The murder of Keane Mulready Woods.

d51984

Unrelated Im hearing, although nothing confirmed yet. RIP to the poor soul anyway.

Antares35

NIMAN wrote: »

Of course there are plenty of decent, hard working, clever kids coming out of single parent households, but I was just thinking of studies I read on US crime figures when there is no father at home.

You're still making a direct link between the two.

Mad_maxx

Boggles wrote: »

Established fact at this stage that if you increase poverty you increase the crime rate.

Your right on services though, the amount of children rotting on waiting lists waiting for basic physiological and development interventions is a scandal.

Multiples of the current numbers living in poverty were in that situation fifty years ago yet crime rates were a fraction of where they are at today.

This prevailing narative about the link between crime - delinquency and poverty is allowed go completely unchallenged and is ideologically driven by the media, quangos, academia and other left wing sources.

My mother in law taught in a primary school in North Limerick city, the kids wanted for nothing yet parents were unwilling to contribute a penny for anything, kids would also brag about having the latest computer consoles etc.

Ireland is a wealthy country with a very strong safety net, it's not the UK, never Mind the usa

The problem here is our soft justice system and nothing else

Antares35

splinter65 wrote: »

It doesn’t matter if you are parenting alone because you are widowed, abandoned or otherwise. Parenting alone is very difficult and children ideally can do with two parents to rear them. That’s not denigrating the lone parent in any way it’s just fact.

I'm well aware it is more difficult and I was not implying otherwise. My issue was with the other poster denigrating the lone parent by implying a direct link between the events and the marital status of this person.

Antares35

eviltwin wrote: »

No it's not. Young men need a positive male in their life, ideally their father. I'm sure that his mother had an impossible task trying to keep him away from gangs, they were giving him the male influence she never could.

You can be sure? Really?

Mad_maxx

Antares35 wrote: »

I'm well aware it is more difficult and I was not implying otherwise. My issue was with the other poster denigrating the lone parent by implying a direct link between the events and the marital status of this person.

Statistically boys brought up in lone parent households have a far higher likelihood of ending up involved in crime.

Single parenthood has long had sacred cow status, it results in such statistics being hushed

Antares35

d51984 wrote: »

Unrelated Im hearing, although nothing confirmed yet. RIP to the poor soul anyway.

If its unrelated you can be sure the poor bugger wont get a fraction of the media hard on that this fella is getting.

splinter65

Antares35 wrote: »

You're still making a direct link between the two.

That’s because there is a link between the two. Children growing up in a two parent household have a much better chance of a good life then those in a lone parent situation. Nobody is blaming the lone parent for anything. It’s just a proven fact.

sonofenoch

Play with fire get hacked up into 40 pieces .......eye for an *insert whatever body part can be found here*

cannotlogin

Why does Ireland not electronically tag all these underage troublemakers?

Eric Cartman

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Statistically boys brought up in lone parent households have a far higher likelihood of ending up involved in crime.

Single parenthood has long had sacred cow status, it results in such statistics being hushed

+1 , a boy being brought up in a council estate / bad area where the drug dealer is looked up to and having no dad around unfortunately makes the odds of growing up to be a productive member of society not involved in crime very slim.

freshpopcorn

cannotlogin wrote: »

Why does Ireland not electronically tag all these underage troublemakers?

Probably because it would effect there human rights!

Hercule Poirot

splinter65 wrote: »

That’s because there is a link between the two. Children growing up in a two parent household have a much better chance of a good life then those in a lone parent situation. Nobody is blaming the lone parent for anything. It’s just a proven fact.

Not necessarily - it's a case by case thing in my opinion. This arbitrary status that is applied to society in general is nonsense. I've seen with my own eyes that it's better to grow up with a lone parent in a loving home than in a home with parents who despise each other but stay together for the sake of the children.

begbysback

Hercule Poirot wrote: »

Not necessarily - it's a case by case thing in my opinion. This arbitrary status that is applied to society in general is nonsense. I've seen with my own eyes that it's better to grow up with a lone parent in a loving home than in a home with parents who despise each other but stay together for the sake of the children.

The case by case ultimately depends on the financial status of the family, a child growing up in a family in terenure, single parent or not, stands a better chance than a child brought up in a deprived area, single parent or not. Though experience of a more caring home environment is a factor, ultimately kids are attracted to the prospects of criminality, and if the alternative options aren’t attractive then crime seems the logical option.

Mad_maxx

Hercule Poirot wrote: »

Not necessarily - it's a case by case thing in my opinion. This arbitrary status that is applied to society in general is nonsense. I've seen with my own eyes that it's better to grow up with a lone parent in a loving home than in a home with parents who despise each other but stay together for the sake of the children.

Even better to be brought up in a loving home by a mother and father

Mad_maxx

begbysback wrote: »

The case by case ultimately depends on the financial status of the family, a child growing up in a family in terenure, single parent or not, stands a better chance than a child brought up in a deprived area, single parent or not. Though experience of a more caring home environment is a factor, ultimately kids are attracted to the prospects of criminality, and if the alternative options aren’t attractive then crime seems the logical option.

The financial status is used too often as an excuse, a terenure family are paupers compared to a family in Kensington, ballymun is Chelsea compared to the favelas of rio

Hercule Poirot

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Even better to be brought up in a loving home by a mother and father

Yeah but that's not what was said

Edit: it wasn't the original poster who replied

begbysback

Mad_maxx wrote: »

The financial status is used too often as an excuse, a terenure family are paupers compared to a family in Kensington, ballymun is Chelsea compared to the favelas of rio

Ive never really seen it used as an excuse, certainly not often anyway, its a genuine factor thats overlooked a lot of times, especially when posters point out the nurture thats required when raising children. But make no mistake, there are successful people in society who would have a similar nature to those involved in crime, the only difference I see is opportunity. A family living in somewhere like Terenure would likely have more opportunity than one living in somewhere like Ballymun, even if they werent financially well off - but make no mistake, if kids from deprived areas were offered lucrative employment as an alternative to crime I believe they would take it. And before posters jump on this as a practical suggestion, its not, merely making a point that financial status, and opportunity is as much a factor in the conversion of kids to criminality, as nurture.

splinter65

Hercule Poirot wrote: »

Not necessarily - it's a case by case thing in my opinion. This arbitrary status that is applied to society in general is nonsense. I've seen with my own eyes that it's better to grow up with a lone parent in a loving home than in a home with parents who despise each other but stay together for the sake of the children.

There’s endless studies and reports on line that make it very clear that children growing up in a lone parent environment are at a distinct disadvantage to those not. We have to stop pretending that it’s not true.

NIMAN

A UK study

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2001/apr/05/crime.penal

Drawing on data from socially deprived areas of south London, she compared a group of "good boys", who had no criminal convictions and had caused teachers no trouble, with a group of "bad boys" at a secure unit for unmanageable adolescents, many of them persisitent offenders convicted of sexual assault, theft and stealing vehicles.

All 68 boys, aged between 12 and 16, were from working class backgrounds, had lower than average intellectual ability, had similar problems with their peers and with hyperactivity, had equally large families, and in both groups 40% suffered from dyslexia.

But there was one "very striking" difference between the two groups: 55% of the "good boys" lived with their biological fathers, compared with only 4% of the "bad boys".

There are loads online from the US too if you are interested.

And I would have no doubt Ireland will not buck the trend and correlate with both UK/US.

Mad_maxx

begbysback wrote: »

Ive never really seen it used as an excuse, certainly not often anyway, its a genuine factor thats overlooked a lot of times, especially when posters point out the nurture thats required when raising children. But make no mistake, there are successful people in society who would have a similar nature to those involved in crime, the only difference I see is opportunity. A family living in somewhere like Terenure would likely have more opportunity than one living in somewhere like Ballymun, even if they werent financially well off - but make no mistake, if kids from deprived areas were offered lucrative employment as an alternative to crime I believe they would take it. And before posters jump on this as a practical suggestion, its not, merely making a point that financial status, and opportunity is as much a factor in the conversion of kids to criminality, as nurture.

People usually end up where they should and that will determine how their children experience the world to a large extent , not always of course but broadly speaking

Unless you have the state dictating and micro managing every move people make, you cannot determine people's choices

Mad_maxx

splinter65 wrote: »

There’s endless studies and reports on line that make it very clear that children growing up in a lone parent environment are at a distinct disadvantage to those not. We have to stop pretending that it’s not true.

That would mean acknowledging that the traditional family unit has no equal and the PC feminist left would prefer see a million of those stories from drogheda this week than do that.

They believe that the state is the only daddy a child needs

jrosen

Im always torn on these situations. Part of me thinks good riddance, he's no loss to society. Then the other part of me thinks did he (or anyone for that matter) really stand a chance.

When you look at the crime within certain areas, the gang issues, the high levels of unemployment coupled with poor commitment to education is it any wonder some of these kids end up on this path.
We are all born equally but there is no denying some of us have huge advantages simply down to who our parents are and where we live.

dd973

Carioco wrote: »

The kid thought he could taunt the suspect like he probably taunted other teens in his career. No one told him the actual caliber and potential of the man he was taunting

I agree with all you've said, but the word 'calibre' is usually attributed towards all things and people as a positive, not some waste of space criminal headcase who has nothing to offer society.

kildare lad

jrosen wrote: »

Im always torn on these situations. Part of me thinks good riddance, he's no loss to society. Then the other part of me thinks did he (or anyone for that matter) really stand a chance.

When you look at the crime within certain areas, the gang issues, the high levels of unemployment coupled with poor commitment to education is it any wonder some of these kids end up on this path.
We are all born equally but there is no denying some of us have huge advantages simply down to who our parents are and where we live.

Most of the lads who I knew growing up that ended up in trouble came from dysfunctional families . Parents didn't give a crap about them, they were allowed roam the streets at all hours from a young age, never brought to sports etc, while the parents were either in the pub or no dad at home. As for coming from disadvantaged areas , i work with a father and his young lad from the inner city, his son told me nearly all his mates sell drugs. They make good money selling coke at the weekend and weed during the week , why would they be bothered to get up at 6.30 every morning to go working when they earn the same money selling coke for a few hours on a Friday night. He told me he'd probably be doing the same if it wasn't for his dad. I believe a strong father figure at home could stop some, but not all, kids going down the wrong road. In my opinion same people shouldn't be allowed have kids

sasta le

They dont live in poverty

tom1ie

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Probably because it would effect there human rights!

How? How come it’s done in the uk?
Personally I don’t think it’d make much of a difference, I think it’s more down to the very weak custodial sentences handed out.
But I would like to know is electronic tagging an option in Ireland?

Mad_maxx

jrosen wrote: »

Im always torn on these situations. Part of me thinks good riddance, he's no loss to society. Then the other part of me thinks did he (or anyone for that matter) really stand a chance.

When you look at the crime within certain areas, the gang issues, the high levels of unemployment coupled with poor commitment to education is it any wonder some of these kids end up on this path.
We are all born equally but there is no denying some of us have huge advantages simply down to who our parents are and where we live.

You're post is a flawless on message echoing of the Liberal narative which prevails around this issue

Education is free and disadvantaged areas schools also receive extra special funding, health care is free for those who are unemployed, the problem is a law enforcement one, Ireland isn't Mexico

That seventeen year old was a predator, not an innocent lamb

NIMAN

Interesting to compare the 2 recent deaths of young men:

This fella, dismembered yet a lot of people are "meh" about the case.

And we have Cameron Blair, stabbed at a house party, when most people were sympathetic.


I think the 2 personalities and how they were living their lives decide how the public react to their deaths.

Boggles

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Multiples of the current numbers living in poverty were in that situation fifty years ago yet crime rates were a fraction of where they are at today.

What's the fraction?

In 1970 we had less than 3 million people.

Many Laws were different, it was legal to rape your wife for instance. When did drink driving legislation come in?

Reporting of crime was far different, as in it wasn't reported a lot of the time and when it was it was dealt with outside the courts, etc, etc.

Now I'm sure you just didn't pick a random stat form 50 years ago and compare to today and come up with your thesis, because that would fair daft wouldn't it?

Society and the problems have changed drastically from 30 years let alone 50.

Or should we just bring institutionalization again?