What do you do with people like this?

irishrebe

Overheal wrote: »

“Don’t trayton me! Don’t choo trayton me!”

If I hadn’t lived in Ireland you could have convinced me everyone in the video was yelling in Swahili

Reminds me of the time my neighbour had a Spanish student staying on our estate in Dublin. Poor kid was convinced nobody was actually speaking English. I was behind him in the local shop once and the woman asked him, 'jehwanna bagwidah?' He stood there in terrified silence, eventually repeated 'bagwidah'? in a bewildered tone and then I stepped in and explained that the young lady was asking him if he wanted a plastic bag for his shopping. I think he gave up on the idea of studying English at university after that.

Your Face

Well, I for one, enjoyed watching that.

dinorebel

Your Face wrote: »

Well, I for one, enjoyed watching that.

Tough w*nk though.

super_furry

That poor child. Heartbreaking.

Bunny Colvin

Ah Dublin. Our proud capital.

wexie

irishrebe wrote: »

Where do you draw the line, though? If she has borderline personality disorder (for example), can you say she's being an @sshole, or is it part of the illness?

She's being an asshole, if you tell her 'oh it's part of your illness, that wasn't you' then it becomes an excuse. Whatever might be wrong with her it's still her acting like that which means she needs to take responsibility for the behaviour and not use the illness as a get out of jail free card.

She should be given help doing that perhaps, but at the end of the day it is her acting like that, nobody making her...

irishrebe wrote: »

What do you do, try to treat and help them or tell them how awful they are?

What makes you think this needs to be an either or proposition? You don't think doing both might be a better solution?

GreeBo

irishrebe wrote: »

Where do you draw the line, though? If she has borderline personality disorder (for example), can you say she's being an @sshole, or is it part of the illness? A lot of mental health problems make people behave in quite a horrible way. What do you do, try to treat and help them or tell them how awful they are?

If her illness means that she acts like an a$$hole then she shouldn't be free to wander the streets abusing people and damaging property.

Nekarsulm

Overheal wrote: »

“Don’t trayton me! Don’t choo trayton me!”

If I hadn’t lived in Ireland you could have convinced me everyone in the video was yelling in Swahili

Swahilli, or Igbo?

It's always uncomfortable seeing a kid getting this kind of example and start in life, but unless Social Services take him and get him into some kind of foster family there is little can be done.
Her, however, I would be taking by the pony tail and leaving her outside on the pavement.
Who needs someone wrecking their shop?

razorblunt

Scum.

Did she call them "black rats" too? Ironic.


I don't understand why they let her do it, the courts will hardly prosecute to the extent of jailing and fining her. Any damage to stock or property theyll foot the bill or claim via insurance. Hardly fair on themselves.

super_furry

Think she'd have a decent case for false imprisonment mind you.

GreeBo

super_furry wrote: »

Think she'd have a decent case for false imprisonment mind you.

I think society has a decent case for imprisonment.

Nekarsulm

super_furry wrote: »

Think she'd have a decent case for false imprisonment mind you.

Would it be false imprisonment, or affecting a form of Citizens Arrest until the Gardai arrive?
She didn't seem to be making too much effort to leave!

Gravelly

irishrebe wrote: »

Reminds me of the time my neighbour had a Spanish student staying on our estate in Dublin. Poor kid was convinced nobody was actually speaking English. I was behind him in the local shop once and the woman asked him, 'jehwanna bagwidah?' He stood there in terrified silence, eventually repeated 'bagwidah'? in a bewildered tone and then I stepped in and explained that the young lady was asking him if he wanted a plastic bag for his shopping. I think he gave up on the idea of studying English at university after that.

This is one of the best posts I've ever read on boards. I literally wept reading it.

If you ever go on stage, I'll be first in line to buy a ticket.

One eyed Jack

irishrebe wrote: »

Where do you draw the line, though? If she has borderline personality disorder (for example), can you say she's being an @sshole, or is it part of the illness? A lot of mental health problems make people behave in quite a horrible way. What do you do, try to treat and help them or tell them how awful they are?

Well, yes! I mean, I'm not suggesting that you personally should point out to her that she's behaving like an asshole, but I certainly would, because whether or not she is experiencing ill mental health, or has a mental illness, her behaviour is still unacceptable.

She appears to be competent enough to understand her actions and the consequences of her actions, so I don't think mental health can be used as an excuse here when it's just easier to point to the simplest explanation. Mountainsaidh hit the nail on the head when she said that this woman knows how to manipulate the situation and peoples perception of her to her advantage.

Certainly by all means I'd encourage her to get help, but I would also have no problem pointing out exactly why she needs help.

I also don't agree with the rest of them standing around there and letting her run riot in the shop and recording it to put it online, that's not helping anyone either, they're being just as much assholes about the whole thing IMO.

GreeBo

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Well, yes! I mean, I'm not suggesting that you personally should point out to her that she's behaving like an asshole, but I certainly would, because whether or not she is experiencing ill mental health, or has a mental illness, her behaviour is still unacceptable.

She appears to be competent enough to understand her actions and the consequences of her actions, so I don't think mental health can be used as an excuse here when it's just easier to point to the simplest explanation. Mountainsaidh hit the nail on the head when she said that this woman knows how to manipulate the situation and peoples perception of her to her advantage.

Certainly by all means I'd encourage her to get help, but I would also have no problem pointing out exactly why she needs help.

I also don't agree with the rest of them standing around there and letting her run riot in the shop and recording it to put it online, that's not helping anyone either, they're being just as much assholes about the whole thing IMO.

My reading of it was that she freaked out last time anyone touched her, so stopping was not an option. All they could do was prevent her from leaving until the Police arrived.

hatrickpatrick

GreeBo wrote: »

If her illness means that she acts like an a$$hole then she shouldn't be free to wander the streets abusing people and damaging property.

This, exactly.

hatrickpatrick

Can I just ask, what the actual f*ck is up with the comments on the two YouTube vides? It's like the video got linked to a Stormfront cult or something.

wexie

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Can I just ask, what the actual f*ck is up with the comments on the two YouTube vides? It's like the video got linked to a Stormfront cult or something.

You must have seen plenty occurrences of similar sentiments here on Boards.
They might be phrased somewhat more subtle but I doubt that would last long if moderation went away.


If not there's a couple of threads I can point you to but I doubt you'd thank me for it.

hatrickpatrick

wexie wrote: »

You must have seen plenty occurrences of similar sentiments here on Boards.
They might be phrased somewhat more subtle but I doubt that would last long if moderation went away.


If not there's a couple of threads I can point you to but I doubt you'd thank me for it.

I'm fully aware that there is indeed some out and out racism, but nowhere near the amount which is being displayed in those comments. They remind me more of a Voat or /pol/ thread, which is why I'm wondering if maybe the video got linked on one of those forums.

Boards like everywhere else has some white supremacists, but nowhere near that many in my experience.

wexie

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I'm fully aware that there is indeed some out and out racism, but nowhere near the amount which is being displayed in those comments. They remind me more of a Voat or /pol/ thread, which is why I'm wondering if maybe the video got linked on one of those forums.

Wouldn't be overly surprised if it had to be honest. But they're not exactly corners of the internet I frequent and I'm sure as hell not going looking.

Is there any kind of moderation of Youtube actually or is it just a free for all?

Tzardine

Teeth like a bag of Manhattan popcorn.

hatrickpatrick

wexie wrote: »

Wouldn't be overly surprised if it had to be honest. But they're not exactly corners of the internet I frequent and I'm sure as hell not going looking.

Is there any kind of moderation of Youtube actually or is it just a free for all?

I tend to read both fairly regularly just to get an idea of what the alt right's current modus operandi is and what ridiculous things they've discovered to be paranoid about this week As for YouTube, there's no centralised moderation in the comments which IMO is fantastic - it's up to the poster of each video to decide what gets removed and what stays up in their own comment sections. Videos, on the other hand, are unfortunately coming in for more moderation following all the uproar over "the internet helped the wrong candidate (Trump) and the wrong result (Brexit) to be voted for".

SEPT 23 1989

the child needs to be removed from that situation full time

if he does have special needs i cant see that strumpet getting him the help he needs

One eyed Jack

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

the child needs to be removed from that situation full time

if he does have special needs i cant see that strumpet getting him the help he needs

What is it with this knee-jerk reaction from some quarters that immediately appear to call for children to be removed from their parents for whatever reason? Have you actually thought about the long-term outcomes for the child or children if they are separated from their parents? The outcomes historically haven't been good. They've been far more detrimental than anything seen in that video could possibly lead to.

If you were at all sincere about helping the child, you'd be helping the mother get the help she needs, to get help for her child, than making stupid suggestions like taking her child from her. That achieves nothing good in the long term, and it's why that approach generally isn't used any more.

GreeBo

Tzardine wrote: »

Teeth like a bag of Manhattan Cheesy popcorn.

FYP.

hatrickpatrick

One eyed Jack wrote: »

What is it with this knee-jerk reaction from some quarters that immediately appear to call for children to be removed from their parents for whatever reason? Have you actually thought about the long-term outcomes for the child or children if they are separated from their parents? The outcomes historically haven't been good. They've been far more detrimental than anything seen in that video could possibly lead to.

If you were at all sincere about helping the child, you'd be helping the mother get the help she needs, to get help for her child, than making stupid suggestions like taking her child from her. That achieves nothing good in the long term, and it's why that approach generally isn't used any more.

We're dealing with a woman here who is very clearly an out and out scumbag. No amount of "getting help" is likely to change that. Even if whatever psychiatric conditions she may have are cured, at the end of the day she'll most likely still have a scummy personality. That's where the idea that she shouldn't be raising a kid comes from.

Read up on anti social personality disorder and its related conditions, it's widely accepted that there's more or less no "cure" for it - if you're the type of person who thinks it's ok to fly into violent, destructive rages like that depicted in the video then I'm sorry but you're more likely to be incurably f*cked than a curable case. On the balance of probabilities, she's never going to be capable of being a good person.

GreeBo

One eyed Jack wrote: »

What is it with this knee-jerk reaction from some quarters that immediately appear to call for children to be removed from their parents for whatever reason? Have you actually thought about the long-term outcomes for the child or children if they are separated from their parents? The outcomes historically haven't been good. They've been far more detrimental than anything seen in that video could possibly lead to.

If you were at all sincere about helping the child, you'd be helping the mother get the help she needs, to get help for her child, than making stupid suggestions like taking her child from her. That achieves nothing good in the long term, and it's why that approach generally isn't used any more.

The mother needs help for herself before she can even think about helping the child.
Meanwhile what does the child do?

One eyed Jack

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

We're dealing with a woman here who is very clearly an out and out scumbag. No amount of "getting help" is likely to change that. Even if whatever psychiatric conditions she may have are cured, at the end of the day she'll most likely still have a scummy personality. That's where the idea that she shouldn't be raising a kid comes from.

Read up on anti social personality disorder and its related conditions, it's widely accepted that there's more or less no "cure" for it - if you're the type of person who thinks it's ok to fly into violent, destructive rages like that depicted in the video then I'm sorry but you're more likely to be incurably f*cked than a curable case. On the balance of probabilities, she's never going to be capable of being a good person.

I'm well aware of what anti-social personality disorder is HP, only I'm not so quick to diagnose anyone with anything on the basis of an interaction like that, let alone imagine that they are beyond help. On the balance of probabilities nothing tbh, because the same could be said of anyone who doesn't meet your arbitrary standards of what does or doesn't constitute "a good person". I could just as easily say that by my arbitrary standards of what does or doesn't constitute a good person, a scumbag is someone who is quick to judge other people. Should they be raising children or should we relieve them of their children too and place them in the care of the State? You'd think such a suggestion is daft, and you'd be right. It is daft.

GreeBo wrote: »

The mother needs help for herself before she can even think about helping the child.
Meanwhile what does the child do?

The child would be getting the help and support they need too at the same time. I can understand that anyone would feel bad for her children, but taking them from her and placing them in care isn't the answer either.

GreeBo

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The child would be getting the help and support they need too at the same time. I can understand that anyone would feel bad for her children, but taking them from her and placing them in care isn't the answer either.

In some cases I think it is the answer.
All the support in the world isn't going to help a child who is growing up in the same environment as their mother.

One eyed Jack

GreeBo wrote: »

In some cases I think it is the answer.
All the support in the world isn't going to help a child who is growing up in the same environment as their mother.

In some cases of extreme abuse, then yeah, definitely, I'd be the first to say the child or children should be out of there for their own safety and welfare, but from just that video alone she should simply have been fcuked out of the shop and the Gardaí called, and so what if she wants to go apeshìt, the reason she was doing it was because she was allowed to do it and encouraged by being filmed doing it. The only one I feel any bit of sympathy at all for in that situation is the child, but rather than take her children off her, which is only done in the most extreme cases, she should be helped to become a better example for her children so that they don't grow up with issues of their own.

keith_sixteen

One eyed Jack wrote: »

she should be helped to become a better example for her children so that they don't grow up with issues of their own.

No helping the likes of her. She is deranged psychopath.

hatrickpatrick

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I'm well aware of what anti-social personality disorder is HP, only I'm not so quick to diagnose anyone with anything on the basis of an interaction like that, let alone imagine that they are beyond help. On the balance of probabilities nothing tbh, because the same could be said of anyone who doesn't meet your arbitrary standards of what does or doesn't constitute "a good person". I could just as easily say that by my arbitrary standards of what does or doesn't constitute a good person, a scumbag is someone who is quick to judge other people. Should they be raising children or should we relieve them of their children too and place them in the care of the State? You'd think such a suggestion is daft, and you'd be right. It is daft.

This is a ridiculous argument. Being incredibly violent, and abusive in public on a regular basis is an extremely common societal marker for somebody being a scumbag, it's not just something that I pulled out of my hole.

I take it that you maybe haven't had much experience with scumbags yourself, but yes I absolutely am saying that those who regularly engage in serious public order offences and violent, rage-filled acts of vandalism, assault, and verbal abuse, absolutely shouldn't be allowed to raise children. I really don't see how that can come across as unfair or overly harsh. If you have extreme anger management, substance abuse, or violence / anti social behaviour issues, then in my view you are automatically an unfit parent and are automatically putting your kid at risk of developing issues of their own by exposing them to this kind of behaviour as a normal part of being a person.

Demonique

wexie wrote: »

Wouldn't be overly surprised if it had to be honest. But they're not exactly corners of the internet I frequent and I'm sure as hell not going looking.

Is there any kind of moderation of Youtube actually or is it just a free for all?

You can report comments but I'm not sure what action will be taken, on Facebook and Twitter you're informed of what action is taken

Outlaw Pete

Could be wrong, but is this the same girl that RTE followed as part of some docu and filmed her going on shoplifting sprees? Recall on one occasion her walking out of Smyth's with a scooter and then flipping out when the crew told that they had actually gone back and paid for it :P

Was about seven or eight years ago now. Might be a different girl but from memory she was very like her.

One eyed Jack

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

This is a ridiculous argument. Being incredibly violent, and abusive in public on a regular basis is an extremely common societal marker for somebody being a scumbag, it's not just something that I pulled out of my hole.

I take it that you maybe haven't had much experience with scumbags yourself, but yes I absolutely am saying that those who regularly engage in serious public order offences and violent, rage-filled acts of vandalism, assault, and verbal abuse, absolutely shouldn't be allowed to raise children. I really don't see how that can come across as unfair or overly harsh. If you have extreme anger management, substance abuse, or violence / anti social behaviour issues, then in my view you are automatically an unfit parent and are automatically putting your kid at risk of developing issues of their own by exposing them to this kind of behaviour as a normal part of being a person.

I'm not arguing with you that anti-social behaviour is a good marker for a scumbag, I'm suggesting that if you feel it's appropriate to remove children from people who are deemed to be scumbags, that's an awful lot of children you're putting in the care of the State, and Irish society has been there before. It didn't work then, and on the balance of probabilities, what do you reckon are the chances your suggestion would work out any better now?

I'm not getting into a pissing contest with you about who has more experience in dealing with scumbags, I'll take it you have plenty, but here's the thing - I've never passed judgement on the families I have worked with who would not only meet your definition of scumbags, but they'd surpass it by a country mile, and curiously enough, contrary to popular belief, their children haven't grown up to be so quick to pass judgement on other people who aren't them and write them off as being beyond help or that they should have their children taken off them.

Of course it's easier to pass judgement than it is to actually try and help people, but just because you can't do it, or rather aren't willing to do it, that doesn't mean they actually are beyond help, they're just beyond any help that you haven't given them. Instead your idea is to take their children from them as setting an example for those children of the kind of society you would want them to grow up in. Hell I think I'd go back on drugs to survive in a shìthole of a society like that too :pac:

KevinCavan

God love her child.What a sorry excuse for an Irish person.Are taxpayers funding the likes of her?

hatrickpatrick

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I'm not arguing with you that anti-social behaviour is a good marker for a scumbag, I'm suggesting that if you feel it's appropriate to remove children from people who are deemed to be scumbags, that's an awful lot of children you're putting in the care of the State, and Irish society has been there before. It didn't work then, and on the balance of probabilities, what do you reckon are the chances your suggestion would work out any better now?

I'm not getting into a pissing contest with you about who has more experience in dealing with scumbags, I'll take it you have plenty, but here's the thing - I've never passed judgement on the families I have worked with who would not only meet your definition of scumbags, but they'd surpass it by a country mile, and curiously enough, contrary to popular belief, their children haven't grown up to be so quick to pass judgement on other people who aren't them and write them off as being beyond help or that they should have their children taken off them.

Of course it's easier to pass judgement than it is to actually try and help people, but just because you can't do it, or rather aren't willing to do it, that doesn't mean they actually are beyond help, they're just beyond any help that you haven't given them. Instead your idea is to take their children from them as setting an example for those children of the kind of society you would want them to grow up in. Hell I think I'd go back on drugs to survive in a shìthole of a society like that too :pac:

So just to be absolutely clear, you honestly believe that the child depicted in the video under discussion here has a shot at a happy childhood and becoming a well adjusted person? If she behaves like this in public, how the hell can you assume she doesn't behave like this in private? She's exactly the kind of shouting, roaring, violent parent that kids would dread coming home to every day.

Let me be a little more blunt: the reason I think the kid should be taken into care is because otherwise, in my ideal system, they'd have no one to look after them - because violent psychos like that woman would be locked up either as prisoners in a jail setting or as patients in a psychiatric hospital.

I do not believe that people like her should be free citizens. Obviously that would mean that they wouldn't be able to parent either, unless perhaps you'd advocate some sort of "bring your kid to jail" system :pac:

A rampage like that depicted in the video should merit an automatic custodial sentence, sob story or no sob story.

One eyed Jack

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

So just to be absolutely clear, you honestly believe that the child depicted in the video under discussion here has a shot at a happy childhood and becoming a well adjusted person? If she behaves like this in public, how the hell can you assume she doesn't behave like this in private? She's exactly the kind of shouting, roaring, violent parent that kids would dread coming home to every day.

They've just as much a shot at a happy life and becoming a well rounded adult as anyone else has in Irish society. With the right support, everyone has an equal shot at becoming a well rounded adult who contributes to society. If you can't see that she was playing up for the camera then I'm unlikely to convince you otherwise tbh.

Let me be a little more blunt: the reason I think the kid should be taken into care is because otherwise, in my ideal system, they'd have no one to look after them - because violent psychos like that woman would be locked up either as prisoners in a jail setting or as patients in a psychiatric hospital.

Right, because throwing people into jails and psychiatric wards and their children into care has worked out so well in the past? Let me be just as blunt then - you want to drag society back to the time of the poorhouses and ensuring children are abused and neglected and are absolutely certain never to have a chance in life, and if they make it to adulthood, they sure as hell aren't in any way well rounded or happy. Your suggestions for society would only cause more of the very thing you are suggesting it would prevent, and it shouldn't take 100 years of hindsight and condemnation of the way society was then, to see that.

I do not believe that people like her should be free citizens. Obviously that would mean that they wouldn't be able to parent either, unless perhaps you'd advocate some sort of "bring your kid to jail" system :pac:

A rampage like that depicted in the video should merit an automatic custodial sentence, sob story or no sob story.

I wouldn't have to advocate a bring your kid to jail system. With their parents in jail, that's where they'd more than likely end up themselves anyway under your system! A rampage like that should never have escalated to that point in the first place because they should have intervened and kicked her out rather than getting out the phone and filming her and allowing her to ham it up for the camera. That's why all we're getting is a mere snapshot when there's undoubtedly a whole lot more to that story, on both sides.

myshirt

Doesn't this lady have a kid with profound disabilities, and a father that has f#cked off. That's what she's mad. She is under serious pressure. The woman needs help, not scumbags mocking her.

Jack, there are definite cases where a child should be removed from a parent / parents. Based on these videos, I'd say lots of boxes are ticked in that regard.

I'd rather a system that dealt with clearly detrimental parenting before it gets too bad. What would your criteria be beyond what we've seen for a child to be taken into foster care?

wexie

Deleted User wrote: »

I'd rather a system that dealt with clearly detrimental parenting before it gets too bad. What would your criteria be beyond what we've seen for a child to be taken into foster care?

At the moment I gather the criteria are more or less that there needs to be a clear and present danger to the child's wellbeing. Which is generally interpreted to mean actual physical health.

Personally I wouldn't mind seeing those criteria tightened up a bit.

But...not until we can be sure that taking the child into care is actually going to lead to a better outcome for the child. And that certainly doesn't seem to be the case at the moment.

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Jack, there are definite cases where a child should be removed from a parent / parents. Based on these videos, I'd say lots of boxes are ticked in that regard.

I'd rather a system that dealt with clearly detrimental parenting before it gets too bad. What would your criteria be beyond what we've seen for a child to be taken into foster care?

Yeah, I'm not denying there absolutely are plenty of cases where I would have recommended that a child or children should immediately be removed from the family home because they were at immediate risk of imminent danger. I wouldn't make that recommendation off the basis of having watched a half hour clip like the one in the opening post. I wouldn't have any definite criteria simply because every situation is different. I didn't see a child at risk in that clip, I saw a woman who was hamming it up for the camera precisely because she knew she was being recorded. She was behaving like an asshole. Does her behaviour indicate she presents any risk to her child? In my opinion it doesn't.

Of course she's not setting a good example for her children, I'm not disputing that, but if that's the standard by which we judge children should be removed from their parents care, then we would simply be over-run with an abundance of children and no resources to provide them with the kind of care that would even come close to the unrealistic standards often expressed in just AH alone of parents.

justfillmein

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I also don't agree with the rest of them standing around there and letting her run riot in the shop and recording it to put it online, that's not helping anyone either, they're being just as much assholes about the whole thing IMO.

maybe.
But I'd imagine it's because they have had run ins with her before.
They probably felt they needed proof of what they had to deal with.

I think they were actually right to record her, because how could you even put that level of madness(her actions, not her mental state) into words when trying to explain to the guards, or anyone else, what they had to put up with.


In the first video she was talking about a conversation she had had with the man in the shop "two weeks ago".
"what did I say to you two weeks ago".
so it could be a regular thing, her going there looking for trouble.

DickSwiveller

Very sad video and people in her state are a common site in Dublin. I saw three women today on Cork Street who could barely stand up they were that out of it. Even sadder when it's a young woman.

One eyed Jack

justfillmein wrote: »

maybe.
But I'd imagine it's because they have had run ins with her before.
They probably felt they needed proof of what they had to deal with.

I think they were actually right to record her, because how could you even put that level of madness(her actions, not her mental state) into words when trying to explain to the guards, or anyone else, what they had to put up with.


In the first video she was talking about a conversation she had had with the man in the shop "two weeks ago".
"what did I say to you two weeks ago".
so it could be a regular thing, her going there looking for trouble.

That's kind of along the lines of what I was thinking too, there's definitely more to whatever is going on there than we saw in the space of that particular interaction, and tbh I'd say we're more likely to see even more of that shyte going up on social media.

I suppose if there's any good at all can come of it, it's that that kind of crap isn't limited to going on behind closed doors any more, and now we're forced to confront it and deal with it one way or another rather than simply having the luxury of being able to ignore it like was done in the past when we adopted an "out of sight, out of mind" attitude to those people on the lower end of the social spectrum and locked them up so we could maintain the illusion of a civilised society.

DickSwiveller

One eyed Jack wrote: »

That's kind of along the lines of what I was thinking too, there's definitely more to whatever is going on there than we saw in the space of that particular interaction, and tbh I'd say we're more likely to see even more of that shyte going up on social media.

I suppose if there's any good at all can come of it, it's that that kind of crap isn't limited to going on behind closed doors any more, and now we're forced to confront it and deal with it one way or another rather than simply having the luxury of being able to ignore it like was done in the past when we adopted an "out of sight, out of mind" attitude to those people on the lower end of the social spectrum and locked them up so we could maintain the illusion of a civilised society.

What can be done, though?

One eyed Jack

DickSwiveller wrote: »

What can be done, though?

There's plenty can be done, and is being done, in spite of shamefully limited resources, and that's why there isn't enough being done, because of limited resources, and that's why when I see people suggesting that the children should simply be removed from the family home in those circumstances, I have to believe it's a typical hyperbolic reaction rather than just a piss poor misunderstanding of the stark reality for the people dealing with those types of cases with what limited resources are available to them.

DickSwiveller

One eyed Jack wrote: »

There's plenty can be done, and is being done, in spite of shamefully limited resources, and that's why there isn't enough being done, because of limited resources, and that's why when I see people suggesting that the children should simply be removed from the family home in those circumstances, I have to believe it's a typical hyperbolic reaction rather than just a piss poor misunderstanding of the stark reality for the people dealing with those types of cases with what limited resources are available to them.

The fact that there aren't enough resources is scandalous - and in such a wealthy country.

hatrickpatrick

One eyed Jack wrote: »

They've just as much a shot at a happy life and becoming a well rounded adult as anyone else has in Irish society. With the right support, everyone has an equal shot at becoming a well rounded adult who contributes to society. If you can't see that she was playing up for the camera then I'm unlikely to convince you otherwise tbh.





Right, because throwing people into jails and psychiatric wards and their children into care has worked out so well in the past? Let me be just as blunt then - you want to drag society back to the time of the poorhouses and ensuring children are abused and neglected and are absolutely certain never to have a chance in life, and if they make it to adulthood, they sure as hell aren't in any way well rounded or happy. Your suggestions for society would only cause more of the very thing you are suggesting it would prevent, and it shouldn't take 100 years of hindsight and condemnation of the way society was then, to see that.





I wouldn't have to advocate a bring your kid to jail system. With their parents in jail, that's where they'd more than likely end up themselves anyway under your system! A rampage like that should never have escalated to that point in the first place because they should have intervened and kicked her out rather than getting out the phone and filming her and allowing her to ham it up for the camera. That's why all we're getting is a mere snapshot when there's undoubtedly a whole lot more to that story, on both sides.

You're not seeing my point, though. It doesn't matter what the prelude was, it doesn't matter what led up to it, it doesn't matter what the "provocation" was - behaving like she did (and from all accounts has done on multiple previous occasions) should merit a prison sentence regardless, because people should be punished for behaving like scumbags. It's that simple. If I walk into a shop and smash the sh!t out of it, regardless of why I did it, I should be getting locked up. Anything less than this sends the message which has apparently been received loud and clear by the scumbags of Ireland - "go on a violent rampage, get away with it scott free".

I honestly don't understand why you're advocating this. It's a very basic tenet of human civilisation that people who commit violent crimes are supposed to face justice for those crimes. Why she did what she did doesn't matter - the act in and of itself warrants her being penalised for it.

EDIT: As for your last post, it's not hyperbole either. I don't believe that people with scumbag tendencies are fit to raise new members of society and I don't believe that they deserve the same freedom as decent people either. This isn't as outlandish a concept as you're trying to make out, it's as old as human civilisation itself - "people who do sh!tty things to other people face consequences for that".

One eyed Jack

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

You're not seeing my point, though. It doesn't matter what the prelude was, it doesn't matter what led up to it, it doesn't matter what the "provocation" was - behaving like she did (and from all accounts has done on multiple previous occasions) should merit a prison sentence regardless, because people should be punished for behaving like scumbags. It's that simple. If I walk into a shop and smash the sh!t out of it, regardless of why I did it, I should be getting locked up. Anything less than this sends the message which has apparently been received loud and clear by the scumbags of Ireland - "go on a violent rampage, get away with it scott free".

I honestly don't understand why you're advocating this. It's a very basic tenet of human civilisation that people who commit violent crimes are supposed to face justice for those crimes. Why she did what she did doesn't matter - the act in and of itself warrants her being penalised for it.

I do see your point, I just don't agree with it, and thankfully too for society we don't just lock people up without any chance to justify their actions. That's totalitarianism you're arguing for, not justice, and it has never led to a harmonious society.

EDIT: As for your last post, it's not hyperbole either. I don't believe that people with scumbag tendencies are fit to raise new members of society and I don't believe that they deserve the same freedom as decent people either. This isn't as outlandish a concept as you're trying to make out, it's as old as human civilisation itself - "people who do sh!tty things to other people face consequences for that".

Depends upon how you define ideas like scumbags, and doing shìtty things to other people. Like I said previously, there's two sides to that story, and we're only seeing one side in that video from the perspective of the people who were recording it and encouraging her behaviour. They're as bad as each other IMO, but I wouldn't go so far as to suggest anyone should be locked up and their children taken away from them. There's nowhere suitable for children in State care as it stands, and there are plenty of parents who would fail your parental standards test, so finding places for them too would place quite a burden on an already overstretched judicial system.

In short HP your vision is just totally unrealistic, impractical, unworkable and above all - simply would not lead to the outcomes for society that you imagine it should. That's already been demonstrated in the past, so what could possibly have you imagine it would work any better now? That's what I don't understand. We've been there already, it didn't work. It was a blight on Irish society and it's something the scumbags who perpetuated it should be ashamed of, yet still to this day they go largely unpunished, and you would support the State wielding that sort of power over people again?

I don't use the phrase often but that would be the very definition of a Nanny State.