An Garda Síochána - COVID19

drunkmonkey

bubblypop wrote: »

Forget about covid pet.
Is there somewhere in the country that you think gardai should not patrol?

Yes beauty spots on nice days, you think it's good they're out annoying people. They're not saving lives get that virtue signaling out of your head it's pure brainwashing or fear of the person above.

drunkmonkey

gmisk wrote: »

Gript...lol....I am out

Do you honestly believe that story would run in the Independent or Times, it doesn't mean it's fake just because it's not in mainstream.
It's naive to think every Garda is in favor of masks, being pressured to take a vaccine and generally do things they didn't sign up to like giving fines to people going to church or the beach.

FishOnABike

Tenzor07 wrote: »

I believe the point is that we're seeing pictures of Garda patrols in beauty spots, where people go to walk in the open air, no virus risk , enjoying the outdoors/good for your health... The impression that these pictures create is that these areas are being policed to "catch people out" and stay away...
I'd rather see Gardai patroling areas of high crime and drug dealing..

Given the number of reported break ins to cars parked in beauty spots while their owners are out enjoying the fresh air I'd be more than happy that the gardaí are paying particular attention to them.

TomsOnTheRoof

TomsOnTheRoof wrote: »

That's completely disingenuous. Gardaí have been patrolling these spots to issue fines, not to protect large gatherings from being targeted by criminal elements.

So gardai just do one particular job when they are out?
Or do they do many many jobs......

drunkmonkey

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Yes beauty spots on nice days, you think it's good they're out annoying people. They're not saving lives get that virtue signaling out of your head it's pure brainwashing or fear of the person above.

How long would these beauty spots remain beautiful and peaceful of Gardai actively avoided them?

I don't think you actually understand how criminals and policing works

drunkmonkey

What's with the constant repetitive questions when you know that's not what's been talked about. It's a good deflection for discussion on the matter at hand I'll give you that.
Garda has their opinion, fake news, seriously:rolleyes:

drunkmonkey

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

How long would these beauty spots remain beautiful and peaceful of Gardai actively avoided them?

I don't think you actually understand how criminals and policing works

Ah will you stop your protecting beaches from people. We're not taking about stopping everyday crime, this is the Covid forum.

bubblypop

bubblypop wrote: »

So gardai just do one particular job when they are out?
Or do they do many many jobs......

"Dispatch, any murders in progress?"

"Nope but there's an old woman being mugged"

"Not my thing dispatch, not my thing"

puts sunglasses back on while the music plays......

drunkmonkey

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Ah will you stop your protecting beaches from people. We're not taking about stopping everyday crime, this is the Covid forum.

Criminals, last I checked, are people. They have been known to, shocking I know, target innocent people that are congregating in beauty spots.

I'll tell you a shocker now, but pickpockets congregate in shopping areas. Shhh, no one knows that so don't let on you know.

drunkmonkey

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Criminals, last I checked, are people.

Your posts are idiotic and clueless.

It's your definition of a criminal is the problem, the ags see a family heading to a beauty spot as something that should be stamped out and met with a possible jail term and i'm the clueless one.

drunkmonkey

Sorry I should have said some members of ags.

runawaybishop

drunkmonkey wrote: »

It's your definition of a criminal is the problem, the ags see a family heading to a beauty spot as something that should be stamped out and met with a possible jail term and i'm the clueless one.

For the last year the papers have been full of reports of people driving stupid distances to go to parks and beaches even at the height of the pandemic. Of course the gardai should be publicising that they will be keeping an eye on popular spots.

drunkmonkey

drunkmonkey wrote: »

It's your definition of a criminal is the problem, the ags see a family heading to a beauty spot as something that should be stamped out and met with a possible jail term and i'm the clueless one.

I know what a Criminal is, I deal with them daily.

But you're right. Every single Gardai shall be dispatched to Ballymun tomorrow. Each one will be assigned a set crime to deal with.

No criminals shall venture out and absolutely no beauty scene shall witness a crime every again

Great idea. Nailed it!

drunkmonkey

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

I know what a Criminal is, I deal with them daily.

Do you think it should be a criminal offense to visit a beauty spot? It would be great to hear your personal lay persons opinion on the different measures ags were asked to implement.

I'm not really expecting a comprehensive answer I understand the position your in.

Happydays2020

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Do you think it should be a criminal offense to visit a beauty spot? It would be great to hear your personal lay persons opinion on the different measures ags were asked to implement.

I'm not really expecting a comprehensive answer I understand the position your in.

Or should it be an offence to try to leave the country? I know the AGS does not write legislation and they are following orders but still....

Tenzor07

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Will will post about anything and everything. We live in a world of constantly outraged experts.Perhaps ags should just abandon social media.

What are you on about? This is the Covid19/Garda thread... And we're discussing the Tweets by the Gardai showing them snapping pictures is wide open outdoor spaces and they're posting about obeying the Covid restrictions...it seems a waste of time to have Police resources checking Covid rules in wide open outdoor spaces where the risk of Covid is little or none...

Now if a resident of North Dublin contacts the Gardai about joyriders, Scrambler bike riders, drug dealing or anti-social behaviour then it's something you'll never see a Tweet about "Patrolling a high crime area"....

Tenzor07

Tenzor07 wrote: »

What are you on about? This is the Covid19/Garda thread... And we're discussing the Tweets by the Gardai showing them snapping pictures is wide open outdoor spaces and they're posting about obeying the Covid restrictions...it seems a waste of time to have Police resources checking Covid rules in wide open outdoor spaces where the risk of Covid is little or none...

Now if a resident of North Dublin contacts the Gardai about joyriders, Scrambler bike riders, drug dealing or anti-social behaviour then it's something you'll never see a Tweet about "Patrolling a high crime area"....

Again, for those that can't follow a simple thought process.

You can't please all of the people, all of the time. No matter what ags does it doesn't do, people will find issue.

This thread is proof of this.

Ashbourne hoop

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I've already said I linked it to the incident in the Church which considering the known circumstances at the time was a reasonable train of thought, we only know now there was a lot more to it, who told you first yesterday there was more to it.

It was NEVER a reasonable train of thought. Anyone with even a passing interest in how child protection laws work in this country knew there was more to it, had to be, that was the only reasonable train of thought. But it fitted the anti eastablishment/gardaí views of many to go along with the NP etc.

drunkmonkey

Ashbourne hoop wrote: »

It was NEVER a reasonable train of thought. Anyone with even a passing interest in how child protection laws work in this country knew there was more to it, had to be, that was the only reasonable train of thought. But it fitted the anti eastablishment/gardaí views of many to go along with the NP etc.

Hence my opening question, is there more to it. There was a coincidence at play and needed to be proved unrelated and it was eventually. Are people normally arrested under the mental health act in the middle of the night and their children taken, I still don't see how the mental health act came into it, I definitely don't think it's mental to object to your kids been masked all day at school if that's how it was used.

drunkmonkey

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Hence my opening question, is there more to it. There was a coincidence at play and needed to be proved unrelated and it was eventually. Are people normally arrested under the mental health act in the middle of the night and their children taken, I still don't see how the mental health act came into it, I definitely don't think it's mental to object to your kids been masked all day at school if that's how it was used.

Of course you don't see how it came into it, nor are you supposed to. Because it's really none of your business.
People are not detained under the mental treatment act for nothing and children are definitely not 'taken' for no good reason.

Ashbourne hoop

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Hence my opening question, is there more to it. There was a coincidence at play and needed to be proved unrelated and it was eventually. Are people normally arrested under the mental health act in the middle of the night and their children taken, I still don't see how the mental health act came into it, I definitely don't think it's mental to object to your kids been masked all day at school if that's how it was used.

The Gardaí use their powers under Section 12 sparingly, and when they do, it is with good reason. If the Gardaí believed there was a risk to the children then of course they need to act asap, and if that's 3am, then so be it. Imagine if, god forbid, something happened to the children and it came out that Gardaí believed there was a risk to the children but decided to wait until 9am before removing them ? They'd be hammered, and rightly so.

drunkmonkey

We don't know if the children were at risk nothing to suggest they were, he was proven fit by a doctor while in custody and released if the story is to be believed hence I don't see how the mental health act came into it.

drunkmonkey

drunkmonkey wrote: »

We don't know if the children were at risk nothing to suggest they were, he was proven fit by a doctor while in custody and released if the story is to be believed hence I don't see how the mental health act came into it.

I'm starting to think there are a lot of people out there that should be detained under the mental treatment act.

bluepurple

drunkmonkey wrote: »

We don't know if the children were at risk nothing to suggest they were, he was proven fit by a doctor while in custody and released if the story is to be believed hence I don't see how the mental health act came into it.

Because it’s easier for them to shove someone onto a psychiatrist than dealing with the situation themselves. You only have to look at what happened in Dundrum back in March to see what’s going on.

Ashbourne hoop

drunkmonkey wrote: »

We don't know if the children were at risk nothing to suggest they were, he was proven fit by a doctor while in custody and released if the story is to be believed hence I don't see how the mental health act came into it.

Other than the Gardai invoking their power under Section 12 ? You will not, and should not, have any more information than that. The children have a right to confidentiality, their father's actions made it harder obviously, it shouldn't be diminished further.

bluepurple

bluepurple wrote: »

Because it’s easier for them to shove someone onto a psychiatrist than dealing with the situation themselves. You only have to look at what happened in Dundrum back in March to see what’s going on.

What happened?

drunkmonkey

bubblypop wrote: »

I'm starting to think there are a lot of people out there that should be detained under the mental treatment act.

Unreal, it's an open air lunatic asylum. Should start with the auld ones driving around on their own with no glasses on because the mask fogs them up. It's like bumper cars out there.

drunkmonkey

Ashbourne hoop wrote: »

Other than the Gardai invoking their power under Section 12 ? You will not, and should not, have any more information than that. The children have a right to confidentiality, their father's actions made it harder obviously, it shouldn't be diminished further.

In general, I don't care about this hoax of a story. I was just asking is it usual to use that act when taking children. Is there not something else that covers a situation like that one.

drunkmonkey

drunkmonkey wrote: »

In general, I don't care about this hoax of a story. I was just asking is it usual to use that act when taking children. Is there not something else that covers a situation like that one.

What are you talking about?
What Act do you think they used?

drunkmonkey

bubblypop wrote: »

What are you talking about?
What Act do you think they used?

I'd have to go back and watch it, it's in the video. I thought the Garda said section 4 of the mental health act. Not going to do it right now.