Gardai shooting to kill?

riskky

I honestly don't know what the fuss is about.when people decide to go robbing armed with guns they expect to be able to use them since guns are not exactly fashion accessories and they should also expect things to go wrong and be shot at,possibly killed.Otherwise they should stick to hockey/hurling sticks and if then they get shot,we could be having these arguments

pete

From ireland.com:

Meanwhile, Eugene Larkin, who owns the shop adjoining the post office, expressed concern that his staff and customers were put in danger and that gardai did not inform him that they were carrying out the operation.

He said there were about four customers in the shop at the time and that there was shooting inside the shop. His manager had been confronted by armed and masked men shortly after she arrived at the shop. A gun had been put into her face and she had been ordered to "hit the ground". The events became "a blur" to the four deli staff after the point where they were threatened by the raiders. "It was all over in about 30 seconds," Mr Larkin said.

"My concerns are that my staff were left there. The guards knew about this operation, this robbery was taking place. They had armed guards in the post office with the post office staff but yet left my staff unprotected in the shop and the customers as well. And I'm just not very happy with it. I'm not happy with the answers I got from the guards when I finally spoke to them at about 5 o'clock yesterday evening."

Mr Larkin claimed the post office knew about the Garda operation but that his staff had not been told.

Speaking on RTE's Morning Ireland programme, he said that if the gardai knew in advance about the robbery, they should never have allowed the gang to enter the shop.

His staff were very annoyed to learn last night that the gardai were in with post office staff and had known about the operation. It had increased the trauma for them that they had been "left exposed".

"They are very upset because they were lying on the ground and the people that were shot fell just feet from them. They were observing all this from the ground. I don't think it's right. If the guards knew that this operation, this robbery was going down, I think they should have had staff out there and maybe armed guards in posing as staff members. I'm just not happy."

Mr Larkin said he eventually got to speak to a senior garda at about 5 o'clock and he had made his unease "very clear".

mycroft

pete wrote:

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.

Can't as of yet. Leap to conclusions much?

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?

in this instance they knew the raiders had at least one firearm, i would suspect that is justification under the rules of engagement.

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.

That was very clever of you to figure out a standard abbreviation. While not sure of the exact salary of the ERU, I'm assuming it's not much higher than the average industrial wage.

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

Excellent questions however the tone of your posts seem to imply you've already made your mind up, while I don't doubt there are some serious questions about the planning of the operation the endgame as it were was the correct action for the situation they were in, how they got to this situation is the question to be asked.

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?

Frothing rabid right wing nonsense. These situations tend to polarise people.

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.

You've yet to demostrate a necessity for an independent investigation, an independent investigate would be necessary for example if the internal investigation failed to answer some of the basic questions you outlined above.

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?

Absolutely, and I've spent far longer demanding for an independent police ombudsman than you have, (no offence) however an assumption of guilt or wrongdoing is not doing the search for truth any favours.

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.

Agreed, for example I don't agree that the shooting was necessary, and I do suspect that this is a "get tough on criminals" after a spate of high profile robberies, and gangland shooting in the greater dublin area. This kind of tit for tat response and jubliant attitude at the police gunning down criminals, is highly disturbing.

Rew

Kingsize wrote:

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.

How that works out in you head I dont know but if the Gardai didn't step in what kind of precedent does that set? Its ok to commit armed robbery?

No innocent people were hurt here the same cannt be said for other armed robberies in recent months. some poor guy got a blast of a shotgun during an armed robbery of a pub not so long ago. These people have to know they cannt get away with it simple as that.

pete

mycroft wrote:

That was very clever of you to figure out a standard abbreviation. While not sure of the exact salary of the ERU, I'm assuming it's not much higher than the average industrial wage.

Including overtime payments, average salaries in the Garda Siochana are the second highest in the public sector at €53,815 or €1,035 a week. That is 29% more than the average public servant and 84% more than the average industrial wage.

http://www.rte.ie/business/2005/0223/cso.html

A quick Google reveals that the max basic salary at point 17 of the scale is €39,914 (joined pre April 1995) or €41,281 (joined post April 1995).

This of course, excludes overtime, (calculated at the rate of 3/82nds of basic weekly pay per hour), subsistence & mileage allowances, rent allowances (http://www.gra.cc/rent.shtml) & "premium payments" for duty at, night, weekends & public holidays.

Average industrial wage = €29,200.

Can we move on now, please?

Excellent questions however the tone of your posts seem to imply you've already made your mind up

Well I have certainly made my mind up that I'm with Amnesty International on this one - there should be an automatic independent investigation of all fatalities caused by Gardaí in the line of duty.

You've yet to demostrate a necessity for an independent investigation, an independent investigate would be necessary for example if the internal investigation failed to answer some of the basic questions you outlined above.

I don't see them as being mutually exclusive. I believe the independent inquiry should run parallel.

Absolutely, and I've spent far longer demanding for an independent police ombudsman than you have, (no offence)

Not that it matters - you know this how, exactly?

however an assumption of guilt or wrongdoing is not doing the search for truth any favours.

I'm not assuming anything. I'm saying there are questions that need to be answered. Independently.

This kind of tit for tat response and jubliant attitude at the police gunning down criminals, is highly disturbing.

Spot on.

tim3115

I don't agree that the shooting was necessary

But it was right no matter what way you look at it. Anyone like this should suffer the consequences.

Oh, and fair play to the Garda who shot the two of them :thumbsup:

Zombrex

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?

Er, what exactly do you think Amnesty are??

I think it is safe to assume that Amnesty are against any form of criminal activity, but "coming out" against illegal criminal gangs is nothing to do with Amnesty, they are about tackling state organisted oppression where it exisits.

tim3115

They're a bunch of whinging twats.

tintinr35

cdebru wrote:

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

if one of them had taken a member of your family hostage, how would you feel then no doubt you would be praising the gardi now, why does everyone feel the need to bitch and whinge about how much they get paid, they do there job which at time places their lives at risk therefore they deserve to get paid well!

tim3115

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

In some instances it should be an immediate death sentence, so your point is certainly debatable.

mycroft

pete wrote:

an extra ten grand or so, is not really much compensation for doing a dangerous job, but lets leave that for another thread

Well I have certainly made my mind up that I'm with Amnesty International on this one - there should be an automatic independent investigation of all fatalities caused by Gardaí in the line of duty.

I think a mandatory inquiry for every discharge of a weapon in the course of duty should be appropriate.

Not that it matters - you know this how, exactly?

trust me

Spot on.

Like this piece of gibbering lunacy;

tim3115 wrote:

In some instances it should be an immediate death sentence, so your point is certainly debatable.

Absolutely not, have you not heard understood or grasped the concept of due process, innocent until proven guilt and y'know the basic concept of what the police and judicuary rolls are?

Quick fact check for you, 2000AD back issues aren't legal text books, you know that right?

pete

Originally misrepresented by mycroft
an extra ten grand or so, is not really much compensation for doing a dangerous job, but lets leave that for another thread

Whoooahh there cowboy. let's not get ahead of ourselves here. I couldn't give a monkeys how much cops are paid, and I object to being portrayed as someone who begrudges them a fair days pay for a fair days work.

You were the one who brought their salaries into the discussion, likening members of the ERU to "some poor cop on 30€", as if they were just dragged off the street, had a gun thrust in their hand and told to watch out for the guys in stripey jumpers.

You then went on to state that ERU members were on "not more than the average industrial wage", and I merely corrected you on the salaries issue and pointed out that the ERU should be highly trained, highly motivated (and not unreasonably compensated) individuals and who should be subject to independent inquiry. That is all.

mycroft

pete wrote:

Whoooahh there cowboy. let's not get ahead of ourselves here. I couldn't give a monkeys how much cops are paid, and I object to being portrayed as someone who begrudges them a fair days pay for a fair days work.

You then went on to state that ERU members were on "not more than the average industrial wage", and I merely corrected you on the salaries issue and pointed out that the ERU should be highly trained, highly motivated (and not unreasonably compensated) individuals and who should be subject to independent inquiry. That is all.

Not to be pedantic but you seem to contradict yourself. And not to be argumentive, I'm having trouble figuring out your meaning, do you mean that you don't care what cops earn? Or do you mean you don't really care but it should be reasonable compenstation?

pete

mycroft wrote:

Not to be pedantic but you seem to contradict yourself. And not to be argumentive, I'm having trouble figuring out your meaning, do you mean that you don't care what cops earn? Or do you mean you don't really care but it should be reasonable compenstation?

There's no contradiction. Like i said, I don't care how much they're paid and, like i said, they should be reasonably (i.e. not unreasonably)compensated.

Getting back on point - these are not rookie cops we're talking about. They are experienced professionals and should be accountable as such. The End.

Trojan

I think it's fair to say that the salary issue has little to do with the main question in the thread, so why don't we stop nitpicking that point?

Is the attitude really jubilant, or is it the heady relief that people often experience when a stress has been lifted? Finally we see that the Gardai are taking real, concrete action against the not-very-nice gentlemen who until now have been raiding banks, post-offices and armoured vans up and down the country with what seemed like a free hand.

pete

Trojan wrote:

Is the attitude really jubilant, or is it the heady relief that people often experience when a stress has been lifted?

If it's the latter then it's incredibly naive. It's not like these two guys were the only armed robbers in the country.

Finally we see that the Gardai are taking real, concrete action against the not-very-nice gentlemen who until now have been raiding banks, post-offices and armoured vans up and down the country with what seemed like a free hand.

Call me old fashioned, but my preference is for the "real, concrete action" of arrest, trial and punishment.

Call Me Jimmy

cdebru wrote:

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

Are you even thinking when you say this? jeez... the gardai weren't sitting there in the shop looking at an inocent armed robber minding his own business thinking "this guy deserves to die for coming in here with the intention to rob this place armed" The gardai didn't "take justice into their own hands" They just shot these guys because the guys didn't put down their weapon (s) after being warned to. Obviously the reason the second guy was shot is because, even though he may not have had a gun he must have done something stupid, whereas the other 2 did what they were told and didnt get hurt. It's that simple

pete

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

Obviously the reason the second guy was shot is because, even though he may not have had a gun he must have done something stupid, whereas the other 2 did what they were told and didnt get hurt. It's that simple

Oh well obviously it's that simple. Good guy shoots bad guys - case closed. If only the world were that straightforward.

If the penalty for "doing something stupid" was death there'd be a whole lot less contributors to this thread.

tintinr35

they were not doing somthing stupid on a whim it was obviously well planned but not so well executed. if they had killed a member of the gardi would there be this much contro. what is the point in an independant investigation a waste of tax payers money to investigate the death of two scumbags

ReefBreak

This thread is 9 pages long, so I'm not going to read it all. A couple of scumbags got shot when they attacked gardai while robbing a post office. They got what they deserved, end of story.

Call Me Jimmy

well pete why would they bother just shooting one other guy besides the first one with the gun and not all of them? duh it is that simple, he must have done something to threaten the gardai, whereas the survivors didn't. also when i said the second guy must have been doing something stupid in my earlier post it's in context, he was part of an armed robbery and in a situation when they were warned to drop their weapons, his crew didnt obey, and THEN he did something stupid like run at the gardai. You took that and tried to apply it to us normal people who have done stupid things, but that's completely different and a bad comparison

tim3115

Absolutely not, have you not heard understood or grasped the concept of due process, innocent until proven guilt and y'know the basic concept of what the police and judicuary rolls are?

Yes and just to show how weak the system is, one of the dead already had 12 convictions, so you explain to me how benefical these rolls actually are?

pete

pete wrote:

Oh well obviously it's that simple. Good guy shoots bad guys - case closed. If only the world were that straightforward.

If the penalty for "doing something stupid" was death there'd be a whole lot less contributors to this thread.

Pete,It's obviously not simple on more than one level.
The only concern I have about this at the moment going on the information to hand is that we don't have an ombudsman yet to examine it in the way all shootings by the Gardaí should rightly be examined.

The other level where it's not simple has been stated over and over again and thats what are the Gardaí supposed to do when one robber is pointing a gun and the other moves in a way that in the split second that there is could have been to get another gun.
Couple that with the fact that on Six one, Ive heard the witnesses in the shop say they heard the Gardaí tell the robber to disarm more than once and that there is CCTV coverage of all this.

I mean it's correct to ask for accountability and all to that, but it's not right for anyone to cast aspersions at Gardaí doing their job in a difficult situation.
Its doubtfull(stating the obvious here but...) that if the raider had discharged his weapon and got away that the gang would be holding an inquiry,its more likely that they would be tittering laughing at the good (as they see it) of what they just did.

mycroft

tim3115 wrote:

Yes and just to show how weak the system is, one of the dead already had 12 convictions, so you explain to me how benefical these rolls actually are?

So what do you suggest, after 12 convictions you, I dunno, get a tattoo on your forehead "I have 12 convictions if caught doing anything stupid or illegal, shoot me".

Gardaí get to be judge jury and executioner? What would you suggest is the alternative.

tim3115

After 12 convictions you are a complete waste, and useless to society. Rehabilitation me arse. I hate this crap that something can be done for half of these blokes.

Trotter

dregin wrote:

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

He'd have been described as some poor cop if he hadnt pulled the trigger first. Given what Ive read here, if Gerry McCabe (RIP) had pulled the trigger first he'd have been criticised here too. Maybe that should remind us what happens when the cop dosnt shoot first. He was a detective and therefore was more than likely armed. He just didnt get to the gun before the fellas that shot him.

Look at Lusk the other way around, we could have another dead Garda and 5 lads spending the next 10 years buying phonecards out of my tax to order more heroin in Mount Joy.

Trotter

cdebru wrote:

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

Yep.. 7 years , reduced to 3 for good behaviour, so they can come back out and do the same thing in 4 years time.

mycroft

tim3115 wrote:

After 12 convictions you are a complete waste, and useless to society. Rehabilitation me arse. I hate this crap that something can be done for half of these blokes.

And an alternative;

Erwin James was the guardian's prison columnist until recently (he's been released) serving a twenty year sentence a career criminal, he was sent to a progressive open prison, found a job, commuting on day release

A sample of his column

As implausible as it sounded, it was true. And he pulled it off. I'll never forget standing on the chapel stage in front of a full house, singing the refrain to The Surrey with the Fringe on Top with a group of fellow long-termers whose combined sentences totalled more than 100 years, nor will I forget the rapturous audience response. We took the benefits of our achievement back to the wings. The experience increased our feelings of being valuable, and undermined the negative effects of prison culture. There had been weeks of rehearsals and by the time of the climatic final performance many of us felt we had grown. That was the point. The delegates' smiles told me they understood.

He now works as an office manager of a charity, and writes a column about his adjustment to the outside.

Trotter

mycroft wrote:

And an alternative;

Erwin James was the guardian's prison columnist until recently (he's been released) serving a twenty year sentence a career criminal, he was sent to a progressive open prison, found a job, commuting on day release

A sample of his column


He now works as an office manager of a charity, and writes a column about his adjustment to the outside.

Its great to hear that happens.. but its so naive to think that it could ever be the norm. Taking Dublin's inner city crime gangs for example.. many of those guys learned their trade from their fathers, and no doubt will pass it on.

boa-constrictor

Sarsfield wrote:

There is no such thing as "shoot to wound" in the real world. Not with real bullets. And you can't challenge an armed robber with a bean-bag gun!

Thats very true. Incidentally, as many weapons have a twisted barrel, to make the bullet spin and thus build up velocity, even if you could shoot the target in the shoulder, it doesn't necessarily mean that the bullet would stay in his shoulder area. It could easily hit a bone and travel into his chest. Because it is spinning it can move in a really unpredictable fashion. To take an accurate shot with a handgun you have to get your stance right, aim correctly, hold the gun in the correct manner, control your breathing and pull the trigger at exactly the correct moment - pretty difficult to make this all come together in a raid situation where you only have a second or two and alot of confusion and shouting going on.