FCP Conference this week

IRLConor

foxshooter243 wrote: »

Agree, reloading doesnt save money , you spend the same or more,but
you can shoot more often..it will expand their product/sales base.

It will also attract new trade in firearms from people who had previously said "I'd love a rifle in <insert calibre here> but the factory ammo is too expensive/not accurate enough/too hard to get".

Gunter Mauser

Reloading appears to have been kicked to touch. What has not been made clear is when and how this will occur.If the DOJ state in principal it will happen provoided safeguards regarding safety with new explosive laws in place first, then its a matter of a having reasonable time frame set for all of this to take place.

If on the other hand the Canadian Guidelines with range safety margins of one in a million chance of been hit by a stray bullet are adopted and this logic gets extended to reloading, its becomes one side picking from the menu part of what the Canadian guidelines have on offer ignoring other relevant items that complete the guidelines dish. IF this does become a selective process that ignores common sense with all the practical evidence from around the world regarding reloading, its safety record along with the fact that only small numbers of the shooting public will ever need or want to take up or engage in then the result will be that good faith in the process of partnership in the FCP will slowly ebb away.

Spectators stand along ditches as rally cars speed past, golf ball in the temple at close range, skydiving all carry greater risk to the general public than properly constructed firing ranges ever will. Personal risk by reloading is a fraction of a fraction compared to sitting behind the wheel of the family car. Unless we all go pc mad trying to stop all activity that has some degree of danger we risk loosing perspective on what
it means to live.:o

Sparks

Gunter, the DoJ isn't going to state in principle that it'll happen because they're looking at a total overhaul of the Explosives Act, and that's not a trivial task - and if they commit to stuff beforehand and find they can't deliver in whatever way they committed to, they get even more egg on their face and given the fiasco over statutory rape under McDowell - caused by rushing legislation - I doubt that any Minister will be pushing for stuff to be done fast as opposed to well, not in the near future anyways.

Also, the one-in-a-million-chance thing on the canadian standard has to do with ranges, not reloading, and it wouldn't make any sense to carry the principle over. As I understand it the only changes to the Canadian document is in the lexicon anyway (they call it a No Safety Area range, we call it a No Danger Area range, that sort of thing). Besides, you can reload in Canada last I checked anyway.

And frankly, the notion of giving up on the FCP because a small fraction of the shooting world couldn't be immediately accomodated stinks to high heaven of the last time pistols were offered back and the pistol shooting community took it in the neck because the fullbore rifle community weren't willing to wait and do stuff in stages. Yes, we should push for reloading. No, not getting it immediately shouldn't convince us to drop the FCP. That'd be childish. Des Crofton put it best (and at the time he was talking about deregulation of airguns under 7 joules/12 ft-lbs, something I want quite badly myself, so if I'm accepting it, you can as well) - some things may be a step too far right this second, but will be medium or long term goals for the FCP.

IRLConor

Sparks wrote: »

And frankly, the notion of giving up on the FCP because a small fraction of the shooting world couldn't be immediately accomodated stinks to high heaven of the last time pistols were offered back and the pistol shooting community took it in the neck because the fullbore rifle community weren't willing to wait and do stuff in stages. Yes, we should push for reloading. No, not getting it immediately shouldn't convince us to drop the FCP. That'd be childish. Des Crofton put it best (and at the time he was talking about deregulation of airguns under 7 joules/12 ft-lbs, something I want quite badly myself, so if I'm accepting it, you can as well) - some things may be a step too far right this second, but will be medium or long term goals for the FCP.

+1

Playing the long game can suck at times, but if we want any real change in the government/DoJ/Garda/public attitude towards firearms it's what we need to do.

Vegeta

well you only need to play the long game if there is opposition to your way of thinking.

The fact the DoJ are opposing (on poor reasoning) reloading is what saddens me.

Bananaman

accusing GB (a DoJ civil servant, and whom even Des Crofton is calling the best thing to happen to Irish shooting in decades) of being bribed

Not my intention at all.

However, someone is telling the powers that be that, contrary to the evidence in other jurisdictions, it is an unsafe practice which they need to be worried about.

If they query the police or relevant lawmakers in other jurisdictions as to whether this can be done and what problems they have experienced they will see that it is not a problem, yet, there is a perception that it is not do-able in this jurisdiction.

B'Man

Sparks

Very true - but then, that was the belief on pistols and fullbore here as well up until very recently - and I don't mean 2004, I mean up until last year or so when GB took over inside the DoJ. We've seen a total about-face on attitudes since, because actual data has been flowing in from people running shoots and nothing going wrong. Reloading is a bit trickier because the Explosives Act is so arcane, but I think if those reloading now were to come out into the light a bit more, that might do more to help the cause than they might think.

Dvs

when GB is making statements like
1.reloading is dangerous.
2.someone could make a bomb with this magic reloading dust.
3.someone could blow up their house reloading.
4.someone could over/under charge rounds and blow up a firearm and injure themselves.
5.criminals could get ammo for illegal guns.

I think its more a case of willful misinterpretation of the facts,
not lack of knowledge or factual information on the Reloading of metallic ammunition in the possession of the DOJ.

Much in the same way as some Superintendents around the country willfully misinterpret the firearms act over the years, and spout a out of context or dubious "fact".

And then dare you challenge them or to prove them wrong.

Its all very well playing nice with the DOJ and ideally would work out better for them and us, but it requires good faith on both sides.

However when they are taking this approach in relation to reloading they need to be challenged on the false and misleading statements that they are making, not given a polite silence.


Lets look at them one by one:
1.reloading is dangerous. Not in the mainland UK, Northern Ireland or other European countries where it takes place.

2.someone could make a bomb with this magic reloading dust.they can also use petrol which is freely available in any quantity, and far more volatile accelerant.

3.someone could blow up their house reloading.I must have missed all the news reports from around the world of this happening!

4.someone could over/under charge rounds and blow up a firearm and injure themselves.yes they could if the were and idiot and did not follow basic reloading practice and use loading data for their calibre.

They could also set themselves and their house on fire,
while refilling their running lawnmower with petrol on the kitchen table by candle light and smoking a cigar.. but saying something like that would be ridiculous.

5.criminals could get ammo for illegal guns.well they don't seem to have much of a problem getting either guns or ammo shipped into the country with the drugs they deal in, reloading ammunition takes a bit of work and if criminals wanted to work they would get f**ing jobs!


Dvs.

Bananaman

DVS,

You'd want to be careful there - we could end up with a pre-requisite for getting reloading may be to get all the scobies off the dole and earning a crust like the rest of us.

Sorry, was that politically incorrect?

<SPANK>

B'Man

foxshooter243

Sparks wrote: »

Very true - but then, that was the belief on pistols and fullbore here as well up until very recently - and I don't mean 2004, I mean up until last year or so when GB took over inside the DoJ. We've seen a total about-face on attitudes since, because actual data has been flowing in from people running shoots and nothing going wrong. Reloading is a bit trickier because the Explosives Act is so arcane, but I think if those reloading now were to come out into the light a bit more, that might do more to help the cause than they might think.

Sparks , would you not think that if those reloading right now came out into the light-they could end up in a dark place?

thehair

Bananaman wrote: »

DVS,

You'd want to be careful there - we could end up with a pre-requisite for getting reloading may be to get all the scobies off the dole and earning a crust like the rest of us.

Sorry, was that politically incorrect?

<SPANK>

B'Man

hi i am on the DOLE i lost 2 jobs in 2 years not by people with firearms no.
how gob=s-h-i-t young ooo yes male drives over 18 and under22 with
full driving lisence.steve
bananaman i am not giving out about the dole part of your post steve:)
when it come down to it this is why training is needed to reload ammo
back in 5 mins dinner is ready:D

IRLConor

foxshooter243 wrote: »

Spars , would you not think that if those reloading right now came out into the light-they could end up in a dark place?

My advice to anyone thinking of doing that would be to have a good chat with a solicitor first.

foxshooter243

IRLConor wrote: »

My advice to anyone thinking of doing that would be to have a good chat with a solicitor first.

I think they are better of in the dark dank chambers in which they reload:D it would take a strong argument to convince me otherwise;)

Gotta go and shoot some targets and i look forward to sparks logic on this one

Sparks

Dvs wrote: »

when GB is making statements

Except he wasn't. I was there watching and to me, I was seeing someone putting forward someone else's arguments and maybe not really agreeing with them, but not having enough expertise himself to make an argument for it. GB has to walk a fine line, don't forget - it's easy for us, we're definitely on one side of the argument; it's easy for the Gardai, they're definitely on the other. The DoJ, and GB as the point man, are not only smack bang in the middle and charged with being even-handed, they're also bound to operate within the confines of the legislation that's been passed and they face being the first people blamed by either side if something doesn't go perfectly.
It's not that I agree with him on this, you understand - I'm just used to seeing people in that position and he's not making a dog's dinner of it at all, so it's not really fair to go for his throat if you disagree with the position he's relaying.
(Not to mention that it's highly unproductive)

I think its more a case of willful misinterpretation of the facts,

Facts you know through decades of experience. Face it DVS, if shooting was an academic discipline, you'd have a BA, an MSc, a PhD and a tenured professorship by this stage.
GB's an ex-triathlete, not a shooter. Some leeway is required here.

Its all very well playing nice with the DOJ and ideally would work out better for them and us, but it requires good faith on both sides.

Indeed. It's been a whole week since the FCP conference, where it was explicitly stated that no decision had been reached and the FCP would be dealing with it and that the DoJ was not ruling anything out. "Good faith" on our side would demand slightly more time than seven days (seven days immediately following a change in Minister no less) to see movement...

they need to be challenged on the false and misleading statements that they are making, not given a polite silence.

As far as I saw, all the points you made below were made in the FCP conference, and will continue to be made in FCP meetings.

I think at this point, we need to display patience; and at the same time, the FCP needs to start making more information public faster so people know what the status of these things are. Which means we have to be in contact with our reps on the FCP and asking them what's going on.

Sparks

foxshooter243 wrote: »

Sparks , would you not think that if those reloading right now came out into the light-they could end up in a dark place?

No, because it's not illegal to reload in Ireland at the moment. Owning the kit is not illegal (this has been tested in court), nor is owning the components (once the appropriate licences are in place), nor is the act itself.
Obviously, I'd recommend that they discuss the matter with their solicitors to deal with any eventualities that arise, but here's the rub:

• If it is illegal, they should not be doing it;
• If it is not illegal, they have no reason to hide it from the DoJ and every reason to promote it.

Sparks

Bananaman wrote: »

DVS,
You'd want to be careful there - we could end up with a pre-requisite for getting reloading may be to get all the scobies off the dole and earning a crust like the rest of us.
Sorry, was that politically incorrect?
<SPANK>
B'Man

No, it just annoyed me a little because I spent six weeks unemployed myself there until two weeks ago (that's the nature of the computer industry, it's more a contract model than a job for life - or at least the web 2.0 part of it is), and several other boards.ie people are in precisely the same boat right now.
Mind you, I was living off savings, not the dole, but had this new job been a fortnight later, I would have been on the dole.

Gunter Mauser

"Frankly, the notion of giving up on the FCP because a small fraction of the shooting world couldn't be immediately accomodated stinks to high heaven" [ quote sparks]

Sparks to quote you back ("immediately accomodated" ) puts a childish tantrum spin on what you are saying.
Anyone / group that wants see the introduction of reloading responding with line "We want it all now"
would be responding very child like indeed, quiet some childish stink frankly. The difference in asking for something in a reasonable time frame while asking for some conditionally as in what is reasonably exceptable duration of time is nerveless not something that stipulates immediate accommodation of any group but as in all negotiations mature dialogue across the table it would be expected that when logjams occur topics that were up for discussion gets sidelined or kicked to touch then what appears as trivial disingenuous responses for this delay can cause great disappointment. It is unreasonable to request infromation regarding the possibility of reloading been introduced, will it be permissible in the future or not and if reloading definitely will be introduced at some stage are we talking about months years decades, what time frame can be expected exactly.Is it suggested negotiators on the FCP have not got an indicator as to when reloading will be introduced and if so does it also suggest it could take a very long time,no one appears to know?


Also, the one-in-a-million-chance thing on the canadian standard has to do with ranges, not reloading,

The one in a million chance referes to very high standards of safety, some might argue better odds getting killed in an mid air collision than getting hit by a bullet from a firing range. GB indicates dangers from reloading that does not seem to concern our neighbors up north or across the sea so is it expected the Canadians guidelines that we are going to follow for range design will also be the templet for reloading here.

Smokeless power, pyrodex declassified as an explosive. What are the difficulties of creating a mechanism
to do this,is it any more difficult than any other part of the jigsaw puzzle regarding firearms law. In most cases
the regular joe just wants to know where they stand one way or the other and to the surprise of some in the UK having a chat with the firearms officer with a cup of tea is being helpful all part of the service.If we are encouraged to be more open and frank getting away from past attudes of secrecy having infromation held by the few then progress must be onwards and foward.

Sparks

Gunter Mauser wrote: »

Anyone / group that wants see the introduction of reloading responding with line "We want it all now"
would be responding very child like indeed, quiet some childish stink frankly. The difference in asking for something in a reasonable time frame while asking for some conditionally as in what is reasonably exceptable duration of time is nerveless not something that stipulates immediate accommodation of any group but as in all negotiations mature dialogue across the table

That wasn't easy to parse Gunter, but if I understand you, you're saying that you're not looking for it now, just to be reassured that it'll happen later. Thing is, that is looking for it now, in effect. You're asking the DoJ to make the decision in our favour right now, even if implementation takes a while. And you're asking that they make that binding decision in a workshop in a closed meeting where only one Garda representative was present. And before all the intricacies of the changes to the Explosives Act have been worked through (it's as massive a change as the Firearms Act received, if not more so and has seen far less scrutiny because of the smaller community interest in it).
That just isn't realistic. The wheels grind far more slowly than that, and in this case, it would actually have been unjust to commit to an answer right then and there. Not because the decision would have been incorrect; but because the process followed wouldn't have given a fair voice to all stakeholders. That's a complaint we've made time and again for thirty years at the DoJ - it's hardly fair to now complain because they're doing it the way we wanted it done and it takes longer than we'd like!

Is it suggested negotiators on the FCP have not got an indicator as to when reloading will be introduced and if so does it also suggest it could take a very long time,no one appears to know?

The FCP reps could answer that far better than I could. Talk to your rep and find out!

The one in a million chance referes to very high standards of safety

Actually, it's down to the probability of a round escaping a range. It's an actual number, a real probability determined by computer modelling and life fire experiments with radar tracking. It's not a turn of phrase, you understand.

GB indicates dangers from reloading

No, GB indicates that such dangers have been presented to the DoJ and have to be considered. If they're demonstratably false, then we've no worries - and most of us would agree that that's the case, so it'll just be a matter of time.

In most cases the regular joe just wants to know where they stand

Yes, but that's not a simple question given the legislation!

If we are encouraged to be more open and frank getting away from past attudes of secrecy having infromation held by the few then progress must be onwards and foward.

Indeed - and yet look at the responses from our own community. The FCP doesn't put out information fast or far enough (where's the FCP website? the monthly email list of status updates?); and our own shooters shy away from any and all publicity it seems (read the "publicity in the shooting sports" thread!). I think we need to remove the beam from our own eye, to steal a phrase.

Grizzly 45

Just reading a buke here ,the Wildfowler by Roger Moran.Story asbout wildfowling and that way of life on the Shannon Estuary,from the War of independance to the 1940s.In it there are plenty of descriptions of buying BP for punt gunning,reloading shotgun cartridges etc.So it just asks the question.Was BP and reloading more common in the 1930s/40s in Ireland,than is let on??Surely in those days of the Independance/civil war ww2.Black powder would have been more curtailed in sales than now for obvious rerasons?Yet it seems to have been available in every hardware store in that time.??

Considering that the act is from the previous century [1800s] I have to ask was this act really enforced totally and stringently,even under English rule?Or were you allowed a certain amount of BP on the liscense,or were muzzleloading weapons exempt?
It just seems that this act has been brought to the fore more recently in the last 30 years than ever before,and moreso now?
IOW was it better left alone and continuing in a grey area,rather than bring it to loght of day and be handed a new and more stringent law on reloading???

IRLConor

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Just reading a buke here ,the Wildfowler by Roger Moran.Story asbout wildfowling and that way of life on the Shannon Estuary,from the War of independance to the 1940s.In it there are plenty of descriptions of buying BP for punt gunning,reloading shotgun cartridges etc.So it just asks the question.Was BP and reloading more common in the 1930s/40s in Ireland,than is let on??Surely in those days of the Independance/civil war ww2.Black powder would have been more curtailed in sales than now for obvious rerasons?Yet it seems to have been available in every hardware store in that time.??

Considering that the act is from the previous century [1800s] I have to ask was this act really enforced totally and stringently,even under English rule?Or were you allowed a certain amount of BP on the liscense,or were muzzleloading weapons exempt?
It just seems that this act has been brought to the fore more recently in the last 30 years than ever before,and moreso now?
IOW was it better left alone and continuing in a grey area,rather than bring it to loght of day and be handed a new and more stringent law on reloading???

Here's a link to the Explosives Act, 1875. If you can understand that, you'll be popular around here.

I don't know what bits have and have not been repealed/amended but one point to be aware of (if you go digging) is that while the Dangerous Substances Act, 1972 amends the act, those parts were never commenced. I have no idea why, but it confused me for a while.

Bananaman

that's the nature of the computer industry

I know - I'm a software engineer myself - I have been on the dole - twice.

I was only extracting the michael.

B'Man

Gunter Mauser

Gunpowder.

(1.) To a person keeping for his Private Use and not for sale gunpowder to an amount not exceeding on the same premises thirtypounds[/U]. [/COLOR]
Consumers Stores Gunpowder. Licensing and Regulation of Stores.

15. Anyperson may apply for a license for a gunpowder store Store license to the local authority at the time arid place appointed by such authority, stating his name, address, and calling, the proposed site and construction of the store and the amount of gunpowder he authority. proposes to store therein; and the local authority shall, as soon as practicable, if the proposed site, of the store, and amount of gunpowder are in accordance with the Order iii Council herein-after mentioned, grant to the applicant, on payment of such fee, not exceeding five shillings, as may be fixed by that authority, the license applied for.
(3.) Prescribe the maximum amount of gunpowder, not exceeding Two Tons, to be kept in stores.

32.Allgunpowder exceeding one pound in weight, when publicly-exposed for sale or sold, shall be ina substantial case, bag canister, or other receptacle made and closed so as to prevent the packages gunpowder from escaping, and (except when the same is sold to labelled. any person employed by or on the property occupied by the vendor for immediate use in the service of the vendor or on such property,) the outermost receptacle containing such gunpowder shall have affixed the word "gunpowder" in conspicuous characters by means of a brand or securely attached label, or other mark.

Dublin City Directory 1850

Robert Long, 14 Arran quay (fishing and fowling, gunpowder merchant)


Ballincollig Gunpowder Mills. Cork.

The Royal Gunpowder Mills continued to make explosives for armies, mining companies and railway companies all over the world from 1794 until the beginning of the 20th century. The industrial complex housing the works meanders along the bank of the River Lee. The many buildings used in the manufacture of gunpowder are still scattered along the main canal and millraces. The complex covers over 130 acres, and the centre provides a guide to the history and interpretation of the explosive goings on in the area.

Sparks

In other words, if you get a licence, you can have propellant. But we knew this already. The tricks are getting the licence and getting the import licence (which the DoJ are currently refusing to grant).

Gunter Mauser

Sparks wrote: »

In other words, if you get a licence, you can have propellant. But we knew this already. The tricks are getting the licence and getting the import licence (which the DoJ are currently refusing to grant).

Sure sparks I know we know the above already, more to do with the comparison between the way it was then and now.

When you think of the quantity of Gunpower (low grade explosive) that could be held under the 1875 act in position by the individual or Store keeper, oil burning lamps or candles exposing flame, it makes our modern domestic environment in the reloading context look very safe. Smokeless power, gadgets to do it all just enforces how much safer now it really is by comparison.:o

Sparks

Photos from the day - first everyone at the conference, then the FCP panel representatives, then the DoJ firearms department team.

Bananaman

Jaysus,

Looks like mass was just over.

I have yet to wear a tie to a shooting event - (bar the one tied around my head at the Club Chrimbo party but that doesn't count) first time for everything I suppose.

Hope everyone looks that bright eyed and bushy tailed this time next year.

B'Man

Sparks

Well, sometimes suits just happen

F-ClassWillie

Nearly fell over watching nation wide after the 6-1 News.

Here you had school Boys & Girls in the Roi making 24" rockets in class assisted by Dads instructed by a yank and guess what the propellant was:eek: the dreaded black power. Launching took place by pressing an electronic activating button. Think we are going about things the wrong way, between the Boyne enactments and kids launching rockets from the school football pitch we have it hard. Nation Wide is the way to go, nice friendly presenters with pleanty of screen time.:)

F-ClassWillie

Black Powder Firing Cannons.

Grizzly 45

[

Here you had school Boys & Girls in the Roi making 24" rockets in class assisted by Dads instructed by a yank and guess what the propellant was:eek: the dreaded black power. Launching took place by pressing an electronic activating button

Now THAT is Intresting.....I have seen model rockets,made by Estes for sale in the UK.The engines are basically BP with a smoke charge.
Wonder are they these..Or are they building the whole thing from scratch?As I tried to get one of these kits here in the ROI only to be told they were classified as "fireworks" and therefore illegal.So have we now got a job for the Gardai and ERU to arrest these feindish rocketeers?:eek: God knows they might build a V2 and launch it at the Dail or somthing !!!!:eek:

.

Think we are going about things the wrong way, between the Boyne enactments and kids launching rockets from the school football pitch we have it hard.

Aint that a fact:rolleyes: