Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2009

hk

Sparks wrote: »

Minister now saying w.r.t. the handgun amendments, he thanks Flanagan and Rabbitte for their broad support. He's of the opinion that handguns must be controlled. He's saying that the handgun ban is not to tackle gun crime, that that's Operation Anvil's job.

Finally someone willing to speak the truth. So what is the reason? Anything more substantial than the Minister having misplaced strong personal feelings?

Sparks

Says it's a matter of record that 42 handguns have been stolen and they've been stolen for a purpose, presumably crime.

Reasons for restricting handguns are much wider, specifically to stop a handgun culture. Handguns are different because of concealability, capacity and their use in shooting rampage. Practical shooting representations are not the majority of shooters.

Wants to say that not all target shooting is not legitimate, the IPSC shooting is not legitimate, it's based on combat-kill philosophy, mentions the UKPSA website.

Government believes that handgun ownership is not in the public interest. We don't want a dunblane here. It's disturbing that handgun rampages aren't covered more in the media.

Sparks

Minister will annually review with the Commissioner the licencing procedure and may ban outright any firearm that he belives is a problem.

Now moving onto the EU arrest warrant stuff.

Sparks

Grizzly, this guy is a junior minister for justice and is speaking on behalf of Ahern.

still talking about EU stuff.

hk

Sparks wrote: »

It's disturbing that handgun rampages aren't covered more in the media.

What??? Any incidents occuring in the US always make the headlines here

Grizzly 45

Oh Ahernes little lap dog...Figures:rolleyes:
Sure ,we only hear about shootings here in Ireland after the Sports news before the ad breaks:rolleyes:
Going on about data security,It will be safe here no problem,obviously missed out on the lost data by his UK colleuges in laptops,CDs etc
What planet are these people on???

Sparks

And the Minister has now wrapped up.
And the Bill has now been referred to the Select Committee on Justice.

Grizzly 45

First impressions?

Sparks

hk wrote: »

What??? Any incidents occuring in the US always make the headlines here

Yeah, but he meant it was disturbing they didn't stay in the headlines longer here, that we're not still going over them weeks later.

Sparks

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

First impressions?

That the Minister has now admitted this isn't anything to do with crime, but that he wants handguns gone.

It wasn't me!

Well, that was... painful.


Many thanks for the live-blogging Sparks, made this whole slow-motion car crash more convenient to observe.

It wasn't me!

Sparks wrote: »

That the Minister has now admitted this isn't anything to do with crime, but that he wants handguns gone.

I posted in the PQ thread about this, but is it within the minister's brief to direct what he views as a culture and openly admits is not within the purview of criminal legislation, or could such an effort lead to challenge?

Grizzly 45

Thanks Sparks for the running comentary.:)
yup, "Ill ban handguns cos I dont like them and i'm the minister...so there!!":mad: As IWM said a car crash .......in slow motion.:rolleyes:

chem

Yea semms like the minister failed to pull the wool over the houses eyes, saying that it would help stop gangland killing. So now he is leaning more on the "mass killing" use of handguns. He is just trying to make the glove fit :mad:

Sparks

It has led to challenge IWM, see Rabbitte's comments. That's all the challange the second stage allows. The committee stage affords more leeway, actual amendments can be brought forward, hopefully Rabbitte will continue to support us here. He seems to have been the most effective voice in the Second stage who's also present on the Committee, but then some of those who supported the bill are on Committee too, including the Chair.

Kryten

Banging head off keyboard repeatedly!!!!!!!! Bloody still comparing us to the US......:mad::mad:

Slav

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

First impressions?

As Ted said to Dougal: "That went well!"

Now I do feel I'm in Ireland! After listening I can't help reminding few other things like "common father, there is cocaine in it!"

And of course the wide use of the W-word though our friend Deasy even said the G-word, the bad G-word. Worst then Guns. You know the one I mean, father...

Anyway, we're not going to America!

chem

Do they really think the laws are so lose here? They give the impression that you can buy handguns on line or over the counter, and walk away with them:rolleyes:

Are there no back bench TDs who dont follow the party line? Every FF TD who spoke just vomited out the same crap Ahern has been repeating like a stuck record, the past few months.

Slow mo car crash indeed.

Sparks

chem wrote: »

They give the impression that you can buy handguns on line or over the counter, and walk away with them:rolleyes:

Give the impression? That's what Deasy said!

It wasn't me!

Sparks wrote: »

It has led to challenge IWM, see Rabbitte's comments. That's all the challange the second stage allows. The committee stage affords more leeway, actual amendments can be brought forward, hopefully Rabbitte will continue to support us here. He seems to have been the most effective voice in the Second stage who's also present on the Committee, but then some of those who supported the bill are on Committee too, including the Chair.

I meant individual challenge, as he seems to be extending himself beyond what seems appropriate for a minister. Apart from the radical increase in powers he confers upon himself with various sections of the bill with regard to direction of policy, in the main he admits his intent is to prevent the formation of a culture, rather than to address a criminal issue, which seems a bizarre use of the legislative power for a minister for justice. How legitimate is the assertion of this authority?

I'd be wary of hoping for much from the committee stages. Charlie Flanagan and Pat Rabbitte seem to see sense in this, but the rest of that committee doesn't look remotely friendly.

It wasn't me!

Sparks wrote: »

Give the impression? That's what Deasy said!

This is utterly baffling, that these people can speak with such conviction and make such important decisions on matters that, day to day, they display such staggering ignorance of. It's frankly frightening. Speaks volumes for the idea of a meritocracy. And this comes after Deasy was ordered to go to a range and learn something about what he's spewing suchh nonsense about. Clearly that hasn't been listened to at all.

PJ Hunter

It's Joe Carey (Claire).

Saying he agrees with the Minister about gun culture, doesn't want to have the NRA in Ireland because of school shootings. It's Joe Carey (Claire).

"NRA in Ireland because of school shootings":eek: lucky this statement was under the protection of the dail, talk about linkage, is it NRA or some other faction altogeather he talks, long ways off the mc'dowells restricted list.

offend the yanks while there at it as well, feck the Olympic 2012 and what shooting tourist will want to come here why bother when they can go up north.

Sparks

It wasn't me! wrote: »

I meant individual challenge, as he seems to be extending himself beyond what seems appropriate for a minister.

I'm sure that can be said in Committee or other stages, but I'm not sure there's a legal precedent or even a mechanism to make it stick

I'd be wary of hoping for much from the committee stages. Charlie Flanagan and Pat Rabbitte seem to see sense in this, but the rest of that committee doesn't look remotely friendly.

Hope?! That died a while back
And I'm not so sure Flanagan is so useful - if he was, we wouldn't have heard from Deasy like that today.

Sparks

It wasn't me! wrote: »

This is utterly baffling, that these people can speak with such conviction and make such important decisions on matters that, day to day, they display such staggering ignorance of. It's frankly frightening. Speaks volumes for the idea of a meritocracy.

Welcome to the ranks of the elitists

And this comes after Deasy was ordered to go to a range and learn something about what he's spewing suchh nonsense about. Clearly that hasn't been listened to at all.

Indeed. And he comes across as such a slimey, sleazy little git that you'd wonder how he ever got voted in at all.

It wasn't me!

Sparks wrote: »

And he comes across as such a slimey, sleazy little git that you'd wonder how he ever got voted in at all.

And there was me holding back lest I get smacked.

It would seem worth contacting those on the committee, particularly Pat Rabbitte, to advance the suggestion that the minister is exceeding his position in attempting to direct general cultural policy (though the notion that there is a developing "culture" of handgun ownership is ludicrous), and should stick to legislative measures designed with a view to tackle criminal problems. The likelihood of a shooting such as those the minister refers to occurring in Ireland with a legally held firearm is insignificant. It simply is not likely at all, and this must be stressed. The reasons it's so unlikely, such as our stringent security measures and the absolutely tiny number of handguns actually in private ownership and the even fewer owners of them, should also be stated and made a point of. I think IRLConor also found a statistic a while back that said that even with the UK ban, per capita, due to exemptions in the law, there are still more licenced handguns in the UK (per capita remember) than there are in Ireland without a ban. The minister should also be challenged, as should those who supported him in his assertion, to provide data which supports their assertion that the numbers of handguns in private ownership will continue to swell exponentially or even at its current rate. Such evidence likely does not exist; I certainly can't find it. Without evidence to suggest that

1. licenced handguns constitute a problem which justifies the minister exceeding himself and directing public policy by his own biases, even when he admits that it is not an effort to prevent crime.
2. The other districts to which he refers in support of his proposed ban have benefited from it, and in the case of the UK he should be challenged with the fact that, per capita, they still possess more licenced handguns than we do here.
3. His assertion that numbers of licenced handguns will continue to climb at the rate he suggests.
4. The brief of the minister for justice carries with it the imperative to direct matters of public "cultural" policy and the development of the state not related to the area of criminal legislation.

Then I think it is fair to say that this law should not be passed. The minister confers upon himself unprecedented powers with regard to his ability to interfere directly in the running and policy of An Garda Síochána, is attempting to make laws which I just don't see to be within his purview and is making them blinded by his own personal prejudices, when he has openly admitted that they're not intended to tackle the area of his brief. It's been said before, but it's frankly astonishing that this document got past the Attorney General, especially given the time it spent at that stage.

Darr

Hi guys ,
I have sent a few email and received very little in the way of replies .
BUT it’s important that we not only show our disapproval to this Bill and the misguided ( they must be as anyone who believes this will do any good is sadly wrong) but also to show our support to those who raise concerns about the bill and its aims .

it takes a few min and may or may not help . but never know unless you give it a go .
Darr

Grizzly 45

And he comes across as such a slimey, sleazy little git that you'd wonder how he ever got voted in at all

Not to mind all of the above.He is also a self admitted law breaker!!

Remember the smoking ban,the Dail bar and a certain TD demanding his "rights"to smoke there??? When they were not forthcoming immediately,off he goes and smokes in a public building,to the detriment of all other TDs health.[Personally I couldnt care less if the whole slimey reptile house up there was coverd in a nicotine fug,and they were all dying slowly of cancer.It's the principle now of the matter]
Then standing up in the Dail and demanding "rights" for the cancer stick brigade???How many people die of second hand smoke inhalation,cancer,etc and die of gun deaths here???
So lets hear it for hyprocrisy and two facedness when it suits.!! Mr Deasy TD!!!C'mon Down!:rolleyes::rolleyes:

It wasn't me!

Written this to Pat Rabbitte. Comments welcome for tweaking before I send it on.

E-mail to Pat Rabbitte wrote:

Dear sir,

I am writing to request your representation of some of my views in the upcoming committee debates on the proposed CJA 2009 Misc. Provisions Bill. Heretofore, you have proven a supporter of the legitimate sporting shooting community in Ireland, and from observing the Dáil debates recently on this issue, I feel you and your party best represent my interests in this matter. I commend to your attention some of my observations on the material substance of this Bill, and some aspects of it which I find startling, to say the least. My interests in the bill are many, but I propose to deal primarily with the oppressive treatment of licenced firearm holders.

In the first place, I wish to make clear that I feel that the Minister is exceeding the scope of his mandate in many aspects of this Bill, by attempting to direct the Oireachtas in an area of policy I cannot help but feel is beyond the Minister's remit. He himself admitted today in the Dáil chamber that the provision of the bill dealing with a ban on the issuing of handgun licences is not a measure designed to prevent the spread of gun crime, but to prevent the development of what, in the minister's eyes, represents a growing "culture" of handgun ownership. I hope you might advise the minister that his brief is with regard to criminal legislation, and that where he himself admits that there is no clear link between this "culture" and his area of criminal legislation, that it is beyond the scope of his job to write legislation in respect of a "culture"

Furthermore, I wish to address the alleged development of a "gun culture" and to set right that there is no such thing. Following the initial judicial review in 2004, when it became a plausible reality to licence handguns in the state, the number of those licenced has been seen to rise, from zero to around 1800. It is also noteworthy that many of those licenced since 2004 number also among the same pistols confiscated in 1972 under the Temporary Custody Order written by the minister of the day, Des O'Malley. The policy following on from the Temporary Custody Order of not re-issuing licences for those firearms seized under the order was illegal, a policy handed down from on high with no legislative backing in the statute books. The fact that the minister celebrates this extra-legal seizure every time he pontificates about how no handguns were licenced before 2004 is not lost on the Irish shooting community, and I - perhaps naively - like to think it is not lost on the community at large. There is, in addition, no evidence to support claims made by the minister and many deputies that the rise in licensing seen since 2004 will continue at the current rate. With many of those firearms confiscated in 1972 having been finally re-licensed (in some cases to the descendants of their original owners), and those shooters interested in pistol sports established, it is far more likely that the rise in licences issued would slow considerably, to a trickle in fact. The numbers do not support the minister's assertion of a "growing culture". It is perhaps also worth noting to the minister that, despite the UK's much-vaunted handgun ban in the wake of Dunblane, the exceptions to the ban mean that there are still more licenced handguns per capita in mainland Great Britain than there are in the Republic of Ireland, and yet this is so insignificant that the fact passes unnoticed for the most part.

The minister is proposing in this bill to confer upon himself unprecedented power in section 25 of the Bill, which carries the provision that the minister may declare restricted certain firearms and ammunition, based on criteria which display clearly the minister's lack of expertise or expert consultation. That the minister can arbitrarily legislate, thanks to the provisions of this section, to ban things, without consultation, of which he knows and understands nothing, would be an abuse of power and the system he represents, and has the potential to most gravely affect the sport of shooting in Ireland. It is a dangerous provision, which again does nothing to prevent criminal activity, and should not be allowed pass into law.

The personal importation of firearms by individuals who have been granted firearms certificates in respect of those firearms is an area particularly significant to some areas of the shooting sports in Ireland, whose equipment is in the main so specialised that it would not be stocked by Irish firearms dealerships. Dealerships may or may not accommodate shooters in this regard, but the likelihood is that there will be extortionate charges for doing so. The monopoly Irish distributors possess with regard to their products also leads already to a situation where prices for consumables such as ammunition are up to four times higher than they are even in Northern Ireland. That Irish shooters would be reliant on Irish dealerships, without recourse to European dealerships within the common market, would certainly throttle the shooting sports in Ireland, who are already under great burden, both financially and legislatively.

Sir, as an Irish sporting shooter, I do not object to the extremely stringent licensing procedure we undergo in order to be able to pursue our sport. Rather, I welcome a system which legally binds a Garda Superintendent to refuse a licence to any individual whose possession of a firearm, in his eyes, will threaten public safety and the peace. I abide by all guidelines with regard to the storage of my sporting equipment and adhere to strict codes of safety, in the interests of the public. I support all efforts on the part of the minister and the government to legitimately tackle gun crim, gangland violence and the drugs trade. I commend both the government and the Gardaí in their successes to date in these endeavours and wish them many more. What I object to is the association of my sporting pastimes with criminals. I object to being treated as a potential criminal, as the minister is suggesting that by licensing the firearms in private ownership in Ireland, Superintendents around the country have acted illegally, by issuing licences in defiance of the firearms act, which states in no uncertain terms that a Superintendent cannot issue a licence unless he is certain that by doing so he will not endanger the public security or the peace. This is not the case. Licenced firearms have not been a problem in this country. They do not constitute a problem and they will not do so. To suggest otherwise is without merit and without basis.

I feel the minister is acting beyond the scope of his brief, biased by his personal views and agenda with regard to firearms. He has no evidence to support his assertion of a growing gun culture in Ireland; he has no evidence to support his assertion that the licensing of firearms, and pistols in particular, constitutes a threat to the public safety; he libels a host of Garda Superintendents, suggesting that they have acted illegally; and he admits that his proposed ban on handguns does not address a criminal issue which would require legislation. There is an abundance of law on the statute books already with regard to the legal possession of firearms. There is no need for further legislation in the area and the minister is not addressing any problem, past, present or future with the proposed additions and amendments. I hope you will speak with the minister on my behalf and raise my concerns in the committee debates on this Bill.

I can be contacted by e-mail if you would like to discuss the matter further.

Yours sincerely,

rrpc

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Written this to Pat Rabbitte. Comments welcome for tweaking before I send it on.

The minister is proposing in this bill to confer upon himself unprecedented power in section 25 of the Bill, which carries the provision that the minister may declare restricted certain firearms and ammunition

Prohibited.

That's not the worst part of it by any stretch. The bit where he can attach blanket preconditions to all licences whenever he likes is pretty far reaching.

Think of the conditions the Minister could attach to your licence with the stroke of a pen.

He now has two effective means of stopping anyone getting a licence: either by prohibition or by attaching such onerous preconditions that complying is impossible.

hk

not to shabby at all! Possibly look at expanding the section on personal import licencing, ie article 7 process, this is not ad hoc and imports are tracked and permission granted, wouldnt sugest going into too much detail, but if he is to counter some of the receint comments he needs to know some of the proceedure, ie people cannot buy firearms or ammunition over the net and that such imports are supervised by the guardi.
might i be so cheeky to suggest posting the final draft so that a few of us could send it on.