Gardai carrying Guns

bravestar

IRLConor wrote: »

I would advise against that, unless monument wants to fall foul of this or this.

Im well aware of the law, thanks. Heaven forbid you could travel to a different country for such training...:rolleyes:

IRLConor

bravestar wrote: »

Im well aware of the law, thanks. Heaven forbid you could travel to a different country for such training...:rolleyes:

It was more for monument's benefit than yours TBH. It's a stupid, NIMBY, Idontlikedalookadat kinda law, but then again that's nothing new with Irish firearms law as you know.

bravestar

IRLConor wrote: »

It was more for monument's benefit than yours TBH. It's a stupid, NIMBY, Idontlikedalookadat kinda law, but then again that's nothing new with Irish firearms law as you know.

Couldn't agree with you more, and after reading over my last post to you, I see that it may have come across a bit hostile. Apologies for that, was meant in a light hearted way

audidiesel

monument wrote: »

No, I'm just saying that shooting people accuracy in computer games is not always as easy as the other poster made out.

There can also be "dynamic situations" in commuter games too, as well as highly advanced physics (to the point that they have to scale them back in many games to keep them fun) and there's moving targets etc. None of this is me seriously comparing games to a real situation that police can find them selves in!

having a liking of fps and also having firing off at least a thousand rounds from a handgun over the last few years, i can confirm they are absolutely nothing alike in reality. recoil, adrenline, even types of clothing being worn all come into play.

its like playing a racing game and thinking you can drive a real racing car quickly around a track. even if you can do it well with all the game aids turned off, its not the same experience in reality.

i know your not seriously comparing the reality with games. but believe me they arent alike at all.

Manic Moran

monument wrote: »

But others were shot by the police. I'm sure they are glad not to be dead, but not so glad they were shot by the people who are suposed to be protecting them.

There's still no sign that he was going to kill anybody else. Unlike some of the police officers, his shooting was very targeted.

Very good reason for guns to be limited to highly trained officers.

By the video, he pointed his firearm at them. Should they wait for him to shoot first, hope he misses, and then shoot back?

Eru

If ever a person deserved a comment that will result in a ban its you Monument.

Your sir are a complete and utter ****wit of the very, very highest caliber.

(PM sent Hooch)

monument

Manic Moran wrote: »

By the video, he pointed his firearm at them. Should they wait for him to shoot first, hope he misses, and then shoot back?

I'd expect them to do it without shooting nine bystanders. I'd expect them to be far better trained before getting guns to use in crowded areas.

Eru wrote: »

If ever a person deserved a comment that will result in a ban its you Monument.

Your sir are a complete and utter ****wit of the very, very highest caliber.

(PM sent Hooch)

Not a great sign of the level of maturity of the people calling for Irish officers to be armed.

audidiesel wrote: »

i know your not seriously comparing the reality with games. but believe me they arent alike at all.

Agreed.

Eru

monument wrote: »

Not a great sign of the level of maturity of the people calling for Irish officers to be armed.

Quote where I called for routine arming please

IRLConor

monument wrote: »

I'd expect them to do it without shooting nine bystanders. I'd expect them to be far better trained before getting guns to use in crowded areas.

Shooting a pistol accurately is hard even if you're not stressed.

Your options as the head of the NYPD are (in no particular order):

• Withdraw firearms from the majority of your officers and only issue them to highly trained units. Watch as the public bitches about the inability of the police to respond to armed assholes and watch as your officers get shot in the line of duty.
• Massively increase the firearms training hours. Watch as the public bitches about the reduced number of officers on the beat and the increased costs.
• Switch from pistols to shoulder fired weapons (probably MP5 or M4 to match the current inventory for the ESU) since these are easier to shoot accurately. Watch as the public bitches about the increased cost and the militarisation of the police force.
• Stick with the pistols and current training regimen and accept that sometimes innocent bystanders will get hit. Train your officers to use good judgement to minimise the total number of people injured/killed. Watch as the public bitches when innocent people get hit by police rounds.

The public will bitch no matter which option you take. You can save officers' lives, bystanders' lives or money - pick any two.

Hooch

Eru wrote: »

If ever a person deserved a comment that will result in a ban its you Monument.

Your sir are a complete and utter ****wit of the very, very highest caliber.

(PM sent Hooch)

Infracted for above comment.

No further comment on this needed.

monument

IRLConor - I wouldn't try to unarm NYC officers - tho maybe there is a case for better training without breaking the bank. While NYC has done a good job at lowering the crime rate, it's still a good bit more dangerous than Ireland.

Eru wrote: »

Quote where I called for routine arming please

Sorry - excuse me if I was wrong, but it looked that way from a number of your posts.

Locust

Only 9 injured, and none with life threatening injuries? Its not the worst outcome in the world, taking into account its one of the most crowded areas in NYC and probably has more cops than anywhere else!

Whatever happened that day, I presume after shooting the co-worker he raised his firearm at more people or the officers - it caused all those officers to open fire. Also worth bearing in mind that bullets will travel through a person and keep on going, & bullets love to fragment and ricochet off concrete surfaces. Thats the call those officers made - presumably (I wasn't there) - to shoot that guy in an attempt to save lives, whats the issue?

Qualitymark

I'd be hesitant to call the Guards if I thought they were going to turn up wearing guns, I'd have to say.

source

Qualitymark wrote: »

I'd be hesitant to call the Guards if I thought they were going to turn up wearing guns, I'd have to say.

Why?

Qualitymark

source wrote: »

Why?

Because the purpose of guns is to shoot people. I stay well away from anyone carrying a gun.

IRLConor

Qualitymark wrote: »

Because the purpose of guns is to shoot people. I stay well away from anyone carrying a gun.

As I said earlier in this thread:

IRLConor wrote: »

That's patently untrue. Some guns are made exclusively for killing people. Some guns (like mine) are made exclusively for shooting paper targets. Some guns are well suited to both.

An "all guns are killing machines" attitude is woefully naïve.

Qualitymark

If gardaí are going to carry guns suitable for shooting paper targets, that's fine by me, then ;D

IRLConor

Qualitymark wrote: »

If gardaí are going to carry guns suitable for shooting paper targets, that's fine by me, then ;D

Your statement sounded like a general policy, hence my answer.

When Gardai carry firearms, they do so in order to increase their ability to protect themselves and others from harm. Unless you consider yourself a threat to them you have nothing to fear.

I can understand some mistrust of the Gardai - I've first hand experience of incompetent members and rude members and downright unprofessional members - but I don't consider them to be a physical threat to me.

Qualitymark

In general I don't distrust the Gardaí, I regard most as intelligent, calm, courteous, thoughtful people who do their job very well.

But, also in general, it would be my observation that when people carry guns it tends to change their attitude; makes them less ready to negotiate and more ready to come the lámh láidir.

goldie fish

Qualitymark wrote: »

In general I don't distrust the Gardaí, I regard most as intelligent, calm, courteous, thoughtful people who do their job very well.

But, also in general, it would be my observation that when people carry guns it tends to change their attitude; makes them less ready to negotiate and more ready to come the lámh láidir.

You have never met any hunters then?

Iwannahurl

Qualitymark wrote: »

In general I don't distrust the Gardaí, I regard most as intelligent, calm, courteous, thoughtful people who do their job very well.

But, also in general, it would be my observation that when people carry guns it tends to change their attitude; makes them less ready to negotiate and more ready to come the lámh láidir.

I'm not sure which of the developed world's police forces are routinely armed, but the ones I've seen certainly look like they mean business (ie give an impression of authority and effectiveness).

I'd also be inclined towards the view that being armed could potentially make (some) police officers (in some jurisdictions) "less ready to negotiate and more ready to come the lámh láidir".

It reminds me of the introduction of tasers in the US. When it was originally proposed that police there would be issued with tasers, one of the arguments in favour of this "non-lethal" technology was that it would lead to a reduction in the number of people shot by police. IIRC this was not what happened. The number of people shot did not drop significantly, whereas a whole new class of tasered people was created. I recall hearing this being discussed by US broadcaster Rachel Maddow, but I can't find a direct source just now.

That said, I doubt there's a consistent causal relationship between police being armed and the nature and extent of deaths due to being shot by police. There must be other factors involved, such as (I'm just guessing here) policies in relation to armed response by police, type of police training, availability of guns among the citizenry, socio-cultural factors relating to gun use etc.

For example, I simply can't imagine anything remotely like the Marikana Massacre ever occurring in Ireland, and I doubt that there are American (pro rata) levels of police shootings in, say, Sweden.

source

Qualitymark wrote: »

In general I don't distrust the Gardaí, I regard most as intelligent, calm, courteous, thoughtful people who do their job very well.

But, also in general, it would be my observation that when people carry guns it tends to change their attitude; makes them less ready to negotiate and more ready to come the lámh láidir.

I don't know about that, I've met and talked with police in Italy and France, all of whom were armed and were really friendly and happy to stand and pose for pictures. Same in Austria, Czech Republic and Australia.

Just because a policeman is armed doesn't mean they're not going to be approachable. The police we're used to seeing armed are those from the USA, and no they don't come across very approachable. Very strict and very formal, but that's because of the culture in the USA.

I've been in the Army Reserve, and I've used a wide range of weapons, from pistols to anti aircraft cannons. It didn't change my attitude, it made me more situationally aware. Sure, I was more switched on when I had a rifle in my hands, but that was for safety nothing else.

Having said all that, it's your opinion I'm arguing against, and they usually say you can't argue with an opinion, but my experience says that your opinion is incorrect.

esf2012

source wrote: »

I don't know about that, I've met and talked with police in Italy and France, all of whom were armed and were really friendly and happy to stand

Agree fully. Many many agencies are very friendly and approachable. Pictures, chat, directions, etc. AGS may have a reputation for this but we are certainly not alone.

and as for Armed police = gun crime, that flies in the face of global statistics where many armed police operate in countries with lower gun crime than here.

Zambia

Qualitymark wrote: »

Because the purpose of guns is to shoot people. I stay well away from anyone carrying a gun.

I have met several people who are just not comfortable around firearms.

I can understand completely.

Manic Moran

Zambia wrote: »

I have met several people who are just not comfortable around firearms.

I can understand completely.

I am reminded a little bit of the TED talk by the Chief of the Dutch Armed Forces.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjAsM1vAhW0

"Being so close to this gun may make you feel uneasy. It may even feel scary. A real gun, at a few feet's distance. [...] Let us cherish the fact that probably most of you have never been close to a gun. [...] Guns are not a part of our lives"

(It's a good talk, by the way)

He is correct, they do make people uneasy, but this is simply because of ignorance. It's not Joe Bloggs' fault, if the man isn't exposed routinely to firearms, either through his personal use or simply by seeing them on a daily basis on a Gard's belt, it's not really his fault. But a Frenchman won't think twice about the concept of a Gendarme with a gun. It's routine, a tool of his trade. After a while, it would become routine to an Irishman. They'll look past the pistol to the Garda wearing it. What's particularly amusing is that it seems that the General has fallen afoul of this as well. Either he doesn't consider the sidearms that Dutch police wear as 'real guns', or he is so used to them being on the streets and seeing them every day that he has completely forgotten to consider them.

NTM

2218219

Random wrote: »

i remember watching a road wars episode where 2 of the uk (unarmed) cops went to the states to go around with some american cops for a few weeks. the 2 uk lads chased down and detained an armed suspect while the american cops arrived later (they couldnt keep up or react quick enough?), guns drawn, wondernig wtf the uk lads were up to.

sometimes its best not to take it as 100% what you see on TV in my opinion.

monument

2218219 wrote: »

sometimes its best not to take it as 100% what you see on TV in my opinion.

Sure, so the armed suspect on a cop show was a really an actor, or what?

Manic Moran

The US attitude is probably something like... "Well, if you want to charge down a gun, it's your funeral..."

When it was originally proposed that police there would be issued with tasers, one of the arguments in favour of this "non-lethal" technology was that it would lead to a reduction in the number of people shot by police. IIRC this was not what happened.

That's because whoever poposed that argument either had no clue what he was talking about, or was relying on the hope that the audience had no clue what he was talking about. The rules for the use of lethal force haven't changed with the introduction of Taser, Taser is not a substitute for a firearm.

You weren't going to use lethal force if there wasn't a lethal threat to you or others before Taser came out, and you certainly weren't about to use less-than-lethal force with a Taser when you're faced with a lethal threat to yourself. What -will- have reduced is the number of people given a clout with the baton, and the amount of personnel physically tackled. Taser is safer for the officer than close-quarters combat, and has less lasting effect on the recipient (Also looks cleaner and less violent in the newspaper photographs)

NTM

MEMBER12

I think it is passed time to arm the Gardai. I believe that members would even pay to purchase their own firearms. Guns are coming into daily life more and more, and as I said on another post life is getting cheaper day by day. It is only a matter of time before an unarmed member is shot or killed responding to an armed incident. I think that the GRA should get off their arse now and start balloting members. This should be brought before the Dail. We need to follow the Canadian system, Gardai need protection now before it is too late. Let's have this discussion now in the cold light of day, rather than in the heat of the moment after a member has been shot.

bluecode

I got used to guns in the FCA, before that I had the I saw them in terms of their mystique. Which is how people who don't handle them see them. I remember once talking to a Garda Sergeant, female, lesbian. I told her I would have long since applied to be a detective in her position. I mention the lesbian thing because she is a bit mannish. She demurred, it was the gun thing that put her off. Detectives carry guns you see. I was puzzled because to me a gun was simply a tool, no mystique. Just a tool. She like so many Irish had built it up in her mind as a scary thing. I just saw a lump of metal that was a bit of fun to fire sometimes. Sometime you needed it to protect yourself.

Recently though I was driving through Dublin, one of the bad areas. There was a bit of keruffle ahead. As I passed there was a detective with a notebook taking notes. He was casually dressed, shirt no jacket but on his waist was a belt and his holstered Sig Sauer P226. I was taken aback, it seemed so out of context. I worried slightly that someone would take it off him.

I lived in Dublin most of my life but never saw that before. Although I had seen detectives with Smith and Wesson revolvers. Plus routinely I see armed units in their Volvos.

Despite that I think the Garda should be routinely armed. We in this country we have built up a ridiculous over the top reaction to guns. Meanwhile in the rest of Europe it's normal. No one thinks twice about it. Even security guards in shops carry guns in some countries.

We give the gun too much mystique. It's just a tool at the end of the day.