FLAG / SSAI Respresentation with DOJ

Leupold

Sparks, were you at the SSAI meetings in question? Was Declan invited to attend the discusssions? Who are the nominees of the SSAI and the NTSA on the DOJ panel?

Sparks

Leupold:

• No (I have always refused to act as the NTSA representative to the SSAI for reasons you are well aware of);
• Yes; and
• according to Declan's open letter on the subject and the NTSA Website respectively, Declan Cahill and Liam Crawford, the Chairmen of the SSAI and the NTSA.

Perhaps you could tell us why Declan is a more appropriate representative than the Chair of the SSAI?

Leupold

Thankyou Sparks, that helps. Much play has been made of democracy in this thread so perhaps it would also help if we knew how our representatives were voting. My understanding is that each of the constituent organisations of the SSAI send representatives who vote on behalf of their clubs and members. It would help to know how this vote went as it could display which sections of the shooting community felt that Declan was doing a good job for them and vice versa. Even though you were not at the meetings in question, it is the interests of all in the shooting community, at this vital juncture, to know how they were represented so could you find out and tell us?

Sparks

Leupold, isn't that a bit disingenous, given what you've just read above?

By which I refer to this:

Declan circulated the minutes of the SSAI meeting where the decision he's talking about was made. Minutes that, last I asked, were not public domain information and were certainly not for distribution to non-SSAI personnel.

Quite frankly, this is not a vital juncture for the shooting community. It's simply an act of tidying something up. Declan has already resigned in writing publicly over a year ago to the ISD; why is he now complaining at being "sidestepped" as though the SSAI committee answered to FLAG instead of the other way round? Perhaps you could find that out and tell us?

rrpc

Leupold wrote: »

Even though you were not at the meetings in question, it is the interests of all in the shooting community, at this vital juncture, to know how they were represented so could you find out and tell us?

Perhaps that question would be better addressed to the member organisation that represents you. It's not Sparks' place to be a spokesman for the SSAI and it's decisions.

And before you ask, I don't know who voted for what either

rrpc

Leupold wrote: »

Sparks, were you at the SSAI meetings in question? Was Declan invited to attend the discusssions? Who are the nominees of the SSAI and the NTSA on the DOJ panel?

The nominee of the NTSA is published on the NTSA website. I pointed this out before, and I believe I also posted the announcement on this board.

Perhaps I'm being paranoid, but your question infers that there is something hidden or underhand involved in these decisions, my answer here is to extinguish any such idea in peoples minds.

Leupold

Sparks, there is a difference between circulating minutes and producing the information I asked you for. You have always been a champion of "open governance" . Why not practise what you preach? Is there a reason you do not want this information in the public domain? As regards your last sentence, the arrogance displayed here explains why you now have this mess on your hands. The SSAI misjudged the effect their decision would have on the broad shooting community. It is interesting that, despite your reference to the long threads that have gone before as being reasons why we should be critical of Declan, the overwhelming sentiment displayed here and in the petition is in support of him.

Ned Muldhoon

Sparks,

Supposition etc refers to Le Chacal's remarks referring to some club politics that I am vaguely aware of and couldn't care less about. Personal vendictiveness is not something we should be promoting.

As to NTSA / SSAI and FLAG, I am not familiar with inter body politics and unless there is a pertinent point I would rather be ignorant of such (not that I under estimate their importance, but I am looking for an answer to a simple question that still has yet to be answered)

I never received a letter, email or any correspondence from Mr. Keogh regarding this situation. I raised this question in the context of a comment made at a gun club meeting which I attended yesterday evening.

My primary interests in shooting possibly cover most diciplines and therefore I have a vested interest in all bodies being represented at any DOJ policy meeting. In my opinion, FLAG and Mr. Keogh represent a large body of shooters who now feel they are left without representation.

I will be watching closely the progress of the SSAI with the DOJ and will make a decision on whether to keep my affiliation with the SSAI in light of recent events. I do not make this comment lightly, but I remember the events in the UK leading to draconian laws and restrictions being passed on firearms ownership mainly due to an incoherent and fractionated approach by the shooting bodies to the government appointed committee. The current stance by the SSAI, inter and intra governing body politics will lead to similar events here. By removing an experienced negotiator we have crippled ourselves before the negotiating even starts.

My opinion, you may not agree, but there is a large proportion of the shooting community who feel the same way and this must be addressed.

Leupold

Ned Muldhoon wrote: »

By removing an experienced negotiator we have crippled ourselves before the negotiating even starts.

My opinion, you may not agree, but there is a large proportion of the shooting community who feel the same way and this must be addressed.

Well said Ned!

rrpc

Ned Muldhoon wrote: »

Why has Mr. Keogh been replaced on the consultative panel? I can see no logic in this.

I missed this before, but not totally because it was niggling at the back of my mind.

Where is this information about Declan Keogh being replaced coming from?

The invitations to attend the FCP were dated the 2nd of October, it's now the 23rd.

Hardly enough time to receive a letter, appoint someone and then replace them.

Could someone please explain?

navan_man.ie

Flag was not disbanded Declan was not sent out to pasture it is my understanding that the SSAI have formed a working forum within their organisation to best put forward the issues and concerns of its members to the Justice Department Panel. There was no vote against FLAG. I understand that it is the belief of the SSAI that one person is not enough to represent the entire organisation and that whoever takes part in the panel would be given the utmost help and support of the committee. From what I can gather it is hoped that Declan will take part in these discussions as he has made huge contributions to the sport of Shooting and his knowledge is invaluable. I presume that the SSAI will circulate a statement or minutes from the last meeting that will verify that it is acting in the best interests of its members. Remembering that up to four members from each of the NGB's who were elected by members of their own associations (ie most of you guys) makeup the SSAI. I dislike taking part in speculation contests, since nothing is fact and none of it is providing any useful factual information. Instead contact your elected members who attended that meeting or wait for the SSAI to make a statement.

NavanMan

Gerri

Sparks wrote: »

I note with irony the complaint about procedures in the SSAI from the man who deliberately ignored the NRPAI constitution, rules, voting rights and members in order to change that body's name and structure to form the SSAI, and who constantly held the position from then on that complaints about this were without merit.

.

Are you talking about the AGM where most of the CURRENT SSAI committee did the name change? If so I wouldn't trust anyone on that committee to represent me.

Leupold

Navan Man is right about the need for a statement to clear the air. No one posting seems to have been at the relevant committee mtgs(3rd and 18th Oct). As I sad in earlier posts, we need information on exactly what decisions were made at these meetings regarding this issue. This information can be a statement, from the SSAI of exactly what was decided and how, or by publishing the relevant portions of the minutes.

DJKH

le_Chacal wrote: »

I note with irony the complaint about procedures in the SSAI from the man who deliberately ignored the NRPAI constitution, rules, voting rights and members in order to change that body's name and structure to form the SSAI, and who constantly held the position from then on that complaints about this were without merit.

not the first time

le_chacal
The person dk was unanimously dismissed from our club for refusing to attend an emergency meeting to answer certain question and to abide by the rules and constitution that he supplied to the Club, as a member of the SSAI, at the club foundation.

I have never been dismissed from a shooting club in my life, if I choose not to come to a meeting after being summoned by an ad hoc committee then that is my business, I have never done anything that would merit dismissal from any club and if not answering "certain questions" is such a serious offence, then God help us.

I have never contravened any constitution or rules supplied by me or not.

Declan Keogh

BlackDot

Facts as given to me by someone who was there:
-Flag has not been disbanded
-Declan was as he said part of a 3 man team representing the SSAI before last Thursday (DK, DC & TM)
-As of last Thursday by vote the team was reviewed and expanded. It was to include 3 main people. Declan Cahill and Declan Keogh included. It was to have the authority to bring in specialist expertese as required.
-The desire was to make sure the group could react and communicate quickly and efficiently.
-It is true that Declan Keogh was not going to be the number one man but that he would remain on the team of three.
-There is a lot of misinformation and half truths out there.

Leupold

That helps a bit Black Dot but it still does not address the issue that only 2 people have been nominated to the DOJ panel and Declan is not one of them. Therefore we, the shooting community at large, will not have the benefit of his knowledge and experience, face to face with the DOJ, where is can be most effective.

BlackDot

Leupold wrote: »

The issue that only 2 people have been nominated to the DOJ panel and Declan is not one of them.

The three man team was there so that should Declan Cahill not be able to attend one of the others, possible Declan Keogh could attend in his place. The committee specifically left the possibility open of DK attending...

navan_man.ie

It is my understanding that Declan if he is willing will be part of the team to attend the justice panel .

HL

FLAG

BlackDot wrote: »

Facts as given to me by someone who was there:
-Flag has not been disbanded
-Declan was as he said part of a 3 man team representing the SSAI before last Thursday (DK, DC & TM)
-As of last Thursday by vote the team was reviewed and expanded. It was to include 3 main people. Declan Cahill and Declan Keogh included. It was to have the authority to bring in specialist expertese as required.
-The desire was to make sure the group could react and communicate quickly and efficiently.
-It is true that Declan Keogh was not going to be the number one man but that he would remain on the team of three.
-There is a lot of misinformation and half truths out there.

Let me relay my experience of the last occasion I sat on a DOJ Firearms Review Group in 1998. The person who sits at the table carries the weight of the people he represents, he must be knowledgeable enough to make appropriate decision on the issues at hand and raised within the forum of the group. He must also be responsible and take full responsibility for the decisions made right or wrong.

There is no room for a committee of three when you have one seat at the table. When it comes to signing on the dotted line with respect to decisions made at the forum there is only room for one signature, the representative carries sole responsibility for doing the job, there is no time to go back to a committee of three.

I did explain this to the chairman at a very early stage in the proceedings, the problem being that it is all fine to discuss this at committee meetings but if the facts are ignored then what can one do.

I can assure you it is not that I would not be part of the hair brained scheme that would not work but for the fact that I pointed out the reality of how these committees work. Me advising the group would not work in the short space of time allowed.

It is time to row back the decision based not only on my experience but the clear weight of opinion in favour of common sense.

I will make the point again, FLAG has the mandate to represent the SSAI, reaffirmed only recently, I have requested the minutes of the meeting but they are not forthcoming.

PS Nice to see you back Mark, on holidays were you!

Regards
Declan Keogh
Chairman FLAG

dresden8

What the hell have I gotten myself into?

MortgageMan

NTSA have been offered a seat independently, yet they are represented by SSAI anyway. If seats are limited and NTSA are already represented, it would seem to me to be a good idea and show of solidarity if IPSA or indeed Declan Keogh were get the NTSA seat.

My two cents

Leupold

But The Minister's invitation was only for one representative and Declan was not nominated so how can he attend?

le_Chacal

DJKH wrote: »

I have never been dismissed from a shooting club in my life, if I choose not to come to a meeting after being summoned by an ad hoc committee then that is my business, I have never done anything that would merit dismissal from any club and if not answering "certain questions" is such a serious offence, then God help us.

I have never contravened any constitution or rules supplied by me or not.

Declan Keogh

1 funny you never turn up to something that you cant control.
2 ad hoc committee! you were one of the members that elected them
3 never dismissed! its on record may be the ssai would like to see the club files. other clubs i woudlnt start nameing them here or would you like me to
4 they are also on record with the garda, would they be telling liees aswell

5 how many otheer people are there on the flag committee or are you the only one.

6 is the ssai the governing body and flag a sub committee
then why is the flag trying to wag the pole

fat-tony

FLAG wrote: »

There are issues surrounding the recent SSAI decision, let’s deal with them in the correct manner and not enter into a debate on these pages.

Declan Keogh
Chairman FLAG

BlackDot wrote:

The three man team was there so that should Declan Cahill not be able to attend one of the others, possible Declan Keogh could attend in his place. The committee specifically left the possibility open of DK attending...

Perhaps Declan K would clarify whether he is or is not comfortable with this approach. His first post on this thread (part of which is quoted above), would indicate that he has issues with a recent SSAI decision. Is this decision to do with representation on the DoJ panel or with something else? If Declan K was aware all along that he was a proxy representative for when Declan C was unavailable, then why didn't he make this clear in the first post.

What is needed is a clear statement from the SSAI regarding the descision taken at the meeting, as otherwise there is a huge amount of speculation taking place from people not privy to the minutes of the meeting and a lot of disengenuous stirring from people who have seen the minutes.

JunkieW

It appears that people are forgetting what this thread is about.

The DoJ invited certain bodies to be represented on this panel.

If they felt that FLAG needed to be represented why didn't they invite them?

le_Chacal

FLAG wrote: »

Regards
Declan Keogh
Chairman FLAG

There is no room for a committee of three when you have one seat at the table. When it comes to signing on the dotted line with respect to decisions made at the forum there is only room for one signature, the representative carries sole responsibility for doing the job, there is no time to go back to a committee of three.

le_chacal
and this would be you, i seeem to rembeer that caused a problem with nrpai at the start of negotiations some years ago.

power strugle! it seem you dont want to loosee the power.
step down and let youger people do it

BlackDot

Declan?

So to summarise:

You will not assist the SSAI (and shooting community) at this critical juncture unless you can be in complete control?:(

Leupold

le_Chacal wrote: »

power strugle! it seem you dont want to loosee the power.
step down and let youger people do it

Perhaps younger and better educated people like you.

rrpc

MortgageMan wrote: »

NTSA have been offered a seat independently, yet they are represented by SSAI anyway. If seats are limited and NTSA are already represented, it would seem to me to be a good idea and show of solidarity if IPSA or indeed Declan Keogh were get the NTSA seat.

My two cents

The NTSA have long since accepted their invitation and nominated their representative. That information has been published here and on their website for the past week.

le_Chacal

Leupold wrote: »

Perhaps younger and better educated people like you.

im.............. sorryyyyyyyyyyyyy:(

sorry i was out at night college and my ninty two year old mother must have put my messages up. I will have to have words with her about her spelling.:p