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.
THE GOVERNMENT IS to oppose a private members’ Bill which seeks to tighten regulations around the use of quads and scramblers.
The Sinn Féin Bill seeks to give gardaí the power to seize and detain quad bikes and scrambler motorcycles when being used unlawfully.
The Road Traffic (Quads and Scramblers) Amendment Bill is currently at Second Stage, and will be discussed in the Dáil tomorrow.
Recent statistics released by the HSE reveal that 62 people were injured last year in accidents involving off-road vehicles like scrambler bikes.
The use of such vehicles has been under the spotlight recently due to an Armenian man, Ilabek Avetian, suffering devastating injuries in September after being struck by a scrambler while sunbathing with his wife in a park in Darndale on the city’s northside.
Avetian lost an eye and suffered brain injuries as a result of the crash, with the public coming together to raise €30,000 for him and his wife once his story came to light.
The figure of 62 for 2017 is actually less than the 71 people injured in 2016 by scramblers and quad bikes, but a deal greater than the 56 people hurt in 2015.
The reason for opposing the proposed new Bill is the government believes an amendment to the Road Traffic Bill to deal with the issue is “not appropriate”.
A government spokesperson said a cross-agency working group has already been set up by the Justice Minister Charlie Flanagan to deliver a “multi-pronged” response the problem of young people using the vehicles.
Last year the minister said he had written to a number of state agencies, including the gardaí, to seek advice as to whether legislation is needed to tackle the use scrambler and quad bikes in public.
It is understood the Attorney General has also been consulted on the matter, and whether the issue should be dealt with under public order offences legislation relating to vehicle misuse off public roads.
Flanagan said has previously said he is “very concerned” about the “serious public safety and anti-social issues” surrounding the misuse of the bikes.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
No need for one for Dublin. No new worthwhile architecture since the brits left.
If only we could have had U2 tower…
@Ian Moloney: the bits gave us nice buildings
@Free comment ratings:…….. And the roads.
@Ian Moloney: But apart from the roads and the buildings, what have the Brits ever done for us? Oh yes, the legal system and of alright sewage. But apart from that, what have they Ebert done for us?
Divided our country!?!
@Paraic McDonagh: They gave you the English language didn’t they….what more do you want.
They also taught farmers here how to plough land without using a rope tied to the tail of an ox.
It was fortunate that the French had civilised the English language and had made vast inroads into civilising the people of Britain before the English so kindly shared with us their language and culture. Weren’t we wise though, to retain our own games and not get involved in that awful English football hooliganism lark.
@Chris Kirk: you’re some git Kirk. The Brits stole our land and turned us into paupers by systematically persecuting Catholics, native Irish speakers and all aspects of Gaelic culture in general. They were also largely responsible for the deaths of millions of Irish people through famine and forced emigration.
@TehJurolan: Little bit over-simplistic there.
Some Protestant Anglo-Irish landlords stole Ireland’s land…from some Catholic Anglo-Norman landlords who had previously stolen it. The anti-Catholic laws really only made any difference if you were a member of the Catholic nobility – they made very little difference if you were a Gaelic commoner who had no assets to lose in the first place.
The Hunger was another matter entirely – but this was more down to greed, incompetence and callous negligence than the planned genocide that some commentators claim.
@TehJurolan:
The declining use of the Irish language meanwhile had less to do with any British actions (apart from the Hunger) and more to do with Irish speakers themselves – the switch to English began with and spread from the urban middle-classes who refused to speak Irish in front of their children under the mistaken belief that a knowledge of Irish was ‘useless’ and might hinder their prospects later in life. Take a look at the comments under any Journal article about the Irish language and its role in education if you want modern-day examples of this attitude.
@Harry Whitehead: they left a great rail system
@TehJurolan: Those Brits were catholic French speaking Normans with a king following instructions from the Pope. The Nomans set up the Catholic monasteries in Britain and Ireland which laid the foundations for the church as we know it today.
@Harry Whitehead: I think that you will find that those so called Anglo Irish were Catholics who refused to change to protestantism. It was them who formed an alliance with the gaelic Irish against English rule during the Confederate wars of 1640′s and they later fought against Cromwell.
@bmul: Then fecked it up with trade unions
@Ian Moloney: there kinda is… http://www.irishtimes.com/1916/1916-then-and-now
@Daniel Dudek Corrigan: very interesting, thanks for sharing.
@bmul: I detect a note of sarcasm there, but really they did. Trains to Achill, Skibereen and more, were all closed down by the liberated free state.
The scene of the planets biggest landstealing empire
@Abcd: What absolute poppycock, but congratulations on being the first to post such a stereotypically Journal reader bigoted, ignorant tosh.
@Abcd: the British rule in Ireland ended almost a hundred years ago and still this small-minded toxic hatred exists. There may be a tiny amount of people alive today that were around for the last days of British rule but two, three generations after the willingness to retain hatred is astonishing. the modern day equivalent is the U.S with the biggest budget deficit in history running to trillions, threatening economic and military sanctions if they don’t get their way.
To those ever eager to ‘brit-bash’, its interesting to see the eagerness to retain access to the U.K market after brexit. Seems it’s acceptable to openly display dislike of all things British – except money.
@Abcd: oh for god sakes. Build a bridge and get over it.
@Gerry Carroll: Say that to the northern nationalist community
@Brian MacCarthaigh: by nationalist you mean wishing for a united ireland otherwise you’d have used the term catholic. We all have freedom of movement. My parents were both Irish but moved like millions of Irish to the UK. They subsequently moved back to Ireland. Northern nationalists may prefer a 32-county Ireland but in a democracy as long as the majority of people in the North wish to remain part of the UK then it will stay that way. If unhappy to live there until that happens, there’s nothing stopping them from moving. Wringing of hands and wishing for change that’s out of individual control to achieve doesn’t help anything. If a 32 county Ireland comes about in the future your argument remains valid for the northern unionists but they have the same freedom of choice as above.
@Brian MacCarthaigh: They are nearly 900 years occupied now
@Abcd: and nothing preventing them moving as I said but I believe your statement is more to do with a personal wish to feel aggrieved for people who don’t all feel that way. Some might certainly, but freedom of choice still not driving them to move. When as the population shifts towards a catholic majority (that’s catholic not necessarily nationalist) majority in the north, if they vote to return the 6 counties to the Republic and that’s a big if, then those you feel the need to comment on behalf of will have nothing to justify your initial comment. I suspect however that you will by then have found some other topic to express your very evident perspective on.
@Gerry Carroll: Partition was the choice of a Republican government over that of a Northern Ireland government which preferred to remain as part of the United Kingdom. In which case the people do not own the country they live in, this is a mandate produced by government decree and cannot be overuled unless both governments agree to it.
Soverignty in the UK is the mandate of parliament and not the people who elect it.
@Gerry Carroll: I think you’ll find that Britain still rules part of Ireland. And as long as that’s the case there will always be animosity
@Gerry Carroll: if you gerrymander a fake entity and call it Northern Ireland then there’s no democracy there. All votes in NI are un democratic
@Abcd: Ulster is about 400 years occupied
@Abcd: Wasn’t that the Americans takibg over Indian homelands, or the Spannish in South America, or the Soviet communist party in Russia.
No ethnic minorities in those days.
@Sara Elia López: Nonsense. People from minority ethnic backgrounds have long been a part of British society, with evidence of their settlement going back to Roman times. As the 20th century unfolded, Britain was still the world’s largest empire and many people from its colonies in Africa, the Caribbean, Asia and the Middle East – as well as other parts of the world – had come to the country to work, study or visit.
It has been estimated that one in five Britons has a black ancestor from the 17th or 18th centuries.
Jesus, did everyone fall off the wrong side of their bed this morning? Grumpy feckers today.
There’s a far better version of this that’s global & has existed for years – http://www.whatwasthere.com
This website is often like reading a Brit owned newspaper published in Ireland. Irish headlines, British news.
Those pictures are a fast way to throw up my Easter eggs.
@Ben Nagle: judging by the implied bitterness of your comment, perhaps a sweetening sugar rush is a good idea. Unoriginal backward looking rhetoric.
Mm . . . They’re a bit crap aren’t they.
have your say