Newly built social homes sitting idle for over 8 months in Wexford

A young Traveller family was moved into a house in the estate here during the pandemic. Initially it was "relatively" quiet with only the occasional squad car arriving (although they've since started circling the estate regularly now), but not too long ago a dozen Gardai arrived one afternoon and "let themselves in" (I only realised it when the loud thud of a forced entry came through the window - I WFH myself). The residents weren't at home but the Gardai were clearly looking for something.

They've now recently gotten a dog/puppy and the poor thing is left outside pretty much all day in the small (very small) garden while they are out wherever they are. Barking is becoming a nuisance already. When the kids grow up I expect far more problems, but I won't be here for that!

No, they may not all be bad but if even quieter ones like this draw that sort of attention and negativity, that's on them not those of us living near them.

Not according to the virtue signallers who do not live near any of them apparently. What do you think?

They shouldn't have it at all IMO - the garden, the dog or the house. If they can't respect these things, and the narrative is that they are agentless victims who aren't responsible for their actions, it'll never change.

Unfortunately it'll be the people around them who'll be left to deal with the consequences of this nonsense mindset

I think it goes without saying that I admit to having negative views of them too.

Given that my opinion is based on reason and actual experience, does that mean that my opinion isn't prejudicial?

@bubblypop doesn't know what 'prejudice' means. Doesn't get the "not based on reason or actual experience" bit.

I suspect the above definition won't help.

I haven't said that all travellers are criminals. I have however said the traveller community has a huge problem with criminality. I acknowledge that they aren't all criminals, but crime and antisocial behaviour is widespread throughout their community.

I have had extensive interractions with travellers for the best part of 50 years. I've been to school with them, grew up with them, was friends with some of them when I was younger, still live near them, know them very well, still observe their antisocial and criminal activities and yes, I'm basing my experience based on my experiences/observations of them and their extended families. You'll find that many others living near other travellers have the same experience/views.

I base my views on my experiences/observations. I don't see many other groups behaving in the same way as the travellers.

I wanted to give you the respect of a proper response to your post cos you’ve been fair, so that’s why the delay in responding. I can’t use the desktop site at all 😬

The prison stats argument is not only misleading, it’s useless, and I demonstrated why it’s useless by way of pointing out that people regardless of their background, whether they’re a traveller or not, engage in criminal behaviour, and most will never get caught, let alone see the inside of a prison. If you’re only looking at prison stats, then yes, it stands to reason why you would be convinced there’s a massive issue with criminality in the wider traveller community. It’s that sort of being attuned to information which supports your already held beliefs about any group, be it travellers or whoever else, which means you’re choosing to place a disproportionate amount of your attention on travellers who engage in criminal activity. It’s a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy, but - recognition of human rights is not contingent upon the levels of criminal activity among any group in society. You’re arguing that travellers should be held to a different standard than everyone else.

The example I gave wasn’t whataboutery. Surely if you’re making the point that travellers are over-represented in criminality statistics, you have to be comparing the level of criminality among travellers with something else? In this case it happens to be the level of criminality among people who aren’t travellers. That’s a direct comparison. And from that comparison we can identify the differences in scale, and proportionate punishment of those individuals involved in criminal behaviour. It’s why for example we don’t send a woman to prison for years for robbing a couple of knickers and lippy from Penneys, whereas someone who defrauds the State to the tune of €1.6m, even if they are a pillar of their community, they get treated in proportion to the level of their specific offence that they’ve been charged with.

The example I gave of the father who abused his daughters for years was in contrast to @teachinggal123’s assertion that travellers today are any different than they were years ago - they aren’t, and the people who they come in contact with aren’t any different either, which is why those women were making the point that they were failed by the State when they were children, because people who had a duty of care to protect them, failed to protect them, due to their own prejudices about travellers. It would be unfair of me to suggest that @teachinggal123 would display the same indifference towards traveller children whom she knew were being abused, even if she does argue that discrimination against travellers is justifiable based upon associating criminality with traveller culture. I couldn’t envision a scenario where anyone would be in a position where they would just straight out tell a traveller child confided in them that they were being abused - “better get used to it, it’s your culture, sort it out yourself, if you stay in school and move out of that caravan into a four bed-semi, you won’t grow up to be responsible for your father abusing you! Now run along, sos is almost over and I have a bursting headache from your sisters acting out in class already!” Do you get the point now?

You don’t have to be a medical expert to see how discrimination perpetrated against travellers because of their inability and unwillingness to conform to your standards would contribute to poor mental health and suicide statistics. Again, on their own, the statistics are meaningless, they only mean anything when they’re put in their proper context. What you’re doing is no different than the way discrimination against other groups in society is justified - criminality among homosexuals meant they were over-represented in prison, mental health and suicide statistics too, and the same argument was made that it was because of their lifestyle that they were over-represented and shouldn’t be granted equal recognition in law. It’s the exact same, no different. Just substitute the word homosexual for traveller in your own post, and you’ll see it for yourself. There are still people who think it’s bollix too that people who are homosexual are getting special treatment that nobody else gets, that they have an awful habit of blaming the State for all their woes and taking no responsibility for their own actions. I mean, word for word, you can surely see the parallels in the arguments? The only difference is the people who are being discriminated against. The justifications offered for the discrimination are exactly the same.

Travellers are doing exactly the same to address the issues in their own community as most people are doing to address issues within their own communities - pretty much fcukall. Most of them think no different than you do - that everything is on the traveller community to bend over backwards and accommodate people who aren’t travellers by trying to be just like them and being miserable in the attempt to fit in where they know they’re not wanted. It’s putting the responsibility on travellers to tow the line and take responsibility for people who engage in criminal behaviour. You don’t expect you should have to take responsibility for criminals, why do you expect travellers should be held to a different standard?

What exactly are you hoping to test? Whether I personally would call you a bigot? Anyone should expect to be called a bigot if they express views which are bigoted. That can’t possibly be any sort of a revelation.

The example you give anyways is a perfect example of expressing a view which is not based upon bigotry. The Judge specifically makes the point that they cannot justify their actions by claiming bare knuckle boxing is in any way an aspect of traveller culture. It’s not.

Tyson Fury, dunno if you’re familiar with him, but he does the same shtick and uses his status as a traveller as an excuse for his behaviour. Far as I’m concerned he’s nothing more than an ignorant thug who’s handy with his fists -

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/03/08/world/tyson-fury-irish-travellers/index.html

See? You can express legitimate criticism of a person’s behaviour, without suggesting that anyone who shares characteristics in common with them is also an ignorant thug who’s handy with their fists. From my own personal experience, most travellers have no interest in bare-knuckle boxing, and the few that do will always try to justify their behaviour by claiming it’s an important part of their culture. It’s not, and the Judge was right to call them out on their BS.

i dont believe that any one who has been involved in front line policing for any length of time could reasonably hold the views that you do tbh

Not all travelers are criminals i agree but the vastly overwhelming majority are , that is just the reality.

99 percent of traveller culture is toxic, dangerous and anti social to the rest of us .

prejudice would suggest that peoples feelings towards travellers are unfounded and without cause , which is not true at all.

its simply the result of decades of being the victim of rampant lawless and difficult to police gangs of travellers . to pretend otherwise helps no one