Off Duty Garda shoots man

CeilingFly

RasTa wrote: »

What is he doing carrying a gun?

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/investigation-launched-after-man-shot-in-the-shoulder-during-struggle-with-offduty-garda-36060612.html

Should be removed from force if so.

Assuming he shot a scumbag that had no problem threatening innocent, then that garda should be promoted

RasTa

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Control how? By shooting people?

Safety, the garda claimed their safety was jeopardised

begbysback

ThisRegard wrote: »

Eh, armed Gardai ARE law!

That would not be correct - their job is to enforce the law.

Syphonax

Canis Lupus wrote: »

What if it was just 1 minute after his shift ended?

An on duty cop vs off duty, I accept certain rules are applicable to them both but there are subtle differnces. If i worked in Mcdonalds im on duty, if im ordering a Big Mac im not

It not as black and white as some are assuming it is, if fact when it comes to courts an off duty cop is EXACTLY just that.

ThisRegard

begbysback wrote: »

That would not be correct - their job is to enforce the law.

Judge Dredd says otherwise.

ohnonotgmail

Syphonax wrote: »

An on duty cop vs off duty, I accept certain rules are applicable to them both but there are subtle differnces. If i worked in Mcdonalds im on duty, if im ordering a Big Mac im not

It not as black and white as some are assuming it is, if fact when it comes to courts an off duty cop is EXACTLY just that.

that is probably the worst false equivalence I have ever seen. Well done.

Captain Obvious

RasTa wrote: »

Safety, the garda claimed their safety was jeopardised

Again, how would the detectives have solved the issue other than by shooting people? The armed support units carry tasers and shields to deal with people armed with knives.

TheDoc

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.

Absolutely laughable post.

To be honest plenty of guards post here, someone will come along with actual facts about carry permits.

But to my knowledge, while we have obviously armed guards, and a new armed unit deployed a few years back, but also I believe that group got expanded recently and we also have the rapid response unit that is also firearm trained now.

Detectives go through firearm training and a number of regular Guardaí of rank will have gone through firearms training and a number of non specialist Guards can have specialist training and store firearms, typically handguns, in lockup/lockers in station.

Plenty of Guards will have firearms stored at home, in the same sort of parameters that any of us can apply for, obviously helping that they are police (and Guardaí provide the permits and inspections) so it's hardly difficult for serving or former serving to be permitted for firearms at home.

As the story reads, there is no indication the firearm was the Guards in question, so there is some serious conclusion jumping here, and while there is typically no carry permits in this country outside of military,police and foreign dignitary security, there is plenty of somewhat unofficial and accepted carrying instances for police and military.

But to be hones the fact the story doesnt even strictly claim the firearm was the Guards, or he was carrying it, makes it a bit funny people are jumping to "kick" him/her of the force. Should be commended quit frankly.

I doubt many of us on our day off or finished a shift would be hopping at the seems to get involved in our field of work. I don't stand in a shop at the weekend and when I see an IT issue roll my sleeves up and start helping.

So this sort of commitment and to be frank, bravery and courage considering the occupation involved should be commended, and those quick to call for a firing should have a serious look at themselves, cause it's embarrassing comments and carry on.

RasTa

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Again, how would the detectives have solved the issue other than by shooting people? The armed support units carry tasers and shields to deal with people armed with knives.

I think the threat of getting shot might have stopped them.

ThisRegard

RasTa wrote: »

I think the threat of getting shot might have stopped them.

Didn't stop the guy last night.

begbysback

ThisRegard wrote: »

Judge Dredd says otherwise.

Well he's not getting a gun - anyways his job is to apply justice.

TheDoc

Syphonax wrote: »

So armed guards are allowed to take the law into their own hands will not on duty??? hmmmm

What is this not on duty crap.

You are aware that Guards are legislated and powered to enact their responsibilities and authority while not officially on roster hours right? You do know that?

Tht if a guard sees you driving home pissed drunk, while they are in plain clothes not on shift, they can pull you over, and they can arrest you and they can prosecute you.

They are told, as general rule of thumb, should the situation not be imperative or immediately threatening to peoples safety, to call for support from the local station, and stay present to pass on information and detail. At the same time, they are actually liable and held accountable for instances of serious incident should they be present and not act.

So would help if you knew how they actually work before spouting your nonsense to be honest.

Panjandrums

This post has been deleted.

SEPT 23 1989

I presume the gang were armed?

BillyBobBS

Chuchote wrote: »

We're living in the equivalent of America during Prohibition. Until drugs are decriminalised (not legalised, decriminalised, there's a difference), it's only going to get more violent and crime is only going to get more profitable, and police are going to get more distant from normal people.

Are they moving Garda HQ to an island of the coast?

But seriously i agree with you. The war on drugs worldwide is a complete and utter failure and can not be won. The cost in America alone over the last 20 years is thought to be up to 3 trillion dollars fighting the war.

Gaillimh1976

Syphonax wrote: »

An on duty cop vs off duty, I accept certain rules are applicable to them both but there are subtle differnces. If i worked in Mcdonalds im on duty, if im ordering a Big Mac im not

It not as black and white as some are assuming it is, if fact when it comes to courts an off duty cop is EXACTLY just that.

Not even McDonalds would hire this level of stupid :rolleyes::rolleyes:

ThisRegard

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

I presume the gang were armed?

Why?

martingriff

RasTa wrote: »

Deleted User wrote: »

You thought, eh?

You didn't take time to think, you saw an opportunity to bash and had to get a thread started before any one else did.

Did I? Ok then

Yes you did you first comment was he should be fired. Not the question of I did not think Garda could be armed off duty? Hope he was not hurt or well done for going after 3 criminal like most people would say. You first comment was attack of fire the pig

RasTa

martingriff wrote: »

Yes you did you first comment was he should be fired. Not the question of I did not think Garda could be armed off duty? Hope he was not hurt or well done for going after 3 criminal like most people would say. You first comment was attack of fire the pig

Thanks for clarifying how I think. I wouldn't be calling them pigs either but thankfully school is starting soon.

Canis Lupus

Syphonax wrote: »

An on duty cop vs off duty, I accept certain rules are applicable to them both but there are subtle differnces. If i worked in Mcdonalds im on duty, if im ordering a Big Mac im not

It not as black and white as some are assuming it is, if fact when it comes to courts an off duty cop is EXACTLY just that.

STOP IN THE NAME OF THE LAW!

*beep beep....beep beep*

Oh wait, my shift just ended. I'm not allowed to use this gun anymore. As you were lads.

Guy:Incognito

Syphonax wrote: »

ive little details of the incident, as do you.!

Yet you decided from the outset he should be throw off the force.

jcd5971

TheDoc wrote:

But to be hones the fact the story doesnt even strictly claim the firearm was the Guards, or he was carrying it, makes it a bit funny people are jumping to "kick" him/her of the force. Should be commended quit frankly.

I don't think anyone should ever be commended for shooting someone.

The guard was most likely justified completely in their actions, but it should be a full detailed uncomfortable investigation into the entire process hitting every action the guard took, until it is absolutely certain they had no alternative course of action.


This isn't an anti Gardai post at all far from it. But I believe none of us want to even look in the direction of USA style policing and therefore drawing and firing a weapon on a person should literally be to save a life that is about to be taken.

Syphonax

TheDoc wrote: »

Absolutely laughable post.

To be honest plenty of guards post here, someone will come along with actual facts about carry permits.

But to my knowledge, while we have obviously armed guards, and a new armed unit deployed a few years back, but also I believe that group got expanded recently and we also have the rapid response unit that is also firearm trained now.

Detectives go through firearm training and a number of regular Guardaí of rank will have gone through firearms training and a number of non specialist Guards can have specialist training and store firearms, typically handguns, in lockup/lockers in station.

Plenty of Guards will have firearms stored at home, in the same sort of parameters that any of us can apply for, obviously helping that they are police (and Guardaí provide the permits and inspections) so it's hardly difficult for serving or former serving to be permitted for firearms at home.

As the story reads, there is no indication the firearm was the Guards in question, so there is some serious conclusion jumping here, and while there is typically no carry permits in this country outside of military,police and foreign dignitary security, there is plenty of somewhat unofficial and accepted carrying instances for police and military.

But to be hones the fact the story doesnt even strictly claim the firearm was the Guards, or he was carrying it, makes it a bit funny people are jumping to "kick" him/her of the force. Should be commended quit frankly.

I doubt many of us on our day off or finished a shift would be hopping at the seems to get involved in our field of work. I don't stand in a shop at the weekend and when I see an IT issue roll my sleeves up and start helping.

So this sort of commitment and to be frank, bravery and courage considering the occupation involved should be commended, and those quick to call for a firing should have a serious look at themselves, cause it's embarrassing comments and carry on.

Thats a load of bollox on your part there TBH.

You even state that “To be honest plenty of guards post here, someone will come along with actual facts about carry permits.” In other words you are admitting that what haven’t got a clue about what you’re posting yet are claiming otherwise to know it all. I haven’t claimed to know the ins and outs of what is permitted for off duty guards but you are, even though you're admitting that you dont.

Pure BS

I wont even bother with the rest of the tripe in your post as its mere waffle.

Syphonax

TheDoc wrote: »

What is this not on duty crap.

You are aware that Guards are legislated and powered to enact their responsibilities and authority while not officially on roster hours right? You do know that?

Tht if a guard sees you driving home pissed drunk, while they are in plain clothes not on shift, they can pull you over, and they can arrest you and they can prosecute you.

They are told, as general rule of thumb, should the situation not be imperative or immediately threatening to peoples safety, to call for support from the local station, and stay present to pass on information and detail. At the same time, they are actually liable and held accountable for instances of serious incident should they be present and not act.

So would help if you knew how they actually work before spouting your nonsense to be honest.

Yes I know this, im specifaclly talking about cops shooting while off duty you havent refuted me anywhere in your post just posted obivious waffle which I already said im aware off.

Armed cops arent the same as normal unarmed cops and im very concerned that an off duty one is wiflully shooting at people without any other cop in sight, no back up no nothing.

Syphonax

Gaillimh1976 wrote: »

Not even McDonalds would hire this level of stupid :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Typical post without substance, i made that analogy so the idiots would dive all over it. thanks, idiot.

Syphonax

Canis Lupus wrote: »

STOP IN THE NAME OF THE LAW!

*beep beep....beep beep*

Oh wait, my shift just ended. I'm not allowed to use this gun anymore. As you were lads.

Thats not where im coming from at all. Again, SHOOING someone without any other 'on duty' cops and with no back up witness etc I dont think its going to be an easy one for this cop when he gets up before a judge, infact this cop is as likely to go to jail as the person he shot at.

Sterling Archer

Syphonax wrote: »

Armed cops arent the same as normal unarmed cops and im very concerned that an off duty one is wiflully shooting at people without any other cop in sight, no back up no nothing.

Whats to say it wasn't his only resort to stop an immediate threat to life.. no back-up in sight, situation is too volatile to wait it out, perhaps the (Shot) man was full blown "I'm gonna kill ya" mode

Full blown speculation at the moment obviously, I'm ok with an armed off-duty Garda wounding someone to stop an immediate threat to life (assuming thats what it was)

Edit - But Yes your right, not the best play by the Garda

dr.fuzzenstein

Syphonax wrote: »

Thats not where im coming from at all. Again, SHOOING someone without any other 'on duty' cops and with no back up witness etc I dont think its going to be an easy one for this cop when he gets up before a judge, infact this cop is as likely to go to jail as the person he shot at.

Have you got some links to back up your
own wild assertions?

jimmycrackcorm

Syphonax wrote:

Armed cops arent the same as normal unarmed cops and im very concerned that an off duty one is wiflully shooting at people without any other cop in sight, no back up no nothing.

Yes because there is no doubt that he did it dirty Harry style, telling the perp to 'Make my day'

RustyNut

Shane_ef wrote: »

Whats to say it wasn't his only resort to stop an immediate threat to life.

Or that he wasn't in the pub for a few pints and then picked a fight.

All speculation, best wait for the details to come out.