action against ASBO's

by daithi Mon May 16, 2005 16:01

good - have the SP or SWP announced their positions on these yet?

by SP Mon May 16, 2005 17:40

See article in the current issue of The Socialist

by John - swp Mon May 16, 2005 17:50

Article on ASBOs in current issue of Socialist Worker,
See:
http://www.swp.ie/socialistworker/2005/sw242/socialistworker-242-7.htm

by Al Mon May 16, 2005 17:53

What the hell is wrong with them? Would you like to have scumbags running around pissed out of their heads smashing up your area and hassling people?
God almighty, do you people just like to moan and petition everything?

by Quelle Surprise Mon May 16, 2005 17:58

Well done Al,

I agree, and yes these people only like to petition and moan and apparently accoring to them it is allright to have scumbags running around pissed outof their heads hassling everybody.

Its their civil rights, wait a minute dont we have those too?

No because we are evil capitalists who abouse the working class, well wake up lads and lassies I am the working class and we dont care we want ASBO's so just shut up and stop wasting your breath

by Seer Mon May 16, 2005 18:31

"What the hell is wrong with them? Would you like to have scumbags running around pissed out of their heads smashing up your area and hassling people?
God almighty, do you people just like to moan and petition everything?"

Hear hear, sounds like you are describing parts of Donegal there but sure isn't Morris looking into that?

by Al Tue May 17, 2005 23:33

I believe he already has. Are you attempting to change the topic because you have no comeback? Or are you just so stupid that you think blanket statements are justified? Suppose I shouldnt expect any better, sure arent all Indymedia users just bored rich kids who have nothing better to do than graffiti and smoke joints while 'rebeling' by calling a guard a name behind his back?

by soundmigration Wed May 18, 2005 01:18

"sure arent all Indymedia users just 'bored rich kids who have nothing better to do than graffiti and smoke joints while 'rebeling' by calling a guard a name behind his back?"

i assume your talking about yourself then too..eh??

Can you explian why you want ASBO's in particular..can you explain how they solve anything, where they have been successful etc etc etc cos if not then why should we all have to put up with bullshit government PR legislation sticking very dangerous and counterproductive plasters over the gaping wound of a fucked up society
not why you want 'anti social behaviour" stopped as im sure you see that

The point is ASBO's dont work, haven't been successful in the UK and just end up processing kids through a criminal justice system that causes more harm than it solves...if you just want to bitch about users on indymedia then fair enough, but if your opinion blinds you to the fact that existing legislation to deal with "anti social behaviour" isn't fully resource to allow it to be effective and that such behaviour is a sypmtom of the society we live, then maybe your prioity isn't really what you disallude your self to believe..or maybe you are, like many folks, quite happy to leave the thinking and action to "bored rich kids who have nothing better to do than graffiti and smoke joints".

by bewildered Wed May 18, 2005 12:56

"Anti-social behaviour will only be seriously tackled when young people are nutured by society, have equal opportunities, and lives free from poverty, a decent education and the prospect of a well paid job and a decent future"


In the meantime, the majority of people who have to put up with both the economic hardships (such as they are) of capitlaist society also have to tolerate the added misery caused by scum.

BTW, I don't doubt that Mcdowell is on another PR trip, but a real policy of cracking down on anti-social behaviour - through the use of a bigger police presence and tough penalties would pay dividends.

by Al Wed May 18, 2005 17:30

Soundmigration,
You obviously missed the whole sarcasm thing in my comment. My comment was to show how annoying and incorrect blanket statements are in reference to comments made by Seer. Then again you kinda proved my point.
I think you are barking up the wrong tree about being under resourced and leaving the thinking to others, considering I’m a guard and can see far better than most antisocial behaviour, its effects and the response. The reason I am in favour is for the same reason I am in favour of any action taken, its action designed to have an effect against, not for those that cause the problems. The fact is ASBo's will work like any other court order such as barring orders in domestic violence. If anything they will keep people out of jail by allowing a second chance, its only those that break an order that have to worry and in order to do that one has to have been issued against you, see what I’m saying? Repeat offenders should be placed inside the justice system. Not everything is cured with a cup of tea and a hug. Remember that councils can act on them as well by removing unruly occupants, which means a sigh of relief for the neighbours. For a better look at ASBO's go to http://www.lexpress.mu/display_article_sup.php?news_id=41071 it shows both sides of the story well. I’m not saying they are the prefect answer but considering neither you or any other user here has suggested a viable answer I think they are a step in the right direction.
Having said all that I’m not in favour of on the spot fines for public order situations.

Bewildered,
A better or bigger police presence is just about the opposite of what most people on this site want. Every second user uses this site to insult and belittle Gardai. In fact more than one user believes that the Gardai should be abolished. I asked the question before. What do users want in a police force, I used the imaginary situation that the Gardai were abolished and the user now had to tackle crime. Not one person responded.

by Seer Wed May 18, 2005 17:40

So you chose to ignore the sarcasm in my comment. So be it.

"The fact is ASBo's will work like any other court order such as barring orders in domestic violence. "

You must have missed Prime Time Investigates the other night. A lot of victims of domestic violence didn't think too much of the 'scumbags running around pissed out of their heads smashing up your area and hassling people', sorry Garda, oops there I go again generalising.

by R. Isible Wed May 18, 2005 17:51

Obviously as a Garda you'll be concerned with making sure that no civil liberties are trampled upon by foolish legislation executed in haste and you'll want to make sure that none of the scarce resources of the Gardai are wasted in trying to enforce dubious new laws that may merely be PR stunts for ministers in trouble.

So, how effective have ASBOs been in the UK?

Has there been enough time elapsed for ASBOs to be evaluated reasonably?

by bewildered Wed May 18, 2005 18:00

I am well aware of the normal left attitude to the police - ironic in the light of the fact that "actually existing socialism" depended almost completely on their police forces. Unfortunately much of the left has adopted a liberal position regarding anti-social (anti-working class) crime and has forgotten that one of the first things that any successful revolution has had to do was smash the criminals - not rehabilitate them - smash them through beatings, prison camps and executions. As the revolutionaires of Paris used to say: "Death to the Thieves!!"

by Al Thu May 19, 2005 15:20

Seer,
Smart ass remarks aside. Does it seem strange that people will refuse to believe media and Tv reports when they go against what they believe but against the Gardai its oh so fair? In other words, Prime-time does what Prime-time does best. It depicts one-sided stories designed to attack a person/organisation which is given little or no room to answer. No I dont watch Prime-time because I know exactly how one sided the media is as do a lot of users on this site. Did it speak about the people that refuse to make complaints? Or the ones that do and then wont appear in court? The ones that will get a barring order but then invite the person back home? The ones that call the Guards but then turn nasty themselves when we arrest the guilty party? And on and on and on.
Domestic violence is something which the Gardai will do their best to eradicate but at the end of the day grown people are making the above decisions. We can only do so much.

R,
You can bring anything into law but its the people that use the law that will decide when and where it should be used. Plenty of public order offences are dealt with outside of arrest yet we have the power to arrest. What Im trying to say is that laws are designed to protect decent hardworking people not criminise them, If I wanted to be in an ego boosting police state I would leave Ireland. As for civil rights, Im afraid I spend most of my time worrying about and trying to help victims of crime, not the perpetrators. As for how effective they are, are you asking my opinion or did you not read the link I provided? I think they can be very effective as it allows councils to take action not just the police and gives victims another route. I have already said Im not in favour of on the spot fines. I think they will be unworkable.

Bewildered,
Dont ask me, Im just a 'freestate bastard'.

I will ask all users here, you put a proposal forward to deal with public order crime and we will see just how great your option is. What would you do with drunk thugs roaming estates they live in and harrasing their neighbours?

by R. Isible Thu May 19, 2005 17:47

If someone's civil rights are violated then they ARE a victim of crime. It's a particularly dangerous type of crime too.

The link that you supplied while interesting actually contains no statistical evidence as to the actual effectiveness of ASBOs. That's at least one of the central questions in introducing any piece of legislation: is there any hope that it would even do what it promises to do? It seems foolhardy to be running around recommending ASBOs if you have no realistic expectation that they'll do what the politicians promise.

The article makes the point that ASBOs in Ireland are inspired by driving fines. Given the complete failure of the Gardai to tackle the rising number of road deaths and accidents I'd be against such an ineffective scheme on principle then.

I've seen no convincing evidence that ASBOs will do anything except provide another overly-broad tool to a police force with too much power.

by Al Thu May 26, 2005 14:06

"If someone's civil rights are violated then they ARE a victim of crime. It's a particularly dangerous type of crime too." - That really depends on the context doesnt it? Are you seriously suggesting that by locking up rapists and murderers that the Gardai and justice system are guilty of crimes against their civil liberties? Come on, what do YOU think is the answer? What about the victims human rights and civil liberties? I find it funny that you are supporting people that would rape/kill and rob you wihout a moments hesitation.

"The link that you supplied while interesting actually contains no statistical evidence as to the actual effectiveness of ASBOs. That's at least one of the central questions in introducing any piece of legislation: is there any hope that it would even do what it promises to do? It seems foolhardy to be running around recommending ASBOs if you have no realistic expectation that they'll do what the politicians promise." - No stats because its still new even in England. I believe in ASBO's because I see the damage unruly louths cause to an estate and their neighbours. I see this both in work and at home. If they dont work, fine get rid of them but no one seems able to come up with a viable alternative.

"The article makes the point that ASBOs in Ireland are inspired by driving fines. Given the complete failure of the Gardai to tackle the rising number of road deaths and accidents I'd be against such an ineffective scheme on principle then." - What is it exactly you want us to do? are you suggesting that its my fault you speed? That you wont wear a seatbelt? that you drink drive? When we do checkpoints we are abused for not going after real criminals yet when w dont were accused of not doing anything. Which is it? how about if I personally go out and fix all the roads and signs, hows that? How about if I design a safer car?

"I've seen no convincing evidence that ASBOs will do anything except provide another overly-broad tool to a police force with too much power" - Besides the fact that I disagree over Garda powers I still maintain that you have missed the point. Its not a power for the Gardai its primarily to aloow citizens and councils to take direct action themselves without Gardai. I have enough power to deal with public order there and then I dont need ASBO's. They are for long term consistent abusers.
Again as always I ask, what do you think would work?

by Thu May 26, 2005 14:30

Oh Al, we've all been entertained by your activity of late, but here's a link for you.

by Al Thu May 26, 2005 14:52

Isnt that what I just said? Thats ASBO's arent for the Gardai but councils and we have the Public order Act? I nearly sure it is.
BTW, does that now make you the GRA's number one fan?

by Thu May 26, 2005 15:15

I just provided a link, that's all, planting seeds, etc. No need to be so defensive. Strange inferences, specious reasoning and odd logic blah blah

by Al Fri May 27, 2005 01:31

Im no more defensive than I usually am. You posted a link which basically agreed with me. the fact that the GRA said it just goes to show that the majority of Gardai think like me. ASBO's are for councils to take action by removing out of control tenents and to ensure those that are peaceful in the area dont suffer because of the few offenders.
I just dont see the problem, only those that dont care about others and think they can destroy an estate and harass its residents need fear ASBO's. Surely that is a good thing?
If you agree then say so, if you dont then explain why.

by Joe C Fri May 27, 2005 02:30

Michael McDowell wants to introduce sweeping new powers for the Garda. He has introduced a new Criminal Justice Bill that he wants to make law in the next year.

This law if passed will extend even further the powers of the state and the Gardai.

This law will increase detention periods without charge from 12 to 24 hours. This does not include time spent sleeping while in custody so it actually means two full days.

The law will also allow a chief superintendent to sign a search warrant - at the moment it has to be signed by a judge for a specific offence. The new law allows a single warrant be used for a number of offences and for a detained person to continue to be held for offences other than that on the warrant.

The law introduces provision for 'fixed penalties' for 'lesser public order offences'. This gives new powers to the Gardai that include the power of arrest and summary conviction of a fine of £1,500 and 6 months imprisonment.

McDowell wants to give courts the power to use statements that have been retracted by witnesses or who refuse to testify. You only have to think of the Birmingham Six or the Guilford Four to see where this can lead.

The police will also have the power to take DNA samples through saliva and gum swabs. This information can be kept for 12 months.

These new powers are being given to the same Gardaí that have been up to their necks in lying, corruption and planting evidence in Donegal and elsewhere.

Already this year the state has paid out over €500,000 in compensation to victims of Garda assaults or wrongful arrests. One victim had urine poured over her from an upstairs window of a police station.

This is also the force that killed John Carty in Abbeylara and then engaged in a cover-up and spin as to how it happened.

The fact that McDowell, a notorious republican basher, read the Bill into the record in Irish should make us even more suspicious. And indeed we should be - he plans to introduce numerous amendments including one to introduce electronic tagging and on Anti Social Behaviour Orders (ASBOs).

As previously with the Public Order Act, McDowell is claiming to be targeting drunken behaviour. However the POA was first used against striking workers.and to arrest demonstrators on anti-war and anti-capitalist protests like the Mayday Reclaim the Streets in 2002.

Most were later acquitted but if this new law was in place the police could have imposed an immediate fine of £1500 and 6 months in prison. The penalty for not complying with an anti-social behaviour order in Britain can be up to 5 years in prison.

McDowell says all this is necessary because the pendulum has swung "too far in favour of the accused". In reality the last ten years have seen a crackdown on civil liberties. The PDs pushed for the restriction on bail rights and for the Public Order Act that gave draconian powers to the Garda.

Mary Harney was clear from the start on why the police needed new powers. She said the police needed powers to deal with major social confrontations like the Poll Tax in Britain.

The Public Order Act and this new Criminal Justice Bill is about increasing the control of the state over everyone, and especially over rebellious young people.

McDowell and the government fear people power and want draconian laws in place to try to crush any resistance to them.

Continued at link:

by Al Fri May 27, 2005 03:01

I ask because there are flaws all over the place. Also, is this your opinion or are you just believing the statement? I will show the flaws, I will not give my own opinion.

"This law will increase detention periods without charge from 12 to 24 hours. This does not include time spent sleeping while in custody so it actually means two full days." - No it doesnt, only between 12 and 8Am will it be suspended and only if the suspect agrees to suspending the questioning. Is 24 hours really that bad for a murderer?

"The law will also allow a chief superintendent to sign a search warrant - at the moment it has to be signed by a judge for a specific offence. The new law allows a single warrant be used for a number of offences and for a detained person to continue to be held for offences other than that on the warrant." _ I dont understand this, is it a search warrant or detention? can you or the writer clarify? When it says for a number of offences, the offence will be on the warrant. Its just tightening up and standerdizing warrants, nothing really changes except its now a Chief Super instead or a peace commisioner.

"The law introduces provision for 'fixed penalties' for 'lesser public order offences'. This gives new powers to the Gardai that include the power of arrest and summary conviction of a fine of £1,500 and 6 months imprisonment." - This is in pounds for starters, shouldnt it be euro? Also, we already have power or arrest for Public order offences and 6 months is already the maximum for a summery offence under POA 1994. This suggests that we will be deciding the sentence, it will still be a judge.

"McDowell wants to give courts the power to use statements that have been retracted by witnesses or who refuse to testify. You only have to think of the Birmingham Six or the Guilford Four to see where this can lead." - under rare circumstances this can already be done (if they die for example). This is to combat shootings where criminals wont testify against eachother and for the last time, Guilford and Birmingham werent the Gardai. Have you got a ROI example?

"The police will also have the power to take DNA samples through saliva and gum swabs. This information can be kept for 12 months." - Already have it and so we should so the next time a rapis offends we will have his DNA. the next time a thug smashes your car window we will have his DNA. What do you think we will do with it? I have no problem with the Gardai having my DNA.

"These new powers are being given to the same Gardaí that have been up to their necks in lying, corruption and planting evidence in Donegal and elsewhere." - Elsewhere? where? facts please. Donegal accepted but they arent in the Gardai any longer so its an incorrect statement.

"Already this year the state has paid out over €500,000 in compensation to victims of Garda assaults or wrongful arrests. One victim had urine poured over her from an upstairs window of a police station." - Out of court, I already discussed this. You are being sued for 5 grand, it will cost 10 grand to fight. Simple economics decides not guilt or innocence. Also, wrongful arrest can include where you arrest based on an eye witness account and they later admit they lied.

"This is also the force that killed John Carty in Abbeylara and then engaged in a cover-up and spin as to how it happened." - no spin or coverups. He was a danger and was shot. FBI stated "We would have shot him sooner", The ERU were right to take down a dangerous armed man. Sad but true. Is its wrong then what would you have done?

"The fact that McDowell, a notorious republican basher, read the Bill into the record in Irish should make us even more suspicious. And indeed we should be - he plans to introduce numerous amendments including one to introduce electronic tagging and on Anti Social Behaviour Orders (ASBOs)." - Again to combat CRIMINALS. I have said all I will on ASBO's but why are you against tagging of repeat offenders? No one knows your wearing it and unless you commit a crime its useless.

"As previously with the Public Order Act, McDowell is claiming to be targeting drunken behaviour. However the POA was first used against striking workers.and to arrest demonstrators on anti-war and anti-capitalist protests like the Mayday Reclaim the Streets in 2002." Really? thats strange because the Criminal justice (Public order) Act 1994 was around for 8 years before Mayday.

"Most were later acquitted but if this new law was in place the police could have imposed an immediate fine of £1500 and 6 months in prison." - Complete and utter shite, we have and will not have a say whatsover in the punishment. Still in pounds though.

"The penalty for not complying with an anti-social behaviour order in Britain can be up to 5 years in prison." - So ours will be lenient then?

"McDowell says all this is necessary because the pendulum has swung "too far in favour of the accused". In reality the last ten years have seen a crackdown on civil liberties. The PDs pushed for the restriction on bail rights and for the Public Order Act that gave draconian powers to the Garda." - Oh please. Bail is granted to just about every prisoner brought into my station and on the rare occasions that it isnt, they get it in court. POA 94 is draconian? Is this just a standard word for all laws? Drunk and disorderly (not the wording but shorter), threatening behavior in public to another person too an extend that they reasonable feared for their safety, Failure to comply with a Garda after being asked to leave the area AFTER being found commiting these offences (except drunk) and finally assaulting a police officer. Perhaps it shouldnt be against the law to assualt a police officer or threaten people?

"Mary Harney was clear from the start on why the police needed new powers. She said the police needed powers to deal with major social confrontations like the Poll Tax in Britain." - She can say what she likes, shes not minister for justice but Poll tax was an all out riot not a protest.

"The Public Order Act and this new Criminal Justice Bill is about increasing the control of the state over everyone, and especially over rebellious young people." - Whats rebellious? Very wide sweeping statement.

"McDowell and the government fear people power and want draconian laws in place to try to crush any resistance to them." - then wouldnt they ban democracy and elections? Seems strange to have all these laws to control people and then let them kick you out in an election. Elections this government has won twice so someone must like them.

This article is a rehashed version of an article written over a decade ago with a few new things thrown in. Lazy sods those SWP. BTW I asked you for your opinions and alternatives, this is not it.

by R. Isible Fri May 27, 2005 08:57

Any evidence from the UK that ASBOs will do what a minister looking for a quick PR steroid shot could use? I mean you must have _something_, _anything_ to back up a piece of legislation which you admit runs the risk of trampling on civil liberties? Remember Indymedia.ie is for the exchange of news and information, not uninformed bulletin board style chat. Thanks.

by bewildered Fri May 27, 2005 10:05

The GRA line on ASBOs is interesting. They claim that there are enough powers to deal with the anti-social and other crime but that they lack the resources.

I beleive that is a valid point. People on the left ought to argue from a similar position: that what working class areas need is proper and adequate policing to deal with anti-social criminal behaviour, ie drug dealing, car theft, house-breaking, mugging, beatings, etc not young fellas drinking in a field and not bothering anyone.

But that would mean support for strong measures by the Gardai and the courts to lock those responsible up. By all means rehabilitate them if possible but first priority must be to take them out of circulation and provide already harassed people with some relief.

The left ought also not react in a knee jerk manner to events like that in Lusk where a gang of notorious drug dealers were taken out.

by Al Fri May 27, 2005 15:01

Bewildered,
Yes that is what we want.

R,
Should we let murderers go? Punishing someone for breaking the law means removing certain rights. I dont know if you are naive or simple fortunate enough to neither be the victim or witness a crime. Lasly, I dont need proof, its the people against ASBO's making the claim, the burden of proof is with them.
All I asked for was opinions and I cant even get that. But to avoid the usual response I will put the ball firmly in your court. 4 independent links backing ASBO's up and stating they work.

http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/news/s/146/146771_asbos_do_work_says_research.html

http://www.crackcocaineincamden.co.uk/pages/crack%20cocaine%20news/news%20pages/0100/0045.htm

http://www.crimereduction.gov.uk/fearofcrime0219.htm

http://www.richmondandtwickenhamtimes.co.uk/news/features/display.var.573450.0.asbos_do_they_really_work.php

by R. Isible Fri May 27, 2005 15:30

Should cow eat moon cheese?

If we're going to play a game of asking unrelated questions then the topic will quickly diverge from whether or not there is any proof of the usefulness of ASBOs at all wont it?

Thanks for supply those four links, unfortunately they are all to opinion pieces (including letters to the editor) in very minor newspapers or weblogs. Hardly reliable sources. Only two of them seem to suggest any figure at all that might bear upon the subject.

You suggest that it is up to those that doubt the effectiveness of introducing ASBOs to prove that they don't work.

This seems illogical to me for the following reasons:

1) It is normal for the proponents of a change in any endeavour to advance evidence to support their claims.

2) The garda are highly underresourced and there is no evidence that they have the numbers to properly enforce any scheme of this sort. (After all as pointed out above if it's modelled on penalty points or anything like that then the proof of the pudding there is that the gards can't do that either)

Until some proof is advanced that these do anything it seems like a naive publicity stunt from a desperate politician banging his chest in an attempt to court the reactionary vote.

As you admit that there's a problem with the balance of civil liberties in this case it would be interesting to see whether or not you can find any plausible evidence suggesting ASBOs are useful. If not then the impression that you have already created in other comments of being unconcerned about civil liberties and being a garda will be reinforced.

I'm assuming of course that you don't just run off half cocked supporting any changes that you like the sound of for emotive and irrational reasons.

by Al Fri May 27, 2005 15:53

R,
My question relates to crime and punishment and civil liberties. Yours does not. Mine is relivent yours is not.

"Thanks for supply those four links, unfortunately they are all to opinion pieces (including letters to the editor) in very minor newspapers or weblogs. Hardly reliable sources. Only two of them seem to suggest any figure at all that might bear upon the subject." - The first states reoffending figures amongst others. the third is from a government website. What is it you want? Considering that no one has supplied anything against ASBO's in either link or statistic.

"The garda are highly underresourced and there is no evidence that they have the numbers to properly enforce any scheme of this sort. (After all as pointed out above if it's modelled on penalty points or anything like that then the proof of the pudding there is that the gards can't do that either)" - Why must I repeat myself? see my previous comments
*by Al Wednesday, May 18 2005, 4:30pm
*by Al Thursday, May 19 2005, 2:20pm
*by Al Thursday, May 26 2005, 1:06pm
*by Al Thursday, May 26 2005, 1:52pm

Now until I get some answere to my quesions I do not feel like wasting any more of my time. I will repeat them,
1. Why do you not want ASBO's? Proof please.
2. Are you more concerned with perpetrators or victims?
3. Is there any proof that ASBO's DONT work?
4. What is your alternative to deal with anti-social behaviour?
5. Do you infact simple go against anything the government or gardai do?

by Colin Revell - Disabled People's movement Wed Sep 28, 2005 17:11 colrevs at hotmail dot co dot uk 07729387405

"s55":-

Is a disabled people's and neurodiverse lobbying group that is tackling the abuse and 'victimisation' of the 'criminalisation' by the UK Government of the use of ASBO's against disabled people.

It's come to our attention of that of the disportionaitely abusive use of ASBO's against disabled people which is discriminatory (dis)abilist attitudes and behaviour and 'victimisation', under s55 DDA and also a serious violation of a disabled persons basic human rights, especially under Articles 3,6, 8 and 14.

We are also in the opinion that it's also targeting and 'stiring up' 'hatred' against certain individuals and groups of disabled people, which is a 'crime', under the Governments own current legislation.

We are disturbed to hear that their are especially two paticular groups of disabled people who are being targeted in the impairments being 'criminalised'.

That is those disabled people who are neurodiverse and those experiencing mental ill health/distress, as current research is highlights within ASBO concern and NAPO.

We need to organise other Mental Health and Neurodiverse Survivors Groups with DANDA, British Council of Disabled People (BCODP), UN Disability Convention, ASBO Concern, Liberty and others within the UK and global disabled people’s movement and allied organisations to 'speak-out' politically to our politicians about the 'criminalisation' of disabled people's behaviour which is an abuse of their basic human rights and civil liberties.

So if you abhor the use of ASBO's been used oppressively against disabled people, then it's your opportunity within this group to organise ourselves as disabled people to 'speak-out', especially under the auspices of 'Nothing about us, without us'.