When policymakers make decisions, it is important to consider the objective of the policy and its effectiveness in achieving that objective. In this case, the objective is to reduce violence. However, I fail to see how introducing firearms into the situation will dissuade people from violent tendencies. If anything, it is likely to result in greater violence. The presence of armed gardaí in a community will only create a perception of violence and mistrust between law enforcement and the community. It is difficult to imagine a scenario where these expectations are not met.
This brings us back to the initial question of what the objective of this policy is. If there is violence on the streets of Dublin, will the gardaí be expected to use their guns? If not, then why have armed gardaí present? If so, then there is a moral issue with using the state’s authority to kill individuals who have been pushed into a life of violence and crime due to deprivation and destitution. Criminality does not arise out of nowhere; it is often a result of individuals being failed by the state.
Furthermore, the rise in youth violence can primarily be attributed to parents who fail to exercise parental control. The recent anti-social behavior on the streets of our capital is evidence of this. Some of the most violent attacks were carried out by children, which is shocking but true. Parents have a responsibility for their children and their actions. While there may be state agencies that offer support and counseling for troubled children, ultimately it is the duty of parents, not the government, to take care of their own children. It is alarming to think that some parents actually encourage their children to engage in criminal activities, but fortunately, this is relatively uncommon and often tied to a history of familial criminality. Poor parenting is often a result of busy lives and parents who fail to invest time in their children. We must remember that children are born as blank slates, and it is up to parents to shape their development.
In regards to the controversy surrounding the release of contaminated water from Fukushima into the ocean, it is important to provide accurate information and scientific data to better understand the Japanese government’s commitment to safety and transparency. The water to be discharged has undergone extensive purification through the advanced liquid processing system (ALPS) and will be further diluted before release. The concentration of tritium will be significantly lower than regulatory standards and the World Health Organization drinking water standard. The concentration of other radioactive materials will also be well below regulatory standards. The ecological impact and potential bioaccumulation have been taken into account in the assessment of radiological environmental impacts. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has conducted a comprehensive review and states that the approach to the discharge of the treated water is consistent with international safety standards, and the radiological impact is negligible. Japan’s government has been transparent in providing information to experts, diplomatic missions, and the international community. They will continue to monitor and provide necessary information based on the IAEA’s report.
Lastly, the hype around the Leaving Certificate exams is unhelpful. As someone who has completed three separate Leaving Certs and pursued further education later in life, I have come to realize that education is about creating options. There are always alternatives and opportunities available. Life is a journey filled with choices and challenges, and it is important for students, teachers, parents, and the media to recognize this.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
