at court, but nevertheless, IMO these crimes do not make druggies "criminals". Criminals, IMO, are those actuiually running the drugs themselves, importing contraband cigarettes and running diesel scams. Lumping druggies in with this lot is a tad unfair IMO. 




Latrade said:


> ..I choose to wish a very painful and slow poisoning on these people via tainted drugs because I'm sure everyone of them specifically chose to leave ordinary decent society of their own freewill in order to become a drug addict..


 

I can't agree with this at all. I take it from your viewpoint that you, like me, grew up in a loving home, had clean cothes, had proper meals and got a decent education. I can only imagine what it must be like growing up, for example, in an abusive home, or one where the child is neglected with its parents down in the pub all day. All your friends are upto no good and you stick out like a sore thumb and get bullied for not taking part. I'm not excusing drug taking or anything like that, but I would imagine that the vast majority of drug addicts out there just didn't decide one day, whilst walking down the street after buying the Irish Times, that life would be better on heroin.

Perhaps I've become a bit softened and I would probably change my viewpoint in a heartbeat if I was personally affected, but for now I just don't think it's as black and white.


----------



## Purple (10 Oct 2012)

Firefly, I think Latrades post was missing the


----------



## Firefly (10 Oct 2012)

Purple said:


> Firefly, I think Latrades post was missing the


 

NO WAY! 

And to think that I was turning into a Leftie 'n all 

Nice one Latrade


----------



## Deiseblue (10 Oct 2012)

Knuttell said:


> Well you did ask Desie!!
> 
> Sorry if the answer wasnt to your liking,perhaps pm me one you would prefer and I will post it for you?



Who is this Desie you refer to ,  Knuttie ?

Your answer was very much to my liking - ill informed , off topic & an indication of how far you will go to prove your prejudices - thankfully that removes the need for me to pm you .


----------



## gillarosa (10 Oct 2012)

They inform people of known threats to their health, safety and life because, its their duty to do so. 
Also from a completely pragmatic point it potentially saves police, emergency service and health service time and money in the event the person heeds the warning and removes themselves from their day to day activities, their home and usual haunts thus stopping easy targetting.
But most of all because there is a knock-on effect on our society when each murder is committed, the seeming lack of respect for life does affect each and everyone of us, its something that needs to be thwarted by whatever means the Gardai have at their disposal


----------



## Chris (11 Oct 2012)

oldnick said:


> Actually,Chris,I don't think many people would disagree with controlled legalisation of drugs . Even a flogger and hanger like me realises that the war is lost and it's better to control it legally.
> Hopefully, it would deprive the ganster-scum of their money, reduce the need for druggies to rob and generally save society a fortune (actually make society a fortune by taxing the stuff).
> Also, both good people like Purple and cruel ones like me would both be happy.



I also think that the tide is turning somewhat, especially with "old fashioned" conservative views slowly dying out. Yes, addicts that break into people's houses commit a crime, but it all stems from desperation of their addiction. I have a close relative who after 20 years of drug and alcohol addiction is finally leading a normal life. Another close friend of mine essentially lost 5 years of his life to addiction. Both of them came from very good homes but somehow ended up in the wrong circles. They didn't resort to burglary but they did steal from friends and family. Having talked to them since they have sobered up I can say for sure that they were not able to control their actions.
If society is really serious about fighting drug related crimes then it makes most sense to fight the cause that underlies it.


----------



## oldnick (11 Oct 2012)

Going back a few posts I have to declare a change of opinion.

Following the awful shooting of evidently a very nice and innocent young chap in Crumlin and reviewing other posters views I confess ,although it makes me sick, that the gardai probably should warn the ganster-scum that there is an imminent threat, if only to lessen the chance of  random shootings that harm innocent people.


----------



## Delboy (11 Oct 2012)

Firefly said:


> Hi Latrade,
> Usually I take a fairly dim view of drug addicts, but I think you are going a bit over-board here.
> 
> Whilst I agree, technically, that they are committing crime by breaking into your house, I think it must be taken into account the state of their mind at the time. I've never taken drugs personally.....



'technically'!!!! There's no 'technically' about it, it'v very black and white.
I was going to post an example of ' a state of mind' scenario but perhaps a bit too graphic for here.
A crime is a crime is a crime....state of mind is just an excuse used by slieveen legal bods and liberal do-gooders, in order to keep criminals on the street because it makes them feel good about themselves


----------



## Knuttell (12 Oct 2012)

Delboy said:


> 'technically'!!!! There's no 'technically' about it, it'v very black and white.
> I was going to post an example of ' a state of mind' scenario but perhaps a bit too graphic for here.
> A crime is a crime is a crime....state of mind is just an excuse used by slieveen legal bods and liberal do-gooders, in order to keep criminals on the street because it makes them feel good about themselves



Well said Sir.




Deiseblue said:


> Your answer was very much to my liking



Glad I could help Deiseblue.


----------



## Latrade (12 Oct 2012)

Delboy said:


> 'technically'!!!! There's no 'technically' about it, it'v very black and white.
> I was going to post an example of ' a state of mind' scenario but perhaps a bit too graphic for here.
> A crime is a crime is a crime....state of mind is just an excuse used by slieveen legal bods and liberal do-gooders, in order to keep criminals on the street because it makes them feel good about themselves


 
Well technically it isn't black and white as criminal law doesn't always have an absolute either/or statement. So in some cases state of mind is factored in, whether it be mental health or otherwise. 

Other than that you're absolutely correct, as a liberal do-gooder myself it is my aim to keep dangerous criminals on the streets irrespective of costs to society. That's exactly why I chose liberalism. I may well hide behind a thin facade of thinking that criminalising drug use and addiction serves no purpose other than to lead to "technically" criminal activities and you've seen through the standard liberal defence that perhaps there are other deeper societal and in many cases mental health issues that drive people to drug addiction. 

It's all a lie and you have expertly seen through my lies. Instead all I really want is that demonstrable (again, it's not bankers I hate the most or politicians, it's that stupid liberal bias reality sometimes has where it clearly shows things like the following statement if only people would use a bit of that old Google) very small proportion of drug users who chose that life and are dangerous to society to be free on the streets for my own sick amusement. 

Sure, there is a massive and long standing issue with understanding, treatment and help for people with mental illnesses where effectively they are left to fend for themselves, unemployable and vulnerable. But that's just the do-gooder in me and like the new iPhone, it doesn't take much to scratch off that do-gooder routine to get to the real truth (by which I mean an extreme inhumane view that has no basis in any reality or study ever performed).


----------



## Deiseblue (12 Oct 2012)

Knuttell said:


> Well said Sir.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Good God , Knutter - it's Deiseblue


----------



## Firefly (12 Oct 2012)

Delboy said:


> 'technically'!!!! There's no 'technically' about it, it'v very black and white.
> I was going to post an example of ' a state of mind' scenario but perhaps a bit too graphic for here.
> A crime is a crime is a crime....state of mind is just an excuse used by slieveen legal bods and liberal do-gooders, in order to keep criminals on the street because it makes them feel good about themselves


 
I'm well aware it's a crime to break into someone's house and I've said as much. What I'm saying, if you cared to read the sentences that directly followed the piece you highlighted above, is that I don't think it's accurate to call druggies criminals (as opposed to committing crimes) due to the state of their mind and that fact that criminals, IMO, are the ones engaged in organised crime such as the importation of the drugs in the first place. I probably am splitting hairs here. Just to add, if one of these druggies came into my house during the night, I wouldn't be in a position, nor would I care, to perform a psychiatric assesment of the state of their mind..the'd get the hurley.


----------



## Delboy (12 Oct 2012)

Latrade said:


> Well technically it isn't black and white as criminal law doesn't always have an absolute either/or statement. So in some cases state of mind is factored in, whether it be mental health or otherwise.
> 
> Other than that you're absolutely correct, as a liberal do-gooder myself it is my aim to keep dangerous criminals on the streets irrespective of costs to society. That's exactly why I chose liberalism. I may well hide behind a thin facade of thinking that criminalising drug use and addiction serves no purpose other than to lead to "technically" criminal activities and you've seen through the standard liberal defence that perhaps there are other deeper societal and in many cases mental health issues that drive people to drug addiction.
> 
> ...



had to read that a few times to try and follow it!!!

Perhaps if the drug addicts, perpetual thieves, corrupt politicians/bankers etc served real jail time instead of the revolving door system we have in this country, we'd not have so many drug addicts walking the street getting their fix by any means possible.
I'm sick and tired of reading about criminals with 40,50 convictions been given another chance by some judge who lives in a nice area with high walls or their tax payer funded legal team pleading that they've had some trauma in their lives which has led to them getting where they are.
I see after the recent drugs deaths in Cork a couple of weeks ago that the Gardai were immediately able to go out and carry out a few raids in which a series of arrests were made and a quantity of drugs were seized. Why are'nt they doing that every day- they know who to target. But the judges will probably give out light sentences and we're back to square one...more robberies, more drug fixes


----------



## Latrade (12 Oct 2012)

Delboy said:


> I'm sick and tired of reading about criminals with 40,50 convictions been given another chance by some judge who lives in a nice area with high walls or their tax payer funded legal team pleading that they've had some trauma in their lives which has led to them getting where they are.


 
I'm sick of reading them too, though funnily enough none actually spring to mind and none show up in a scan of newspaper articles from the last few years. But yeah, I share your outrage of this scandal that seemingly doesn't occur all that often at all. 




Delboy said:


> I see after the recent drugs deaths in Cork a couple of weeks ago that the Gardai were immediately able to go out and carry out a few raids in which a series of arrests were made and a quantity of drugs were seized. Why are'nt they doing that every day- they know who to target. But the judges will probably give out light sentences and we're back to square one...more robberies, more drug fixes


 
I remember that and yeah it was sad, but I also remember we've had press release practically every month demonstrating the Gardai are seizing major quantities of drugs. A few examples Kildare in October, Limerick and Kilkenny in September and Tipperary in August. So erm, well, they kind of are tackling the biggest issue which is the importers and dealers. But your point still stands...I think.


----------



## Chris (12 Oct 2012)

Delboy said:


> Perhaps if the drug addicts, perpetual thieves, corrupt politicians/bankers etc served real jail time instead of the revolving door system we have in this country, we'd not have so many drug addicts walking the street getting their fix by any means possible.


Show me one country that has managed to keep drugs out of jails, let alone out of the hands of a free society. Since the dawn of modern society, drugs have been common lace; they were in ancient Egypt, Greece and Rome. To think that you can eradicate drugs from society is in my opinion utopian. 
For the average druggie even the Bangkok Hilton is a better place than the streets, so they will always strive for some "respite" in jail. It is not a coincidence that alcoholics are not committing burglary in large numbers. The reason that drug addicts are committing crimes in order to get their fix is because their addiction involves an illegal substance.



Delboy said:


> I'm sick and tired of reading about criminals with 40,50 convictions been given another chance by some judge who lives in a nice area with high walls or their tax payer funded legal team pleading that they've had some trauma in their lives which has led to them getting where they are.


But these multi conviction criminals we hear about are not your average druggie or junkie, they are hardened carrier criminals.



Delboy said:


> I see after the recent drugs deaths in Cork a couple of weeks ago that the Gardai were immediately able to go out and carry out a few raids in which a series of arrests were made and a quantity of drugs were seized. Why are'nt they doing that every day- they know who to target. But the judges will probably give out light sentences and we're back to square one...more robberies, more drug fixes


You obviously have some evidence to suggest that gards are not doing drug busts when they know exactly where the drugs are? You don't think that maybe the investigation into the deaths uncovered some leads?
A neighbor of my in-laws is a detective in the drug squad and he says that more than 90% of drug busts never make it into the media. Small quantities of drugs are constantly being recovered.
The only reason why criminals have such power and commit such violent acts is because the drugs are illegal. When the US went into prohibition it fueled the largest increase in organized crime in US history. When you make something illegal you are handing a silver platter to organized crime.


----------



## Delboy (12 Oct 2012)

Latrade said:


> I'm sick of reading them too, though funnily enough none actually spring to mind and none show up in a scan of newspaper articles from the last few years. But yeah, I share your outrage of this scandal that seemingly doesn't occur all that often at all.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



there you go...hot off the press....89 previous convictions before this latest indiscretion
[broken link removed]


----------



## Knuttell (12 Oct 2012)

Chris said:


> The only reason why criminals have such power and commit such violent acts is because the drugs are illegal. When the US went into prohibition it fueled the largest increase in organized crime in US history. When you make something illegal you are handing a silver platter to organized crime.



Agree 100% have been saying this for years indeed a senior retired Detective said as much a few years back.

The State should take control of this,get the Drugs manufactured in controlled plants and distribute them for a few euro a week to those that require them.
Removing completely the power from drug lords and reducing crime very significantly,the saving to the State in terms of cost of policing and and massive drop in crime.

However this would have to be rolled out across all of Europe or else we would be over run by the Continents addicts.


----------



## Latrade (12 Oct 2012)

Delboy said:


> there you go...hot off the press....89 previous convictions before this latest indiscretion
> [broken link removed]


 
For which he was jailed. 

But just to bring it back to the original debate on the drug addicts, the proposition was the Gardai shouldn't warn drug addicts that a huge batch of poisonous herion was in circulation. So in this man's example, the state sanctioned death of a handbag snatcher. Is that what we're saying?

I can understand people's discontent with durg addicts, I don't agree with that position obviously and I don't agree with the view that there are no mitigating factors that mean we can be sympathetic their lives. I can understand it, but still disagree as there is clear evidence that position is wrong. But I just don't understand the bloodlust for the state to allow deliberately through deliberate neglect anyone person's death.


----------



## Delboy (12 Oct 2012)

Latrade said:


> For which he was jailed



pity he was'nt jailed properly for any 1 of the previous 89 convictions and the poor woman in question here would'nt have had to have been dragged down the road


----------



## Deiseblue (12 Oct 2012)

Delboy said:


> pity he was'nt jailed properly for any 1 of the previous 89 convictions and the poor woman in question here would'nt have had to have been dragged down the road



He was jailed & unfortunately became addicted to heroin whilst imprisoned in Mountjoy in 2007 !


----------



## Liamos (12 Oct 2012)

Deiseblue said:


> He was jailed & unfortunately became addicted to heroin whilst imprisoned in Mountjoy in 2007 !



Ah the poor fella!


----------



## Liamos (12 Oct 2012)

Chris said:


> But these multi conviction criminals we hear about are not your average druggie or junkie, they are hardened carrier criminals.



On the contrary, you will find that it is your average druggie or junkie who is in and out of Mountjoy every few months. These are the guys who are committing burglaries and amass numerous convictions but are released again and again.


----------



## Delboy (12 Oct 2012)

Deiseblue said:


> He was jailed & unfortunately became addicted to heroin whilst imprisoned in Mountjoy in 2007 !



must have been some severe jail sentences he got for the previous 89 convictions.....and him out and about committing this crime a year ago at the age of 26 then


----------



## Purple (12 Oct 2012)

Liamos said:


> On the contrary, you will find that it is your average druggie or junkie who is in and out of Mountjoy every few months. These are the guys who are committing burglaries and amass numerous convictions but are released again and again.



Which tells us that locking them up doesn't work. Maybe if their quality of life outside prison was better then prison would serve as a deterent.


----------



## Delboy (12 Oct 2012)

Purple said:


> Which tells us that locking them up doesn't work. Maybe if their quality of life outside prison was better then prison would serve as a deterent.



true and maybe if their prison sentences increased incrementally for every subsequent crime, and any possible early releases were tied into undertaking meaningful courses whilst in prison, we'd go a long way towards solving the problem of habitual criminals


----------



## Firefly (12 Oct 2012)

Purple said:


> Which tells us that locking them up doesn't work. Maybe if their quality of life outside prison was better then prison would serve as a deterent.


 
Or maybe life is too good in prison?


----------



## Purple (12 Oct 2012)

Delboy said:


> true and maybe if their prison sentences increased incrementally for every subsequent crime, and any possible early releases were tied into undertaking meaningful courses whilst in prison, we'd go a long way towards solving the problem of habitual criminals


If this is about saving money then the cheapest solution is also the best solution; investment in education at an early age. By that I don't mean paying already overpaid teachers even more; I mean proper infrastructure, smaller classes and better training for teachers in order to bring them up the acceptable international standards. Prevention is better (and cheaper) than cure. 
This won't happen of course because our socialist government is not that interested in empowering the poor,  just punishing the rich and the teaching unions don’t care about education and so take the money that should go towards these things and give it to their members. 



Firefly said:


> Or maybe life is too good in prison?


 I don’t think many people would consider conditions in Mountjoy as good.


----------



## Knuttell (12 Oct 2012)

Sentences should be significantly longer/harsher,there is no deterrent,Murderers are routinely out after 12 years,crimes that should be treated as murder are tried as manslaughter*,its depressing how little the victim is considered and that their life meant so little. *

Muggers should get a 10 year sentence and serve every day of it.

Rapists and Child abusers should be castrated and given at a minimum 20 years.

Murderers should get life.

Life should mean life,they should be carried out in a pine box with a trapdoor and dropped into a communal grave.

If these sentences were routinely handed down I guarantee crime levels would fall.

I am not concerned with reforming these criminals or looking sympathetically at their backgrounds or any of the rest of that PC nonsense,I just want them off the street and serving a decent sentence that truly reflects their crimes that hopefully will deter them and others and allow the rest of us some peace of mind in our homes,towns and Cities.


----------



## Purple (12 Oct 2012)

Knuttell, can you point to any evidence that harsher sentences reduce crime rates?
The USA has much harsher sentencing policies and the second largest proportion of its population in the penal system of any country in the world and yet it has much higher crime rates than us.


----------



## Knuttell (12 Oct 2012)

Purple I just want them locked up for a very long time and off our streets if it acts as a deterrent, that's a bonus.

If we need to build 5 times the amt of prisons,then build them,lock them up and throw away the key for all I care,if you cannot behave yourself without raping molesting,robbing and killing then you have no place in society.


----------



## Purple (13 Oct 2012)

Knuttell said:


> Purple I just want them locked up for a very long time and off our streets if it acts as a deterrent, that's a bonus.
> 
> If we need to build 5 times the amt of prisons,then build them,lock them up and throw away the key for all I care,if you cannot behave yourself without raping molesting,robbing and killing then you have no place in society.


Robbing could mean breaking into a car. That hardly deserves to be on a list with rape, molesting (child abuse?) and murder. I agree that those offences should carry much greater prison terms but the economic and social cost of prevention is a small fraction of what it costs to keep people in prison.


----------



## MrMan (13 Oct 2012)

So knuttell if you were wrongly convicted of rape, would your castration just go down as collateral damage in the fight against crime? We all want to see the bad men put away, but things are rarely black and white.


----------



## Knuttell (13 Oct 2012)

Purple said:


> Robbing could mean breaking into a car. That hardly deserves to be on a list with rape, molesting (child abuse?)



Yes it does,we live in a society that is in places held to ransom by criminals and other scum,that have no fear of committing crime or getting caught as they will usually be out in jig time.

There should be zero tolerance for any criminal activity with draconian (compared to our current laughable system) sentences.




MrMan said:


> So knuttell if you were wrongly convicted of rape, would your castration just go down as collateral damage in the fight against crime?



In cases where the evidence is damning,DNA etc and in cases of repeat offenders/rapists and child molesters,then in order to protect the innocent from these predatory animals and their sick appetites,then yes Castration and not chemical castration either.


----------



## Purple (13 Oct 2012)

Knuttell said:


> Yes it does,we live in a society that is in places held to ransom by criminals and other scum,that have no fear of committing crime or getting caught as they will usually be out in jig time.
> 
> There should be zero tolerance for any criminal activity with draconian (compared to our current laughable system) sentences.


 So an 18 year old who breaks into a car should be placed in prison for years with murderers? Sounds like an expensive way of turning petty criminals into brutalised violent criminals.



Knuttell said:


> In cases where the evidence is damning,DNA etc and in cases of repeat offenders/rapists and child molesters,then in order to protect the innocent from these predatory animals and their sick appetites,then yes Castration and not chemical castration either.


So beyond a reasonable doubt then?


----------



## Knuttell (13 Oct 2012)

Purple said:


> So an 18 year old who breaks into a car should be placed in prison for years with murderers? Sounds like an expensive way of turning petty criminals into brutalised violent criminals.



If that's the price to pay where people can walk the streets at night and elderly people are not terrified of their houses being broken into and robbed and killed etc then that's the price.

If you don't want to to the time don't do the crime.

Reasonable doubt has in the past seen innocent people sentenced,however if there is DNA evidence and the offender is a serial rapist with a long line of victims,then you know what?Castrate them then lock them away for 20 years.

I have less than zero sympathy for these animals.


----------



## Purple (13 Oct 2012)

Knuttell said:


> If that's the price to pay where people can walk the streets at night and elderly people are not terrified of their houses being broken into and robbed and killed etc then that's the price.
> 
> If you don't want to to the time don't do the crime.


Eircom phonewatch adverts and tabloid hype have more to do with people feeling safe or not in their homes and walking the streets than actual crime rates. This is a very safe country.




Knuttell said:


> Reasonable doubt has in the past seen innocent people sentenced,however if there is DNA evidence and the offender is a serial rapist with a long line of victims,then you know what?Castrate them then lock them away for 20 years.


No, criminal convictions require reasonable doubt.



Knuttell said:


> I have less than zero sympathy for these animals.


 Thats not possible


----------



## Knuttell (13 Oct 2012)

Purple said:


> Eircom phonewatch adverts and tabloid hype have more to do with people feeling safe or not in their homes and walking the streets than actual crime rates. This is a very safe country.



I am not so sure about that,there are murders every week sometimes more than one or even two,not just gangland but elderly people being tied up beaten in their own homes,rapes, pedophile rings,armed robberies,tiger kidnappings,insurance fraud,God but its rotten to the core with crime.

Ireland once upon a long time ago was a safe place,not any more,I wish that it were.

Just to be clear I am not just talking about zero tolerance for all crime,whether it occurs in a filling station hold up or in the CEOs office of a major Bank,send them all to Jail for a good hard sentence with 12 to a cell and one slop bucket with missing handles and you better believe it but crime rates will fall.


----------



## MrMan (13 Oct 2012)

You mean Ireland where nobody spoke out about the crimes that were happening all around them? don't mix perception up with reality.


----------



## Purple (13 Oct 2012)

Lets take a 25 year period. 2007 is the latest year I can find statistics for. 
In 1982 the total number of inditable offences committed in Ireland was 97,626.
In 2007 that figure was 104,946.
In 1982 our population was 3,504,000. In 2007 our population was 4,109,086.
Therefore in 1982 there were 0.0278 inditable crimes per person or 36 people for every one inditable crime and in 2007 there were 0.0255 inditable crimes per person or 39 people for every one inditable crime.

In other words there was an 8% drop in inditable crimes per head of population over that 25 year period. 

Homicide rates have gone up over that period; from 1 per 100'000 to 1.8 per 100'000. In 2007 we had an average of 1.6 homicides per week. Therefore they can console themselves that this is one of the safest countries in the world. They can also remember that over half of all murders are carried out by family members or people known to the victim and less than 30% are carried out by strangers.


----------



## Knuttell (13 Oct 2012)

MrMan said:


> You mean Ireland where nobody spoke out about the crimes that were happening all around them? don't mix perception up with reality.



You are of course correct,foolish Knuttell for not perceiving properly the lack of crime/murders.rapes/etc being reported on a daily basis on our National Radio and in our National press.

I must not mix perception up with reality
I must not mix perception up with reality
I must not mix perception up with reality
I must not mix perc


----------



## Knuttell (13 Oct 2012)

Purple said:


> Lets take a 25 year period. 2007 is the latest year I can find statistics for.
> In 1982 the total number of inditable offences committed in Ireland was 97,626.
> In 2007 that figure was 104,946.
> In 1982 our population was 3,504,000. In 2007 our population was 4,109,086.
> ...



Link?


----------



## Purple (13 Oct 2012)

Knuttell said:


> Just to be clear I am not just talking about zero tolerance for all crime,whether it occurs in a filling station hold up or in the CEOs office of a major Bank,send them all to Jail for a good hard sentence with 12 to a cell and one slop bucket with missing handles and you better believe it but crime rates will fall.



There is no statistical link between the length of sentences given out, the prison conditions or even capital punishment and reductions in crime.
Education levels, employment levels and social conditions are the main factors that influence crime rates.
If you want to reduce crime then educate children and give them opportunities in life. Level them up so that they have the prospect of supporting themselves honestly. Oh, and it takes generations to fix, not weeks or months or even a few years.

That’s my view anyway; I believe in equality of opportunity (which is why I hate socialism, but that’s a different topic).


----------



## Knuttell (13 Oct 2012)

Purple said:


> If you want to reduce crime then educate children and give them opportunities in life. Level them up so that they have the prospect of supporting themselves honestly. Oh, and it takes generations to fix, not weeks or months or even a few years.
> 
> That’s my view anyway; I believe in equality of opportunity (which is why I hate socialism, but that’s a different topic).



In an ideal world,this would indeed be the case and in a Utopian society there would be no crime.... sadly its never going to happen but we could come close if we introduced the legalisation of all drugs across Europe it would go a long way to massively reducing crime figures and save us Billions.

Its a no brainer,will it ever happen?

Not a chance.


----------



## MrMan (13 Oct 2012)

Knuttell said:


> You are of course correct,foolish Knuttell for not perceiving properly the lack of crime/murders.rapes/etc being reported on a daily basis on our National Radio and in our National press.
> 
> I must not mix perception up with reality
> I must not mix perception up with reality
> ...



You said Ireland long ago was a safe place, I refered to the many rapes that occured long ago but have only come to light in recent years. there was less public awareness about what went on all over the country and information wasn't immediately available as it is now.


----------



## oldnick (13 Oct 2012)

_"You may as well be hung for stealing a sheep as for a lamb"_

That ,or something like that, was the old phrase which pretty well means that if I am going to get decades in sub-human conditions for stealing a car I may as well take the risk of shooting my way out of getting caught.

The present system in Ireland seems crazy, with criminals being give laughable sentences which only mean about two-thirds time served , with repeat offenders are repeatedly given bail. 
Most people want better control of repeat offenders (especially the crazy bail laws) and ,in many crimes, harsher sentences.

But to go to the opposite extremes would probably mean a big increase in violence from criminals desperate to avoid getting caught and ending in Knuttell's prisons for twenty years .


----------



## Knuttell (13 Oct 2012)

oldnick said:


> if I am going to get decades in sub-human conditions for stealing a car I may as well take the risk of shooting my way out of getting caught.



On the other hand its more likely he will say to himself...

"If I get caught stealing this car I am going to an Irish gulag for the best part of 20 years,its not worth it,time I got a job and became a productive member of society instead of the worthless,hooded,robbing little chav bag that I now am.

Abracadabra!!

As if by magic,one less high end car stolen.


----------



## Wishes (14 Oct 2012)

oldnick said:


> I confess ,although it makes me sick, that the gardai probably should warn the ganster-scum that there is an imminent threat, if only to lessen the chance of  random shootings that harm innocent people.



Not for one moment do I believe a gangster would stay indoors, just in case a stray bullet might whizz by his/her head and incidentally maim an innocent bystander. 

Most of these guys don't care about their own lives, let alone members of the pubic who don't engage in illegal activity.    

Are these thugs not a threat to the State?  Yet the State is protecting them by informing them their lives are at risk.


----------



## Purple (15 Oct 2012)

Knuttell said:


> Link?



[broken link removed]

[broken link removed]

In 2007 we were the 4th safest country in the world.

Try Google for anything else.


----------

