George Nkencho shooting *Mod warning Added to OP*

zerosugarbuzz

Anti racism ads for ihrec.ie running on one of the Channel 4's this afternoon. Haven't seen that before.

Lumen

Kraftwerk wrote: »

You're talking about being stopped and found in possession of a machete/kitchen knife though. That's not what happened here.

His reason for having the knife are clear from his actions. He used it to threaten staff in a shop where he assaulted staff and used it to attack the Gardai when they arrived. He used it as a weapon to commit crimes. Large knife/machete in this instance is irrelevant as far as the law is concerned.

Again, it is different in law because a machete is by definition an offensive weapon, whereas a large kitchen knife is not.

There is no defence for carrying a machete in public, ever.

punisher5112

punisher5112 wrote: »

Did you not see the videos?
The posts?
The WhatsApp posts etc etc....

I am in no way starting a race war, they've started that themselves.

It's disgusting what they are doing and saying towards us the Irish people that allowed them in, fed and clothed them, housed them, education and money each week, free health care I can go on.

You linked to a burglary on the Canada goose store. So what does that have to do with a 'war on ireland'?

Kraftwerk

Lumen wrote: »

How many times does this need to be spelled out?

Here, I'll highlight it for you in an FAQ.

http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/FAQ#:~:text=Offensive%20weapons%20include%20flick-knives,%2C%20sap%20gloves%2C%20and%20machetes.

Quote me the section where is says its illegal to attack someone with a machete but not a large kitchen knife...

You're referencing laws on manufacture, hire and importation to try argue a scumbag attacking a gard with a machete is worse that attacking him with a kitchen knife. You're talking complete and utter nonsense. None of that is remotely relevant to him attacking the Gardai or their response.

Directly after what you quoted: "The Firearms and Offensive Weapons Act 1990. prohibits the manufacture, importation, sale, hire or loan of offensive weapons and penalties of up to seven years imprisonment can apply"

Kraftwerk

Lumen wrote: »

Again, it is different in law because a machete is by definition an offensive weapon, whereas a large kitchen knife is not.

There is no defence for carrying a machete in public, ever.

He's not charged with carrying a machete he's dead because he tried to kill a gard. Its irrelevant whether or not it was a machete or large knife.

How are you this confused about what actually happened??

TheChizler

Kraftwerk wrote: »

Machete/meat cleaver/large kitchen knife makes no difference whatsoever the intent and result are the same.

I think it makes a difference in terms of what was likely to be going through his head. If it was a machete I'd be more inclined to think he was in general a violent individual with a firm grasp on reality to be able to plan sourcing one, and I'd have zero sympathy. If it was a common knife, while it doesn't rule the above out, it leaves the possibility open that he was experiencing some kind of psychosis and wasn't aware of what he was doing (this man took on a dozen Gardaí and ARU, it doesn't exactly scream rational). I'm not saying this is what happened or is even likely but it's a possibility. We might not ever know for sure.

Of course that wouldn't make what happened in any way ok at all and the victim is just as injured, but I'd be slow to call him a scumbag and delight in his death as many seem quick to do.

doublejobbing 2

doublejobbing 2 wrote: »

To be fair I'd apply that one to Irish people who love moaning about what aspects of our culture or society are apparently inferior to France/ Germany/ Spain et al.

Agree with me or leave. Great philosophy.

TheChizler

nullzero wrote: »

What are you talking about?

This is not a moment. This was a man taking a weapon from his house to the local shop and back and not putting it down once.

His intent was to take the weapon and use it.
He was repeatedly told to put it down and attempted to attack the Gardai telling him to put it down.

What more evidence of intent is required?

That moment being that hour or whatever it was. All other moments being his life before that.

Lumen

Kraftwerk wrote: »

Quote me the section where is says its illegal to attack someone with a machete but not a large kitchen knife...

You're referencing laws on manufacture, hire and importation to try argue a scumbag attacking a gard with a machete is worse that attacking him with a kitchen knife. You're talking complete and utter nonsense. None of that is remotely relevant to him attacking the Gardai or their response.

Directly after what you quoted: "The Firearms and Offensive Weapons Act 1990. prohibits the manufacture, importation, sale, hire or loan of offensive weapons and penalties of up to seven years imprisonment can apply"

As has been explained to you, it goes to intent.

If I'm defence counsel and my client gets into a row in a shop and then pulls out a knife, I can make the case that my client had a reasonable excuse for carrying the knife and only brought it out in anger on the spur of the moment. It may or may not wash, but it is arguable.

I cannot make that argument with a machete, because in the eyes of the law it has no use except as a weapon. Possession proves premeditation.

I don't know what happened in the shop, but from what I recall of the reporting he assaulted the shop worker and then subsequently brought out a knife. Was it the same as the knife used later? I don't know.

Essentially: if he had a machete then he has no defence whatsoever, and conversely the actions of the gardai are almost by definition reasonable, because they were responding to a threat that was by definition offensive. Do you not see how this is important?

oholly121

ED E wrote: »

Foreword: Im mocking Coppinfart here, not what happened. Because clearly rational thought left the nation sometime around 1960.

There’s actually a #ruthcoppingerlogic over on Twitter that pokes fun at this too!!

Kimbot

Lumen wrote: »

As has been explained to you, it goes to intent.

If I'm defence counsel and my client gets into a row in a shop and then pulls out a knife, I can make the case that my client had a reasonable excuse for carrying the knife and only brought it out in anger on the spur of the moment. It may or may not wash, but it is arguable.

I cannot make that argument with a machete, because in the eyes of the law it has no use except as a weapon. Possession proves premeditation.

I don't know what happened in the shop, but from what I recall of the reporting he assaulted the shop worker and then subsequently brought out a knife. Was it the same as the knife used later? I don't know.

Essentially: if he had a machete then he has no defence whatsoever, and conversely the actions of the gardai are almost by definition reasonable, because they were responding to a threat that was by definition offensive. Do you not see how this is important?

He took knife out in the shop, continued to walk home with it and when instructed to drop the weapon decided instead to lunge at the guards. There is no defence for that regardless of the knife type.

TomTomTim

Lumen wrote: »

Essentially: if he had a machete then he has no defence whatsoever, and conversely the actions of the gardai are almost by definition reasonable, because they were responding to a threat that was by definition offensive. Do you not see how this is important?

Nor would he with a knife of any sort. Your logical process is bizarre.

Kraftwerk

TheChizler wrote: »

I think it makes a difference in terms of what was likely to be going through his head. If it was a machete I'd be more inclined to think he was in general a violent individual with a firm grasp on reality to be able to plan sourcing one, and I'd have zero sympathy. If it was a common knife, while it doesn't rule the above out, it leaves the possibility open that he was experiencing some kind of psychosis and wasn't aware of what he was doing (this man took on a dozen Gardaí and ARU, it doesn't exactly scream rational). I'm not saying this is what happened or is even likely but it's a possibility. We might not ever know for sure.

Of course that wouldn't make what happened in any way ok at all and the victim is just as injured, but I'd be slow to call him a scumbag and delight in his death as many seem quick to do.

If it was a machete you can just as easily say it may not have been his and he was experiencing some sort of mental episode and grabbed it. If it was a kitchen knife he may have purchased it with the intent to use it as a weapon. You could invent any narrative you like.

But we know he had a large knife and given his actions on that day we know he brought that large knife with him to use as a weapon and we know he used it as a weapon to try injure/kill a gard. Its irrelevant what kind of knife it is given it would have been used the same and the end result would be the same.

Titzon Toast

Chalk McHugh wrote: »

Like so many others i have been angered and disgusted by the carry on of the black community in Blanchardstown over the last couple of days. Absolute disgrace and it must be stopped.

As much as they'd like it Dublin is not Compton, Brixton or South Central LA. The video of the man being confronted and threatened to be 'rushed' and beaten in his van reminded me somewhat of when the local black thugs surrounded Reginald Denny's truck and pulled him out and proceeded to beat him to within an inch of his life during the first few hours of the 1992 LA riots. That man in Blanchardstown was very close to being beaten live on camera by the rabid mob.

That could have been any of our families, friends or mothers hiding in that Spar shop while listening to deranged hate-filled black racists scream about killing whites outside while banging on the shutters. And later on pummelling a woman and a young lad close by like a pack of wild dogs!

Who do these people think they are storming through Blanch shopping centre roaring and shouting and threatening anyone who dares to make eye contact or stand in their way?

Or issuing barely disguised threats about terminating and 'finding' the guard involved in the justified killing of a knife wielding maniac.

Who do these scumbags think they are? They are the ones who will lose out over this as no rational Irish person will defend these actions.

It's not the guard who is racist but the very people screaming loudest about these perceived injustices are they themselves full of hate and anger towards our morals and our democratic principals. It has taken this incident for the mask to finally slip but it looks like this resentment had been building up for years and the damage done by the last few days (and who knows what still has to come) may be irrepareable.

The last few days have been stomach churning and It's time for the Irish state, politicians, guards, people etc to stand up and be firm and to not tolerate such depraved carry on on our streets again.

100% agree with this post. Absolutely spot on.

If he shouted a well know muslim chant whilst swinging a knife, it would be ok then???. Like many have said, the intent and actions are the same and so should the outcome be by return. So girl was saying all the chap ever did was smile and he was so nice. Well if he's her idea of nice then id hate to meet mister nasty. He had multiple priors ffs...

strandroad

Lumen wrote: »

As has been explained to you, it goes to intent.

If I'm defence counsel and my client gets into a row in a shop and then pulls out a knife, I can make the case that my client had a reasonable excuse for carrying the knife and only brought it out in anger on the spur of the moment. It may or may not wash, but it is arguable.

I cannot make that argument with a machete, because in the eyes of the law it has no use except as a weapon. Possession proves premeditation.

What kind of a knife you could reasonable have on you in public? A pen or pocket knife to peel apples perhaps.

Any other kind of kitchen knife is brought with an intent in mind, isn't it? Even if it's not a machete but a piece from a kitchen knife block why would you ever allow it in a shop?

nullzero

TheChizler wrote: »

That moment being that hour or whatever it was. All other moments being his life before that.

An hour is not a moment.

Carrying a weapon that distance shows his intent to use that weapon. He has no defence in that situation. He was in the wrong.

Kraftwerk

Lumen wrote: »

As has been explained to you, it goes to intent.

If I'm defence counsel and my client gets into a row in a shop and then pulls out a knife, I can make the case that my client had a reasonable excuse for carrying the knife and only brought it out in anger on the spur of the moment. It may or may not wash, but it is arguable.

I cannot make that argument with a machete, because in the eyes of the law it has no use except as a weapon. Possession proves premeditation.

I don't know what happened in the shop, but from what I recall of the reporting he assaulted the shop worker and then subsequently brought out a knife. Was it the same as the knife used later? I don't know.

Essentially: if he had a machete then he has no defence whatsoever, and conversely the actions of the gardai are almost by definition reasonable, because they were responding to a threat that was by definition offensive. Do you not see how this is important?

So your argument is "if this was a completely different scenario things may be seen differently".?

As I said. What you're talking about has no relation to what happened. He's not being charged for possession so why are you claiming what he was in possession of matters in relation to the laws on possession?

It's a bizarre argument to claim that he's got a defence for getting killed while trying to stab a gard because the weapon he used may not be on the offensive weapons list ...

Kimbot

https://www.knivesireland.com/pages/knife-law-ireland

Take a read of the first part alone.

Knife Law Ireland

Remember you cannot carry a knife in public without a valid reason and this is strictly enforced by An Garda Síochána. You can legally purchase our knives here.

Knife law in Ireland generally falls into two categories, outright prohibition and allowed but with caveats, remember just because a knife might not be prohibited outright does not mean you can legally carry in public, you CANNOT carry any type of knife in public no matter what size the blade, folding or fixed. without a valid reason, the validity of said reason is in of its self not a black and white area, it will usually fall on the guard in question to use his best

TheChizler

Kraftwerk wrote: »

If it was a machete you can just as easily say it may not have been his and he was experiencing some sort of mental episode and grabbed it. If it was a kitchen knife he may have purchased it with the intent to use it as a weapon. You could invent any narrative you like.

But we know he had a large knife and given his actions on that day we know he brought that large knife with him to use as a weapon and we know he used it as a weapon to try injure/kill a gard. Its irrelevant what kind of knife it is given it would have been used the same and the end result would be the same.

That's a possibility too though I'd think it much less likely compared to the obvious impression you'd get.

And I agree the Gardaí were probably left with no option here, not disputing their actions. My issue is with how people are trying to portray him as an individual by inventing detail there is no evidence for. It does nothing to calm the situation, only causes division.

strandroad

TomTomTim wrote: »

Nor would he with a knife of any sort. Your logical process is bizarre.

It really is. Machetes are used as garden tools by the way, would any solicitor honestly raise this in defence?

hynesie08

strandroad wrote: »

What kind of a knife you could reasonable have on you in public? A pen or pocket knife to peel apples perhaps.

Any other kind of kitchen knife is brought with an intent in mind, isn't it? Even if it's not a machete but a piece from a kitchen knife block why would you ever allow it in a shop?

Stanley blade or Swiss army knife would both be relatively commonplace in work trousers, but you'd be hard pressed to explain having them in a pair of shorts.

Signore Fancy Pants

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

The goal of my argument was to question the "fact" being presented he had a machete. We saw earlier on in the thread how the narrative of having a machete was used to paint and portray him as more violent and of course as others have pointed out it also has racist connotations and overtones. It seems to me that the machete story was manufactured in order to present false narratives, in order to paint and portray a certain picture. Its a perfectly reasonable point to discuss. Noone has presented any proof of a machete but have tried to claim it as "fact". Its interesting though that when I question the narratives that there is a pileon onto me with all sorts of name calling.

Lets be honest Joey, you are firmly against racism, as am I, it has no place in society.

However, your intent whether you admit it or not, was to look for anything in a post which you could use to support your claim that members of this site are racists.

In this particular instance you are challenging the allegation of the possession and use of a Machete and you may be right but you dont care if it was a butter knife or a Machete. You care about labeling people here as being racist because they use the term or believe from the description that it was a "Machete".

While it has been reported that a "large knife" was observed by eye witnesses, people may have incorrectly deduced that it was a Machete, as that is what people associate as being a "large knife" and as a colloquialism. This does not mean people are racist.

However it is factual that Machete's are a weapon of choice by some people (incuding in Africa) due to its accessability, utility and the psychological fear it instills in people. It's not stereotypical as some here have suggested, its fact. It is not racist to assume a black male in Ireland could use a Machete as a weapon, to suggest so is reaching.

Personally, I have directly come up against people in Africa with Machete's, I have seen the aftermath of their use and as an impliment of destruction, they scare the sh1t out of me.

If the perpetrator had been a white guy, you wouldnt even be in here arguing about the term "Machete" or infering that if it was a butter knife, that it is somehow less violent. You are only here because if the term "Machete" turns out to be false, you can tell people they are racist for assuming he used a Machete.

Then trying to cover your motivation by unsuccessfully suggesting that possession and intent with a butter knife somehow negated the violence of the individual.

Also, the narrative you say is being pushed is not down to the fact if he had a Machete or a butter knife, its because of his actions.

Your talking bollox Joey and we can all see it.

Skyrimaddict

Love how virgin media news just now had no mention of these protests at all.

I'm fecking sick of being white in ireland, we get the ****e stick of everything and if anyone says anything about it we are racists.

Being a white male who earns good money means I need to apologise for this and guilty if I don't agree with thugs like this.

walshb

strandroad wrote: »

It really is. Machetes are used as garden tools by the way, would any solicitor honestly raise this in defence?

Defence lawyers would argue absolutely anything to win a case..

Nothing should ever surprise anyone as regards the lengths defence attorneys will stoop to..

TheChizler

nullzero wrote: »

An hour is not a moment.

Carrying a weapon that distance shows his intent to use that weapon. He has no defence in that situation. He was in the wrong.

Never said anything to the contrary, of course he was in the wrong and paid for it with his life.

Lumen

Kraftwerk wrote: »

So your argument is "if this was a completely different scenario things may be seen differently".?

As I said. What you're talking about has no relation to what happened. He's not being charged for possession so why are you claiming what he was in possession of matters in relation to the laws on possession?

It's a bizarre argument to claim that he's got a defence for getting killed while trying to stab a gard because the weapon he used may not be on the offensive weapons list ...

I have made no such argument. I simply said that carrying a machete was technically indefensible, whereas carrying a large knife was not.

Look, this particular rabbit hole started because Kevin Irving asked what the difference was in law between a large knife and a machete, which I answered with a legal reference, so I'll leave it here.

Kimbot

Kimbot wrote: »

He took knife out in the shop, continued to walk home with it and when instructed to drop the weapon decided instead to lunge at the guards. There is no defence for that regardless of the knife type.

The Gardai should have paused a minute to check the specifications of the bladed instrument before clipping him.

"Jeez Seamus, is that a chef knife or machete he's coming at us with"?
"Hold on Mick....Despatch can you check the definition of a machete for us.."
"Sesmus, he's getting closer
"Hang on Mick, they're checking".

JeffKenna

nullzero wrote: »

An hour is not a moment.

Carrying a weapon that distance shows his intent to use that weapon. He has no defence in that situation. He was in the wrong.

Exactly, he consciously put a dangerous weapon into his hand with the intention to use it. Regardless of race, creed or colour you have to accept there may be consequences to that.

whisky_galore

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Can you imagine the headlines

"Irish police set attack dogs on black man suffering mental illness "

"15 irish police stood by as attack dogs tore lumps from mentally unwell black man"

Holy smokes

So what do you want to do?
Go back to shooting legs and knives?

Or maybe a rapid response team with a cup of tea?

At least he'd be still alive, ringing his solicitor about dog bite compensation.