Uniformed Garda Armed

Overheal · 01-05-2011 06:29PM

JohnathanM wrote: »

Well, a short while back I was mooching around town and back to the car with a newly acquired axe slung over my shoulder.

Not exactly a concealable weapon though is it? Either way we're talking about knives. We could get into a big spiel about hunting rifles vs. glocks, too.

Would you have given me a second glance? In any case the 3" blade he carried was legal in Seattle, and Irish law is largely irrelevant in the USA. So, I don't think I'm being a hypocrite.

RCW 9.41.270
Weapons apparently capable of producing bodily harm — Unlawful carrying or handling — Penalty — Exceptions.

(1) It shall be unlawful for any person to carry, exhibit, display, or draw any firearm, dagger, sword, knife or other cutting or stabbing instrument, club, or any other weapon apparently capable of producing bodily harm, in a manner, under circumstances, and at a time and place that either manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons.

(2) Any person violating the provisions of subsection (1) above shall be guilty of a gross misdemeanor. If any person is convicted of a violation of subsection (1) of this section, the person shall lose his or her concealed pistol license, if any. The court shall send notice of the revocation to the department of licensing, and the city, town, or county which issued the license.

(3) Subsection (1) of this section shall not apply to or affect the following:

(a) Any act committed by a person while in his or her place of abode or fixed place of business;

(b) Any person who by virtue of his or her office or public employment is vested by law with a duty to preserve public safety, maintain public order, or to make arrests for offenses, while in the performance of such duty;

(c) Any person acting for the purpose of protecting himself or herself against the use of presently threatened unlawful force by another, or for the purpose of protecting another against the use of such unlawful force by a third person;

(d) Any person making or assisting in making a lawful arrest for the commission of a felony; or

(e) Any person engaged in military activities sponsored by the federal or state governments.

[1994 sp.s. c 7 § 426; 1969 c 8 § 1.] Effective date -- 1994

http://knife-expert.com/wa.txt

JohnathanM · 01-05-2011 06:30PM

Overheal wrote: »

That's not the situation. Have you looked into the incident?

If they knew the guys history they probably would have found him harmless. Instead it looks to the cop like he walked across a semi-delirious guy walking down the street with a knife, that when asked to drop it did not understand and so did not comply, based on what we know now from people who did know him.

In actual fact the cop didn't know him and had no way of determining he was harmless. Except to say the man was carrying the knife, probably not in a lucid state, and not complying with an order to drop his weapon.

Fine, but how do we get from that to shooting the man four times? As you say yourself, the policeman didn't even know if his request was understood. I can't see any rationale from the facts which suggests that lethal force was appropriate even where we accept a reasonable assumption that he may have been a threat.

vampire of kilmainham · 01-05-2011 06:35PM

Biggins wrote: »

Just out of curiosity (I don't know so I ask), are all British police armed?
...And if not, of those that are, how many innocent people have been killed proportion-wise in relation to numbers of population?
I know one life is too many but to think that Gardi will all just go on power trips might be pushing it a bit?
(Yes there WILL be a few of course, its unavoidable)

no not all british police are armed but a lot more of their uniform police are armed then ours and i dont mean special units...

Overheal · 01-05-2011 06:36PM

JohnathanM wrote: »

Fine, but how do we get from that to shooting the man four times? As you say yourself, the policeman didn't even know if his request was understood. I can't see any rationale from the facts which suggests that lethal force was appropriate even where we accept a reasonable assumption that he may have been a threat.

I'm not a cop, but what I do know is that you don't just use one bullet. The rule of thumb you hear in gun ranges is 2 to the chest, 1 to the head. And then you have a real situation. I could easily imagine 4 bullets in such quick succession. Shoot to Wound is not afaik a rule of engagement.

JohnathanM · 01-05-2011 06:42PM

Overheal wrote: »

Not exactly a concealable weapon though is it? Either way we're talking about knives. We could get into a big spiel about hunting rifles vs. glocks, too.

Sure, but the point was really about the threat. This goes into the legislation you mention below.

Overheal wrote: »

RCW 9.41.270
<snip>
[1994 sp.s. c 7 § 426; 1969 c 8 § 1.] Effective date -- 1994

The legislation here clears up that the knife was legal to hold and carry openly, especially as it does not constitute a "dangerous knife" under the state's municipal code (SMC s. 12A). The point I think hinges on this:

"and at a time and place that either manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons."

Whittling wood isn't an act of intimidation or one that would normally raise concern for the safety of others. It seems to me that the knife was legal to carry, and he was only in potential breach of the law in his use of it. That is a matter to be decided upon fact through the judiciary, and until such a point there's no substantiated crime.

Overheal · 01-05-2011 06:44PM

yet you can see where the confusion between those two people arose.

Big Nasty · 01-05-2011 06:45PM

Einhard wrote: »

The point is that the officer already has the power and authority to command the malefactor to stop.

If a guard can't enforce his will over some petty scumbags then he's not much of a guard. Also, I don't want a situation where the Gardaí are pulling their weapons over petty misdemeanours.

You try going up against four scumbags on your todd, cop or not! They're an wful lot less likely to try tackle you if you're packing.

JohnathanM · 01-05-2011 06:53PM

Overheal wrote: »

yet you can see where the confusion between those two people arose.

I can only see confusion on the part of the policeman, and a tremendous overreaction. As a policeman, I would hold him to a higher standard than an ordinary citizen in how he should have reacted. I can honestly see no way in which he action is excusable, and I don't see how some guy with his head down whittling a bit of wood is a threat. Had he waving a huge blade around, then I'd be far less opinionated. He didn't do that though.

tayto lover · 01-05-2011 07:00PM

JohnathanM wrote: »

I can only see confusion on the part of the policeman, and a tremendous overreaction. As a policeman, I would hold him to a higher standard than an ordinary citizen in how he should have reacted. I can honestly see no way in which he action is excusable, and I don't see how some guy with his head down whittling a bit of wood is a threat. Had he waving a huge blade around, then I'd be far less opinionated. He didn't do that though.

I watched that clip and there was very little time between the policeman going around the corner after the man and the actual shooting. That policeman should be on trial unless the man ran at him with the knife which i don't think happened.
I still think uniformed gardai should not be armed.

Einhard · 01-05-2011 07:01PM

MCMLXXV wrote: »

You try going up against four scumbags on your todd, cop or not! They're an wful lot less likely to try tackle you if you're packing.

That's why I think tazers and other forms of non-lethal force should be in use.

What happens if a guard comes upon a few lads out knacker drinking, and tells them to clear off, only to be called a pig or similar, and told where to go? Should he pull out is gun? And then what? Shoot them if they refuse to comply?

vampire of kilmainham · 01-05-2011 07:12PM

JohnathanM wrote: »

When I read around at the time I heard that he was deaf, which is why he he didn't turn around when the officer called him. Looking again, it seems that was the case in one ear:

http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2010/12/18/16603076.html

To be honest, I don't personally care if the fella was simply ignoring him. Not a reason to kill somebody.

The officer named ian birk had to surrender his gun and badge obiviousley pending an investigation id imigane he would be suspended from the force as he could of used different tactics when he confronted the man not just fireing his wepon 4 times i suspect this cop had some sort of psychological problems which obviousley none of his fellow officers noticed or his supiriour's still no excuse though...

Dangerous Man · 01-05-2011 07:14PM

Bosco boy wrote: »

That's a rather large brush you have there, what a load of bitter sh1te

We're discussing the police force so of necessity one speaks in 'broad strokes'. And you know what you can do with your 'bitter shite,' right?

vampire of kilmainham · 01-05-2011 07:16PM

MCMLXXV wrote: »

There's too many dirty scroates in this country with no respect or fear of the law.

it's the same in all countries where the cops are armed cops being armed dosent change that...

vampire of kilmainham · 01-05-2011 07:20PM

lizt wrote: »

I can see pros and cons. Obviously the system could be open to abuse and would no doubt result in unnecessary deaths.

But I was watching crimecall the other night and there was one lone garda sent to investigate suspicious activity at a post office (which was being robbed at the time). As far as I remember, the raiders were armed and he approached the house with just his baton. There was nothing to stop them blowing his head off, which thank god they didn't do.

It's the same with a lot of situations where the number of civilians (such as in riot, protests that go wrong etc.) far outnumber the gardai. They look a bit stupid standing there with just a baton to protect themselves.

There would be armed responce units at a riot

Craebear · 01-05-2011 07:25PM

Just give them shillelaghs and sling-shots. Guns cost money.

vampire of kilmainham · 01-05-2011 07:39PM

tayto lover wrote: »

I would not like to see Gardai carrying guns while in uniform. There should be specialist units for this as in other countries.

there allready is special armed units in this country called the emergency responce unit or ERU and all detective units are armed. In all other countries all the police are armed but they have specialists units to deal with a major incident

Biggins · 01-05-2011 07:44PM

Craebear wrote: »

Just give them shillelaghs and sling-shots. Guns cost money.

News Flash!
...So does most things ...including shillelaghs and sling-shots.

vampire of kilmainham · 01-05-2011 07:50PM

Thrill wrote: »

The other side of the coin is that if the Garda was armed then they probably would have blown his head off.

or the garda most likley would of blown their heads off and rightley so if they started to fire at him

Terry · 01-05-2011 08:15PM

Have the shooting forum crowd arrived yet?
There was a thread like this a few years back, and one of them ended up site banned with his sights set on me. That was highly entertaining.

Give the rank and file pepper spray and tazer.
Train the emotionally stable ones in the use of firearms and give them guns.

Any petty criminal can get their hands on a gun for little or nothing.

Most of the people with guns are low-level gang members who think they're hard men. They will most likely never fire a shot at someone else.

The you have the odd heroin or coke dealer. They're the dangerous ones.
They will use a gun and not care about the consequences.
Factor in the rise of crack as a cheap replacement for the coke that so many of the Celtic tiger cubs are so fond of, and you have things getting out of control.

Then you have all the former Provo guns finding their way to Limerick and Dublin. The ones that were not handed over in the GFA.

Solution:
Arm some of them. Give the rest guns with blanks. They can fire away and only kill people like Brandon Lee.

Manic Moran · 01-05-2011 08:28PM

The Gardai would only be warranted to use their weapons in specific scenarios anyway, and in those scenarios the armed units are dispatched.

When seconds count, help is only minutes away...

It is not hard to imagine a situation in which a policeman has a need for someone to shoot at the guy currently shooting at him like right bloody now, not "after he gets on the radio, dispatch sends the response unit, and then they drive to wherever the problem is"

Remember that to a beat cop, a pistol is a defence weapon. It has, in practical terms, no purpose other than keeping people alive (Though if the target dies in the process, so be it). Specialised armed units with their MP5s or whatever they're carrying these days, are capable of more than immediate self defence. I don't think anyone would suggest that they would be disbanded if police were routinely armed, but there are needs that they cannot fulfil. Similarly, there are roles that the average armed cop cannot fulfil with his pistol.

NTM

Terry · 01-05-2011 09:06PM

Manic Moran wrote: »

When seconds count, help is only minutes away...

It is not hard to imagine a situation in which a policeman has a need for someone to shoot at the guy currently shooting at him like right bloody now, not "after he gets on the radio, dispatch sends the response unit, and then they drive to wherever the problem is"

Remember that to a beat cop, a pistol is a defence weapon. It has, in practical terms, no purpose other than keeping people alive (Though if the target dies in the process, so be it). Specialised armed units with their MP5s or whatever they're carrying these days, are capable of more than immediate self defence. I don't think anyone would suggest that they would be disbanded if police were routinely armed, but there are needs that they cannot fulfil. Similarly, there are roles that the average armed cop cannot fulfil with his pistol.

NTM

That's true, but I think the fear that most people have is a scenario where everyone has the ability to arm themselves, like in the U.S.

We all know about Columbine and similar incidences.
People become frightened when they hear these stories.

Yes, arming the Gardaí will lead to one member going nuts some day, but the ****er would have done the same whether it was a legally held firearm or not.

I've had run-ins with the Gardaí since I was 15. Quite a lot of that was to do with my Father telling them that I was on drugs and to stop and search me every time they saw me (****ing neighbours and their mad stories. I was just naturally skinny).

I quickly learned that the best way to deal with a power tripper was to just go with the flow and let them root through my pockets.
They got bored after a few months. It actually got to the point where they would ask us to drink our cans on the canal banks because that way we wouldn't be bothering anyone.
They would occasionally stop by to check on us (we were still under age) to make sure we weren't acting the bollix. We exchanged pleasantries and then went back to dealing with real criminals.

Every so often we'd have a few new people join us and there was always one jackass (let's call him Billy) who thought he was the man.
As soon as the Gardaí arived, he'd be giving them the height of abuse, spitting at them, calling them names and all the usual scumbag stuff.
They'd give Billy a couple of slaps, throw him in the a cell for the night and we'd only ever see Billy again when he got drunk and thought he could take them on again.

The only people who should be afraid of armed Gardaí are people like Billy (gun butt to the head), armed robbers, wannabe terrorists and wannabe gangsters.
The rest of us will be fine.

philologos · 01-05-2011 09:08PM

All that happens when you arm police is that criminals bring more firearms out with them in the expectation that the Gards will have them. More guns, on more officers seems to bring about more violent crime. Armed units to be called out on request sure, but that every Gard should have one isn't a good idea as I would see it.

AudreyHepburn · 01-05-2011 09:10PM

Absolutly yes. Every other Police Force in the world is armed and for one thing from what I can tell they garner a lot more respect for it from the public. No way you'd disrespect an NYPD officer for instance the way you would a Garda.

Plus I think seeing armed Police officers would be good deterrent for would-be criminals.

And of course they deal regularly with the worst scum in society and imo need a way to protect themselves and us more effectively than a baton and spray

My name is URL · 01-05-2011 09:21PM

Manic Moran wrote: »

When seconds count, help is only minutes away...

It is not hard to imagine a situation in which a policeman has a need for someone to shoot at the guy currently shooting at him like right bloody now, not "after he gets on the radio, dispatch sends the response unit, and then they drive to wherever the problem is"

Remember that to a beat cop, a pistol is a defence weapon. It has, in practical terms, no purpose other than keeping people alive (Though if the target dies in the process, so be it). Specialised armed units with their MP5s or whatever they're carrying these days, are capable of more than immediate self defence. I don't think anyone would suggest that they would be disbanded if police were routinely armed, but there are needs that they cannot fulfil. Similarly, there are roles that the average armed cop cannot fulfil with his pistol.

NTM

Those are all fair points. I'm still completely unconvinced that there is any real urgency to arm all Gardai however. If members of the force were being fired upon or threatened with firearms more frequently then my views would differ. At the minute though, the Gardai do a fine and adequate job using their current methods and protocols.

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Absolutly yes. Every other Police Force in the world is armed and for one thing from what I can tell they garner a lot more respect for it from the public. No way you'd disrespect an NYPD officer for instance the way you would a Garda.

Plus I think seeing armed Police officers would be good deterrent for would-be criminals.

And of course they deal regularly with the worst scum in society and imo need a way to protect themselves and us more effectively than a baton and spray

There's a lot of appealing to emotion going on in that post tbh.

Bosco boy · 01-05-2011 09:27PM

Dangerous Man wrote: »

We're discussing the police force so of necessity one speaks in 'broad strokes'. And you know what you can do with your 'bitter shite,' right?

People who use broad strokes are generally ill informed and like I said full of bitter sh1te!

AudreyHepburn · 01-05-2011 09:29PM

My name is URL wrote: »

There's a lot of appealing to emotion going on in that post tbh.

Not really but what's the issue if there is a little?

Manic Moran · 01-05-2011 11:58PM

If members of the force were being fired upon or threatened with firearms more frequently then my views would differ

I think your views on the matter would differ even if it were highly infrequent, at least if you were the person being fired upon at that particular moment and time.

Statistics and fequencies are well and good on paper, but they mean nothing in real life. "Sorry we didn't equip your husband properly for the situation that he found himself in, but statistically, nobody should have been shooting at him that day." Not much consolation.

NTM

SIRREX · 02-05-2011 12:50AM

Manic Moran wrote: »

Statistics and fequencies are well and good on paper, but they mean nothing in real life.

NTM

I work in an area where we regulary talk to gardai who are undergoing their Firearms training (we cross paths at lunchtime) and they will tell you straight out that while they do train for plainclothes situations they would not like to be armed while walking the beat (at least not with firearms), but a taser would be useful.

It is their opinion which should hold most sway in this disscusion. And by the way, i've seen inside the boot (Trunk to you Manic) of those Volvos the Regional Response Units zoom around in, and all I'll tell you is, if they open that up, and you're in their bad books, your day is about to get a whole lot worse

Voodoomelon · 02-05-2011 12:59AM

In fairness the only people that can answer this question fairly are the Gardaí themselves. We can all ramble along agreeing and disagreeing when in fact we know little of the situations Gardaí find themselves.

A chap I went to college with has been a Garda for about 5 years and he's already armed, I never actually asked him what rank he is, but he regularly carries a P226, I must ask him what he thinks.
My store also had a second attempted break in about a year ago and several armed Gardaí showed up with hands on hips, ready to draw. It was great to see, no f***in about. That kind of response sends a message.

Maybe if some Gardaí want to chime in to add some opinions?

yoshytoshy · 02-05-2011 01:02AM

Jakkass wrote: »

All that happens when you arm police is that criminals bring more firearms out with them in the expectation that the Gards will have them. More guns, on more officers seems to bring about more violent crime. Armed units to be called out on request sure, but that every Gard should have one isn't a good idea as I would see it.

I was thinking the same myself and also bullets being fired could actually harm bystanders etc.

Uniformed Garda Armed

Comments