Justice - Zero Tollerance????

Villain

During John O’Donoghue’s time as Opposition Spokesperson on Justice he constantly called for “Zero Tolerance” from Nora Owen who was Minister for Justice at the time. He also called for increased Prison places and harsher sentencing.

In 1997 FF took over in Government and John O’Donoghue was installed as Minister for Justice. Followed by the new PD Leader and Former Attorney General Michael McDowell.

Now lets have a look at some of the stats.

Firstly lets look at the population of this state:
1996 3,626,087
2002 3,917,203
2004 4,130,000

Ok so there was a rise in population of around half a million between 1996 and 2004
Now lets look at the number of Gardai in the state:
1997 10,800
1998 11,235
1999 11,458
2000 11,640
2001 11,814
2002 11,900
2003 12,018
2004 12,209

So between 1997 and 2004 the number of Gardai at all ranks increased by 1409, now you don’t have to be a genius to figure out that an extra 1409 Gardai aren’t going to be able to cope with an increase in population of 500,000. Especially when you look at the rise in crime I mean the burglary numbers are below
Burglaries on Homes:
2001 14,877
2002 15,474
2003 16,129
2004 16,273
2005 17,598

Murder stats:
1990 17
2000 39
2001 52
2002 52
2003 45.
2004 37
2005 60

Now even more worrying is the stats below from last year:

Headline offences committed by persons on bail in 2005
Group 01 - Homicide 20
Group 02 - Assault 232
Group 03 - Sexual Offences 32
Group 04 - Arson 26
Group 05 - Drugs 430
Group 06 - Theft 2,914
Group 07 - Burglary 1,171
Group 08 - Robbery 321
Group 09 - Fraud 205
Group 10 - Other Headline Offences 105
Total 5,456

So 5,456 offences were commited by people who were on bail!!!

Several people from the Moyross area of Limerick have been on various radio shows over the past 2 days in the wake of the horrific attack on 2 very young children, these residents have stated that the area is very much a no-go area for Gardai, acts of crime seem to occur on a daily basis but go undetected.

The new Tanaiste needs to act now to enforce a Justice system that can make a real impact on crime in our state. The Garda numbers are expected to reach 14,000 before 2007 and while that is welcome news these Gardai need to be properly resourced, the criminals are using huge resources and modern technology to carry out their actions we have to match those and surpress them if we are to make a real impact.

Save our State before its too late.

constitutionus

you know the moyross thing reminds me of when i was growing up in tallaght. the reason why vigilantes we're running around the place wasnt because of some mad IRA thing. it was because we had 50 thousand people and no gardai. christ i was 16 before i seen my first gardai and the poor fecker was scared out of his mind hanging onto his alsatian for dear life. even now despite getting divisional status over seven years ago theres still only 53 to 56 gardai on shift at anytime to police 100 thousand people. thats a bloody joke. if you take the number of gardai as 14000 now ,which it isnt, and divide it by the population of the island that means providing you take my higher figure of 56 gardai on shift then the people of tallaght have a gardai to citizen ratio of 5 times less than the national average (1 gardai for every 321 people vrs 1 gardai for every 1786 in tallaght)

zero tollerance was just a buzz word here, it was never seriously implemented. you know things are bad when i guy from moyross comes on telly asking for two squad cars to patrol the area. i mean FFS that should be the very least a comunity deserves. but no, you can bet your arse if it was a ministers kids that were in hospital there'd be sweeping changes. as it is there'll be alot of puff and bluster and then it'll be forgot.
except of course in moyross, im not condoning it but i dont rate the chances of the scumbag/s that did it. if there not done in by the locals they'll be got in prison. isnt celtic tiger ireland wonderful !

Akrasia

People are using the absolutely horrific Moyross incident as an excuse to call for implimentation of ASBO legislation.

Bull****. The people who burned those two kids are not 'anti social' they are criminals of the very worst and most depraved kind. There are plenty of laws on the books to deal with criminal activity, we don't need to criminalise even further the people on the margins, we need to remove the cause of the crime at it's root.

I am normally the last person to call for more gardai powers, but in this case, the gardai are a hell of a lot less corrupt than the professional thugs who control half of Limerick. They've built themselves a fortress from where they can't be touched, and they are terrorising the rest of the community.

The gardai are afraid to go into moyross and they have good reason, they are outnumbered hundreds to one, so the gardai should launch a massive operation on the streets to reverse that ratio. Put dozens of gardai in the area, on every street corner for a few weeks. they will be harrassed and attacked by the criminal gangs, and assaulting Gardai is a criminal offense, offenses for which there should be more than enough evidence to convict if they are arrested in the act.
The gardai should have paddy wagons loaded up with riot police ready to arrest gangs of thugs as soon as they start causing trouble. (They are prepared to use this tactic against unarmed peace protesters where a lack of state resources never seems to be an issue) What are they afraid of? that it might spark a riot? The residents of these areas live under permenant riot conditions, and every day it gets worse as the gangs become more violent and more confident

Sangre

Harsh sentences and increased prison places have been shown time and time again not to work on reducing crime.

Also you can't fully compare current crime to the stats 10 years ago as the new PULSE system only came in around 2002 and alters the compilation of statistics. Bit annoying but not much can be done.

dathi1

Harsh sentences and increased prison places have been shown time and time again not to work on reducing

Works in Singapore....and New York.

Vadrefjorde

dathi1 wrote:

Works in Singapore....and New York.

They have proper prisons, we closed half of ours!

dathi1

dathi1 wrote:

Works in Singapore....and New York.

Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner showed that the reduction of crime in New York, in the zero tolerance era, could be explained by changing demographics rather than policing and judicial policies.

Singapore's politics has been dominated by a single party since its independence. Without another party having spent time in power, you can't really show low crime rates to be caused by the current and past with harsh and authoritarian policies on crime. You need a point of comparison.

Akrasia

Sangre wrote:

Harsh sentences and increased prison places have been shown time and time again not to work on reducing crime.

Also you can't fully compare current crime to the stats 10 years ago as the new PULSE system only came in around 2002 and alters the compilation of statistics. Bit annoying but not much can be done.

I'm not talking about harsher prison sentences in general, I'm talking about arresting and convicting these specific people who are a cancer everywhere they end up. these are extremely dangerous people who can destroy entire communities just by their presence and behaviour, they have no business walking the streets and they have no business raising children in their own image.
Limerick is only the way it is because these thugs have had virtual immunity for such a long time now

Andrew 83

Deleted User wrote:

Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner showed that the reduction of crime in New York, in the zero tolerance era, could be explained by changing demographics rather than policing and judicial policies.

While they seemed to rule out many of the other explanations I wouldn't really go along with them completely. I think it was the result of a number of factors coming together, the most convincing academic research I've read was an examintation of the fall of the crack cocaine market. Either way I'd agree that zero tolerance didn't have much to do with it. Crime levels had already been falling for the 4 years or so before Giuliani, Bratton et al took office.

ISAW

Andrew 83 wrote:

While they seemed to rule out many of the other explanations I wouldn't really go along with them completely. I think it was the result of a number of factors coming together, the most convincing academic research I've read was an examintation of the fall of the crack cocaine market. Either way I'd agree that zero tolerance didn't have much to do with it. Crime levels had already been falling for the 4 years or so before Giuliani, Bratton et al took office.

The policy also had other pillars such as "assertive enforcement" but soft policeing has also been shown to work. http://www.soc.surrey.ac.uk/martin_innes.htm

ISAW

irish1 wrote:

So between 1997 and 2004 the number of Gardai at all ranks increased by 1409, now you don’t have to be a genius to figure out that an extra 1409 Gardai aren’t going to be able to cope with an increase in population of 500,000.

Yep and if they dont have 5000 extra gardai by next year the minister of Justice will be in a pickle. But they will have them wont they?

Especially when you look at the rise in crime...

already dealt with - the extra gardai will have to be there by election time.

Now even more worrying is the stats below from last year:
...
Total 5,456

So 5,456 offences were commited by people who were on bail!!!

But the bail act entitles them to bail! Do you suggest we do away with bail?

Several people from the Moyross area of Limerick have been on various radio shows over the past 2 days in the wake of the horrific attack on 2 very young children, these residents have stated that the area is very much a no-go area for Gardai, acts of crime seem to occur on a daily basis but go undetected.

this has nothing to do with you earlier point on detected and reported crime. How can deal with an issue you claim seems to happen but for which we have no evidence? Next you will probably suggest we assume guilt until proven innocent?

The new Tanaiste needs to act now to enforce a Justice system that can make a real impact on crime in our state. ...Save our State before its too late.

Save the hyperbole and tabloid crisis creation.

sceptre

I don't think it's any secret that all the talk of zero tolerance and three strikes by O'Donoghue was a load of hot air given that he sucked and blew as Justice Minister and didn't bother implementing the kind of policy he repeatedly called for when in opposition. Having said that what he was calling for while in opposition was poor policy as well so in my opinion he could be classified as both ineffectual and incompetent, which aren't two things that go well together when your job requires you to be neither.

McDowell of course follows the same hot air route and I'm firmly convinced of that even in the absence of the figures provided above. I've been at a loss to come up with a short list of things he's tried to do to combat crime in the first place. The figures are nice and show correlation but as anyone knows correlation and causation (or lack of anti-causation) aren't necessarily linked. However in the absence of even a coherent policy or intent on crime I'll happily discount the possible lack of causation and regard McDowell as ineffectual and incompetent as well. I'd love to be proved incorrect on this but I suspect that apart from a few slogans and well-wishes, no-one's going to be able to let me know what mcDowell has actually been doing with his time in office.

Obviously I'm not a fan of the baseball bat style of justice condoned by some, either on this board or elsewhere but I can see how some people get seduced by this form of "justice" in the absence of the obvious first step of more police on the streets. Ahern is the main culprit here by starving Justice of sufficient funding to provide extra policing and allowing some people in deprived areas to rely on criminal gangs of the provisional variety to "police" their areas, swapping one band of thugs for another. That's an action from both Ahern and McDowell (and the latter's predecessor) that I can't forgive.

sceptre

ISAW wrote:

But the bail act entitles them to bail! Do you suggest we do away with bail?

Section 2 of the Bail Act entitles the court to refuse bail. I don't think anyone's suggested doing away with bail so I'd like to eliminate the possibility of a straw man before we start down that road.

Villain

ISAW wrote:

Yep and if they dont have 5000 extra gardai by next year the minister of Justice will be in a pickle. But they will have them wont they?

They will have 14,000 gardai if they reach their targets, not enough imo.

ISAW wrote:

already dealt with - the extra gardai will have to be there by election time.

They will only have an extra 1500 or so and the government have to give those gardai all the resources they need, no point just increasing numbers if they aren't resourced.

ISAW wrote:

But the bail act entitles them to bail! Do you suggest we do away with bail?

The bail act does allow for people to be refused bail you know. Or do you think that the bail act should just let everyone get bail and not take into account the risk of them re-offending. The stats don't lie ISAW 5,456 offences were commited by people on bail last year adn if you look at the stats I provided you will see that there was a high number of serious crimes included in that figure.

ISAW wrote:

this has nothing to do with you earlier point on detected and reported crime. How can deal with an issue you claim seems to happen but for which we have no evidence? Next you will probably suggest we assume guilt until proven innocent?


Save the hyperbole and tabloid crisis creation.

Are eyewitness statements no longer accepted as evidence???

I have presented FACTS ISAW, you can hardly call them hyperbole and tabloid crisis creations???

ISAW

sceptre wrote:

Section 2 of the Bail Act entitles the court to refuse bail. I don't think anyone's suggested doing away with bail so I'd like to eliminate the possibility of a straw man before we start down that road.

Only where they are charged with a serious offence. I am not aware of people charged with rape murder and terrorist offences who are released when the prosecution has made a case that they will commit a serious offence when out on bail. Is hot wiring cars and joy riding a serious offence?
they also have to take the following into account:
( a ) the nature and degree of seriousness of the offence with which the accused person is charged and the sentence likely to be imposed on conviction,
( b ) the nature and degree of seriousness of the offence apprehended and the sentence likely to be imposed on conviction,
( c ) the nature and strength of the evidence in support of the charge,
( d ) any conviction of the accused person for an offence committed while he or she was on bail,
( e ) any previous convictions of the accused person including any conviction the subject of an appeal (which has neither been determined nor withdrawn) to a court,
( f ) any other offence in respect of which the accused person is charged and is awaiting trial,
and, where it has taken account of one or more of the foregoing, it may also take into account the fact that the accused person is addicted to a controlled drug within the meaning of the Misuse of Drugs Act, 1977.

Where does that leave the "revolving door"? Are you suggesting courts are not exercising these powers to refuse bail on good grounds?

Andrew 83

sceptre wrote:

I don't think it's any secret that all the talk of zero tolerance and three strikes by O'Donoghue was a load of hot air given that he sucked and blew as Justice Minister and didn't bother implementing the kind of policy he repeatedly called for when in opposition. Having said that what he was calling for while in opposition was poor policy as well so in my opinion he could be classified as both ineffectual and incompetent, which aren't two things that go well together when your job requires you to be neither.

Unfortunately O'Donoghue's 'zero tolerance' approach wasn't all hot air. In fact it followed quite well the 'broken windows' theory of James Q. Wilson and George Kelling which said that allowing petty crime (such as broken windows in an area) to exist bred more serious crime. The solution was therefore to show zero tolerance to all petty crime, giving the maximum punishments possible for these, and therefore creating a culture where no serious crime could happen. They found that arresting people who dodged fairs on the subway etc often caught people who were wanted for other crimes or in other states too.

However O'Donoghue's application to Ireland was disastrous. The petty crime that was clamped down hardest on was crimes such as begging and prositution. In the six years before FF came to power and O'Donoghue began to implement his 'zero tolerance' approach there were proceedings issued against beggars on an average of 128 times a year. For the three years after he took office it was up to an average of 508 cases per year. When it comes to prostitution it was even more shocking. In the two years before O'Donoghue the average number of prosecutions taken against prostitutes was 60, in his first 2 years in was 650 - over 100 times as many. This shows that zero tolerance wasn't hot air, it was carried out. However its effect was to penalise those at the very bottom of society who were merely doing what they had to do to survive. Meanwhile assaults etc continued to rise in the meanwhile.

(The stats mentioned are taken from Crime Control in Ireland: The Politics of Intolerance by Ian O'Donnell and Eoin O'Sullivan. They got the figures from Garda Annual Reports)

matrim

irish1 wrote:

Now lets have a look at some of the stats.

Firstly lets look at the population of this state:
1996 3,626,087
2002 3,917,203
2004 4,130,000

Ok so there was a rise in population of around half a million between 1996 and 2004
Now lets look at the number of Gardai in the state:
1997 10,800
1998 11,235
1999 11,458
2000 11,640
2001 11,814
2002 11,900
2003 12,018
2004 12,209

So between 1997 and 2004 the number of Gardai at all ranks increased by 1409, now you don’t have to be a genius to figure out that an extra 1409 Gardai aren’t going to be able to cope with an increase in population of 500,000.

I do agree that a review of the justice system is needed and there should be more gardai on the street. But your drawing the wrong conclusion from your figures
In 1996 there was 1 gardai for every 335 people.
In 2004 there was 1 gardai for every 338 people.

Thats not a massive increase, and shows that there was a problem in 1996 with the amount of Gardai.

ISAW

irish1 wrote:

They will have 14,000 gardai if they reach their targets, not enough imo.


They will only have an extra 1500 or so and the government have to give those gardai all the resources they need, no point just increasing numbers if they aren't resourced.

The bail act does allow for people to be refused bail you know. Or do you think that the bail act should just let everyone get bail and not take into account the risk of them re-offending. The stats don't lie ISAW 5,456 offences were commited by people on bail last year adn if you look at the stats I provided you will see that there was a high number of serious crimes included in that figure.

where did you get the figures? Headline offences may make headlines but they are not all serious. One can only refuse bail for serious offences, I note if you take out drugs offences, burglary, fraud, other offences and thoise not directly against people like murder and rape you end up closer to 500 offences and NOT 5,500 as you claim. An eleven foild decrease. Hyperbole.

Yes we need morre gardai. Yes they should be properly resourced. Yes the media and FG want to make crime a big issue. But blaiming it all on the minister or the current government doesnt really work with me. Why? because "hard line" policing does nt deal with the causes of crime. Just beefing up the numbers and making the courts convict and imprision more will not in itself solve the problem. Indeed soft policing may be a better aproach. do we really want gardai to be seen as "the enemy" as they are in N Ireland?

I have presented FACTS ISAW, you can hardly call them hyperbole and tabloid crisis creations???

Yes I can. And I just did.

ISAW

Andrew 83 wrote:

(The stats mentioned are taken from Crime Control in Ireland: The Politics of Intolerance by Ian O'Donnell and Eoin O'Sullivan. They got the figures from Garda Annual Reports)

Try here for those stats:
http://www.garda.ie/angarda/annreport.html

Villain

ISAW wrote:

where did you get the figures? Headline offences may make headlines but they are not all serious. One can only refuse bail for serious offences, I note if you take out drugs offences, burglary, fraud, other offences and thoise not directly against people like murder and rape you end up closer to 500 offences and NOT 5,500 as you claim. An eleven foild decrease. Hyperbole.

I got my figures from Garda reports from www.garda.ie and the Central Statistics Office is there some figure you want to dispute?? I wouldn't dismiss Theft as not been directly against people, the property that was stolen had to belong to someone? The headline offences commited by people on bail statistic is taken from the Garda report, now I think the Gardai are professional enough to report the figures correctly and they stated that 5,456 headline offences were commited by people on bail, thats a fact not hyperbole.

ISAW wrote:

Yes we need morre gardai. Yes they should be properly resourced. Yes the media and FG want to make crime a big issue. But blaiming it all on the minister or the current government doesnt really work with me. Why? because "hard line" policing does nt deal with the causes of crime. Just beefing up the numbers and making the courts convict and imprision more will not in itself solve the problem. Indeed soft policing may be a better aproach. do we really want gardai to be seen as "the enemy" as they are in N Ireland?

The whole Justice system is laughed at by criminals on a daily basis especially young offenders who know the chances of them ever seen the inside of a prison is very slim. People need to know that their illegal actions will result in severe penalties imo.

Yes I can. And I just did.

The facts don't lie ISAW, a headline offence is a headline offence.

Oh and you didn't answer my question, Are eyewitness statements no longer accepted as evidence???

ISAW

irish1 wrote:

I got my figures from Garda reports from www.garda.ie and the Central Statistics Office is there some figure you want to dispute??

I would prefer if you stated WHERE you got the figures. I mean provide the actual citation and page reference if possible. It is a standard way of doing things. I admit I too am lazy on this sometimes.

I wouldn't dismiss Theft as not been directly against people, the property that was stolen had to belong to someone?
I think I stated it was not a "crime against the person" but a "crime against property" . These are catagorisation of crime. crimes against the person e.g. rape murder are considered more serious.

The headline offences commited by people on bail statistic is taken from the Garda report,

which one? where? what page?

now I think the Gardai are professional enough to report the figures correctly and they stated that 5,456 headline offences were commited by people on bail,

I think so too but unless you supply the reference anyone reading this is none the wiser as to whether they actuslly DID report that will they?

thats a fact not hyperbole.

It is fact that about 5,500 offences were committed by people on bail


It is fact that 101,659 offences were recoeded for 2005 http://www.garda.ie/angarda/annreport.html page 24 -

Oh and I found your stats on page 43 roughly 5 per cent of all recorede crime and possibly single offenders committing very many of these.

there were also 21,497 recorded juvanile offences. -page 50
316,389 proceedings on non headline offences with 20,306 convictions. - page 56

It is hyperbole when 500 extremely serouus crimes by maybe possibly 50 offenders (murderers rapists) are blown up to a "crime spree" of 5,500 crimes (which include breaking windows and stealing cds from cars ). Now I dont want my car window broken but /i do know that when I lived in the city centre there were two individuals who got bamged up for say six months to nine months at a time. Whenever they got out reported breakins went up about 25 per cent in the district! they were a crime spree but there were only two of them.

The whole Justice system is laughed at by criminals on a daily basis especially young offenders who know the chances of them ever seen the inside of a prison is very slim. People need to know that their illegal actions will result in severe penalties imo.

so what? The point is that the system need to be respected by the non criminals. And locking people up in prision for say three years for bag snatching doees not solve anything. Ask Lonergan the governor of Mountjoy. He will tell you that 90 per cent of his "clients" come from the same five areas of Dublin - I wont name thaem but you can guess. How is it that all the bad people seem to come from slum areas,? The rest of us must just be better people eh? So why not just lock them up and be done with them?

The facts don't lie ISAW, a headline offence is a headline offence.

what is a "headline offence"? You accept it includes burglary and larceny fraud and other non violent crimes?

Oh and you didn't answer my question, Are eyewitness statements no longer accepted as evidence???

You asked this question in response to my comment about you claiming something seemed to be the case. Her are your actual words bolding added by me

acts of crime seem to occur on a daily basis but go undetected.

I only asked how you can argue about undected crimes which seem to happen. "If you dont have the facts dont argue based on supposition" is all I was saying. what has eyewitness accounts got to do with that?

sceptre

ISAW wrote:

Where does that leave the "revolving door"? Are you suggesting courts are not exercising these powers to refuse bail on good grounds?

I'm not suggesting anything. I'm merely pointing out, as a response to "But the bail act entitles them to bail! Do you suggest we do away with bail?" that no-one is suggesting that we "do away with bail" and that the Bail Act allows the court to refuse bail, as you've clarified (I didn't as I didn't think the response needed it) in the case of a serious offence where certain issues may be fulfilled. I don't like the "but but" hyperbole on either side of this discussion.

Delboy05

whats needed are harsher sentences and more prisons. 3 strikes and your out,a nd each time your released and commit crime again, you then get increased sentences.
Make the Judges answerable to the public – have them stand for election based on their records. I’m tired of watching repeat offenders getting turned out on to the streets…what will those f$ckers who killed that poor leitrim man get…5 years each, out in 3- as they’ll say they were only robbing him and did’nt mean to kill. 20 years minimum for a murder conviction, 10 years minimum for assault leading to death, 5 years min for carrying a gun, 3 min. for a knife etc etc
Stop prisons from becoming training centres for criminals by keeping them apart….make prisoners spend more time alone in cells, say 22 hours a day. No TV’s, computer games etc…just books and educational material. Also make them work to pay back their debt to society.
Families where there is constant crime – cut out all social welfare benefits, housing, dole etc. Make parents entirely responsible for their children’s repeat criminality…..jail the parents, put the kids into care. Increase the number of places for convicted minors and increase the number of carers to watch over them both inside and when set free.
The vast majority of the public would support this if consulted, I’m certain of this….the long term outcomes would pay for the initial short term expenditure….people want to see action on crime…enough is enough

ISAW

sceptre wrote:

I'm not suggesting anything. I'm merely pointing out, as a response to "But the bail act entitles them to bail! Do you suggest we do away with bail?" that no-one is suggesting that we "do away with bail" and that the Bail Act allows the court to refuse bail, as you've clarified (I didn't as I didn't think the response needed it) in the case of a serious offence where certain issues may be fulfilled. I don't like the "but but" hyperbole on either side of this discussion.

Okay people are entitled to bail and courts are entitled to deny it (in serious cases)

I dont want to go off on a tangent either but I think the "serious cases" clarification is important. Why? Because - are serious cases the same as "headline crimes" as reported by the gardai. I mean are do "serious cases" include theft, fraud or ordinary assault?

you see I was pointing out that the really dangerous criminal at large is the murderer or rapist or violent criminal. Granted the thief maybe should be denied bail but a thief or fraudster does not threathen your bodily integrety.

so the figures given listed almost 5500 crimes while on bail. But in my view about 500 of those were the really serious crimes. Of course this is my view but you might elucidate what the legal definition of "serious" is? Is it the same as "felony" i.e. over 12 months in prison. contempt of the high court carries up to 18 months I believe. Is it reALY A SERIOUS CRIME?

So can the others (i.e. non violent and not against the person) be denied bail? If they can should they be?

ISAW

Delboy05 wrote:

whats needed are harsher sentences and more prisons. 3 strikes and your out,a nd each time your released and commit crime again, you then get increased sentences.

We have already gon into this issue. what evidence do you have that more prisions and longer sentences are a solution. Is the Us a better safer society for doing just that?

Make the Judges answerable to the public – have them stand for election based on their records.

They do that in the Us as well. Yet 12,000 or so people a year are killed by guns!

I’m tired of watching repeat offenders getting turned out on to the streets…what will those f$ckers who killed that poor leitrim man get…5 years each, out in 3- as they’ll say they were only robbing him and did’nt mean to kill. 20 years minimum for a murder conviction, 10 years minimum for assault leading to death, 5 years min for carrying a gun, 3 min. for a knife etc etc

So you believe Pádraig Nally the man who shot the two travellers should get 10 years minimum?

Stop prisons from becoming training centres for criminals by keeping them apart….make prisoners spend more time alone in cells, say 22 hours a day. No TV’s, computer games etc…just books and educational material. Also make them work to pay back their debt to society.

How can one work in solitary confinement as you outline? what if they cant read?

Families where there is constant crime – cut out all social welfare benefits, housing, dole etc. Make parents entirely responsible for their children’s repeat criminality…..jail the parents, put the kids into care. Increase the number of places for convicted minors and increase the number of carers to watch over them both inside and when set free.

You are joking arent you? Where is the evidence that this works? Prove results not reactions. Sure why not introduce slavery for the families of offenders?

The vast majority of the public would support this if consulted, I’m certain of this….the long term outcomes would pay for the initial short term expenditure….people want to see action on crime…enough is enough

People want results not reaction! If yopu believe most people want this then stand for election and see how far you get!
Maybe Tainiste???

Mick86

I presume the Gardai know the names of the people who are the root cause of any particular area's problems. These people should be interned for many years. Say until they are too old to lift a gun or a petrol bomb. If perchance someone is actually convicted of a serious crime then the maximum sentence should be imposed without any parole. A life sentence should mean just that. The offender dies in prison. Most of our judges should be pensioned off and the same for very many Gardai. A lot of them just want to mark time until retirement. And if we could get teh GS to actually shoot some of these fcukers that would be nice too.

Delboy05

ISAW wrote:

We have already gon into this issue. what evidence do you have that more prisions and longer sentences are a solution. Is the Us a better safer society for doing just that?

They do that in the Us as well. Yet 12,000 or so people a year are killed by guns!


How can one work in solitary confinement as you outline? what if they cant read?

You are joking arent you? Where is the evidence that this works? Prove results not reactions. Sure why not introduce slavery for the families of offenders?

Guns can be bought over the counter in the USA, not here so your not comparing like with like, and are making a pointless argument.
I never mentioned soliatary confinement - I just said keep them locked up in their cells for much much longer and when they are out for the 3 or 4 hours, splt that between work and recreation. As for those that can't read, have them go to classes in the hours they are allowed out of their cells, and have the resources there for them to learn. No contact allowed when prisoners receive visits, which should help keep out most of the drugs.
A controlled environment is what prisoners should encounter in jail, not a holiday camp.

As for families been held responsible for their kids crimes - I have no evidence it works....so lets give it a go. I think slavery is a misleading term in this case, but is'nt it better to see the criminals punished rather than their law abiding neighbours day in, day out.
On teh Last Word yesterday, this was discussed by Willie O'Dea, a local Limerick councillor and adublin based social worker originally from Moyross (even he reluctantly agreed that the families would have to be made pay as nothing else has worked). Willie O'Dea said the Gov't were lookign to change the law to make parents entirely responsible for repeat offenders. And about time....don't know why any Gov'e would'nt introduce this as they'll ahve the publics support...a sure fire vote winner (they might loose a few votes from the woolly-headed liberals, but so what...a drop in the ocean compared to how many they wil get in favour).

Criminals cant commit crime if they're locked up, and the next generation of budding crims won't have heroes to look up to..... time to get real on crime

Villain

ISAW wrote:

I would prefer if you stated WHERE you got the figures. I mean provide the actual citation and page reference if possible. It is a standard way of doing things. I admit I too am lazy on this sometimes.

I don't have time to reference every stat but if you read through the Garda Annual Reports I'm sure you will find most of the stats I presented, (actually I think you found some already on Page 43 of teh 2005 report). Now if there is any particular figure who think is incorrect or need clarifying I will try and find my reference and get back to you.

ISAW wrote:

I think I stated it was not a "crime against the person" but a "crime against property" . These are catagorisation of crime. crimes against the person e.g. rape murder are considered more serious.

Well they are all classed by the Gardai as headline crimes and as I said theft and other crimes while not directly against the person, people do suffer from the crime.

ISAW wrote:

which one? where? what page?

I would have thought that it was obvious giving that I stated the facts were from 2005

ISAW wrote:

I think so too but unless you supply the reference anyone reading this is none the wiser as to whether they actuslly DID report that will they?

Page 43 Garda Annual Report 2005

ISAW wrote:

It is fact that about 5,500 offences were committed by people on bail


It is fact that 101,659 offences were recoeded for 2005 http://www.garda.ie/angarda/annreport.html page 24 -

Oh and I found your stats on page 43 roughly 5 per cent of all recorede crime and possibly single offenders committing very many of these.

there were also 21,497 recorded juvanile offences. -page 50
316,389 proceedings on non headline offences with 20,306 convictions. - page 56

It is hyperbole when 500 extremely serouus crimes by maybe possibly 50 offenders (murderers rapists) are blown up to a "crime spree" of 5,500 crimes (which include breaking windows and stealing cds from cars ). Now I dont want my car window broken but /i do know that when I lived in the city centre there were two individuals who got bamged up for say six months to nine months at a time. Whenever they got out reported breakins went up about 25 per cent in the district! they were a crime spree but there were only two of them.

Well I'd love to know how can you say that of the 500 "extremely serious crimes", were carried out by possibly 50 offenders??? How do you know the crimes weren't carried out by 500 different people, and if you are correct that means people on bail aren't just refending once or twice but re-offending several times???

ISAW wrote:

so what? The point is that the system need to be respected by the non criminals. And locking people up in prision for say three years for bag snatching doees not solve anything. Ask Lonergan the governor of Mountjoy. He will tell you that 90 per cent of his "clients" come from the same five areas of Dublin - I wont name thaem but you can guess. How is it that all the bad people seem to come from slum areas,? The rest of us must just be better people eh? So why not just lock them up and be done with them?

Why do people from these area's re-offend? I would have thought that if our Justice system was working these people would try to stay clean and not re-offend i.e. they know the consequences of thier actions are serious and Jail isn't a place they want to go.

what is a "headline offence"? You accept it includes burglary and larceny fraud and other non violent crimes?

It's all those offences I listed earlier according the Garda report, the Gardai classified these offences as headline offences not me.

You asked this question in response to my comment about you claiming something seemed to be the case. Her are your actual words bolding added by me

I only asked how you can argue about undected crimes which seem to happen. "If you dont have the facts dont argue based on supposition" is all I was saying. what has eyewitness accounts got to do with that?

Because imo eyewitness accounts are more than "supposition" thery are evidence, do you not agree? Does our Justice system not regard eyewitness statements as evidence in trials.

Hotblack Desiato

1. Abolish concurrent sentences. No 'discounts' for repeat offenders or 'taking 100 other offences into consideration'. Full sentence to apply consecutively on each conviction.

2. Drastically reduce the availability of bail for serious offences. How often do we hear of criminals caught in the act of serious crimes up to and including rape and armed robbery, then RTE report that 'a file has been sent to the DPP' etc. in other words they're out on the streets laughing all the way.

3. Life to mean life. Remission should be earned. Sexual or violent offenders with a strong likelihood of reoffending should be interned indefinitely to protect the public. If this requires a constitutional amendment then so be it. How often do we hear that a rapist or depraved killer had a string of previous convictions and should still have been in prison when they reoffended.

4. Juries to be made fully aware of the previous convictions of defendants.

5. Prison building programme, to include sufficient provision for remand prisoners. No contact visits to be permitted in any institution. Prison should be prison not a holiday camp.

ISAW

Delboy05 wrote:

Guns can be bought over the counter in the USA, not here so your not comparing like with like, and are making a pointless argument.

guns are bought over the counter everywhere. if you mean "open to anyone to buy" guns are not bought over the counter like that in the USA either. In fact it is only some states. the point I was making was not about availability of guns it was about levels of violence. If guns were not freely available people would stab ecch other or whatever. The point is that more prisions and longer sentences didnt lower crime there did it?

I never mentioned soliatary confinement

sorry but you did you ststed

make prisoners spend more time alone in cells, say 22 hours a day.

- I just said keep them locked up in their cells for much much longer and when they are out for the 3 or 4 hours, splt that between work and recreation.

you said alone which is soliytary confinement.

As for those that can't read, have them go to classes in the hours they are allowed out of their cells, and have the resources there for them to learn.

But thats my point! How coud they work if they are doing that?

No contact allowed when prisoners receive visits, which should help keep out most of the drugs.

Has it? Please showm me evidence.

A controlled environment is what prisoners should encounter in jail, not a holiday camp.

How is a prision a holiday camp? How many prisions have you visited?

As for families been held responsible for their kids crimes - I have no evidence it works....so lets give it a go.

So If you also believe black people are inferior or jews are abnormal and should be exterminated and you have no evidence for it but you believe that it might be better for society should we also give that a go?

I think slavery is a misleading term in this case, but is'nt it better to see the criminals punished rather than their law abiding neighbours day in, day out.

You have it the wrong way around. Isn't it better that the innocent go free than they be punished with the guilty?

On teh Last Word yesterday, this was discussed by Willie O'Dea, a local Limerick councillor and adublin based social worker originally from Moyross (even he reluctantly agreed that the families would have to be made pay as nothing else has worked).

there is nothing un constitutional with making parents responsible for their children. That is not the point. The point is whether putting parents in gaol is any solution to crime.

Willie O'Dea said the Gov't were lookign to change the law to make parents entirely responsible for repeat offenders. And about time....don't know why any Gov'e would'nt introduce this as they'll ahve the publics support...a sure fire vote winner (they might loose a few votes from the woolly-headed liberals, but so what...a drop in the ocean compared to how many they wil get in favour).

as I stated - a far cry from putting parents in gaol.

Criminals cant commit crime if they're locked up, and the next generation of budding crims won't have heroes to look up to..... time to get real on crime

ah why not go the whole hog and lock everybody up? then no crime will happen outside prision.

ISAW

irish1 wrote:

I don't have time to reference every stat

Piece of advice. record you sources. If you cant support what you state as a a fact then why state it?

Well they are all classed by the Gardai as headline crimes and as I said theft and other crimes while not directly against the person, people do suffer from the crime.

thats not the point! the point is that could others be hurt if this person is out on bail. Furthermore saying someone will suffer from a person not yet convicted of a crime is per judging them and that is not just.

Well I'd love to know how can you say that of the 500 "extremely serious crimes", were carried out by possibly 50 offenders??? How do you know the crimes weren't carried out by 500 different people, and if you are correct that means people on bail aren't just refending once or twice but re-offending several times???

But that is my main point. the poeple you hear about in the press have maybe 50 offences while on bail. I said it was possible. It is. YOU are the one who brought up the stats. They dont list how many offenders. I am sure the gardai have those stats. But it is for you not I to get them. i slao spoke to a person who did jury service last week. It was a rape case. women on the jury were actually sorry for the guy. anyway a majority verdict was returned on sexual assault but none on rape. Only after did they find out it was the third time he was up and he had other sexual charges pending. which is a situation to which I do not object.

Why do people from these area's re-offend? I would have thought that if our Justice system was working these people would try to stay clean and not re-offend i.e. they know the consequences of thier actions are serious and Jail isn't a place they want to go.

a prision system is not a justice system! Locking people up or the threat of it is not a solution.
By the way you contradict yourself. You claim there is not enough punishment and also claim that they people should fear this punishment.

And it is much wider than the prisions. It is a social issue.

It's all those offences I listed earlier according the Garda report, the Gardai classified these offences as headline offences not me.

But what is "headline" ? What does it mean?

Because imo eyewitness accounts are more than "supposition" thery are evidence, do you not agree? Does our Justice system not regard eyewitness statements as evidence in trials.

Yes it does. What has that got to do with refusing bail?