Off Duty Garda shoots man

Barry Badrinath

Jawgap wrote: »

The fact that it sounds like a couple of warnings were issued and the guy got close enough to grapple and physically struggle with the Guard, kind of suggests the Guard waited until the last possible second to discharge the weapon......not exactly 'gun slinging'

This is complete speculation on my part but maybe he felt it was his last possible option - that unless he did fire there was every chance the gun would be wrestled away from him and he'd be on the wrong end of it.

Thats what I have been thinking myself.

Syphonax

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

There is very little info on the incident yet in your OP you were adamant they should be removed from the force. If insisting that a garda is removed from the force based on no info isn't slaughtering i dont know what it.

Yes ok, I admit my first post was OTT dramatic. But many on here are congratulating him and 'slaughtering' the guy who got shot just because they are assuming the gard got the right guy, if he hit an innocent pedestrian tones would soon change.

Syphonax

Senor Fancy Pants wrote: »

I'm sure he knew who he was shooting at, if indeed it was intentional....a shoulder shot is a dodgy enough point to be choosing to target someone.

We dont know the full story yet.

However, what I do know is, any firearm carrier is without any shadow of a doubt, cognicent of the sh1t storm that comes at you after squeezing a trigger in the line of duty.

It's not something taken lightly, on a whim or otherwise. It is a tool to be used as a last resort.

If you had any experience of firearm training or responsibility you would know that but I suspect you dont.

It's not the wild west and firearms holders dont go looking for trouble.

you're assuming a lot, gards are just humans and not Judge Dredd or whatever, IMO, on the limited info we have, I think the gard was reckless, endangering his own life, that of innocent civilians and he could have killed the 'criminal'......like I said he isnt Judge Dredd and doesnt have the right to be Judge, Jury and executioner.

Wossack

Syphonax wrote: »

you're assuming a lot, gards are just humans and not Judge Dredd or whatever, IMO, on the limited info we have, I think the gard was reckless, endangering his own life, that of innocent civilians and he could have killed the 'criminal'......like I said he isnt Judge Dredd and doesnt have the right to be Judge, Jury and executioner.

lol

Syphonax

Wossack wrote: »

lol

zzzzzzz so im assuming a lot too, shoot me

Depp

RasTa wrote: »

What is he doing carrying a gun?

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/investigation-launched-after-man-shot-in-the-shoulder-during-struggle-with-offduty-garda-36060612.html

Should be removed from force if so.

plenty of guards are armed such as armed response and detectives, as far as I know some detectives are entitled to and in some cases required to carry 24/7, important to remember some of these guys especially drugs detectives can become targets themselves and to have them turn in their protection when they clock out would be extremely reckless.

Barry Badrinath

Syphonax wrote: »

you're assuming a lot, gards are just humans and not Judge Dredd or whatever, IMO, on the limited info we have, I think the gard was reckless, endangering his own life, that of innocent civilians and he could have killed the 'criminal'......like I said he isnt Judge Dredd and doesnt have the right to be Judge, Jury and executioner.

I'm not assuming.

I'm informing you of the basic responsibilities of a firearms holder.

You have continually spouted your own assumptions and a raft of uneducated and idiotic comments.

One of which I am quoting right now.

Despite not knowing the full story combined with having no knowledge, experience or appreciatio of firearm responsibilities you still ascertain that this member of AGS was reckless and acting as judge, jury and executioner.

Hop off to the comments section of some online rag if you want to spout rubbish, you are making a fool out of yourself.

Are Am Eye

A couple of thoughts on this...

Syphonax had a previous run in with a garda as per a post he made in legal forum. This may be informing his strong feeling on this event. I am a critic of the garda in general. But I know that there are good individuals in it and you have to judge each new event on the facts as available.

That GSOC are involved tells you nothing. It is mandatory for them to be informed and to investigate any time a person is injured and a garda discharged a shot.

They judge this on whether there was a requirement to use force e.g to protect life, and was the minimum required force used.

The allowance of a garda to have a gun when he's not working has probably been overstated by some people back the thread. It is allowed in certain circumstances but is the exception.

MarcusP12

Syphonax wrote: »

MarcusP12 wrote: »

I'm only making an assumption here but i'm going to make a wild guess that any time a fire arm is discharged and especially when someone is actually injured or killed, there will be some form of report or investigation on the incident. I, again, assume this is to determine whether such force was necessary under the circumstances. I would also assume that this would happen whether the garda in question was on duty or not.

So I have serious doubts that a court case would be inevitable. Of course I could find out if the above is accurate since my brother in law is a piece carrying detective sergeant......but i'd prefer to give the garda the benefit of the doubt and praise his brave intervention....

There is very little information about this incident but yes someone been shot warrants an investigation and if the gard is in the wrong it would be another massive embarrassment for the force, I suspect this is why there is so little information regarding the incident as naturally the garda like anyone else looks after their own.

Sorry but that's absolute nonsense, you're clearly making wild assumptions of impropriety on the part of the garda to fuel an anti-garda agenda. You've clearly no evidence to support this and as stated, this is an on going investigation so naturally information is at a premium....who'd want to be a garda when this is the kind of rubbish and attitude out there....

begbysback

There isn't much information on this at the minute, in other such cases it would be mentioned that someone was in custody or the like - but just after watching the news there was lack of such, which leads one to think that the shooting victim is not actually a suspect.

mynamejeff

Syphonax wrote: »

An on duty cop vs off duty, I accept certain rules are applicable to them both but there are subtle differnces. If i worked in Mcdonalds im on duty, if im ordering a Big Mac im not

It not as black and white as some are assuming it is, if fact when it comes to courts an off duty cop is EXACTLY just that.

you really are making a fool of your self here and should nave stoped long ago.

gardai are responsible for their actions as a garda while on duty and off even if it has nothing to do with being a garda ie a garda who punches some one on a football field can be disciplined by the garda authorities. i suggest you use google.

whatever previous interactions you have had with them seems to have made you bitter and nonsensical.

there are many reasons why a armed garda would have a gun on them while off duty one of which is if a specific threat had been made against them.
in this context it seems possible , garda working in a station with many national units dealing with series criminals

your preexisting bitterness towards gardai and lack of knowledge and information in this is really not doing you any favors here. you've spent all day losing a arguments biased on your own bitterness


sad really but sure ..........

SEPT 23 1989

begbysback wrote: »

There isn't much information on this at the minute, in other such cases it would be mentioned that someone was in custody or the like - but just after watching the news there was lack of such, which leads one to think that the shooting victim is not actually a suspect.

Sounded like a domestic going off what eyewitnesses heard

studdlymurphy

Even though he would have been allowed carry the gun, if he carried it out with him to the pub that's a different story. Hope that's not the case.

Captain Obvious

begbysback wrote: »

There isn't much information on this at the minute, in other such cases it would be mentioned that someone was in custody or the like - but just after watching the news there was lack of such, which leads one to think that the shooting victim is not actually a suspect.

He is probably in hospital. No point in arresting him til he gets out, if he needs to be arrested at all.

A Battered Mars Bar

God damn Murr. The Mayor will have my ass for this! Turn in your badge I'm taking you off the beat. And your gun.........and the other one.......and the other one. Now get out of my sight.

Ring ring. Ring ring. Ring ring.

What is it Janice?

Sarg it's the Mayor on line 2.

God damn it Murr. I'll have you pushing pencil's for the rest of your career.

Hello ah Mr. Mayor. .. hold on one sec.

Oh and Murr before you go. Good job
Now get out of my office!

begbysback

Captain Obvious wrote: »

He is probably in hospital. No point in arresting him til he gets out, if he needs to be arrested at all.

I dont believe there are any suspects in this case, otherwise the news takes a different tone - that of a hero off duty garda saving they day....

Noticeably absent in this instance

fullstop

Syphonax wrote: »

If the guard was off-duty he shouldnt be carrying a gun

Syphonax wrote: »

Thats toally avoiding my point, yes they can carry guns

Hmm.

Panjandrums

This post has been deleted.

RustyNut

Panjandrums wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Even if the guard was under no threat, or if the person who got shot was innocent of any serious crime.

jimmycrackcorm

RustyNut wrote:

if the person who got shot was innocent of any serious crime.

That sounds doubtful.

Grayson

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

That sounds doubtful.

He did say "if" though so it's correct.

Panjandrums

This post has been deleted.

begbysback

Panjandrums wrote: »

I made that comment knowing several armed Gardai and the type of person that they are.
Discharging your weapon isn't taken lightly.

So you're awarding commendations to every Garda who shoots someone, regardless of circumstances, based on the type of person you believe they are?

Panjandrums

This post has been deleted.

RustyNut

Panjandrums wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Yea, armed Gardai, the ultimate professionals...

An investigation led by Superintendent Philip Moynihan, of Bray, discovered that the men, who were armed with Smith & Wesson handguns, went drinking in a local pub while on duty — a clear breach of garda regulations.

It is understood they visited the popular watering hole, Paddy Cullen’s, in Ballsbridge, at around 9pm, towards the start of a 12-hour shift. They returned to the embassy an hour later to be present for the changeover of the uniformed garda presence at the security hut, before going back to the pub where they had several more drinks.

A violent row developed between the men over whose turn it was to pay for a round of drinks and they had to be pulled apart by members of the public.

Captain Obvious

RustyNut wrote: »

Yea, armed Gardai, the ultimate professionals...

2006

RustyNut

Captain Obvious wrote: »

2006

Your point being?

Captain Obvious

RustyNut wrote: »

Your point being?

The only example you could find to make your point was 11 years ago and was two guys with 35 years service (combined). It's relevance to modern day Gardaí seems pretty remote.

RustyNut

Captain Obvious wrote: »

The only example you could find to make your point was 11 years ago and was two guys with 35 years service (combined). It's relevance to modern day Gardaeems pretty remote.

What's changed in the last 11 years?

Captain Obvious

RustyNut wrote: »

What's changed in the last 11 years?

The way in which Gardaí are recruited, trained, monitored and disciplined.

RustyNut

Captain Obvious wrote: »

The way in which Gardare recruited, trained, monitored and disciplined.

Anything independant to back up that claim?

Are Am Eye

Captain Obvious wrote: »

The way in which Gardaí are recruited, trained, monitored and disciplined.

Were they trained to fabricate a million fake checkpoints?

clairewithani

I wonder who Garda bashers hope will help them in a time of need.

Pwindedd

RustyNut wrote: »

Yea, armed Gardai, the ultimate professionals...

In fairness that's not a great example. No mention of weapons being drawn or fired - if anything it just proves that even while drunk the officers carried their weapons responsibly and handed in the weapons before shift ended. (The whole getting drunk and disorderly thing notwithstanding of course)

Are Am Eye

clairewithani wrote: »

I wonder who Garda bashers hope will help them in a time of need.

They're obliged to help everyone in the country. That's what they're paid to do. They can't elect to only deal with people who turn a blind eye to garda corruption.

corner of hells

RustyNut wrote: »

Captain Obvious wrote: »

2006

Your point being?

You brought the sole example up , how about giving us a few more examples to show us nothing has in fact changed.

RustyNut

corner of hells wrote: »

You brought the sole example up , how about giving us a few more examples to show us nothing has in fact changed.

Why? is one example of armed gardai abandoning their post, drinking alcohol on duty and engaging in violent criminal behavior while carrying a state issued firearm not enough to show that they can not be trusted blindly as the poster I was replying to seemed to imply?

What evidence is there to show that anything has changed since the incident I linked to. Did AGS not accidently shoot someone in the face recently?

corner of hells

RustyNut wrote: »

corner of hells wrote: »

You brought the sole example up , how about giving us a few more examples to show us nothing has in fact changed.

Why? is one example of armed gardai abandoning their post, drinking alcohol on duty and engaging in violent criminal behavior while carrying a state issued firearm not enough to show that they can not be trusted blindly as the poster I was replying to seemed to imply?

What evidence is there to show that anything has changed since the incident I linked to. Did AGS not accidently shoot someone in the face recently?

They sure did shoot someone accidentally in the face in a targeted operation against a criminal gang.I wasn't there myself but you know yourself in a high adrenaline moment tensions are running high and at the moment that's still being investigated.

Youre quoting examples one of which is with GSOC which in fact acknowledges that things do change but in reality there isn't a lot examples at all.

clairewithani

Are Am Eye wrote: »

They're obliged to help everyone in the country. That's what they're paid to do. They can't elect to only deal with people who turn a blind eye to garda corruption.

Read the question. Who would they want to help them? Gardaí would do their job. Don't doubt it for a minute.

Captain Obvious

RustyNut wrote: »

Anything independant to back up that claim?

Plenty. Even more if you look at the changes since those two particular Gardaí would have been recruited and trained. I'll give you an example of two changes. I'll have a look for more later.

Training: Total revamp

Discipline: New Legislation

Are Am Eye

clairewithani wrote: »

Read the question. Who would they want to help them? Gardaí would do their job. Don't doubt it for a minute.

You don't think anyone should ever criticise gardai based on the fact they might require the services of the gardai. That won't lead to a very efficient police force will it when they can do whatever they want and as little as they want because they are immune to criticism.

In the real world everybody is subject to scrutiny and standards of performance.

RasTa

My only real impression of the Garda is doing jury duty and I'm surprised some of them still have jobs. The judge fell asleep a few times for the 2nd case so I'm surprised she still has a job too.

clairewithani

Are Am Eye wrote: »

You don't think anyone should ever criticise gardai based on the fact they might require the services of the gardai. That won't lead to a very efficient police force will it when they can do whatever they want and as little as they want because they are immune to criticism.

In the real world everybody is subject to scrutiny and standards of performance.

It's not that I don't think people should criticise gardaí but the amount of bashing of guards, teachers and medical profession that goes on in society gets tiring.

Augme

clairewithani wrote: »

It's not that I don't think people should criticise gardaí but the amount of bashing of guards, teachers and medical profession that goes on in society gets tiring.

If the Gardai didn't make a mess of things so often they'd probably wouldn't get bashed so often.

Spider Web

Much of the differing views in this regard boil down to whether a person views the guards as a collective, or individually.

Only viewing them as a collective makes no sense to me though.

Or at least if people could try to view them in both contexts.

Grossly unfair on one hardworking, decent guard to be deemed the same as a crooked one though. And lazy, uncritical thinking too.

I don't think Claire said nobody should ever criticise the guards either.