Peter Casey believes Travellers should not be recognised as an ethnic minority

Spanish Eyes

I am curious to know if there has been any evaluation of the success or otherwise of financial and other supports given to the Traveller Community?

Has the support for this ethnic minority achieved a decent measure of success yet I wonder?

To me, you can throw any epithets around, and give financial supports to anyone, but unless THEY are willing to change, it is all for nought.

I am sure there are positives, but really out there on the ground it doesn't seem to me that the so called culture of non education and mysoginy will change anytime soon.

I would love to be corrected.

Bannasidhe

ELM327 wrote: »

A very sad tale and one which should be investigated by the correct authorities,


But to equate one sorry tale with rampant abuse from travelers to animals is quite frankly wilful ignorance or delusion and I'm not sure which is worse.

It's willful ignorance of the abuse carried out by settled people. Or delusion that "nice" people don't do such things.

Well they do.
Every day.

ELM327

Bannasidhe wrote: »

It's willful ignorance of the abuse carried out by settled people. Or delusion that "nice" people don't do such things.

Well they do.
Every day.

Pro rata at the same rate? Come off it now.

FrancieBrady

tretorn wrote: »

Are you for real?????

Have you any idea why three hundred thousand people voted for Casey, someone who they never heard of before.
Can you explain why the vote was so high in areas where there are a lot of travellers.
Maybe get on a bus to Rathkeale or Tuam or Longford and pass the time of day eith the locals. You might learn something, you never know, you just might.

Yes I am for real.

There is a reason why exploitative people like Casey will be repudiated by people who can think past their own parish concerns and see a bigger picture.

Rural crime was always present. The man or woman isolated in the countryside last week was just as isolated in the 50's.

What has changed is there for all to see, and tbh doesn't take a populist hate monger like Casey to highlight.

You create a have and have not economy or social order and simultaneously decimate the security infrastructure of the state and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to workout what is going to happen.

All Casey succeeded in doing was to get the chattering lazy ranters going and the conversation is suddenly not about government policy but about a segment of the community partly responsible.
Traveller crime is a 'symptom' not the cause of the problem.

And yes, the subtext of that ^ is that those that voted for Casey are more angry than clever tbh.

Roger Hassenforder

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I simply don't believe travellers are inherently more disposed to violence as others...

*wipes tears of laughter from eyes.

Dear god, pure gold Francie, fair play!

ELM327

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yes I am for real.

There is a reason why exploitative people like Casey will be repudiated by people who can think past their own parish concerns and see a bigger picture.

Rural crime was always present. The man or woman isolated in the countryside last week was just as isolated in the 50's.

What has changed is there for all to see, and tbh doesn't take a populist hate monger like Casey to highlight.

You create a have and have not economy or social order and simultaneously decimate the security infrastructure of the state and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to workout what is going to happen.

All Casey succeeded in doing was to get the chattering lazy ranters going and the conversation is suddenly not about government policy but about a segment of the community partly responsible.
Traveller crime is a 'symptom' not the cause of the problem.

And yes, the subtext of that ^ is that those that voted for Casey are more angry than clever tbh.

Ignoring some of the nonsense in this post and focusing on the emboldened line.
In the 50's-80's the "tinkers" as they were known then, were welcomed by one and all out the country. I have family near galway and the tinkers would be viewed as handymen that would fix things for you or do odd jobs for cash. Nowadays that doesnt really happen as people don't fix things when they break, they buy new ones. So the old "tinker" doesn't exist and has been usurped by the "modern traveller" who lives on the fringe of society leeching - legally or illegally - off the good men and women of middle ireland. And this, ladies and gentlemen, is precisely why I along with many others in middle Ireland voted for Casey - with no canvassing or promotion.

FrancieBrady

ELM327 wrote: »

Ignoring some of the nonsense in this post and focusing on the emboldened line.
In the 50's-80's the "tinkers" as they were known then, were welcomed by one and all out the country. I have family near galway and the tinkers would be viewed as handymen that would fix things for you or do odd jobs for cash. Nowadays that doesnt really happen as people don't fix things when they break, they buy new ones. So the old "tinker" doesn't exist and has been usurped by the "modern traveller" who lives on the fringe of society leeching - legally or illegally - off the good men and women of middle ireland. And this, ladies and gentlemen, is precisely why I along with many others in middle Ireland voted for Casey - with no canvassing or promotion.

Please don't indulge in the 'great silence' - the fact is the 'traveller' still makes his living (and it seems to be a very good one in some cases) dealing with the settled community.
Somebody is buying the stuff they traverse the countryside with as they have always done.

No doubt there are some that have taken the 'shortcuts' to profit that many in the settled community have taken and continue to take.
The history of the travellers that you outlined (and which I am aware of too) tends to suggest I am right that there is nothing inherently violent in them.
*I think the previous poster rubbishing that idea might be struggling to understand what 'inherent' means.

ELM327

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Please don't indulge in the 'great silence' - the fact is the 'traveller' still makes his living (and it seems to be a very good one in some cases) dealing with the settled community.
Somebody is buying the stuff they traverse the countryside with as they have always done.

No doubt there are some that have taken the 'shortcuts' to profit that many in the settled community have taken and continue to take.
The history of the travellers that you outlined (and which I am aware of too) tends to suggest I am right that there is nothing inherently violent in them.
*I think the previous poster rubbishing that idea might be struggling to understand what 'inherent' means.

Nothing inherently violent?
That's like saying guns have nothing inherently violent as they used to be just metal. Silly.


Travellers 50 years ago are nothing like they are these days.

Cina

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Please don't indulge in the 'great silence' - the fact is the 'traveller' still makes his living (and it seems to be a very good one in some cases) dealing with the settled community.
Somebody is buying the stuff they traverse the countryside with as they have always done.

No doubt there are some that have taken the 'shortcuts' to profit that many in the settled community have taken and continue to take.
The history of the travellers that you outlined (and which I am aware of too) tends to suggest I am right that there is nothing inherently violent in them.
*I think the previous poster rubbishing that idea might be struggling to understand what 'inherent' means.

You have got to be kidding.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Please don't indulge in the 'great silence' - the fact is the 'traveller' still makes his living (and it seems to be a very good one in some cases) dealing with the settled community.
Somebody is buying the stuff they traverse the countryside with as they have always done.

No doubt there are some that have taken the 'shortcuts' to profit that many in the settled community have taken and continue to take.
The history of the travellers that you outlined (and which I am aware of too) tends to suggest I am right that there is nothing inherently violent in them.
*I think the previous poster rubbishing that idea might be struggling to understand what 'inherent' means.

You're in the wrong house Francie, try one with padded walls.

KrustyUCC

I wonder where the 'traveller' get the stuff that they still make their 'living' selling?

SafeSurfer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yes I am for real.

There is a reason why exploitative people like Casey will be repudiated by people who can think past their own parish concerns and see a bigger picture.

Rural crime was always present. The man or woman isolated in the countryside last week was just as isolated in the 50's.

What has changed is there for all to see, and tbh doesn't take a populist hate monger like Casey to highlight.

You create a have and have not economy or social order and simultaneously decimate the security infrastructure of the state and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to workout what is going to happen.

All Casey succeeded in doing was to get the chattering lazy ranters going and the conversation is suddenly not about government policy but about a segment of the community partly responsible.
Traveller crime is a 'symptom' not the cause of the problem.

And yes, the subtext of that ^ is that those that voted for Casey are more angry than clever tbh.

You make points that are simply untrue.

Rural crime was almost unheard of in 1950s Ireland. People left their doors unlocked, in my own area, into the 1980s.

Rural population has not kept pace with overall population growth in the country. But the isolation that you mention is much more acute now than in 1950s Ireland because of the number of people in rural ireland who no longer live where they work.

In the 1950s in rural Ireland if you had a neighbouring house, chances were, without being sexist, that the wife would be at home with the kids or it would be a working farm, with someone onsite. Contrast that with today’s rural dwellers and the only houses occupied during working hours are those of the elderly.

I find it particularly insensitive to peddle the nonsense that rural isolation in 1950s Ireland is equivalent to the rural isolation of today. Take a look at comparative suicide rates from then and now, of depression rates and tell me that things haven’t changed.

Jackman25

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yes I am for real.

There is a reason why exploitative people like Casey will be repudiated by people who can think past their own parish concerns and see a bigger picture.

Rural crime was always present. The man or woman isolated in the countryside last week was just as isolated in the 50's.

What has changed is there for all to see, and tbh doesn't take a populist hate monger like Casey to highlight.

You create a have and have not economy or social order and simultaneously decimate the security infrastructure of the state and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to workout what is going to happen.

All Casey succeeded in doing was to get the chattering lazy ranters going and the conversation is suddenly not about government policy but about a segment of the community partly responsible.
Traveller crime is a 'symptom' not the cause of the problem.

And yes, the subtext of that ^ is that those that voted for Casey are more angry than clever tbh.

Anyone who robs and terrifies innocent people is a degenerate scumbag regardless of creed, race, sexuality or choice of habitat.
That is the cause of the problem.
Ireland is one of the best countries in the world to be a "have not" and the vast majority of the "have nots" get on with it and make the best of it. There is no excuse for being a robbing scumbag in this country.
Lack of security is certainly not the cause of the problem, sure more could be done to prevent the problem and I certainly lay that at the door of the Government and I would like to see far more security presence in rural areas and far tougher sentencing on crime. Ideally something like a 3 strikes out policy.

FrancieBrady

Jackman25 wrote: »

Anyone who robs and terrifies innocent people is a degenerate scumbag regardless of creed, race, sexuality or choice of habitat.
That is the cause of the problem.
Ireland is one of the best countries in the world to be a "have not" and the vast majority of the "have nots" get on with it and make the best of it. There is no excuse for being a robbing scumbag in this country.
Lack of security is certainly not the cause of the problem, sure more could be done to prevent the problem and I certainly lay that at the door of the Government and I would like to see far more security presence in rural areas and far tougher sentencing on crime. Ideally something like a 3 strikes out policy.

You have got to stop fulminating and step back.

Nobody is 'excusing' rural crime. Stop wasting pixels writing about these fantasy 'excusers'. They don't exist.

KrustyUCC

Jackman25 wrote: »

Anyone who robs and terrifies innocent people is a degenerate scumbag regardless of creed, race, sexuality or choice of habitat.
That is the cause of the problem.
Ireland is one of the best countries in the world to be a "have not" and the vast majority of the "have nots" get on with it and make the best of it. There is no excuse for being a robbing scumbag in this country.
Lack of security is certainly not the cause of the problem, sure more could be done to prevent the problem and I certainly lay that at the door of the Government and I would like to see far more security presence in rural areas and far tougher sentencing on crime. Ideally something like a 3 strikes out policy.

Sure look at poor auld Margaret Cash

The gubberment is robbing here despite never having worked a day in her life and being 100% dependant on welfare

She still 'had' to rob €300 worth of clothes from Penneys to 'cloth' her seven children

listermint

SafeSurfer wrote: »

I find it particularly insensitive to peddle the nonsense that rural isolation in 1950s Ireland is equivalent to the rural isolation of today. Take a look at comparative suicide rates from then and now, of depression rates and tell me that things haven’t changed.

Just for clarity sake, Suicide rate is not a rural problem so dont even go there.

Its an everywhere problem and has many root causes. Living in the countryside not being one.

FrancieBrady

SafeSurfer wrote: »

You make points that are simply untrue.

Rural crime was almost unheard of in 1950s Ireland. People left their doors unlocked, in my own area, into the 1980s.

Rural population has not kept pace with overall population growth in the country. But the isolation that you mention is much more acute now than in 1950s Ireland because of the number of people in rural ireland who no longer live where they work.

In the 1950s in rural Ireland if you had a neighbouring house, chances were, without being sexist, that the wife would be at home with the kids or it would be a working farm, with someone onsite. Contrast that with today’s rural dwellers and the only houses occupied during working hours are those of the elderly.

I find it particularly insensitive to peddle the nonsense that rural isolation in 1950s Ireland is equivalent to the rural isolation of today. Take a look at comparative suicide rates from then and now, of depression rates and tell me that things haven’t changed.

While I agree with some of what you say, I don't agree with it all.

Response times - communication improvements - mobility has to be factored in as well.

Of course things have changed in Urban/Rural circumstances, but there are those who advocate foe stripping rural Ireland even more bare of her traditional infrastructure.
It should be those we are railing against.

What I think is a huge, if not the main problem is that motorway/better road arteries have exposed large areas of the countryside, not easily reached from the bigger urban areas. Working with local knowledge,(settled people tipping off criminal gangs)has led to a lot of these robberies are taking place.
Gardai know well what is going on, but they don't have the manpower or resources to do anything constructive to deter it or stop it, nor even prosecute it properly when they succeed.

PlaneSpeeking

KrustyUCC wrote: »

I wonder where the 'traveller' get the stuff that they still make their 'living' selling?

Normal people - "Sheds by and large"
Apologists - "ah sure they make dem by their own fair hands so they do"

KrustyUCC

listermint wrote: »

Just for clarity sake, Suicide rate is not a rural problem so dont even go there.

Its an everywhere problem and has many root causes. Living in the countryside not being one.

It certainly is an issue

"Men are four times more likely to die by suicide than women and the highest risk group is among those aged 45-54, researchers have found.
It also found that farmers and people living in rural isolation are among the groups most vulnerable."

https://www.independent.ie/business/farming/rural-life/farmers-among-those-most-likely-to-die-by-suicide-36723840.html

PlaneSpeeking

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You have got to stop fulminating and step back.

Nobody is 'excusing' rural crime. Stop wasting pixels writing about these fantasy 'excusers'. They don't exist.

I've just read your posts.

So yeah, they do.

Danzy

omega man wrote: »

There is absolutely no argument that welfare fraud or animal abuse etc doesn’t take place as much in the so called settled community. The issue here is proportionality with respect to population percentages.

One of the problems with the ethnicity b.s. is that people can pretend it is all down to racism.

It is cultural, it is values, not genes.

listermint

KrustyUCC wrote: »

It certainly is an issue

"Men are four times more likely to die by suicide than women and the highest risk group is among those aged 45-54, researchers have found.
It also found that farmers and people living in rural isolation are among the groups most vulnerable."

https://www.independent.ie/business/farming/rural-life/farmers-among-those-most-likely-to-die-by-suicide-36723840.html

You wanna talk suicide rates, look up suicide rates in the traveller community and lets start talking about that subject since you brought it up.


Come on, raise the topics talk about them.

KrustyUCC

Right so you still believe although suicide is an everywhere problem and has many root causes yet Living in the countryside is not one?

SafeSurfer

listermint wrote: »

Just for clarity sake, Suicide rate is not a rural problem so dont even go there.

Its an everywhere problem and has many root causes. Living in the countryside not being one.

Suicide is as much a rural problem as it is elsewhere. In fact moreso. Suicide rates are higher in rural than urban areas.
https://www.teagasc.ie/media/website/rural-economy/farm-management/Pain_and_Distress_in_Rural_Ireland_Report.pdf

Pyr0

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Suicide is as much a rural problem as it is elsewhere. In fact moreso. Suicide rates are higher in rural than urban areas.
https://www.teagasc.ie/media/website/rural-economy/farm-management/Pain_and_Distress_in_Rural_Ireland_Report.pdf

Probably caused by being robbed by travellers all the time :pac:

SafeSurfer

listermint wrote: »

You wanna talk suicide rates, look up suicide rates in the traveller community and lets start talking about that subject since you brought it up.


Come on, raise the topics talk about them.

Yes, suicide rates among the traveling community are a tragedy that need to be discussed.
You wouldn’t have asked for that discussion but for Peter Casey’s comments.

PlaneSpeeking

listermint wrote: »

You wanna talk suicide rates, look up suicide rates in the traveller community and lets start talking about that subject since you brought it up.


Come on, raise the topics talk about them.

Given that a Pavee Point representative cited "racism" as a reason for this alleged spike in Traveller suicide rates, you can see there are large pinches of salt taken at this.

Perhaps an upbringing with a sense of entitlement doesn't allow for the growth of resilience ?

I see it with students all the time who have been mollycoddled their whole lives; once one thing goes against them or there is someone who treats them fairly - rather than give them preferential treatment, they crumble.

mickdw

I've been away for a few days. Couldn't comment here since the result.
I said since cases comments that I thought he would do 20 percent. To exceed that and go far above it in rural areas is a stunning result.
It was a vote relating to traveller comments but for 20 percent to vote for him shows the strength of the feelings out there and it needs to be taken seriously now and properly debates at national level.
The behaviour of government and the entire media in the build up to the vote was a disgrace. It was a clear attempt to paint Casey as a fool and a racist and the publishing of old poll data the last weekend with little will to highlight that it was old data not reflecting Casey comments was nothing short of high level corruption.
How many people swallowed the data put in front of them, decided that maybe seeing as only 2 percent were still voting for Casey that maybe they were wrong in their opinion of him and didn't then vote for him.
Casey is no public slick public speaker but I imagine he might take a seat off the 'no thanks' FF camp if he runs on a similar stance come the general election.

mickdw

I've been away for a few days. Couldn't comment here since the result.
I said since cases comments that I thought he would do 20 percent. To exceed that and go far above it in rural areas is a stunning result.
It was a vote relating to traveller comments but for 20 percent to vote for him shows the strength of the feelings out there and it needs to be taken seriously now and properly debates at national level.
The behaviour of government and the entire media in the build up to the vote was a disgrace. It was a clear attempt to paint Casey as a fool and a racist and the publishing of old poll data the last weekend with little will to highlight that it was old data not reflecting Casey comments was nothing short of high level corruption.
How many people swallowed the data put in front of them, decided that maybe seeing as only 2 percent were still voting for Casey that maybe they were wrong in their opinion of him and didn't then vote for him.
Casey is no public slick public speaker but I imagine he might take a seat off the 'no thanks' FF camp if he runs on a similar stance come the general election.

ELM327

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Given that a Pavee Point representative cited "racism" as a reason for this alleged spike in Traveller suicide rates, you can see there are large pinches of salt taken at this.

Perhaps an upbringing with a sense of entitlement doesn't allow for the growth of resilience ?

I see it with students all the time who have been mollycoddled their whole lives; once one thing goes against them or there is someone who treats them fairly - rather than give them preferential treatment, they crumble.

This thing of "racism" being used by travellers is akin to the Ali G sketch where he asks "Iz it coz i iz black". It is not possible for a group of white europeans to be racist to another group of white europeans.


Whatever about "ethnic discrimination", but "racism" being used in this scenario is risible, and denigrates actual victims of racist violence.