Government to discuss right to protest

Jamie2k9

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/coronavirus/covid-19-government-to-discuss-right-to-protest-says-coveney-1.4354408

The Government is to discuss the right to protest following an anti-mask demonstration that took place in Dublin at the weekend, Simon Coveney has said.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs said it was important to strike the right balance between the rights of individuals and law and order.

“There’s always a balance that the State has to manage between giving people the right to protest and be heard and to demonstrate and at the same time ensure that law and order is respected,” he told Newstalk’s Pat Kenny show.

The Government is to discuss the right to protest following an anti-mask demonstration that took place in Dublin at the weekend, Simon Coveney has said.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs said it was important to strike the right balance between the rights of individuals and law and order.

“There’s always a balance that the State has to manage between giving people the right to protest and be heard and to demonstrate and at the same time ensure that law and order is respected,” he told Newstalk’s Pat Kenny show.

Thousands of people took part in a protest in Dublin against the wearing of masks on Saturday.

Interesting the right to protest wasn't an issue for BLM in June.

I think it would be unwise to restrict protests no matter who is involved.

Hande hoche!

Quite dystopian for a Monday.

Thought the BLM protests were criticised heavily at the time

and if something happens a few times its time to take action

of course, if a protest is literally set up in defiance of public health instruction as opposed to any other consideration then that too has to be considered


ie play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

i think meself its high time the right to protest was challenged.

its pretty much always antisocial idiocy from people who contribute nothing

Jamie2k9

Deleted User wrote: »

Thought the BLM protests were criticised heavily at the time

and if something happens a few times its time to take action

of course, if a protest is literally set up in defiance of public health instruction as opposed to any other consideration then that too has to be considered


ie play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

i think meself its high time the right to protest was challenged.

its pretty much always antisocial idiocy from people who contribute nothing

Not politiclly, they stayed out of it.

jam_mac_jam

No, you can't restrict protests and at the same time be talking about opening the pubs. If we were back in March I could see their point but not now. I wouldn't agree with it in March either but there would be some argument.

This is very sinister.

sabat

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Thought the BLM protests were criticised heavily at the time

and if something happens a few times its time to take action

of course, if a protest is literally set up in defiance of public health instruction as opposed to any other consideration then that too has to be considered


ie play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

i think meself its high time the right to protest was challenged.

its pretty much always antisocial idiocy from people who contribute nothing

Show me a single condemnation of the BLM protests from an Irish politician.

sabat

sabat wrote: »

Show me a single condemnation of the BLM protests from an Irish politician.

show me where either of ye have answered my point about the difference between a protest that literally exists to defy public health advice

not all things are equal

nb id have welcomed the govt criticising BLM protest, i criticised them on the board at the time

im sure they would be prohibited too if protests are cancelled

victim complex only has merit if the victims arent deserving of whatever they get imo

Double O Seven

The government are spooked at the size of these anti lockdown protests, they thought that only a handful of rent a mobbers would turn up but there looked to be at least 1000 people.

titan18

You can't say one protest is fine and another isn't imo. Either ban them all under public health considerations or fcuk off.

Eric Cartman

titan18 wrote: »

You can't say one protest is fine and another isn't imo. Either ban them all under public health considerations or fcuk off.

This.

Id personally support a ban on all protests that interfere with traffic or commerce. These people can go to the phoenix park or something.

But yet again its only an issue now because of who is protesting, not a word about the counter protest on oconnell street being bad too.

_Kaiser_

It's a very bad idea for a country to start restricting the right to protest because the Government doesn't like the message or the support for it. Hiding it behind "health" or "law and order" (from what I saw on the brief Indo video people were marching peacefully) is a sinister unwelcome development.

Not really surprised the comments came from Coveney either. As I've said before, I think he'd be far more damaging on matters like this than the weak, populist Leo if he ever gets to be Taioseach.

Double O Seven

Double O Seven wrote: »

The government are spooked at the size of these anti lockdown protests, they thought that only a handful of rent a mobbers would turn up but there looked to be at least 1000 people.

yeah thats a whole

.0002

of the population

oh everyone is shook by the power of the numbers there alright

nutters all over the world follow the same trends

victimisation complex
self aggrandisement
esoteric knowledge as to why they have beaten science

these folks add a charming dash of thuggery and the usual flag waving to the mix

absolute trash collection as a group, zero worth to anyone including themselves

and anyone on here defending them by sideways means or directly- for political reasons or because they enjoy conspiracy theory and self pity above reality and living in a modern community is no better

Mad_maxx

sabat wrote: »

Show me a single condemnation of the BLM protests from an Irish politician.

or journalist

conorhal

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

It's a very bad idea for a country to start restricting the right to protest because the Government doesn't like the message or the support for it. Hiding it behind "health" or "law and order" (from what I saw on the brief Indo video people were marching peacefully) is a sinister unwelcome development.

Not really surprised the comments came from Coveney either. As I've said before, I think he'd be far more damaging on matters like this than the weak, populist Leo if he ever gets to be Taioseach.

Simon 'The Merchant Prince of Cork' Coveney, is a very creepy autoctatic character that dispises the plebians who he is forced to lower himself to asking to vote for him.

Make no mistake about it, this is little more then an excuse to grant the government the power to shut down any protest that will arrise when the covid bill comes due in the middle of the looming crash that's just around the corner. Water charges and a whole host of measures and bailouts will be on the cards and they want to be prepared in advance to ensure they have the power to crush any dissent.

suicide_circus

Vladimir Putin approves this message.

Gatling

conorhal wrote: »

Simon 'The Merchant Prince of Cork' Coveney, is a very creepy autoctatic character that dispises the plebians who he is forced to lower himself to asking to vote for him.

Make no mistake about it, this is little more then an excuse to grant the government the power to shut down any protest that will arrise when the covid bill comes due in the middle of the looming crash that's just around the corner. Water charges and a whole host of measures and bailouts will be on the cards and they want to be prepared in advance to ensure they have the power to crush any dissent.

It's Ireland we don't have the ability to crush dissent or the man power ,

ExMachina1000

Bad road to be going down.

If protest is banned what will the gardai do if people ignore the rule and hold another protest?

Will they beat them off the streets with batons and water cannon?

hynesie08

The right to peaceful assembly is a cornerstone of a democracy and should be fought for by every citizen.

Showing up with a 2 by 4 and assaulting people who disagree with your stance loses you that right..

suicide_circus

hynesie08 wrote: »

The right to peaceful assembly is a cornerstone of a democracy and should be fought for by every citizen.

Showing up with a 2 by 4 and assaulting people who disagree with your stance loses you that right..

Mostly peaceful protests are all the rage these days

titan18

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

It's a very bad idea for a country to start restricting the right to protest because the Government doesn't like the message or the support for it. Hiding it behind "health" or "law and order" (from what I saw on the brief Indo video people were marching peacefully) is a sinister unwelcome development.

Not really surprised the comments came from Coveney either. As I've said before, I think he'd be far more damaging on matters like this than the weak, populist Leo if he ever gets to be Taioseach.

I can see a logic in banning them due to covid, but that has to be a blanket ban. You can't go anti-mask protests are banned, and BLM protests are ok for example when both are flouting public health measures, and use public health as the reason to ban them. That's moronic and hypocritical. Horse has already bolted on it too after the BLM protests back in May/June were allowed work away.

If you ban one, you ban them all, and that includes things like the Debenhams strike then.

I disagree with the anti-maskers but i'm fully in support of their right to say it.

The old "First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out — Because I was not a Socialist. Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out — Because I was not a Trade Unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out — Because I was not a Jew" quote rings true here

TomTomTim

We need to get rid of freedom of expression too. People simply shouldn't have a right to disagree with common sentiment, or government mandates. As good obedient citizens, we should always obey our betters.

DangerScouse

Think the anti lockdown/anti mask crowd are nutjobs much like the BLM idiots but i would defend their right to protest and make a fool of themselves.

excludedbin

titan18 wrote: »

You can't say one protest is fine and another isn't imo. Either ban them all under public health considerations or fcuk off.

I think you can when that "protest" is just a homophobic mob looking to kick off. At least one gay person was left in a bloody mess after these "protesters" were done with her.

But hey, the far-right got their chance to start some violence again so naturally their fans here are chomping at the bit to defend it.

suicide_circus

excludedbin wrote: »

I think you can when that "protest" is just a homophobic mob looking to kick off. At least one gay person was left in a bloody mess after these "protesters" were done with her.

But hey, the far-right got their chance to start some violence again so naturally their fans here are chomping at the bit to defend it.

That person has #righttoprotest in their twitter bio

sabat

excludedbin wrote: »

I think you can when that "protest" is just a homophobic mob looking to kick off. At least one gay person was left in a bloody mess after these "protesters" were done with her.

But hey, the far-right got their chance to start some violence again so naturally their fans here are chomping at the bit to defend it.

There's convincing evidence all over Twitter that that person used some kind of artificial blood pouch then doubled down when they were caught by injuring themselves later.

AllForIt

What I think one does not have a right to do is counter-protest. Protesting a protest will only result in someone getting a few smacks. Which they deserve. Talk about asking for it.

And then the police have to not only police the original protest but then break up scuffles requiring even more police/resources.

keano_afc

sabat wrote: »

There's convincing evidence all over Twitter that that person used some kind of artificial blood pouch then doubled down when they were caught by injuring themselves later.

Saw that, certainly does look like a self inflicted wound. That particular person has been very vocal on social media about punching "fascists". Looks like they found the trouble they were after and couldnt handle it.

titan18

excludedbin wrote: »

I think you can when that "protest" is just a homophobic mob looking to kick off. At least one gay person was left in a bloody mess after these "protesters" were done with her.

But hey, the far-right got their chance to start some violence again so naturally their fans here are chomping at the bit to defend it.

Others have pointed out in relation to that incident, but ignoring that part.

Obviously, violence is wrong, but that shouldn't be justification under a public health guise to ban certain protests.

I disagree with the anti mask crowd, but if they want to peacefully protest, which some will do, let them at it. Sure, clamp down when there's violence, but that should be the same with any protest, no matter the reason.

You can't go banning certain protests cos you disagree with them. It's all cos of covid, or none.

Fwiw, if it was up to me, I'd ban them all cos of covid. I didn't agree with the BLM crowd back in June and thought they were all idiots, and I think the anti maskers are idiots. But they're free to preach their idiocy just as I am to ignore it.

biko

The freedom of assembly is in the constitution, hence the politicians can discuss it, but they cannot change anything.

WAW

Eric Cartman wrote: »

This.

Id personally support a ban on all protests that interfere with traffic or commerce. These people can go to the phoenix park or something.

But yet again its only an issue now because of who is protesting, not a word about the counter protest on oconnell street being bad too.

You're missing the point of protest completely by suggesting it take place in the Phoenix Park

Infini

The best way to tackle this is first not to outright remove the right to protest but to tackle the actual problem group: The Ratlicker Conspiracy Peddlers and Organisers of these groups.

There was 2 protests, One involved social distancing and masks and adhering to health guidelines, these are the ones that should be left alone.

The other involved bullshìt peddlers, lies and blatantly ignoring advice and the safety of others in pursuit of an agenda of delusion and deception. This is the one that needs to be targeted, fine and charge the organisers of these and not those who have real grievances like the Debenhams workers.

paw patrol

Infini wrote: »

The best way to tackle this is first not to outright remove the right to protest but to tackle the actual problem group: The Ratlicker Conspiracy Peddlers and Organisers of these groups.

There was 2 protests, One involved social distancing and masks and adhering to health guidelines, these are the ones that should be left alone.

The other involved bullshìt peddlers, lies and blatantly ignoring advice and the safety of others in pursuit of an agenda of delusion and deception. This is the one that needs to be targeted, fine and charge the organisers of these and not those who have real grievances like the Debenhams workers.

ban the protests you deem unworthy...:pac:

excludedbin

suicide_circus wrote: »

That person has #righttoprotest in their twitter bio

Well yeah, right to protest, not to form a mob to attack people.

sabat wrote: »

There's convincing evidence all over Twitter that that person used some kind of artificial blood pouch then doubled down when they were caught by injuring themselves later.

keano_afc wrote: »

Saw that, certainly does look like a self inflicted wound. That particular person has been very vocal on social media about punching "fascists". Looks like they found the trouble they were after and couldnt handle it.

Shockin'. The far right attack someone and, right on cue, the usuals are crying false flag. Funny how the "convincing evidence" never materialises or is nothing more than some randomer claiming they're somehow familiar with self inflicted wounds or some ****e.

Anything at all to avoid condemning your compatriots, eh?

WAW

I prefer to live in a country with a democratic right to protest whether I agree or disagree with the protestors.
It's very dangerous and hugely depressing for people to be calling on curbing the right to freedom of assembly and association.
For those giving off about the anti mask demos and public health. The whole point is that these people disagree that Covid is the threat it's purported to be therefore their protest is in their view not a threat to public health. More and more are moving to that view.
Regardless, let the people demonstrate.

Jimmy McGill

If they ban protests the number of people on the streets will increase exponentially it's as simple as that. It would be such a stupid move.

Mr. Karate

But remember folks. Trump is the real tyrant and dictator.

You're all getting a great lesson on why many Americans fight for their guns right. It can be summed up in one sentence.

"The 2nd protects the 1st."

dan1895

paw patrol wrote: »

ban the protests you deem unworthy...:pac:

You'd find more worthiness in a piece of dog **** on the pavement than in that rabble of tin foil hat wearing ratlickers.

suicide_circus

excludedbin wrote: »

Well yeah, right to protest, not to form a mob to attack people.

Yeah but it was mostly peaceful

Mr. Karate

suicide_circus wrote: »

Yeah but it was mostly peaceful

Fiery, but mostly peaceful.

ELM327

I abhor those idiots and their message, the protestors.
But you cannot unilaterally remove the right to free speech and free assembly. The government serves the people not the other way round.

The Tetrarch

Do the protesters think they will enlighten the Government who will then cancel all Covid-19 restrictions?
929,000 deaths worldwide and the protesters want no restrictions here.
Perhaps it makes sense to them if they reason they do not have Covid therefore it not a problem.
That is a bit like standing in the middle of a busy road, closing your eyes, and saying there is no traffic.

excludedbin

suicide_circus wrote: »

Yeah but it was mostly peaceful

Oh wow what a le epic meme XD haven't heard that one before!

Funny how one side is expected to condemn violence while the other can just meme it off. Sorry you think someone being targeted because of their sexuality by far right thugs is so funny.

hynesie08

excludedbin wrote: »

Well yeah, right to protest, not to form a mob to attack people.




Shockin'. The far right attack someone and, right on cue, the usuals are crying false flag. Funny how the "convincing evidence" never materialises or is nothing more than some randomer claiming they're somehow familiar with self inflicted wounds or some ****e.

Anything at all to avoid condemning your compatriots, eh?

The false flag was the tricolor wrapped around a 2x4

suicide_circus

excludedbin wrote: »

Sorry you think someone being targeted because of their sexuality by far right thugs is so funny.

I dont, hope she's ok. Just couldn't resist a chance to poke fun at the absurdity of the "mostly peaceful" trope we see in relation to other current protests.

sabat

excludedbin wrote: »

Well yeah, right to protest, not to form a mob to attack people.


Shockin'. The far right attack someone and, right on cue, the usuals are crying false flag. Funny how the "convincing evidence" never materialises or is nothing more than some randomer claiming they're somehow familiar with self inflicted wounds or some ****e.

Anything at all to avoid condemning your compatriots, eh?

The evidence that convinced me was this video from around the 23 second mark, so voila:

https://twitter.com/BaronStrucker/status/1304832503119839232

excludedbin

suicide_circus wrote: »

I dont, hope she's ok.

I'm sure you do.

Just couldn't resist a chance to poke fun at the absurdity of the "mostly peaceful" trope we see in relation to other current protests.

In the US. Not really seeing what relevance it has to a far right mob attacking someone in Ireland, though. Shouldn't it be possible to, oh I don't know, just condemn that without trying to divert attention to an unrelated issue?

Seems to be the done thing whenever anyone brings up the violent thugs that make up the far right; try to drag the subject away to literally anything else. Or claim 'the term has lost all meaning' which I'm sure we'll be seeing shortly. Anything, anything else to avoid condemning it.

excludedbin

sabat wrote: »

The evidence that convinced me was this video from around the 23 second mark, so voila:

https://twitter.com/BaronStrucker/status/1304832503119839232

sabat wrote: »

There's convincing evidence all over Twitter that that person used some kind of artificial blood pouch then doubled down when they were caught by injuring themselves later.

That's what you said. Where's the "artificial blood pouch"? Where's the evidence that they were "injuring themselves"?

EDIT: In fact, the video just shows her already injured. I have no idea what you think that's meant to prove but please, in future, try just a bit harder.

suicide_circus

It goes without saying that all right thinking people condemn violence. Events elsewhere in the world influence events in Ireland and perhaps the mostly peaceful protests in the US which have been plastered over our screens for the last 100+ days may be a source of inspiration to the more simple minded here.

Graham

biko wrote: »

The freedom of assembly is in the constitution, hence the politicians can discuss it, but they cannot change anything.

Freedom of assembly does not appear to be unconditional

The State guarantees liberty for the exercise of the following rights, subject to public order and morality: –

--//--

ii The right of the citizens to assemble peaceably and without arms.

Provision may be made by law to prevent or control meetings which are determined in accordance with law to be calculated to cause a breach of the peace or to be a danger or nuisance to the general public and to prevent or control meetings in the vicinity of either House of the Oireachtas.

40.6.1.ii

Infini

paw patrol wrote: »

ban the protests you deem unworthy...:pac:

Why should those who deny reality and perpetuate the spread of a potent and lethal virus be allowed to so without consequence? The Majority of protest's usually have a genuine concern or issue of actual importance or concern. They also have at least tried or mads sure to adhere to health advice because they dont wish harm to society or others but only to highlight issues.

What do these have? Lies, Conspiracies, deception, lack of any logic or reason. They deny reality and threaten others, shout "Pedo" in a pathetic drive to silence others who blow holes in their argument, they're thick idiots at best and lowlife agressive hooligans at worst, they're not protestors but out to cause harm.

Real prostestors have genuine causes. These dont and never will they're a disgrace and an insult to all those who have sacrificed, lost loved ones this year and suffered but these ratlickers outright want to ignore all advice and sense because they're drunk on conspiracies and lies. All they're doing is abusing the right to protest for their own selfish egos.

OneEightSeven

Plenty of people weren't wearing masks for the BLM protests in early June and there wasn't surge in cases. If the government ban protesting, it's going to backfire.