ASBOs (1 Viewer)

[skinnerchinner]

they're all the rage

 

[Buzzo]

http://www.iprt.ie/iprt/1230

That's a pretty basic introduction to all that is wrong with em right there.....

Fuckin McDowell.

 

[RSJ]

....

 

[Ed]

Everyone under 30 should be forced to be home before 9 pm.
Random beatings of children who are being "cheeky" (that includes playing football, smiling, running etc.) should be promoted.
People over 30 are the only ones responsible enough to make decisions and think for themselves.

 

[Bag'o'cans]

http://www.iprt.ie/iprt/1230

That's a pretty basic introduction to all that is wrong with em right there.....

Fuckin McDowell.

Thought they were only in the UK!

 

[hanley]

they're all the rage

too right


wearing hats and hoods and the like it right out of order

 

[Buzzo]

Thought they were only in the UK!

McDowell decided in March that he'd try to introduce them as part of the new Criminal justice Bill. They've already been watered down a little over here but there's a great big protest on the 11th of June that everyone should go to because we really really don't need ASBOs and they just put way too much power into the hands of people who weild enough already, and they take power away from young people, AND if implemented they'll divert much needed funding away from something alot more deserving. Heard these two kids from Clondalkin speaking about it last night and one of them just put it so perfectly; they've already cut funding from youth projects in socially excluded areas of Dublin, and considering the cost of implementing ASBOs, it's basically like they are using the money to punish children instead of help them. Argh. so stoopid.
Criminalising young people is fundmentally wrong. It doesn't work. That simple.

http://www.nyci.ie/asbo/caseagainstasbo.pdf
http://www.swp.ie/resources/cjb_asbo/CJB_June11_leaflet.pdf

 

[oh shit]

i recommend this article on authoritarian statism by phil scraton if anyone's got the time (it's 22 pages, deals with the US and UK, but is vvvery relevant to the ASBOs debate).

 

[aoboa]

Just fine the parents.
It's ridiculous that the state feels it must impose this to control anti social behaviour. Put the responsability back on the parents until the kids are 16.

 

[aoboa]

BTW: They could then put the money they make from fines into resources for kids.

 

[oh shit]

Just fine the parents.

i don't think that would work either alan.
basically the situation in modern free-market economies is on the one hand, systematically marginalising and socially excluding thousands of people, and on the other hand, demanding that those people then bear the responsibility for 'behaving' themselves and their kids.

 

[aoboa]

I understand the arguments against holding parents responsible.
I also understand the argument that the state (ecomony/poverty-trap) should be held responsible.
Thing is, a whole load of anti-social behaviour goes on in well of areas too.
Kids I went to school with who came from really well off middle class families would be the first to set fire to something, if you know what I mean.

 

[oh shit]

totally. there is a different standard of policing and punishment used, depending on who you are and where you come from, what you look like, the colour of your skin, your gender.
when someone like me did stupid shit, it's "boys will be boys" or whatever, something they'll grow out of.
when someone from a mile down the road does it, it's cos there's something dangerous or criminal about them and they need to be punished or put under surveillance or whatever.
so if the question is, should everyone be equally punished, or should everyone get the same chances and understanding; i'd be inclined to argue for the latter (if only cos i'd maybe have been imprisoned myself by now for some of the shit we got up to )

 

[broken arm]

if a parent wants less input from the state in relation to the education and upbringing of their child is it right for society as a whole to bear the cost of the childs anti-social behaviour?

just a question like.....

 

[aoboa]

totally. there is a different standard of policing and punishment used, depending on who you are and where you come from, what you look like, the colour of your skin, your gender.
when someone like me did stupid shit, it's "boys will be boys" or whatever, something they'll grow out of.
when someone from a mile down the road does it, it's cos there's something dangerous or criminal about them and they need to be punished or put under surveillance or whatever.
so if the question is, should everyone be equally punished, or should everyone get the same chances and understanding; i'd be inclined to argue for the latter (if only cos i'd maybe have been imprisoned myself by now for some of the shit we got up to )

Definitely the latter, although unfortunately it will never happen.
It's always gonna be "ah, the posh kid who went astray" Vs "sure he had no chance, look what he was born into"
No matter what though, there're more good people than bad everywhere, no matter how rough the estate or poor the area. Most people can live, rich or poor, and bring up their kids well.
Some people, rich AND poor, can't - they should all be treated the same.

 

[Chocohead]

if a parent wants less input from the state in relation to the education and upbringing of their child is it right for society as a whole to bear the cost of the childs anti-social behaviour?

just a question like.....

wouldnt the child be part of society? therefore society would be bearing th eocst of one of its own

 

[Buzzo]

aaaaaaaaaaarghghghgghghghghghghghghghghg Just heard McDowell on the telly. He makes my blood boil so he does.

Hey, it isn't just kids with parents that are implicated here, you're talking about young but legally responsible homeless kids, drug users and prostitutes being locked up on a whim for non imprisonable offences instead of being given a chance to rehabilitate. It basically empowers the authorities to remove the problem from the streets and into the new spaces in our prisons for a while.

What Oh Shit said though, a punishment imposing fines on finacially crippled families as well as wel-l off ones is basically discriminatory and only serves to further exclude these families. Our whole stupid system is discriminatory against the socially excluded. It's grim, we've got all this money floating around in the economy so we spend it on contriving new ways to justify locking up the poor people, and a bigger prison to accommodate them.

Boyler I'm totally gonna ASBO your kid's ass if these come in.

 

[nlgbbbblth]

Definitely the latter, although unfortunately it will never happen.
It's always gonna be "ah, the posh kid who went astray" Vs "sure he had no chance, look what he was born into"
No matter what though, there're more good people than bad everywhere, no matter how rough the estate or poor the area. Most people can live, rich or poor, and bring up their kids well.
Some people, rich AND poor, can't - they should all be treated the same.

would tend to agree with Alan
you need equal chances / opportunities to be given. Basically treat them the same.
the amount of shit myself and my friends did when we were 12-15 wasn't good. And we all came from stable, middle class backgrounds.

in terms of crime and punishment there argument that the rich get off easier doesn't always ring true.

for example, look at the infamous Anabels media circus and outrage at the sentences given to the well-off defendants.

and then look at the murder in New Ross of the Swedish man. No rich people involved there, strictly dudes from unprivileged backgrounds/'rough' estates etc. They got sentences which were laughably lenient and an insult to the victim's family but there was no media frenzy and neither was their background made an issue of.

 

[Buzzo]

Anti-Social Behaviour Orders: Social Policy and Human Rights

Date: 22 June, 2005

The question whether Irish law should introduce anti-social behaviour orders has provoked a huge debate.

On the one hand, it is said that there is a clear and social need to control anti-social behaviour which is causing severe disturbance and fear to residents, many of them elderly people On the other hand, it is contended that anti-social behaviour orders would turn more young people into criminals, damaging the effectiveness of other social and legal policies. Questions as to the consistency of ASBOs with the Constitution and European Convention on Human Rights have also given rise to a debate.

The speakers have particular expertise in law, criminology, penology and human rights. There will be an opportunity for questions and discussion.

The fee to attend the conference is 100 euros, however there is a specialreduced rate of 50 euros for NGOs and other interested organisations.

If you would like further information, don't hesitate to contact:

Catherine Finnegan
School of Law,
House 39, Trinity College, Dublin 2.
Telephone (01) 608 2367
Fax (01) 677 0449
http://www.tcd.ie/Law/Conference.html

PROGRAMME:

5:30 Registration

6:00 ASBOs: Criminology and Penological Aspects (Speaker: Ivana Bacik)6:20 ASBOs: Yet Another Pig in the Poke and Backward Step for Juvenile Justice (Speaker: Paul O'Mahony)

6:40 ASBOs and Children at Risk - Implications for Law and Practice (Speaker: Geoffrey Shannon)

7:00 Tea / Coffee Break

7:20 ASBOs: A Human Rights Challenge (Speaker: Ursula Kilkenny)

7:40 ASBOs: Issues of Principle and Policy (Speaker: Sarah Benson)

8:00 Anti-Social Behaviour Orders and the Constitution (Speaker: William Binchy)

8:20 Questions and Discussion

 

[broken arm]

Our whole stupid system is discriminatory against the socially excluded.

not to oversimplify this but - I don't know of any provision in the law that says you are to be more leniant towards rich kids. Isn't it more often a case of the prejudices of those who decide i.e. judges (as opposed to the actual law)

i could be wrong and no better a lady to set me straight oh queen buzzo