Stay classy Gardai - Mod Note in OP

Paparazzo

monkeybutter wrote: »

The reactions on this thread show Irish people in a very bad light indeed.

The police are not a bunch of thugs, they should behave in a professional manner. I would hope that a complaint is lodged on this and that the one that broke the window is suspended at least.

I'd certianly be suing them for damages, whiplash etc etc

It's a disgrace

"etc etc"? Too many more injuries to mention? :rolleyes:
How much money should he get? Emotional damage too i suppose?
Making up injuries and suing people over nothing shows irish people in a far worse light imho.

griffdaddy

monkeybutter wrote: »

After hearing this, I have changed my mind, for no reason I now think this guy was a dickhead, was totally at fault and all police should now carry guns and should cap anyone they believe might be a threat, no matter how trivial and with no recourse to justice.

I wonder would this increase or decrease the chances of getting shot on the job for yer average plod?

Where did I say anything about police carrying guns? What are you even talking about? If you are being completely uncooperative what do you expect them to do? I've encountered plenty of cúnt Gardai in my time and I'm not defending them all or anything. But if you behave like this guy did you should expect a tough reaction

hondasam

Seachmall wrote: »

.

Of course it's possible they did and we just didn't hear it but going by the video alone the Gardai were in the wrong.

I'm sure I heard the guard asking for his D/lic before the window was smashed.
I think I would disagree with your statement, driver was wrong imo, not saying what the gardai did was right either.
If you think about it of course they asked for his D/lic, it's procedure.

_feedback_

Seachmall wrote: »

From what I heard, and obviously we can't hear everything, they demanded he roll down his window and/or exit the car.

You're not obliged to do either unless there is reasonable suspicion that you have or are going to commit an offence.

You are obliged to present your license, and failing to do so is an offence, but there's no indication in the video they requested his license before they smashed his window in.

Of course it's possible they did and we just didn't hear it but going by the video alone the Gardai were in the wrong.

What is this ... You're not obliged...

These are Gardai, doing their job. They want you to open the window, you open the window. Why wouldn't you?

If he is not "obliged" to open the window, why should they be obliged to pussy foot around this clown and be nicey nicey to him. He is wasting their time and being a dick.

griffdaddy

monkeybutter wrote: »

Your point is that they were expecting the unexpected? That is not possible

Are you saying shoot first ask questions later? Is this your point?

I just used that terminology because the poster I quoted used it. A better way to phrase it would be that 'they were anticipating the worst possible outcome' which is exactly what their job is to do. Just out of interest, what do you think would happen if I was pulled at a checkpoint somewhere and refused to pull in or open my window? Do you think the cops would just scratch their heads and wave me through 'this one's got us stumped boys, better wave him on'

Where To

Seachmall wrote: »

From what I heard, and obviously we can't hear everything, they demanded he roll down his window and/or exit the car.

You're not obliged to do either unless there is reasonable suspicion that you have or are going to commit an offence.

You are obliged to present your license, and failing to do so is an offence, but there's no indication in the video they requested his license before they smashed his window in.

Of course it's possible they did and we just didn't hear it but going by the video alone the Gardai were in the wrong.

monkeybutter

griffdaddy wrote: »

Where did I say anything about police carrying guns? What are you even talking about? If you are being completely uncooperative what do you expect them to do? I've encountered plenty of cúnt Gardai in my time and I'm not defending them all or anything. But if you behave like this guy did you should expect a tough reaction

Would shooting him in the head not be a tough reaction? Can you put some limits on what you think the filth should and shouldn't do?

He wasn't an obvious threat that we can hear, he wasn't being abusive as far as we can see or hear, I mean if he had done anything wrong, surely they would push forward and prosecute him for this.

Zab

I haven't seen anybody mention the fact that he does actually start moving the car to the side of the road following signals of one of the female garda. He does this a little late but the earlier signals are pretty unprofessional (watch again to see what I mean). Then the hatless garda comes over from the van and the driver has to stop because his route is now blocked. The signaller even puts out her arm to stop the hatless guy but is ignored.

The driver is being a jackass. I have no sympathy for him in this situation. It seems very possible that he is out to provoke reactions like this. The only thing I'll say for him is that he remains calm throughout.

The hatless garda overreacts. He interferes with a situation that's starting to move towards a resolution and then unnecessarily smashes the window. I think it's clear that there's a point at which they will have to smash the window, but I think it's equally clear that they aren't at that point yet.

The fact is that if we accept that we have a select group of people with extra authority (An Garda Síochána in this case)then it's pretty obvious that we also hold them to a higher standard. The hatless man failed to meet this standard. He deserves a rebuke from his superiors, but if this is his first overreaction then probably nothing more. However, I would say that the fact that he clearly lost his cool isn't a good sign.

Seachmall

hondasam wrote: »

I'm sure I heard the guard asking for his D/lic before the window was smashed.
I think I would disagree with your statement, driver was wrong imo, not saying what the gardai did was right either.
If you think about it of course they asked for his D/lic, it's procedure.

I stand corrected, at 1:28ish I hear "License" from the Garda outside the car.

They do appear to start tapping on the window a second or two later as if they're trying to break it though, which is hardly a reasonable amount of time.

The video really isn't enough to conclude on anything, but my scepticism over the Gardai's response still remains.

elviscostello wrote: »

why should they be obliged to pussy foot around this clown and be nicey nicey to him.

Well, the law for one.

The "Common Sense" and "Common Courtesy" arguments don't play when the discussion is about law.

Where To wrote: »

Seriously, if you're going to patronise my post please don't be so blatantly obvious about ignoring a key part of it which refutes your point.

monkeybutter

griffdaddy wrote: »

I just used that terminology because the poster I quoted used it. A better way to phrase it would be that 'they were anticipating the worst possible outcome' which is exactly what their job is to do. Just out of interest, what do you think would happen if I was pulled at a checkpoint somewhere and refused to pull in or open my window? Do you think the cops would just scratch their heads and wave me through 'this one's got us stumped boys, better wave him on'

Based on this thread, I set his car alight and watch him burn for disobeying me. If he doesn't want to burn he can obey me and get out of the car. This seems to be what joe public wants, so I'd give em what they want

griffdaddy

monkeybutter wrote: »

Would shooting him in the head not be a tough reaction? Can you put some limits on what you think the filth should and shouldn't do?

He wasn't an obvious threat that we can hear, he wasn't being abusive as far as we can see or hear, I mean if he had done anything wrong, surely they would push forward and prosecute him for this.

No, shooting him in the head would be murder. I don't know why you're calling them 'the filth' either, it just makes genuine liberals or people with genuine grievances with the gardai look bad. He had two tonnes of steel at his disposal and was refusing to cooperate. He could've been any kind of head banger. If it's ok to ignore police, as your posts indirectly suggest, what's the point in having them at all?

ejmaztec

Seachmall wrote: »

He was released without charged and had not committed an offense.

Taking this into consideration it begs the question, what law justifies this use of force?

The RTA makes no mention of using force when someone fails to produce their license.

The guy was most likely a shit-stirring dickhead but that doesn't void the fact these, or at least one of these, Gardai acted in a manner that was dangerous and not in accordance with the law.

People seem happy to gloss over that simply because the guy was an idiot.

I'm sure they could have found something to nail him on, but they probably didn't want a whingeing martyr on their hands (probably advice from higher up the chain), so let him go.

The Guards shouldn't have lost it, and they definitely need a course in anger-management, because they fell hook, line and sinker for his provocation, and that's exactly what he hoped to achieve IMO.

What he didn't get was universal condemnation of the actions of the Guards, because I think, judging from this thread, that most people think he's the dickhead in all of this.

monkeybutter

griffdaddy wrote: »

No, shooting him in the head would be murder. I don't know why you're calling them 'the filth' either, it just makes genuine liberals or people with genuine grievances with the gardai look bad. He had two tonnes of steel at his disposal and was refusing to cooperate. He could've been any kind of head banger. If it's ok to ignore police, as your posts indirectly suggest, what's the point in having them at all?

look I can't call then the filt but you can refer to them as *****. I think this is terribly unfair of you.

Also, you previous post where you were blaming another poster for your use of terminology smacks a little of nazi germany to be honest.

d3exile

Seachmall wrote: »

Gardai acted in a manner that was dangerous and not in accordance with the law.

People seem happy to gloss over that simply because the guy was an idiot.

no, what they did was completely legal, if not they would have been suspended or fired and it would have made news... all the driver had to do is report it to the ombudsman (no doubt he did, S2S have them on speed dial) and they'd take the report and about 2 hours later close it. its a non issue.

monkeybutter wrote: »

Based on this thread, I set his car alight and watch him burn for disobeying me. If he doesn't want to burn he can obey me and get out of the car. This seems to be what joe public wants, so I'd give em what they want

wouldyastop no one is suggesting the guards do that, the issue over was the window breaking proportunate, not should they burn out his car. :rolleyes:

Will I Amnt

"Don't pepper spray me.......I don't want that"
I lol'd

hondasam

Seachmall wrote: »

I stand corrected, at 1:28ish I hear "License" from the Garda outside the car.

They do appear to start tapping on the window a second or two later as if they're trying to break it though, which is hardly a reasonable amount of time.

The video really isn't enough to conclude on anything, but my scepticism over the Gardai's response still remains.

He had ample opportunity to open the car door and hand over his d/lic.
He was recording on the approach to the CHPT, listen to him, ''don't pepper spray me'' all for the video.
As I said the gardai do not come out of it smelling of roses either but these video's are edited.

Honey-ec

RATM wrote: »

there was absolutely no need to smash the drivers window in while he was in the drivers seat- they could have caused him serious damage had a shard of glass landed into his neck or head.

Safety glass, dude, safety glass.

hondasam

monkeybutter wrote: »

Based on this thread, I set his car alight and watch him burn for disobeying me. If he doesn't want to burn he can obey me and get out of the car. This seems to be what joe public wants, so I'd give em what they want

You seem to have a problem with the gardai. As stated by several posters no one is saying gardai were 100% correct but the driver caused the situation deliberately.
You must see that it was a set up, who goes around recording their daily drive to the shop.

griffdaddy

monkeybutter wrote: »

look I can't call then the filt but you can refer to them as *****. I think this is terribly unfair of you.

Also, you previous post where you were blaming another poster for your use of terminology smacks a little of nazi germany to be honest.

I used cúnt as an adjective for SOME Gardaí that I've encountered, you used filth as a noun for ALL Gardaí. there's a fundamental difference. I wasn't blaming the other poster for anything, I was just explaining why I used that phrase. But yes, you're right. One of the things that Nazis were most notorious for was blaming the Jews for imposing their ambiguous terminology. :rolleyes:

monkeybutter

d3exile wrote: »

no, what they did was completely legal, if not they would have been suspended or fired and it would have made news... all the driver had to do is report it to the ombudsman (no doubt he did, S2S have them on speed dial) and they'd take the report and about 2 hours later close it. its a non issue.



wouldyastop no one is suggesting the guards do that, the issue over was the window breaking proportunate, not should they burn out his car. :rolleyes:

No, what he asked was what would I do if I was Jonn C fuzz and someone refused to cooperate, as in wouldn't get out of a car if I asked. Based on the actions in the vidjo getting the general green light, I'd have to ratch it up a tad. It would be effective wouldn't it? If he got out, no probs, if he stays in and burns they he probably had something to hide.

Case closed.

Lets all see what the ombudsman has to say about this, but if he had no dash cam, then it would be his word against that of 3, i don't like to generalise here, bent coppers. Who do you think theyd believe? You'd be looking at a 5-10 stretch in pelican bay no doubt.

Seachmall

hondasam wrote: »

He had ample opportunity to open the car door and hand over his d/lic.

But the clock that defines "ample time" only begins counting when his license is requested.

From what we can hear they ask at 1:29 and begin tapping the window at 1:30, that is hardly ample time.

I'm not saying he's not a dickhead, and it was definitely a setup, but from what I can hear from the tape I don't believe they acted in accordance with the law. It's almost pedantic but it is the law.

Either way the complaint has been filled. Only time will tell if they acted unprofessionally.

Of course I'll have lost interest at that point. :pac:

_feedback_

Seachmall wrote: »

Well, the law for one.

The "Common Sense" and "Common Courtesy" arguments don't play when the discussion is about law.

The law works both ways.. The above refers to half a sentence. My point was in reply to your way of thinking that"he's not obliged to open the window". I think any decent person is obliged to co-operate as best they can. Most would do that without a second thought. He made no attempt to co-operate.

The law is a funny thing. What they did could be deemed reasonable if we knew the full story. For all we know, this muppet could be constantly acting the idiot and looking for a response. He could have driven that road ten times that week and caused an obstruction to the Gardai every time.. who knows.

johnboysligo

Gummy Panda wrote: »

I always wonder do they have cam ready cause they are going to be confrontational and try provoke a response from the Garda.

Dashboard cameras are becoming a very common way to avoid lengthy fights with insurances companies who don't want to pay out and determining responsibility in an accident.
If having a camera is enough to provoke a Gardai they shouldn't wear a bright uniform and work in public spaces. Was driving on that length of road somehow confrontational? Was the fact the window was broken and WOULD not open confrontational?

If anything the Gardai tried to provoke a response from him, The Gardai was prepared to use two weapons a baton and his pepper spray, yes pepper spray is a weapon, because the driver could not open his window. There was 10 seconds of "its broken" before the garda decided to smash the window. Yeah he provoked the Garda alright.

griffdaddy

Monkeybutter, I actually can't figure out if you're trolling or if you have some kind of persecution complex

monkeybutter

griffdaddy wrote: »

I used cúnt as an adjective for SOME Gardaí that I've encountered, you used filth as a noun for ALL Gardaí. there's a fundamental difference. I wasn't blaming the other poster for anything, I was just explaining why I used that phrase. But yes, you're right. One of the things that Nazis were most notorious for was blaming the Jews for imposing their ambiguous terminology. :rolleyes:

Sorry is one ok, but the other isn't, who are you to judge this, is that not unfair no? Is yours not a generalisation? You certainly weren't balanced in anyway, I've met plenty of cant gards in my time, did you qualify this by saying you met many nice ones as well?

What I was saying is that you weren't willing to take personal responsiblilty for what you said in your post, this smack of nazi germany alright.

Seachmall

elviscostello wrote: »

The law works both ways.. The above refers to half a sentence. My point was in reply to your way of thinking that"he's not obliged to open the window". I think any decent person is obliged as a citizen to co-operate as best he can. Most would do that without a second thought. He made no attempt to co-operate.

You only have to cooperate as much as the law requires.

I'm not arguing he shouldn't have just opened his door or used common sense, I'm arguing the Gardai response was too forceful given he had not committed an offence (as far as we can tell).

The law is a funny thing. What they did could be deemed reasonable if we knew the full story. For all we know, this muppet could be constantly acting the muppet and looking for a response. He could have driven that road ten times that week and caused an obstruction to the Gardai every time.. who knows.

If he drove past the checkpoint twice a day every day with "F* The Police" blaring on his ****ty sound system I'd still expect the Gardai to act professionally.

Like I said earlier, it's unfair to expect them to be perfect but I think in this situation they went too far over too little.

Micky Dolenz

That's maddness. The Garda in question completely lost his cool, he can be heard huffing and puffing and is clearly agitated. Not what you would expect from a seasoned professional. The other Gardai seem calm and collective.

For all the Gardai knew, the driver may have been a bit slow in the head department. After 90 seconds, the Gardas action seem rash.

hondasam

Seachmall wrote: »

But the clock that defines "ample time" only begins counting when his license is requested.

From what we can hear they ask at 1:29 and begin tapping the window at 1:30, that is hardly ample time.

I'm not saying he's not a dickhead, and it was definitely a setup, but from what I can hear from the tape I don't believe they acted in accordance with the law. It's almost pedantic but it is the law.

Either way the complaint has been filled. Only time will tell if they acted unprofessionally.

Of course I'll have lost interest at that point. :pac:

Tapping the window is not breaking it. feck you I have to keep going back to look at it again. what one are you looking at?
There will be no complaint, it will be dropped. More time wasting.
I will remind you when and If I see it in the papers. :pac:

Ricardo G

monkeybutter wrote: »

Just so you know this, and looking at your post, and the fact that you think the police acted properly, I'd reckon you don't already know this, you cannot expect the unexpected. Once you expect it, it can no longer be unexpected.

I think your expecting me to unexpectingly expect your expectations...bet you did'nt expect that :rolleyes:

monkeybutter

griffdaddy wrote: »

Monkeybutter, I actually can't figure out if you're trolling or if you have some kind of persecution complex

I thought exactly the same thing when you said 'By doing what they did were they not expecting the unexpected'.

Not only did you not grasp the poor judge of the person who posted 'expecting the unexpected' you agreed with him. You said that your whole point was expecting the unexpected.

As you can't do this, does this mean you have no point?

Or were they expecting the unexpected by smashing the window?

It's terribly confusing to say the least