Limerick DC Appeal - SUCCESS!!!

Dvs

Hello Sparks,
Now I don't intend to get into an argument with you about this,
But it is clear to me that you have issues going back to the,
"we could have had air pistols and maybe rimfire in time discussions."

which you supported and others did not,
but the fact that it would have ticked all your boxes and suited you,
you say it was a lost opportunity,
if you were a centrefire pistol shooter you would not have seen it as such,
but thats in the past get over it.

Almost every direct line of communication with the DOJ to date has not proved to be the solution to the poor treatment and contempt with which sports shooters are treated by the state.

To quote Dermot Ahern'
"the distinction between legal and illegal firearms is irrelevant"
Lots of scope for debate there....


Talking, discussing, agreeing and then doing the exact opposite,
is not the DOJ communicating with sports shooters and their NGB's,
It is dishonorable people in the DOJ using the illusion of engaging with NGB's,
and manipulating those people for their own ends, to the point of having some of these people defend the actions of the DOJ and the Minister right up to the point where the so called nay sayers are proved right.

Sparks wrote: »

But walking into the Super's office, demanding a licence, insisting that he has no right to refuse, acting entitled beyond reason, playing the hurt idiot when the refusal comes, and then going straight to the barrister's office and down to the DC without trying any other path? That's not using a right, it's abusing it. And as to the current practise of taking JRs on DC decisions without appealing to the CC? That's a practice designed to antagonise the respondant, not resolve the dispute.
.

This senario is a little bit stacked to support your own argument.

What about the sports shooter walking into the Super's office,
at either the Super's request or the sports shooters,
to discuss the application/renewal and
to give the Super a chance to talk to the person face to face,
the person explains their participation in their sport,
why they require the particular firearm,
and how they have complied with all the requirements in the SI regarding safe storage of their firearms,
they provide the Super with documentary evidence of club membership,
participation in competition etc,
and inspite of all this the Super sits there and says,
I am going to refuse this application because,
I'm not satisfied that you have a need for this firearm.

The sports shooter says,
Well Super I don't know what more I can do to satisfy you,
what is it that you are not satisfied with?

The Super says, I am going to refuse this application because,
I'm not satisfied that you have a need for this firearm,
then sits there and stares at the sports shooter with a smug grin.



Three days later the sports shooter receives a refusal letter,
stating it has been refused because,
it is not the only firearm appropriate for the purpose for which you require it.

This senario rings true for more refusals now in the district court appeals process,
than the one put forward by you.

What approach would you suggest in this senario?

Dvs.

rowa

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

On that I will agree with you 100% Sparks.It shouldnt be a decision to be taken lightly.

One man,who if there is a workable policy under FG,will be under the party whip to shut up?


i don't think deasy is the sort to shut up and fancies himself as a bit of a renegade or rebel , and i don't think its just the pistols he is against either , deadly .308 calibre rifles that are accurate to 5 miles etc.

Grizzly 45

What about the sports shooter walking into the Super's office,
at either the Super's request or the sports shooters,
to discuss the application/renewal and
to give the Super a chance to talk to the person face to face

IF you can even get that far in the first place!!!!:rolleyes:

i don't think deasy is the sort to shut up and fancies himself as a bit of a renegade or rebel , and i don't think its just the pistols he is against either , deadly .308 calibre rifles that are accurate to 5 miles etc

I dont think we need to take lectures from a man who admits to criminal activity in the Dail.
Remember his breaking of the smoking ban in the Dail bar.Because it was his "right"as a smoker to do so???
He can pontificate as much as he wants about guns,but if he is under a party whip.He will have to put up and shut up and vote with the party.IF they can come up with somthing worthwhile that is

Dvs

rowa wrote: »

i don't think deasy is the sort to shut up and fancies himself as a bit of a renegade or rebel , and i don't think its just the pistols he is against either , deadly .308 calibre rifles that are accurate to 5 miles etc.

I don't think Deasy is anti gun as much as he is Pro Deasy,
he got some mileage out of his statements in the Dail and media,
and believes it will gain him votes.

Let every sports shooter that lives in or beside his constituency,
prove him wrong on that one at the next election, by encouraging everyone they can to vote against him, and tell Fine Gael canvassers calling to doorsteps exactly why they are losing these votes.

Dvs.

rrpc

Dvs wrote: »

Hello Sparks,
Now I don't intend to get into an argument with you about this,
But it is clear to me that you have issues going back to the,
"we could have had air pistols and maybe rimfire in time discussions."

which you supported and others did not,
but the fact that it would have ticked all your boxes and suited you,
you say it was a lost opportunity,
if you were a centrefire pistol shooter you would not have seen it as such,
but thats in the past get over it.

This isn't an 'alright Jack' argument, it's a little more pragmatic in that it's possible that had that offer been taken up at the time, the growth in pistol shooting may not have been as alarming to the Minister as he characterised it in 2008.

The same way that the introduction of the .243 and .270 for deer culling led to the introduction of other larger calibres for target shooting without the same level of alarm (whether manufactured or not).

The UK is only now starting to allow limited availability of pistols in the run up to 2012 and perhaps with the Conservatives in power, that limited availability may well be expanded.

It's just a different way of looking at things. I'm not suggesting it's correct, but the possibility can never be discounted because the offer was rejected.

bunny shooter

Who & why was this "offer" rejected?

I don't remember being asked my opinion :rolleyes:

Dvs

Hello RRPC,
I'm sure Dermot Ahern can be,
Alarmed, Outraged, Concerned, Shocked and Appalled at the drop of a hat,
with equal conviction and lack of sincerity, his motivation as you well know was nothing to do with shooting sports, it was simply easier to take firearms from law abiding sports shooters than from criminals, and claim he was dealing with "Irelands gun culture", 99% of people in Ireland believed and still believe he some how took illegal firearms away from criminals.

Criminals possession or use of illegal firearms has not been effected,
yet the Minister is patting himself on the back for reducing the number of licenced firearms in the country.

The Minister felt the financial impact on shooting ranges, firearms dealers and members of staff put out of work by his new legislation were not his concern.

His latest issue of Outrage, Shock, Concern is "Head shops",
a scourge across the country selling so called legal highs,
the Minister is going to deal with "Irelands Drug culture"
by tackling these people that hide in plain sight,
open shops in the main streets of towns,
put up large signs, pay rent, rates, and tax,
"the fiends!" he is going to make their products illegal.

Make no mistake he will deal with them,
but what about the criminal drug dealers,
dealing in already illegal drugs with impunity will they be put out of business by this?

No is the answer, in fact their illegal business model is being protected by this,
If Irish people wish to get wasted on a psychotropic substance,
they are going to have to damn well buy it from a proper outlet.

Next thing he will be patting himself on the back for having dealt with,
"Irelands Drug culture" by reducing the number of head shops.

Dvs.

Note:
I do not take nor do I agree with the taking of psychotropic drugs of any kind legal or illegal,
but the truth is people that want to will, and have been doing so,
since the first caveman or woman ate a bit of a plant and started giggling.

Dvs

bunny shooter wrote: »

Who & why was this "offer" rejected?

I don't remember being asked my opinion :rolleyes:

For the love of all that is holy don't start this,
you'll inflame Sparks carpal tunnel syndrome.

:rolleyes:

Dvs.

rrpc

Dvs wrote: »

Hello RRPC,
I'm sure Dermot Ahern can be,
Alarmed, Outraged, Concerned, Shocked and Appalled at the drop of a hat,
with equal conviction and lack of sincerity, his motivation as you well know was nothing to do with shooting sports, it was simply easier to take firearms from law abiding sports shooters than from criminals, and claim he was dealing with "Irelands gun culture", 99% of people in Ireland believed and still believe he some how took illegal firearms away from criminals.

Well, when you're the Minister, you can do and say these things. Bemoaning the darkness of the night does not make the sun rise any quicker :rolleyes:

Sparks

bunny shooter wrote: »

Who & why was this "offer" rejected?
I don't remember being asked my opinion :rolleyes:

Dvs wrote: »

For the love of all that is holy don't start this,
you'll inflame Sparks carpal tunnel syndrome.

That's okay DvS, we have Search for a reason. Here you go bunny:
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=50434114&postcount=174

Sparks

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

On that I will agree with you 100% Sparks.It shouldnt be a decision to be taken lightly.

Amen to that.

Ok,lets break this down abit.Who exactly can walk in and demand a liscense for a CF handgun liscens post 18/11/08?

Legally, noone. However you can do so for licences for nearly any other firearm, and as the cases so far have shown, pistols are not the sole source of cases (O'Leary was for a rifle, for example).

So far we have had one case of this.

And several more where the first resort was the courts and where there's been a strong push to go right to the High Court for Judicial Review without going through intermediate steps.

So how many realistically do you think Sparks,are actually doing a Fight da power run?

Less than thirty from what I can tell.
But that's enough to do harm - even one case can do a lot of harm, for example - take McCarron as an example, the High Court judgement was used to decimate pistol licencing and the Supreme Court judgement overturned O'Leary's ruling that the applicant was what had to be considered rather than the firearm.

One man,who if there is a workable policy under FG,will be under the party whip to shut up?

Funnily enough, we were told he was under the FG whip and going against FG party policy when he did the damage last time.

Different story,it was a tempoary custody order ,not a confiscation.As you have said yourself many times.The Govt had no case to answer then.

Because they never took possession of the firearms. Which is what will happen this time around. "Terribly sorry, that firearm's been prohibited, your licence is null and void, could you bring it down to the station today please sir or we'll have to send out the ERU to your home to collect it. No, no, we're not confiscating it sir, you still own it, you just can't possess and use it... "

Not to mind times have changed since 1972.A whole new raft of law from the EU comes into play

Not so much. EU firearms law basicly starts with a preamble that explicitly states the EU will not overrule national firearms legislation where that legislation is more restrictive than EU legislation. And since the firearm remains your property, and you have no human right to possess a firearm under the EU legislation or the Irish Constitution (read the Supreme Court judgement, paragraph five for an explicit statement of this), neither of those bodies of law are going to be of much use.

Not to mind we have become less subservient to our lords and masters than we were in 72.

Maybe so - but we've also got far, far less legal avenues thanks to the Criminal Justice Act 2006, 2007 and 2009. Which is kindof why I had a bit of a mini-rant when the Criminal Justice Bill 2004 came out, because this sort of thing was fairly clear even back then and again in 2009.

Dvs wrote: »

it is clear to me that you have issues going back to the,
"we could have had air pistols and maybe rimfire in time discussions."

I have a strong disagreement with how that decision was taken, yes.
Specifically, I disagree with the decision being taken there and then in the room. I disagree with the way that those with sports that involved air and smallbore pistol shooting (which made up four quarters of the NRPAI members at the time) were overruled by those with interests in centerfire shooting. I disagree with the "everything and right now" approach being used over the "take something and build on it" approach. And I disagree with keeping the decision hidden away after it was made.

Do you think that those disagreements are something I am not entitled to?

Almost every direct line of communication with the DOJ to date has not proved to be the solution to the poor treatment and contempt with which sports shooters are treated by the state.

Well, except for the 99.99%+ of applicants whose licences are renewed without issue.
And I'm just pondering - we had this argument in 2000/2001, those who believed you could use the judical branch as a stick to beat the government with pooh-poohed those who warned people about what happened in 1972, and they proceeded to take several High Court cases and a Supreme Court case, they won their cases (as was predicted in 1972) and within a year, the Criminal Justice Bill 2004 overturned the Supreme Court victory with a single line buried in a miscellaneous section at the back like an afterthought (again, as was predicted in 1972).

And today, we seem to be right back in 2001 again, and we've seen how this goes.

What about the sports shooter walking into the Super's office,
...
The Super says, I am going to refuse this application because,
I'm not satisfied that you have a need for this firearm,
then sits there and stares at the sports shooter with a smug grin.

Then you thank him nicely, ask him to put it in writing, and go call your NGB.
Because now he's acting outside the law and best practice, and now you're talking about the cases I was describing as necessary.

What approach would you suggest in this senario?

Call NGB, who call FPU BEFORE the refusal letter arrives, while it can still be sorted out.
If no resolution is possible, then sit down with the missus and ask if you can risk the kid's college fund on a court case for your licence, and if you're both okay with it, go to the DC and seek arbitration.
What I wouldn't do is to seek to go to the DC "to teach the Super a lesson" or "to seek justice". I don't want to teach or to get justice, I just want my pistol licence. And if that's not what you want when you walk in the door of the court, you're not acting in good faith and frankly, a case like that is risking a lot for no good reason. The courts are not there to ensure social justice is done. They're there to ensure that the law is followed. You want social justice, that's what the Oireachtas is for in Ireland.

Dvs wrote: »

Hello RRPC,
I'm sure Dermot Ahern can be,
Alarmed, Outraged, Concerned, Shocked and Appalled at the drop of a hat,
with equal conviction and lack of sincerity, his motivation as you well know was nothing to do with shooting sports, it was simply easier to take firearms from law abiding sports shooters than from criminals, and claim he was dealing with "Irelands gun culture", 99% of people in Ireland believed and still believe he some how took illegal firearms away from criminals.

Exactly. So why are we trying to make ourselves a problem to be solved for someone of that nature, who has the full legal authority to ban our firearms overnight without any form of oversight?

Bananaman

Farks sake.

Why o why - in all that is holy - do we have to keep trawling up the 'world would have been a better place if they did what I told them'

It's ancient - lets say that again - ANCIENT history.

The Associations that were around back then are no longer around.
The People who were running the associations back then are no longer around.
The Ministers that were running the country back then are no longer around
The Garda Commissioner that was around back then is no longer around.

It's behind us - leave it there.

Look at the present and the future.

We have Air Pistol and Rifle
We have Smallbore Pistol and Rifle
We have Centrefire Pistol and Rifle.

We have sports in all in which we are doing quite well.

Lets focus on
a) making those sports a success AT HOME.
b) ensuring the future of the facilities on which we ALREADY partake of these sports
c) ensuring the continued licensing of ALL of the firearms required to fulfill a) and b)

And stop picking holes in each other.

B'Man

MODS: I would suggest a thread on 'picking holes in decisions other people have made' thread and some pruning - not a lot of this thread is about the title anymore - but that's just me.

bunny shooter

Bananaman wrote: »

..........The People who were running the associations back then are no longer around...........

Mr Keogh is back with the NASPRC I read somewhere recently

After reading that I am :eek: ! How much of that post is now reality :eek:

Grizzly 45

Did you miss his point about hole picking??;):D

rrpc

Bananaman wrote: »

Farks sake.

Why o why - in all that is holy - do we have to keep trawling up the 'world would have been a better place if they did what I told them'

It's ancient - lets say that again - ANCIENT history.

Please take this in the spirit it is meant , but...

History is there to be learnt from.

The Associations that were around back then are no longer around.

Actually most of them are; the NASRPC, the NRPAI (now the SSAI) and the NTSA were all in existence back then.

The People who were running the associations back then are no longer around.

Rumours of my demise have been greatly exaggerated...:D I only know of one person from back then who has passed on to the great shooting range in the sky. I could be wrong (I don't spend my days reading the death notices).

The Ministers that were running the country back then are no longer around

Nora Owen would take exception to that

The Garda Commissioner that was around back then is no longer around

AFAIK, Paddy Culligan is still going strong.

The point being that what seems like ancient history to you could seem like only yesterday to old codgers like me

Grizzly 45

And [un]fortuneatly so is the then Minister for Justice.Dessie O Malley.:rolleyes:

Good point on the history learning.Have the agust bodies learned from this as well.After all they are first port of call on this sort of thing.
Bloddy Ell I was six when this malarkey started!38 years later I dont intend to be 82 the next time this comes upto be legislated on again.Old coot is right RR.:D

Sparks

bunny shooter wrote: »

Mr Keogh is back with the NASPRC I read somewhere recently

Pretty much everyone who was involved in the bad old days is still involved, to one degree or another, though some are now simply ignored by the DoJ because of the history which they do learn from.

After reading that I am :eek: ! How much of that post is now reality :eek:

Take a trawl through the posts from around that time. The number of predictions made back then which have proven to be reasonably accurate is enough to make me sick. B'man saying that I shouldn't trawl up the 'world would have been a better place if they did what I told them' stuff, but he's not the one who predicted several years ago what's happening today, and how it would happen; nor is he the one who had to watch while people ignored warnings and brought it all about. Several of us, however, did -- and we're entitled to feel that he and others ought to know their Santayana better.

Bananaman

Sparks wrote: »

B'man saying that I shouldn't trawl up the 'world would have been a better place if they did what I told them' stuff, but he's not the one who predicted several years ago what's happening today, and how it would happen; nor is he the one who had to watch while people ignored warnings and brought it all about.

And I think I'm the better for it.

Too many people interested in the politics of this stuff and who got to say what to who and who was in the picture when or who pointed out that they wrote on the back of a beermat that the world would end in 2012.

I wasn't there - I didn't get trench foot or whatever ye all got back in '63 - I don't give a cobblers.

I want to look forward and see what we can do and how we can do it instead of constantly looking back and looking for what we didn't do and whose fault it is.

Saying 'I told you so' is being petty and of no use. I said a lot of stuff that I cannot remember that I am sure came to pass aswell.
We could have a Nostradamus thread - I will start with "Even a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day"

I'm only interested in the sport - taking part, ensuring people can take part and ensuring we have the tools to take part - for all of the shooting sports - if more people focused on that we might have a better time of it.

I just want to go to the range once a week and enjoy my sport and have a bit of craic and go to a competition every two or three weeks and enjoy my sport - same as everyone else - same as we've have been doing since we started - regardless of who was in charge of 'our fate' - even when they got distracted from the running of the sports with political folly.

Is it too much to ask?

B'Man

bunny shooter

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Did you miss his point about hole picking??;):D

No, just pointed out that his statement was incorrect

Notice bannana thanked your post maybe there's a reason he wants the past forgotten? :P

Sparks

Bananaman wrote: »

Is it too much to ask?

Based on my own personal experiences over the last decade of trying to do precisely what you're talking about, yes.

Or did you think that the folks who listened the least were sportspeople?

Liam Good

Sparks wrote: »

Based on my own personal experiences over the last decade of trying to do precisely what you're talking about, yes.

Or did you think that the folks who listened the least were sportspeople?

Mark,the formation of the NTSA way back was the beginning of all this.People were told then that splitting the then NRPAI would not be a good move. Funnily enough, the people who wanted to form the NTSA didn't listen to the good advice which was given then and has been the root cause of a lot of the current difficulties. I was there,I did hear the speakers,I did contribute to the discussion and my opinion was ignored and I have been proven correct. Hooryay for me for being able to predict the future but it didn't make any difference, except that I can now sit here and say " I told you so".

Sparks

Liam, go back about five years before that, and remind us all who preceded the original NRPAI and what that story was, would you please? (And you might also tell us why the NTSA had to be set up to start with while you're at it, and maybe what the difference is between the setting up of the NTSA and the setting up of the LRRAI).

Not all of us forget history.

Sikamick

Quote[Sparks]

Liam, go back about five years before that, and remind us all who preceded the original NRPAI and what that story was, would you please? (And you might also tell us why the NTSA had to be set up to start with while you're at it, and maybe what the difference is between the setting up of the NTSA and the setting up of the LRRAI).

Not all of us forget history.


_____________________________________________________________
Here we go again

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054954952


Sikamick

bunny shooter

:eek:

J***S H C****T :rolleyes:

Now I am sorry I asked !!!!!! :rolleyes:

This is worse than even I knew about

No wonder DOJ was able to shaft us

Bananaman

I remember this one fella - about 20 years ago - didn't buy his round one night - I'm not talking to him since

......
......
......
......
but hold on
......
......
......
......
I'm not a child
......
......
......
I can make rational decisions in the here and now and ignore the fact that he didn't buy a round back in the 80's because lets face it - they were only £2.67 a pint back then and of no relevance to the here and now because at the very least we are dealing with a different currency and Guinness don't even own Guinness anymore.
......
......
Can't believe that I was petty enough to hold that grudge over something for so long
......
......
How adult of me to admit and accept that



Oh - did my inner monologue escape?

B'Man

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

:eek:

J***S H C****T :rolleyes:

Now I am sorry I asked !!!!!! :rolleyes:

This is worse than even I knew about

No wonder DOJ was able to shaft us

It's not as bad as all that bunny, I have quite a lot of documentation from that time and it was all relatively pain free.

I believe the problems stemmed from the old 2% rule where you had an NRPAI committee of at best six who were trying to run everything with varying degrees of success. According to their constitution there was supposed to be a nine member committee with three or four seperate sub-committees of three (one committee member and two 'extras') dealing with different aspects of the association's business.

A lot of clubs kicked up for varying reasons mostly through frustration at the slow processes involved and after about four years of this, eventually the NTSA was set up in November 1985. They remained as a subset of the NRPAI but with increased autonomy; the NASRC was also set up around the same time though exactly when I'm not sure. Certainly they were in existence in 1987 when the NRPAI constitution was changed to turn it into an umbrella body.

That's a short potted history for you. I know that some of the members of the NRPAI committee of that era are still around and still taking part in competitions.

Apologies to everyone concerned for the thread derailment

Kramer

2 weeks now since the judgement.........
Have all those who were successful in Limerick DC received their licences?
At the very least, grant notices?

Grizzly 45

Nothing yet Kramer.But it is in hand with the legal eagles and if they want to push this out further,or to the last day so be it.We are committed to take it to the High court.We are not going away you know.;)

Grizzly 45

I am very pleased to announce that my Mum recived her three notices of grant for her guns in the mail this morning...:D Along with the three letters of recipt of applications for said grants.

I am just very glad that this is now over for her.This was a SHAMEFUL,UNNECESSARY,VERY STRESSFUL and a DOWNRIGHT DISGRACEFUL treatment of a senoir citizen by the Gardai of senior rank of Limerick at the time.
They might be a Garda "officers",but they are certainly no gentlemen!!!

We had our Xmas of 2009 ruined by this carry on,and at this age with my sole surviving parent,they will be few left of those events.For that I will NEVER forgive or forget :mad::mad:

To put a woman of 70 plus thru the mill,recovering from major surgery at that time,[a triple bypass which she had to have done outside Ireland...Thanks Mary Harney....:mad:] almost forcing her to have to take to the witness box in a DC which would have been proably full of Scobes and scumbags ,who has never comitted a wrong in this country,has paid her taxes on the nail for 50 odd years of living here,and is not even an Irish citizen.It is a SHAMEFUL endightment of how our Minister for "Justice,"Govt dept and "police force" are handling this liscensing system,and treating the Irish gunowner.

If she is one there are no doubt many other senior citizens who have been harrassed,intimidated and cowed into giving up their firearms,and wouldnt have the courage,or willpower or means to stand up and say the same or fight it out.

Shame on you Dermot Aherne!For your egoistical power trip.
Shame on you Factna Murphy,for not enforcing order on your officers below you!!
You both should be below every Irish citizens and gunowners contempt!!

The beat goes on..
Grizzly45

cavan shooter

Thats a terrible indictment of our governments treatment of its citizens, I know you dont want more public spotlight but would you not consider taking this out in the open maybe speak to some of the politicians who have back us on this.

Hope your Mams ok