Mentality that you find hard to understand

ShooterSF

Oh one to add to my list. To give an example of this mentality we need to look at the abortion debate we had here. Someone who felt they should outlawed posted a heart string pulling sad story of a lady who regretted having an abortion as support for her belief! Seriously? What if she was a 1 in 1000 statistic? If you're going to argue a side use logic and properly applied stats not single incidents.

Odysseus

goosey gander wrote: »

23 hours lock down,too harsh??? I dont think their victims would think so!

I can assume you have NEVER been the victim of a crime cause i doubt if you were, you would have such a strong opinion on upholding the human rights of criminals!

And what about the dignity of their victims , the people they made suffer, the family of murder victims???

As it is the Irish prison system is failing at rehabilitating criminals so at least if prison was harsh people would think twice about going back!

Actually I have, violent crimes included. Within my work I have been abused, had threats made against both my person and property and the like. I also used to supply support for people who encounteedr violence with their work. So I have some sense of the impact of crime on peoples lifes. That was until cut-back stopped this service, even though time wise it was done on a voluntary basis.

So I say above I'm not a liberal in the sense if you commit a crime you should face the consequenes of it.


However, I also understand that some people will never change, but some give the right options do.

Edit, your shouting of NEVER shows the mistake of assuming.

El Weirdo

pablomakaveli wrote: »

I never once said they should be constantly tortured. I also said convicted criminals should be punished in the ways i mentioned above, i did'nt say suspects like the birmingham six.

Sorry to be a pedant, but the Birmingham Six were convicted of the bombings before their convictions were found to be unsafe and overturned.

Odysseus

pablomakaveli wrote: »

I see your point. Obviously it would be better if we could rehabilitate them all but some are beyond that.

As for human rights the criminals who have murdered, raped or assaulted other people have shown no respect for the human rights of their victims. If they are punished enough they may think twice before doing it again.

I agree but don't if that makes sense. I think most are capable of it, however, but they lack the willingness/motivation/personal ethics to engage in a process at that time, and tbh may never commit to doing so.


THB on the second point I think we both agree on severe sentences for crimes like those, it what happens during the time their locked up. However, I don't think severe punishments will make that type of criminal think twice, if so it will be about not getting caught again.

Kipperhell

pablomakaveli wrote: »

I'm going to clarify what i mean because i think there's a misunderstanding. I'm not calling for prisoners to be punished in terms of being raped or beaten constantly.

I'm talking about punishment in terms of them receiving only basic meals, only getting an hour outside a day, speding most of the day locked in their cells, having very few personal items in their cell and doing work without getting paid .And for more serious criminals no visitors, less time outside, two meals a day etc.

I never once said they should be constantly tortured. I also said convicted criminals should be punished in the ways i mentioned above, i did'nt say suspects like the birmingham six.

Let's clarify that further then. We were talking human rights and you can't seem to clarify any of your points given a list of scenarios.

It sounds like you have never read up on recidivism and studies of such. If locking somebody up and treating them as you say actually worked I would be all for it. The reality is it doesn't and often makes people worse. If you treat people like animals they become animals.

There are many people who killed people in a rage such as husbands, wives and close friends while they were drunk or under the influence of drugs. Basically people who are extremely unlikely to kill again. You avoided the point I made about a wife that kills an abusive partner but you are saying such a woman should be restricted from seeing her children who she might have tried to save and also be punished further. Even say a guy who killed his wife when he discovers she has an affair is so unlikely to commit a similar crime the objective of punishment to stop him doing it again is kind of ridiculous.

It is obvious you have a very black and white view of certain crimes which is fine. I see there is probably more to it all but maybe you can understand the mentality now which was all I was pointing out. I understand your mentality but generally think it is down to a lack of understanding or willingness to consider the reality.
You seem to think if the punishment is severe it will stop people doing it because of fear of punishment and also think if the punishment is tough it will stop people re-peat offending. If that were true I would agree with you however from what I have read on the subject neither is true on a general scale.I personally want sentences to reduce repeat offenders and if that meant a bubble bath everyday I would be for it. The reality is a good drug program would probably be best.

fryup

The mentality i couldn't get my head around, was the one that persisted amongst a certain portion of the population down south during the troubles.

You know the "holy joe" types who were totally opposed to divorce, totally opposed to abortion, but when it came to the IRA killing innocent people...."ah sure thats alright":cool:

RossFixxxed

fryup wrote: »

The mentality i couldn't get my head around, was the one that persisted amongst a certain portion of the population down south during the troubles.

You know the "holy joe" types who were totally opposed to divorce, totally opposed to abortion, but when it came to the IRA killing innocent people...."ah sure thats alright":cool:

I went to school with someone who got an Eire 36 tattoo! Win. I dunno where he found another 4 counties, maybe it was England, Scotland, Wales and the Isle of Mann or something.

You should have seen the look on his face

irish_bob

i dont get the RENT IS DEAD MONEY line , you might aswell say food is dead money or going out on the piss , you dont get money back from those investments either , anyone who chose to rent since around 2004 is laughing all the way to the bank now and has the freedom to buy where they would never have been able to in the past

Fuhrer

El Siglo wrote: »

Ireland is a kip

Compared to what?

Degsy

irish_bob wrote: »

anyone who chose to rent since around 2004 is laughing all the way to the bank now and has the freedom to buy where they would never have been able to in the past

Unless they've been renting some poxy bedsit that the landlord hasnt decorated since the 1920's and they cant get the deposit for a house.

Fuhrer

Degsy wrote: »

Unless they've been renting some poxy bedsit that the landlord hasnt decorated since the 1920's and they cant get the deposit for a house.

The knowledge that theey spent 5 years of rent money and have nothing to show for it might stifle a few of their chuckles

Ally Dick

I cannot stand the 'dump and run' brigade in toilets. They flush the toilet and open the door to leave at the same time. They show no regard for anyone else. They could have left large railway tracks across the bottom of the bowl or floating turds behind, yet they do not care. I have never understood this mentality

Snakeblood

Ally Dick wrote: »

I cannot stand the 'dump and run' brigade in toilets. They flush the toilet and open the door to leave at the same time. They show no regard for anyone else. They could have left large railway tracks across the bottom of the bowl or floating turds behind, yet they do not care. I have never understood this mentality

Think of it like you've just killed someone and want to flee the scene. Mind you, I hang around and take pictures. And leave cryptic messages.

Degsy

Fuhrer wrote: »

The knowledge that theey spent 5 years of rent money and have nothing to show for it might stifle a few of their chuckles

Indeed.
And the fact that its difficult to save when paying money to some red-faced country pillock for a urine-stinking fleapit might also stop the laughter.

Degsy

Ally Dick wrote: »

I cannot stand the 'dump and run' brigade in toilets. They flush the toilet and open the door to leave at the same time. They show no regard for anyone else. They could have left large railway tracks across the bottom of the bowl or floating turds behind, yet they do not care. I have never understood this mentality

Sod that.
I take a huge crap and leave it visible in the bowl.
Then i go into the cubicle next door and sit there sniggering while i wait for the next toilet user to discover my little "gift".

Rebelheart

fryup wrote: »

The mentality i couldn't get my head around, was the one that persisted amongst a certain portion of the population down south during the troubles.

You know the "holy joe" types who were totally opposed to divorce, totally opposed to abortion, but when it came to the IRA killing innocent people...."ah sure thats alright":cool:

The mentality I don't understand is that of the supposedly peace-loving advocates of non-violence who apparently abhor Irish republican violence but who are enthusiastic about commemorating people who died on behalf of the British Empire as it occupied, brutalised, oppressed and tortured people across the planet in the course of robbing them throughout the past few centuries. Nice one.

Yes, so much for having moral consistency on the issue of using violence to achieve a political aim.

bullpost

Right now Misers.
People who have enough money to live comfortably but spend all their waking hours trying not to spend it.
Just had some people stay over for guts of a week. They have their own business and are not short of a bob or two.
We fed and watered and entertained them but got not a jot in return. They boasted about their possessions but spent all day looking for the cheapest deal or whatever. They even talked about bringing their own spirits into the pub.
lots more examples but you get the picture.
I know people who have to watch what they spend because they don't earn a whole lot and I have no problem with that whatsoever, but this is different.

Trankton

ShooterSF wrote: »

while singing "I am the champions".

How many of you are there??

Degsy

bullpost wrote: »

Right now Misers.
People who have enough money to live comfortably but spend all their waking hours trying not to spend it.
Just had some people stay over for guts of a week. They have their own business and are not short of a bob or two.
We fed and watered and entertained them but got not a jot in return. They boasted about their possessions but spent all day looking for the cheapest deal or whatever. They even talked about bringing their own spirits into the pub.
lots more examples but you get the picture.
I know people who have to watch what they spend because they don't earn a whole lot and I have no problem with that whatsoever, but this is different.

I used to work with a man in his 60's who owned two houses and had made 3 million quid in another property deal.
He used to bring in a packet of marieta biscuits each monday and rationed them out throughout the week for his breaks.
I nicked a biscuit once and he went on about it for days.

Theta

ShooterSF wrote: »

I hope you never win the lotto. People that live to work is one I really don't get. Sorry. The minute I can afford to stop working I'll simultaneously cry with happiness, do a jig and have a tug while singing "I am the champions".

There is a difference between being rich enough not to work and people who dont want to work and want to live off the state.

Even if I was rich I would still want to be working at something or else I would go bored.

I dont get religious types and overly conservative people. People who think I should live there way because I think I shouldnt force my beliefs on others.

Euro_Kraut

I don't understand Rascim and/or intorelance.

4zn76tysfajdxp

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

I don't understand Rascim and/or intorelance.

O rly?

[URL= wrote:

Wikipedia[/URL]"]The German word Kraut when standing alone in English is used most frequently as a colloquial term for German people and is usually derogatory.

waitinforatrain

Degsy wrote: »

I cant understand the mentality of people who let dogs shiit all over the place and then scoop it up and put it in bags..i mean wtf?

I can't understand the mentality of people who let people shiit all over them