Off Topic Chat. (MOD NOTE post# 3949 and post#5279)

tonysopprano · 15-06-2021 2:24am

(4) Any reference in subsection (1) of this section to an offence includes a reference to attempting or conspiring to commit the offence.

AND ONLY TO THE OFFENCES MENTIONED IN SUBSECTION 1

tonysopprano · 15-06-2021 2:41am

But of course that's why they snuck it in, under the SCAMDEMIC legislation, without any debate or or having to go through oireachtas and seanad, JUST BECAUSE IT WAS NOTHING THAT WASN'T THERE ALREADY. What bubble did you arrive in?

tonysopprano · 15-06-2021 2:43am

"I've explained it to you several times and you can't seem to grasp it. Every power of arrest, search and detention in the new Bill is a direct replacement for an already existing power."

If nothing new, why waste time on it?

Mellor · 15-06-2021 11:41am

otmmyboy2 wrote: »

Suspect in a crime therefore suspected of committing an offence, thus what I said was accurate with the information to hand.
Therefore not misinformation - false or inaccurate information, especially that which is deliberately intended to deceive
Since it was not false or inaccurate given the information I had to hand.

But it was false, the “information to hand” doesn’t make it true.
Now, it wasn’t your fault, the article wasn’t crystal clear. But nonetheless what was posted was incorrect. Which makes it misinformation.
The majority of misinformation that’s spread is done so unintentional, that’s why it’s so rampant in the modern era where reads source material.

Mellor · 15-06-2021 11:57am

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

.
Or let me put it another way if you believe this...You would have no problem then if AGS,the Revenue ,Tusla,and any other welfare or law enforcement organisation ,dropped in tomorrow at 3AM with no warrant,no excuse,or other plausible reason to search your house,your private papers,and your bottom sock drawer.Question you,your family and underage children without any legal counsel,you present on any topic they fancy ,and for as long they want?Take any documents,papers ,or anything they want as "evidence of a crime"not spe ified
Then leave with no explanation or reason?
You would object?But if you have done nothing wrong,what have you got to hide?

That would be illegal for them to do that without a warrant. I don’t see how’s that the relevant? The above applies to searches under a warrant.

For example, say a paedophile this subject to a search warrant, the above makes it possible to extend that to his pin/password. Are you actually arguing that a suspect paedophile has a right of privacy to his personal device. I doubt it.

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

But why would they need, a warrant?

Because it’s a fundamental tenet of the law. That’s kinda basic stuff.

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

We've already seen where some guy in the UK, while having beliefs and views on Nazism has been jailed because he had "nazi memobrillia" and some "banned books"[freely available on Amazon.co.uk and in your local bookshop]

You think he was a poor victim of the law? :pac: :pac:

BattleCorp · 15-06-2021 12:00pm

Uinseann_16 wrote: »

So lads this is it , encryption on devices no longer protects you if you don't hand your password over to a warrantless search you'll be thrown in jail for 5 years and fined 30,000
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/new-garda-powers-to-allow-access-to-mobile-phones-1.4592434
Sad day for privacy
Absolutely an abuse of powers will arise form this
Doesn't matter if you're innocent ,you're assumed guilty with no right to privacy

https://assets.gov.ie/137505/620ea206-de91-4bb3-97b1-0e0209b3ecf8.pdf

Section 16 leads me to believe that they need a warrant to force you to provide your passwords etc.

Grizzly 45 · 15-06-2021 9:37pm

tudderone wrote: »

I have an uncle who decided to head to the pub one night for a jar, while there the pub was unusually quiet and he got chatting with a lad at the bar about racing and football and all that rubbish. Two mornings later at about 6 am his front door was taken off the hinges and a couple of car loads of branch men piled in, he was nicked in handcuffs etc and taken off to the station while the house was ransacked.

Turns out the guy, who he didn't know, was involved with a republican group, the chatting and passing the time of day was enough to get someone a warrant and his privacy invaded and him arrested.

This "It'll never happen to me" line is in the famous last words top ten.

Yup!! Happened to a mate of mine too down in Ennis about 10 years ago. Seen talking to the wrong person who was a friend of his then GF's brother who was involved in something illegal.Gott an oh dark hundred wake up call courtesy of AGS SB too.

Grizzly 45 · 15-06-2021 9:49pm

Mellor wrote: »

That would be illegal for them to do that without a warrant. I don’t see how’s that the relevant? The above applies to searches under a warrant.

Do the words "HYPOTHETICAL EXAMPLE" mean anything to you?

Snippage of irrelevant verbiage

You think he was a poor victim of the law? :pac: :pa

What is he exactly GUILTY of under UK law may I ask???

Apart from being a moron, it seems to be believing still in an ideology that is more or less in histories dustbin.

Owning 3 books that are commonly available ? They are not illegal to own, well maybe now in the UK.It might be nice if the UK govt published a banned list then to prevent such incidents occurring in the future:roll eyes:

Being sentenced by a judge with a bias against "right wing extremists"but is very tolerant of Islamist and Leftist extremism in similar cases.

So yeah,your " poor victim of the law" quip is extremely fitting.:pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac:

Grizzly 45 · 15-06-2021 9:55pm

BattleCorp wrote: »

https://assets.gov.ie/137505/620ea206-de91-4bb3-97b1-0e0209b3ecf8.pdf

Section 16 leads me to believe that they need a warrant to force you to provide your passwords etc.

Wonder how long will it be before some bright spark develops a total bleach of your phone,if you input a code once or twice? I can see that one being a top seller with criminals or anyone else not wanting a snooper on your phone.

TBH you must be a pretty dumb criminal to have a phone or computer chock full of info on you or at home. Anyone smart will be using multiple burner phones or computer and account for one-off communications.

Mellor · 16-06-2021 3:35am

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Do the words "HYPOTHETICAL EXAMPLE" mean anything to you?

An example is usually supposed to be relevant or have a point. :rolleyes:
An illegal, unwarranted searches has no bearing on the topic. Not sure what point you thought you were making. Good to know you're support paedo-privacy though.

What is he exactly GUILTY of under UK law may I ask???

I'd have to read the case notes or judgement to answer that.
Should be spelled out in black and white what the conviction was in the summary.

Apart from being a moron, it seems to be believing still in an ideology that is more or less in histories dustbin.

You think Fascism doesn't exist in 21st century?

Obvious no intelligent reasonable people subscribe to it. Could say the exact same about communism.
Idiots. But idiots that exist.

Owning 3 books that are commonly available ? They are not illegal to own, well maybe now in the UK.It might be nice if the UK govt published a banned list then to prevent such incidents occurring in the future:roll eyes:

But I'd be pretty confident that he wasn't jailing simply for owning Mein Kampf or similar. As pointed out here, it's on sale in Easons and I'd guess in UK book shops too. Probably thousands sold every year.

Being sentenced by a judge with a bias against "right wing extremists"but is very tolerant of Islamist and Leftist extremism in similar cases.

Funny you mention that.
I sure you'd be equally a sympathetic to some Islamist right to preach jihad or buy bomb making books. Or that they shouldn't be subjected to search warrants. :pac::pac::pac:

Your post history betrays you there.

otmmyboy2 · 16-06-2021 11:10am

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Wonder how long will it be before some bright spark develops a total bleach of your phone,if you input a code once or twice?

Already exists.
If you are employed in a lot of companies which deal in sensitive information and want to access your work emails/internal wiki/memos/info etc on your personal phone you must install an application that can wipe your phone remotely, or on input of a code or sequence of physical buttons(if applicable).

Outlook on mobile also offers a similar feature.

There are obviously more intrusive ones which would clean your phone so that even a digital forensics expert would have a slim chance of recovering anything, but the 2 methods I mentioned above are already commonplace in certain industries.

otmmyboy2 · 16-06-2021 11:30am

Mellor wrote: »

An example is usually supposed to be relevant or have a point. :rolleyes:
An illegal, unwarranted searches has no bearing on the topic. Not sure what point you thought you were making. Good to know you're support paedo-privacy though.

Privacy is just that, privacy. Same as firearms. Similarly they can be used for good or bad, but the things themselves are not inherently either.

Nice use of strawman arguments though. :P

Also talking about illegal vs legal warranted searches rather ignores the potential for legal, but immoral, laws being passed which would unfairly penalize a segment of the population.

Everything that happened in the holocaust and the holodomor was legal by the laws at the time, but that does not make it right.
Huh, on a side note Google flags holodomor as a misspelling(missing from their dictionary) despite it being correct, and having killed ~4 million.
Bias possibly? :P

I know many here would disagree on the nature of right vs wrong in laws regarding covid, unprecedented as they were here in peacetime, and even by comparison to the "Emergency" year's measures.

Legal != moral, particularly with the current trend of legislating morality in western countries.

I'd have to read the case notes or judgement to answer that.
Should be spelled out in black and white what the conviction was in the summary.

"guilty of possessing materials likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism"
According to here:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-berkshire-56499185

Sadly that "crime" is sufficiently encompassing everything that someone could use to commit a terrorist act.
IE, pretty much everything.
Perhaps when they do finally outlaw everything but double barrel shotguns over there that will be the argument they use.
Firearms could definitely fall under "materials likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism", as could kitchen knives, several common household cleaning agents, etc.

Your post history betrays you there.

Looking back on anyone's post history in OT and you don't need a doctorate in political philosophy, or psychology, to figure out the gist of the poster's political leanings.

Personally I like that there is such a lively debate among the differing axes on the political spectrum.
I'd actually be very curious to see the results of some other member's political compass tests.

Here's my most recent one, the idea being you do it periodically and see where or how your views change over time:
https://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2?ec=4.5&soc=-4.72

Grizzly 45 · 16-06-2021 12:56pm

otmmyboy2 wrote: »

Ev
I do think that AGS can make up the law in some cases.

Just got to look at the many cases of them abusing their powers under COVID regulations to see that in action.:mad:

otmmyboy2 · 16-06-2021 1:00pm

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Just got to look at the many cases of them abusing their powers under COVID regulations to see that in action.:mad:

Indeed, people getting ticketed for not going to their nearest shop, as opposed to the one 10 minutes further away. :mad:

Grizzly 45 · 16-06-2021 1:53pm

Mellor wrote: »

An example is usually supposed to be relevant or have a point. :rolleyes:

It does...But if you can't see it that's your problem.... try using a thing called your imagination..It's where hypothetical situations are discussed.And where some who think they are and always will be guiltless seem to live too.

An illegal, unwarranted searches has no bearing on the topic. Not sure what point you thought you were making. Good to know you support paedo-privacy though.

Irrevelant and a poor attempt at an insult and argument.Whataboutery of the padeo boogeyman...

I'd have to read the case notes or judgement to answer that.
Should be spelled out in black and white what the conviction was in the summary.

But I'd be pretty confident that he wasn't jailing simply for owning Mein Kampf or similar. As pointed out here, it's on sale in Easons and I'd guess in UK book shops too. Probably thousands sold every year.

Might be a good idea to go read it then and then comment?
Be the second time you have fallen into the same trap in the last month by being thoroughly uninformed and commenting:D
But herses a starter for you to research on,or not maybe?

https://centipedenation.com/second-column/england-man-jailed-5-years-for-having-3-lawful-books-and-for-being-right-wing/
Or just go back a weeks worth of posts to find the discussion here.

You think Fascism doesn't exist in 21st century?

You do realise Fascism and Nazism are two completely different ideals. So please define which one you think is a problem and don't be lazy by throwing the two of them together?And the way you can be called a "fascist" these days on Social media or wherever for having a different viewpoint, makes the term as non-insulting and irrelevant.

Obvious no intelligent reasonable people subscribe to it. Could say the exact same about communism.
Idiots. But idiots that exist.

ASFIK there is no law on being an idiot in the World? Or an idiot who espouses a dead and debunkedpolitical ideal,who reads outdated technical manuals on hand to hand fighting and a manual full of dangerously inaccurate chemical formulas on making explosives and narcotics?But obviously not idiotic enough to try them out and reduce the global population of idiots by one.

Funny you mention that.
I sure you'd be equally a sympathetic to some Islamist right to preach jihad or buy bomb making books. Or that they shouldn't be subjected to search warrants. :pac::pac::pac:

They can do and read and preach whatever they want,so long as they don't put their warped beliefs which are just as totalitarian as Communism or Nazism into practise and start bombing, shooting to knifing in the name of their imaginary sky pal ,Allah.
Same as some Swastika wearing dope can go yell about Hitler being his god,or some moron wearing a red star beret can waffle on about how great Che was. Called freedom of Speech.

But what we do not do is arrest and imprison them because they "might" commit a crime or do something with their knowledge to harm others.
It's supposition of a crime and more than the rest a sure sign of a totalitarian society. Yes,you can yell fire in a crowded cinema,but you then must accept the total personal consequences for your action.

Go preach jihad in your mosque,but don't be surprised if you are doing a long stretch inside,or some other nutter arrives and uses your followers as target practice.

Go and believe that you have done nothing wrong and have nothing to hide,and that its "good law" that "only targets "padeos, criminals,and subversives and the"alt right wing" [whatever that is]..

Until someday something you do or post or possess is considered "a criminal act or material to assist in a crime, or contraband" And then tell some kangaroo court you aren't a criminal.:rolleyes:
What is legal today might be illegal tomorrow and as such a good citizen who has done nothing ,blah,blah,blah.Why do you have it in your possession then?

Your post history betrays you there.

Whatever that obtuse statement is supposed to mean.

Grizzly 45 · 16-06-2021 2:09pm

intresting take on this discussion

https://www.theburkean.ie/articles/2021/06/16/the-new-garda-powers-bill-a-cause-for-concern

BattleCorp · 16-06-2021 2:12pm

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Wonder how long will it be before some bright spark develops a total bleach of your phone,if you input a code once or twice? I can see that one being a top seller with criminals or anyone else not wanting a snooper on your phone.

TBH you must be a pretty dumb criminal to have a phone or computer chock full of info on you or at home. Anyone smart will be using multiple burner phones or computer and account for one-off communications.

Yep, that's what I do. :pac::pac::pac:

Grizzly 45 · 16-06-2021 2:14pm

More seriously, demanding medical certs off people who are not wearing masks and demanding it be provided to them in person at their local AGS station within 24 hours or face arrest.
2 cases of it down here in Limerick I've heard of.:mad:

Witcher · 16-06-2021 3:21pm

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

intresting take on this discussion

https://www.theburkean.ie/articles/2021/06/16/the-new-garda-powers-bill-a-cause-for-concern

Good to have more poorly researched takes on the new Bill.

As the same legislation intends to give Gardaí the power to forcefully take a finger-print

'How dare the Gardai get this power that they already have'

Feisar · 16-06-2021 5:18pm

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

More seriously, demanding medical certs off people who are not wearing masks and demanding it be provided to them in person at their local AGS station within 24 hours or face arrest.
2 cases of it down here in Limerick I've heard of.:mad:

Hardly a problem, just wear a mask or carry yer cert.

Munsterlad102 · 16-06-2021 6:17pm

Feisar wrote: »

Hardly a problem, just wear a mask or carry yer cert.

Let's be honest, it's not life a piece of cotton is going to stop you getting or spreading a microscopic airborne virus. Look at the masks people wear spray painting or ones used for biological or chemical warfare and compare that to what is supposed to stop a global pandemic. The masks are no more than a psychological technique to give the impression of change and help.

Richard308 · 16-06-2021 6:28pm

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

More seriously, demanding medical certs off people who are not wearing masks and demanding it be provided to them in person at their local AGS station within 24 hours or face arrest.
2 cases of it down here in Limerick I've heard of.:mad:

What’s the big deal to wear a face shield/ mask? Even less say to carry a letter from a doctor saying you are unfit to wear a mask. People are nervous of the virus and they alleviate peoples concerns or unjustified concerns who knows. But that is the law in most countries

Feisar · 16-06-2021 7:11pm

Munsterlad102 wrote: »

Let's be honest, it's not life a piece of cotton is going to stop you getting or spreading a microscopic airborne virus. Look at the masks people wear spray painting or ones used for biological or chemical warfare and compare that to what is supposed to stop a global pandemic. The masks are no more than a psychological technique to give the impression of change and help.

Agreed, however them’s the rules. Plus it’s hardly a massive ask. Overall AGS have been pretty light handed.

hiddenmongoose · 16-06-2021 7:53pm

Munsterlad102 wrote: »

Let's be honest, it's not life a piece of cotton is going to stop you getting or spreading a microscopic airborne virus. Look at the masks people wear spray painting or ones used for biological or chemical warfare and compare that to what is supposed to stop a global pandemic. The masks are no more than a psychological technique to give the impression of change and help.

100%, set of boxers and jeans cant hold in a good fart that can clear a room but a homemade 1mm of leopard print fabric will save us all from the most deadly virus, its all just a pretense, to be seen doing something proactive

Bog Trotter99 · 16-06-2021 8:42pm

hiddenmongoose wrote: »

100%, set of boxers and jeans cant hold in a good fart that can clear a room but a homemade 1mm of leopard print fabric will save us all from the most deadly virus, its all just a pretense, to be seen doing something proactive

That's probably the best example I have heard for not wearing a mask.

I would like to see someone argue with that logic.

badaj0z · 16-06-2021 8:50pm

Farts are mainly gas, if not then 1mm of cloth will save you from embarrassment .If you have a real problem with this then brown jeans are recommended. Masks are designed to stop liquid born contaminants such as cough "splutter". The diameter of the liquid globules defines how close a weave or print the material in the mask structure should be.

Cass · 16-06-2021 8:57pm

hiddenmongoose wrote: »

100%, set of boxers and jeans cant hold in a good fart that can clear a room .........

badaj0z wrote: »

Farts are mainly gas, if not then 1mm of cloth will save you from embarrassment .If you have a real problem with this then brown jeans are recommended.

................ and there it is. We're actually talking sh*t.

Be careful, don't want a Fauci situation here:

Munsterlad102 · 16-06-2021 8:58pm

badaj0z wrote: »

Masks are designed to stop liquid born contaminants such as cough "splutter". The diameter of the liquid globules defines how close a weave or print the material in the mask structure should be.

True, however Covid 19 is mostly airborne when you cough/exhale and not in the droplets. So that sort of negates anything fabric related stopping it's spread.

Witcher · 16-06-2021 9:14pm

Munsterlad102 wrote: »

True, however Covid 19 is mostly airborne when you cough/exhale and not in the droplets. So that sort of negates anything fabric related stopping it's spread.

It's airborne as an aerosol. Airborne doesn't mean it's a gas, it means that the droplets are being borne by air.

A mask prevents the expulsion of droplets and them becoming aerosolised during speech or a cough/sneeze.

https://www.livescience.com/face-mask-visualization-droplets-covid-19.html

badaj0z · 16-06-2021 9:15pm

Munsterlad102 wrote: »

True, however Covid 19 is mostly airborne when you cough/exhale and not in the droplets. So that sort of negates anything fabric related stopping it's spread.

What is your source for this statement?

tudderone · 16-06-2021 9:29pm

Putin has a go off America because of Gun violence, if you ever needed evidence you're on the right side, there it is.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9693491/Putin-insists-no-hostility-Biden.html

Grizzly 45 · 16-06-2021 11:06pm

Feisar wrote: »

Hardly a problem, just wear a mask or carry yer cert.

I m not in the habit of handing out my medical information to complete strangers who have NO authority to demand it in the first place.
Nor do I think wearing a bit of ol T shirt on my face will stop micron sized bacteria from being either exhaled or inhaled.:rolleyes:

Grizzly 45 · 16-06-2021 11:20pm

[

QUOTE=Cass;117440051]Interpreting, but not implementing.

Sorry.IMPLEMENTED in numerous cases in Limerick and Kerry divisions under his dictatorhip including me and my mother in 2009. Was the starter of the Limerick DC cases.

Attempted, next.

Sedition of Irish law as it stood...Next.
T

I wasn't discussing public consultation.

.
I was...

This is exactly what I've been saying, checks and balances.

That seemingly don't work too well here for some reason.

Again, a failed attempt because they cannot legislate and the courts/law will prevent them doing otherwise (doing, not trying).

And how many could have afforded court cases,as well as now in the future?It's gone from thousands to tens of thousands with the lawyers eyeing up the dC cost awards nowadays.

Because its their job to. Even in America, where they have a constitutional right to firearms, they still get crap and its up tot he courts to decide

.
However that crap doesn't usually come from the police forces,sheriffs depts ,highway patrol etc,etc.It comes on a political level and Federal level and usually Feds trying to enforce it. Bad example too BTW,as the majority of police officers and depts in the US are pro-gun ownership, excluding the Dem held cities of course and have categorically stated they win not enforce gun confiscation laws

Grizzly 45 · 16-06-2021 11:29pm

Cass wrote: »

Read that again, slowly.

They have the powers granted to them. I'm not arguing that you're wrong, nor am I saying there is rampant abuse, but you even said it, they are working within the powers granted to them.

Yes and its called "exceeding your authority" of powers vested to you by this "public safety" legislation. A Garda has no,none,zero,keine,non,nyet authority under the legislation to demand medical information off you,or anyone else for that matter either. Pity some of them missed the briefing on those points it seems.

Grizzly 45 · 16-06-2021 11:33pm

Witcher wrote: »

Good to have more poorly researched takes on the new Bill.

Why not elaborate? Tell us whats wrong with it?

Im sure you'll have something to say about this one too then?:rolleyes:

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40313759.html?fbclid=IwAR1TMIN8GoHeZrgOYVg0tz47HWxNBhGp7iVAJT28IY2wXZkES5stw3MPcts

Witcher · 16-06-2021 11:37pm

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Why not elaborate? Tell us whats wrong with it?

Im sure you'll have something to say about this one too then?:rolleyes:

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40313759.html?fbclid=IwAR1TMIN8GoHeZrgOYVg0tz47HWxNBhGp7iVAJT28IY2wXZkES5stw3MPcts

I did explain it to you.

The Gardai already have the power to take fingerprints by force...this Bill isn't providing it as your link suggested.

Vicky Conway lol she has never had a good word to say about the Gardai on anything, she regularly retweets people praising George Nkencho...enough said.

Cass · 16-06-2021 11:40pm

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Sorry.IMPLEMENTED in numerous cases in Limerick and Kerry divisions under his dictatorhip including me and my mother in 2009. Was the starter of the Limerick DC cases.

You won. Checks and balances. :d

Sedition of Irish law as it stood...Next.

Not its not. You're blowing it out of proportion. It never came to be and AGS did not use a non existent law or one they made up themselves.

I was...

Then you're talking to yourself.

That seemingly don't work too well here for some reason.

Big difference between what you perceive to be working well to not existing.

And how many could have afforded court cases,as well as now in the future?It's gone from thousands to tens of thousands with the lawyers eyeing up the dC cost awards nowadays.

Somewhat moot as the point is there are AGS, then the courts. That is how the law is set up, so that AGS do not have the power they did prior to the 2009 act. The Persona Designata status is no longer solely with AGS, and the courts will decide if the AGS act outside the law.

However that crap doesn't usually come from the police forces,sheriffs depts ,highway patrol etc,etc.It comes on a political level and Federal level and usually Feds trying to enforce it. Bad example too BTW,as the majority of police officers and depts in the US are pro-gun ownership, excluding the Dem held cities of course and have categorically stated they win not enforce gun confiscation laws

Firstly it doesn't matter who it comes from, if its legislated for the police must enforce the law.

Secondly Ireland has only one police force, my reference was about a country with a right to firearms and yet states face mag bans, firearm type bans, etc.

The assertion that they make up their own law, and enforce that law is asinine. Its simply not possible. Yes there have been instances of Super's/Chief Supers acting on their own desire/personal agenda, but they soon get put back in their place through the court system where the law is applied and not desire/personal agenda of the Garda involved.

However this is the exception, not the rule, and some doing this does not make your claim a reality.

Cass · 16-06-2021 11:44pm

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Yes and its called "exceeding your authority" of powers vested to you by this "public safety" legislation. A Garda has no,none,zero,keine,non,nyet authority under the legislation to demand medical information off you,or anyone else for that matter either. Pity some of them missed the briefing on those points it seems.

Nope, no, nein, whatever.............

You are changing topic/deflecting the direction of the conversation.

Your point was they have no authority but say "abuse their powers" in your own post. Now you are complaining about them asking for information they, according to you, have no right to ask for.

The original fact is they have the power under legislation. Do you really think the Commissioner woke up some morning in March last year and decided to start stopping people from traveling, walking, going out, socialising, close pubs, restaurants, etc. He simply enforced the legislation passed by the Government.

Abuse of that power is down to the legislation, how its worded and hence at the feet of the law makers.

Grizzly 45 · 16-06-2021 11:47pm

tudderone wrote: »

Putin has a go off America because of Gun violence, if you ever needed evidence you're on the right side, there it is.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9693491/Putin-insists-no-hostility-Biden.html

Putin just owned Joe from the word go. He didn't need flashcards either,unlike Joe to remember his points.He turned the whole thing about dictatorships around on the US by jailing the Jan 6th protestors,and the shooting of Ashli Babbit and summed up Biden very eloquently as a professional politican.https://yournews.com/2021/06/15/2156054/vladimir-putin-dismisses-joe-biden-as-career-man-with-fake/

https://sputniknews.com/news/202106161083165006-twitter-buzzes-guessing-whats-on-the-flashcards-used-by-biden-at-summit-with-putin/

Grizzly 45 · 16-06-2021 11:54pm

Witcher wrote: »

I did explain it to you.

No you didn't...You posted a one sentence statement on a point from an article
while dismissing the rest of it seems,as "Good to have more poorly researched takes on the new Bill."

The Gardai already have the power to take fingerprints by force...this Bill isn't providing it as your link suggested.

Nobody is debating that point.What people are more concerned about is the possible misuse of power by AGS in this bill.That was what I was asking if you wanted to elaborate on?

Vicky Conway lol she has never had a good word to say about the Gardai on anything, she regularly retweets people praising George Nkencho...enough said.

A stopped clock is also right twice a day too.:p

Witcher · 17-06-2021 12:00am

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

No you didn't...You posted a one sentence statement on a point from an article
while dismissing the rest of it seems,as "Good to have more poorly researched takes on the new Bill."

Nobody is debating that point.What people are more concerned about is the possible misuse of power by AGS in this bill.That was what I was asking if you wanted to elaborate on?

A stopped clock is also right twice a day too.:p

Witcher wrote: »

Good to have more poorly researched takes on the new Bill.

As the same legislation intends to give Gardaí the power to forcefully take a finger-print

'How dare the Gardai get this power that they already have'

My point was obvious.

As per the quote from the article, it implied the Gardai were being granted the power to take fingerprints by force with the new bill. They already have this power as I stated; 'How dare the Gardai get this power that they already have'

Grizzly 45 · 17-06-2021 12:22am

You are changing topic/deflecting the direction of the conversation

.

No I'm not...I'm stating what the legislation says.NOONE has the right to demand private medical information off you under the current legislation..Simple as End Of. If you belive contrary show us exactly where it says such in the covid legislation.A garda demanding production of such is exceeding their authority...Ergo abusing their powers as a police officer...whats so difficult here ?

Your point was they have no authority but say "abuse their powers" in your own post. Now you are complaining about them asking for information they, according to you, have no right to ask for.

Oh sweet suffering Cats! Is exceeding your authority not an abuse of power?

The original fact is they have the power under legislation

.

UTTERLY AND TOTALLY WRONG! It has even been stated by a Superintendent in writing to a question posted that the AGS have NO authority whatsoever to ask for medical information.IE doctors letters.Now if you are going to say a Superintendent is wrong on this? [Supt Jim Bryan, Bruff Garda stn,Co Limerick]Their policy is engage ,encourage and lastly enforce.the enforcement bt,usually being under the public order act and not Covid regulations.

Do you really think the Commissioner woke up some morning in March last year and decided to start stopping people from traveling, walking, going out, socialising, close pubs, restaurants, etc. He simply enforced the legislation passed by the Government.

And you are accusing ME of deflecting?? Cmon man!

Abuse of that power is down to the legislation, how its worded and hence at the feet of the law makers

.

Also down to human nature...Sanford prison experiment example.

Cass · 17-06-2021 12:34am

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

. No I'm not......whats so difficult here ?

You're now arguing the content of the legislation whereas the original point was they are making up their own laws.

Oh sweet suffering Cats! Is exceeding your authority not an abuse of power?

Original point was not about abuse, but the lack of power/legislation. Again they are working, however you perceive it, within the confines of legislation.

UTTERLY AND TOTALLY WRONG!

Nope.

You're moving onto what they're asking for, not the legislation that governs it.

And you are accusing ME of deflecting?? Cmon man!

You're not really at the races today methinks.

Deflecting is avoiding the topic, and changing the conversation is, well, changing the conversation topic.

You claimed, originally, that AGS are making up the law themselves. They're not. Any perceived abuse of this power is a separate discussion and one I'm not interested in so you may look elsewhere for a row on that one.

When I challenge you to show me examples of how the AGS made up a law and enforced this made up law you've only mentioned attempted scenarios, and failed personal agendas of a few Supers/Chief Supers which eventually lost in court.

My point above is that the Commissioner did not take it upon himself to initiate a lockdown for the last 15 months, the Government did and the Gardaí enforce any legislation related to it. Precisely on topic.

Also down to human nature...Sanford prison experiment example.

M'eh.

Cass · 17-06-2021 1:28am

How in the name Jaysus is this allowed?

Not just the site, but the act? Heroin is still illegal, yes? Using it is still an offense, yes? I believe this crap was even dismissed in other countries like the States where the courts said such sites would be still illegal, and the actions carried out in them too.

The Misuse of drugs (supervised injecting facilities) act 2017 grants "licenses" to these sort of premises, but why? Not going to do a "wont' someone think of the children" but with everything going on how the feck are smack heads given this exemption from prosecution?

civdef · 17-06-2021 1:54am

For the record,

Different regulations apply in different locations, but on public transport, the regulation places the onus on the person claiming exemption from mask wearing to prove they have a reasonable excuse for not doing so.

Mellor · 17-06-2021 6:40am

otmmyboy2 wrote: »

Privacy is just that, privacy. Same as firearms. Similarly they can be used for good or bad, but the things themselves are not inherently either.

Nice use of strawman arguments though. :P

Good analogy. Firearms.
We agree that law abiding citizens are entitled to privacy/firearms.
I also imagine that certain people, due to their criminal behaviour waive some of those right. Where is the issue.

Not sure what strawman you refer to. Grizzly was advocating against the legal and warrant searches of peoples harddrives. Child porn is probably the most common use of that, which we hear about on the media. Applying that to his comments is not a strawman.

Also talking about illegal vs legal warranted searches rather ignores the potential for legal, but immoral, laws being passed which would unfairly penalize a segment of the population.

But we're talking about an actually law, not a hypothetical law that could be past.

Everything that happened in the holocaust and the holodomor was legal by the laws at the time, but that does not make it right.

I'm not sure how legal is was at the time either tbh.
But how is that related to this law that was being discussed.
Trying to switch it to hypothetical future laws is moving the goalposts.

Huh, on a side note Google flags holodomor as a misspelling(missing from their dictionary) despite it being correct, and having killed ~4 million.
Bias possibly? :P

A guess, but possibly because it's not English. Romanised Ukrainian I think.

Legal != moral, particularly with the current trend of legislating morality in western countries.

I don't think anyone has made the case that the law dictate morality.

"guilty of possessing materials likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism"
According to here:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-berkshire-56499185

Thanks you.

Firearms could definitely fall under "materials likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism", as could kitchen knives, several common household cleaning agents, etc.

Agreed. It's vague on the face of it.

What is you opinion of the guy? Was just a enthusiastic history buff.
Would you be ok with a jihadist possessing similar bomb making equipment?

Looking back on anyone's post history in OT and you don't need a doctorate in political philosophy, or psychology, to figure out the gist of the poster's political leanings.

People have a right to a political opinion. I'd never suggest someone cannot have an opinion.
But when they opinion becomes hypocrisy, I call it out, and will continue to do so.
Making up lies about victims of terrorism is beyond a justifiable opinion imo.
Criticism a extremist group/person is normal morality.
Criticising a extremist group/person for an action, and excusing another for the same is not normal - incidentally it's precisely the behaviour of extremist groups.

Here's my most recent one, the idea being you do it periodically and see where or how your views change over time:
https://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2?ec=4.5&soc=-4.72

Very interesting. Thanks for posting

Mellor · 17-06-2021 7:08am

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

It does...But if you can't see it that's your problem.... try using a thing called your imagination..It's where hypothetical situations are discussed.And where some who think they are and always will be guiltless seem to live too.

Hypothetical. Imagination. We were talking about a real bill in the real world. It's not exactly health to retreat to a fantasy world when somebody points incorrect statementments.

Might be a good idea to go read it then and then comment?
Be the second time you have fallen into the same trap in the last month by being thoroughly uninformed and commenting:D

I read the post here last month. He wasn't jailed for just possessing books.
I hadn't read the judicial summary, I doubt most here did. That's allowed.

Also, reference to last month is rich. is rich. By being "thoroughly uninformed" you mean calling you out the lies you made up? And pointing out that the "evidence" you use to prove it did back up you claims.

Did you miss the part where the Mod (Cass) removed your post for being disinformation and untrue?

You do realise Fascism and Nazism are two completely different ideals. So please define which one you think is a problem and don't be lazy by throwing the two of them together?

They are different. They are not completely different. They are also not in the slight bit mutually exclusive.

Asking which of them is the problem sounds like you are implying it's only one of them.

And the way you can be called a "fascist" these days on Social media or wherever for having a different viewpoint, makes the term as non-insulting and irrelevant.

Just like the way people throw out communist to describe anything left wing. The word lose meaning, and I'd question if they even understood it.

But we're not talking about random snowflakes on twitter. we're talking about a person with a obsession with nazi, white supremacy, wight-wing terrorism etc.
Not sure if you are saying he isn't a fascist or if that fascist is not a pejorative Term?

ASFIK there is no law on being an idiot in the World? Or an idiot who espouses a dead and debunkedpolitical ideal,who reads outdated technical manuals on hand to hand fighting and a manual full of dangerously inaccurate chemical formulas on making explosives and narcotics?But obviously not idiotic enough to try them out and reduce the global population of idiots by one.

No law agaisnt being an idiot.
Sometimes idiotic opinions and interest lead them to do idiotic and criminal action.

I've zero sympathy for the guy. I think the his actions are not that of simple historic interest.

They can do and read and preach whatever they want,so long as they don't put their warped beliefs which are just as totalitarian as Communism or Nazism into practise and start bombing, shooting to knifing in the name of their imaginary sky pal ,Allah.

Some U-Turn. Last week you were questioning the innocence of victims are at NZ mosque due to what may have been preached inside.
You seem to be a proponent of freedom of speech but only when it suits you or aligns with your ideals.

But what we do not do is arrest and imprison them because they "might" commit a crime or do something with their knowledge to harm others.
It's supposition of a crime and more than the rest a sure sign of a totalitarian society. Yes,you can yell fire in a crowded cinema,but you then must accept the total personal consequences for your action.

Go preach jihad in your mosque,but don't be surprised if you are doing a long stretch inside,or some other nutter arrives and uses your followers as target practice.

If some guy who preaches jihad, buys bomb making manuals, idolises islamic terror attacks, wacks off over the videos - I'm ok with him doing time. I'm completely ok with that.
Using his actions to justify murder of different people who didn't do those thing. What moral and sane person thinks that's ok?

Mellor · 17-06-2021 8:10am

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Wonder how long will it be before some bright spark develops a total bleach of your phone,if you input a code once or twice?

otmmyboy2 wrote: »

Already exists.
If you are employed in a lot of companies which deal in sensitive information and want to access your work emails/internal wiki/memos/info etc on your personal phone you must install an application that can wipe your phone remotely, or on input of a code or sequence of physical buttons(if applicable).

As otmmyboy2 point out, already ready exists and it's pretty commonly used in corporate world. Any of the big banking/accounting firms etc install it on staff phones as a security measure. It's a digital wipe, so maybe be possible to recover some. Government security agencies would have additional physical wipes.

Can probably download a version of the software to most phones.
But I've heard of some disasters. As in people being on holidays, at family birthdays, whatever. And a child getting their hands on the phone and wiping it.

Uinseann_16 · 17-06-2021 11:30am

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/new-garda-powers-bill-must-go-back-to-the-drawing-board-1.4595274
Although I picked up the warrantless part incorrectly it seems it was not just me who thought the forcing of passwords was a invasion of privacy

Richard308 · 17-06-2021 11:31am

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

.

No I'm not...I'm stating what the legislation says.NOONE has the right to demand private medical information off you under the current legislation..Simple as End Of. If you belive contrary show us exactly where it says such in the covid legislation.A garda demanding production of such is exceeding their authority.

They don’t demand private and sensitive medical information. If you get a cert from your Gp it will not state what prohibits you from wearing a mask (unless your gp is an idiot). They’ll ask you have you one. If you volunteer this letter stating you are exempt from wearing a mask check mate. No issue.
It’s not hard to wear a mask/faceshield. It alleviates stress for people around you. They might be useless but if it reduces stress on someone else I’m only too happy to be considerate of those around me.

Shooting Forum - Firearms licencing information

Off Topic Chat. (MOD NOTE post# 3949 and post#5279)

Comments

Forum Charter - Useful Information - Photo thread: Hardware - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads - Upcoming Events - RFDs by County

Forum Charter - Useful Information - Photo thread: Hardware - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads - Upcoming Events - RFDs by County

Forum Charter - Useful Information - Photo thread: Hardware - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads - Upcoming Events - RFDs by County

Forum Charter - Useful Information - Photo thread: Hardware - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads - Upcoming Events - RFDs by County

Forum Charter - Useful Information - Photo thread: Hardware - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads - Upcoming Events - RFDs by County