Are you happy with the "new" firearms licencing system ?

bunny shooter

How do you feel about new licencing regime ?

I think we have been shafted big time :mad:

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

How do you feel about new licencing regime ?

I think we have been shafted big time :mad:

You might want to add: (un)happy with the system but/and (un)happy with how it's being applied.

Number of options there.

boc121

bunny shooter wrote: »

I think we have been shafted big time :mad:

+1 :mad:

Sick of being screwed at this stage, a couple of pensioners took to the streets and got them to change their minds,supposedly there's 200,000 of us and we're bending over and taking it up the ass:eek: Surely we can organise some sort of protest.

bunny shooter

How it is being applied could be fixed if things were made more black and white.

As long as there is room for a Super or a Chief Super to "interpret" things and we have vague "guidelines" which cannot be enforced the system is no good.

hence my choices

There is an old army term "KISS" ................. "keep it simple stupid"

Grizzly 45

At this stage of the game I would rather do all the strenous paperwork and tests of a continental country to get my gun liscense,and know bar doing somthing daft I have it then for life,and can literally walk into a gun shop,purchase what I want and walk out the door,and it will be registerd within a week on my gun liscense with the county council....Rather than put up with this arbitary,goal post moving,playing against a stacked deck of officals in both Govt and police who are deciding that their interpertation of what the law of the land is .Not to mind the financial cost of having to fight this thru our "justice system"
No other country in the world would tolerate this kind of nonsense.That a high ranking member of a police force can stand up in a court of law and freely admit that he and his colleuges conspired to pervert the law to their ideals and interpertation beggers belif!!!

BornToKill

Happy/unhappy is subjective and subject to change from day to day. It might be better to ask if the new system is better or worse than what went before.

bunny shooter

:rolleyes:

I'm working on the KISS principle

On your current experince of the current system if you have been through it and if you haven't there is an option

BornToKill

bunny shooter wrote: »

:rolleyes: I'm working on the KISS principle

Well, I'd say you got the SS part right anyway then.

bunny shooter

BornToKill wrote: »

Well, I'd say you got the SS part right anyway then.

Make a good Minister for Justice then wouldn't I

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

How it is being applied could be fixed if things were made more black and white.

As long as there is room for a Super or a Chief Super to "interpret" things and we have vague "guidelines" which cannot be enforced the system is no good.

But that was present in the 'old' system as well, so there's no differentiation between new and old.

For example, I'm very happy with the way the CS in my division is doing things. He's properly considering each application on it's merits and talking to the applicants directly.

Whatever about the end result, you couldn't ask for more than that. I know of at least two other divisions that are doing the same thing, but others are being less than cursory in the way they're carrying out their functions.

It's a much more complex question than you make it out.

bunny shooter

Where you live should not determine how the firearms system is administered.

The sysytem should be if you fulfill crieria xyz you can have abc not how "sound" your Super Chief Super is .....................

One man one licence, "one on, one off" etc

It's only complex because it's made complex

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

Where you live should not determine how the firearms system is administered.

The sysytem should be if you fulfill crieria xyz you can have abc not how "sound" your Super Chief Super is .....................

As I said, that was present in the old 'system'. The new system has been partly in place and well documented since 2006. The issue (as before) is the implementation, not the system itself.

Odysseus

I relatively new to shooting so I would have to say I'm happy at the moment. I have applied for three licences in the past year, this time last year for a Gamo .22 air rifle, I got the licence on the 13rd of July. I applied for an O/U in Sept and revieved the licence in Dec. However, they seem to had made some changes as I applied for a .17hrm last month and I recieved the grant letter yesterday.

So I happy enough with the system at the moment, and looking at the difference in waiting times they seem to improving in my area. However, I'm conscious that my interest in this sport has not been negatively effected by the recent changes in the law. So I would be happy enough in relation to how it has effected me, I would be unhappy with it when I see how it has effected other sport shooters on this site. It may not be a discipline that I currently engage in, but I support others rights to engage in any dicipline they chose to engage in.

I hope that makes some sense.

rrpc

Odysseus wrote: »

I relatively new to shooting so I would have to say I'm happy at the moment. I have applied for three licences in the past year, this time last year for a Gamo .22 air rifle, I got the licence on the 13rd of July. I applied for an O/U in Sept and revieved the licence in Dec. However, they seem to had made some changes as I applied for a .17hrm last month and I recieved the grant letter yesterday.

So I happy enough with the system at the moment, and looking at the difference in waiting times they seem to improving in my area. However, I'm conscious that my interest in this sport has not been negatively effected by the recent changes in the law. So I would be happy enough in relation to how it has effected me, I would be unhappy with it when I see how it has effected other sport shooters on this site. It may not be a discipline that I currently engage in, but I support others rights to engage in any dicipline the chose to engage in.

I hope that makes some sense.

+1

The actual 'system' itself; the application, licence and for the majority of applicants the speed and efficiency of the whole process has improved immeasurably.

That's the 'system' to my mind.

johngalway

I can't find an option which suits me.

I got the .223 and the 12ga no probs. My HMR is up in the air, still not got the full proper licence for it, just a halfassed mistake.

It's worked OK for me, but I don't like how it is being applied to others. There but for the grace of God and that.

Dusty87

I have to say in my experience im happy with the way i was dealt with. Put in an application for a .223 rifle on the 23rd of december. Had the licence in my hand less than 3 weeks later:eek: I licenced a shotgun in the old system and it took over 4 months.
Im happy with the way my application turned out. No messing around. However, i dont have a handgun or a restricted firearm, and i dont think its right to refuse a licence that has been granted before over some new stupid excuse that the Super never thought of when licencing the guns for the past x amount of years.

ghostmantra

i voted not happy it took forever :(but saying that i have what i wanted,so i should be grateful

boc121

ghostmantra wrote: »

(but saying that i have what i wanted,so i should be grateful

Why should we be grateful, we've proven we are capable,honest,law abiding and not f###ed in the head:eek::eek: and payed a lot of money for a service.We would'nt put up with it from phone,electricity,gas etc but we take all kinds of s##te from the government.We need some leadership on this.
Waiting patiently bunny:P

skipz

Application sent in August, acknowledgement letter in November, final date after 3 months the 20nd January. No liecene yet:mad:. Rang the G's, "uummhhh, we'l ring back in 2 days". 3 weeks, no call.:mad:

Kryten

No I cannot say the new system is better, There is still the Gardai making up their own rules. Many of my team mates in Hilltop have had centerfire pistols renewed. The rest of us have been given the PFO by our chief supers. We have attendance lists at ranges and Nationals and Internationals the length of our arms. Still we are refused. Des Croften put it elequetly. Licencing by postcode lottery. Not acceptable. I wont have it.

Idiots!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

bunny shooter

boc121 wrote: »

..............We need some leadership on this.
Waiting patiently bunny:P

If we could be sure we could get enough people off their asses to do something I'm sure we could make a difference

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

If we could be sure we could get enough people off their asses to do something I'm sure we could make a difference

The only way to make a difference is to appeal every refusal. There have only been three so far as I know with the score running at 2-1 in favour of the applicant.

The costs of defending these cases bear directly on the divisional budget and pretty soon the realisation will dawn that this isn't a cost effective exercise.

It's stupid and unnecessary and a waste of taxpayer's money. If these guys properly carried out their functions under the act as some of their colleagues have, it wouldn't be a problem.

bunny shooter

Have you been refused anything ?

It's easy say appeal when you don't have to

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

Have you been refused anything ?

It's easy say appeal when you don't have to

If the prerequisite for giving advice was that you had to have been in the same position yourself, 90% of the lawyers/accountants/[insert profession of your choice here] would be out of a job. :rolleyes:

bunny shooter

The short answer to my question would be

rrpc wrote: »

No

Appealing is grand but .................................

It costs the applicant money (even if they win?) not just legal fees time off work etc

The applicant will/could be recognised in open court and the less desirable members of society will/could be listening to the detailsof the case

Most people are not used to the court environment and this leads to stress/anxiety for the applicant and maybe his/her family

There is a belief in this country that to "stand up" to the Gardai will/could lead to reprisals against the applicant and his/her family by members of the Gardai or there may be discrimination against them in future firearms licence applications

etc etc

rrpc wrote: »

..............90% of the lawyers/accountants/[insert profession of your choice here] would be out of a job. :rolleyes:

And that's a bad thing because ?

Grizzly 45

If you are appealing make sure your legal team states that you will be looking for costs as well.
At least if you win ,you are coverd for your expenses.

Taking a few of Bunnies points.
Insist that the case is in camera or if the judge wont allow this that he directs that any press/media types do not publish pertinent details like your name and address.That is the least any judge could do.Some might also say they will hear these cases after normal court hours,when the scumbags have been dealt with.

Simple way to sort out the court stress, go down to your local DC and sit there for a couple of hours and watch how it works..It can be great free entertainment for all the family,and cheaper than the pictures.You are entitled to be there too even if you have no busisness with the court. It does also give you a chance to see how your solicitor performs in a working enviroment.
Yes,it can be stressy for those who have never been in the witness box.But remember two things;[1] they are counting on you being intimidated by this whole procedure to not want to go thru with this appeal and [2] if you tell the truth and stick to your facts you cant be caught out.

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

The short answer to my question would be

No.

The short answer to your first post is we are very good at telling us what we should do.

I just gave specific advice and immediately you look to shoot the messenger. You don't want to appeal, that's your decision, but don't go telling us what we should do in some unspecified manner. That's real easy too

And that's a bad thing because ?

I didn't say it was bad. The implication is it's impossible. Otherwise, criminal lawayers would need to have been criminals etc.

bunny shooter

rrpc wrote: »

The short answer to your first post is we are very good at telling us what we should do.

But I don't remember asking "us" to speak for me

rrpc wrote: »

I just gave specific advice and immediately you look to shoot the messenger.

I didn't shoot the messenger. I asked him a question. Big difference

rrpc wrote: »

You don't want to appeal, that's your decision, but don't go telling us what we should do in some unspecified manner.

All I did was offer some reasons why people, not necesarrily me, might not want to

rrpc wrote: »

That's real easy too .

Ya, it's very easy giving advice when you don't have to use it yourself

rrpc wrote: »

I didn't say it was bad.

Again, I asked a question. I did not say you did

rrpc wrote: »

The implication is it's impossible.

Nothing is impossible ............ look at this country boom to bust in 24 months or so

rrpc wrote: »

Otherwise, criminal lawayers would need to have been criminals etc.

True..............a criminal is someone who has been convicted by a jury/judge of a crime not someone who commits a crime (FTR ..... I am not saying criminal lawyers are criminals although I'm sure some of them might be able to twist it so it looks like I have :D:D:D:D)

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

If we could be sure we could get enough people off their asses to do something I'm sure we could make a difference

Remember now? :rolleyes:

bunny shooter

No "us" in mine

I'm a "we" kinda guy

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

No "us" in mine

I'm a "we" kinda guy

I'm a grammatically correct kind of guy. The subjective pronoun couldn't be used in an objective statement.