nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Garda shoots dog in Longford

Stephen Gawking

What's this all about? I've seen the video that the woman took of the incident but it's not very clear. Not sure if I can post the video here so I'll erron the side of caution & not post it. Was the garda justified? He looks like he was alone or was it a negligent discharge? Hard to say either way.

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/investigation-underway-after-dog-shot-dead-in-longford-man-injured-in-incident-889607.html

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

1874

fabvinny wrote: »

i know the guy in the van,he went up there from cork to buy an engine.deal went tits up for some reason and he called the guards.

That was his main mistake, never have dealings with travellers, in my experience they will try renegotiate the deal or do a really poor job, one that will likely have to be redone at greater cost as the bad work will have to be undone. That may be a possibility with any work done, but its a very high possibility, an almost absolute certainty with travellers. Its unfortunate but true, I belive there is a good paving bunch of guys around Dublin who are travellers, Ive heard good things, but Id be so concerned about all the problems I hear about travellers generally, which is a lot, Id be reluctant to deal with them. Had dealings with other travellers and never again.
That howling banshee, she made me want to put a slap across her trap.
Hugely dissapointed with the Gardai turning up heavy handed in balaclavas to deal with protestors for a real issue (housing) they need to do so and armed, both non lethal and also lethal weapons and come down heavy on the crooks in the traveller community.

That guy should have steered clear of the travellers for one, or anyone where theres any suspicion of items being sourced illegally, ie dont buy stolen or even potentially stolen goods.

Graniteville

archer22 wrote: »

So what really happened here?

So far the story seems to go as follows.
Guy brings van to travellers to get it repaired
Guy does not want to pay for the repairs.
Guy gets Garda friend to help him recover van.
Garda friend gets into altercation and kills a Dog and wounds Dogs owner.

If thats the correct version then its bizarre ...to put it mildly!!

Or the REAL story...

Gardai smash traveller chop shop and take conficate over €1/2 million of car and van parts stolen from Ireland and the UK.

In follow up operations they stop and try and arrest this scumbag who is both a well know traveller criminal with several conviction for violence, robbery and other offences and wanted for questioning in relation to the raid last week.

Rather than accept he has been caught (yet again) the scumbag uses his dog to intimidate and effectively threaten the garda. Garda unfortunately shoot the wrong object and the dog is dad instead of the scumbag

And pavee point's comment on this and last week's incident?

- Yep, NADA!

blade1

Gravelly wrote: »

Are these the same travellers that tried bombing a Garda's house recently?

They must be as there is only a couple of them giving the rest a bad name.
They've covered some ground over the years.

arybvtcw0eolkf

FTA69 wrote: »

A scuffle can’t be reason to shoot someone.

It can, if...

A soldier or guard can shoot someone to prevent themselves from being forcibly disarmed, or in defense of your own life or the life of a comrade.

Its unclear what happened before the confrontation so we don't know whey the guard has her weapon drawn so we don't know whether his actions or those of the injured could have been prevented.

He has legal use of force on his side once his actions are within legal requirements (ie self defense) and not punitive.

As we don't know what happened before the recording started its impossible to know if minimum use of force was used first and failed. He appears to be alone so weight of numbers wasn't an option [for example].

In the guards position I think I'd have shot the dog too.

Don't know why we don't see a dead dog in the video, maybe it ran off injured then dropped dead. German Shepards are big strong dogs, with a low velocity small caliper weapon you'd probably need a head shot to drop the dog where it stands.

Fann Linn

Gofundme set up now for anyone who wants to contribute to Fido's funeral.

fabvinny

1874 wrote: »

That was his main mistake, never have dealings with travellers, in my experience they will try renegotiate the deal or do a really poor job, one that will likely have to be redone at greater cost as the bad work will have to be undone. That may be a possibility with any work done, but its a very high possibility, an almost absolute certainty with travellers. Its unfortunate but true, I belive there is a good paving bunch of guys around Dublin who are travellers, Ive heard good things, but Id be so concerned about all the problems I hear about travellers generally, which is a lot, Id be reluctant to deal with them. Had dealings with other travellers and never again.
That howling banshee, she made me want to put a slap across her trap.
Hugely dissapointed with the Gardai turning up heavy handed in balaclavas to deal with protestors for a real issue (housing) they need to do so and armed, both non lethal and also lethal weapons and come down heavy on the crooks in the traveller commu

That guy should have steered clear of the travellers for one, or anyone where theres any suspicion of items being sourced illegally, ie dont buy stolen or even potentially stolen goods.

agreed,and to be fair,the guy in the van is no angel either.....

1874

fabvinny wrote: »

agreed,and to be fair,the guy in the van is no angel either.....

Well, you think hed have got out and helped instead of sitting on his hole hiding in the van the coward

tuxy

All mainstream news sources confirming that one shot was fired, the same shot that killed the dog hit the man in the leg/foot.

RobbieMD

Effects wrote: »

Really, why not? I know people that use it against grizzly bears.

I honestly dont know why but in training it’s specifically told that’s its ineffective against dogs.
Maybe bear spray has a higher amount of capsaicinoids?

Effects

RobbieMD wrote: »

I honestly dont know why but in training it’s specifically told that’s its ineffective against dogs.

I've been subject to the effects of a mild dose of pepper spray. It wasn't nice. I presumed it would have a similar effect on the breathing and vision of a dog.

mynamejeff

expectationlost wrote: »

what would he have done had he not had the gun?

been assaulted with unknown injuries and the theft of his official firearm

do people think thats uncommon ? happens on a daily basis

not in rural areas miles from any support or back up

https://www.rte.ie/news/investigations-unit/2018/0906/991972-waterford-is-the-most-dangerous-county-for-gardai/

crusier

If they had fed the dog the bullet wouldn't have made it through to his foot!

tuxy

crusier wrote: »

If they had fed the dog the bullet wouldn't have made it through to his foot!

A bullet can go through soft tissue. Explains why it was very minor damage to his foot, most the power had been taken out of the bullet.

Discodog

The Guard did not have control. He was extremely unprofessional, failed to see the risks & should of pulled back & asked for backup. Very worrying that such a poorly trained Guard is holding a firearm.

Fann Linn

Discodog wrote: »

The Guard did not have control. He was extremely unprofessional, failed to see the risks & should of pulled back & asked for backup. Very worrying that such a poorly trained Guard is holding a firearm.

And all of that from a couple of minutes of youtube.
No one apart from those involved or witness to same knows what went on from start to finish.

Will I Am Not

Discodog wrote: »

The Guard did not have control. He was extremely unprofessional, failed to see the risks & should of pulled back & asked for backup. Very worrying that such a poorly trained Guard is holding a firearm.

And what happens the man in the van while the Garda holds back?

Discodog

Will I Am Not wrote: »

And what happens the man in the van while the Garda holds back?

What do you mean ?

Captain Obvious

Discodog wrote: »

What do you mean ?

Well the man with the dog was physically assaulting the man in the van.

mynamejeff

Discodog wrote: »

The Guard did not have control. He was extremely unprofessional, failed to see the risks & should of pulled back & asked for backup. Very worrying that such a poorly trained Guard is holding a firearm.

different thread same agenda

Discodog

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Well the man with the dog was physically assaulting the man in the van.

The Garda should of secured his weapon before intervening.

upandcumming

Discodog wrote: »

What do you mean ?

He means what happens to the lad in the van when the guard is back at his car chatting on the phone?
The van driver gets beat asunder and the guard there chatting the boys on the phone?

[Deleted User]

Discodog wrote: »

The Garda should of secured his weapon before intervening.

How?

And then get the sh*t beaten out of him?

LOL

Discodog

mynamejeff wrote: »

different thread same agenda

What agenda ? Someone was shot & could of been killed. The Guard could of been disarmed & the weapon used by someone else. You never see armed Police getting close in those situations.

Odelay

Discodog wrote: »

What agenda ? Someone was shot & could of been killed. The Guard could of been disarmed & the weapon used by someone else. You never see armed Police getting close in those situations.

You don’t think the scrote had some responsibility in this? Perhaps if he wasn’t being an arsehole this wouldn’t have happened? Someone could have died because of his actions.

mynamejeff

Discodog wrote: »

What agenda ? Someone was shot & could of been killed. The Guard could of been disarmed & the weapon used by someone else. You never see armed Police getting close in those situations.

you have no idea what you are talking about disco dog. but are happy to take a pop at a garda at any possible opportunity.

like i said

different thread same agenda

upandcumming

Discodog wrote: »

What agenda ? Someone was shot & could of been killed. The Guard could of been disarmed & the weapon used by someone else. You never see armed Police getting close in those situations.

Are you making the decision to forget that when the Garda arrived on the scene the lad had a slashhook out? He was after coming from a funeral of course...

tuxy

Discodog wrote: »

The Guard did not have control. He was extremely unprofessional, failed to see the risks & should of pulled back & asked for backup. Very worrying that such a poorly trained Guard is holding a firearm.

I do agree it does look unprofessional. However he would not have time to wait for backup if he felt the man in the van was in imminent danger.

Infini

Honestly when it comes down to it the Garda is 90% likely to be perfectly justified in firing his weapon expecially considering the kind of vermin theyre having to deal with. We need more serious laws and prisons for getting the worst of these locked up where they belong and away from terrorising innocent people.

jimmycrackcorm

Discodog wrote:

The Guard did not have control. He was extremely unprofessional, failed to see the risks & should of pulled back & asked for backup. Very worrying that such a poorly trained Guard is holding a firearm.

If the dog had been given your alias, he'd have danced out of the way of the bullet.

Discodog

Get Real wrote: »

First you say the guard should have stepped back and left the situation.

Then it's pointed out by a poster it doesn't make sense to abandon someone being assaulted in his van.

Then you reply by changing your approach and say "well he should have secured his weapon". Then if he was attacked by a dog he'd have had no weapon to use.

You're questioning a humans actions and the quick decisions to be made alone, the ith a camera in your face, during a situation that could escalate.

And yet you changed you're "should have done" twice and can't make your mind up on what should have been done from the comfort of an arm chair. The irony.

Well the usual Boards response will prevail here. The real question is whether GSOC do their job - I suspect that the new commissioner will be watching closely.