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

John Waters & Gemma O'Doherty to challenge lockdown in the high Court

Long_Wave

Now I know they are going to get a lot of ridicule for this but the lockdown is almost certainly unconstitutional so I wish them luck. https://mobile.twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/1250421661062459399

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

[Deleted User]

martingriff wrote: »

Well I have just done crude maths on RIP.ie March of Last year there was 89 pages of deaths with 41 on each so multiplies both together and then took away 300 for the times a death may be on twice and got 3,349.

Did the same for 2020

This time there were 97 pages did the same but subtracted 326 just for the increase of pages and got 3,651.

I know its crude both even by the increase in the amount of pages you will see there were more this year then last year

It's worse than crude, it's a very bad method. Even your own maths is estimating.

You have no idea how many actual deaths made it to that site either this year or last. All your research does is show there were more notices, not deaths.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

It's worse than crude, it's a very bad method. Even your own maths is estimating.

You have no idea how many actual deaths made it to that site either this year or last. All your research does is show there were more notices, not deaths.

It’s fine for now. We will eventually know the death rate. A crude measurement is useful until we have that because the cultural norm in this country is to give notice of deaths. That won’t be any different this year.

scudzilla

Glebee wrote: »

Just back from a next door neighbours funeral who pasted away from complication due to Covid 19. Fcuk off Gemma you absolute mongloid.

In the history of boards i'd say that was the most rewarding red card ever

Be right back

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

If death notices aren’t currently needed, the numbers on RIP.ie should be down then, shouldn’t they? How come they’re up?

You seem to be suggesting that more people are paying for something that they have less need for this year than last year. Which makes no sense.

On the RIP notices, perhaps it's more of a way for people to sympathise with the family by posting a condolence as they cannot physically attend the funeral. It may be why the number of notices haven't decreased.

Pablo Escobar

Juicee wrote: »

Gemma posted a stat on her twitter showing the deaths are down about 1000 versus at this stage in 2017 / 2018 / 2019. She also posted a US gov stat showing seasonal flu deaths plummeted vs same stage in previous years.
I haven't verified this myself personally. I'm sure it could be proven (or disproven if untrue) easily enough

Maybe she's also disputing which direction is 'down' and which is 'up', but in my world deaths are up by c.1,000 in Ireland v last year,
in the period since 1st March, even though the official COVID stats are lower.

Seasonal flu deaths were down this year. Some years they're up and others they're down. I'm not sure what that has to do with a viral outbreak though.

The moral here really though is that you need to verify her posts before you post it in a public forum.

martingriff

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

It's worse than crude, it's a very bad method. Even your own maths is estimating.

You have no idea how many actual deaths made it to that site either this year or last. All your research does is show there were more notices, not deaths.

Yep I even said as such. You seem to take this bad that there maybe more death this month for this year. Even when shown more seem to pay this year for the service you get very defensive

facehugger99

scudzilla wrote: »

In the history of boards i'd say that was the most rewarding red card ever

Sure, calling someone a mongloid.

What a hero.

Annasopra

Long_Wave wrote: »

Now I know they are going to get a lot of ridicule for this but the lockdown is almost certainly unconstitutional so I wish them luck. https://mobile.twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/1250421661062459399

On what basis do you believe it is almost certainly unconstitutional?

[Deleted User]

facehugger99 wrote: »

Sure, calling someone a mongloid.

What a hero.

As predictable as ever.

Annasopra

Seth Brundle wrote: »

But apart from attention seeking, what benefit is it to them? Businesses are closing their doors (and had been doing so before the lockdown) because of the obvious benefits to their customers, their workforce and so on.
Why would anyone with an ounce of cop-on want to remove the procedures that minimise the spread of a deadly virus?

Gemma has said the virus doesnt exist, that is a hoax designed to allow 5g camers monitor the Irish population.

Annasopra

Pinkpotato wrote: »

The constitution actually allows for this during outbreaks of infectious disease. Which is why legaslation only had to be built on for the new laws and not a full referendum

Where?

Boggles

Why is a court entertaining this bollíx?

Surely the 2 of them should just be detained under the mental health act and put in a rubber room for 12 months.

Keyzer

Long_Wave wrote: »

Now I know they are going to get a lot of ridicule for this but the lockdown is almost certainly unconstitutional so I wish them luck. https://mobile.twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/1250421661062459399

With all due respect, anyone who supports anything these two nutcases dream up in their deluded minds needs to take a long hard look at themselves. A really long look.

Baggly

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Where?

Keep reading.

Pinkpotato wrote: »

The constitution actually allows for this during outbreaks of infectious disease. Which is why legaslation only had to be built on for the new laws and not a full referendum

bennyl10 wrote: »

Article 24.1 allows for public emergency, not necessary for it to be war,a dn allows for bill to be passed for the preservation of public peace and security

that is actually what's happened in this case

Pinkpotato wrote: »

STATUTORY RULES AND ORDERS. 1941. No. 13.

THE PUBLIC HEALTH (INFECTIOUS DISEASES) REGULATIONS, 1941.

DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC HEALTH.

WHEREAS the Minister for Local Government and Public Health is empowered by Section 148 of the Public Health (Ireland) Act, 1878, as amended by the Public Health Act, 1896, from time to time, to make, alter and revoke regulations with a view to the treatment of persons affected with any epidemic, endemic or infectious disease and for preventing the spread of the disease and to provide for the enforcement and execution of the regulations :

Dr. Bre

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Gemma has said the virus doesnt exist, that is a hoax designed to allow 5g camers monitor the Irish population.

If so they will be very bored monitoring my life

batman_oh

facehugger99 wrote: »

Sure, calling someone a mongloid.

What a hero.

I think that's being generous to this particular individual. She's pathetic

is_that_so

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Where?

It's not absolutely explicit but there is a very broad for the common good theme running through it right from the very top. They'd almost certainly lose the constitutional argument. Their beef is with the legislation and how flawed they claim its enactment is, despite it being both temporary and really just an extension of the 1947 Health Act.

woohoo!!!

What this effort will actually achieve is the passing of censorship laws, to be known as the gemma doctrine.

[Deleted User]

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Again, I'm not in your 'up, down' argument. I'm just suggesting it's a poor method to gauge deaths.

Notices are never needed though, it's an optional thing people do just as some people will have it announced in work or social clubs, some won't. I have never felt the need or desire to let work or my colleagues now about the funerals of my relatives but I get emails about the relatives of colleagues. It's just something some do

RIP.ie notice is a standard inclusion in Funeral directors packages at this stage.

Annasopra

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

You have to pay for rip.ie so it's not an accurate method.

When we take into consideration that there's no funerals and only immediate families at the grave, a notice isn't really needed.

So then theres even more deaths?

Carfacemandog

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Any idea what the pair are trying to achieve from this malarkey?

Disruption and chaos. It's always the end game from people associated with Robert Mercier and declan ganley.

plodder

(Again) not a lawyer, but article 24.1 only refers to the process of passing legislation. It doesn't say anything about the balance of rights between the individual and common good in an emergency situation itself.

It's clear there are or were concerns about constitutionality here. You only have to read the law and regulation passed to see the concern in terms of how limited the restrictions are and how clearly the rationale is explained. There was plenty of opportunity to pass a regulation that would have been unconstitutional. Eg if the 'stay at home' restriction was phrased wrong you could have had a situation where someone was away from home when it came into force, and then committing an offence retrospectively, which would have made the whole measure unconstitutional. Though maybe that was more obvious to professional lawyers.

Though it seems to me the constitution didn't really envisage this situation at all, and what we are relying on is the "unenumerated" personal rights established over the years by the courts eg "bodily integrity" and some kind of sensible interpretation of balancing that right for the majority against the right of Waters and O'Doherty to swan around as they please.

As an academic exercise, maybe this isn't such a bad thing so long as it doesn't affect the actions taken against the pandemic here and now. But, maybe for the future it will be best to have a bit more clarity.

Gregor Samsa

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Again, I'm not in your 'up, down' argument. I'm just suggesting it's a poor method to gauge deaths.

Notices are never needed though, it's an optional thing people do just as some people will have it announced in work or social clubs, some won't. I have never felt the need or desire to let work or my colleagues now about the funerals of my relatives but I get emails about the relatives of colleagues. It's just something some do

No one is suggesting that it's an iron-clad scientific method of determining the death rate. Only the CSO will be able to provide that, and at a much later date. But given that it is a uboiquitous cultural staple in Ireland, there's no reason to think that it's not a valid incicator of a trend.

If the numbers in rip.ie had been down this year, it may have been a valid argument that this did not reflect a dip in the death rates as possibly some people just decided not to post the notices since funeral attendence is restricted. There would be strong atguments against this, but it's all moot because the numbers are up.

To correct you on one point, rip.ie is actually a free service, so your contention that some people will not use it for montiary reasons is not valid (and again, even it it was, it wouldn't explain why the numbers have risen).

I'm not sure if you've ever organised a funeral, but the bit where they ask you for the wording about the death notice is a standard part of the procedure. The costs of publising the notice in a newspaper are insignificant in commparison to the cost of the grave, coffin and fineral director's costs. Whether you send emails to work colleagues about funerals in your familly is yet another moot point. It has nothing to do with the cultural norm of publishing a death notice in this country.

All this aside, if you don't think it's an indication of a higher death rate, what do you suppose is behind the significant rise in death notices on rip.ie for the past month in comparison to other years?

Keyzer

facehugger99 wrote: »

Sure, calling someone a mongloid.

What a hero.

You've got no moral high ground to stand on - some of your recent posts are disgraceful.

Esho

eviltwin wrote: »

Who's bankrolling this pair of muppets?

Does anyone know the answer to this?

TaurenDruid

Dr. Bre wrote: »

If so they will be very bored monitoring my life

But the 5G cameras can only do face recognition if we're more than 6 feet apart, apparently... you couldn't make it up!

[Deleted User]

mikeym wrote: »

Gemma needs to join boards.ie and give her opinion.

I'm sure she's already here.

Juicee

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058070570

gards want to check your shopping now. This latest disturbing development highlights the importance of this constitutional challenge.

TaurenDruid

Juicee wrote: »

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058070570

gards want to check your shopping now. This latest disturbing development highlights the importance of this constitutional challenge.

Yes, Gemma. Whatever you say, Gemma.

YFlyer

Esho wrote: »

Does anyone know the answer to this?

Bill Gates. The plan is to get more people infected.