Follow @PoliticsIE
 
 
 
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 31

Thread: Dermot Ahern - the most authoritarian Minister for Justice ever?

  1. #1
    Politics.ie Member borntorum's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    12,781
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default Dermot Ahern - the most authoritarian Minister for Justice ever?

    As discussed here, this week the government have introduced the Criminal Law (Defence and the Dwelling) Bill 2010 which essentially aims to allow people to kill burglars on their premises.

    This is just the latest in an increasingly long list of new provisions brought in by Dermot Ahern that have the effect of increasing the power of the State, or that have a 'get tough' intention behind them.

    -Criminalising the 'direction' of a 'criminal gang', or engaging in certain activities as a member of a 'criminal gang', and making it easier to refuse bail.

    -Increased provision for covert surveillance in criminal investigations

    -The blanket ban on head shops

    -The introduction of the blasphemy law.

    Are there others that people can think of?

    Given the paucity of political discourse in this country, there is rarely any coherent defence of libertarianism, and we have seen time and time again that anybody who dares to suggest that adults should be left alone to do what they want without the nanny state looking over their shoulder gets shouted down by the Liveline mob.

    But after the comparative restraint of Brian Lenihan's period as Min for Justice, Ahern seems determined to create a reputation for himself as the hard man of Irish politics. What will be his next legislative crusade, and is there ever any hope that some opposition politicians might call for less, rather than ever more, interference in the lives of citizens?

  2. #2
    Politics.ie Member Libero's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Somewhere solvent
    Posts
    3,003
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    In fairness to Ahern, he is in favour of amending strict gambling legislation to allow casinos, especially if said casinos are in his constituency and he's on good terms with the promoters.

  3. #3

    Default

    Right and Paddy Cooney and The Heavy Gang were what ?

  4. #4
    Politics.ie Member Sync's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    27,582
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)

    Default

    Well there's the Civil Partnership bill as well.

    Aside from the blasphemy law which is........ludicrous imo, do you think any of those policies would be out of line with the will of the Irish people? Do you think the majority of Irish don't want action on criminal gangs? That they do want headshops? That they don't want the ability to defend their home?

    I'm not saying any of the above are right or wrong, but there's no real outcry from the public or any of the other parties on any of these items.
    I'm living in America, and in America, you're on your own. America's not a country. It's just a business. Now f***ing pay me.

  5. #5
    Politics.ie Member borntorum's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    12,781
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sync View Post
    Well there's the Civil Partnership bill as well.

    Aside from the blasphemy law which is........ludicrous imo, do you think any of those policies would be out of line with the will of the Irish people? Do you think the majority of Irish don't want action on criminal gangs? That they do want headshops? That they don't want the ability to defend their home?

    I'm not saying any of the above are right or wrong, but there's no real outcry from the public or any of the other parties on any of these items.
    I'm not actually saying whether the individual provisions are right or wrong in themselves (FWIW, I'm opposed to banning headshops, dubious about the efficacy of the gangland legislation, and actually agree with Ahern that constitutionally a blasphemy law was required).

    My point is that on most issues, other than the Civil Partnership Bill (although the cohabitation provision is strange and not the mark of a libertarian by any means) Ahern tends towards an authoritarian position. In this he is supported, almost entirely it would appear, but the political and media establishments. Is there nobody to put the libertarian case, and argue that we need less legislation enforced better, rather than this never-ending treadmill of ever more restrictive laws being passed in order to make it seem that something is being done? The Council for Civil Liberties can annoy me as much as they annoy many people, but at least they usually have the courage to go out and argue the non-populist point. We are drowning in a sea of Joe Duffy, tabloid-inspired authoritarian populism

  6. #6
    Politics.ie Member Grumpy Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    6,080
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Kevin O'Higgins? Gerry Boland? Oscar Traynor? Charlie Haughey? Dessie O'Malley? Paddy Cooney? Sean Doherty? Michael Noonan? Nora Owen?

    Ahern may be a hardnut but he has a fair bit of competition there.

  7. #7
    Politics.ie Member Sync's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    27,582
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by borntorum View Post
    I'm not actually saying whether the individual provisions are right or wrong in themselves (FWIW, I'm opposed to banning headshops, dubious about the efficacy of the gangland legislation, and actually agree with Ahern that constitutionally a blasphemy law was required).

    My point is that on most issues, other than the Civil Partnership Bill (although the cohabitation provision is strange and not the mark of a libertarian by any means) Ahern tends towards an authoritarian position. In this he is supported, almost entirely it would appear, but the political and media establishments. Is there nobody to put the libertarian case, and argue that we need less legislation enforced better, rather than this never-ending treadmill of ever more restrictive laws being passed in order to make it seem that something is being done? The Council for Civil Liberties can annoy me as much as they annoy many people, but at least they usually have the courage to go out and argue the non-populist point. We are drowning in a sea of Joe Duffy, tabloid-inspired authoritarian populism
    We're drowning in that sea and surrounded by those politicians because that's what the public wants. If a libertarian stands up and says they're pro headshops then they should go for that and see how the Irish public votes.
    I'm living in America, and in America, you're on your own. America's not a country. It's just a business. Now f***ing pay me.

  8. #8
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Cork
    Posts
    2,528
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    To deal with gun crime, he went after the legally held handguns.

    To deal with drug crime, he made the legal highs illegal.

    Next step, to deal with Prostitution, he will make it illegal to have sex.

  9. #9
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    126
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    The Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Act 2010 is also a fairly good piece of legislation. I just wish he'd hurry up with the Immigration Bill and speed up the processing of lengthy asylum claims (for both the taxpayer and the genuine refugee).

  10. #10
    Politics.ie Newbie
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    78
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dohville View Post
    To deal with gun crime, he went after the legally held handguns.

    To deal with drug crime, he made the legal highs illegal.

    Next step, to deal with Prostitution, he will make it illegal to have sex.
    I've heard that you no longer have to show ID in order to buy as much ammo as you want - surely this is not a good thing - but this is how the new law works ??

    And as for making sex illegal soon (AGAIN - didn't the Catholic Church do this for the last 1,000 years) - with the moronic new blasphemy law - TALKING about sex and using certain words in certain contexts could very well be illegal - nevermind the actual act!

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •