At last we have zero tolerence, YIPEE!

Darragh29

Well it might have taken it's time in coming but at last we have a Justice Minister promising to bring us zero tolerance policing by the Gardai!

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/gardai-vow-zero-tolerance-of-violence-1830421.html

Now before you start getting excited and start thinking that maybe we are now one step closer to tackling gangland criminals or the plague on communities that is antisocial behaviour, regretttably no, the zero tolerance attitude is just being aimed at YOU, if you protest against the government and things become a little heated!

I personally think that this is great news, I can just picture the scene in my head. Next month the pensioners, or some group that are being sodomised by this government, will have a protest and the minister might decide that it's best that he stays in the car! A crowd will gather around the car in protest and some poor pensioner will have their head split open when the Gardai draw the batons...

Then maybe we'll be sufficiently shocked to take to the streets and stay there until we have evicted this government from office! So I say, bring on zero tolerance policing to the law abiding citizens who protest against this shambolic disgrace of a government! So I say to the government: Take out the batons to us at a protest, I DARE YA!

turgon

First line of the article:

Gardai have warned there will be no tolerance of violent street demonstrations over any issue.

So its nothing to do with the Justice Minister, in fact. But Im sure that was keenly overlooked in an attempt to add more fuel to fire upon which people hope to cast FF.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

If the guards get nasty with the pensioners, there will be only one winner.

okay, two if you count the media.

Darragh29

turgon wrote: »

First line of the article:

So its nothing to do with the Justice Minister, in fact. But Im sure that was keenly overlooked in an attempt to add more fuel to fire upon which people hope to cast FF.

And who does the Garda Commissioner report to and take his orders from?!?!? The Minister for Justice! The Minister for Justice sets the policy and the Garda Commissioner follows it...

Daftendirekt

This is the gist of the article:

Independent.ie wrote:

Mr Ahern warned that while protesters had the right to demonstrate and voice their opinions, they did not have the right to behave in such a manner where others may get hurt.

It's hardly Orwellian to ask protesters to protest without getting violent, now is it?

andrew

Darragh29 wrote: »

I personally think that this is great news, I can just picture the scene in my head. Next month the pensioners, or some group that are being sodomised by this government, will have a protest and the minister might decide that it's best that he stays in the car! A crowd will gather around the car in protest and some poor pensioner will have their head split open when the Gardai draw the batons...

Really, because I can't picture that happening at all. A guard hitting a pensioner? Really?

philologos

If people are being violent at protests they should be restrained. If you have grievances against the Government, feel free to let people know, however if you decide to get violent at a protest there should be justice carried out against you.

If we consider violent protest to be acceptable, where should we draw the line? Were the Athens riots okay? Or were the Dublin riots okay?

On this issue Ahern seems to be quite reasonable infact:

Mr Ahern warned that while protesters had the right to demonstrate and voice their opinions, they did not have the right to behave in such a manner where others may get hurt.

Socially and ethically responsible protest is what we should be aiming for surely?

We've had one proper violent "Protest" in the last few years and zero tolerance would have been great in that situation. I'm talking about the anti-orange march protests of course.

Of course, these were violent knackers and the Guards wouldn't be bothered tackling them, sure they might get hurt. Just wait for some student's protesting over fee's or something similar and watch the heads get cracked.

Darragh29

Just seems to me that the words, "zero tolerance" being used by Gardai now is almost like poking the rest of us in the eye!

Where is zero tolerance for all the junkies in the city centre who have taken over the boardwalk and other parts of town???

Where is zero tolerance for gangland criminals, 90% of them who have carried out gangland executions in recent years have not even been charged with an offence, let alone be charged and found guilty?!?!?

Where is zero tolerance for scumbags that are involved in anti-social behaviour in housing estates, making life a misery for hard working law abiding citizens???

But yet if you put your hand on the ministers state car, zero tolerance enforcement awaits you???

philologos

If it is only for violent protest, what do the rest of us who generally live lawfully have to fear?

Darragh29

Jakkass wrote: »

If it is only for violent protest, what do the rest of us who generally live lawfully have to fear?

So say I'm out in my local town here at a protest and I hear that Mary Harney is opening some new private nursing home in my community... So I join a large protest that is blocking her car from departing from the venue, to protest against my the A & E department in my local hosital being closed.

We are occupying the only road out of the estate where she is departing from. It isn't a violent protest, but if I don't get out of the way when I'm told to by a Garda, then zero tolerance awaits me! You can't have it every way lads, you can't fu*k up the country and then expect people not to get animated about it when they take to the streets to protest!

oncevotedff

Darragh29 wrote: »

.....Next month the pensioners, or some group that are being sodomised by this government, will have a protest and the minister might decide that it's best that he stays in the car! A crowd will gather around the car in protest and some poor pensioner will have their head split open when the Gardai draw the batons...

Since the Gardai are amongst those being sodomised by the government maybe they won't bother.:D

Fremen

In my opinion, a "zero tolerance policy", in any walk of life, is a synonym for a "zero judgement policy". Nothing like a zero tolerance policy to turn a peaceful protest into a riot.

What I would really like to hear is the garda commissioner saying something like "The Gardaí will judiciously apply some common sense and respond with an appropriate level of crowd control or force as the situation demands." Of course, that kind of statement just doesn't make for great headlines.

Darragh29

Darragh29 wrote: »

We are occupying the only road out of the estate where she is departing from. It isn't a violent protest, but if I don't get out of the way when I'm told to by a Garda, then zero tolerance awaits me!

So you stay there, and she remains inside the car inside the estate, and that goes on for how long exactly and achieves what?

Protest is fine. But if a Garda tells someone to move on and they don't, then they break the law, and the consequences are their fault, not the Garda's for applying the law.

Darragh29

Deleted User wrote: »

So you stay there, and she remains inside the car inside the estate, and that goes on for how long exactly and achieves what?

Protest is fine. But if a Garda tells someone to move on and they don't, then they break the law, and the consequences are their fault, not the Garda's for applying the law.

You can't run a country into the ground and then expect people, who's lives you've ruined, to stand idly by and just let you saunter into a photo opportunity in your 09D state Mercedes. People have limits that they can be pushed to, it's just human nature that people when you bend them over and try to sodomise them, eventually they will try to stand up straight again!

Fremen

Jakkass wrote: »

If it is only for violent protest, what do the rest of us who generally live lawfully have to fear?

That kind of reasoning bothers me a little bit. It suggests far too much trust in the authorities. What we should be asking is "What was wrong with the old system, and why are we changing it?".

A policy used to stop a violent riot today could be a policy used to stop a protest which is merely embarassing to the government tomorrow. Look at the British terror laws. Originally intended to hinder terrorism, they're now also used to harass journalists and Icelandic Banks.

Laws (or policies) like this tend to drift from their intended purpose, and they're a whole lot harder to get rid of than to implement.

Darragh29

Darragh29 wrote: »

You can't run a country into the ground and then expect people, who's lives you've ruined, to stand idly by and just let you saunter into a photo opportunity in your 09D state Mercedes.

By all means protest. Noone has propsed removing freedom of speech or association from our Constitution, this isn't North Korea.

But when a member of the gardai says move along, refusing to do so is an offence, and protests must stay on the right side of the law.

I think every person who protests at any time feels strongly that the issue that has moved them to take to the streets is really crucial and merits bending the law. But whether it be animal rights or Shell to Sea or freeing some Shinner fighting extradition or whatever it is, even trying to keep Mary cooped in some estate, it doesn't mean we can ignore the Gardai.

Mena

Jakkass wrote: »

If people are being violent at protests they should be restrained. If you have grievances against the Government, feel free to let people know, however if you decide to get violent at a protest there should be justice carried out against you.

If we consider violent protest to be acceptable, where should we draw the line? Were the Athens riots okay? Or were the Dublin riots okay?

On this issue Ahern seems to be quite reasonable infact:


Socially and ethically responsible protest is what we should be aiming for surely?

Oh ****, for the first time ever, I agree with something Jackass posted :eek:

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

But when a member of the gardai says move along, refusing to do so is an offence, and protests must stay on the right side of the law.

Really? I'm outside the Dail at a protest and a Guard says "Move along" and I don't, I'm breaking the law?

Darragh29

I think using the words "zero tolerance", given the national mood at the moment is akin to asking the country for a scrap! It goes to show a lack of humility and understanding of the hardship that some people are currently experiencing, entirely symptomatic of a government that hasn't done one thing right in 12 years, apart from ordering 900 fu*king hospital trollies...

All this statement is saying is basically, "if you stand up against us, we will smack you back down again"...

Rojomcdojo

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Really? I'm outside the Dail at a protest and a Guard says "Move along" and I don't, I'm breaking the law?

Depends on the context. If a Garda reasonably believes that maintaining the peace requires someone to leave an area and directs them to do so and they fail, that is a Public Order offence. I'm not sure they can make such demands for the hell of it mind, or that they use them lightly.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1994/en/act/pub/0002/sec0008.html

Darragh29 wrote: »

I think using the words "zero tolerance", given the national mood at the moment is akin to asking the country for a scrap!

I do accept that there is a bit of an overreaction and the language is intemperate. As Fremen said above, the gardai could have phrased this in terms of seeing what the appropriate response is to any situation and there would be no story.

philologos

Mena wrote: »

Oh ****, for the first time ever, I agree with something Jackass posted :eek:

I really should post here more often

In fairness in the instance that is in the Irish Independent article people were attempting to damage the Ministers car. I don't think it will bring in a Big Brother state.

Mr Smith's car was kicked and repeatedly punched while placards were thrown at its windscreen.

Now should that kind of behaviour be encouraged. My opinion is no matter how much you despise the Minister of Agricultures policies it isn't a legitimate form of protest to do this. This is relatively low scale violence, but it is still illegal and the Gardaí are there to enforce the law.

lostexpectation

Daftendirekt wrote: »

This is the gist of the article:





It's hardly Orwellian to ask protesters to protest without getting violent, now is it?

its hardly unheard of for police to start or provoke violence at demonstrations is it.

dvpower

Gardai have warned there will be no tolerance of violent street demonstrations over any issue.

.
.
.


The Irish Independent understands that gardai do not anticipate further action being taken over the farmer protest -- despite senior officers voicing their extreme unhappiness.

Has Zero Tolerance been redefined?

dvpower

lostexpectation wrote: »

its hardly unheard of for police to start or provoke violence at demonstrations is it.

There isn't anything to suggest that was the case here.

gurramok

FF promised Zero Tolerance in the 1997 general election, we know what has happened since.

Anyway, will the gardai enforce zero tolerance against a violent demonstration by fellow public sector workers??

Wheely

Darragh29 wrote: »

I think using the words "zero tolerance", given the national mood at the moment is akin to asking the country for a scrap! It goes to show a lack of humility and understanding of the hardship that some people are currently experiencing, entirely symptomatic of a government that hasn't done one thing right in 12 years, apart from ordering 900 fu*king hospital trollies...

All this statement is saying is basically, "if you stand up against us, we will smack you back down again"...

I think you're being a little dramatic here. I read the article and if you think that's what it says then you're hearing something I'm not. Sorry.

Biggins

No new laws were introduced. Its just a reiteration of the already present laws.
I'm sure the minister for Agriculture wasn't impresssed at the reaction he got from the crowd and voiced his opinon to Gardi heads.

Nothings changed.

As for "...in an attempt to add more fuel to fire upon which people hope to cast FF."

well they do make it easy for the public to get angry at them.
I'm just amazed worse hasn't happened already.

"zero tolerance" would be better off practised by the fraud squad on the bankers and other crooks in national level!
Now that would be a miracle.

Treora

Jakkass wrote: »

If people are being violent at protests they should be restrained. If you have grievances against the Government, feel free to let people know, however if you decide to get violent at a protest there should be justice carried out against you.

If we consider violent protest to be acceptable, where should we draw the line? Were the Athens riots okay? Or were the Dublin riots okay?

On this issue Ahern seems to be quite reasonable infact:


Socially and ethically responsible protest is what we should be aiming for surely?

Had we the gards battening down on Dev when he made that break for it from England then we wouldn't be in this mess. If a sizable number of people are getting to the stage where they are rioting with a political purpose then sitting down with them first is the most imporant thing, else leave government. People have thresholds and that is the lesson people should learn from the deaths of 6 million Europeans. :eek:

Police states and May day riots are plain wrong.

Shan75

Deleted User wrote: »

By all means protest. Noone has propsed removing freedom of speech or association from our Constitution, this isn't North Korea.

But when a member of the gardai says move along, refusing to do so is an offence, and protests must stay on the right side of the law.

I think every person who protests at any time feels strongly that the issue that has moved them to take to the streets is really crucial and merits bending the law. But whether it be animal rights or Shell to Sea or freeing some Shinner fighting extradition or whatever it is, even trying to keep Mary cooped in some estate, it doesn't mean we can ignore the Gardai.

Surely part of our problem in this country is we accept too easily what the Government dishes out.A few proper protests where people refuse to back down to the Gardai doing the politicians dirty work may not be a bad thing.Not that I'm advocating an all out offensive by the public against the politicians and their subordinates but some French style protests might make our politicians finally sit up and realise we will not be easily dictated to.It won't happen of course as no matter how bad things get only the minority are capable of anything other than apathy or even resignation.

Darragh29

Shan75 wrote: »

Surely part of our problem in this country is we accept too easily what the Government dishes out.A few proper protests where people refuse to back down to the Gardai doing the politicians dirty work may not be a bad thing.Not that I'm advocating an all out offensive by the public against the politicians and their subordinates but some French style protests might make our politicians finally sit up and realise we will not be easily dictated to.It won't happen of course as no matter how bad things get only the minority are capable of anything other than apathy or even resignation.

This is my point entirely. Civil unrest is an inevitable eventuality when a country decends into where we now find ourselves. Unfortunately in Ireland, we are only capable of the mildest apathy as suggested above, however we seem to want to talk about our dilema more than any other country, which I find particularly frustrating.

But I'm starting to see signs that the country is starting to grow a pair and stand up for itself at last, and the treatment dished out to Smith the other day is evidence of that I think. And the state gets rattled and says as usual the most offensive and inflamatory thing possible, "we'll show you zero tolerance if you want to see it"...

Our apathy as a national constituency is a disgrace. I'm not condoning violence, but we do need to grow ourselves a pair, this government doesn't fear us and doesn't respect us... They aren't even paying attention to us, the threat of taking out the wooden spoon to us last week, tells us that.

Maybe, just maybe, people were pretty happy with their lot for a long time now?

I mean, tens of thousands tore the British Embassy apart in the 70s. I'm not sure we're as passive as you make out, it's just that perhaps we thought we had it good for the past 10 years?

Darragh29

Deleted User wrote: »

Maybe, just maybe, people were pretty happy with their lot for a long time now?

I mean, tens of thousands tore the British Embassy apart in the 70s. I'm not sure we're as passive as you make out, it's just that perhaps we thought we had it good for the past 10 years?

I think as a nation, we are now going through a national reawakening. As a nation, we are now like the beautiful young woman who has just been sat down by her sister and told that her boyfriend she was preparing to marry, has in fact been visiting gay brothels on a weekly basis for the last 2 years and has last week been diagnosed with several venerial diseases.

Like the woman who cannot accept that the husband to be was ripping her off for years and has now brought her home a few unsavory doses, we are in shock. That Celtic Tiger that we are all led to believe in, that was all an illusion, it was never going to happen to us! The wealth we expected, the higher quality of life we expected, it was all a fallacy, a myth, a lie... For the vast majority of us, the Celtic Tiger meant only one thing, a higher mortgage, that now has to be repaid even though you might have lost your job. The ultimate betrayal...

So just like the woman who is putting her head into her hands in shock after she gets the news from her sister, we are in shock, disbelief...

But shock will turn to anger as it surely must, and you can imagine what will happen when that woman eventually catches up with her cheating boyfriend!

Shan75

Deleted User wrote: »

Maybe, just maybe, people were pretty happy with their lot for a long time now?

I mean, tens of thousands tore the British Embassy apart in the 70s. I'm not sure we're as passive as you make out, it's just that perhaps we thought we had it good for the past 10 years?

I'd agree there is an element of that alright and when people have good lifestyles on the surface they are not paying as much attention as they should to what is bubbling a little bit deeper.

Good example about the Embassy but I think this shows also that we have to be backed into a corner before we react.When things are seemingly good we accept being ripped off and political corruption and we don't concern ourselves too much with how people are being treated etc.Now we are standing on the precipice there will be people who mount protest campaigns and there will be people who go over the top and allow themselves to create havoc but there will also be the majority who will watch it all unfold on their television sets and think " ara sure what difference can we make anyway".

Ara sure is the great Irish motto.

Shan75

Shan75 wrote: »

there will also be the majority who will watch it all unfold on their television sets and think " ara sure what difference can we make anyway".

Which is a very good point.

Not that people can't make a difference, but it's certainly tue that protests often don't. There are calmer and more effective ways of registering discontent, FF will be much more concerned abou local election results and poll trends than any farmers banging on a car roof.

Red Sleeping Beauty

I saw three Gardai assault a wino on the boardwalk in Dublin last week. The guy could barely stand and was being arrested. One of them had their kosh out, another was in the process of handcuffing this guy and the third (the man - other two were women) was standing there observing. The wino moved one step (it looked like he fell forward) and then the male garda grabbed the wino and threw him to the ground, reefed his arm around his neck and sat on him.

A Garda van showed up with two more garda and another garda showed up on foot.

So that's a grand total of 6 Gardai for one drunk man that could barely support his own weight.

Yeah, fantastic zero tolerance - rolleyeyes etc etc-

Red Sleeping Beauty

With regards to protests/demonstrations, how long before they (you know who you are ) have a death on your hands, a la Mr Ian Tomlinson ?

sovtek

Deleted User wrote: »

So you stay there, and she remains inside the car inside the estate, and that goes on for how long exactly and achieves what?

Well then she has to actually face the public she supposedly represents or she sits her ass in her car until the Gards start cracking skulls. I know wich scenario I prefer.

Protest is fine. But if a Garda tells someone to move on and they don't, then they break the law, and the consequences are their fault, not the Garda's for applying the law.

Are you aware of the concept of civil disobedience?

sovtek

Darragh29 wrote: »

You can't have it every way lads, you can't fu*k up the country and then expect people not to get animated about it when they take to the streets to protest!

Of course "they" do want and expect to have it everyway and everyone to shut up and let them get on with it. I'm still trying to get my head around that attitude after living here for almost a decade.

thebman

Fremen wrote: »

In my opinion, a "zero tolerance policy", in any walk of life, is a synonym for a "zero judgement policy". Nothing like a zero tolerance policy to turn a peaceful protest into a riot.

What I would really like to hear is the garda commissioner saying something like "The Gardaí will judiciously apply some common sense and respond with an appropriate level of crowd control or force as the situation demands." Of course, that kind of statement just doesn't make for great headlines.

Have to agree with this. If they take a hard-line so will the protesters and things will just escalate and get worse.

What was wrong with the way things were? Nobody has gotten seriously injured at a protest about the economy that I'm aware of.

The minister isn't any more special than a regular citizen even if he imagines he is. This is clearly the politicians crying over being held up and not wanting people to protest near them.

You can protest, just do it over there where we won't have to look at you or acknowledge your protest.

I'm not for violent protests but the when were the gardai pushed over? Was it before or after they started trying to force people to get out of the way of the ministers car?

ChocolateSauce

As a general rule, zero tolerance is a really bad idea. Although I wouldn't have zero tolerance for zero tolerance, I'd be pretty close. Once it is established as an acceptable policy, it can spread to areas where it will ultimately lead to injustice and may even be counter productive.

sovtek

sovtek wrote: »

Are you aware of the concept of civil disobedience?

Yes I am.

That sort of nonsense may be fine for students with Che posters on their walls and ideals about smashing the system. But in the real world...

I just think that there are more effective ways of getting an argument across rather than slugging it out with the Gardai. And history has taught us that, while sometimes disobediance works, sometimes it sways public opinion against even very valid protests. Think of public reaction to the Miners in 1983 in England once protests became violent. Of course one can take anecdotes, there were successful campaigns too, but it certainly is not a panacea.

thebman

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes I am.

That sort of nonsense may be fine for students with Che posters on their walls and ideals about smashing the system. But in the real world...

I just think that there are more effective ways of getting an argument across rather than slugging it out with the Gardai. And history has taught us that, while sometimes disobediance works, sometimes it sways public opinion against even very valid protests. Think of public reaction to the Miners in 1983 in England once protests became violent. Of course one can take anecdotes, there were successful campaigns too, but it certainly is not a panacea.

Yeah but the problem is this will be used whenever people protest at a ministers car or anything else. The gardai will try to move them away and when they don't move, zero tolerance will kick in.

It is guaranteed if you read the article, that seems exactly the situation they are talking about having zero tolerance for and it makes sense considering that event occurred recently and obviously pissed off the wrong people.

Treora

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes I am.

That sort of nonsense may be fine for students with Che posters on their walls and ideals about smashing the system. But in the real world...

Sure wasn't a varient of that mischief what the sandle wearing Gandhi used. Back in his box and reform the empire. :rolleyes:

Red Sleeping Beauty

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes I am.

That sort of nonsense may be fine for students with Che posters on their walls and ideals about smashing the system. But in the real world...

I just think that there are more effective ways of getting an argument across rather than slugging it out with the Gardai. And history has taught us that, while sometimes disobediance works, sometimes it sways public opinion against even very valid protests. Think of public reaction to the Miners in 1983 in England once protests became violent. Of course one can take anecdotes, there were successful campaigns too, but it certainly is not a panacea.

This is the real world. It doesn't get anymore real than people losing jobs and facing gigantic bills. It doesn't get anymore real than people dying on hospital trollies. On trying to force people on the bottom rung of the ladder with medical cards to pay for their medication. It doesn't get anymore real than kids being given their education in tin shacks which resemble images of the third world.

Historys' taught a lot of things. Someone once said, the history of society is the history of class struggle. What better way can people get their opinion across? You think ticking a poxy box on a sheet of paper every 5 years actually matters ? Actually achieves anything ?

This is all very real.

brianthebard

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes I am.

That sort of nonsense may be fine for students with Che posters on their walls and ideals about smashing the system. But in the real world...

I just think that there are more effective ways of getting an argument across rather than slugging it out with the Gardai. And history has taught us that, while sometimes disobediance works, sometimes it sways public opinion against even very valid protests. Think of public reaction to the Miners in 1983 in England once protests became violent. Of course one can take anecdotes, there were successful campaigns too, but it certainly is not a panacea.

Do you have any panaceas lying around?

Alan Rouge

Alan Rouge wrote: »

Someone once said, the history of society is the history of class struggle.

That was Karl Marx. His fanclub went on a really big rampage, stormed the Winter Palace, wiped out the Tsar's family etc. Anyone know how that whole thing panned out? Did it secure many years of happiness afterwards?

brianthebard wrote: »

Do you have any panaceas lying around?

We'll just pop this one in the oven...but here's one I prepared earlier...

sovtek

Deleted User wrote: »

That sort of nonsense may be fine for students with Che posters on their walls and ideals about smashing the system. But in the real world...

Aside of your derision for people that want to make things better for everyone else...in the real world its how Martin Luther King got the civil rights act. It's also how a lot of other things got done that you now enjoy the fruits of.

sovtek

sovtek wrote: »

Aside of your derision for people that want to make things better for everyone else

:D

Yes, that's it. I hate happiness!

You'll forgive my derision at the notion that violence or 'civil disobediance' makes the world a better place.

Look, we can spend all day plucking examples of protests that went well and ones that backfired spectacularly. I'll repeat that it's no panacea, do you think it is?

sovtek

Deleted User wrote: »

:D

You'll forgive my derision at the notion that violence or 'civil disobediance' makes the world a better place.

civil disobedience
 
Use civil disobedience in a Sentence
–noun
1. the refusal to obey certain laws or governmental demands for the purpose of influencing legislation or government policy, characterized by the employment of such nonviolent techniques as boycotting, picketing, and nonpayment of taxes. Compare noncooperation (def. 2), passive resistance.
2. (initial capital letters, italics) an essay (1848) by Thoreau.

Precisely. Hence my use of the word 'or', when I referred to 'violence or civil disobediance'.

I'd do the clever clever thing and link a definition of the word 'or' for your benefit, only don't you think debating at that level is a tad childish?

Now, will you accept that I may know what civil disobediance and let's all get back on topic, and leave the english language lessons for some other forum?