WITSU Rag Week 2012

Finneen · 23-02-2012 10:02pm

Waterford City Council should buy a water cannon.

Sully · 23-02-2012 10:02pm

Potential-Monke wrote: »

The thing about loitering is, it has to meet the following criteria:

Section 8(1)(b) of the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act 1994:

without lawful authority or reasonable excuse, is acting in a manner which consists of loitering in a public place in circumstances, which may include the company of other persons, that give rise to a reasonable apprehension for the safety of persons or the safety of property or for the maintenance of the public peace,

Now, that's grand for those causing a problem, but it doesn't apply to someone just sitting on the side of the street. They're entitled to sit there until whatever time they want, and the Gardai cannot move them on if they are not causing an annoyance.

The Guards bend the rules all the time. No harm in asking people to move on. I'm sure they can find some excuse to find people as causing an annoyance.

Again, law dictates that someone arrested for Section 4 or 5 (the most common: drunk in public and disorderly conduct) of the same Public Order Act states that they get a fixed charge, no longer a court appearance. There's nothing that can be done about that, unless they commit a more serious offence (in the eyes of the law), then it's dealt with in court. I believe the court have a lot to do in regards to this too, however Judge Kennedy in Waterford does get very appropriate and heavy fines for public order offences.

"Fixed charge" - as in no fine? Just a warning?

This would work for WIT sponsored events in WIT controlled events. But, a persons arrest is covered by data protection laws and the Gardai cannot inform the employers or college of someones arrest.

I thought that WIT were always made aware if a student was involved in an incident. Thought that's what was said in a letter sent out, maybe I am misunderstanding it.

I know what you're trying to get at though, something should be done. And i honestly believe that the best start is to have all food outlets close at 2am sharp. Some of them stay open until 4. Of course people are going to hang around if there is something to do. If all those places were closed, the street would be dead and people would feck off home. It would be a start.

Its a good idea, but a little early. Maybe 3am - giving an hour. But the problem seems to be the large volume of people on the street. If we shut up shop, they may not go away if there is a big crowd together.

ex_infantry man · 23-02-2012 10:16pm

mike65 wrote: »

The future always looks scary when drunk on Daddys money. *wasn't like that when I was a student* etc.

i don,t think i,ve ever come across a bunch as bad as this yet and i often used do bouncing for previous rag weeks over the years!! is it something to do with the fact there parents never slapped em as a child or what???

ex_infantry man · 23-02-2012 10:17pm

Finneen wrote: »

Waterford City Council should buy a water cannon.

now that would be money well spent!!!

Sully · 23-02-2012 10:17pm

ex_infantry man wrote: »

i don,t think i,ve ever come across a bunch as bad as this yet and i often used do bouncing for previous rag weeks over the years!! is it something to do with the fact there parents never slapped em as a child or what???

Might not be told. Parents may have a different view to what their kids get up to outside of the house.

ex_infantry man · 23-02-2012 10:20pm

Sully wrote: »

Might not be told. Parents may have a different view to what their kids get up to outside of the house.

as bad as things were when i was growing up with my parents splitting up when was seven! ya did,nt see me running around like a hooligan when drunk causing a nuisance to society

Sully · 23-02-2012 10:25pm

ex_infantry man wrote: »

as bad as things were when i was growing up with my parents splitting up when was seven! ya did,nt see me running around like a hooligan when drunk causing a nuisance to society

Well, we don't know that for sure. :pac:

ex_infantry man · 23-02-2012 10:30pm

Sully wrote: »

Well, we don't know that for sure. :pac:

ah now sully don,t be doubting me lol you being a fellow tramore head and all lol

Finnbar01 · 24-02-2012 4:42pm

Potential-Monke wrote: »

The solution as far as i'm concerned is have all food outlets closed at 1am the latest. No where to go + no food for drunk idiots = fooking off home for toast and burning the house down.

Then they'll just go out an hour or two earlier.

Best thing to do is arrest them when they break the law.

CardBordWindow · 24-02-2012 4:57pm

Or just a military enforced curfew at midnight every night!

hardybuck · 24-02-2012 5:11pm

Potential-Monke wrote: »

The solution as far as i'm concerned is have all food outlets closed at 1am the latest. No where to go + no food for drunk idiots = fooking off home for toast and burning the house down.

Sure wouldn't the fast food outlets be free to trade like every other business in the area? They could open 24 hours if they wanted?

Seems wrong to be suggesting that the business owners who own the outlets should be deprived a huge portion of their income. Perhaps more attention should be focused on the pubs who let people get into that condition in the first place.

cocoshovel · 24-02-2012 5:11pm

CardBordWindow wrote: »

Or just a military enforced curfew at midnight every night!

Shoot anything that moves after 2am.

ROCKMAN · 24-02-2012 6:31pm

hardybuck wrote: »

Sure wouldn't the fast food outlets be free to trade like every other business in the area? They could open 24 hours if they wanted?

Seems wrong to be suggesting that the business owners who own the outlets should be deprived a huge portion of their income. Perhaps more attention should be focused on the pubs who let people get into that condition in the first place.

Pub And chipper owners :rolleyes::rolleyes:

There's a novel idea , lets blame those really at fault ,The individuals who cannot handle drink and act the tit , week in week out.

hardybuck · 24-02-2012 6:52pm

ROCKMAN wrote: »

Pub And chipper owners :rolleyes::rolleyes:

There's a novel idea , lets blame those really at fault ,The individuals who cannot handle drink and act the tit , week in week out.

Yeah but it's not good enough to keep serving people to the point where they can barely walk, then fire them outside. After that they're somebody else's problem.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there something in the legislation where it is illegal to keep serving a drunk person?

deisedave · 24-02-2012 7:07pm

hardybuck wrote: »

Yeah but it's not good enough to keep serving people to the point where they can barely walk, then fire them outside. After that they're somebody else's problem.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there something in the legislation where it is illegal to keep serving a drunk person?

Yeah you are exactly right pubs getting people so drunk (which is basically just a nice word for high on drink) and then chuck them out onto the streets where there is just complete mayhem. In other countries police would fine the pubs for letting people get so drunk in there pubs, I do like drinking myself but I really think if alot of the trouble that comes from drink was coming from a different drunk there would be uproar but because its drink people turn a blind eye.

I think minimum pricing in pubs not off licenses, scattered opening hours and more responsibility on the publican is the way to go. I would also like to see the Guards actually making arrests when drunk people break the law not just a telling off and letting them on their merry way.

Adyx · 24-02-2012 10:10pm

Well whatever about weekend nights, you can't really put too much blame on the pubs for the condition students get themselves into. As I said before on the nightlife thread, most of them drink fuck all once they're out. Or at least buy fuck all. They either bring in their own or just rob someone else's. When they do buy a drink, they're literally scrounging their wallets for a few coppers. I honestly think a lot don't go out with any money at all - maybe enough to pay a door charge.

Nypd · 24-02-2012 10:25pm

Adyx wrote: »

Well whatever about weekend nights, you can't really put too much blame on the pubs for the condition students get themselves into. As I said before on the nightlife thread, most of them drink fuck all once they're out. Or at least buy fuck all. They either bring in their own or just rob someone else's. When they do buy a drink, they're literally scrounging their wallets for a few coppers. I honestly think a lot don't go out with any money at all - maybe enough to pay a door charge.

Iv said it before and I'll say it again, cheap booze in the supermarkets should hold the main portion of the blame, boxes of beer for €20, tesco selling bottles of spirits for €15 or less.
Most places don't get busy until midnight so you have 2-2.5 hours of ramming drinks into yourself.
Stagger the closing hours, only leaving the big venues open late into the night.
It works in other European countries why can't it work here ?

Potential-Monke · 25-02-2012 9:08pm

Sully wrote: »

The Guards bend the rules all the time. No harm in asking people to move on. I'm sure they can find some excuse to find people as causing an annoyance.

Keep in mind that there are only 7 cells in Waterford... And they can't double up anymore.

"Fixed charge" - as in no fine? Just a warning?

Fixed charge is a fine, usually €80, and a "conviction" in it's lightest form.

I thought that WIT were always made aware if a student was involved in an incident. Thought that's what was said in a letter sent out, maybe I am misunderstanding it.

Unfortunately, no, it would be a complete breach of Data Protection Laws. If a WIT rep saw something happening and a WIT student was arrested as a consequence, then there's nothing stopping the rep telling, but the Gardai have their hands tied. It would be like if you got arrested for being drunk,. would you appreciate your boss/family being told?

Its a good idea, but a little early. Maybe 3am - giving an hour. But the problem seems to be the large volume of people on the street. If we shut up shop, they may not go away if there is a big crowd together.

But if food venues closed early, then some people would leave early, others would want to keep drinking. It would stagger the volume of people between midnight and 3am, rather than having everyone on the street from 2.30am to 3am.

Another great idea would be to have 23hr opening. It does work in other countries, why not here?

@Finbarr01: If you were to arrest everyone for breaking the law, everyone would be in jail. It's grand saying only arrest the really drunk people who are causing trouble/annoyance, but that's still a huge number for which there is no place to put them/no enough resources to deal with them.

@hardybuck: They are free to trade, but i'm sure a lovely by-law from WCC would curb that (i may be mistaken on that though). And it would be great to hold the pubs responsible, the problem is proving it was their drink that got them that way. As many have said, most students don't drink alot when they're out, it's all done beforehand.

Finnbar01 · 25-02-2012 9:31pm

Potential-Monke wrote: »

@Finbarr01: If you were to arrest everyone for breaking the law, everyone would be in jail. It's grand saying only arrest the really drunk people who are causing trouble/annoyance, but that's still a huge number for which there is no place to put them/no enough resources to deal with them.

I'm not saying we should arrest everyone, only the most serious law breakers. Or at least bring in a system of fixed fines.

I agree that pub closing times should be more staggered.

WITSU Rag Week 2012

Comments