Extermination through sterilisation - the solution to "skangerism"

Elmer Blooker

ok then, people not vermin - sorry
I would challenge any of you to go to the forty foot tomorrow and stay for more than five minutes.

The King of Moo

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

ok then, people not vermin - sorry
I would challenge any of you to go to the forty foot tomorrow and stay for more than five minutes.

I won't be able to make it there. What would happen if I did?

pennypocket

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

ok then, people not vermin - sorry
I would challenge any of you to go to the forty foot tomorrow and stay for more than five minutes.

But maybe that's just life. In general. I'm stuck in traffic and I'm pissed with my fellow motorists. I'm in a queue for the till and somone's prodding their basket up my ass. At that point, I need to remember this is water. On a summer's day, the seaside is jammed with all of humanity. That's life. If you don't like it, don't go there. You can't just arbitrarily ban all those you consider to be 'scumbags' from public life. Where would it end? We have enough walled gardens and ghettos as it is.

bodice ripper

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

ok then, people not vermin - sorry
I would challenge any of you to go to the forty foot tomorrow and stay for more than five minutes.

My mates go there. What are y sayin about me mates?

Skinnykenyan

Dig a big hole
Fill it with scumbags
Cover hole
Repeat

Helps society and all also helps the economy by making good fertiliser. Sometimes my genius ideas amaze me.....

pennypocket

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

ok then, people not vermin - sorry
I would challenge any of you to go to the forty foot tomorrow and stay for more than five minutes.

I am happy you see that people are people. That is a good thing. Perhaps you are just antisocial like me? Read the David Foster Wallace article, it could be enlightening:)

Terry1985

pennypocket wrote: »

"Vermin". Great. The old language of hate resurrects itself (aka early modern, even medieval antisemitism - push them down the wells). Seriously Elmer Blooker, check yourself, do it regularly and then do it again. Don't call other human beings vermin and enter the twenty-first century.

You'd swear the twenty first century was a perfect utopia :rolleyes:

You live in a safe little middle class bubble, driving to work, not using public transport.

There's a lot of decent hard working people on Ireland who are carrying the country with their taxes. Why should they have to tolerate their house being robbed when they're at work, phone robbed in the city, by people whose attitude to society absolutely stinks. An attitude that is passed on to their children who we also have to pick up the bill for.

Instead of criticizing people who are crying out for something to be done about these dysfunctional people/families why don't you enlighten us with your answers?

SeanW

pennypocket wrote: »

Ha. Spoken like a person who has never been to Japan.

I suppose you have? And I'm sure you found the place a hellhole of people robbing each other on the street, strung out druggies all over the place and every field and side alley filled with burned out cars?
:rolleyes:
Did you ****.

Of course you don't believe in forced sterilisation, that would be a stupid person. But yet, your language betrays you: 'feral animal', 'spawn scumbag after scumbag' 'severe options', 'scummy children'.

Because some people fit that description - they behave like feral scumbags and should be treated as such.

Maybe, perhaps, just, maybe, the atomisation of Irish society - culture, community, solidarity, has a lot more to do with the choices we make in the first place (i.e. we are an economy first, not a society). You cannot blame a canary for dying in a poisonous mine nor can you disadvantage a child for the circumstances of their birth.

Maybe, perhaps, just maybe, you don't know jack **** about how I arrived at my conclusions or my own personal circumstances.

I don't really care to share my life story here but suffice it say that many of the factors that supposidly cause people to grow into scumbags were and remain present in my own life. Yet for some reason I never felt the need to go "joyriding" in stolen cars (and subsequently burning them out), abuse animals, rob people to buy drugs, vandalise public property, throw bricks at passing trains, attack firefighters and guards etc.

Maybe, perhaps just maybe, it's because I was raised at home, unlike Mr. Wards 20 children and the legions of scumbags that roam our fair isle making life miserable for whoever they can. It should also be noted that not all scumbags are from the lower classes - give some rich kid some drink and his/her true nature might come out just as easily.

And you're right: I don't want forced sterilisation. I want PC leftists like you, old-hippy etc to present alternatives! Show me what alternative there is to people like that who have children they don't want to raise, and I'll back it. Until that time you should explain why allowing people like that to have children, paid for by everyone else, is a good idea.

pennypocket

SeanW wrote: »

Actually no; sterlisation is not necessarily the answer, there are a number of far less drastic things that could be done.

*Sterilisation* (or with a z for americanized spelling). How about I head a campaign to sterilise all first-born males who cannot spell properly and didn't get their English grammar? (Aka all the fascists in this thread). I shall eat, shoot and leave.

SeanW

pennypocket wrote: »

*Sterilisation* (or with a z for americanized spelling). How about I head a campaign to sterilise all first-born males who cannot spell properly and didn't get their English grammar? (Aka all the fascists in this thread). I shall eat, shoot and leave.

Wow, you caught me on a typographical error. :rolleyes:

That's really mature.

Going into pedantic-idiot mode:
You forgot to captialise the A in *Americanized.* Did you not get your English grammar?
/pedantic-idiot mode

The King of Moo

Terry1985 wrote: »

You'd swear the twenty first century was a perfect utopia :rolleyes:

You live in a safe little middle class bubble, driving to work, not using public transport.

There's a lot of decent hard working people on Ireland who are carrying the country with their taxes. Why should they have to tolerate their house being robbed when they're at work, phone robbed in the city, by people whose attitude to society absolutely stinks. An attitude that is passed on to their children who we also have to pick up the bill for.

Instead of criticizing people who are crying out for something to be done about these dysfunctional people/families why don't you enlighten us with your answers?

Who said anything like that?
Just because you don't think people should be sterilised because they drink Dutch Gold, it doesn't mean that you want people to tolerate crime.
Why do people seem to think only ridiculously extreme positions are the only possible ones.

SeanW

The King of Moo wrote: »

Who said anything like that?

The justice system routinely, for one thing. It seems to be a routine matter for someone to rape or murder someone for their 100-something-th conviction. That suggests a very high tolerance for crime, most likely at the behest of the PC-left.

Just because you don't think people should be sterilised because they drink Dutch Gold, it doesn't mean that you want people to tolerate crime.
Why do people seem to think only ridiculously extreme positions are the only possible ones.

The sense that I've gotten from the PC-left is that this is precisely what they think.

The King of Moo

SeanW wrote: »

The justice system routinely, for one thing. It seems to be a routine matter for someone to rape or murder someone for their 100-something-th conviction. That suggests a very high tolerance for crime, most likely at the behest of the PC-left.

How often do things like this actually happen?

Are you sure it's not just a cases of examples of criminals accruing many small convictions reoffending being reported more often than less sensational stories of people getting reasonable sentences for their crimes?

SeanW wrote: »

The sense that I've gotten from the PC-left is that this is precisely what they think.

But has anyone actually said that?

pennypocket

SeanW wrote: »

Wow, you caught me on a typographical error. :rolleyes:

That's really mature.

Going into pedantic-idiot mode:
You forgot to captialise the A in *Americanized.* Did you not get your English grammar?
/pedantic-idiot mode

SeanW relax. It's the weekend and it's a beautiful day. I don't want to castrate you for your petty grammatical errors, but as a scumbag by definition, I am entitled to defend myself in any which pathetic way I can against the alphas ... In any case, you lost me at fascistic ghettoisation many miles ago. My pedantic self couldn't help it : captialise ?

SeanW

pennypocket wrote: »

but as a scumbag by definition, I am entitled to defend myself in any which pathetic way I can against the alphas

Do you do this?

SeanW wrote:

go "joyriding" in stolen cars (and subsequently burning them out), abuse animals, rob people to buy drugs, vandalise public property, throw bricks at passing trains, attack firefighters and guards etc.

If you don't do this (preferably never did) you're not a scumbag.

In any case, you lost me at fascistic ghettoisation many miles ago.

Huh? "Fascistic ghettoisation?"

pennypocket

SeanW wrote: »

Do you do this?
If you don't do this (preferably never did) you're not a scumbag.

Huh? "Fascistic ghettoisation?"

I would be a scumbag given the definitions thrown around in this thread. It's nothing to do with criminality, as far as I can see. You are told you look like a scumbag and that is it. According to posts here, being in a public place, at the forty foot, in town, in the Luas, breathing, etc, people can be characterised as zombies, filth, not fit to have children, vermin, or should be exterminated. Fascistic ghettoisation - in other words, or in simpler terminology, stick to your own area. I reject all of this.
But, nevertheless, it's been educational ;-)

I edit : Where is OP Mike65 of the 81k posts in all of this? Why is he opining on Portmarnock when he resides in Waterford? So many questions. Little answers. So Mike65, were you trollin?

WakeUp

Ok can the OP or anyone else who subscribes to his line of thought kindly outline, in detail, how such a thing might be enforced and why - cause & affect ? that being the response to an action or event. How would this work? who would decide ? how do you propose the "sentence" is carried out ? who is to be targeted parents or the accused or both?..lots of emotion throughout this thread anyone care to put forward some non-emotionally driven details as to how this might be done and to whom?...

pennypocket

WakeUp wrote: »

Ok can the OP or anyone else who subscribes to his line of thought kindly outline, in detail, how such a thing might be enforced and why - cause & affect ? that being the response to an action or event. How would this work? who would decide ? how do you propose the "sentence" is carried out ? who is to be targeted parents or the accused or both?..lots of emotion throughout this thread anyone care to put forward some non-emotionally driven details as to how this might be done and to whom?...

Yah. Let's get back to OP on the detail. We could be waiting awhile. Idiots tend to lack detail. How about that he and those 'subscribed' to (what publication?) his line of thought realised that they are all fúcking twíts? What about that?

Seachmall

pennypocket wrote: »

Yah. Let's get back to OP on the detail. We could be waiting awhile. Idiots tend to lack detail. How about that he and those 'subscribed' to (what publication?) his line of thought realised that they are all fúcking twíts? What about that?

Idiots also tend to lack the ability to convey their opinions or criticisms in an eloquent manner.

Also, what definition of scumbag do you subscribe to? I'd be interested to know why you feel you are one.

dd972

It always makes me laugh when walking through O'Connell St that there's all these visitors from the UK, US and beyond who fall for all the 'Brand Ireland' B.S delivered in some breathy, overblown brogue by some Maureen O'Hara lookalike on an ad, their image of the place formed by The Quiet Man, The Corrs and all that other schmaltz.

They pay through the nose to get here, ( they see a special offer from Aer Lingus for €39.99 that turns into €189.95 when it's time to enter their card data ) and fork out €500.00 for a hotel.

Then when they get off the 747 from the Airport the first sight that greets them is a bunch of Hepatitis riddled, pock mark faced Herbert's with their arse's hanging out of tracksuits out slugging Dutch Gold on a shoplifting spree with young Dwayne in tow in a pushchair hollering nasal gibberish.

SeanW

pennypocket wrote: »

I would be a scumbag given the definitions thrown around in this thread. It's nothing to do with criminality, as far as I can see. You are told you look like a scumbag and that is it. According to posts here, being in a public place, at the forty foot, in town, in the Luas, breathing, etc, people can be characterised as zombies, filth, not fit to have children, vermin, or should be exterminated. Fascistic ghettoisation - in other words, or in simpler terminology, stick to your own area. I reject all of this.
But, nevertheless, it's been educational ;-)

I would disagree with that too: to my mind a scumbag = routine, so-called "low level" criminal or someone who commits so-called "anti-social behaviour."

Being poor, on welfare, wearing tracksuits, drinking Dutch Gold, talking with a "Dub" accent etc doesn't make you a scumbag (though it helps if you don't knacker-drink).

Vandalising stuff and being abusive does. It's those kind of people I wouldn't shed a tear if they were sterilised, locked up forever etc.

Handsome Bob

SeanW wrote: »

I would disagree with that too: to my mind a scumbag = routine, so-called "low level" criminal or someone who commits so-called "anti-social behaviour."

Too narrow a definition. I've known lads in suits who'd take a piss on a person sleeping rough. If that's not a scumbag then I give up.

DEFTLEFTHAND

We should utilise our uninhabited offshore islands. We could set up special 'work' camps on them.

old hippy

SeanW wrote: »

Consider a country I admire greatly: Japan. In that part of the world, saving face in society is a major goal in their culture. If a child/teenager does something bad, it reflects badly on the parents, who lose face in the eyes of their peers unless the parent is seen to offer a heartfelt apology for their errant young-uns. That system seems to work, and Japan is one of the safest countries in the world to live in (if not the safest) and people look out for each other a lot more there.

I suggest therefore that the problem of people not raising their children is largely responsible for the problem of scumbaggery and wonder what the solution is.
Place restrictions (such as good behaviour bonds) for welfare-lifers having children? Dock parents welfare for incidents of "anti-social behaviour" by their children? If they're not on welfare, could we have some element of criminal punishment parents of scummy 'children?' Could we somehow fundamentally alter our culture so that it's like Japan, where public safety and respect for your fellow citizen is "cool?"

I admire Japan greatly. I've just come back from there again but I think you're seeing it through rose tinted spectacles. Japan has a lot of problems that we don't often see here. The yakuza operate in every layer of society - from office supplies, to vice, porn, gambling - right up to the government. And then there's the police who can be quite brutal, indeed. As for looking out for each other - I presume you haven't heard the increasing cases of old people being found dead in their appartments (sometimes for months) as nobody has looked in on them?

Ye gods, can't believe I'm criticising my beloved Japan :eek:

dj jarvis

dd972 wrote: »

It always makes me laugh when walking through O'Connell St that there's all these visitors from the UK, US and beyond who fall for all the 'Brand Ireland' B.S delivered in some breathy, overblown brogue by some Maureen O'Hara lookalike on an ad, their image of the place formed by The Quiet Man, The Corrs and all that other schmaltz.

They pay through the nose to get here, ( they see a special offer from Aer Lingus for €39.99 that turns into €189.95 when it's time to enter their card data ) and fork out €500.00 for a hotel.

Then when they get off the 747 from the Airport the first sight that greets them is a bunch of Hepatitis riddled, pock mark faced Herbert's with their arse's hanging out of tracksuits out slugging Dutch Gold on a shoplifting spree with young Dwayne in tow in a pushchair hollering nasal gibberish.

where to start

brand Ireland INCLUDES the capital city , and as all capital city's it has its zombies - would you be suggesting that the tourists that arrive here are all thick and dont actually know this ?

The schmaltz as you call it is part of Ireland , the quiet man was shot here , the coor are Irish and live here , so your point is what ?

as for paying through the nose , they are adults , do you not think they understand the price as they book , its not as if they are being forced or being robbed at gun point , and in fairness you must not travel much , 500 euro for a hotel for even 3 days in most capitals is cheap :rolleyes:

as for your last "point" , i thought these zombies you think that roam all over the place were in o O'Connell st , not at the airport ,
as i have said in this thread already , i have not seen ONE other capital city in the world that i have visited that does not have the VERY same group of individuals , i am sure where ever the tourists have come from have the same guys wandering around , just different accents

sure its not like any major american city's have meth heads selling their kids , stumbling from meth house to the grave - is it :rolleyes:

previous user

Oink wrote: »

Don't hold back there OP. Let me google that just to clarify. Is this what we're talking about?

http://untreaty.un.org/cod/icc/statute/99_corr/cstatute.htm

[SIZE=-1]Article 7[/SIZE] [SIZE=-1]Crimes against humanity
[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1][SIZE=-1](g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity;


[/SIZE][/SIZE]

These people aren't human, they're a RAt infestation in our society!

Reekwind

previous user wrote: »

These people aren't human, they're a RAt infestation in our society!

I think the technical term is untermenschen

The King of Moo

previous user wrote: »

These people aren't human, they're a RAt infestation in our society!

Are you just copying and pasting this from Mein Kampf?

old hippy

previous user wrote: »

These people aren't human, they're a RAt infestation in our society!

Disgusting. I don't know what society you're speaking on behalf of but it sure ain't mine.

SeanW

Handsome Bob wrote: »

Too narrow a definition. I've known lads in suits who'd take a piss on a person sleeping rough. If that's not a scumbag then I give up.

True; but I'm fairly sure pissing on someone is a crime of some sort; and wearing a suit doesn't preclude you from being a scumbag.

Handsome Bob

SeanW wrote: »

True; but I'm fairly sure pissing on someone is a crime of some sort; and wearing a suit doesn't preclude you from being a scumbag.

Ideally if it's witnessed by a garda. I don't think many people sleeping rough would go to the bother of reporting such an incident unfortunately.

Aseth

Links234 wrote: »

Wow, we're talking about exterminating the lower classes? beautiful, AH... absolutely beautiful.

that's gonna take a lot of work though, maybe we should relocate these undesirables to camps, so we can er, concentrate our efforts there. then it would be much easier to move on to other undesirable classes, such as jews, gypsies, homosexuals, socialists and others

**** sake

It's AH - what do you expect?! :rolleyes:

previous user

The King of Moo wrote: »

Are you just copying and pasting this from Mein Kampf?

no.

M three

wesf wrote: »

Actually one night while having a few drinks with friends we were talking about this subject.
I came up with an amazing idea, here it is:
Choose a county nobody likes, lets say Roscommon, fence it off Jurassic Park style, take all the normal people and move them elsewhere while leaving the scumbags there.
Round up all the other scumbags around the country and throw them in also.
Here comes the best bit, charge people, stag do's etc, to enter the park on a hunting weekend, you get to hunt down and kill scumbags, while generating money for the country also, win win for everyone!!

Didnt the animals in jurassic park eventually overrun the hunters?

Richard Hillman

M three wrote: »

Didnt the animals in jurassic park eventually overrun the hunters?

The dinosaurs are much smarter than the skanger.

Grand Moff Tarkin

previous user wrote: »

These people aren't human, they're a RAt infestation in our society!

Correct. There is some serious rodent scum walking the Earth claiming to human when in fact they would be better off on all fours for the amount of good they do.

old hippy

Grand Moff Tarkin wrote: »

Correct. There is some serious rodent scum walking the Earth claiming to human when in fact they would be better off on all fours for the amount of good they do.

Don't sit on the fence, tell us how you really feel.

karma_

Aseth wrote: »

It's AH - what do you expect?! :rolleyes:

Even by AH standards I expect more.

Certainly more than this -

previous user wrote: »

These people aren't human, they're a RAt infestation in our society!

If replies like this don't send shivers down the spine of every person in this country then something is very wrong.

looking_around

I just shrugged? .. no shivers, nor surprise at all .. >_>

SeanW

karma_ wrote: »

If replies like this don't send shivers down the spine of every person in this country then something is very wrong.

You're absolutely right; rats may be ugly disease carrying vermin, but they act out of pure animal instinct rather than malice. They have the excuse that their brains are the size of a pea, and whats more noone complains when you put down rat poison.

Scumbags on the other hand act out of pure malice and act like feral vermin because they may know better, but choose to be scumbags. Also for many of them, society has to give them free housing and pocket money as a reward for being like feral animals because even if they wanted a job, noone in their right mind would hire them.

So yes, comparing scumbags to rats is indeed very shocking. It's an undue insult to rats!

antopanto

Every week we here storeys about scumbags attacking decent folk, like that old age pensioner who suffered from alzeimers. This scumbag got into her house, snatched her necklace and wedding rings from her, and anything else he could rob. Here is the punch line, he had over 20 previous convictions, which would indicate that he is a serial offender. This poor old lady died soon after this incident. Many Serial Offenders do it for the buzz, and only stop at an age, when they can no longer face prison (in their 50's). They should bring out a Serial Offenders Act, where by an offender who show's serial behaviour with no little/chance of rehabilitation, should be locked up, until they reach 50 years, that way the decent people in society are protected, before the behaviour of the serial offender starts to turn nasty.

There has also been a recent increase in this social behaviour which could be linked with youth unemployment, if the government had a policy of generating employment, young people would be less likely drift into anti social behaviour. From this point of view big business, bankers and high wealth individuals are to blame, as their tax evasion, and low tax rates, and bank/bond holder bailouts, has resulted in a shrinkage of the economy, and less funds being made available to generate employment, and essential services needed by our communities.

Handsome Bob

antopanto wrote: »

Every week we here storeys about scumbags attacking decent folk, like that old age pensioner who suffered from alzeimers. This scumbag got into her house, snatched her necklace and wedding rings from her, and anything else he could rob. Here is the punch line, he had over 20 previous convictions, which would indicate that he is a serial offender. This poor old lady died soon after this incident. Many Serial Offenders do it for the buzz, and only stop at an age, when they can no longer face prison (in their 50's). They should bring out a Serial Offenders Act, where by an offender who show's serial behaviour with no little/chance of rehabilitation, should be locked up, until they reach 50 years, that way the decent people in society are protected, before the behaviour of the serial offender starts to turn nasty.

There has also been a recent increase in this social behaviour which could be linked with youth unemployment, if the government had a policy of generating employment, young people would be less likely drift into anti social behaviour. From this point of view big business, bankers and high wealth individuals are to blame, as their tax evasion, and low tax rates, and bank/bond holder bailouts, has resulted in a shrinkage of the economy, and less funds being made available to generate employment, and essential services needed by our communities.

If we're talking purely in criminal terms, then I have to say that I'd disagree. Age on its own does not stop a scumbag; they might just get "cuter" about what activity they engage in or in the risks that they decide to not take on (and in turn delegate to younger, more impressionable, people).

karma_

SeanW wrote: »

You're absolutely right; rats may be ugly disease carrying vermin, but they act out of pure animal instinct rather than malice. They have the excuse that their brains are the size of a pea, and whats more noone complains when you put down rat poison.

Scumbags on the other hand act out of pure malice and act like feral vermin because they may know better, but choose to be scumbags. Also for many of them, society has to give them free housing and pocket money as a reward for being like feral animals because even if they wanted a job, noone in their right mind would hire them.

So yes, comparing scumbags to rats is indeed very shocking. It's an undue insult to rats!

I find the opinion you and others are peddling to be absolutely abhorrent. See, we tend to think of people like the Nazis to be evil but the truth is they are not. They were people like those you pass on the street every day and all the motivation most of them would need to cut your throat would be an authority figure telling them to do so.

Step back and actually consider what your talking about here, the extermination and an entire 'class' of people. Sure to take that line to it's natural conclusion why don;t we build the gas chambers now and ease the unemployment queue while we're at it?

We live with the illusion of safety in society and most never realise just how quick, with the right set of circumstances people who think like you could get into power. A sobering thought.

Grand Moff Tarkin

old hippy wrote: »

Don't sit on the fence, tell us how you really feel.

Natural selection can only take you so far until you get to a point where the certain bad elements need to be removed for the good of society in general.

Seachmall

karma_ wrote: »

Step back and actually consider what your talking about here, the extermination and an entire 'class' of people.

The 'class' of people he is suggesting be exterminated (scumbags) are the same class of people our legal system attempts to imprison. Does that make the legal system Nazi-esque?

A scumbag is, at least by my definition, a criminal. They engage in antisocial behaviour routinely. They harass, intimidate, vandalise, rob and otherwise act in a way most of us agree to be unacceptable. Hence, we have criminalised those actions.

We're not talking about one-off offenders here either, we're talking about those who have absolutely no regard for the welfare of others and no want to rehabilitate.

Nobody is suggesting a genocide, more correctly it would be capital punishment for those that disregard the law as a matter of course and are incapable of changing their ways.

As is, the legal system seems to determine the punishment of a crime depending solely on the crime itself, it fails to recognise the offenders history and it fails to extrapolate from their history the likelihood of reoffending. It seems silly to take someone off the streets and then put them back only having to take them off the streets again. We give people the benefit of the doubt when it comes to rehabilitation but the fact of the matter is some people have proven again and again that they are not worthy of that benefit.

If you fail to adhere to the laws of a society you should lose your right to exist in that society. And unfortunately Australia isn't taking convicts anymore.

karma_

Seachmall wrote: »

If you fail to adhere to the laws of a society you should lose your right to exist in that society. And unfortunately Australia isn't taking convicts anymore.

Fascist nonsense.

Seachmall

karma_ wrote: »

Fascist nonsense.

It's not. It's the reason we lock people up.

Rehabilitation clearly doesn't work so instead we just remove them from society for some arbitrary amount of time.

And many countries revoke passports and citizenships for certain crimes (such as treason), and many clubs and schools kick members out for not adhering to codes of conduct. Are they fascists?

Handsome Bob

Seachmall wrote: »

It's not. It's the reason we lock people up.

Rehabilitation clearly doesn't work so instead we just remove them from society for some arbitrary amount of time.

And many countries revoke passports and citizenships for certain crimes (such as treason), and many clubs and schools kick members out for not adhering to codes of conduct. Are they fascists?

Not sure how you can make such a defacto statement like that. It clearly does work for some people, maybe for not as many as you'd like mind.

Seachmall

Handsome Bob wrote: »

Not sure how you can make such a defacto statement like that. It clearly does work for some people, maybe for not as many as you'd like mind.

Well how many people does it need to rehabilitate to be considered working?

100%? 90%? 80%? 40%?

SeanW

karma_ wrote: »

I find the opinion you and others are peddling to be absolutely abhorrent. See, we tend to think of people like the Nazis to be evil but the truth is they are not. They were people like those you pass on the street every day and all the motivation most of them would need to cut your throat would be an authority figure telling them to do so.

Step back and actually consider what your talking about here, the extermination and an entire 'class' of people. Sure to take that line to it's natural conclusion why don;t we build the gas chambers now and ease the unemployment queue while we're at it?

It's got nothing to do with "class" anyone can be a scumbag, like the "lads in suits that would urinate on a homeless person" above. It just so happens that many of them (for obvious reasons) couldn't get a job even if they wanted one, so they get dole and housing. But given the warning of "Post hoc ergo propter hoc" (After it, therefore because of it) you can't equate scumbag-ness with poverty or use of social welfare.

We live with the illusion of safety in society and most never realise just how quick, with the right set of circumstances people who think like you could get into power. A sobering thought.

If you live in some parts of Ireland, e.g. Limerick, Ennis, parts of Dublin etc, your "illusion of safety" doesn't exist for its people because all they know is fear, abuse and intimidation. I was watching one program about anti social behaviour in a public housing estate in Limerick and there was a couple who had aged the equivalent of 30/40 years inside of a decade because of the abject misery that scumbags had caused them.

karma_ wrote: »

Fascist nonsense.

There is nothing fascist about it. Everyone has the right to live their lives free and clear as they see fit PROVIDED that they respect those same rights of everyone else. If you don't respect the rights of others, your own are taken away, such as the right to freedom via prison, or other means desperately needed to protect other people. Problem: the current system is incapable of this in many cases which is why we have so many scumbags out there getting more violent after 20, 50, 100 or more convictions (assuming each crime results in a conviction, which doesn't seem likely). And our social systems allow the problem to get worse each generation because of the number of people having children they don't raise.

And again, I'm not saying sterilise these people per-se, but rather I want those dogmatically opposed to the idea to propose something that deals with the scumbag problem. An alternative.