Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Off Duty Garda shoots man

Options
24567

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    El Tarangu
    Registered Users Posts: 1,615 ✭✭✭El Tarangu


    Well done to that Garda - in an altercation with three people, he managed to keep his head and aim for their shoulder.


  • Options
    #33
    Riesen_Meal
    Registered Users Posts: 10,575 ✭✭✭✭Riesen_Meal


    alchemist33 wrote: »
    They used to, anyway. My uncle was a detective in the 70s and 80s and had a handgun in his house.

    My uncle was a detective also and used to carry back in the day also, there isn't many that do but I think he had to...

    Nowadays we can see clearly in the side of the new fangled squad cars have "firearm unit" written on them

    In some ways I think they all should have guns but then you see some of the stuff in America where they shoot mentally ill people or black people for little or nothing - that would put me off the majority of Gardai having them here...

    We've already had a case of nutty guards going after their ex girlfriends partners and harassing them when they hear they are with new people so of course not all cops can be trusted either - they are people at the end of the day and people have flaws...


  • Options
    #34
    backspin.
    Registered Users Posts: 1,091 ✭✭✭backspin.


    Chuchote wrote: »
    Guilty till proved innocent, eh?

    I doubt he was carrying his shopping home.


  • Options
    #35
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    Chuchote wrote: »
    Guilty till proved innocent, eh?

    Well he didn't take them on for no reason did he?


  • Options
    #36
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    RasTa wrote: »
    So why aren't all our Garda armed judging by the responses. I thought only the armed support unit are allowed firearms and didn't think they could take them home. So if over a 3rd have them. Maybe we should arm them all when out on patrol?
    Bit of a leap in logic, no?

    "I wasn't aware that some Gardai bring their weapons home, so logically we should arm all Gardai"

    I don't believe that all Gardai should be armed, but I understand and support the reasons behind some Gardai having weapons off-duty & at home.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Gazzmonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 816 ✭✭✭Gazzmonkey


    RasTa wrote: »
    Maybe I'm wrong so but I thought firearms would be stored in the station.

    Me & you are allowed to have guns in a gun safe... why not a guard?


  • Options
    #38
    begbysback
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,910 ✭✭✭begbysback


    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    Well he didn't take them on for no reason did he?

    That's the thing about guns - shoot first and ask questions later.

    One could argue that it's more likely to be shot as an innocent bystander by a guard if all are armed, than being shot by a gang member as part of a fued.


  • Options
    #39
    Kimbot
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 18,454 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kimbot


    RasTa wrote: »
    Maybe we should arm them all when out on patrol?

    Eh no thanks, we still have a few nutter on the force and giving them a gun wouldn't help out too much. I shudder to think if this guy had a gun on him that day.

    460_0___30_0_0_0_0_0_examiner_5.jpg


  • Options
    #40
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    jonnycivic wrote: »
    I shudder to think if this guy had a gun on him that day.
    If he had a gun on him that day, he wouldn't have been posted to riot duty.

    Duh.


  • Options
    #41
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    Chuchote wrote: »
    Interesting piece

    http://www.cracked.com/personal-experiences-2353-i-was-cop-in-country-with-no-guns-6-startling-truths.html


    Also

    Thank God the country is exactly the same as it was when that quote was taken. ............


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Kimbot
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 18,454 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kimbot


    seamus wrote: »
    If he had a gun on him that day, he wouldn't have been posted to riot duty.

    Duh.

    Well if all guards had guns given to them then why would he have been posted on another duty? Surely he would be doing the same job.


  • Options
    #43
    dr.fuzzenstein
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,635 ✭✭✭✭dr.fuzzenstein


    RasTa wrote: »
    The criminals might shoot back.

    So send unarmed police to deal with armed gangsters. Oirish.


  • Options
    #44
    Syphonax
    Registered Users Posts: 448 ✭✭Syphonax


    If the guard was off-duty he shouldnt be carrying a gun and has no recourse to use it in force. Being off-duty means he is just a normal citizen and not a guard. Armed response units are specifically called to deal with armed crime and do not roam the streets like cops in America. He should have contacted on duty guards to deal with the crime and not involved himself. He should be should be thrown off the force for malpractice and even criminal charges should be brought against him.


  • Options
    #45
    dr.fuzzenstein
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,635 ✭✭✭✭dr.fuzzenstein


    Syphonax wrote: »
    If the guard was off-duty he shouldnt be carrying a gun and has no recourse to use it in force. Being off-duty means he is just a normal citizen and not a guard. Armed response units are specifically called to deal with armed crime and do not roam the streets like cops in America. He should have contacted on duty guards to deal with the crime and not involved himself. He should be should be thrown off the force for malpractice and even criminal charges should be brought against him.

    Bollocks.


  • Options
    #46
    Allinall
    Registered Users Posts: 6,567 ✭✭✭Allinall


    Syphonax wrote: »
    If the guard was off-duty he shouldnt be carrying a gun and has no recourse to use it in force. Being off-duty means he is just a normal citizen and not a guard. Armed response units are specifically called to deal with armed crime and do not roam the streets like cops in America. He should have contacted on duty guards to deal with the crime and not involved himself. He should be should be thrown off the force for malpractice and even criminal charges should be brought against him.

    100% factually incorrect.


  • Options
    #47
    Captain Obvious
    Registered Users Posts: 4,165 ✭✭✭Captain Obvious


    Syphonax wrote: »
    If the guard was off-duty he shouldnt be carrying a gun and has no recourse to use it in force. Being off-duty means he is just a normal citizen and not a guard.

    What are you basing this on?


  • Options
    #48
    Tell me how
    Registered Users Posts: 21,520 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    Syphonax wrote:
    If the guard was off-duty he shouldnt be carrying a gun and has no recourse to use it in force. Being off-duty means he is just a normal citizen and not a guard. Armed response units are specifically called to deal with armed crime and do not roam the streets like cops in America. He should have contacted on duty guards to deal with the crime and not involved himself. He should be should be thrown off the force for malpractice and even criminal charges should be brought against him.

    Oh f*ck off with this nonsense.


  • Options
    #49
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater
    Registered Users Posts: 3,236 ✭✭✭Dr. Kenneth Noisewater


    Chuchote wrote: »
    The Garda Síochána will succeed, not by force of arms or numbers,
    but by their moral authority as servants of the people."
    Commissioner Michael Staines (1885-1955), First Commissioner of An Garda Síochána.

    Times have changed, drastically, since that quote.


  • Options
    #50
    Syphonax
    Registered Users Posts: 448 ✭✭Syphonax


    Allinall wrote: »
    100% factually incorrect.

    just like your post, 100% without substance.


  • Options
    #51
    MarcusP12
    Registered Users Posts: 1,069 ✭✭✭MarcusP12


    Says a lot about the mindset of some people and the respect they have for the gardai that, in the absence of the full fact of the situation, the assumption is that he should lose his job for carrying a gun and having to use it. I'd prefer to give the guy the benefit of the doubt until its proven otherwise that he acted inappropriately. At the end of the day, he didn't <have> to get involved but obviously felt duty bound to do what he did for whatever reason at the time. I'd say there's plenty of people here who wouldn't stay on at work one minute beyond their official finish time let alone put their life in danger like this gard did when off duty, whatever the reason was.

    As has been said already, we all know that there are problems within the garda force but the vast majority of gardai are decent people trying to do their job (which involves protecting us from the scum of society lest we forget) and they should have our respect on an individual basis, regardless of what you think of the higher management. There are bad apples in every profession.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    jonnycivic wrote: »
    Well if all guards had guns given to them then why would he have been posted on another duty? Surely he would be doing the same job.
    Actually in many jurisdictions it's protocol that units assigned to riot duty leave their firearm at the station, because the close-quarters mean a greater risk of someone taking it. Not to mention that shooting a weapon in a crowd leads to all sorts of madness.

    In any case, your suggestion is false equivalency - that the Garda pictured would have just as easily started shooting protesters as he did crack skulls. Using a baton to drive back a rowdy crowd and using a gun to shoot people down are two entirely different things.


  • Options
    #53
    Dyr
    Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    Back in the cowboy days a friend of mine who worker in a bar found a shooter under a seat, turned out it belonged to a detective who was pissed drunk and left it behind him

    Anywhoo if this was part of the Conrad thing I reckon it would have been reported as such


  • Options
    #54
    Syphonax
    Registered Users Posts: 448 ✭✭Syphonax


    Allinall wrote: »
    100% factually incorrect.

    ...im open to correction of course....


  • Options
    #55
    RasTa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,116 ✭✭✭✭RasTa


    Maybe these garda need guns.
    Gardaí believe the team of officers who attended the incident had their safety jeopardised because of the lack of an armed response unit in Sligo. The nearest armed response unit is based in Ballyshannon, Co Donegal, more than 42km away.

    "The fact of the matter is, we don't have the resources a town the size of Sligo needs," a source said.

    Travelers stabbing each other last night, armed garda outside the hospital

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/armed-garda-on-patrol-at-one-of-countrys-busiest-hospitals-amid-fear-of-feud-bloodbath-36060004.html


  • Options
    #56
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Syphonax wrote: »
    ...im open to correction of course....
    Well you're incorrect in that an off-duty garda shouldn't be carrying a weapon. Many do, legally and for good reason.

    You're also incorrect that off-duty Gardai are just normal citizens. They're not. They're legally Gardai 24/7 and empowered (and duty bound) to uphold the law at any time.

    Any obligation to contact on-duty Gardai only applies in situations where the Garda can wait for assistance.

    Which ultimately means that you're incorrect in your assertion that he should be dismissed from the forced and criminally charged, since on the face of it there is no basis for either such actions.


  • Options
    #57
    ThisRegard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,834 ✭✭✭✭ThisRegard


    Syphonax wrote: »
    If the guard was off-duty he shouldnt be carrying a gun and has no recourse to use it in force. Being off-duty means he is just a normal citizen and not a guard. Armed response units are specifically called to deal with armed crime and do not roam the streets like cops in America. He should have contacted on duty guards to deal with the crime and not involved himself. He should be should be thrown off the force for malpractice and even criminal charges should be brought against him.

    Everything about your post is wrong, apart from the spelling perhaps. Actually, I'm docking you points for the use of guard instead of garda.

    edit: bollox, you get no points, you made a mess of "Shouldn't" in your first sentence, and "should be should be" in your last.


  • Options
    #58
    begbysback
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,910 ✭✭✭begbysback


    Bambi wrote: »
    Back in the cowboy days a friend of mine who worker in a bar found a shooter under a seat, turned out it belonged to a detective who was pissed drunk and left it behind him

    Anywhoo if this was part of the Conrad thing I reckon it would have been reported as such

    Actually reminds me of one night during late 80's maybe early 90's when a drunk detective showed up on the door of a friend of mines father, slightly crooked guy, not a hardened criminal by any stretch - but it seems he outsmarted the detective in some situation and he wasn't too happy about this - so he shows up one night with a skinful and pulls out his gun making threats...

    Ok it's most likely an exception but it could have ended nastily.


  • Options
    #59
    Syphonax
    Registered Users Posts: 448 ✭✭Syphonax


    seamus wrote: »
    Well you're incorrect in that an off-duty garda shouldn't be carrying a weapon. Many do, legally and for good reason.

    You're also incorrect that off-duty Gardai are just normal citizens. They're not. They're legally Gardai 24/7 and empowered (and duty bound) to uphold the law at any time.

    Any obligation to contact on-duty Gardai only applies in situations where the Garda can wait for assistance.

    Which ultimately means that you're incorrect in your assertion that he should be dismissed from the forced and criminally charged, since on the face of it there is no basis for either such actions.

    Thats toally avoiding my point, yes they can carry guns but this would have nothing to do with their job, it would be personal to them. Guards can affect arrests while off duty however SHOOTING someone is entirely a different matter than making an arrest and could likely warrant the guard arrested.


  • Options
    #60
    Syphonax
    Registered Users Posts: 448 ✭✭Syphonax


    ThisRegard wrote: »
    Everything about your post is wrong, apart from the spelling perhaps. Actually, I'm docking you points for the use of guard instead of garda.

    edit: bollox, you get no points, you made a mess of "Shouldn't" in your first sentence, and "should be should be" in your last.

    garbage nonsensical post. -10 points for pure baloney.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    ThisRegard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,834 ✭✭✭✭ThisRegard


    Syphonax wrote: »
    Thats toally avoiding my point, yes they can carry guns but this would have nothing to do with their job, it would be personal to them. Guards can affect arrests while off duty however SHOOTING someone is entirely a different matter than making an arrest and could likely warrant the guard arrested.

    The problem is you haven't actually made a point.


Advertisement