|
Post by Bilk on Mar 26, 2008 16:07:50 GMT
I agree and have just voted
|
|
|
Post by An Fear Dubh on Mar 26, 2008 16:22:33 GMT
I must say Bilk's vote did surprize me, but I have learnt to expect Bilk to think.
I was going to comment that this poll would fall along traditional lines 'nationalist v unionist'. But Bilk spoilt that assumption.
|
|
|
Post by Bilk on Mar 26, 2008 16:55:14 GMT
I believe policing should be in the hands of the people, and in this case the people are the people of Northern Ireland. Only those who are accountable to the people of that part of this island can and should be responible for the way they are policed. I certainly don't think the present system of policing is anywhere close to what I expect from a police force.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Mar 26, 2008 17:00:20 GMT
I find the poll a bit stupid because we have so many more republicans here who will obviously vote yes on it. I voted yes, because I want to see it happen but take it with a pinch of salt.
|
|
|
Post by earl on Mar 26, 2008 20:40:20 GMT
I voted no. I agree that it has to happen eventually but not at this current time. We have the assembly up and running now, so let's let things settle, let people get used to the current situation and hopefully, there'll be more people onside over the next 18 months or so. Slow steps are needed in NI.
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on Mar 26, 2008 22:20:24 GMT
I agree with Earl here so there is more cross community agreements and further moving from republican vs Unionist. Earl has thought about this and didn't jump in to hit the yes button, he has showed consideration and forward thinking here.
And lets not forget the ira's army council as well.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Mar 26, 2008 22:38:12 GMT
Unless you want dissidents running around claiming to be the IRA army council and getting more support then that needs to stay.
What benefit is there of English men running our police when they've never set foot in the place? When was the last time a British minister was in Divis?
|
|
|
Post by Bilk on Mar 27, 2008 14:11:57 GMT
Unless we want to see thugs and bandits running around freely doing exactly what they like, in both unionist and nationalist areas of our cities, then there has to be a fundamental change in policing. They are still policing the "troubles" while the rest of us have moved on.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Mar 27, 2008 14:26:57 GMT
That change won't happen as long as English ministers and Lords are calling the shots. They've never been to where I live. How the fuck do they know what to legislate for?
|
|
|
Post by An Fear Dubh on Mar 27, 2008 17:28:48 GMT
I am surprised at Earl for swallowing the Unionist line so sweetly.
I can not see why we need time to 'let things settle'! What do we need this time for? What are these things that will settle? How many years have past in the North and how have 'things settled'? Who are these additional people that will be won over during this time to delay? Are they Nationalists? Are they Unionists? Obviously Earl suggests that these additional people are Unionists. Is it not more possible that as time moves on and 'things settle' and elections draw closer, Unionist politicians become more conscious of votes and adopt positions that might feed into the 'siege' mentality.
So from my view point this call for more time is just the same delaying tactic that Unionists have used during every step of this process. How long do you envisage this time frame? The St. Andrew's deal gave us that time delay to allow 'things to settle' and set a time frame when it believed policing powers should to be transfered. Can you ever see a time when Unionists would feel the time is right? Unionists only ever move when pushed over the edge it is difficult because of the 'siege' mentality for them to move forward.
I would agree with Bilk's view that it is better and important that local people have control over local issues and that includes how we are policed. And from the left-wing perspective the system is not to my liking but I would sooner have local people controlling it.
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on Mar 27, 2008 20:30:08 GMT
Why has Earl swallowed anything? Do you then think bilk has swallowed the republican line so sweetly?
Earl is his own man with a mind of his own, he has gave his opinion, as has you and bilk and others. You have no problem with Bilks opinion but have a swipe at Earl because of his.
|
|
|
Post by An Fear Dubh on Mar 28, 2008 14:11:19 GMT
I am not having a 'swipe' at Earl. I am questioning how he reached his conclusion. And I have asked some questions that I feel that line of logic needs to answer. If you want to answer those questions feel free. Then I will consider the response and if the answers logically stack up then I will reconsider my position on this issue.
I would be of the same view if I lived in Liverpool. That local people should be able to hold the police to account, should be able to direct the police in how they are organized. And have input into how the courts also are run.
In England the role of the police has moved away from communities dealing with normal crime and the police have become more political. (ie Used to help break strikes, or trade union issues, used for policing immigration issues, etc).
So when someone is beaten to death in his own home in my community. I want to be able to ask the local police how this could happen. And their response would be different if they knew that local politician would be able to hold them too account. Rather than try to hide behind a maze of accountability.
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on Mar 28, 2008 14:38:18 GMT
AFD you said about Earl swallowing the Unionist line so sweetly, that is a swipe to me.
I do want the same as yourself although it is far from a major issue for me. The climate is far from right to devolve policing and untill then it shouldn't happen. As Earl said it is way too early.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Mar 28, 2008 14:49:29 GMT
Wasp do you mind if I ask you what estate you live in? I'm not going to come and find your house and egg it ;D But if the problems are anything like in Poleglass, or Divis, or Beechmount, or Ballymurphy, or Lenadoon or any other big housing estate in West Belfast then I find it very hard to believe that you can't see it as the right time to get our claws into the police and get the changes we need before more people are jumped, mugged, stabbed, or killed in their own home. It may be okay if your living in East Belfast, as far as I've been told by people I work with, the paramilitaries still do the rounds there. It doesnt happen in West Belfast nearly as much anymore, and not at all in some parts.
Why are unionists always so behind the times? You need to get behind this for the sake of the entire country and put to side what you think of the IRA or this place will get worse and worse. Republicans support this, so its ironic that it will be unionists like yourself who don't support it that are going to be leading to the downfall of your own country. If its not governable (this time through hoods and drug dealers and gangs) then its not worth the bother.
All very well for Earl to think its too early, he doesn't live here and can't possibly know what its like.
|
|
|
Post by An Fear Dubh on Mar 28, 2008 15:12:31 GMT
Wasp you seem to want to bring this debate down to a personal level, where I am accused of insulting someone. But you ignore the questions asked and try to deflect the debate into an area where you feel safe, personal abuse.
I am interested in the positions of Bilk and Earl, because I have come to respect their logic. And in this debate both have accepted a position that steps outside of the traditional lines.
As a Left wing Republican of course I accept Bilk's assessment, it is the same as mine. The Sinn Fein position is reached because that is the desires of republicans and the local communities which they represent, we want local input into policing and justice.
You Wasp are a Unionist of sorts and in the same way Unionist opinion is formed by you and the community you come from, and is reflected by unionist politicians.
Earl has previously defined himself republican. But having respect for his logic I would like to explore the conclusions he has reached. This is not a personal 'swipe' but a constructive and mature debate. I will read carefully what is said back and consider it. And see how it reflects on the position I have taken. I will look positively at the argument for delay if it is backed up by sound reasoning rather than just an emotional feeling. That is not to dismiss emotional feelings but we must not be governed by emotions alone.
|
|