April Jones abduction

[EC Unique]

My system gives zero reoffending for minimal cost to the taxpayer for child rapists and murderers.

Will your system ensure zero wrongful convictions?

A risk worth taking IMO. With the technology available today in terms of DNA etc 100% certainty can be achieved and in such cases corporal punnishment should be an option.

Some people on here have themselves on a moral pedestal and are not in touch with the real world (a description that often suits teachers) . It is only in very recent years that corporal punnishment has not been an option. It was in place for thousands of years and IMO it will return.

[EC Unique]

My basis for defending travellers was that just because some commit crime doesnt mean they all do. Yes sections of the community that have high crime rates should have intervention of some sort and should even be cost effective to do so. However, the criminal is 100% responsible for their crime and whining about their upbringing means nothing in my book. But in my opinion a line must be drawn when it comes to child killers. I do not want my tax being spent locking these scum up in high security wings where even the other prisoners recognise them as a different level of prisoner. It doesn't give me a bulge in my trousers as you put it to say justice would only be done by exterminating such scum. They are not worth the effort and such funding would be better spent counselling the victims family who are forgotten as they start their life sentence. Am I right in saying that by your statistics 25% of sex crime perpetrator reoffend despite the punishment and rehabilitation and of course being on a sex offenders register and cops having knowledge of their whereabouts. 1 in 4 reoffend (or are caught reoffending) isn't impressive to me. My system gives zero reoffending for minimal cost to the taxpayer for child rapists and murderers.

What about Jon Venables and Robert Thompson. Would you be OK with executing 12 year olds?

Considering that Venables was out and about with a new ID and was caught with chid porn maybe it would have been a good idea.

[Tony Baloney]

My basis for defending travellers was that just because some commit crime doesnt mean they all do. Yes sections of the community that have high crime rates should have intervention of some sort and should even be cost effective to do so. However, the criminal is 100% responsible for their crime and whining about their upbringing means nothing in my book. But in my opinion a line must be drawn when it comes to child killers.

You missed the point of my comparison then - which is the language involved in describing both groups by a large section of people often descends into populist vulgarity and crosses over into a bigger group of "undesirables". Wherever it is deserved for either or on an individual basis is down to personal opinion.

I do not want my tax being spent locking these scum up in high security wings where even the other prisoners recognise them as a different level of prisoner.

So when would you want the execution to be carried out? Straight after sentencing with no right of appeal? Because the only alternatives is to either be placed in high security wings or on death row. And the latter doesn't necessarily lead to cost effectiveness itself - recent reports commissioned in the United States have shown that a prisoner on death row costs more in state & federal funds than a prisoner sentenced to life in prison without parole. With many state budgets operating on tight limits, either abolishing the death penalty or commuting death sentences to life without parole is being strongly looked into.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty (A campaign site, so not necessarily impartial)
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/28/opinion/28mon3.html?_r=0
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jun/20/local/la-me-adv-death-penalty-costs-20110620

It doesn't give me a bulge in my trousers as you put it to say justice would only be done by exterminating such scum.

I said "bulge in (my) boxers", not trousers. And while I'm not going to make a personal check but "exterminating" is a fairly excitable, passionate, dramatic word to me.

They are not worth the effort and such funding would be better spent counselling the victims family who are forgotten as they start their life sentence.

Leaving aside the cost effectiveness of the death penalty mentioned above, you are going to have to show that family members of murder victims are not by and large getting adequate support like counselling. If you can't then again you're just coming out with another bullshit tabloid meme.

Am I right in saying that by your statistics 25% of sex crime perpetrator reoffend despite the punishment and rehabilitation and of course being on a sex offenders register and cops having knowledge of their whereabouts. 1 in 4 reoffend (or are caught reoffending) isn't impressive to me.

Recidivism is where a released prisoner reoffends with a similar crime. Jeez, if you weren't sure what the word meant a quick google would have gave you the answer. Therefore 25% of sex offenders (all ages) do not commit recidivism within three years (after six months from release the chances of reoffending start to diminish), 75% do. Not a great number granted - but in comparison recidivism in other crime categories in the USA (I originally said UK in my last post - a mistake) other categories where rates are above 70% from a study in the 90's include possession, use and selling of illegal weapons, robbers, burglars, and car thieves. Strangely enough rape and murder had the lowest rates, down to less than 2.5% and 1.2% respectively -
the average rate was over 60%. This is in comparison to a UK average of 50% after three years. A study by UCD in 2008 shown that 50% of prisoners released do not commit recidivism after four years in Ireland. In Norway, home of the infamous Batsoy prison island, recidivism is only 20%, the lowest in Europe.

My system gives zero reoffending for minimal cost to the taxpayer for child rapists and murderers.

Well Deiseach has already taken you up on one point in your claim. What I would ask is that given the data above regarding death row in the United States, how can you show that what you propose would be a "minimal cost to the taxpayer"?

How many children do you have? Guessing none as you compare child rape with burglars and car thieves. I'd rather a recidivist stole my car than killed and/or molested one of my children. But that's just my right-wing opinion.

[trileacman]

My basis for defending travellers was that just because some commit crime doesnt mean they all do. Yes sections of the community that have high crime rates should have intervention of some sort and should even be cost effective to do so. However, the criminal is 100% responsible for their crime and whining about their upbringing means nothing in my book. But in my opinion a line must be drawn when it comes to child killers.

You missed the point of my comparison then - which is the language involved in describing both groups by a large section of people often descends into populist vulgarity and crosses over into a bigger group of "undesirables". Wherever it is deserved for either or on an individual basis is down to personal opinion.

I do not want my tax being spent locking these scum up in high security wings where even the other prisoners recognise them as a different level of prisoner.

So when would you want the execution to be carried out? Straight after sentencing with no right of appeal? Because the only alternatives is to either be placed in high security wings or on death row. And the latter doesn't necessarily lead to cost effectiveness itself - recent reports commissioned in the United States have shown that a prisoner on death row costs more in state & federal funds than a prisoner sentenced to life in prison without parole. With many state budgets operating on tight limits, either abolishing the death penalty or commuting death sentences to life without parole is being strongly looked into.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty (A campaign site, so not necessarily impartial)
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/28/opinion/28mon3.html?_r=0
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jun/20/local/la-me-adv-death-penalty-costs-20110620

It doesn't give me a bulge in my trousers as you put it to say justice would only be done by exterminating such scum.

I said "bulge in (my) boxers", not trousers. And while I'm not going to make a personal check but "exterminating" is a fairly excitable, passionate, dramatic word to me.

They are not worth the effort and such funding would be better spent counselling the victims family who are forgotten as they start their life sentence.

Leaving aside the cost effectiveness of the death penalty mentioned above, you are going to have to show that family members of murder victims are not by and large getting adequate support like counselling. If you can't then again you're just coming out with another bullshit tabloid meme.

Am I right in saying that by your statistics 25% of sex crime perpetrator reoffend despite the punishment and rehabilitation and of course being on a sex offenders register and cops having knowledge of their whereabouts. 1 in 4 reoffend (or are caught reoffending) isn't impressive to me.

Recidivism is where a released prisoner reoffends with a similar crime. Jeez, if you weren't sure what the word meant a quick google would have gave you the answer. Therefore 25% of sex offenders (all ages) do not commit recidivism within three years (after six months from release the chances of reoffending start to diminish), 75% do. Not a great number granted - but in comparison recidivism in other crime categories in the USA (I originally said UK in my last post - a mistake) other categories where rates are above 70% from a study in the 90's include possession, use and selling of illegal weapons, robbers, burglars, and car thieves. Strangely enough rape and murder had the lowest rates, down to less than 2.5% and 1.2% respectively -
the average rate was over 60%. This is in comparison to a UK average of 50% after three years. A study by UCD in 2008 shown that 50% of prisoners released do not commit recidivism after four years in Ireland. In Norway, home of the infamous Batsoy prison island, recidivism is only 20%, the lowest in Europe.

My system gives zero reoffending for minimal cost to the taxpayer for child rapists and murderers.

Well Deiseach has already taken you up on one point in your claim. What I would ask is that given the data above regarding death row in the United States, how can you show that what you propose would be a "minimal cost to the taxpayer"?

How many children do you have? Guessing none as you compare child rape with burglars and car thieves. I'd rather a recidivist stole my car than killed and/or molested one of my children. But that's just my right-wing opinion.

So you think that the death sentence is the way forward even with the threat of wrongful conviction? That the execution of some hundred prisoners is paramount to the possible loss of a few innocent lives.

[Tony Baloney]

Fionntamhnach can research the difference between wrongful convictions and recidivism. If the number of people reoffending exceeds those wrongfully convicted then yes I would take my chances.

[Nally Stand]

From what I've read, chemical castration works significantly better. Physical or Surgical castration while removes the testicles still doesn't stop all testosterone production as some is produced by the Adrenal glands. OTOH Chemical castration works to suppress all testosterone levels in the body.

Fionntamhnach - a Graduate of the University of Life: Bachelor Of Science With First Class Honours In Televisual Digital Technology with Diploma in Castration Techniques

[Tony Baloney]

From what I've read, chemical castration works significantly better. Physical or Surgical castration while removes the testicles still doesn't stop all testosterone production as some is produced by the Adrenal glands. OTOH Chemical castration works to suppress all testosterone levels in the body.

Fionntamhnach - a Graduate of the University of Life: Bachelor Of Science With First Class Honours In Televisual Digital Technology with Diploma in Castration Techniques

I didn't want to comment earlier on his reading materials. I'm glad someone else did!

[Dougal Maguire]

My system gives zero reoffending for minimal cost to the taxpayer for child rapists and murderers.

Will your system ensure zero wrongful convictions?

A risk worth taking IMO. With the technology available today in terms of DNA etc 100% certainty can be achieved and in such cases corporal punnishment should be an option.

Some people on here have themselves on a moral pedestal and are not in touch with the real world (a description that often suits teachers) . It is only in very recent years that corporal punnishment has not been an option. It was in place for thousands of years and IMO it will return.

I'm just back from the pub and have a few in me, but God even when sozzled I can see the nonsense in this. So what about the guy convicted ( wrongly) of killing Jill Dando? A fair price to pay??

[Mentalman]

Fionntamhnach can research the difference between wrongful convictions and recidivism. If the number of people reoffending exceeds those wrongfully convicted then yes I would take my chances.

No way, as mentioned such cases as Birmingham and Guilford counter this completely, if there is one thing Irish people should understand it's this. If the option had being available, as stated by the trial judge and on the original appeal, those people would have been executed. And remember the forensics were viewed as being 100%, above reproach at the time.

To me the only sensible approach is long sentences coupled with the option of voluntary chemical castration. Those who say the latter option won't work, or is too expensive , remind me of those who are against means testing of various allowances - (a) where's your evidence to the contrary (b) where's your costings, i.e. how much per annum does it cost to house a prisoner as opposed to a system of 3 injections a year, which if they don't take they end back behind bars anyway. It appears the understandable disgust at these creatures blinds people's reason to the point of bloodlust, which is pointless as the death penalty will never return to either Ireland or the UK.

[mylestheslasher]

My system gives zero reoffending for minimal cost to the taxpayer for child rapists and murderers.

Will your system ensure zero wrongful convictions?

I would suggest it only be used when there is 100% certainty backed up by DNA evidence.

[mylestheslasher]

My basis for defending travellers was that just because some commit crime doesnt mean they all do. Yes sections of the community that have high crime rates should have intervention of some sort and should even be cost effective to do so. However, the criminal is 100% responsible for their crime and whining about their upbringing means nothing in my book. But in my opinion a line must be drawn when it comes to child killers. I do not want my tax being spent locking these scum up in high security wings where even the other prisoners recognise them as a different level of prisoner. It doesn't give me a bulge in my trousers as you put it to say justice would only be done by exterminating such scum. They are not worth the effort and such funding would be better spent counselling the victims family who are forgotten as they start their life sentence. Am I right in saying that by your statistics 25% of sex crime perpetrator reoffend despite the punishment and rehabilitation and of course being on a sex offenders register and cops having knowledge of their whereabouts. 1 in 4 reoffend (or are caught reoffending) isn't impressive to me. My system gives zero reoffending for minimal cost to the taxpayer for child rapists and murderers.

What about Jon Venables and Robert Thompson. Would you be OK with executing 12 year olds?

No - in most countries 12 year olds are not tried in adult courts for good reasons. However, consider this Veneables was caught with child porn under his new identity. If this great rehabilitation system doesn't even work on a 12 year old then what hope for the rest of the scum that are adults.

[deiseach]

The producers of CSI would be delighted if they were reading this thread. 100% certainty from forensic evidence? Lads, don't ever play poker.

[mylestheslasher]

My basis for defending travellers was that just because some commit crime doesnt mean they all do. Yes sections of the community that have high crime rates should have intervention of some sort and should even be cost effective to do so. However, the criminal is 100% responsible for their crime and whining about their upbringing means nothing in my book. But in my opinion a line must be drawn when it comes to child killers.

You missed the point of my comparison then - which is the language involved in describing both groups by a large section of people often descends into populist vulgarity and crosses over into a bigger group of "undesirables". Wherever it is deserved for either or on an individual basis is down to personal opinion.

I do not want my tax being spent locking these scum up in high security wings where even the other prisoners recognise them as a different level of prisoner.

So when would you want the execution to be carried out? Straight after sentencing with no right of appeal? Because the only alternatives is to either be placed in high security wings or on death row. And the latter doesn't necessarily lead to cost effectiveness itself - recent reports commissioned in the United States have shown that a prisoner on death row costs more in state & federal funds than a prisoner sentenced to life in prison without parole. With many state budgets operating on tight limits, either abolishing the death penalty or commuting death sentences to life without parole is being strongly looked into.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty (A campaign site, so not necessarily impartial)
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/28/opinion/28mon3.html?_r=0
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jun/20/local/la-me-adv-death-penalty-costs-20110620

It doesn't give me a bulge in my trousers as you put it to say justice would only be done by exterminating such scum.

I said "bulge in (my) boxers", not trousers. And while I'm not going to make a personal check but "exterminating" is a fairly excitable, passionate, dramatic word to me.

They are not worth the effort and such funding would be better spent counselling the victims family who are forgotten as they start their life sentence.

Leaving aside the cost effectiveness of the death penalty mentioned above, you are going to have to show that family members of murder victims are not by and large getting adequate support like counselling. If you can't then again you're just coming out with another bullshit tabloid meme.

Am I right in saying that by your statistics 25% of sex crime perpetrator reoffend despite the punishment and rehabilitation and of course being on a sex offenders register and cops having knowledge of their whereabouts. 1 in 4 reoffend (or are caught reoffending) isn't impressive to me.

Recidivism is where a released prisoner reoffends with a similar crime. Jeez, if you weren't sure what the word meant a quick google would have gave you the answer. Therefore 25% of sex offenders (all ages) do not commit recidivism within three years (after six months from release the chances of reoffending start to diminish), 75% do. Not a great number granted - but in comparison recidivism in other crime categories in the USA (I originally said UK in my last post - a mistake) other categories where rates are above 70% from a study in the 90's include possession, use and selling of illegal weapons, robbers, burglars, and car thieves. Strangely enough rape and murder had the lowest rates, down to less than 2.5% and 1.2% respectively -
the average rate was over 60%. This is in comparison to a UK average of 50% after three years. A study by UCD in 2008 shown that 50% of prisoners released do not commit recidivism after four years in Ireland. In Norway, home of the infamous Batsoy prison island, recidivism is only 20%, the lowest in Europe.

My system gives zero reoffending for minimal cost to the taxpayer for child rapists and murderers.

Well Deiseach has already taken you up on one point in your claim. What I would ask is that given the data above regarding death row in the United States, how can you show that what you propose would be a "minimal cost to the taxpayer"?

Oh great. Now we have the EG style replies dissecting line by line every post.

I haven't missed your point on travellers, you have no point.

When should they be executed. Well I suppose a period of time for an appeal could be set aside - maybe 3 months. However right to appeal should be at the judges discretion as an appeal puts the victims family through further torment. In the case where there is absolute certainty of guilt why should these vermin be offered the right to appeal. The victims should be the primary concern in this which is the big flaw in the law at the moment which treats them as no more than witnesses.

Extermination is an excitable word is it? A simple check on google would tell you that the definition of the word does not include any reference to excitability (or dramatic/passionate either for the record). The only pleasure I would have from executing a child rapist is that he would never inflict that evil on another child again.

Tell me, since you have all the statistics, how much would it cost to house a child rapist/murderer per annum in the high security wing of a prison segregated from other prisoners. €100k per annum being generous I reckon. So lets say he that the child rapist gets 20 years that's €2m to house and "rehabilitate". Do you think the state will spend €2m on the victims? Do you not think that €2m could not be better spent elsewhere in society?

You are correct, I did not know what Recidivism was, not a word I've ever heard before. Normal Joes would you re-offend. So I assumed you meant the opposite of what you did as I couldn't believe anyone would be stupid enough to argue for rehabilitation of sex offenders and then quote a 75% re-offend statistic to back that up. Npw you have quoted a whole other range of statistics for "recidivism". To cut a long question short, do you have statistics for "child rapists" alone as you seem to quoting general figures for crime in other countries.

All your harking back to the statistics in the USA. The USA is a basket case that executes prisoners at election time while cowardly dropping bombs on women and children in other parts of the world. What makes you think I would want to propose a system anything like that. Same goes for those twats in the EU that have no problem selling weapons to countries to help them murder each other and then stand idly by when they do. Apparently you cant execute vile criminals in your jails if you want to join this great club. 

[mylestheslasher]

The producers of CSI would be delighted if they were reading this thread. 100% certainty from forensic evidence? Lads, don't ever play poker.

For the record I said DNA not forensic evidence.

[seafoid]

How many children do you have?

That's none of your business and irrelevant anyway. Would a student doing PhD in criminology researching recidivism which involves sexual crimes who does not have any children of their own mean that their work would be useless in your eyes?

Anyway, Mark Bridger himself is a father of six - looks like being a father doesn't stop you from being charged for the murder and abduction of a five year old child alongside attempting to pervert the course of justice.

Guessing none as you compare child rape with burglars and car thieves. I'd rather a recidivist stole my car than killed and/or molested one of my children. But that's just my right-wing opinion.

No. It's your way of spinning what I had wrote. There was no implication of a comparison of the impact of any category of crime mentioned on victims - I would much rather that I was burgled than any child within a 20 miles radius of where I live of being raped and murdered myself. The categories of recidivism rates were brought up to show how different rates of rehabilitation and reform work with different types of criminals - and the main category being cited in my case was sexual assault of adults & children for which children only make up a proportion of the category. I also put the statistics for rape (I actually have no idea if this category includes children) and murder which were lower than I expected, making a point that convicts released in these categories generally reform themselves with little risk of reoffending in the same category of crime. Without more details and breakdowns of specific convictions and arrests after release from these figures these are as accurate as I can currently get. What it does show is that those convicted of sexual assault have a higher rate of reoffending soon after release in the USA than on average - but not hugely so. Not surprising to an extent considering that the prison system in America is one which is heavily overcrowded and has a revolving door reputation.

Prisons in the US have 3 times more prisoners than 30 years ago. Many are run by private companies. Training and reeducation are often minimal.  Return on equity is often the key performance indicator. High recidivism rates are good for business. 

I wouldn't use the US as a good benchmark . It has the closest thing to a frontier mentality of justice- lock them up and throw away the keys - and it is a breeding ground for abuse.


http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/oct/11/prison-rape-obamas-program-stop-it/

The people we imprison are overwhelmingly our most disadvantaged: the poor and the poorly educated, the black and the brown, the mentally ill. Typically, they're given extraordinarily long sentences compared to prisoners in the European Union, often for infractions that would not warrant incarceration elsewhere. And while they're imprisoned, appalling numbers of them are subjected to sexual abuse. A new BJS study released in May found that approximately one in ten former state prisoners were sexually abused while serving their most recent sentences. Overall (but accounting only for prisons, jails, and juvenile detention facilities), the Justice Department estimates that more than 209,400 people are sexually abused in US detention every year.