Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

**ALL THINGS IRISH WATER/WATER RELATED** Part 2 - MOD WARNING IN OP

1…5556586061…132

Comments

  • #1712
    tayto lover
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 54,085 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    end of the road wrote: »
    mary will always side with irish water, no matter what. she will always blame everyone else for everything no matter what. irish water are and never will be wrong with her

    Am I the only one thinking that Mary has family member(s) working for IW?
    Something not just right about her posts.
    She can usually use a bit of reason in her other posts but not with anything against IW.
    I have my suspicions.


  • #1713
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,703 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    I do not want to pay for water in any way
    Deleted User wrote: »
    Pushing and shoving innocent workers doing their legal job is ok in your World maybe, but it sure as Hell isn't in mine! Why did he wait for the cameras to roll before kicking off?

    Oh Jesus..:rolleyes:

    Quit while you're behind will ya.

    :pac:


  • #1714
    tayto lover
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 54,085 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    Little CuChulainn wrote: »
    No he didn't. Just more fabricated law from the anti-everything crowd. You cannot attack someone because their barrier is protruding onto your property.

    The video actually showed them pushing him and directing their power-hose onto him? He was trying to close his gate, remove their barrier from his premises and also remove them.
    Is this how all the other incidents have kicked off in the city Little Cu Cu?


  • #1715
    Little CuChulainn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,624 ✭✭✭Little CuChulainn


    I would like to see IW to cease trading and water to remain controlled by government/local auth
    tayto lover wrote: »
    The video actually showed them pushing him and directing their power-hose onto him? He was trying to close his gate, remove their barrier from his premises and also remove them.
    Is this how all the other incidents have kicked off in the city Little Cu Cu?

    The earliest video I have seen shows him attacking them first. Watch it quick before it gets taken down. The start has already been edited out in many of the reposts.

    https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=740312536062758


  • #1716
    Specialun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,068 ✭✭✭Specialun


    I normally wouldnt give a flying fook with these IW video's but with this one i think there acting the gimp. The bottom line here is that both the IW works and gear is on the homeowners property, regardless if they like it or not theyneedhis permission, clearly they have not got this. The homeowner is entitled to forcefully remove their gear, its his property. The IW workers are also aggressive,but they are not allowed to be


  • Advertisement
  • #1717
    Little CuChulainn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,624 ✭✭✭Little CuChulainn


    I would like to see IW to cease trading and water to remain controlled by government/local auth
    Specialun wrote: »
    The homeowner is entitled to forcefully remove their gear, its his property.

    Again, no he is not.


  • #1718
    listermint
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,358 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    I do not want to pay for water in any way
    Little CuChulainn wrote: »
    The earliest video I have seen shows him attacking them first. Watch it quick before it gets taken down. The start has already been edited out in many of the reposts.

    https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=740312536062758

    I posted the whole thing. Its a few pages back. Stop trying to talk nonsense. The whole thing is there to see.


  • #1719
    listermint
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,358 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    I do not want to pay for water in any way
    Little CuChulainn wrote: »
    Again, no he is not.

    He is, they have no rights to be on the property. Where do you make this stuff up.


  • #1720
    tayto lover
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 54,085 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    Little CuChulainn wrote: »
    The earliest video I have seen shows him attacking them first. Watch it quick before it gets taken down. The start has already been edited out in many of the reposts.

    https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=740312536062758

    He was clearly very angry and agitated at the start but they were well onto his property too which they should not have been and they refused to allow him close HIS gate. I didn't like his language.
    I don't agree with blocking these workers. I chose not to register instead.


  • #1721
    teddy_303
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 361 ✭✭teddy_303


    some people here don't seem to know we are governed by consent, not force. tresspass is a brech of common law, its indefenseable.


  • Advertisement
  • #1722
    tayto lover
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 54,085 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    Little CuChulainn wrote: »
    Again, no he is not.

    Of course he is. He owns the property.


  • #1723
    shinzon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,463 ✭✭✭shinzon


    I do not want to pay for water in any way
    It amazes me when someone posts a video on this page that they think that's its edited to within an inch of its life that the person recording it is somehow in collusion with the person whose trying to get the workers off his property

    Now paddy ill go upto the gate and you press the record button as soon as I try and move the barriers.

    Have we become that cynical that we cant believe whats in the video without all sorts of conspiracy theories and what lead upto it etc etc etc

    Shin


  • #1724
    Little CuChulainn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,624 ✭✭✭Little CuChulainn


    I would like to see IW to cease trading and water to remain controlled by government/local auth
    tayto lover wrote: »
    He was clearly very angry and agitated at the start but they were well onto his property too which they should not have been and they refused to allow him close HIS gate. I didn't like his language.
    I don't agree with blocking these workers. I chose not to register instead.

    I'd say he was angry, he couldn't get his car into his driveway. Still doesn't give him a right to attack them.
    tayto lover wrote: »
    Of course he is. He owns the property.

    It doesn't matter. You cannot attack someone just for being on your property, even if you do not want them there. It isn't even a criminal offence for them to be there.


  • #1725
    KevIRL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,323 ✭✭✭✭KevIRL


    I would like to see IW to cease trading and water to remain controlled by government/local auth
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1khn0OxDLA


    Another video starring the 'victim' from the vid posted earlier. Go to 1:22 on this vid. Anger issues it would seem


  • #1726
    Little CuChulainn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,624 ✭✭✭Little CuChulainn


    I would like to see IW to cease trading and water to remain controlled by government/local auth
    shinzon wrote: »
    It amazes me when someone posts a video on this page that they think that's its edited to within an inch of its life that the person recording it is somehow in collusion with the person whose trying to get the workers off his property

    Now paddy ill go upto the gate and you press the record button as soon as I try and move the barriers.

    Have we become that cynical that we cant believe whats in the video without all sorts of conspiracy theories and what lead upto it etc etc etc

    Shin

    Like I said, the reposts are edited to exclude the bit at the start where the man clearly assaults the IW employees first.


  • #1727
    tayto lover
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 54,085 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    It doesn't matter. You cannot attack someone just for being on your property, even if you do not want them there. It isn't even a criminal offence for them to be there.[/QUOTE]

    So if I catch a lad in my driveway and he says he's working for IW then he's ok.
    Don't think so. They have no right to be on his property without his consent.


  • #1728
    tayto lover
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 54,085 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    Little CuChulainn wrote: »
    Like I said, the reposts are edited to exclude the bit at the start where the man clearly assaults the IW employees first.

    So nobody protesting can come within a certain distance of them BUT they can come onto your property without penalty?
    The law is an ass.


  • #1729
    listermint
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,358 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    I do not want to pay for water in any way
    Little CuChulainn wrote: »
    Like I said, the reposts are edited to exclude the bit at the start where the man clearly assaults the IW employees first.

    I posted a video with the full start to finish.

    What is it you are taking about.? The video is longest one from start to finish.


  • #1730
    Tinkersbell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,318 ✭✭✭Tinkersbell


    I do not want to pay for water in any way
    KevIRL wrote: »
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1khn0OxDLA


    Another video starring the 'victim' from the vid posted earlier. Go to 1:22 on this vid. Anger issues it would seem

    WTF?

    Anyway, the way things are heading somebody is going to snap big time and when a body is being lowered into a grave, be it either a protester or an IW worker, you can all come on here and blame the corpse.


  • #1731
    Tinkersbell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,318 ✭✭✭Tinkersbell


    I do not want to pay for water in any way
    tayto lover wrote: »
    So if I catch a lad in my driveway and he says he's working for IW then he's ok.
    Don't think so. They have no right to be on his property without his consent.



    If he doesn't leave when told to, the householder has the right to physically remove him.


  • Advertisement
  • #1732
    Little CuChulainn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,624 ✭✭✭Little CuChulainn


    I would like to see IW to cease trading and water to remain controlled by government/local auth
    tayto lover wrote: »
    So if I catch a lad in my driveway and he says he's working for IW then he's ok.
    Don't think so. They have no right to be on his property without his consent.
    tayto lover wrote: »
    So nobody protesting can come within a certain distance of them BUT they can come onto your property without penalty?
    The law is an ass.

    It's a civil tort. You cannot attack them, you can only sue them.


  • #1733
    Frank Bullitt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,921 ✭✭✭✭Frank Bullitt


    Going by some of the logic in here, I have the right to punch the postman next time he walks up my driveway because he is trespassing...makes perfect sense.


  • #1734
    Tinkersbell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,318 ✭✭✭Tinkersbell


    I do not want to pay for water in any way
    Gintonious wrote: »
    Going by some of the logic in here, I have the right to punch the postman next time he walks up my driveway because he is trespassing...makes perfect sense.

    Why would you do that?
    You want your post delivered, don't you?


  • #1735
    tayto lover
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 54,085 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    Gintonious wrote: »
    Going by some of the logic in here, I have the right to punch the postman next time he walks up my driveway because he is trespassing...makes perfect sense.

    Total rubbish post.


  • #1736
    hynesie08
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,241 ✭✭✭✭hynesie08


    Gintonious wrote: »
    Going by some of the logic in here, I have the right to punch the postman next time he walks up my driveway because he is trespassing...makes perfect sense.

    It's the carolers I'm waiting for, First one to step through my gate singing silent night.... BOOM, Headkick.


  • #1737
    shinzon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,463 ✭✭✭shinzon


    I do not want to pay for water in any way
    Public Order act 1994

    Under the Public Order Act 1994

    By law, the true owner can use reasonable force to remove you from the premises

    Wilful obstruction. 9.—Any person who, without lawful authority or reasonable excuse, wilfully prevents or interrupts the free passage of any person or vehicle in any public place shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £200.

    Yes that's punts not euros but seems pretty clear to me

    Shin


  • #1738
    tayto lover
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 54,085 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    Next time I go to Dublin i'm parking in someone's drive. They can do nothing about it.


  • #1739
    gladrags
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,028 ✭✭✭gladrags


    I do not want to pay for water in any way
    Little CuChulainn wrote: »
    It's a civil tort. You cannot attack them, you can only sue them.

    You can defend yourself and your property against an attacker.

    Clever that, you are assuming attack,rather than defence.


  • #1740
    Frank Bullitt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,921 ✭✭✭✭Frank Bullitt


    tayto lover wrote: »
    Total rubbish post.

    So please, explain how.

    How is it any different as to what the man in the video did?

    I am all for protesting this, my parents are back home. But the way this person went about getting them off his property was totally gung ho. Why didnt he just ask them to get off his property instead of beginning to push them and struggle with them? Why didn't he calmly explain to them that they are trespassing?

    He went straight out to incite an argument, and he instigated it himself. Just because they were in his garden does not give anyone the right to attack or assault them. And what are the workers to do? They aren't robots, so this type of action against them would clearly get some sort of action from them.

    Both are in the wrong, but the way the situation panned out was mainly due to the actions of the home owner.


  • Advertisement
  • #1741
    Little CuChulainn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,624 ✭✭✭Little CuChulainn


    I would like to see IW to cease trading and water to remain controlled by government/local auth
    shinzon wrote: »
    Public Order act 1994

    Under the Public Order Act 1994

    By law, the true owner can use reasonable force to remove you from the premises

    Wilful obstruction. 9.—Any person who, without lawful authority or reasonable excuse, wilfully prevents or interrupts the free passage of any person or vehicle in any public place shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £200.

    Yes that's punts not euros but seems pretty clear to me

    Shin

    They had both lawful authority and reasonable excuse to be there.

    Edit: Also, nowhere in that section does it give permission to attack someone who is in breach of it. You just made that bit up and inserted in between the name of the legislation and the section you quoted.
    gladrags wrote: »
    You can defend yourself and your property against an attacker.

    Clever that, you are assuming attack,rather than defence.

    His property wasn't under attack and neither was he. his driveway was blocked and part of the barrier was on his property. That does not require defending nor would a court accept it as a reasonable excuse to attack someone.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement