Garda Armed Response Unit

NoDice

PaintDoctor wrote: »

The guy had - I believe - discharged a shot into the ceiling. That means all bets are off. Either which way, he would have been asked to disarm (Negotiated with if you will), and if he refuses to comply with that, any person with a modicum of sense would render him ineffective. Gardaí may have bulletproof vests, but their heads, arms, legs, pelvis are all still valid targets. We've become desensitised by hollywood movies where people get shot in the arm, wince for 5 minutes, and carry on like nothing happened. If I was a Gard and someone was waving a shotgun they'd recently fired about, I'd have no hesitations in making sure I got home safe to my family at the end of my shift.

But you're not a garda either and this situation comes along once in a blue moon here. I live close to Blarney Street and there have been alot of stories going around about it tbh.

I completely see your point. Obviously the bulletproof vests only cover what they can, I'm not an idiot and there is no need to point out what is does cover. On your logic, flip around that scenario. What was stopping the garda taking the same kind of shot? Shot to the arm to physically disarm the guy with the shotgun? It's an idea but what happened happened. Again, I'm not comdemning that garda.

Cadyboo

The Armed Response Unit have fantastic training. I see them driving around on a daily basis and at first it made me nervous, but now I like seeing them, after hearing about the Blarney St shooting.

I think they were dead right to shoot that guy with the gun, and someone said earlier that the guard had to take time off because of it. Of course he did, its not everyday they shoot someone and no matter what training they get, you would never be prepared for your feelings after.

Criminals and gangs have the run of this country, and they still will until we get more armed guards. In my opinion anyone who has a gun, and is in the vicinity of the public or aiming it at a guard, refusing to drop it, should be shot. Not to kill but I dont think there should be negotiations. Either drop it, or get shot.

Faith

NoDice wrote: »

What was stopping the garda taking the same kind of shot? Shot to the arm to physically disarm the guy with the shotgun?

Shooting him in the arm ran the risk of simply angering the guy more. The pain of the shot, coupled with the anger, would make him more likely to start blindly shooting all over the place. He'd be in pain, but his arm would still work. It's a pretty dangerous strategy, unfortunately.

Owen

Faith wrote: »

Shooting him in the arm ran the risk of simply angering the guy more. The pain of the shot, coupled with the anger, would make him more likely to start blindly shooting all over the place. He'd be in pain, but his arm would still work. It's a pretty dangerous strategy, unfortunately.

Pretty much what Faith said. If you injure the guy, and he's already enraged, red mist can kick in and logic can go out the window. You're trying to argue this out rationally, negotiate here, shoot there, but what you have to remember these situations have the human brain operating at its most basic level - survival and predator instincts. The Gard who's had the training and experience can keep their cool and use higher brain functions to try and realise the best possible outcome with the least amount of risk, but at the other end of the stick is a lunatic with a shotgun who could quite literally do anything without provocation or warning.

Cadyboo

Cadyboo wrote: »

Criminals and gangs have the run of this country, and they still will until we get more armed guards.

Armed guards won't change that, if we have loads of armed guards the little scrote who does housebreakins will realise that he too needs a gun. We don't want every scrote having a gun.

Criminal gangs have such a stronghold on the country due to money and fear, ordinary folk are afraid of them. They have money mainly due to drugs. I reckon the only way to stop their flow of cash is to have serious charges for poccession of even small quantities of drugs. Everyone who buys coke or weed etc is contributing to the criminal gangs power in this country.

Folks don't like that theory but if there was no demand for coke, hash etc from the normal folk the gangs income would be severely dented. Of course they will still have demand for the likes of heroin but that isn't as big a revenue generator as the drugs that are somewhat socially acceptable.

Cork has suffered from the demise of the ordinary, decent criminal that kept heroine etc away from the city.

Cadyboo

RoverJames wrote: »

Criminal gangs have such a stronghold on the country due to money and fear, ordinary folk are afraid of them. They have money mainly due to drugs. I reckon the only way to stop their flow of cash is to have serious charges for poccession of even small quantities of drugs. Everyone who buys coke or weed etc is contributing to the criminal gangs power in this country.


Cork has suffered from the demise of the ordinary, decent criminal that kept heroine etc away from the city.

I totally agree with that. It is a disgrace the amount of suspended sentences people get, or fines for what I would consider a jail sentence is warranted. Every day in the court pages of the echo there are loads of cases, and 9 out of 10 times no prison sentence.
People have no respect for the guards.

I thought ye'd give out to me
I may come on Friday now

flutered

blubloblu wrote: »

I'm not sure if I like the idea of armed patrols. Policemen with guns tend to have attitude problems.

as do most scummer drug dealers

Cadyboo

RoverJames wrote: »

I thought ye'd give out to me
I may come on Friday now

Ha ha, poor RJ:D

minidazzler

The armed response guys have some fantastic kit TBH.

MP7 is a 4.6 mm PDW that will go through alot of body armor.
Sig 226 which is a proven pistol.
TASER, who doesn't like to see scummers get shocked?

The Incident on blarney street to me, sounds like a complete legit shooting, there had to be an investigation, because there will always be investigations.

Apparently the guy was trying for suicide by cop, he failed and ended up in pain instead.

Dead happy they exist, and if they did get a little trigger happy with scumbags, it wouldn't bother me too much. I highly doubt any innocent people will be shot by them any time soon.

The cars are awesome too! Purpose built police vehicles!

Hogzy

And ya know what. i think well all sleep a little better knowing that the Law is out shooting crooks

In all seriousness though the armed gardai do make people feel safer in a society where Crime Lords had (and still do IMO) too much power over society.

Criminals need to start realising if you fight the law the law will win.

Hogzy

And ya know what. i think well all sleep a little better knowing that the Law is out shooting crooks

In all seriousness though the armed gardai do make people feel safer in a society where Crime Lords had (and still do IMO) too much power over society.

Criminals need to start realising if you fight the law the law will win.

Max001

There's a lotta crap being talked here, seemingly by otherwise intelligent individuals (RoverJames et al).
1. The Gards coulda merely driven north a few miles and had amongst the best armed training in the world. But, I guess that woulda been politically problematic, since Irish Americans / Irish & Americans did everything possible to prevent the RUC modernising its weapons from US & UK WWII hand me downs when the PIRA was running around with AK's, FNs & RPG7s!
2. Forget any notions of head shots or arm shots or shooting them in the balls. Any short barreled weapon like H&Ks have limited range and their stopping power dissipates rapidly depending on ammunition & distance.
All law enforcement organisations and even special forces are taught to aim for centre mass, as in shoot to stop. In a possibly high threat situation, with a possibly moving target, who may also be on drugs, where you might be lucky to get a centre mass hit, you never, ever aim for anywhere else. Shooting to stop is the rule and is the only effective goal. No police officer wants to take a life, but then any criminal who carries and uses a firearm has to take full responsibility if his day later turns to sh*t, because of it.
2b. If you're wide of the mark and hit a criminal in arms or legs with modern rounds, trust me, they won't be getting up any time soon. Shock alone will keep them down, unless they're on PCP etc which is unlikely in Ireland. Modern rounds are generally meant to flatten and tumble inside a body, therefore entry wounds may be small, but internally, there's a f**k of a lotta soft tissue/bone damage.
3. Forget any notions of negotiating with someone who has already discharged a weapon. They're entitled to a warning, thats all. Depending on the calibre of the firearm they're carrying, if you let them continue to fire, rounds may penetrate your cover, those of bystanders, or even walls/doors/ windows of buildings nearby, killing others.
4. Arming police will not escalate illegal carrying of firearms. The biggest threat to criminals is other criminals and this is why they carry more deadly weapons. Because for ....what...€200? approx you can buy a S&W revolver and 20 rounds......lethal at 20 yds or less in the hands of an amateur.
Unfortunately AGS has been woefully slow to modernise either its people or its practices or its equipment. Not surprising really when generally change is either driven from within (hardly in AGS) or externally (happening more and more).
Its hypocritical to say the least to expect police officers to face increasingly armed criminals. Try to imagine being in their shoes, doing what they do for an average wage. You've obviously chosen not to serve and protect your community, so try to engage brain before keyboard
Generally my observations of AGS is that they're comparibly pretty piss poor, but then they are only recently starting to modernise and from a generally very low base. Give 'em ten years, then maybe you might have a police service thats comparable to the RUC/PSNI, GB police forces or nationwide/federal forces overseas.

In the meantime, I suppose they're doing their best and respect to them for doing the largely thankless job they do.

lemansky

Faith wrote: »

Shooting him in the arm ran the risk of simply angering the guy more. The pain of the shot, coupled with the anger, would make him more likely to start blindly shooting all over the place. He'd be in pain, but his arm would still work. It's a pretty dangerous strategy, unfortunately.

Precisely. Shooting to injure is grossly irresponsible. If the Guards had done that and gotten away with it, they would have had strips torn off them by the powers that be.

Edit part 2 : Didn't read the post above fully, it made my point already.

minidazzler

Max001 wrote: »

There's a lotta crap being talked here, seemingly by otherwise intelligent individuals (RoverJames et al).
1. The Gards coulda merely driven north a few miles and had amongst the best armed training in the world. But, I guess that woulda been politically problematic, since Irish Americans / Irish & Americans did everything possible to prevent the RUC modernising its weapons from US & UK WWII hand me downs when the PIRA was running around with AK's, FNs & RPG7s!
2. Forget any notions of head shots or arm shots or shooting them in the balls. Any short barreled weapon like H&Ks have limited range and their stopping power dissipates rapidly depending on ammunition & distance.
All law enforcement organisations and even special forces are taught to aim for centre mass, as in shoot to stop. In a possibly high threat situation, with a possibly moving target, who may also be on drugs, where you might be lucky to get a centre mass hit, you never, ever aim for anywhere else. Shooting to stop is the rule and is the only effective goal. No police officer wants to take a life, but then any criminal who carries and uses a firearm has to take full responsibility if his day later turns to sh*t, because of it.
2b. If you're wide of the mark and hit a criminal in arms or legs with modern rounds, trust me, they won't be getting up any time soon. Shock alone will keep them down, unless they're on PCP etc which is unlikely in Ireland. Modern rounds are generally meant to flatten and tumble inside a body, therefore entry wounds may be small, but internally, there's a f**k of a lotta soft tissue/bone damage.
3. Forget any notions of negotiating with someone who has already discharged a weapon. They're entitled to a warning, thats all. Depending on the calibre of the firearm they're carrying, if you let them continue to fire, rounds may penetrate your cover, those of bystanders, or even walls/doors/ windows of buildings nearby, killing others.

Firstly, The ERU, who trained the RSU's, have trained and continue to train with both the ARW and FBI HRT, adequate training to say the least.

The H&K MP7 has an effective range of 200m, though the ammunition depending on which they use goes up to 150m, which is respectable really, given the effective range of the Steyr AUG used by the DF is given as 300m. The calibre is 4.6x30mm, this will penetrate body armour given the muzzle velocity of 725m/s. It's the perfect weapon for the RSU I would think, it's not like they need large intruding rifles for what they do. They are Personal Defence Weapons, and I guess they would serve that purpose admirably. A larger calibre round is not always the best choice.

If the RSU are engaging anyone at a distance of more than 100 meters, then IMO, something has gone drastically wrong.

Cops are supposed to take people down with the minimum force necessary, if this means shooting them in the legs/arm, that's OK, center mass is not gonna be anyones first choice in a legal case, but it's the easiest target.

One does not need to be on drugs of any sort to withstand a gun shot wound, simple adreniline can keep you going and keep you shooting. There are numerous times in history when this has proven true.

The Gardai no doubt have a VERY clear escalation of force procedure, negotiate and shoot as a VERY VERY last option I would wager.

Overall, they seem fairly good, given they have only shot someone once since they have started in Cork, that is fairly good going. We won't hear of many situations which came close, but they probably do happen.

Max001

minidazzler wrote: »

Firstly, The ERU, who trained the RSU's, have trained and continue to train with both the ARW and FBI HRT, adequate training to say the least.

Takes a long time to build up organisational capability and just because someone's passed a course, means little. Application on duty is a whole other learning curve and your initial or refresher training only lays a foundation.

minidazzler wrote: »

The H&K MP7 has an effective range of 200m, though the ammunition depending on which they use goes up to 150m, which is respectable really, given the effective range of the Steyr AUG used by the DF is given as 300m. The calibre is 4.6x30mm, this will penetrate body armour given the muzzle velocity of 725m/s. It's the perfect weapon for the RSU I would think, it's not like they need large intruding rifles for what they do. They are Personal Defence Weapons, and I guess they would serve that purpose admirably. A larger calibre round is not always the best choice.

You're quoting manufacturer's specs and in any case an MP7 is no match for an assault rifle. The effectiveness of any firearm is only as good as the man holding it. Many european police armed response units carry assault rifles. Why? Because sooner or later they'll face criminals with assault rifles.

minidazzler wrote: »

If the RSU are engaging anyone at a distance of more than 100 meters, then IMO, something has gone drastically wrong.

Cops are supposed to take people down with the minimum force necessary, if this means shooting them in the legs/arm, that's OK, center mass is not gonna be anyones first choice in a legal case, but it's the easiest target.

Wrong. Centre mass is the safest option as well as being legally defensible, providing deadly force is warranted. There's no doctrine of increasing use of lethal force, lol No armed police officer anywhere will ever shoot anywhere else other than centre mass.

minidazzler wrote: »

One does not need to be on drugs of any sort to withstand a gun shot wound, simple adreniline can keep you going and keep you shooting. There are numerous times in history when this has proven true.

Clearly you've never been shot. Ask someone who has, by a 9mm round or larger.

minidazzler wrote: »

The Gardai no doubt have a VERY clear escalation of force procedure, negotiate and shoot as a VERY VERY last option I would wager.

Obviously. Firearms 101. However, what you fail to realise is that a situation can escalate to deadly force in seconds.

minidazzler wrote: »

Overall, they seem fairly good, given they have only shot someone once since they have started in Cork, that is fairly good going. We won't hear of many situations which came close, but they probably do happen.

deRanged

sweet volvos though.

Max001

Max001 wrote: »

There's a lotta crap being talked here, seemingly by otherwise intelligent individuals (RoverJames et al).

Et tu Maxi dude, et tu

Max001 wrote: »

1. The Gards coulda merely driven north a few miles and had amongst the best armed training in the world. But, I guess that woulda been politically problematic, since Irish Americans / Irish & Americans did everything possible to prevent the RUC modernising its weapons from US & UK WWII hand me downs when the PIRA was running around with AK's, FNs & RPG7s!

I didn't comment on their training so I have nothing to say to that

Max001 wrote: »

2. Forget any notions of head shots or arm shots or shooting them in the balls. Any short barreled weapon like H&Ks have limited range and their stopping power dissipates rapidly depending on ammunition & distance.
All law enforcement organisations and even special forces are taught to aim for centre mass, as in shoot to stop. In a possibly high threat situation, with a possibly moving target, who may also be on drugs, where you might be lucky to get a centre mass hit, you never, ever aim for anywhere else. Shooting to stop is the rule and is the only effective goal. No police officer wants to take a life, but then any criminal who carries and uses a firearm has to take full responsibility if his day later turns to sh*t, because of it.

No doubt you are correct here

Max001 wrote: »

2b. If you're wide of the mark and hit a criminal in arms or legs with modern rounds, trust me, they won't be getting up any time soon. Shock alone will keep them down, unless they're on PCP etc which is unlikely in Ireland. Modern rounds are generally meant to flatten and tumble inside a body, therefore entry wounds may be small, but internally, there's a f**k of a lotta soft tissue/bone damage.

...... and here, again I didn't comment on that I think

Max001 wrote: »

3. Forget any notions of negotiating with someone who has already discharged a weapon. They're entitled to a warning, thats all. Depending on the calibre of the firearm they're carrying, if you let them continue to fire, rounds may penetrate your cover, those of bystanders, or even walls/doors/ windows of buildings nearby, killing others.

The dude in question had a shotgun not a missile

Max001 wrote: »

4. Arming police will not escalate illegal carrying of firearms. The biggest threat to criminals is other criminals and this is why they carry more deadly weapons. Because for ....what...€200? approx you can buy a S&W revolver and 20 rounds......lethal at 20 yds or less in the hands of an amateur.

Take that one up with Fachtna Murphy if you like, I won't be agreeing with your viewpoint, he might though. Arming rank and file gardai is accepted to be a step in an increase in weaponry and violence. Police in the likes of the States and Australia complain about how they are insufficiently armed against criminals. In countries where the rank and file folks are armed gun crime in higher than in Ireland, google is your friend here, or the library perhaps.

Max001 wrote: »

The biggest threat to criminals is other criminals and this is why they carry more deadly weapons

Yeah, that's why they tool up for armed robbery, in case other criminals try to intervene and take the loot.

Max001 wrote: »

............ You've obviously chosen not to serve and protect your community, so try to engage brain before keyboard

I imagine that was directly aimed at me rather than the et al, I did indeed chose not to protect and serve my community. Having workmates present their badge to me at checkpoints after they have had a load of pints didn't appeal, nor did bringing their wives / girlfriends / random tramps home in the squad car on a Saturday night at 2 / 3 am appeal.

That serve and protect horsesh1t doesn't wash with most folk nowadays.

Max001

Evidence RJ, evidence.

You are entertaining at times and I'll happily defer to you on issues
where you're an expert, but its not on to bandy unsupported claims
about, as in armed police cause increased crime with firearms. Simply
not logical and I've never seen a study that indicates that. If its true,
why aren't police forces moving towards being unarmed instead of the
other way round.

There are bad apples in every walk of life RJ and maybe in RoI historically
the dumb son did go into the police, as I've heard said. However in the 21st century in Ireland or elsewhere, people have more choices generally
speaking. I can't vouch for the motivations of people who join AGS but I
do know a lotta cops in different countries and almost to a wo/man, they
do the job because its their vocation. The hours are sh*tty, as are the working conditions and you have to deal with the scum of society. Rapists, drunks, pedophiles, murders, druggies, the insane, the indigent.
Occasionally you see people at their best, but usually its at their worst. You will have to break the news to a parent, that their lost child's dead, possibly murdered. You'll have to be around dead bodies a lot, including autopsies. Burnt bodies, hangings, car crashes, dead kids.
The pay ain't great and damn sure you'll never get rich and chances are you'll die before collecting the greater part of your pension, because studies have shown, nightshift workers suffer health-wise over the long term due to shift working. We ain't even got to the high likelihood of injury or in some jurisdictions, death on duty.

So, next time you meet a cop, maybe sometime when you need a cop, remember that they do a sh*tty job because they want to serve and protect and those ain't just words, when you risk your life every time
you put on a uniform. They don't expect your thanks and they don't expect 15 mins of fame, but they have a right to some respect, cause if
they didn't do a job you won't, who would rule society. Why, criminals with guns!

PS You don't need an RPG to penetrate a vehicle or building. A NATO calibre round, which is standard to many police forces, as well as the military, will quite happily go through walls and then through you!

parsi

It's amazing really how so many discussions relating to the guards end up with the lines (or a variety thereof):

You shut up because you've never had to deal with a junkie / a dead body / tell a parent about their son / a murder / work a night-shift / get a pay cut / had to moonlight as a bouncer / try to manage two houses whilst on-shift / ran a tarmacadam business.

Max001

parsi wrote: »

It's amazing really how so many discussions relating to the guards end up with the lines (or a variety thereof):

You shut up because you've never had to deal with a junkie / a dead body / tell a parent about their son / a murder / work a night-shift / get a pay cut / had to moonlight as a bouncer / try to manage two houses whilst on-shift / ran a tarmacadam business.

No one told anyone to 'shut up'. Is accuracy so hard? RJ is entitled to
his views, however if some are unfounded and another seeks to help
by giving an alternate perspective, is that worth getting your frillies in
a twist about? Are you RJ's dad? :rolleyes:

parsi

LOL - you must be a member of the GRA - attacking the poster rather than the post.

Must add

until you post some facts that in countries where rank and file police are armed gun crime is lower than in ireland your claims are unfounded maxi dude. Also your rose tinted view of the police force is stomach churning.

Max001

RoverJames wrote: »

until you post some facts that in countries where rank and file police are armed gun crime is lower than in ireland your claims are unfounded maxi dude. Also your rose tinted view of the police force is stomach churning.

You mean your claims RJ. Are you medicated, seriously? I made no such claims! As to your stomach being churned.....pmsl.....if thats all it takes,
then you were right never to put on a uniform. Again with your sweeping generalisations....which police force is 'the police force' you're referring to? Look RJ, you obviously have your 'mind' made up no matter what and you're not even interested in corroborating/supporting your own wild claims, so say what you like, I couldn't give a f**k. Lifes too short

Max001

For someone who couldn't give a f*** you have posted some longwinded muck on this thread of little interest to anyone

Max001 wrote: »

Evidence RJ, evidence.



You are entertaining at times and I'll happily defer to you on issues

where you're an expert, but its not on to bandy unsupported claims

about, as in armed police cause increased crime with firearms. Simply

not logical and I've never seen a study that indicates that. If its true,

why aren't police forces moving towards being unarmed instead of the

other way round.

RoverJames wrote: »

until you post some facts that in countries where rank and file police are armed gun crime is lower than in ireland your claims are unfounded maxi dude. Also your rose tinted view of the police force is stomach churning.

Max001 wrote: »

You mean your claims RJ. Are you medicated, seriously? I made no such claims! As to your stomach being churned.....pmsl.....if thats all it takes,

then you were right never to put on a uniform. Again with your sweeping generalisations....which police force is 'the police force' you're referring to? Look RJ, you obviously have your 'mind' made up no matter what and you're not even interested in corroborating/supporting your own wild claims, so say what you like, I couldn't give a f**k. Lifes too short

Having a hissy fit on a forum always entertains though so cheers for that.
Regarding the medication, I reckon it's time you took yours.

castie

Locking this