Judicial Punishment

tomh1736

Following on from a rather heated ( and lengthy) thread on another forum where the efficacy of judicial corporal punishment was discussed, whats the feeling among those involved in law enforcement and maintaining public order in Ireland. We all know of countries like Singapore where caning and birching is doled out by the courts as punishment. Although it seems extreme in the unlikely event that it was used in Ireland would it reduce the level of crime and antisocial behaviour and could it be the best deterrent ever.

Potential-Monke

I'm sure i can't make a personal comment on this, due to my position. But i'm also sure you can imagine what i'd like to say but i'm not allowed to.

AlekSmart

tomh1736 wrote: »

Following on from a rather heated ( and lengthy) thread on another forum where the efficacy of judicial corporal punishment was discussed, whats the feeling among those involved in law enforcement and maintaining public order in Ireland. We all know of countries like Singapore where caning and birching is doled out by the courts as punishment. Although it seems extreme in the unlikely event that it was used in Ireland would it reduce the level of crime and antisocial behaviour and could it be the best deterrent ever.

I rather suspect Tom,that you are geting worked up over nothing.

I know little of the Singaporean situation,however as I (rapidly) grow older,my realization that Ireland Teo is careering towards a sheer cliff face drop under the guidance of a brace of Supreme beings is increasing with every minute....

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/landmark-ruling-could-have-major-impact-on-future-garda-inquiries-30070925.html

It would appear that the good Justices of the SC have a highly developed sense of what Mr DeValera was actually thinking as he penned his 1932 missive....and boy,do their Supremeships think he was on some Gooooood Shyttttt.....:o

We already have a daily imposed constitutional crisis relating to Bail,which has resulted in INNOCENT citizens being murdered,now this "Court" seeks to further expand the rights of criminally inclined types,on the basis that it's "What they do out Foreign"....another good days work down by the Liffeyside.....:rolleyes:

kub

My favourite subject, I can say what I like on this as thankfully I am not a member of AGS.

Criminals in my own opinion are of low intelligence in general. Therefore they look at life similarly to children. The simple deterrent of punishment is what puts these individuals off committing crime.
If the deterrent is not strong enough then the crime will be committed.
Of course as the legal trade has a vested interest in re offenders then this will never change.

tomh1736

kub wrote: »

My favourite subject, I can say what I like on this as thankfully I am not a member of AGS.

Criminals in my own opinion are of low intelligence in general. Therefore they look at life similarly to children. The simple deterrent of punishment is what puts these individuals off committing crime.
If the deterrent is not strong enough then the crime will be committed.
Of course as the legal trade has a vested interest in re offenders then this will never change.

Why can't members of AGS comment on this? Surely they are entitled to an opinion like anyone else. I would have to agree a deterrent that has enough impact will surely bring down crime rates. It seems common sense.

kub

tomh1736 wrote: »

Why can't members of AGS comment on this? Surely they are entitled to an opinion like anyone else. I would have to agree a deterrent that has enough impact will surely bring down crime rates. It seems common sense.

I thought there was some law about AGS members speaking with the media, if of course that is what those arrogant legal eagles regard this as.

bravestar

tomh1736 wrote: »

Why can't members of AGS comment on this? Surely they are entitled to an opinion like anyone else.

Nope. If Gardai could talk about what they wanted, things would be very different.

kub

bravestar wrote: »

Nope. If Gardai could talk about what they wanted, things would be very different.

I agree I have a close working relationship with many and I for one know for sure the rubbish that these guys have to put up with. The vast majority of it is from above.

tomh1736

kub wrote: »

I agree I have a close working relationship with many and I for one know for sure the rubbish that these guys have to put up with. The vast majority of it is from above.

I suppose as judicial corporal punishment is something that Ireland doesn't impose on criminals it would be seen as flying in the face of the Irish Court System if AGS were to openly state that they were in favour of it. What then of the issue of corporal punishment in the home place? I have seen debates before rage on this issue and there are a number of people out there that feel that heightened crime rates and juvenile delinquency is largely down to lack of discipline and in some cases corporal punishment with kids at home. Is there any evidence to suggest that public order offences among teenagers in particular was less twenty/thirty years ago when corporal punishment with smacking, leather belts, wooden spoons etc would have been a fairly common occurrence? What's the experience of those involved in law enforcement?

monocled mutiner

Well I've made my feeling on this clear recently. I'm 67 years young and I remember as a teenager if the local guard caught you up to mischief he would have taken his belt to you. Believe me that kept teenage crime at a very low level. I think the courts and the guards using physical punishment on teenage hoodlums would be far better than any of your asbos or community service if it were used today

kub

The one line that I always remember Jerry Ryan (2fm), RIP, was 'they done away with corporal punishment and replaced it with nothing'.

We have a generation coming up now who know every thing, thanks to their gadgets and social media but lack common sense.

McCrack

Get back under your rock Kub. The days of beating up children in the guise of punishment are over. Prisoners/criminals too. It's not acceptable anymore and nor should it be acceptable to inflict pain/injury on people.

tomh1736

McCrack wrote: »

Get back under your rock Kub. The days of beating up children in the guise of punishment are over. Prisoners/criminals too. It's not acceptable anymore and nor should it be acceptable to inflict pain/injury on people.

I don't think anyone is talking about "beating anyone up" neither children nor criminals or prisoners. The debate is on corporal punishment. It's interesting that you should say it's not acceptable to inflict pain/injury on people. What about the pain/injury inflicted on the victims of crime and antisocial behaviour by the perpetrators?

kub

McCrack wrote: »

Get back under your rock Kub. The days of beating up children in the guise of punishment are over. Prisoners/criminals too. It's not acceptable anymore and nor should it be acceptable to inflict pain/injury on people.

Where did I mention that it was OK to assault children?

What I do wonder though is, are our jails and judicial system a deterrent to criminals?

I have my doubts.

tomh1736

kub wrote: »

Where did I mention that it was OK to assault children?

What I do wonder though is, are our jails and judicial system a deterrent to criminals?

I have my doubts.

It's amazing how the anti smacking brigade are very quick to throw our terms like assault and abuse when the issue of corporal punishment in the home is discussed.
As for the courts and prison system definetly not a strong enough deterrent for the type of crime we are seeing these days

kub

tomh1736 wrote: »

It's amazing how the anti smacking brigade are very quick to throw our terms like assault and abuse when the issue of corporal punishment in the home is discussed.
As for the courts and prison system definetly not a strong enough deterrent for the type of crime we are seeing these days

Indeed they are, shiny happy people.

The one thing that I have often considered is, as our own prison system is not providing a deterrent and is so expensive per prisoner could we come to an arrangement with some developing nation whereby we could arrange to send our repeat offenders to do their time in those countries prisons instead.

I wonder would that provide a sufficient deterrent?
But then I suppose various vested interest parties in the legal world would not like the idea of stopping repeat offenders as these 'clients' provide repeat revenue to many legal companies.

McCrack

tomh1736 wrote: »

I don't think anyone is talking about "beating anyone up" neither children nor criminals or prisoners. The debate is on corporal punishment. It's interesting that you should say it's not acceptable to inflict pain/injury on people. What about the pain/injury inflicted on the victims of crime and antisocial behaviour by the perpetrators?

Well clearly corporal punishment is inflicting pain and injury on another person as punishment for behavioural and criminal transgressions. Clearly that can involve punching or striking with a weapon. If its done enough times the person then gets beaten up. It certainly happened in some Irish classrooms up to the 1980s, children were literally beaten up.

Re your last question I don't quite understand what you're asking.

tomh1736

McCrack wrote: »

Well clearly corporal punishment is inflicting pain and injury on another person as punishment for behavioural and criminal transgressions. Clearly that can involve punching or striking with a weapon. If its done enough times the person then gets beaten up. It certainly happened in some Irish classrooms up to the 1980s, children were literally beaten up.

Re your last question I don't quite understand what you're asking.

I don't think any one is talking about punching a child. You refer also that hitting repeatedly would constitute "beating up". Again I don't think anyone is talking about continually or repeatedly hitting. It's about delivering punishment which is most cases would be a short sharp shock. I'm well aware of the excesses of corporal punishment in the past in Irish classrooms and know that children were beaten up/ assaulted. I don't think anyone is out to justify or condone this!

I'm not quite sure what you don't understand in the question on my previous post. You are quick to point out that physical punishment is an injustice due to infliction of pain/injury. I am merely pointing out that if physical punishment is used on criminals what of the pain/injury that has been inflicted on the victims of these criminals. Have you ever heard of an eye for and eye?

McCrack

With respect then you're not asking me a question but making a point. I don't agree it's acceptable to inflict pain and/or injury (or a "short sharpe shock??")on another as punishment for wrongdoing and that includes violence against the person offences.

johnnyskeleton

kub wrote: »

My favourite subject, I can say what I like on this as thankfully I am not a member of AGS.

Criminals in my own opinion are of low intelligence in general. Therefore they look at life similarly to children. The simple deterrent of punishment is what puts these individuals off committing crime.
If the deterrent is not strong enough then the crime will be committed.
Of course as the legal trade has a vested interest in re offenders then this will never change.

If that were true, then the legal profession would welcome corporal punishment because a person in jail for six months will commit less crime than someone who gets a caning and moves on, no?

obplayer

McCrack wrote: »

Get back under your rock Kub. The days of beating up children in the guise of punishment are over. Prisoners/criminals too. It's not acceptable anymore and nor should it be acceptable to inflict pain/injury on people.

Why are we allowed to lock people up but not birch them? Which is more humane, loss of part of your life or physical pain?

McCrack

obplayer wrote: »

Why are we allowed to lock people up but not birch them? Which is more humane, loss of part of your life or physical pain?

We live in a civilised society with international human rights obligations. We have moved on from giving out lashings/beatings. I mean if people want a society where pain and injury is inflicted on criminals there are many countries in the world they can move and live in where that's done. It's not going to happen here.

obplayer

McCrack wrote: »

We live in a civilised society with international human rights obligations. We have moved on from giving out lashings/beatings. I mean if people want a society where pain and injury is inflicted on criminals there are many countries in the world they can move and live in where that's done. It's not going to happen here.

Sorry but you haven't answered the question. Why is locking someone in a cell for part of their life, which can never be returned, more humane than birching them and sending them on their way?

Potential-Monke

I was "bate" as an older child/teen. If i done something wrong that deserved it (yes, deserved) then so be it. I don't blame my parents, they knew know different. I don't blame anyone really, it was the done thing (this is only back in the late 80's through the 90's). But i will say one thing, if it wasn't for them, or more specifically the fear of it, i would definitely be on the other side of the law. I was close to it many times, but my parents set me straight.

Now, i don't carry it into work either. Christ, i don't want to go to jail for attempting to discipline a criminal. Not worth it. But i believe that criminals today, especially repeat criminals in the areas of common crime (that is, burglary, theft, robbery, criminal damage), have nothing to fear. It's all too common that a repeat criminal gets a lenient sentence, or that lovely "probation report". All a criminal has to do is plead ignorance, they knew no better due to a bad upbringing, the area they're in, lack of community amenities (which get destroyed by same said criminals), they're working on getting better, drug problems, etc, etc. Once they do that, the majority of the time they get an extremely lenient or suspended sentence. Whereas you and i know better so we should face the full brunt of the law.

And then you have the prison system, one that is overfull and has a massive revolving door. I've lost count of how many times i've been on a prisoner escort 2 hours from the station, and after booking the prisoner into the prison, heading home and seeing the same prisoner leave the bus/train station as you get home. Month long sentences cancelled due to lack of room. Criminals are laughing at us. Same for penal warrants. Court fines a criminal €500 or 2 weeks in default (that is 2 weeks in prison if they don't pay). The criminals know better than to pay as they'll likely spend no more than 5 hours of those 2 weeks behind bars. Plus they also get a free train/bus ticket and €20 when they're leaving, and free cigarettes in prison (from SVdP).

And they have a cushy number in there, free food (and a choice at dinner), tv, gym equivalent, learn a trade (or an underworld trade). Prison is not a deterrent.

Corporal punishment will not be brought back. But something needs to deter criminals, and the current system does not work. I believe we also need an Ombudsman for Judges, as some of them don't seem to remember what it's like for the regular folk who are most often than not the victims of these criminals. How in this day and age criminals with massive previous convictions are still walking around is beyond me. It's like the Judges are afraid to give hefty sentences to repeat offenders, and often fall into the trap of the sob story of the criminals.

I fear it will be a long time before this changes, and it's still getting worse (look at the recent handcuff and pepper spray cases). Criminals have more rights than law-abiding citizens, while the Gardaí have their job being made harder and harder by soft Judges who can't see common sense. Add to that a Minister who hates us, a public who dislike us due to the actions of a few, an management who are more concerned with the amount of money saved and idiotic new ideas rather than the morale of the force, or the massive shortage of their members and unfit for purpose equipment or vehicles.

monocled mutiner

obplayer wrote: »

Why are we allowed to lock people up but not birch them? Which is more humane, loss of part of your life or physical pain?

At last someone is talking sense and this is probably the wisest thing that has been said. It's hardly any more humane to lock someone up in a small room against their will and deprive them access to their home family and friends. There are so many with a rigid stance in their opinions that they fail to see this or choose to ignore it however. Given the choice a lot of people who pass through the courts would probably prefer the birch than going inside.

kub

monocled mutiner wrote: »

At last someone is talking sense and this is probably the wisest thing that has been said. It's hardly any more humane to lock someone up in a small room against their will and deprive them access to their home family and friends. There are so many with a rigid stance in their opinions that they fail to see this or choose to ignore it however. Given the choice a lot of people who pass through the courts would probably prefer the birch than going inside.

Ah sur God love them........is it? Those 'people' are in prison for a good reason. If prison is that bad so then how come these 'people' re offend?

Also let's not consider the victims of these 'people' either.

monocled mutiner

kub wrote: »

Ah sur God love them........is it? Those 'people' are in prison for a good reason. If prison is that bad so then how come these 'people' re offend?

Also let's not consider the victims of these 'people' either.

This thread seems a little dormant. I wonder would it have more life on the After Hours Forum. I might take the liberty of posting it there.

Potential-Monke

monocled mutiner wrote: »

This thread seems a little dormant. I wonder would it have more life on the After Hours Forum. I might take the liberty of posting it there.

Don't know if you posted it there, but i can tell you now that quite a lot of people in AH would be against corporal punishment. Quite a few bleeding heart liberals there...

My name is URL

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Don't know if you posted it there, but i can tell you now that quite a lot of people in AH would be against corporal punishment. Quite a few bleeding heart liberals there...

Because only a 'bleeding heart liberal' (lol at that term btw... are you Nigel Farage?) could possibly be opposed to something that has no scientific founding whatsoever, or something which is unproven to work and which every progressive nation has stopped doing.

If liberal loonies are the ones who oppose that then it doesn't say a whole lot for the lunatics who fantasise about seeing it.

Potential-Monke

My name is URL wrote: »

Because only a 'bleeding heart liberal' (lol at that term btw... are you Nigel Farage?) could possibly be opposed to something that has no scientific founding whatsoever, or something which is unproven to work and which every progressive nation has stopped doing.

If liberal loonies are the ones who oppose that then it doesn't say a whole lot for the lunatics who fantasise about seeing it.

No, it's a term i like to use for those who think of a criminals rights before the victims, you know, the same who don't want to see the death penalty, manual labour, etc. They're the same people who would call bloody murder because a muslim who took a job in a supermarket was fired for refusing to handles wrapped pork/alcohol products (that didn't happen, but you get my point). I was making the point that quite a lot of them hang around in AH for threads like this.

And it worked on me. If it wasn't for it, i would more than likely be on the opposite side of the law, but the heavy hand of my parents kept me in line. And no-one is fantasizing about seeing it, we're discussing it and i believe that it can be warranted. I'm not talking about kicking the crap out of a child for a minor thing, i'm on about a good slap for something serious, like i used to get, and which kept me in line.

You can't say much on the internet these days without someone taking it up wrong or getting offended...

bravestar

Potential-Monke wrote: »

No, it's a term i like to use for those who think of a criminals rights before the victims, you know, the same who don't want to see the death penalty, manual labour, etc. They're the same people who would call bloody murder because a muslim who took a job in a supermarket was fired for refusing to handles wrapped pork/alcohol products (that didn't happen, but you get my point). I was making the point that quite a lot of them hang around in AH for threads like this.

And it worked on me. If it wasn't for it, i would more than likely be on the opposite side of the law, but the heavy hand of my parents kept me in line. And no-one is fantasizing about seeing it, we're discussing it and i believe that it can be warranted. I'm not talking about kicking the crap out of a child for a minor thing, i'm on about a good slap for something serious, like i used to get, and which kept me in line.

You can't say much on the internet these days without someone taking it up wrong or getting offended...

Worked on me too. We have gone WAY too far in the other direction now...

monocled mutiner

The liberals are way too wrapped in the mistreatment of the criminal that they forget about the victims of crime. I'm all for judicial corporal punishment and I think it serves well in the home as well. If the gardai were given the authority to use corporal punishment on some of the wayward youths in society today we might see a better nation and one with more respect for the law

Jiggers77

The days of judicial punishment on convicted criminals are long gone mores the pity and the system of punishment meted out isn't near severe enough. There's no way it will come back.
Smacking kids in the home, now that's somethin that could really teach a bit of respect to spoilt brats. Unfortunately parents are afraid to give their kids a slap these days for fear of the repercussions. 1984 - kids are caught vandalising property. Gardai bring them home. Parents give them a good leathering, they have a sore behind, learn their lesson and the family move on. 2014 - kids are caught vandalising properly. Gardai bring them home. Parents give them a good leathering. Parents are arrested and charged with assault. Kids removed by social services. Kids learn nothing!!!!!!!!

kub

Jiggers77 wrote: »

2014 - kids are caught vandalising properly. Gardai bring them home. Parents give them a good leathering. Parents are arrested and charged with assault. Kids removed by social services. Kids learn nothing!!!!!!!!

Have to disagree with you there, more like 2014 - kids caught vandalising property, Gardai arrive, kids tell Gardai to ...... off, as they know they are under age and know the lads cannot really do much. Eventually after calling for back up the Gardai manage to bring the kids home to their parents.
Then the abuse from the parents begins, starting with the fact that the Gardai were wronging their kids, that it was others and that they should really be spending their time catching real criminals instead of picking on their saintly kids. They are then asked to please remove their patrol car from their property as it just does not look good.
Cue a visit to their solicitor, an investigation by the Ombudsman and then probably a bollocking from their superior officers.

Meanwhile fast forward 15 years and those kiddies above have grown into mature disrespectful criminals.

AlekSmart

kub wrote: »

Have to disagree with you there, more like 2014 - kids caught vandalising property, Gardai arrive, kids tell Gardai to ...... off, as they know they are under age and know the lads cannot really do much. Eventually after calling for back up the Gardai manage to bring the kids home to their parents.
Then the abuse from the parents begins, starting with the fact that the Gardai were wronging their kids, that it was others and that they should really be spending their time catching real criminals instead of picking on their saintly kids. They are then asked to please remove their patrol car from their property as it just does not look good.
Cue a visit to their solicitor, an investigation by the Ombudsman and then probably a bollocking from their superior officers.

Meanwhile fast forward 15 years and those kiddies above have grown into mature disrespectful criminals.

We read and hear an awful lot about the "Revolving Door" system of Irish criminal justice,kub's post above,outlines in simple detail how that door first starts to spin.

NOTHING can be done to stop the spinning UNLESS it begins at the START of the process.

The entire Garda Juvenile Liason Scheme operation is in urgent need of detailed revision.

Currently,it is being used as a highly valuable preparation ground for progression into the Adult Criminal world and there is really no better place to learn the ropes than in a live environment !!

Potential-Monkes suggestion is surely well worth serious consideration...

Corporal punishment will not be brought back. But something needs to deter criminals, and the current system does not work. I believe we also need an Ombudsman for Judges, as some of them don't seem to remember what it's like for the regular folk who are most often than not the victims of these criminals. How in this day and age criminals with massive previous convictions are still walking around is beyond me. It's like the Judges are afraid to give hefty sentences to repeat offenders, and often fall into the trap of the sob story of the criminals.

There is now an ongoing routine of Judges,particular in the Higher Courts,delivering judgements which,in a real-world environment,are incapable of logical explanation,yet apart from a somewhat dubious "Appeal by the DPP" process,the Judge's decision cannot be subject to reasonable review.

This sort of thing,to my mind,should be subject to robust questioning...

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/violent-criminal-wont-serve-extra-jail-time-for-hit-run-death-of-conor-14-30087076.html

A classic case for an Ombudsman's attention I feel ???

kub

I am convinced at this stage that the Judges are acting like sales reps for their colleagues ie the solicitors and barristers.

Simply the more they give light punishments to the likes of that 'gentleman' above then the more they will re-offend and therefore the more their solicitors and barristers will benefit by representing them and paid handsomely for it, more than likely by the Free Legal Aid scheme, ie the Tax Payer.

I think its never going to change as there are too many vested interests in the sector in which our current Minister Of Justice belongs and to which he gets his advice.