Cost of policing the Corrib gas protests

Sgt. Sensible

oscarBravo wrote:

Let's go back to my littering example. Suppose a Garda had seen the 'scumbag' in question dropping the litter, and instead of arresting him, he'd threatened to do so unless the 'scumbag' picked up the litter and disposed of it properly.

Based on some of the madness I've witnessed in Dublin, if the 'scumbag' refused to pick up the litter he would more than likely get a ride in the paddy wagon at the very least. My guess is that if protesters are behaving illegally, then mass arrests would only inflame the situation, result in images of baton swinging cops and win the protesters support.

mountainyman

oscarBravo wrote:

Let's go back to my littering example. Suppose a Garda had seen the 'scumbag' in question dropping the litter, and instead of arresting him, he'd threatened to do so unless the 'scumbag' picked up the litter and disposed of it properly. Would you feel the Garda was failing to do his job, by preventing crime instead of mindlessly enforcing it? Do you feel that mindless zero-tolerance enforcement would lead to a better society?

If a guard were to do that Oscar Bravo I would say that guard is exemplary.

However: what if the 'scumbag' came back the next day and dropped the litter again. Should the law not be enforced at that point?

MM

oscarBravo

mountainyman wrote:

However: what if the 'scumbag' came back the next day and dropped the litter again. Should the law not be enforced at that point?

Personally, I think so, but cf. the good Sergeant's post before yours.

Sponge Bob

mountainyman wrote:

The law is laid down by the legislature. The police are junior Civil Servants their role is to enforce the laws the legislature has laid down. It is the role of the legislature to decide which laws to enforce all of them

I'll bet you €20 at 10/1 that if you go down to Mayo in the morning, point a Garda in the direction of the nearest bog where he will see ragwort thistle or dock growing and report this breach of the laws of the state where the landowner (eg Shell) allows a plant duly scheduled in that order I linked above under the Noxious Weeds Act to grow unhindered....he will either refuse flat out to enforce said act or will arrest you for obstructing a Garda for ...basically telling him about the Noxious Weeds Act and the Ministerial Order at all.

Section 4.—Any member of the Gárda Síochána and any inspector may at all reasonable times enter upon any land situated in any area to which any order made under this Act and for the time being in force relates for the purpose of ascertaining whether any noxious weeds are growing on such land.

The €200 I owe you at that point should cover your fine, after that you are on your own

Do not expect equal enforcement of all the applicable laws of the state

StripeyCat

I would like to forcefully agree with the sentiments of those who think the protesters' actions are illegal and should be punished by the forces of law and order.

Furthermore, the actions of Mssrs. Connolly and Pearse in 1916 were also illegal, and I think it is reprehensible that these these people are held up as some sort of example to young people, with railway stations named after them and statues erected to their memory (well some of them...).

They were clearly breaking the law of the country and deserved the robust treatment they received from the authorities at the time.

People in Ireland should have accepted the need for young men to travel to France and Belgium to fight for the King, and demonstrations against conscription and in favour of Irish self-government should have been beaten off the streets by the police.

Yours sincerely,
Col Kevin Myarse (Ret'd)

Rebeller

StripeyCat wrote:

I would like to forcefully agree with the sentiments of those who think the protesters' actions are illegal and should be punished by the forces of law and order.

Furthermore, the actions of Mssrs. Connolly and Pearse in 1916 were also illegal, and I think it is reprehensible that these these people are held up as some sort of example to young people, with railway stations named after them and statues erected to their memory (well some of them...).

They were clearly breaking the law of the country and deserved the robust treatment they received from the authorities at the time.

People in Ireland should have accepted the need for young men to travel to France and Belgium to fight for the King, and demonstrations against conscription and in favour of Irish self-government should have been beaten off the streets by the police.

Yours sincerely,
Col Kevin Myarse (Ret'd)

The funniest post of the thread so far.

Avns1s wrote:

As someone who is from the region, I am appaled at:
1. The amount of airtime that these clowns have received.
2. The way this carry-on portrays the region and its people to those outside, particularly potential investors in job creation projects.
3. The cost of trying to ensure that the workers can go about their business through the need for such a level of Garda presence.
4. The distraction of the Gardai from other duties which could be equally or indeed more important.
5. The actions of the people themselves who should be in lines for Oscars for their performances.
6. The actions of the TD's especially the independent bandwagon jumpers who arrived there today. Not to mention the strange Doctor!!
7. The way Sinn Fein has also jumped on the bandwagon.
8. The intimidation meted out by the protestors to local people who dont actively support their position, to visitors to the area and to others outside who are in positions of authority.

Avns1s, are you not concerned about the theft of our national resources and the danger posed by the high pressure pipeline travelling close to peoples' homes?

How would you feel if the current government bizarrely changed the law so that a certain company could legally hack into your wireless broadband connection and use your bandwidth and computer processing power to carry out its business. Would you be happy about subsidising the company's stealing of YOUR resources by allowing it to write off the cost of equipment etc required to hack into your system against tax?

Avns1s

Rebeller wrote:

Avns1s, are you not concerned about the theft of our national resources and the danger posed by the high pressure pipeline travelling close to peoples' homes?

How would you feel if the current government bizarrely changed the law so that a certain company could legally hack into your wireless broadband connection and use your bandwidth and computer processing power to carry out its business. Would you be happy about subsidising the company's stealing of YOUR resources by allowing it to write off the cost of equipment etc required to hack into your system against tax?

Rebeller, I wouldn't disagree with you at all. I agree that the way the government and Ray Burke at the time dealt with the gas issue. With the benefit of hindsight, the valuable resource has been squandered and that is a scandal. But that's a done deal. We now have to learn from it and move on. In a sense, it's like saying that the (hypothetical) house that you bought in 1990 and currently is worth 15 times what you paid for it, was stolen from the vendors of that time.

Likewise, I think that the high pressure line shouldn't be within whatever are the internationally recognised limits for the laying of such a line. BTW I live close to the follow on line bringing the processed gas to Oranmore from the Corrib field. I think it should be possible for Shell to do this and I'm sure that they are either keeping the recommended distance from the houses or we would be hearing much more from the protesters.

It is worthy of note that the protest line is made up of about 40 "locals", some of whom live 6 miles from the gas pipeline, together with a cohort of ecowarriors and local politicians and others who are on the bandwagon. It's not an issue which ahs received overwhelming and unanimous support of the local population. In fact, quite the opposite. The silent majority ar enot bein heard at all on this in the Erris region.

I fully endorse their right to protest. Just do it peacefully, and without costing the state a fortune or interefering with the lives of others.

Rebeller

Avns1s wrote:

Rebeller, I wouldn't disagree with you at all. I agree that the way the government and Ray Burke at the time dealt with the gas issue With the benefit of hindsight, the valuable resource has been squandered and that is a scandal. But that's a done deal

It's not a done deal. If we let this go we might as well put up a sign saying all our resources are here for the taking.

If those in the know had shouted stop when info about Haughey's corruption came to light in the early 80s we might now have a very different country. This cannot be let pass. Otherwise future generations will ask the same questions we are asking now about planning corruption: "how did they let it happen".

Avns1s wrote:

Likewise, I think that the high pressure line shouldn't be within whatever are the internationally recognised limits for the laying of such a line. BTW I live close to the follow on line bringing the processed gas to Oranmore from the Corrib field

Then you have more reasons than most to support the actions of these protestors.

Avns1s wrote:

I'm sure that [Shell] are either keeping the recommended distance from the houses or we would be hearing much more from the protesters

This is the problem. If there was corruption involved in the original 1987 decision that resulted in the changing of the rules in relation to offshore exploration, this would suggest that there is a good likelihood that any planning decisions made since then and relating to the same project are also susupect.

Now, if you accept, as you do above, that the Ray Burke decision in 1987 was a "scandal" how can you now be certain that all the decisons leading on from that first decision are not also suspicious? Do you think that there has been a sudden and dramatic sea change and those involved have now decided to only act in the best interests of the State and its people?

Avns1s wrote:

It is worthy of note that the protest line is made up of about 40 "locals", some of whom live 6 miles from the gas pipeline, together with a cohort of ecowarriors and local politicians and others who are on the bandwagon. It's not an issue which ahs received overwhelming and unanimous support of the local population. In fact, quite the opposite. The silent majority ar enot bein heard at all on this in the Erris region

Well, if you feel so strongly that your view and interests and those oif the majority are not being represented why not organise a poll locally or a counter protest. We often here about these mysterious "silent majorities".

To borrow the national lottery's slogan, "If you're not in, you can't win"

Avns1s wrote:

I fully endorse their right to protest. Just do it peacefully, and without costing the state a fortune or interefering with the lives of others.

Could we not apply the same rule to the actions of Shell