Shooting Ban

Coolhand

Is there much chance that all shooting is going to be banned after they ban the handguns does anyone think. Just want to see what the future looks like for the sport as I hope to get into it.

pullandbang

Can't see hunting, vermin control, clay shooting or any shotgun shooting being banned in the future. Sadly can't say the same about rifles/pistols?

bunny shooter

pullandbang wrote: »

Can't see hunting, vermin control, clay shooting or any shotgun shooting being banned in the future. Sadly can't say the same about rifles/pistols?

+1

Sparks

Never did understand how shotgun got so free and clear myself, unless it has to do with the shotgun owners including a lot of the senior legal eagles as well as the IFA.
But rifles and pistols, yeah, we've a PR problem. It's gotten better in some areas thanks to a decade of hard work, but the lack of that work in other areas is now telling

jwshooter

Sparks wrote: »

Never did understand how shotgun got so free and clear myself, unless it has to do with the shotgun owners including a lot of the senior legal eagles as well as the IFA.
But rifles and pistols, yeah, we've a PR problem. It's gotten better in some areas thanks to a decade of hard work, but the lack of that work in other areas is now telling

hunting rifles are not a problem no more that olympic target pistols , semi auto rifles and pistols other than rimfire are .the competition clay shooter or game shooter is way down on the DOJ hit list .at the very top is the practical shooter or call it what you will ,the powers that be just dont want these type of firearms in irish citizens hands end of story .none of the shooting body s will put there necks on the block to save them .time to face facts get over it and move on these type of fire arms are going to be harder to keep and almost impossible to get .i spent all of last week with firearm s in my hands ,culling deer it is not part time thing with me i love my way of life and my sport . but if it comes down to it they can have my 9mm our sport is under enough pressure as it is

Bananaman

Don't believe a word of it.

The Minister has stated publicly that one of his goals is to introduce legislation to allow him to

ban outright any type of firearm.

http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/Minister%20Dermot%20Ahern%20Outlines%20Handguns%20Ban

If he confiscates the pistols and revolvers, rifles and shotguns will be next.

We need firearms legislative review to be done properly and not on the whim of an individual.

The FCP has not met in almost 5 months - need I say more.

B'Man

Sparks

Hate to say it B'man, but that legislation was introduced in 2004 and we said it here then.

And I understand that there was at least a partial meeting of the FCP only a short time ago, and that the working groups have been working uninterrupted since before the FCP conference earlier this year; but they so rarely make public statements that you'd never know (but do read the one at the top of the forum).

dave999

Bananaman wrote: »

If he confiscates the pistols and revolvers, rifles and shotguns will be next.

My feeling is that you have to take shotguns out of the current 'at risk' catagory. Shotguns are percieved as traditional and dare I say mature, from a farming/game sport point of view.

I feel that the mature well constructed infrastructure of members associations and clubs means that this risk of ban is significantly reduced though political connections, public awareness (which of course includes significant number of shotgun owners).

I doubt it will be in my lifetime that shotguns are banned (but then this may be cut short if I upset a certain type of dealer).

Vegeta

dave999 wrote: »

I hope I'm wrong, but doubt it will be in my lifetime that shotguns are banned (but then this may be cut short if I upset a certain type of dealer).

Bit of a typo there I'd say dave :P

pullandbang

Vegeta wrote: »

Bit of a typo there I'd say dave :P

No, I use the same dealer myself and I know what he means:D:D

Sniff, sniff, ....where's me hanky!

chem

Bananaman wrote: »

We need firearms legislative review to be done properly and not on the whim of an individual.

B'Man

And who is the minister giving the duty of firearms legislative review to? The same garda who said his hand were tied on issue of licenced pistols. Sure we can all sleep safe in our beds now! The gardai would be happy to see every gun banned! Its not going to be an impartial vote when it comes to what they want banned. And it seems like the minister is all ears to anything the commisioner has to say lately

rrpc

Less of the doom and gloom lads, it's Christmas

It's one Minister and one Commissioner, they come and go. Two Ministers ago we had Michael McDowell who although he had legislative diarrhoea from time to time, understood the sport and its requirements. He was happy to let it continue under a stricter regime which he devised and by and large we were happy with, provided the correct balances were in place.

Our job is to continue to educate, keep our sport safe and well run, make sure that there is nothing happening that could give rise to concern and continue to enjoy and develop our sport.

In the last few years we have more than doubled the number of clubs and ranges in the country. We also need to develop our target shooters so that we can boast success at international competition and blow our trumpets as loud and as clear as possible when that happens.

For the first time in the history of the state, we have formal contact with the Department of Justice through the FCP and also the range inspector who by the naure of his job will be in constant contact with the various ranges and clubs around the country.

I'd be the first to admit that it's not perfect, but it's a helll of a lot better than anything else we've had in the past, including no contact with either the Department or the Minister of the day.

dresden8

rrpc wrote: »

I'd be the first to admit that it's not perfect, but it's a helll of a lot better than anything else we've had in the past, including no contact with either the Department or the Minister of the day.

Unfortunately one result of contact with the Department is that the IPSA have packed up and disbanded.

Hardly a result.

Bananaman

we have formal contact with the Department of Justice through the FCP

I agree that the FCP, on paper, is a good step forward but I have my doubts on it's effectiveness.

On it's watch we have had the standing Minister for Justice call for a ban on all firearms. Hardly what you would call a good reference.

Personally, I am quite annoyed at the insular nature of it. "we" do not have formal contact with anyone. Specific individuals do.

The body is formed of people who were invited to join it but all of them represent US and are accountable to US as they require US to re-elect them to their positions.

I am represented by a number of "bodies", on the FCP but have heard absolutely nothing since they met in Mullingar a couple of generations back.
I know that while things are in progress they cannot be discussed or whatever but surely they have reached the occasional agreement and have occasionally met.
An official announcement through the "bodies" represented on it once in a while might be an idea and lead us to understand what the "consultative" part means.
Perhaps they don't know what's going on either?



From what I have heard they have not met since August.

For me to believe it is doing good work, I need to know what it is doing.
Right now I only know that all firearms are under threat of being banned and there has not even been a statement from the FCP.

the IPSA have packed up and disbanded.

They were told to - the choice was
to disband IPSA and possibly have everyone keep their hangun licenses (not just IPSA members - every owner of a hangun license) or
keep IPSA and a ban on handgun licenses would be introduced.

Not really a choice.

Underhand skulduggery if you ask me.
The people who brought that situation about should be ashamed of themselves.


B'man

bunny shooter

rrpc wrote: »

................I'd be the first to admit that it's not perfect, but it's a helll of a lot better than anything else we've had in the past, including no contact with either the Department or the Minister of the day.

Bravo !!!!! But you are more than a little biased

Didn't he who shall not be mentioned here have contact with DOJ?
Didn't Des Crofton have contact with DOJ too?
Didn't NTSA send a list (of pictures ) to DOJ?

IRLConor

bunny shooter wrote: »

Didn't he who shall not be mentioned here have contact with DOJ?
Didn't Des Crofton have contact with DOJ too?
Didn't NTSA send a list (of pictures ) to DOJ?

Lots of parties had contact with the DoJ over the years but unless I'm mistaken they weren't all at the same table at the same time.

Oh, and you can mention DK if you want so long as you stay within the rules about saying stuff about named individuals.

BornToKill

Bananaman wrote: »

On it's watch we have had the standing Minister for Justice call for a ban on all firearms.
B'man

That's just silly - it's a complete misrepresentation and wholly disingenuous. But then you know that already ...

bunny shooter

"...including no contact with either the Department or the Minister of the day" As I stated that statement isn't quite true then.

bunny shooter

BornToKill wrote: »

That's just silly - it's a complete misrepresentation and wholly disingenuous. But then you know that already ...

:eek: Where you been hiding?

dresden8

Bananaman wrote: »

They were told to - the choice was
to disband IPSA and possibly have everyone keep their hangun licenses (not just IPSA members - every owner of a hangun license) or
keep IPSA and a ban on handgun licenses would be introduced.

Not really a choice.

Underhand skulduggery if you ask me.
The people who brought that situation about should be ashamed of themselves.


B'man

I suppose being told f*ck off and die is technically a form of consultation.

Anybody ever see "Sophie's Choice"?

bunny shooter

dresden8 wrote: »

I suppose being told f*ck off and die is technically a form of consultation.

Only if they ask you your opinion before they tell you to "f*ck off and die"

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

Bravo !!!!! But you are more than a little biased

And you're not? :P

Didn't he who shall not be mentioned here have contact with DOJ?
Didn't Des Crofton have contact with DOJ too?

All of the above did, but not on a formal and continuing basis. Nothing to prove that any of those contacts were in any way effective and if you were of a cynical disposition (which of course you're not bunny) you'd have to say that the CJA 2006 wasn't exactly an unmitigated success from the shooters point of view.

Didn't NTSA send a list (of pictures ) to DOJ?

If it's the one you're talking about bunny, the NTSA did not send it to the DoJ, but now that it's on our website, anyone can look at it.

Speaking for myself, I don't give a sh*t who sees lists of our equipment. It's our sport and we have every right to publish any aspect of it we feel like. Others seem equally unconcerned about using our name when it suits them.

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

"...including no contact with either the Department or the Minister of the day" As I stated that statement isn't quite true then.

It depends on when you're talking about. I'm going back two decades when successive Ministers and their Department refused to engage in any shape or form with the shooting organisations.

Submissions were made alright, but seeing as they were largely ignored, that doesn't equate to contact in any meaningful sense of the word.

There's certainly very little documentary evidence that any meaningful contact was made at any stage. The number and frequency of High Court cases would attest to that.

bunny shooter

rrpc wrote: »

And you're not? :P........

I would be more biased if I was actually a member of the FCP, like yourself

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

I would be more biased if I was actually a member of the FCP, like yourself

Eh? I'm not. If you know who I am (which you seem to), you can check the names on the DoJ website.

I hope your shooting is more accurate than your statements on Boards

Sparks

Swing and a miss Bunny, I know rrpc in real life and he's not on the FCP.

edit: And if we're going to start guessing about who's who on a board where anonymity is considered valuable, you need to decloak first.

bunny shooter

Well I know who you are RRPC as you pobably know who I am at this stage. I know exhaustive enquiries have been made about me using information gleamed from my posts on Boards.ie and I have seen your name attached to the FCP as a rep of one of the major shooting organisations. Ya, your name isn't on the DOJ website, but it is on a post here somewhere linked to the FCP (looking for list as we type;)). Now I am not going to name you here, or the sporting organisation you are affiliated to, as that would be a step too far, even for me

Sparks

Bunny, I'm telling you, he's not the rep. I know who the rep is, personally, as do all the NTSA members.

edit: And the reason they know is that it was publicly announced on the website.

Now quit this carping unless you're happy to name yourself here.

bunny shooter

OK, he might not be the a rep, but he his involved

Why would I have/want to de cloak my identity? I am not involved in the FCP in any shape or from. I am hiding nothing from the other posters here.

In fact for the record - I, Bunny Shooter, hereby declare I am in no way involved in the FCP or do I hold any position, except as an ordinary member, in any shooting oganisation in this country.

Sparks

I think you're getting into King Ralph territory there BS.
And you don't have to "out" yourself if you don't want to - but you don't get to "out" others without doing so. Anything else would not be fair.

It wasn't me!

bunny shooter wrote: »

OK, he might not be the a rep, but he his involved

How? Seriously, you have all the information, so how is he involved and how do you know?

Why would I have/want to de cloak my identity? I am not involved in the FCP in any shape or from. I am hiding nothing from the other posters here.

Neither is rrpc or anyone else. The problem is you seem to want to know everyone else's name and what they do without stating your own, and for no good reason either. I've made it pretty clear who I am at various points, as have several other people, but that's irrelevant. You seem to have an agenda, so if you want some clarity, you have to make it clear.