Students attack Leinster house with Mars Bars

Lads will ye give over the whole "if you want a degree pay for it".

1. The country is in the ****. If fees were to be introduced they should have been during the boom. Its just a simple fact that part time jobs are harder to come by now, theyre extremely rare. This, coupled with the fact that peoples parents arent working means the number of people who can afford to go to college is SIGNIFICANTLY lower.

2. The grant is also rumored to be facing a cutback. It is meagre at the best of times, unless you are basically on the breadline it wont make a massive dent in the cost of education. This was also one of the aims of the protest.

3. By providing a system whereby only those that can afford it end up going will fuel a class divide between the haves and have nots. Excluding the exremely talented, a poorer student with above average ability will go on the dole whereas a kid who is below average, with rich parents, will end up getting a 3rd level education. This will not only isolate the poorer in society but will also cheapen degrees and reflect bad on our education system.

4. This situation will also ensure that the student population will become largely the stereotype which people here have perpetuated in this thread, freeloaders who are out on their parents money with little or no value on the education which they are recieving. It will also mean that the students with the ability are left behind.

In short, the principles of this march are sound. It is a time where we NEED to be investing in education. The system does need reforming, from the fees to the grants to the points system, but simply saying "if you cant afford it tough ****" is not good enough.

A fairer system would take some innovation though, something which the government doesnt seem to do. They either cut or tax. What I would propose would be a system based on-
a. Those with the ability and the drive will be the ones who pay less, or dont pay at all
b. Less fees for those who perform well. Getting a 1.1? Here is your reward!
c. Less fees for those who are doing critical, in demand courses. Science, technology, engineering etc. Degrees in subjects like philosophy, soccer, rugby will cost you. Im not saying theyre bad degrees, however they are more for personal advancement, and if the govt is to invest it should invest in something which will be useful to the economy, as opposed to something someone decides to do to expand their own horizons.

Thats all for now. As an aside, I had to laugh at Cowen yesterday having a pop at Labour for bringing in free fees 16 YEARS AGO. Eh hello brian, you were in power pretty much since then, if it was such a bad decision why didnt you do anything about it? Oh yeah, that would have gone against the FF ethos of "Keep everybody happy and we'll hold onto power as long as we can, til the bitter bitter end"

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I wasn't at the protest today, I actually woke up late and missed it.

But I want to address one recurring theme in this thread and something which has actually pissed me off for a long time, even before today:

Where the **** do people get the idea that the gards have a right to order you around when you're not breaking the law?

A public place is a public place. It is not a crime to stand at any point in a public place UNLESS you are causing trouble.
So whan a gard says "move along" or "go home", why the F.UCK should I? I'm breaking no laws. There's no curfew in this country. Unless it can be proven that I am actually breaking the law, IMO I have NO obligation to go ANYWHERE.

This isn't in relation to breaking in to the department of finance. It's just in relation to the general "if a gard tells you to move, move" BS in this thread. I'll ****ing well obey the law, but that's ALL. My allegiance is to the law itself, not to the people who are enforcing it. Therefore if I am breaking no law doing what I'm doing, I see no reason whatsoever why I should pay them any attention.

Obviously if I'm interfering with someone else this doesn't apply, but in general, the gards don't have the right to enforce no go areas or curfews. At least in principle they don't. In practice they do it all the time. Like clearing Grafton street at a certain time in the morning after a night out. It's a ****ing public street. OUR public street. There's no curfew which says "this street must be emptied of pedestrians by X time."

Ask me to move and I will (politely but firmly) ask you to cite what law I am in violation of by remaining where I am.

Maybe if you went to bed before 5 in the morning you'd have made the protest.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

A public place is a public place. It is not a crime to stand at any point in a public place UNLESS you are causing trouble..

....and have you been charged with a criminal offence for standing in a public place? Yes, the gardaí have numerous pieces of legislation to allow them to ask you to vacate an area. Check out the Public Order Act for some great examples.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I wasn't at the protest today, I actually woke up late and missed it.

But I want to address one recurring theme in this thread and something which has actually pissed me off for a long time, even before today:

Where the **** do people get the idea that the gards have a right to order you around when you're not breaking the law?

A public place is a public place. It is not a crime to stand at any point in a public place UNLESS you are causing trouble.
So whan a gard says "move along" or "go home", why the F.UCK should I? I'm breaking no laws. There's no curfew in this country. Unless it can be proven that I am actually breaking the law, IMO I have NO obligation to go ANYWHERE.

This isn't in relation to breaking in to the department of finance. It's just in relation to the general "if a gard tells you to move, move" BS in this thread. I'll ****ing well obey the law, but that's ALL. My allegiance is to the law itself, not to the people who are enforcing it. Therefore if I am breaking no law doing what I'm doing, I see no reason whatsoever why I should pay them any attention.

Obviously if I'm interfering with someone else this doesn't apply, but in general, the gards don't have the right to enforce no go areas or curfews. At least in principle they don't. In practice they do it all the time. Like clearing Grafton street at a certain time in the morning after a night out. It's a ****ing public street. OUR public street. There's no curfew which says "this street must be emptied of pedestrians by X time."

Ask me to move and I will (politely but firmly) ask you to cite what law I am in violation of by remaining where I am.

you really need to educate yourself on the laws of this country, instead of spouting off ignorant and incorrect statements.

Obviously, I don't agree with introducing high fees which will turn third level into (even more of) an elitist playground for rich kids. However I also don't agree with only making the rich pay and the rest get in free either.

Having money shouldn't determine a person's access to third level at all. This sends out a clear message that qualifications are something that can be bought. For many people university is just the done thing and an excuse to party and spend parent's money. People who have no interest or make no real contribution to Univerities lower the overall standard to the extent that having a degree in Ireland means squat all, just about everyone has one nowadays. (<I think this is a huge issue in some of the bigger Uni's like UCD.)

At the same time, I don't agree with free fees across the board as firstly it's extremely wasteful and secondly it still allows dossers to go along for the ride while the institution inevitably lowers its standards to suit its attendees, not the other way round.

I think university should be accessible to those who genuinely need/want it and who can demonstrate they have the skills and discipline to actually study and complete a programme. Entry should be based on academic or personal merit, financial situation shouldn't even come in to it.

Say what you want about the fees but the behaviour of the gardai based on the videos on youtube is pure thuggery. A shield and a badge doesnt give them the right to stand over and strike people sitting on the ground.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-REt8kCjCRo

Seems the Guards are coming quite well out of this after everything has calmed down.

Twitter was very good at up to date accounts of what was happening. Definitely wasn't as mad as initially portrayed.

prinz wrote: »

Actually it does when you are in a riot situation and those concerned aren't complying with lawful instructions to move back/away/get off the ground. Seems to be very little striking going on and a lot of show too btw..

How is sitting on the ground a riot situation? Sitting on the ground they are practically defenseless being hit by the guards, and about a minute and a half in, the guards drag someone away further antagonising the situation.Let them sit there, a few hours theyll get bored and go home.

Im not a student, but at least one group in this country finally is willing to step up and do something. The rest of us sit in pubs moaning about it. Ive a feeling if its the teachers and nurses sitting on the ground in forthcoming weeks the guards wont swing so easily.

OctavarIan wrote: »

Disorderly conduct in a public place and wilful obstruction. Both were evident yesterday, as was failing to comply with directions by the Gardaí after commiting those offences. The Gardaí could have decided to start slapping fines on people and they'd have been well within their powers to do so.

Seriously don't preach yourself as in allegiance to 'the law' when you aren't even aware of what 'the laws' are.

The aim of most effective protest isnt to have a allegiance to the law.