Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
A VISUALLY-IMPAIRED man says he plans to move from his home in Co Kerry in protest at the rising levels of anti-social behaviour there.
Tim, a busker and Kerry native, was recently assaulted by two women while he walked his dog with his wife.
Speaking to Cork Today on C103 FM, Tim described how one of the women “started grabbing hold of me and punching out” after his wife had asked her to stop feeding their dog, a Rottweiler.
“We had finished work for the day, we were sat beside a particular establishment in Tralee, and because of our dog’s breed we’re cautious about people touching or feeding her,” he said.
When the attacking woman was asked to stop feeding Tim’s dog she became “verbally abusive and started shaking me around” to the extent that he nearly fell to the ground.
“I didn’t hit her back because I wasn’t brought up that way,” he said.
He said that he doesn’t believe the women knew he was visually-impaired because “I don’t look like I’m visually-impaired”.
https://soundcloud.com/cork103/tim-who-is-visually-impaired-tells-patricia-about-being-attacked-in-tralee-recenlty
Tim and his wife contacted the gardaí but the two women had absconded by the time they arrived. He said they were between 35 and 40 years old.
“They were local, and they do have issues – I sort of feel sorry for them really,” adding that the women are known to have drug and alcohol problems.
Tim now says he and his wife will move from Tralee as the level of anti-social behaviour in the town is “unacceptable”.
“We’re moving on because it’s not a nice environment to be living in, the anti-social behaviour has just gotten really, really bad now,” he said.
I live in the centre of town, and there’s a public car park nearby which has cider parties and the like going on. I know we were all young once, but I don’t want to be living in that environment.
Tim and his family now plan to move to a more rural area and to buy their own place in the country.
He says the idea of a white cane presenting a target for anti-social behaviour is one that’s familiar to him.
“I’ve had that experience myself. A white cane is supposed to enhance the independence of someone who may be blind or visually-impaired, but for some they just see you as someone to wind up and have a go at,” he said.
He says that the level of bad behaviour in Tralee is worse than in any other place he has been to.
“I can stand outside a shop in Bristol, or in Belfast, and not get any grief,” he said.
They’re totally different to Tralee, and it’s a sad reflection on our society.
I’m not going to be putting up with that, we’re definitely going to move.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
If you sign up for the army you are subject to their rules and regulations. If you break said rules you will be held accountable and punished under the penal system. This is the world you sign up to. You cannot cry foul because you all of a sudden don’t want to be there.
Actually it’s was an order or that was the rules is not an excuse
Actually it is a valid defence.
Tell that to the nazis . If wrong is being done to blindly follow because it’s the rules is as guilty as the system then .
Maxwell, it’s your type of thinking that leads to war crimes being committed.
By Godwin’s Law I have won this argument. It’s nothing to do with the Nazi’s. This is a case of espionage. He stole secrets and released them. I’m not talking about whether he was right or wrong. I’m merely saying he knew what he was doing was wrong, he knew the consequences of his actions, he knew the punishment. Yet, he still committed the crime. Amnesty, have no place getting involved. It’s not illegal detention any treatment he suffers is that of the US Army Prison service.
It is all about weather she was right or wrong . If she was wrong to do what she did then punish by all means . But as I see it she was right to do as she did so punishment of any kind is unjust .
If the USA(I) were not breaking rules and regulations manning,would not have had anything to disclose or uncover in the first place but let’s forget all about that shall we.
Mark, much as I agree with your opinions on this in this last case right and wrong doesn’t come into it. It’s a legal issue…which is the only way societies can work as different people have different views of what is right and wrong. Laws are objective (or should be).
No I understand that . You speed it’s points . But say you are rushing someone very ill to hospital I believe no points should be given and on more than one occasion the ags give an escorts . It’s about the moral right and wrong that is the real issue here . Laws of the land should not punish those who take the right path .
In the end of the day, the army relies on integrity and following orders for a very valid reason. Failure to follow orders can very well get you or others around you killed. It’s likely that some of the documents released by Manning and Wikileaks regarding classified troop movements and deployments could have put the lives of soldiers in jeopardy.
You break ranks and refuse to follow orders, you get punished.
Laws should not allow the extremes that the us have gone to in intelligence gathering . They should protect and support the ordinary citizen . Right and wrong here are the big issue
Just one of the thins he helped to expose..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0I6S8mva-s
“Things”
The US army didn’t show much integrity when they shot those journalists that were waving a white flag on the ground.
From what little I know of the case, Bradley Manning’s intention behind the leaks was to punish the system that was mistreating him. It wasn’t for the greater good, it was revenge. He’s not quite the crusader people think he is. Just my opinion, open to other views on this.
Actually it was one of her first duties as a soldier to report War Crimes, when she witnessed it. I’d say she did her duty. To mankind
“Actually it was one of her first duties as a soldier to report War Crimes, when she witnessed it.”
But the fact of the matter is Manning didn’t witness anything. Manning bulk-released a massive amount of confidential documentation rather than reporting on any one incident or multiple incidents to her superiors.
This wasn’t whistle-blowing, it was embittered revenge.
And by God wins law you have lost.
If you sign up for the Gardai you are subject to their rules and regulations. Oops! Thankfully whistleblowers that protect democracy here are not languishing behind bars for 35 years, even if it did take a bit of time to sort it out. Whistleblowers need protection, not prison, how can exposing corruption be wrong? Only the corrupt would think it is, even if they are only morally corrupt.
The Garda whistle-blowers didn’t bulk-release confidential Garda files to a Swedish organisation, they followed the correct legal proceedings for calling attention to issues within the Gardaí.
Your comparison is quite frankly weak.
Doubtful. They were ignored by the system here until it was discovered by the media. What do you think would happen when you go the the authorities in the US? It was hard enough here for whistleblowers so I would think, given that the US puts them in prison, they would be ignored. Whistleblowers need to be protected, the US government does the opposite of protection.
Different system, different results. But both were abused by the authorities they were reporting on. Your lack of vision in the comparing of two different systems is quite frankly weak. As is your moral compass and sense of democracy. You’re like Brooks in The Shawshank Redemption, institutionalised.
Of all the crimes underway in the world right now, why Bradley. It wouldn’t be just because he’s T in the LGBT.
Christians are being beheaded and crucified, there is no outcry about Mosul, but Colm chooses Bradley for his primary concern. It is very convenient at times being director of Amnesty, it can help in ones own personal concerns/agenda.
Amnesty have reported on the persecution and violence against Christian’s. Organisations can have an opinion on more than one topic but I understand how that concept may be hard for you to grasp as iona et al seem to focus on one topic.
@ Bryan Whaley
Bryan, Amnesty is an international organisation set up to stand against torture worldwide. It has long lost its focus, is a supporter of torture of the unborn, ie. abortion, and uses its decreasing influence to promote personal agendas such as Bryan, who is not being tortured, and in jail for valid reasons.
It now sickens me to see Amnesty collecting on the streets to pay for their director to make comments like this article. People just don’t realise that they are not acting against torture, just supporting abortion and personal agendas.
There has been no article here from Amnesty, decrying the crucifixions last week, or the beheadings.
Not newsworthy obviously.
Amnesty just support abortion now, nothing else? A quick glance at their website suggests otherwise. Is your personal animosity with the head of amnesty got to do with the charity one in four which highlighted clerical sex abuse? Would you have been happier if people pretended it didnt happen? It sickens me how catholic lobby groups do not make their accounts available to the oireachtas. How much does the leader of youth defence pay herself?
@ Bryan Whaley
No, I’m afraid the international organisation is united in its support of abortion. When the internal coup occurred, liberal directors were appointed all around the world over branches of amnesty.
But it good to remind people to reconsider where their charitable dollars are being spent.
I’d love to support an international organisation against torture, but amnesty is not one.
I do dislike persons who abuse the brand “amnesty”, once a noble entity; to collect for and support such rubbish cases as above. I’m not worried about individuals and their reputations, just the real vulnerable in society, which Amnesty now only gives token support.
I don’t think Eric Snowdon is the T in LGBT and is also backed by amnesty so you’re argument is a little silly.
@ Colin Kavanagh
Try as I may, I can’t see any mention of Eric Snowdon in the above article.
So why is the article about the one LGBT person, exclusively, and not the myriad of deserving causes. Are some more equal than others, officially.
Because Paddy (see last sentence in article), Amnesty brought up her case to mark the one year anniversary of her arrest.
@ Colin Kavanagh
You are dredging the bottom of the barrel for excuses. Let me put it this way, did amnesty have an article on the first anniversary of Snowdons effective imprisonment. His arrest in no way constitutes torture or injustice in any acceptable legal way. Colm’s gift of media attention is exclusively because he played the transgender card following his arrest.
More absurd histrionics from Amnesty International. ‘She’ pleaded guilty to 10 charges and is lucky not to have been sentenced to death. Why should anyone give a fig about this incarceration? If you wear the boots of a soldier, you march to the tune of the army, Sir.
‘The charge of the light brigade’ comes to mind
Same could be said of politicians, yet we are aghast when they are corrupt. Daft statement. If you were a soldier and you were told to kill a child would you do it? Orders are orders. “I was following orders”, greatest defense at Nuremburg.
“She”? Why the double quotes???
Freak!
Tool
Can’t all be perfect like you Kay. Fortunately.
Shag off Kris!!
Well if you employee someone like Chelsea Manning ,
You are only looking for trouble.
In fairness he is a few sandwiches short of a picnic.
Why
Dermot is probably one of those people who for some reason has an opinion on transgender people
One has to wonder about the checks and balances in place in the U.S. military when a psychological basket case like Bradley Manning was allowed access to secret intelligence.
“Please release him let him go”…so he can get a decent haircut!!!
So pro Israeli antics and anti transgender. Your a wonderful specimen taxi bill. I wouldn’t call you for a lift though. I’d say you burn the ear off passengers.
If he had a grievance there are a set of regulations and procedures to follow. When he made contact with Assange he disregarded all the other legal avenues open to him. And with the assistance of Assange stole classified material and passed it to an unauthorized third party. And when arrested admitted to the charge and pleaded guilty in his Court Marshall to all the charges laid against him.
So I don’t see why he should be given special consideration.
have your say