Irish Times reports that all pistols are to be banned

rrpc

delop wrote: »

IMO there is no harm banning them for a few yes to see how it goes, and as for politicians trying to score political points by doing this. they will have scored a few for me, and I dont think im in the minority

We had no licensed handguns in the state twelve years ago when Veronica Guerin was murdered. Two years earlier we didn't have them when Martin Cahill was murdered. During the depths of the troubles, licensed handguns were available to residents in Northern Ireland at all times without hiatus and still do to this day. If it's proof that licensed handguns have no bearing on crime you're looking for, well there it is.

TBH some of the melodramatic whining from some posters here, I hope they are not all concealed weapons owners and if they are it really scares me :-(

There is no such thing as concealed wepaon ownership in this country. It is not allowed. We have very strict laws which only allow you to carry a firearm to and from a range and locked in a box in the boot of your car while in transit.

This is not the USA despite what the Minister would have you believe.

Trojan911

rrpc wrote: »

I think it's just as objectionable to imply that any officer of An Post would be involved in such criminality

Of course it is. It is however, very possible and I extend this further a field. A corrupt postie is just one example of how criminal gangs could get this information. Corruption is everywhere & just because you don't read about it in the news that dosen't mean it's not going on.

rrpc wrote: »

or that they would even bother to take the time to note who received what kind of letter at a praticular time of the year.

They would if they were being paid enough.

delop

rrpc i think you signature says it all :-)

rrpc

delop wrote: »

rrpc i think you signature says it all :-)

Indeed it does

mad puppy

If there were no firearms dealers, there would be no robberies of firearms dealerships. Well done Delop, that wasrather clever logic. However, there would still be illegal firearms, still be armed robberies and still be gangland killings. This is because criminals do not, in fact, rely on stealing licensed firearms to accomplish their nefarious aims.

So your solution, banning legal firearms (you would would have to ban shotguns too, you know) would only have the effect of eliminating the specific crime of stealing firearms from people entitled to have them. It would not prevent a single other crime, nor a single other killing.

What about alcohol and cigarettes and fast food? None of them do any good, all are health hazards that can and do kill, and if they were illegal then everyone would be much better off. Those people who can manage to have a glass of wine without driving or beating up the kids should suck it up for the greater good. Indeed, far more people would be saved by banning the above than would be saved by banning legal firearms - perhaps you should make that your platform. It would certainly have a more logical bent than your current ill-thought - and based on your comments about concealed weapons and "let's see what happens if they are banned", utterly ignorant - position.

Relevant

Obviously this isn't an argument i'll win on a shooting forum so i'll bow out. The fact that people are comparing cars etc being banned (because they can be used to harm people) to pistols is ridiculous.

A pistol is a small concealable(sp) object with the primary purpose of causing harm. It isn't comparable to a knife, it ahs other pusposes, it isn't comparable to a car, it has other purposes. A pistol ejects a small hard object designed to puncture what it hits at a high velocity. Ok so people use them for sport shootni but the fact of the matter is they are dangerous. If we were to adopt the rationale of some people around here i'd be able to buy a tank and drive around my land firing shells at targets as long as i locked it up in the evening!

rrpc

I for one would be disappointed if you were to feel that your views were not welcome on this forum.

It is often important to hear the views of people who are opposed to you or your interests. Sometimes you can become too inward looking and forget that there are other viewpoints.

As regards the cars argument, I don't think anyone is advocating banning cars to prevent deaths. Rather the analogy is being used to demonstrate that there are other ways to reduce the danger without banning anything.

The overarching question should really be: Is it right to reduce the freedoms of people in a democratic siociety because of the actions of those who remain outside the law?

In other words, are we punishing the victims?

Bananaman

delop,

I know you are only stirring the pot and trying to get people to rise to the bait but I would like to question some of your earlier statements.

I hope they are not all concealed weapons owners

I am starting to think you are actually not in Ireland but in the states. There is no concealed carry in Ireland except by the Gardai.

that will not affect your quality of life if taken from you...

I compete both at home and abroad - I plan all my holidays and a lot of my weekends around competition.

Don't tell me it would not affect my quality of life.

until we do we need the gov to make laws for everyone at the expense of a small minority in each case.

We are a Republic - go read the rules on that.

IMO there is no harm banning them for a few yes to see how it goes,

That was tried in Britain for the last 10 years - now the world knows what the result of that would be.

Hope you have a nice weekend - I know I'm going to spend mine on the range enjoying my sport .

B'Man

PJ Hunter

Bananaman wrote: »

delop,

I know you are only stirring the pot and trying to get people to rise to the bait but I would like to question some of your earlier statements.



I am starting to think you are actually not in Ireland but in the states. There is no concealed carry in Ireland except by the Gardai.



I compete both at home and abroad - I plan all my holidays and a lot of my weekends around competition.

Don't tell me it would not affect my quality of life.



We are a Republic - go read the rules on that.



That was tried in Britain for the last 10 years - now the world knows what the result of that would be.

Hope you have a nice weekend - I know I'm going to spend mine on the range enjoying my sport .

B'Man

I am starting to think you are actually not in Ireland but in the states. There is no concealed carry in Ireland except by the Gardai. B'Man[/quote] Oh yes there is:eek: about 10000? carry conceal licensed up north.

bunny shooter

"Up North", is another country. Same as US is another country. Articles 2 & 3 have been removed Therefore, you are wrong

delop

Bananaman wrote: »

delop,

I know you are only stirring the pot and trying to get people to rise to the bait but I would like to question some of your earlier statements.

Well Im sorry if I spoke outta turn that wasnt my intention...

Im from the south west

out of interest, when you go on these competitions abroad. do you bring your pistol with you on the plane? Is that allowed?

I only ask cause I do a bit of sailing, and they wont let me bring my lifejacket on airlines such as Ryanair, Aerlingus dont mind though

Sparks

delop wrote: »

out of interest, when you go on these competitions abroad. do you bring your pistol with you on the plane? Is that allowed?

Yup, they're shipped in the hold, inspected in the airport and securely locked away.

I only ask cause I do a bit of sailing, and they wont let me bring my lifejacket on airlines such as Ryanair, Aerlingus dont mind though

I'm guessing the lifejacket is seen as a risk in an unpressurised hold - does it have an autoinflation system using pressurised gas of some kind?

delop

Sparks wrote: »

does it have an autoinflation system using pressurised gas of some kind?

It does yes, but I believe most big planes have a pressurised hold when I looked into it.... Sure you Lynx would explode otherwise

I dont think its a safety issue with most airlines who refuse, more like they havent thought about it so they say no if asked. In fact one airline person on the phone told me that were I to ask the answer would be no, but If I didnt say anything everything would be fine, but to disconnect the bottle from the jacket to be sure

sfakiaman

delop wrote: »

I only ask cause I do a bit of sailing, and they wont let me bring my lifejacket on airlines such as Ryanair, Aerlingus dont mind though

Aerlingus would also let you bring your flaregun, but sorry no flares. You'd be lucky if Ryanair let you bring sandwiches.

PJ Hunter

bunny shooter wrote: »

"Up North", is another country. Same as US is another country. Articles 2 & 3 have been removed Therefore, you are wrong

Forget the articles bunny, sure the minister is only a stones throw away from licensed pistols by the thousands:eek: again, not like the USA! but fello cousins on the one Island all part of the EU, all who have similar problems with drug and international terrorism which has struck out and lashed many EU countries.

Jacobo

Relevant wrote: »

A pistol is a small concealable(sp) object with the primary purpose of causing harm.

My pistol is not exactly concealable. It's 30 cm long, it's bulky and weighs 1.3 kg. It was designed to punch holes in pieces of paper from 25 metres, a task at which it excels.

Of course it could be dangerous in the wrong hands, but every day I see people in the construction work in front of my office operating equipment which could be extremely dangerous in the wrong hands, and nobody says anything about it

tba

not many bulldozers are used in gangland killings.

sig226

not many bulldozers are used in gangland killings.

... and even less legally held firearms used in gangland killings

bunny shooter

PJ Hunter wrote: »

Forget the articles bunny, sure the minister is only a stones throw away from licensed pistols by the thousands:eek: again, not like the USA! but fello cousins on the one Island all part of the EU, all who have similar problems with drug and international terrorism which has struck out and lashed many EU countries.

Forget the articles, sure now we don't even have a constitutional claim to the six counties. Therefore, they are more of a foreign country than they ever were. Therefore, their laws, despite them being our "fello cousins" and fellow members of the EU counts for very little in legal terms in this country/juristiction.

And all this has what to do with legally held pistols?

Drug dealers and international terroists are now using licenced firearms, gosh I never realised

So now I am not just seen as a potential criminal but a potential drug dealer and international terrorist by the some of the other residents of this lovely little country the vast majority of who haven't been security vetted like I have by the Gardai and a Superintendant is satisfied I am a fit person to hold firearms with NO danger to the public or myself.

Relevant

sig226 wrote: »

... and even less legally held firearms used in gangland killings

I can think of 30 formerly legally held ones that will be

sig226

I can think of 30 formerly legally held ones that will be

Really?? because last year there was a record 22 gangland murders are none were committed with firearms that were ever legally held.

What percentage for illegaly held firearms do you think this represents??? Do you think a change in law will make it harder for criminals to license them???

bunny shooter

Relevant wrote: »

I can think of 30 formerly legally held ones that will be

:eek: Have you some inside knowledge or is this an assumption? Such scathing statements, with no basis in fact, are 99% of the problem with the disinformation that is being bandied about at the moment.

Relevant

bunny shooter wrote: »

:eek: Have you some inside knowledge or is this an assumption? Such scathing statements, with no basis in fact, are 99% of the problem with the disinformation that is being bandied about at the moment.

Ok so maybe they won't be used for murders. But they will be used to threaten, mame and intimidate. You hardly think the people who robbed them did so to set up a target shooting club in their back garden!

sig226

You hardly think the people who robbed them did so to set up a target shooting club in their back garden!

You have a point, but something tells me that these people would gain access to firearms even if there were no legal firearms in the country.

Relevant

sig226 wrote: »

You have a point, but something tells me that these people would gain access to firearms even if there were no legal firearms in the country.

Yes they would still gain access. But why should we make it easier for them to do so?

sig226

Yes they would still gain access

Im glad you agree.

But why should we make it easier for them to do so?

If you were to take this argument to its logical conclusion we should ban fast cars because having them makes it easier for joyriders to gain access to them.

If as we agree criminals will gain access to firearms either way why restrict the enjoyment of law abiding people???

kowloon

I'd imagine if all the illegal guns in the country, or even a significant proportion of them, saw actual use we would have more then 22 killings.

As for making it easier: In the few places where guns aren't available, and the reason is almost always poverty, they make the things from scratch. In Afghanistan it's a cottage industry, in the poorest parts of africa they make them out of plumbing supplies.

sig226

A handgun ban has been in operation in the UK for years now. This has been a complete failure. There has been nothing to indicate that a similar policy here would have a different result. I would push for a ban of all legally held firearms if I belived that it would help solve our gun crime problems. The truth is it would make no differrence, but the problem is that will not sell newspapers!

rrpc

Relevant wrote: »

Ok so maybe they won't be used for murders. But they will be used to threaten, mame and intimidate. You hardly think the people who robbed them did so to set up a target shooting club in their back garden!

I actually have trouble understanding why that particular crime was carried out. I have no idea what was taken, but can assume that it would be the usual small dealers collection of shotguns, .22 rifle and possibly a couple of .22 pistols (second hand) or air pistols.

When criminals seem to have so many guns they can drop them at the scene of the crime (last wednesday night), or give them to children (East Wall) then I doubt if their value in the criminal underworld is particularly high.

The going rate in the UK for a handgun on the street is said to be between £50 and £100, the haul on that basis would be little more than a couple of grand with the added bonus of some pretty nasty charges for the crime itself if the perpetrators are caught.

On that basis it doesn't even come within an asses roar of the haul from the cash in transit company with pretty much the same effort involved.

sig226

I actually have trouble understanding why that particular crime was carried out

Armatures? Perhaps they had more ambition than brains.
For all we know the pistols were replicas, blank firers, muskets or decommissioned. The authorities would still refer to them as pistols and talk of them as though they are real firearms. This technique was used to come up with the magic 1,800 handguns from a far smaller number after all.