Three convicted murderers working in Belfast shopping center.

cloud493

Surely thats part of the punishment? Having to live with what you did.

Mr. CooL ICE

Laois6556 wrote: »

If that's true and they are no longer sick, hideous people and they now know what they did was evil and wrong then how can they just get on with their lives?
I know if I killed someone, even by accident there's no way I could get over the guilt. I can't imagine what it'd be like to actually murder someone, be thought how wrong it was and then carry on as normal.

Well that's for them to live with. It doesn't matter if they have the same level of empathy as you, they just have to get on with their lives.

Exposing them in a newspaper as convicted criminals trying to live normal lives doesn't achieve anything except sell papers and/or ad revenue.

Laois6556

cloud493 wrote: »

Surely thats part of the punishment? Having to live with what you did.

How is that punishment? So someone murders someone but regrets it straight away, well that's enough punishment for them then. No need for anything else the guilt is enough.

Laois6556

Nicolas Cage wrote: »

Well that's for them to live with. It doesn't matter if they have the same level of empathy as you, they just have to get on with their lives.

Exposing them in a newspaper as convicted criminals trying to live normal lives doesn't achieve anything except sell papers and/or ad revenue.

There's a lot of scummy journalists but I really don't mind what they've done in this instance. These killers don't deserve to live normal lives.

Nodin

Laois6556 wrote: »

There's a lot of scummy journalists but I really don't mind what they've done in this instance. These killers don't deserve to live normal lives.

.....a short sighted and rather self defeating attitude.

Mr. CooL ICE

Laois6556 wrote: »

How is that punishment? So someone murders someone but regrets it straight away, well that's enough punishment for them then. No need for anything else the guilt is enough.

I don't think anybody is suggesting that.

Whether their sentences were sufficient or not is a debate for another day.

Laois6556 wrote: »

There's a lot of scummy journalists but I really don't mind what they've done in this instance. These killers don't deserve to live normal lives.

Back to this again...

Laois6556

Laois6556 wrote: »

How is that punishment? So someone murders someone but regrets it straight away, well that's enough punishment for them then. No need for anything else the guilt is enough.

Nobody actually said that. And more to the point, nobody actually thinks that.

Most people would be pro ex-cons getting a start at a life outside of crime where they can become functioning members of society.

Laois6556

Nodin wrote: »

.....a short sighted and rather self defeating attitude.

Maybe but just over 10 years in prison for these vicious murderers. Some people might be happy for them to live life happily ever after but I'm not one of them.

Laois6556

Nicolas Cage wrote: »

I don't think anybody is suggesting that.

Whether their sentences were sufficient or not is a debate for another day.



Back to this again...

Yeah we're stuck at the same point.

Puddleduck

And yet I cant get a job cleaning toilets, and I havent even murdered anyone

Billy86

Laois6556 wrote: »

I think it's pretty obvious what my point is. The punishment for these fellas was far too lenient.

Remind all of us what exactly that has to do with this tabloid, the employers, or these three men going about getting jobs once they were freed?

Laois6556 wrote: »

I'd favour the death sentence but life in prison actually meaning life in prison would be a start.

Most evidence shows that the death sentence leads to higher murder rates in general. It is of no benefit go society beyond those baying for blood o, revenge and whatnot.

Nodin

Laois6556 wrote: »

Maybe but just over 10 years in prison for these vicious murderers. Some people might be happy for them to live life happily ever after but I'm not one of them.

....but the fact is that they are out, and you don't seem to have any constructive alternative solution.

Nodin

Puddleduck wrote: »

And yet I cant get a job cleaning toilets, and I havent even murdered anyone

That's where ye are goin wrong then.

Laois6556

Candie wrote: »

Nobody actually said that. And more to the point, nobody actually thinks that.

Most people would be pro ex-cons getting a start at a life outside of crime where they can become functioning members of society.

Why should they be given that opportunity? I suppose that's where we all disagree. I don't think they should have a choice over what sort of life they live after murdering someone, others do.

Albertofrog

Quote: Laois6556
I'd favour the death sentence but life in prison actually meaning life in prison would be a start.

So you would be happy for your taxes to keep them in jail until they die?
Rather than them work and them pay taxes?

Laois6556

Billy86 wrote: »

Remind all of us what exactly that has to do with this tabloid, the employers, or these three men going about getting jobs once they were freed?


Most evidence shows that the death sentence leads to higher murder rates in general. It is of no benefit go society beyond those baying for blood o, revenge and whatnot.

I was asked a couple of times for my standpoint, I just answered.

No study has evidence for anything as that's impossible to find. Different circumstances etc is why that's the case.

Laois6556

Nodin wrote: »

....but the fact is that they are out, and you don't seem to have any constructive alternative solution.

Yes, my view is that they shouldn't be out and now that they are I hope they have the most unhappiest lives possible. Not very constructive but there ya go.

Roquentin

Puddleduck wrote: »

And yet I cant get a job cleaning toilets, and I havent even murdered anyone

same with me......who do i have to kill to get a job around here:pac:

Laois6556

Albertofrog wrote: »

Quote: Laois6556
I'd favour the death sentence but life in prison actually meaning life in prison would be a start.

So you would be happy for your taxes to keep them in jail until they die?
Rather than them work and them pay taxes?

You'd have to hope that it would take less than 10 years to give them the injection.

Albertofrog

Laois6556 wrote: »

You'd have to hope that it would take less than 10 years to give them the injection.

But you stated you would settle for life imprisonment.
That costs.

Nodin

Laois6556 wrote: »

Yes, my view is that they shouldn't be out and now that they are I hope they have the most unhappiest lives possible. Not very constructive but there ya go.

You can work for a living and be very miserable, ye know. The fact is these people did their time, went to get an honest job and have been shafted by the same shower of gobshites that will be happy to whinge when they get the scratcher, or if they ended up on the streets.

Laois6556

Albertofrog wrote: »

But you stated you would settle for life imprisonment.
That costs.

You'd never put anyone in prison if it's money saving you were looking for.

Laois6556

Nodin wrote: »

You can work for a living and be very miserable, ye know. The fact is these people did their time, went to get an honest job and have been shafted by the same shower of gobshites that will be happy to whinge when they get the scratcher, or if they ended up on the streets.

I just can't find any sympathy for them no matter how rotten those journalists are.

Albertofrog

Laois6556 wrote: »

You'd never put anyone in prison if it's money saving you were looking for.

But we're talking about this specific case.
Would you be happy to pay for these three to be in jail for forty to fifty years or would they be better off trying to make an effort in society?

Laois6556

Albertofrog wrote: »

But we're talking about this specific case.
Would you be happy to pay for these three to be in jail for forty to fifty years or would they be better off trying to make an effort in society?

I'd be happy to pay a few cent to have them rot in jail, happier if they got the injection, not very happy at all to see them live great lives.

Nodin

Laois6556 wrote: »

I just can't find any sympathy for them no matter how rotten those journalists are.

"sympathy" has fuck all to do with it. People commit crime, serve a sentence and get out. They have to have some light at the end of the tunnel if they rehabilitate, otherwise the whole thing is pointless, and society has painted itself into a corner with prisoners. Thanks to some **** in a rag, teaching these people a trade, encouraging them to get a job and the rest has been a waste of time effort and money. It may well discourage from employing prisoners.

Billy86

Laois6556 wrote: »

I was asked a couple of times for my standpoint, I just answered.

No study has evidence for anything as that's impossible to find. Different circumstances etc is why that's the case.

Between the 50 US states conditions are quote similar, and of them only three states (two of whom got rid of it very recently) in the top 22 for murder rates have no death penalty, the other 19 do. And pretty much every state to abandon the death penalty has seen drops, often very significant ones, almost immediately after doing so. I'm not going go derail this thread on the matter, but the only arguments in favour of the death sentence are revenge, blood thirstiness, and a "deterrent" argument that has been shown time and again to be baseless.



But all of that is irrelevant anyway... your argument is with our court system, which has nothing to do with this story - the tabloid, the employer or even the employeew/ex convicts. The criminals were tried by our court system, they were deemed guilty and sentenced by our court system, and they were later deemed reformed and released by our court system. None of that has anything to do with if they should be allowed have a job or not, if they should be allowed on the dole or not, or be forced to revert to a life of crime instead to stop fro maturing to death. That is the danger of this story and what it has done.

Albertofrog

Laois6556 wrote: »

I'd be happy to pay a few cent to have them rot in jail, happier if they got the injection, not very happy at all to see them live great lives.

And you know they are having great lives?
And it's more than a few pence - different jurisdiction

Roquentin

imo they either get in prison for life or when they get released they are left alone. You are releasing them on the premise to integrate them back into society because they have served their time.

If these guys reoffend, you can blame the paper that reported them.

I have said it time and time again. The internet needs to be better regulated and the media needs to be better regulated. there is too much tabloid fodder in the media. There was the guy in austrailia who killed himself who the media printing his drunken night hotel carnage. that was utterly disgraceful by the papers.

and my advice to anyone in todays society: dont **** up in life, because if you do, the media will destroy you

Billy86

Laois6556 wrote: »

Yes, my view is that they shouldn't be out and now that they are I hope they have the most unhappiest lives possible. Not very constructive but there ya go.

So do you hope to pay for their dole for the rest of their lives, or do you hope to see an increase in crime?

Laois6556

Nodin wrote: »

"sympathy" has fuck all to do with it. People commit crime, serve a sentence and get out. They have to have some light at the end of the tunnel if they rehabilitate, otherwise the whole thing is pointless, and society has painted itself into a corner with prisoners. Thanks to some **** in a rag, teaching these people a trade, encouraging them to get a job and the rest has been a waste of time effort and money. It may well discourage from employing prisoners.

Back to my original point. How can we know if these people have changed their ways and if they have how can they live with the guilt? It'd be different if we were talking about robbers or other form of criminals. These are cold blooded murderers, once you sink that low you're at the point of no return but that's just my opinion and one that most here seem to disagree with.

Laois6556

Billy86 wrote: »

Between the 50 US states conditions are quote similar, and of them only three states (two of whom got rid of it very recently) in the top 22 for murder rates have no death penalty, the other 19 do. And pretty much every state to abandon the death penalty has seen drops, often very significant ones, almost immediately after doing so. I'm not going go derail this thread on the matter, but the only arguments in favour of the death sentence are revenge, blood thirstiness, and a "deterrent" argument that has been shown time and again to be baseless.



But all of that is irrelevant anyway... your argument is with our court system, which has nothing to do with this story - the tabloid, the employer or even the employeew/ex convicts. The criminals were tried by our court system, they were deemed guilty and sentenced by our court system, and they were later deemed reformed and released by our court system. None of that has anything to do with if they should be allowed have a job or not, if they should be allowed on the dole or not, or be forced to revert to a life of crime instead to stop fro maturing to death. That is the danger of this story and what it has done.

You're right, that's a discussion for another day but those studies are not conclusive as they can't be.

Laois6556

Albertofrog wrote: »

And you know they are having great lives?
And it's more than a few pence - different jurisdiction

Greater than it should be anyway.

Nodin

Laois6556 wrote: »

Back to my original point. How can we know if these people have changed their ways and if they have how can they live with the guilt?.

How do you know the person nearest to you won't turn on you? How do you know you won't be run over when you are crossing the road? I've explained to you the problem in general terms, but you seem to be hell bent on repeating "but they're baaad " like that's some sort of solution or contribution.

Laois6556

Billy86 wrote: »

So do you hope to pay for their dole for the rest of their lives, or do you hope to see an increase in crime?

Obviously neither.

Billy86

Laois6556 wrote: »

Obviously neither.

Well they are no longer in prison, so if you don't want them to have job then your only two other options are paying for their dole of seeing an increase in crime.

CaptainInsano

Nicolas Cage wrote: »

Thanks for your explanation.

It was blatantly obvious that was what he meant.


Anyway, I love all the 'oh fair play to them for working and trying to have a better life but you won't catch me in there getting my keys cut lolz' posts.
Someone even called them brave, piss off. We all work, these people don't deserve any credit at all for trying to be normal human beings.
But yeah, let them have their little jobs and hope they don't kill again, unfortunately it's the only solution we have. I'm not going to shower them with faux support.

Laois6556

Nodin wrote: »

How do you know the person nearest to you won't turn on you? How do you know you won't be run over when you are crossing the road? I've explained to you the problem in general terms, but you seem to be hell bent on repeating "but they're baaad " like that's some sort of solution or contribution.

I've said my thoughts on what should happen to them now are not very constructive, I have a different view to you and others on what I think is appropriate punishment for killers like these 3. I don't think they can be changed into decent people and live normal lives. Others don't think the same. People have different opinions on things! Wow.

Laois6556

Billy86 wrote: »

Well they are no longer in prison, so if you don't want them to have job then your only two other options are paying for their dole of seeing an increase in crime.

No, you asked what I'd hope would happen to them. I hope they live unhappy, short lives.

Nodin

Laois6556 wrote: »

I've said my thoughts on what should happen to them now are not very constructive, .

No, they're not constructive, useful or anything else.

Laois6556 wrote: »

I have a different view to you and others on what I think is appropriate punishment for killers like these 3.
.

That's irrelevant, because they are out in the real world now.

Laois6556 wrote: »

I don't think they can be changed into decent people and live normal lives. .

But they are no longer in custody, will not be subjected to the revenge fantasy of your choice, and society has to cope with them and others in the best manner possible. You and those wrote that article aren't helping.

CaptainInsano

Roquentin wrote: »

imo they either get in prison for life or when they get released they are left alone. You are releasing them on the premise to integrate them back into society because they have served their time.

If these guys reoffend, you can blame the paper that reported them.

I have said it time and time again. The internet needs to be better regulated and the media needs to be better regulated. there is too much tabloid fodder in the media. There was the guy in austrailia who killed himself who the media printing his drunken night hotel carnage. that was utterly disgraceful by the papers.

and my advice to anyone in todays society: dont **** up in life, because if you do, the media will destroy you

I'm completely against the poorly written article but if they repeat offended you can't blame anyone but them. What kind of normal person would say 'Ah sh1t I lost my job, sure I may as well kill again.'' If they are that close to the edge that they need to be mammy'd by society in case they murder someone then they aren't rehabilitated at all.

Recondite49

Nicolas Cage wrote: »

They did the crime and paid the time. I'd rather they honestly work somewhere than not at all.

They're cutting keys ffs. It's not like they beat 100s of applicants to the role of mattress tester.

A man's got to eat.

Mr. CooL ICE

CaptainInsano wrote: »

It was blatantly obvious that was what he meant.

No. He said they didn't deserve to live a normal life without offering any alternatives. I, and others, were trying to drag it out of him.

His view on rehabilitation is completely linear and short-sighted. Rehabilitation of criminals and reintegration them to society is what an enlightened society endeavours. I like to think that both ourselves and our neighbours think better than just locking them up and throwing away the key without consideration for any alternative.

gordongekko

More than 3 crooks working in the dail and nobody seems fussed

Recondite49

Nicolas Cage wrote: »

No. He said they didn't deserve to live a normal life without offering any alternatives. I, and others, were trying to drag it out of him.

His view on rehabilitation is completely linear and short-sighted. Rehabilitation of criminals and reintegration them to society is what an enlightened society endeavours. I like to think that both ourselves and our neighbours think better than just locking them up and throwing away the key without consideration for any alternative.

You have to reflect on the irony that as their new occupation they were working cutting keys. Still, they did their time, they've got to eat - is anyone saying they'd rather they were on the dole or wasting taxpayer's money by still being in prison?

osarusan

Laois6556 wrote: »

Obviously neither.

your arguments are agony to read.

We get it, you wish they would rot in prison for life, or even better, be executed.

But that is not going to happen. You know it. They are out now, and there's nothing you can do about it.

The question is, now that they are out, what do you want to happen next?

do you want them to try and get some kind of job and leave some kind of normal life? Or are you happy for newspapers to harass them, 'out' them, and make it much less likely that they can get any kind of employment?

Laois6556

Nodin wrote: »

No, they're not constructive, useful or anything else.

Well we have something in common then.

Nodin wrote: »

That's irrelevant, because they are out in the real world now.

So no one can comment on lenient sentences then when people are released.

Nodin wrote: »

But they are no longer in custody, will not be subjected to the revenge fantasy of your choice, and society has to cope with them and others in the best manner possible. You and those wrote that article aren't helping.

No, now they're out and have an opportunity to kill someone else. Maybe they wont but they have a choice over things unlike their victims.

CaptainInsano

Recondite49 wrote: »

You have to reflect on the irony that as their new occupation they were working cutting keys. Still, they did their time, they've got to eat - is anyone saying they'd rather they were on the dole or wasting taxpayer's money by still being in prison?

I'm sure the victims families would rather they were in prison still. Let's not forget the impact on them here. They are the most important people of the whole story.

Laois6556

Nicolas Cage wrote: »

No. He said they didn't deserve to live a normal life without offering any alternatives. I, and others, were trying to drag it out of him.

His view on rehabilitation is completely linear and short-sighted. Rehabilitation of criminals and reintegration them to society is what an enlightened society endeavours. I like to think that both ourselves and our neighbours think better than just locking them up and throwing away the key without consideration for any alternative.

You knew what I was talking about.

We're going round in circles with the second point. Kinda like the whole thread.

Billy86

Laois6556 wrote: »

No, you asked what I'd hope would happen to them. I hope they live unhappy, short lives.

And I hope to get home to find my bed stuffed to the brim with million Euro notes that Kate Upton and Mila Kubik and waiting for me on top of. But then I realise that not realistic, just like your hopes for them to willingly starve themselves to death rather than get a job, claim the dole or revert back to crime. Because those are the only real three options.