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

1: Education

Kids should be taught the correct values from an early age in school. IMO schools should have lessons built into the curriculum teaching kids the impact of crime on society and how it impacts on their lives.
Click to expand...

I agree that education is the key to prevention. As I've said on other threads on this forum, kids who attend schools where the majority of students are from disadvantaged areas are more likely to be underachievers. Changing the socio-economic profile of these schools is the key. Or closing these schools down and distributing the kids among schools where there is a more varied socio-economic mix of students.
 
Peer groups - which will improve if the socio-economic profile of certain schools is changed.

An adult to look up to. A lot of kids dont respect/care about/or want to be and particular teacher. But if there is someone in their lives, a sports trainer maybe, who they can admire, aspire to be like - this could be a huge help - especially if they dont have a parent or other adult who is a good solid role model.

The local priest probably filled the position of a good adult role model in times gone by, sports trainer type role models are good - but what if the kid isnt into sports? A community club leader?
 
What exactly are we discussing on this thread?

The OP was "Should people with 75 previous convictions ever be let out of prison again"

Nobody has denied the the co-relation between crime and socio economic circumstances. However, the causes of crime should not be a consideration when determining if someone with 75 previous convictions should ever be released from prison.

What should be considered is: If a person with 75 previous convictions is released from prison are they likely to re-offend? The answer in the overwhelming majority of cases is YES they are exremely likely to re-offend.

We can try to address the current causes of crime and we can try to address prisons conditions. However, prisons were not designed to prevent people from re-offending, prisons are where we put people who commit crime.
 
As a previous poster noted- You can have a lot more than one conviction from one incident. So personally I think you should be treated with kid gloves 1st couple of times so long as they are not serious and if they are sufficiently spaced apart. But if you're blatantly taking the p*ss you should have graduated sentences. i.e. your sentence gets increased every time you appear in front of a judge as its obvious you're not learning the lessons that prison is supposed to teach you.
 
mathepac said:
Can you identify some of the rehabilitation programmes / initiatives available to young offenders from the time they enter the penal / criminal justice system?
Click to expand...

No I can't identify specific programmes, but I do know that there are sports programmes and tournaments organised inside prison and teams are given a chance to win something, there is of course the option to further ones education in prison, drug rehab, chaplain and councilling services.
 

I don't agreee that peers have a bigger influence than parents on young people. If a child is brought up with certain standards then it is very hard to stray from those when older. Of course, there are exceptions - there might be one child in a family who gets into trouble while his/her siblings do not but they tend to be minor crimes and when they grow and mature move on with their lives without getting into trouble. Its the minority we are talking about here who go on to commit more serious crimes
 
Agree totally with csirl.

Law abiding citizens need to be protected from criminals. The 3 strikes law is fair, you get two chances to change your behaviour and if you decide not to, you suffer the consequences. That's the problem in this country, there are no consequences or if there are, they're not sufficiently serious to deter the would-be criminals.

Look at the case of [broken link removed], who's out again to terrorise and possibly even kill.

He should have received lengthy consecutive sentences for his crimes and, as some of the victims were choked during the course of the attacks, he should have been charged with attempted murder.

If the 3 strikes law were in place, we would be safe from creatures like him and he would be jailed for life.
 

His lawyers are apparently taking a court case against several newspapers because they claim his "rights" are being violated by them disclosing his address or whereabouts
 
TarfHead said:
Why '75' ? Why not 74, or 76, or 20 ?
Click to expand...

The specific number of 75 was the number of convictions Sean Keogh had on his record before becoming involved in the altercation in Drimnagh where 2 Polish men were murdered.
 

Im not sure how much I agree with this (again only my opinion not any kind of scientific evidence). Kids rebel against their parents, not against their peer group. They spend more 'quality' time with their peers, not their parents. They try things out behind their parents backs, some of these things are totally innocent and natural of course, but if they were in with a bad crowd they could be trying not so innocent things. They also develop their own morality based on other factors - some of these factors being that they disagree with their parents value system for one reason or another (like children of religious parents being atheist or children of smokers never taking up the habit/vice versa).

And of course, in some cases parenting is not a positive influence in a childs live due to various dysfunctions in a family.

The environment (parenting, peer group, school, tv, magazines, clubs etc...) all exert a lot of influence on a child, parenting may only be a small percentage in overall influence.

I suppose a lot depends on the type of parenting of course.
 
csirl said:
Changing the socio-economic profile of these schools is the key. Or closing these schools down and distributing the kids among schools where there is a more varied socio-economic mix of students.
Click to expand...
I would have agreed with this in the past, but I'm not so sure any more. I remember attending a debate a long time ago that:

"University dulls diamonds and polishes stones"

Perhaps our entire society is geared this way? Is there merit in moving at the pace of the slowest? Or should we separate the worst and the best, and help them both equally so they can achieve their own potential?

Education is key, but not on its own. Parenting is also key. Maybe even more key (if that's even a term?)

I know this is dragging the post off topic, and you could write a thesis on this. For the record I agree with the three strikes rule. We the people have a contract with the State, and as far as I can see the State is pretty damn far from living up to its part of the bargain in a lot of areas - not least crime and the lax treatment of repeat criminals.
 

We had very nice neighbours some years ago whose son was what would be regarded as a bit wild. No harm, just always messing around never seemed to be at home. Whenever you went out he was always there looking for someone to play with or as he got older to hang around the local streets.

By the time he was fifteen he was hanging around with a gang and then his parents decided to move because of the area. In all the years he lived there I never remember him being taken anywhere by his father. Apart from the two weeks holiday a year he was never off the road. Years later I heard he was in a rehab centre because of drugs and I don't know what happened to him since.

The point i'm making is that his parents swore that the cause of all his problems was the area we lived in, nothing to do with them. Yet nobody had any time for him. He had a decent home, was fed well, dressed well but ignored most of the time. His only life was outside with his friends
 
Complainer said:
I do believe that creating a more equal society is the way to go.
Click to expand...

Could you define what is unequal about our society?

Also, why do people with the exact same backgrounds not always end up making the same bad decisions?

For example, a friend of mine from Killinarden (bad part of Dublin) has a masters degree, whereas others from his area are in prison. The difference? He chose a different path.
 

Do you honestly believe we live in an equal society?

Why don't you ask Daniel Mc Anaspie and the other children we have heard about recently why they made such bad choices.

Anyone who gets out of the poverty and criminal trap that they are born into deserves great credit. However, it shouldn't be a greater struggle for a child from Killinarden to get the same opportunities as someone born in D4. I know it's a utopian concept but all Children should be born with the same chance in life. They make their own choices after that.
 

I think its more about perception than reality. The reality is that all children, including those from bad areas, get free primary and secondary eduction. It is possible for the child from Killinarden to study hard, get a good leaving cert and go to college. Once in college, children from such backgrounds get fees paid, grants etc. and can easily survive by doing some part time and summer work (as most students do). The problem is that these children dont realise or believe that they can do this.

I know people will go on about the schools being bad etc. etc., but in the end of the day, every school in Ireland teaches exactly the same core curricullum and every kid sits the same paper in the leaving cert.
 

School is only a small part of it. I have done work for inner city schools in Dublin as part of a programme with employers in the area. Talk to the teachers and ask them how many of the children come into school hungry, malnurished, tired, physically abused etc. Ask them how many don't turn up because their parents couldn't be bothered to take them. Ask them how many have family members serving time in prison. Ask them how many have seen and alcohol and drug abuse in their families.

Now go to other parts of Dublin and ask the same questions. Then tell me it is an equal society, everyone has the same chance in life and the only reason people don't escape is that they are too lazy or make bad choices.
 

All people are equal, but some people are more equal than others.
 
UFC said:
a friend of mine from Killinarden (bad part of Dublin) has a masters degree, whereas others from his area are in prison. The difference? He chose a different path.
Click to expand...

Your mate had good influences around him. His parents or someone exposed him to the way things can be. Most kids in disadvantaged areas dont get this support.
 

redbhoy said:
Your mate had good influences around him. His parents or someone exposed him to the way things can be. Most kids in disadvantaged areas dont get this support.
Click to expand...
The problem is figuring out how to change this dynamic. Magically creating an 'equal' society won't change things. I read the links that Complainer included and the drive seems to be for equalising income - either by having less difference at gross pay level or by taxing and redistributing so that net levels are less unequal. I don't think giving disinterested or abusive parents more money will make the slightest difference to their children's future. So what do you do to break the cycle? Direct provision of food instead of welfare? Remove all children from parents who don't know how or don't want to provide the opportunities to their children? It really is a vicious cycle - people need to be educated to know how to strive for the best for themselves and their children but if they don't know that, they won't push for their children to be educated... Equal opportunities ARE provided for children to access a good 14 year education - but it is the lack of interest/education of the parents that stops equal education being provided/accessed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register