P226 & pistol politics

Bananaman · 31-08-2010 7:03am #1

I think sI'me of you may be getting the cart before the arse there and frankly MM - your comments are less than helpful to those seeking to license one of these considering the propensities of some that read this board, if what we are told is to be believed

considering many people own a 226 and have been refused in various ways, for those people it makes sense to convert it to 22lr in order to compete in smallbore competitions in the interim while the courts decide the future of their top slide

for many who have a 226 and have been licensed it makes sense to convert to 22lr when they wish to enter smallbore competitions - same competition holster and mag holders - same grip and sight picture, etc

some of you seem to indicate that the purpose is the other way round but in that you are suggesting people are planning to do something wrong which you should not do

B'Man

rrpc · 31-08-2010 7:44am

Bananaman wrote: »

I think sI'me of you may be getting the cart before the arse there and frankly MM - your comments are less than helpful to those seeking to license one of these considering the propensities of some that read this board, if what we are told is to be believed

You do realise that MM is a US army (Cav I think) officer? so his perspective needs to be viewed in that light.

Not exactly under this jursidiction in so many ways

Tackleberrywho · 31-08-2010 7:55am

Chaps yee are both up very early.

I just had a similar convo yesterday evening in work. One of the guys was in the states for 2 years working. When he was leaving the guys he worked with; presented him with a pair of matching Colt .45 revolvers (pearl handled)

He had to explain that he could not bring them home

(very humbly of course)

Ah Bless the states and there attitudes towards firearms.
Full Auto rifles shooting deer!:rolleyes:

Sparks · 31-08-2010 8:27am

Bananaman wrote: »

considering many people own a 226 and have been refused in various ways, for those people it makes sense to convert it to 22lr in order to compete in smallbore competitions in the interim while the courts decide the future of their top slide

I disagree. I think the thing that makes the most sense for these people is to put the 226 in storage with the local RFD and go to court - they're the only people in the country who can licence those 226s, they've much lower resale value as a result, and welding a 22lr conversion kit in there - which is the only way these things will be licenced - is only going to ruin a perfectly good centerfire pistol.

The ban on centerfire pistols is not irrevocable under future ministers, don't forget; it wouldn't be the first time a subsequent minister changed a predecessor's laws by any measure. And because ownership and possession are seperate legal concepts, there's no reason the firearms can't remain the owner's property while they seek a licence for them.

some of you seem to indicate that the purpose is the other way round but in that you are suggesting people are planning to do something wrong which you should not do

This is ironic B'man - because you're suggesting that they enter 22lr matches with equipment that's well below par for a 22lr match instead of sticking with equipment that's well above par for a 9mm match. Horses for courses. If the purpose is to compete, a 226 with a 22lr conversion is a bad idea. If the idea is to licence a 226, then a 226 with a 22lr conversion is a bad idea. The only reason a 22lr conversion kit for a 226 makes any sense is if you want to compete in 9mm and can't afford huge amounts of money for training, and so train with 22lr. Which is, if I remember right, the original design purpose of those kits.

Grizzly 45 · 31-08-2010 10:36am

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Ah Bless the states and there attitudes towards firearms.
Full Auto rifles shooting deer!:rolleyes:

Which state was that in Tack???Very few states,if any allow Class3 or full auto firearms for hunting.

Grizzly 45 · 31-08-2010 10:51am

Sparks wrote: »

I disagree. I think the thing that makes the most sense for these people is to put the 226 in storage with the local RFD and go to court - they're the only people in the country who can licence those 226s, they've much lower resale value as a result, and welding a 22lr conversion kit in there - which is the only way these things will be licenced - is only going to ruin a perfectly good centerfire pistol.

The ban on centerfire pistols is not irrevocable under future ministers, don't forget; it wouldn't be the first time a subsequent minister changed a predecessor's laws by any measure. And because ownership and possession are seperate legal concepts, there's no reason the firearms can't remain the owner's property while they seek a licence for them.

This is ironic B'man - because you're suggesting that they enter 22lr matches with equipment that's well below par for a 22lr match instead of sticking with equipment that's well above par for a 9mm match. Horses for courses. If the purpose is to compete, a 226 with a 22lr conversion is a bad idea. If the idea is to licence a 226, then a 226 with a 22lr conversion is a bad idea. The only reason a 22lr conversion kit for a 226 makes any sense is if you want to compete in 9mm and can't afford huge amounts of money for training, and so train with 22lr. Which is, if I remember right, the original design purpose of those kits.

How will you weld a conversion kit into a polymer frame???:)
I agree with you Sparks on the .22 conversions not being a most satisfactory solution.However,it is the best of a bad bunch at the moment.It is either be shooting .22 from an expensive gun not designed for it,that you already have a liscense for,or not shoot at all. or [C] Sell at loss,to rebuy somthing that is no doubt going to be over charged for here again.
As for their reliability,well the new generation of them are very,very ,good.
There are mini IPSC .22lr guns being built now on full blown frames and they just usea overworked and tuned upper.From what I see the upper is just deburred and polished up alot and springs are set to a certain ammo brand.Nothing that a competant gunsmith couldnt do.

I wouldnt be holding my breath on any minister changing the laws on firearms in Ireland.We had 35 years of that possibility,and not one of them FF ,FG, wanted to touch that hot potato.:(

Sparks · 31-08-2010 11:10am

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

How will you weld a conversion kit into a polymer frame???:)

Epoxy I'd imagine. Whatever method you choose, it'll have to be permanent to satisfy the PTB; otherwise, they'd be giving you the wink and the nod to have a "22" which becomes a 9mm with about five minutes of easy work, and not only would that be borderline illegal at best, it'd be deeply unfair to the rest of us who have to adhere to unfair laws for the time being.

I agree with you Sparks on the .22 conversions not being a most satisfactory solution.However,it is the best of a bad bunch at the moment.

I really don't believe that Grizzly.

It is either be shooting .22 from an expensive gun not designed for it,that you already have a liscense for,or not shoot at all. or [C] Sell at loss,to rebuy somthing that is no doubt going to be over charged for here again.

Is not "never shoot again", it's "stop shooting for now until you get the paperwork sorted".
It might not be fair, but it doesn't (a) sabotage your case to get the licence ("Your honour, he's been shooting that thing for the last six months happily in 22lr, why does he need 9mm?") or (b) lower the value of the firearm by permanently converting it to a calibre it wasn't designed for and in which it really, really can't compete.

As for their reliability

Don't care too much about the reliability Grizzly (well, to a degree - I wouldn't shoot a P22 after their slide failure problems came out, but that's a gross problem). Accuracy is the thing I'm mostly thinking of here.

I wouldnt be holding my breath on any minister changing the laws on firearms in Ireland.We had 35 years of that possibility,and not one of them FF ,FG, wanted to touch that hot potato.:(

We also had 30-odd years of IRA terrorism running rampant during those 35 years, and then after that we had 30 years of mental prejudice against firearms to deal with.

For someone who just went to court and back for years to get his firearms Grizzly, you sometimes seem to have very little patience

Grizzly 45 · 31-08-2010 12:56pm

Sparks wrote: »

Epoxy I'd imagine. Whatever method you choose, it'll have to be permanent to satisfy the PTB; otherwise, they'd be giving you the wink and the nod to have a "22" which becomes a 9mm with about five minutes of easy work, and not only would that be borderline illegal at best, it'd be deeply unfair to the rest of us who have to adhere to unfair laws for the time being.

Heres a better solution.Simply leave the bits into a gun dealer that are 9mm..Benefits are[a] cheaper to store,for any gundealer with cop on,as they are only bits and less of a security hazard too,as they are useless without the frame you go and buy or aquire the 9mm other bits somwhere illegally,you have to deal with serial numbers,so you have an illegal firearm ,if caught with it.
Epoxy,hmm,100degress,i belive it starts to break down again,so boil your Glock and you are back to square one.

Is not "never shoot again", it's "stop shooting for now until you get the paperwork sorted".
It might not be fair, but it doesn't

(a) sabotage your case to get the licence ("Your honour, he's been shooting that thing for the last six months happily in 22lr, why does he need 9mm?") or

more like" Judge,my client is forced to shoot a form of sport he really doesnt want to due to the draconian legislation of this land,and he was also registerd as a 9mm owner before,and that the CS stated that he would refuse point blank to liscense a 9mm,but would liscense a .22 in the same firearms format."

(b) lower the value of the firearm by permanently converting it to a calibre it wasn't designed for and in which it really, really can't compete.

Don't care too much about the reliability Grizzly (well, to a degree - I wouldn't shoot a P22 after their slide failure problems came out, but that's a gross problem). Accuracy is the thing I'm mostly thinking of here

You say tomato I say tamatoe.What might be accruate for me,mightnt be for you.I'm looking for the 10X ,you are looking at putting a hole in the hole of the 10X:D.

We also had 30-odd years of IRA terrorism running rampant during those 35 years, and then after that we had 30 years of mental prejudice against firearms to deal with.

Lets break that down abit.30 years of discovering that banning firearms didnt work at all,as the pipelines from the US,Europe and Libya,poured illegal arms into the 32 counties.10 years of peace,where the PTB sat on their hands and didnt address an issue at all of giving back to the citzens of the State their confiscated property.Until forced to face the issue,and make a complete pigs mickey of it as usual.:rolleyes:

For someone who just went to court and back for years to get his firearms Grizzly, you sometimes seem to have very little patience

eight months and counting Sparks.:D
Trouble is ,I'm getting old.about half way in the shooting life,and I dont want to hear in Numberd days old folks home for canterkerous ,stubborn aul B"""Trds ,that pistol shooting with big cal is legal once again in Ireland.:D
Patience is a virtue,but not when you are dealing witha process that makes the wind erosion of Mt Everest look speedy.

Tackleberrywho · 31-08-2010 1:18pm

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Which state was that in Tack???Very few states,if any allow Class3 or full auto firearms for hunting.

Louisana used to AFAIK Grizzly, remember watching a comedian talk about it before it was stopped.
http://mdc.mo.gov/hunting-trapping/regulations/deer-regulations/2010-firearms-deer-hunting

They are still much more lax than us on what they are allowed use.

Methods allowed
Methods allowed during all portions of the firearms deer season, except the muzzleloader portion.
centerfire pistol, revolver or rifle using expanding-type bullets. Legal ammunition includes lead bullets, copper bullets and bullets made of other material designed to expand.
shotgun (including .410) with slugs only
air-powered gun, .40 caliber or larger, charged only from an external high compression power source (external hand pump, air tank, or air compressor)
a muzzleloading or cap-and-ball firearm .40 caliber or larger and capable of firing only a single projectile at one discharge; in-lines and scopes are allowed
multiple-barreled muzzleloading or cap-and-ball firearms and/or muzzleloading or cap-and-ball handguns, including revolvers, .40 caliber or larger are allowed and may be carried in addition to a muzzleloading or cap-and-ball rifle
a longbow, compound bow or recurve bow of any draw weight; hand-held string releasing devices, illuminated sights, scopes and quickpoint sights are allowed
crossbow
atlatl, which is defined as a rod or narrow board-like device used to launch, through a throwing motion of the arm, a dart 5 to 8 feet in length.

Sparks · 31-08-2010 1:39pm

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Heres a better solution.Simply leave the bits into a gun dealer that are 9mm.

That's not a better solution Grizzly, it's effectively the same solution.

Epoxy,hmm,100degress,i belive it starts to break down again,so boil your Glock and you are back to square one.

Not all epoxies.

more like" Judge,my client is forced to shoot a form of sport he really doesnt want to due to the draconian legislation of this land,and he was also registerd as a 9mm owner before,and that the CS stated that he would refuse point blank to liscense a 9mm,but would liscense a .22 in the same firearms format."

(1) The rule for the restricted licence (like it or not) is to prove that no other firearm is suitable to the task. If you're not even competing in the competition, but have started competing in another competition - one which the 226 with the 22lr conversion is just not as competitive in as dedicated 22lr pistols - then you're sinking your own argument.
(2) It's a legal case. As I've said before, a legal case is far less arbitrary than a horse race perhaps, but it is still a contest, an adversarial system, and should one side falter, the judge does not award points for effort. Walking into one with assumptions about what's obvious is a pretty good way to lose your house.

You say tomato I say tamatoe.What might be accruate for me,mightnt be for you.I'm looking for the 10X ,you are looking at putting a hole in the hole of the 10X:D.

See, to my ears, that was you saying my kind of shooting was far harder

10 years of peace,where the PTB sat on their hands and didnt address an issue at all of giving back to the citzens of the State their confiscated property. Until forced to face the issue,and make a complete pigs mickey of it as usual.:rolleyes:

Er, no.
We were offered pistols back in the late 90s, don't forget, but turned them down at the time.

Trouble is ,I'm getting old.about half way in the shooting life,and I dont want to hear in Numberd days old folks home for canterkerous ,stubborn aul B"""Trds ,that pistol shooting with big cal is legal once again in Ireland.:D
Patience is a virtue,but not when you are dealing witha process that makes the wind erosion of Mt Everest look speedy.

It's not that slow.
In the short time I've been in it, the shooting world in Ireland has changed utterly. You wouldn't recognise today if you'd seen it in 2000. Any rifle you want? Air and smallbore pistols being licenced and some centerfires still around with actual licences holding the door open for later re-introduction of their licencing after the next election? The old way of running NGBs very thoroughly kicked in the arse and denounced in public? A public forum like this one up and running and established enough to now be thought of as being insufficiently radical? The DoJ and the NGBs sitting down for regular talks at an established forum?

Feck it man, we've never had it so good, not in your lifetime or in mine. And that was just ten years. Where will we be in ten more?

bunny shooter · 31-08-2010 2:24pm

Sparks wrote: »

......In the short time I've been in it, the shooting world in Ireland has changed utterly. You wouldn't recognise today if you'd seen it in 2000. Any rifle you want? Air and smallbore pistols being licenced and some centerfires still around with actual licences holding the door open for later re-introduction of their licencing after the next election? The old way of running NGBs very thoroughly kicked in the arse and denounced in public? A public forum like this one up and running and established enough to now be thought of as being insufficiently radical? The DoJ and the NGBs sitting down for regular talks at an established forum?

Feck it man, we've never had it so good, not in your lifetime or in mine. And that was just ten years. Where will we be in ten more?

+1 :cool:

Manic Moran · 31-08-2010 4:54pm

I think sI'me of you may be getting the cart before the arse there and frankly MM - your comments are less than helpful to those seeking to license one of these considering the propensities of some that read this board, if what we are told is to be believed

You misinterpret my comment. By 'Practical' I meant for the purposes of 'practical shooting' such as IPSC competition. P226 is, as .22s go, a fairly lousy static target pistol, Sparks was quite correct that there are better pistols for that job.

I shall edit my comment to make that clear.

NTM

Grizzly 45 · 31-08-2010 8:45pm

Sparks wrote: »

That's not a better solution Grizzly, it's effectively the same solution.

But one that is more palatable then then flogging off the gun or leaving it gathering mould in a gun dealer.

(1

See, to my ears, that was you saying my kind of shooting was far harder

Well, when IPSC is legal here again...somday over the Rainbow.:P.You can try it out and see is it.:P:P

Er, no.
We were offered pistols back in the late 90s, don't forget, but turned them down at the time.

This is one of these legends that now I find in time,who said this and who said that,and offered this,becomes somwhat nebelous with the mists of timeWe know your side of the story,but others who shall not be named contradict it as having other meanings as to what went on..Anyway it is totally irrevelant at this stage of the game,and I find playing revising of history and what if while entertaining,a waste of time.

It's not that slow.
In the short time I've been in it, the shooting world in Ireland has changed utterly. You wouldn't recognise today if you'd seen it in 2000.

Seen it since the late 1970s up to the present day.30 years of moaning&groaning and blaming NI,with a Murra nuthin can be done about it attitude.My biggest regret,that I didnt push harder to get practical shooting established here with shotguns in the 80s.IPSC would be alive and well here today,with pistol ,rifle and shotgun,.22 mini shoots and airsoft.:(:(

Any rifle you want?

AH HAHAHaHa aaaaaa!!!Considering I'm still waiting for a CS to put his signature on a grant notice that he was told to do so by a District Court TWICE now .FOUR months ago,and is now trying to stall this further because of its looks,and the fact it has an AR action.Well,sorry I just found that very humourous.
Good job I didnt ask for this rifle in .338 Lapura:eek:

and some centerfires still around with actual licences holding the door open for later re-introduction of their licencing after the next election?

Call me an old pessimistic cynic Sparks.But I am in no way optimistic that will be recinded after 2012.We are given that promise in a nebelous form,by a bunch of politicans in opposition,more like Irish politicans in opposition,who are known if there was a aul vote to be got in eating a barrel of rotten pork in public .They would do so.Seen too many promises forgotton or broken to belive a word out of a politicans gob anymore.Especially our lot,whatever colour their shirts are.:(

A public forum like this one up and running and established enough to now be thought of as being insufficiently radical?

Glad that we are only considerd insuffcently radical!!:eek::eek:
Going by some on the PTB side we are fermenting seemingly political unrest,and almost preaching open armed rebellion..Some of our side would rather see Boards.ie totally removed from the Irish scene too.
God help us if there was a really "Rad" board here.:rolleyes:

The DoJ and the NGBs sitting down for regular talks at an established forum?

Regular talks...Hmmmm...Does anything constructive emerge,or does anything change...much?Or is it just.."thanks lads for the Valueable contributions...We will consider it..." And Now I as Minister for Justice and God almighty will do as I see fit!Irrespective of what those Bas"""DS have to say[as RUMOUR has it,a certain group of Irish gunowner repersentatives were referred to in the ministerial office? Anyone confirm or deny this???]

Feck it man, we've never had it so good, not in your lifetime or in mine. And that was just ten years. Where will we be in ten more?

True to a point..
It could also be a Hell of alot better too.In the sense if on certain issues the advice of gunowner rep bodies had been taken on board as well.
Well,lets wait and see shall we?Thats if we are not flooded out with the Global warming first or Dec21st 2012 happens.;):D

Sparks · 01-09-2010 12:15am

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

True to a point..
It could also be a Hell of alot better too.

Yeah, but the day that's not true, you'd best sell your firearms because all that'll be left is disappointment and sitting round the pub swapping stories of how you used to be good at something

Bananaman · 01-09-2010 7:40am

Just to back to the poin of the thread for a moment

there are many opinions about the 226 in 22lr - not to many of them have to do with what it is like to shoot or if it puts holes in paper

it is an expensive 22lr option - not so much if you already have the frame

it has a large grip - as it was designed for better things - some people may find this offputting - again not so much if you already have the frame

it is accurate enough - might be a bit heavy for the one handed stuff but you'd get used to it - will it beat a Pardini or GSP? - depends whose shooting them - in fairness the two lads I know who shoot with those will be hard beaten by anyone shooting any firearm - although I do like beating them with their own firearms on occasion

will you enjoy shooting it? Of course you will - it's range time

hope it helps

B'Man

Mr Mole · 06-09-2010 10:23am

Sparks wrote: »

In the ISSF events, we're not allowed to use optics of any kind, only iron. And as huge as the bullseye pistol event is in the US, we don't see much of it here at all, in fact I don't remember ever hearing of a match here. It tends to be either ISSF or PPC1500 or (before it was banned), IPSC.

Sparks, can you identify the legislation for me where IPSC is banned? I'm not personally aware of any shooting sport being banned under any Irish Legislation.

Sparks · 06-09-2010 11:52am

Mr Mole wrote: »

Sparks, can you identify the legislation for me where IPSC is banned? I'm not personally aware of any shooting sport being banned under any Irish Legislation.

C'mon Mole, don't play word games you know the bit used to ban IPSC as well as I do - section 4B, inserted by section 33 of the 2009 Act:

33.— The Principal Act is amended by the insertion of the following new section after section 4B (inserted by section 34 of Act of 2006):
“Prohibition of practical or dynamic shooting.

4C.— (1) It is an offence for a person to facilitate or engage in the use of a firearm for the purposes of practical or dynamic shooting.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to the facilitation or engagement in the use of a firearm pursuant to an authorisation under section 2(5)(a) of this Act, where the muzzle energy of the firearm is less than 16 Joules.

(3) A person who is guilty of an offence under this section is liable—
(a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding €5,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or both, and

(b) on conviction on indictment, to a fine not exceeding €20,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years or both.

(4) In this section “ practical or dynamic shoot ing” means any form of activity in which firearms are used to simulate combat or combat training.”.

We might not like it, but we'll get rid of it faster if we don't pretend it's not there, or that mere semantics will get us round it when a sitting Minister actively wanted the sport banned.

Grizzly 45 · 06-09-2010 12:02pm

Technically true Mr Mole.IPSC isnt banned outright by being mentioned in legislation.Just unfortunetlythey use section 4C of the CJA[misc prov]2009 and define itas any form of activity in which firearms are used to stimulate combat or combat training.
Ah what the Heck...Sparks has typed it faster than me again....:D

Not to mind IPSC could continue here as it does in the UK and many parts of the World where real firearm ownership is a mega problem with airsoft.Just seems to be a problem with people having to want to take it up.

Mr Mole · 06-09-2010 12:15pm

Section 4 of the act is specific, it creates penalties for combat training or simulated combat training with firearms, no reference is made to IPSC, nor is IPSC combat training or simulated combat training.

For those who attended some of the District Court cases, the same arguement was used by Garda Siochana to tarnish WA1500 and Prrecision Pistol, and they failed miserably.

Sparks, I dont do semantics. This is the stated law, and while you have your opinion, please dont use opinion here, especially as a respected Moderator to tarnish other peoples shooting sports. There have been enough spokes put in the wheels of the shooting community without helping the PDB rip the wheels off altogether.

Sparks · 06-09-2010 12:25pm

Mole, I'm not trying to tarnish anyone's sport here, rumours to the contrary aside. At the time I was speaking in defence of it publicly and privately to the PTB (while, to be blunt, those whose job it was to defend it were doing the opposite).

And yes, it's like the 1972-2004 de facto ban on pistols in that it is not a de jure ban, and that's a good thing as it's less of a door slam than it might have been; but it's still an obstacle to overcome, and while it's not technically correct to refer to it as a de jure ban and I'd never do so in a PQ or to the Minister, it is a de facto ban and that's also important to recognise because if you don't recognise that the de facto ban exists, then the PTB can just claim there's no problem to solve because no ban exists.

Mr Mole · 06-09-2010 12:40pm

Sparks wrote: »

Mole, I'm not trying to tarnish anyone's sport here, rumours to the contrary aside. At the time I was speaking in defence of it publicly and privately to the PTB (while, to be blunt, those whose job it was to defend it were doing the opposite).

And yes, it's like the 1972-2004 de facto ban on pistols in that it is not a de jure ban, and that's a good thing as it's less of a door slam than it might have been; but it's still an obstacle to overcome, and while it's not technically correct to refer to it as a de jure ban and I'd never do so in a PQ or to the Minister, it is a de facto ban and that's also important to recognise because if you don't recognise that the de facto ban exists, then the PTB can just claim there's no problem to solve because no ban exists.

Agreed to an extent, but if we the shooters and sports people refer to it as banned, we will give the "ban" an acceptance it doesnt deserve, as in the case on 1972, where all and sundry acceped it as true, and it became true. Reference to IPSC being banned will male it true in the eyes of many. I have shot IPSC. The only place I ever engaged in combat or simulated combat with a firearm was in The Defence Forces and An Garda Siochana.

Sparks · 06-09-2010 12:45pm

I think that's confusing two seperate issues there Mole, (a) the classification of IPSC as combat training, and (b) the status of IPSC within our borders.
I'm all for recognising the legal situation as it stands, but you also have to recognise the de facto situation, as where it and the law conflict is often one of the first places to start trying to change things.

Mr Mole · 06-09-2010 12:58pm

Sparks wrote: »

I think that's confusing two seperate issues there Mole, (a) the classification of IPSC as combat training, and (b) the status of IPSC within our borders.
I'm all for recognising the legal situation as it stands, but you also have to recognise the de facto situation, as where it and the law conflict is often one of the first places to start trying to change things.

No Sparks, its not confusing at all.
Getting back to point, you outlined in the post I referred to, that IPSC was banned. Thats inherently incorrect. You clarified it somewhat in further posts, and I am satisfied with that. It should be up to the reader now to make their own decision based upon the information provided.

When someone in your position as a Mod makes a statement like that, many less informed take it as a given fact.

Sparks · 06-09-2010 1:01pm

And if someone who doesn't know any better reads a post of mine that says IPSC is not banned and they go run an IPSC match?

Mr Mole · 06-09-2010 1:06pm

IPSC matches need sanction from a Regional Director.
If we took that attitude, then we would not be shooting WA 1500 or PPC either. Those that shoot IPSC know exactly the position better than anyone outside that discipline. Please dont use the arguement of trying to protect people from themselves.

Anyway, its Sig thread and we have hijacked it!

Adieu!:D

Sparks · 06-09-2010 1:43pm

Mr Mole wrote: »

IPSC matches need sanction from a Regional Director.

To count towards rankings and such, yes.
To be run by a club as a local shoot? Not unless the Regional Director has been given legal authority to shut down the club, or has some sanction to hand that such a club would know and/or care about.
It's like ISSF matches. To count towards international standings, they have to be sanctioned by the ISSF themselves; to count towards national standings, by the NTSA; but for any club to run a match themselves and have a bit of fun, that's purely down to the club themselves, noone has veto over it bar the club.
But if a club tried to run a "fun" IPSC match, there'd be trouble from the DoJ and Gardai side of things.

Those that shoot IPSC know exactly the position better than anyone outside that discipline.

I might argue that point in a few exceptional cases, but I'm not thinking of those in the inner sanctum here; I'm thinking of those who're reading here and don't know one way or the other.

Mr Mole · 06-09-2010 2:11pm

If any club allows combat or tactical training or simulated combat or tactical training on their premises, or if someone carries out such activity in a place outside a range, then they may well find that there is law to deal with them. Regretfully, some people associate these activities with shooting sports.

Sparks · 06-09-2010 2:22pm

Regretably, yes, and more regretably, the PTB associate them with specific shooting sports, mainly IPSC. And they are wrong to do so, but they do so nonetheless.

Personally, I believe this will be changed in time, and hopefully not too much time (just about long enough for a general election sounds about right). But right now, I do think it's better that we know where we stand without any illusions; but I don't think that knowing where we stand means accepting where we stand as a long-term position.

rrpc · 06-09-2010 2:25pm

Mr Mole wrote: »

If any club allows combat or tactical training or simulated combat or tactical training on their premises, or if someone carries out such activity in a place outside a range, then they may well find that there is law to deal with them. Regretfully, some people associate these activities with shooting sports.

This thread is seriously derailed

I'd suggest to anyone who wants to know exactly what that section of the act means, that they follow the example of Atheist Ireland earlier this year in attempting to challenge the blasphemy law. In other words, invite a prosecution and fight it out in court. AFAIK, that's the only way...

Not on a thread that was providing some very interesting discussion on different target pistols...

...14 or so posts ago

Sparks · 06-09-2010 2:37pm

rrpc wrote: »

This thread is seriously derailed

And so I've split out the 'politics' bit and I'm moving the remains of the original thread into the Target Shooting forum under the umbrella of the No Politics rule in there.

rrpc · 06-09-2010 3:15pm

Just to add that my previous post should not be read as inciting anyone to break the law, but to point out that that's mostly how law is evaluated.

Shooting Forum - Firearms licencing information

P226 & pistol politics

Comments