George Nkencho shooting *Mod warning Added to OP*

kirving

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

so why is it being presented as a fact he had a machete then

What's the technical, and legal difference between a large knife and a small machete?

punisher5112

Kevin Irving wrote: »

What's the technical, and legal difference between a large knife and a small machete?

I'd class them all as a deadly weapon when been used for purposes of threatening to injure or kill another human being.

Stihl waters

MontgomeryClift wrote: »

A Jamaican living in Dublin speaks out:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-k1AdFnLbc

Jesus my I.Q dropped 50 points listening to him, did he avail of any free education after coming to Ireland or is he deliberately trying to speak like that

redhand07

Signore Fancy Pants wrote: »

I suppose we don't, at least the name of the organiser is consistent with someone from Blanchardstown.

If it is bogus, at least by proxy it demonstrates a level of support and a lack of tolerance for this aggresive behaviour being turned into a glory hunt by the racebaiters.

Would I recommend large donations? No.

It's legit. Same lady sued blanchardstown shopping center for her kid.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/20000-for-boy-who-cut-eyebrow-on-bollard-37912107.html

whisky_galore

riffmongous wrote: »

Or someone suffering a psychiatric episode, like at Abbeylara.

Interestingly, attack dogs were recommended as a less lethal way of subduing. As ever I guess funding is a reason we'll never see these brought into use.

Annasopra

Signore Fancy Pants wrote: »

Whether he had a butter knife or a Machete is irrelevent,

Actually its not irrelevant at all.

We have seen posters jumping up and down here about him having a machete trying to prove some sort of point about how violent he was.

There is a big difference between a small butter knife and a big machete. If he was threatening gardai with a machete then their reaction is understandable. If he was using a butter knife then its less understandable.

It does make a big difference.

Signore Fancy Pants

redhand07 wrote: »

It's legit. Same lady sued blanchardstown shopping center for her kid.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/20000-for-boy-who-cut-eyebrow-on-bollard-37912107.html

Yep, saw that myself.

gozunda

bubblypop wrote: »

Available to gardai, yes.
Not posted online.

How about individuals waving stuff around identifying those concerned?

Here we have 'protestors' placarding photographs of the garda who they think "murdered' the said knife wielding 'not a thug' who not only assaulted and threatened staff and gardai but who also refused to comply with the garda called out to deal with the situation risking their own lives to do so ...

https://twitter.com/BLANOsVideos/status/1344605013662957568?s=20

riffmongous

Padre_Pio wrote: »

Another eejit who refused to drop his gun, after two days of a siege, and two shots to the legs.

Ah yeah cause he just did it for the craic like, even after being shot a few times he just wanted to keep playing the eejit :rolleyes: You see some simple things written here but that's taking the biscuit.

Lumen

Signore Fancy Pants wrote: »

Whether he had a butter knife or a Machete is irrelevent

I have this vision of you running away from the Cornucopia proudly waving a butterknife as Jennifer Lawrence takes aim with her bow...

kirving

punisher5112 wrote: »

I'd class them all as a deadly weapon when been used for purposes of threatening to injure or kill another human being.

As would I. Arguing over irrelevant details is a clear deflectionary tactic.

Thankfully, the law is written in such a way as to eliminate such semantics, and is something along the lines of "knife or any other article which has a blade or which is sharply pointed" .

Equally, we use "mechanically propelled vehicle" instead of "car" and "van" so we don't have people defending a drunk driver in a commercial Golf, as it doesn't fit either definition.

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

There is a big difference between a small butter knife and a big machete.

Thankfully the law doesn't make such a distinction, a butter knife in the neck could still kill someone.

riffmongous

whisky_galore wrote: »

Interestingly, attack dogs were recommended as a less lethal way of subduing. As ever I guess funding is a reason we'll never see these brought into use.

I saw that too, I'd imagine it will come up in the GSOC report (if there were any mental illness issues at play here)

Kraftwerk

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Actually its not irrelevant at all.

We have seen posters jumping up and down here about him having a machete trying to prove some sort of point about how violent he was.

There is a big difference between a small butter knife and a big machete. If he was threatening gardai with a machete then their reaction is understandable. If he was using a butter knife then its less understandable.

It does make a big difference.

It's been reported as a large knife based on eye witness accounts in the eurospar where he attacked staff.

It's interesting you're trying to push Ebun Josephs disingenuous narrative that it may have been a butter knife without any evidence and deliberately ignoring eye witness accounts.

whisky_galore

whisky_galore wrote: »

Interestingly, attack dogs were recommended as a less lethal way of subduing. As ever I guess funding is a reason we'll never see these brought into use.

We could go the route of the Czech Police:

doublejobbing 2

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

There is a big difference between a small butter knife and a big machete. If he was threatening gardai with a machete then their reaction is understandable. If he was using a butter knife then its less understandable.

.

But Ruth Coppinger thinks any knife, be it a samurai sword or a Fisher Price chef set, is not a real weapon.

Signore Fancy Pants

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Actually its not irrelevant at all.

We have seen posters jumping up and down here about him having a machete trying to prove some sort of point about how violent he was.

There is a big difference between a small butter knife and a big machete. If he was threatening gardai with a machete then their reaction is understandable. If he was using a butter knife then its less understandable.

It does make a big difference.

There is absolutely no difference when it comes to the intended use of the object.

Whatever type of knife it was, the intent is clear. A butter knife used in a violent manner can result in death.

Now, if there were claims of his possession of a machete but it turned out he was wielding a nice bread roll from Eurospar in an aggressive manner, then the actions of AGS would be less understandable.

He was in possession of a knife, he refused to put it down, he went for AGS with the knife.

You are putting forth a weak and frankly ridiculous argument which one can only surmise is to disrupt conversation with bolloxology.

Are you suggesting that he cant be classed as beimg violent if he was only armed with a small knife?

Lumen

Kevin Irving wrote: »

As would I. Arguing over irrelevant details is a clear deflectionary tactic.

Thankfully, the law is written in such a way as to eliminate such semantics, and is something along the lines of "knife or any other article which has a blade or which is sharply pointed" .

The other relevance of the machete is that it plays into racist stereotypes of the black savage. Earlier in the thread someone drew a line to Hutu massacres in the Congo. I don't know of any genocides effected using butterknives.

Annasopra

Kevin Irving wrote: »

As would I. Arguing over irrelevant details is a clear deflectionary tactic.

The "fact" he had a machete was presented in here as very relevant near the start of this thread where you had people displaying images of machetes to illustrate a point. Its a fair point. If its a machete then its clear he was very violent. If its a butter knife then its less clear. I am not trying to deflect from anything. I am questioning where this "fact" came from and asking if it has been verified.

Guerillabear

whisky_galore wrote: »

Interestingly, attack dogs were recommended as a less lethal way of subduing. As ever I guess funding is a reason we'll never see these brought into use.

Why on Earth should we risk a garda dog getting injured or killed trying to subdue this man? The dog has at least been serving a purpose in this country

There's no way they shot him over a butter knife. You'd want to be very naive to believe that.

Annasopra

Kraftwerk wrote: »

It's been reported as a large knife based on eye witness accounts in the eurospar where he attacked staff.

It's interesting you're trying to push Ebun Josephs disingenuous narrative that it may have been a butter knife without any evidence and deliberately ignoring eye witness accounts.

I am not pushing any narrative. I asked questions about the narrative being pushed.

walshb

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Actually its not irrelevant at all.

We have seen posters jumping up and down here about him having a machete trying to prove some sort of point about how violent he was.

There is a big difference between a small butter knife and a big machete. If he was threatening gardai with a machete then their reaction is understandable. If he was using a butter knife then its less understandable.

It does make a big difference.

I agree that it should make a difference..

But I would be somewhat confident he was shot because the weapon he had was more potentially lethal and dangerous than a butter knife.

Kermit.de.frog

I have a question...

If you have concerns about where the country is headed where can you turn to?

What if you're not hard right wing and are just concerned?

What if you are not racist but just worried?

There is nowhere to go for people who are just middle of the road but who are more and more uneasy with the path we are on.

There is no political party to support.

I mean if you're left wing but have concerns you basically have SF and PBP and Labour (who want to bring back automatic birthright citizenship). But they are all on the same broad page.

This is exactly what happened in Sweden. If you were worried you had no where to turn to unless you were hard right.

oldtimeyfella

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I am not pushing any narrative. I asked questions about the narrative being pushed.

Another one "just asking questions" to cover up their ****stirring.

Kraftwerk

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I am not pushing any narrative. I asked questions about the narrative being pushed.

So now that you know that it's been reported (in the Irish Times reporting on eye witness accounts) as a large knife and not a butter knife I presume you'll agree that it shows that in your words he was "very violent" to be attacking gardai with a large knife?

nullzero

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

The "fact" he had a machete was presented in here as very relevant near the start of this thread where you had people displaying images of machetes to illustrate a point. Its a fair point. If its a machete then its clear he was very violent. If its a butter knife then its less clear. I am not trying to deflect from anything. I am questioning where this "fact" came from and asking if it has been verified.

Do you believe that armed Gardai would be called out to deal with a man armed with a butter knife?

The butter knife idea is clearly false, and while the presence of a machete is yet to be completely proven, a sizeable blade was involved and it would have been a dangerous knife to require ASU involvement.

The fact is that you are engaging in an argument that has no validity for what seems to be the sake of Contrary-ism.

Lumen

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I have a question...

If you have concerns about where the country is headed where can you turn to?

What if you're not hard right wing and are just concerned?

What if you are not racist but just worried?

There is nowhere to go for people who are just middle of the road but who are more and more uneasy with the path we are on.

There is no political party to support.

I mean if you're left wing but have concerns you basically have SF and PBP and Labour (who want to bring back automatic birthright citizenship). But they are all on the same broad page.

This is exactly what happened in Sweden. If you were worried you had no where to turn to unless you were hard right.

If you're just a bit racist and want Ireland to return to the 1950s then Aontú is the party for you.

Kermit.de.frog

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I have a question...

If you have concerns about where the country is headed where can you turn to?

What if you're not hard right wing and are just concerned?

What if you are not racist but just worried?

There is nowhere to go for people who are just middle of the road but who are more and more uneasy with the path we are on.

There is no political party to support.

I mean if you're left wing but have concerns you basically have SF and PBP and Labour (who want to bring back automatic birthright citizenship). But they are all on the same broad page.

This is exactly what happened in Sweden. If you were worried you had no where to turn to unless you were hard right.

This is it. The only parties to vote for are the looney right, if you're concerned about these issues.

And people wonder why the far right in Europe has been rising this past decade.

SEPT 23 1989

Eurospar Ireland have donated 500.00

Lumen

Lumen wrote: »

If you're just a bit racist and want Ireland to return to the 1950s then Aontú is the party for you.

You just proved his point.