Ticknock range

skellig

Sparks---Looks like you are not familiar with the phrase "keep your cards close to your chest"

Sidney Reilly--- you are correct I do not represent L.R.P.C and I never said that I did and obviously Clubs prefer not to use the boards for official discussions (now thats really stating the obvious --wonder why??)

Civdef---Asking O.Mitchell the question you propose would be like opening a can of worms and in my opinion would be of no help whatsoever.

Clash--- Well in some Planning cases ,to hide certain information from the wonderful ,public caring Planning Officials under your jumper -well it certainly would have to be a great big wooly jumper!:D


B.R.C and the Midlands have Planning Permission but surely all the other Clubs/Ranges around the country have it too.
Im not certain but I believe there are approx. 16 Clubs and Ranges affiliated to the S.S.A.I (in your case Sparks the N.R.P.A.I ),surely they all have to have Planning too (if it is so called law and for public awareness)
Especially in the interest of Public Health and Safety ie noise level , backstops , lead deposits , lead exposure in the line of shooters shooting out of containers , buildings , indoor ranges etc. God knows what else there could be to make life even more difficult in our sport. Im sure the Planning Officers , Public Health and Safety officials and the Gardai would have a lot more to add to that list!! for example are all firing points from Public roadways the correct distances??!!


If Ticknock Range was safe enough for army use considering their use of automatic weapons that shoot wildly ,surely it has to be a hell of a lot safer for Club Members who would have a genuine respect for their range,to practice our sport!
If other Ranges can function without Planning why cant Ticknock?--It sounds like discrimination to me

Riggser

skellig wrote:

If Ticknock Range was safe enough for army use considering their use of automatic weapons that shoot wildly

Now now, making stupid comments like that won't help your cause.

rrpc

skellig wrote:

B.R.C and the Midlands have Planning Permission but surely all the other Clubs/Ranges around the country have it too.

I can't speak for all other ranges, as I don't have all their details, but Rathdrum's range was built before planning permission was required (Pre 1963). Some of the other ranges operate out of temporary structures for which planning is not required. I mentioned BRC and Midland, as they are new ranges with permanent structures, so I was comparing like with like.

Im not certain but I believe there are approx. 16 Clubs and Ranges affiliated to the S.S.A.I (in your case Sparks the N.R.P.A.I ),surely they all have to have Planning too (if it is so called law and for public awareness)

DURC, UCD and Wilkinstown are indoor ranges, so they are in permanent structures that have planning permission (college buildings in the case of DURC and UCD and a shed in the case of Wilkinstown). DURC is also a pre 1963 development AFAIK.

Especially in the interest of Public Health and Safety ie noise level , backstops , lead deposits , lead exposure in the line of shooters shooting out of containers , buildings , indoor ranges etc. God knows what else there could be to make life even more difficult in our sport. Im sure the Planning Officers , Public Health and Safety officials and the Gardai would have a lot more to add to that list!! for example are all firing points from Public roadways the correct distances??!!

Air Rifle ranges have no noise issues. There is no lead exposure at the line of shooters (unless they're shooting each other :eek:) All the ranges I have mentioned above also have Garda authorisations. No range that I know is close to a public road.

If Ticknock Range was safe enough for army use considering their use of automatic weapons that shoot wildly ,surely it has to be a hell of a lot safer for Club Members who would have a genuine respect for their range,to practice our sport!

Did you read the An Bord Pleanala inspectors report?, the Army closed all access to Ticknock while using the range. Ask around, you'll find the Army stopped using that range on grounds of safety.

If other Ranges can function without Planning why cant Ticknock?--It sounds like discrimination to me

I don't know of any range functioning without planning within permanent structures, and I would suggest that neither do you. You obviously have no idea of the planning laws, but then again that shouldn't surprise me..

What does surprise me, is that you should turn on your fellow shooters, who by and large have given useful information on this board to anyone considering taking up shooting or building a range. Your contention that you must 'keep your cards close to your chest' is arrant nonsense in this day and age. Many of the posters here expressed the opinion that the loss of the ticknock range was a sad loss, and some suggested (quite rightly in my view) that it was the lack of dialogue and paranoid secrecy that most damaged your case. You now respond by in effect threatening other clubs and ranges in the mistaken belief that they are in the same position vis a vis planning that you were.

Clash

Skellig wrote:

Clash--- Well in some Planning cases ,to hide certain information from the wonderful ,public caring Planning Officials under your jumper -well it certainly would have to be a great big wooly jumper!:D

Did you read my post?, you obviously didn't understand it.

surely they all have to have Planning too (if it is so called law...

'So called law'? Since 1963 it is law.

If other Ranges can function without Planning why cant Ticknock?--It sounds like discrimination to me

Sounds like ignorance to me.

Sparks

Sparks wrote:

Where's the LRPC's official public response?

Found today. A reasonable response, but if it's only sent to her, it's about as useful as the paper it's printed on. Needs to be printed in the press

FAO Ms. Olivia Mitchell TD, Fine Gael, Dublin South
Re FG Press-Release about Ticknock Rifle-Range

Dear Ms. Mitchell

We have been saddened and shocked by your recent press-release from the Fine Gael National Office which seems to attempt to blacken the character of the LRPC as a club and that of its members as individuals! NEVER would the club, nor any of its members, consider the behaviour [suggested by the FG Press-release] of intimidating or bullying anyone! The Leinster Rifle & Pistol Club is composed of eminently respectable and responsible members of the Leinster community who pursue a wholly legitimate and tightly-controlled pastime – shooting. Up until now the shooting fraternity has been ignored by the major Political Parties but now we are being portrayed in an entirely undeserved negative light!!

As we are a law-abiding organisation and your press-release was based on an entirely inappropriate miss-interpretation of events [the LRPC has NEVER considered the holding of any “hunt” in protest against the decision of an Bórd Pleanála nor any of the DL & RCC], we respectfully request that you withdraw your allegations against the LRPC and support any future attempt to source acceptable range facilities.

Yours sincerely,
Rod Wilson
Chairman
Leinster Rifle & Pistol Club

civdef

They could do a lot worse than send this to FG TD's in other constituencies and see if Ms Mitchell speaks for them also. Most TDs in rural areas will be well aware of how widespread shooters are in the community. If the response isn't satisfactory, send it to members of other parties, and see if any of them would like to make some politcal capital from Ms Mitchell's stance.

Sparks

Not a bad idea that, civ.

Riggser

Would I be right in saying this Ticknock is a sinking ship?

Sparks

In the sense that it hasn't sunk yet, but bilge pumping and repair work is needed, yes Riggser

sidneyreilly

Sparks wrote:

Found today. A reasonable response, but if it's only sent to her, it's about as useful as the paper it's printed on. Needs to be printed in the press

Tried the press Sparks, apparently it's "not news", wont print it or anything else we have given them

Rew

I think the club still have plans but only because I dont think they will give up easily. Id also hold out some hope that they could prove it would be a safe range under the CJB amendments range authorisation stuff.

Barry Aldwell

rrpc wrote:

When I was in the Free Clothes Association, the Regulars would accompany us when on shooting details, and would stay on the roads outside the range.

This practise ended over a decade ago.

When the army is making use of a small arms range, red flags are flown, and (unarmed) sentries are posted to advise civilians that there is firing going on, and they should stay away from the range, and to inform the firing point via radio if anybody strays into the danger area.

LB6

Did anyone ask OM who, representing Ticknock Range, informed her that the club is "considering hunting on the land instead". Or where she's getting her much misinformed information?

Sparks

sidneyreilly wrote:

Tried the press Sparks, apparently it's "not news", wont print it or anything else we have given them

The problem with the press is that you have a very, very narrow window of opportunity to get stuff printed in relation to a story like this, and you have to do a lot of the journalist's work for them in order to maximise your chances of being printed. At this stage, your best bets would be letters pages, or to turn it into a "man bites dog" story by making it interesting enough that they will want to print it, but still appearing harmless to the general populous. Also, remember that regional press and radio stations are always looking for stories like this which would get a response; have you tried approaching East Coast FM or LMFM or any of the Wicklow local papers?

(This, btw, is why I kept saying, and still believe, that every club needs a dedicated PRO)

rrpc

Barry Aldwell wrote:

This practise ended over a decade ago.

Oops, showing my age inadvertently

rrpc

sidneyreilly wrote:

Tried the press Sparks, apparently it's "not news", wont print it or anything else we have given them

It'd certainly be news if you sent her a solicitors letter

Sparks

rrpc wrote:

It'd certainly be news if you sent her a solicitors letter

Yes, but the thing is that there's a fair bit of risk in that one. Sending a soliciter's letter is something you would have to be willing to follow through on. And while suing her for slander or libel would certainly make the headlines in both regional and national press and possibly the tv and radio media; it runs the risk of portraying her as the defender of the ordinary people being beaten with the courts by the big bad gun-totin' people (at which point you can predict with 99% certainty that there'll be a copy of the "from my cold dead hands" Charlton Heston photo shown). You'd want a very good PRO, well briefed and who came across as being utterly innocous. Female if possible, calm and rational above all else, and trained for this sort of thing.

Basicly, without a very good relationship with the media, I wouldn't personally touch that option with a twelve-foot barge pole.

rrpc

Sparks wrote:

Yes, but the thing is that there's a fair bit of risk in that one. Sending a soliciter's letter is something you would have to be willing to follow through on.

Absolutely not. It's up to you if you follow through or not. The point being that you get your headlines, plus your side of the story in print hopefully including some major back pedalling by the person concerned. As for the defender of the population bit, I fail to see where that angle comes in, when your reputation has been besmirched.

Sparks

As for the defender of th population bit, I fail to see where that angle comes in, when your reputation has been besmirched.

You wouldn't; you know something about target shooting. For over 95% of the electorate, however, guns are only used by:
1) The IRA / other terrorist groups
2) Bank robbers / other armed criminals
3) Army / armed police
4) Hunters (read, "the bastards who killed Bambi's mother")
5) Nutters

Therefore, if Mitchell tries to keep guns away from anyone that's not army or gardai, it's a good thing. It's not a sophisticated viewpoint and that's what she is counting on. If she'd been counting on rationality from the start, remember, she'd have pointed out to the MTB boys that they were using that woodland illegally!

rrpc

All of the above, but when you have the moral high ground, it's very hard for somebody else to share it with you. e.g. LRPC, complied with ABP ruling, closed down range, and then find themselves libelled in print on the web by a politician. Hand that one to the nearest FF poilitician in the constituency, and sit back.

The point is that you have got your case in print, you also have politician on the back foot. You can be Mr. Reasonable in print and make them look like twits.

If you start off thinking that you don't have the moral high ground, you won't.

Sparks

If you start off thinking that you don't have the moral high ground, you won't.

And if you start off without considering what can go wrong and preparing for it, while taking on someone with professionally retained PR firms available to her at the party level, you're not exactly taking the right attitude.

Getting the FF lads to do this for you would seem to be a far better idea, btw.

civdef

Anyone up in that neck of the woods able to let us know what the constituency is like? How tight are seats and who's under pressure to retain their seat.

That sort of information is of great use when taking on a TD.

skellig

Hi Riggser--- Automatic Weapons do shoot wildly thats a fact!! (perhaps you dont realise there is a big difference between an Air Firearm and one of these)

R.R.P.C---how wrong you are! I dont see the point in explaining the reasons why to you as I reckon it will only bring more attention to our ranges in this country so its bestto leave you in your ignorance.
By the way the next time you are on a range take off your blinkers and see how near you are to a public road!!

Clash---Yes Ive read your post and your right I dont understand it ,to me it was rubbish without heart and foundation!
"so called law ? since 1993 it is law" my my did you find that one in a big book all by yourself wel done , that explains a lot:D

Riggser--- Ticknock is not a sinking ship and your smart ass comments are not any help to the situation. Can you not show a litle compassion to other shooters maybe you are just an air rifle shooter whos hallway is big enough for a Range and youve nothing to worry about.
one thing for sure your personal icon seems to suit you perfectly:rolleyes:

rrpc

Skellig wrote:

R.R.P.C---how wrong you are! I dont see the point in explaining the reasons why to you as I reckon it will only bring more attention to our ranges in this country so its bestto leave you in your ignorance.

You mean you've lost the argument and won't admit it. You haven't had any problems drawing attention to ranges' shortcomings in the past.

Skellig wrote:

I have heard a so called Range Officer crowing aloud on the M.N.S.C.I Ranges about being at the Fasaroe Range (East Coast Sporting Club) where he refused to shoot due to rocky ground and a back stop only 7 foot high.They continued on regardless ;so much for safety and while Im on the topic the one at M.N.S.C.I isnt high enough either

By the way the next time you are on a range take off your blinkers and see how near you are to a public road!!

And you can point me to the section of the firearms acts that specifically refers to the distance of ranges from the public road.

Sparks

skellig wrote:

R.R.P.C---how wrong you are! I dont see the point in explaining the reasons why to you as I reckon it will only bring more attention to our ranges in this country so its bestto leave you in your ignorance.

Given that RRPC's been the person in charge of the process of getting Rathdrum's new range built and who successfully got planning permission for it skellig, I think your comments on ignorance reflect more on yourself than him.

By the way the next time you are on a range take off your blinkers and see how near you are to a public road!!

Rathdrum, UCD, DURC, WTSC; all are indoor ranges and thus exempt from the legislation you're thinking of (which is UK legislation if I recall right anyway - 18 metres from the centre of the nearest public highway, according to the N.Ireland legislation from 2004).

"so called law ? since 1993 it is law" my my did you find that one in a big book all by yourself wel done , that explains a lot:D

Methinks a slightly less ad hominem argument would be more appreciated by An Bord Planala...

Can you not show a litle compassion to other shooters maybe you are just an air rifle shooter

That's twice in one post you've denegrated air rifle shooters. Could it be that you have some sort of assumed hierarchy of worth amongst shooters in your head there skellig?

Rew

skellig wrote:

Hi Riggser--- Automatic Weapons do shoot wildly thats a fact!! (perhaps you dont realise there is a big difference between an Air Firearm and one of these)

Eh? Have you ever even fired one? I do regularlly and your talking rubish. Im pretty sure Riggser is an instructor on a number of fully auto weapons but if you think your better qualified then him feel free to tell us your backround.

Riggser--- Ticknock is not a sinking ship and your smart ass comments are not any help to the situation. Can you not show a litle compassion to other shooters maybe you are just an air rifle shooter whos hallway is big enough for a Range and youve nothing to worry about.
one thing for sure your personal icon seems to suit you perfectly:rolleyes:

Good to know how much you respect your fellow shooters... :rolleyes:

Clare gunner

Sparks wrote:

Yes, but the thing is that there's a fair bit of risk in that one. Sending a soliciter's letter is something you would have to be willing to follow through on. And while suing her for slander or libel would certainly make the headlines in both regional and national press and possibly the tv and radio media; it runs the risk of portraying her as the defender of the ordinary people being beaten with the courts by the big bad gun-totin' people (at which point you can predict with 99% certainty that there'll be a copy of the "from my cold dead hands" Charlton Heston photo shown). You'd want a very good PRO, well briefed and who came across as being utterly innocous. Female if possible, calm and rational above all else, and trained for this sort of thing.

Basicly, without a very good relationship with the media, I wouldn't personally touch that option with a twelve-foot barge pole.

Not necessarily true either.With our libel laws here,and the media being seen to take Olivias side by posting such pictures or anti Ticknock range comments.Ticknocks counsel could argue very well that there was undue media influence on the part of the antis thussly leaving the papers &c open to a lawsuit themselves..The press and media have to tread very,very,very,carefully on such things once even the most prelimery legal proceedings have been issued.
Also who exactly is she??A pretty much non entity politican in opposition in a party that is trying to get back into power with labour in the next election.It isnt good politics to aleinate a minority in your constituency.I suggested it before,to get news coverage you must make news.I would suggest Tnk proposes to run a single issue canditate in the next election on this matter of the range.It proably wont work politically,but it WILL get you [if handled correctly] good and detailed press coverage to put your points across.but you have to handle it properly and have all your facts ready and homework done as to who,what,when,where,why.etc.Go into it half assed or reticent to put all facts on the table,you will do yourselves more damage than at present.

Clash

skellig wrote:

Clash---Yes Ive read your post and your right I dont understand it ,to me it was rubbish without heart and foundation!

Eh??, It was one line FFS! - Skellig is obviously someone who likes to broadcast their stupidity

"so called law ? since 1993 it is law" my my did you find that one in a big book all by yourself wel done , that explains a lot

1993?? - Learn to read first Skellig before you try and engage sarcasm. I emphasise the word try, I've heard better from a twelve year old.

Apologies in advance if you are a twelve year old.

Riggser

skellig wrote:

Hi Riggser--- Automatic Weapons do shoot wildly thats a fact!! (perhaps you dont realise there is a big difference between an Air Firearm and one of these)

I was talking about automatic firearms on a range being fired by qualified people and I wouldn't class them as firing "wildly". What's your experience of automatic firearms may I ask? Hope it's not a few episodes of the A-Team.

skellig wrote:

Riggser--- Ticknock is not a sinking ship and your smart ass comments are not any help to the situation. Can you not show a litle compassion to other shooters maybe you are just an air rifle shooter whos hallway is big enough for a Range and youve nothing to worry about.
one thing for sure your personal icon seems to suit you perfectly:rolleyes:

Well I'll put it another way, is this range going to be up and running anytime soon, say within the next six months? Yes or no?

Your public relations is disastrous. You piss and moan in a public forum that is read by fellow shooters and does no help to whatever situation you are in. You've just alienated air rifle shooters and even worse all you can do is make a remark about my avatar?!

I hope you're not in charge of anything to do with Ticknock and if you are I hope your authority is taking away and someone more capable steps in.

sidneyreilly

Your public relations is disastrous. You piss and moan in a public forum that is read by fellow shooters and does no help to whatever situation you are in. You've just alienated air rifle shooters and even worse all you can do is make a remark about my avatar?!

I hope you're not in charge of anything to do with Ticknock and if you are I hope your authority is taking away and someone more capable steps in.[/QUOTE]

As previously stated Skellig is NOT speaking on behalf of LRPC, I would suggest that you cease comminications with him/her.