Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Gardai shooting to kill?

  • 26-05-2005 1:13pm
    #1
    CJhaughey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,907 ✭✭✭✭


    Seems that with the recent killings in Lusk of two robbers, the guards are shooting to kill not wound.
    I seem to remember the guards also killing some of their own in Abbeyleix a few years back, Are they adequately trained or trigger happy?


«134567

Comments

  • #2
    por
    Closed Accounts Posts: 568 ✭✭✭por


    CJhaughey wrote:
    Seems that with the recent killings in Lusk of two robbers, the guards are shooting to kill not wound.
    I seem to remember the guards also killing some of their own in Abbeyleix a few years back, Are they adequately trained or trigger happy?

    Well done Gardai, good to see them cleaning the streets of S**T,
    Pleople who carryout armed robberies don't deserve anything better.
    Agin well done, 2 less pieces of s**t in the world.


  • #3
    Iago
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,638 ✭✭✭Iago


    If some scumbag was trying to kill me by firing on my first you can be sure I wouldn't be trying to shoot him in the hand and incapacitate him.

    They opened fire, they paid for it with their lives, deserved as far as I'm concerned.


  • #4
    Meh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,295 ✭✭✭Meh


    CJhaughey wrote:
    Seems that with the recent killings in Lusk of two robbers, the guards are shooting to kill not wound.
    I should hope so, policemen are trained to shoot to kill. Shooting to wound is for the movies.


  • #5
    CJhaughey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,907 ✭✭✭✭CJhaughey


    Yeah I don't have any sympathy for armed robbers, you get what you deserve.
    But the question remains how well trained are the people on the end of the triggers?
    Remember Abbeylara? that guy wasn't a danger to anyone but himself yet he was shot in the back and riddled as he fell.
    That is not responsible firearm use to me.
    I am not defending the robbers far from it.


  • #6
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Seems that with the recent killings in Lusk of two robbers, the guards are shooting to kill not wound.
    It would appear to me CJhaughey that you have your mind made up without knowing the facts of the situation.

    Perhaps you should ask the head postmistress for more facts?

    According to the news at one She was sitting at her desk with two gardaí hiding behind her when these robbers started pounding the security screen with a sledge hammer and others were pointing guns.
    Again according to the news at one, the Gardaí have said that these people were known drug dealers.
    They happened to be out on an armed robbery and were bested.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    loz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 667 ✭✭✭loz


    Its fairly difficult to shoot to wound ! - esp a terget probably hit behind a car, wall etc, with only the main body mass ( upper body ) exposed.


  • #8
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    What Meh said. On top of that, if you attemt to shoot to wound, that lets them live only to take court cases against us (The State) for causing them permanent or severe physical trauma.


  • #9
    Sarsfield
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,359 ✭✭✭Sarsfield


    There is no such thing as "shoot to wound" in the real world. Not with real bullets. And you can't challenge an armed robber with a bean-bag gun!


  • #10
    jman0
    Closed Accounts Posts: 731 ✭✭✭jman0


    So... i guess the consensus is: Bring on the Death Penalty and Let our Gards Be Judge and Jury!

    /sarcasm


  • #11
    Hobbes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,264 ✭✭✭✭Hobbes


    Also they are armed. Now if you were going on about shooting to kill unarmed people it might be newsworthy. They did thier job.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    jman0 wrote:
    So... i guess the consensus is: Bring on the Death Penalty and Let our Gards Be Judge and Jury!

    /sarcasm
    Nope I'd say the concensus is, if you play with fire, the fire will burn you.


  • #13
    Meh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,295 ✭✭✭Meh


    CJhaughey wrote:
    Remember Abbeylara? that guy wasn't a danger to anyone but himself yet he was shot in the back and riddled as he fell.
    That is not responsible firearm use to me.
    We've had several informative threads about the Abbeylara incident, the actual shooting itself isn't the controversial part. What's controversial is the events leading up to the shooting. Once the guy pointed his gun at the gardai and refused to drop it, they had no choice other than to shoot him.
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=169169&highlight=abbeylara
    jman0 wrote:
    So... i guess the consensus is: Bring on the Death Penalty and Let our Gards Be Judge and Jury!

    /sarcasm
    Yes, that's exactly what we're saying.
    /sarcasm


  • #14
    sceptre
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    jman0 wrote:
    /sarcasm
    Your sarcasm isn't very good.

    It's very difficult, outside of a Hollywood movie and a bad episode of Alias, to shoot someone in the middle of a gun fight and aim to incapacitate with any degree of success. Not when the other guy is carrying a gun and using it next to a few friends who may be doing likewise.


  • #15
    Sarsfield
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,359 ✭✭✭Sarsfield


    jman0 wrote:
    So... i guess the consensus is: Bring on the Death Penalty and Let our Gards Be Judge and Jury!

    /sarcasm

    Nope. But sometimes the result of a shootout will be death!

    Reports suggest the Gardai asked the robbers to surrender. They declined (which they indicated by shooting at the Gardai). The Gardai replied and did a better job than the robbers.

    Regarding the issue of Garda competence (and not referencing this particular incident), I know nothing about guns, but I have family in the military. They don't hold the Gardai in very high regard in terms of their weapons training.


  • #16
    Villain
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,951 ✭✭✭✭Villain


    Meh wrote:
    We've had several informative threads about the Abbeylara incident, the actual shooting itself isn't the controversial part. What's controversial is the events leading up to the shooting. Once the guy pointed his gun at the gardai and refused to drop it, they had no choice other than to shoot him.

    Don't want to drag this off topic but I think the Gardai did shoot to kill in Abbeylara, they could hav disarmed him by shooting to the shoulder or legs but instead they just opened fire randomly and from I can remember the fatal bullet was fired as he was falling.


  • #17
    bonkey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    CJhaughey wrote:
    But the question remains how well trained are the people on the end of the triggers?

    Thats a completely seperate question to whether they are trained to shoot to wound or to shoot to kill, though.
    that guy wasn't a danger to anyone but himself
    No offence, but how qualified are you to make that decision, and what level of information do you have access to in order to make it.
    That is not responsible firearm use to me.

    Which is a third question, being neither directly an issue of whether you shoot to wound/kill, nor of how well you're trained in shooting, but rather how disciplined garda gun-use is, and what the rules and regulations concerning that usage are.

    Training and intent factor into it, sure, but so do a number of other things.

    jc


  • #18
    loz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 667 ✭✭✭loz


    irish1 wrote:
    Don't want to drag this off topic but I think the Gardai did shoot to kill in Abbeylara, they could hav disarmed him by shooting to the shoulder or legs but instead they just opened fire randomly and from I can remember the fatal bullet was fired as he was falling.

    Do you know what happens when you sever an artery ?- often found in arms and legs you knob


  • #19
    bonkey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    irish1 wrote:
    Don't want to drag this off topic but I think the Gardai did shoot to kill in Abbeylara, they could hav disarmed him by shooting to the shoulder or legs but instead they just opened fire randomly and from I can remember the fatal bullet was fired as he was falling.

    Firstly...shooting randomly isn't shooting to kill. Its shooting randomly.

    Secondly, if someone points a gun at you and refuses to drop it and you decide to fire, you fire to ensure they cannot shoot you. The notion that you can safely do this with a shot to the hand/arm/shoulder/ etc. is - as far as I'm aware - Hollywoodism at its best. You shoot to put the person out of action. Again - from what I know - that means chest or head, typically with at a double- or triple-tap.

    Anything less and you're simply giving the target a reason to shoot back, and an opportunity to do so. In that situation, you'd be better off not firing at all.

    jc


  • #20
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Like someone has already said shooting to wound someone is Hollywood nonsense, the police are trained (and should be trained) to shoot to take the person down (completely disable them) while minimising the chance they will miss or leave the person with the ability to fire back. That normally means a shot to the upper chest as it is the easiest area to hit while also causing the person a massive shock to the system rendering them disabled. Ufortunately for the person getting shot, it is going to be very very life threatening

    The idea that the Guards should shoot at the sholders or arms (or legs) is movie nonsense because it greatly increases the chances that the fire arms officer will miss the target or that the perp will not be disabled and will start blasting back at the officer.

    The simple fact of the matter is that guns are letal weapons, when used correctly they kill people. The debate of whether the Gardi should use non-letal weapons is for another thread, but it is not pratical or a good idea to try and train police to use guns in a non-letal manner.

    With reguard to Abbeylara the last theory I heard was the man turned towards the crowd gathered with the gun because he knew the Gardi would shoot him when there was a possibility he threatened others. He committed sucide by what is known as "death by cop" (forcing a police officer to shoot you on purpose)


  • #21
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    loz wrote:
    Do you know what happens when you sever an artery ?- often found in arms and legs you knob

    Take a weeks break for that


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    Villain
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,951 ✭✭✭✭Villain


    I think some of the so-called experts at the tribunal stated it is possible to disarm someone using a firearm without killing them, especially if they a professionally trained unit like the ERU are meant to be. Also another expert said dogs have been used to disarm people successfully in simalar circumstances, remember he had a shotgun nor a machine gun, the ERU would have to have gotten pretty close to sustain serious injury.

    Oh and LOZ spare me the insults.


  • #23
    Beruthiel
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 42,362 Mod ✭✭✭✭Beruthiel


    jman0 wrote:
    So... i guess the consensus is: Bring on the Death Penalty and Let our Gards Be Judge and Jury!

    nobody said that
    however
    if you get up in the morning, pick up your gun and head off to a post office with the sole intention of robbing it, then you deserve whatever happens en route
    I for one, won't shed any tears


  • #24
    Ratchet
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,175 ✭✭✭Ratchet


    CJhaughey wrote:
    ....
    That is not responsible firearm use to me.
    .......

    which use of the gun is responsible? maybe shooting clay pigeons


    unfortunately, guns have only one purpose, there is not much choices when guns are involved and it is not a video game

    the aim always will be to keep casualties low.

    put yourself in position where:

    you "shoot to wound" then injured guy kills your team mate with shot, which should really get you.

    Or

    you put him down with first shot ,so he will not have that previous option.

    Yes, the best option will be that he gets wounded is unable to move, gives up and doesn't see the light for next 20 years



    Unfortunately, there is no right option as use of arms is wrong in the first place and when bullets start flying , rulez go to the bin.


  • #25
    tim3115
    Closed Accounts Posts: 334 ✭✭tim3115


    At last, the Gardaí show some action towards this scum. Pity the entire force is a shambles. Should have shot the 5 of them.


  • #26
    Boggle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 964 ✭✭✭Boggle


    Haven't heard enough about the post office robbery but from initial reports I would support the gardai in this instance. I too would have questions about their levels of discipline with firearms - apparently when they ar eat the shooting range they reckon they are cowboys, running around with the guns held up beside their heads like in the westerns. That being said, the raiders were perfectly willing to shoot the police and so deserved whatever happened.

    Abbylara is another mattre completely and I still do not believe that they had no choice but to gun the man down. I think the situation was just poorly handled from start to finish and stank of poor levels of training and lack of intelligence by those in command.


  • #27
    gandalf
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    LOL I love how the Chuckie brigade are all up in arms because the Gardai carried out their duty. I suppose the correct method should be point blank in the back of the head.

    The Gardai did their job, these guys opened up first and had to be stopped. The "oh the should have shot to maim arguements are fantasy of the highest order" as alot of others have said already you shoot to put the criminal down and make sure they do not have a chance to shot you or any innocent bystanders.


  • #28
    A Dub in Glasgo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,286 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    The chuckie brigade? Is that not a bit of a petty baitng?

    Anyway, 2 down 3 to go


  • #29
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    A Dub in Glasgo wrote:
    Anyway, 2 down 3 to go

    Dub, if you are referring to the two that were killed and that 3 more to go...
    Thats nonsense talk and well you should know it.
    You hardly expect the Gardaí not to fire in these circumstances, it could easily have been a case of a garda dead or a postmistress,I doubt the robbers going on past experiences would care.

    The robbers were bested in this situation, its a pity they died but then those that loveth the danger shall perish therein as my mom always says and aiming your gun at armed Gardaí is certainly a dangerous thing to do.


  • #30
    A Dub in Glasgo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,286 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    You misunderstand.... I would prefer to have seen the whole gang point their guns so that they could be eliminated


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    gandalf
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    What community policing style eh :rolleyes:


  • #32
    Sleipnir
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,513 ✭✭✭Sleipnir


    You don't "shoot to kill" or "shoot to incapacitate", you just SHOOT!
    If you shoot with the intention of only injuring someone in the leg or arm then chances are you'll miss no matter how many times you pull the trigger.

    If one of the Garda involved was shot and killed because he hesitated, knowing that he'd be accused of shooting to kill, what would we be saying now?

    "They let the thieves away with it"
    "They musn't be very well trained"

    Their damned if they do and damned if they don't.


  • #33
    sceptre
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    A Dub in Glasgo wrote:
    You misunderstand.... I would prefer to have seen the whole gang point their guns so that they could be eliminated
    I'd have preferred to have seen none of the gang point their guns so that none of them had to have been eliminated as opposed to arrested but perhaps that's just me.


  • #34
    ambro25
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,994 ✭✭✭ambro25


    Having been trained for years in firearms handling (hunting) and once accidentally involved in a 'real' firefight (shot at with .22LR, accidentally replied with 8x57 Mauser instead of 12-bore :o ) - I actually find pros and cons to both sides of this debate... and though I certainly don't profess to have as much training and/or conditioning and/or professionalism as the G-Men in question, I'd testify to a few true things being that, when you're being shot at, (i) everything goes to sh*t (ii) you *might* have enough reflex/fast enough neurones to differentiate shoot-to-kill / shoot-somewhere-where-they-are, and (iii) everything (read: the handling, the outcome) depends on the situation at hand, which can be examined with 20/20 hindsight to your heart's content but will forever remain a done thing that can't be undone. Shooting-to-maim is wholly and absolutely unrealistic (since you don't know how a bullet will travel inside a body - it depends on a whole bunch of factors, including randomness), and particularly so when firearms are involved on both sides.

    I'm siding 110% with the guys in blue on this one, given that it was (probably, havent' heard much details about this) at very-close-quarters and there was (manifestly) intent to maim/kill from the perps. Any other consideration, unless you are actually either a Gardai, a Judge or an MP, is IMHO absolutely irrelevant.

    My two cents :)


  • #35
    Trotter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,362 ✭✭✭Trotter


    jman0 wrote:
    So... i guess the consensus is: Bring on the Death Penalty and Let our Gards Be Judge and Jury!

    /sarcasm


    Have you been effected by the scourge of drug dealers selling drugs to children in your neighbourhood, having 12 year olds being given free heroin to get them hooked early..

    Or.. Have you ever been in a post office when these people run in with sawn off shotguns (Not sure what guns todays fellas had) which are designed to cause maximum damage on impact, and POINT them at people collecting their pensions?

    Or... Maybe had a syringe pointed at you by a crazed junkie threatening to give you aids unless you empty your wallet? (You might find that fellas that rob post offices tend to dabble in supplying these drug dealers..knowing full well where the money for the stuff comes from)..

    I havent had any of these things happen to me.. And ya know what.. If I did.. I wouldnt have AN OUNCE of sympathy for the people that did it to me.

    Maybe the Gardai spend too much time looking at the effects of these people on communities to have too much sympathy either. If someone walks into my living room with a balaclava and a weapon and screams for money, would I ask him whether he is sure of what he's doing?

    Theres too many do gooders in this country. You choose to be an armed robber, live with the consequences. Its about time the good decent people of this country got back in control. If it takes the Gardai shooting first at a fella pointing a gun and wearing a mask.. so be it.


  • #36
    Rew
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 8,679 Mod ✭✭✭✭Rew


    I know is been said a few times but ther eis no such thing as shoot to wound.

    At Abbylara as sombody said the shooting its self was not the problem, in fact the cops didnt shoot early enough going by the rules they use in those situations. The events leading up to it were a problem. As i recall he was shot in the legs and the fatal shot actully travled from his legs up in to his torso killing him. As sombody else said there are major arterys in the arms and legs including the shoulder.

    The cops are left with little choice when faced with armed criminals they have to consider worst case and act accordingly. If they didnt meet an armed threat in such a way the criminals would think that using guns will get them what ever they want.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    whiskeyman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,564 ✭✭✭✭whiskeyman


    The robbers sealed their fate with the decision to arm themselves with guns.
    Using other weapons - knives etc... lead to a different method of attack should it be required, and it is only for very close quarter combat.
    With the presence of guns, armed perps have to be neutralised if they refused to surrender. Shoot to wound should be out of the question. It's shoot to neutralise - they have to be taken out. A wounded perp could still discharge a firearm on the ground.
    I presume the Gardí have to first notify their presence "drop your weapons" before they deem it essential fire?


  • #38
    sceptre
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    whiskeyman wrote:
    I presume the Gardí have to first notify their presence "drop your weapons" before they deem it essential fire?
    Regardless of whether they have to or not, according to the RTE report in this case they did.


  • #39
    Trotter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,362 ✭✭✭Trotter


    whiskeyman wrote:
    I presume the Gardí have to first notify their presence "drop your weapons" before they deem it essential fire?

    Yep.. I expect each Garda would have roared "drop it" or "drop your weapons" clearing them to shoot if needs be.

    In this case that warning was ignored. If Im holding a 6 week old puppy and 12 armed gardai tell me to drop it.. I will... never mind a weapon!! Why?? I know what to expect if I dont.

    About time there was a bit of a risk involved in robbing a post office. As that American Sheriff said on Today FM last week.. we are too engrossed in rehabilitation of career criminals.. lets get back to punishment..or words to that effect.


  • #40
    happygoose
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 703 ✭✭✭happygoose


    The ERU are as highly trained as other other equivalent policing force in the world. They had a job to do and they did it this morning. It is unfortunate that the consequence is that two lives have been lost and a poor garda(í) conscience will be wrath forever with memories of today, even though they were just carrying out their job.

    The first few messages on this thread were utter bull, from far left and far right. "Shoot to kill", what a load of far removed kak. Abbeylara and Abbeyleix too, diffferent cases/circumstance should be treated individually. Similarly,b'**** on the other side of the spectrum, you can't take out five criminals with shots to the head.

    I'm glad to hear, through various reports today, that the vast majority of people are behind the Gardaí and what happened this morning.


  • #41
    Rew
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 8,679 Mod ✭✭✭✭Rew


    They have a procedure they have to follow or they will be done for murder same as anyone else. Part of it requires them to issue a warning (within reason).


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    whiskeyman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,564 ✭✭✭✭whiskeyman


    sceptre wrote:
    Regardless of whether they have to or not, according to the RTE report in this case they did.
    Well, in that case. I think it's a job very well done for the Gardaí.
    They had no fatalities their side and protected the public.
    They put their own lives at risk to face the scum of society and prevailed.
    This will hurt the mentality of the criminal underworld - easy targets are going out of fashion and we're taking you on.


  • #43
    shltter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,841 ✭✭✭shltter


    I would not jump to conclusions that the Gardai were right or wrong the story we have heard this morning is the Gardas side of the story

    listening to joe duffy

    apparently the raiders did not fire first
    only one of them was armed
    the gardai were aware of the robbery in advance

    it put a slightly different complexion on events that is not to say the Gardai were not justified in their actions but the fact that a story was spun this morning that gardai returned fire makes me wonder why lie about it


    it is sad to see people rejoicing in the death of anyone


  • #44
    Trotter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,362 ✭✭✭Trotter


    Think of it this way.. I heard before it costs €70000 a year to house a prisoner.. Thats 3 school busses with seatbelts. (Second hand obviously!)


  • #45
    ambro25
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,994 ✭✭✭ambro25


    @shltter

    Whether they 'returned' fire or not, is irrelevant, really. The real issue, IMO, would therefore appear to be whether the perps were given a chance to drop their weapon(s) or not. If they were and chose not to cooperate, well... I know what I did (well, shot back after requesting the other guy to 'stop shooting'), and what Gardai seemingly and rightfully did too, i.e. not wait to be shot at first and possibly maimed/killed. What would you have done? :rolleyes:


  • #46
    shltter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,841 ✭✭✭shltter


    whiskeyman wrote:
    Well, in that case. I think it's a job very well done for the Gardaí.
    They had no fatalities their side and protected the public.
    They put their own lives at risk to face the scum of society and prevailed.
    This will hurt the mentality of the criminal underworld - easy targets are going out of fashion and we're taking you on.



    I dont know about protecting the public apparently a woman and her three year old child live in a flat above the Post office

    the first they were aware of this was when they heard the shouting and shots if public safety had been the gardas first concern surely removing that woman and child last night would have been the way to go


    Surely a job very well done would have been 5 people arrested


  • #47
    dream brother
    Registered Users Posts: 405 ✭✭dream brother


    Put youself in the cops shoes, if there is a chance you could died doing your job and the only way out is to shoot the robber, then what option do you have. After all they're here to protect people from criminals, yet there's every chance that they could be shot at and wounded or worse!


  • #48
    ambro25
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,994 ✭✭✭ambro25


    shltter wrote:
    Surely a job very well done would have been 5 people arrested

    True and good, but how do you propose to do that when the perps have one or several weapons and are not (allegedly) in a disposition to surrender?


  • #49
    MrPudding
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    shltter wrote:
    Surely a job very well done would have been 5 people arrested

    How do you arrest an armed man that is determined not to be arrested?

    MrP


  • #50
    Trotter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,362 ✭✭✭Trotter


    shltter wrote:
    it is sad to see people rejoicing in the death of anyone


    Nobody is rejoicing... But the reality is.. these guys pulled weapons out with the intention of using them.

    I feel much safer knowing the Gardai have a way of finding out these things are about to happen and are prepared to deal with it in the way they did.

    Any loss of life is a bad thing, Im thinking about how many drains would have been dug over the next 10 years by 5 fellas as opposed to just 3. Pity they wont be made to work, just drink tea and watch TV in cells.

    You use a gun in a post office, you know the consequences. Im so tired of the anti-garda sentiment when things like this happen. Non lethal weapons should be available to detain armed robbers.. IF the robbers are using crowbars. If they're using guns.. they need to deal with the results.

    No innocent civilians hurt (physically anyway), no Gardai injured, 5 armed robbers unable to do the same next week. That will be seen as a decent result.


  • #51
    Quantum
    Closed Accounts Posts: 240 ✭✭Quantum


    CJhaughey wrote:
    Seems that with the recent killings in Lusk of two robbers, the guards are shooting to kill not wound.
    I seem to remember the guards also killing some of their own in Abbeyleix a few years back, Are they adequately trained or trigger happy?
    The Gardai have specific rules on situations where weapons should be fired. These are rigorous and well justified.

    I don't believe Gardais should EVER shoot to wound. If the targets of their gunfire are, or are perceived to be, a danger to the public, or to the Gardai themselves, then they should be shooting to kill in as few shots as possible.


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement