Residents object to temporary halting site

irishpancake

whatismyname wrote: »

Just wondering, what is the law you mention that they are breaking? I'd love to be better informed and understand this more.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1994/act/2/section/9/enacted/en/html#zza2y1994s9

9.—Any person who, without lawful authority or reasonable excuse, wilfully prevents or interrupts the free passage of any person or vehicle in any public place shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £200.

Or maybe this:

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1961/act/24/section/98/enacted/en/html

98.—(1) A person shall not do any act (whether of commission or omission) which causes or is likely to cause traffic through any public place to be obstructed.

(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) of this section shall be guilty of an offence.

(3) Where a person is charged with an offence under this section, it shall be a good defence to the charge for him to show that there was lawful authority for the act complained of or that it was due to unavoidable accident.

There may be more, I have not had time.

Arytonblue

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/protest-over-traveller-site-like-alabama-in-the-1950s-360073.html

Just seen Labour's Aodhan O'Riordan compare the situation with the halting site to 1950's Alabama.....Sweet jubus, what an utterly incomprehensible twit. It's one thing for the likes of Una Mullally and her fellow airheads at the Times to vilify the residents and their actions but for a government minister..for equality? Completely unacceptable and unbecoming for a so called elected representative. And Labour wonder why people are abandoning them in droves. Talk about out of touch.

irishpancake

sasta le wrote: »

Travellers want equal status but also want to be an ethnic race.But they demand many different services that we would not get

Don't you believe that all ethnicities should be treated as equal under the Law?

Who is this "we"......and who are "not we"?

whatismyname

irishpancake wrote: »

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1994/act/2/section/9/enacted/en/html#zza2y1994s9

9.—Any person who, without lawful authority or reasonable excuse, wilfully prevents or interrupts the free passage of any person or vehicle in any public place shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £200.

Or maybe this:

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1961/act/24/section/98/enacted/en/html

98.—(1) A person shall not do any act (whether of commission or omission) which causes or is likely to cause traffic through any public place to be obstructed.

(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) of this section shall be guilty of an offence.

(3) Where a person is charged with an offence under this section, it shall be a good defence to the charge for him to show that there was lawful authority for the act complained of or that it was due to unavoidable accident.

There may be more, I have not had time.

Do you know how 'reasonable excuse' is defined? (Many would certainly say that the residents had that, given their concerns about the suitability of the field, etc.)

Same with 'public place'?

Do you much about the ins and outs of the law, or are you just deciding that they've broken the law, and finding some laws that suit this decision?

Genuine question.

irishpancake

sasta le wrote: »

I mean they can be housed in a hotel b&b in the aftermath of a fire why the rush to build them a new halting site
Was that even legal what the council were doing?

They are in Emergency accommodation, in Wicklow, which will no longer be available this weekend.

There is a need for new Emergency accommodation ASAP, for this shocked, grieving, bedraggled, physically and mentally exhausted people who have lost 40% of their family members, 10 out of 25, and who face the ordeals of funerals in the coming days.

This is not a halting site, it is Emergency accommodation, which will suffice until their Permanent accommodation has been made ready, some time after Christmas.

There are time frames which have rigid deadlines.

What the Council are trying to do here is perfectly legal, but, I confess, should have been handled with more sensitivity.

However, a large number of these residents were to the forefront in sympathising with the bereaved people, which no-doubt was genuine, in the immediate aftermath, so the Council might have expected more co-operation would have been forthcoming.

This was their mistake.

runawaybishop

end of the road wrote: »

i have offered facts, evidence, and logic and this thread backs it all up. i have been called out on no bs, all be it some don't wish to hear the truth which is what i deal only. i know how to debate properly so won't be putting up and shutting up. there is no pc. its a term made up by those who's views and ideals are no longer relevant to throw into their little victim rants.

No, you have posted unsubstantiated nonsense and hypocritical statements.

irishpancake

jmayo wrote: »

Well there is the lad down at the end of the road and yer wan with the pancakes.
Apart from that good luck finding anyone dumb enough.



Ehh what does temporary mean in your world ?

<mod snip> please don't discuss users accounts from other forums here </mod snip.>

Stalking me, are we?


Last edited by Boom_Bap; Today at 16:08. Reason: removed talk on the quoted users account on another forum.



Why don't you use Google or the vast array of on-line resources which could give you the desired definition.

Thanks to the Mods, the relief.......


Across Forums...nice chap.

Eutow

Arytonblue wrote: »

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/protest-over-traveller-site-like-alabama-in-the-1950s-360073.html

Just seen Labour's Aodhan O'Riordan compare the situation with the halting site to 1950's Alabama.....Sweet jubus, what an utterly incomprehensible twit. It's one thing for the likes of Una Mullally and her fellow airheads at the Times to vilify the residents and their actions but for a government minister..for equality? Completely unacceptable and unbecoming for a so called elected representative. And Labour wonder why people are abandoning them in droves. Talk about out of touch.

I wouldn't call it out of touch, I would call it extreme ignorance of history. It just shows the utter gobsh!tes currently occupying Leinster House.

irishpancake

BattleCorp wrote: »

Once again end of the road I'll ask you this question.

Hey, end of the road, would you be happy with a halting site beside your house?

Would you feel comfortable with a halting site beside your elderly parent's house or other elderly relatives house (if applicable)?

Do you realise that people are not compelled to answer you tedious repetitive questions.

It's not as if they were a serious contribution to the debate.........

or World Peace and Disarmament, now, is it?

irishpancake

BattleCorp wrote: »

My point being that if end of the road won't answer the question, then he should stop preaching about bigots and racists when clearly he doesn't feel comfortable answering this question.

It's all well and good to preach about this and that, but it would be different if it was in his back garden.

Nobody is compelled to answer silly, loaded questions from a poster with an obvious agenda.

Spanish Eyes

What would happen if the bereaved refuse to move from the Emergency Accommodation in Rockville to the newly refurbished site?

That is something that could happen in fairness.

Irish Pancake might know what law could be invoked to ensure that they leave when the new site is ready.

Hypothetical I know, but if I were a resident of Rockville, it is something I would like reassurance on.

runawaybishop

irishpancake wrote: »

Nobody is compelled to answer silly, loaded questions from a poster with an obvious agenda.

Loaded in that the answer would be resounding "not in my back garden"? Lols.

hmmm

Labour would do well to haul in O'Riordan now, as I think comments about Alabama etc. are going to lose Labour lots of votes in working class neighbourhoods. There's reasons people do not want halting sites in their community, and refusing to acknowledge these reasons smacks of ivory towerism.

TheQuietFella

Sheep Lover wrote: »

1 pic of a dead toddler on a beach in Europe and people were going to put up millions of refugees in their homes.

10 dead kids in a nearby community and they won't let the families temporarily live in a field next door.

Strange world

Put them on your doorstep!

foggy_lad

irishpancake wrote: »

They are in Emergency accommodation, in Wicklow, which will no longer be available this weekend.

There is a need for new Emergency accommodation ASAP, for this shocked, grieving, bedraggled, physically and mentally exhausted people who have lost 40% of their family members, 10 out of 25, and who face the ordeals of funerals in the coming days.

This is not a halting site, it is Emergency accommodation, which will suffice until their Permanent accommodation has been made ready, some time after Christmas.

There are time frames which have rigid deadlines.

What the Council are trying to do here is perfectly legal, but, I confess, should have been handled with more sensitivity.

However, a large number of these residents were to the forefront in sympathising with the bereaved people, which no-doubt was genuine, in the immediate aftermath, so the Council might have expected more co-operation would have been forthcoming.

This was their mistake.

When have similar extraordinary lengths been undertaken by any arm of government/state for any other citizen or group of citizens after such a tragic event?

irishpancake wrote: »

Nobody is compelled to answer silly, loaded questions from a poster with an obvious agenda.

The same can be said of your own posts and your own agenda.

alan partridge aha

hmmm wrote: »

Labour would do well to haul in O'Riordan now, as I think comments about Alabama etc. are going to lose Labour lots of votes in working class neighbourhoods. There's reasons people do not want halting sites in their community, and refusing to acknowledge these reasons smacks of ivory towerism.

+1000000

Can't stand the pri5k and hope he gets his comeuppance in the GE. That little stunt he pulled on SNS with BOC comes to mind.

sasta le

Would the halting site or emergency housing be better standard

Eugene Norman

irishpancake wrote: »

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1994/act/2/section/9/enacted/en/html#zza2y1994s9

9.—Any person who, without lawful authority or reasonable excuse, wilfully prevents or interrupts the free passage of any person or vehicle in any public place shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £200.

Or maybe this:

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1961/act/24/section/98/enacted/en/html

98.—(1) A person shall not do any act (whether of commission or omission) which causes or is likely to cause traffic through any public place to be obstructed.

(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) of this section shall be guilty of an offence.

(3) Where a person is charged with an offence under this section, it shall be a good defence to the charge for him to show that there was lawful authority for the act complained of or that it was due to unavoidable accident.

There may be more, I have not had time.

These laws would apparently ban protests, particularly wild cat protests. Wasn't that what Murphy was arrested for?

Seems to my eyes the travellers are not a different ethnic group. They are a different ethical group.

sasta le

I have a thread i started in legal discussion asking what is traveller status in ireland?

Eugene Norman

irishpancake wrote: »

Don't you believe that all ethnicities should be treated as equal under the Law?

Who is this "we"......and who are "not we"?

I'll tell you who "we" isn't. It's not the top 20% of constituencies where the typical Irish times commentator or upper middle class politico like Aodhan comes from.

tom_k

irishpancake wrote: »

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1994/act/2/section/9/enacted/en/html#zza2y1994s9

9.—Any person who, without lawful authority or reasonable excuse, wilfully prevents or interrupts the free passage of any person or vehicle in any public place shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £200.

Or maybe this:

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1961/act/24/section/98/enacted/en/html

98.—(1) A person shall not do any act (whether of commission or omission) which causes or is likely to cause traffic through any public place to be obstructed.

(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) of this section shall be guilty of an offence.

(3) Where a person is charged with an offence under this section, it shall be a good defence to the charge for him to show that there was lawful authority for the act complained of or that it was due to unavoidable accident.

There may be more, I have not had time.

Thanks for these links.

Residents may wish put up the defence of reasonable excuse under the 1994 Act or unavoidable accident under the 1961 Act given the "shock and awe" tactics of DLR council. That's if any charges will ever be brought which I'd think unlikely unless they want this thing to spin out of control altogether. Either way it'd be for a judge to decide.

VinLieger

irishpancake wrote: »

Nobody is compelled to answer silly, loaded questions from a poster with an obvious agenda.

Pot.Kettle.Black

katydid

irishpancake wrote: »

Don't you believe that all ethnicities should be treated as equal under the Law?

Of course they should. What has that got to do with this discussion? We're not talking about ethnicity here.

If you mean travellers as a group, they should definitely be treated equally. Not given special treatment, as they are now.

katydid

irishpancake wrote: »

However, a large number of these residents were to the forefront in sympathising with the bereaved people, which no-doubt was genuine, in the immediate aftermath, so the Council might have expected more co-operation would have been forthcoming.

This was their mistake.

There's quite a difference between sympathising with a family on its loss and agreeing to have a carefully tended green area on their road turned into an encampment, with possible social problems following on.

irishpancake

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

if Jesus was any use he wouldn't have left this happen, leave him out of it.

any thought for the countless elderly people of Ireland suffering "shock, traumatised, physically and mentally scarred" by members of this culture?

Yes it's a tragedy, but two wrongs don't make a right. What exactly is traveller culture anyway?
-A life of poor health, poor hygiene depression, high illiteracy rates, criminality, low life expectancy, discrimation (whether deserved is subjective).

Time for society to stop pandering to traveller nonsense and their sense of entitlement while reciprocating sweet FA, and complete disrespect for others. Not all are bad of course, but I have yet to encounter one.

You want me to leave Jesus out of Christianity!!!....:p

which, of course, is Constitutionally the guiding ethos of this State.....

The Constotutional Preamble states as follows:

In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity, from Whom is all authority and to Whom, as our final end, all actions both of men and State must be referred, We, the people of Éire, Humbly acknowledging all our obligations to our Devine Lord, Jesus Christ, ...

Do hereby adopt, enact, and give to ourselves this Constitution

Of course I have thoughts for anyone suffering "shock, traumatised, physically and mentally scarred" from whatever source.

I condemn without reservation anyone, whether they be Traveller, Settled, Black, Polish, anyone..... who would inflict such savagery upon innocent, vulnerable people, particularly elderly people who are defenceless and frail.

That is savagery, and should be met with the full force of the law.

I am no Liberal.

I cannot agree at all with you final two sentences, as they are obviously motivated by some deep seated hatred within you towards those you don't understand, and don't try to understand.

Life is a broad tapestry, with room for all, and Irish culture, including Traveller culture, is rich indeed.

You need to look at the musicians who came from that culture, The Fureys, Ted their Dad, Johnny Doran, the famous piper from Wexford, Pecker Dunne, Margaret Barry, Dolores Keane, and more.......

We are rightly proud of these musicians, and singers, I hope, and they all come from Traveller Culture.

katydid

foggy_lad wrote: »

If the council were in any way honest and decent with this situation they would not be trying to "DUMP" this group of people onto the area where they will clearly know they are not wanted! They would have found temporary homeless accommodation for them the same as they would do for any average Joe/Mary who had lost half his family in a house fire.

Does the council normally house people whose houses burn down? I thought you were expected to fend for yourself.

katydid

irishpancake wrote: »

Traveller specific accommodation.

"Traveller specific"?

Why do the travellers get to decide that they want specific types of accommodation? The hundreds of families in hotels and B&Bs don't get to demand "settled specific accommodation".

foggy_lad

katydid wrote: »

Does the council normally house people whose houses burn down? I thought you were expected to fend for yourself.

If your house burns down you will be made aware of homeless groups and services and in more tragic cases with deaths and serious injuries the council will often arrange accommodation for families but as for paying and providing clothing and other needs that is usually left up to relatives and charities like the Lions Club and St Vincent de Paul

katydid

end of the road wrote: »

they aren't getting special treatment. all that is happening here is emergency accommodation being provided for people who lost a large number of family members, in the biggest loss of life since stardust. you can swap the word racist with bigot, i think that is a more accurate word.

Is it normal to provide such people with accommodation? I thought people were expected to fend for themselves.
And why are they providing them with a site for caravans or portacabins instead of proper housing?