Grandfather clause pistols

Cass

hk wrote: »

Completely agree,
The point i was making about the leglislation is the same as you made, people here seem to think that if they had the pistols prior to the cut off date they were automatically entitled to keep them, was just pointing out this is not the case and we should wait to see how others get on.

On a personal note i never thought i was entitled to my licences (not that naive) but being pre Nov. 18th i had some level of expectation of a fair hearing (so to speak).

I dont think it was all or nothing and I feel if all shooters stuck together we would be in a better position, there are people out there who believed that a pistol ban was ok as it wouldnt affect them. There seems to be anactidotial evidence to suggest that people are having trouble liciencing shotguns and rifles, just saying a little untiy between shooters of all types would be far more benificial to the community as a whole

Couldn't agree more. I covered this in another thread http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055700573 , post 7 and 15.

Originally Posted by rrpc

We have very little bargaining power, the only thing in our favour at the moment is that the Minister is on record as saying that the vast majority of license holders would have nothing to fear and that the new laws were designed to eliminate inconsistencies in the application of the firearms acts.

We have no bargaining power. With 1800 (approx) pistols licenced and some owning 2 or 3 there are roughly 1400 or less actual sports shooters. Take away .22 and others that fall outside the centrefire remit and we become those outside the vast majority.

Originally Posted by rowa

can't help but feel rrpc that this has been a ban by stealth.......

Its looking that way. On a personal note i will not be surrendering a €2500 firearm without compensation. Surrender it to the Gardai who either don't sell it, leave it too late and destroy it or sell it for €200. Not going to happen. I know some will say give it to a dealer. Seriously what dealer is going to take in pistols they cannot resell either here (no licences) or abroad where they are cheaper to buy new than ours are second hand. I'm trying not to be all doom and gloom, it is still early days, but you can't help but expect the worst.

Bananaman

rowa wrote: »

not a military style one but a nice safe match pistol

Contradiction in terms.

By Definition a match pistol is more accurate - therefore more dangerous.

B'Man

rowa

you say ezridax that you will not be surrendering your pistol unless compensation is paid , i have heard others saying similar things along those lines too , but what are you going to do ? you've been refused a licence for your pistol and as such then hold an unlicenced firearm , what happens next ? i could see a couple of cars full of armed police turning up at your door with a warrant and demanding you hand it over ,

what are you going to do in that case ? if you simply hand the gun into a dealer the guards would be satisfied as you no longer hold the gun and will not be getting it back , job done in there eyes ,

i can see us all taking a bath on our centrefires and no one in the public giving a tinkers curse about us .

the brightest star in the sky is hoping for a change of goverment and a more sympathic minister of justice , put it in storage until then or a total loss .

Sparks

Bananaman wrote: »

By Definition a match pistol is more accurate - therefore more dangerous.

Really? We're going there that fast B'man? It's not enough to be kicked from one side, you need to kick from the other as well? :mad:

Sparks

rowa wrote: »

you say ezridax that you will not be surrendering your pistol unless compensation is paid

There won't be compensation because there isn't any change of ownership. And if you can't sell it for cost now, hand it in, let the state cover the storage costs, and either re-licence in the future or sell on.

But before we get there, lets try working the problem first.

Cass

rowa wrote: »

you say ezridax that you will not be surrendering your pistol unless compensation is paid , i have heard others saying similar things along those lines too , but what are you going to do ? .... .

Let me clarify my point and position. I paid €2500 for my pistol. Accessories cost a few hundred more but we'll stay with the pistol for the time being. I will not hand that firearm over to the Gardai and be completely at their mercy in relation to getting a fair deal (price wise) for the firearm. Do you honestly believe there are not Gardai in the armed units drooling at the prospect of getting a significantly more accurate and reliable firearm than could be got before through the state.

I (if the s**t hit the fan) would have no choice but to surrender my firearm and would do so to a GUN dealer if i had to. My point about the dealers is, they may or may not take in firearms for storage or for sale. How many restricted firearms dealers are out there. Now divide the number of pistol owners by that amount. A dealer could have upwards of 100 firearms "in storage" at any one time. If however the dealers could take the firearms in and sell them i'm still faced with the possibility that they will not get a reasonable price as some pistols are cheaper to buy in Europe and definietly cheaper in the states than what we paid for them here. I'm not stupid and think that i will get even close to what i paid for mine back again but i wouldn't be letting anyone sell it for say, 20 - 25% of its value.

Then there is the cost of storage. I've heard everything from €50 - €200 per month. Times are tough enough without having to fork out anything extra. I've already invested heavily in my security measures at home to make sure i met with certain criteria. Now some of that security seems unnecessary.

To be honest i don't know exactly where i stand and you never know all this ranting and raving may be for nothing. I could get a letter in the morning saying my application was succesful. We are all in unchartered waters, some without a paddle, and i'm trying to keep afloat. One thing i do know for sure, if the decision does not go my way i've have a few reasons for appeal and will fight tooth and nail to keep my firearm both for my own sake and the sake of my sport.

meathshooter

under the new act you have 30 days to appeal you need as far I know get a form 100.1 from the district court you can download it to and fill it out you don't need a solicitor to do this but would help, but this will not be won in the district court but I'm sure it will not end there I hope. I cannot afford a high court challenge I hope Des is reading this and comes to our aid and also the other fine sportsmen who had the balls to stand up to this bull in the first place after all Des was lied to surprise surprise.I have this form filled out and ready to be lodged haven't got refusal letter yet. we need a case that will win to set precedence and we need to stand united a one cause lets face it what will be NEXT,hopefully we will have a change of government shortly which fingers crossed will be more sympathetic to our sport and not just political bull and start sacking top garda who are incompetent at tackeling crime and deflect the limelight at easy targets in there cusy little numbers (wonder what expences they spend at the top )and stop harassing law abiding citizens

G17

meathshooter wrote: »

after all Des was lied to

I 100% believe that to be the case.

Grizzly 45

.

Do you honestly believe there are not Gardai in the armed units drooling at the prospect of getting a significantly more accurate and reliable firearm than could be got before through the state.

Oh please do!! The thought of the ERU unit walking around with customised pistols with a 3.5 lb or less modified trigger,or some other non spec firearm modification on police duty,will get every litigatious lawyer worth his fee out celebrating since the Beef tribunal!!For the first "accidental discharge" or shooting incident to sue the ass of the State or Garda for using a non specified duty firearm???There are plenty of police depts and expolice officers now working in Mc Donalds in the States who will testify as to how they have been taken to the cleaners by good lawyers on the fact alone that their officers were using standard issue dept firearms,but didnt use them correctly.The NYC transit police spring to mind with the Glock.Their trigger pull had to be modified to 6.5lbs!!After a very nasty shooting incident and lawsuit.
"trigger reset" had a lot to do with it I belive.

Just noted past 2000 posts [Yoo Hoo],without getting banned and no doubt peeing off many here and in "authorithy"[you know who you are!]

meathshooter

they would want to learn how to use them first I know one or two gards that are good shots the rest would want to go to spec savers and I think thats what scares them and I would rather put mine trough a chop saw than give them

Rovi

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Oh please do!! The thought of the ERU unit walking around with customised pistols with a 3.5 lb or less modified trigger,or some other non spec firearm modification on police duty,will get every litigatious lawyer worth his fee out celebrating since the Beef tribunal!!For the first "accidental discharge" or shooting incident to sue the ass of the State or Garda for using a non specified duty firearm???There are plenty of police depts and expolice officers now working in Mc Donalds in the States who will testify as to how they have been taken to the cleaners by good lawyers on the fact alone that their officers were using standard issue dept firearms,but didnt use them correctly.The NYC transit police spring to mind with the Glock.Their trigger pull had to be modified to 6.5lbs!!After a very nasty shooting incident and lawsuit.
"trigger reset" had a lot to do with it I belive.

Absolutely correct.
There's no way on God's little green earth that any Garda on duty will carry anything other than an officially issued firearm.
The potential for litigation would be stupendous.

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Just noted past 2000 posts [Yoo Hoo],without getting banned and no doubt peeing off many here and in "authorithy"[you know who you are!]

BANNED!

G17

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

.
Just noted past 2000 posts

A fine mix of hilarity, nonsense, sense, conjecture, incitement, wisdom, despair, incredulity, campness, knowledge, loaded questions, empty breech questions, butchness, titilation, belittlement, encouragement and passion.

Indeed you are mad as a stick but the forum is probably a better place for it (terms and condition apply).


:D:D

Bananaman

Sparks wrote: »

Really? We're going there that fast B'man? It's not enough to be kicked from one side, you need to kick from the other as well? :mad:

I just find it offensive that the Gardai can declare that an Olympic Match Pistol is any more or less dangerous than a centrefire target pistol when it is absolutely untrue.

To use this as an argument for declining a license application is disingenuous.

To not argue that point is to put ones head in the sand and hope that one does not take one in the donkey.

B'Man

Sparks

Bananaman wrote: »

I just find it offensive that the Gardai can declare that an Olympic Match Pistol is any more or less dangerous than a centrefire target pistol when it is absolutely untrue.

I agree.
Point either at someone and they're dangerous to the point where trying to measure the level of risk is an assine activity.
However, saying that the Match pistols are more dangerous because they're more accurate is even more daft.

meathshooter wrote: »

you don't need a solicitor to do this but would help, but this will not be won in the district court but I'm sure it will not end there

Okay, two things - firstly, never go to court without a professional. Ever. Doesn't matter what for. If it's important enough to go to court, it's important enough to bring a solicitor at least (in a DC) or a barrister.

Secondly, we're not there yet, but if we do go there, I'd lay odds we would be going past the DCs. And that means money. Lots of it.
If you're going down this road, be sure you've got the funds for it, and also be sure you've spoken to people on the FCP like jaycee.

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

The thought of the ERU unit walking around with customised pistols with a 3.5 lb or less modified trigger,or some other non spec firearm modification on police duty,will get every litigatious lawyer worth his fee out celebrating since the Beef tribunal!

Forget using an non-issued firearm, you're talking about a member of the ERU being proven to have stolen a firearm from Garda custody (remember, ownership has not changed hands - unless the owner gives permission for the firearm to be removed from storage, it's theft, regardless of who takes it).
Noone's going to risk that.

Rovi

In the hands of someone who doesn't know what they're doing or someone with ill intent, they're ALL 'dangerous' (as are kitchen knives, cars, etc).
Obviously, we who know something about shooting know that in the hands of someone with ill intent who knows what they're doing, a more accurate firearm is more 'dangerous' in that it allows them to carry out their evil deeds more efficiently and to greater effect, while to the uninformed knee-jerkers who must be seen to be doing something, 'dangerous' is defined by buzzwords (Glock, magnum, semi-automatic, etc), or physical appearance (black, pistol grip, shoulder things that go up :rolleyes:, etc).

Unfortunately, the noble guardians tasked with saving us from ourselves hold all the cards here.

bunny shooter

Sparks wrote: »

..........and also be sure you've spoken to people on the FCP like jaycee.....QUOTE]

:eek: thrown to wolves

A public statement from shooting groups on FCP would be welcome soon....nudge, nudge

pedroeibar

Sparks wrote: »

Forget using an non-issued firearm, you're talking about a member of the ERU being proven to have stolen a firearm from Garda custody (remember, ownership has not changed hands - unless the owner gives permission for the firearm to be removed from storage, it's theft, regardless of who takes it).
Noone's going to risk that.

I think it is a bit more complicated than that. Nor am I suggesting that any garda would take/use a weapon from a station. AFAIK if you surrender your weapon for safekeeping you retain title. If it is seized it becomes the property of the Minister. That is worth checking out if you are faced with a gun & no licence situation.
P.

Rovi

pedroeibar wrote: »

I think it is a bit more complicated than that. Nor am I suggesting that any garda would take/use a weapon from a station. AFAIK if you surrender your weapon for safekeeping you retain title. If it is seized it becomes the property of the Minister. That is worth checking out if you are faced with a gun & no licence situation.
P.

:mad: <SMACK>



If it finally boils down to me having to surrender my FIREARM to the State, they'll be getting only the serial numbered parts, and those will be inoperable.

foxshooter243

ezridax wrote: »

Let me clarify my point and position. I paid €2500 for my pistol. Accessories cost a few hundred more but we'll stay with the pistol for the time being. I will not hand that firearm over to the Gardai and be completely at their mercy in relation to getting a fair deal (price wise) for the firearm. Do you honestly believe there are not Gardai in the armed units drooling at the prospect of getting a significantly more accurate and reliable firearm than could be got before through the state.

I (if the s**t hit the fan) would have no choice but to surrender my firearm and would do so to a GUN dealer if i had to. My point about the dealers is, they may or may not take in firearms for storage or for sale. How many restricted firearms dealers are out there. Now divide the number of pistol owners by that amount. A dealer could have upwards of 100 firearms "in storage" at any one time. If however the dealers could take the firearms in and sell them i'm still faced with the possibility that they will not get a reasonable price as some pistols are cheaper to buy in Europe and definietly cheaper in the states than what we paid for them here. I'm not stupid and think that i will get even close to what i paid for mine back again but i wouldn't be letting anyone sell it for say, 20 - 25% of its value.

Then there is the cost of storage. I've heard everything from €50 - €200 per month. Times are tough enough without having to fork out anything extra. I've already invested heavily in my security measures at home to make sure i met with certain criteria. Now some of that security seems unnecessary.

To be honest i don't know exactly where i stand and you never know all this ranting and raving may be for nothing. I could get a letter in the morning saying my application was succesful. We are all in unchartered waters, some without a paddle, and i'm trying to keep afloat. One thing i do know for sure, if the decision does not go my way i've have a few reasons for appeal and will fight tooth and nail to keep my firearm both for my own sake and the sake of my sport.

whilst your on the subject of dealers storing firearms EZ, a dealer in Donegal told me that Dealers are restricted as to how many pistols they can hold or store at any one time, so there maybe another obstacle in the way of folks who may wish to hold their firearms in storage with the hope of being able to licence them in the future. This is info passed on to me and I cant guarentee the veracity of it , but is well worth checking out;)

4gun

might I make a suggestion as far as finance are concerned
why not set up a bank account and publish the number on line for visitors of this forum and other bodies, so that individuals or dealers can donate to the possible court cost of fighting this case, I'm pretty sure that there can be found some persons from the shooting fraternity who would have the intregrity to manage the funds appropriately
FAS employee's need not apply:D

bunny shooter

BTW love the new avator Rovi

pedroeibar

Rovi wrote: »

:mad: <SMACK>



FIREARM

:eek::eek:
:o
Sorry! ;)
:D:D:D:D

Rovi

pedroeibar wrote: »

:eek::eek:
:o
Sorry! ;)
:D:D:D:D

No bother.

Sparks

4gun wrote: »

I'm pretty sure that there can be found some persons from the shooting fraternity who would have the intregrity to manage the funds appropriately

Are you joking or just not paying attention for the last twenty years? :pac:

Look, anyone who had the integrity you're talking about would never accept the responsibility you're also talking about. And we have a long history of little hitlers stepping forward (hell, charging forward and butting heads) for such roles as this.

It is not a trivial problem.
It is not an unsolvable one either, but I for one would not give a single cent until I saw specific goals listed, specific methods detailed, and a decent communications strategy in place and a set of criteria for what cases would be funded. Don't forget, taking a poorly-chosen case to court is what gave the Commissioner the ammunition for half the crap in the guidelines via the Charleton judgement.

And also don't forget that such funds have been set up in the past and then the people controlling them shut down communications, refuse to take advice or direction from those they supposedly answer to, take on exceptionally financially risky courses of action, usually fail to accomplish anything, and what happens to the money when the group is shut down is often left undefined - we've seen orders for the money to go to other groups, orders for the money to go to charity and so forth, and the point that the original donors could sue for their unused monies back never crosses anyone's mind, nor does the thought of tracking who gave what.

rowa

i was just talking to a south dublin firearms dealer , apparently 2 centrefire pistols have been approved and licences issued for them , but this seems to be the exception rather than the rule.
the licenced firearms dealers have made/are making a pact not to accept centrefire pistols that have been refused licences , this is not to discommode customers but they do not want to assist and aid the doj/gardai in carrying out this ridiculous act .
let the gardai deal with them , if they want to be nasty let them deal with consequences eg. a station locker full of centrefire pistols.

Bananaman

Sparks,

I assumes you would not take part in funding any court case anyway seeing as you do not hold any restricted firearms and are therefore not affected by the latest skulduggery.

Are you saying that you would be willing to help fund and fight for the cause of centrefire pistols shooters?

B'Man

4gun

Sparks wrote: »

Are you joking or just not paying attention for the last twenty years? :pac:

Look, anyone who had the integrity you're talking about would never accept the responsibility you're also talking about. And we have a long history of little hitlers stepping forward (hell, charging forward and butting heads) for such roles as this.

It is not a trivial problem.
It is not an unsolvable one either, but I for one would not give a single cent until I saw specific goals listed, specific methods detailed, and a decent communications strategy in place and a set of criteria for what cases would be funded. Don't forget, taking a poorly-chosen case to court is what gave the Commissioner the ammunition for half the crap in the guidelines via the Charleton judgement.

well no wonder shooting is where its at when guys look out for their own
nobody trusts any body
what i was talking about was for the possibility of a court case
I dont own a pistol but i was willing to led my support as far as i am now concerned you can shove it up

Sparks

Bananaman wrote: »

Sparks,
I assumes you would not take part in funding any court case anyway seeing as you do not hold any restricted firearms and are therefore not affected by the latest skulduggery.

First off, I am - ISSF pistol uses up to .38cal and if centerfire's gone, that's something I can't try.
Secondly, if this kind of stuff happens to a few hundred pistol users, what's to stop it happening to me tomorrow?

Are you saying that you would be willing to help fund and fight for the cause of centrefire pistols shooters?

I'm saying I'd give a few quid if it was going to be done right.

I'm not giving money again to a fund that isn't run properly, doesn't do basic accountancy, doesn't track donations, doesn't have set goals, doesn't keep donors informed, runs off at the mouth every chance it gets, issues press releases which contain "factual inaccuracies" (and that's the polite way of putting it), doesn't take directions, takes on court cases that could get all the NGBs shut down and sold off for costs, and doesn't achieve anything after all the shouting and risky behaviour!

Sparks

4gun wrote: »

nobody trusts any body

For good reason. Look 4, what you suggested is not a new idea.
Oddly enough, it's been tried before. As you may guess, it was a disaster. And that was when we had a lot more stability, legally speaking. Today we're in a far more precarious position and anyone doing something like this could do all of us far more damage if they screwed the pooch. I'm not willing to help fund that in any way, both because it'd be a waste of money, and more importantly, because it'd be a major hazard to the sport that I'd be contributing to.

rowa

4gun wrote: »

well no wonder shooting is where its at when guys look out for their own
nobody trusts any body
what i was talking about was for the possibility of a court case
I dont own a pistol but i was willing to led my support as far as i am now concerned you can shove it up

if we don't support each other in this , they'll pick us off one by one , next it'd be a tightening of the centrefire rifles , after that probabily the gun clubs , the doj has to approve them you know , so if they suddenly brought in draconian rules about the building of ranges , they'd be stuffed , we could revert back to 1972 here very quickly if no resistance is put up ,

have ANY of the shooting organisations made a statement about all this yet ?