Dail Question

Chipboard

Not sure if anyone is still interested but I see the question of how many handguns are licenced here came up in the Dail recently and Minister Ahern fobbed it off again. At least he didn't read out that pre-prepared speech he usually wheels out whenever he is asked anything even remotely related to guns.

Dail Written Answers on 12 Oct 2010

Lucinda Creighton (Dublin South East, Fine Gael)

Question 374: To ask the Minister for Justice and Law Reform the number of handguns currently licensed here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36522/10]

Dermot Ahern (Minister, Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform; Louth, Fianna Fail)

I have requested from the Garda authorities the information sought and I will write to the Deputy when it is available.

Sparks

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68506898&postcount=524



The deputy will pass on the information, and has tabled a more detailed question for us as well.

(also, moving this to shooting because there's a No Politics rule in the target shooting forum charter)

Chipboard

Dermot Ahern (Minister, Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform; Louth, Fianna Fail)

I can now inform the Deputy that to date (valid to 11th October 2010), there have been 998 Firearm Certificates issued under the provisions of the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2009 in respect of handguns, 599 of which are classified as non-restricted handguns, with 389 classified as restricted handguns.

While the Act did provide in certain circumstances for the issuing of licenses for restricted handguns which were in the possession of persons prior to the 19th of November 2008, no licenses can be issued in respect of new restricted handguns after that date.

I'm racking my brains to figure out how I differ to the 389 (fair play to them) who have got their restricted handgun licences.

bunny shooter

Chipboard have you a link to this answer please

Sparks

bunny shooter wrote: »

Chipboard have you a link to this answer please

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=69019444&postcount=530

demonloop

[QUOTE=Chipboard;69021819
I'm racking my brains to figure out how I differ to the 389 (fair play to them) who have got their restricted handgun licences.[/QUOTE]
I'd imagine the majority are held for humane dispatch, security reasons and other reasons that are not recreational / sport shooting

Bananaman

i think you'll find your address is the primary deciding factor on whether or not you get licensed.

B'Man

kildare.17hmr

demonloop wrote: »

I'd imagine the majority are held for humane dispatch, security reasons and other reasons that are not recreational / sport shooting

What other reasons could you have for getting a restricted handgun? didnt think they were aloud for security reasons

Sparks

They are allowed for sporting reasons if you had a licence for that particular firearm before Nov 17 2008. That's where the bulk of the 389 are coming from, I would wager.

It wasn't me!

I'd wager that a very small number are for humane dispatch, and none for personal security.

kildare.17hmr

It wasn't me! wrote: »

I'd wager that a very small number are for humane dispatch, and none for personal security.

Thought the same lad i would say you'd win that bet

bunny shooter

Sparks wrote: »

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=69019444&postcount=530

I meant a link on the Court/Government site? ..................................

bunny shooter

kildare.17hmr wrote: »

Thought the same lad i would say you'd win that bet

I reckon you'd loose if a story I heard is true and I reckon the person that told me would know

kildare.17hmr

bunny shooter wrote: »

I reckon you'd loose if a story I heard is true and I reckon the person that told me would know

Do share bunny

Bananaman

Speculation and Rumour mongering.

Some people never learn.

B'Man

Sparks

bunny shooter wrote: »

I meant a link on the Court/Government site? ..................................

Here, near the top of the page, question (and answer) 202.

bunny shooter

kildare.17hmr wrote: »

Do share bunny

As I said, I heard a story, and the story teller is a credible person IMHO. I won't repeat it here as it is a 'sensitive' subject

Bananaman wrote: »

Speculation and Rumour mongering.

Are you calling me and/or the person who told the story a liar?

How do you know it's "Speculation and Rumour mongering"? You don't even know what the story was

Bananaman wrote: »

Some people never learn.

B'Man

Don't be so hard on yourself

Just because you haven't the proof doesn't mean it doesn't exist

If you had it you'd probably want to edit & compile it before you showed it to anyone :P

And if you are inferring that the "List" I mentioned here previously was a rumour and scaremongering how do you explain the contents of the current "list"?

Traumadoc

Did a politician who moved from the north to the south a number of years ago have a pistol licensed for personal protection?

kildare.17hmr

@Bunny.....Ah yeah i no what ya mean lad, i remember something about it before on here alright

Sparks

bunny shooter wrote: »

And if you are inferring that the "List" I mentioned here previously was a rumour and scaremongering how do you explain the contents of the current "list"?

/facepalm
This again? FFS BS...

bunny shooter

Sparks wrote: »

/facepalm
This again? FFS BS...

I'm taking your advice from another thread...........moving on, but not forgetting the past ................ oh ya, and he started it

bunny shooter

Traumadoc wrote: »

Did a politician who moved from the north to the south a number of years ago have a pistol licensed for personal protection?

That as well

Under the legisaltion you have to provide a "good reason" and it has to satisfy the Super of Chief Super as being a good reason. It doesn't state it has to be target shooting .............................

Sparks

bunny shooter wrote: »

I'm taking your advice from another thread...........moving on, but not forgetting the past ................ oh ya, and he started it

I wish you would (not forget the past) - you'd also remember that everyone from the DoJ to the NTSA to the IPSA said the rumour was rubbish...

bunny shooter

Sparks wrote: »

I wish you would (not forget the past) - you'd also remember that everyone from the DoJ to the NTSA to the IPSA said the rumour was rubbish...

Hard to believe that now :rolleyes: considering some of what I seen but then again the IMF etc isn't happeing either :P



Ah here, let's not go there again

Sparks

bunny shooter wrote: »

considering some of what I seen

Which, of course, we can never be told about :rolleyes:

I mean, I've seen documents that say you personally shot JFK from the grassy knoll, but I could never show them to anyone. Honest. Wanna buy a bridge?

bunny shooter

Sparks wrote: »

Which, of course, we can never be told about :rolleyes:

Never is such a long time

Sparks wrote: »

I mean, I've seen documents that say you personally shot JFK from the grassy knoll, but I could never show them to anyone.

:eek: just goes to show you can trust nobody to keep a secret :mad:

Sparks wrote: »

Honest. Wanna buy a bridge?

Didn't the Yanks do that? Bought London Bridge thinking they were buying Tower Bridge

Bridges are man made and always prone to collapse

Sparks

bunny shooter wrote: »

Didn't the Yanks do that? Bought London Bridge thinking they were buying Tower Bridge
Bridges are man made and always prone to collapse

See, this is precisely what I'm talking about. First off, the "buy a bridge" idiom refers to the Brooklyn Bridge; and secondly, no, the Yanks didn't buy the wrong bridge, that's an urban legend - McCulloch knew exactly what he was buying, and even a single google search would show you that. But why let the facts ruin a good story, eh?

bunny shooter

Sparks wrote: »

..............But why let the facts ruin a good story, eh?

Exactly

Or if a lie is told often enough and people subsequentially believe it, it no longer is a lie, maybe?