I THINK at this point in our history we should give thanks to Thomas Bomber Clarke, the young gentleman who pleaded guilty to amongst various other offences the theft of a bicycle.
This surely is a landmark in Irish jurisprudence, for I recall no other case of a charge, never mind a guilty plea - and therefore a conviction - concerning the larceny of a bicycle. This particular bicycle, we hear, cost £50, so it was not the world's greatest bike. But it was stolen; and the culprit apprehended; and for this we should rejoice.
Bicycle theft is probably the most common form of theft in Dublin. The stolen bicycle for most of us represents money saved money saved means money earned money earned means hours worked hours worked means time given to somebody else for income which is then taxed.
Undiscussed element
That is the unseen and undiscussed element of theft in Dublin - not the item removed, but the hours and days of people's lives which are stolen by the thieves. Those hours, those days, will not come again.
The nice thing about Bomber was that he was extradited from the Netherlands to face the charge of this bicycle larceny - though I might add, not that alone. No matter. Not merely do we get our first conviction for bicycle theft in living memory, but we get it on foot of an extradition which began when Bomber was arrested the very day that Ireland was playing the Netherlands.
And that, no doubt, is as often as we can expect a conviction for bicycle theft in Dublin - whenever the thief has fled to Amsterdam, and Ireland happens to be playing the Dutch there.
Bicycle theft - as Bomber has discovered, God love him - is against the law; but that law is hardly ever invoked. We, have vast bodies of law which are never invoked - such as the drink driving laws, past and present, the dog muzzling laws, the restaurant licensing laws and so on; and to them all; now, Brendan Howlin proposes to add some more with his Litter Bill.
Interesting reading
It makes interesting reading, this Litter Bill. If it becomes law, a fine of £1,500 should be levied on those found guilty of littering - and most of us would agree, £1,500 sounds like an awful lot of money for throwing litter about the place. Far better dump it in a dump. That's what we need a bit draconian action by Government to clean up the dreadful, problem of litter which so shocks visitors to Ireland.
Unfortunately, the response is not nearly draconian enough, and is yet another example of Government by Wishful Decree. The £1,500 fine merely replaces the £800 fine which was introduced in the Litter Act, which provided for an £800 fine for littering. Inflation since 1982 means that figure of £800 is now worth £1,795; so what the Minister has done is actually reduce the fine, in real terms, from what it was in 1982.
Do you remember the effect of the draconian Litter Act of 1982, and how it cleared up the problem of litter in Ireland? You do not? You do not because it did not.
The 1982 Litter Act was just another unenforced law, a statement of pious intent with no political intention whatsoever of implementing the law vigorously. If people ceased to litter less in the 1980s than they did before it wasn't because of the terror of the consequences of the law; it was because they chose not to litter for other reasons.
The law was not enforced. It was ignored. Dublin Corporation actually introduced litter wardens, but they could do virtually nothing, because of their limited legal powers - the two wardens employed by the city managed a magnificent 103 prosecutions last year. That is, one each a week. Superb. And the Garda Siochana certainly did not regard it within their remit to stop people littering.
Walk through Dublin city centre today. If you manage to find a patrolling garda - and that in itself will be quite achievement stroll in front of him or her and drop a piece of paper on the pavement.
The law is clear - an £800 penalty should await you. Will you feel a hand upon your shoulder? Will you feel the firm tread of constabulary boots directing you to the nearest Garda station? Will you feel the weight of a righteous State prosecuting you with the vigour which your crime deserves?
You will not. And you will not, not because of any failure of the gardai, but because successive governments have not felt the need to fund and train and motivate the police force of Ireland to have a more rounded view of their duties.
In such circumstances, the size of the fine is irrelevant. As bike thieves might be a little more cautious about their capers if they really thought bicycle larceny was going to be a seriously investigated and seriously punished crime without requiring an Amsterdam connection before gardai got all gung ho, so the rest of us would be a little less carefree with our litter if we were convinced of the punishments which awaited those who break the law.
Dogs and law
Which brings us to the matter of dogs and law. A few years ago some idiot minister. I cannot remember who, nor to which government the creature belonged - introduced a truly cretinous law requiring the muzzling of certain breeds of dogs, including all those with the title "bull" in front of them.
Harmless species like Staffordshire bull terriers, which, unlike their cousins, the American pit bulls, had attacked nothing, were obliged to be muzzled in public; as were bulldogs, which have no muzzle to muzzle. Alsatians, and Rottweilers were also required to be muzzled.
These species do not exist in law. The law means nothing. Most of the types listed above remain unmuzzled, and untroubled - and indeed, untroubling. Now we hear that the Garda will be expected to impose the new laws on unwanted dog poo around the street; and no doubt they will - when they manage to track the culprit litterer hiding out in Amsterdam at the precise time that Ireland is playing The Netherlands.