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

youth charged with posession of stick

growler

http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/1014/athlone.html

"A 17-year-old youth was charged with having an article capable of inflicting serous injury and likely to intimidate another person, namely a large wooden stick."

not condoning in any way attacking Gardai , but how can you be charged with possession of a stick, will we see Garda raids on hurling games as gangs of youths wield dangerous sticks capable of inflicting serious injury.

A number of questions spring to mind:

The "stick" in question is referred to as being "wooden", is there some other type of stick out there that I don't know about?

At what point does a stick become intimidating? would a small stick intimidate a very small person, or would a small person wielding a very big stick be a more serious offence than a big fecker with a ruler? Is oak more threatening than say birch or a bamboo shoot? Do judges have some sort of guide book to refer to which works out the degree of seriousness of each stick related offence, a comlex formula involving height and weight of the victim and stick wielder and the relative length, weight, thickness, species, freshness, number of leaves, thorns etc. of the offending piece of wood?

Any lurking lawyer types... please help to clear this up for me.

Or indeed if anyone has been viciously or mildly assaulted by a stick perhaps you could let us know the type of stick involved and rate it on a scale of 1-10 for pain inflicting effectiveness.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Mr. CooL ICE

He deserves an awful lot of stick over this!

Mossy Monk

This guy was with a another guy who stabbed another human being. I would call him a scumbag and the Gardaí were right to arrest him.

axer

growler wrote: »

The "stick" in question is referred to as being "wooden", is there some other type of stick out there that I don't know about?

A stick of glue; [SIZE=-1]A cinnamon stick; a stick of dynamite.[/SIZE]

growler wrote: »

At what point does a stick become intimidating?

When you portray it as a weapon or indicate in someway that it will be used in violence against someone.

growler wrote: »

would a small stick intimidate a very small person, or would a small person wielding a very big stick be a more serious offence than a big fecker with a ruler?

It depends. You could kill a small or large person with a small or large stick. It all depends how the person portrays their intentions.

growler wrote: »

Is oak more threatening than say birch or a bamboo shoot?

I would think it is not what material the stick is both more to do with the perceived intentions of the stick wielder and what damage could the stick do

growler wrote: »

Do judges have some sort of guide book to refer to which works out the degree of seriousness of each stick related offence, a comlex formula involving height and weight of the victim and stick wielder and the relative length, weight, thickness, species, freshness, number of leaves, thorns etc. of the offending piece of wood?

I doubt that is needed however maybe someone who would be considered an expert in the strength of the stick i.e. an expert in wood, could be called by either party - prosecution or defence to determine whether the stick could be used as a weapon however it is the intimidation that is the problem here as a regular Joe Soap may not know whether a specific stick is strong enough to be used as a weapon thus may be intimidated by a stick considered not strong enough to be used as a weapon much the same as a plastic gun that looks like a real one could be used to intimidate someone.

growler wrote: »

Any lurking lawyer types... please help to clear this up for me.

I am not a lawyer but I have applied common sense to this.

growler wrote: »

Or indeed if anyone has been viciously or mildly assaulted by a stick perhaps you could let us know the type of stick involved and rate it on a scale of 1-10 for pain inflicting effectiveness.

I would presume there are many factors to consider when determining the pain a specific stick could inflict so I believe any answers to the this last question are purely subjective.

Jesus Wept

growler wrote: »

Any lurking lawyer types... please help to clear this up for me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDOtPIP_Fg4

Dord

[generic garda culchie accent]Are you the owner of this here schtick?[/generic garda culchie accent]

Dave!

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1990/en/act/pub/0012/sec0011.html#zza12y1990s11

Firearms and Offensive Weapons Act, 1990
11.—Where a person, while committing or appearing to be about to commit an offence, or in the course of a dispute or fight, produces in a manner likely unlawfully to intimidate another person any article capable of inflicting serious injury, he shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable—

( a ) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding £1,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding twelve months or to both, or

( b ) on conviction on indictment, to a fine or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or to both.

Seems fair enough to me. You use a stick to commit a crime (in this case assault a Garda), you should be charged for it.

The other bloke was charged with assault causing harm:

Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act, 1997
3.—(1) A person who assaults another causing him or her harm shall be guilty of an offence.

(2) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable—

( a ) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to a fine not exceeding £1,500 or to both, or

( b ) on conviction on indictment to a fine or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or to both.

I would thought that he'd be done for something else if he did in fact stab a Garda, but I'm no legal eagle, so I dunno.....

Hagar

growler wrote: »

Do judges have some sort of guide book to refer to which works out the degree of seriousness of each stick related offence

The expression "Rule of thumb" comes from an old law which stated, more or less, that a man could beat his wife with as stick provided it was no thicker than his thumb. HTH.

Maybe his wife was with him and he was preparing to administer to her a well deserved, yet legal, beating* ?

* Yes I'm joking.

walrusgumble

jesus the bull mccabe would be having non of it:D

Kernel

It's down to the 'mens rea' or intent of the person having the stick. If he intends to bash someones head in with the stick, he can be charged and prosecuted. If he's on the way to a match with a hurley, with no intention of doing harm he can't.

Makes sense when you think about it, otherwise garda would stop a lad with a hurley, lad says "I'm away to smash the shop window down the road" garda says... "ok, go ahead and I'll arrest you afterwards".

Wertz

growler wrote: »

Or indeed if anyone has been viciously or mildly assaulted by a stick perhaps you could let us know the type of stick involved and rate it on a scale of 1-10 for pain inflicting effectiveness.

I had the 2nd, 3rd and 4th phalanges of both my hands shattered in a serious assault a good few years back.
The weapon used was a length of 3" by 2" builder's lumber. I also nearly had my skull caved in by said "stick" (hands were defensive injuries).
On a scale of 1-10 for pain? Try 11....and try it for about 3 months.
I was off work for nearly 6 months and still have trouble with the right hand.

I'm not sure I like the tone of your post...anything can be turned into a weapon, no matter how innocent it's real usage purposes (or lack of).
Would you consider a baseball bat a stick? How about a truncheon or a cudgel? I'd say you'd get a fair old crack off of one of those tourist shelalaighs or a stout walking stick...as mentioned above, it's all about the intentions, the circumstances and what has transpired.

Fair play to the cops in this case...any size of stick in the wrong hands is as potentially harmful, or indeed letha,l as a knife, gun, sword or any other more glamourous weapon...
OP needs to cop the f*ck on and quit with the pedantry...

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

should the guards arrest people with dangerous looking fists?

arbeitsscheuer

Mordeth wrote: »

should the guards arrest people with dangerous looking fists?

You mean they don't at the moment?!?
Why, this is a SCANDAL!!!

We can't have uncouth ruffians roaming the streets with such an arsenal of weaponry... Next thing you'll be telling me that "Thumbs" are a perfectly legal bodily accoutrement...

Robbo

A stick with dog**** on the end is pretty much above a thermonuclear bomb in terms of deadliness. It's an established fact that prior to the invasion of Iraq, Saddam Hussein was building dog**** enriching plants and had amassed a number of suitable sticks.

Terry

Robbo wrote: »

A stick with dog**** on the end is pretty much above a thermonuclear bomb in terms of deadliness. It's an established fact that prior to the invasion of Iraq, Saddam Hussein was building dog**** enriching plants and had amassed a number of suitable sticks.

They moved them to Syria before the Americans invaded.

Fad

was he wearing a hoodie?
would make alot of sense then

Wertz

Yeah because obviously hoodie = violent :rolleyes:

delta_bravo

growler wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/1014/athlone.html

"A 17-year-old youth was charged with having an article capable of inflicting serous injury and likely to intimidate another person, namely a large wooden stick."

not condoning in any way attacking Gardai , but how can you be charged with possession of a stick,

Perhaps because it is capable of inflicting serous injury and likely to intimidate another person? You kinda answered your own question there

Deliverance

Mordeth wrote: »

should the guards arrest people with dangerous looking fists?

Yes, if they are wearing knuckledusters? Unless of course in the spirit of this thread: you can prove that the knuckledusters are jewelery.

Deliverance

Kernel wrote: »

It's down to the 'mens rea' or intent of the person having the stick. If he intends to bash someones head in with the stick, he can be charged and prosecuted. If he's on the way to a match with a hurley, with no intention of doing harm he can't.

Makes sense when you think about it, otherwise garda would stop a lad with a hurley, lad says "I'm away to smash the shop window down the road" garda says... "ok, go ahead and I'll arrest you afterwards".

Ah but it would depend on whether the lad had a ball with him, I walked my sister home in England years ago, and because it was a bad enough area I decided to carry a hurley with me for protection, I brought a ball for the craic and hopped it along the way to alleviate boredom, kinda of a dual purpose if you like.

The police stopped me and informed me that it was a dangerous weapon, and I could be arrested for it, when I produced the ball and showed them what I could do ie: hopped it a few times they laughed and said carry on. A couple of potential messers shouted out to me after the police left, "Dangerous weapon mate?", and I waved the hurley at them and replied "not yet" and they laughed.
I felt safer with my hurl and my ball that night, It was protection rather than a weapon. Idiots that go out with 'weapons' usually end up getting F'd up by their own stupidity in one way or another.

Dave147

You should need a licence to carry a stick in this day and age. Walking around wielding sticks is outrageous. ANARCHY!

bman

If the OP is been serious then he's either a knacker or an idiot (or both). These two were obiously out to cause harm. One of them stabbed a guard FFS. Both should be charged and sent away for a while. Scum like these are the bane of this country and the more of them off the streets the better.

biko

Rince an Bhata Uisce Bheatha
An Irish Stick Fighting Style
http://www.geocities.com/glendoyle/bata/

arbeitsscheuer

bman wrote: »

If the OP is been serious then he's either a knacker or an idiot (or both). These two were obiously out to cause harm. One of them stabbed a guard FFS. Both should be charged and sent away for a while. Scum like these are the bane of this country and the more of them off the streets the better.

Dya ever get lonely way out there on the Right?

bman

arbeitsscheuer wrote: »

Dya ever get lonely way out there on the Right?

Nope, I think the majority of the people think the same way but it’s politically incorrect to say it. These sorts of people don't benefit society in any way as far as I can see. I'm not saying to lock them all up and throw away the key, but when they go out looking for trouble like this then I don't see anything wrong with prosecuting them.

growler

I fear my initial post has been taken a tad toooooo seriously by some of you lot, got the wrong end of the stick even (groan)

for the record, I am not in favour of beating gardai with sticks of any length, weight or composition, not am i in favour of possession of sticks for any non carpentry / sporting / walking related activities paticularly by those with criminal or sociopathic tendencies.

i am also very sorry about the mental and physical damage that some on here have suffered as a result of the misuse of any type of wooden implements.

I would be impressed if a charge of possession of a cinnamon stick was ever successfully brought by our esteemed law enforcement agencies, thought it wouldn't greatly surprise me.

I am not a knacker or an idiot (afaik) though i did once have a hoodie (approx. autumn 1989)

I am impressed by the tale of venturing into the darklands of london wielding a stick for personal protection, though I would suggest the poster gets a kevlar vest for such future forays.

and , lighten up.

rubadub

growler wrote: »

At what point does a stick become intimidating?

I know you are taking the piss, but another point is when does a knife become intimidating.

Imagine scumbag has a dagger, a stanley or a 10" kitchen knife in its packaging in a roches stores bag. I reckon the kitchen knife would get him the least grief. The stanley is probably less than the legal limit (3" blade or something) so he will probably get away with it, and could say it is for work. The dagger would get the worst grief as it is not a work or kitchen tool.

But I would rather face a scumbag with a dagger than a stanley, since the stanley is more likely to be used as it would be harder to kill somebody with.

The kitchen knife is technically the worst- if the basis is on blade length- which it does seem to be.

- you never hear the full story on these anyways, he could be a scumbag who got away with loads of stuff- just like when you hear of dealers being done for 1gram of hash, they are not touching the stuff they sell so when they do get caught they give the max sentence.

Degsy

I remember being told by a copper that an umbrella could be considered an offensive weapon.Its all about context.If a couple of scumbags are going beating on a local pheasant shoot then they'll obviously need sticks,likewise if thye're in a mini bus with a load of other blokes,being driven by a priest,on the way to a hurley match they can have hurls with them.The point is,if you're standing at a bus stop and two shiitheads approach you with sticks,you're goingto feel intimidated because they have no *reason or lawfull excuse* to have them in a public place.Whether they intend to use them is a moot point,you may feel that they intend to and your reaction to this feeling makes them offensive weapons.The majority of fools who go round carrying sticks havnt got any feckin brains anyway,if they were tough and hard as they want you to think then they wouldnt need weapons.If they WERE going to fill somebody in with weapons they should at least have the basic intelligence to conceal them.If they havn't got the brains to realise this,they deserve to be nicked.

Wertz

Degsy wrote: »

...likewise if thye're in a mini bus with a load of other blokes,being driven by a priest...

Now it's at times like these I'd want more than a feckin' hurley

growler

Degsy wrote: »

If they WERE going to fill somebody in with weapons they should at least have the basic intelligence to conceal them.If they havn't got the brains to realise this,they deserve to be nicked.

"is that a stick down your trousers young man ?" :eek:

humanji

growler wrote:

I fear my initial post has been taken a tad toooooo seriously by some of you lot, got the wrong end of the stick even (groan)

You really need a good beating for that one!