George Nkencho shooting *Mod warning Added to OP*

givyjoe

Mules wrote: »

How in the name if God is it hateful?

Yeah, i mean how dare we call him a thug. It's not like he put an innocent Spar employee in hospital with serious head injuries after beating the sh1t out of him for no reason. The real problem is calling poor George a thug :rolleyes:.

runawaybishop

Lux23 wrote: »

I think my argument is that they shouldn't label anyone a thug until they are at least convicted, and even at that I still think it is a hateful word.

Papers in Ireland use the word 'thug' all the time, don't see any issue with it myself, headlines are usually sensationalist anyway.

titan18

Lux23 wrote: »

I think my argument is that they shouldn't label anyone a thug until they are at least convicted, and even at that I still think it is a hateful word.

Probably but they're the equivalent to the likes of the Mirror (owned by some crowd as Mirror) or Sun, rather than an actual reputable media organisation. Those people have labelled people far worse with even less evidence than dublinlive calling George a thug (think Hillsborough or the Depp case as examples)

DwightSchrute1

Lux23 wrote: »

I think my argument is that they shouldn't label anyone a thug until they are at least convicted, and even at that I still think it is a hateful word.

You certainly have your priorities in order.. concerned about calling a person a thug when that’s exactly what he was.. you seem to have no concern for the man assaulted in the shop or the Gardai threatened with a knife by George.

Beechwoodspark

Just on that car crash interview on RTÉ earlier ...

Have to say... I have a feeling the ultra aggressive media stance George’s family “representatives” are taking will backfire spectacularly

TomTomTim

This reminds me of Louise O'Neill being offended by people calling the lads who ruined Lidl scumbags.

AlmightyCushion

Lux23 wrote: »

Dublin Live which is owned by the Irish Mirror Group.

The Sun referred to Colm Horkan's killer as a thug.

BattleCorp

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Question is, could they have shot him in the shoulder or the leg? Why shoot to kill?

He was a threat to the Gardai and others so that is why they shot him. In shooting him, they had to make sure he was neutralised and couldn't attack them so they had to shoot him until they were sure he couldn't attack any more. Unfortunately that involved him dying.

And as has been said 1000 times before, it's very very difficult to hit a small moving target. And quite dangerous to try.

Bit excessive to shoot him dead?

Absolutely not (in my opinion).

Hamsterchops wrote: »

He may well have been a raving drug fuelled lunatic who needed to be taken down, but I just asked a few questions and I've got some answers.

Was it definitely a Machete?

It doesn't matter if it was a machete or not. It was a knife. He still had the potential to do damage.

Lux23

titan18 wrote: »

Probably but they're the equivalent to the likes of the Mirror (owned by some crowd as Mirror) or Sun, rather than an actual reputable media organisation. Those people have labelled people far worse with even less evidence than dublinlive calling George a thug (think Hillsborough or the Depp case as examples)

Well, I don't know about Depp as he lost the case, but Hillsborough is a perfect example of papers rushing to make judgements to sell papers or as it is now get website hits! The Editor of Dublin Live was boasting on LinkedIn about how many hits the site got last week, and guess what was the top story?

Sir Oxman

Lux23 wrote: »

I think my argument is that they shouldn't label anyone a thug until they are at least convicted, and even at that I still think it is a hateful word.

It's a bit difficult to convict him now (not meant as a pisstake about a dead man)

Is thug another word for the 'list', as usual set by Americans, again?
Nothing to do with this country or anyone from any country that lives here.
https://www.nytimes.com/times-insider/2015/05/01/how-loaded-is-the-word-thug-readers-react/

I have used thug to describe thugs since I began witnessing/noticing thuggish and scumbag behaviour over 45 years ago.

Lux23

Sir Oxman wrote: »

It's a bit difficult to convict him now (not meant as a pisstake about a dead man)

Is thug another word for the 'list', as usual set by Americans, again?
Nothing to do with this country or anyone from any country that lives here.
https://www.nytimes.com/times-insider/2015/05/01/how-loaded-is-the-word-thug-readers-react/

I have used thug to describe thugs since I began witnessing/noticing thuggish and scumbag behaviour over 45 years ago.

You're not a newspaper editor though, you're entitled to express that opinion and I have no problem with you using the word as you don't have any sway over public opinion.

sabat

ASOT wrote: »

White, black, pink, orange, purple, grey, if you go around attacking people you can rightly be labeled a thug.

Now what you hear is not a test: I'm rappin' to the beat
And me, the groove, and my friends are gonna try to move your feet

Lux23

givyjoe wrote: »

Hmm, that's potentially a bit defamatory no?

Yet, a dead man is free game because you can't defame a dead person.

Hamsterchops

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

You are not fooling nobody
Go on, build up to your little moment when you say "well lads based on all you told me the guards were racist"

As I said before, you think you are clever.

When it comes to this story I am certainly not clever, and I'm not trying to fool anybody as I haven't made any accusations against anyone or their race. Indeed I never mentioned race.

I just dropped into this thread a couple of pages ago and asked a few questions, and so now that I see what a contentious & prickly issue it is I'll drop out straight away.

I'm not blaming the Guards for shooting him, and I'm not sure he needed to die, then again maybe they acted in the best interest of the public. I asked if he could have been wounded instead of killed, and apparently it's not that easy in the real world (to just wound), fair enough then if the other methods had failed to take him down.

I'm done with this, bye.

Lux23

guyfo wrote: »

You and I have a very different interpretation of the phrase "not guilty"

And what was George Nkencho found guilty off?

Signore Fancy Pants

Lux23 wrote: »

But killing a Guard isn't a criminal act?

I think you are getting too hooked up on your outrage to see that "thug" is an appropriate term.

Its not a term that HAS to be applied to all AGS events.

I have outlined what the word means, accept it or dont accept it, its up to you. However if you dont accept it as an apt term, well, you have some misplaced agenda.

doublejobbing 2

Here's a question for all those I've seen on social media questioning the peaceful resolution of other cases involving manic knifemen.

Have any of these people the slightest piece of proof that armed Gardai in these instances were circa 3 feet from an attacking knifeman, as appears to be the case in the video we saw, and still refused to shoot the man?

Or in the vast majority of the cases, was the sight of armed Gardai within firing distance enough to persuade them to disarm? Something that should have crossed George's mind when the gun wielding Gardai decided tasers and gas were the best option first?

Various idiots have contrasted the response of the Blanch ERU to an incident they were a part of some months ago.

https://www.thesun.ie/news/5570770/taxi-driver-suspected-killing-wife-tried-take-life/

The fact this man seems to have incapacitated himself by way of suicide attempt by the time the guards reached him, and thus was likely in no physical condition to lunge out, seems lost on them.

givyjoe

Lux23 wrote: »

Yet, a dead man is free game because you can't defame a dead person.

Are you for real? First of all, correct as that is literally the law. Secondly, Paddy Jackson was found not guilty. Thirdly, there's fcuking eye witnesses of this guy beating the crap out of the Spar employee and video footage of him swinging a large knife at a guards head.

Like, there's whataboutery, then there is this outrageous level of nonsense.

Baggly

Mod

Lads, get back on topic please.

Lux23

givyjoe wrote: »

Are you for real? First of all, correct as that is literally the law. Secondly, Paddy Jackson was found not guilty. Thirdly, there's fcuking eye witnesses of this guy beating the crap out of the Spar employee and video footage of him swinging a large knife at a guards head.

Like, there's whataboutery, then there is this outrageous level of nonsense.

So it is wrong to label a person that hasn't been convicted of anything a thug?

guyfo

Lux23 wrote: »

I just don't agree with the media labelling a dead man a thug.

He is dead for no other reason than acting like a thug.... what is your issue with the truth?

Tippex

I cannot believe that posters are getting hung up on the term Thug.
From the time I was growing up (I'm 46 btw) the term thug was always used to describe someone that had done something wrong i.e. threatened someone or bet the crap out of them.
I just googled the term and this came up from the UK https://uk.news.yahoo.com/gamer-mugged-at-knifepoint-by-thug-pretending-to-sell-ps-5-144925089.html

If you are really getting hung up on a term like thug you need to look at your priorities.
If the reporting is true that George did beat the crap out of the manager in eurospar then quite rightly he is a thug. not even going in on the rest of the incident.

DwightSchrute1

Lux23 wrote: »

So it is wrong to label a person that hasn't been convicted of anything a thug?

What would you label George as considering his actions on the day he died?

Mike Murdock

Lux23 wrote: »

Yet, a dead man is free game because you can't defame a dead person.

There have been plenty of people that have violently assaulted members of the public that have been labelled "thugs" by the Tabloids and they have not been convicted of anything.

It is particularly prevalent in the UK, where those that have assaulted individuals have been labelled this during the trial. Before they have been convicted.

afro man

Lux23 wrote: »

So it is wrong to label a person that hasn't been convicted of anything a thug?

What would you label a person who assaulted shop worked and tried to stab Garda

nullzero

nullzero wrote: »

Here's the text of her latest tweet;

"Saying a prayer this evening for the family and friends of #GeorgeNkencho who are grieving and for Black people in Ireland who have to worry about racist violence everyday.
#JusticeforGeorgeNkencho"


Do black people in Ireland have to worry about "racist violence" every day?

Goebbels Big Lie in action.

Twitter is a cess pit and it's management openly allow this type of divisive drivel have a platform, they should be ashamed of themselves, but we all know they're proud of themselves instead.

No they don't.
My other half is black (but I'm a racist)
They've been in Ireland 12 years.
Once a piessed off woman who was driving told him go back to his own country (racially motivated some would say we call it low IQ idiot)
Once during a sport game where some northern farmers called him a black b@#stard (definitely racism) but again could fall under the low IQ small minded idiot bracket.
But nothing else..
Why?
Because he works, integrates, and most importantly leaves the kitchen knives in the kitchen where they belong.

givyjoe

Lux23 wrote: »

So it is wrong to label a person that hasn't been convicted of anything a thug?

Is this a joke? Like, come on, this can't be a serious question? Surely to Christ you can tell the difference between the two cases? There is no question of George's guilt, it was literally captured on camera. He obviously can't be tried in court as he's dead. There is very much a doubt around Paddy Jacksons guilt, hence he wasn't found guilty!

Absolutely bizarre take, you seem to be more offended by this chap being called a thug, after he verifiably tried to kill a guard and put some else in hospital.

Honestly, what is your point?!

Tippex

afro man wrote: »

What would you label a person who assaulted shop worked and tried to stab Garda

misunderstood [/sarcasm]

hynesie08

Lux23 wrote: »

So it is wrong to label a person that hasn't been convicted of anything a thug?

Thug is not a criminal term, it's a colloquialism, and an apt one in this case.

Baggly

Mod

Mimon, dont post in this thread again.