Issue with the 77A

devnull · 08-09-2017 09:57PM

Stephen15 wrote: »

Also a curfew in this sense generally only apllies to minors this would apply to minors. However my plan would to apply to anyone hanging around without good intent whether they 15 or 50.

Good luck defining what 'good intent' would be and creating a regulation that would not be challenged by people as being possibly in breach of article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights in relation to their right to liberty.

Then you are going to have to have the personnel to enforce this which is not going to come cheap for all the areas that are hit by behaviour from time to time and a justice system that hands out real punishments rather than the pathetic ones they hand out now for anti-social behaviour.

Stephen15 · 08-09-2017 10:36PM

ThisRegard wrote: »

A police state is what you're suggesting, but only in certain areas?

What do you mean by police state. A state where justice is served meaning people who break the law are prosecuted.

Do gooders don't like it but policing the areas where there is a high level of crime is a perfectly logical step. No point on overly policing an area with a low level just for balance. Do gooders say "oh the kids have nothing to do" or "they need help not punishment".

Fact of the matter is most people in these areas are honest decent hard working people. Extra policing despite the fact that do gooders don't like it will make the good honest hard working people like bus users and bus drivers feel safer meaning they can go about their daily in peace just like people in areas with low levels can.

ThisRegard · 08-09-2017 10:42PM

You want people who leave their homes after a certain time to be stopped and give a valid reason as for doing so.

I don't know what you mean though by your constant references to do gooders, unless you're misusing the term.

Stephen15 · 08-09-2017 10:55PM

devnull wrote: »

Good luck defining what 'good intent' would be and creating a regulation that would not be challenged by people as being possibly in breach of article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights in relation to their right to liberty.

Then you are going to have to have the personnel to enforce this which is not going to come cheap for all the areas that are hit by behaviour from time to time and a justice system that hands out real punishments rather than the pathetic ones they hand out now for anti-social behaviour.

Countries break European law all the time look at Hungry with their border fence Austria with their border checks.

These are far more extreme than simply putting boots on the ground and enforcing the law. Loitering is a crime in this country afaik.

Good intent would be going to work, waiting for a bus, going for a walk, playing a sport or doing something thats not sitting on a street corner doing this should be done in a house not on a street.

I agree we do need a system which comes down harder on people who are involved with anti social behaviour in the courts.

As for personnel how come the Luas can afford security even IE have been increasing their presence but DB don't spend a penny on it.

ThisRegard · 08-09-2017 11:00PM

Stephen15 wrote: »

As for personnel how come the Luas can afford security even IE have been increasing their presence but DB don't spend a penny on it.

Security on trains or the luas don't run alongside them protecting them like the secret service, nor would they ask people in public to go home and get off the streets.

whiskeygirl · 08-09-2017 11:02PM

Stephen15 wrote: »

Countries break European law all the time look at Hungry with their border fence Austria with their border checks.

These are far more extreme than simply putting boots on the ground and enforcing the law. Loitering is a crime in this country afaik.

Good intent would be going to work, waiting for a bus, going for a walk, playing a sport or doing something thats not sitting on a street corner doing this should be done in a house not on a street.

I agree we do need a system which comes down harder on people who are involved with anti social behaviour in the courts.

As for personnel how come the Luas can afford security even IE have been increasing their presence but DB don't spend a penny on it.

Because DB's network dwarfs that of Luas and IE, and IE/Luas own the linear routes (way easier to provide security) and stations their respective services use, as opposed to Dublin Bus which uses public roads and places. Fairly obvious.

Stephen15 · 08-09-2017 11:07PM

ThisRegard wrote: »

You want people who leave their homes after a certain time to be stopped and give a valid reason as for doing so.

I don't know what you mean though by your constant references to do gooders, unless you're misusing the term.

Its called profiling it happens all the time look at who the guards at checkpoints, look at the motor insurance industry as an example.

Target large congregations of young lads drinking Dutch Gold not people on their own or people who like they maybe going to work or travelling somewhere. I or anybody I know leaves their house without a purpose whether it be to go to work, go for a daytrip, go for a walk/run or bring the dog for a walk etc. I don't go out to sit on a wall and throw stones at buses or get up to other anti social behaviour.

By do gooders I mean people who defend these scumbags saying they've got "nothing better to be doing" or they simply "bored". I'm often bored too but I don't go around throwing stones at buses or breaking the law.

XPS_Zero · 08-09-2017 11:17PM

brokenarms wrote: »

Probably local councillors . Plenty of them around there.

Out in force for the water demonstration. Not bothered now by the looks of it.

I'll preface this by saying I disagreed with water charges, not on their own but because with all the other stealth taxes we were getting the line had to be drawn somewhere...but...

Most of the ones that turn up for the water demonstration, SWP, or SP or ULA or AAA-PBP or provisional continuity new AAA-ULA-SWP whatever other alphabet soup they've vomited up after their latest split over what happened in Russia in 1918...they are not interested so much in issues as they are issues that allow them to grab the limelight and play working class hero.

They're a crew of upper middle class toffs who went to fee paying schools who enjoy playing dress up and pretending to be working class (in a way that's actually quite insulting and condescending) just long enough to get the cameras pointing at them then they go away. I recall an incident at the US embassy, much as I would not support most US blood baths, where they said they were going to burn a US flag, nobody turned up other than one journo who hid wondering if they'd still do it with no cameras around...they didn't.

They also seem to think being working class means dressing like a scrote in tshirts or jeans to an office job, well I grew up in a council estate and went to a normal school and I have an office job now...I wear a f---g suit to it, I shave, I wash my hair and generally you know...groom myself. The cartoonish image these upper middle class clowns "playing" poor have of us, and through which they claim to want to represent us, is really insulting.

Crime is a real complex issue where there is no easy answer or simple slogan, it takes hard work and complex solutions so it's not suited to these people who think you can fit answers to complex policy issues on the back of a beer mat. You will never see RBB or Paul Murphy or the like at meetings about drugs or crime and if you did they'd give you nonsense like "tax the rich to give them more facilities", as if lack of a basketball court makes you want to joyride cars and throw rocks at busses...no being a s-c-u-m-b-a-g who was dragged up not brought up makes you want to do those things. Much as these areas need investment and better planning it's not an excuse for an individual to commit a crime.

liger · 08-09-2017 11:17PM

howiya wrote: »

As I said before all routes should be stopped at the square until problem goes away or is dealt with.

What about when the problem starts in the Barn or Cork street area, should they just cancel the buses? There was a high number of used needles being left on buses and it was tracked back to this area. Bypassing areas won't solve anything and only punishes decent people who use the service.

I'd be very interested to see exact numbers for incidents recorded, are we talking 5 times a day 7 days a week? once every couple of days. Are these confirmed incidents or some drivers that want to make the rest of their shift handy ? don't say it's not a possibility.

john boye · 08-09-2017 11:28PM

Whilst private security could certainly help with on-board issues it still wouldn't do much to prevent stone-throwing, which seems to be the meat of the matter here.

Stephen15 · 08-09-2017 11:29PM

ThisRegard wrote: »

Security on trains or the luas don't run alongside them protecting them like the secret service, nor would they ask people in public to go home and get off the streets.

No thats the job of the Gardai. I never said security should do that but what they could do is phone the Guards and ask them to stop doing what they're doing and to leave the area or the Guards will come and arrest them/bring them home something they're allowed. Even place them under citizens arrest if needs be which is legal. At the end of the day its not illegal to tell someone what they're doing is illegal/wrong/immoral and call them out for it.

whiskeygirl wrote:

Because DB's network dwarfs that of Luas and IE, and IE/Luas own the linear routes (way easier to provide security) and stations their respective services use, as opposed to Dublin Bus which uses public roads and places. Fairly obvious.

The Luas uses plently of public spaces look at most of the stops on in the cc on the red line such as Jervis Street, Smithfield and Hueston. All public rights of way patrolled by private security when Luas CC opens there will be plently more stops shared with public rights of way opened all of which will be patrolled by private security at times.

As for routes only with high levels of anti social behaviour will be patrolled not the ones with low levels. So most routes wouldn't require security.

Stephen15 · 08-09-2017 11:37PM

john boye wrote: »

Whilst private security could certainly help with on-board issues it still wouldn't do much to prevent stone-throwing, which seems to be the meat of the matter here.

Sent a few security guards in a car with loudspeaker, cctv and a direct radio to the guards to escourt the buses. Even give the buses a Garda escourt through the estates.

Petyr Baelish · 08-09-2017 11:39PM

XPS_Zero wrote: »

I'll preface this by saying I disagreed with water charges, not on their own but because with all the other stealth taxes we were getting the line had to be drawn somewhere...but...

Most of the ones that turn up for the water demonstration, SWP, or SP or ULA or AAA-PBP or provisional continuity new AAA-ULA-SWP whatever other alphabet soup they've vomited up after their latest split over what happened in Russia in 1918...they are not interested so much in issues as they are issues that allow them to grab the limelight and play working class hero.

They're a crew of upper middle class toffs who went to fee paying schools who enjoy playing dress up and pretending to be working class (in a way that's actually quite insulting and condescending) just long enough to get the cameras pointing at them then they go away. I recall an incident at the US embassy, much as I would not support most US blood baths, where they said they were going to burn a US flag, nobody turned up other than one journo who hid wondering if they'd still do it with no cameras around...they didn't.

They also seem to think being working class means dressing like a scrote in tshirts or jeans to an office job, well I grew up in a council estate and went to a normal school and I have an office job now...I wear a f---g suit to it, I shave, I wash my hair and generally you know...groom myself. The cartoonish image these upper middle class clowns "playing" poor have of us, and through which they claim to want to represent us, is really insulting.

Crime is a real complex issue where there is no easy answer or simple slogan, it takes hard work and complex solutions so it's not suited to these people who think you can fit answers to complex policy issues on the back of a beer mat. You will never see RBB or Paul Murphy or the like at meetings about drugs or crime and if you did they'd give you nonsense like "tax the rich to give them more facilities", as if lack of a basketball court makes you want to joyride cars and throw rocks at busses...no being a s-c-u-m-b-a-g who was dragged up not brought up makes you want to do those things. Much as these areas need investment and better planning it's not an excuse for an individual to commit a crime.

All very good points.

I believe that the reason SF, PBP, AAA / Solidarity whatever they want to call themselves now won't get involved is because the enemy here is not the rich man, the 1%. It's the "working class" man and their kids, their voters. They can't go pointing the finger at them now can they? No, it's much better to place the blame on the Garda, the tool of the state who as we all know are the real enemy...

Yes, lets call on the Garda when it suits us but call them scum the rest of the time.

Have your cake and eat it folks. Paul Murphy will spoonfeed it to you as you walk home with no bus to take you there.

XPS_Zero · 09-09-2017 12:13AM

Petyr Baelish wrote: »

All very good points.

I believe that the reason SF, PBP, AAA / Solidarity whatever they want to call themselves now won't get involved is because the enemy here is not the rich man, the 1%. It's the "working class" man and their kids, their voters. They can't go pointing the finger at them now can they? No, it's much better to place the blame on the Garda, the tool of the state who as we all know are the real enemy...

Yes, lets call on the Garda when it suits us but call them scum the rest of the time.

Have your cake and eat it folks. Paul Murphy will spoonfeed it to you as you walk home with no bus to take you there.

Because they see most problems as social ones they can't seem to grasp the concept of an individual doing something wrong. Many problems are social (your parents not teaching you to respect public and private property, that violence is not "funny" it's wrong etc) but those social problems can be solved at a macro policy level while still enforcing individual responsibility. I don't dispute that my growing up in a deprived area makes me more likley to commit crimes, I do dispute that its something that should mitigate my punishment in court, same way being drunk or on drugs should not.

The scrotes who are these little knacks parents are not working class, they are the small but loud class of welfare lifers who in many cases have never worked a day in their lives or if they do work the bare minimum, who "accidentally" get pregnant 5 times in a row while still on the dole etc Working class people actually have jobs.

I don't see any contradiction between having progressive social and crime policies that seek to make these areas nicer places to live and having hammer blow punishments for these kids early on. What tends to happen though is two things, and this is where the problem lies:

1. The parents have never taught them that this stuff is wrong
2. When the system gets a hold of them their solicitor moans about their socio-economic situation and "deprived" area and they get a slap on the wrist, over the years they notice there is no habitual offenders law so they can clock up as many offenses as they want and still get suspended sentences.

As any parent reading this will know kids, like pets, naturally test boundries until a line is drawn and they are told "no!", both of these patterns teach them there are no consequences to my actions, therefore why stop?

I don't have one easy answer, I'm not like RBB, though I do have a long complex set of them I could suggest too long to go into here, the solutions are out there but they're not simplistic. I can understand their frustration in wanting to withdraw busses from the area but I would want to explore ideas that target the offenders much more directly.

Stephen15 · 09-09-2017 12:33AM

Petyr Baelish wrote: »

All very good points.

I believe that the reason SF, PBP, AAA / Solidarity whatever they want to call themselves now won't get involved is because the enemy here is not the rich man, the 1%. It's the "working class" man and their kids, their voters. They can't go pointing the finger at them now can they? No, it's much better to place the blame on the Garda, the tool of the state who as we all know are the real enemy...

Yes, lets call on the Garda when it suits us but call them scum the rest of the time.

Have your cake and eat it folks. Paul Murphy will spoonfeed it to you as you walk home with no bus to take you there.

Heres a video of incidents of Luas security being firm on people. This what SF/PBP/AAA/Solidarity probably support. The person in question obivously did something he's obivously not being restrained by a security guard for no reason

https://youtu.be/HxG4CN4g3bc

Whatever the hell "Freedom of Country" means

Heres another video made by some SJWs well very well said by the security guard at 4:46 and at 6:18.

https://youtu.be/VqpeLlOzgQI

I don't usually defend guards but I think an ordinary person should be protected from crime and anti social behaviour. I'm not against filming the Gardai or anyone for that matter if they're they should called up on it what I am against is people hassling Gardai only doing a job and stopping whats illegal.

I do think there is a certain degree of laziness from Gardai not responding to incudents that aren't serious enough for them. I believe if nipped low level crime such as anti social behavior and small theft in the bud serious crime will follow if dealt properly and effectively.

dfx- · 09-09-2017 02:07AM

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

I had my first and only experience of this route today (or technically yesterday given that it was Thursday). Anyway, my issue with this route is the amount of detours it takes. It was all good up until turning left onto Castletymon Road. From here, it zigzagged through Avonmore Road, Seskin View Road, Old Bawn Road, Belgard Square North, Belgard Square West, Alderpark Court etc. :mad:

All I can say is that I feel very sorry for those who frequently rely on it for getting to town. Some of the roads are heavily traffic calmed, not to mention the fact that there were plenty of tight junctions where the front of the bus ended up on the other side of the road. Having said that, it was a once off. So, it was a bit of an adventure! :rolleyes::D

Bottom line, this route should be split into 2 or 3 dedicated variations!

Absolutely. The route is far far too long and should be back to the Square terminus before Network Direct got hold of it.

It was extended to improve connectivity cover over the cut of the 50.

devnull wrote: »

Remember that Dublin Bus won't get paid for journeys that they do not run.

There should not be a financial incentive or imperative or burden put on companies to send drivers, passengers and buses into danger.

KD345 wrote: »

Whilst this is the case, the Dublin Bus contract with the National Transport Authority clearly details the obligation on the company to operate their buses safely without risk to passengers. The ongoing problems on these routes, to which the NTA are aware, would certainly override the loss of service penalty.

You might as well as shout it at the moon as make the NTA aware about it, what are they going to do about it? Especially after office hours...

devnull · 09-09-2017 10:23AM

dfx- wrote: »

There should not be a financial incentive or imperative or burden put on companies to send drivers, passengers and buses into danger.

If areas are dangerous then the bus should be curtailed and diverted to not serve areas which can reasonably be deemed as being dangerous, then there should not be any with-holding of PSO in my view because it would be unfair.

However if timetabled departures are cancelled and do not operate at all then Dublin Bus should not be paid PSO for them because they are not operating the bus services that they are paid to operate.

Stephen15 · 09-09-2017 12:38PM

liger wrote: »

What about when the problem starts in the Barn or Cork street area, should they just cancel the buses? There was a high number of used needles being left on buses and it was tracked back to this area. Bypassing areas won't solve anything and only punishes decent people who use the service.

I'd be very interested to see exact numbers for incidents recorded, are we talking 5 times a day 7 days a week? once every couple of days. Are these confirmed incidents or some drivers that want to make the rest of their shift handy ? don't say it's not a possibility.

The incidents of leaving syringes on buses tend to rarer and more unpredictable than stone throwing and anti social behaviour. I have heard of syringe incidents on routes like the 39a, 46a and 66b which wouldn't be generally assoicated with anti social behaviour.

Stone throwing tends to happen in housing estates/residential areas where the buses have no where to go just keep getting pelted and it will more than likely happen again and again when the next bus goes through the area. Routes like the 13, 27, 40, 77a and 79/a are hit with anti social behaviour on a regular basis while the rest of the DB network generally runs fine.

brokenarms · 09-09-2017 12:38PM

All called off now. I guess the Garda have come to some sort of arrangement to keep the show on the road.

The withdrawal of bus services from West Tallaght has been called off by unions, following an emergency meeting with Dublin Bus on this morning (Friday)

http://www.echo.ie/news/article/withdrawal-of-bus-services-from-west-tallaght-has-been-called-off

john boye · 09-09-2017 01:41PM

One pet peeve of mine in all this is the widespread use of the "anti-social behaviour" term for stone-throwing etc when it's quite clearly criminal behaviour.

liger · 10-09-2017 12:22AM

brokenarms wrote: »

All called off now. I guess the Garda have come to some sort of arrangement to keep the show on the road.

The withdrawal of bus services from West Tallaght has been called off by unions, following an emergency meeting with Dublin Bus on this morning (Friday)

http://www.echo.ie/news/article/withdrawal-of-bus-services-from-west-tallaght-has-been-called-off

That's a load of B.S..... if an incident happens after 8pm they withdraw for the rest of the night. no difference between 8pm and 9pm and 10pm.

I guarantee that there will be an increase in incidents reported after 8pm.

musiknonstop · 10-09-2017 12:34AM

howiya wrote: »

Who are they expecting to attend on behalf of the "community"?

54a also serves Killinarden. No mention of it in the article

That eejit Paul Murphy maybe, since he's a TD for the area.

brokenarms · 10-09-2017 12:39AM

liger wrote: »

That's a load of B.S..... if an incident happens after 8pm they withdraw for the rest of the night. no difference between 8pm and 9pm and 10pm.

I guarantee that there will be an increase in incidents reported after 8pm.

Im not sure what you are getting at there.

Are you saying the drivers may report more that may not have happened?

Stephen15 · 10-09-2017 12:40AM

liger wrote: »

That's a load of B.S..... if an incident happens after 8pm they withdraw for the rest of the night. no difference between 8pm and 9pm and 10pm.

I guarantee that there will be an increase in incidents reported after 8pm.

I would imagine that a driver would have to prove that an incident has actually happened. If there is a Garda or even an internal DB investigation CCTV would have to prove it did happen. If not then a driver would surely be disciplined.

If it was a stone throwing incident which seems to be a bulk of the issue here windows would likely be smashed. I would imagine company policy would dictate that any thats not in fit condition for service will have to return to base for the issue to be rectified. A smashed window would fall into this category. If the bus is not fit for service its hardly the drivers fault.

liger · 10-09-2017 11:01AM

brokenarms wrote: »

Im not sure what you are getting at there.

Are you saying the drivers may report more that may not have happened?

Yes. I'm suggesting that it will be abused by certain drivers who will want to make their shift easier. It's too easy too abuse.

Stevek101 · 10-09-2017 11:53AM

liger wrote: »

Yes. I'm suggesting that it will be abused by certain drivers who will want to make their shift easier. It's too easy too abuse.

According to the Code of Practice drawn up at this morning’s meeting, buses damaged by antisocial behaviour “must be sent to the Garda station in Tallaght [and] the driver should point out any damage to the investigating Garda”.

Surely that is suppose to prevent that. Supposedly the 27 is being GT operated at the minute.

brokenarms · 10-09-2017 12:22PM

liger wrote: »

Yes. I'm suggesting that it will be abused by certain drivers who will want to make their shift easier. It's too easy too abuse.

The driver is to take the bus in question to the Garda station after the incident to report the damage.

Also the video cctv of 12 cameras will be examined.

Your assumptions are well of the mark Liger.

AlekSmart · 10-09-2017 12:47PM

liger wrote: »

Yes. I'm suggesting that it will be abused by certain drivers who will want to make their shift easier. It's too easy too abuse.

As an aside,do you have a set of alternative proposals which will address the problem,or is it your contention that the problem is imaginary ?

liger · 10-09-2017 03:32PM

AlekSmart wrote: »

As an aside,do you have a set of alternative proposals which will address the problem,or is it your contention that the problem is imaginary ?

My problem is that I don't see why a bus being hit by a stone at 19.55 means an hour withdrawal but a bus being hit by a stone at 20.05 means people lose their services for the rest of the evening. And that it's a system to easy to abuse.

example.

77a driving around killinarden heights, Driver hears a bang and reports it. Drives to garda station in tallaght, Can't see any damage, cctv is pulled, won't see stone hitting bus unless a window breaks. buses withdrawn.

Next night driver going around the heights, fed up with speed ramps and short running time or just hates the routes. calls control, reports a bang, goes to garda station. no damage, cctv sees nothing. buses withdrawn.

It's too easy to abuse and the 20.00 cut off makes no sense.

Stephen15 · 10-09-2017 03:51PM

liger wrote: »

My problem is that I don't see why a bus being hit by a stone at 19.55 means an hour withdrawal but a bus being hit by a stone at 20.05 means people lose their services for the rest of the evening. And that it's a system to easy to abuse.

example.

77a driving around killinarden heights, Driver hears a bang and reports it. Drives to garda station in tallaght, Can't see any damage, cctv is pulled, won't see stone hitting bus unless a window breaks. buses withdrawn.

Next night driver going around the heights, fed up with speed ramps and short running time or just hates the routes. calls control, reports a bang, goes to garda station. no damage, cctv sees nothing. buses withdrawn.

It's too easy to abuse and the 20.00 cut off makes no sense.

Theres multiple CCTV cameras both inside and outside the bus. So any incident may need to be proved by CCTV. If an incident can't be proven then I would imagine that the driver maybe subject to displinary action.

8pm might be a little early to start pulling buses for the rest of the night. But if an incident happened after 9 it will be 10 by the time they're back and then its not far from last bus so not really much point.

Issue with the 77A

Comments