'less-lethal' weapons conference

http://www.breakingnews.ie/2004/10/19/story171754.html

Peace activists to protest at ‘less-lethal’ weapons conference
19/10/2004 - 08:28:51

Peace activists are due to mount a protest later today outside a “less-lethal” weapons conference being held at the Berkeley Court Hotel in the Ballsbridge area of Dublin.

The two-day conference is designed to showcase new technology and weapons like electronic stun guns and firearms that discharge bean bags instead of bullets.

The protestors have claimed that such weapons are frequently used as tools of torture and studies have shown that they have caused several deaths.

Green Party TD John Gormley has also expressed concern at the fact that members of the Gardaí are set to appear as speakers at the conference.

He said the Gardaí had no need for such “less-lethal” weapons and their introduction would only serve to intimidate members of the public from attending protests and demonstrations.

http://breaking.tcm.ie/2004/10/08/story170117.html

The Labour mayors of Dublin's four local authorities are voicing opposition to a weapons conference that is due to be held in the capital later this month.

Dublin City Lord Mayor Michael Conaghan has said that the less-lethal weapons conference is not welcome here.

He said that many of the weapons expected to be on display at the conference can inflict horrific damage or even kill.

Am I the only one that see's these people over-reacting? Indymedia is calling again for people to march (and bring whistles :rolleyes: ).

I've read a bit about this and it seems that the main problem these groups have is that many of the products that will be discussed/showcased can be used in torture, and may cause fatalities.

The problem I have with this, is that we're calling out that the Gardai are not being efficient enough. That they're too violent in breaking up crowds etc etc etc. And Yet, when they consider particapating in a conference that relates to non-lethal pacification of violent fringes, more protests are organised.

Is it the aspect of the items being reviewed at the conference thats the issue, or is it that our Sinn Fein/Labour politicians and Peace party groups
just don't trust the Gardai with such equipment?

I for one, support such involvement. I'd like to see the Gardai equipped, and having the modern "know-how" of modern non-lethal pacification techniques/equipment.

Perhaps I'm way wrong here, and the the people opposing the conference have valid reasons. I just don't understand what the problem is.

Nuttzz

Maybe if the cops had these types of weapons at abbeylara John Carthy might still be alive?

But they only had weapons whose primary goal is to kill and look what happened, it they prevent something like abbeylara happening again then I would be for them

tribble

On the one hand I can see the many advantages these weapons have over their more lethal alternatives.

However, I do have difficulty in seeing real instances on Irish society where
these weapons would be of use.

These weapons are only of any use against UNARMED opponents.
You aren't going to be firing a high velocity bean bag at a criminal with a assault rifle.

How many of our protests turn violent? (no, police brutality doesn't count).
How often are the guards mugged in the street?

Sure, the Guards have a dangerous job, but arming themselves will only engender fear in the general public and preparedness in criminals who will not forgiving in THEIR choice of, what they will see as a defensive weapon.

As always, I'm open to persuasion...

tribble

gandalf

TBH I think these protestors could spend their time better and save more lives protesting the pathetic shape of the health service!!!

Thing is. We trust detectives to have access to firearms. How is allowing attendence to this conference, or having these equipment any different? Do these groups really distrust our police force that much?

Xterminator

tribble wrote:

On the one hand I can see the many advantages these weapons have over their more lethal alternatives.

However, I do have difficulty in seeing real instances on Irish society where
these weapons would be of use.

These weapons are only of any use against UNARMED opponents.
You aren't going to be firing a high velocity bean bag at a criminal with a assault rifle.

How many of our protests turn violent? (no, police brutality doesn't count).
How often are the guards mugged in the street?

Sure, the Guards have a dangerous job, but arming themselves will only engender fear in the general public and preparedness in criminals who will not forgiving in THEIR choice of, what they will see as a defensive weapon.

As always, I'm open to persuasion...

tribble

Well i would say their are cetain areas of Dublin where the guards&fire brigade and other officers of the law, are attacked on a regular basis, often by stone throwing thugs, against whom these non-lethal weapons would be ideal.

For example certain areas around Tallaght, Darndale, Ballymun, and Limerick, and some traveller sites etc, are places where such 'public order' offenses happen when the guards try carying out their duties, like trying to arrest a youth in a group.

Only today the litany of weapons found in a traveller site in Dunsink ( such as petrol bomb making equipment, a harpoon gun etc) makes scary reading in an area where public disorder has been in the news recently.

X

Sparks

Nuttzz wrote:

Maybe if the cops had these types of weapons at abbeylara John Carthy might still be alive?

Nope. Once McCarthy walked out that door with a loaded shotgun, he was dead and there wasn't much that could be done about it. The time to prevent abbylara was much, much earlier - when he had his shotgun taken off him a year earlier for waving it at people, to be exact.

magpie

Sinn Fein/Labour politicians

It's a little disingenuous to group these people together don't you think? SF are the political wing of the IRA, The Labour Party is Ireland's oldest political party with a long and distinguished history in this country.

I have a problem with the concept of 'less lethal' weapons, and their name gives us the clue. They're not 'non-lethal' weapons and they can potentially cause fatalities. Please remember that the notorious 'truncheon rounds' or 'rubber bullets' as used in NI are classed in this category.

I would be concerned that security forces would be less likely to use restraint in deploying these weapons, on the grounds that they are 'less lethal', but the question remains would you like to have a beanbag fired at you at 300mph if you were exercising your right to protest? Weapons are and should be seen as, lethal. If the Gardai stick to using firearms and only in extremis it will be a lot safer for everyone than if they are handed stun-guns, netguns, and God-knows what else to deploy as they see fit.

The movement in this country towards the outright suppression of the right to protest is something that we all, regardless of our political views, should be wary of. The recent May Day demonstrations that never really happened are a case in point. The security forces (i.e. the government) made it known that they would be out in force, and that it would be potentially dangerous to be on the streets, in order to try and dissuade ordinary members of the public from protesting. It should also be noted that water cannon were borrowed from the PSNI, and brought down to Phoenix Park under cover of night from Belfast.an Surely the irony of the Gardai wanting to use Northern Irish Security Forces' water cannons on citizens of the Republic canot escape anyone.

Quis costodiet quies custodies?, as a wise old roman dude once said.

dictatorcat

I've read a bit about this and it seems that the main problem these groups have is that many of the products that will be discussed/showcased can be used in torture, and may cause fatalities.

From a recent email from the labour party:

Speakers at this conference include Tom Smith, President of Taser International and according to Amnesty International some Governments have used tasers for torture and to extract confessions from political prisoners. Andy Mazarra, the head of the Applied Research Unit, which runs the Pentagon's 'less lethal programme' is another guest speaker. The Pentagon programme conducted experiments of 'psycho pharmaceutical' devices to control prisoners, a technique which has been employed extensively in Iraq and Afghanistan by the US.

Is it the aspect of the items being reviewed at the conference thats the issue, or is it that our Sinn Fein/Labour politicians and Peace party groups
just don't trust the Gardai with such equipment?

Do not lump Labour in with the Shinners please. When labour protests it's because they care about the issues, unlike some groups I could mention who seem to like the publicity.

Hydrosylator

Given that the gardaí couldn't resist from playing with their new toy, the water cannon, on non-violent protestors last mayday, I certainly don't think that potentially lethal weapons should be allowed into their over-eager hands.

As it stands the gardaí either have lethal weapons, or they don't, and any fuzzing of that distinction could be dangerous. Certainly, a baton can easily be lethal, but it's very easy to gauge the velocity and trajectory of a piece of wood held in the hand. Beanbag rounds, on the other hand, can cause irreversible injury or death if they hit you in the head or in most of the torso, and there is no way to vary how hard they hit somebody, short of opening up the shells and removing some gunpowder.

These weapons simply aren't versatile enough for a force whose strongest point is their use of discretion in dealing with people.

Do not lump Labour in with the Shinners please. When labour protests it's because they care about the issues, unlike some groups I could mention who seem to like the publicity.

When they're opposing the same conference, I will. On other issues, I certainly wouldn't.

Given that the gardaí couldn't resist from playing with their new toy, the water cannon, on non-violent protestors last mayday, I certainly don't think that potentially lethal weapons should be allowed into their over-eager hands.

Given that there were certain elements at the mayday march that did involve themselves in violent actions, don't you think the use of more selective non-lethal responses for the Gardai to use would be better? I agree a watercannon is too widespread a tool to use.

Speakers at this conference include Tom Smith, President of Taser International and according to Amnesty International some Governments have used tasers for torture and to extract confessions from political prisoners.

some governments

Yes. But we're talking about our government. Not a government that has to my knowledge ever been charged with human rights issues or any such crime.

The Pentagon programme conducted experiments of 'psycho pharmaceutical' devices to control prisoners, a technique which has been employed extensively in Iraq and Afghanistan by the US.

So what? Just because the Gardai are going to be at the conference doesn't mean that they're going to apply those methods.

The opposition to this conference seems to stem from people who oppose the Gardai being there or participating. I trust our government (somewhat, but enough) that they won't start using techniques that are that controversional, or dangerous.

dictatorcat

Deleted User wrote:

The opposition to this conference seems to stem from people who oppose the Gardai being there or participating. I trust our government (somewhat, but enough) that they won't start using techniques that are that controversional, or dangerous.

I have no qualms as to who participates, it's up to the gardai to decide whether or not to attend and it's still a freeish country anyway, and like you i see no reason to fear the government on this issue.

That said, this conference is being organised for the venders of "less lethal" weapons and they don't care who buys their goods and for what purpose. Not all police forces and governments are as benign as ours. We as a generally peaceful nation should not be facilating those who aid people/governments who see no qualms in doing harm to others.

That said, this conference is being organised for the venders of "less lethal" weapons and they don't care who buys their goods and for what purpose. Not all police forces and governments are as benign as ours. We as a generally peaceful nation should not be facilating those who aid people/governments who see no qualms in doing harm to others.

I agree but I don't think it can regulated that well. Any conference that is applied to Police forces or the military can be used by other people to cause harm. Its the nature of the business, that its quite easy to turn it around to cause crime or violence. However, preventing such conferences only makes us (the Irish forces) less capable to combat imported violence, or in fact, less capable of dealing with a changing world.

dictatorcat

Deleted User wrote:

I agree but I don't think it can regulated that well. Any conference that is applied to Police forces or the military can be used by other people to cause harm. Its the nature of the business, that its quite easy to turn it around to cause crime or violence. However, preventing such conferences only makes us (the Irish forces) less capable to combat imported violence, or in fact, less capable of dealing with a changing world.

There's nothing stopping represintives of our forces from attending these confrences abroad, in countries where the culture allows for such things. Misuse may be a by-product of the industry but it does not justify the abuses by the industry (testing on prisoners etc.).

As for not hosting the confrence making us less capable to combat voilance i have to disagree, the nature of modern violance is generally unprovoked attacks, or in the case of organised crime gun violance. A criminal is not going to use a taser when a gun is more readily available and cheeper. Hence we have the garda special branch. The only uses for less lethal weapons over guns are personal use, torture and crowd control.

The implications of less lethal weapons on crowd control is another thorny issue. I would go as far as allowing water cannons, but rubber bullets, gas and tasers have all proven themselves far from less lethal!

sovtek

I would be hesitant to introduce these weapons in Ireland (if they aren't already). I just think that they have often overreacted to protestors in general and these weapons lend themselves to being used more frequently because of their "less lethal" status.
I'm reminded of the tree huggers that had mace rubbed on their eyelids in America a few years back. As well I've read about deaths from bean bags and stun guns.

There's nothing stopping represintives of our forces from attending these confrences abroad, in countries where the culture allows for such things. Misuse may be a by-product of the industry but it does not justify the abuses by the industry (testing on prisoners etc.).

To be honest I prefer that its on here. It marks Ireland as being a country that isn't afraid to host such events, because of some bad publicity. Also I'd prefer that the conference be hosted in Ireland, rather than say..... China where extreme techniques/equipment would be more allowable.

The abuses aspect is a different matter. Thats an internal implication of the companies that produce the equipment. A bit like normal consumer products that have been tested on animals.

A criminal is not going to use a taser when a gun is more readily available and cheeper.

Lol. This conference is for the Gardai to attend, and participate. Not our Irish crinimals. The issue is the usage of said equipment by our Gardai. Not that crinimals will use them.

The only uses for less lethal weapons over guns are personal use, torture and crowd control.

Personal use. Not applicable. They're essentially illegal under Irish law as far as I know.
Torture. Whoa! where did this come from? How does that relate to the Irish Government, the Gardai, or any of the Irish body's that will attend the conference?
Crowd control. Something this country needs to learn how to do properly. The Mayday highlighted the almost amateurist approach, and a water cannon was not the best thing to use. This conference, would give the Gardai access to something specific.

I would go as far as allowing water cannons, but rubber bullets, gas and tasers have all proven themselves far from less lethal!

Fair enough. But from what I've heard, the Gardai aren't going to this conference, to buy a shipment of rubber bullets or Gas. They're participating on an info level, and anything that expands their knowledge in Pacification, is all to the good.

bonkey

dictatorcat wrote:

I would go as far as allowing water cannons, but rubber bullets, gas and tasers have all proven themselves far from less lethal!

So you're saying that you see no difference in equipping the police with these items as opposed to real sidearms, SMGs and assault-rifles???

Because thats the implication....you're saying that these alternatives are not less lethal than firearms....

Personally, I think you're somewhat off the mark there. Given a choice, I'd much rather have cops fire into a crowd with rubber bullets than with conventional ones. Sure, if the cops are out to kill people and call it crowd control, either weapon will probably do the job, but if - shock horror - they're actually trying to do crowd-control and call it crowd-control, then I'd imagine that there would be a significant difference in lethality.

Or maybe we should just insist that no police carry any weapons. Ever. And no unarmed-combat training either...they could use that to kill people too.

Hey...I know...lets just ban the police from actual policing. That way they'll never abuse their positions or the toys that they get in order to do their jobs.

jc

dictatorcat

It's easy to pick apart my arguement when you pull lines out of context and throw them back at me!

bonkey wrote:

So you're saying that you see no difference in equipping the police with these items as opposed to real sidearms, SMGs and assault-rifles???

Because thats the implication....you're saying that these alternatives are not less lethal than firearms....

The police are already equipt with firearms, they're called the special branch. To equip them with less lethal weapons instead of firearms would be foolish as the criminal element have access to lethal weapons and to ask the police force to combat this with anything that puts them at greater risk of fatality would be irresponsable. Before you say anything, I know our police force is largely unarmed but the unarmed guard on the street does not have to deal gun related crime directly.

Personally, I think you're somewhat off the mark there. Given a choice, I'd much rather have cops fire into a crowd with rubber bullets than with conventional ones. Sure, if the cops are out to kill people and call it crowd control, either weapon will probably do the job, but if - shock horror - they're actually trying to do crowd-control and call it crowd-control, then I'd imagine that there would be a significant difference in lethality.

If you recall, certain members of the force got by quite well with batons several years ago! Our police do not use rubber bullets for crowd control, thankfully they do not fire into a crowd with anything. You control a crowd with barracades and peaceful means, to do otherwise can and often does, incent voilance and lead to a distrust of the police force later on, look at the RUC (when it was still known as that). Guardai means "guardians of the peace".

Or maybe we should just insist that no police carry any weapons. Ever. And no unarmed-combat training either...they could use that to kill people too.

Now you're just being silly.

Hey...I know...lets just ban the police from actual policing. That way they'll never abuse their positions or the toys that they get in order to do their jobs.

If you had read my earlier posts you would have seen that i have no qualms with the Irish police force. Unfortunately not all countries can say the same! The vendors at this confrence do not just supply police forces in stable countries, hence the need to protest.


I believe this post pretty much addresses Klas' arguements also.

To equip them with less lethal weapons instead of firearms would be foolish as the criminal element have access to lethal weapons and to ask the police force to combat this with anything that puts them at greater risk of fatality would be irresponsable.

You're missing the point. We're not talking (At least I'm not) abt removing the firearms element from the Special Branch. I'm saying that non-lethal equipment could be applied to the General purpose Gardai. The ones that walk the streets.

Before you say anything, I know our police force is largely unarmed but the unarmed guard on the street does not have to deal gun related crime directly.

Thats crap. They're more likely to come into contact with people with guns initially, and at that stage the Special Branch is called in. The only times that the general Gardai wouldn't be exposed would be on an operation like a "sting" or such. Not all interactions are planned.

The allowance of non-lethal equipment like tasers would help for Solo Gardai, dealing with groups of people (after clubs, hooligans etc). It would also allow Gardai to be not-so-vulnerable against sword/bill-hook carrying travellers.

You control a crowd with barracades and peaceful means, to do otherwise can and often does, incent voilance and lead to a distrust of the police force later on, look at the RUC (when it was still known as that).

Sure. Against a peaceful crowd. But when a crowd comes prepared to deal out violence, more forceful means need to be used. Tear gas etc. If a protest included individuals throwing molotov cocktails or carrying other weapons. You can only really control a crowd using barricades and other peaceful means, if the crowd is willing to remain inside the law. If they break those boundaries through violence, more is required to break them up.

As for the distrust, we've seen that anytime that the Gardai have had to move against a protest, distrust has been generated, whether its been merited or not.

If you had read my earlier posts you would have seen that i have no qualms with the Irish police force. Unfortunately not all countries can say the same!

true enough. But this thread is abt the Irish involvement, not usage by Chinese security forces or such.

The vendors at this confrence do not just supply police forces in stable countries, hence the need to protest.

So protest against the conference, or the items/methods being displayed. Not abt the Gardai involvement, which seemed at least to me to be the focus of most the groups complaints.

Lemming

Deleted User wrote:

You're missing the point. We're not talking (At least I'm not) abt removing the firearms element from the Special Branch. I'm saying that non-lethal equipment could be applied to the General purpose Gardai. The ones that walk the streets.

And if you look at such places like the US, the first thing a cop is most likely to do in an encounter is pull their weapon and point it at you before they say a thing. Giving the rank-and-file "less-lethal" weapons as standard fare is not a good idea. They'll simply just use them. They don't exactly have a good track-record in this respect now do they?

"yer man there is acting the b*llocks*. I'll a) tell him to cop on and p*ss off home or get arrested, or b) I'll just tazer him and drag him down the copshop without saying anything to him to stop"

I can see that situation quite clearly. I've encountered more than my fair share of gardai in a really bad mood and being verbally abusive and agressive to boot. Quite simply, I don't trust the gardai *not* to use any "less-lethal" weapons they get their hands on. They're not "non-lethal". They're "less-lethal", but I doubt many gardai will pick up on that subtle distinction.

The allowance of non-lethal equipment like tasers would help for Solo Gardai, dealing with groups of people (after clubs, hooligans etc). It would also allow Gardai to be not-so-vulnerable against sword/bill-hook carrying travellers.

Tazers fire two prongs into you, and send a voltage down the connected wire bits. The prongs lodge themselves. They'll even break the skin (which adds the spectre of transmission of virii like HIV and the Hepatitus strains). If you have a group to contend with, a tazer isn't going to help. Not one bit. You'll get one of them before the rest cop on that you've just left yourself wide open to attack since the prongs need to be dislodged, and probably just pissed them off to by stunning one of their mates

civdef

Lemming wrote:

And if you look at such places like the US, the first thing a cop is most likely to do in an encounter is pull their weapon and point it at you before they say a thing. Giving the rank-and-file "less-lethal" weapons as standard fare is not a good idea. They'll simply just use them. They don't exactly have a good track-record in this respect now do they?

Is this based on real-world experience or from watching too much TV? My money is on the latter somehow.

People don't seem to realise that by and large, less-lethal weapons are less harmful to the recipient than a smack of a baton, for example. CS / pepper spray wears off after about 10 minutes, and generally leaves no after effects, unlike bruising / fractures which can result from baton strikes. Taser is similar. On training courses, police officers routinely get to experience receiving CS or Taser on themselves, in order to appreciate the effects. Can't imagine them doing that if they were risking injury or death.

On the UK police use of force chart, for example CS is used before resorting to the baton, because of the reduced risk of causing serious injury.

Less-lethal weapons save lives. The give officers another choice between the extremes of going hand to hand or firearms. Tasers and bean-bag rounds have been used in cases where offenders (in many cases mentally impaired) would otherwise have been shot - examples of this are typically where knives or swords are involved.

People keep banging on about how little they trust the Gardai and how incompetent they are and how they will use any new weapons on peaceful protestors. They might do worse to reflect on the fact that a large number of Gardai carry handguns and sub-machine guns, yet somehow have managed to avoid massacring protestors with them.

Lemming

civdef wrote:

People don't seem to realise that by and large, less-lethal weapons are less harmful to the recipient than a smack of a baton, for example. CS / pepper spray wears off after about 10 minutes, and generally leaves no after effects, unlike bruising / fractures which can result from baton strikes. Taser is similar. On training courses, police officers routinely get to experience receiving CS or Taser on themselves, in order to appreciate the effects. Can't imagine them doing that if they were risking injury or death.

On the UK police use of force chart, for example CS is used before resorting to the baton, because of the reduced risk of causing serious injury.

I don't have a problem with CS/Pepper spray. I have a problem with the more .... physical ... weapons. How do you think people would react if the Gardai deployed plastic bullets? Given the notoriety that arouse from their use in N.Ireland

People keep banging on about how little they trust the Gardai and how incompetent they are and how they will use any new weapons on peaceful protestors. They might do worse to reflect on the fact that a large number of Gardai carry handguns and sub-machine guns, yet somehow have managed to avoid massacring protestors with them.

People keep banging on about it because the Gardai DON'T have a good track record with the use of weapons and/or suppresion.

And a large number of Gardai don't carry hand guns. It's quite a small number., comprising the Special Branch and the the likes of the Rapid Response Unit. Detectives have *access* but not carte-blanche.

civdef

CS pepper spray is no use for people with knives for example, you need to be within 5 metres of the target, which is too close for safety to someone with a knife, so you need the extra reach of a taser or bean-bags.

There are around 1600 Garda authorised to carry firearms - hardly a small number. It's a higher proportion of firearms qualified officers to non qualified than you'd find in most UK forces for example (bar the PSNI, MDP & UKAEAC - which are fully armed).

Are you able to give some examples of this poor garda track record with weapons you alledge? Or is this like your opinion of police firearms use in the US?

Lemming

civdef wrote:

CS pepper spray is no use for people with knives for example, you need to be within 5 metres of the target, which is too close for safety to someone with a knife, so you need the extra reach of a taser or bean-bags.

Nightstick perhaps? Extendable Baton perhaps? don't forget that bean-bags are very similar to plastic bullets in their operation/effect

There are around 1600 Garda authorised to carry firearms - hardly a small number.

The obvious word there is "authorised". What you're proposing is to /equip/ a significantly higher percentage of the force with weapons that can kill if carelessly used. I realise a truncheon can kill - just like a spoon can kill - , but a bean-bag at close range is far less easy to call. Nor a tazer.

Are you able to give some examples of this poor garda track record with weapons you alledge? Or is this like your opinion of police firearms use in the US?

Examples? Oh, both of the May-Day "riots", countless smaller incidents involving brutality which have made the papers over the last few years, my personal experience with *some* gardai's attitude towards citizens. Even the Gardai's execution of the Landsdowne road riot was not above-board.

Did I actually comment on "use" of firearms inside the US? No - I commented on the mentality. Big difference.

civdef

Lemming wrote:

Nightstick perhaps? Extendable Baton perhaps? don't forget that bean-bags are very similar to plastic bullets in their operation/effect

You clearly don't understand or know much about either. Extendable batons have the same limitations as normal ones. Bean-bags work very differently to plastic bullets.

I realise a truncheon can kill - just like a spoon can kill - , but a bean-bag at close range is far less easy to call. Nor a tazer.

It is easier to call - both are significantly less likely to kill.

Examples? Oh, both of the May-Day "riots", countless smaller incidents involving brutality which have made the papers over the last few years, my personal experience with *some* gardai's attitude towards citizens. Even the Gardai's execution of the Landsdowne road riot was not above-board.

Mayday riots - apparently the courts don't agree with you on that.
You'll have to do better than quoting "countless" newspaper reports - url's maybe?
Your personal experience of bad Garda attitudes, whilst unfortunate is hardly relevant unless the bad attitude involved them inappropriately using weapons.
Landsdown Road - not relevant in a discussion of inproper police use of weapons on innocent people, considering the recipients of the force were far from innocent.

Did I actually comment on "use" of firearms inside the US? No - I commented on the mentality. Big difference.

You made an observation about the likelihood of a US police officer drawing their pistol - which I pointed out seemed to be based on an active TV watching career rather than any real knowledge.

And if you look at such places like the US, the first thing a cop is most likely to do in an encounter is pull their weapon and point it at you before they say a thing. Giving the rank-and-file "less-lethal" weapons as standard fare is not a good idea. They'll simply just use them. They don't exactly have a good track-record in this respect now do they?

And I keep saying that we're talking abt the Irish Police force, not any other country's. Pointing to US actions does not mean that Irish forces will act the same way.

As for the Gardai not having a good track record, it depends on how you look on it. I tend to view that "peaceful" protests in Ireland don't have a good track record at being peaceful, and the Gardai have been forced into acting. With the Gardai, there have been mistakes. Thats natural. But at the same time, the Gardai have acted in the past with the maturity and skill, that other more modern countries have.

I can see that situation quite clearly. I've encountered more than my fair share of gardai in a really bad mood and being verbally abusive and agressive to boot. Quite simply, I don't trust the gardai *not* to use any "less-lethal" weapons they get their hands on. They're not "non-lethal". They're "less-lethal", but I doubt many gardai will pick up on that subtle distinction.

Theres a huge distinction between being aggressive and actually intentionally harming a suspect. And I'm curious to know where and what you were doing to receive the attention of the Gardai?

As for not picking up on the distinction, I daresay they're more aware of it than you. Its their ass on the line with so many groups shouting for any incident they can. They're more likely to be careful than if you were handed said equipment.

Lemming

Deleted User wrote:

Theres a huge distinction between being aggressive and actually intentionally harming a suspect. And I'm curious to know where and what you were doing to receive the attention of the Gardai?

One of the more memorable involved me standing outside a niteclub waiting for some friends to come out. I was standing there. As one is wont to do on a pavement. I wasn't doing anything other than standing there. The gardai had been called to the club at the end over a stolen hand-bag or something. And they were extrordinarily abusive and agressive towards everyone. I was told to "f*ck off home before I kick your f*cking head in and drag you down the station". For standing quietly waiting for some mates. Now there's a dispersal tactic based on maturity for you :rolleyes:

I also used to do those cycling rickshaw thingies in town for a couple of years when I was in college, and again lot sof littel incidents either myself, or witnessed of gardai being somewhat ... questionable in their conduct.

As for not picking up on the distinction, I daresay they're more aware of it than you. Its their ass on the line with so many groups shouting for any incident they can. They're more likely to be careful than if you were handed said equipment.

It all boils down to accountability at the end of the day. If a garda screws up, will he be prosecuted? No. Probabily not. And he either knows it, or knows he can get away with it by doing x,y,z. On that score the gardai do most definitely not have a good track record. And there's nobody to blame but themselves for that one. And in that, there's teh crux of the matter I think, rather than the use of weapons.

AngelofFire

For example certain areas around Tallaght, Darndale, Ballymun, and Limerick, and some traveller sites etc, are places where such 'public order' offenses happen when the guards try carying out their duties,

.

Thats a sweeping gerneralisation. Ballsbridge, Blackrock, Cabineteely, Howth, Outside Landsdowne after Rugby games, and Southside Wine Receptions are also places where public order offences happen. Those areas you that listed do not have the monopoly on public order offences.

Very good protest. I was there carrying the Labour Youth banner, i had the pleasure of speaking to Mayor Michael Conaghan, hes a very nice man, and a genuine lefty.Plastic bullets and other "less lethal" weapons are not the way forward. When fired indescriminately they harm innocent people, a guy from the SWP read out a list of the 20 people who have been killed by plastic bullets in northern ireland.Amongst the dead were children as young as 14 who weren`t even involved in terrorism. After the good friday agreement Bertie ahern said plastic bullets have no place in the north, why is he trying to introduce them down south.

bobbyjoe

If a garda screws up, will he be prosecuted

Obviously not.

Thats a sweeping gerneralisation. Ballsbridge, Blackrock, Cabineteely, Howth, Outside Landsdowne after Rugby games, and Southside Wine Receptions are also places where public order offences happen. Those areas you that listed do not have the monopoly on public order offences.

The same applies to Gardai as a police force, and its ability or maturity when having equipment that is less-lethal. Simple guidelines, or a body to monitor their uses in the Republic would combat that problem.

Plastic bullets and other "less lethal" weapons are not the way forward. When fired indescriminately they harm innocent people, a guy from the SWP read out a list of the 20 people who have been killed by plastic bullets in northern ireland.

I'm not advocating the use of plastic bullets or such. However, just from reading your statement, you say "indescriminately". Any usage of riot control used in that manner will cause casualties. The problem you seem to have is the Gardai's lack of training.

Now there's a dispersal tactic based on maturity for you

Fair enough. Sounds extreme the way you describe it. It might well have been.

I on the other hand haven't had any bad experiences with them. From living in Athlone, Mullingar, Dublin, Thurles and finally Cork, I've seen actions by Gardai that have given me great respect for them. The only exception would be Thurles, but thats just the Bogger mentality some Gardai have in small towns.

It all boils down to accountability at the end of the day. If a garda screws up, will he be prosecuted? No. Probabily not. And he either knows it, or knows he can get away with it by doing x,y,z. On that score the gardai do most definitely not have a good track record. And there's nobody to blame but themselves for that one. And in that, there's teh crux of the matter I think, rather than the use of weapons.

I agree. Accountability is lacking with the Gardai. But the responsibility for that lies with us. Us as in the Irish People. We're too lazy to push for reform, and then complain that no-one else has integrated that reform.

chewy

"We're too lazy to push for reform, and then complain that no-one else has integrated that reform"

how do we push for reform

everyone knows the gardai need more accountability... but the gov just want them to investiage themselves and thats been shown as a total failure with the rts investigation board getting stoned walled by the cops...


ohh civdef comes out with all this stuff (and where's his links?), do you play rent a cop at the weekend do ya?


british cs gas causing lasting damage
Review urged on CS sprays
'from the police's own science bureau'
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,11026,1289437,00.html

civdef

chewy wrote:

ohh civdef comes out with all this stuff (and where's his links?), do you play rent a cop at the weekend do ya?

british cs gas causing lasting damage
Review urged on CS sprays
'from the police's own science bureau'
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,11026,1289437,00.html

Well, for one thing, that link you quote doesn't state "british cs gas causing lasting damage" . The article is about a request for further research. None of the symptoms described constitute lasting damage.

http://www.advisorybodies.doh.gov.uk/cot/csgas.htm


For the record I have personal experience of the subject, including getting sprayed with CS. I can assure you if given a choice between a whack of a baton and being sprayed with CS, I'd take the latter.

chewy

"Landsdown Road - not relevant in a discussion of inproper police use of weapons on innocent people, considering the recipients of the force were far from innocent."

how do you know that, how do the police know who was innocent and wasn't when they went the cops went around viciously beaten anybody in arms lenght and atleast two of the people in the crowd were Irish people caught in the melee and got beaten on the head for no reason!!!

http://www.advisorybodies.doh.gov.uk/cot/csgas.htm

and all the training and scientific testing goes out the window if a cop loses his cool and sprays the cs gas directly into person eyes which theres clear footage of recently in the uk

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-4568469,00.html
BOSTON (AP) - A college student celebrating the Red Sox come-from-behind victory over the New York Yankees was killed after a police officer called in to control the rowdy crowd shot her in the eye with what was designed to be a non-lethal projectile


significantly less liley to kill, but who do know?

civdef

how do you know that, how do the police know who was innocent and wasn't when they went the cops went around viciously beaten anybody in arms lenght and atleast two of the people in the crowd were Irish people caught in the melee and got beaten on the head for no reason!!!

Never heard about Irish people getting mixed up in the Combat 18 crowd before, any sources on that? Once a riot situation develops, it's unfortunate if you get caught up inocently in it, but you are likely to get hurt (from either side) - the plan is not to get caught up in the first place.

and all the training and scientific testing goes out the window if a cop loses his cool and sprays the cs gas directly into person eyes which theres clear footage of recently in the uk

The risk of eye damage from CS spray directly into the eye is a physical one from the force of the spray rather than the chemical. Regulations on use require a minimum distance of around 1m between the canister and the sprayee except in emergencies. If an officer misuses any weapon, or physical force, they should and do face investigation and criminal charges.

Phil_321

I think they should be allowed to use non-lethal weapons. It's gotten out of hand these days with people complaining about the guards. They're afraid to do their job properly in case they get brought up for it.

I was told to "f*ck off home before I kick your f*cking head in and drag you down the station".

They're not sales assistants, they're not supposed to be polite. The guy was just doing his job, as you said, dispersing the crowd. That language seems fairly effective to me.

bonkey

Lemming wrote:

I was told to "f*ck off home before I kick your f*cking head in and drag you down the station". For standing quietly waiting for some mates. Now there's a dispersal tactic based on maturity for you :rolleyes:

Only one thing to do. Campaign for cops to only be allowed wear fluffy slippers, so that they can't kick anyone's head in.

I mean...its the same line as "if we give them notionally-non-lethal weapons, they'll only abuse them to beat us up", except its dealing with a notionally-non-lethal weapon they already have.

Personally, I think getting warned as opposed to getting kicked is a very mature way to disperse a crowd. The same logic should follow with CS Gas, tasers, etc....you'd be told "sod off home before I shove 20,000 bolts up your a**e (and make you go VOOM)".

But apprently not....the "opposing" logic seems to be that the cops mightn't kick you without reason (oinly threaten to), but if we gave them better weapons, they'd use them indiscriminately....

jc

chewy

civdef do you think that when a cop does something wrong he is investigated properly what world do you live in,


i don't have any links on the lansdowne story i looked before but it was so long ago...

i remember the footage you should have seen the look on those guards faces , if their own mother had walked in front of them the would have kept on beating, those guards should be albe to keep their heads in that sorta situation

bonkey it is true that police are more likley to use force when they have these weapons because they think they won't cause more damage

cops should be sure of every action they take...

i think it was 31 or so people who got killed up the north
look at the list of the dead
http://www.serve.com/pfc/policing/plastic/plastic23072001b.html


this is how a cop is more likely to use excessive force with these weapons,

parahprasing.... it was up the north when the hunger strikes were causing havoc in the prisons and we have an 11 year old girl walking to the shops... at a nearby checkpoint a british soldier is pissed off at the fenians so he takes his plastic bullet gun and decides to give one of them a warning... bang oh dear he's hit her in the head and killed her.... if he only had a rifle he would have not shot at her, (now that no arguement for guns ) it just an argument for the mistaken idea that these guns are "safer"

Lemming

bonkey wrote:

Only one thing to do. Campaign for cops to only be allowed wear fluffy slippers, so that they can't kick anyone's head in.

As amusing as that sounds, my point wasn't anything to do with not getting kicked in the head, but rather that if you put a weapon in the hands of an already aggressive person, compound that with giving them the power of authority and it doesn't sit well thinking about the possibilities.

The garda in question didn't tell me to move on, didn't make any motions as if to disperse, and I wasn't standing in a bunch of people, but off to the side and away from the general throng of people coming out of the club. He simply went at me. I would rather the likes of him *weren't* given the notion that they could fire a weapon at someone and automagically not kill them.

Sand

Theres no reason to assume the Gardai cant be trusted to use less lethal weapons responsibly - theyve been cleared of the May Day riots - correctly imo - they policed the violent protests against the EU meeting brilliantly I thought despite provocation from the "peaceful" protestors, and abbeylara was a witch-hunt by TDs trying to make a name for themselves by crucifiying Gardai who justifiably shot an armed dangerously unbalanced man advancing on them.

Theres talk about the crinimals arming themselves more heavily in response to Gardai - hello, the gangs in Limerick are more heavily armed than the Taliban these days! If anything I have nothing but the utmost respect for the courage of unarmed Gardai, such as the Garda who raced after an republican gang who abducted a scumbag like the Viper, despite being shot at with automatic weapons by these so called patriots. The opponents of providing the Gardai with an upgrade to ye olde baton have to resort to invoking the RUC trying to police a terrorist campaign or isolated incidents in police forces thousands of miles away. That or theyre arts students and thus their opinions can be discounted from any reasonable debate.

Very good protest. I was there carrying the Labour Youth banner,

Do you know who that gimp dressed all in black with the skull mask and the plastic gun was? He was phtographed in the Irish Times I think standing beside a line of Gardai. All but one of them were chatting amongst themselves amibialy ( obviously taking a break from torturing hippies with tasers ) but the look of the Garda beside of him was priceless - he was just glancing at the protestor and speaking for the nation with an exspression that said "You bloody plonker!"

Sparks

Sand wrote:

Theres no reason to assume the Gardai cant be trusted to use less lethal weapons responsibly

Other than the less-than-stellar record of the ERU with lethal weapons.

theyve been cleared of the May Day riots - correctly imo

The force in general, perhaps - the individuals in question, however, that's a different matter. Being cleared of wrongdoing and having your mates say "Sorry your honour, I don't remember who was there with me" are two different things.

abbeylara was a witch-hunt by TDs trying to make a name for themselves by crucifiying Gardai who justifiably shot an armed dangerously unbalanced man advancing on them.

Actually, the witch-hunt is being pointed at legitimate firearms owners. The latest suggestions by Barr include mental health evaluations every year for every firearms owner (all 200,000 of us, presumably at our expense, and it'd be nice to see where we get the two weeks to spend in a mental health facility under observation which is what a proper workup requires - and all of us at the same time because of how the system works); and requiring our doctors and lawyers to break confidentiality if they think we're mentally disturbed (despite their lack of credentials in mental health, a point the Irish medical association is protesting over).

I agree that the Gardai on the ground when McCarthy left the house had no choice - with an armed assailant in a situation like that, you have to shoot, and shoot to kill for that matter (those who believe you can shoot a moving attacker to disarm them have seen too much hollywood and too little actual rifle range time).

Meanwhile, however, there are those who have questions to answer and who weren't asked to do so in the four investigations preceding Barr: for example, the Garda superintendent who returned McCarthy's firearms to him a year before the shooting, despite the fact that their original confiscation was because he'd waved them at people in a threatening manner and despite his qualified psychologist stating to the Super in writing that McCarthy might become despondant and perhaps suicidal if he didn't get them back (not something you'd associate with a mentally stable individual).

Frankly, the level of training we give Gardai leaves a lot to be desired. It's not the fault of the Gardai, you understand - we just don't fund them sufficently to train them. But then that has to make you pause and wonder - if the Gardai empowered by law to make decisions regarding firearms certificates can't be given sufficent training to understand the job, then how can we know that we'll fund the Gardai enough so that they'll be trained in using less-lethal weapons safely?