Hypothetical Situation

[UnrepentantFenian]

Assumption 1: An armed gang who have previously undertaken robberies, plan to rob a post office/bank.

Assumption 2: The Authorities are aware in advance of the time and place of this event.

Assumption 3: The Authorities have had this gang under surveillance for some time and are anxious to obtain convictions.

Assumption 4: The opportunity exists to safely arrest the gang, before the event, in possession of firearms.

Assumption 5: The oppurtunity exists to ambush the gang "red-handed", after or during the robbery, where the situation might be more volatile.

Question: Should you:

a) Arrest the gang in possession of the firearms before the event and secure prosecutions with lesser sentences, but ensure no casualties on either side. Prevent the crime. Newspaper coverage of event would be minimal. Deterrence factor to other criminal elements would be minimal.

Or

b) Ambush the gang during or after the robbery and obtain prosecutions with considerable sentences, but risk the lives of the Gardaí, the gang and civilians. Regardless of the outcome front-page coverage would be guaranteed. Deterrence factor to other criminal elements might be locally significant for a finite period of time.

[UnrepentantFenian]

anybody? I for one would be an a)

[pauline]

When it is a question of lives being lost, no matter whose lives, then the answer is a) every time!

[GusherING]

If you chose option a, chances are they wouldn't be in custody this morning, they'd be out on the streets planning robberies. And if wasn't today, it'd be after a few years in jail, not the life sentences they're looking at. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

[hiker]

with the judiciary we have in this country, I go for B.

[Libero]

Assumption 6: republicans are taking the worst possible interpretation of events, acting cynically towards the gardaí and looking for an excuse to further slander the police force they hate.

I should probably play the ball and not the man but it is funny to see the Gardaí being slated as unnacountable, dishonest, violent and vicious by those who support the IRA or its lunatic fringe groups.

[badinage]

it is funny to see the Gardaí being slated as unnacountable, dishonest, violent and vicious by those who support the IRA or its lunatic fringe groups.

Not to mention the fact that the IRA considers itself a police force, and believes it has the right to go to the homes of suspected criminals and shoot them in the knees, or even execute them, without there being any threat to the lives of the IRA men.

So basically the Republican analysis of this is:

1) We don't like authority.

2) Therefore we don't like the Gardai.

3) Therefore we don't like the Gardai shooting criminals, even though we don't mind the IRA shooting criminals.

[borderlinegenius]

When it is a question of lives being lost, no matter whose lives, then the answer is a) every time!

I don't usually do this, but the question practically asks itself: any lives? No matter who? Even British soldiers?

[pauline]

blg wrote:

"I don't usually do this, but the question practically asks itself: any lives? No matter who? Even British soldiers?"

YES - ANY LIVES - IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU?

But what a typically irrelevant, stupid comment that once again portrays only a blind ignorant prejudice and also exposes both a failure of even any basic understanding of the true causes of the conflict in the North as well as minimising the deaths of two people yesterday.

[borderlinegenius]

blg wrote:

"I don't usually do this, but the question practically asks itself: any lives? No matter who? Even British soldiers?"

YES - ANY LIVES - IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU?

But what a typically irrelevant, stupid comment that once again portrays only a blind ignorant prejudice and also exposes both a failure of even any basic understanding of the true causes of the conflict in the North as well as minimising the deaths of two people yesterday.

Yes, yes, very good. Clearly you enjoy making a fool of yourself, and further, you've obviously never read anything else I've ever written on this site.

'Minimising the deaths of two people yesterday'. Please explain how. This ought to be a hoot.

Any lives? So you're a pacifist, are you?

Also, if you could rant a little more about my 'blind ignorant prejudices', that would be great. I could do with a hearty belly laugh of a Friday afternoon.