Glenster wrote: » Well done, everyone hates you now.
Sleeper12 wrote: » You must look like you are having a seizure with all the eye rolling. You may need to get that looked at.
cursai wrote: » Only the people who live in their heads though.
Deleted User wrote: » So every single time a traveller goes to visit someone hospital there is at least 40 in the group? Now, I fully believe what you are saying. But bet others who are not as kind will think you are floundering and just firing out any old nonsense.
Joeytheparrot wrote: » Whats the big deal? Some travellers get a few extra visitors in hospital?
cursai wrote: » An extra 30 visitors who refuse to leave........ask any public nurse.
DoozerT6 wrote: » Not getting involved in the wider debate, but .....this is absolutely true. Sometimes there's trouble, sometimes there's not. But they absolutely do visit in large numbers, which can be intimidating for other visitors due to their sheer numbers around the ward/wider area, and the fact that they sometimes forget to use their indoor voices. Source: I work in a public hospital and see this fairly regularly.
jimgoose wrote: » In fairness some of them would be Ward sisters
cursai wrote: » Also people who have ACTUAL real life experience in these things wont dispute that claim.
Deleted User wrote: » I saw one the other day that had a dog. And the dog was not on a leash. And a fellow told me a month ago he saw a traveller in a van with a broken brake light. If we combined our "ACTUAL real life experiences", it'd be a damning read...
joe40 wrote: » First out I do not hate travellers, I will always treat people as I find them. As a secondary school teacher I have dealings with traveller children and would NEVER discriminate, especially towards a child. However the point I would like to make is this. Our society as it stands can only function if there is vast majority compliance with laws and social norms of behaviour. The gardai by enlarge cope with the crime that is commited because a very small proportion of the population engage in crime. If one day everyone decided to break the law, even if 50% of the population decided to break the law our gardai and justice system could not cope. A school is a microcosm of society I can deal with poor behaviour because it only happens with a minority of pupils, vast majority just want to get on with their work. My problem with traveller culture and lifestyle is that there is nowhere near the same level of compliance with laws and social behaviour. There is crime, feuds anti social behaviour in the settled community but only a tiny % of our 5 million plus citizens take part. That % is much greater in the travelling community and leaders in the travelling community need to address this alongside the gardai.
Omackeral wrote: » Ah yes but the rules need to be enforced by the Gardai or security or whoever else. You can't expect these folks to adhere to them themselves. That's essentially what we're told on here anyway.
Graces7 wrote: » define equal please?
Graces7 wrote: » Do you mean homogeneous?
Graces7 wrote: » Identical to you? Clones of you?
Graces7 wrote: » Interesting times ahead with refugees arrive
Graces7 wrote: » Or that they have to meet YOUR standards and ideas?
huddledDuke12 wrote: » By equal, I mean that if people keep somewhat in sync with each other, there shouldn't be any qualms. Here are a few traits that are a good guideline to achieving this synchronicity:Having a job or being self employed to the extent that you have the financial means to support a family. No male or female pride as has been demonstrated by some ethnic groups. As human beings, we are well able to think with our brains and not on primitive instincts. Honesty. Anyone who deliberately leads a largely dishonest lifestyle is automatically going to loose respect from society as behaving dishonest is wrong plain and simple. Living a lifestyle within the confines of common law. No. That is ridiculous. Everyone is born with different talents and personality traits. So, as long as these traits are harnessed for the betterment of man kind, there shouldn't be any issues. Obviously, everyone was born different. However, it is what we do with these differences that ultimately defines us. If we all lead productive lives, we should get respect from our piers. In other words, if you make a positive contribution to society, you will get so much more in return. Respect is a two-way system. So, the more that one person or group of people gives to another person or group of people, so too should the level of respect as long as it's reciprocal at each end. On the other hand, if one side is giving far more than the other side, it becomes draining in the long term and eventually, they give up. I am not talking about refugees. However, while we are on that topic, if refugees come to our country and land a job and build a life for themselves here, I have absolutely no problem with them staying here. In fact, I would find that very commendable. It isn't MY standards at all. It is the general way of life that has been formed in and become known as Western Civilization. Now, while Western Civilization is far from perfect given the high levels of corruption and backstabbing from numerous vested interest groups (both governmental and private), I do think that the general benchmark has proven itself sustainable. Bottom-line, if we offer unconditional respect and equality to every Tom, Dick and Harry regardless of their contribution and outlook, we end up with a society plagued by double-standards where it is one rule for one group and another rule for another group.
[Deleted User] wrote: » It is. And when international organisations have looked at IRELAND and our treatment of travellers, the condemnation is pretty much universal. The most discriminated against people in Europe, acc to the EU. Denied basic human rights, acc to the Council of Europe etc. etc.
Means Of Escape wrote: » What are they denied ? Medical cards ? Access to education ? New halting sites? Food? Shelter ? OR Fields to graze their horses? Sulky tracks ?
Means Of Escape wrote: » What are they denied ? Medical cards ? Access to education ? New halting sites? Food? Shelter ? OR Fields to graze their horses? Sulky tracks ? Take a trip to Calcutta and you will witness true denial of human rights
Sleeper12 wrote: » There will be no confusion in social welfare or the Gardai. If someone is breaking the law they are treated the same. Travellers or settled people. Being an ethnic group they are entitled to protect & preserve their heritage. If their heritage is crime then its still illegal. It's scaremongering to claim otherwise
Deleted User wrote: » You were entitled to make your "but at least they're better off than the street children of Calcutta" point to the Council of Europe, though suspect it's outside their jurisdiction. Think they looked at the services in the 54 sites provided out of the 1,000 that was felt would be needed when they determined that we were denying travellers basic human rights. A return of just over 5% of the target met in 20 years is poor...
jackofalltrades wrote: » Basic human rights. Food, water, shelter, safety. Can you prove where travellers were being denied the above?
huddledDuke12 wrote: » By equal, I mean that if people keep somewhat in sync with each other, there shouldn't be any qualms. Here are a few traits that are a good guideline to achieving this synchronicity:Having a job or being self employed to the extent that you have the financial means to support a family. No male or female pride as has been demonstrated by some ethnic groups. As human beings, we are well able to think with our brains and not on primitive instincts. Honesty. Anyone who deliberately leads a largely dishonest lifestyle is automatically going to loose respect from society as behaving dishonest is wrong plain and simple. Living a lifestyle within the confines of common law. No. That is ridiculous. Everyone is born with different talents and personality traits. So, as long as these traits are harnessed for the betterment of man kind, there shouldn't be any issues. Obviously, everyone was born different. However, it is what we do with these differences that ultimately defines us. If we all lead productive lives, we should get respect from our piers. In other words, if you make a positive contribution to society, you will get so much more in return. Respect is a two-way system. So, the more that one person or group of people gives to another person or group of people, so too should the level of respect as long as it's reciprocal at each end. On the other hand, if one side is giving far more than the other side, it becomes draining in the long term and eventually, they give up.I am not talking about refugees. However, while we are on that topic, if refugees come to our country and land a job and build a life for themselves here, I have absolutely no problem with them staying here. In fact, I would find that very commendable. It isn't MY standards at all. It is the general way of life that has been formed in and become known as Western Civilization. Now, while Western Civilization is far from perfect given the high levels of corruption and backstabbing from numerous vested interest groups (both governmental and private), I do think that the general benchmark has proven itself sustainable. Bottom-line, if we offer unconditional respect and equality to every Tom, Dick and Harry regardless of their contribution and outlook, we end up with a society plagued by double-standards where it is one rule for one group and another rule for another group.
Johngoose wrote: » https://www.google.ie/amp/amp.irishexaminer.com/ireland/672000-spent-on-24-hour-security-at-traveller-housing-project-431706.html
Graces7 wrote: » SO no nontraveller commits offences? As you say it maks news because you want it to.
cursai wrote: » Every man, woman and child should be entitled to a car/house/house beside immediate family/spending money/fag money regardless of their propensity to work or contribute towards such things.
jackofalltrades wrote: » That's just not true. I watched a documentary on RTÉ about the work of the Revenue Commissioners. During the course of the programme they stopped motorists and dipped the tanks of diesel cars/vans. They found a van that was running on agricultural diesel. The Revenue Commissioner officer then proceeded to ask the man involved how much money he had in his pockets. He ascertained that he had about €300-400 in cash. He then confiscated this and let him on his way. His reasons for doing this was that he wouldn't show up in court as he was a traveller. Say what you want about this but that is unequal treatment. Also if a "settled" person took their child out of primary school they'd probably have a social worker breathing down their neck. The same goes if they were bringing them up in a house without running water of an indoor toilet.
[Deleted User] wrote: » Here is a summary of the decision in the case of the ERRC v Ireland...http://www.coe.int/en/web/turin-european-social-charter/home/-/asset_publisher/Vugk5b0dLMWq/content/the-decision-on-the-merits-of-the-complaint-errc-v-ireland-became-public?_101_INSTANCE_Vugk5b0dLMWq_viewMode=view/
Irish Praetorian wrote: » So the ultimate grounds for complaint that were upheld dealt with access to and provision of housing? Fair enough, perhaps the simplest solution would be to ensure they go through the same mechanisms as the rest of us looking for property - buying and/or renting it. Surely existing sources of income and Rent supplement would be more than sufficient?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w5.vanillicon.com/v2/5c1c06444977305a5e99f4ce35119320.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w4.vanillicon.com/v2/4c2f272c464d99a9eee64a80fbe71a0c.svg)
