Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Traveller houses burnt out **Please Read Mod Warning (posts 6 & 8) before posting**

  • 25-02-2013 10:11pm
    #1
    periodictable
    Closed Accounts Posts: 931 ✭✭✭


    Here's a link to another episode in the ongoing saga of Traveller accommodation in Ennis:

    http://clare.fm/news/2-houses-damaged-after-fire-ennis-traveller-site

    I drove by there some days back- the site is closed and barricaded and several of the houses had severe fire damage. As a tax payer, I'm somewhat pi***d off at the cost of this accommodation and the complete and utter disregard that some of the occupants have for it.
    I realize that the thought police will be watching every word I write, but frankly enough is enough. Anyone availing of housing from the local authority should be forced to take what is offered, or go to the end of the waiting list, and welfare payments garnished substantially for damage caused. In fact, if someone in public authority housing can afford to run a vehicle, I fail to see what they cannot prioritize and pay rental for accommodation.
    As for whoever burned the houses, perhaps a mandatory minimum of 10 years in the slammer might cause them to repent of their anti-social ways, and upon release, garnishment of welfare payments or wages to pay for the damage.


«1

Comments

  • #2
    poppyvally
    Closed Accounts Posts: 341 ✭✭poppyvally


    We're too terrified to add anything. This is a traveler friendly forum. What you say could be used in evidence against you & you might be silenced for an indefinite period


  • #3
    Carry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,024 ✭✭✭Carry


    In the link it says 'arson attack', it doesn't say that travelers did it. It could as well be that 'outraged tax-paying citizens' did it.

    I do agree though that arson is despicable. But I don't agree with digging up the pitchforks and go against the usual suspects.
    You find scumbags in all reaches of society - even in banks, government and whatnot...

    And poppyvally, what do you mean with your post?


  • #4
    Carazy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 395 ✭✭Carazy


    An indication to the cost of the few houses since they were built is given here;
    http://www.clareherald.com/2013/02/two-homes-destroyed-in-ennis-arson.html


  • #5
    ads20101
    Registered Users Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭ads20101


    Carry wrote: »
    In the link it says 'arson attack', it doesn't say that travelers did it. It could as well be that 'outraged tax-paying citizens' did it.

    seriously - do you really believe that?


  • #6
    Clareman
    Moderators, Sports Moderators, Regional Midwest Moderators Posts: 24,008 Mod ✭✭✭✭Clareman


    Folks,

    The other mods and I aren't more "friendly" towards any group than another, as moderators it is our responsibility to ensure balanced discussion while adhering to the laws of Ireland and the rules of boards.ie, if posters are unable to post within these guidelines then we take action, we do not set out to stifle debate or discussion, we just ensure that people obey the rule

    For posters not sure of how to debate on this topic, a good rule of thumb would be to avoid phrases like "all travellers", phrases that paint an entire ethnic group with the same brush is racist and will not be allowed. Also, due to the laws of Ireland, it is illegal to discuss ongoing legal cases or to speculate as to whoever carried out the crimes, avoid this also.

    If you don't agree with any of this or feel I (or we) are being heavy handed, please open a topic in the feedback forum where it will be reviewed and discussed by the wider board community and the admins.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Johnboy1951
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,034 ✭✭✭✭Johnboy1951


    This is a genuine comment in case you think I am trying to rise you .....
    For posters not sure of how to debate on this topic, a good rule of thumb would be to avoid phrases like "all travellers", phrases that paint an entire ethnic group with the same brush is racist and will not be allowed.

    I believe that racism does not apply and here is why .....
    Racism is usually defined as views, practices and actions reflecting the belief that humanity is divided into distinct biological groups called races and that members of a certain race share certain attributes which make that group as a whole less desirable, more desirable, inferior or superior.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism
    Ethnicity or ethnic group is a socially defined category based on common culture or nationality.[1][2] Ethnicity can, but does not have to, include common ancestry, appearance, cuisine, dressing style, heritage, history, language or dialect, religion, symbols, traditions, or other cultural factor. Ethnic identity is constantly reinforced through common characteristics which set the group apart from other groups.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_group

    I do not believe that any 'anti-traveller' sentiment expressed can be rightfully called racism.

    .... but maybe I am misunderstanding the situation under the laws of Ireland which maybe do recognise 'the travellers' as a separate race and not just a separate ethnic group.


  • #8
    Lady Chatterton
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,585 ✭✭✭✭Lady Chatterton


    I do not believe that any 'anti-traveller' sentiment expressed can be rightfully called racism.

    .... but maybe I am misunderstanding the situation under the laws of Ireland which maybe do recognise 'the travellers' as a separate race and not just a separate ethnic group.


    No one has an issue with fair and balanced comment but if posts are offensive or derogatory in nature they may incite hatred.

    Prohibition of Incitement To Hatred Act, 1989

    2.—(1) It shall be an offence for a person—

    (a) to publish or distribute written material,

    (b) to use words, behave or display written material—

    (i) in any place other than inside a private residence, or

    (ii) inside a private residence so that the words, behaviour or material are heard or seen by persons outside the residence,

    or

    (c) to distribute, show or play a recording of visual images or sounds,

    if the written material, words, behaviour, visual images or sounds, as the case may be, are threatening, abusive or insulting and are intended or, having regard to all the circumstances, are likely to stir up hatred.


    Full text can be found on the link below

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1989/en/act/pub/0019/index.html


  • #9
    periodictable
    Closed Accounts Posts: 931 ✭✭✭periodictable


    Nobody is pointing the finger at Travellers-I suppose anyone could have set these fires.
    To me the bigger issue is lack of respect for public property and the sense of entitlement in the state, yet no corresponding duty or expectation to take care of the property by some of those availing of it.
    http://www.clarepeople.com/2013/02/26/up-in-smoke/

    I wonder if I can apply for a particular "ethnic" status? What are the criteria? Anyone know?


  • #10
    Clareman
    Moderators, Sports Moderators, Regional Midwest Moderators Posts: 24,008 Mod ✭✭✭✭Clareman


    @Johnboy1951 and all posters,

    I will not discuss or debate what I have posted above, if you do not agree with it bring it up in feedback or with another mod, I am not a solicitor so I will not be looking for loop holes into the difference between race and ethnic groups.

    Questioning or calling out a moderators decision on thread is normally a banning offence on boards, I will ignore this last 1 but not anymore, there is proper avenues to bring up your questions/queries/issues/problems/concerns, on thread isn't the place.


  • #11
    Palmach
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 980 ✭✭✭Palmach


    6 posts in and a mod has stuck their oar into what was a fairly innocuous discussion. No wonder this place is empty.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    Clareman
    Moderators, Sports Moderators, Regional Midwest Moderators Posts: 24,008 Mod ✭✭✭✭Clareman


    Palmach banned.


  • #13
    dr.fuzzenstein
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,620 ✭✭✭✭dr.fuzzenstein


    Yes. ****** did *** on **.**.****.
    When *** did *** the ***, *** where ***.
    Needles to say, ****** will ***' and *** will be *****.
    Nice weather we're having.


  • #14
    Lady Chatterton
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,585 ✭✭✭✭Lady Chatterton


    Dr. Fuzzenstein is on a week off.

    If anyone wants to raise concerns about this thread or the Clare forum in general, please start a thread in 'Feedback'.


  • #15
    pilate 1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 178 ✭✭pilate 1


    dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »
    Yes. ****** did *** on **.**.****.
    When *** did *** the ***, *** where ***.
    Needles to say, ****** will ***' and *** will be *****.
    Nice weather we're having.

    im missing something here. why the ban?for being a smart arse or is there some
    hidden message in above post cause i dont get it.


  • #16
    Lady Chatterton
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,585 ✭✭✭✭Lady Chatterton


    Lets get back on topic - 'Traveller houses burnt out'


  • #17
    CptSternn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,530 ✭✭✭CptSternn


    It's that time of year sure. I remember back when I was a small thing we used to light up caravans around near the end of February. It's perfectly normal behaviour to engage in, boss.


  • #18
    JamBur
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 871 ✭✭✭JamBur


    What a crock of ****e, people aren't even allowed discuss the topic without heavy handed moderation.

    The reality is that most people wouldn't want travellers as neighbours, and that is for a very good reason. Nobody wants hassle on their doorstep. People will come on now and say that they have the greatest traveller neighbours ever, but unfortunately they are the exception that proves the rule.


  • #19
    kstand
    Registered Users Posts: 1,248 ✭✭✭kstand


    Back to the topic ion hand. Clearly this was not the first time that this has happened on this site. The site and houses have cost quite a substantial amount of tax-payers money. Would it not have been prudent for the county council to install CCTV on site while they were in the building process so that anyone caught doing this could have been caught in the act?
    Right now we have had a load of tax-payers money go up in smoke and no leads as to who did it and why - just mad speculation. No finger can be pointed until there is clear evidence here.


  • #20
    the_syco
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,306 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    JamBur wrote: »
    What a crock of ****e, people aren't even allowed discuss the topic without heavy handed moderation.
    Certain organisations could bring boards.ie to court if the mods didn't moderate.

    As for the fire, we'll probably find out it's part of a long standing feud.


  • #21
    kstand
    Registered Users Posts: 1,248 ✭✭✭kstand


    the_syco wrote: »
    Certain organisations could bring boards.ie to court if the mods didn't moderate.

    As for the fire, we'll probably find out it's part of a long standing feud.

    This may be so but without CCTV footage to confirm that, it's nothing more than speculation.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    the_syco
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,306 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    kstand wrote: »
    This may be so but without CCTV footage to confirm that, it's nothing more than speculation.
    I find with feuds, something like this will be seen as a cause after retaliation happens.


  • #23
    Merch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,327 ✭✭✭Merch


    kstand wrote: »
    Back to the topic ion hand. Clearly this was not the first time that this has happened on this site. The site and houses have cost quite a substantial amount of tax-payers money. Would it not have been prudent for the county council to install CCTV on site while they were in the building process so that anyone caught doing this could have been caught in the act?
    Right now we have had a load of tax-payers money go up in smoke and no leads as to who did it and why - just mad speculation. No finger can be pointed until there is clear evidence here.

    Why should the Council have to install CCTV? why dont they just put it up everywhere for god sake?
    Why should the taxpayer foot the bill for CCTV or anything else?
    When whats there is destroyed and no one knows what happened, who pays for the monitoring?
    why should it be necessary?

    In fact putting cctv up presupposes there will be trouble, its almost like an accusation, I can see the backlash if that happened, besides if its put up, it will be damaged/stolen, waste of taxpayers money.


  • #24
    Lady Chatterton
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,585 ✭✭✭✭Lady Chatterton


    JamBur, the Mods on this forum have absolutely no issue with criticism but if you've issues with us or our decisions you need to start a thread in the Feedback forum.

    I feel it is important that Mods are fair and consistent -

    Palmach received a ban yesterday for this comment:
    Palmach wrote: »
    6 posts in and a mod has stuck their oar into what was a fairly innocuous discussion. No wonder this place is empty.

    So I feel it is appropriate that you receive a ban for your comment:
    JamBur wrote: »
    What a crock of ****e, people aren't even allowed discuss the topic without heavy handed moderation.


  • #25
    kstand
    Registered Users Posts: 1,248 ✭✭✭kstand


    Merch wrote: »
    Why should the Council have to install CCTV? why dont they just put it up everywhere for god sake?
    Why should the taxpayer foot the bill for CCTV or anything else?
    When whats there is destroyed and no one knows what happened, who pays for the monitoring?
    why should it be necessary?

    In fact putting cctv up presupposes there will be trouble, its almost like an accusation, I can see the backlash if that happened, besides if its put up, it will be damaged/stolen, waste of taxpayers money.

    The guts of over a million Euro up in smoke - public money spent on this project, it is not a private estate. The tax payer has already footed a huge bill and for the sake of a few thousand extra, this would have been unnecessary. As for the so-called "backlash" - how long more does the tax-payer and ordinary cash=-strapped citizen have to stand for this sort of thing and see their money literally burned in front of them with nothing done in case it fails to appease a few liberal idiots? I know if it were my home, given to me by the people, that I would only be too happy for them to monitor it to make sure no one attacked it or burned me out.
    I really dont understand your point. If they had CCTV on that site, the perpetrators could be brought to justice. You are going on about the cost of it - whats it going to cost to house these people now?
    Honest, I dont understand the logic of some people. Is it any wonder the country is in the state it is in.


  • #26
    Merch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,327 ✭✭✭Merch


    kstand wrote: »
    The guts of over a million Euro up in smoke - public money spent on this project, it is not a private estate. The tax payer has already footed a huge bill and for the sake of a few thousand extra, this would have been unnecessary. As for the so-called "backlash" - how long more does the tax-payer and ordinary cash=-strapped citizen have to stand for this sort of thing and see their money literally burned in front of them with nothing done in case it fails to appease a few liberal idiots? I know if it were my home, given to me by the people, that I would only be too happy for them to monitor it to make sure no one attacked it or burned me out.
    I really dont understand your point. If they had CCTV on that site, the perpetrators could be brought to justice. You are going on about the cost of it - whats it going to cost to house these people now?
    Honest, I dont understand the logic of some people. Is it any wonder the country is in the state it is in.

    I agree with you,

    Im sick of seeing travellers near me in privately rented accomodation paid for by the state driving in new cars, they clearly have money to spend which they are not willing or obliged to pay into rent or mortgage like anyone else.

    I can see where you're coming from in that cctv would only cost a bit extra compared to what was spent, but, a even comprehensive system cannot cover every angle, it will be impossible, someone can get around it by either, damaging the camera or obscuring its view or making themselves unidentifiable by having their face covered. Properties will still be burned down or wrecked, and the CCTV systems will be too, just more waste.
    It makes my blood boil.

    I would be only too happy to have a home provided for me and then secured by being monitored too, Im not up to anything and am not concerned about my comings and goings looking unusual.

    My idea to save a few thousand euro
    Dont instal CCTV
    My idea to save a few million euro, dont waste tax payers money on the sort of thing that ends up in smoke.

    I dont know what the answer is to housing them, they dont want to integrate or stay apart and not behave in a way that isn't acceptable to the rest of society, they dont want to contribute. Accomodations are provided at great cost and are destroyed.

    It would have been better to house these people to the same standard everyone else is, on the housing list and then you take what you are offered or back to the end of the Q, no special treatment.
    Its a bloody joke and not a funny one.


  • #27
    kstand
    Registered Users Posts: 1,248 ✭✭✭kstand


    Merch wrote: »
    I agree with you,

    Im sick of seeing travellers near me in privately rented accomodation paid for by the state driving in new cars, they clearly have money to spend which they are not willing or obliged to pay into rent or mortgage like anyone else.

    I can see where you're coming from in that cctv would only cost a bit extra compared to what was spent, but, a even comprehensive system cannot cover every angle, it will be impossible, someone can get around it by either, damaging the camera or obscuring its view or making themselves unidentifiable by having their face covered. Properties will still be burned down or wrecked, and the CCTV systems will be too, just more waste.
    It makes my blood boil.

    I would be only too happy to have a home provided for me and then secured by being monitored too, Im not up to anything and am not concerned about my comings and goings looking unusual.

    My idea to save a few thousand euro
    Dont instal CCTV
    My idea to save a few million euro, dont waste tax payers money on the sort of thing that ends up in smoke.

    I dont know what the answer is to housing them, they dont want to integrate or stay apart and not behave in a way that isn't acceptable to the rest of society, they dont want to contribute. Accomodations are provided at great cost and are destroyed.

    It would have been better to house these people to the same standard everyone else is, on the housing list and then you take what you are offered or back to the end of the Q, no special treatment.
    Its a bloody joke and not a funny one.

    I would be sickened to a near state of violence if I had saved all my life and behaved myself and bought a house on an estate and then found a year or two down the line that while I was struggling that a family like this could be lumped in a few doors down, for free, contributing nothing and flagrantly abusing what they had with no regard for law or order.
    There should be a ruling whereby private landlords are not allowed by law to rent their houses to the DSS or anyone who can claim off the DSS unless they are students. Let there be government built housing schemes where these people are housed and if they dont like it, then tough - Europe is plenty big these days, plenty of other countries to take them if they dont like the lot they are getting for free in this country.


  • #28
    Lady Chatterton
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,585 ✭✭✭✭Lady Chatterton


    kstand wrote: »
    There should be a ruling whereby
    private landlords are not allowed by law to rent their houses to the DSS or anyone who can claim off the DSS unless they are students.

    That proposal is not going to work. Thousands of families rent privately because they can't afford /or do not want to purchase a home of their own. Under your proposal they would have no choice but to go on the local authority housing list, that doesn't make any sense :confused:. Most tenant/landlord arrangements work to the benefit of both parties.

    As for only making properties available to students, not many students would be interested in renting a property in Ennis or Kilrush, students need accommodation near colleges - Limerick, Galway, Dublin, Waterford, Mayo, Letterkenny, Sligo, Cork etc.

    Finally, students (a small minority) have also been know to damage properties too.
    An estimated €10,000 - 15,000 worth of water damage was caused to a Cork household during a house party last Monday night, February 6. The house in question is located next to the university on College Road and is rented by 7 college students. All will be liable to pay for damages.

    http://cork.studenty.me/2012/02/10/estimated-e15000-in-damages-caused-to-household-during-uccs-raise-and-give-week/
    €10,000 damage to house at teen's 'Project X' party

    IN SCENES REMINISCENT OF THE FILM 'PROJECT X', A PARTY FIRST ADVERTISED ON FACEBOOK LEADS TO €10,000 OF DAMAGE AT RENTED SWORDS HOME

    http://www.independent.ie/regionals/fingalindependent/news/10000-damage-to-house-at-teens-project-x-party-29031049.html
    House wrecked as 'Facebook party' descends into chaos

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/house-wrecked-as-facebook-party-descends-into-chaos-29021138.html#sthash.tDd72P5O.dpuf


  • #29
    colm_mcm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,478 ✭✭✭✭colm_mcm


    Don't they have CCTV in some housing estates already? Seem to remember a mate who lived in waterpark saying there was cameras there?


  • #30
    Merch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,327 ✭✭✭Merch


    MrsD007 wrote: »

    As for only making properties available to students, not many students would be interested in renting a property in Ennis or Kilrush, students need accommodation near colleges - Limerick, Galway, Dublin, Waterford, Mayo, Letterkenny, Sligo, Cork etc.

    Finally, students (a small minority) have also been know to damage properties too.



    http://cork.studenty.me/2012/02/10/estimated-e15000-in-damages-caused-to-household-during-uccs-raise-and-give-week/



    http://www.independent.ie/regionals/fingalindependent/news/10000-damage-to-house-at-teens-project-x-party-29031049.html



    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/house-wrecked-as-facebook-party-descends-into-chaos-29021138.html#sthash.tDd72P5O.dpuf

    While not good, None of those houses was burned to the ground.
    The total damage there, which is pretty bad, doesnt approach the cost or damage mentioned above.
    Which is a cost borne by the tax payer, not like the examples by students.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    Lady Chatterton
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,585 ✭✭✭✭Lady Chatterton


    Merch wrote: »
    While not good, None of those houses was burned to the ground.
    The total damage there, which is pretty bad, doesnt approach the cost or damage mentioned above.
    Which is a cost borne by the tax payer, not like the examples by students.
    I agree that damage wasn't as bad but I was replying to K Stand's post - he felt it would be better if properties were only given to students instead of people claiming rent allowance.

    A close friend of my mine lives close to student accommodation as she has told me some real horror stories about houses that have destroyed by tenants. In many cases the landlord wins their court cases but the defendants can't/won't the damages due to him/her.


  • #32
    periodictable
    Closed Accounts Posts: 931 ✭✭✭periodictable


    the_syco wrote: »
    Certain organisations could bring boards.ie to court if the mods didn't moderate.

    As for the fire, we'll probably find out it's part of a long standing feud.
    Perhaps then there's a conflict with freedom of expression and the Incitement to Hatred legislation? It seems to me that there's a chilling of free speech on any discussion of Travellers in all the media. Something for the lawyers to challenge perhaps?


  • #33
    Lady Chatterton
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,585 ✭✭✭✭Lady Chatterton


    periodictable wrote: »
    Perhaps then there's a conflict with freedom of expression and the Incitement to Hatred legislation? It seems to me that there's a chilling of free speech on any discussion of Travellers in all the media. Something for the lawyers to challenge perhaps?
    With free speech comes responsibilities.

    I think the recent Denis O'Brien V Irish Daily Mail case illustrates that you're entitled to an opinion as long as you're in a position to back up your opinions with hard facts and sufficient evidence. I'm not saying it's correct but this is the reality of the situation.
    Denis O'Brien wins defamation case against Irish Daily Mail


    http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0214/367770-defamation-denis-obrien/
    Denis O’Brien wins €150,000 in Daily Mail defamation case

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/denis-obrien-wins-150000-in-daily-mail-defamation-case-29070377.html
    O’Brien wins €150,000 in damages in 'Mail' case

    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2013/0215/1224330058788.html


  • #34
    Clareman
    Moderators, Sports Moderators, Regional Midwest Moderators Posts: 24,008 Mod ✭✭✭✭Clareman


    periodictable wrote: »
    Perhaps then there's a conflict with freedom of expression and the Incitement to Hatred legislation? It seems to me that there's a chilling of free speech on any discussion of Travellers in all the media. Something for the lawyers to challenge perhaps?

    There's no free speech on boards, yuo agreed to this when you signed up.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/faq.php?faq=bie_faq


  • #35
    periodictable
    Closed Accounts Posts: 931 ✭✭✭periodictable


    I know.
    I'm talking about discussion outside of this arena. I'm concerned about a state that attempts to rein in opinion and thought, and in other areas intrude even more into the private sphere, be it Revenue accessing one's bank account or the local planner deciding on what shape windows you can have in your house.
    This article may broaden horizons.

    http://jonathanturley.org/2012/10/14/the-death-of-free-speech/


  • #36
    Carry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,024 ✭✭✭Carry


    periodictable wrote: »
    I know.
    I'm talking about discussion outside of this arena. I'm concerned about a state that attempts to rein in opinion and thought, and in other areas intrude even more into the private sphere, be it Revenue accessing one's bank account or the local planner deciding on what shape windows you can have in your house.
    This article may broaden horizons.

    http://jonathanturley.org/2012/10/14/the-death-of-free-speech/

    You make an interesting point here.
    Though it's not the topic of this thread I'm equally nonplussed about the general hypocritical attitude in Ireland about calling a spade a spade. And especially the general libel policy.

    MIND: I'm not talking about the mods or the rules of boards in this case. It's about the social policy of suing everyone who says something about someone. Or suing all and sundry for that matter. The compensation society.

    The discrepancy between naming convicted people with name and address which affects innocent relatives as well and is leading to social exclusion of them, and uttering opinions about circumstances or people, is rather confusing if not appalling. Where I come from names of convicts are seldom named, addresses never.

    Almost back to topic.
    When I moved to Ireland I was renting of course, before I bought a house. Whenever I was looking for a place the landlords told me that they don't want people on the dole, students, nurses (no, really) or anyone young! Why? Landlord-Explanation: They wreck the place! And as some other people explained (I'm quoting here): Irish people only care about places they own, not places they rent.

    I made that experience when I took in two intern working students in my rented house years ago. They couldn't give a damn about the place. Why, they said, it's the landlord's duty to look after the place. No, I said, it's our home for the time being. Who gives a bother, they replied, we're going home anyway after a few months.
    Needless to say, I chucked them out.

    Back to the original topic.
    I am aware that travelers cause a lot of trouble. I know people who happen to live beside them and they are telling appalling stories. I happened to have traveler neighbours a long time ago (in Ennis) who were actually quite nice and polite and kept the place very tidy. Trouble started when the whole clan appeared - multitude is the evil.
    I am also aware that family feuds destroy communities not only property which is bad enough. And I am sure, if I would ever feel threatened by anyone (traveler or not) I would defend myself and my loved-ones with every pitchfork I can dig up.

    I don't have a final opinion on this special case. I think that the whole stance of Irish policy towards travelers is half-hearted and beyond the point. Inclusion doesn't mean to pacify trouble-makers and giving in to every whim of them or being afraid of consequences.
    The community as such, that is society, should be a priority. Destructive forces should be effectively tackled.

    2 cents and such like...


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    CptSternn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,530 ✭✭✭CptSternn


    JamBur wrote: »
    People will come on now and say that they have the greatest traveller neighbours ever, but unfortunately they are the exception that proves the rule.

    I think that is one of the most singularly telling things someone can say that inadvertently works against them.

    When someone says 'I know a Traveller who is a nice person'. At the same time they are saying basically 'I know most are horrible people, but I found a good one'. It's like saying you won the lotto or something. It actually emphasizes the point that what you have found is an exception to the rule, a total fluke, a one in a million chance sort of thing...and most importantly that underneath your vocal praise you are blatantly aware of this.

    It's like saying 'my neighbour was in prison for years, but he is a great guy'. It's more of what you are not saying that really says it all. It's a bit ironic so many people in this thread and other similar threads who think they are helping the cause of the Traveller by saying things like this are oblivious to what they are actually saying.


  • #38
    CptSternn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,530 ✭✭✭CptSternn


    kstand wrote: »
    BWould it not have been prudent for the county council to install CCTV on site while they were in the building process so that anyone caught doing this could have been caught in the act?

    Funny story. These sites HAD CCTV installed. But guess what? 'Unknown' people continued to destroy it constantly to the point it cost so much too maintain that the council stopped paying to fix it and monitor it.

    They would fix it, and it would be wrecked again in a matter of days. The council felt they were pissing money away paying a company to monitor broken cameras and stopped paying them until they were fixed...but they were never working more than a few days so the whole thing was basically abandoned.

    I used to work for a security company which had a council contract to monitor and secure the site.


  • #39
    CptSternn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,530 ✭✭✭CptSternn


    MrsD007 wrote: »
    Finally, students (a small minority) have also been know to damage properties too.



    http://cork.studenty.me/2012/02/10/estimated-e15000-in-damages-caused-to-household-during-uccs-raise-and-give-week/



    http://www.independent.ie/regionals/fingalindependent/news/10000-damage-to-house-at-teens-project-x-party-29031049.html



    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/house-wrecked-as-facebook-party-descends-into-chaos-29021138.html#sthash.tDd72P5O.dpuf

    10,000 + 10,000 + 10,000 /= 2.2 MILLION in one town, Ennis.


  • #40
    CptSternn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,530 ✭✭✭CptSternn


    So as I mentioned earlier I moved to Holland.

    Funny story in regards to the Irish Travellers in this area which people here talk about. A few years back they decided to set up shop in a public forest in Belgium, a few minutes down the road from where I now live. A load of caravans, cars, and vans rolled into a national forest and basically set up their own site there. The local police came out and politely asked them to move on, telling them they could not live there as it was a public place where people were welcome to visit, but was closed at night and they could not live there. The police got the normal response, they were told off and said if they wanted them gone they would have to force them off the land.

    The next morning about 5:30 am the Belgium Army rolled into the forest with a fecking tank. An army officer called them all outside on a blow horn and told them they had fifteen minutes to evacuate the area. They again started giving out and the officer made a motion with his arm and a lad on the .50 caliber mounted on the tank opened up on one of the caravans turning it into confetti. Within 15 minutes the entire site was EMPTY.

    I think Ireland needs to use this story as an example. ;)


  • #41
    ads20101
    Registered Users Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭ads20101


    I think when the whole country is under serious financial constraints we need to have a serious think about local authority housing.

    I understand that there are various groups of people that misuse local housing, have to move out, declare themselves homeless, then demand that the council provide housing as per law. But there should be more structured tenancy agreements. People that have a history of damaging community paid for housing have to be accountable for their actions.

    I understand that much of the law in this area is defined from European law but there are examples that we can draw from. For example some councils in the uk have not only refused to provide social housing for those proven to engage in anti social behaviour, they have even gone as far as evicting anti social tenants.

    Don't misinterpret what I am saying, I am a strong advocate for the state providing shelter and financial support to those temporarily unable to get work, and those unable to work due to disability, but if we are as a civilised community going to continue providing social supports we need to take a much harder line to those that misuse it.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    periodictable
    Closed Accounts Posts: 931 ✭✭✭periodictable


    CptSternn wrote: »
    So as I mentioned earlier I moved to Holland.

    Funny story in regards to the Irish Travellers in this area which people here talk about. A few years back they decided to set up shop in a public forest in Belgium, a few minutes down the road from where I now live. A load of caravans, cars, and vans rolled into a national forest and basically set up their own site there. The local police came out and politely asked them to move on, telling them they could not live there as it was a public place where people were welcome to visit, but was closed at night and they could not live there. The police got the normal response, they were told off and said if they wanted them gone they would have to force them off the land.

    The next morning about 5:30 am the Belgium Army rolled into the forest with a fecking tank. An army officer called them all outside on a blow horn and told them they had fifteen minutes to evacuate the area. They again started giving out and the officer made a motion with his arm and a lad on the .50 caliber mounted on the tank opened up on one of the caravans turning it into confetti. Within 15 minutes the entire site was EMPTY.

    I think Ireland needs to use this story as an example. ;)
    Reminds me of the cleanup of NYC under Giuliani in the 90s-Tompkins Square Park on the Lower East Side had become a cardboard city with homeless, drug pushers and general layabouts setting up permanent shop there. They were ordered to leave but laughed it off. At 6am the next day, the national guard rolled in with tanks and bulldozers and emptied the park, reclaiming it for the citizenry of the city by 8.30am. It was an example of the failure of the policy of "pretend it doesn't exist and it will go away attitude" of government, which resulted in a lawlessness in the area. Unfortunately, unless people live by the basic rules of society, such force will be needed to make it clear that breaking the laws are unacceptable.


  • #43
    Johnboy1951
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,034 ✭✭✭✭Johnboy1951


    CptSternn wrote: »
    So as I mentioned earlier I moved to Holland.

    Funny story in regards to the Irish Travellers in this area which people here talk about. A few years back they decided to set up shop in a public forest in Belgium, a few minutes down the road from where I now live. A load of caravans, cars, and vans rolled into a national forest and basically set up their own site there. The local police came out and politely asked them to move on, telling them they could not live there as it was a public place where people were welcome to visit, but was closed at night and they could not live there. The police got the normal response, they were told off and said if they wanted them gone they would have to force them off the land.

    The next morning about 5:30 am the Belgium Army rolled into the forest with a fecking tank. An army officer called them all outside on a blow horn and told them they had fifteen minutes to evacuate the area. They again started giving out and the officer made a motion with his arm and a lad on the .50 caliber mounted on the tank opened up on one of the caravans turning it into confetti. Within 15 minutes the entire site was EMPTY.

    I think Ireland needs to use this story as an example. ;)

    I would consider that action, as described, unacceptable and over the top.
    I recognise there might be a lot more to the story that is unsaid .... hence 'as described' above.

    Violence begets violence ..... and unnecessary deadly force (even if apparently only on a caravan in this case) is completely unacceptable to me. As I read it I imagined someone hiding in the trailer .....

    BTW .... I see no reason at all why vehicles and such which are placed, as in the story, should not be confiscated and destroyed after a short period during which the owner could pay a large fine.

    I feel sure that if such a scheme was in operation there would be less inclination on the part of some to put their vehicles/caravans/etc in danger of destruction.


  • #44
    Bowlardo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,390 ✭✭✭Bowlardo


    Johnboy1951 wrote: »
    Violence begets violence ..... and unnecessary deadly force (even if apparently only on a caravan in this case) is completely unacceptable to me. As I read it I imagined someone hiding in the trailer .....
    BTW .... I see no reason at all why vehicles and such which are placed, as in the story, should not be confiscated and destroyed after a short period during which the owner could pay a large fine.
    I feel sure that if such a scheme was in operation there would be less inclination on the part of some to put their vehicles/caravans/etc in danger of destruction.

    why do you think that? They asked them kindly to move their vehicles and were clearly told were to go.

    Your suggestion of confiscating the vehicles is flawed on so many levels. You had the wild imagination to believe someone "may" have been hiding in the trailer yet you can not fathom that one or the police/army would be injured when trying to confiscated the trailer.

    You mention violence begets violence....what a cliché but I would agree with you on the majority of levels. However when someone is blowing up trailers with a tank I think everyone knows who is boss. The point is proven in the fact that they all ****ed off within 15 minutes

    See the link below for the muppets to explain how this works
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWSYiGpLrHY


    http://youtu.be/PWSYiGpLrHY


  • #45
    Johnboy1951
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,034 ✭✭✭✭Johnboy1951


    Bowlardo wrote: »
    why do you think that? They asked them kindly to move their vehicles and were clearly told were to go.

    Your suggestion of confiscating the vehicles is flawed on so many levels. You had the wild imagination to believe someone "may" have been hiding in the trailer yet you can not fathom that one or the police/army would be injured when trying to confiscated the trailer.

    You mention violence begets violence....what a cliché but I would agree with you on the majority of levels. However when someone is blowing up trailers with a tank I think everyone knows who is boss. The point is proven in the fact that they all ****ed off within 15 minutes

    I haven't heard of any vehicle, owned by other members of society being shot to destruction, but am aware that such vehicles get towed, impounded etc etc.

    So, care to explain why doing the same with these vehicles "is flawed on so many levels"?


  • #46
    Balagan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,168 ✭✭✭Balagan


    ads20101 wrote: »
    I think when the whole country is under serious financial constraints we need to have a serious think about local authority housing.

    I understand that there are various groups of people that misuse local housing, have to move out, declare themselves homeless, then demand that the council provide housing as per law. But there should be more structured tenancy agreements. People that have a history of damaging community paid for housing have to be accountable for their actions.

    I understand that much of the law in this area is defined from European law but there are examples that we can draw from. For example some councils in the uk have not only refused to provide social housing for those proven to engage in anti social behaviour, they have even gone as far as evicting anti social tenants.

    Don't misinterpret what I am saying, I am a strong advocate for the state providing shelter and financial support to those temporarily unable to get work, and those unable to work due to disability, but if we are as a civilised community going to continue providing social supports we need to take a much harder line to those that misuse it.

    Good post. And if we have any interest in knowing the identities of those who are not law abiding while continuing to receive every support society can give, all we have to do is exercise our constitutional right to attend Court hearings. All is revealed there in the light of day, the identities, the behaviour, the attitude and, above all, the endless cycle of repeat offending of many. Don't worry too much about being safe in the Court. There will be at least 15 and often more than 20 Gardai spread between the court rooms, the foyer and the steps.

    Instead of taking up column inches quoting pithy and 'sound-bitey' comments which some Judges make for their own amusement, the reporters might, when giving details of sentences handed down, also list any and all previous convictions of the individuals concerned. Even just listing the number of convictions would fill us in on the massive scale of the dysfunction that exists.


  • #47
    Clareman
    Moderators, Sports Moderators, Regional Midwest Moderators Posts: 24,008 Mod ✭✭✭✭Clareman


    Folks, I know that some people think we're very heavy handed mods, this post is just a gentle reminder and isn't directed to any 1 poster or post, that condoning violence or any criminal activity is against the rules of boards and will lead to bans.


  • #48
    Bowlardo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,390 ✭✭✭Bowlardo


    Johnboy1951 wrote: »
    I haven't heard of any vehicle, owned by other members of society being shot to destruction, but am aware that such vehicles get towed, impounded etc etc.
    Why do you think that is? might it have to that with at some level they will accept the person in authority?
    Johnboy1951 wrote: »
    So, care to explain why doing the same with these vehicles "is flawed on so many levels"?

    It's flawed because I don't believe it would be possible for them to get the trailers towed away without someone getting hurt. I don't think this takes a great stretch of the imagination to come to that opinion.
    The people who (aggressively) refused to remove their trailers are hardly going to let them walk in and tow them away.

    If you can imagine they came back the next day with a few more people for towing. I would see the same result but with the situation escalating for people on both sides. I would be of the very strong opinion that people (police) providing a public service should not be but in to situations were violence can be avoided. the people that were parked there must have been acting like serious *****.

    I do not know what authorization you need in Belgium to get a tank and roll in to a forest to blow up a trailer but i am fairly sure it is not like borrowing the local tractor lawnmower to cut the green in the estate.
    You are forgetting that the people with the trailers are completely in the wrong. end of story. they should move. They didn't. Not only didn't but they acted the absolute ***** when asked not to move.
    How do i know that? I know that because someone gave the police/army the green light to get the keys for the tank and head down to the forest and blow the ****e out of a tralier. fairly sure a good few boxes would have to ticked before you would get the go ahead on that

    I believe respect is earned. You give it in order to get it.
    Show no respect and I don't believe respect should be given.


  • #49
    Johnboy1951
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,034 ✭✭✭✭Johnboy1951


    So those guys with the guns .... the army .... were incapable of rounding up those objectors present, and holding them while the vehicles were towed away?

    Yeah! Right! Heavily armed army personnel incapable of a little bit of crowd control? :D

    There should have been lots of options available other than shooting up one of the vehicles.

    Minimum force when dealing with the public is the usual motto .... the story as told does not reflect that.

    You disparagingly refer to my thoughts about someone hiding out in their own caravan ...... and you provide this?
    If you can imagine they came back the next day with

    Some consistency might be helpful.
    The next morning about 5:30 am the Belgium Army rolled into the forest with a fecking tank. An army officer called them all outside on a blow horn and told them they had fifteen minutes to evacuate the area. They again started giving out and the officer made a motion with his arm and a lad on the .50 caliber mounted on the tank opened up on one of the caravans turning it into confetti. Within 15 minutes the entire site was EMPTY.

    They could just as easily have towed away the vehicles and impounded them.

    If that was done often enough it might discourage this behaviour of parking up and daring anyone to move them.

    I see no necessity to have .50 calibre bullets flying about .... unnecessary force endangering lives!


  • #50
    the_syco
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,306 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    CptSternn wrote: »
    The next morning about 5:30 am the Belgium Army rolled into the forest with a fecking tank. An army officer called them all outside on a blow horn and told them they had fifteen minutes to evacuate the area. They again started giving out and the officer made a motion with his arm and a lad on the .50 caliber mounted on the tank opened up on one of the caravans turning it into confetti. Within 15 minutes the entire site was EMPTY.

    I think Ireland needs to use this story as an example. ;)
    Awesome! Can't see it working here though, as the travellers would claim discrimination.
    Johnboy1951 wrote: »
    So, care to explain why doing the same with these vehicles "is flawed on so many levels"?
    A fully armed ERU taskforce is needed to arrest one traveller, as travellers have a history of being violent, not obeying the law, and attacking police officers. How exactly do you intend on taking the caravans?


  • #51
    Johnboy1951
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,034 ✭✭✭✭Johnboy1951


    the_syco wrote: »
    Awesome! Can't see it working here though, as the travellers would claim discrimination.


    A fully armed ERU taskforce is needed to arrest one traveller, as travellers have a history of being violent, not obeying the law, and attacking police officers. How exactly do you intend on taking the caravans?

    :D:DI don't

    It was army personnel, fully armed, and obviously with a tank as well as whatever else they brought.

    Apparently they got the whole lot of them outside their caravans .... and so it is reasonable to assume they had them all under control.
    You believe they did not?
    You think they could have shot up a caravan if the travellers were not under control?

    They were heavily armed Belgian army personnel for goodness sake!

    It was a planned raid.
    As part of the planning they could have arranged to tow the vehicles if they wished.


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement