The curious case of the fall in crime

Wait, tell him it makes them single mothers on welfare… see if he can hit his chin with his knee this time…

3…2…1… Heneberry is go…

You are only counting the immediate financial cost…

Yes, it’s called: locking the criminals up. As a working class person, who has been on the receiving end of thugs, lock the c*nts up.

Of course you and your middle class ways.

You are pathetic.

So you giving up???

Evidence-based? Live like one.

Now, get back and crawl underneath your rock.

Have I made myself clear?

You’re right. I was just counting the property value and damage. I was doing that to try to present a financial value of all this crime to the criminal. The actual cost of the crime to the wider society is massive so it would seem to me that it’s a fair argument for tackling the causes of crime rather than having to deal with the costly aftermath.

Centrist dogooding scumbagism?

Here’s a link to the ‘Cost of Crime in Northern Ireland’ document. A very interesting read.

Some interesting statistics here:

So the system seems majorly overcrowded, despite large increases in capacity. About 40% of people being locked up are in for non-payment of court-ordered fines, and about 85% of these reoffend in some way within four years.

I never said anything about single mothers on welfare. You are the one that brought that up so we know exactly what you think of them.

No I didn’t or maybe you are referring to Coles2? (Our resident big shot republican :slight_smile: )

Likewise. And there’s something that’s even worse about someone making excuses for ciriminals whilst ignoring the victims.

Those centrist analytical scumbagists at the Royal Society of Chemistry weigh in with a cautious

This left right paradigm is called polarisation and it’s a tool for keeping people from working together to deal with mutual problems.
I have not read the research, if it holds and it seems to in the situations the articles highlighted then it puts a dent in both sides arguments.

The main reason for fall-off in burglaries is because there is no profitable market for second hand goods.

The chinese factories are churning out new goods so cheaply that second hand ones are unprofitable to sell. When you can buy a new DVD player in tesco for €30, it makes a second hand one worthless.

The only thing thats profitable for burglars is gold jewellery. And that market only exists because there is no regulation on Cash-For-Gold shops. These shops are very profitable and are politically protected.


Mossy is libertarian anyway. Libertarian shouldnt be classified as “right wing”.

I agree, but that been said zero tolerance definitely has an impact.
Statistically, you often (always) find that the vast bulk of crime is carried out by a very limited amount of people.

Zero tolerance may target the symptoms (i.e. crime etc) rather than the cause (father in prison etc), but for reducing crime, it is effective.

Indeed, but not as effective as maintaining a clean and healthy environment.

Have you got any evidence to support those claims. Just interested.

“Left” and “right” are each descriptive of authoritarian positions. Liberty has no horizontal relationship to authoritarianism. Libertarianism’s relationship to authoritarianism is vertical; it is up from the muck of men enslaving man.

Why Left and Right are not helpful terms - → … ful-terms/

There are lots of alternate ways of looking at political spectra, so one should define the axes before applying labels to someone. :smiley:

[*Ingelhart World Values map * (World Values Survey - Wikipedia):

[*Political compass * (Political spectrum - Wikipedia):

[*Pournelle chart: * (Pournelle chart - Wikipedia)

[*Nolan chart: * (Nolan Chart - Wikipedia)

edit: typo

There are a lot of press reports that Cash-for-Gold shops will only offer you less than 50% of the market spot price for gold. The costs in processing scrap gold are fairly low, leaving a large profit margin. Google it if you want proof.

Regarding political protection, I dont have evidence but the facts are that a set of recommendations that would regulate Cash-for-Gold shops, have been sitting on the Minister for Justices desk for over two years. But no legislation has been introduced to the Oireachteas. Why not? Somebody must be blocking it. The fact is that if these shops were in some way, prevented from buying stolen jewellery, their business would shrink dramatically. They must be lobbying strongly against it, which is perfectly legal for them to do.

how exactly would that work? track the serial numbers on each loose earring?

The jewellers that want regulation, are suggesting that in order to sell a piece of jewellry, you should have to present some evidence that you own it. Ie a receipt or debit card statement.

If a person doesnt have any evidence of ownership, they should have to show ID and the jeweller should retain a photo of the item being traded, which can be compared with photos of stolen items.

The proposed regulations arent very onerous. But Shatter is apparantly blocking them. Cash-For-Gold shops are obviously against any restrictions in trade.