Should the Gardaí carry guns?

Simple Simon

Yeah, so I was listening to Moncrieff on Newstalk 106 earlier today and they were kinda debating if the ordinary street police should carry handguns, like in America. Just wondering what everyone's thoughts on this are... Would it even the odds? Discourage crime? Encourage more criminals to get guns? Make a very hostile society?

Personally, I'm gonna go with the latter... It'd make me quite uneasy to see a cop stopping someone for speeding, and approaching the car with their hand rested on their gun.

I also don't think it's necessary... Sure, it would even the odds, but attacks on Gardaí where a gun would have prevented it are quite rare. There's a special detective's unit or whatever that deals with armed threats, such as that bank robbery not long ago when the robbers were shot.

I think the topic came up on the show because some American police organisation were shocked that our cops don't have knife-proof jackets, and volunteered to donate some.

Thoughts?

super_furry

No way. Instead of clubbing hippies, they'd shoot them.

Sandals

no, plain simple no.

Cungi

They don't need to. We don't have stupid gun laws over here

whiskeyman

spud guns maybe.... those things give a good sting at close range.

Hugh Hefner

I'm gonna say no.


On a related note, I'm work experience-ing in a primary school and yesterday they had some gardai in to talk to the class. Anyway one of them started talking about his baton and how it's always to be kept under his jacket, so as not to cause panic, and that it's only for self-defence. He seemed to be pretty cautious of using it which I found reassuring.

He also said that he only ever had to use it once, to break a window to help someone who was trapped in a house. If he barely needs a baton I don't think he needs a gun. They would do more harm than good.

To be honest, if I were in America and needed some directions or something I'd be weary of approaching a cop, someone with a gun in plain sight.

super furry wrote:

No way. Instead of clubbing hippies, they'd shoot them.

Oh noes! I don't want to be shot while juggling! The beatings are barely standable as it is!

hullaballoo

Been done

jonny68

Most certainly not the garda are bad enough without arming them with fuc*in guns:eek:

Binomate

First of all why would they need them?
Second of all there are some gardaí with guns.
Third of all Look at all of the problems guns have brought to America. Roughly 10,000 people die a year in America due to guns and because Americans are too stuborn to change their contitution and what it was founded upon.

snickerpuss

No i think it would probably need to alot of people being accidently shot, like so: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4359692.stm

Mossy Monk

absolutely not

guns dont solve anything

Niall123

jonny68 wrote:

Most certainly not the garda are bad enough without arming them with fuc*in guns:eek:

Hehe you censored the wrong letter.

But on topic I believe that as soon as the gardai get guns the crimenals believe the greater need to have them themselves.

Then of course ya got the whole unnessisary shootings, making it easier to frame people, etc.

Its a definite No from me.

coolhandluke

All they want are anti-stab vests,is that too much too ask !!!!!!!

Lump

Yea give them shotguns, make sure the knackers die.

John

Ruffty^

lol Lump. Gardai with guns, there is no need, the ERU is grand. I`d say that would greatly increase the chances of a garda being shot, not with another gun, but with his own.

simu

No - it would ruin the line of their uniform tbh.

Rb

Give the regular gardaí guns?Hell no. They're power-freaks as it is, if they had a gun it would just make it a whole lot worse.
And besides, there's absolutely no need for them to be armed.

Our man in Havana

Give them Guns, then the skangers will learn a valuable lesson.

cormie

tranquiliser guns, yes.

OfflerCrocGod

No, No, No.

kstanl

Many law abiding people, including myself, don't trust the Gardaí. Until they can prove that they're a professional institution and not just a bunch of rednecks with chips on their shoulder, then I think we should avoid giving them firearms. Gardaí training and levels of discipline aren't anywhere near at a high enough level for this kind of legislation to be passed.

Dimitri

They don't need guns its that simple! However i do believe that armed criminals should be locked away for a good long time. possesing an illegal weapon in this country should be seen as intent. I don't care what anyone says you don't buy a handgun without wanting to kill someone!

Hobbes

They already have Gardai that carry guns.

I was at a CS lan party some time back. Summer time in a large hut we rented. The heat was killing us so all the windows and doors were open and two guys had stripped down to thier kacks (while everyone else moved the tables not to have to look at the disturbing image).

Anyway screams of "Shoot him!", "Quick Plant the bomb!" and "Kill the hostages!" got the attention of the neighbours who called the cops. An armed cop walked in and said "Whats up lads".. looks at the two guys (who look naked the way they are sitting). One of them says "Ahh just ignore me".

First time I saw a cop with a side arm, but it wasn't hidden or anything.

A one of the lads I know is a garda and he said where ever possible they avoid using the batton. Not because they don't want to hit the person but becuase they have to file a long "incident report" any time they use it.

He said if it just a matter of knocking some sense into people they will use their hefty maglite insted.

Sifo

definiteley not, just about anyone can become a member of the gardai nowadays... Hick rednecks if you ask me!!

Remember this?

http://www.indymedia.ie/newswire.php?story_id=64809&media_type=VIDEO

Tobias Greeshman

There's no way they should be allowed to carry guns, I'd feel very uncomfortable with some fecker straight outta templemore carying round a gun on his waist. If they need to deal with the dangerous criminals they have the Drug Squad and ERU gardai. I think some detectives are allowed carry them as well, but it depends on what they do.

daywalker

Sifo wrote:

definiteley not, just about anyone can become a member of the gardai nowadays... Hick rednecks if you ask me!!

and sure if they couldnt get into the guards they could always volunteer for the free clothes association to get some practice with guns.

Pigman II

Nah I don't think so.

For one thing I wouldn't trust your average Garda with a gun anyway and for another petty criminals will definetly be more inclined to start tooling up themselves to match it, and then we're the losers caught in the crossfire.

stevenmu

I'm probably one of the few people on boards in favour of gun rights but I don't think Gardai should be armed. Primarily because they themselves don't want to be. Also in the US many of the police forces are extremely badly trained in the use of firearms, they recieve basic training, qualify once and then often never use their gun again untill years later they're forced to use it in a situation they're not ready for. The NRA (yes, those right wing extremist racist gun-nuts), have campaigned many times for police officers to be given better mandatory training and be forced to re-qualify at regular intervals. If the US can't get it right, there's F all chance we would.

bullrunner

silas wrote:

There's no way they should be allowed to carry guns, I'd feel very uncomfortable with some fecker straight outta templemore carying round a gun on his waist. If they need to deal with the dangerous criminals they have the Drug Squad and ERU gardai. I think some detectives are allowed carry them as well, but it depends on what they do.

Dont give gardai batons let alone guns...they have no control when they start using them...imagine them with guns??and what about the corrupted gardai? they may start shooting people who dont do what they want!

as for the ERU...I cant think of 1 single incident that they have been involved with that hasnt resulted in somebody being shot or killed! think abbeylara/ lusk post office...

stevenmu

bullrunner wrote:

as for the ERU...I cant think of 1 single incident that they have been involved with that hasnt resulted in somebody being shot or killed! think abbeylara/ lusk post office...

You seem to think that's a bad thing ? The reason people ended up shot or killed is because they threatened the lives of ERU officers, forcing them to respond. What would suggest they do, stand there waving their batons while people are shooting at them ? Armed officers are called to certain situations because those situations require an armed response. They have a very serious and important job to do, and they do it aswell as they can. The do not just turn up at places and start shooting at random people for the fun of it.

Also the reason you can't think of any incidents where people weren't shot, is because the bleeding heart media only kicks up a fuss when someone gets hurt, they barely mention the ones where no one does, presumably they think armed criminals should be confronted with hugs and kisses.

SpAcEd OuT

^^^

wasnt of one the lusk post office raiders shot in the back though?

stevenmu

SpAcEd OuT wrote:

^^^

wasnt of one the lusk post office raiders shot in the back though?

I don't remember the exact details but I don't see why that should be a big deal. If someone was pointing a gun at your friend or family member and you were behind them with a gun of your own, would you wait untill they turn around or shoot them in the back ?

bullrunner

stevenmu wrote:

You seem to think that's a bad thing ? The reason people ended up shot or killed is because they threatened the lives of ERU officers, forcing them to respond. What would suggest they do, stand there waving their batons while people are shooting at them ?

they dont need to have a shoot to kill policy.

shooting people in the back in lusk? they knew that an armed robbery was going to happen..they put an armed member of the eru in the postoffice...could they not have rounded these people up before the robbery started and had them charged with plotting a robbery? saves lives!

stevenmu

bullrunner wrote:

they dont need to have a shoot to kill policy.

You're right, they should just shoot the guns out of the robbers hands, it always works for the cops in the movies anyway.

edit: There's been a couple of cases I've heard of where there's been assasination attempts on criminals by criminals carried out around Ireland, where the victim has been able to run away after having been shot. Shooting someone in the leg, arm, shoulder or wherever isn't going to make it impossible for them to shoot back, or worse start shooting aimlessly. SWAT and HRT teams in the US train to shoot people (when shooting is required) in the head twice or with a 3 round burst (depending on the weapon being used) to try to guarantee that the criminal isn't going to be a danger to them or others.

bullrunner wrote:

shooting people in the back in lusk? they knew that an armed robbery was going to happen..they put an armed member of the eru in the postoffice...could they not have rounded these people up before the robbery started and had them charged with plotting a robbery? saves lives!

IIRC, they had reliable intelligence about not only when, but also how the robbery was to be conducted. It was decided that catching them in the act was the best way to proceed, I;m just guessing here but I think there's some funny loopholes in the relevant legislation that meant stopping them before hand would have led to much lower sentences. Unfortunatly the group robbing the post office changed their plan at the last second, I think there was a van in the way or something, which meant the ERU's trap wasn't going to work so they had to adapt to the situation. Obviously capturing criminals will always be preferable to killing them, but sometimes there's just no choice.

scuba steve

no, instead of beating people in the back of the paddywagon, theyd shoot em in the hand or foot or something like that

Simple Simon

stevenmu wrote:

If the US can't get it right, there's F all chance we would.

Because they're the prototype for every good country to strive to reach?

bullrunner wrote:

they dont need to have a shoot to kill policy.

shooting people in the back in lusk? they knew that an armed robbery was going to happen..they put an armed member of the eru in the postoffice...could they not have rounded these people up before the robbery started and had them charged with plotting a robbery? saves lives!

Why the f*ck would you kick up a fuss over an armed robber getting killed? I have to say I'd be happier putting a bullet in every one of them rather than have my taxes pay for their dinner, tv, and polo lessons...

nobodythere

No way, tasers I wouldn't be so against though.

Nightwish

No, I dont think they should as some of them could be end up being a tad trigger happy. I think that non-lethal weapons should be supplied though

grasshopa

grasshopa wrote:

No way, tasers I wouldn't be so against though.

They seem to do fine without them. Is arming the Gardai worth the inevitable unnessecary deaths that will follow?

Silvera

I don't believe the average Garda needs or wants a gun.

However, anti-stab vests and stun guns (or tazer guns) are needed A.S.A.P !

the boss of me

1 in 8 guards is carrying but we dont notice because they are in civvies.. ie they are in detective branch. last gaurd murdrered was Gerry McBabe and his gun didn`t save him.

boneless

I shudder at the thought of a fully armed Garda force. I wouldn't trust them with water pistols never mind Glocks or Hi power BAPs.

Imagine McDowell, the minister for inequality, having them as his private force....