People of the year awards

Beano

jezzer wrote: »

proper order too

is that you Martin?

jezzer

Beano wrote: »

what have you done to merit an award? Is there an award for belittling people who have stood up and be counted? And i think you will find that they have earned their pension so why should they give it up just to make you feel better?

Well if they have such a problem with the organisation they should hand it back

Well by the looks of it if i tie my shoelaces i should get an award as they seem to be handing them out to just about anybody these days which in all sincerity devalues the contribution of decent people who earn these awards

Beano

jezzer wrote: »

Well if they have such a problem with the organisation they should hand it back

so not try and change it then?

jezzer

Beano wrote: »

and benefit from it by having traffic offences squashed?

i will ask you again

If the guard uses his discretion and believes this is warranted then yes.

I am under no obligation to you or anyone to disclose private details.

jezzer

Beano wrote: »

so not try and change it then?

change what?

jezzer

floggg wrote: »

Well then thats your problem right there - and also your fault too if you bought it knowing it was illegal to drive it on the road without it.

Actually, Im not going to bother. Never argue with fools and all that.

you dont argue with yourself so...

Beano

jezzer wrote: »

If the guard uses his discretion and believes this is warranted then yes.

so if somebody doesnt know a guard then they're just unlucky and dont get the benefit of any discretion?

jezzer wrote: »

I am under no obligation to you or anyone to disclose private details.

i'll take that as a yes then.

Beano

jezzer wrote: »

change what?

the organisation. i thought that was clear.

jezzer

Beano wrote: »

it has always been an offence to drive without an NCT. before now they would take you to court. now they give you a fixed penalty notice instead.

in most instances the guard used his discretion now he cannot do so

bear1

jezzer wrote: »

Of course its discretion and it was hardly of national importance was it? just because you dont know anyone in the guards to get you off, your probably just the jealous sort

Hahahahahah :pac:
I've a clean licence, I got 4 points and a 160e fine for speeding a few years ago all in the one day. I paid my fine and drove as carefully as I could after that.
I was jealous of people having had clean licences yeah.
It's obvious you are just trying to get a rise out of people but keep at it, you'll get better at it someday

jezzer

Beano wrote: »

so if somebody doesnt know a guard then they're just unlucky and dont get the benefit of any discretion?




i'll take that as a yes then.

You wont take it as anything, you have no right to assume anything about my private details

Beano

jezzer wrote: »

in most instances the guard used his discretion now he cannot do so

of course they can. they just dont issue the fixed penalty notice.

bear1

jezzer wrote: »

in most instances the guard used his discretion now he cannot do so

Can you prove the Guards used their discretion? And also if you can show this secret law where Guards were allowed to cancel points please? I get the impression you think it was ok for them to do this.

jezzer

bear1 wrote: »

Hahahahahah :pac:
I've a clean licence, I got 4 points and a 160e fine for speeding a few years ago all in the one day. I paid my fine and drove as carefully as I could after that.
I was jealous of people having had clean licences yeah.
It's obvious you are just trying to get a rise out of people but keep at it, you'll get better at it someday

its obvious that you are a bit sad and you shouldn't be speeding

Beano

jezzer wrote: »

You wont take it as anything, you have no right to assume anything about my private details

in the absence of a definitive answer what else can i do?

jezzer

bear1 wrote: »

Can you prove the Guards used their discretion? And also if you can show this secret law where Guards were allowed to cancel points please? I get the impression you think it was ok for them to do this.

Thats like asking to prove you are typing, nonsensical statement, no secret law, they were able to use their discretion

Beano

bear1 wrote: »

Can you prove the Guards used their discretion? And also if you can show this secret law where Guards were allowed to cancel points please? I get the impression you think it was ok for them to do this.

of course it was ok. especially when he was the one benefiting.

bear1

jezzer wrote: »

its obvious that you are a bit sad and you shouldn't be speeding

Don't say that Don't worry if I speed again I'll just get a Guard to cancel the points for me.

jezzer

Beano wrote: »

in the absence of a definitive answer what else can i do?

You keep your unqualified opinion to yourself is what you do

jezzer

bear1 wrote: »

Don't say that Don't worry if I speed again I'll just get a Guard to cancel the points for me.

Ah sorry, you cant do that now because of a couple of whistleblowers....

Beano

jezzer wrote: »

You keep your unqualified opinion to yourself is what you do

I shall speak my mind freely. Once i keep within forum rules.

jezzer

Beano wrote: »

I shall speak my mind freely. Once i keep within forum rules.

Making sweeping statements regarding a person's private dealings is not within the rules

bear1

jezzer wrote: »

Thats like asking to prove you are typing, nonsensical statement, no secret law, they were able to use their discretion

They are allowed to use a minimal amount of discretion by the roadside.
This is what tells me you haven't a clue about what you are talking about.
They are NOT however, allowed to give points and a fine only for the points to then be wiped from the database. Are you seriously saying that this is within the Gardai's discretion to do and that those who blew the whistle were just annoyed at their colleagues?
You are making stupid statements that quite a few people have asked you to back up but you are too inept to do it.
Must be horrible having nothing sensical to say.

jezzer

bear1 wrote: »

They are allowed to use a minimal amount of discretion by the roadside.
This is what tells me you haven't a clue about what you are talking about.
They are NOT however, allowed to give points and a fine only for the points to then be wiped from the database. Are you seriously saying that this is within the Gardai's discretion to do and that those who blew the whistle were just annoyed at their colleagues?
You are making stupid statements that quite a few people have asked you to back up but you are too inept to do it.
Must be horrible having nothing sensical to say.

sensical, oh big word there from a small minded individual

if you dont get my point by now then i feel sorry for you, too many do gooders in this country has it ruined

bear1

jezzer wrote: »

sensical, oh big word there from a small minded individual

if you dont get my point by now then i feel sorry for you, too many do gooders in this country has it ruined

Ah so you've resorted to petty insults now I don't get your point cause there is no point to get.
Judging by your posting style you just talk nonsense.

Beano

jezzer wrote: »

Making sweeping statements regarding a person's private dealings is not within the rules

report my post then.

GLaDOS

Leave out the personal remarks

Attack the post, not the poster

Xios

bear1 wrote: »

Ah so you've resorted to petty insults now I don't get your point cause there is no point to get.
Judging by your posting style you just talk nonsense.

This guy is hilarious, keep the thread going. It's like an open faucet into the mind of an adolescent.

Venus In Furs

Whistleblowers are a brave and rare breed (doubt I'd be courageous enough) - these guys put their jobs and personal lives on the line with the greater good in mind, leading to a major inquiry.
Of course they deserve to be honoured.

jezzer

Xios wrote: »

This guy is hilarious, keep the thread going. It's like an open faucet into the mind of an adolescent.

Indeed...sometimes people just cant understand things but thats ok too.

jezzer

Venus In Furs wrote: »

Whistleblowers are a brave and rare breed (doubt I'd be courageous enough) - these guys put their jobs and personal lives on the line with the greater good in mind, leading to a major inquiry.
Of course they deserve to be honoured.

In my opinion it has devalued the people of the year award, the award should be for people who make the lives of others better, in this situation how did these guys make anyones lives better? Imagine what their families went through? all for what? so a few penalty points were quashed, hardly detrimental to the security of the country was it? No doubt they are still happy enough to take their state pensions. What they did would also have had a negative effect on their colleagues, some of them decent coppers who know the real right from wrong, cops who see the bigger picture of what policing is really all about.
What I reckon happened here was that these two guys got overlooked for promotion and decided to play the great fellas and rat on their colleagues. Whistleblowing is a nasty business, something that should be discouraged in any organisation except in cases of serious crime or detriment to the organisation.
They didnt put their jobs on the line because they knew they had their state pensions in the bag, maybe a bit of sick leave thrown in. In terms of their personal lives i'm sure they live off the notoriety and do-gooders clapping them on the back. In my opinion they should have weighed up the seriousness of what they were exposing and put their families first and keep their mouths shut.

mikom

jezzer wrote: »

In my opinion they should have weighed up the seriousness of what they were exposing and put their families first and keep their mouths shut.

Now if only the starting of this thread was pre-empted with the same sort of thinking.........

jezzer

mikom wrote: »

Now if only the starting of this thread was pre-empted with the same sort of thinking.........

Not entirely sure what you mean?

bear1

jezzer wrote: »

Not entirely sure what you mean?

What he means is that finally after so much wasted time you actually wrote something that people can debate about.
Whether people still agree with you (I don't but we've established that) is a different matter.
You do however keep banging on about "overlooked promotions", why? What makes you think that?
I'd say the only reason they rated was because they were proud of their job and didn't want to see corrupt coppers ruin their image which invariably it did anyway.
There should be no corruption at all especially in the Guards position as they are also a public figure with authority. If the whistleblowers hadn't had rated then God knows how much worse it would have gotten.

Venus In Furs

They did of course do a favour to society by exposing garda corruption, which will help reduce it because it's on the radar now.
To call it "a few penalty points" is dishonest (e.g. the S. Roche-Kelly case).

jezzer

Venus In Furs wrote: »

They did of course do a favour to society by exposing garda corruption, which will help reduce it because it's on the radar now.
To call it "a few penalty points" is dishonest (e.g. the S. Roche-Kelly case).

I wouldnt go so far as calling it corruption, it was more along the lines of discretion

jezzer

bear1 wrote: »

What he means is that finally after so much wasted time you actually wrote something that people can debate about.
Whether people still agree with you (I don't but we've established that) is a different matter.
You do however keep banging on about "overlooked promotions", why? What makes you think that?
I'd say the only reason they rated was because they were proud of their job and didn't want to see corrupt coppers ruin their image which invariably it did anyway.
There should be no corruption at all especially in the Guards position as they are also a public figure with authority. If the whistleblowers hadn't had rated then God knows how much worse it would have gotten.

Ok fair points, firstly i think that your statement is very naive, if they were proud of their job they would have had their perceived wrongdoing internally, i state overlooked promotions as the most credible reason they did what they did, certainly if there was real corruption here, i would commend it being brought to the fore (not necessarily ratting out) such as gardai taking cash which was in evidence, gardai extortion, gardai involvement in criminal elements, but regarding penalty points, no, this was not anywhere near the national interest and aside from anything, it was not worth putting decent colleagues and their families through all of that

Beano

jezzer wrote: »

I wouldnt go so far as calling it corruption, it was more along the lines of discretion

you keep using that word discretion. Almost like you understand what it means.

bear1

jezzer wrote: »

Ok fair points, firstly i think that your statement is very naive, if they were proud of their job they would have had their perceived wrongdoing internally, i state overlooked promotions as the most credible reason they did what they did, certainly if there was real corruption here, i would commend it being brought to the fore (not necessarily ratting out) such as gardai taking cash which was in evidence, gardai extortion, gardai involvement in criminal elements, but regarding penalty points, no, this was not anywhere near the national interest and aside from anything, it was not worth putting decent colleagues and their families through all of that

The last sentence you wrote is why i believe they had balls and were brave at disclosing the corruption. They must have known the risks but still went ahead and stood up to what they knew was right. Fair play to them.

jezzer

i dont agree

Dont call me Shirley

Interesting, didn't Rehab have a whistleblower of their own on Prime Time a few years back?

Beano

jezzer wrote: »

i dont agree

wow, only 5 days to come up with that incisive response. oscar wilde would be proud

bear1

jezzer wrote: »

i dont agree

Don't agree with what?