2 dead including Garda following shooting Omeath Co Louth

Spanish Eyes

Strumms wrote: »

Id respectfully disagree there... i dont think very much will change. Plus its outrageous that a Garda should have to sacrifice their life and for that to be the catalyst to enable them recieving the resources that they and the people of this country need. Of course any report in the aftermath that could indicate shortcomings in resources etc would be welcomed but that is certainly too little and too late for Garda Golden and his family.

That's the way things happen in this country unfortunately. I agree with you that the Garda should not have lost his life for change to happen but that's where we are as a country.

Building regs/fire safety check.
Bail breaches, check
And many more things too.

Reactive, not proactive, and it was always thus.

That is the reality. Sorry.

My name is URL

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Thanks I'm not up to speed on bail laws at all. I didn't realise that if one breached bail conditions a judge would have to be involved in order to revoke bail.

That surely needs to be addressed. But I reckon something Constitutional will get in the way of that.

Hopefully the whole bail system will be looked at again now. And if it needs a referendum, so be it. It would pass 100%.

I'm not sure if there'd be much of a constitutional block to it tbh. Auld conservative and traditionalist judges would probably put stop to it fairly sharpish though

You'd think they'd be a dying breed at this stage but even newer ones are reluctant to have processes modernised.

mariaalice

How can a 24 year old be a dissident republican? as opposed to a violent thug why was the media describing someone who was a toddler when the anglo Irish agreement was signed as a dissident republican.

Little CuChulainn

mariaalice wrote: »

How can a 24 year old be a dissident republican? as opposed to a violent thug why was the media describing someone who was a toddler when the anglo Irish agreement was signed as a dissident republican.

Presumably because he is involved with a group of people with goals similar to those of the provos who came before them.

Spanish Eyes

My name is URL wrote: »

I'm not sure if there'd be much of a constitutional block to it tbh. Auld conservative and traditionalist judges would probably put stop to it fairly sharpish though

Why then is a breach of bail conditions not dealt with by arrest and charge?

I am no expert but I have something in the back of my mind about a right to innocence before being proven guilty, which may hark back to constitutional rights. I dunno.

Boring username

Well you'd better sit down for this revelation...............In 2012, Ardrian Macken had been in court charged with possession of bestiality images.

In July 2012 aged 22 he appeared in court in Newry charged with ‘possessing photos of women having sex with animals’.
The charge suggested that Mackin had been in possession of ’23 extreme pornographic images’. He was granted bail following his appearance.

http://www.thejournal.ie/adrian-mackin-profile-2382815-Oct2015/

Stay classy, dissidents.


Edit: Just saw someone else posted it too.

My name is URL

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Why then is a breach of bail conditions not dealt with by arrest and charge?

I am no expert but I have something in the back of my mind about a right to innocence before being proven guilty, which may hark back to constitutional rights. I dunno.

Dunno either tbh. Perhaps someone else could answer that.

Arrest isn't an indication of guilt fwiw. A person would be arrested on suspicion of breaking bail conditions just as any other crime, a judge would still be the one to determine if conditions were in fact broken, so 'innocent until proven guilty' should even come into it really.

JustTheOne

Boring username wrote: »

Well you'd better sit down for this revelation...............In 2012, Ardrian Macken had been in court charged with possession of bestiality images.





http://www.thejournal.ie/adrian-mackin-profile-2382815-Oct2015/

Stay classy, dissidents.


Edit: Just saw someone else posted it too.

Can you tell me what in God's name this is to do with the shooting last night?

Boring username

JustTheOne wrote: »

Can you tell me what in God's name this is to do with the shooting last night?

It might explain why he decided to murder a Garda, and attempt to murder his wife.

Spanish Eyes

My name is URL wrote: »

Dunno either tbh. Perhaps someone else could answer that.

Arrest isn't an indication of guilt fwiw. A person would be arrested on suspicion of breaking bail conditions just as any other crime, a judge would still be the one to determine if conditions were in fact broken, so 'innocent until proven guilty' should even come into it really.

I see what you mean alright. But at the same time, bail conditions are set out. If they are breached that person should automatically be put on remand.

However, the PC response to this is the bailed person's RIGHTS (v. responsibility and all that, and the rights of victims too).

The word of a Superintendent should be enough to revoke bail. With proper evidence trail. Get them into jail on remand and talk to the judge later to ratify the decision.

I'm probably coming across as a bit OTT on this. Apologies.

I am just totally fed up with the protection of a potential perpetrator in comparison to victims.

Also the length of time it takes to take a case to court there is unreal. Which makes bail a joke.

The man who murdered the Garda was on bail since January. No sign of a court date.

Skylinehead

Boring username wrote: »

It might explain why he decided to murder a Garda, and attempt to murder his wife.

How does that explain murder?

lawlolawl

mariaalice wrote: »

How can a 24 year old be a dissident republican? as opposed to a violent thug why was the media describing someone who was a toddler when the anglo Irish agreement was signed as a dissident republican.

Dissident republicans are violent thugs.

Organised crime gangs that drape a flag over themselves as some pathetic attempt at legitimacy.

Grab All Association

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I wonder will mackin get an IRA funeral and will Adams be offering his sympathies?

I think you need to look up the meaning of dissident republicanism.

end of the road

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

RIP Garda Golden and condolences to his family, friends and colleagues.

I've said it before and I'll say it again....our Gardai need to be armed if they are going to be dealing with the dregs of society who have no qualms about who they hurt or kill.

The awful thing is that no matter how many brave Gardai risk their lives on the job, no matter how of them pay the ultimate price for protecting and serving us, there are still those will think it's acceptable to disrespect them and insist they are nothing but lazy useless ignorant thugs.

Our Gardai do a tough job and they deserve our support and respect.

ireland has armed gards. the emergency responce unit. with the low levels of gun crime arming every single gard is not practical or cost effective. it doesn't even guarantee garda shootings (all be it rare) won't happen again, infact it could make them more common

seamus

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Presumably because he is involved with a group of people with goals similar to those of the provos who came before them.

There are plenty of people around with delusions of themselves as soldiers or fighters. Especially in the US, there are plenty of stories of people who've failed multiple times to be accepted into the armed forces yet will still have themselves a tonne of army hardware, spend their weekends running around the woods in camo gear and even tell people they're in the army every chance they get.

They exist in Ireland too, so there's every reason to think that other armed groups similarly suffer delusional psychos who go around telling people they're a member. Only difference is that in the case of dissident groups anyone can call themselves a member and nobody really can dispute it.

No doubt there'll be a week of stories and analyses in all the rags over the coming week about this guy. Certainly from the outset, it doesn't seem like this incident really has anything to do with dissident activity either way. They're not in the habit of shooting themselves.

PressRun

Thread is a **** show.

To me, a murder/suicide committed by an individual with a history of criminal behavior and who was believed by his partner to be capable of something like this speaks to a mental health issue above all else. Anyone who makes threats to kill their partner and themselves is not well and should probably have been hospitalized long before things were ever able to get to this point.

There were also clearly significant dangers in sending a lone guard into a volatile situation. I don't believe the guards should be armed since, lets face it, this is such a significant incident precisely because it doesn't happen every day. It shouldn't be treated as a call to arms, but surely questions should be asked about how this was handled.

I also don't know how significant the dissident republican link actually is apart from possibly explaining where he acquired a gun. There's nothing to suggest that this was anything other than the actions of an unhinged individual, tbh.

Little CuChulainn

end of the road wrote: »

ireland has armed gards. the emergency responce unit. with the low levels of gun crime arming every single gard is not practical or cost effective. it doesn't even guarantee garda shootings (all be it rare) won't happen again, infact it could make them more common

The emergency response unit do not respond to calls outside of Dublin unless they are major emergencies. The regional support unit do the country calls. There's two to four working at any one time to cover about 6 counties.

Little CuChulainn

seamus wrote: »

There are plenty of people around with delusions of themselves as soldiers or fighters. Especially in the US, there are plenty of stories of people who've failed multiple times to be accepted into the armed forces yet will still have themselves a tonne of army hardware, spend their weekends running around the woods in camo gear and even tell people they're in the army every chance they get.

They exist in Ireland too, so there's every reason to think that other armed groups similarly suffer delusional psychos who go around telling people they're a member. Only difference is that in the case of dissident groups anyone can call themselves a member and nobody really can dispute it.

No doubt there'll be a week of stories and analyses in all the rags over the coming week about this guy. Certainly from the outset, it doesn't seem like this incident really has anything to do with dissident activity either way. They're not in the habit of shooting themselves.

However there was sufficient evidence on this particular individual to merit a prosecution before the special criminal court. So maybe not your average boaster.

whatismyname

PressRun wrote: »

Thread is a **** show.

To me, a murder/suicide committed by an individual with a history of criminal behavior and who was believed by his partner to be capable of something like this speaks to a mental health issue above all else. Anyone who makes threats to kill their partner and themselves is not well and should probably have been hospitalized long before things were ever able to get to this point.

There were also clearly significant dangers in sending a lone guard into a volatile situation. I don't believe the guards should be armed since, lets face it, this is such a significant incident precisely because it doesn't happen every day. It shouldn't be treated as a call to arms, but surely questions should be asked about how this was handled.

I also don't know how significant the dissident republican link actually is apart from possibly explaining where he acquired a gun. There's nothing to suggest that this was anything other than the actions of an unhinged individual, tbh.

I'd actually been sitting here last night and this morning thinking 'I wonder how long it will be before someone decides this was a result of mental illness'

Boring username

Skylinehead wrote: »

How does that explain murder?

*Might*.

Well an individual who is up in court for bestiality, with a known involvement in dissident republicanism, sees a Garda escorting the gunman's wife in a domestic abuse incident, might, just might have a grudge against law enforcement officials.
So he shoots his wife, and murders a Garda. They always have someone else to blame except themselves.

You seem almost resentful that a dissident has been shown up for the scumbag that he is.

end of the road

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

One option would be to make a breach of bail an arrestable and chargeable offence. People on bail might take it a bit more seriously then.

i'd doubt it. if they don't take it seriously in the first place they aren't going to start because its an arrestable offence (i actually thought it was an arrestable offence all ready)

Little CuChulainn

end of the road wrote: »

i'd doubt it. if they don't take it seriously in the first place they aren't going to start because its an arrestable offence (i actually thought it was an arrestable offence all ready)

If they don't then they will be arrested an lose their bail. If it doesn't work as a deterrent then they can still be forced to comply by being arrested and brought straight before a judge.

end of the road

Daroxtar wrote: »

a judicial system that is often more concerned with the rights of perpetrators than the welfare of the public in general.

where is this justice system because it certainly isn't in this country. our justice system has to operate within the laws and guidelines given. people may not like that but its fact. they are not releasing people because they are more concerned about criminals then victims. they are not releasing people for the hell of it. they are doing it because its what the law and sentencing guidelines require. i have plenty of issues with our justice system but facts are facts, and the reality is the judges have laws and guidelines to abide by themselves in relation to sentencing and bail

end of the road

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

The emergency response unit do not respond to calls outside of Dublin unless they are major emergencies. The regional support unit do the country calls. There's two to four working at any one time to cover about 6 counties.

oh so the regional support unit have come on stream then? i was under the belief that they were to happen but didn't.

Raging_Ninja

Boring username wrote: »

*Might*.

Well an individual who is up in court for bestiality, with a known involvement in dissident republicanism, sees a Garda escorting the gunman's wife in a domestic abuse incident, might, just might have a grudge against law enforcement officials.
So he shoots his wife, and murders a Garda. They always have someone else to blame except themselves.

You seem almost resentful that a dissident has been shown up for the scumbag that he is.

If this was in fact caused by mental illness, then you are looking for rationality where very little may have existed in the first place.

PressRun

whatismyname wrote: »

I'd actually been sitting here last night and this morning thinking 'I wonder how long it will be before someone decides this was a result of mental illness'

Seems more likely than anything politically motivated. Someone who threatens to kill themselves and their partner and then actually follows through by killing a guard, themselves and attempting to kill their partner doesn't exactly seem like the most stable person in the world. And none of that in any way says 'terrorist' or 'political' to me. Not every mentally ill person is violent, and in fact most mentally ill people are more likely to be victims of violence themselves, but mentally ill people can be violent, and it's not as though mental health services in Ireland are top notch.

Manic Moran

Nesta99 wrote: »

One thing we should all recognise in this country that guns do not solve gun crime. Gardaí being unarmed is how it should stay but with properly resourced specialised units that will provide back-up.

I don't think anyone would claim that guns solve crime. They're issued to police around the world, even countries with such low violence rates as Japan and Iceland, for the purposes of protecting life.

Obviously the Garda leadership have so far made the decision that for whatever reason, be it policy or financial, they believe that the merits of the partially armed force is worth the risk to the individual garda. The problem with the theory which, again, virtually no other country in the world follows, is that for the several minutes (or more) between when the Garda in question realises "a firearm would be rather handy right about now", gets on the radio and says "lads, would you mind showing up with the response unit", and when they actually get to the scene, the Garda in question has all but no control over the situation, and is purely reliant on the inclinations and capability of someone who has enough respect for the law to be brandishing a firearm in the first place. The policy may be sensible at a macro scale, but doubtless there are periods of time when certain -individuals- (or their families) might be lamenting the policy.

Now, if this would have had any effect here is, of course, an open question, but the dilemma still stands.

BoatMad

I think a key question to be answered here , is how a lone unarmed guard was sent to a house of a known dissident republican , in mental distress or other wise . A superior will need to have some very clear answers ready

BoatMad

Manic Moran wrote: »

I don't think anyone would claim that guns solve crime. They're issued to police around the world, even countries with such low violence rates as Japan and Iceland, for the purposes of protecting life.

Obviously the Garda leadership have so far made the decision that for whatever reason, be it policy or financial, they believe that the merits of the partially armed force is worth the risk to the individual garda. The problem with the theory which, again, virtually no other country in the world follows, is that for the several minutes (or more) between when the Garda in question realises "a firearm would be rather handy right about now", gets on the radio and says "lads, would you mind showing up with the response unit", and when they actually get to the scene, the Garda in question has all but no control over the situation, and is purely reliant on the inclinations and capability of someone who has enough respect for the law to be brandishing a firearm in the first place. The policy may be sensible at a macro scale, but doubtless there are periods of time when certain -individuals- (or their families) might be lamenting the policy.

Now, if this would have had any effect here is, of course, an open question, but the dilemma still stands.

I believe that detective in Dundalk was armed , was he not, it didn't help him

whatismyname

BoatMad wrote: »

I believe that detective in Dundalk was armed , was he not, it didn't help him

Yes he was, but he didn't even have time to pull his weapon, had just gone to step out of his car.

If I remember correctly, the thread on here after his death had some debate about the type of weapon etc. Apparently there was some weapon that they had used to be provided with in this instance which they are no longer not - it had been more intimidating apparently. I don't know more though without going back to look at the thread, and don't really know a lot about weapons generally...