Tiger Kidnapping

Rb

MooseJam wrote:

didn't the ira steal 28 million sterling from a bank, whats that in euros

Yeah but thats because the security in that bank was borderline retarded. That wasn't just a bank branch either, it was the equivilant of AIB Bankcentre or even the central bank, so they'd more money than anywhere else stored in it.

Bank branches themselves are only authorized to hold a surprisingly small amount of cash.

InFront

rb_ie wrote:

Bank branches themselves are only authorized to hold a surprisingly small amount of cash.

You've been doing your homework rb_ie?!

MooseJam

rb_ie wrote:

Bank branches themselves are only authorized to hold a surprisingly small amount of cash.

hundreds of thousands isn't surprisingly small

InFront

Regular branches hold hundreds of thousands?

Rb

MooseJam wrote:

hundreds of thousands isn't surprisingly small

No but its not a significant amount, as I said, a persons house burning to the ground would have more of an effect than a bank raid on insurance, though it a house burning down would have probably no effect whatsoever, perhaps on the house owners premium, but certainly not on other customers.
Are you just looking for an argument or something? Or are you just having problems keeping up with the pace of the thread?

InFront wrote:

You've been doing your homework rb_ie?!

Lol, not so much homework no..

MooseJam

yes regular branches hold hundreds of thousands, sure what would they do if 200 people came in looking to withdraw a grand

MooseJam

perhaps one bank raid might not but lots of premises are robbed and lots of houses burn down and of course it effects your or my policy, if it didn't then the insurance companies would go out of business.

ballooba

MooseJam wrote:

Thanks for putting me right muletide, I don't know why everyone thinks im an idiot, it's the bank staff handing over the money without calling the guards that has them marked as soft targets, the guards should be informed as soon as possible and then the money and the gang can be tracked and if the family are found then they can move against the gang, maybe thats what happened in this case.

For the umpteenth time, that is what happened!!!

Seriously, Darwin Award candidate.

Rb

MooseJam wrote:

perhaps one bank raid might not but lots of premises are robbed and lots of houses burn down and of course it effects your or my policy, if it didn't then the insurance companies would go out of business.

No, they don't. Not many places are robbed for substantial amounts, and not all that many houses burn down.

ballooba

slipss wrote:

Hopefully what will deter other scumbags?

They didn't get to torch the cars. They were recovered. One of them is pictured in today's independent (the Renault).

The mobile home has been located also. The gang has been identified.

MooseJam

ballooba wrote:

For the umpteenth time, that is what happened!!!

Seriously, Darwin Award candidate.

I'm saying it should be the norm, that was the first time the guards were involved and it worked out fine, in all previous cases the people played along and didn't involve the guards

MooseJam

rb_ie wrote:

No, they don't. Not many places are robbed for substantial amounts, and not all that many houses burn down.

so tell us how many big roberies there were and how many houses burnt down...
or are you just saying that

Rb

MooseJam wrote:

so tell us how many big roberies there were and how many houses burnt down...
or are you just saying that

Erm, you're the one who said that loads of places get robbed and loads of houses get burnt to the ground, if anything the burden of proof should lay on you for making the initial statement. Robberies for substantial amounts make the media, the latest was for 500K, there hasn't been an exactly massive amount of them reported. Same goes for a lot of houses burning down, some make the media, some may not but either way, theres not a significant amount lot of them.

ballooba

MooseJam wrote:

I'm saying it should be the norm, that was the first time the guards were involved and it worked out fine, in all previous cases the people played along and didn't involve the guards

That's what your saying now. Not what you were saying initially.

Admit it. You didn't have a clue about this or other Tiger Kidnappings before you started this thread.

Rb

ballooba wrote:

Admit it. You didn't have a clue about this or anything else in life before you started this thread

fyp:)

MooseJam

ballooba wrote:

That's what your saying now. Not what you were saying initially.

Admit it. You didn't have a clue about this or other Tiger Kidnappings before you started this thread.

MooseJam wrote:

they would inform the guards as they should do rather than playing along with the kidnappers

thats a snippet of the very first post i made on this thread saying the exact same thing i've been saying all along, it was what i was saying initially

ballooba

What you actually said IN FULL was:

MooseJam wrote:

One way to fight the rise in tiger kidnappings would be to charge the bank personnel who walk out of the banks with all the money with theft and lock them up for 10 or 15 years, why haven't any of these people been charged, if they knew they were going to face a lenghty sentence they would inform the guards as they should do rather than playing along with the kidnappers

and showing your in-depth knowledge of the situation:

MooseJam wrote:

scenario ... bank worker goes to the bank as requested and while there calls the guards and says armed gang are in my house, said house gets surrounded by the guards and gang give up or get shot dead. This might give the criminals planning the next raid second thoughts.

MooseJam

ok I was being a little facetious but the basic point i was making is the same, that the guards should be informed, on this occasion it appears they were and everything worked out fine so it is not the crazy idea that you all seem to think it is

brianthebard

MooseJam wrote:

ok I was being a little facetious but the basic point i was making is the same, that the guards should be informed, on this occasion it appears they were and everything worked out fine so it is not the crazy idea that you all seem to think it is

Lolz backpedalling worthy of a corrupt TD...

Nermal

rb_ie wrote:

You're quite clueless too, aren't you? Bank branches are not allowed hold very substantial amounts of money, a bank raid will have little or no effect on YOUR insurance premiums.

€500k (taken in this robbery) is a substantial sum of money. it's €500K now missing from the account of whoever insures the bank, that will be made up in premiums paid by the bank, which will ultimately come from customers.

also someone's home burning down *does* affect other people's premiums. are you quite sure you have fully grasped the concept of insurance?

DMC2005

Nermal wrote:

also someone's home burning down *does* affect other people's premiums. are you quite sure you have fully grasped the concept of insurance?

Insurance companies will calculate premiums based on risk, not simply history.

So it is quite right to say that a house burning down may not affect premiums - there would be no knee jerk reaction to claims.

stepbar

MooseJam wrote:

you're implying that going along with these scumbags is the right thing to do, why don't any of these people just call the guards, it's not that hard a concept to understand, if they called the guards then there would be a lot less of these kidnappings.

The guards were aware of the suitation from start to finish. You dont know what you are talking about TBH. Im not going to say on this board what actually happened but the guards knew what was goin on. What were the guards to do? Jump in and the game was over, family dead. Put the manager in jail because he wanted to see his family alive??? what a stupid suggestion :rolleyes:

stepbar

Nermal wrote:

We all pay the cost of the insurance, so saying 'it's all insured anyway' is of no good. Hardly in society's interest to let vast sums end up in criminal hands either.

Quite simply, the consent of more people should be necessary to open a safe. McDowell is perfectly correct, the banks and security companies can solve this one easily, they just don't care enough.

McDowell is stupid, what would he know? So you're saying that if your collegue came to you and said that he needed 500k because his family was kidnapped, I think you would help him / her. It wouldnt matter if you needed 10 people to open a safe, you would still help your collegue, wouldnt you?

stepbar

brianthebard wrote:

Was BOI keeping a tiger in the vault? Do they appreciate in value at a better rate than the normal rate of a current account?

Put it in a savings a/c

nlgbbbblth

DaveMcG wrote:

Unless you're a manager or someone with alot of security clearance, I doubt you have anything to worry about to be honest. No point in kidnapping the cleaner if they can't give you access to the safe.

Not true.
They don't care who they kidnap so long as it is someone who works in the building.

slipss

ballooba wrote:

They didn't get to torch the cars. They were recovered. One of them is pictured in today's independent (the Renault).

The mobile home has been located also. The gang has been identified.

Oh well if it's in the Independent it has to be true, lol. No but seriously, thanks for the info, like I said I was just going on what was in the link. But anyways on closer inspection of the facts via more reliable sources it seems my first presumption was correct. The people lifted for questioning were lifted purely on a tip off made by a low level coke dealer looking to dodge charges and the gardais full proof tactic of pulling in the prime suspects instantly for questioning instead of mounting a counter inteligence operation. But either way I hope it all works out, its a horrible thing to not feel safe in your own home.

P.S I noticed I started two sentences with "But", I tend to do that alot, could someone tell me if it's right to start a sentence like that or is it like starting a sentence with "And".?

InFront

If you have a poetic licence to do so, that's OK. In everyday language, I think the intelligentsia grammatica frown upon it. Most people don't mind at all.

Rudolph Claus

But why dont they mind?

Victor

MooseJam wrote:

yeah the kidnappers are just going to start popping caps, it'd be just like the movies :rolleyes:

OK, a nervous, strung-out coke fiend with a Glock 22 and body armour.

Feeling lucky?

Bottle_of_Smoke

InFront wrote:

I don't know, but I thought McDowell's 'stern words' to the financial institutions were comical. The Minister for Justice complaining that financial institutions were allowing these crimes to happen. How typically... PD

They were comical & silly but I can see why he's getting pissed off. When a bank is raided the staff aren't allowed hit the panic button until all the raiders are gone.

This is because if the guards came the bank could be liable for compensation from a hostage situation. Could end up several multiples of the actual cash taken.

Now I don't see why they can't hit a panic button that alerts a monitoring group.
Would just mean the gardai send a plain clothes officer to walk down to the bank & then radio a description of the escape vehicle & direction they headed. They wouldn't follow or anything would just make it so much easier to trace the raiders afterwards

I can't believe someone suggested charging the bank staff. One good thing about the tiger raids here is there's been no murdered hostages. Charging the staff would just lead to fatalities.

Terry

InFront wrote:

Would you expect a staff member of a bank to allow himself to be shot instead of handing over money in an armed robbery?
What about a girl behind a counter in a shop?

I'd start by chatting her up, proceed to gain her confidence, then stick her a loaf and take the money in the till.

the_syco

julep wrote:

I'd start by chatting her up, proceed to gain her confidence, then stick her a loaf and take the money in the till.

Watched "Intermission" lately?:D