Do you really think that tiger kidnappers do a reasoned 'cost-benefit' type analysis before deciding whether to proceed with their adventures?If Ahern & Co really wanted to end tiger kidnapping perhaps they could introduce a special sentence of 20 years (no early release) for tiger kidnappings instead?
I don't see how €500 a year could cover all the minor purchases (a newspaper, a sandwich, a box of disprin, a couple of bits from Tesco) that people make in a year. Do Danes use laser cards for this kind of stuff as well I wonder, or are they just super organised at buying everything in bulk?
Do you really think that tiger kidnappers do a reasoned 'cost-benefit' type analysis before deciding whether to proceed with their adventures?
I think you are overestimating the amount of reasoned thinking that goes into these decisions.For crime to pay it has to outweigh the probability of getting caught and the fine for getting caught.
I think you are overestimating the amount of reasoned thinking that goes into these decisions.
Have you considered the possibility that they used a stolen car? Does stealing a 10D car show their intelligence?Have to agree with Firefly, in particular the most recent tiger kidnapping seemed very well organised and the fact that the culprits used a 10 D car (as reported) would suggest that they're not a couple of idiots using an old banger and going in with tights over their heads.
On the contrary, we're talking about organised crime here where reasoned thinking and meticilous planning are the norm. If, for example, mandatory life sentences were handed down for these crimes, I think it would make it a lot more difficult for these crime gangs to recuit
Good question and tbh I'm not sure of the answer. I think tiger kidnapping is relatively new so not sure on the data available. Also, if we had to look elsewhere for evidence on everything we'd never pioneer anything. We introduced the smoking ban ahead of most of our European neighbours for example.Have these long sentances worked anywhere else?
Good question and tbh I'm not sure of the answer. I think tiger kidnapping is relatively new so not sure on the data available. Also, if we had to look elsewhere for evidence on everything we'd never pioneer anything. We introduced the smoking ban ahead of most of our European neighbours for example.
Why not give it a whirl and see what happens? In my book the worst that can happen is that some scumbag who has psychologically destroyed a family gets put away for an awefully long time.
Very true.If they charge for withdrawing money, people will want cash payment so that they do not put money in the bank, the black economy will thrive.
I've had my fill of 'give it a whirl and see what happens' policies. Check out the article by Frank McDonald in the Irish Times about the cost and damage done by McCreevy's 'give it a whirl' decentralisation policy. Personally, I'd prefer to see a well thought out policy based on local and international best practices, rather than just 'give it a whirl'. Your estimation of "the worst that can happen" is short-sighted. The most obvious flaw is that you ignore the extra cost of keeping people in prison for life, and the 'lost opportunity' of this prison place for other purposes.
Just in case of any confusion, that's not what I was recommending either.I knew my "give it a whirl" would invoke a response. Perhaps what we need instead is another expensive, dust-gathering report full of best practices sitting on a shelf somewhere.
I genuinely don't get what you're saying here.I think the extra cost and "'lost opportunity' of this prison place" would be quite low as a result of very harsh sentencing in the first place.
Indeed, why aren't the banks using timer-based or remote-control access systems so that the branch staff are just not able to get at large volumes of cash at short notice. This would remove the incentive for this kind of attack completely.Some banks still have poor security, especially in smaller branches, some still don't provide adequate training, policies and protection for their keyholders.
I genuinely don't get what you're saying here.
The point I was making is that IMO very harsh sentencing would act as a deterrent....fewer tiger crimes would be committed, therefore less prison places would be required.
Again, you are making assumptions about a logical process being involved in the planning of these crimes.
But regardless, tiger crimes make up a small section of the prison population, so even if the detterent worked in this area, there will still be no shortage of candidates waiting for the space being taken up by the tiger guys.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?