Should people with 75 previous convictions ever be let out of prison again.

[Duke of Marmalade]

Is your post for real?

Sorry for the sarcasm, cheapest form of wit and all that.

Just pointing out that it is very easy for an underclass kid to accumulate convictions but seemingly impossible to bring to book those who have committed economic treason on a whole nation, and by the way creamed a few 10s of millions for themselves and their families.

 

[Ancutza]

i am all for the law of 3 strikes - no matter what the crime was ....

A life sentence for stealing your 3rd car? Harsh but no doubt fair!

 

[Latrade]

I think we're looking at this the wrong way, if someone can clock up 75 convictions in so short a time, then there's obviously too much that is a criminal offence. We should reduce the number of offences, that way we decrease the number of crimes overnight.

And I'm only half joking, because when we sit back and judge these people (rightly or wrongly) we operate on the basis that we're 100% law abiding. And yet, some may break the speed limit, use a bus lane, some in their car while on work buisness, not declare a nixer, do something against a safety policy at work, take some paper home from work, etc.

If you're just going to say "75 conviction" what are they for? I'd say given the way so much stuff has been criminalised over the last 15-20 years, it's hard not to go through the day without doing something illegal.

So yeah, 3 strikes and you're out, but I suppose that only relates to the crimes that you don't commit, they're not proper crimes anyway. Because as we know, it's a fact that harsh punishment of crime works. Just look at when there was real punishment of criminals, when you could do hard time for pinching some bread, or be executed or be shipped off, crime was virtually zero... oh wait real crime rates are much less.

But when we knew how to deal with murderers with hanging and all that good stuff. But them those pesky statistics and reality show that murder rates are lower these days, but then as we all know, reality has a liberal bias.

 

[Complainer]

When I was younger I used to think "we should help them" and "they're a product of their environment".

Now I just think they're scum and should be put down (why waste the money keeping them in prison for life?)

We have too many scumbags in this country. Recidivists shouldn't have a right to live in our society.

So how did it come to be they are 'scumbags' and you are not?

This reduced crime by 70% where it was introduced. Not because it acted as a deterant, but because the majority of crime is committed by a small number of habitual criminals. Once they get locked up, the crime rate plummets.

Source please?

 

[UFC]

So how did it come to be they are 'scumbags' and you are not?

Probably loads of reasons:

Terrible parents
Poor genetics
Possibly some sort of brain damage from fetal alcohol syndrome or some such thing
Laziness
Bad attitude
Mental illness
Complete lack of education
etc., etc. ...

Regardless, the fact of the matter is they are now pure scum and really should have no place in our society. As adults they understand they are doing wrong.

 

[Latrade]

Source please?

It wasn't 70% reduction, but there was a reduction in the states that introduced a 3 strikes system for certain crimes. Couple of problems with that though, first, crime also went down in States that don't have the same system. Like the zero tolerance approach in New York where Giuliani gets the credit, unfortunately crime was already dropping before he came to office and before the introduction of zero tolerance and at the same rate in other cities that didn't have the ZT system.

The massive drops in crime over the 90s and the 2000s had more to do the good economic times with low unemployment and good wages than any conservative, hard line approach to handling crime. Just like in the old Victorian days, it just didn't work being hard on crime. The only common feature in crime rates dropping and rising is economic stability and social conditions.

And in 3 strikes system rape and assault actually increased, so people were given 25 years for stealing a golf club or some cookies, but rapists and thugs still walked the streets. Sure you need to lock up your sister, wife and daughter after dark, but you can sleep at night knowing your golf clubs are finally safe and secure.

 

[Complainer]

Probably loads of reasons:

Terrible parents
Poor genetics
Possibly some sort of brain damage from fetal alcohol syndrome or some such thing
Laziness
Bad attitude
Mental illness
Complete lack of education
etc., etc. ...

Regardless, the fact of the matter is they are now pure scum and really should have no place in our society. As adults they understand they are doing wrong.

So out of the seven possible causes you list, five were things that these individuals have/had no control over. And the other two (laziness and bad attitude) are almost certainly related to the other five. You expect people who are mentally ill, and/or intellectually disabled and/or uneducated to have the same understanding of right and wrong as you. So these people were unlucky enough to be born into a very difficult environment, and your response is to 'put them down'.

Nice values.

 

[csirl]

Excuses, excuses, excuses. What's with the abdicating of responsibility? We are all human, we all possess advantageous and disadvantageous traits. There are plenty of people born in difficult environments who are model citizens. Nobody has a "right" to used their background as an excuse to commit crime and terrorise their fellow citizens.

 

[Complainer]

Nobody has a "right" to used their background as an excuse to commit crime and terrorise their fellow citizens.

Fully agree with you there. But as long as we fail to look at the causes (not the excuses), we will fail to address the real issues.

 

[Latrade]

Excuses, excuses, excuses. What's with the abdicating of responsibility? We are all human, we all possess advantageous and disadvantageous traits. There are plenty of people born in difficult environments who are model citizens. Nobody has a "right" to used their background as an excuse to commit crime and terrorise their fellow citizens.

My problem with this is not regarding excuses, rather causes. The only consistent indicator of "crime" regards social conditions.

The other issue I can never get my head around and that is never taken into account is what crimes do we consider? So it's murder, assault, rape, theft, drugs, vandalism, begging, etc. They're the ones we want irradicating and they're the people we want locked up.

But what about white collar crime? A drug dealer may beat up a few people and murder the odd competitor every year and wreck the lives of a few thousand, but bankers in this country alone managed to ruin the lives of 4 million people. Hundreds of thousand now unemployed, thousands struggling to keep their houses and the one statistic we never get to hear about is suicide.

And yet not one of the systems that are tough on crime ever include white collar crime.

Excuses indeed.

 

[censuspro]

Fully agree with you there. But as long as we fail to look at the causes (not the excuses), we will fail to address the real issues.

But there comes a point where people have to be held accountable for their actions. By "failing to address the real issues" we are taking one thing and calling it something else "it's not crime, they're a product of their environment" this completly alleviates the responsibility for their own actions.

 

[Complainer]

But there comes a point where people have to be held accountable for their actions. By "failing to address the real issues" we are taking one thing and calling it something else "it's not crime, they're a product of their environment" this completly alleviates the responsibility for their own actions.

I've no problem with making people accountable for their actions. Crime is crime.

However, if we ever want to break out of this vicious cycle of crime in socially deprived areas, we need to address the causes.

 

[censuspro]

I think we are giving this guy too much credit. It is reasonably easy to chalk up convictions. Take a simple theft of a packet of cigarettes from a shop, this might involve the following multiple convictions:

Larceny
Possession of an offensive weapon
Possession of illegal drugs
Threatening bodily harm
Resisting arrest
Trying to escape Garda custody
Dangerous driving (subsequent car chase)
Driving whilst under the influence of drugs
Damage to property (when car crashes)
Using abusive language to Gardai
Obstructing the course of justice
Contempt of court

So there's 12 convictions from a stolen packet of fags.

Now it is far, far more challenging for, say, an Anglo banker to secure even one conviction

Maybe he shouldn't:
Steal a pack of cigs
Posess an offensive weapon
Threaten to kill or hurt someone with the offensive weapon
Resist arrest
Steal a car and evade arrest
Use abusive language
obstruct justice or be in contempt of court.

 

[Mpsox]

They should introduce the 'three strikes' law, same as in the States, with a very harsh penalty for the 3rd offence.

Some people say that harsh penalties don't act as a derrent, but having lived in countries whose punishments fit the crimes, such as Singapore, I don't understand why tougher mandatory sentences are not introduced here.

Be careful for what you wish for. How many of us on here got up to mischef in our youth? I have a clean record but have been dragged into fights a couple of times in pubs in my youth where someone I was with in a group kicked it off (cause he was a pillock), or nipped up an alleyway on the way home when I was got short. Had the Guards come along, I could quite easily have 2/3 strikes against me now.

Harsher sentances is too simplistic a solution. After all, we imprison people in this country for not paying their debts, should they count as a "strike" when often the reason they are in debt may not necessarily be their fault but a reflection of circumstances. ?

Whilst I don't argue that harsher sentances are required in a lot of cases (or at the very least a complete overhaul of the bail laws in Ireland) I also know people who had a criminal record as long as their arm due to drug addiction, but who also sorted out their lives, are now happily married with kids and a full time job and if you met them, you'd never believe what their younger days were like.

You need only pick up any local newspaper and read the court cases to know that we are raising a generation of ferral children who have no respect for authority. Harsher punishments is only part of the solution, we should also be asking ourselves why these kids turned out like that (remember, they were all babies who went goo-goo gaa-gaa at some stage) and what we should as a society be doing about it for the future. It's a debate about what kind of Ireland we want to live in as much as a debate about sentancing

 

[censuspro]

I've no problem with making people accountable for their actions. Crime is crime.

However, if we ever want to break out of this vicious cycle of crime in socially deprived areas, we need to address the causes.

Agreed. But that has nothing to do with sentencing.

 

[Complainer]

But that has nothing to do with sentencing.

DIsagree - it has everything to do with sentancing, and with the broader criminal justice system.

 

[censuspro]

DIsagree - it has everything to do with sentancing, and with the broader criminal justice system.

How does someone coming from a socially deprived area have to do with whether we introduce mandatory sentencing? This is just a way to alleviate the responsibility people have for their own actions.

 

[censuspro]

Sorry for the sarcasm, cheapest form of wit and all that.

Just pointing out that it is very easy for an underclass kid to accumulate convictions but seemingly impossible to bring to book those who have committed economic treason on a whole nation, and by the way creamed a few 10s of millions for themselves and their families.

Mandatory sentencing would apply to them too.

 

[MrMan]

The system is best used and abused by those that it is supposed to be helping. We have a soft stance on crime and criminals of all types can get by on the knowledge that should they get caught, they won't be hard done by.
When we catch a 'scumbag' and start analysing exactly how it came to pass that he punched a girl in the face so she would drop her handbag, we lose sight that the real victim is the priority and when we introduce his background into the debate we are already softening up his sentence.
You can't heal someones past, so if they continue to make choices outside the law, then we should be altering his future for our own sake, and by that I mean real sentences in prisons that meet their basic needs without luxuries.

 

[redbhoy]

The quicker people realise that the Legal System doesnt give a toss about victims or Society as a while the better. They care about perpetuating the Court System which keep all involved in their accustomed lifestyle at teh top of the pile. (Gardaí, Solicitors, Barristers, Judges, politicians are all complicit in this charade)