Bank roof "occupied"...then Gardaí beat them up :D

k_mac wrote: »

It is based on everyone else. Unfortunately you are in the minority.

How do you know I'm in the minority? I'd estimate its people like you who think everythings grand that are in the minority.

k_mac wrote: »

And the message from the rest of us is we don't really care what you do.

Speak for youself Plod, you're not 'the rest of us' you're just you. You don't care what I do ??? Well you seemed pretty adament a few post back that I can't pick and choose my own laws etc....

So which is it? You care or you dont?

Inconsistant.

Degsy wrote: »

So what are you planning then, Chairman Mao?

Its top secret.

Cheap Thrills! wrote: »

Its SUPPOSED to be based on me, my needs and wishes. Thats what democracy is. You are obviously pleased with the status quo so I can only surmise you are benefitting from this corrupt system in some way.

No offence but, my God, this is the most immature, self centred definition of democracy I have ever come across! It's NOT all about you. You want your "Cheap Thrills", then off you go and riot or whatever you want, but don't come in here and start lambasting the rest of us who, while equally p*issed off at the situation, prefer to deal with it in a more constructive manner.

And by your unquestioning suckery respect for the law maybe you're a guard with a God complex.....I don't really care, the message from me is this. I'm not going to be a co-operative, obedient, conformist little droid in this rotton 'system'...

Respect for the law is the foundation stone of every democratic society. It's one of the things that marks out civil societies from tinpot dictatorships. It's not something you can opt-out of at your own personal whim. If you decide to ignore the law of the land, how on earth do you think you have any moral basis to condemn others for allegedly doing the same thing?

sron wrote: »

You're equating minor trespassing with fraud on an enormous scale. Stop being silly.

I never wrote anything of the sort.

I don't believe that people can go around deciding which laws they're willing to obey, and when they're going to do so. You have a problem with that contention?

If the laws of the land betray the citizens, they should (must, if you want to talk like Tom Paine) refuse to accept the status quo. Change never happened by asking nicely. If the government/banks are to be reformed it won't be done by the people of Ireland quietly acquiescing to the whims of their leaders.

Do you understand the concept of a democracy? Seriously, do you? We don't live in a dictatorship. Ireland isn't North Korea, much as a lot of people here would have one believe. We have a free vote on who we wish to govern us. Indeed, you or I can run for parliament. We can seek a mandate from our peers. That's how change is achieved in a democracy. Not by indulging in schoolboy, narcissistic revolution fantasies.

sron wrote: »

People do this every day of their lives. They drink under-age, they buy fireworks, they trespass on farmers' fields, they cross the road before the light goes green, etc. The only places where obedience to the law is absolute, are under totalitarian regimes.

Yes, but they don't drape their actions in a mantle of populust heroism as some posters here are wont to do. They also understand the consequences of their action, and don't b*tch and whine about state persecution when faced with them.

The law is the status quo, even in a democratic system; so for change to occur, the laws must change (or their enforcement), or, the laws must be subverted. Civil disobedience has never been appreciated by any government (the law-makers), so of course such actions are in one way or another illegal.

In a democratic system there are democratic options available to those who wish to change the law. If one doesn't gain a popular mandate to make such changes, then one can't take it upon onself to subvert the law. That leads to tyranny. What you're essentially arguing is that the law is entirely subjective, and personal opinion the ultimate arbiter determining one's attitude to it. That's a dangerous concept.

Furthermore, such actions aren't illegal because the powers that be disapprove. They are illegal because they are against the laws which govern society, and which were implemented by a succession of governments directly elected by the people. Again, if you want to change those laws, the only legitimate course is to do so through the people at an election. If you choose otherwise, you're acting on nothing more than personal whim and caprice.

I ask not for violence, but for a healthy disrespect to be shown to a legal system which is so unfairly biased towards the select few.

I'm all for protest, but not where the protesters decide that the laws that apply to everyone else, shouldn't apply to them. And who exactly distinguises between "healthy disprespect" and the unhealthy kind? Again, its entirely subjective. You might draw the line at breaking into a bank, for someone else if may be to firebomb a bank, regardless of those inside. You might abhor the latter, but who are you to condemn such an action when you advocate the subversion of the law in general?

Mark200 wrote: »

It achieved absolutely nothing. We will all have a chance to vote out Fianna Fail in the next election. But I personally don't see what the huge rush is for a Fine Gael/Labour coalition... as if all our problems will suddenly disappear once Fianna Fail are gone. As if a coalition of a party who knows we need more cuts, with a party who thinks we don't need any is somehow going to be the answer to everything.

Nobody thinks our problems will suddenly disappear when FF go. People want FF out because they are doing their best to destroy this country through incompetence and corruption.

Mark200 wrote: »

..... Get real.....

Get real.

.....So unless you can actually cite a law that they broke then just shut up.

Touched a nerve?

If these protesters spent as much effort trying to set up business and creating job's and doing their bit to get us out of this mess it would be a better use of time than "taking to the streets". :rolleyes: Then again these people think the government should give them everything.