Willie O'Dea Posing With Firearms

Sparks

Storm in a teacup.

I have to say that that particular phrase just goes over so well with the target shooters that O'Dea treated so badly in his time in the DoJ, when they're a damn sight more responsible with firearms than he's proven to be...

AARRRGH

Hagar wrote:

Apart from the politics of the issue..

A) Treat every weapon as if it's loaded regardless of what anyone else has told you
You never point a weapon at a person unless you intend to fire at that person
C) You never put your finger on the trigger of a weapon until it is pointed at your target and you are prepared to fire

Apart from that it was just buffoonery for the camera

A) I'm sure the weapons specialists who were with him can be trusted
Why? That's ridiculous.
C) Why? That's ridiculous. Who makes up these silly rules?

Never go to boards.ie unless you plan on replying to a topic.

Sparks

dublindude wrote:

A) I'm sure the weapons specialists who were with him can be trusted

Sure they can. Now look at the photo and tell me how you know that there's no round in that pistol's breech.

Why? That's ridiculous.
C) Why? That's ridiculous. Who makes up these silly rules?

People who've seen other people shot with supposedly unloaded firearms. And they're followed by people who don't want to be shot by supposedly unloaded firearms.

Ajnag

A) I'm sure the weapons specialists who were with him can be trusted
Why? That's ridiculous.
C) Why? That's ridiculous. Who makes up these silly rules?

Gun safety is not rediculous, reguardless of how well trained you are, there was still a chance that those weapons could have been loaded. And gun owners and people who have a long experiance make up those "silly rules" :rolleyes:

Do you own a gun?

civdef

Dublindude, as you seem to know better than the collective experience of responsible shooters for the last 500 years or so, and see fit to dismiss the most fundamental safety rules dealing with the use of firearms, have you got any level of experience to back this up?

Dave!

tba wrote:

I have to get a credit card someday...
http://tinyurl.com/arr2n

lol, class

Mighty_Mouse

Sure they can. Now look at the photo and tell me how you know that there's no round in that pistol's breech.

Lads im sure the army gun experts did hand willie a loaded gun and might of even checked the breech for him and all!

I know its not best gun practice etc but again lads its a mountain out of a molehill.personally i think its quite a good photo! Also sure wasnt he inspecting the armys weaponry! If the gun went off sure the cameraman would know its faulty anyways!

Again imo it sounds like ppl involved in shooting have very little to be talking about and are latching on to this issue a little.

RuggieBear

Mighty_Mouse wrote:

Again imo it sounds like ppl involved in shooting have very little to be talking about and are latching on to this issue a little.

it's kinda understandable when this gob****e has done so much to hinder their beloved sport

Sparks

Mighty_Mouse wrote:

Lads im sure the army gun experts did hand willie a loaded gun and might of even checked the breech for him and all!

That's "you think" not "you know". With a 9mm pistol, you want more of the latter and a damn sight less of the former. This isn't a toy we're talking about don't forget, that thing is a sidearm, designed to be used to kill people. Waving it about like that shows a distinct lack of cop-on.

Again imo it sounds like ppl involved in shooting have very little to be talking about and are latching on to this issue a little.

I think if he'd done as much against your sport as he has ours, you'd feel rather miffed as well.

Mighty_Mouse

it's kinda understandable when this gob****e has done so much to hinder their beloved sport

how has willie o dea harmed shooting in ireland. explain pls

Sparks

Mighty_Mouse wrote:

how has willie o dea harmed shooting in ireland. explain pls

From page one of the thread:

Sparks wrote:

A few years back, when he was the Minister of State in the Dept. of Justice, we (the National Target Shooting Association, the national governing body for Olympic target shooting) met with him to discuss pistol licences for people to compete in the Olympics (a third of the shooting events in the Games are shot with pistols - .22 calibre and air pistols). We were turned down because they were supposed to be far too dangerous for ordinary people to have them. And now he's breaking the first rule of firearms safety on the front page of the Irish Times as if it's some great big joke (the day after a series of gangland murders in residential areas) and you wonder why some of us are ticked off?

AARRRGH

civdef wrote:

Dublindude, as you seem to know better than the collective experience of responsible shooters for the last 500 years or so, and see fit to dismiss the most fundamental safety rules dealing with the use of firearms, have you got any level of experience to back this up?

Let me see.

The army experts check the gun. They see it is empty. He holds it and poses.

Of course, being a boards.ie nerd I am sure you know more than the army experts.

And this has made you so angry... why?

Is it because you're jealous of him holding a handgun?
Is it because you have some kind of weird issues with guns/the army?

Let's not totally overreact here. No child in Ireland is going to see that picture, somehow find a pistol, and shoot someone.

If you want to be angry, blame the newspapers for publishing the picture.

Sparks

dublindude wrote:

Let me see.
The army experts check the gun. They see it is empty. He holds it and poses.
Of course, being a boards.ie nerd I am sure you know more than the army experts.

No, it's the having been a target shooter for twelve years and a range officer for seven, and the having trained somewhere around four to five hundred people in target shooting that mean that I would know enough to comment.
The boards.ie thing is just ancillary.

And this has made you so angry... why?

See above. We want to take part in the Olympic games and need air pistols to do so; we're denied by him because they'd be too dangerous. Ignore for now the facts that shotguns and buckshot are freely available at that time and that armed crime isn't carried out with single-shot air pistols like this one:


Yet now we see him waving about a sidearm, a pistol that's designed for killing people, on the front page of the Times for PR reasons. Do you not see why we might be annoyed at this?

Is it because you're jealous of him holding a handgun?

Jealous is the wrong word to use. We would be annoyed at the double standards involved in him denying us access to pistols for serious training and yet having no concept of gun safety and waving about a pistol like that himself.

Let's not totally overreact here. No child in Ireland is going to see that picture, somehow find a pistol, and shoot someone.

Only yesterday on Liveline we heard the story of an Irish child who played at cowboys and indians with his kid sister and his father's supposedly unloaded shotgun, with tragic consequences. The Department of Justice (where O'Dea was the Junior Minister for years) constantly tells us that firearms are highly dangerous and must always be handled with care (which isn't so much preaching to the choir as preaching to the bishops), and yet, here he is, waving one about like a child's toy.

If you want to be angry, blame the newspapers for publishing the picture.

Why? Is the Minister not responsible for his own actions?

civdef

dublindude wrote:

Let me see.

The army experts check the gun. They see it is empty. He holds it and poses.

Of course, being a boards.ie nerd I am sure you know more than the army experts.

And this has made you so angry... why?

Is it because you're jealous of him holding a handgun?
Is it because you have some kind of weird issues with guns/the army?

Let's not totally overreact here. No child in Ireland is going to see that picture, somehow find a pistol, and shoot someone.

If you want to be angry, blame the newspapers for publishing the picture.

First of all thanks for the personal angle you've taken with your reply. Shall I take that as a "no" to my substantive question as to whether you have any knowledge or experience of firearms then?

Secondly, for the record, I do know what I'm talking about here.

I'm not very jealous of Willie holding a gun, he looked like he was enjoying himself, which was nice to see.

I'm not even particlularly angry about what he did, it's about par for the course with politicans and photoshoots, but your seemingly ill-informed dismissal of the basic points of firearm safety, coupled with your arrogant and aggressive response to my questioning of your credibility do strain my patience somewhat.

oscarBravo

Sparks wrote:

...single-shot air pistols like this one:
http://www.dominoguns.com/im_prod/fwb/fwb_p40_3_g.jpg

Is it just me, or would anyone else be concerned at how you'd have to hold thon gun to read the guage on the front? :eek:

AARRRGH

civdef wrote:

First of all thanks for the personal angle you've taken with your reply. Shall I take that as a "no" to my substantive question as to whether you have any knowledge or experience of firearms then?

Secondly, for the record, I do know what I'm talking about here.

I'm not very jealous of Willie holding a gun, he looked like he was enjoying himself, which was nice to see.

I'm not even particlularly angry about what he did, it's about par for the course with politicans and photoshoots, but your seemingly ill-informed dismissal of the basic points of firearm safety, coupled with your arrogant and aggressive response to my questioning of your credibility do strain my patience somewhat.

So you're only angry because what he did was dangerous?

Get over yourself will you. The army experts checked the gun. Are you trying to create a false reality in your brain that the gun was loaded and he was trying to shoot someone?

??????

Bizarre.

sparks wrote:

Yet now we see him waving about a sidearm, a pistol that's designed for killing people, on the front page of the Times for PR reasons. Do you not see why we might be annoyed at this?

I can understand you seeing it as hypocritical, but to get so worked up about it??? Come on. Not healthy.

civdef

So you're only angry because what he did was dangerous?

Get over yourself will you. The army experts checked the gun. Are you trying to create a false reality in your brain that the gun was loaded and he was trying to shoot someone?

??????

Bizarre.

I'll restate my position.

What Willie O'Dea did was stupid. Politicans are stupid a lot, particularly where cameras are involved. I am not angry about Willie being stupid.

People who know about firearms (this would include the Army), but clearly not you, will realise that what Willie did was stupid and unsafe. If a soldier did that on a range with a pistol, he could expect a serious shouting at, and possibly a smack across the head. A civilian shooter would get banned from a range for life for doing something like that.

People who know about firearms know that they are too serious to treat as toys, they are not to be pointed frivously at others, and you never assume a gun is unloaded. You posted as if you know better. You are wrong.

You took issue with the fundamental principles of firearm safety, mocking the posts of others who pointed out that what Willie did was unsafe and stupid. Some of these people clearly know about firearms safety. You don't. I'm not angry about that though, just exasperated.

Any questions?

magpie

Sure what's wrong with the Minister for Defence pretending to be Dirty Harry with a stupid sh1t-eating grin pointing a gun at the press corps?

You'd swear we were some sort of first world country that actually expects our Ministers to act with some modicum of dignity rather than a tin-pot fascist african dictatorship where guns are a 'laugh'

AARRRGH

civdef wrote:

Any questions?

Yes. You still seem to be living in some false reality about this.

This was a staged photoshoot. It wasn't a random act in the middle of Grafton Street.

When you watch a movie and the actor is holding a gun, do you scream with rage?

Let me repeat what I said above. THIS WAS A STAGED PHOTOSHOOT.

FFS :rolleyes:

Hagar

Dublindude you are out of your depth here in discussing a topic you obviously know nothing about.

Step away from the keyboard and save what's left of your dignity.

Sparks

oscarBravo wrote:

Is it just me, or would anyone else be concerned at how you'd have to hold thon gun to read the guage on the front? :eek:

You don't read the gauge when the cylinder is attached to the pistol (the cylinder unscrews out of the pistol so you can attach it to a scuba tank and refill it with air). You generally only watch the gauge when it's being refilled and before you screw it into the pistol to start training or shooting.

Sparks

dublindude wrote:

The army experts checked the gun.

And therein's the first assumption that'll get you shot; relying on someone else to check your firearm is unloaded. I know you're thinking "their the rangers, sure they'll never make a mistake". I've seen rangers make mistakes and have accidental discharges on the range. They make mistakes just fine, just like you and me.

I can understand you seeing it as hypocritical, but to get so worked up about it??? Come on. Not healthy.

You have to understand that in the manner in which we were consistently refused, it was strongly implied that we could not be trusted to be safe with pistols. This was despite our safety record (in over 160 years of formal target shooting in Ireland, not one injury from formal target shooting. Not one. Remember, we had pistols in all calibres and types up to 1972 as well, so it's not like we hadn't shown we had a safety record with pistols at this point. So it was personally insulting on many levels, and wasn't handled with much tact to be honest.

AARRRGH

Sparks wrote:

You have to understand that in the manner in which we were consistently refused, it was strongly implied that we could not be trusted to be safe with pistols. This was despite our safety record (in over 160 years of formal target shooting in Ireland, not one injury from formal target shooting. Not one. Remember, we had pistols in all calibres and types up to 1972 as well, so it's not like we hadn't shown we had a safety record with pistols at this point. So it was personally insulting on many levels, and wasn't handled with much tact to be honest.

Oh I agree you have a total valid argument regarding airguns etc. You have my full support there

But I think it is pushing it a bit using this incident to vent all your anger.

AARRRGH

Hagar wrote:

Dublindude you are out of your depth here in discussing a topic you obviously know nothing about.

Ahh you're just angry because I criticised your post in another thread a few minutes ago... :v: :v:

Zombrex

dublindude wrote:

Let me repeat what I said above. THIS WAS A STAGED PHOTOSHOOT.

FFS :rolleyes:

Exactly,

I very much doubt O'Dea grabbed someones gun and started waving it about while the camera man went "what a scoop!".

This was staged, no one is going to give the a member of the Irish cabinet a loaded fire arm and tell him to mess around with it.

Do people think when Blair or Bush get into a tank in Iraq people around them start running for cover in case they accidently blow up a building?

Storm .... in .... a .... tea .... cup

He looks mighty stupid in the photo, but I fail to see what the big deal is

Hagar

Errr... No. Still digging?

Apologies for off topic post. I just don't like unjustified public criticism. Especially of me.

HybridTech

Looking at the date involved, 1972, would it have been more to do with the ease of concealment of pistols, if they got into the wrong hands, as opposed to not trusting your safety record? Consider what was happening in our country then.

Sparks

HybridTech wrote:

Looking at the date involved, 1972, would it have been more to do with the ease of concealment of pistols, if they got into the wrong hands, as opposed to not trusting your safety record? Consider what was happening in our country then.

Except that all firearms bar .22 rifles and air rifles and shotguns were refused licences at the time. And they were never (and still are not) refused up North. As an RUC officer once succintly put it, "It's not the licenced firearms we worry about". And what we heard unofficially from DoJ officials was far more direct and tactless to be honest.

HybridTech

Were these safe?

http://www.targetshootingireland.org/Photos/displayimage.php?album=23&pos=1

Cork

I think politicians in our national parliament with their contrived outrage was worse.

What photo opportunities are allowed?

Kissing babies?
Posing with models?

Do the opposition partys have a list.

Are these parties purposing toy guns be banned?

It is worse, these people get elected.