Dissident Republican killed in Kildare

Foxhound38

http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0719/463386-athy-death/

Between the dissidents killing each other, and the drugs gangs killing each other, and the dissidents killing the drug gang members and vice versa - why can't we as a society get a handle on our more violent elements? Are the Gardai not equipped for it? Are the politicians too cowardly to introduce relevent legislation? Are we as a society too permissive of violent elements?

There must be something we can do to stem the tide here, because there seems to be more killings every week and sooner or later innocent people are going to get hurt...

gallag

Foxhound38 wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0719/463386-athy-death/

Between the dissidents killing each other, and the drugs gangs killing each other, and the dissidents killing the drug gang members and vice versa - why can't we as a society get a handle on our more violent elements? Are the Gardai not equipped for it? Are the politicians too cowardly to introduce relevent legislation? Are we as a society too permissive of violent elements?

There must be something we can do to stem the tide here, because there seems to be more killings every week and sooner or later innocent people are going to get hurt...

While no innocent are being caught in the crossfire I would not waist resources stopping them from thinning themselves out.

Patrick2010

I have no problem with these guys killing each other, why should we waste valuable Garda resources preventing this?

Foxhound38

Patrick2010 wrote: »

I have no problem with these guys killing each other, why should we waste valuable Garda resources preventing this?

Because innocents can and do get caught in the crossfire for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. It also creates a culture of violence in society - we have the right to lay down certain civic rules, that we don't kill each other is pretty much at the top of said rules, and these lads flout it on a daily basis. We undermine the whole system if we allow this because we're not arsed enforcing.

Mardy Bum

The only way the country will get control of the black market drugs is by making them legal. There are plenty of people who will join both groups until such day it becomes economically pointless.

.jacksparrow.

Oh look another one of these threads, wonder where this will end.

And the only info we know is he was assaulted which could mean anything like a random attack, why is there a men thread insinuating its
Some sort of tit for tat with criminals?

gallag

.jacksparrow. wrote: »

Oh look another one of these threads, wonder where this will end.

Probably with you trying to convince everybody that the dissidents are a great bunch of lads and should have the support of the irish people! Amiright?

COYW

.jacksparrow. wrote: »

Oh look another one of these threads, wonder where this will end.

You really don't like these threads that shed a negative light on dissident republicans do you?

Let them kill each other. If he or she is dead, I hope the guards hold a strong presence at the funeral, preventing any moronic republican salute, just like they did at Rory's funeral.

My name is URL

gallag wrote: »

While no innocent are being caught in the crossfire I would not waist resources stopping them from thinning themselves out.

Yeah, good idea. Just let them run amok with no resistance at all. That'll send out the right message and make people feel confident about the Gardai's ability to actually deal with this stuff. You're a genius.

PizzamanIRL

This was a personal attack, nothing to do with the IRA. Just some unhappy junkies in this kip of a town.

Wacker The Attacker

gallag wrote: »

While no innocent are being caught in the crossfire I would not waist resources stopping them from thinning themselves out.

Fat Freddy.

Is that you?

Sandy Vagina

No sympathy for republican scum like that. How many lives has violent republican ideology's followers caused on this island?????

Foxhound38

PizzamanIRL wrote: »

This was a personal attack, nothing to do with the IRA. Just some unhappy junkies in this kip of a town.

He was in some form of IRA and he was killed by criminal elements, that much isn't it doubt, and the only claim made...

.jacksparrow.

gallag wrote: »

Probably with you trying to convince everybody that the dissidents are a great bunch of lads and should have the support of the irish people! Amiright?

I have stated numerous times I disagree with dissidents, but ignoring them is naive and results in more bloodshed.

I won't e even go into your blind defence of the orange order, the riots, the marches you defend lauding ex uda and uvf killers.

PizzamanIRL

Foxhound38 wrote: »

He was in some form of IRA and he was killed by criminal elements, that much isn't it doubt, and the only claim made...

Yes but you're making it sound like it was about IRA involvement. It was just a brutal attack on someone who happened to be involved in the IRA before.

St.Spodo

Sandy Vagina wrote: »

No sympathy for republican scum like that. How many lives has violent republican ideology's followers caused on this island?????

Most republicans don't kill people.

PizzamanIRL

St.Spodo wrote: »

Most republicans don't kill people.

And most republicans aren't disabled cripples who can't defend themselves. He gets my sympathy.

pablomakaveli

.jacksparrow. wrote: »

I have stated numerous times I disagree with dissidents, but ignoring them is naive and results in more bloodshed.

I won't e even go into your blind defence of the orange order, the riots, the marches you defend lauding ex uda and uvf killers.

It's funny how many posters on boards say they don't support the dissidents but then go on to play down or defend them and completely contradicting themselves in the process.

"I don't support the dissidents but..." has become the new "I'm not racist, but..." on Boards.

gallag

.jacksparrow. wrote: »

I have stated numerous times I disagree with dissidents, but ignoring them is naive and results in more bloodshed.

I won't e even go into your blind defence of the orange order, the riots, the marches you defend lauding ex uda and uvf killers.

You might want to provide a link to where I have called UDA/UVF killers anything but scum and when have I defended the riots or the OO? Just complete bollocks really.

.jacksparrow.

pablomakaveli wrote: »

It's funny how many posters on boards say they don't support the dissidents but then go on to play down or defend them and completely contradicting themselves in the process.

"I don't support the dissidents but..." has become the new "I'm not racist, but..." on Boards.

But I don't support dissidents, I think they are fighting a war that doesn't exist, can't put it simpler than that.

Sandy Vagina

St.Spodo wrote: »

Most republicans don't kill people.

No instead they support men who do. They paint murals of them. They throw a few bob into a hat being passed around at a wolftones session. They pretend they're peaceful people but secretly rejoice at the death of British servicemen, and come on to threads like this and defend terrorists.

smcgiff

St.Spodo wrote: »

Most republicans don't kill people.

To be fair, his description didn't end at just 'Republican'.

The law of the land needs to be upheld. Terrorist's need to be held equally accountable, even if attacking other undesirables. We already have cases where innocent bystanders have been killed due to mistaken identity or because they were possible witnesses to crimes.

Yamanoto

Patrick2010 wrote: »

I have no problem with these guys killing each other, why should we waste valuable Garda resources preventing this?

Because the costs to the State of investigating the murder, bringing it to trial & incarcerating the perpetrator represent an inestimably greater burden on the taxpayer, I would imagine.

OCorcrainn

My name is URL wrote: »

Yeah, good idea. Just let them run amok with no resistance at all. That'll send out the right message and make people feel confident about the Gardai's ability to actually deal with this stuff. You're a genius.

Yeah because look how that has worked out with the loyalists in the north.......

tritium

Op is right, sooner or later innocents will be caught in the crossfire...

Build them an arena and charge admission to the death matches. Funds raised can go to services for the victims of these assholes

joe swanson

No loss.. ..

Riddle101

Mardy Bum wrote: »

The only way the country will get control of the black market drugs is by making them legal. There are plenty of people who will join both groups until such day it becomes economically pointless.

Won't stop anything, by making drugs legal. By doing that, how can you arrest gangs that sell drugs? Or bring drugs into the country? You're just giving them freedom to do their jobs more effectively. Not to mention, legalizing could probably bring a lot of negative attention to Ireland.

Anyway, you can't really help the gang violence. It's part of the nature of gangs to feud and kill each other. The only thing you can hope for is that not too many innocents get caught up in the crossfire.

Local-womanizer

Riddle101 wrote: »

Won't stop anything, by making drugs legal. By doing that, how can you arrest gangs that sell drugs? Or bring drugs into the country? You're just giving them freedom to do their jobs more effectively. Not to mention, legalizing could probably bring a lot of negative attention to Ireland.

I think the intention would be the state controls the production and selling of the drugs, not the gangs. You take the control out of the dealers hands.

That way you know you are getting a quality product from someone who isn't going to come around and break your fingers if you owe them money.

Mardy Bum

Riddle101 wrote: »

Won't stop anything, by making drugs legal. By doing that, how can you arrest gangs that sell drugs? Or bring drugs into the country? You're just giving them freedom to do their jobs more effectively. Not to mention, legalizing could probably bring a lot of negative attention to Ireland.

Anyway, you can't really help the gang violence. It's part of the nature of gangs to feud and kill each other. The only thing you can hope for is that not too many innocents get caught up in the crossfire.

If it is legal the markets will take over along with economies of scale. The symptoms that lead people to gang culture obviously need to be addressed in a larger way; poverty and education, however if big legal business takes over the drug market consumers will buy from legal sellers and probably at a cheaper price. How many gangs are currently brewing alcohol?

Riddle101

Local-womanizer wrote: »

I think the intention would be the state controls the production and selling of the drugs, not the gangs. You take the control out of the dealers hands.

I figured as much, but you're basically asking the state to become drug dealers themselves. It would compromise both the state and society's integrity in the process. Making drugs legal would be like saying it's ok to take drugs, and you can buy from us. People already have problems with drinking and smoking, if they're allowed take drugs as well then who knows what effects it can have. Youths might be encouraged to take them too because there are no boundaries.

Furthermore, this country is very bad a regulating things. So I doubt they'd be able to regulate drugs very well.

Mardy Bum wrote: »

If it is legal the markets will take over along with economies of scale. The symptoms that lead people to gang culture obviously need to be addressed in a larger way; poverty and education, however if big legal business takes over the drug market consumers will buy from legal sellers and probably at a cheaper price. How many gangs are currently brewing alcohol?

It will encourage competition between the state and the gangs. Which is not a good thing, because it could cause all the gangs to join forces and work together undermine the state. The last thing you want is for the gangs to be co-operating with each other, which they will if they have a common enemy to fight. It could turn into a war between the state and the gangs, and will still lead to bloodshed which was what this topic is all about. These gangs aren't just going to give in, they're going to want to fight to keep their businesses from going bust. But that's my theory anyway.

Bigdeadlydave

Have to say the reporting of this murder has been quite strange, the man was very badly injured in a car crash a while ago, was very frail and struggled to walk, even with his ever present stick. He spent most of his time the last while sitting on the bridge watching the world go by. So it was a very viscous attack to do it to someone in his condition, yet for some reason only one or two of the papers made even a passing reference to his condition.

frag420

Riddle101 wrote: »

I figured as much, but you're basically asking the state to become drug dealers themselves

They already deal tobacco and alcohol!! What's your point?

It will encourage competition between the state and the gangs. Which is not a good thing, because it could cause all the gangs to join forces and work together undermine the state. The last thing you want is for the gangs to be co-operating with each other, which they will if they have a common enemy to fight

But you also said...

Anyway, you can't really help the gang violence. It's part of the nature of gangs to feud and kill each other

So which is it?

PizzamanIRL

Bigdeadlydave wrote: »

Have to say the reporting of this murder has been quite strange, the man was very badly injured in a car crash a while ago, was very frail and struggled to walk, even with his ever present stick. He spent most of his time the last while sitting on the bridge watching the world go by. So it was a very viscous attack to do it to someone in his condition, yet for some reason only one or two of the papers made even a passing reference to his condition.

Exactly. They would prefer to put out the highly dramatic headline so they sell newspapers. Painting him as a mad bomber who tried to blow up Aintree, when it was reported at the time of that incident that he was just basically the delivery man. He doesn't have a clean past but the papers would prefer to talk about his dirty past instead of the fact that a defenceless man was kicked to death. He was as good as a statue on that bridge in Athy, when he wasn't hobbling down the town to get to his little spot.

Bigdeadlydave

PizzamanIRL wrote: »

Exactly. They would prefer to put out the highly dramatic headline so they sell newspapers. Painting him as a mad bomber who tried to blow up Aintree, when it was reported at the time of that incident that he was just basically the delivery man. He doesn't have a clean past but the papers would prefer to talk about his dirty past instead of the fact that a defenceless man was kicked to death. He was as good as a statue on that bridge in Athy, when he wasn't hobbling down the town to get to his little spot.

Also, the man has not been an active republican for quite some time, because of his disability, his situation was worlds apart from that of Alan Ryans.

Riddle101

frag420 wrote: »

They already deal tobacco and alcohol!! What's your point?

There's a line that must be drawn. Yeah i've heard all the arguments about tobacco and alcohol. But those things have been accepted into society long long ago. Doesn't mean that all drugs should be legalized. If it were that easy to legalize them, don't you think they WOULD be legal now?

So which is it?

It's both. The violence will always be there because it's the nature of organised crime, drugs being a common reason. However I fully believe that a better justice system and policing is a much better solution then legalizing and selling. To legalize it and have the state sell it, means that you're just adding to the trouble. Gangs will start attacking the state more if they the state starts selling as well and innocents will be targeted deliberately instead of being killed by accident, which is usually what happens.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Patrick2010 wrote: »

I have no problem with these guys killing each other, why should we waste valuable Garda resources preventing this?

At least they do limit the killing to people involved in the life, it's a different world and hard for the average Joe to understand. The crowd down in Limerick killed people with no connection to organised crime. The doorman who refused entry to one of these gangster thugs sister for instance.

That crowd have nothing to do with the Republican movement and also of course a lot of Republican organisations aren't involved with the underworld.

Local-womanizer

Riddle101 wrote: »

I figured as much, but you're basically asking the state to become drug dealers themselves. It would compromise both the state and society's integrity in the process. Making drugs legal would be like saying it's ok to take drugs, and you can buy from us. People already have problems with drinking and smoking, if they're allowed take drugs as well then who knows what effects it can have. Youths might be encouraged to take them too because there are no boundaries.

Furthermore, this country is very bad a regulating things. So I doubt they'd be able to regulate drugs very well.




It will encourage competition between the state and the gangs. Which is not a good thing, because it could cause all the gangs to join forces and work together undermine the state. The last thing you want is for the gangs to be co-operating with each other, which they will if they have a common enemy to fight. It could turn into a war between the state and the gangs, and will still lead to bloodshed which was what this topic is all about. These gangs aren't just going to give in, they're going to want to fight to keep their businesses from going bust. But that's my theory anyway.

If people want to do drugs now they will. If they could get drugs over the counter from an approved source they will. They will stay away from the drug gang.

What do you mean about no boundaries, which will lead to young people taking them? Regulation would solve this.

The drug gangs are hardly going to improve their customer service so they can compete with the state. If drugs were legal then that's the end of gangs dealing drugs.

It doesn't affect me on that I don't take drugs, but I don't see the merit in trying to the defeat the drug problem the way they are doing now, as its not working.

Riddle101

Local-womanizer wrote: »

If people want to do drugs now they will. If they could get drugs over the counter from an approved source they will. They will stay away from the drug gang.

How do you approve something like cocaine or heroine over the counter? No medical professional or chemist is going to approve such a thing. Hell it's hard enough to get prescription pills, but you're basically saying that junkies and addicts will be able to buy over the counter. I just can't see that happening. Just imagine the chemists being filled with these addicts, and then we'll see how low Ireland can go with drug addiction.

What do you mean about no boundaries, which will lead to young people taking them? Regulation would solve this.

As I already said above. Ireland is bad at regulating things. So I wouldn't trust them to be able to regulate drugs properly. It just won't work.

But legalizing basically says it's ok to take drugs. It's not a very good message you want to be sending to kids and teenagers.

The drug gangs are hardly going to improve their customer service so they can compete with the state. If drugs were legal then that's the end of gangs dealing drugs.

You'd be surprised. Drug dealing is a major business for gangs, it's one of their primary resources. You think they're just going to stop because the state sells them. They will look for ways to undermine the state, who knows what it will lead to, but we're talking about gangs who are experienced in this game, the state is not experienced.

It doesn't affect me on that I don't take drugs, but I don't see the merit in trying to the defeat the drug problem the way they are doing now, as its not working.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that what they're doing now is not working, it just needs to be improved upon. As I said before, improving the justice system and policing would be better. Harsher sentences and better vigilance is what's needed. Stooping to the gangs level and having the state become a huge drug dealer and importer just looks bad for the country.

Mardy Bum

Riddle101 wrote: »

You'd be surprised. Drug dealing is a major business for gangs, it's one of their primary resources. You think they're just going to stop because the state sells them. They will look for ways to undermine the state, who knows what it will lead to, but we're talking about gangs who are experienced in this game, the state is not experienced.

Yes it will. They will just go out of business.

Riddle101

Mardy Bum wrote: »

Yes it will. They will just go out of business.

I doubt it, but that's all I say about that.

Sleepy

Riddle101 wrote: »

It will encourage competition between the state and the gangs. Which is not a good thing, because it could cause all the gangs to join forces and work together undermine the state. The last thing you want is for the gangs to be co-operating with each other, which they will if they have a common enemy to fight. It could turn into a war between the state and the gangs, and will still lead to bloodshed which was what this topic is all about.

This sounds ideal to me. A bunch of ignorant scumbags vs the Ranger Wing?

Clean streets in no time.

tdv123

If they were actually fighting for Irish freedom like the Provos or the old IRA I would feel sorry them but there just a bunch of drug dealing thugs who deserve what they get. They have no coherent plan & just pick soft targets

Is this a bit like the INLA/IPLO feud?

Would the creation of the Irish Republic declared in 1919 being established excluding the North make these hard-liners happy & finally take the gun out of Irish politics?

Riddle101

Sleepy wrote: »

This sounds ideal to me. A bunch of ignorant scumbags vs the Ranger Wing?

Clean streets in no time.

We could do that now, if the state got it's act together and started cracking down on crime more, and we have a better justice system.