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
.22 Pistol or 9mm Licensed in Limerick?
Options
-
15-12-2009 12:17pm#1
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
That part of the firearms act didn't change bunny, I think I noted this for your benefit before...
So you agree "policy unit" is a bit misleading or are you choosing to ignore this part of my statement ?
So what happened to all the promises from the shooting members of the FCP that these guidelines were going to put all applicants on a level playing field and that the Supers/Chief Supers were going to follow the guidelines so we were all treated the same and if you ticked all the right boxes that you'd be fine? And that the FPU would sort things before it became necessary for court cases ?
So if they are not going to follow the guidelines and are going to continue the old ways why waste time with guidelines ?
And just because you keep repeating the same old smoke screen and dodging the truth here to cover up this fact won't make it come true
0 -
-
-
Nope, irony - because you've sung his praises quite a bit on here in the past.bunny shooter wrote: »Ah bitterness ?
Er, are you in the same country I'm in?Dunno, he ain't saying too much anymore
The silence is getting relly deafening now ........ maybe they realise they were hood-winked
'Cos last I looked, several FCP members were taking cases from District Courts right up to Supreme Courts; and the FCP itself, being run as it is by the DoJ (I'm reasonably sure that technically, the Minister chairs the FCP, acting through one of his DoJ officials), is not someplace you should be expecting an anti-DoJ or anti-Minister or anti-Garda statement to come from...0 -
Nope, irony - because you've sung his praises quite a bit on here in the past.
Praise where it's due when it's due, quite a simple concept...............and the FCP itself, being run as it is by the DoJ (I'm reasonably sure that technically, the Minister chairs the FCP, acting through one of his DoJ officials), is not someplace you should be expecting an anti-DoJ or anti-Minister or anti-Garda statement to come from...What does Des say, seeing as how he took on such a lead role in the FCP from day one
Both statements are correct ................... yet ............. they don't seem compatable
'Cos last I looked, several FCP members were taking cases from District Courts right up to Supreme Courts;
To me that makes all their efforts seem even more pointless, despite thier good intentions
*Okay, actually we do know - they were all pretty much fulfilled as promised. It's just that people never actually listened to what was being promised, so when the FCP delivered what they said they would, everyone went nuts because they had led themselves to expect the impossible.
Agreed BUT Don't remember hearing anyone correcting all these misinformed people and there was a lot of them here. DeValera pulled a similar stroke on Michael CollinsPeople started asking why the FCP wasn't overruling the Minister, why it wasn't rewriting the Dail's legislation, and why wasn't the FCP sorting out their individual problems - all of which everyone on the FCP knew from before Day One wasn't ever going to be possible or even constitutional in Ireland to try to do; and which we said over and again in here.
We were told as long as ya tick all the boxes you'll be fine ..... not so in reality for most peoplePeople just didn't bother to listen at the time. As to the FPU, their role actually is to ensure consistency, and yes, they're not getting it done. Yet. But it's hardly fair to yell at them, when the real problem in all of this is sitting well above their paygrade in a Ministerial Merc...
To be fair the consistency problem is down to some Supers/Chief Supers abusing their power probably because they don't want their name on a licence form if something goes wrong, basic "pampers" (cover your arse
)physology, and it will unfortunately take more court cases to solve this which the whole FCP/FPU situation was meant to stop :rolleyes: The current Minister, well his time will end and soon hopefully 0 -
You said: make/enforce, and since they can't enforce anything (the firearms act has something to say on that), the rest of your sentence was basically bull* and deserved to be ignored on that basis.bunny shooter wrote: »So you agree "policy unit" is a bit misleading or are you choosing to ignore this part of my statement ?
I asked you before to point out where anyone on the FCP actually said that - which you didn't, so saying it again is about as valid as the first time. I may need to point you to the terms of reference of the FCP, but I can't be a*sed, so you do if you're bothered. But making the assumption that the guidelines and by extension the firearms act are some sort of recipe to create the firearms licence of your dreams is naive in the extreme.So what happened to all the promises from the shooting members of the FCP that these guidelines were going to put all applicants on a level playing field and that the Supers/Chief Supers were going to follow the guidelines so we were all treated the same and if you ticked all the right boxes that you'd be fine? And that the FPU would sort things before it became necessary for court cases ?And just because you keep repeating the same old smoke screen and dodging the truth here to cover up this fact won't make it come true
Play the man bunny, it's so much more constructive. :rolleyes:
People here, you included - even if you like to play the sardonic bystander - always seemed to ignore the inconvenient truth of what the firearms act actually says and what it actually means. Most of it has been in existence for a far longer period than the current Minister has held office and both myself and Sparks among others have pointed out time and again where the problems with it would bite. Somehow this fact was lost in the general noise on here and the belief that somehow all this would be rolled back with the advent of the FCP. Right now there are people posting here who seem to believe it's some Grimm fairy tale that will wink out of existence when they all wake up, yet somehow are disavowing the messages their olfactory nerves are sending them.
The reality is that the work of the FCP is only really beginning because the firearms act (the operation of which they are to report on) is only now being rolled out.0 -
-
-
I can dig that. I just think that "questions where they're due" is equally validbunny shooter wrote: »Praise where it's due when it's due, quite a simple concept
Des took a lead role amongst the shooting representatives (or at least a loud one, sometimes it's hard to distinguish the two). But the actual panel itself, overall, is the DoJ's to run.Both statements are correct ................... yet ............. they don't seem compatable
Nope. Most people knew going into the FCP that it was an advisory body. And, credit where it's due, under other Ministers (like Lenihan, who set it up and invited everyone in), it would probably have had more weight. But this Minister is... well, bad, to be succint. And if the rot is in at the top, it's pretty hard for anything below to be unaffected.To me that makes all their efforts seem even more pointless, despite thier good intentions
From much earlier (from when the restricted list was first announced in fact):Agreed BUT Don't remember hearing anyone correcting all these misinformed peopleSparks wrote:shooters in ireland did not draft the mandate for the FCP; nor did they issue the invitations to the representatives on the FCP; and not only that, but the FCP does not just represent the interests of shooters, but also those of farmers and the Gardai and dealers and insurance people and so forth. Last I checked, the Gardai and the IFA don't answer to us...
...
My point was that the FCP has no power as such. It is an advisory panel of invited people. Meaning that not only do they not have the power to draft legislation, they don't have any power in that sense.
About the best they can do is to mitigate the worst of the potential damage in the CJA2006. And even there, they're limited. (That's not to say that we shouldn't do that - I'd rather have the airbag than not even if I'd have preferred not to crash the car in the first place, if you follow me).
Indeed... by Des. And one or two others who are banned from here and so of whom we don't speak much anymore. But for what the FCP shooting bodies themselves were saying, well, read their statement at the time. I don't see anything in there about ticking boxes. I see them saying they were in a bad spot, without much authority, doing the best they could (which they weren't really trying to oversell, not excessively anyway). And honestly, compared to ten years ago, we are in a better place. Maybe not to the liking of this Minister, but we're here and in two or three years we'll still be here and he'll be gone and maybe we can make more progress then. This isn't a sprint, it's a looooong walk, y'know?We were told as long as ya tick all the boxes you'll be fine ..... not so in reality for most people
That's pretty much the sum of itTo be fair the consistency problem is down to some Supers/Chief Supers abusing their power probably because they don't want their name on a licence form if something goes wrong, basic "pampers" (cover your arse)physology, and it will unfortunately take more court cases to solve this which the whole FCP/FPU situation was meant to stop :rolleyes: The current Minister, well his time will end and soon hopefully 0 -
-
Advertisement
-
I can dig that. I just think that "questions where they're due" is equally valid
AgreedDes took a lead role amongst the shooting representatives (or at least a loud one, sometimes it's hard to distinguish the two). But the actual panel itself, overall, is the DoJ's to run.
Take your word for it I wasn't thereNope. Most people knew going into the FCP that it was an advisory body. And, credit where it's due, under other Ministers (like Lenihan, who set it up and invited everyone in), it would probably have had more weight. But this Minister is... well, bad, to be succint. And if the rot is in at the top, it's pretty hard for anything below to be unaffected.
Agreed. Minister is/was a bit too right wing
:cool:Indeed... by Des. And one or two others who are banned from here and so of whom we don't speak much anymore. But for what the FCP shooting bodies themselves were saying, well, read their statement at the time. I don't see anything in there about ticking boxes. I see them saying they were in a bad spot, without much authority, doing the best they could (which they weren't really trying to oversell, not excessively anyway).
:eek:And honestly, compared to ten years ago, we are in a better place. Maybe not to the liking of this Minister, but we're here and in two or three years we'll still be here and he'll be gone and maybe we can make more progress then. This isn't a sprint, it's a looooong walk, y'know?
Agreed but I think dark days are aheadThat's pretty much the sum of it
Yes it is unfortunately 0
Advertisement