Time to arm the gardai

CJhaughey · 08-12-2009 01:08PM

IMO if you arm every Garda, you raise the stakes.
Every 2bit scumbag will now be looking for a gun of their own in order to make themselves equal in firepower. Then you have the whole shootout scenario developing , Not Good.
I think the way it is being handled is the correct way, unarmed general Gardai and armed response units available at short notice.
Arming the whole force is not the way forward, not every Garda will feel confident carrying a Personal sidearm let alone being of the correct mindset to aim and pull the trigger.
It is one thing to talk about it but using deadly force on another human is a sobering thought. Regardless of how far down the social scale that individual is perceived to be.

parsi · 08-12-2009 01:17PM

tracy3135 wrote: »

I for one must inform you all that I will stop less suspect vehicles, search less homes, apprehend less armed persons and keep myself safe for my own family's sake cause I simply am not valued enough or paid enough to take this crap.

Don't feed the troll..

TheNog · 08-12-2009 02:05PM

This topic has been discussed many times in this forum and almost each and every time just after an incident of injury of a Garda. In my belief the time hasnt yet come for every member of the force to be armed. The RSU has only been rolled or is still be rolled out nationwide so we should see what effect this has first. My experience of the RSU so far has been positive. They are proactive and always seem to be only minutes away when needed.

However I feel the need for a fully armed force is not very far off and I do expect it may happen during my time of service. If it does happen I will embrace it and continue to do the job I have always wanted to do.

Im also an advocate of single car occupants (definitely in country stations) but only with the right equipment available and possibly with armed members. I dont accept Ruralshires Inspector Gadgets reasons for not having them such as parking, fuel consumption or the death of the PC. The American Police forces seem to get along fine with the necessary equipment and radio protocols.

FGR · 08-12-2009 02:31PM

tracy3135 wrote: »

even just driving with them in the patrol car, you are leaving yourself open to civil action should something go wrong. As a result you are slow to react even if it is to defend yourself!!!

There's a lot of truth in this. Many other police forces provide certain immunities to police officers however Gardaí are left wide open should -anything- go wrong.

I'm pretty sure you're not the only one who feels that they have to be wounded before they can justify any action.

realismpol · 08-12-2009 04:24PM

hk wrote: »

What is to say that the Garda who responded last night was not armed to begin with. Most plain clothes are.

I have no real issue with arming the gards but sometimes a firearm can be more of a hindrance, much more difficult to deal with general public order issues and drunks if you constantly have to keep an eye on you firearm to ensure you are not disarmed. Further more in a lot of situations you simply wont have time to draw a firearm, a lot of these suprise situations happen so fast there wouldnt be a chance. If there is prior knowledge that something is happening armed support can be called for and is readily available in most large urban areas in Ireland

There are holsters specially designed to prevent this from happening i.e certain ways of opening only known to the user of the firearm. This has been the case for years in the u.s. Also you can attach metal ring tethers to them like in northern ireland to prevent people from snatching and using your weapon. Some firearms also have unique safety locks also which prevent it being immeadiately used and only by the user.

Most european armed police forces have all the above in place. Snatching of firearms from officers is a rare event if ever happening in europe. Mostly happens in u.s and is even rare enough there. The only way would be a gang of people over powering a police officer but even at this they still wouldn't be able to remove the firearm if it was tethered to the holster via metallic wire. Even in the u.s i remember seeing about 10 years ago a type of gun carried by police officers that wouldn't fire unless the bottom of the ammunition clip is quickly tagged with a small metallic pin located elsewhere on the officers uniform known only to him. Thus anyone acquiring the weapon could not fire even if the safety was off and the weapon was loaded.

Don't get me wrong here i know its a lot of responsibility to carry a firearm and im not for one minute suggesting that it doesn't put pressure on the officer to watch himself but it definetly would lead to better proffessionalism and also i do believe lower crime rates and better arrest statistics not to mention improving officer and public safety. I actually think people's confidence in the gaurds would be boosted as well as the gaurds themselves who would no longer be afraid to respond to emergency calls as first responders. If someone knows an armed gaurd is going to show up on the scene of a crime quickly then they will be less likely to attempt a robbery.

We have to be realistic though because Criminals and the like just don't respect unarmed police officers. Thats just an unfortunate fact. The general public do but they are not the ones carrying out crimes and robberies so we have to kind of wake up a little here and stop avoiding the issue. Crime rates are rising and criminals are becoming more bolder even prepared to kill police officers now. Thats just the way society has gone.

On the gun been taken off officer issue If you have metallic wire attached to the gun to the belt or holster, the holsters which are designed to be only opened a certain way known only to the user(lots of these types of holster out there) and safeties always in place then there is practically zero chance of someone acquiring the gun off the police officer or using it against him. This has rarely if ever happened in northern ireland or elsewhere and they suffer from terrorist threats a lot and other countries where crime rates are a lot more rampant.

This is a non issue for me. The idea behind the carrying of firearms for me is not for use but rather as a deterrent to criminals. As pointed out the simple sight of police officers carrying firearms on their belt is enough to deter would be criminals. That is a simple fact.

Im not saying that we arm all gaurds willy nilly im saying the correct checks and procedures must in place first i.e all firearms need to have tethers, certain holsters with locks on them and all firearms have safety's on at all times holstered. Officer background checks would have to be more rigourous. As someone already rightfully pointed out it would also lead to a more professional police force. This would also prevent the legal loopholes which may exist if incidents do occur.

Added to this obviously the correct checks and balances in place for all serving members carrying firearms and investigative and administrative leave policies in place in the event of firearms being used by officers. This is just standard practice. I don't really see why people are worried. Its more based on a paranoi imo then anything else. In the end of the day the safety of the general public and the law of the land comes first before anything else. I think the majority of the irish public would be fine with armed officers as long as the right checks and balances, safety regulations and training procedures are in place.

CJhaughey · 08-12-2009 04:36PM

realismpol wrote: »

Mostly happens in u.s and is even rare enough there. The only way would be a gang of people over powering a police officer but even at this they still wouldn't be able to remove the firearm if it was tethered to the holster via metallic wire.

there is practically zero chance of someone acquiring the gun off the police officer or using it against him. This has rarely if ever happened in northern ireland or elsewhere

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,326148,00.html
http://www.winonadailynews.com/news/state-and-regional/mn/article_e6fafcee-9da5-11de-a78c-001cc4c03286.html
not that rare it seems...

CB19Kevo · 08-12-2009 04:40PM

The way forward i beleive is increase garda numbers and establish more response units.
not alone in the city's but spread accross the country ensuring armed response is avalible within a short time anywhere in the state.
I cant see justification in arming all members but instead there should be greater investment in the force,increased training and better equipment.

The solutions are easy but in this Country there made out as impossible:rolleyes:

Hooch · 08-12-2009 04:54PM

tracy3135 wrote: »

I for one must inform you all that I will stop less suspect vehicles, search less homes, apprehend less armed persons and keep myself safe for my own family's sake cause I simply am not valued enough or paid enough to take this crap.

And its silly childish posts like that, that turns the public against AGS.

If your that unhappy maybe this isnt the job for you. Please consider your posts, for the vast majority of Gardaí do NOT think like this. I may feel under valued but i'll still do my job when it boils down to it, and most certainly will do my duty when called to do so in the situations your outlined.

realismpol · 08-12-2009 05:00PM

CJhaughey wrote: »

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,326148,00.html
http://www.winonadailynews.com/news/state-and-regional/mn/article_e6fafcee-9da5-11de-a78c-001cc4c03286.html
not that rare it seems...

Yes that would be the usa where the level of gun crime is practically the highest in the world. Incidents like this happen mostly in the usa because the usa has a gun culture. Thats a fact. You can find many incidents of lots of events happening with firearms in the usa simply because there is 2 - 3 guns in the united states for every citizen. It is still a rare event over there. There is one police officer killed in the united states practically every day. The majority of them are not killed by their own weapon they are shot by assailants using their own weapons. Also in the U.S police officers do not in general carry tethers on their guns and the use of firearms in general is a widely socially accepted thing. Use of firearms and regulation of their use is more liberal then in other countries even amongst police departments in the united states.

We don't have a gun culture over here and the murder of police officers is not nor will it ever be a daily event. If your suggesting that a reason for not arming the gardai is because look over in the usa one or two police officers get killed yearly using their own guns thats a pretty weak argument. The usa has 350 million people with a ratio of 2 or 3 guns for each person living there. Shooting of police officers in the united states is a daily occurance sometimes even 3 -4 officers are killed daily unfortunately. It next to south africa, brazil probably has the highest level of police officer killings in the world.

budda15c · 08-12-2009 06:45PM

realismpol wrote: »

Yes that would be the usa where the level of gun crime is practically the highest in the world. Incidents like this happen mostly in the usa because the usa has a gun culture. Thats a fact. You can find many incidents of lots of events happening with firearms in the usa simply because there is 2 - 3 guns in the united states for every citizen. It is still a rare event over there. There is one police officer killed in the united states practically every day. The majority of them are not killed by their own weapon they are shot by assailants using their own weapons. Also in the U.S police officers do not in general carry tethers on their guns and the use of firearms in general is a widely socially accepted thing. Use of firearms and regulation of their use is more liberal then in other countries even amongst police departments in the united states.

We don't have a gun culture over here and the murder of police officers is not nor will it ever be a daily event. If your suggesting that a reason for not arming the gardai is because look over in the usa one or two police officers get killed yearly using their own guns thats a pretty weak argument. The usa has 350 million people with a ratio of 2 or 3 guns for each person living there. Shooting of police officers in the united states is a daily occurance sometimes even 3 -4 officers are killed daily unfortunately. It next to south africa, brazil probably has the highest level of police officer killings in the world.

While, I think a time will come where Gardaí will need to be routinely armed, I think it won't be for some time yet, for a number of reasons mainly:
- Irish culture and Irish peoples attitudes towards firearms is very different to other parts of the world. I don't think the Irish public have had the exposure to, or education about firearms to be exposed to them on a daily basis.
- Also I think, you would be surprised by the number of Gardaí who would not be comfortable carrying a firearm, especially on a daily basis. Many Gardaí I would imagine joined the force, knowing it was a mainly unarmed force. Many Gardaí are very proud of that fact and rightly so. As a member of the public, I am proud of the fact that we have a mainly unarmed police force. There could be no greater mistake than giving a firearm to someone who is not comfortable carrying it.

I think, as other posters have pointed out, more dedicated Armed Response Units, readily available and high visibility like the RSU are the way forward.

Also on the point of Gardaí gaining more respect by being routinely armed. There is a huge difference between respect and fear, which is something I think people forget all too easily. I believe the vast majority of the public would have a greater fear of the Gardaí if they were armed, (because as I said earlier the general public have not had any exposure to firearms) but not necessarily more respect. Personally I would not find a Garda any less approachable if he/she was carrying a firearm, but I think the vast majority of the public would. Whilst it may instill fear in criminals and gougers (who are the minority), the risk is it will have the same effect on the law abiding majority.

Again, regards respect. I respect Gardaí and the sometimes thankless job they do, I wouldn't respect them anymore just because they had a sig on their hip. I respect them because the very vast majority of them I have encountered have been decent, approachable, level-headed men and women, who more often than not have been able to resolve situations without the use of force. As in all walks of life there are a few @rseholes and whilst I don't hold much respect for them as a person, I still treat them with the respect their uniform and organisation deserves and has earned.

realismpol · 08-12-2009 07:55PM

budda15c wrote: »

While, I think a time will come where Gardaí will need to be routinely armed, I think it won't be for some time yet, for a number of reasons mainly:
- Irish culture and Irish peoples attitudes towards firearms is very different to other parts of the world. I don't think the Irish public have had the exposure to, or education about firearms to be exposed to them on a daily basis.
- Also I think, you would be surprised by the number of Gardaí who would not be comfortable carrying a firearm, especially on a daily basis. Many Gardaí I would imagine joined the force, knowing it was a mainly unarmed force. Many Gardaí are very proud of that fact and rightly so. As a member of the public, I am proud of the fact that we have a mainly unarmed police force. There could be no greater mistake than giving a firearm to someone who is not comfortable carrying it.

I think, as other posters have pointed out, more dedicated Armed Response Units, readily available and high visibility like the RSU are the way forward.

Also on the point of Gardaí gaining more respect by being routinely armed. There is a huge difference between respect and fear, which is something I think people forget all too easily. I believe the vast majority of the public would have a greater fear of the Gardaí if they were armed, (because as I said earlier the general public have not had any exposure to firearms) but not necessarily more respect. Personally I would not find a Garda any less approachable if he/she was carrying a firearm, but I think the vast majority of the public would. Whilst it may instill fear in criminals and gougers (who are the minority), the risk is it will have the same effect on the law abiding majority.

Again, regards respect. I respect Gardaí and the sometimes thankless job they do, I wouldn't respect them anymore just because they had a sig on their hip. I respect them because the very vast majority of them I have encountered have been decent, approachable, level-headed men and women, who more often than not have been able to resolve situations without the use of force. As in all walks of life there are a few @rseholes and whilst I don't hold much respect for them as a person, I still treat them with the respect their uniform and organisation deserves and has earned.

You make some very good points and i definetly agree with what your saying about the respect and fear issue. I do think though that the whole issue of irish people being educated to firearms is a bit of a lame duck issue. A lot more irish people have used and had access to firearms then one would think. Saying that Irish people are uneducated in regards to firearms and fear them like they are some sort of black magic not to be interferred with is a bit over the top. Many young people have been members of the fca and reserve defence forces and handled firearms. Many people have had uncles or relatives who own shotguns hunting rifles etc, target shooting. So for me anyway that's just an excuse.

I do agree on the rank and file members not being comfortable with it but in the end of the day you have to also try something before you can claim to be uncomfortable or comfortable with it. For many i would think its not so much comfort but lack of exposure in handling firearms thats the issue. That would probably come with proper training and learning all the ins and outs of firearms and their use. They are dangerous objects but i don't believe its an engrained thing in irish people since the day we were born that when you see a firearm its like handling a bomb.

I mean bascially the issue of the firearm is not to force gardai to use it but to have it for their own defence. I'm not of the opinion it would be used as an offensive tool like criminals use it but an defensive tool to protect members of the publics lives and the gardai themselves in very rare instances where lives are at risk.

People saying if gardai arm themselves criminals will suddenly go out and acquire m-16s and start a war are overreacting also. I hate to be the bearer of bad news but criminals already carry these firearms and have targeted unarmed officers including attempts to kill them. If things got that bad the criminals would be wiped out by the army. So again overreaction. Criminals are cowards in the end of the day not martyrs. Thats exactly why they target ordinary civillians and unarmed police.

The whole mantra of its great to see the respect level for the gaurds and im proud of them being unarmed etc. I dunno if that makes any difference when a gaurd is standing there and a guy is trying to slash at his neck or face with an 8 inch blade. Just put yourself in that situation. Would you be happy you were unarmed then?

These things happen wheither the gaurds have or haven't firearms. Its just they can defend themselves, their lives, the lives of others and the law of the land when armed. I know it sounds hyperbolic but it is the general meat and bones of the issue.

In the end of the day wheither gaurds are comfortable or not carrying them they may be forced into getting them because the criminals certainly are getting more bolder and gardai are at a point where they are putting their lives on the line being unarmed. Thats a much greater danger then the comfort level of a person carrying a firearm to me. One big problem i see in all the comments is fear. Its fear of the unknown here thats the issue and that leads to all sorts of excuses and paranoid scenarios people come up with because in the end of the day people don't like change and fear it.

But it really is at this stage a neccessary step. Once you see gaurds carrying firearms and how little things will change people will get over it very quickly just like they did when armed support units travel around and noone now bats an eyelid whereas 20 years ago people would have been up in arms over it.

Delancey · 08-12-2009 08:00PM

An issue that would need addressing were all gardai to be armed is a sensitive one and that is suicide by officers using service weapons.

'Access to means' has long been identified as a major risk factor in suicide.
I dont have up to date figures but at one time for every officer the NYPD lost killed in the line of duty there were 5 or 6 officers ending their lives - often using service revolvers. Closer to home , in the latter part of the 'troubles' there were years when the R.U.C. lost as many officers to suicide as to terrorist attack - again service weapons were the main means of suicide.
I am also aware of instances where Gardai have ended their own lives with issued firearms - I apologise in advance to anyone here who knew these Guards and is offended by this issue being mentioned - I assure you no offence is intended but would it not be a tragedy if by arming all Gardai '' in order to preserve their lives '' the exact opposite happened ?

realismpol · 08-12-2009 08:12PM

delancey42 wrote: »

An issue that would need addressing were all gardai to be armed is a sensitive one and that is suicide by officers using service weapons.

'Access to means' has long been identified as a major risk factor in suicide.
I dont have up to date figures but at one time for every officer the NYPD lost killed in the line of duty there were 5 or 6 officers ending their lives - often using service revolvers. Closer to home , in the latter part of the 'troubles' there were years when the R.U.C. lost as many officers to suicide as to terrorist attack - again service weapons were the main means of suicide.
I am also aware of instances where Gardai have ended their own lives with issued firearms - I apologise in advance to anyone here who knew these Guards and is offended by this issue being mentioned - I assure you no offence is intended but would it not be a tragedy if by arming all Gardai '' in order to preserve their lives '' the exact opposite happened ?

Thats really clutching at straws. Why not go into a debate about suicide while we're at it and how this affects members of the force. I can't really decipher what your trying to say.

It appears your trying to make an analogy between gardai access to firearms and suicide as a reason not to arm the gardai. Your last sentence seems to imply that access to firearms would suddenly result in the gardai committing suicide en masse. Suicide is a seperate social issue and if a gaurd wants to commit suicide theres a bigger problem there then him having access to the means to do it fast. I mean he can do it pretty easy a lot of different ways other then using a gun. That wouldn't be the issue the issue would be why he wants to commit suicide not him having access to a gun. Not having access to firearm is not going to end his desire to end his life.

Also firearms i would imagine under strict guidelines would be issued to officers before they go out on and after they return from patrol to a secure armoury manned by other officers or a sinlge officer depending on station size thus preventing the officer using this weapon on his own or in the station if he did contemplate doing such a thing. This would also all be documented by the manning officer to ensure no ammunition or firearms went missing whilst the garda was on patrol. This would also be useful in investigative cases whereby there was any incident involving rounds missing or discharged as records of ammunition counts and patrolling officers would be stored. As i said and others have mentioned this would lead to much more proffessionalism in the force and more security for everyone.

Counts of ammunition stocks firearms for smaller stations would be carried out by regional adminstrators to ensure no firearms or ammunition go missing.

I can see theres even a big level of distrust here of the gardai. I have no issue with them all carrying firearms as long as the correct checks procedures and balances are put in place as i mentioned above. Some of the paranoid stuff people come up is obviously borne out of their fears and lack of knowledge of how to operate such a scheme to the benefit of everyone.

donvito99 · 08-12-2009 08:45PM

delancey42 wrote: »

An issue that would need addressing were all gardai to be armed is a sensitive one and that is suicide by officers using service weapons.

'Access to means' has long been identified as a major risk factor in suicide.
I dont have up to date figures but at one time for every officer the NYPD lost killed in the line of duty there were 5 or 6 officers ending their lives - often using service revolvers. Closer to home , in the latter part of the 'troubles' there were years when the R.U.C. lost as many officers to suicide as to terrorist attack - again service weapons were the main means of suicide.
I am also aware of instances where Gardai have ended their own lives with issued firearms - I apologise in advance to anyone here who knew these Guards and is offended by this issue being mentioned - I assure you no offence is intended but would it not be a tragedy if by arming all Gardai '' in order to preserve their lives '' the exact opposite happened ?

realismpol wrote: »

Thats really clutching at straws. Why not go into a debate about suicide while we're at it and how this affects members of the force. I can't really decipher what your trying to say.

It appears your trying to make an analogy between gardai access to firearms and suicide as a reason not to arm the gardai. Your last sentence seems to imply that access to firearms would suddenly result in the gardai committing suicide en masse. Suicide is a seperate social issue and if a gaurd wants to commit suicide theres a bigger problem there then him having access to the means to do it fast. I mean he can do it pretty easy a lot of different ways other then using a gun. That wouldn't be the issue the issue would be why he wants to commit suicide not him having access to a gun. Not having access to firearm is not going to end his desire to end his life. Also firearms i would imagine under strict guidelines would be issued to officers before they go out on and after they return from patrol to an armoury manned by another officer where possible preventing the officer using this weapon on his own or in the station if he did contemplate doing such a thing.

I can see theres even a big level of distrust here of the gardai. I have no issue with them all carrying firearms as long as the correct checks procedures and balances are put in place as i mentioned above. Some of the paranoid stuff people come up is obviously borne out of their fears and lack of knowledge of how to operate such a scheme to the benefit of everyone.

I think that he makes a very fair point. He made a very acceptable conclusion that suicides would have a very high chance of emerging were fire arms to be introduced to members.

Me thinks that giving firearms to Gardaí will equal in a criminals mind 'the Guards are fair game now'. I think all thats needed is more RSU's, make them a big contingient of daily patrols, and roll 'em out across the country pronto.

realismpol · 08-12-2009 08:51PM

donvito99 wrote: »

I think that he makes a very fair point. He made a very acceptable conclusion that suicides would have a very high chance of emerging were fire arms to be introduced to members.

Me thinks that giving firearms to Gardaí will equal in a criminals mind 'the Guards are fair game now'. I think all thats needed is more RSU's, make them a big contingient of daily patrols, and roll 'em out across the country pronto.

Suicides amongst force members happen anyway. I have made the point that firearms would be stored in station in an armoury manned by officers. All officers firearms would be checked in and out and recorded by the manning officers before the officer goes out on patrol. Thus unless a garda decides to shoot himself whilst on patrol with other members or on his own, this fear is unwarranted. He would not have access to a firearm once he finishes his patrol or in the station itself even bar leaving the armoury to go directly out on patrol.

Also criminals deciding gaurds are fair game. They already do that im afraid. But they only do it because gaurds are unarmed. If they they respected the law then they wouldn't be criminals would they. Criminals don't tend to tackle the eru. And theres a reason why they don't. Criminals are dumb but they aren't dumb enough to suddenly start targeting police officers en masse because they are carrying firearms. This is ireland and europe we live in not coloumbia with some sort of narco criminals carrying bazookas and taking on the army. The criminals would more then likely just concentrate their efforts on other white collar based crimes or those not involving robberies or direct confrontation with police.

Show me one other country in europe with armed police whereby the criminals suddenly targeted police because they are armed. Any examples? Exactly there are none because like i pointed out earlier its just your fear reflex creating as many negative scenarios as you can because your human instinct fears change. And when your in fear you'll do anything or in this case make up any excuse to avoid change.

The way people talk you'd swear ireland had bravehearts for criminals. If criminals did target police the army would be called in and they would be wiped out quicker then you could bat an eyelid. Criminals generally like to make money and survive where possible. They like to take on weaker victims and that generally doesn't involve taking on someone who can fight back or call in his big buddies.

By your logic there would be about 30 dead gardai already. You know the eru that drive around in marked patrol cars? Yeah with armed support unit written in big fancy lights for all the ciminals to see. Why haven't they been targeted?? Any idea. I ll tell you why the criminals are scared of them thats why. If they did ever target them they would have another unit there to take em out fast or the army called in. Firearms instill fear and thats a good thing when the good guys are carrying them. Thats just the truth.

guil · 08-12-2009 08:56PM

donvito99 wrote: »

Me thinks that giving firearms to Gardaí will equal in a criminals mind 'the Guards are fair game now'. I think all thats needed is more RSU's, make them a big contingient of daily patrols, and roll 'em out across the country pronto.

imo u are contradictin urself a bit, first ya say it would make guards fair game, then ya say have more RSU's

well surely if criminals know that RSU could be on the scene in minutes, there is a chance they would shoot or take unarmed guards hostage

Hellm0 · 08-12-2009 09:07PM

We do have armed guards, just they only respond to situations where they are required.

I am 100% against having armed representatives of the state present in every day life, I do not believe it is a deterrent and in fact leads to better armed criminals.

realismpol · 08-12-2009 09:12PM

What do you mean better armed? They already carry fully automatic sub machine guns and automatic handguns as well as assault rifles and pipe bombs. If they get any better armed they'll be carrying RPG's which some of them have im sure.

This argument about criminals targeting police is a mute one ok folks stop bringing it up i've already proven how its just a hogwash excuse if you read my postings. Ive directly addressed the issue and yet people still keep coming on with the same lame excuse. You cannot predict a future event with no evidence of it ever happening in any country in europe with armed police.

Its just irish hogwash which we are very good. Ahhh sure if you arm de gaurds all the ciminals will come out and target them. Jesus ffs are you living in the real world. Yes criminals are gonna suddenly decide its in their best interest to kill police officers on masse and then get absolutely destroyed by the defence forces who have lets see armoured personnel carriers and 50 cal machine guns. Some of you people obviously don't understand the criminal mind. They like to target weak persons not people who will put up a fight or possibly kill them.

Again let me directly address your hogwash. If your theory was true the eru would have 30 dead gardai. Sure they drive around with armed support unit written on their cars and they are armed gardai. How come criminals don't shoot them or target them? because if they do

(A) they will have other eru units or possibly the defence forces after them
(B) they like to target weak people and have no interest in possibly getting killed in confrontation with armed police.
(C) They exist to make money off weaker people and not to die where possible

Please a bit of balance in the comments.

donvito99 · 08-12-2009 09:13PM

guil wrote: »

imo u are contradictin urself a bit, first ya say it would make guards fair game, then ya say have more RSU's

well surely if criminals know that RSU could be on the scene in minutes, there is a chance they would shoot or take unarmed guards hostage

What I am saying is that criminals would consider the ordinary Community Guard on the beat 'fair game'.

Garda management know what they are getting into with regards to RSU's.

donvito99 · 08-12-2009 09:15PM

realismpol wrote: »

This argument about criminals targeting police is a mute one ok folks stop bringing it up i've already proven how its just a hogwash excuse if you read my postings.

:mad:

Don't tell me what I can and cannot say, please!

Are you from an ES background?

How can you definetively prove that 'criminals targeting POlice is a mute one'?

Argh...

donvito99 · 08-12-2009 09:17PM

realismpol wrote: »

Some of you people obviously don't understand the criminal mind.

And you do?

I'll leave that up to the people who deal with them on a daily basis and the criminals themselves.

Hellm0 · 08-12-2009 09:20PM

realismpol wrote: »

What do you mean better armed. They already carry fully automatic sub machine guns and automatic handguns as well as assault rifles and pipe bombs. If they get any better armed they'll be carrying RPG's which some of them have im sure.

Examples? I mean call me crazy, but I don't think of Ireland as being anything like say, Darfur. And I certainly havn't heard of any "Heat" like shootouts in the past while. Perhaps you just live in the thick of things?

realismpol wrote: »

This argument about criminals targeting police is a mute one ok folks stop bringing it up i've already proven how its just a hogwash excuse if you read my postings.

Excuse me Herr Commandant, but I see no mod tag under your name and I do not consider my opinion to be "hogwash".
Have you ever lived in a country with armed police? Let me tell you, I would rather deal with the Gardai than the US police services. Guns change the nature of the relationship between the police services and the public, and not in a good way. There are other ways to address the problems of our society.

donvito99 · 08-12-2009 09:21PM

Hellm0 wrote: »

Examples? I mean call me crazy, but I don't think of Ireland as being anything like say, Darfur. And I certainly havn't heard of any "Heat" like shootouts in the past while. Perhaps you just live in the thick of things?

Excuse me Herr Commandant, but I see no mod tag under your name and I do not consider my opinion to be "hogwash".
Have you ever lived in a country with armed police? Let me tell you, I would rather deal with the Gardai than the US police services. Guns change the nature of the relationship between the police services and the public, and not in a good way. There are other ways to address the problems of our society.

+1

realismpol · 08-12-2009 09:24PM

So you think criminals will suddenly start ordinary beat officers on patrol just because they are carrying guns. Seriously you really believe they'll do that.

I'd like to know what possible benefit they would get out of doing this bar being at the end of garda bullet themselves. Explain that one to me. Criminals don't like to die. This is not al qaida we are dealing with. Its a known fact that criminals are cowards. They target only weak individuals that they think they can get away with murdering or stealing from.

Your telling me a criminal strategy would be to suddenly start targeting gardai and killing them. No i don't think so.

Also yeah the guy above saying criminals in ireland aren't carrying fully automatic sub machine guns and automatic handguns. LOL. Criminal groups in ireland have ties to terrorist organisations. You know that right? whats the point..

Liamario · 08-12-2009 09:25PM

The only firearms that normal Gardai should have at their disposal are non lethal ones- tasers etc.... To give normal gardai lethal weapons is asking for trouble and will only lead to easier access to weapons for the criminals than they already have

realismpol · 08-12-2009 09:29PM

Liamario wrote: »

The only firearms that normal Gardai should have at their disposal are non lethal ones- tasers etc.... To give normal gardai lethal weapons is asking for trouble and will only lead to easier access to weapons than they already have

I think tasers would be an acceptable substitute to a firearm. Its just they can't penetrate certain clothing, you only get one shot and they only travel a certain distance. But yeah perhaps.

Hellm0 · 08-12-2009 09:32PM

realismpol wrote: »

So you think criminals will suddenly start ordinary beat officers on patrol just because they are carrying guns. Seriously you really believe they'll do that.

I'd like to know what possible benefit they would get out of doing this bar being at the end of garda bullet themselves. Explain that one to me. Criminals don't like to die. This is not al qaida we are dealing with. Its a known fact that criminals are cowards. They target only weak individuals that they think they can get away with murdering.

Your telling me a criminal strategy would be to suddenly start targeting gardai and killing them. No i don't think so.

There will ALWAYS be a criminal element. We have the ERU for serious occasions where that level of force is required. But granting the police the ability to carry arms for day to day tasks simply is not wise. By allowing the Gardai to carry arms on every occasion we also grant them the power to decide, on the spot (and as a representative of the state) whether a member of the public needs a bullet in the head. This is not something lost on the criminal community, the knowledge that a situation can escalate to the use of firearms that bit easier will, without a doubt, increase the danger of that situation for everyone. I would rather a Gardai get slashed in the face doing his job than the embrace a society where law is enforced at the end of a bayonet.

donvito99 · 08-12-2009 09:32PM

realismpol wrote: »

So you think criminals will suddenly start ordinary beat officers on patrol just because they are carrying guns. Seriously you really believe they'll do that.

I'd like to know what possible benefit they would get out of doing this bar being at the end of garda bullet themselves. Explain that one to me. Criminals don't like to die. This is not al qaida we are dealing with. Its a known fact that criminals are cowards. They target only weak individuals that they think they can get away with murdering or stealing from.

Your telling me a criminal strategy would be to suddenly start targeting gardai and killing them. No i don't think so.

None of us are saying that we are going to see some kind of war or anything. I am saying that an ordinary beat Garda carrying a firearm would be more likely to be shot.

Not only that, but giving Gardaí firearms contradicts the Garda's image and approachablity and status in Irish society.

I believe that the current system that we have works and just needs to be expanded.

However if a Garda says to me I want to be armed because <lists ten reasons> then yes, I would be of an open mind to the matter.

@realismpol, what kind of background experience with criminology etc do you have, which is surely needed to make such confident and voluminous posts?

Whitewater-AGS · 08-12-2009 09:38PM

I'm in favour of arming all Gardai. The ordinary uniform Garda is already fair game to criminals who are using petrol bombs, pipe bombs and every type of firearm unfortunatly like most things in this job change only comes around when its too late.:mad:

realismpol · 08-12-2009 09:38PM

Hellm0 wrote: »

There will ALWAYS be a criminal element. We have the ERU for serious occasions where that level of force is required. But granting the police the ability to carry arms for day to day tasks simply is not wise. By allowing the Gardai to carry arms on every occasion we also grant them the power to decide, on the spot (and as a representative of the state) whether a member of the public needs a bullet in the head. This is not something lost on the criminal community, the knowledge that a situation can escalate to the use of firearms that bit easier will, without a doubt, increase the danger of that situation for everyone. I would rather a Gardai get slashed in the face doing his job than the embrace a society where law is enforced at the end of a bayonet.

I want examples of european countries where the above you are stating has happened. Yeah. Because if you can't back up your statements with facts to a degree then what your saying does not hold any sort of merit.

Your over exaggerating the situation. A garda deciding wheither to put a bullet in someones head??? You know about procedure and training with firearms with comments like that of course. There would be strict guidelines for the use of firearms by police as there are in all countries. Thats what training is for. Its not just a garda deciding hey this guy looks threatening ill just have to pop one in his head look out joe public here i come.

Thats not what happens there are strict polcies for even when a gun can be unholstered and actually even pointed at someone. First option is always non lethal then when all else fails and lives are at risk the firearm with verbal commands is first used then if all else fails Lethal force is then applied. The lethal option is last option anyone ever wants to take unless your life or the life of a member of the public is directly at risk. Talk about using hyperbolic statements.

And the last comment you'd rather a garda gets slashed in the face then use a firearm. WOW just wow how someone could say such a thing boggles the mind. Obviously not a serving member are you?

Please quit the hyperbolic factless statements and we can have a proper debate on the merits of using firearms.

This isn't the wild west and please have some more faith in public representatives then to assume they would just put a bullet in the head of their fellow citizens for the sake of it.

Time to arm the gardai

Comments