Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Truth about traveller crime
Options
Comments
-
For what it's worth, I think we all own the narrative of how we are perceived. We are perceived through our actions and words. It is in the gift of travellers, if they are percieved negatively, to change that in a general sense. You'll never please everyone in life.0
-
Wasn't the complaint that they are untouchable and the guards are afraid to do anything about the crime they commit. Something doesn't add up.
Logical fallacy here
The fact that lots of them are in prison doesn't mean that all of them are in prison who should be. Even if they are under-policed, the rate of crime among travellers may be so high that they still out number other groups in the prison population.0 -
Logical fallacy here
The fact that lots of them are in prison doesn't mean that all of them are in prison who should be. Even if they are under-policed, the rate of crime among travellers may be so high that they still out number other groups in the prison population.
His/her point was a sound one.
However a lot of ifs, buts and maybes in yours.Racism is now hiding behind the cloak of Community activism.
0 -
Working class heroes wrote: »His/her point was a sound one.
However a lot of ifs, buts and maybes in yours.
No, it was quite clearly flawed.0 -
Would a pub owner, who is having second thoughts about hosting a traveller wedding in his premises, be considered a racist by you?
How many more goalposts are you looking to move?
Peter Casey a nobody, that I said he made a racist quote. All over the place.
I think its clear that if you are a pub in that situation, its obviously something you need to deal with carefully. Luckily and disappointingly, the travellers are also well aware of their reputation and I'd look to have a conversation beforehand on what was expected and that outline how they had to be understanding to his own business interests. If you get burnt, it is obviously more difficult to be as trusting next time around. If possible I would look to agree what the consequences would be if that particular traveller gathering lived up to the worst examples which we all know of.
Guess its like how the Irish were treated in the UK previously, and Australia recently. It is of course part of the stigma that goes with the travellers that they are going to destroy the place. It is of course as bad that the pub gets a reputation of admitting travellers and locals stay away.
Again, from my experience, a friend runs a pub at home, who allowed travellers to drink there. During the downturn (the last one) it was the one pub doing a good business, and it was self-policing as any trouble, or threat of danger, went back to the 'head tinker' to address. There wasnt as much trouble as you would expect given that "they" recognised how the publican was sticking their necks out for them.0 -
Advertisement
-
Logical fallacy here
The fact that lots of them are in prison doesn't mean that all of them are in prison who should be. Even if they are under-policed, the rate of crime among travellers may be so high that they still out number other groups in the prison population.
Yeah, they are so lawless that the establishment never has the balls to stand up to them, guards dont tackle them. Only a staggeringly disproportionate amount of them end up in prison.
That's the summary of Eric Cartman and others argument. Its nonsense.0 -
Deebles McBeebles wrote: »If it agreed with my "theory", I still wouldn't want to know. Don't take it personally.
Why would I need you to give me pointers here? I can form my own arguments. I'm far from racist, not that you really care either way, you've made up your mind. I've seen some of what you've said, I don't agree, that's it. I find your points, and others on here, to make very little sense in the grand scheme of things.
Yeah, I don't care if you don't think you are a racist.0 -
I never said he/she was definitely wrong. I said that he/she wasn't necessarily correct.Working class heroes wrote: »His/her point was a sound one.
However a lot of ifs, buts and maybes in yours.
If you want to determine if the traveller community is being adequately policed, you need to take the number of convictions among travellers and express that as a percentage of the actual number of crimes being by travellers. There's no way to know the actual number of crimes but you could get a reasonable estimate like this. Determine what crimes travellers are mostly in prison for. Let's take tool shed robberies as one example. Of all the tool shed robbers in prison, find out what percentage are travellers. Let's say it's 60%. We could then assume that travellers commit 60% of tool shed robberies. Wouldn't be exactly that of course but you could calculate a margin of error easily enough. Then find out how many tool shed robberies are actually prosecuted. I'd imagine it's a minority, say 20%.
Well now we know that we should focus on travellers when it comes to investigating tool shed robberies. You might want to repeat that process across multiple different types of crimes that travellers are in prison for. If they're committing a majority of certain crimes and those crimes are under-prosecuted then we know that travellers are an under-policed community.
I wasn't saying the other poster was definitely wrong. I'm saying they'd need to present some evidence.0 -
And why isn't there enough challenge? You said before that the people who voice their opinions of travellers would never do the same about black people or Poles? Why do you think one would be opposed and not the other? Maybe because dislike of travellers is founded on real concerns about criminality? Concerns that don't exist about blacks and Poles.
criminality is just their excuse, i could believe that if some of them were able to get away with behaving the same to other groups they would probably do it.
i couldn't know it for sure, but i could believe it and it wouldn't surprise me, shall we say.
some of us manage to be able to condemn criminality from travelers while disagreeing with any discrimination they face.No. It's because no single ethnic group commits crime at the same rate as travellers. There's no group of people in this country that in anyway compares with travellers when it comes to crime. Therefore when you see a traveller, it's natural that you'll be more concerned about whether that traveller is a criminal than you would about the average settled person.
no, it's because ultimately they can do it without major challenge.
the amount of criminality within a community does in no certain terms justify bigotry or discrimination against members of a community.You keep on saying it's impossible to pressure travellers into joining society if they don't want to. It absolutely is. All you have to is change the incentives.
changing the incentives is clamping down on discrimination hard, so that those who wish to be part of society have a reason to actually want to be part of it.
for those who don't want to be part of society whether settled criminal or a criminal within the traveling community, all that can be done there is management of the issue by appropriate sentencing.Travellers stay the way the way there because they have no reason to change. Give them reasons. Halt their state aid and shut down their criminal enterprises.
haulting their state aid is only going to make the criminal element commit more crime while pushing those who are in genuine need into poverty and even crime itself. it is not going to bring about the change you want, which i think you actually know in reality.
if haulting necessary state aid was the answer to everything as some conservatives would have us believe, then it would be the main stay of everything and there would be no problems, there would be plenty of examples in the western world to show it to be the way to go.ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.
0 -
It's not even hate in most circumstances. It's well founded concern and suspicion based on reality.
i think we can probably say in reality that it's hate, suspicion based on whatever is just another excuse for it.
being suspicious of someone is simply being suspicious of someone, some of us know the difference between genuine suspicion and "suspicion" used to target members of a community because they are simply from a specific community.We all agree that if you meet a traveller (who you have reason to believe is a good person) and you mistreat them, this makes you a bad person.
actually, only some of us agree with that by the looks of it, because if we all agreed with it as we should and some of us do, then there wouldn't be discrimination, rhetoric and all else toards the whole community, rather the criminal element would be called out, and i would expect the threads on here would be tiny.You keep trying to lump traveller crime in with crime in general. Here's why that's foolish. The majority of criminals in the state aren't travellers agreed. This why it's hard to police them. They are normal members of society and we often can't police them till after they commit a crime.
With travellers it's different. Here you have a distinct group of people who live apart from everyone else and it is well known that this group's primary income is from the proceeds of crime. The fact that most criminals in this country aren't travellers isn't an excuse not to police the travelling community who we know are highly criminal. That's just stupid. There's also the fact that they mainly operate in rural Ireland which is itself under-policed thanks to garda station closures.
crime is crime, so it's perfectly reasonable to lump traveler crime into the rest and call for it all to be dealt with.
an under resourced garda force is never going to be able to catch every single criminal, however it does seem that they are dealing with criminality within the traveling community, if the prison population figures are anything to go by.ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.
0 -
Advertisement
-
I never said he/she was definitely wrong. I said that he/she wasn't necessarily correct.
If you want to determine if the traveller community is being adequately policed, you need to take the number of convictions among travellers and express that as a percentage of the actual number of crimes being by travellers. There's no way to know the actual number of crimes but you could get a reasonable estimate like this. Determine what crimes travellers are mostly in prison for. Let's take tool shed robberies as one example. Of all the tool shed robbers in prison, find out what percentage are travellers. Let's say it's 60%. We could then assume that travellers commit 60% of tool shed robberies. Wouldn't be exactly that of course but you could calculate a margin of error easily enough. Then find out how many tool shed robberies are actually prosecuted. I'd imagine it's a minority, say 20%.
Well now we know that we should focus on travellers when it comes to investigating tool shed robberies. You might want to repeat that process across multiple different types of crimes that travellers are in prison for. If they're committing a majority of certain crimes and those crimes are under-prosecuted then we know that travellers are an under-policed community.
I wasn't saying the other poster was definitely wrong. I'm saying they'd need to present some evidence.
No. I wasn't making any claim. I was repeating the claim made by many on here that travellers are lawless and no one tackles them. That may be true but its that argument that needs to be backed up with evidence. Good to have you on the case.0 -
end of the road wrote: »changing the incentives is clamping down on discrimination hard, so that those who wish to be part of society have a reason to actually want to be part of it.
Do they not have enough reason already? What about our lower suicide rates, our longer life expectancy, our lower rates of incarceration?0 -
Well now you're claiming that those who disagree with you are badly motivated. That they're using the criminality argument as a cover for bigotry. Fair enough if that's what you think. I think you're wrong about that but even still, surely from your point of view the best way to help travellers is to suppress crime in that community and force them to join society. This would help travellers as well as remove the cover for the people who harbour genuine bigotry.end of the road wrote: »criminality is just their excuse, i could believe that if some of them were able to get away with behaving the same to other groups they would probably do it.
i couldn't know it for sure, but i could believe it and it wouldn't surprise me, shall we say.
some of us manage to be able to condemn criminality from travelers while disagreeing with any discrimination they face.
I'm not denying that genuine bigotry exists but two things can be true at once.
(1.) Bigotry for an ethnic group is bad
(2.) The bigotry exists because of problems that are real.
We can address those problems while at the same time not condoning bigotry.
Yes, but you're not addressing my point. Why do you think that there is less opposition to looking at travellers with a different lens than other groups. WHY do you think travellers are singled out?end of the road wrote: »no, it's because ultimately they can do it without major challenge.
Nothing justifies bigotry. Agreed. But not all discrimination is based on bigotry as I discussed at length in earlier posts. There are times when we have to make judgments about a person when there is no information about the specific individual available. We have no choice but to defer to what we know about the person's group. Although, this will put travellers at a disadvantage, it's not bigotry, it's rational human behaviour.end of the road wrote: »the amount of criminality within a community does in no certain terms justify bigotry or discrimination against members of a community.
We've been trying the outreach approach for quite some time now. Travellers receive state aid. They're advocacy groups like Pavee Point receive state funding. They were recognised as an ethnic minority for purposes of furthering their welfare. It's not working. The crime rates have not decreased. And the attitudes of settled people have not changed much either. A 2017 survey found just 9% of people would want a traveller marrying into their family.end of the road wrote: »changing the incentives is clamping down on discrimination hard, so that those who wish to be part of society have a reason to actually want to be part of it.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/just-9-of-settled-people-would-want-a-traveller-marrying-into-family-1.3244131
Yes of course but remember that sentencing occurs only after the criminal has been caught and convicted. The objective is to increase the prosecution rate too. This means increased policing of people more likely to commit crimes such as travellers.end of the road wrote: »for those who don't want to be part of society whether settled criminal or a criminal within the traveling community, all that can be done there is management of the issue by appropriate sentencing.
Which is why I'm proposing that it be done while simultaneously instituting a major Garda crackdown on traveller crime.end of the road wrote: »haulting their state aid is only going to make the criminal element commit more crime while pushing those who are in genuine need into poverty and even crime itself. it is not going to bring about the change you want, which i think you actually know in reality.
Yes, it will lead to increased poverty in the traveller community. I'm counting on it in order to force them to integrate.
Here you go again, "If it worked not only would it have been done, it would be the NORM". The problem is you're assuming that the people in power are seriously trying to solve the problem. You see most politicians don't actually care about solving the problem, they care about being re-elected. To get re-elected you don't need to solve the problem, you just need a credible plan to solve the problem regardless of whether or not the problem gets solved.end of the road wrote: »if haulting necessary state aid was the answer to everything as some conservatives would have us believe, then it would be the main stay of everything and there would be no problems, there would be plenty of examples in the western world to show it to be the way to go.0 -
Now you're just assuming motive again. This appears to be the standard tactic with you. Label people who have issues with travellers as bigots because if they are bigots then you shouldn't have to engage with their concerns.end of the road wrote: »i think we can probably say in reality that it's hate, suspicion based on whatever is just another excuse for it.
being suspicious of someone is simply being suspicious of someone, some of us know the difference between genuine suspicion and "suspicion" used to target members of a community because they are simply from a specific community.
Sounding like a broken record now. Not all discrimination is bigotry, see posts above. "rhetoric"? Why is rhetoric against the travelling community necessarily bigoted? My rhetoric against them wasn't bigoted and neither was Peter Casey's or most other people.end of the road wrote: »actually, only some of us agree with that by the looks of it, because if we all agreed with it as we should and some of us do, then there wouldn't be discrimination, rhetoric and all else toards the whole community, rather the criminal element would be called out, and i would expect the threads on here would be tiny.
The reason we're calling out the community as a whole is because this community refuses to take responsibility for the massive criminal element within it. When the problem is that bad it's not just case of calling out the specific criminals but the community that tolerates them and protects them.
But they shouldn't be dealt with all in the same way because it's happening in a different context. Proceeds of crime is the primary source of income for this community. A community that has deliberately excluded itself from normal society. Of course that community should be singled out in policing.end of the road wrote: »crime is crime, so it's perfectly reasonable to lump traveler crime into the rest and call for it all to be dealt with.
I've already explained why the prison population percentages are a flawed metric of whether or not travellers are adequately policed.end of the road wrote: »an under resourced garda force is never going to be able to catch every single criminal, however it does seem that they are dealing with criminality within the traveling community, if the prison population figures are anything to go by.0 -
-
You implied that the prison population figures disproved the idea that travellers are under-policed. And I explained why that wasn't necessarily wrong.No. I wasn't making any claim. I was repeating the claim made by many on here that travellers are lawless and no one tackles them. That may be true but its that argument that needs to be backed up with evidence. Good to have you on the case.
As for breaking down the estimation process for the actual crime rates, I was just explaining how that process works and what the standard would be to prove what you were trying to prove. Putting this aside, it's well documented that the crime rates in the travelling community remain high. The lack of tax being paid on income is itself an indication that their income is coming from illicit activity.0 -
Key in Enniscorthy on Twitter , some fairly mad traveller carry on down there the past week . Coronavirus seems irrelevant to them0
-
Reference please?
We can conclude this by looking at the crime rate, the fact that travellers do not really participate in the normal workforce, the fact that taxes are not paid and the fact that most travellers do quite well for themselves living mostly comfortable lives. Wealth estimation is how traveller's income is often concluded as they don't report income themselves.0 -
You implied that the prison population figures disproved the idea that travellers are under-policed. And I explained why that wasn't necessarily wrong.
As for breaking down the estimation process for the actual crime rates, I was just explaining how that process works and what the standard would be to prove what you were trying to prove. Putting this aside, it's well documented that the crime rates in the travelling community remain high. The lack of tax being paid on income is itself an indication that their income is coming from illicit activity.
No I didn't and I stated it again after that. You seem to be a stickler for details so it's strange how you switch to anecdotes when you don't have any evidence to back up your hunches. Travellers who get employment in retail or coffee shops or any other PAYE form of employment don't have to pay income tax? Really?0 -
We can conclude this by looking at the crime rate, the fact that travellers do not really participate in the normal workforce, the fact that taxes are not paid and the fact that most travellers do quite well for themselves living mostly comfortable lives. Wealth estimation is how traveller's income is often concluded as they don't report income themselves.
If you could back up the many claims here with any reference it would be great. Again surprising with your penchant for methodology outline previously.
Comfortable lives - 3% of travellers live past 65.0 -
Advertisement
-
If you could back up the many claims here with any reference it would be great. Again surprising with your penchant for methodology outline previously.
Comfortable lives - 3% of travellers live past 65.
obesity, drug abuse, alcoholism, bareknuckle boxing, road traffic accidents inter family assaults. Its their lifestyle that they've chosen thats killing them.
22% of travellers die in car accidents.0 -
Eric Cartman wrote: »obesity, drug abuse, alcoholism, bareknuckle boxing, road traffic accidents inter family assaults. Its their lifestyle that they've chosen thats killing them.
Certainly doesn't help. All the hallmarks of a comfortable life you've listed there.0 -
Certainly doesn't help.
doesn't help, nor does genetic defects from inbreeding. But its not a systemic failure, they don't get denied access to our hospitals which have one of the lowest infant mortality rates in the world, they're not denied access to our cancer or cardiac specialists. Its completely lifestyle related.
from https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0029665108009464
17.3% of traveller children consuming chips on a daily basis, vs 7.5% in a settled group
25% of traveller children consuming crisps daily, vs 15% in a settled group
rates of dieting/ not eating prevalent in traveller girls.
multiple studies indicating 50% of traveller men are obese and a further 25% overweight.
with a start like that you haven't a hope.0 -
-
Certainly doesn't help. All the hallmarks of a comfortable life you've listed there.
By comfortable life I mean financially comfortable. Travellers can often be seen driving nice cars and such. The media often cites poverty with regard to travellers ignoring the fact that we have very little official information about traveller income. Wealth estimation based on possessions like vehicles is often used as a metric.0 -
By comfortable life I mean financially comfortable. Travellers can often be seen driving nice cars and such. The media often cites poverty with regard to travellers ignoring the fact that we have very little official information about traveller income. Wealth estimation based on possessions like vehicles is often used as a metric.
Afraid "often be seen driving nice cars" isn't much of a reference. Again - maybe its a decent anecdote - but feels a lot like a hunch.
Also "Wealth estimation based on possessions like vehicles is often used as a metric" - Jeez - estimation - possessions like vehicles - often used. Again very ropey. Come back to me with GINI Coefficients or something.
Cloaked in scientific type language but not saying anything, while giving out about reports on traveller poverty not being sufficiently scientific. Gas0 -
Eric Cartman wrote: »nobody is going to take out a small violin for the musicians and drug dealers who similarly die young , 'live fast, die young' and 'living to excess' are very apt here.
Yeah, not wrong there and understandable. As long as the Kinahins/Hutchs are killing themselves there isnt an issue type approach.
I guess that no one on Boards asking all Blanch/Drimnagh/North Inner City lads and lasses to apologise and take responsibility for the actions of the criminals in their community before accepting them as regular individuals.0 -
Certainly doesn't help. All the hallmarks of a comfortable life you've listed there.
All the hallmarks of having too much time on your hands.Key in Enniscorthy on Twitter , some fairly mad traveller carry on down there the past week . Coronavirus seems irrelevant to them
Huge group of travellers near me who congregate at the entrance to the local shop in the mornings now. Don't know how its allowed. Everyone else has to queue and social distance.0 -
Well now you're claiming that those who disagree with you are badly motivated. That they're using the criminality argument as a cover for bigotry. Fair enough if that's what you think. I think you're wrong about that but even still, surely from your point of view the best way to help travellers is to suppress crime in that community and force them to join society. This would help travellers as well as remove the cover for the people who harbour genuine bigotry.
you are never going to suppress or eradicate crime in any group.
crime is only something that can be managed by locking up the criminals or other appropriate sentencing, it is ultimately a problem that has to and can only be managed.I'm not denying that genuine bigotry exists but two things can be true at once.
(1.) Bigotry for an ethnic group is bad
(2.) The bigotry exists because of problems that are real.
We can address those problems while at the same time not condoning bigotry.
nope, bigotry doesn't exist because there are problems, bigotry exists because some people think they are superior to someone else either on the basis of race, sexual orientation, etc. problems with a group are just used as an excuse for it.Yes, but you're not addressing my point. Why do you think that there is less opposition to looking at travellers with a different lens than other groups. WHY do you think travellers are singled out?
the same reasons as any sort of singling out exists as i have answered above.Nothing justifies bigotry. Agreed. But not all discrimination is based on bigotry as I discussed at length in earlier posts. There are times when we have to make judgments about a person when there is no information about the specific individual available. We have no choice but to defer to what we know about the person's group. Although, this will put travellers at a disadvantage, it's not bigotry, it's rational human behaviour.
there is a massive difference between simply making a judgement on someone you don't know and discrimination.We've been trying the outreach approach for quite some time now. Travellers receive state aid. They're advocacy groups like Pavee Point receive state funding. They were recognised as an ethnic minority for purposes of furthering their welfare. It's not working. The crime rates have not decreased. And the attitudes of settled people have not changed much either. A 2017 survey found just 9% of people would want a traveller marrying into their family.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/just-9-of-settled-people-would-want-a-traveller-marrying-into-family-1.3244131
Yes of course but remember that sentencing occurs only after the criminal has been caught and convicted. The objective is to increase the prosecution rate too. This means increased policing of people more likely to commit crimes such as travellers.
Which is why I'm proposing that it be done while simultaneously instituting a major Garda crackdown on traveller crime.
Yes, it will lead to increased poverty in the traveller community. I'm counting on it in order to force them to integrate.
you can count on it all you like but if you think that by forcing people who haven't done anything wrong into poverty, they will engage with the people who forced them into poverty, i fear you are in for a very very big shock.Here you go again, "If it worked not only would it have been done, it would be the NORM". The problem is you're assuming that the people in power are seriously trying to solve the problem. You see most politicians don't actually care about solving the problem, they care about being re-elected. To get re-elected you don't need to solve the problem, you just need a credible plan to solve the problem regardless of whether or not the problem gets solved.
because if something is shown to be a huge success in solving or changing something across multiple countries, then it stands to reason that eventually all countries in a group will follow it in some form.ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.
0 -
Advertisement
-
Now you're just assuming motive again. This appears to be the standard tactic with you. Label people who have issues with travellers as bigots because if they are bigots then you shouldn't have to engage with their concerns.
and yet i am engaging with the concerns so clearly your statement isn't adding up.
there is a massive difference between simply having a concern with a group and engaging in discrimination and all else toards a group.Now Sounding like a broken record now. Not all discrimination is bigotry, see posts above. "rhetoric"? Why is rhetoric against the travelling community necessarily bigoted? My rhetoric against them wasn't bigoted and neither was Peter Casey's or most other people.
he made generalised statements about the traveling community, yes some members of the traveling community engage in what he stated and the authorities can and should be dealing with it as much as it is possible, however when he accused the whole community of engaging in such actions, then tbh i cannot see any other conclusion to come to about him and similarly minded people.
as i said, i and many others can condemn and call out bad behaviour from travelers and others while not tarring all with the same brush, it's easily done and there is no excuse for going a different way to that.Now The reason we're calling out the community as a whole is because this community refuses to take responsibility for the massive criminal element within it. When the problem is that bad it's not just case of calling out the specific criminals but the community that tolerates them and protects them.
i could buy that if those calling the whole community out for such did the same where members of the settled community put up a wall of silence when criminality is committed, dispite the fact that they may not be doing it out of choice but out of fear of reprisals.
call out any community for protecting criminals or none, it goes on across both communities.Now But they shouldn't be dealt with all in the same way because it's happening in a different context. Proceeds of crime is the primary source of income for this community. A community that has deliberately excluded itself from normal society. Of course that community should be singled out in policing.
singling out specific communities for more policing generally doesn't seem to have an effect in terms of actually dealing with criminality, rather it removes resources from policing the rest of society, and people who may have been willing to engage and provide information from that community are quite likely going to stop doing so if their community is picked on.
if specific communities commit more crime then others, the way to deal with that is to police effectively across the board, to show that all are equal.
living off the procedes of crime is not a traveler specific issue, there are already systems in place to deal with that issue and i believe cab do engage in raids from time to time.Now I've already explained why the prison population percentages are a flawed metric of whether or not travellers are adequately policed.
well yes, you tried to do so, but the problem for me is that your explanation didn't add up because the claim that this all spawned from was that travelers were untouchable and that nobody tackled them, which is clearly untrue.
the claim wasn't to my knowledge about people being properly policed or not, which in this country people not being properly policed is not a traveler specific issue.ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement