Irish Times reports that all pistols are to be banned

PJ Hunter

It is claimed one of the reasons pistols need to banned is fear by media and politicians that 1800 pistols & revolvers of various kinds not all of them glocks brings us closer to pistol ownership on a par with the USA.
All his has nothing to do with legalities of course but it is been used as the reference to prove what the minister states as fact.

Other EU countries have much more serious problems domestically
than us. Yet they don't knee-jerk in the same way as happens here.
Perhaps they never relised pistols are licensed around the EU inc NI:)

bunny shooter

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!

So you have changed your assumption of them being used to murder to being used to intimidate etc instead. And for your next wild assumption and scathing comment ............................... ?

So a baseball bat, pick-axe handle or a hurley or some such item can't do same. Yet there is no cry to ban these items.

So banning pistols will stop the criminals from intimadating people etc?

I actually don't know why they robbed 'em. Do you? And can you please provide some evidence for your next assumption?

I think a far more pertinant question here is have the people involved in this crime such little disregard for the law and the consequences of being caught that they are willing to carry out a crime like this. It is obvious that the criminals have no fear of being caught.

Kryten

Received the following reply from Joe Costello

Dear xxxxxxx

Thank you for your email regarding handguns.

Where weapons are used the vast majority of criminal activity is carried out with handguns. I do not believe that there is any valid reason why any citizen should be entitled to carry a handgun or to keep a handgun in their home.

Neither do I believe that licensed gun-dealers should keep guns in their home under any circumstances. It is appalling that a robbery should take place as happened yesterday in Co Tipperary where 30 handguns and rifles were stolen from the home of a licensed firearms dealer.

The damage to life and limb that will be caused by that single theft alone is incalculable.

I have no desire to interfere with the use of handguns on the firing range and for competition purposes. However, I believe that the licensing and storage of handguns must be more strictly controlled in the interests of protecting the lives of our citizens.

Yours sincerely


Joe Costello TD

And my reply

Dear Deputy Costello,

Thank you for your prompt reply.I agree that this recent theft is appaling. But it makes no difference if the Firearms dealer had the guns at home or a different location. A tiger kidnap, or somone putting a gun to your head, will still result in the theft of the guns, cash, cars, etc... The contents of the theft have not been fully confirmed, so your assumption that it was 30 handguns and rifles is just speculation. Realistically, most firearms dealers will mainly stock shotguns, a few rifles and at most only a couple of pistols. The reason for this is that pistols cannot be purchased by the dealer for stock. Each handgun needs an end user certificate, i.e a licence.
The stolen firearms may or may not be used in crime. This is of great concern. I hope the Gardai are able to recover them and catch the perpetrators.
Licenced pistol shooters do not carry their pistols. They do transport them to and from the range, locked in a box in the boot of the car. Yes they do keep them at home, but there is no other workable alternative. For example competition shooters, of which I am one, need to practie very regularly. The competitions are usually on weekends and can be located anywhere from Wicklow to Cork and other places in between. So central storage in an armoury would not really work. Also the central storage location would, in time ,become known and itself become a target for criminals. Unless it is in an Army Barracks armoury.
For best practice on laws governing handgun ownership, we should look to Europe for ideas and stop comparing us to the US. German and French firearms laws are strict. As are Northern Ireland, Jersey, Isle of Man. We do not need to re-invent the wheel here or impose a ban. We are as passionate about our Sport as a lot of people are about GAA. If you click on NASPRC , It will give you an idea of how active our sport is. As you said, Yes, we need strict controls, but the ban that the minister is proposing is totally unjust.
You would be extremely welcome to attend a shoot in order to see what goes on. You will be pleasantly surprised. You will find all the contact information you need on the website I have linked.

Yours in Sport

BryanL

FRom todays Examiner.ie not good news on any level. The message i get is that criminals are out of control but the politicians get is that we again need to ban handguns.

Gardaí hunt gang who stole guns from dealer’s home

By Noel Baker and Ciaran Murphy
GARDAÍ were last night hunting a gang of men who stole 30 guns from a rural firearms dealer in Tipperary amid fears the weapons may end up in the hands of feuding criminals.


Four men, at least one of whom was armed, ambushed Thomas Keevan and his partner Rita as they returned after a night out to their house in Cregg, a mile and a half from Carrick-on-Suir, at about 1.30am yesterday.

The couple was taken inside and held there, along with his partner’s daughter and another person, thought to be a caretaker, as the raiders collected the 30 firearms, which included pistols and rifles.


The raiders then escaped from the house, also taking the family car, a champagne- coloured Honda Civic Saloon. Mr Keevan, who is in his 50s and known locally as Tonnie, managed to free himself and raised the alarm.

No shots were fired and no one was injured in the raid.

The Mayor of Carrick-on-Suir, Sinn Féin Cllr Liam Walsh, said one possibility was that feuding gangs from either Limerick or Waterford targeted the rural gun dealership to stock up on weapons.

“That amount of firearms on the streets, God only knows,” he said, adding that people in the area were shocked that a member of the community had been targeted in such a way.

It is understood Mr Keevan has long repaired guns and operated the licensed firearms dealership from the two-storey property in Cregg.

Mr Keevan and his loved ones were yesterday being cared for by his brothers Eddie and John Paul, who live locally.

Eddie Keevan’s wife and Tommy’s sister-in-law, Kathleen Keevan, yesterday said: “To see someone waiting for you when you come in — you’d be very shocked, wouldn’t you?”

Gardaí investigating the burglary have appealed for anyone with any information to contact them on 051-642040 or 1800 666111, and said they were particularly interested in any sightings of the Honda Civic saloon, registration 03WX5048.

Waterford Fine Gael Deputy John Deasy said the raid highlighted the need for legislative clarification on the licensing of handguns.

“An argument has been made by a small group of handgun enthusiasts that legally held firearms do not end up in the hands of criminals and therefore the issue does not give cause for concern,” he said.

“Yesterday’s robbery and others like it prove that legally held handguns are indeed being targeted by criminal gangs. It is also clear that existing security arrangements are not proving to be a deterrent to those intent on stealing them.”

Click here for irishexaminer.com stories before this date

BornToKill

rrpc wrote: »

especially in Britain where firearms offences have increased seven fold since handguns were banned

This is repeated time and again but I don't see any citation. On the contrary, Thursdays Independent reported gun murders in Britain at a 20 year low.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/britain-records-18-fall-in-gun-deaths-1232069.html

chem

BTK there might be a fall in murders with firearms, but not a fall in firearms offences in the UK.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1576406/28-gun-crimes-committed-in-UK-every-day.html

Some family members moved back to Ireland from Luton last year because they said gun and knife crime as out of control. There kids had no life because they had to stay indoors and were afraid to play outside.

Also have a look at the UK homeoffice pdf link on the report. It shows gun crime is increasing.

tba

I'm not sure that the comparison of a gun to a car (as both are lethal in the wrong hands) is a valid one, a car has a secondary result of injury resulting from its primary function of transportation. The same could be said about a lot of everyday objects.

Guns were invented to kill just because someone decided they were cool, and that a sport involving them should arise does not change the reason they were created.

And if someone comes on and says that there sports firearm was created for sporting purposes then they have not understood my point.

BornToKill

chem wrote: »

but not a fall in firearms offenses in the UK

Chem, I have no doubt at all but that firearms offenses are up in Britain but have they really increased sevenfold in the 10 years since the ban on handguns?

Also, with firearms offenses up but firearms murders down, there has to be a suspicion that many of the recorded offenses involve airsoft, replicas, deacts, etc. rather than live firearms. Knive crime is a real problem but is a separate matter to my query.

chem

BornToKill wrote: »

Chem, I have no doubt at all but that firearms offenses are up in Britain but have they really increased sevenfold in the 10 years since the ban on handguns?

Also, with firearms offenses up but firearms murders down, there has to be a suspicion that many of the recorded offenses involve airsoft, replicas, deacts, etc. rather than live firearms. Knive crime is a real problem but is a separate matter to my query.

UK Home office report Firearm offences


Provisional statistics are available for recorded crimes involving firearms other
than air weapons for the 12 months ending September 2007. Firearms are taken
to be involved in an offence if they are fired, used as a blunt instrument against a
person, or used in a threat.
In the year to September 2007 there were provisionally 10,182 firearm offences.
This was an increase of 427 offences or four per cent, compared with the 12
months ending September 2006. Two thirds of firearm offences involve no
physical injury.
Table 5 Firearm offences (excluding air weapons) by level of injury: England and
Wales
Nature of injury Year ending Sep 06 Year ending Sep 07 % change
Fatal injuries(1) 55 49 -11
Serious injuries 438 368 -16
Slight injuries 2,614 2,728 +4
Total injuries 3,107 3,145 +1
Threats 5,059 5,357 +6
No injuries 1,589 1,680 +6
Total 9,755 10,182 +4
1. Because of the small number of fatal injuries the percentage change should be treated with caution.
The total number of offences involving firearms resulting in injury increased
slightly, by one per cent (38 offences), in the year to September 2007 compared
with the previous 12 months. Firearm offences resulting in fatal injury decreased
by 11 per cent, from 55 in the year to September 2006 to 49 in the year to
September 2007. Serious injuries were down by 16 per cent while slight injuries
increased by four per cent.
Table 6 Firearm offences (excluding air weapons) by type of weapon: England and
Wales
Weapon type Year ending Sep 06 Year ending Sep 07 % change
Shotgun 592 641 +8
Handgun 4,248 4,284 +1
Rifle(1) 74 60 -19
Imitation firearm(2) 2,607 2,710 +4
Unidentified firearm 1,270 1,317 +4
Other firearm(3) 964 1,170 +21
Total 9,755 10,182 +4

1. Because of the small number of offences involving rifles, the percentage change should be treated with caution.
2. Imitation handguns, which are converted to fire bullets like handguns, are counted as handguns.
3. Other firearms include CS gas, disguised firearms, machine guns, pepper spray, stun guns and other specified
weapons (majority are paintball guns).
There were 4,284 offences where handguns were used in the year to September
2007, an increase of 36 offences or one per cent compared with the year ending
September 2006. Imitation weapons were used in 2,710 offences, up four per cent
or 103 offences.

BornToKill

Yes, I read that on the link. But it says that handgun crime is up 1% over 12 months in E&W. When did the claimed sevenfold rise happen since it clearly wasn't in the last year?

bunny shooter

tba wrote: »

I'm not sure that the comparison of a gun to a car (as both are lethal in the wrong hands) is a valid one, a car has a secondary result of injury resulting from its primary function of transportation. The same could be said about a lot of everyday objects.

Guns were invented to kill just because someone decided they were cool, and that a sport involving them should arise does not change the reason they were created.

And if someone comes on and says that there sports firearm was created for sporting purposes then they have not understood my point.

A legally held firearm, is licenced for a legal activity, by it's legal owner, same as a car. If either is robbed and used in an illegal manner by another person can you hold the legal owner responsible for the theives actions? No, therfore why punish the innocent?

Cars were not invented to kill but they do, same as a firearm can. How many people are killed on our roads by the misuse of legally driven cars? More than by legally held firearms I reckon. So shall we ban cars too? Or would it be a better idea to deal with the people who misuse these items. A firearm cannot kill. It is an inaniminate object. Someone has to use the firearm to kill same as a car

My point is if were were to ban everything that has been used to kill someone then we will have very few possessions left.

Sparks

tba wrote: »

And if someone comes on and says that there sports firearm was created for sporting purposes then they have not understood my point.

Or maybe they just think your point is farcical. After all, by your logic, we'd have to ban archery, javelin throwing, all the martial arts, and we might as well ban other things as well, like cooking (because originally cooking was doing by slaves, and slavery's bad, m'kay?).

Fact is, firearms were not created because someone thought they were cool, not all firearms are designed to kill, and remarkably few are designed to kill humans, and most of those are completely illegal to own throughout the EU. To say that target shooting pistols are the same as assault rifles or machine guns is farcical in the extreme, and I'd really rather think that we actually drafted our legislation based on reality, rather than what you can learn from watching Shoot Em Up or James Bond films.

Jacobo

Sparks wrote: »

After all, by your logic, we'd have to ban archery, javelin throwing, all the martial arts, and we might as well ban other things as well, like cooking (because originally cooking was doing by slaves, and slavery's bad, m'kay?).

And don't forget fencing; knife crime is spiraling out of control!

rrpc

BornToKill wrote: »

Chem, I have no doubt at all but that firearms offenses are up in Britain but have they really increased sevenfold in the 10 years since the ban on handguns?

Sorry BornToKill you're quite right. I got that figure form a newspaper article some time ago and I can't find the link now

However, the Gun control network :eek: has all the statistics over the last almost twenty years and you'll find them here.

Briefly, gun crime appears to have doubled between 1997/98 and 2003/04 and has decresed slightly since then. Homicide with a firearm isn't at a twenty year low though, as it was lower in 1989 than in 2008.

ivanthehunter

Sparks wrote: »

Or maybe they just think your point is farcical. After all, by your logic, we'd have to ban archery, javelin throwing, all the martial arts, and we might as well ban other things as well, like cooking (because originally cooking was doing by slaves, and slavery's bad, m'kay?).

Fact is, firearms were not created because someone thought they were cool, not all firearms are designed to kill, and remarkably few are designed to kill humans, and most of those are completely illegal to own throughout the EU. To say that target shooting pistols are the same as assault rifles or machine guns is farcical in the extreme, and I'd really rather think that we actually drafted our legislation based on reality, rather than what you can learn from watching Shoot Em Up or James Bond films.

i hate to admit it bit i'd have to agree with you on this point of fact

Manic Moran

remarkably few are designed to kill humans, and most of those are completely illegal to own throughout the EU

Actually, I would wager to say that the vast majority of firearms which were primarily designed to kill humans are perfectly legal to own throughout the EU, varying from flintlocks through Mosin-Nagant bolt actions to L1 SLRs and USP pistols. I believe a few of EU countries (Admittedly, mainly from the former Eastern Bloc) even allow full-auto firearms. And they seem to generally have very little trouble as a result of it. I believe you may overstate the proportion of purpose-designed target firearms in Europe compared to the firearms totals as a whole. Just go into a German gunshop, such as this one in Hamburg. The M-16s/AR-15s should be pretty obvious, but you don't hear Germans complaining too much about them. Check out the pistols in the cabinet on the right, none appear to be pure target pistols.
http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t136/GambitWeekly/P1000987.jpg

Checking the website for the Paris gunstore Armurmerie de la Bourse, I see they're selling an AK-74 for just under E900, or a HK-93 for almost two grand. The Overland AR-15 is nearly 2.5K, but legal. I could probably go on for other countries.

They seem to have understood that it's not 'what you have', it's 'what you do with it' that's important.

NTM

daveob007

nipplenuts wrote: »

As a non shooter;

Where do you practise with your pistols?

Is the problem people having their legit guns stolen for use by criminals?

Is 1700 Glocks not a lot for what's a fringe hobby?

If you have proper managed clubs could a compromise not be that the guns are not taken home?

there are not 1700 glocks but 1700 pistols of all types.
anyway a glock is only a brand name and no more dangerous than a sig or beretta etc. the media love to make up big sensational stories about glocks being the chosen weapon of criminals,but the fact is they will use anything they get.
the glocks are part of drug shipments and not picked from a catalogue.

Blazher

Its because glocks are cheap to make and buy. There are lots around. They are thrown in with shipments as said. They are an easy target for the media. It just rolls off the "press"

Did anyone see the star today. What a joke. The media in this state are a joke. I understand that they are trying to sell more papers but the hype and BS“ is going to far.

tba

bunny shooter wrote: »

A legally held firearm, is licenced for a legal activity, by it's legal owner, same as a car. If either is robbed and used in an illegal manner by another person can you hold the legal owner responsible for the theives actions? No, therfore why punish the innocent?

I would never say that you or any other person should punish the innocent, you are insinuating that I think people who hold firearms are inherently criminal, that is not the case.

bunny shooter wrote: »

Cars were not invented to kill but they do, same as a firearm can. How many people are killed on our roads by the misuse of legally driven cars? More than by legally held firearms I reckon. So shall we ban cars too? Or would it be a better idea to deal with the people who misuse these items.

Guns are used to kill things. Cars are used to transport people. Misuse of anything in a criminal sense is impossible to stop. However generally, stolen items are used for their main purpose.

bunny shooter wrote: »

My point is if were were to ban everything that has been used to kill someone then we will have very few possessions left.

Or Hands

Sparks wrote: »

Or maybe they just think your point is farcical. After all, by your logic, we'd have to ban archery, javelin throwing, all the martial arts, and we might as well ban other things as well, like cooking (because originally cooking was doing by slaves, and slavery's bad, m'kay?).

Now, you are implying that I'm in favor of slavery while clamping down on gun possession, with a convoluted and biased position that is completely apportioned to my point on the primary use of objects. I was not referring to association or capacity, but rather raison d’être (reason for being).

Sparks wrote: »

Fact is, firearms were not created because someone thought they were cool, not all firearms are designed to kill, and remarkably few are designed to kill humans, and most of those are completely illegal to own throughout the EU. To say that target shooting pistols are the same as assault rifles or machine guns is farcical in the extreme, and I'd really rather think that we actually drafted our legislation based on reality, rather than what you can learn from watching Shoot Em Up or James Bond films.

I refer again to the final sentence in my previous post and state again that that guns are used to kill things, be them animals or people.

When you remove the association of lethality from lethal objects (which I hope none of you have) then they become dangerous.

I am certainly empathetic to your opinion, but I cannot see the need to have a lethal weapon for a sport when the sport does not need the gun to be lethal.

It wasn't me!

tba wrote: »

When you remove the association of lethality from lethal objects (which I hope none of you have) then they become dangerous.

I am certainly empathetic to your opinion, but I cannot see the need to have a lethal weapon for a sport when the sport does not need the gun to be lethal.

You made sense until here. They're dangerous, regardless. That's why we train and operate in strictly controlled environments under supervision to ensure that all procedures are uniform and safe, while using something that has an inherent capacity, like a knife, to be dangerous. However, just like a knife being used to cut carrots for the soup, we use a dangerous object in a safe manner.

Your second point, I'm not even sure what you mean, care to clarify? The sport demands that holes get punched in paper, what's that got to do with the lethality or otherwise of guns?

bunny shooter

tba, you obviously have not grasped the points I have tried to make :rolleyes:

tba

It wasn't me! wrote: »

You made sense until here. They're dangerous, regardless. That's why we train and operate in strictly controlled environments under supervision to ensure that all procedures are uniform and safe, while using something that has an inherent capacity, like a knife, to be dangerous. However, just like a knife being used to cut carrots for the soup, we use a dangerous object in a safe manner.

Thats exactly what I said, only with more breviloquence.

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Your second point, I'm not even sure what you mean, care to clarify? The sport demands that holes get punched in paper, what's that got to do with the lethality or otherwise of guns?

Not to be flippant, but you can punch holes in paper with a paper punch.

The problem is the terminology, why is it called shooting?

As far as I know Olympic participants are disqualified from the sport if they even shoot a non approved pistol, or fire their pistol of the range, you are the most responsible crowd of users out there.

You can all whine all you want about how the government are cracking down on your sport, but the fact is you are going about it the wrong way.

Again the problem is the terminology, why is it called shooting? The average fellow on the street only knows about guns from, shoot them up (I had to google that), you are associated with the scum of the earth.

The government should be clamping down on hand guns, your sport should be flexible enough to accommodate that, not butt up against a law designed to protect people, you will gain no friends that way.

bunny shooter wrote: »

tba, you obviously have not grasped the points I have tried to make :rolleyes:

So you are giving up? That attitude will not serve you well in your effort to retain control of your sport.

IRLConor

tba wrote: »

I am certainly empathetic to your opinion, but I cannot see the need to have a lethal weapon for a sport when the sport does not need the gun to be lethal.

Find me a non-lethal replacement for all the guns used in all the target shooting sports without compromising the essential challenges in the sports and I'll cheerfully help you replace them.

As for all the guns licensed in the state for killing animals, well then it's going to be quite difficult to satisfy your wants. To get something which will humanely kill a wild deer you need to use something which is well over the limit of lethality towards humans.

The fundamental error in the "guns were designed to kill" argument is the assumption that all guns are essentially similar. There's a massive variation in the design and purpose of all guns and trying to lump objects-which-propel-a-projectile-from-a-cylinder into one box is oversimplifying the matter greatly. Some guns are designed to kill people, some guns are designed to kill animals, some guns are designed for target shooting and some were designed to meet more than one of those goals.

IRLConor

tba wrote: »

As far as I know Olympic participants are disqualified from the sport if they even shoot a non approved pistol, or fire their pistol of the range, you are the most responsible crowd of users out there.

The ISSF (who govern Olympic shooting) have no such rules. The rules are here: http://www.issf-shooting.org/documents/rules/2009/pdf/ISSFRuleBook2009englishWEB.pdf

ISSF shooters of all types and levels can shoot whatever firearm they like, wherever they like (subject to local laws of course) in their spare time. The only time a firearm restriction comes into play is in the competitions themselves.

It wasn't me!

tba wrote: »

Not to be flippant, but you can punch holes in paper with a paper punch.

The problem is the terminology, why is it called shooting?

I honestly don't see your point here. The object with shooting is to take a system of sights and orientate them on a target at a set distance and achieve great marksmanship with this equipment. Shooting kit is capable of doing this. Other things are not. It's called shooting because that's exactly what it is. I don't see the relevance of it, can you explain?

As far as I know Olympic participants are disqualified from the sport if they even shoot a non approved pistol, or fire their pistol of the range, you are the most responsible crowd of users out there.

Not true, there's some aggro, but it's at NGB level upwards. Responsible? Absolutely nothing makes an Olympic shooter any more or less responsible than a deer-stalker, a clay shooter, a duck shooter or someone who shoots targets casually at the range. Responsibility is individual in every case.

Again the problem is the terminology, why is it called shooting? The average fellow on the street only knows about guns from, shoot them up (I had to google that), you are associated with the scum of the earth.

I don't want to sound overly challenging, but the terminology? Calling it shooting is a problem? I seriously need to know your logic here, because to me it just sounds insane.

The government should be clamping down on hand guns, your sport should be flexible enough to accommodate that, not butt up against a law designed to protect people, you will gain no friends that way.

The government should be aiding and funding our branches of law enforcement to tackle gun crime on the streets, rather than diverting attention from its failure to do so by taking the grandstand to proscribe legally held pistols as though they were a real threat, when they're not, in the context of criminal firearms possession. Nobody here is saying that they're against attempts to tackle gun crime; what they're saying is that they're being unfairly victimised as though they contribute to it, because this government doesn't have the capacity to tackle it in real terms.

BornToKill

rrpc wrote: »

Sorry BornToKill you're quite right. I got that figure form a newspaper article some time ago and I can't find the link now

However, the Gun control network :eek: has all the statistics over the last almost twenty years and you'll find them here.

Briefly, gun crime appears to have doubled between 1997/98 and 2003/04 and has decresed slightly since then. Homicide with a firearm isn't at a twenty year low though, as it was lower in 1989 than in 2008.

Not that it really matters, but it was 52 (45 E&W, 7 Scotland) in 1989 and 42 last year and the '20-year low' is straight from The Independent:


Britain records 18% fall in gun deaths

By Nigel Morris, Deputy Political Editor
Thursday, 8 January 2009

• Print

The number of deaths in Britain from gunshot wounds has fallen to a 20-year low despite concerns about levels of violent crime.

rrpc

BornToKill wrote: »

Not that it really matters, but it was 52 (45 E&W, 7 Scotland) in 1989 and 42 last year and the '20-year low' is straight from The Independent:

Not to nitpick BTK, but the same source puts the figure for 2007/08 at 48 + 4 for Scotland, the exact same as 1989.

Total offences are still double in England and Wales what they were in 1989 and 50% higher than they were in 1997.

The most important factor in this debate is that offences using a handgun have not decreased at all since the total ban in 1997, they've increased.

Meyer

He believed a proposed ban on handguns would help Irish society from developing an entrenched gun culture.

Link

I get really tired of this same excuse being wheeled out again and again and again...Why do handguns over every other firearm licensed amount to an "entrenched gun culture"?
That said, he then goes on to say this,

He was hopeful a knife awareness campaign to be rolled out this year would help educate young people as to the dangers of carrying the weapons. The campaign would at first focus on Dublin, Cork and Limerick, three places where the need to tackle knife crime was greatest.

Why no awareness campaign on handguns? If he thinks young people are so dumb, that they believe knives don't really hurt anyone, then surely their just as ignorant of handguns...:rolleyes:

FlyOver

Meyer wrote: »

Link
Why no awareness campaign on handguns? If he thinks young people are so dumb, that they believe knives don't really hurt anyone, then surely their just as ignorant of handguns...:rolleyes:

The awareness campaign would only have to be in the form of Prime Time on RTE explaining the sport of pistol shooting (all types). And, the Irish Independent and/or Irish Times running a decent factual report on pistol shooting sports.

By the time this manufactured policitcal victory of banning pistols by the minister for justice becomes apparent, with continued murders and related gangland gun crime, he'll be out of office.

Gun crime is here to stay, it's an unfortunate fact. With all the other problems this country facing it will make for good headlines and news reports when he does eventually ban pistols.

Rovi

Matt Cooper had an interesting interview with Paul Williams (Sunday World Crime Editor) and Cyprian Brady (Fianna Fáil TD) in his 'The Last Word' programme on Today FM last Thursday (8/1/2009).
The podcast went up a few days ago, and I've linked it and the particular segment in the Press Clipping thread.

Interestingly, Paul Williams slated the Minister and the other politicians calling for a ban on legally held handguns, as he's of the opinion that such a move would do nothing to stem 'gun crime'.

Bear in mind though, that this was the day BEFORE the gun dealer in Tipperary was robbed.