Gardai shooting to kill?

mycroft

pete wrote:

re: 2 posts back:

maybe, but i don't remember any other case of cops being shot at that required a forensic analysis before they could state "definitively" that it happened...

We could suggest that another instance of a shooting in a town called abbeylara, that has forced the police through bitter lessons to clarify what occured?

pete

mycroft wrote:

again call me nuts, but exactly at what point do the garda give the benefit of the doubt to someone who could maybe be carrying a loaded firearm? Wheres the line, at what point when someone carrying a firearm (which they have no way of knowing is loaded) is pointed at them can kill them?

Completely irrelevant to the question I asked.

hopefully but you are engaged in pure speculation, you've yet to provide an example of whether some poor cop on 30€ a year should decide whether the gun pointed at him is loaded and when he should shoot.

What do you mean "yet to provide an example"? I wasn't aware I'd made any previous contribution to this thread. And not that it's relevant, but I sincerely doubt that members of the ERU would fit your profile.

Do I have sympathy for the two dead guys? No. Do I think the cops have serious questions to answer? Yep.

pete

mycroft wrote:

We could suggest that another instance of a shooting in a town called abbeylara, that has forced the police through bitter lessons to clarify what occured?

You mean the Abbeylara incident in which the police were proven by Dr John Harbison to have lied about the circumstances surrounding the shooting?

edit: that being my recollection of the Prime Time documentary about it...

dregin

mycroft wrote:

some poor cop

The E.R.U. doesn't = "some poor cop" tbh.

tintinr35

how many people whould these raiders have harmed had the gardi not stepped in the way i see it if they had got away or killed some innocent person there would be outrage, now that they have done thier job i.e. to protect the citizens of the state everyone is giving out sh1t, let them get on with there job, these people were armed raiders who BROKE THE LAW KNOWINGLY and have now paid the price.
personally i have no sympathy for armed criminals but everyone is entitled to their opinion

Esel

No need to wonder anymore what whoever thought up the name 'Operation Anvil' had in mind.

tintinr35

esel wrote:

No need to wonder anymore what whoever thought up the name 'Operation Anvil' had in mind.

WTF???

cdebru

mycroft wrote:

again call me nuts, but exactly at what point do the garda give the benefit of the doubt to someone who could maybe be carrying a loaded firearm? Wheres the line, at what point when someone carrying a firearm (which they have no way of knowing is loaded) is pointed at them can kill them?



hopefully but you are engaged in pure speculation, you've yet to provide an example of whether some poor cop on 30€ a year should decide whether the gun pointed at him is loaded and when he should shoot.

the Gardai identify themselves if the guys refuse to put down their weapons then obviously the gardai are entitled to shoot no question


what the questions are around this are

was the public safety ensured by the gardai

could the guys have been arrested

If there was only one firearm as reports are now suggesting why were 2 raiders shot dead

why was the story that the raiders had fired first put out

It all leads back to the Urgent need for a Garda obudsman to investigate these incidents

cdebru

tintinr35 wrote:

, these people were armed raiders who BROKE THE LAW KNOWINGLY and have now paid the price.
personally i have no sympathy for armed criminals but everyone is entitled to their opinion

the Price for breaking the law is not an immediate death sentence

the Price is supposed to be set in court by a judge after a trial

Call Me Jimmy

what the questions are around this are

If there was only one firearm as reports are now suggesting why were 2 raiders shot dead

eh well to answer this, if you are a garda, and there is a robbery and you tell a guy to put down his gun that you can see and he doesn't and you shoot, and then another guy makes a movement, u blow him away imo, u assume he's armed coz u dont wanna give him a chance. I'll admit i'm a tad conservative on these matters but i know that's what i'de do. This situation is a possibility tho

Sparks

eh well to answer this, if you are a garda, and there is a robbery and you tell a guy to put down his gun that you can see and he doesn't and you shoot, and then another guy makes a movement, u blow him away imo, u assume he's armed coz u dont wanna give him a chance.

Which is the course of action the ERU are meant to be trained not to take. You shoot to prevent casualties, not for punitive reasons. The former requires you to shoot to kill, but only at those who are a threat; the latter gets you life imprisonment for murder.

Call Me Jimmy

yeah but they're humans too, someone reaches for something or makes a rash movement in a situation like that, after being warned, it is very difficult for a garda in that situation.

bounty

anyone who does armed robberies deserves to be shot

Hobbes

cdebru wrote:

the Gardai identify themselves if the guys refuse to put down their weapons then obviously the gardai are entitled to shoot no question

Normally they are warned numerous times, if they fire or make moves that seem threatening or endangering lives the gardai will open fire.

You point the gun at the Gardai they don't have to wait until it goes bang to shoot you.

They also didn't go in guns blazing or all four of them would of been shot.

Nuttzz

http://www.rte.ie/news/2005/0527/dublin.html

RTÉ News has learned that the two armed robbers shot by gardaí in Co Dublin yesterday were fired on after they failed to drop their weapons despite repeated requests to do so.

Garda sources say one of the men, 33-year-old Colm Griffin, pointed a loaded handgun at gardaí outside Lusk Post Office and that this has been captured on CCTV.

Post mortem examinations carried out last night found that Mr Griffin and 24-year-old Eric Hopkins died after they were both shot once in the upper body.

good result for the cops, 2 less scum bags on our streets. If they were stupid enogh to ignore armed gardai then what else do you expect. 2 irish nominations of the darwin awards.....

bonkey

cdebru wrote:

what the questions are around this are

Are they? I'd reword most of them slightly, actually...

was the public safety ensured by the gardai

Were the gardai genuinely attempting to ensure public safety in the appropriate manner.

could the guys have been arrested

Would it have been possible to ensure an arrest without endangering lives.

why was the story that the raiders had fired first put out

Who were the original sources of breaking story? If the police, then why did they make a statement before they had the facts?

It all leads back to the Urgent need for a Garda obudsman to investigate these incidents

The incident leads back to a need to investigate the incident.

Even if it were a case of a dozen eye-witnesses saying how the police were fired upon first, by all members of the gang, and where there was an almost-certainty that members of the public would have beeen killed if the police didn't return fire immediately, and the entire thing was captured on film from multiple angles......there'd still be a need to investigate the incident.

jc

mycroft

pete wrote:

Completely irrelevant to the question I asked.

Not not at all, you've beggared the question, about the circumstances of the shooting, I've merely pointed out that the police should be allowed to use hostile force, when they suspect that the suspect has a lethal weapon.

What do you mean "yet to provide an example"? I wasn't aware I'd made any previous contribution to this thread. And not that it's relevant, but I sincerely doubt that members of the ERU would fit your profile.

And this doubt is based on?

Do I have sympathy for the two dead guys? No. Do I think the cops have serious questions to answer? Yep.

Again based on what?

You mean the Abbeylara incident in which the police were proven by Dr John Harbison to have lied about the circumstances surrounding the shooting?

You'll find most on this thread feel the shooting was the regretable end game of a series of mistakes, by the time he had left the house with a loaded gun the ERU didn't have much choice but to shoot.

The E.R.U. doesn't = "some poor cop" tbh.

Are we quibbling about their salary?

It all leads back to the Urgent need for a Garda obudsman to investigate these incidents

Again just to clarify the existances of an ombudsman is to investigate failures or inconsistences of internal garda investigations. Shrilly demanding an ombudsman investigation before the police have carried out their own investigation is unfair, and fails to understand the roll of the ombudsman.

Sparks

From the report on RTE1 this morning, the impression was being given that the whole thing was a plan gone wrong, in that they had intended to effect the arrest outside the post office, but the gang got inside so they had to try to get people out the back to safety and then engage them. Of course, the owner of the shop is still angry at the lack of communication and the former account came from the gardai, so it would appear that it's less clear than first appeared.

Sparks

mycroft wrote:

Again just to clarify the existances of an ombudsman is to investigate failures or inconsistences of internal garda investigations. Shrilly demanding an ombudsman investigation before the police have carried out their own investigation is unfair, and fails to understand the roll of the ombudsman.

Just to clarify further, the model being referred to is that of the PSNI, where any officer firing his weapon automatically results in an investigation from the PSNI ombudsman. Frankly, it's a good idea - pulling the trigger is a serious matter, and if it's done, you want to be able to show it was justifitied, as much for the garda involved as for the public.

tim3115

I see Amnesty sticking their noses in once again. Never mentioned the wrongdoings of the criminals, just said that the Gardaí have questions to be answered etc.

People do know that one of the guys shot dead had 12 convictions already? For robbery and what have you. I'd be more worried about that, why wasn't he shot earlier.

Sparks

Thing is Tim, AI are pointing out that the investigation process used by the Gardai is insufficently independent. Which is perfectly true and correct and is something to be fixed. Hell, the lead story in the news prior to the shooting was that of another man in Donegal who had been wrongfully convicted by corrupt Gardai and who served a sentence as a result of perjury which was committed to get someone promoted.

Which is a wholly seperate issue to the ERU's actions yesterday...

Kingsize

how many people whould these raiders have harmed had the gardi not stepped in the way

Gardai are settimg a precedent here- this will only result in more innocent people being hurt & hostage taking situations IMO.

Villain

The only issue I can see from this incident is why the Gardai allowed cilivians to enter the post office having known a raid was going to occur. The 2 dead raiders were only shot once and only after refusing to put down their weapons.

pork99

AmenToThat wrote:

Precisely the point Im making, I have no love for bankrobbers but the fact remains the gardai knew in advance about the activities of these fellas and in my opinion these robbers shouldnt have even got to the 'scene of the crime' let alone there be a need for stun grenades or gas!

Then they would have got a year or two in prison (possibly even less) and have been out on the streets doing the same thing again and again.

While I agree that the systems for Garda accountability and internal discipline badly need to be brought up to date I think they did a great job in Lusk.

TWO men shot dead by gardai yesterday were members of a notorious criminal gang responsible for a spate of armed robberies and drug trafficking in ravaged areas of Dublin.

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1404900&issue_id=12541

Those guys were parasitic vermin. This sort of thing should happen once a week at least, the Gardai need to be far more aggressive with these gangs.

When I heard the news report yesterday morning that someone had been killed I thought how awful because I was expecting that it might have been post office staff, Gardai or some innocent bystander. But when I heard that it was the criminals who had been shot I laughed. I thought "what a beautiful day, the sun is shining and our brave policemen have exterminated some dangerous scum". It made me happy!

It was the criminals not the Gardai who put those people in the shop in danger. The cops couldn't compromise their operation by forewarning people as some posters seem to think they should have.

I'm disappointed that Amnesty are so quick to come out for an investigation. Where were they when security guards' families were being kidnapped and threatened? The real gross violators of people's human rights in this country are those criminal gangs and dissident paramilitary groups. Yet do we ever hear a squeak out of Amnesty or the ICLU about them?

mycroft

pork99 wrote:

I'm disappointed that Amnesty are so quick to come out for an investigation. Where were they when security guards' families were being kidnapped and threatened? The real gross violators of people's human rights in this country are those criminal gangs and dissident paramilitary groups. Yet do we ever hear a squeak out of Amnesty or the ICLU about them?

Oh lord.......

Simplisitic very simplisitic, Amnesty report on government abuse, what are they supposed to track down criminals and check to see if they're not breaking human rights, they're human rights activists, not cops......

Sparks

pork99 wrote:

Then they would have got a year or two in prison (possibly even less) and have been out on the streets doing the same thing again and again.

Except for the lad with the gun, who would get a longer sentence for illegal possession of a firearm...

While I agree that the systems for Garda accountability and internal discipline badly need to be brought up to date I think they did a great job in Lusk.

The Gardai or the systems?

I'm disappointed that Amnesty are so quick to come out for an investigation. Where were they when security guards' families were being kidnapped and threatened? The real gross violators of people's human rights in this country are those criminal gangs and dissident paramilitary groups. Yet do we ever hear a squeak out of Amnesty or the ICLU about them?

Those criminal elements aren't responsible for gardai corruption, the state of the mental health system, internment (when it was ongoing), or any of the other things that it's AI's job to criticise publicly. And calling for an investigation is not criticising the individual gardai involved, it's calling for a systemic reform so that a gardai pulling a trigger will cause a mandatory independent investigation, which does as much to protect gardai acting properly as it does to catch those who aren't!

pete

mycroft wrote:

Not not at all, you've beggared the question, about the circumstances of the shooting, I've merely pointed out that the police should be allowed to use hostile force, when they suspect that the suspect has a lethal weapon.

No, actually I've raised the question of why the police apparently can't say if the gun found at the scene was fired at them or not. This question is perfectly valid on its own, irrespective of any subsequent events, particularly given a previous friendly fire incident.

NOw, let's just look at this statement for a moment.

the police should be allowed to use hostile force, when they suspect that the suspect has a lethal weapon

I'll admit that I don't actually have a copy of the ERU's rules & regs to hand, but I'd be very interested to know if they say that the cops can shoot to kill based on the belief that you or I might possess (not "intend to use" - just might possess) a "lethal weapon".

Can someone clarify?

pete wrote:

And not that it's relevant, but I sincerely doubt that members of the ERU would fit your profile.

And this doubt is based on?

A combination of common sense and a general knowledge of public sector salaries. You're the one who described the armed members of the ERU as "some poor cop on 30€". Now, I'm assuming you actually meant €30,000p.a., so are you seriously suggesting that the ERU are comprised of a load of wet behind the ears recruits fresh out of Templemore? I sincerely doubt it, and I pointed it out. In any event their salary is irrelevant, but you brought it up, not me.

pete wrote:

Do I have sympathy for the two dead guys? No. Do I think the cops have serious questions to answer? Yep.

Again based on what?

If that question was in response to my not having any sympathy for the dead guys, it's because they knew the chance they were taking. Their death's are unfortunate, but I won't be shedding any tears.

However, the fact that they were committing an armed robbery at the time of their deaths does not reduce in any way the need to ascertain if the Gardaí planned the operation as adequately as they might have done, and if they reacted with reasonable force. Specifically, some questions i'd like to know the answers to are: How much advance notice did the police have? Where were the ERU positioned? Who was the "someone on the roof"? Why did the ERU allow civilians to be present? How did their intelligence indicate the raiders would be armed? Exactly how were the raiders actually armed? Did the raiders (attempt to?) fire first? How many shots were fired by the ERU? How many ERU officers discharged their weapons? How many times were the dead actually hit? etc etc etc

You'll find most on this thread feel the shooting was the regretable end game of a series of mistakes, by the time he had left the house with a loaded gun the ERU didn't have much choice but to shoot.

"Didn't have much choice"?... Way to miss the whole point. But that's a whole other discussion.

Again just to clarify the existances of an ombudsman is to investigate failures or inconsistences of internal garda investigations. Shrilly demanding an ombudsman investigation before the police have carried out their own investigation is unfair, and fails to understand the roll of the ombudsman.

Ah so it's a "shrill demand" now, is it? Out of curiosity, how do you describe the rantings of the hang 'em high brigade, then?

The demand for an independent investigation is there simply because a police investigation would not be independent and would be open to accusations of a cover up, whether a cover up actually happened or not.

The ERU are not conscripts with itchy trigger fingers, forced into a role they do not want. The are individuals who chose to be police officers and who, like all other Gardaí, must accept the responsibilities that go hand in hand with the powers granted to them. Those selected for promotion to the ERU are not forced to accept the position - they have chosen to be members of an armed unit, and have been given the right to shoot to kill under certain circumstances. Surely this right demands an even higher level of accountability?

To be honest this discussion could do with a few more cool heads and a few less CS players whose knowledge of police procedure and civil rights comes from an intensive studying of the works of Bruckheimer / Schwarzenegger et al.

PhoenixRising

mike65 wrote:

My philosophy is simple - if a cop sees an armed man with a gun and he does'nt disarm when ordered you shoot him.

That sums up exactly my view on the subject. They get one chance to lay down their weapons, if they don't then they get shot. Simple as that. It's the only way such a situation can be handled. I think the Gardai were absolutely correct to do what they did given the evidence that's emerged so far.

It's been like taking candy from a baby with all the bank, ATM, and security van raids over the last few months, and if anything - even it makes would be bank robbers think twice before they go out and rob a bank now, it's worth it in my opinion. Those two scumbags got what was coming to them....

pete

From the Irish Times:

Senior Garda sources told The Irish Times they expected the gang to run into the post office through the front door and it was planned to apprehend them at the entrance.

However, the same sources said the gang opted to drive around to the back of the shop in their stolen vehicle and enter through the rear of the building.

When this happened, ERU officers ran from a camper van where they were hiding outside the building into the post office. When they reached the back of the shop, one of the raiders was attempting to break the bullet-proof glass at the post office pay hatch with a sledgehammer.

A number of staff were in the post office and shop at the time. There was a substantial amount of cash in the post office, much of which was for social welfare payments due to be paid yesterday and today.

Senior Garda sources claimed last night that one member of the ERU opened fire on the two men after one of them threatened him with a fully loaded semi-automatic handgun. The second raider was fatally wounded as he attempted to rush at or confront the armed ERU officer. Garda sources said they were satisfied the raiders had not discharged their weapon but a technical examination would be needed to confirm this. The shooting and the events leading up to it were captured on CCTV footage inside the shop in Lusk village where the post office is situated.

Gardaí claimed the man brandishing the firearm was warned repeatedly to drop it. They said he refused and threatened gardaí with the gun, at which point he was shot.

Trojan

pete wrote:

To be honest this discussion could do with a few more cool heads and a few less CS players whose knowledge of police procedure and civil rights comes from an intensive studying of the works of Bruckheimer / Schwarzenegger et al.

As a center-left liberal, I find it odd that my own view in this matter is very right wing. I'm delighted that the Gardai are finally fighting fire with fire.

It may have something to do with the fact that a) I live in Killester, with countless armed robberies in the village or within 2 miles in the last 2 months, and b) I am from Mayo, which had a robbery this week.

Criminal gangs are cocky and arrogant, as they were back in the days of Gilligan and his gang. I welcome the Gardai's attempts to change this, and I trust (although not blindly) that they will react with the force necessary only to disable these dangerous criminals. Unfortunately for the 2 thugs involved yesterday, the necessary force was fatal.

I suggest that armed robbers choose another profession if they are concerned about their right to breath being infringed upon