Irish Examiner view: E-scooters give shoplifters the means to make a fast getaway

Thieves no longer need to leg it now they can leap on a scooter and whiz away on the footpath with their ill-gotten gains

The owner of a Centra store said he is 'out €60,000 or €70,000 a year before we turn on a light' due to shoplifting, much of it facilitated by e-scooters. Picture: iStock

Amidst the retailer furore over the out-of-control increase in shoplifting in Ireland’s cities, there was a small pointer to a trend which has facilitated the sense of impunity enjoyed by many gangs.

Thieves no longer need to leg it when they have grasped some contraband from the shelves of a store. Nor do they need a getaway vehicle waiting around the corner. There are alternatives in this age of mobility, and they extend beyond the tried-and-trusted BMX bike.

Following evidence presented to the Oireachtas trade committee about the scale of the problem, the owner of a Centra in Dublin said that he is “out €60,000 or €70,000 a year before we turn on a light” due to constant low-level robbery incidents.

“They come in organised gangs, four or five in it together. They come on their wretched electric scooters.”

E-scooters are everywhere in Ireland, as they are in many European countries, yet their use here is illegal on public roads, and laws to change that have been delayed until at least the first quarter of next year because they have to be signed off by the European Commission.

Transport minister Jack Chambers said: “No e-scooter which exceeds the parameters for maximum weight, power output, and design speed will be permitted for use in public places.” 

And anyone under the age of 16 will be banned from using such machines after a U-turn by the Government as a result of lobbying over road safety concerns.

Laws which are openly flouted bring civil society into contempt and promote the belief among the selfish and self-centred that rules are for other people. They also make our urban and rural areas more dangerous places.

That thought presented itself again when a garda found it necessary to warn parents against buying scrambler or quad bikes for Christmas.

Superintendent Declan O’Sullivan of Mayfield Garda Station in Cork said they are completely inappropriate gifts for children and can pose serious dangers in the hands of young people.

A Garda operation targeting scramblers earlier this year encountered children as young as 10 driving these vehicles and doing so without tax or insurance. It later emerged that some of the vehicles had been bought as Communion or Confirmation gifts. 

Scramblers or mini motorised motorcycles are legally termed as mechanically propelled vehicles and it is an offence to “supply” them to people under 16. Fines can be levied up to €3,000, and conviction can also result in a prison term not exceeding six months.

On the face of it, this should be plain common sense but, as a society, we need to ask more challenging questions, such as ‘do we really want it?’, about technology which impinges heavily upon daily life. 

Into this category we can place drones, scrambler bikes, and, yes, e-scooters.

With social media and mobile comms, the Pandora’s box has already been opened. While some jurisdictions, such as the UK, wishfully think of banning access for under-16s, we can only say: “Good luck with that”. 

As one commentator observed this week, it’s as if those in charge of the legislation have never met a child, never mind having any.

But, for other smart kit which can be used to accelerate already increasing levels of crime, or which can cause hurt and injury in unregulated hands, we do not have to be laissez-faire. 

We have enough danger on our roads already without bringing the footpaths into the equation. 

New dimension to age-old scams 

At first glance, the legal action by the Tánaiste Micheál Martin against Google might seem to be founded in thoroughly modern principles: Big Tech being pursued to discover the identities of the malefactors using a leading politician’s name to promote a crypto currency scam.

In December 2005, then enterprise minister Micheál Martin visited Google's European HQ in Dublin to announce 600 new jobs. Now, in 2023, Mr Martin wants to find out who is behind an ad campaign on Google erroneously linking him to a cryptocurrency scam. Picture: Niall Carson/PA

And, to the extent to which it challenges the ease with which those with evil intent can digitally usurp normal commercial channels, and have their identity protected because of corporate protocols, it is very much a 21st-century phenomenon. 

But at its core is the matter of reputation, with an affidavit from Mr Martin asserting that the false ad campaign on the Google platform contained statements which “would injure his reputation in the eyes of reasonable members of society.” In other words, defamation.

That principle was established nearly a century ago in a case taught by law schools around the world featuring a famous amateur golfer Cyril Tolley who made a claim against the chocolate bar makers Fry & Sons. 

In what might have seemed a good idea at the time, the confectionery manufacturers created a caricature of the British champion alongside some creative copy comprising a limerick:

The caddy to Tolley said: ‘Oh Sir,

Good shot Sir, that ball see it go Sir.

My word how it flies

Like a cartet of Frys.

They’re handy, they’re good, and priced low sir’. 

Mr Tolley, who knew nothing of the campaign, was not amused and claimed that it portrayed him as someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was unworthy of his amateur status. The matter went to the British House of Lords, who agreed and upheld damages.

What is surprising about this week’s case is that Mr Martin had to go to law to find out who is behind the false advertisements — as did, in a similar hearing, this time involving Meta — the well-known UK-based Qatari businessman Wissam Al Mana, a former husband of the singer Janet Jackson.

Wissam al Mana with his then wife Janet Jackson at Milan Fashion Week 2013. In an Irish court last week, Mr al Mana received an apology from Facebook owner Meta over ads falsely linking him to a cryptocurrency. Picture: Vittorio Zunino Celotto/Getty

In a case heard in Dublin, Facebook’s owner Meta “unreservedly and sincerely” apologised to Mr Al Mana over the publication of “fake ads” falsely linking him to a cryptocurrency auto-trading programme.

Digital commerce was supposed to lead to a frictionless and speedy trading environment, but the ability to set matters in train without the checks and balances of personal contact and experience appears ripe for exploitation.

What sales manager with traditional values would sign off a controversial campaign involving a high-profile public figure without making at least one precautionary call to check things out?

No wonder Mr Martin frets about the potential erosion of trust in the political system and the disruption and disfigurement of public life in the State. It’s something that should worry us all.

CORK

Your home for the latest news, views, sports and business reporting from Cork.