The Sandbox

sidneyreilly

DDLR wrote:

I think we all want the same thing, To keep our firearms, and be able to hunt or Sport shooting and get IRELAND some gold around the world! without having to bring the state to court everytime you want to do something, IMHO the boards is the wrong place to talk about this, Should hold public meeting for every shooter in ireland that whats to come and clear some **** up, Alot of the Groups are trying to undermine each other and not fighting on same team becuase we all want same thing as i said befor!

A public meeting would be an excellent idea (so long as it wouldnt descend into a slagging match), it could give us an oppertunity to organise in to some kind of common group that could back up the likes of FLAG and the NARGC.

DDLR

sidneyreilly wrote:

A public meeting would be an excellent idea (so long as it wouldnt descend into a slagging match), it could give us an oppertunity to organise in to some kind of common group that could back up the likes of FLAG and the NARGC.

Dude i agree!

PS:: Vegeta mate,

Vegeta wrote:

For you or FLAG to say I am whining about nothing is very annoying

I never once said anything about you whinining! and if it came across that way im sorry, I understand were your coming from, I also have two Rifles and i need to zone them every now and again!

But the point i was really trying to make was, To much **** is getting blown up here!! we need to have a LIVE METTING in a hall and get a rep for every party down and get this sorted! We need to all be on same page because alot of people have ALOT to lose here , il be more then willing to help out and arrange the meeting or something!


But as for FLAG, im going from my personaly feelings, Declan sound

Sparks

DDLR wrote:

I dont know about you lot but it has cost me over 25000 euro "yes 25k" over last year to get my house up to saftly specs so i could get my pistols and eqt so i could go out and train and one day get a top3 world rank in IPSC for ireland! be IRELANDS first IPSC/3gun World Champion!

And yet you support Declan, which I don't understand - because you don't qualify for a carding grant because he refused to work with the ISC to review the carding grant criteria (even though the NTSA was supporting the idea), leading to the ISC deciding that only olympic sports would receive support. With a carding grant, you could have gotten a few thousand or so a year to support your competitive training and travel to competitions and so forth.

Liam Good

Vegeta wrote:

Ya see the problem I have with FLAG putting forward suggestions to the DoJ is that they don't represent me. For example I would like to own a pistol, single shot action would do me, don't even want a semi auto. Reason for owning it would be to finish off deer if they don't die with the first shot.

No problem,apply for a single shot .32 for Humane Dispatch, explain why it's required and the Superintendent will issue an Authorisation for the ammo (authorisation is not necessary for the pistol itself and you won't even have to pay a licence fee) .32cal pistols are available from McDonnells of Queen St in Dublin, they are pricey but will fulfil the role required.

DDLR

Sparks wrote:

And yet you support Declan, which I don't understand - because you don't qualify for a carding grant because he refused to work with the ISC to review the carding grant criteria (even though the NTSA was supporting the idea), leading to the ISC deciding that only olympic sports would receive support. With a carding grant, you could have gotten a few thousand or so a year to support your competitive training and travel to competitions and so forth.

TBH mate i started off known i wouldnt get anything from the state so iv had that mind set since! Yes the money would be great and make it easyer but i wont depend on it, Im getting by as it is atm, Everything will be ok!!

We will talk money once i get my first WORLD Championship for ireland

FLAG

Vegeta wrote:

That's the thing DDLR i'd be all praise for FLAG aswell if I were in your position. You got what you wanted in the CJB

I don't do any formal target shooting whereas you do. I, as a hunter will not be able to zero my own rifle on my own land after this legislation comes through.

I live in Clare and the closest full bore rifle range is in Offaly or Kerry. An awful long drive and extra expense every year to fire 6-10 shots, which may be undone by a big pothole on the way home.

Now FLAG says this is nonsense and I will be able but the reality is that everything else (wording of the Bill itself, and Mr. Howlin asking Mr. Lenihan this exact question) says other wise. To be told that my fears are crazy rantings is very frustrating as I may have to give up deer shooting and rifle shooting altogether just to stay on the right side of the law.

Your shooting life will probably improve as a result of this bill, mine will definitely be more inconvient if things stay the way they are.

For you or FLAG to say I am whining about nothing is very annoying. I have real concerns. I am not arguing for the sake of a fight, the evidence is there to support my claims, minutes from meetings where the question was put to Mr. Lenihan and the bill itself. So far FLAG has shown no evidence of his point of view.

How would you feel if handguns were banned in the morning and somebody told you to shut up, you now have a 3 year license, what are you complaining about. I bet you would not be happy after making an investment of 25,000.

FLAG worked for you but calls me a moaner because I raise concerns on a forum. I just hope you can see why I am concerned. You don't have to agree with my arguement just acknowledge its a valid arguement.

Also what is worng with talking about this here. Honestly are the powers that be going to log on to boards and go, Jesus they are having an arguement about how sh1te the new CJB is. What info can they use to harm us.

Hi

Are you just stupid or can you not understand plain english, the incoming legislation will not effect your current ability to do what you wish to do. When a person applies for any firearm using the reason for target shooting then they invoke a limitation that they need to be a member of a recognised and authorised club. As a person applying and being granted a lisecne for a firearm for hunting and the like you will not come under any of the range regulations. The effect of asking a minister a complicated question to which he had not got the apprpriate answer lead to confusion, this is what I was saying is the effect of asking questions in the house on a matter that is complicated. As I have said before and I will say it again any queries to the FLAG mailing address are answered as fully as they can be and if you were to send me a mail instead of loosing it on the boards then I could ahve answered your query a long time ago. Lads this is old news, mind you keep harping on about it an some bugger may look to waht you are doing in the field and start to look at some regulation. Presently once lisenced we have a great deal of freedom to do what we want in the field.

Also to answer the bull that has arisen after my post of our very first proposals to the DOJ, we were advised that if we looked for a limited release offering security and assurance to calm a lot of nervs over firearms back then that we may maks some progress, contrary to what some might say I did not scupper the progress, it was the IRA blowing up Canary Warf, it was Thomas Hamiltion killing all the kids and the Port McArthur incident had a little to do with stunting progress here, annoyed I don't know why I bother.

FLAG

Sparks wrote:

And yet you support Declan, which I don't understand - because you don't qualify for a carding grant because he refused to work with the ISC to review the carding grant criteria (even though the NTSA was supporting the idea), leading to the ISC deciding that only olympic sports would receive support. With a carding grant, you could have gotten a few thousand or so a year to support your competitive training and travel to competitions and so forth.

Same old same old......................spose you'll never give up going on and on and on....................

newby.204

FLAG wrote:

As I have said before and I will say it again any queries to the FLAG mailing address are answered as fully as they can be and if you were to send me a mail instead of loosing it on the boards then I could ahve answered your query a long time ago. Lads this is old news, mind you keep harping on about it an some bugger may look to what you are doing in the field and start to look at some regulation. Presently once lisenced we have a great deal of freedom to do what we want in the field.

I could not find the FLAG mailing address and so i sent you a PM FLAG to which you have not responded, with either answers to my questions, or the FLAG mailing address!!!!!

FLAG

newby.204 wrote:

I could not find the FLAG mailing address and so i sent you a PM FLAG to which you have not responded, with either answers to my questions, or the FLAG mailing address!!!!!

Not true:

You got a response as soon as I saw the PM which was about 10 minutes ago. What do you want me to do stay on line to wait for your questions!

FLAG

Sparks wrote:

And yet you support Declan, which I don't understand - because you don't qualify for a carding grant because he refused to work with the ISC to review the carding grant criteria (even though the NTSA was supporting the idea), leading to the ISC deciding that only olympic sports would receive support. With a carding grant, you could have gotten a few thousand or so a year to support your competitive training and travel to competitions and so forth.

Mark:

I am really sorry but this bull has got to stop:

1) I had resigned well before the meeting with the ISC at which they made the announcement that carding would no longer be availale to non-Olympic sports. The delegation consisted of NTSA and SSAI representatives. I was not there.
2) The first grant to a shooter who participated in non olympic sports was to Nicholas Flood and yes this time I can claim total responsibilty for getting the sport included
3) We struggled for a number of years to keep non olympic shooting sports carded
4) The last meeting I as involved in with members of the NTSA with respect to carding grants was when the criteria for non olympic shooting sports were changed, this had the effect of demoting World Class I performance in non olympic sports to World CLass II status, despite the fact that for that year Nicholas would have qualified as a world class I carded shooter.

Please get your facts right, if you wish I can get a statement from one of the individuals who was at the meeting, it was not me and I had well resigned from the SSAI..............so lay off.

FLAG

newby.204 wrote:

I could not find the FLAG mailing address and so i sent you a PM FLAG to which you have not responded, with either answers to my questions, or the FLAG mailing address!!!!!

Suppose he was right I had not responed to him, but had he waited one more minute he would have read the following response, which was posted at 21.09

Re: A few qs on the CJB

---

Quote:
Originally Posted by newby.204
Hey,
First off im not interesyed in gettin into the slugging match you are havein with several members of boards, i have just have a few questions is all.

Second target shooting does not affect me!

Im not a member of a shooting club, yet I want to reload for cost reasons, will this be feasable under the new legislation?

Can you please clarify the medical professional reference when applying for a licence rule? There is no requirement for a medical as a precondition for a lisence, it may be required however the main reason for the section is to facilitate the outcome of the Barr tribunal and the recomendation on one of the modules for a medical?

If we lose fullbore calibers as it has been stated on boards, will all rimfire calibers still be licencable? We will not! this is more bull**** spread on the boards by ignorance, can some one show me where it says BAN in the legislation!

Will we at any stage in the future be licenced as individuals, not licencing each individual firearm? Three year lisence format is still to be regulated, it would be desireable and a lot of work was done in co-operatin with the PSNI where the individual is lisenced, wait and see.

Will I be open to prosecution for zeroing my rifle on a friends farm, as it is not a "range"? No,

If you cant answer these questions through this PM system please send me your email address!!! flagireland@eircom.net

I WILL NOT divulge any information you give me on boards!! You will have to trust me as i am trusting you!!


Answers are not secret!

Regards
Declan

newby.204

FLAG wrote:

Not true:

You got a response as soon as I saw the PM which was about 10 minutes ago. What do you want me to do stay on line to wait for your questions!

Public apology im sorry, something was wrong with my server it didn regiter the new PM's. Thanks for the help FLAG!!!1

Vegeta

Liam Good wrote:

No problem,apply for a single shot .32 for Humane Dispatch, explain why it's required and the Superintendent will issue an Authorisation for the ammo (authorisation is not necessary for the pistol itself and you won't even have to pay a licence fee) .32cal pistols are available from McDonnells of Queen St in Dublin, they are pricey but will fulfil the role required.

My FAO and my Super are not that obliging and have told me even for humane dispatch I will have to join a target shooting club.

Another example if you think i am making it up, is that at 17 i was refused a shotgun license after doing a safety course with the NARGC because i was too young.

Vegeta

FLAG wrote:

Hi

Are you just stupid or can you not understand plain english, the incoming legislation will not effect your current ability to do what you wish to do. When a person applies for any firearm using the reason for target shooting then they invoke a limitation that they need to be a member of a recognised and authorised club. As a person applying and being granted a lisecne for a firearm for hunting and the like you will not come under any of the range regulations. The effect of asking a minister a complicated question to which he had not got the apprpriate answer lead to confusion, this is what I was saying is the effect of asking questions in the house on a matter that is complicated. As I have said before and I will say it again any queries to the FLAG mailing address are answered as fully as they can be and if you were to send me a mail instead of loosing it on the boards then I could ahve answered your query a long time ago. Lads this is old news, mind you keep harping on about it an some bugger may look to waht you are doing in the field and start to look at some regulation. Presently once lisenced we have a great deal of freedom to do what we want in the field.

Also to answer the bull that has arisen after my post of our very first proposals to the DOJ, we were advised that if we looked for a limited release offering security and assurance to calm a lot of nervs over firearms back then that we may maks some progress, contrary to what some might say I did not scupper the progress, it was the IRA blowing up Canary Warf, it was Thomas Hamiltion killing all the kids and the Port McArthur incident had a little to do with stunting progress here, annoyed I don't know why I bother.

Wow you are a real pleasant character aren't you. I do not take to being called stupid very lightly. You have a made a personal insult on a debate over the Criminal Justice Bill. Shows a real insight into your character.

I have asked you for proof several times of your point of view, surely you asked someone about the ability for hunters to zero rifles off of a range. If so you will have an e-mail or a letter or some form of reply confirming your stand point. Show me. If it is only your word (gathered by your own reading of the Bill) how i can i be expected to believe you. I might be prosecuted on the strength of your advice.

Show me proof.

Mr. B. Lenihan was asked the question not the Minister for Justice, and it is not a complicated question when it is your job to know the answers.

Sparks

FLAG wrote:

Mark:
1) I had resigned well before the meeting with the ISC at which they made the announcement that carding would no longer be availale to non-Olympic sports. The delegation consisted of NTSA and SSAI representatives. I was not there.

That is not what the NTSA report on the meeting states. Perhaps if the NRPAI was less secretive, there'd be less confusion?

2) The first grant to a shooter who participated in non olympic sports was to Nicholas Flood and yes this time I can claim total responsibilty for getting the sport included

And now I'm confused, because that's not what you said earlier to me. Specifically, you said that the NTSA drew up the criteria and that you felt that that wasn't right and should be changed.
So if it was only you that got the sport included, how would the NTSA have drafted the criteria?

Please get your facts right, if you wish I can get a statement from one of the individuals who was at the meeting, it was not me and I had well resigned from the SSAI..............so lay off.

I think you'd better get the statement and forward it on to the NTSA...

Sparks

Declan,
You said that writing emails would do no good and asked what good anything we'd sent in had done. Can I ask you, reading the email I sent to Howlin and the others sent in by other posters, and the amendments that he put in for the report stage of the CJB; and considering that we're just individual shooters, and didn't claim to be in any association and enjoy no special privilege and had only a few days to work with and never even met the man - do you still think that there's no point in grass roots support? Or that boards.ie isn't useful?

I've no real belief that those amendments will all make it through the process, and I wouldn't be shocked if none of them did; but at least it's better to register the protest from shooters than to applaud the bill as perfect, isn't it?

FLAG

Vegeta wrote:

Wow you are a real pleasant character aren't you. I do not take to being called stupid very lightly. You have a made a personal insult on a debate over the Criminal Justice Bill. Shows a real insight into your character.

I have asked you for proof several times of your point of view, surely you asked someone about the ability for hunters to zero rifles off of a range. If so you will have an e-mail or a letter or some form of reply confirming your stand point. Show me. If it is only your word (gathered by your own reading of the Bill) how i can i be expected to believe you. I might be prosecuted on the strength of your advice.

Show me proof.

Mr. B. Lenihan was asked the question not the Minister for Justice, and it is not a complicated question when it is your job to know the answers.

I agree nobody likes to be called stupid and indeed I did not call you stupid, I asked a question, it was not a statement. How someone hiding behind the anonymous nature of the boards could be insulted in any case is beyond me. No one knows who you are so the only one who may think you are stupid is when you look in the mirror as no one else can see you.

Not the same however in my own case as everyone knows who I am and insults have flown in my direction since the inception of the boards.

If you think that I or anyone else can give you the assurances that you seek you are really barking up the wrong tree, the legislation is the legislation written to achieve a particular end and in the case of range regulation is to bring forward standards that are to be applied to club/formal ranges where organised shooting takes place, can one be clearer than that. Unfortunately my frustration has spilled over to boarding on insults but then again how many times must the same point be made. When I have been dealing with the DOJ in recent years I tried very hard to view the proposals that we made to be as inclusive as possible, I too hunt, I hunt deer, vermin, pigeons, etc, I shoot targets, clays, pistol etc so I have a vested interest in things to do with shooting, you on the other hand admitted to not giving a toss about anyone except your own insular shooting, that is the sort of thing that lost the pistols in the UK in 1998 I’m OK jack as long as my shooting is not effected.

So stop harping on about you own little sandpit in case you loose it and think about the bigger picture of keeping the sport for everyone! Maybe that the mistake I made over the last ten years, should have though only about myself, but then again that is not me!

FLAG

Sparks wrote:

Declan,
You said that writing emails would do no good and asked what good anything we'd sent in had done. Can I ask you, reading the email I sent to Howlin and the others sent in by other posters, and the amendments that he put in for the report stage of the CJB; and considering that we're just individual shooters, and didn't claim to be in any association and enjoy no special privilege and had only a few days to work with and never even met the man - do you still think that there's no point in grass roots support? Or that boards.ie isn't useful?

I've no real belief that those amendments will all make it through the process, and I wouldn't be shocked if none of them did; but at least it's better to register the protest from shooters than to applaud the bill as perfect, isn't it?

I await to see the amendments that result from your intervention.

DDLR

FLAG wrote:

I agree nobody likes to be called stupid and indeed I did not call you stupid, I asked a question, it was not a statement. How someone hiding behind the anonymous nature of the boards could be insulted in any case is beyond me. No one knows who you are so the only one who may think you are stupid is when you look in the mirror as no one else can see you.

Not the same however in my own case as everyone knows who I am and insults have flown in my direction since the inception of the boards.

If you think that I or anyone else can give you the assurances that you seek you are really barking up the wrong tree, the legislation is the legislation written to achieve a particular end and in the case of range regulation is to bring forward standards that are to be applied to club/formal ranges where organised shooting takes place, can one be clearer than that. Unfortunately my frustration has spilled over to boarding on insults but then again how many times must the same point be made. When I have been dealing with the DOJ in recent years I tried very hard to view the proposals that we made to be as inclusive as possible, I too hunt, I hunt deer, vermin, pigeons, etc, I shoot targets, clays, pistol etc so I have a vested interest in things to do with shooting, you on the other hand admitted to not giving a toss about anyone except your own insular shooting, that is the sort of thing that lost the pistols in the UK in 1998 I’m OK jack as long as my shooting is not effected.

So stop harping on about you own little sandpit in case you loose it and think about the bigger picture of keeping the sport for everyone! Maybe that the mistake I made over the last ten years, should have though only about myself, but then again that is not me!

I have to agree myself! I shoot Rifle and Pistol! Truely the real thing id like to see is the door opened for people to take up the sport and get ireland on the map! Yes i know we have had some good shooters but thats Rifle and Shotgun, Im talking about Pistol also!

The way it looks now is, As of next year when a new person that has never used a firearm befor will find it next to impossable to join our sport, on less they have a **** lot of money and are willing to spend it, From the people i know that shoot we are far from rich we are normal hard working people that fund our shooting so we can get some gold for ireland!

I still think people are going over board here :P A live meet should be arranged with all partys because at then end of the day its ALL SHOOTERS thats going to lose out

We need to group up and get something done, FLAG has opened the door now lets push our way in!

Sparks

DDLR wrote:

I still think people are going over board here :P A live meet should be arranged with all partys because at then end of the day its ALL SHOOTERS thats going to lose out
We need to group up and get something done, FLAG has opened the door now lets push our way in!

My first ever email to FLAG was on working together to promote the sport. The first time I ever met Declan in person, we talked about getting all of the shooting associations to come together in one single body. The outcome of the former was this formal letter sent to the Sports Council, which lead to cuts in funding for not just the NTSA but the entire NRPAI; the latter never lead anywhere. And the last major public meeting that FLAG had much to do with saw an invalid AGM of the NRPAI where the NRPAI constitution was thrown to one side, voting rights ignored, member bodies ambushed and frankly, I don't think that's going to help if we do it again.

What we need is a single, completely independent, lobbying body. One supported not just by the NTSA, NSAI, NASRC and Pony Club, but also by the NARGC and the IFA - but which is not attached to any of these bodies. People serving in it should not be members of any of the above bodies committees and they should be required to operate right out in the open, communicating fully and regularly. Now that might work. What we have now doesn't seem to be doing so well.

Sparks

FLAG wrote:

I await to see the amendments that result from your intervention.

From the Report stage amendments:

88. In page 37, line 30, after “security,” to insert the following:
“and having consulted such organisations as in the Minister’s opinion are representative of persons engaged in sporting or other lawful use of firearms,”.

89. In page 37, to delete line 38 and substitute the following:
“(iv) the muzzle energy of ammunition likely to be used by the firearm,”.

90. In page 38, between lines 7 and 8, to insert the following:
“(2) In making an order under subsection (1) the Minister shall have regard to the desirability of facilitating persons engaged in sporting or other lawful use of firearms.”.

91. In page 38, between lines 7 and 8, to insert the following:
“(2) A person aggrieved by an order of the Minister under subsection (1) may give notice in a form to be prescribed by the Minister of his or her grievance and of the grounds for it, and the Minister shall consider such notice and shall make a decision on foot of the notice either to make no amendment to the order under subsection (1) or to may make such amendment to the order under subsection (1) as, in the opinion of the Minister, the circumstances warrant.
(3) A person dissatisfied by a decision of the Minister under subsection (2) may appeal against such decision to the High Court which may give such directions to the Minister as the circumstances warrant.”.

93. In page 39, lines 11 and 12, to delete “one month” and substitute “3 months”.

94. In page 40, line 28, after “Minister,” to insert the following:
“and having consulted such organisations as in the Commissioner’s opinion are representative of persons engaged in sporting or other lawful use of firearms,”.

95. In page 40, between lines 36 and 37, to insert the following:
“(3) In making an order under subsection (1) the Minister shall have regard to the desirability of facilitating persons engaged in sporting or other lawful use of firearms.”.

96. In page 40, between lines 36 and 37, to insert the following:
“(3) Guidelines under this section shall be made available by the Commissioner to those likely to be affected thereby.”.

98. In page 41, line 16, after “club” to insert “or a clay-pigeon shooting club”.

100. In page 41, line 40, after “competence” to insert “or a bona fide intention to acquire competence”.

101. In page 41, line 41, after “concerned” to insert the following:
“or in such other similar firearms as satisfy the issuing person that the
applicant will be competent in the use of the firearm concerned”.

104. In page 44, between lines 17 and 18, to insert the following:
“(15) Regulations under subsection (13) insofar as they determine standards by reference to subsection (14)(vi) shall have due regard to the need for shooting ranges to be used by persons who are in the process of acquiring competency in the use of firearms.”.

I can't claim to have drafted them; but they are all points I wrote about in the emails sent to Brendan Howlin. Likewise, I can't say it was my emails and not other emails sent from the other readers of this forum, but the correlation and the nature of these things makes it a reasonable assumption that the suggestions came from this forum at least.

Now, to use the vernacular, I've shown you mine. Let's be seeing your amendments if you please.

Sparks

FLAG wrote:

Not the same however in my own case as everyone knows who I am and insults have flown in my direction since the inception of the boards.

And you lost the right to complain the first time you threw insults yourself. And frankly, you've thrown much muckier ones than you've received.

If you think that I or anyone else can give you the assurances that you seek you are really barking up the wrong tree

Actually, the fact that you can't give assurances - but still expect us to remain silent on your assurance that the Bill will be used the way you, who are not the Minister for Justice, say it will be used - rather shows that Veg's concerns are both valid and accurate.

I have a vested interest in things to do with shooting, you on the other hand admitted to not giving a toss about anyone except your own insular shooting, that is the sort of thing that lost the pistols in the UK in 1998 I’m OK jack as long as my shooting is not effected.

And again I remind you that our first contact was you writing a formal letter to the ISC in response to a private informal email and thereby undermining the NTSA in favour of your own baliwick. If you're going to talk the talk Declan, you ought to walk the walk.

Vegeta

FLAG wrote:

I agree nobody likes to be called stupid and indeed I did not call you stupid, I asked a question, it was not a statement. How someone hiding behind the anonymous nature of the boards could be insulted in any case is beyond me. No one knows who you are so the only one who may think you are stupid is when you look in the mirror as no one else can see you.

Not the same however in my own case as everyone knows who I am and insults have flown in my direction since the inception of the boards.

If you think that I or anyone else can give you the assurances that you seek you are really barking up the wrong tree, the legislation is the legislation written to achieve a particular end and in the case of range regulation is to bring forward standards that are to be applied to club/formal ranges where organised shooting takes place, can one be clearer than that. Unfortunately my frustration has spilled over to boarding on insults but then again how many times must the same point be made. When I have been dealing with the DOJ in recent years I tried very hard to view the proposals that we made to be as inclusive as possible, I too hunt, I hunt deer, vermin, pigeons, etc, I shoot targets, clays, pistol etc so I have a vested interest in things to do with shooting, you on the other hand admitted to not giving a toss about anyone except your own insular shooting, that is the sort of thing that lost the pistols in the UK in 1998 I’m OK jack as long as my shooting is not effected.

So stop harping on about you own little sandpit in case you loose it and think about the bigger picture of keeping the sport for everyone! Maybe that the mistake I made over the last ten years, should have though only about myself, but then again that is not me!

To start you implied i was stupid by asking the question, don't try and dodge it now. I have never insulted you.

Also you couldn't be further from the truth about not caring about other aspects of shooting. I have emailed everyone who would listen about every problem on that Bill even if it didn't effect me directly. Show me where I said i didn't care. I have stated that some of the current changes to legislation don't effect me from day to day but there is a big difference between that statement and not caring about other aspects of shooting.

Yes you can be clearer so I ask you a simple direct question now, which yes, does effect me on a day to day basis.

Have you ever asked the Minister this exact question, "Can a hunter shoot at a target on his land or land he has permission to shoot on, to zero his rifle/practice?"

If you have never asked this question then how can you even comment on it.

Its amazing that I ask you a straight forward question and you attack my motives as being greedy and only caring about my own "little sandpit"

17HMR

Vegeta wrote:

Its amazing that I ask you a straight forward question and you attack my motives as being greedy and only caring about my own "little sandpit"

Lot of argumentum ad hominem in the 'box.....
(Not getting at you Vegata, but those whose opening remarks take an "Are you stupid..." tack)

Vegeta

FLAG wrote:

Hi

Are you just stupid or can you not understand plain english, the incoming legislation will not effect your current ability to do what you wish to do.

that's a response FLAG made to me

17HMR

Yep. Understand.

The bit in brackets was a clumsy attempt to point out who I was talking about !

Should have replied to the original Flag post as opposed to your quoting of Flag's post.

And anyway ....I suppose accusing someone of an ad hominem attack is probably in itself an ad hominem attack ! Which goes to show there really is too much of it going on

Sparks

I suppose accusing someone of an ad hominem attack is probably in itself an ad hominem attack !

Technically, it's not, unless you say that their insulting you is evidence that they're wrong.

FLAG

Sparks wrote:

As I have said, there is a great deal of concern about this aspect of the Bill. Many of these issues have not been well-disseminated within the shooting fraternity. Will the Minister clarify section 29 which gives him the power to make regulations? I have been asked to ask the Minister specifically to confirm that it is not his intention to designate Olympic target shooting pistols as firearms which will be restricted or banned. I would like some clarification in that regard. I hope the Minister does not intend to restrict or prohibit the ownership of Olympic target shooting pistols which, by their nature, cannot be seen as offensive weapons.

Well Mark theres a surprise, a question that clearly exposes ones own self interest above anyone elses, reminds me of the representations made by "The Olympic Coaches Association" to the DOJ.

Sparks

An association we've never seen a shred of proof for. Nice rumour though, discredits people you've happily shafted in the past.

And what's wrong with me asking about my sport when it's just me asking and not an association? After all, you had no problem with shafting my sport to the ISC in the name of the NRPAI so why should there be a problem with me trying to protect it from the DoJ in my own name, right? C'mon, let's hear that reasoning Declan.

(Still waiting for your list of amendments by the way).

1911

Sparks wrote:

An association we've never seen a shred of proof for.

Talking about proof, So when are we going to see this letter,