Time to arm the gardai

realismpol · 08-12-2009 2:17am #1

A plainclothes garda suffered slash wounds to his face after he intervened in a shop robbery.
Officer hurt trying to stop robbery

The officer, who was on duty at the time, was passing the shop on Dublin's South Circular Road at around 7pm on Monday when he saw a man jump over the counter and threaten staff.
The garda confronted the robber and was cut on the face, before the attacker fled the scene empty handed in a small red car, thought to be a Honda Civic.

I think its time to arm the gardai. The level of violence in general in society is probably worse then its ever been and with this incident the other incident in galway a few months back where a gard was stabbed and the general increase in the amount of attack so on gaurds its time to simply arm them with at least tasers or small firearms.

I wonder what this gaurd could have done to stop this robbery. He had probably only had an esp baton and some mace as well as an anti stab vest facing off against a robber armed with a knife. The end result is predictable. He got seriously injured with probable permanent scarring on his face.

Unfortunately the only thing which instills fear amongst criminals or these types of degenerates is the sight of a gun pointed at them. Becuase this gaurd wasn't armed, he could not stop the robber dead in his tracks and also could not prevent the robbery.

If he had he been carrying a firearm he would have more then likely stopped the robbery by force or by simple commands with the threat of force. Pepper spray batons and anti stab vests are all fine for dealing with drunken disorderly youths or aggressive type personalities but you need to be carrying more to stop armed robbers who have no hestitation in attempting to seriously harm or even kill members of law enforcement. Wheither its admitted or not attacks on police are people putting up the middle finger to society and our right to live in peace in general.

I think we are heading down the road to all gaurds being armed and its about time.

koHd · 08-12-2009 2:20am

I'm with arming them. But this guy was off duty. So that case is not an argument for it as off duty you shouldn't be carrying one anyway.

punk_one82 · 08-12-2009 2:23am

The text clearly says he was on duty but was plain clothes..? I'm definitely with arming them. They need more than batons and mace to deal with these scumbags.

realismpol · 08-12-2009 2:27am

koHd wrote: »

I'm with arming them. But this guy was off duty. So that case is not an argument for it as off duty you shouldn't be carrying one anyway.

Carrying of firearms is routine for offduty police officers in other countries. I don't see why a gaurd's instinct should leave him once he leaves the station to go home. Obviously this guy's didn't but unfotunately for him he ended up on the wrong side of a knife precisely because he wasn't armed.

I think we're reached a point in our society where we really need to ask ourselves wheither our policing methods and tactics (and that does include equipment) is a deterent to crime or not. If your going to reduce gardai numbers which no doubt this government will you need to do something to make up for the lack of numbers. Having firearms wheither people like it or not is the ultimate tool for police to deal effectively and quickly with armed criminals. Its not hyperbole its a fact.

In the end of the day the statement should go out if you want to attempt to take the life of a serving law enforcement officer you will lose your own. The court system is no longer a deterrent to these types of people and time has proven that the situation is only getting worse as attacks on gardai increase.

The days of fearing the local gaurd or even knowing his name are long gone. These people have zero respect (a) for themselves (B) for society (c) for gardai or any norms of laws we all follow. The consequences for them must be made clear and arming the gardai is one definite step in the right direction. Most other countries in europe and the world all have armed police. Its time we followed suit.

CiaranC · 08-12-2009 2:32am

realismpol wrote: »

I think its time to arm the gardai. The level of violence in general in society is probably worse then its ever been

Got an actual source for this?

sdanseo · 08-12-2009 2:34am

CiaranC wrote: »

Got an actual source for this?

We have the highest gun murder rate in Europe according to a recent newspaper article, source is this forum (somewhere :O )

As someone looking to join and on the way into the reserves, I'd be happy with with being armed as well although I wouldn't push for it, not with the spray coming in. I would strongly be in favour of baton/cuffs/spray being legal to carry off duty provided you can account for any use of them in a situation described above. While it would be a lot of reponsibility granted, I think the safety of members has to come first and even if it takes a gun to do that then so be it.

koHd · 08-12-2009 2:35am

punk_one82 wrote: »

The text clearly says he was on duty but was plain clothes..? I'm definitely with arming them. They need more than batons and mace to deal with these scumbags.

Ah so he was on duty. Sleepy eyes and small mobile screen equals fail.

realismpol · 08-12-2009 2:37am

Im not for saying reservists should carry firearms that would be a little over the top. Even in new york reservists don't carry firearms. But obviously full serving members should be able to carry them. Proper checks must be put into place obviously also to ensure the mental health checks of serving officers carrying firearms, background checks and proper checks and balances put in place. Any officer involved in the use of firearms would have to be put on adminstrative leave following any incidents(shootings). This is standard procedure in most countries and i think we should follow suit.

Generally in europe where most police are armed the shootings are surprisingly low and police rarely if ever in their lifetime have to resort to using their firearms yet it is a great tool for them to have given their line of work. My uncle was in the nypd and told me he never had to use or even unholster his firearm while on duty once in his entire career.

It is a serious responsibity to carry a firearm and not one to be taken lightly but we have to be realistic and look whats going on in society. We cannot have these degenerates running amok ruining the lives of others and attempting to kill law enforcement officers just because they think they can get away with it.

CiaranC · 08-12-2009 2:38am

sdonn wrote: »

We have the highest gun murder rate in Europe according to a recent newspaper article, source is this forum (somewhere :O )

This is a reflection of the fact that practically all our murders occur using guns (e.g. They are gangland related). We have a low actual murder rate.

We already have armed units to deal with gangland criminals.

sdanseo · 08-12-2009 2:47am

CiaranC wrote: »

This is a reflection of the fact that practically all our murders occur using guns (e.g. They are gangland related). We have a low actual murder rate.

We already have armed units to deal with gangland criminals.

Except in |Dublin where most of this stuff happens, where all we have is an albeit high number of detectives. I wouldn't like to see the country stay like the UK where every cop is armed has an MP5/MP7. That doesnt make it about self defence it makes it about deterrent, and it doesn't work there because they have huges crime rates especially knife crime. The Irish ganland crims wont be deterred, they'll be mowed sown by each other or be **** scared of cops and the only way to make them scared of all Gardaí is to arm them all.

realismpol · 08-12-2009 2:51am

CiaranC wrote: »

This is a reflection of the fact that practically all our murders occur using guns (e.g. They are gangland related). We have a low actual murder rate.

We already have armed units to deal with gangland criminals.

True we do but the point is they can't be everywhere at once. Gangland criminals don't resort to robbing shops and trying to stab police officers. This is a new type of violence we are seeing. The teenager who attempted to kill the gaurd by stabbing him recently wasn't a gangland criminal. The chinese man who stabbed a gaurd multiple times a few years back wasn't a gangland criminal. Gangland criminals are more smart then to be out doing that.

We're at a situation now whereby people are getting killed during robberies. Just look what happened to that shopkeeper last week and also 2 years ago. Both killed. We need to have armed gaurds on the beat to deal with this type of criminal behaviour or else we are just wiping it under the carpet and you know what happens when you sweep dust under the carpet. It grows. We can't be pc when dealing with crime because crime doesn't respect the law.

CiaranC · 08-12-2009 2:54am

realismpol wrote: »

you know what happens when you sweep dust under the carpet. It grows.

lol, what?

Can you show why making beat garda armed would reduce crime figures?

taytothief · 08-12-2009 2:54am

sdonn wrote: »

As someone looking to join and on the way into the reserves, I'd be happy with with being armed as well although I wouldn't push for it, .

If the patrols by the met in London aren't armed, why would we need armed patrols?

realismpol · 08-12-2009 2:56am

taytothief wrote: »

If the patrols by the met in London aren't armed, why would we need armed patrols?

Last time i checked we lived in the republic of ireland not the u.k. Why does everyone in ireland always look to the u.k before they make a decision. Remind me why we fought the war of independence again???

Anyway most if not all the police forces europe are armed and the u.k is moving down the path to arming all of its police officers also.

CiaranC · 08-12-2009 2:59am

realismpol wrote: »

Last time i checked we lived in the republic of ireland not the u.k. Why does everyone in ireland always look to the u.k before they make a decision. Remind me why we fought the war of independence again???

Anyway most of the rest of europe is armed and the u.k is moving down the path to arming all of its police officers also. Britain is a nanny state and their crime rate is even worse then ours so that kind of explains a lot.

Are you just making random points?

There are plenty of armed police forces in countries with higher violent crime rates, doesnt appear to be working for them.

sdanseo · 08-12-2009 3:02am

CiaranC wrote: »

lol, what?

Can you show why making beat garda armed would reduce crime figures?

It's as much about protecting the Garda. For example in the PSNI it's a PPW officially - personal protection weapon.

realismpol · 08-12-2009 3:04am

CiaranC wrote: »

lol, what?

Can you show why making beat garda armed would reduce crime figures?

Of course it would reduce crime figures. A criminal intending to rob a shop or post office would be very wary of robbing one if he knew there would be a chance of getting killed now wouldn't he. If he knows no gard on duty is armed except for a few specialised units located in only certain large cities he's going to take the chance. If he robs the shop, post office and an unarmed garda confronts him in uniform. Whats he going to think?

Hmmm i can put my hands up and surrender even though i am carrying a knife and he has a no weapon of note.

His other choice if the garda is armed. I can give up get arrested and be counted as another arrest statistic for law enforcement or get shot. I don't really know anyone who likes the feeling of hot lead in their chest or head. Do you?

The sight of and use of a gun deters crime. Thats why police generally in most countries carry them. If i need to explain that then... You want to know why. Ill tell you why. We as humans have a basic instinct to survive. We will do anything to survive. It is an emotion that is part of our biology and we can't make it go away with thought. Our most basic instinct is to survive. If Your planning on robbing a shop and you think there may be someone around carrying a tool which can instantly end your life if you make a wrong move and would be specifically out looking for people with your ill intentions. Answer me this?

Are you (a) more likely to rob a shop
(b) unlikely to rob the shop

CiaranC · 08-12-2009 3:10am

realismpol wrote: »

The sight of and use of a gun deters crime.

Then why is there MORE crime in dozens and dozens of countries whose police forces carry guns than there is here?

I dont think youve thought this through.

taytothief · 08-12-2009 3:10am

realismpol wrote: »

Last time i checked we lived in the republic of ireland not the u.k. Why does everyone in ireland always look to the u.k before they make a decision. Remind me why we fought the war of independence again???

Anyway most if not all the police forces europe are armed and the u.k is moving down the path to arming all of its police officers also.

What are you talking about?
And what has independence got to do with it?

London has a population that is larger than all of Ireland, yet they don't feel the need to be armed on patrols at the moment. They also have "terrorism" to consider. I think having an unarmed police force re-assures people; it's something that makes the gardai more accessible and less threatening to citizens. I believe it's something to applaud.

Maybe, if you feel you need a method to kill somebody, you shouldn't be a garda. Army maybe?
Also, if the met don't need to be armed but members of the gardai feel they need to be, I would question the training.

pwd · 08-12-2009 3:17am

They have special units who are armed in Limerick. I think that is probably the best idea. Arming every guard is a bad idea I think.
I think selection should be tougher for the guards and they should be trained more.

realismpol · 08-12-2009 3:20am

taytothief wrote: »

What are you talking about?
And what has independence got to do with it?

London has a population that is larger than all of Ireland, yet they don't feel the need to be armed on patrols at the moment. They also have "terrorism" to consider. I think having an unarmed police force re-assures people; it's something that makes the gardai more accessible and less threatening to citizens. I believe it's something to applaud.

Maybe, if you feel you need a method to kill somebody, you shouldn't be a garda. Army maybe?
Also, if the met don't need to be armed but members of the gardai feel they need to be, I would question the training.

Hmm yes i understand the logic. So again what your basically saying is because the u.k don't arm their police we shouldn't.

What about the other countries you know generally the rest of the world. Are they all wrong. Please give me a break with the 'people trust the gardai a sense of local community like'

People trust the gaurds less now then they ever did. Im not saying thats the gaurds fault its not. Its just the way society has gone. WHat do you mean less threatening to citizens?? Gaurds aren't threatening to citizens in general(could be wrong) because the majority of citizens follow the laws of the land anyway. Its not the gaurds role to be viewed as aggressors. Wheither people actually trust the gardai is their own personal issue. I do trust them. Generally gaurds don't go out each day to rob someone and possibly kill them.

Why would a citizen fear a gaurd when his/her sole role is to protect the public. So what your saying is that gaurds cannot be trusted with firearms bascially.

The point im making here is that armed police would be a deterrent against criminals not citizens. Criminals don't respect citizens or police or the law of the land. Times are changing and we need to change with the times.

The whole thread isn't about killing people. Jez. The point is gaurds need to be armed to deal with todays level of threat to them and to propely protect the public. Wheither people agree or not that gaurds should be armed you can't argue with the fact that firearms are the only tool which provide this threat deterrent to criminals because criminals are in the game to make money not to die.

taytothief · 08-12-2009 3:35am

realismpol wrote: »

Hmm yes i understand the logic. So again what your basically saying is because the u.k don't arm their police we shouldn't.

What about the other countries you know generally the rest of the world. Are they all wrong. Please give me a break with the 'people trust the gardai a sense of local community like'

People trust the gaurds less now then they ever did. Im not saying thats the gaurds fault its not. Its just the way society has gone. WHat do you mean less threatening to citizens?? Gaurds aren't threatening to citizens in general(could be wrong) because the majority of citizens follow the laws of the land anyway. Its not the gaurds role to be viewed as aggressors. Wheither people actually trust the gardai is their own personal issue. I do trust them. Generally gaurds don't go out each day to rob someone and possibly kill them.

Why would a citizen fear a gaurd when his/her sole role is to protect the public. So what your saying is that gaurds cannot be trusted with firearms bascially.

The point im making here is that armed police would be a deterrent against criminals not citizens. Criminals don't respect citizens or police or the law of the land. Times are changing and we need to change with the times.

You mention logic but you seem to have a fierce hatred for all things foreign.
If an area (any area) that has a population fairly close to twice the population of Ireland, and also has the threat of "terrorism", but still doesn't feel the need to arm its police force, why would we?

Also, unarmed police forces include, england, ireland, new zealand, norway, off the top of my head.

Shield · 08-12-2009 3:57am

Moderator note: koHd will not be joining us for the next 24 hours.

Back on topic please.

Bottle_of_Smoke · 08-12-2009 4:11am

Been living in Northern Ireland the last year and a half. Have to say there is just something different about a cop walking past with a gun on their belt. Actually their belts here look like they have about fifty different ways of killing you if they felt like it. Compared to the police in Dublin I just feel as if I have to take the PSNI more seriously

I'm a law abiding citizen myself so I don't know how this would translate for actual criminals.

The example the OP made, definitely think it would have made a difference. I doubt the cop would have even had to draw the gun, just it being there would have stopped the f*cker in his tracks.

Zambia · 08-12-2009 4:17am

Nope the Gardai already perform a decent job without the use of Firearms. Plus from the feedback on these discussions the AGS members on here are not calling for them.

I see no reason that the introduction of firearms would increase officer safety. Unless you plan to send them out alone.

I would be more in favour of spending the money on

Increasing Border security and reducing arms shipments in.
Increased Personal Protection equipment eg vests
Increased training in Control And Restraint techniques

But that's all less dramatic

the locust · 08-12-2009 9:09am

I can see valid points but i think the pros out way the cons. Its sad but policing the world we live in may take a sidearm. My thoughts...

I think if every member got a 'ppw'/glock 9mm for example:-

- It would raise the level of training and professionalism in AGS throughout. It takes discipline which comes with handling and carrying a firearm - and professionalism is much needed in this place.

- It was also raise and enhance the authority that members are rapidly loosing and that's mentioned to me every flippin week! If a beat member is on a checkpoint or beat with a glock on his hip - bottomline - he'd get a more respect walking down the street from the public in general

- It would be better for the public. From people i've spoken to, a lot are in favour of us being armed, i 've heard fewer people against it when the topic is raised. they would feel safer and that AGS are more capable of protecting them or acting on serious crime. It makes sense that the 'good guys' should have the guns and not just the baddies!

- It would deter potential criminals, and prevent crime. Some people fear the wild west and random shootings if AGS were all armed. I don't think so. Many other euro police and others as already mentioned never actually have to fire thier weapons. Its just enough that people can see its there. For criminals, I think its fairly obvious that someone is going to think twice or more carefully about pulling out a knife if he knows 'every guard is armed'

- It would mean more members are more capable and more could be deployed on thier own, increasing the effectiveness of units... You can cover a greater area with single members spread out, and a car on patrol to assist if needed.

- It would also mean greater personal safety for members. 'But ah sure you have armed units to deal with gangland crime' Urm what about the poor uniformed first responders who arrive on the scene within minutes unarmed with a pipe and some pepper spray they can do feck all but wait for back up or try be a hero? Different, safer and successful outcome if two guards well trained to use firearms turn up, they can make an arrest. Rather than they got away, again.

hk · 08-12-2009 9:31am

What is to say that the Garda who responded last night was not armed to begin with. Most plain clothes are.

I have no real issue with arming the gards but sometimes a firearm can be more of a hindrance, much more difficult to deal with general public order issues and drunks if you constantly have to keep an eye on you firearm to ensure you are not disarmed. Further more in a lot of situations you simply wont have time to draw a firearm, a lot of these suprise situations happen so fast there wouldnt be a chance. If there is prior knowledge that something is happening armed support can be called for and is readily available in most large urban areas in Ireland

08-12-2009 9:43am

the locust wrote: »

I can see valid points but i think the pros out way the cons. Its sad but policing the world we live in may take a sidearm. My thoughts...

I think if every member got a 'ppw'/glock 9mm for example:-

- It would raise the level of training and professionalism in AGS throughout. It takes discipline which comes with handling and carrying a firearm - and professionalism is much needed in this place.

- It was also raise and enhance the authority that members are rapidly loosing and that's mentioned to me every flippin week! If a beat member is on a checkpoint or beat with a glock on his hip - bottomline - he'd get a more respect walking down the street from the public in general

- It would be better for the public. From people i've spoken to, a lot are in favour of us being armed, i 've heard fewer people against it when the topic is raised. they would feel safer and that AGS are more capable of protecting them or acting on serious crime. It makes sense that the 'good guys' should have the guns and not just the baddies!

- It would deter potential criminals, and prevent crime. Some people fear the wild west and random shootings if AGS were all armed. I don't think so. Many other euro police and others as already mentioned never actually have to fire thier weapons. Its just enough that people can see its there. For criminals, I think its fairly obvious that someone is going to think twice or more carefully about pulling out a knife if he knows 'every guard is armed'

- It would mean more members are more capable and more could be deployed on thier own, increasing the effectiveness of units... You can cover a greater area with single members spread out, and a car on patrol to assist if needed.

- It would also mean greater personal safety for members. 'But ah sure you have armed units to deal with gangland crime' Urm what about the poor uniformed first responders who arrive on the scene within minutes unarmed with a pipe and some pepper spray they can do feck all but wait for back up or try be a hero? Different, safer and successful outcome if two guards well trained to use firearms turn up, they can make an arrest. Rather than they got away, again.

Being trained in using a firearm will not make a member any more or less professional, you either are or are not.

You earn respect from people in your dealings with them, not because you are carrying a firearm. And that will never change.

People say we should be armed every time there is a gun murder. Having an armed police force will not stop a murder from happening. Intercepting somebody on the way to carry out a shooting will. There have been numerous examples of this in the media and more that have not.

Having a gun is no reason for having single crew cars. Having a second member with you is ideal. See this blog. And you just have to watch episodes of "Cops" to see how many single crew cars respond to standard calls.

tracy3135 · 08-12-2009 9:58am

I am a member of the force and every day I go to work I face the prospect of being maimed or killed and leaving behind my three beautiful children to go through life without me. I want to state that I am not really in favour of being armed with a gun for a number of reasons which I will outline.

Firstly in our job every time you take an action against a member of the public whether it be restraining them, placing them in the cell while they are drunk, even just driving with them in the patrol car, you are leaving yourself open to civil action should something go wrong. As a result you are slow to react even if it is to defend yourself!!! I would imagine that this plain clothes garda WAS armed but to justify shooting a man who is only armed with a knife would put this man's career and freedom in question. He would need to show evidence before the Ombudsman that he felt this man had intentions of wounding or killing another with that knife. Unfortunately it was probably not until he was slashed himself that he felt the level of threat would be justified.

Secondly, if every garda had a firearm, then every criminal armed with a firearm would feel the need to shoot Gardai in order to evade arrest. There are rarely shoot outs with a member of the force and it is often that a Garda manages to arrest an armed criminal without the need for a shoot out. I would definitely feel more threatened stopping a car with suspects of board it if I were armed as immediately I would be seen as a huge threat and more Gardai would loose their lives. We have recently been armed with pepper spray which is an effective tool in the arrest of violent persons most of the time and I feel it will benefit the force greatly.

My final point is that with daily threats to our lives and to our families lives, who feels that we should take ANOTHER hit in this budget. Certainly not I. For I don't think there is anyone out there, even the recently unemployed amongst you who would take the level of violent we are exposed to on a daily basis for the pathetic wage we get. And are we being rewarded or even paid a fair wage for this, no.

I for one must inform you all that I will stop less suspect vehicles, search less homes, apprehend less armed persons and keep myself safe for my own family's sake cause I simply am not valued enough or paid enough to take this crap.

Trojan911 · 08-12-2009 11:48am

tracy3135 wrote: »

I am a member of the force and every day I go to work I face the prospect of being maimed or killed and leaving behind my three beautiful children to go through life without me. I want to state that I am not really in favour of being armed with a gun for a number of reasons which I will outline.

Firstly in our job every time you take an action against a member of the public whether it be restraining them, placing them in the cell while they are drunk, even just driving with them in the patrol car, you are leaving yourself open to civil action should something go wrong. As a result you are slow to react even if it is to defend yourself!!! I would imagine that this plain clothes garda WAS armed but to justify shooting a man who is only armed with a knife would put this man's career and freedom in question. He would need to show evidence before the Ombudsman that he felt this man had intentions of wounding or killing another with that knife. Unfortunately it was probably not until he was slashed himself that he felt the level of threat would be justified.

Secondly, if every garda had a firearm, then every criminal armed with a firearm would feel the need to shoot Gardai in order to evade arrest. There are rarely shoot outs with a member of the force and it is often that a Garda manages to arrest an armed criminal without the need for a shoot out. I would definitely feel more threatened stopping a car with suspects of board it if I were armed as immediately I would be seen as a huge threat and more Gardai would loose their lives. We have recently been armed with pepper spray which is an effective tool in the arrest of violent persons most of the time and I feel it will benefit the force greatly.

My final point is that with daily threats to our lives and to our families lives, who feels that we should take ANOTHER hit in this budget. Certainly not I. For I don't think there is anyone out there, even the recently unemployed amongst you who would take the level of violent we are exposed to on a daily basis for the pathetic wage we get. And are we being rewarded or even paid a fair wage for this, no.

I for one must inform you all that I will stop less suspect vehicles, search less homes, apprehend less armed persons and keep myself safe for my own family's sake cause I simply am not valued enough or paid enough to take this crap.

Then why don't you leave?

Your post doesn't add up, by the way.

___________________________________________

Op,

No to arming Gardai, is my reponse. It's not needed.

Shires · 08-12-2009 12:01pm

realismpol wrote: »

The chinese man who stabbed a gaurd multiple times a few years back wasn't a gangland criminal

Not trying to make a point, just an observation plain and simple... I was in the vicinity when this happened and there were a number of members with drawn firearms.

CJhaughey · 08-12-2009 12:08pm

IMO if you arm every Garda, you raise the stakes.
Every 2bit scumbag will now be looking for a gun of their own in order to make themselves equal in firepower. Then you have the whole shootout scenario developing , Not Good.
I think the way it is being handled is the correct way, unarmed general Gardai and armed response units available at short notice.
Arming the whole force is not the way forward, not every Garda will feel confident carrying a Personal sidearm let alone being of the correct mindset to aim and pull the trigger.
It is one thing to talk about it but using deadly force on another human is a sobering thought. Regardless of how far down the social scale that individual is perceived to be.

parsi · 08-12-2009 12:17pm

tracy3135 wrote: »

I for one must inform you all that I will stop less suspect vehicles, search less homes, apprehend less armed persons and keep myself safe for my own family's sake cause I simply am not valued enough or paid enough to take this crap.

Don't feed the troll..

TheNog · 08-12-2009 1:05pm

This topic has been discussed many times in this forum and almost each and every time just after an incident of injury of a Garda. In my belief the time hasnt yet come for every member of the force to be armed. The RSU has only been rolled or is still be rolled out nationwide so we should see what effect this has first. My experience of the RSU so far has been positive. They are proactive and always seem to be only minutes away when needed.

However I feel the need for a fully armed force is not very far off and I do expect it may happen during my time of service. If it does happen I will embrace it and continue to do the job I have always wanted to do.

Im also an advocate of single car occupants (definitely in country stations) but only with the right equipment available and possibly with armed members. I dont accept Ruralshires Inspector Gadgets reasons for not having them such as parking, fuel consumption or the death of the PC. The American Police forces seem to get along fine with the necessary equipment and radio protocols.

FGR · 08-12-2009 1:31pm

tracy3135 wrote: »

even just driving with them in the patrol car, you are leaving yourself open to civil action should something go wrong. As a result you are slow to react even if it is to defend yourself!!!

There's a lot of truth in this. Many other police forces provide certain immunities to police officers however Gardaí are left wide open should -anything- go wrong.

I'm pretty sure you're not the only one who feels that they have to be wounded before they can justify any action.

realismpol · 08-12-2009 3:24pm

hk wrote: »

What is to say that the Garda who responded last night was not armed to begin with. Most plain clothes are.

I have no real issue with arming the gards but sometimes a firearm can be more of a hindrance, much more difficult to deal with general public order issues and drunks if you constantly have to keep an eye on you firearm to ensure you are not disarmed. Further more in a lot of situations you simply wont have time to draw a firearm, a lot of these suprise situations happen so fast there wouldnt be a chance. If there is prior knowledge that something is happening armed support can be called for and is readily available in most large urban areas in Ireland

There are holsters specially designed to prevent this from happening i.e certain ways of opening only known to the user of the firearm. This has been the case for years in the u.s. Also you can attach metal ring tethers to them like in northern ireland to prevent people from snatching and using your weapon. Some firearms also have unique safety locks also which prevent it being immeadiately used and only by the user.

Most european armed police forces have all the above in place. Snatching of firearms from officers is a rare event if ever happening in europe. Mostly happens in u.s and is even rare enough there. The only way would be a gang of people over powering a police officer but even at this they still wouldn't be able to remove the firearm if it was tethered to the holster via metallic wire. Even in the u.s i remember seeing about 10 years ago a type of gun carried by police officers that wouldn't fire unless the bottom of the ammunition clip is quickly tagged with a small metallic pin located elsewhere on the officers uniform known only to him. Thus anyone acquiring the weapon could not fire even if the safety was off and the weapon was loaded.

Don't get me wrong here i know its a lot of responsibility to carry a firearm and im not for one minute suggesting that it doesn't put pressure on the officer to watch himself but it definetly would lead to better proffessionalism and also i do believe lower crime rates and better arrest statistics not to mention improving officer and public safety. I actually think people's confidence in the gaurds would be boosted as well as the gaurds themselves who would no longer be afraid to respond to emergency calls as first responders. If someone knows an armed gaurd is going to show up on the scene of a crime quickly then they will be less likely to attempt a robbery.

We have to be realistic though because Criminals and the like just don't respect unarmed police officers. Thats just an unfortunate fact. The general public do but they are not the ones carrying out crimes and robberies so we have to kind of wake up a little here and stop avoiding the issue. Crime rates are rising and criminals are becoming more bolder even prepared to kill police officers now. Thats just the way society has gone.

On the gun been taken off officer issue If you have metallic wire attached to the gun to the belt or holster, the holsters which are designed to be only opened a certain way known only to the user(lots of these types of holster out there) and safeties always in place then there is practically zero chance of someone acquiring the gun off the police officer or using it against him. This has rarely if ever happened in northern ireland or elsewhere and they suffer from terrorist threats a lot and other countries where crime rates are a lot more rampant.

This is a non issue for me. The idea behind the carrying of firearms for me is not for use but rather as a deterrent to criminals. As pointed out the simple sight of police officers carrying firearms on their belt is enough to deter would be criminals. That is a simple fact.

Im not saying that we arm all gaurds willy nilly im saying the correct checks and procedures must in place first i.e all firearms need to have tethers, certain holsters with locks on them and all firearms have safety's on at all times holstered. Officer background checks would have to be more rigourous. As someone already rightfully pointed out it would also lead to a more professional police force. This would also prevent the legal loopholes which may exist if incidents do occur.

Added to this obviously the correct checks and balances in place for all serving members carrying firearms and investigative and administrative leave policies in place in the event of firearms being used by officers. This is just standard practice. I don't really see why people are worried. Its more based on a paranoi imo then anything else. In the end of the day the safety of the general public and the law of the land comes first before anything else. I think the majority of the irish public would be fine with armed officers as long as the right checks and balances, safety regulations and training procedures are in place.

CJhaughey · 08-12-2009 3:36pm

realismpol wrote: »

Mostly happens in u.s and is even rare enough there. The only way would be a gang of people over powering a police officer but even at this they still wouldn't be able to remove the firearm if it was tethered to the holster via metallic wire.

there is practically zero chance of someone acquiring the gun off the police officer or using it against him. This has rarely if ever happened in northern ireland or elsewhere

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,326148,00.html
http://www.winonadailynews.com/news/state-and-regional/mn/article_e6fafcee-9da5-11de-a78c-001cc4c03286.html
not that rare it seems...

CB19Kevo · 08-12-2009 3:40pm

The way forward i beleive is increase garda numbers and establish more response units.
not alone in the city's but spread accross the country ensuring armed response is avalible within a short time anywhere in the state.
I cant see justification in arming all members but instead there should be greater investment in the force,increased training and better equipment.

The solutions are easy but in this Country there made out as impossible:rolleyes:

Hooch · 08-12-2009 3:54pm

tracy3135 wrote: »

I for one must inform you all that I will stop less suspect vehicles, search less homes, apprehend less armed persons and keep myself safe for my own family's sake cause I simply am not valued enough or paid enough to take this crap.

And its silly childish posts like that, that turns the public against AGS.

If your that unhappy maybe this isnt the job for you. Please consider your posts, for the vast majority of Gardaí do NOT think like this. I may feel under valued but i'll still do my job when it boils down to it, and most certainly will do my duty when called to do so in the situations your outlined.

realismpol · 08-12-2009 4:00pm

CJhaughey wrote: »

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,326148,00.html
http://www.winonadailynews.com/news/state-and-regional/mn/article_e6fafcee-9da5-11de-a78c-001cc4c03286.html
not that rare it seems...

Yes that would be the usa where the level of gun crime is practically the highest in the world. Incidents like this happen mostly in the usa because the usa has a gun culture. Thats a fact. You can find many incidents of lots of events happening with firearms in the usa simply because there is 2 - 3 guns in the united states for every citizen. It is still a rare event over there. There is one police officer killed in the united states practically every day. The majority of them are not killed by their own weapon they are shot by assailants using their own weapons. Also in the U.S police officers do not in general carry tethers on their guns and the use of firearms in general is a widely socially accepted thing. Use of firearms and regulation of their use is more liberal then in other countries even amongst police departments in the united states.

We don't have a gun culture over here and the murder of police officers is not nor will it ever be a daily event. If your suggesting that a reason for not arming the gardai is because look over in the usa one or two police officers get killed yearly using their own guns thats a pretty weak argument. The usa has 350 million people with a ratio of 2 or 3 guns for each person living there. Shooting of police officers in the united states is a daily occurance sometimes even 3 -4 officers are killed daily unfortunately. It next to south africa, brazil probably has the highest level of police officer killings in the world.

budda15c · 08-12-2009 5:45pm

realismpol wrote: »

Yes that would be the usa where the level of gun crime is practically the highest in the world. Incidents like this happen mostly in the usa because the usa has a gun culture. Thats a fact. You can find many incidents of lots of events happening with firearms in the usa simply because there is 2 - 3 guns in the united states for every citizen. It is still a rare event over there. There is one police officer killed in the united states practically every day. The majority of them are not killed by their own weapon they are shot by assailants using their own weapons. Also in the U.S police officers do not in general carry tethers on their guns and the use of firearms in general is a widely socially accepted thing. Use of firearms and regulation of their use is more liberal then in other countries even amongst police departments in the united states.

We don't have a gun culture over here and the murder of police officers is not nor will it ever be a daily event. If your suggesting that a reason for not arming the gardai is because look over in the usa one or two police officers get killed yearly using their own guns thats a pretty weak argument. The usa has 350 million people with a ratio of 2 or 3 guns for each person living there. Shooting of police officers in the united states is a daily occurance sometimes even 3 -4 officers are killed daily unfortunately. It next to south africa, brazil probably has the highest level of police officer killings in the world.

While, I think a time will come where Gardaí will need to be routinely armed, I think it won't be for some time yet, for a number of reasons mainly:
- Irish culture and Irish peoples attitudes towards firearms is very different to other parts of the world. I don't think the Irish public have had the exposure to, or education about firearms to be exposed to them on a daily basis.
- Also I think, you would be surprised by the number of Gardaí who would not be comfortable carrying a firearm, especially on a daily basis. Many Gardaí I would imagine joined the force, knowing it was a mainly unarmed force. Many Gardaí are very proud of that fact and rightly so. As a member of the public, I am proud of the fact that we have a mainly unarmed police force. There could be no greater mistake than giving a firearm to someone who is not comfortable carrying it.

I think, as other posters have pointed out, more dedicated Armed Response Units, readily available and high visibility like the RSU are the way forward.

Also on the point of Gardaí gaining more respect by being routinely armed. There is a huge difference between respect and fear, which is something I think people forget all too easily. I believe the vast majority of the public would have a greater fear of the Gardaí if they were armed, (because as I said earlier the general public have not had any exposure to firearms) but not necessarily more respect. Personally I would not find a Garda any less approachable if he/she was carrying a firearm, but I think the vast majority of the public would. Whilst it may instill fear in criminals and gougers (who are the minority), the risk is it will have the same effect on the law abiding majority.

Again, regards respect. I respect Gardaí and the sometimes thankless job they do, I wouldn't respect them anymore just because they had a sig on their hip. I respect them because the very vast majority of them I have encountered have been decent, approachable, level-headed men and women, who more often than not have been able to resolve situations without the use of force. As in all walks of life there are a few @rseholes and whilst I don't hold much respect for them as a person, I still treat them with the respect their uniform and organisation deserves and has earned.

realismpol · 08-12-2009 6:55pm

budda15c wrote: »

While, I think a time will come where Gardaí will need to be routinely armed, I think it won't be for some time yet, for a number of reasons mainly:
- Irish culture and Irish peoples attitudes towards firearms is very different to other parts of the world. I don't think the Irish public have had the exposure to, or education about firearms to be exposed to them on a daily basis.
- Also I think, you would be surprised by the number of Gardaí who would not be comfortable carrying a firearm, especially on a daily basis. Many Gardaí I would imagine joined the force, knowing it was a mainly unarmed force. Many Gardaí are very proud of that fact and rightly so. As a member of the public, I am proud of the fact that we have a mainly unarmed police force. There could be no greater mistake than giving a firearm to someone who is not comfortable carrying it.

I think, as other posters have pointed out, more dedicated Armed Response Units, readily available and high visibility like the RSU are the way forward.

Also on the point of Gardaí gaining more respect by being routinely armed. There is a huge difference between respect and fear, which is something I think people forget all too easily. I believe the vast majority of the public would have a greater fear of the Gardaí if they were armed, (because as I said earlier the general public have not had any exposure to firearms) but not necessarily more respect. Personally I would not find a Garda any less approachable if he/she was carrying a firearm, but I think the vast majority of the public would. Whilst it may instill fear in criminals and gougers (who are the minority), the risk is it will have the same effect on the law abiding majority.

Again, regards respect. I respect Gardaí and the sometimes thankless job they do, I wouldn't respect them anymore just because they had a sig on their hip. I respect them because the very vast majority of them I have encountered have been decent, approachable, level-headed men and women, who more often than not have been able to resolve situations without the use of force. As in all walks of life there are a few @rseholes and whilst I don't hold much respect for them as a person, I still treat them with the respect their uniform and organisation deserves and has earned.

You make some very good points and i definetly agree with what your saying about the respect and fear issue. I do think though that the whole issue of irish people being educated to firearms is a bit of a lame duck issue. A lot more irish people have used and had access to firearms then one would think. Saying that Irish people are uneducated in regards to firearms and fear them like they are some sort of black magic not to be interferred with is a bit over the top. Many young people have been members of the fca and reserve defence forces and handled firearms. Many people have had uncles or relatives who own shotguns hunting rifles etc, target shooting. So for me anyway that's just an excuse.

I do agree on the rank and file members not being comfortable with it but in the end of the day you have to also try something before you can claim to be uncomfortable or comfortable with it. For many i would think its not so much comfort but lack of exposure in handling firearms thats the issue. That would probably come with proper training and learning all the ins and outs of firearms and their use. They are dangerous objects but i don't believe its an engrained thing in irish people since the day we were born that when you see a firearm its like handling a bomb.

I mean bascially the issue of the firearm is not to force gardai to use it but to have it for their own defence. I'm not of the opinion it would be used as an offensive tool like criminals use it but an defensive tool to protect members of the publics lives and the gardai themselves in very rare instances where lives are at risk.

People saying if gardai arm themselves criminals will suddenly go out and acquire m-16s and start a war are overreacting also. I hate to be the bearer of bad news but criminals already carry these firearms and have targeted unarmed officers including attempts to kill them. If things got that bad the criminals would be wiped out by the army. So again overreaction. Criminals are cowards in the end of the day not martyrs. Thats exactly why they target ordinary civillians and unarmed police.

The whole mantra of its great to see the respect level for the gaurds and im proud of them being unarmed etc. I dunno if that makes any difference when a gaurd is standing there and a guy is trying to slash at his neck or face with an 8 inch blade. Just put yourself in that situation. Would you be happy you were unarmed then?

These things happen wheither the gaurds have or haven't firearms. Its just they can defend themselves, their lives, the lives of others and the law of the land when armed. I know it sounds hyperbolic but it is the general meat and bones of the issue.

In the end of the day wheither gaurds are comfortable or not carrying them they may be forced into getting them because the criminals certainly are getting more bolder and gardai are at a point where they are putting their lives on the line being unarmed. Thats a much greater danger then the comfort level of a person carrying a firearm to me. One big problem i see in all the comments is fear. Its fear of the unknown here thats the issue and that leads to all sorts of excuses and paranoid scenarios people come up with because in the end of the day people don't like change and fear it.

But it really is at this stage a neccessary step. Once you see gaurds carrying firearms and how little things will change people will get over it very quickly just like they did when armed support units travel around and noone now bats an eyelid whereas 20 years ago people would have been up in arms over it.

Delancey · 08-12-2009 7:00pm

An issue that would need addressing were all gardai to be armed is a sensitive one and that is suicide by officers using service weapons.

'Access to means' has long been identified as a major risk factor in suicide.
I dont have up to date figures but at one time for every officer the NYPD lost killed in the line of duty there were 5 or 6 officers ending their lives - often using service revolvers. Closer to home , in the latter part of the 'troubles' there were years when the R.U.C. lost as many officers to suicide as to terrorist attack - again service weapons were the main means of suicide.
I am also aware of instances where Gardai have ended their own lives with issued firearms - I apologise in advance to anyone here who knew these Guards and is offended by this issue being mentioned - I assure you no offence is intended but would it not be a tragedy if by arming all Gardai '' in order to preserve their lives '' the exact opposite happened ?

realismpol · 08-12-2009 7:12pm

delancey42 wrote: »

An issue that would need addressing were all gardai to be armed is a sensitive one and that is suicide by officers using service weapons.

'Access to means' has long been identified as a major risk factor in suicide.
I dont have up to date figures but at one time for every officer the NYPD lost killed in the line of duty there were 5 or 6 officers ending their lives - often using service revolvers. Closer to home , in the latter part of the 'troubles' there were years when the R.U.C. lost as many officers to suicide as to terrorist attack - again service weapons were the main means of suicide.
I am also aware of instances where Gardai have ended their own lives with issued firearms - I apologise in advance to anyone here who knew these Guards and is offended by this issue being mentioned - I assure you no offence is intended but would it not be a tragedy if by arming all Gardai '' in order to preserve their lives '' the exact opposite happened ?

Thats really clutching at straws. Why not go into a debate about suicide while we're at it and how this affects members of the force. I can't really decipher what your trying to say.

It appears your trying to make an analogy between gardai access to firearms and suicide as a reason not to arm the gardai. Your last sentence seems to imply that access to firearms would suddenly result in the gardai committing suicide en masse. Suicide is a seperate social issue and if a gaurd wants to commit suicide theres a bigger problem there then him having access to the means to do it fast. I mean he can do it pretty easy a lot of different ways other then using a gun. That wouldn't be the issue the issue would be why he wants to commit suicide not him having access to a gun. Not having access to firearm is not going to end his desire to end his life.

Also firearms i would imagine under strict guidelines would be issued to officers before they go out on and after they return from patrol to a secure armoury manned by other officers or a sinlge officer depending on station size thus preventing the officer using this weapon on his own or in the station if he did contemplate doing such a thing. This would also all be documented by the manning officer to ensure no ammunition or firearms went missing whilst the garda was on patrol. This would also be useful in investigative cases whereby there was any incident involving rounds missing or discharged as records of ammunition counts and patrolling officers would be stored. As i said and others have mentioned this would lead to much more proffessionalism in the force and more security for everyone.

Counts of ammunition stocks firearms for smaller stations would be carried out by regional adminstrators to ensure no firearms or ammunition go missing.

I can see theres even a big level of distrust here of the gardai. I have no issue with them all carrying firearms as long as the correct checks procedures and balances are put in place as i mentioned above. Some of the paranoid stuff people come up is obviously borne out of their fears and lack of knowledge of how to operate such a scheme to the benefit of everyone.

donvito99 · 08-12-2009 7:45pm

delancey42 wrote: »

An issue that would need addressing were all gardai to be armed is a sensitive one and that is suicide by officers using service weapons.

'Access to means' has long been identified as a major risk factor in suicide.
I dont have up to date figures but at one time for every officer the NYPD lost killed in the line of duty there were 5 or 6 officers ending their lives - often using service revolvers. Closer to home , in the latter part of the 'troubles' there were years when the R.U.C. lost as many officers to suicide as to terrorist attack - again service weapons were the main means of suicide.
I am also aware of instances where Gardai have ended their own lives with issued firearms - I apologise in advance to anyone here who knew these Guards and is offended by this issue being mentioned - I assure you no offence is intended but would it not be a tragedy if by arming all Gardai '' in order to preserve their lives '' the exact opposite happened ?

realismpol wrote: »

Thats really clutching at straws. Why not go into a debate about suicide while we're at it and how this affects members of the force. I can't really decipher what your trying to say.

It appears your trying to make an analogy between gardai access to firearms and suicide as a reason not to arm the gardai. Your last sentence seems to imply that access to firearms would suddenly result in the gardai committing suicide en masse. Suicide is a seperate social issue and if a gaurd wants to commit suicide theres a bigger problem there then him having access to the means to do it fast. I mean he can do it pretty easy a lot of different ways other then using a gun. That wouldn't be the issue the issue would be why he wants to commit suicide not him having access to a gun. Not having access to firearm is not going to end his desire to end his life. Also firearms i would imagine under strict guidelines would be issued to officers before they go out on and after they return from patrol to an armoury manned by another officer where possible preventing the officer using this weapon on his own or in the station if he did contemplate doing such a thing.

I can see theres even a big level of distrust here of the gardai. I have no issue with them all carrying firearms as long as the correct checks procedures and balances are put in place as i mentioned above. Some of the paranoid stuff people come up is obviously borne out of their fears and lack of knowledge of how to operate such a scheme to the benefit of everyone.

I think that he makes a very fair point. He made a very acceptable conclusion that suicides would have a very high chance of emerging were fire arms to be introduced to members.

Me thinks that giving firearms to Gardaí will equal in a criminals mind 'the Guards are fair game now'. I think all thats needed is more RSU's, make them a big contingient of daily patrols, and roll 'em out across the country pronto.

realismpol · 08-12-2009 7:51pm

donvito99 wrote: »

I think that he makes a very fair point. He made a very acceptable conclusion that suicides would have a very high chance of emerging were fire arms to be introduced to members.

Me thinks that giving firearms to Gardaí will equal in a criminals mind 'the Guards are fair game now'. I think all thats needed is more RSU's, make them a big contingient of daily patrols, and roll 'em out across the country pronto.

Suicides amongst force members happen anyway. I have made the point that firearms would be stored in station in an armoury manned by officers. All officers firearms would be checked in and out and recorded by the manning officers before the officer goes out on patrol. Thus unless a garda decides to shoot himself whilst on patrol with other members or on his own, this fear is unwarranted. He would not have access to a firearm once he finishes his patrol or in the station itself even bar leaving the armoury to go directly out on patrol.

Also criminals deciding gaurds are fair game. They already do that im afraid. But they only do it because gaurds are unarmed. If they they respected the law then they wouldn't be criminals would they. Criminals don't tend to tackle the eru. And theres a reason why they don't. Criminals are dumb but they aren't dumb enough to suddenly start targeting police officers en masse because they are carrying firearms. This is ireland and europe we live in not coloumbia with some sort of narco criminals carrying bazookas and taking on the army. The criminals would more then likely just concentrate their efforts on other white collar based crimes or those not involving robberies or direct confrontation with police.

Show me one other country in europe with armed police whereby the criminals suddenly targeted police because they are armed. Any examples? Exactly there are none because like i pointed out earlier its just your fear reflex creating as many negative scenarios as you can because your human instinct fears change. And when your in fear you'll do anything or in this case make up any excuse to avoid change.

The way people talk you'd swear ireland had bravehearts for criminals. If criminals did target police the army would be called in and they would be wiped out quicker then you could bat an eyelid. Criminals generally like to make money and survive where possible. They like to take on weaker victims and that generally doesn't involve taking on someone who can fight back or call in his big buddies.

By your logic there would be about 30 dead gardai already. You know the eru that drive around in marked patrol cars? Yeah with armed support unit written in big fancy lights for all the ciminals to see. Why haven't they been targeted?? Any idea. I ll tell you why the criminals are scared of them thats why. If they did ever target them they would have another unit there to take em out fast or the army called in. Firearms instill fear and thats a good thing when the good guys are carrying them. Thats just the truth.

guil · 08-12-2009 7:56pm

donvito99 wrote: »

Me thinks that giving firearms to Gardaí will equal in a criminals mind 'the Guards are fair game now'. I think all thats needed is more RSU's, make them a big contingient of daily patrols, and roll 'em out across the country pronto.

imo u are contradictin urself a bit, first ya say it would make guards fair game, then ya say have more RSU's

well surely if criminals know that RSU could be on the scene in minutes, there is a chance they would shoot or take unarmed guards hostage

Hellm0 · 08-12-2009 8:07pm

We do have armed guards, just they only respond to situations where they are required.

I am 100% against having armed representatives of the state present in every day life, I do not believe it is a deterrent and in fact leads to better armed criminals.

realismpol · 08-12-2009 8:12pm

What do you mean better armed? They already carry fully automatic sub machine guns and automatic handguns as well as assault rifles and pipe bombs. If they get any better armed they'll be carrying RPG's which some of them have im sure.

This argument about criminals targeting police is a mute one ok folks stop bringing it up i've already proven how its just a hogwash excuse if you read my postings. Ive directly addressed the issue and yet people still keep coming on with the same lame excuse. You cannot predict a future event with no evidence of it ever happening in any country in europe with armed police.

Its just irish hogwash which we are very good. Ahhh sure if you arm de gaurds all the ciminals will come out and target them. Jesus ffs are you living in the real world. Yes criminals are gonna suddenly decide its in their best interest to kill police officers on masse and then get absolutely destroyed by the defence forces who have lets see armoured personnel carriers and 50 cal machine guns. Some of you people obviously don't understand the criminal mind. They like to target weak persons not people who will put up a fight or possibly kill them.

Again let me directly address your hogwash. If your theory was true the eru would have 30 dead gardai. Sure they drive around with armed support unit written on their cars and they are armed gardai. How come criminals don't shoot them or target them? because if they do

(A) they will have other eru units or possibly the defence forces after them
(B) they like to target weak people and have no interest in possibly getting killed in confrontation with armed police.
(C) They exist to make money off weaker people and not to die where possible

Please a bit of balance in the comments.

donvito99 · 08-12-2009 8:13pm

guil wrote: »

imo u are contradictin urself a bit, first ya say it would make guards fair game, then ya say have more RSU's

well surely if criminals know that RSU could be on the scene in minutes, there is a chance they would shoot or take unarmed guards hostage

What I am saying is that criminals would consider the ordinary Community Guard on the beat 'fair game'.

Garda management know what they are getting into with regards to RSU's.

donvito99 · 08-12-2009 8:15pm

realismpol wrote: »

This argument about criminals targeting police is a mute one ok folks stop bringing it up i've already proven how its just a hogwash excuse if you read my postings.

:mad:

Don't tell me what I can and cannot say, please!

Are you from an ES background?

How can you definetively prove that 'criminals targeting POlice is a mute one'?

Argh...

Time to arm the gardai

Comments