Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Meeting for all firearms owners
Options
Comments
-
.............Have you seen who's organising the meeting?
No
Who are these heros/vagabonds
Apart from Cal
whose LRRAI are a breakaway group from another group/location ?
I have openly posted here that I am dubious of the FCP process, not the shooting people on it, and the DOJ's intentions and I am still of that opinion. I am led to believe that another government department misled and subsequently shafted a representative assocation recently on matters that were considered "sorted". So to all those at the table BEWARE !
Howver, I don't think the DOJ will entertain another shooting representative group, maybe I'm wrong? They are not interested in our political problems and all those claiming to represent the "grassroots" of the shooting community in this country.
The legislation is apparently nearly ready? Is it not a bad time to rock the boat? Those at the "table" claim they are looking after "our" interests. We have been told what to expect. Now if they and we have been lied to then it will be time for a "new" organisation IMO0 -
-
The LRRAI from what I can see BS.
Oh right :rolleyes: So why they throwing toys out of their prams? They want to shoot pistol at long range now? or are they telling us certain rifles/calibres are in trouble?I think the NRAI might contest the notion that they're free from luggage...
I know what ya mean
0 -
-
Not a breakaway group as such. In fact, I'm not really sure what it is the LRRAI does anymore. They've given up on their claim to be the fullbore NGB from what I can tell - or if not, noone's listening to them anymore, though the cost of that whole debacle in money alone was enormous. :mad:bunny shooter wrote: »Apart from Cal whose LRRAI are a breakaway group from another group/location ?
Led to believe by whom? And what department? and what association?I have openly posted here that I am dubious of the FCP process, not the shooting people on it, and the DOJ's intentions and I am still of that opinion. I am led to believe that another government department misled and subsequently shafted a representative assocation recently on matters that were considered "sorted". So to all those at the table BEWARE !
I couldn't speak for them, but I'd feel fairly sure that they wouldn't entertain this group at least.Howver, I don't think the DOJ will entertain another shooting representative group, maybe I'm wrong?
Very nearly - I think we're talking the first few days of april.The legislation is apparently nearly ready?
It's not so much the rocking, it's the jumping up and down that needs avoiding - and jumping up and down is precisely the agenda for saturday's affair.Is it not a bad time to rock the boat?
If your representatives fail you or lie to you, you do not throw out the entire structure; you elect new representatives. If you think the FCP isn't working, you pull out of it. But it's very scary to consider how much would have to go wrong before you would dissolve the SSAI, NTSA, NASRPC, ICPSA, NARGC, and all the rest of the alphabet soup and reform them under Cal Ward as the bright new hope for shooters everywhereThose at the "table" claim they are looking after "our" interests. We have been told what to expect. Now if they and we have been lied to then it will be time for a "new" organisation IMO
0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
I think that's assigning a degree of oversight and forethought that isn't really warranted Grizzly
(Not to mention that the budget was announced long after the Misc.Provisions Bill and that the Bill applies to too small a group of people to generate much outrage. Publicity yes - I can almost guarantee the Minister will show up on the media claiming to have 'done something about the problem', but outrage, outside of our community, not so much).0 -
-
bunny shooter wrote: »I am referring the the RDF and gratuity payments for new recruits, who were royally shafted to save money when the problems in the economy came to light
Search this forum under gratuity and recruits should find it
http://forum.irishmilitaryonline.com/forumdisplay.php?f=3
Sparks here is a good link to what I mentioned
http://forum.irishmilitaryonline.com/showthread.php?t=142690 -
Not exactly "Support the Troops", is it?
But the reason I asked BS, is that in context it didn't seem like you were talking about the DoD
(And it's interesting to note that that was about the Minister for Defence, not his Department, because that's a dynamic we see in Justice as well - the Department have been straight up and professional all the way, but the Minister, well, his actions have been somewhat less... cordial? civil? polite? I'm not sure which word suits here...)0 -
-
-
Not exactly "Support the Troops", is it?
But the reason I asked BS, is that in context it didn't seem like you were talking about the DoD
(And it's interesting to note that that was about the Minister for Defence, not his Department, because that's a dynamic we see in Justice as well - the Department have been straight up and professional all the way, but the Minister, well, his actions have been somewhat less... cordial? civil? polite? I'm not sure which word suits here...)
Yes, but who is in charge? Minister or civil servants ?0 -
As a newcomer to the target club scene I can tell you that the whole 'who can piss highest competition' thing is starting to do my head in.Dr. Milkman prescribes that each one involved take several tin cans to a sandpit with several hundred rounds of ammo and blow the living shyte of the cans as a means of relieving aggression. Or maybe a good roide would sort out all and sundry!
We were going to not even mention it in here (the mods in here tend to get sent more stuff than wikileaksA divided group are easily conquered, so maybe all the protagonists in the sport should just fade into the backround and let other people come forward. )...
...and we're keeping all the really borderline stuff out of here...
...and we've kicked the people responsible off boards.ie, some permanently...
...but there is that one little point made here that has some legitimacy, namely that our communications as a community aren't for beans. Which means meetings like this can seem legit to people because they don't know the background. I don't know how to overcome that without actually talking about it, best I can do is put it where it won't get into people's faces unless they're interested enough to go find it. That's why the Target Shooting and Hunting forums have no-politics rules. That's why the ISP blog.
If you've got a suggestion that's better (or even just different) than that, post it here, let's talk about it. Maybe it'll be the solution, or maybe it'll lead to it.0 -
That's one of those questions with a really simple answer until you look closelybunny shooter wrote: »Yes, but who is in charge? Minister or civil servants ?
The Minister is In Charge.
The Minister is In Charge but has much to Oversee.
The Minister is In Charge but has much to Oversee and so relies on his civil servants.
The Minister is In Charge but has much to Oversee and so relies on his civil servants to fill in the fine detail to his broad brush strokes.
The Minister is In Charge but has much to Oversee and so relies on his civil servants to fill in the fine detail to his broad brush strokes and so expects them to display a controlled degree of initiative.
See what I mean? 0 -
-
Advertisement
-
That would be a welcome reprieve!OK lets look at this logically.
In the cases where it's purely down to personal acrimony, I'm 100% with you - but there are specific cases where things aren't personal, and where there are genuine conflicts of interest, not all of which are resolvable in a single monolithic body.Sadly, these personal differences and varying opinions have caused different 'camps' to form AND REGARDLESS OF WHETHER ONE IS RIGHT OR WRONG THE RIFTS ARE DAMAGING THE SPORT OF SHOOTING AS A WHOLE.
(and just to make the point, the FCP has actually brought the different 'camps' closer together than they have ever been, at least in the last thirty years. There are a minority of guys who won't play well with others, and there is also the case of the IPSA, but apart from those two, everyone else is finally starting to get along, well not like a happy family, but more like a traditional Irish family, with shoving and jostling and hair-pulling but only in the house and when there aren't guests. It's not perfect, but it's better than anything we have ever had, ever before. Ever. Not kidding.)
I'd have genuine problems with the idea that those who are in the minority would always have to accept majority rule in our sport.Some describe Democracy as simply 'Majority Rule', I think it is more accurate to define it as 'Acceptance by the Minorities of Majority Rule'.
Apart from the whole 'rule' thing that is
Consider state funding. Right now, and for the past few decades, the bulk of state funding was given to shooting as a whole because of the perception of olympic shooting by the government. I'm not saying that that was morally or ethically right - I don't think it was, I think if you're a genuine sportsperson representing your country, then you deserve that country's support - but that was what the situation was and noone seriously tried to change it. But while the bulk of funding came because of the olympic shooters, the bulk of funding did not go to olympic shooters, quite the contrary. That wasn't right either, even if it was an Irish solution to an Irish problem.
Consider how we determine who the majority is. We have no mechanism to contact every licenced firearms holder in Ireland. None. We can't access that data through the DoJ or Gardai because that'd be illegal under the Data Protection Act. We certainly don't have them all as members in associations. And good as here is, they're not all on boards.ie either. So how, if we don't know who everyone is, can we let them all vote? How can we claim a mandate if any such vote only reaches a fraction of those out there? If a dozen guys in a room all vote to sue the government on behalf of all 200,000 shooters in Ireland, they can hardly claim any form of mandate, can they?
We can be reasonably sure that the largest section of those with firearms licences by a very healthy margin are the farmers with the shotgun behind the door on the farm, but do they get a say in all this? Do we limit it to the target shooters or the hunters? Do you get one vote or two or three if you do different things at different times (farmer during the week, hunter on the weekends and evenings, target shooter in the off-season from hunting, or whatever).
Also, I've seen the 'majority rule' method applied in one body personally, I've seen it leaned on in another body personally, and it's history as to how it went in a third body. It's how the NRPAI was originally formed and run and why the NTSA split away from the original NRPAI back before the NRPAI became a federation. It's how the NRPAI was run after federation and that's part of why the NTSA finally left again recently. It was used in the bad old days in the NTSA and caused much strife between clubs that has taken years of hard work and sacrifice to even begin to fix, and it still demands it every day from those who do the admin work. 'Majority rule', without minority protection, has caused more divisiveness, underhandedness and personal acrimony in our sports than you'd credit.
Not to mention that majority rule without minority protection is why we had no pistols or fullbore rifles in Ireland for 32 years. None of us like majority rule when we're the minority
And those of us who were dragged into them and who got ticked off at it because we saw the stuff going on in the background know who we are as well, but I don't think many people see much of a difference between those two groups. Which is sad.The individuals involved in the slagging matches, bitch-slapping fests and Chinese whisper campaigns know who they are themselves.
Actually, they've retired or been ejected from the representation function on several occasions over the last few years. They keep coming back. This meeting on Saturday is another such attempt at a comeback, and if followed through on, it's just going to create another cycle of crap for the rest of us to have to cope with.for the sake of unity and the continued enjoyment of our chosen sport they should withdraw from the representation function for the good of the sport.
No, but one did appear in the Law Review a while back (Rovi linked to it in the Press Clippings thread). Thing is, a legal challange to statute law would be technically arcane, quite difficult and very expensive.The most successful lobby groups use PROFESSIONALS. This would include PR people, lawyers and negotiators with proven track records. Have any of our representative groups sought or published a considered legal opinion on the proposed handgun ban for instance?
Not enough.Are we blowing our trumpets about the good stuff shooters do like raising cash for charity?
You're not, but the money's not there. Would you be willing to volunteer to be a PRO yourself and give your time instead of your money? There's a slot open for a decent PRO in the NTSA right now and the FIS runs training courses for PROs, and you'd have some pretty good technical support so all you'd have to do would be to generate content (ie. write stuff up, maybe take photos, and so on).I would be willing to pay good money for a representative body fronted by professsionals but maybe I'm alone in this.
I'd be in agreement as to this government's approach to things, but believe me - the adversarial idea is not a good one. You cannot use the Judiciary as a stick to beat the Legislative or Executive branches with. It was tried, with the full budget of the NARGC behind it. It led to Dunne v. Donoghue and to the dropping of the policy against pistols and dozens of victories in judicial reviews of licencing decisions and we all celebrated, but it didn't stop there, and it led onwards to the Criminal Justice Act of 2006 which set in statute law all the inequities that had previously only been a matter of policy, and which extended those inequities to areas previously untouched, and it gave powers to the Minister that previously he had not sought, and it led onwards to the Charleton decision in Donegal which is being used as a stick to beat us with in the press right now. The adversarial path has damaged our sport immeasurably, and to return to it now, when the law is firmly and solidly set against such an action, and when we have for the first time in recorded history an actual official forum for our representatives to access the Department (and this unofficial one where the grassroots can have a direct say and know that the Powers That Be as well as the Governing Bodies will all read it), well that would be a very bad choice indeed. Unless, of course, you're a barrister or solicitor, in which case you'd stand to make a lot of moneyFinally, much credit for the improvements in Irish society in recent years have been attributed to the Partnership approach. It is increasingly clear to me that the current government leadership have effectively consigned partnership to the bin. So perhaps we may need to revert to a more adversarial approach in times to come.
Don't be sorry for speaking your mind - be sorry more people won't do it openlySorry for the rant! 0 -
Also, I've seen the 'majority rule' method applied in one body personally, I've seen it leaned on in another body personally, and it's history as to how it went in a third body. It's how the NRPAI was originally formed and run and why the NTSA split away from the original NRPAI back before the NRPAI became a federation. It's how the NRPAI was run after federation and that's part of why the NTSA finally left again recently. It was used in the bad old days in the NTSA and caused much strife between clubs that has taken years of hard work and sacrifice to even begin to fix, and it still demands it every day from those who do the admin work. 'Majority rule', without minority protection, has caused more divisiveness, underhandedness and personal acrimony in our sports than you'd credit.
Wow! some snippage required just to get this bit out
I've done a bit of reading of old documents lately Sparks and it seems to me that the original devolution of the NTSA from the NRPAI back in 1986 was for more pragmatic reasons. It appears that it was carried out in an orderly and amicable fashion and (although I haven't got to the main reasons for it yet) the NRPAI committee were kept well informed of progress.0 -
-
Very important note for anyone attending this meeting tomorrow.
This bit of advice is free and without strings, but borne of long experience in these matters.
If you are thinking of joining this federation or whatever, be sure to get a copy of the constitution so you know what you're signing up for.
Half the problems with other such associations in the past have come from either ignorance of, or inability to get a hold of this sort of documentation. Usually there are no ulterior motives associated with such failures, but there are always problems afterwards when people realise what they've signed up for isn't what they'd thought.
The whole SSAI votes at AGM's thing being a case in point.
Those who are organising this will (or should) know that it's in their own best interests to provide this kind of stuff and if they've got legal experts wagging their tails ready to scamper to the High Court, then they'll have all the other i's dotted and t's crossed as well.
But don't take it for granted!
Like anything else you need to know what you're signing up for and a constitution and rules are the most basic requirements for such a body.
Oh! and have fun. 0 -
-
Of course, the constitution of an unincorporated association (ie. a club) is as binding as wet tissue paper...
You're hardly suggesting such a body would ignore their own rules?
But seriously, the rules of an organisation and its constitution will tell you all you need to know as to its aims and aspirations and how people can join etc.
Just good practice.0 -
After all that I cant make it to the meeting now myself! Got call today and the crime prevention officer is calling tomorrow.
Maybe its the work of faith and im been saved from the hands of these demons:D;)
Lads im no undercover agent for any side. I just got an email that I taught was in the interest of shooters so posted it here. TBH I regret posting it because now in some peoples eyes ive taken sides:(0 -
After all that I cant make it to the meeting now myself! Got call today and the crime prevention officer is calling tomorrow.
Maybe its the work of faith and im been saved from the hands of these demons:D;)
Lads im no undercover agent for any side. I just got an email that I taught was in the interest of shooters so posted it here. TBH I regret posting it because now in some peoples eyes ive taken sides:(
Don't be silly Chem, you're one of us 0 -
-
Advertisement
-
After all that I cant make it to the meeting now myself! Got call today and the crime prevention officer is calling tomorrow.
Maybe its the work of faith and im been saved from the hands of these demons:D;)
Lads im no undercover agent for any side. I just got an email that I taught was in the interest of shooters so posted it here. TBH I regret posting it because now in some peoples eyes ive taken sides:(
0070
Advertisement