Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - David McKeown

#16
Quote from: trailer on March 03, 2024, 09:23:50 PM
Quote from: David McKeown on March 03, 2024, 05:33:52 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 03, 2024, 01:05:14 PM
Quote from: David McKeown on March 03, 2024, 12:00:03 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 03, 2024, 08:39:50 AM
Quote from: Jell 0 Biafra on March 03, 2024, 04:31:53 AMhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

Not really. 7% of the prison population identify as travellers. Only 0.7% of overall population identify as travellers.



Of course you wouldn't expect the prison population to match the general population distribution. There's hundreds of reasons for that.  Crime being higher in traditionally impoverished areas being one of the most prevalent.

What are the reasons for the higher crime rate?




Criminology is a very complex area so I dont purport to explain it all.  There's plenty of interrelated criminogenic factors, median income, population density, age, gender balance all have major impacts on crime rates, as do other features.  For example petty crime has exploded in Northern Ireland since the end of the troubles.  There's a large number of reasons for that, but one of the main ones was the availability and trust in police to investigate same.  During the troubles there was a disproportionate number of protestant low level criminals but that was reflective of crime reports etc. I cant remember what the most recent figures were but they are much closer. 

The point I'm making is that in very few places in the world if any does the prison population match the breakdown of society,

Fair bit of nonsense
Quote from: David McKeown on March 03, 2024, 05:33:52 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 03, 2024, 01:05:14 PM
Quote from: David McKeown on March 03, 2024, 12:00:03 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 03, 2024, 08:39:50 AM
Quote from: Jell 0 Biafra on March 03, 2024, 04:31:53 AMhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

Not really. 7% of the prison population identify as travellers. Only 0.7% of overall population identify as travellers.



Of course you wouldn't expect the prison population to match the general population distribution. There's hundreds of reasons for that.  Crime being higher in traditionally impoverished areas being one of the most prevalent.

What are the reasons for the higher crime rate?




Criminology is a very complex area so I dont purport to explain it all.  There's plenty of interrelated criminogenic factors, median income, population density, age, gender balance all have major impacts on crime rates, as do other features.  For example petty crime has exploded in Northern Ireland since the end of the troubles.  There's a large number of reasons for that, but one of the main ones was the availability and trust in police to investigate same.  During the troubles there was a disproportionate number of protestant low level criminals but that was reflective of crime reports etc. I cant remember what the most recent figures were but they are much closer. 

The point I'm making is that in very few places in the world if any does the prison population match the breakdown of society,

"Complex" = Go away. Stop asking questions.  The judiciary wants you to stop looking at the obvious.

No complex means not something that I as someone who only practices criminal law, hasn't studied criminology since my under grad degree and has very poor written communication skills is going to be able to accurately explain in a short message on a discussion forum.

For example crime increases dramatically in a recession. So do personal injury claims. Is there one reason for this?  No there are several.

Crime increases in post conflict society again there's no singular reason but there are plenty of complicated interrelated reasons.

Do harsher sentences act a deterrent? No again differing reasons for that depending on the type of crime.

I see quite often media wishing to boil these issues down into sound bites and over simplify what are actually complex issues.
#17
Quote from: Dubh driocht on March 03, 2024, 08:56:31 PMPetty crime has not exploded since the end of the troubles.  In fact it has gone down.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/385106/crime-rate-in-northern-ireland/

Now it's been nearly 20 years since I studied Criminology but I don't think that link shows the whole story. The earliest figure I see on that link is from 2002. Which is not when the troubles ended. During the 80's and 90's total crime stood at I think around the mid 40's crime per 1000 people mark including terrorism offences. In 2002 it was over 60. It has come down since but given that the troubles crime rate included terrorism offences I stand by what I was taught which Professor Kieran McEvoy used to describe in his books as the Ulster Paradise.

Certainly Wikipedia and this article seem to suggest that was correct.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Northern_Ireland

https://cain.ulster.ac.uk/othelem/research/esrc7.htm

#18
Quote from: trailer on March 03, 2024, 01:05:14 PM
Quote from: David McKeown on March 03, 2024, 12:00:03 PM
Quote from: trailer on March 03, 2024, 08:39:50 AM
Quote from: Jell 0 Biafra on March 03, 2024, 04:31:53 AMhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

Not really. 7% of the prison population identify as travellers. Only 0.7% of overall population identify as travellers.



Of course you wouldn't expect the prison population to match the general population distribution. There's hundreds of reasons for that.  Crime being higher in traditionally impoverished areas being one of the most prevalent.

What are the reasons for the higher crime rate?




Criminology is a very complex area so I dont purport to explain it all.  There's plenty of interrelated criminogenic factors, median income, population density, age, gender balance all have major impacts on crime rates, as do other features.  For example petty crime has exploded in Northern Ireland since the end of the troubles.  There's a large number of reasons for that, but one of the main ones was the availability and trust in police to investigate same.  During the troubles there was a disproportionate number of protestant low level criminals but that was reflective of crime reports etc. I cant remember what the most recent figures were but they are much closer. 

The point I'm making is that in very few places in the world if any does the prison population match the breakdown of society,
#19
GAA Discussion / Re: Division 2 2024
March 03, 2024, 05:15:24 PM
Quote from: SouthOfThe Bann on March 03, 2024, 04:59:29 PM
Quote from: Captain Scarlet on March 03, 2024, 11:49:35 AMAre Meath and Cavan going better than expected? I half-expected for the wheels to come off Meath this year...well I hoped as much but it turns out it's Kildare who are in bits.

That draw should see Armagh and Donegal doing the job now. I don't think any of the others would really survive in the top division at this stage.



Does the draw change anything from a Cavan perspective?

If Cavan win all their games they still go up or am I wrong on that?

Yes the top 3 all have their destiny in their own hands
#20
Quote from: trailer on March 03, 2024, 08:39:50 AM
Quote from: Jell 0 Biafra on March 03, 2024, 04:31:53 AMhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

Not really. 7% of the prison population identify as travellers. Only 0.7% of overall population identify as travellers.



Of course you wouldn't expect the prison population to match the general population distribution. There's hundreds of reasons for that.  Crime being higher in traditionally impoverished areas being one of the most prevalent.
#21
GAA Discussion / Re: Division 2 2024
March 02, 2024, 08:26:06 PM
Poor call on that black card for me
#22
GAA Discussion / Re: Division 2 2024
March 02, 2024, 11:53:03 AM
Inspection in the morning to see if it can be played tomorrow
#23
Quote from: Duine Inteacht Eile on March 01, 2024, 11:32:01 PM
Quote from: David McKeown on March 01, 2024, 09:51:56 PM
Quote from: Main Street on February 26, 2024, 05:08:42 PM
Quote from: David McKeown on February 26, 2024, 02:38:29 PMI thought it was a perfectly good goal under the rules.  I always interpreted any ball not in the control of the player in question to be a ball in flight provided it wasn't on the ground. So you cant kick it up for your self to fist in but can fist it any other format provided there is no other rule break.  I'd also like to see the physics of who actually touches the ball last but you'd need at least a high speed camera for that
This ball was not in flight and was in the full control of the goalie when it was struck out of his hands into the net. What rule are thinking of that favors the ref's decision in this situation?

In flight isn't defined. I always understood it to mean any ball not on the ground or in your possession. I'm not sure how any other interpretation of it would work. It can't simply mean in the air otherwise you could solo a ball and then punch it in
In flight is defined.

The ball is deemed to be in flight, once it is off the ground, having been played away within the Rules of Fair Play.

Are you certain the part in bold is against the rules?

I did not know this thanks. I wonder when this was added because I don't remember it when I worked on the rule book. I think the bit in bold would be against that definition as it wouldn't be played away.

Having looked at the rule book though and not relied on my clearly wrong memory it doesn't matter about in flight in this situation.

Under the rules.

3.1 A goal is scored when the ball is played over the goal-line between the posts and under the crossbar by either team.

Exception

A player on the team attacking a goal and who is in possession of the ball may not score:
(i) by carrying the ball over his opponents' goal line;
(ii) a goal with his hands except as provided in Rule 1.2, Exception (ii) but may score a point with the open hand(s) or fist.

So the Roscommon lad wasn't in possession I wouldn't say so the goal was fine



#24
Quote from: Main Street on February 26, 2024, 05:08:42 PM
Quote from: David McKeown on February 26, 2024, 02:38:29 PMI thought it was a perfectly good goal under the rules.  I always interpreted any ball not in the control of the player in question to be a ball in flight provided it wasn't on the ground. So you cant kick it up for your self to fist in but can fist it any other format provided there is no other rule break.  I'd also like to see the physics of who actually touches the ball last but you'd need at least a high speed camera for that
This ball was not in flight and was in the full control of the goalie when it was struck out of his hands into the net. What rule are thinking of that favors the ref's decision in this situation?

In flight isn't defined. I always understood it to mean any ball not on the ground or in your possession. I'm not sure how any other interpretation of it would work. It can't simply mean in the air otherwise you could solo a ball and then punch it in
#25
GAA Discussion / Re: Division 2 2024
March 01, 2024, 09:48:34 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on February 26, 2024, 03:58:59 PM
Quote from: David McKeown on February 26, 2024, 02:48:49 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on February 26, 2024, 08:01:06 AMDidn't get seeing the replay but was told by someone that Donegal never should have had a penalty. Anyone got a clip of it or were close enough to judge it.

It was a strange one.  I thought the ref made his mind up early gave it after what looked a decent tackle but had he not blown his whistle then I think what followed was more a penalty.  Then to add confusion he seemed to speak to an Umpire about whether or not it was a penalty.

All that said I thought there was a worse decision on Armagh's second or third last point.  Armagh had the ball inside the 14, 2 on 2 and the ref blew for what looked all day long like an off the ball deliberate body collision to stop a man getting free inside.  I was convinced it was going to a black card and a real question if it would be one of those penalties but no card at all was produced.
Cheers, might give the game a rewatch on iplayer an evening this week. Particularly want to see Rians point, Forkers in the first half and that bicycle kick from Mackin to gwt himself out of trouble- don't think I've ever seen anyone do that before!

Also thought one of the Donegal lads could have seen yellow or red for a tussle with Forker- definitely drove Forkers head into the ground with a forearm while they were on the ground- linesman had a pretty clear view of it.

I was trying to figure out how that bicycle kick wasn't throw ball
#26
GAA Discussion / Re: RG at arms length
March 01, 2024, 09:28:53 PM
Quote from: Main Street on March 01, 2024, 08:21:03 PM
Quote from: David McKeown on March 01, 2024, 05:52:03 PMInteresting judgement highlighting another flaw in the conflicting rules of the association.
Which flaw are you referring to? How did the DRA manage to come to a decision like this when the findings of the report on the allegations against  RG have not yet been concluded?

The flaw being that the rule relied upon by the Safeguarding Panel to disbar RG was in direct conflict with the Rules on disbarment within the Official Guide. The panel holding that when a body within the GAA sought to rely on a rule that was in conflict with the official guide then the rule had to specifically disallow the official guide rules. Which the Safeguarding rules relating to adults don't do. But that the rules relating to safeguarding children do.

They also had issue with whether or not the Safeguarding rules were even applicable as they required disciplinary proceedings to have commenced whereas the Safeguarding panel where at least one step before that in the investigation stage. But the DRA didn't conclusively rule on that point.
#27
GAA Discussion / Re: RG at arms length
March 01, 2024, 05:52:03 PM
Interesting judgement highlighting another flaw in the conflicting rules of the association.
#28
GAA Discussion / Re: Division 2 2024
February 26, 2024, 02:48:49 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on February 26, 2024, 08:01:06 AMDidn't get seeing the replay but was told by someone that Donegal never should have had a penalty. Anyone got a clip of it or were close enough to judge it.

It was a strange one.  I thought the ref made his mind up early gave it after what looked a decent tackle but had he not blown his whistle then I think what followed was more a penalty.  Then to add confusion he seemed to speak to an Umpire about whether or not it was a penalty.

All that said I thought there was a worse decision on Armagh's second or third last point.  Armagh had the ball inside the 14, 2 on 2 and the ref blew for what looked all day long like an off the ball deliberate body collision to stop a man getting free inside.  I was convinced it was going to a black card and a real question if it would be one of those penalties but no card at all was produced.
#29
I thought it was a perfectly good goal under the rules.  I always interpreted any ball not in the control of the player in question to be a ball in flight provided it wasn't on the ground. So you cant kick it up for your self to fist in but can fist it any other format provided there is no other rule break.  I'd also like to see the physics of who actually touches the ball last but you'd need at least a high speed camera for that
#30
General discussion / Re: Lurgan
January 14, 2024, 10:30:48 PM
There's limits on how much businesses can take in cash before they have to refer the amount for money laundering regulations.  The figure depends on the business but for solicitors offices its 1,000 i think its 5k for car sales but might be wrong