FCP Conference this week

Rovi

cantona wrote: »

Does that mean that I can stop my 5 hour send/receive 86% sent now?

Please say yes.

EEEK!
Are you doing this over a modem???

Feck, you should have said, no-one's expecting someone to tie up their phone connection on a big file like this.

I've grabbed it from IRLConor's link, and I suspect everyone else who wants it can (or will) do the same.

I presume we're talking about the same thing?
The version IRLConor posted is dated September 1999, is yours the same?
If it is, go ahead and cancel the upload.
Actually, even if it isn't, cancel it anyway; trying to do this over a slow connection is way above and beyond the call of duty.

Perhaps send a quick e-mail to your recipients telling them about the link here?


Thanks,
Rovi.

IRLConor

cantona wrote: »

Does that mean that I can stop my 5 hour send/receive 86% sent now?

Please say yes.

Yes.

The link I posted is the document I received from cantona.

Bananaman

Does any of this concern and need for download mean that anyone - in particular - is going to voice their opinion, at the conference that it is a travesty that IPSA is not included in the bodies that represent the "shooting community"

I find any inference that IPSA do no represent a proportionate number - far larger that some of the represented bodies - of the shooting community - quite offensive and reprehensible.

Any attempt by anyone, while representing another shooting body or club should be treated with the utmost contempt.

And I'm being nice.

B'Man

Sparks

Any attempt by anyone, while representing another shooting body or club should be treated with the utmost contempt.

Any attempt by anyone to say "Oi, the IPSA ought to have been here" should be treated with contempt?

IRLConor

Bananaman wrote: »

Any attempt by anyone, while representing another shooting body or club should be treated with the utmost contempt.

I honestly don't think there'd be many in the various shooting bodies or clubs who would consider the IPSA not a part of the "shooting community". If you shoot, you're part of the community as far as I'm concerned.

EDIT:

To clarify my thinking on the various interpretations of "shooting community" a little further:

If you get a wedding invitation that says "Bananaman + Family" do you bring the wife and kids or do you bring cousin Jimmy? Technically he's family too, but you're going to pick the people closest to you. It's not because you don't like cousin Jimmy or that you want to snub him, it's because fundamentally your close relations are more important to you than your more distant ones.

Now, to stretch the analogy a bit further: If you get a wedding invitation that says "Bananaman + up to 4 family members (sorry, the church is small)" and you have a wife and two kids you might consider inviting cousin Jimmy since he really wants to be at the wedding. You might also consider telling the bride and groom that you're only bringing three since they might want the space for someone important to them that they had been forced to leave out.

In any of the cases above it's unfair for cousin Jimmy to assume that you didn't include him on the invitation because you're out to get him.

IRLConor

Sparks wrote: »

Any attempt by anyone to say "Oi, the IPSA ought to have been here" should be treated with contempt?

I don't think that's what he was saying.

Sikamick

Sparks wrote: »

Several actually. Anyone else want to decloak as having been invited?

Sparks, I was but cant attend due to illness. I am sure there will be plenty of good people attending that will act in our interest.

Michael O'Connor
Secretary to Dublin Target Sports Club

Bananaman

My comments were in response to the following earlier quote:

So there's a 'shooting community' and a 'shooting community' depending on who you are.

That point of view should not be accepted and should, in fact, be fought by anyone who regards themselves as part of the "shooting community".

My "Any attempt" statement was in reference to people either expounding or accepting that statement or it's like.

B'Man

Sparks

Well, we're here, a mite early...

Sparks

Quick change in the lineup already, the Olympic talk won't be given by Kevin Kilty, but by (if I heard right) Cian Merne.

Sparks

And underway. Opening address by Mary O'Rourke, standing in for Brian Lenihan (events overtaking organisation there). Discussion on the firearms licence fee hike and other recent changes.

Sparks

Quite a few boards.ie posters here as well, we've noted.

Sparks

Cian Merne now up to talk about olympic shooting, giving Kevin Kilty's talk with about six hours notice

Sparks

Nice to see the Irish team on a conference slide (the clay pigeon team winning the ISSF world championships in 2002).

Sparks

On age of competitors - start winning early, you keep winning for longer.

Sparks

BTW, this is on a laptop battery and wifi, so if comments stop suddenly, it's not censorship

Discussion now about the level of committment required for olympic shooting at an international level, facilities in other nations (as many clay pigeon ranges around milan as golf clubs around dublin), how the ICPSA high performance program is working.

Sparks

And now Garreth Byrne on the FCP.

Sparks

GB was surprised we've not had consultation processes in the past when he started in the firearms department. Thinks the DoJ will always be seen as the spoilsports by the sport because they have to set the rules. Was involved in a minority sport before (triathlon) so knows about that side of things.

The media makes life harder with the tabloid coverage of target shooting. Focus must be on a healing relationship with the shooting community for the moment (group hug later). This may be the first of an annual series of these meetings.

Sparks

Very hard for the Ordinary Decent Shooter to get a good deal thanks to criminality and the media. Need to keep things as constructive as possible, even when taking one step forward and two steps back. The legislation originated in 1925, so it was never going to be neat and tidy, and the explosives legislation goes back to the 1800s. The DoJ has not distinguished itself in this area (mention made of an apology for this - which I think is a purely informal thing btw).

Equilibrium is a goal here.

Vegeta

Anyone asking questions Sparks? Doesn't sound like that sort of a day though more of a formal preentation type scenario.

Sparks

The recent changes to the firearms system have perturbed the system (in a physics sense) and we're now reseeking equilibrium.

Attitudes to firearms need adjustments, and they're set by poor press and the like.

To GB, responsible ownership and clubs are the glue of the system, and GB's been impressed over the past year by exposure to the people in the FCP and the community in general - the things that tick off the civil service or gardai aren't in evidence there.

Sparks

The FCP status report is in this month's ISD. The DoJ's goal here is to be as facilitative as possible while implementing the 2006 act. The panel has experts at it, so the DoJ don't have a need to be experts in the field with the FCP in place.
Much discussion has happened in the FCP about guidelines, secure storage, competence levels, fees structure, and so forth.
Upcoming subgroups - customer service issues, clubs.
The economics of this aren't lost on the DoJ either.
The elements of the system would be the infrastructure and the people in the community.
The 2006 act was a bit over-ambitious in trying to get everything going on the same day.
On the supply side, the dealer survey 2007 was commissioned. The results were anonymous and of great interest to the DoJ.
The move to restricted dealerships.

Sparks

Over 50 applications in for restricted dealerships so far.
Moving on those is a priority.
Infrastructure - Clubs and ranges
Approval now secured from Canada to use their standards
The people -
Secure storage, competence, fee structure (now declassified as an exise duty, so the money comes into DoJ and into a firearms fund to go to safety programmes and the like), training licence.

The legislation is not a thing of beauty!
Boards.ie mentioned (GB happy he features here regularly, and I was talking to him earlier, he does read here regularly).
Misc Prov Bill 2008 mentioned.
New system will be better.
Hopes for better clearer days ahead and better mutual understanding.

Ahead of schedule, so taking queries:

Irish Deer Society - query on number of licencees (200,000)
GB - 235,000 licences, approx 200,000 people but hard statistics are not easy to find within the DoJ

Firearms Dealer - is there a plan to simplfy in garda stations the procedure for applying for licences
GB - yes, that's foreseen and planned. The paperwork now dates to the 1920s. IT systems need to be used more, without looking for an extremely expensive all-singing system. Local knowlege is exceptionally important, but consistency is also required. A more manageable way of doing this needs to be sought.
- will licenceing be outsourced?
GB - yes.

Deer Alliance - O'Leary case, how does it affect the Restricted firearms act?
GB - not briefed (was away), hasn't seen the judgement yet. Thinks that it shouldn't apply.

British Deer Society - will the extention of the licence to multi-year apply to visitor's permits
GB - not decided yet. Ireland/UK situation slightly unique given the regularity of the travel involved.

Taking a coffee break now.

Sparks

A few vegeta. Workshop 3 tomorrow looks like the real questionfest actually, it's left competely open and questions are being solicited on the form attendees fill out to indicate which workshop they'll attend.

Dr_Teeth

Thanks very much for the liveblogging Sparks, keep em coming.

bigred

Dr_Teeth wrote: »

Thanks very much for the liveblogging Sparks, keep em coming.

Agreed. Good job Sparks

bunny shooter

I'll "de-cloak" now. I was invited but unfortunately, couldn't attend.

Thanks Sparks for updates.

foxshooter243

good stuff thanks..

Sparks

Back from coffee.
Spoke with GB, he's happy this is being mentioned here and I'll pass on the questions from here into Workshop 3 later.

Superintendent Noel Clarke now.
Project manager in the Gardai for the entire process of bringing in the 2006 act's changes.
Significant lead time for the serious IT changes in the Gardai involved in this.
Is also a minority sport (motorsport).
Talk was to be about the Guidelines, but things have prevented sections 31 et al being brought in and so that's not going to happen.
So insight into the Gardai point of view instead.
230,000+ licences held by 200,000 or so people.
All renewals at once. Majority happen without issue or difficulty at all.
Biggest problem is late payment of fees - being chased months after because people just don't get round to paying on time.
Will talk later about outsourcing. Goal is to remove money from the process as much as possible, as the administration costs for any money is enormous (public bodies needing auditing and so forth).
Gardai are just one of the three parts of the system (the other two being the DoJ who set the law and the Judiciary who make final judgements).

Sparks

Talking about disputes over whether or not conditions are met. Reasonableness is the main test used; he doesn't think any of us would have differing judgements if put in the same place. Mention made of O'Leary v Maher, and that common sense isn't always common (varies from person to person) and so they have to accept that what's common sense to one person isn't common sense to everyone else.

In the vast majority of certs, no conditions are applied (outside of the number of rounds on the cert). The cases we all hear of are not the norm, they are the exceptions.

Super is required to consider criminals getting someone else's firearm. The Super's responsible for the level of crime in their area and it has to be a consideration - not a bar, but a consideration. Secure storage is an important thing as a result.