Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2009

Meyer

bunny shooter wrote: »

I think the important term in his statement is "military-type firearms" eg AR 15's and some of the other stuff I have seen recently on the range :eek:

There are no "military-type firearms" in Ireland...At least not in the hands of Civilian licensed firearms holders! In fact there is no such thing as "Military-type", Its either a Military firearm or its not! there is no middle ground in that regard. I have/had experience of military firearms -I owe my life to having such a firearm- and with the risk of sound jingoistic, I would not be typing this post if I had to depend on "military-type firearms"!

Personally I can see no reason why anyone in this country would need or want a fullbore semi-auto rifle.

Personally, I can see no reason why anyone would want to shoot Bunny's, and yet that is your username "bunny shooter".
I shoot at paper targets these days, I no longer have a reason to shoot at living things, and yet I can understand if you have a reason to shoot bunnys...I might not agree with you or your reasons for doing so, But I'll be damned if I'll condemn you for doing so, and it really is disingenuous of you to proclaim that you "can see no reason why anyone in this country would need or want a fullbore semi-auto rifle".

rrpc

The implications of what we are doing here is not only to tighten the regulations and put a stop to proliferation; we are terminating one particular acknowledged sport.

I think this is where Pat Rabbitte is either misinformed or at least not fully informed. Clearly he is referring to Practical shooting, but he also appears to believe that practical shooting is the only sport to require and use full bore pistols.

This is patently untrue and he actually should know better as I know that I amongst others wrote to him enumerating the sports that used full bore pistol including ISSF full bore pistol. I think somebody else mentioned earlier on this thread the belief that the opposition people showed very little knowledge of the subject, not being able to counter the Minister's arguments and this is obviously true here as well.

And it's not been for lack of briefing

Grizzly 45

I think at the end of the day, all shooters across Europe are fearful that some sociopath/mentally deranged individual will take their legally held firearms and go postal.

Has happened in quite a few countries,but they didnt run out and ban a paticular type of firearm.[Apart from the UK,and we generally ape them anyway in all things.]

I think that was the real motive behind Ahern's plan.
[/QUOTE]

Well,he has said so now that is his reasons in the Dail.Apart from changing from the "crime issue".

I just find it extremely sad legislation is passed to prevent it(by banning handguns exception air/olympic pistols) on the basis it might one day happen.

Yup,but in Ireland our politicans are very slow learners...For some reasons especially ministers for justice.Our last one who got involved in this Desmond O Malley,went and took up our stuff to prevent the IRA from arming on the civillian pouplation,and thought the NI problem would be over in a month.Ruined shooting in this country for 35 years,and didnt stop one death in NI or the Republic with his daft policy..:mad: To this day that man is still so arrogant to belive that he prevented more deaths in nI and the republic with this idiocy.
Yeah we are all kids and sheep here.
Kids because we cant be trusted with anything adult or to make rational decisions.Sheep to be fleeced at tax time or when our govt fuk up the economy,and to vote correctly in elections.So our Nanny Govt knows whats best for us.We truely got the Govt we deserve.

Thanks Ly,I just might take youup on that offer.Luxembourg might be small,and expensive,but next to Switzerland still one of the most gun friendly countries in the EU.

bunny shooter

Meyer wrote: »

............ Personally, I can see no reason why anyone would want to shoot Bunny's, and yet that is your username "bunny shooter"..............

I am entitled to my opinions as are you.

Bunny shooting is nor more illegal than paper-punching

Vegeta

bunny shooter wrote: »

I am entitled to my opinions as are you.

But in fairness Bunny, you'd be the first to jump on the NTSA (or any governing body) if there was even a hint that they came out with a statement like

Personally I can see no reason why anyone in this country would need or want a fullbore semi-auto rifle.

So its ok for you to make statements like this but its not ok for others, riiiiiiigggghhhhhht

Just an observation, I think you should practice what you preach.

Grizzly 45

Clash,without going into this all again boring and peeing off people and starting a flame war.You have to
[1] Go and read the previous postsa on this,read the www.arrse.co.uk Threads on this to get the backround to Shortt and the whole irish Bodygaurd training situation.

Breifly...
Bodygaurd training,is NOT the same as practical pistol shooting.As somone who has done both,I can state that categorically.Proper BG training has maybe 5% firearms training ,and 95% AVOIDANCE of getting into firefights!!Your job is to protect your client not to get involved in shootouts.The old adage is ;if you have to draw your firearm in the presence of your client,you have lost badly!
They are as different now as chalk and cheese.Some people might argue that it started out as a combat art of shooting in the 1970s.But that is like saying nowadays that a police force square bashing and marching in formation is revelant to modern law enforcement procedures on the street.

This type of training that Shortt is/was offering here in Louth[Min Aherns constiturency!!] has been illegal since the end of the civil war! It is specifically mentioned as prohibited in the offences against the state act 1939.paraphrasing;The drilling,instructing of a body of men in the use of arms,or military commands,or having such a body respond to such commands or accepting military drill.

There has been alot of inneuendo,rumours,heard it on the grapevine,somone told me but cant name them ,but it happened..really!
heresay,and rumour
That there has been others doing likewise around ranges in Ireland.
YET when this has been questioned,no one has produced in the public domain any hard evidence to back these claims up,or is willing to come forward and actually say,that there were criminal goings on.
So unless somone wants to actually name places,names,dates and who in practical pistol was involved in training bodygaurds,contractors for Fiji,hitmen for Bolivia,or Terminators from the future..this should be treated under the rules of evidence as heresay and rumour.AKA BS The worst kind of evidence in a court of law.

However ,somwhere or somhow the DOJ have got this all mixed together by accident or design,maybe read a website on the International DEFENSIVE Pistol Association..Which is a sport,but is so totally combative in nature,it makes PP look tame in comparision.
And being burrocrats and not up on the total differences equated PP and IDPA as one and the same?
And now wont be told any different.
Yet,they accept heresay and rumour as concrete evidence and ignore a blatant case of illegality going on in their own bosses constituency! That certainly has to raise some questions with anyone thinking right on this issue.
Is this just the ministers way of trying to bury somthing embarrasing in his own constituency.That has nothing to do with a sport??
That it is impossible to say they were wrong and mistook IDPA for PP as it would make them look like bigger fools than they are?

The rules of evidence don't allow for youtube videos to be admissable unfortunately

.

Actually,it does!!and it has been used in court cases here and abroad.
You are self confessing[dont know the legal term] to ba crime.

So, isn't it possible for the Minister to know about stuff going on in the same way without it being strong enough to stand up in court?

Seeing that there is legislation there already to deal with this,and other people involved in paramilitary activities have been convicted and accused on less evidence than this.That doesnt wash.

Maybe you'll throw a few angry smilies at me for saying this, but if you can believe youtube videos are enough to hang this shortt lad then you're justifying the Minister taking the same stance.

:DNot quite.The minister hasnt actually been forthcoming with clear ,conscise,day,date,time,who ,what, when, where,evidence that any person involved in the IPSA or PP comitted a n offence with firearms under Irish law,that would justify PP being banned here.If it had been used to train up a squad of contractors or that shower who went off to South America and got shot ora bunch of people planning to overthrow the State..Well and good.BUT it hasnt and isnt.
OTOH when there issolid evidence of wrongdoing with firearms in Co Louth and that kind of paramil itary training...The silence is deafning!!!
Gotta ask why????

[

rrpc

Vegeta wrote:

But in fairness Bunny, you'd be the first to jump on the NTSA (or any governing body) if there was even a hint that they came out with a statement like: "Personally I can see no reason why anyone in this country would need or want a fullbore semi-auto rifle."

I'm assuming that he's still doing it based on this sentence:

bunny shooter wrote: »

I agree pistol shooters are being scapegoated by certain interested shooting sport participants but it's not by Des and the NARGC

It's not even remotely realistic to suggest that any shooting sports participants would (a) want to scapegoat pistol shooters or (b) be in a position to do so.

Of course those who don't take part in pistol shooting sports may well agree with Bunny's stance, except against pistols instead of fullbore semi's, but does that make them responsible for the Minister's clampdown? And is it really any help to make such unfounded accusations?

There are times when I despair of people to do the right things and to respond in the right way and this is one of them. Instead of actually dealing with the problem we have a few people who should know better spending their time pointing fingers at each other.

I have even recently heard the old "If we can't have our stuff, let's make sure nobody gets anything" nonsense rearing it's ugly head again :mad:

Vegeta

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Stuff

Ok folks the discussion on this guy ends here, anything else will be deleted. Please remember DeV's sticky post. Allegations (which are different than the results from court cases) against named individuals, even if true, is a banning offense so lets not go any further on it ok.

So far, as far as I can see, no one has said he did anything illegal but its borderline so it ends here ok.

Grizzly 45

There are times when I despair of people to do the right things and to respond in the right way and this is one of them. Instead of actually dealing with the problem we have a few people who should know better spending their time pointing fingers at each other.

Buts thats SOP here in Ireland.Ignore the up coming crisis,rush headlong and headless into it when it arrives,with no coherent plan to counter it,or knowing who is on your side or not,or not fully implimenting the plan.
With inevetible defeat,blame each other.:rolleyes:

I have even recently heard the old "If we can't have our stuff, let's make sure nobody gets anything" nonsense rearing it's ugly head again :mad:

Not nice at all,but quite understandable.

rrpc

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Not nice at all,but quite understandable.

Not to me it isn't. It seems to me that those articulating this POV are doing it on the basis of a vested interest. Hardly the kind of people you want championing your sport if all that really matters to them is the money.

rrpc

Vegeta wrote: »

So far, as far as I can see, no one has said he did anything illegal but its borderline so it ends here ok.

I agree, I saw nothing illegal in that stuff (as the law currently stands) even if you could prove it happened here (which isn't definite either).

This to my mind is the crux of the problem as the Minister sees it. How do you distinguish one from the other?

Grizzly 45

Very simply....
[1] TALK to those involved in PP and bodygaurding work.There are plenty of people who were involved in both aspects and will/would frankly and freely tell you that doing things on the BG line of work in a PPmatch would get you disqualified and doing PP stunts in a real life or death shooting situation would get you dead!!It is one reason a Califorinan police dept banned their personel from joining PP matches,their police officers were getting killed trying to use tactics from the PP areana,and getting muddled with their own training.
They are as different as a car is to a helicopter.

[2] LOOK at the equipment or get somone with LEO/military to do so and anyalise it to current LEO/military tactics.PP handguns are about as useful in combat/police work as a NASCAR is to commute to work. No sane police force, BG, or military unit would allow or use a pistol modified in trigger weight,safties ,holsters etc.The legal implications of accidental discharges would be horrible.

[3] BELIVE these reports,after all thats what you are employing all these experts for.

[4] Follow up and find evidence of so called wrong doing that is factual,not some mumbo jumbo of rumours and heresay.And be able to prove it.

If I had to go into this of how the differences of both skills are you would ban me for boredom.BUT I can tell you this;any competant military or LE firearms trainer could have put the minister right on the differences.

RR
I thought that comment was coming from the crowd,not the leaders.
What stuff are you referring to??my comment or <SNIP> video??
BTW it is provable,if that is what you are referring to.

Vegeta

Folks please don't discuss this person any further. There's no problem talking about the difference between body guard work and practical shooting disciplines and why its unfair to class them as one.

Just don't make allegations that may get boards sued. Even if you can prove them

This one comes from the owner of the site and he wont take kindly to it.

Please don't force my hand to delete any more mentions of this guy and hand out bans.

Grizzly 45

Veg,
You had better edit your comment @11:50 then as well.As the quote has all the details I removed from my original post.;)

While we are on this subject,maybe editing this Boards thread then might be in order as well?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055380672

Vegeta

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Veg,
You had better edit your comment @11:50 then as well.As the quote has all the details I removed from my original post.;)

Ooopps thanks for the heads up

While we are on this subject,maybe editing this Boards thread then might be in order as well?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055380672

Not my back garden but I'll have a read of it

rrpc

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Very simply....
[1] TALK to those involved in PP and bodygaurding work.There are plenty of people who were involved in both aspects and will/would frankly and freely tell you that doing things on the BG line of work in a PPmatch would get you disqualified and doing PP stunts in a real life or death shooting situation would get you dead!!It is one reason a Califorinan police dept banned their personel from joining PP matches,their police officers were getting killed trying to use tactics from the PP areana,and getting muddled with their own training.
They are as different as a car is to a helicopter.

You'd be only able to do all that if you're there to see it going on when it's going on.

But let's say you decide you want to do the kind of training that the Minister is talking about. What's preventing you (assuming you're allowed of course) setting up a range as a PP range, with maybe three or four stages and running your course? Unless somebody's actually there watching it the whole time, it's not possible to be able to know at all times what exactly is going on on that range or ranges.

All the levels of proof you're setting out there are assuming that you can actually view the activities taking place at the time. You can't make that assumption, in any case, the level of sophistication of the 'ranges' I've seen in some of the videos would fall far short of the average PP range, so using a PP range would be a step up.

I'm just playing devils advocate here Grizzly, I honestly can't see how you can effectively police these activities in the real world.

Grizzly 45

RR.
Let me put it like this;
Ireland is a pretty small country,The PP crowd were the smallest of the shooting faternatity, BGs are an even smaller community [Those who are genuine that is].Sooner or later if there was anything untowed going on,you can be double damn sure it will be passed on as to who,what and when was playing at silly buggers and throwing their rubbish over the neighbours fence.

Quite frankly PP is soo removed from real BG firearms training,I would be more inclined to go off and equip the team with airsoft " weapons".Of which I can get copies of state of the art current stuff inc hand grenades,and RPG launchers:eek: with no hassle,paperwork,bother and be 100% legal by simply enrolling my "team" in an airsoft leauge, finding an old place to practise whatever and then be able to practise all sorts of manouvers,fire support etc etc and with 1000% less hassle than mucking about here with real firearms in Ireland.
How do we know that airsoft in Ireland isnt being checked for Left/Right wing groups,terrorists,criminals etc????
By comparision PP requires all members to be liscensed by the Gardai to own firearms,is regulated,has no military overtones,doesnt even allow cammo clothes,or milspec holsters .

Is conducted on approved ranges subject to Garda supervision and authorisation.You know yourself the hassle of setting up a range,do you think anyone investing that time money and effort is going to risk it on illegal activity??
Put it like this;of either sports that would be more benefical and open to abuse as what the minister is looking at.It is airsoft...Not practical shooting.
Even at this stage PP could still survive in Ireland as it does out in the Far East by doing it in airsoft.As airsoft is legal and fits the description of a combat sport,so why wouldnt PP not continue under this guise???

bunny shooter

Vegeta wrote: »

But in fairness Bunny, you'd be the first to jump on the NTSA (or any governing body) if there was even a hint that they came out with a statement like



So its ok for you to make statements like this but its not ok for others, riiiiiiigggghhhhhht

Just an observation, I think you should practice what you preach.

I am an indiviual and my statements are my personal opinion. You and anyone else here is entitled to agree or disagree with them as I am with yours/theirs.

However, nobody here is entitled to tell me my opinons are wrong, unless they are illegal.

If an organisation or association wants to make statements they should be representing the opinions of a majority of their members.


Good old democracy

chem

Lads, just to take the thread back on track. From my reading of the mins of the meeting. Minister Ahern is not having it all his own way. Mostly thanks to Mr. Rabbit. Hopefully the pressure will be kept up and some kind of half way deal can be met. Im alot more positive for pistol shooting having a future here after reading the debate

If we all have not done so already. Id say an email of thanks should be sent to the ministers who spoke up for pistol shooting, a little goes along way;)

daveob007

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

RR.
Let me put it like this;
Ireland is a pretty small country,The PP crowd were the smallest of the shooting faternatity, BGs are an even smaller community [Those who are genuine that is].Sooner or later if there was anything untowed going on,you can be double damn sure it will be passed on as to who,what and when was playing at silly buggers and throwing their rubbish over the neighbours fence.

Quite frankly PP is soo removed from real BG firearms training,I would be more inclined to go off and equip the team with airsoft " weapons".Of which I can get copies of state of the art current stuff inc hand grenades,and RPG launchers:eek: with no hassle,paperwork,bother and be 100% legal by simply enrolling my "team" in an airsoft leauge, finding an old place to practise whatever and then be able to practise all sorts of manouvers,fire support etc etc and with 1000% less hassle than mucking about here with real firearms in Ireland.
How do we know that airsoft in Ireland isnt being checked for Left/Right wing groups,terrorists,criminals etc????
By comparision PP requires all members to be liscensed by the Gardai to own firearms,is regulated,has no military overtones,doesnt even allow cammo clothes,or milspec holsters .

Is conducted on approved ranges subject to Garda supervision and authorisation.You know yourself the hassle of setting up a range,do you think anyone investing that time money and effort is going to risk it on illegal activity??
Put it like this;of either sports that would be more benefical and open to abuse as what the minister is looking at.It is airsoft...Not practical shooting.
Even at this stage PP could still survive in Ireland as it does out in the Far East by doing it in airsoft.As airsoft is legal and fits the description of a combat sport,so why wouldnt PP not continue under this guise???

pp and bg and all that stuff
this thread is becoming totally mind boggling with so many different topics.
i never seen pp or practical shooting being done but i did do paintballing and that to me was as close as simulated combat as you get,your target is not a moving paper or wooden one but another person.
great fun but painful,i got more injuries from that i could ever get from pistol/rifle shooting.
The big issue at present is the ban that looks very likely at the moment.
fg and labour spoke well for us in the dail but have they put forward any real usefull changes to the bill which might see us keeping the sport???
its one thing speaking in the dail but doing is another thing.

rrpc

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

RR.
Let me put it like this;
Ireland is a pretty small country,The PP crowd were the smallest of the shooting faternatity, BGs are an even smaller community [Those who are genuine that is].Sooner or later if there was anything untowed going on,you can be double damn sure it will be passed on as to who,what and when was playing at silly buggers and throwing their rubbish over the neighbours fence.

And yet there's a thread over three hundred pages long (last time i looked) on politics.ie on just such activities and the people who are involved and some very unsavoury characters. I think we're a bit too innocent here and don't believe the stuff that's going on until it's shoved right into our faces as the Michael Dwyer incident proved.

Quite frankly PP is soo removed from real BG firearms training,I would be more inclined to go off and equip the team with airsoft " weapons".Of which I can get copies of state of the art current stuff inc hand grenades,and RPG launchers:eek: with no hassle,paperwork,bother and be 100% legal by simply enrolling my "team" in an airsoft leauge, finding an old place to practise whatever and then be able to practise all sorts of manouvers,fire support etc etc and with 1000% less hassle than mucking about here with real firearms in Ireland.

Except that when you're charging €2500 a pop, there's a lot more cachet to things going bang as opposed to click

How do we know that airsoft in Ireland isnt being checked for Left/Right wing groups,terrorists,criminals etc????

I think you'd need to be careful about saying things about another sport that might bring it into disrepute for no good reason other than you trying to prove a point on an internet forum.

Even at this stage PP could still survive in Ireland as it does out in the Far East by doing it in airsoft.As airsoft is legal and fits the description of a combat sport,so why wouldnt PP not continue under this guise???

Or paintball for that matter. In fact the legislative provision to ban PP specifically allows it to be carried out with paintball markers or airsoft. More than anything else, this really indicates that it's possibly not PP as such that the Minister has a problem with but the possibility of it being used as a camouflage for other activities.

Vegeta

bunny shooter wrote: »

I am an indiviual and my statements are my personal opinion. You and anyone else here is entitled to agree or disagree with them as I am with yours/theirs.

However, nobody here is entitled to tell me my opinons are wrong, unless they are illegal.

If an organisation or association wants to make statements they should be representing the opinions of a majority of their members.


Good old democracy

As I said just an observation. Never said you were right, wrong, up, down, black or blue.

Just saying that I think those comments comical from you considering your disgust with others who allegedly(wasn't even true) did the same.

Just my 2c

chem

rrpc wrote: »

And yet there's a thread over three hundred pages long (last time i looked) on politics.ie on just such activities and the people who are involved and some very unsavoury characters.

Linky??

Sikamick

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

RR.
Is conducted on approved ranges subject to Garda supervision and authorisation.You know yourself the hassle of setting up a range,do you think anyone investing that time money and effort is going to risk it on illegal activity??

The answer is YES and I made the offer to meet you and let you see the evidence, I'm still waiting.

Sikamick

meathshooter

heres a quote from the minister at the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2009: Committee Stage. Thursday, 18 June 2009 does anybody know what the NASRPC submissions where?



Deputy Dermot Ahern: It is a very diverse group. I am not saying what the Deputy is suggesting. There was no huge difficulty at the meeting. There might have been one or two people who had a particular interests in some of the more controversial issues in this proposed legislation. We received a submission from Mr. Declan Cahill of the National Association of Sporting Rifles and Pistols Clubs. My officials are looking at this in the context of a sports administration perspective. We will talk to the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism about that. We have received many representations on the proposed legislation. My officials tell me that there has been unprecedented consultation on this.

CJhaughey

meathshooter wrote: »

My officials tell me that there has been unprecedented consultation on this.

Does this mean that consultation is unprecedented? Or does he mean that lots of gunowners are rightly concerned at the draconian and unprecedented powers that he wishes to grant himself and have taken it upon themselves to make submissions?

bunny shooter

Vegeta wrote: »

..............Just saying that I think those comments comical from you considering your disgust with others who allegedly(wasn't even true) did the same.............

I presume this is a reference to the "list" Not really wanting to go there again :rolleyes:

For the record I do/would not wish to see anyones legal sport taken from them

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

I presume this is a reference to the "list" Not really wanting to go there again :rolleyes:

Oh. Good. Lord. not. again.



Maybe because no list ever appeared in legislation? Other than the restricted list, and well, a lot of your stuff is on that list bunny

bunny shooter

rrpc wrote: »

Oh. Good. Lord. not. again.



Maybe because no list ever appeared in legislation? Other than the restricted list, and well, a lot of your stuff is on that list bunny

I agree. I had deleted some of that post :eek:

I am not going there :eek:

No, I have nothing on the restricted list Had a clear out

Meyer

It is the Government’s belief that the promotion of undesirable shooting practices over the last number of years, which has created demand for high-powered handguns, assault rifles and other military-type firearms, is not in the public interest and will not continue.

Just been going over this in my mind. If you ignore the bit about the demand for high-powerd handguns, etc, etc. It translates as the banning of "undesirable practices" not being allowed to continue, and not the banning of the firearms themselves...Am I being overly optimistic in reading that into it?