NASRPC proposals on licencing centerfire pistols, as submitted to the DoJ

bunny shooter

I reckon in hindsight that some of their proposals were taken on board by the PTB as when I was renewing my licences and I looked for my .303 for target shooting my Super wanted to know "what competitions and at what level I was shooting competions at" :eek::mad:

Tackleberrywho

bunny shooter wrote: »

I reckon in hindsight that some of their proposals were taken on board by the PTB as when I was renewing my licences and I looked for my .303 for target shooting my Super wanted to know "what competitions and at what level I was shooting competions at" :eek::mad:

My point exactly,
You have a .303. Put up a target on s sunday, take a few shots, have a cofee and a chat and tehn go home.

What makes a NASRPC fella who goes to the same range anymore important?

<mod snip because folk may be trying to eat toast>

The oldest definition of sport in English (1300) is of anything humans find amusing or entertaining

I do not find Target shooting competitions amusing or entertaining, however I find shooting the odd Target amusing and entertaining.

So why is not competing Not Sporting??

4gun

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

The oldest definition of sport in English (1300) is of anything humans find amusing or entertaining

too broad a defination, I would at this tpiont in time enjoy seeing some of our T.Ds tarred and feathered (at the least) so long as its sport :rolleyes:

would agree that the compulsory requirement to attend a compitition opens it up for abuse..compeating against mates on a sunday after noon should be enough ...what will the require next .. that you have to shoot at least 1 game bird to own a shotgun

Cass

Sikamick wrote: »

NASRPC list of disciplines from their website:

..............
..............
6 Classic Rifle
7 Black Powder Shooting

On that note i would seek clarification of a couple of things.

• Do the NASRPC have the facilities and ranges to host these style of competitions as the majority of their ranges would be certified for smallbore rifles only, making the running of such competitions nigh on impossible.
• How could the NASRPC have "control" over the black powder rifle shooting. As the MNSCI is the ONLY range in the country certified by the DOJ to hold/store and allow the use of powder of ANY sort, and the fact that the NASRPC are not affiliated to the MNSCI i'm wondering how they plan on running such black powder rifle shooting events.

bunny shooter

VCRAI have been running classic rifle comps for a while now sucessfully without any input from the NASRPC.

Now they recently began caliming NGB status over it :eek:

Another power grab :mad:

Sikamick

gunhappy_ie wrote: »

Has the VCRAI got authorisiation yet ??

Gun_happy for what.

Please note that we are an Association not a club, please look at SSAI which means Shooting Sports Association of Ireland, then you have an other example NASRPC, which means National Association of Sporting Rifle and Pistols Clubs and the LRRAI which means Long Range Rifle Association of Ireland.

Please note Associations are not required under the Act to pay for Authorization as they are made up from members of Authorized clubs which have already paid their 1000 Euro.

Sikamick

SAKO_FTR

gunhappy_ie wrote: »

Has the VCRAI got authorisiation yet ??

The VCRAI
Vintage Classic Rifle Association of Ireland
Like other associations it is made up of member from authorized clubs.
As the association is for people with like minded interests i.e. collecting and shooting vintage / classic service rifle in competitions arranged by the Association.

Grizzly 45

Not to mind "target shotgun" which is not clay piegon shooting,and virtually unknown here.
Indeed some of those points must have been taken on with the Gardai asking about club attendance,competitions enterd and what not,[amazing they wernt asking for us to bring in any trohpies that had been won as well!].
Wouldnt surprise me now the ethnic cleansing attitude against semi rifles and restricted/unrestricted shotguns with odd stocks as well,that that was part of somones pet hate and it was pushed through too.

Esel

I can't remember the title - can anyone help? One of XTC's big hits.....

Kilo

Esel wrote: »

I can't remember the title - can anyone help? One of XTC's big hits.....

Making plans for Nigel?

cavan shooter

I have been watching this post but saying nothing (Shut mouth catches no flies etc) The whole competition or not argument is absolutely scandalous, The fact of the matter is that people partake in target shooting because they enjoy it be it clays or rifle or pistol. Why should I have to shoot in a competition, To get away from this I would urge all shooters who are in a club to submit the scores to the club so a league/record can be kept in relation to time spent.

I have done this with everyone in our club both for clays and game/ vermin shoots I have a register of active members covering scores, meetings and apologies as required.

As an outsider looking in The in fighting and bickering among the target disciplines is looking like the "Peoples liberation front of Judae scene from the Life of Brian" suggest you get a room and sort out in private, it just looks bad, It just appears to be very divided and never the twain shall meet.

As for the submission/proposals I have formed a view a long time ago that elitism and arrogance is alive and well in a lot of organisations, and this proves it. People forget that committees are accountable to their members and if committees are doing a solo run, change the committee (simples)
Thats for all organisations NARGC/NASRPC/local gun club/GAA/socccer/ Peoples liberation front of Judae.:D

Grizzly 45

Esel wrote: »

I can't remember the title - can anyone help? One of XTC's big hits.....

Could be quite a few applying here.:eek:

Are You Receiving Me?" – 3:04 (from single, 1978)

1. "Wait Till Your Boat Goes Down" – 4:20 (from single, 1980)
2. "Generals and Majors" (Moulding) – 3:41 (from single, 1980
3. "Wake Up" (Moulding) – 3:40 (from single, 1985)

Personally I think Genisis Land of Confusion would be more appropriate to the Irish shooting world.

daveob007

war by culture club....sums it up well

Esel

Kilo wrote: »

Making plans for Nigel?

That's the one!

Hondata92

Just looking through the commissioners guidelines

CHAPTER 3: CONDITIONS THAT MAY BE CONSIDERED RELEVANT WHEN GRANTING A FIREARM CERTIFICATE AND CASE LAW

In the case of self loading (semi automatic) pistols and revolvers consideration may be given to a requirement to dismantle each gun when not at the range where it is intended to be used with some necessary parts held at the range.

http://garda.ie/Documents/User/Commissioners%20Guidelines%20%28as%20amended%2022nd%20Oct%29%20in%20relation%20to%20Firearms%20Licensing%5B1%5D.pdf

Page 16

Maybe some of the suggestions were taken on board :mad:

Kimber

I hear you brave young Shooters
You are hungry for the truth
But to learn the ancient methods
Sacred doors you must unlock

In the hills of Fallen Angels
On a journey you must go
Where the forest meets the sand
To find a land ancient and old

Together you will form a strong alliance
And bring the ancient ones to heel

To bring the peace to the land
Through the valley you must walk
Now go my young Sparks
Find the truth and talk

Grizzly 45

The silence here,apart from the "press release" is deafening and telling it's own tale at this stage!!!;)

gunhappy_ie

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

The silence here,apart from the "press release" is deafening and telling it's own tale at this stage!!!;)

Perhaps a car pool up to there next meeting is in order. Get answers from the horses mouths so to speak

Rosahane

Sparks wrote: »

No, there's nothing like that in the Acts, you're thinking of the guidelines laid down by the NASRPC in their proposal:

I hadn't seen these proposals before.

Frankly, I'm amazed at the arrogance displayed by a self appointed body presuming to tell the Garda, the Dept. of Justice and the sainted Firearms Consultative Panel how to leglislate. After all the NARGC have only about 200,000 members while some of the other bodies involven in shooting sports nationally could have up to a few dozen members and THEY didn't presume to know best :eek:

We need a FOI request and a concerted campaign by everybody on Boards who is not a member of the NARGC to have a go at the NARGC and express shock, horror and anguish and call for heads to roll :rolleyes::cool::D

Rosahane

Rosahane wrote: »

I hadn't seen these proposals before.

Frankly, I'm amazed at the arrogance displayed by a self appointed body presuming to tell the Garda, the Dept. of Justice and the sainted Firearms Consultative Panel how to leglislate. After all the NARGC have only about 200,000 members while some of the other bodies involven in shooting sports nationally could have up to a few dozen members and THEY didn't presume to know best :eek:

We need a FOI request and a concerted campaign by everybody on Boards who is not a member of the NARGC to have a go at the NARGC and express shock, horror and anguish and call for heads to roll :rolleyes::cool::D

Lest there be any misunderstanding the above is just a joke which was prompted by an earlier thread attacking another large national organisation!

I thoroughly support and have nothing but respect for the position Des Crofton has taken on the issue of licencing and legislation. He hasn't been suckered by the DOJ divide and conquer strategy!

Sparks

Rosahane wrote: »

Lest there be any misunderstanding the above is just a joke which was prompted by an earlier thread attacking another large national organisation!

Seriously? You're defending that group's actions?
Why, exactly?

I thoroughly support and have nothing but respect for the position Des Crofton has taken on the issue of licencing and legislation. He hasn't been suckered by the DOJ divide and conquer strategy!

Nor have the other NGBs. But quiet hard work ain't as sexy as shouting and banging the table, is it?

Bananaman

Sparks wrote: »

Seriously? You're defending that group's actions?
Why, exactly?

Are you going to attack him for doing so?why, exactly?

This vendetta of yours has got very old - NASRPC is not a handful of people in the tap room of the brazen head - it is a club netwkrk of many hundreds, if not thousands, of people

Please stop trying to sully their name because of what was done in their name, by those that no longer can

B'Man

Sparks

Bananaman wrote: »

Are you going to attack him for doing so?why, exactly?

Attack? Vendetta? Please.
Try using words that accurately describe what you say you're talking about.

Please stop trying to sully their name because of what was done in their name, by those that no longrr can

Firstly, I didn't sully their name. They did that themselves.

Secondly, it's not done in their name by those that no longer can; it's what was done in the name of the NASRPC by those people who are currently running it.
The signatories are still on the NASRPC committee, acting as chairman in one case.
So give up this "Oh, it's in the past, it was other people" dross, it doesn't hold water.

Bananaman

Like I said - very old and boring.

Your attaching this argument to any topic which a has large number of readers is also a bit obvious.

I hate to break it to you - but nobody cares - anybody actually involved in NASRPC or its member clubs knows it is all a load of old male chicken which was dealt with a long time ago.

Those that believe there is a problem have read you wrong and believe that this is a current issue and recent proposals, when they are in fact, politically speaking, dinosaur poo.

For the life of me I cannot understand what it is that you want.

Have you an alternative group of people willing to put in the time and effort to administer the NASRPC, develop its club network and develop target shooting as a whole?

Have you a proposal in mind for how things should be? That does not involve bad mouthing people and attacking groups which are not "the chosen ones".
If so, out with it man.

Or are you just whinging, spoiling for a fight and trying to bad mouth people to no end?

Please explain.
(By all means put it in another thread as it has nothing to do with Gardai or the unlawful confiscation of firearms)

B'Man

Sparks

Bananaman wrote: »

Or are you just whinging, spoiling for a fight and trying to bad mouth people to no end?

Let me see if I understand you.
Your association tries to screw over the rest of us, but it's old news because it happened at the time of the pistol ban, and so we shouldn't keep it in mind, because it's all ancient history -- even though your current chairman is a signatory to that document and he's now the chair of FISA as well?

Yeah, I'm not buying the "How long do I have to keep my antics secret before nobody can blame me for them" argument either B'man. Try again.

Sparks

Posts moved to the NASRPC Proposal thread, as suggested by B'man.

Bananaman

Sparks wrote: »

Bananaman wrote: »

Or are you just whinging, spoiling for a fight and trying to bad mouth people to no end?

Let me see if I understand you.
Your association tries to screw over the rest of us, but it's old news because it happened at the time of the pistol ban, and so we shouldn't keep it in mind, because it's all ancient history -- even though your current chairman is a signatory to that document and he's now the chair of FISA as well?

Yeah, I'm not buying the "How long do I have to keep my antics secret before nobody can blame me for them" argument either B'man. Try again.

So is that a yes?

B'Man

PS: its not my association - i'm also a member of many others

Sparks

It's a refusal to accept the stupid and ridiculous notion that we cannot criticise an association that tried to actively hurt others just because you believe that they're innocent and that they need to be running things.

And it is your association B'man. Or are you saying you're not an NASRPC member? That you don't shoot in their matches? That you haven't posted up their competition notices here for years?

Bananaman

Sparks wrote: »

And it is your association B'man. Or are you saying you're not an NASRPC member? That you don't shoot in their matches? That you haven't posted up their competition notices here for years?

To be clear.....

I am not an NASRPC member - my target shooting club is.
Individuals cannot be members of the NASRPC.

I "work" for the NASRPC - albeit as a volunteer.

I do sometimes shoot at NASRPC matches - as do hundreds of others. Generally, however, I don't shoot as much as I used to as I tend to "work" NASRPC matches.

What I find annoying is your incessant need to criticise the association - when it is individuals you seem to have problems with.

Today, No individuals hold sway over the NASRPC.
In the past they did.
Not anymore.

---

It is not "My association".

When you say that you are attempting to create a division where I am on "my side" and you and others are on "your side".

That is childish, unnecessary and uncalled for.

We are all target shooters - we all take part in the same sport - there are no "sides".

It does not matter what type of firearm you use,
It does not matter what type of ammo you use.
it does not matter what colour or shape of target you shoot at.
It does not matter what togs you wear while doing it.

We all shoot.

There should be no "them" and "us".

That is what NASRPC is about.

That is why I will not countenance you attacking it because of some historical bollix that was dealt with, by the NASRPC itself, a long time ago.

---

I am unaware as to whether or not you are a member of a club affiliated to the NASRPC (many people are members of multiple clubs so it is hard to know) but, if you are not, then you have no say in what they do.

However, as I asked earlier - seeing as the NASRPC website states that they welcome feedback .....

What is it that you want to see happen?

B'Man

Sparks

Bananaman wrote: »

What I find annoying is your incessant need to criticise the association

It's not an incessant need of mine; it's a genuine need of everyone. Any group that would pull that kind of stunt (and the others they've pulled) needs to be criticised for it, if not ostracised.

Today, No individuals hold sway over the NASRPC.
In the past they did.
Not anymore.

Are you trying to tell me that the Chairman of the NASRPC has no sway over the NASRPC?

We are all target shooters - we all take part in the same sport - there are no "sides".

Really? Because the document in post #1 here very, very clearly sets out two sides, those the NASRPC deem worthy of a licence for a pistol and those it does not.

It does not matter what type of firearm you use,

So why say that Glocks shouldn't be licenced then?

There should be no "them" and "us".
That is what NASRPC is about.

The signed document in post #1 is proof that that is not what the NASRPC is about.

That is why I will not countenance you attacking it because of some historical bollix that was dealt with, by the NASRPC itself, a long time ago.

It's not historical, it's definitely not rubbish, and it was not dealt with by the NASRPC a long time ago.

The NASRPC is attempting to brazen it out, hoping that if they keep insisting that it's nothing, that it's all in the past and that it's all different now, that people will believe them; despite the facts that those who drafted and approved that document still chair the NASRPC or are heavily involved in running it, that it's not that long ago since it was drafted, that it was a document designed to undermine and divide the other NGBs for the benefit of the NASRPC, and that it was done in utter contempt of the FCP system that was in place at the time, and that it was by no means the last such stroke that was pulled.

What is it that you want to see happen?

I would like for people to know what kind of crap those involved in the NASRPC get up to, and why it undermines any efforts made by others, and for those in the NASRPC committee to not pull things like this in the future.