Skip to main content

Total ban of “single-use” bags? Don’t overdo it!

Total ban of “single-use” bags? Don’t overdo it!

We (hopefully) all know about the environmental problems plastic causes. We see regularly pictures and read reports about animals that were interfered with by getting caught in or swallowing items made of plastic. The plan is to forbid forks and knives, straws and plates and cups made of plastic and while there is a lot of sense in some of this, there is the possibility to go overboard a bit in an over-exaggerated “we have to do something” drive.

Ireland was one of the earlier countries to charge for the use of plastic bags and in the meantime MANY countries caught up or even did better by forbidding certain type of plastic bags. But at a visit in Germany a few months ago, I came across a situation that showed me that we really can overdo it!

I was in a middle sized town and had a look at some shops without any clear intent to buy something. C&A, a big clothes shop, was also there and I went inside to have a look. They are known for good quality for low prices. Not as low as Penney’s, but still very competitive. And while having a look around, I found a T-Shirt that I really liked and one or two other items that looked great and were at the right price.

So I went to the till and pushed the clothes across the counter to pay. The employee behind the counter scanned the labels of the three items and pushed them back to me. :-O I looked at her in a quizzical way and she said “Oh, do you need a bag?” I said “Do you have a paper bag?” Her reply: “No, we don’t do paper bags, but you can buy a plastic bag.” :-O :-O

I had no interest in using a plastic bag, but I also didn’t want to walk out of the shop with three pieces of clothing clenched under my arm just because I hadn’t pre-planned the purchase and therefore didn’t bring my own bag!!

Is it too much to ask to get at least the flimsiest of paper bags to put your purchases in if you go clothes shopping? C&A also sells suits and evening dresses. Would you not think that it is in the interest of the shop to provide customers with basic means to bring their garments home unblemished?

I am all in favour of protecting the environment, but that experience did annoy me quite a bit. I could have bought a plastic bag, but I decided not to (for environmental reasons), so I DID walk out of the shop with three items of clothing clenched under my arm. :-O

Deranged opinions of legal profession in Ireland! – Rape case in Cork

Deranged opinions of legal profession in Ireland! – Rape case in Cork

I have complained many times over the last few years about nonsensical judgements by Irish judges that let criminals off with super low or with no penalties in cases where we, the public feel that serious misjustice has been done.

So many judges in Ireland clearly can not be trusted with the law, which is a shocking realisation in itself. But we would hope that other part of the justice system are at least more trustworthy and show a better understanding of right and wrong.

A trial at Cork Circuit Criminal Court, however, showed that the next level down, i.e. the people that are not (yet) judges are as deranged in their opinions as many judges.

At that trial in Cork a 27 year old man was accused of raping a 17 year old girl in a laneway.

In her closing words, the senior counsel for the defence, Elizabeth O’Connell SC said:
“Does the evidence out-rule the possibility that she was attracted to the defendant and was open to meeting someone and being with someone? You have to look at the way she was dressed. She was wearing a thong with a lace front.” :-O

The job of a defence lawyer is to achieve an acquittal of the accused and they do whatever it takes, even defending someone who is clearly guilty. We don’t know if the accused in this case was guilty or not. He claims that she consented, she says she didn’t. BUT he was acquitted in court by a jury of eight men and four women and it could well be that the outrageousness of “wearing a thong with lace front” contributed to that acquittal.

First of all, how can the clothing that a woman is wearing justify a rape? That is totally ridiculous! Some men might not have much of a brain, others are happy to switch it off, but NO man should EVER be allowed to use the defence that he couldn’t stop himself after he saw a woman dressed in a certain way.

Secondly, how does it matter what clothing is worn UNDERNEATH the normal (outer) clothing? Unless I run around showing everyone my under wear, it is MY decision what I wear underneath and NOBODY has the right to assume that I am inviting any sort of behaviour based on my choice of under garment!

But it is the third thing that shocks me most! This stupid argument about the “thong with a lace front” justifying what might have been rape was not raised by an old, crusty, misogynistic, out-of-touch-with-life, male solicitor/barrister. No, it was used by a middle aged FEMALE barrister and I can only assume that she never wore a “thong with a lace front” in her life! (Her picture is in this article, but has been removed by the Law Library it seems where it was originally found.) If women think that another woman’s clothing choice justifies any sort of behaviour by a man, then what chance do young women that were attacked have in this country?

Even more oddly, though, the FEMALE judge in the court did not stop that misguided defence strategy, but seemingly accepted the victim blaming based on her choice of clothing.

The Irish legal system is in a bad state if the professionals in it have no better understanding of right and wrong!!

The Irish Examiner brought this court case to our attention.

Useless laws in Ireland? Why only here?

Useless laws in Ireland? Why only here?

In some parts of Dublin, there is a problem with motorised youths on footpaths and in parks. They use quadbikes and small motorbikes (nicknamed “scramblers”) and in 2016 a total of 71 people got injured and in 2017, 62 people suffered injuries, Now I have to be honest and admit that I don’t really care about injuries to people that drive them. It is only injuries to people that are hit by them that count.

You would think that if an illegal vehicle is used (the quadbikes and motorbikes have no insurance and pay no tax), the gardai would make sure that the bikes will be impounded and the drivers will be charged and punished. You would think that! But that is not what is happening!

Instead it emerged this week that Gardai are told NOT to pursue quad bikes and it also emerged that Irish laws are not so clear on what a street is.

I can’t get my head around this: There are around 190 countries in this world and there are many countries (mainly in Europe) where the legal system is quite similar to the system in Ireland. If ANY one of these countries has effective laws and effective law enforcement in ANY area that Ireland can’t get under control, why do our lawmakers not just copy the laws that others have put in place?

We constantly hear of loop holes for drunken drivers. Now there is a problem with quadbikes and motorbikes and there are many other areas as well where the Irish laws are ineffective. Is it that our law makers are just not smart enough or why can’t they get it sorted?

Here is an example of a story that shows the ineffectiveness of laws and law enforcement.

 

Do we live behind the moon? We want Electric Scooters!

Do we live behind the moon? We want Electric Scooters!

I mentioned last week that I was in San Diego recently and I totally appreciated the easy availability of the Uber service, something we are sorely missing in Ireland, just because the National Transport Authority is protecting the Taxi Cartel here for no good reason.

And there is another great thing that San Diego (and many other cities on the USA) offer that falls under the headline of “transport” and that we are still missing in Ireland. San Diego has electric scooters everywhere that can be rented for short trips by anyone via a simple app. There are thousands of scooters everywhere and all you need is register with the service provider (Lime or Bird), download an app and then pay a $1 release charge per trip and 15 cent per minute of a rental charge.

If you use the scooter for a long time, it can get expensive: A 1 hour usage will cost a total of $10. But at 15 miles per hour and with a reach of about 30 miles, you can could certainly cover quite a distance in that hour. In addition, the main target seems to be relatively short trips of closer to 10 minutes than an hour. And for that, using a scooter is a fun way to get from A to B. All this is hugely helped by the fact that you can park the scooter at any street corner (as long as it doesn’t obstruct), so it doesn’t have to be brought to a specific base (unlike the Dublin Bikes, for example).

I zipped around a little and it was a lot of fun!

In Dublin we lately see more and more people commuting on Electric Scooters (which they own), but unfortunately using a scooter in Ireland is still illegal and there are currently NO plans in the in the Department of Transport to look into “Personal Electric Mobility Vehicles” (PMV or PEM). We really do seem to live behind the moon!

Electric mobility is looking like the BIG change to our transport system in the future and I mentioned recently that by 2020, the Irish Government would like to have 20,000 electric cars on Irish streets (but will probably fall way short of that). If electric vehicles is the future, then it is high time to start looking at other electric vehicles as well.

Dublin Edition of Monopoly

Dublin Edition of Monopoly

There has been a Dublin Edition of Monopoly since the 70s, but a brand new edition has been revealed and there are some changes to the previous version. Originally Ailesbury Road in Dublin 4 (not Aylesbury in Tallaght!) was the top spot, this has changed and now the top place is the GPO. Ailesbury Road’s reputation as the most exclusive area has indeed gone down in recent years, but the GPO as the top spot is not necessarily a good replacement!

And for some odd reason, Molly Malone is the cheapest place in Dublin according to the new Monopoly. This is also incorrect, Molly Malone is neither in a dodgy nor a cheap neighbourhood.

It seems that the creators of the new Monopoly tried to pack as many Dublin locations onto the board irrespective of their fit! Monopoly always differentiated between expensive and cheap, but if all places that have a high recognition factor are in expensive areas, then some incorrect categorisation is bound to happen.

Do mistakes like that dilute the Monopoly message? I think so! But imagine a really poor area of Dublin had been chosen for the lowest priced field? People in that area wouldn’t be too impressed!

RTE writes about the new game here.

 
Malcare WordPress Security