Why are gangsters being informed their lives are at risk?

Purple said:
You don't watch Fox News then
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
Last edited:

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.
Click to expand...

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).
 
Purple said:
I agree with Latrade on that point.
Click to expand...

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,....
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
Deiseblue said:
I really would like to know when terms such as " well intentioned " , " politically correct " & " liberal " became pejorative terms ?
Click to expand...

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.
 
Latrade said:
Well that's taken the debate to a new level. I presume we have a thread closer.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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 !!
 
Originally Posted by Deiseblue
I really would like to know when terms such as " well intentioned " , " politically correct " & " liberal " became pejorative terms ?
Click to expand...

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?
 

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..
Click to expand...


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.
 
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?
Click to expand...

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 .
 
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
 

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.
 
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register