nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

The Frederick St protest and reaction

guylikeme

Surprised there wasnt a thread. Maybe there's just no shock factor any more to what happens.

Anyways..without debating who is right or wrong on this, id like to hear why Gardai wore Balacalavas. Seems a little overdone.

I am of course coming in late to all this, fill me in if i'm missing obvious detail.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Wheeliebin30

_brendand_ wrote: »

Well they *can* but is it right that during a housing crisis buildings are left unoccupied and unused? I agree that the more correct way to go about it is to encourage the owners of these properties to use them for such purposes by the appropriate incentives, but I imagine that was the intent of the protest. If you're determined to think that the protestors just wanted trouble and nothing else, so be it.

Maybe they want to move in next week it doesn’t matter it’s their house they bought with their money.

No one should tell them how they should use it.

I can’t understand why people think they can.

yabadabado

Yer Da sells Avon wrote: »

The point I'm making is that you should similarly have to apply for permission to leave a house vacant.

Hahaha, Jaysus talk about delusion.

Yer Da sells Avon

yabadabado wrote: »

Hahaha, Jaysus talk about delusion.

In what way is it deluded?

[Deleted User]

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

What about people trying to get home to pick up kids from crèche and have no other alternative?

Yep, pick up their kids from a €1500/2000 a month creche whatever the cost of it is, and then commute home to the arse end of Westmeath or wherever and probably muttering every mile of the way home about their miserable lifestyle. We did this during Celtic Tiger 1 and moaned mightily about it. Celtic Tiger 2 The Sequel finds us doing the exact same thing again and seemingly willing to do nothing about it.

F**k it, you know what, the Pavlovian worshippers of the system deserve their long miserable commutes if they continue to buy into a concept that treats them so badly in the long run.

_brendand_

These Pints Are Savage wrote: »

No you shouldn't. And you don't.

Well think about it - what is the purpose of planning permission? To regulate the development of property such that it is not causing a nuisance to the overall society. How is valuable housing being left vacant not a nuisance to society. If the government can tell me I can't stick a house on some field that I own in the middle of Carlow, why should they not be able to tell me that I have to allow a property to be used?

10000maniacs

Yer Da sells Avon wrote: »

If your 'success' is based around buying properties and allowing them to appreciate during a housing crisis, while doing nothing with them, then you are neither a decent nor productive person - you're a leech.

Again, it is none of your business how the house is used. Lefties drooling over other peoples property. Quite sickening. Earn your own money.

Kermit.de.frog

_brendand_ wrote: »

If you have a house in the center of Dublin which you can afford to not use or rent out, you are most definitely rich, or an idiot (or maybe a rich idiot, but only one need to apply here).

Even if they are an idiot so what? It's their property.

Clearly the vast majority do rent out because it's economically advantageous to do so. Anyone not doing so you are talking about a tiny minority.

Again there may be other reasons a house is not suitable to rent.

NasserShammaz

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

"More or less at the behest of the building owner".... in other words, you don't know, and AGS are refusing to comment who employed the unknown heavy enforcers.

Perhaps the Gards just coincidentally arrived at the same time as the heavies arrived, the two just had a chance meeting upon the street of an early Autumn evening?

This is After Hours I know, where anything can happen, the place where people will turn a blind eye to potential skullduggery taking place by people in unmarked vans with missing reg at the front, UK reg at the back right under the Gards noses, because you know they where there to uphold the law.

Yet at the same time I think this forum would go into meltdown if there was a thread opened that centred on a clapped out van with missing UK registered plates that happened to be driven by a member of a certain minority group. ......

So as I have already said, it's a bit rich to preach that the Gards were there to facilitate this gang of masked men, who if acting in a security capacity, one would expect to be obliged to wear some kind of identification, let alone be driving a vehicle that complied with our road traffic laws.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I would have thought these same folk would expect to see the law of the land applied to each party, impartiality being assumed obviously?

How much is it to rent a Guard these days

Yer Da sells Avon

10000maniacs wrote: »

Again, it is none of your business how the house is used. Lefties drooling over other peoples property. Quite sickening.

If you want to add an extra window to the front of your house, or re-clad the building to your own questionable individual taste, should that be none of anyone else's business?

Noveight

Deleted User wrote: »

F**k it, you know what, the Pavlovian worshippers of the system deserve their long miserable commutes if they continue to buy into a concept that treats them so badly in the long run.

For the most part they've no focking choice!

Sitting on your arse on O'Connell street at rush hour of a Wednesday won't put food on the table nor a school uniform on a young lad.

dxhound2005

NasserShammaz wrote: »

How much is it to rent a Guard these days

More expensive than renting a Gard.

prinzeugen

Oh great. The "Shame, shame, shame on you" rent a mob is back is back in action with their so called peaceful protests.

I wish they would feck off to Russia or North Korea if they think socialism/communism is so bloody wonder and leave us to it.

Kermit.de.frog

Yer Da sells Avon wrote: »

In what way is it deluded?

It's private property.

Here is what angers me about this for those on the moral horse - it's fine to be on that high horse so long as your rights are not being infringed.

But there is very short distance between the state telling others what to do with their own property and that happening to you some day.

Then you will have a different attitude completely.

If you want communism or Venezuelan socialism just say it. It's not a crime.

But don't try and dress it up as if your suggestions are something different to that or don't quite go that far or whatever.

Hurrache

Makes no sense whatsoever inconveniencing the ordinary wurker as many of those involved in politics supporting such protests would say.

Why not picket and block the county council and other local government offices, places in which people work who can actually make a difference?

Let's see the socialists support that, inconvenience themselves and their colleagues, or is it too much hassle for the protestors to get a bus out to Tallaght, Swords, Blanchardstown and so on?

Yer Da sells Avon

prinzeugen wrote: »

Oh great. The "Shame, shame, shame on you" rent a mob is back is back in action with their so called peaceful protests.

I wish they would feck off to Russia or North Korea if they think socialism/communism is so bloody wonder and leave us to it.

Frankly, I wish all the landlords' bootlickers would fuck off to... I dunno, anywhere, frankly.

McMurphy

10000maniacs wrote: »

Again, it is none of your business how the house is used. Lefties drooling over other peoples property. Quite sickening. Earn your own money.

Been thinking of maybe turning my grannys old tenement gaff into a knockin shop.

She can move in with us for a while so as I can cash up for a while.

If the next door neighbours whinge I'll tell them to mind their own business so.

This time next year Rodders......

Yer Da sells Avon

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

It's private property.

Here is what angers me about this for those on the moral horse - it's fine to be on that high horse so long as your rights are not being infringed.

But there is very short distance between the state telling others what to do with their own property and that happening to you some day.

Then you will have a different attitude completely.

If you want communism or Venezuelan socialism just say it. It's not a crime.

But don't try and dress it up as if your suggestions are something different to that or don't quite go that far or whatever.

You're too obtuse (I'll be kind and assume it's just willful obtuseness anyway) to acknowledge the fact that it is already the case that you cannot do whatever you want with private property.

Kermit.de.frog

Hurrache wrote: »

Makes no sense whatsoever inconveniencing the ordinary wurker as many of those involved in politics supporting such protests would say.

Why not picket and block the county council and other local government offices, places in which people work who can actually make a difference?

Let's see the socialists support that, inconvenience themselves and their colleagues, or is it too much hassle for the protestors to get a bid out to Tallaght, Swords, Blanchardstown and so on?

I wonder how many of them have jobs because most people don't have the time to be 24/7 protesters.

weldoninhio

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

"More or less at the behest of the building owner".... in other words, you don't know, and AGS are refusing to comment who employed the unknown heavy enforcers.

Perhaps the Gards just coincidentally arrived at the same time as the heavies arrived, the two just had a chance meeting upon the street of an early Autumn evening?

This is After Hours I know, where anything can happen, the place where people will turn a blind eye to potential skullduggery taking place by people in unmarked vans with missing reg at the front, UK reg at the back right under the Gards noses, because you know they where there to uphold the law.

Yet at the same time I think this forum would go into meltdown if there was a thread opened that centred on a clapped out van with missing UK registered plates that happened to be driven by a member of a certain minority group. ......

So as I have already said, it's a bit rich to preach that the Gards were there to facilitate this gang of masked men, who if acting in a security capacity, one would expect to be obliged to wear some kind of identification, let alone be driving a vehicle that complied with our road traffic laws.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I would have thought these same folk would expect to see the law of the land applied to each party, impartiality being assumed obviously?

The eviction team would have rang the Gardaí ahead of time to let them know when they were going to begin eviction proceedings. The Gardaí would have assessed the potential for any trouble starting, they would have taken into account the fact that the crusties were already ignoring a court order and likely to resist. The Gardaí may not know who employed the eviction team, or if they are even employed, it could be family members or friends of the owner. That is not the Gardai’s concern.

There is no obligation for them to wear ID as explained earlier in the thread. The vehicle did comply with our road traffic laws, as explained by AGS spokesperson in the Irish Times.

Could you explain what law the eviction team broke?

[Deleted User]

Noveight wrote: »

For the most part they've no focking choice!

Sitting on your arse on O'Connell street at rush hour of a Wednesday won't put food on the table nor a school uniform on a young lad.

Well I'm afraid I'll see you back here for the Celtic Tiger sequels 3,4,5 & 6 then..... If you think nothing can be done about it then that's what will happen... nothing.

Hurrache

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Been thinking of maybe turning my grannys old tenement gaff into a knockin shop.

She can move in with us for a while so as I can cash up for a while.

If the next door neighbours whinge I'll tell them to mind their own business so.

This time next year Rodders......

Big difference, what you're proposing is facilitating an illegal activity.

cursai

2A29C62300000578-3148193-Dangerous_Children_in_the_Philippines_are_risking_their_lives_to-a-11_1435912665033.jpg

Oh the horror. If only these wasters went on holidays to other places except Majorca to kick each others heads in like ferrel dogs, they might have some perspective on things.

Brock Turnpike

Crusties! Huh!
What are they good for?
Absolutely nothing
Sing it again...

Crusties! Huh!

end of the road

steves2 wrote: »

if you want a free house, you shouldn't get to pick where it is.

there are no free houses. there are subsidized houses, and those who need them don't ultimately get to pick where they get them in practice as it stands. they may do on paper, and that's a non-issue.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Don't these people have jobs? It's a Wednesday evening...

yes, i believe a lot of them likely do have jobs. it's not just the jobless that protest.
i'd imagine their jobs are finished for the day, or their shift isn't until later. you could go in to the protest and ask them i'm sure, if you really want to know the answer?

Franz Von Peppercorn

These Pints Are Savage wrote: »

Because I do not like the idea of government forcing me to do something with my property that I have bought with my money. Your comparison does not work.

Why don't you lefties move to Venezuela? I hear it's great over there, everyone is a multi millionaire these days!

The comparison works exactly because it was about planning permission. Which stops people doing things with their property.

Anyway the housing situation needs to be solved one way or t’other.

prinzeugen

Yer Da sells Avon wrote: »

Frankly, I wish all the landlords' bootlickers would fuck off to... I dunno, anywhere, frankly.

Is that just landlords or does it include anyone that owns private property?

20Cent

Vacant properties devalue the houses around them, are bad for neighbourhoods and are a waste of space. If they can't afford to make it habitable enough the let out then sell it. Should be a big tax on vacant buildings so they either get used or sold to someone who will use it.

McMurphy

Gotta laugh at the folk proclaiming private property rights this and constitution that now in the face of protest against the govt.

A few years ago I remember the very same people laughing at people who were proclaiming their private property rights/the constitution etc when FG were introducing the HHC and LPT taxes......

Can't decide which group to call game keeper and which group are poachers, the arguments gone full circle.

Franz Von Peppercorn

10000maniacs wrote: »

Again, it is none of your business how the house is used. Lefties drooling over other peoples property. Quite sickening. Earnyour own money.

Funny enough rent isnt considered earned income.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unearned_income

And of course most renters work.

Franz Von Peppercorn

These Pints Are Savage wrote: »

Doesn't work at all. If I want to change my property then yes I have to get planning permission. If I live in a listed building I can't change it one bit. If I don't want to do anything I don't need permission and I don't have to worry about the Commissar coming to seize it. Feels good to live in a free country.

In both cases you are not free to do what you like with your property.