Banned from Shooting

bunny shooter

But you forgot all the denials of ANY list being handed in just prior to the revelation that a list was handed in

bunny shooter

TBH this is gone so childish I don't really care anymore :rolleyes:

I'll serve out me ban and try to be a good boy :rolleyes:

IRLConor

bunny shooter wrote: »

But you forgot all the denials of ANY list being handed in just prior to the revelation that a list was handed in

What was denied was that the list was "a list with specifications of particular handguns to the DOJ and said that they were the only type of handguns that they thought should be used for target shooting in Ireland".

Get your facts right please and stop slinging muck.

bunny shooter

yawn, course it was :rolleyes:

Does this mean I'm causing more trouble

Sparks

What I don't get - and never have fully gotten - is how folks like Bunny here can say "oh, he said X" on here, and expect others to believe it, despite the fact that the original material is still available for viewing and contradicts what they're saying.

For example, in this case, it all kicks off on post 32 of this thread with a post from DoubleAlpha:

From what I am hearing, a certain group sometime ago sent in a list with specifications of particular handguns to the DOJ and said that they were the only type of handguns that they thought should be used for target shooting in Ireland.

If this is true, then I think that these guys are responsible for this situation.

I responded:

I've heard that rumour as well. However, I've also heard where it started from, and suffice it to say that the knowlege of the source very soundly discredited the rumour in my mind, long before I ever asked the guys cited in the rumour what the story was. And we've had this argument on boards before, and I don't want to go into it again. Click on the Search button at the top of the page and use it - there's at least three threads in here about it.

The topic goes away at this point, and after two pages of in-depth information about the original post on that topic, bunny dragged it up again in post 93 with a snide comment or five, utterly derails the thread and finally launchs into it in post 104:

Apparently a list of a certain type of pistol/s was handed to DOJ and/or the FCP by certain people involved in the FCP without the agreement and/or knowledge of other FCP participants ? Hence my statement "All the members of the FCP know " As the man said, there are stories circulating. I reckon the truth is out and some people are worried ? Who they may be is anyones quess though.

Now this is exactly what I'd answered waaay back on the first page of this thread, but Bunny didn't think this was good enough. I responded the same way I had earlier:

Bunny, I've heard that story before. Like I said, I know where it started. And knowing where it started completely discredited the story.

And then Bunny replied:

As the say in the "X Files" - "The Truth is out there".
smoke and mirrors :rolleyes:

rrpc took exception to this tone, because of Bunny's earlier snideness towards him between posts 93 and 104 and replied in depth:

It wil come out here and now if you can answer my questions directly instead of beating about the bush. Any sane person or organisation would be worried if untrue rumours are circulating about them and yes I will refer you to DeVore's post on that score. I would particularly wish to have withdrawn the scurillous allegation: "said that they were the only type of handguns that they thought should be used for target shooting in Ireland." which is complete bull.

The only list the NTSA gave the DOJ was the one that specified all the ISSF rules regarding firearms to be used in ISSF competition.

In the interests of openness, I'm attaching that document here. It was given to the DoJ at a meeting back last year before the FCP was set up, and was in reference to the draft restricted list which if it had continued in it's then form would have restricted certain Olympic Air Rifles among others.

This list was also produced at an FCP user group meeting (not the full FCP) to prove that there was no such thing as a 'Pistol designed for use in Olympic competition' as stated in the SI No. 21.

And he attached the list to the post. There was a bit of waffling back and forth as Bunny fudged the point as much as he could. I then added my 2c to rrpc's response:

The list that RRPC mentioned by the way, I can confirm - because it's a list I originally drew up myself. This was before the FCP, before the CJA and if I remember correctly, before even the final CJB was published. It comes from an australian target shooting webpage and it's a list of photos of ISSF pistols and it's marked as such. The point of it was to show what the ISSF rulebook was referring to, because the DoJ had no mental image of target shooting pistols (they did have a very solid image of the handguns in use by terrorist groups at the time, and we wanted some seperation from that image). At the time, the DoJ had been told by the source of the rumours you're discussing that 9mm glock pistols were used in the Olympics. We were asked about that. We pointed out that they weren't since there are no centrefire pistols in the Olympics (they went off the programme in the early 70s with the 300m rifle events because of the cost of building new ranges for them and the increasing pressure on space in the Olympic Village). At no time that I know of or have heard about has it ever been suggested that it's a list of the only pistols that ought to be allowed. We were not the only group meeting the DoJ at that time by the way - we were one of at least a half-dozen.

We even posted the photos:


And it goes on like that, with Bunny constantly saying that because we had a list that had been shown to the DoJ of the pistols used in ISSF shooting years before the Firearms Consultation Panel had been formed, that that meant that we had gone in to see the Department of Justice behind the back of the Firearms Consultation Panel and given the DoJ a list that specified the only pistols anyone in the country ever needed.

And as I explained at the time by PM to Bunny, there was a certain person out there who had just been kicked off the national committees with a great deal of good cause, and he was starting a lot of rumours to blacken the names of those on those committees by spreading lies in order to have them ousted and him put back in. He'd gone to the DoJ, to the Department of Sport, to anyone who'd listen and lots that wouldn't, and generally caused a lot of embarressment and havoc for those trying to do the job. That same person had already tried (and almost succeeded) to have the shooting forum on boards.ie closed down through threats of libel action against several people, and has a long history of similar behaviour over two decades. So I wasn't really very happy at the idea that he'd use boards.ie to attack the governing bodies through rumour and inneuendo like that.

By the way, by the end of that thread, the main body whom it was argued had been damaged by the alleged "list", explicitly came out and said publicly that in their opinion the rumour was horsesh/t. Which still didn't slow down Bunny, because Bunny "knew" better than every other person involved in the entire story on every side of the table. The DoJ say no list of these-pistols-and-only-these-pistols was handed in. The NTSA say no such list was handed in. The IPSA say no such list was handed in. The FCP says no such list was handed in. Everyone supposedly involved says no such list was handed in. And we all knew who'd started the rumour in the first place, and why, and what they stood to gain. So we were all satisfied that the rumour was bull. All bar bunny, that is, who wasn't on the committees, didn't meet the DoJ, knew noone involved, and had no valid source of information that he'd tell us about.

And that's that story.

bunny shooter

Selective quoting from the thread is not a noble ploy Sparks.

#post 36 where rrpc claims the chairman of the NTSA wanted to know who sent in a list, and as you rightly point out above it seems the NTSA sent a list of pictures, which isn't really a list at all.

Or was it you did it as an individual Sparks without the approval of your own NGB?

As IrlConnor put it, for the Gallery, there were denials of a list and then there were admissions of a list, still seems strange to me, all by members of the NTSA, which Sparks, Irl Connor and a mod at that time rrpc are still members of, strange that isn't it. Looks like one shooting organisation has 50%control over the moderation of the shooting forum.

Also for the gallery after the NTSA showed Dept of Justice this list the Gardai, in the early days of pistol licencing, were advised to refuse to licence any pistol that wasn't suitable for "Olympic" shooting.

Hope I'm not causing trouble again Someone take this shovel off me

IRLConor

bunny shooter wrote: »

As IrlConnor put it, for the Gallery, there were denials of a list and then there were admissions of a list, still seems strange to me, all by members of the NTSA, which Sparks, Irl Connor and a mod at that time rrpc are still members of, strange that isn't it. Looks like one shooting organisation has 50%control over the moderation of the shooting forum.

rrpc was never a mod and I have never been anything other than an ordinary member of the NTSA. Currently there are no mods or former mods on the committee of the NTSA.

Not just that, but even if one of us was on the committee it would still be quite a leap to suggest that that would translate into the NTSA having control over the forum.

Vegeta

bunny shooter wrote: »

As IrlConnor put it, for the Gallery, there were denials of a list and then there were admissions of a list, still seems strange to me, all by members of the NTSA, which Sparks, Irl Connor and a mod at that time rrpc are still members of, strange that isn't it. Looks like one shooting organisation has 50%control over the moderation of the shooting forum.

So seriously, tinfoil hat or saucepan?

Bunny I would really have thought that when the NARGC rumour thread went sour you would have stayed out of the politics stuff on boards. Why do you feel the need to constantly bring this stuff up. Why not just be a useful poster and share your knowledge with others or tell us about your shooting experiences.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=56244313&postcount=69

Listen lad I'm sure you are a nice fella away from the keyboard, but a darker side of you comes across on the forum. Its not doing you any good I'd imagine

Sparks

bunny shooter wrote: »

Selective quoting from the thread is not a noble ploy Sparks.

You'd have me quote every post in a five-page thread???

#post 36 where rrpc claims the chairman of the NTSA wanted to know who sent in a list, and as you rightly point out above it seems the NTSA sent a list of pictures, which isn't really a list at all.

And that pretty much sums up why and how Bunny takes up so much of our time on the forum.

Post #36 Bunny, is where rrpc said (not "claims" unless you're calling him a liar, and if you want to do that, don't hide behind snide suggestive language) that the chairman wanted to know who handed in a list of the only kind of pistols anyone should be allowed have. The list that rrpc and I spoke of later was a list (with photos so they didn't think of a glock when they thought of an olympic air pistol, which - thanks to the above-unnamed someone - they were at the time) of pistols we use in the NTSA.

Most folks get that those are not the same thing and preparing the latter is not preparing the former. (And by "most folks" I mean the NTSA, IPSA, FCP, DoJ, SSAI, NRAI, NASRPC, NSAI - basicly, everyone bar bunny from what I can tell).

I mean, I have a list here of groceries to buy this weekend, does that mean that "a list exists"? :rolleyes:

And for the gallery, the list and photos the NTSA prepared was prepared years ago, before the new firearms laws were written. Before the FCP was founded. Before the restricted firearms list was ever dreamt up and before it was ever drafted. So how they were supposed to have prepared the list behind the backs of the FCP in order to influence the contents of the restricted firearms list is an interesting question, given that neither existed at the time. I wish all governing bodies would display such foresight!

Also for the gallery after the NTSA showed Dept of Justice this list the Gardai, in the early days of pistol licencing, were advised to refuse to licence any pistol that wasn't suitable for "Olympic" shooting.

No, they weren't. For the gallery, the Department of Justice is prohibited by law (as established in Dunne v Donoghue in the Supreme Court) from giving such "advice". The problem is that Superintendents are legally the only person in the country that can make the licence/don't licence decision when someone applies for a firearms licence and noone - not the Commissioner, not the Minister, not the Courts, not the Dail - can direct them to say yay or nay in that decision. And that means that the Superintendents' backsides are the ones in the sling if something goes wrong. And that combination of not being given direction, being given enormous liability, and being given both the power to do as they wish and no training to tell them which way to go, makes them fairly conservative and they go with what they know or what they think they know.

And when they look at our pistols (see above) they don't think of someone holding up a bank with one; but with other pistols, like Glocks (which have a famous brand name unfortunately) or "9mm" pistols, they've heard of them being used in gun crime and they're far more wary. And that's why you hear of difficulties for those shooting with those kind of firearms.

Hope I'm not causing trouble again Someone take this shovel off me

You're not causing trouble Bunny. You're just using up time that could be used for something productive.

seamus

Closing this to save people from wasting their time. Gordon has already been here and ruled. I concur, the ban is just.

Everything else is irrelevant politics.