why rifles for civilian security?

firefly08

I often used to see half a dozen or so soldiers standing around the square in Ennis when they're moving money to/from the banks. They're always armed with their Steyer 5.56mm rifles. I'm glad to see they're coming prepared and everything, but wound't it be very dangerous to civilians and passers by if they were to actually engage in a firefight with those rifles in a place like that?

Shouldn't they have pistol calibre sub machine guns or something along those lines? That's that the cops carry when they're out in force, and I always assumed that was the reason - to minimize the chance of collateral damage. Just curious.

Danbo!

This is a pure guess, as I've no military background, but I assume the rifles give off a stronger look of security and basically a message of "you'd be stupid to fcuk with us". I also assume they have very strict rules of engagement that someone here may be able to expand on, although chances are they're very confidential about those rules.

Stercus Accidit

From casually reading online (I am by no means an expert of any description nor do I pretend to be ) I heard that 5.56 yaws and dumps alot of its energy quickly, at close range like swat incursions in the US where they often use m4 style rifles, it fragments entirely on impact. So in that regard it may be very suitable for this usage and wont over penetrate.

Manic Moran

Two reasons come immediately to mind.

1) Rifles are more accurate. You shoot at someone at 30 yards with a pistol, you're going to have a lot of rounds hitting anything but the target. Shootouts at 10 yards with pistols tend to have more rounds missing than hitting. Better to have a couple of well-placed rounds instead.

2) It's what the soldiers have, and what they are best trained to use.

The main advantages to pistols are that they are not very cumbersome. If your job entails doing anything other than shooting (eg writing tickets, wrestling with people, etc) carry something on your hip and keep your hands free. If your sole function in life is to shoot people, then there's nothing wrong with using something which requires both hands and doing the shooting job well.

NTM

Wicklowrider

Don't want to comment on the Standing Orders or compromise the security of the escorts but I'd like to share a funny story. One day I was waiting my turn in my Barbers. I was reading a magazine and the barber was chatting with the guy whose hair he was cutting.
I tuned in when the barber said " But sure their guns aren't loaded when they do those cash escorts". So I asked what he meant and he informed me that the army escorts weren't allowed out of barracks with loaded weapons! Some deterrent we were if people believed that!

Locust

There are pros and cons lots of ways but I suppose rifles have more range/accuracy/power and also deal more effectively with a target that is wearing body armour - especially jacketed rounds. (not sure what ammo they use for CIT's) Body armour is more readily available than ever if someone wanted to buy a vest or whatever.

As opposed to pistol ammunition which wouldn't penetrate as well against body armour. Although technology is always improving and I know people can do amazing things with handguns, and submachine guns can be very accurate and are lighter and easier to wield.

5.56 rifles carried by professional soldiers are a great deterrent against say a worst case plausible scenario say an armed and organized gang wearing body armour? Much more than submachine guns. Don't some of the british armed cops around the airports/public hotspots carry g36k's which is a chopped down 5.56 rifle? (switching away from the 9mm mp5's as a lot of organizations are nowadays doing)

That said i suppose a soldier/police officer when trained must take into account his target and his environment i.e. what is behind his target too. He cannot just fire off rounds like rambo where civilians are present as 5.56 would penetrate a body/vehicles etc... and keep on going. He has to be able to justify his shots i suppose? His training disciplines him so.

I remember someone once saying every round fired is or could be a solicitor/court case coming back to bite you!

heffomike54

At a guess, the soldiers train with these rifles the whole time, so probably just easier to use these weapons then have to issue something else for the escort then change back again afterwards.

petergfiffin

Manic Moran wrote: »

2) It's what the soldiers have, and what they are best trained to use.

This is pretty much it in a nutshell. Before the introduction of the Steyr NCOs carried the Gustav SMG and this was also used on CIT escorts.

If anything other than the standard issue weapons were used then only those trained in those weapons could do CIT which would be less than ideal.

source

Wicklowrider wrote: »

Don't want to comment on the Standing Orders or compromise the security of the escorts but I'd like to share a funny story. One day I was waiting my turn in my Barbers. I was reading a magazine and the barber was chatting with the guy whose hair he was cutting.
I tuned in when the barber said " But sure their guns aren't loaded when they do those cash escorts". So I asked what he meant and he informed me that the army escorts weren't allowed out of barracks with loaded weapons! Some deterrent we were if people believed that!

Complete bull.

I was once a member of the RDF and I've done weapons escorts to and from the range. On each occasion I had full magazines with live ammunition.

Be under no illusions these soldiers are heavily armed and capable of doing quite a bit of damage if required to do so.

The main reason I can think of for the rifles instead of pistol calibre sub machine guns, is the main threat to cash in transit for years was the provos. Who would be out with kalashnikovs and body armour. No point in going up against that with a pistol calibre. Also as others have said a rifle is way more accurate than a sub machine gun or pistol and the DF don't want to spend money on extra weapons and ammunition and training just for CIT when a perfectly good alternative exists.

Dan_Solo

The best tooled up gangs from Limerick or the IRA will bring AK47s to the party. No point in taking them on with spud guns.

enfield

" But sure their guns aren't loaded when they do those cash escorts".

Perhaps he meant a loaded weapon with a round up the breech. Of course there are rounds in the magazines but not one in the breech.i.e. cocked.
Tom.

deise go deo

enfield wrote: »

" But sure their guns aren't loaded when they do those cash escorts".

Perhaps he meant a loaded weapon with a round up the breech. Of course there are rounds in the magazines but not one in the breech.i.e. cocked.
Tom.

Why would he make a point of mentioning that?

helimachoptor

He meant they werent loaded at all, rather than not having one in the breech.

Wicklowrider

foinse wrote: »

Complete bull.

I was once a member of the RDF and I've done weapons escorts to and from the range. On each occasion I had full magazines with live ammunition.

enfield wrote: »

Perhaps he meant a loaded weapon with a round up the breech. Of course there are rounds in the magazines but not one in the breech.i.e. cocked.
Tom.

deise go deo wrote: »

Why would he make a point of mentioning that?

Just to clarify the barber (who in fairness is an eldery man) was the one who believed the escorts weapons were unloaded - I've done my share of escorts so I know the drill

source

helimachoptor wrote: »

He meant they werent loaded at all, rather than not having one in the breech.

It's a common misconception that Irish people have about the Defence Forces that they don't use live ammunition. I cannot count the amount of times I've heard someone say that they only use live ammo when overseas.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Manic has it on the button more or less.

Plus a threat to an escort won't always happen in an urban environment, as an example an IRA splinter group attacked an escort (pre-ceasefire days) in Wicklow with AK47's.. Result was the death of one terrorist (if anyone remembers the attempted bombing of The Widow Scanlons in Pearce St., the function was for this guy).

As for sub caliber rounds etc, well - why bring a knife to a gun fight!.

Just to put the OP's mind at ease re. a fire fight in a public area.

Although we're the butt of a lot of jokes from some sectors, our troops are very well disciplined, trained and highly motivated. A fire fight wouldn't be a 'free for all'.

Dan_Solo

Spencer Creamy Business wrote: »

Although we're the butt of a lot of jokes from some sectors, our troops are very well disciplined, trained and highly motivated. A fire fight wouldn't be a 'free for all'.

I'd trust the army with Steyr's not to kill every civilian in a 100 yard radius before special branch anyway. And old army man used to say they were afraid to even stand behind them at the firing range.:eek:

firefly08

Just to put the OP's mind at ease re. a fire fight in a public area.

Although we're the butt of a lot of jokes from some sectors, our troops are very well disciplined, trained and highly motivated. A fire fight wouldn't be a 'free for all'.

No bother, I never had any real doubts about that...just curious about the thinking behind it.

xflyer

The myth that the army/RDF or FCA weren't allowed to carry live ammunition still persists. It was particularly directed at the FCA. I was on a cash escort in Fermoy with loaded .303s believe it or not. We never left the barracks carrying weapons without some soldiers being fully armed.

On the point of carrying assault rifles on escorts. I think it's needed now more than ever. With the IRA threat there was the deterrent effect and it was safe enough to assume the IRA wouldn't engage the army because they were forbidden to do so by their own rules. But does that apply to the current dissidents? Or some of the more dangerous criminal gangs?

Maikkomi, your description of the Wicklow incident isn't quite accurate. It was a Garda ambush. Coincidentally I happened to have taken part in an RTE reconstruction of that day. The raiders carried on AK47, a fake RPG, a pistol, a shotgun and a lump hammer and I recall an angle grinder.

Strangely for the reconstruction I got to carry the RPG which was actually real!

Also the Widow Scallan's incident involved a PIRA/Sinn Fein fund raiser being attacked by loyalists. The event was to raise money for prisoner's families.

[Edited by moderator for OpSec reasons]

cushtac

xflyer wrote: »

On the point of carrying assault rifles on escorts. I think it's needed now more than ever. With the IRA threat there was the deterrent effect and it was safe enough to assume the IRA wouldn't engage the army because they were forbidden to do so by their own rules. But does that apply to the current dissidents? Or some of the more dangerous criminal gangs?

The IRA has killed & injured both soldiers and Gardaí in the past, once while robbing a post office cash delivery. It was never safe to assume that the IRA would refrain from attacking Irish security forces, regardless of their supposed rules.

xflyer wrote: »

Maikkomi, your description of the Wicklow incident isn't quite accurate. It was a Garda ambush. Coincidentally I happened to have taken part in an RTE reconstruction of that day. The raiders carried on AK47, a fake RPG, a pistol, a shotgun and a lump hammer and I recall an angle grinder.

Spencer Creamy Business was accurate enough, and it was not a Garda 'ambush'. The INLA were planning to rob a cash van & were being watched by a Garda surveillance unit. When they tried to hold up the van they were challenged by armed Gardaí, one of them threatened a Garda with his gun & was shot dead in self defence.

arybvtcw0eolkf

xflyer wrote: »

The myth that the army/RDF or FCA weren't allowed to carry live ammunition still persists. It was particularly directed at the FCA. I was on a cash escort in Fermoy with loaded .303s believe it or not. We never left the barracks carrying weapons without some soldiers being fully armed.

On the point of carrying assault rifles on escorts. I think it's needed now more than ever. With the IRA threat there was the deterrent effect and it was safe enough to assume the IRA wouldn't engage the army because they were forbidden to do so by their own rules. But does that apply to the current dissidents? Or some of the more dangerous criminal gangs?

Maikkomi, your description of the Wicklow incident isn't quite accurate. It was a Garda ambush. Coincidentally I happened to have taken part in an RTE reconstruction of that day. The raiders carried on AK47, a fake RPG, a pistol, a shotgun and a lump hammer and I recall an angle grinder.

Strangely for the reconstruction I got to carry the RPG which was actually real!

Also the Widow Scallan's incident involved a PIRA/Sinn Fein fund raiser being attacked by loyalists. The event was to raise money for prisoner's families.

Your right there, I was thinking of a completely different operation entirely, thank you.

Just on this small point..

On the point of carrying assault rifles on escorts. I think it's needed now more than ever. With the IRA threat there was the deterrent effect and it was safe enough to assume the IRA wouldn't engage the army because they were forbidden to do so by their own rules.

The IRA murdered Private Patrick Kelly and recruit garda Gary Sheehan during the Don Tidey kidnapping.

The same shower murdered Gda Gerry McCabe, so I don't know about things being different between then and now tbh.

[Edited by Moderator for OpSec reasons]

Wicklowrider

http://archives.tcm.ie/irishexaminer/1998/12/03/ihead.htm

Cullemore robbery

"The judge said that the five men had attempted to rob money from the Securicor van after blocking the road and posing as workmen. All had resisted arrest in varying degrees."
"The court heard that the five were members of a six man armed gang that posed as county council workmen before blocking the main N 11 road with a van and car and attempting to rob a Securicor van carrying more than £250,000 back to Dublin.
The gang was armed with an assault rifle, a pump action shotgun and revolver and one raider also had an imitation rocket launcher and another had an angle grinder used for cutting through metal.
Four of the raiders approached the Securicor van after blocking the road with a transit van and one of them tried to use the angle grinder to cut open the van while another used a lump hammer to smash the windows. One of the two security men left the van and was made to lie on the roadway.
Gardai from the Emergency Response Unit and the National Surveillance Unit arrived on the scene almost immediately and confronted the raiders. One of the raiders hijacked a civilian car and levelled a gun at the gardai who opened fire, fatally wounding the raider. None of the raiders' weapons were fired during the incident."

If you know the N11 exit at Cullenmore, just before Ashford, it was on the Cullenmore bends it happened.

SIRREX

Wicklowrider wrote: »

http://archives.tcm.ie/irishexaminer/1998/12/03/ihead.htm

Cullemore robbery

"The judge said that the five men had attempted to rob money from the Securicor van after blocking the road and posing as workmen. All had resisted arrest in varying degrees."
"The court heard that the five were members of a six man armed gang that posed as county council workmen before blocking the main N 11 road with a van and car and attempting to rob a Securicor van carrying more than £250,000 back to Dublin.
The gang was armed with an assault rifle, a pump action shotgun and revolver and one raider also had an imitation rocket launcher and another had an angle grinder used for cutting through metal.
Four of the raiders approached the Securicor van after blocking the road with a transit van and one of them tried to use the angle grinder to cut open the van while another used a lump hammer to smash the windows. One of the two security men left the van and was made to lie on the roadway.
Gardai from the Emergency Response Unit and the National Surveillance Unit arrived on the scene almost immediately and confronted the raiders. One of the raiders hijacked a civilian car and levelled a gun at the gardai who opened fire, fatally wounding the raider. None of the raiders' weapons were fired during the incident."

If you know the N11 exit at Cullenmore, just before Ashford, it was on the Cullenmore bends it happened.

I seem to remember this was on the day of the Garda "Blue Flu" protest when they all rang in sick. I'd say the scum were fairly sick to see the ERU rock up so quick

gbee

firefly08 wrote: »

Steyer 5.56mm rifles. Shouldn't they have pistol calibre sub machine guns or something along those lines? .

The machine pistols that the police carry are more lethal in that they spray munitions around and are harder to control.

A soldier firing off his Steyer is more likely to put the rounds where he aims.

gizmo555

gbee wrote: »

The machine pistols that the police carry are more lethal in that they spray munitions around and are harder to control.

I seem to remember the first time a Garda used an Uzi in anger in the late 70s or early 80s, tackling some armed robbers, a passing jogger was wounded. On the seafront somewhere around Booterstown or Sandymount, IIRC.

gbee

xflyer wrote: »

The myth that the army/RDF or FCA weren't allowed to carry live ammunition still persists.

Just to confirm, was in the service circa '72 23BN SIgs Collins/Cork 5 rounds in the magazine, bandelier with 45 more rounds. Safety on. And whilst the majority of troops in parades and public ceremonies would not be armed with live weapons, there would be a live security group mixed among them ~ only known to the CS and the selected live group.

source

gbee wrote: »

The machine pistols that the police carry are more lethal in that they spray munitions around and are harder to control.

A soldier firing off his Steyer is more likely to put the rounds where he aims.

Not true any longer, Armed members of AGS now carry H&K mp7's, There are a few uzi's still in service but the mp7 has taken over.

Zambia

gbee wrote: »

The machine pistols that the police carry are more lethal in that they spray munitions around and are harder to control.

no no no

Firearms dont spray operators do

gbee

Zambia232 wrote: »

no no no

Firearms dont spray operators do

Afraid I have to disagree with you here. Firearms have characteristics, the sub machine pistols, designed for close quarter combat and house to house fighting sprayed rounds.

The Tommy Gun was a favourite for this feature, but taming this in modern guns was the challenge. Learning how the weapon fired, dictated how the operator would use it.

In the Tommy Gun, the crims loved the straying effect, the Police Were trained to use it differently.

discus

Jeeeesus christ is this gbee for real? Describing a gun from 70 years ago....?

Zambia

gbee wrote: »

Afraid I have to disagree with you here. Firearms have characteristics, the sub machine pistols, designed for close quarter combat and house to house fighting sprayed rounds.

The Tommy Gun was a favourite for this feature, but taming this in modern guns was the challenge. Learning how the weapon fired, dictated how the operator would use it.

In the Tommy Gun, the crims loved the straying effect, the Police Were trained to use it differently.

But you actually have not, we both agree they can both strafe/spray. Its the skill of the operator that stops this.

Locust

For this type of work nobody 'sprays (and prays)' thats hollywood. Unless you are in some special forces black ops commando unit (or untrained/militia/rebel).

Yes i know WW2 heros stormed german pillboxes with their tommy guns on full auto and israeli commandos have emptied magazines in seconds at their enemies etc. But thats a different scenario, a different time, job and circumstance. I suppose real life obviously isn't Modern Warfare 2.

As far as i'm aware police and soldiers today all fire on semi automatic and are trained to do so, very quickly and accurately. I think some of the firearms the UK cops carry and others are even adapted for semi automatic fire only. Simply because they are accountable for all rounds they discharge (either directly or by ricochet) to any person other than the target.

So submachine guns are safer/in terms of being less lethal and a danger to onlookers i suppose. Pros and cons both ways. At the end of the day though if i put myself in the shoes of a bank robber, i'd be more intimidated and put off by a seeing a soldier carrying a 'battle/assault rifle' than a submachine gun (purely from asthetics!), although if it came down to using them i think both can do the Cash Escort job.

Poly

My limited understanding is that the soliders are there to protect the public, not the cash?

So if a situation arose would the CO be instructed to protect civilians first and worry about the cash later?

Don't know anyone who would take a bullet for a bank (bar the Irish taxpayer of course:()

Wicklowrider

Poly wrote: »

My limited understanding is that the soliders are there to protect the public, not the cash?

So if a situation arose would the CO be instructed to protect civilians first and worry about the cash later?

Don't know anyone who would take a bullet for a bank (bar the Irish taxpayer of course:()

Rest assured that due consideration would be given to life and limb in ANY situation. Members of the pdf could never be accused of discharging weapons recklessly. An enormous amount of emphasis is given to this in training and reinforced prior to deployment armed parties. You probably couldn't even guess the amount of emphasis on safety - and rightly so.

cushtac

Poly wrote: »

My limited understanding is that the soldiers are there to protect the public, not the cash?

They are there to protect the staff delivering the cash and to deter subversives/criminals.

xflyer

The IRA murdered Private Patrick Kelly and recruit garda Gary Sheehan during the Don Tidey kidnapping.

The same shower murdered Gda Gerry McCabe, so I don't know about things being different between then and now tbh.

The IRA has killed & injured both soldiers and Gardaí in the past, once while robbing a post office cash delivery. It was never safe to assume that the IRA would refrain from attacking Irish security forces, regardless of their supposed rules.

Indeed but those were exceptions. I'm no apologist for the IRA but their standing orders forbade them to attack the 'Free State' forces. So by definition a planned robbery of cash being escorted by the army would be in direct contravention of their own orders not to say suicidal. But the PIRA as such no longer exists as an armed organisation. It's replacement the RIRA/CIRA is far less predictable which was really my point.

Hence the continued need for cash escorts.

savagecabbages

Its my understanding that the escorted cash in transits rarely come under attack from criminals right? Meaning they are a serious deterrent.

Has there ever been an attempted robbery on a DF escorted van? [Not including ambushes]
And what about Garda escorted ones? They also seem to be providing a worthwhile deterrent.
We all know of the murder of Gerry McCabe, but I suspect that wasn't simply a robbery more a pre-planned political incident...

cushtac

xflyer wrote: »

Indeed but those were exceptions. I'm no apologist for the IRA but their standing orders forbade them to attack the 'Free State' forces.

They're not exceptions, the majority of Gardaí killed in the line of duty have died at the hands of the IRA.

xflyer wrote: »

So by definition a planned robbery of cash being escorted by the army would be in direct contravention of their own orders not to say suicidal. But the PIRA as such no longer exists as an armed organisation. It's replacement the RIRA/CIRA is far less predictable which was really my point.

PIRA are the ones with the track record of robbing banks & CIT in this country, regardless of their supposed rules. The dissidents have yet to attempt it.

It's also worth nothing that despite such actions supposedly being contrary to their rules, neither SF nor the IRA will condemn the Adare incident.

judestynes

gbee wrote: »

The machine pistols that the police carry are more lethal in that they spray munitions around and are harder to control.

A soldier firing off his Steyer is more likely to put the rounds where he aims.

This is because soldiers are trained to shoot and gardaí are trained to shoot everything

cushtac

judestynes wrote: »

This is because soldiers are trained to shoot and gardaí are trained to shoot everything

Please tell us all about your experiences of Garda firearms training & shooting under duress.

judestynes

cushtac wrote: »

Please tell us all about your experiences of Garda firearms training & shooting under duress.

A conversation I had with a garda sgt. at Elizabeths fort station in Cork. I was part of a display there a while back when the Elizabeth fort museum opened up. This particular garda was taking a look at some of the pieces in my collection of deacts a smith&wesson m10 2" .38 revolver, he commented that it was about time the gard's updated their weapons to the newer walther's. I told him I thought the s&w's are a fine weapon in regards reliablity and accuracy his response was "but sure the boys can fire off 6 rounds in no time and hit nothing" my reponse "thats hardly the guns fault". Other conversations I had with a garda firearms instructor whom I know quite well, he's a fine shooter himself but has recommended to his superiors to change the training module and increase to the standards required to be certed as a firearms officer.

xflyer

cushtac wrote: »

They're not exceptions, the majority of Gardaí killed in the line of duty have died at the hands of the IRA.

PIRA are the ones with the track record of robbing banks & CIT in this country, regardless of their supposed rules. The dissidents have yet to attempt it.

It's also worth nothing that despite such actions supposedly being contrary to their rules, neither SF nor the IRA will condemn the Adare incident.

We're getting into a circular argument here. My point was simple. The escorts are still needed because of the dissidents. The PIRA are history. The dissidents unfortunately not. They are unpredictable.

There is no denying the IRA killed Gardai. But their rules forbade them to attack them in the same way as they did the RUC or the British army. Who were specifically targeted. We didn't have fortified Garda stations or armoured landrovers. Adare was an exception that wasn't repeated. Most other murders were not related to cash escorts.

cushtac

judestynes wrote: »

A conversation I had with a garda sgt. at Elizabeths fort station in Cork. I was part of a display there a while back when the Elizabeth fort museum opened up. This particular garda was taking a look at some of the pieces in my collection of deacts a smith&wesson m10 2" .38 revolver, he commented that it was about time the gard's updated their weapons to the newer walther's. I told him I thought the s&w's are a fine weapon in regards reliablity and accuracy his response was "but sure the boys can fire off 6 rounds in no time and hit nothing" my reponse "thats hardly the guns fault". Other conversations I had with a garda firearms instructor whom I know quite well, he's a fine shooter himself but has recommended to his superiors to change the training module and increase to the standards required to be certed as a firearms officer.

So you've no experience yourself, merely anecdotes from others yet you feel qualified to pass comment on the abilities of the thousands of Gardaí who carry firearms on a daily basis?

xflyer wrote: »

We're getting into a circular argument here. My point was simple. The escorts are still needed because of the dissidents. The PIRA are history. The dissidents unfortunately not. They are unpredictable.

Your original comment was that is was safe to assume that PIRA wouldn't engage the Army as it was contrary to their rules; it was pointed out that this was nonsense as they had previously killed both Gardaí and soldiers.

xflyer wrote: »

There is no denying the IRA killed Gardai. But their rules forbade them to attack them in the same way as they did the RUC or the British army. Who were specifically targeted. We didn't have fortified Garda stations or armoured landrovers. Adare was an exception that wasn't repeated. Most other murders were not related to cash escorts.

Do you think the IRA deserve some sort of credit for not killing as many members of the Irish security forces as they did in NI?

They discarded their rules when it suited them and did nothing to punish those IRA members who broke them, on the contrary they actively assisted such terrorists in evading justice by hiding them & intimidating witnesses. Most other murders were not related to cash escorts, but were murders nonetheless and prove my point.

Crann na Beatha

This post has been deleted.

Wicklowrider

Obaraten wrote: »

Many a time on cash escorts i was asked "are those guns real" or "are they real bullets"

Yep, many a time.:)
Also had a dope telling me one time I "should take the bullets out of the box and put them in the gun" He was referring to the Gustav Magazine.

MajorMax

Dan_Solo wrote: »

I'd trust the army with Steyr's not to kill every civilian in a 100 yard radius before special branch anyway. And old army man used to say they were afraid to even stand behind them at the firing range.:eek:

My mother was a hotel manager in the 60's in Dublin city centre and they used to get special branch men coming in to drink late at night after finishing a shift. She said they were like cowboys always messing with their revolvers. One night one of them fired a shot into the ceiling of the bar over an argument, narrowly missing the hotel guest in the room above who slept through the whole thing and never noticed. The guards all legged it. The next day an Inspector called in and read my mother the riot act for serving alcohol afer hours. my mother always said the safest place to stand with an armed guard is directly in front of him:D

xflyer

Do you think the IRA deserve some sort of credit for not killing as many members of the Irish security forces as they did in NI?

NO!Look Cushtac stop trying to turn this into an argument or make me look like a provo supporter or apologist for the actions of those terrorists. There are plenty on these boards as it is.

My point was and is that they PIRA were unlikely to make an assault on a cash escort guarded by soldiers and in fact never did as a matter of historical fact. The current crop however may have different ideas for all we know. Thus the more heavily armed cash escorts are the better.

Clear?

cushtac

xflyer wrote: »

NO!Look Cushtac stop trying to turn this into an argument or make me look like a provo supporter or apologist for the actions of those terrorists. There are plenty on these boards as it is.

You did a good enough job of that yourself.

xflyer wrote: »

My point was and is that they PIRA were unlikely to make an assault on a cash escort guarded by soldiers and in fact never did as a matter of historical fact.

My point was and is that PIRA have killed Gardaí while robbing cash as a matter of historical fact, yet you seem to accept their assurances that it was against their rules.

xflyer wrote: »

Clear?

Yes, you're either incredibly naive or a closet supporter.

xflyer

You're trolling now Cushtac.:rolleyes:

cushtac

Report me then.

Manic Moran

Don't bother. Original question asked and answered.

NTM