Petition To Stop Ban!!!

packas

foxhunter wrote: »

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/stopthefirearmsban/index.html

Please sign the petition at the above link to try and stop the ban on handguns
you will be asked for a donation but you do not have to make one.

Regards to every one.

Hi Foxhunter. Regarding the donations. What will that be used for & who will have control of it?

Bananaman

Packas,

I think you can ignore the donation - it is a function of the website hosting the petition - not the petition itself.

B'Man

packas

Bananaman wrote: »

Packas,

I think you can ignore the donation - it is a function of the website hosting the petition - not the petition itself.

B'Man

No worries B'Man.

foxhunter

packas wrote: »

Hi Foxhunter. Regarding the donations. What will that be used for & who will have control of it?

B Man summed it up really Packas
Cheers.

cavan shooter

Gentlemen, further to the posts, the most prolific sport using deadly weapons is the game of hurling. As anyone can attest the beatings given by these wooden terror instruments are vile. Knee cappings during the troubles were frequently carried out with these things. Children are handed these things at 4-5 and trained to be aggressive. For God sake ban hurleys. Now you think Im being ridiculous but I can giving enough air time get people agitated. I call it the power of the Plaebs

A gun is a hunk of steel, the weekest link in it is the nut holding on to the trigger and there is no hunger to tackle them. The do gooders think prison is not right, a Guard cant arrest the pluckers the wrong way or he's out, Apologise to the Court and give a hard luck story about a deprived child hood and youll walk. No, no hunger to actually tackle the shlits, but ban the hunk of steel dont deal with the cause

Screw drivers have been used to kill, bare hands and feet have been used to kill. We have spineless politicians who wont tackle the people who use these things, and We dont have a decent PR person to argue our points thats the problem.

I hear about the gun that shot the man in east wall, I am stunned by the silence in relation to the little pastard that did it. Hell go to Oberstown or St Pats, where the little **** will carry his head high cause what he did his a badge to these people. Do the crime/Do the time and make him a lesson to all.

Hard labour should be brought back:D

BTW I think a bit of Trolling was going on there (maybe Im wrong)

Rant over.........:o

fathersymes

cavan shooter wrote: »

We dont have a decent PR person to argue our points thats the problem.

Exactly! The power in PR is very very powerful, PR companies can get anything printed and spin a twist on any story. A good PR campaign would embarrass that uninformed charlatan Aherne and highlight his smokescreen.

How much would a PR campaign cost? Perhaps the NARGC could foot the bill.

bunny shooter

fathersymes wrote: »

...............How much would a PR campaign cost? Perhaps the NARGC could foot the bill.

SSAI, NTSA and NRAI must have funds too ?

Sparks

SSAI, NRAI, ICPSA would all have funding; so would the larger grounds like Courtlough, Lough Bo, Harbour House, Hilltop, MNSCI, etc.
(NTSA's cut off from funding at the moment so I'm not sure they can kick in very much to all of this).

Of course, the very first question will be "what do we spend the money on?", or more specifically, "what kind of shooting gets promoted most?" - and right there is where the arguments will start.

IRLConor

bunny shooter wrote: »

SSAI, NTSA and NRAI must have funds too ?

I don't know about the SSAI organisations or the NRAI but last time I saw, there wasn't a hell of a lot of money in the NTSA.

If anyone wants to spend money on a PR campaign feel free to PM me your details and I'll put you in contact with some of my colleagues.

bunny shooter

Sparks wrote: »

..........Of course, the very first question will be "what do we spend the money on?", or more specifically, "what kind of shooting gets promoted most?" - and right there is where the arguments will start.

I think the time has come for ALL types of shooting to come together and to fight as ONE organisation and to forget the petty bickering that seems to be going on before ALL of us have to stop shooting 'cause it looks like the writings on the wall for ALL firearms irregardless of what they are used for.

fathersymes

I don't have a pistol, but thats irrelevant, I don't want them after my rifles next.

So I'll start the ball rolling and pledge 100euros towards a PR fund.

Next step is to appoint a representative to brief a PR agency and establish a fee.

The representative is the difficult bit!

bunny shooter

Noble gesture fatersymes, however I am currently paying fees to 3 x participants in the FCP and don't see why I should pay again.

IRLConor

bunny shooter wrote: »

I think the time has come for ALL types of shooting to come together and to fight as ONE organisation and to forget the petty bickering that seems to be going on before ALL of us have to stop shooting 'cause it looks like the writings on the wall for ALL firearms irregardless of what they are used for.

Find me a person (or group of people) who will be acceptable to all shooters and I'll agree with you.

When it comes to the point where the DoJ says "You can have X or Y but not both" a rep who comes from an X background will choose X, a rep who comes from a Y background will choose Y and a rep who stamps their foot and says "Both or nothing!" will damage the sport(s) more than either of the first two possibly could.

Consider the following question:

"What do you propose that we as a shooting community could (in theory) compromise on to save the sport as a whole?"

If you get all the shooters in Ireland to agree on a common answer then, and only then, will you be able to have a body who can represent all the shooters in the country.

Bananaman

If you get all the shooters in Ireland to agree on a common answer

I think they will all agree to not accept a ban on firearms - of any kind, that we already responsibly, own.

I think they will all accept that there isn't a problem being caused by legally held firearms - of any kind.

I think they will all agree that they do not wish to have their firearms confiscated and the Minister to announce that he has removed a threat to the public safety.

IRLConor

Bananaman wrote: »

I think they will all agree to not accept a ban on firearms - of any kind, that we already responsibly, own.

Say the DoJ said "Right, we're banning all centrefire rifles over .270", which would you prefer:

• Person A: "No! I will not accept that!"
  DoJ: "Tough titty, it's happening whether you like it or not"
  
  
• Person B: "Look, can we compromise and at least keep some of them?"
  DoJ: "OK, let's talk."

I'm a "half a loaf is better than no bread at all" kind of guy.

Bananaman

I am not

I would ask "why?" and try to understand and help solve the problem
rather than trying to find a compromise to a solution for which there is no problem

B'Man

Sparks

Bananaman wrote: »

I think they will all agree to not accept a ban on firearms - of any kind, that we already responsibly, own.

Two points -
1. We don't really have any choice in accepting or not, only in protesting or not.
2. You don't know the firearms community well if you think that it's so self-sacrificing. It sounds cynical to say so, but remember that we already threw air and smallbore pistols "under the bus" in the 90s in favour of fullbore firearms. And remember that the single time the entire community got off its collective arse to do something about something was when the Minister was going to hike the licence fees.

I know that sounds a bit negative, but, well, there it is I'm afraid.
We're more sinned against than sinning, certainly - but that doesn't make us perfect in all our faculties either.

MortgageMan

Hello Gentlemen & Ladies

In addition to the I-Petition there is also a paper Petition, I have attached a copy here.

This petition has been drawn up by members of a number of different shooting clubs and gun dealers throughout Ireland, encompassing Rifle, Shotgun and Pistol. It is a grassroots group who have come together with the intention of bringing the voice of sportsmen, sportswomen, Hunters and Clubs throughout Ireland to the forefront in this time of uncertainty.

Our governing bodies are doing great work trying to further our cause with the DOJ and the petition is a backup for these groups. The petition will show the real support throught Ireland from Shooters, Clubs, Families and all other interested parties. If firearms are restricted as has been stated the financial and social lose to communities throughout Ireland will be vast.

The petition by this time should be available in nearly all shooting clubs , ranges and dealers throughout Ireland. The response so far has been fantastic and hopefully will continue to grow.

Please show your support for your sport by signing the petition. To find out more please ask your range owner or firearms dealer for more details.

bunny shooter

IRLConor wrote: »

...........Consider the following question:

"What do you propose that we as a shooting community could (in theory) compromise on to save the sport as a whole?"..........

IMHO I don't think "Olympic" shooting is in any danger (and i'm not stirring here).

The practical boys are disbanding. Will this be enough for DOJ?

Rifles wise I personally would 'surrender' .223 and anything above .308.

Pistols everything over .22lr.

Shotguns anything with a capacity over 3 rounds.

A person should be allowed maybe 10 x firearms depending on proof of usage and secure storage and/or allow clubs have purpose built armouries for members firearms.

Only condition would be that this is end of restrictions by DOJ

IRLConor

Bananaman wrote: »

IRLConor wrote:

I'm a "half a loaf is better than no bread at all" kind of guy.

I am not

And that's precisely why we'll never have a single body representing all shooters in this country. Shooting is a big collection of sports and people are different. That's life.

Bananaman wrote: »

I would ask "why?" and try to understand and help solve the problem
rather than trying to find a compromise to a solution for which there is no problem

The problem is that this country has a serious crime problem and gun crimes both sell newspapers and make for good government-bashing material in the Dail.

The "solution" (a gun ban) appears to have already been decided upon. The Minister has repeatedly said that he was going to further restrict the ownership of handguns and as a politician he will be very wary of changing his mind since changing your mind seems to be considered a fatal flaw in politics. I would be astonished if he gave up on it now.

The one thing we can lobby for (not really negotiate, since to negotiate you need leverage and we have almost none) is a structure to the ban that would inconvenience the least number of shooters.

Jonty

bunny shooter wrote: »

IMHO I don't think "Olympic" shooting is in any danger (and i'm not stirring here).

The practical boys are disbanding. Will this be enough for DOJ?

Rifles wise I personally would 'surrender' .223 and anything above .308.

Pistols everything over .22lr.

Shotguns anything with a capacity over 3 rounds.

A person should be allowed maybe 10 x firearms depending on proof of usage and secure storage and/or allow clubs have purpose built armouries for members firearms.

Only condition would be that this is end of restrictions by DOJ

Why pick on 223???

Sika_Stalker

Jonty wrote: »

Why pick on 223???

The fact that its a nato round

IRLConor

bunny shooter wrote: »

IMHO I don't think "Olympic" shooting is in any danger (and i'm not stirring here).

ISSF rifle and shotgun, no. I wouldn't call ISSF pistol all that safe yet though, at least not the semi-auto .22s and definitely not the (ISSF but not Olympic) .32s. That is, unless the details have been hammered out and I haven't been told of course.

bunny shooter wrote: »

The practical boys are disbanding. Will this be enough for DOJ?

For the Minister? Unlikely. It didn't "take guns off the streets" :rolleyes:
For the DoJ & Gardai? I have no idea.

bunny shooter wrote: »

Rifles wise I personally would 'surrender' .223 and anything above .308.

Pistols everything over .22lr.

Shotguns anything with a capacity over 3 rounds.

A person should be allowed maybe 10 x firearms depending on proof of usage and secure storage and/or allow clubs have purpose built armouries for members firearms.

That's probably further than I'd go. Certainly from what people say about it in the hunting forum giving up on .223s would be a really bad step for fox shooters.

bunny shooter wrote: »

Only condition would be that this is end of restrictions by DOJ

That's never going to be an option. The only way to guarantee that would be to put it in the constitution and that's never going to happen.

IRLConor

Sika_Stalker wrote: »

The fact that its a nato round

.223 is a Remington round. 5.56 is the NATO round. They are very similar but not similar.

The "military round" argument is nonsense dreamt up by people who haven't realised that anything capable of humanely killing a deer is pretty much guaranteed to be more powerful than many military calibres.

Sparks

bunny shooter wrote: »

Only condition would be that this is end of restrictions by DOJ

Bunny, if we could enforce any such condition on the DoJ or Minister, do you not think such a deal would have been struck in '72 in the first place? Or even in '64 when the second Firearms Act was brought in? The simple fact is, you're talking about 5% of the electorate looking for a veto power over the Minister for Justice and Dail Eireann in a legislative matter.
Never going to happen. Ever.
Not in an enforcable manner anyway, as it'd be illegal under Irish Law. You might get a "promise" or an "undertaking". Ten of those and about four euro will get you a fancy italian coffee.

The best we could ever hope for is the FCP. And we have it. However, people don't seem to fully understand it. For example, we keep saying the FCP has to make a statement, when we meant the shooting bodies in the FCP. The FCP is chaired by the Department of Justice after all - it's not about to issue statements instructing people in how to protest the Minister's policy.

The sad, currently ignored truth of all of this is that the adversarial approach taken in the last decade with the DoJ is what triggered McDowell's Criminal Justice Act 2006 and our congenital tendency to avoid the media and engage in PR work meant that we didn't have public opinion on our side when a Minister who was hostile to the sport finally got into office where he had been granted such broad powers over our sport with so few checks and balances. And right now the 2% rule is ensuring that most shooters aren't doing a blessed thing about this. For example, where's the large protest by the farmers about the pistol ban? They're the biggest segment of the firearms-owning community. Where's the NARGC's statement on this? The ICPSA's? The gun dealer's?

Look, you want to see something done about this? Then you've got your head wrong. If you want to do something about it, then you've got your head right, and welcome to the 2%.

If you want to do something, call the DoJ to register your protest. Nothing fancy, just ring 'em up, give them your name, have them record that you're protesting this. Be polite, the guy on the other end of the phone isn't the Minister. The Minister doesn't even know his or her name. There are 200,000 of us - 200,000 phone calls will be noticed. And it'll cost you about 12 cents or so, and maybe five minutes of your day.

Sika_Stalker

very little difference in the two of them
http://www.ar15barrels.com/data/223vs556.pdf
but that a topic for another tread

bunny shooter

For the record Sparks I have been in touch with DOJ on more than one occasion and on a variety of firearms issues. I have been in touch with all my local TD's.

Now to answer the 223 question. I have had it and I have had/do have a lot of other rifle calibres too including .22lr, .17hmr, .22wmr, .22 hornet, .17 REM, .204 Ruger, .220 swift, .243, 6.5x55 Swede

.223 is not the best round out there for either vermin or target shooting. And I have done both with all the above calibres.

Most lads including myself got one because of "cheap ammo". Now I never found the "cheap ammo" to be anything only crap out of the two .223 rifles I had (Sako 75, 1 in 12 twist and Steyr Prohunter, 1 in 9 twist).

Most lads have a .223 to shoot foxes, well a .17 REM, .204 Ruger, .220 swift or .243 is a better round. The onlt "cheap" ammo is FMJ and this should never be used for hunting antway. Not saying a 223 won't kill foxes just that the other calibres IMO are better.

Target shooting with a .223 is limited to something with at least a 1 in 9 twist with at least a 75 grain bullet (hornady springs to mind) and these cost more than 6.5x55 Swede in Lapua 139 grain Scenars.

PJ Hunter

Sika_Stalker wrote: »

very little difference in the two of them
http://www.ar15barrels.com/data/223vs556.pdf
but that a topic for another tread

If you want to do something, call the DoJ to register your protest. Nothing fancy, just ring 'em up, give them your name, have them record that you're protesting this. Be polite, the guy on the other end of the phone isn't the Minister. The Minister doesn't even know his or her name. There are 200,000 of us - 200,000 phone calls will be noticed. And it'll cost you about 12 cents or so, and maybe five minutes of your day.

National phone in day on one prearranged date. Post petitions to the doj to coincide.

Sparks

No. No organising. No synchronisation. No fancy stuff. Just pick up the fscking phone and do it.

I swear, we always seem to want to organise ourselves to death.

bunny shooter

Vive la revolution

As long as our "representative organisations" are involved in FCP it doesn't matter what we as individuals do