Support For Open Letter Regarding "Mental Health Assessments"

vixdname

All,
I mailed the IMO about their ridiculous proposal that the Department Of Justice stop issuing firearm licenses to anyone until they have been "Assessed" by GPs as to their mental health and risk they pose (According to the GPs) to themselves and others.
Grizzly 45 came up with the idea of using the mail I sent as the basic template for an "Open Letter" that should be used and sent via physical letter (snail Mail) to the IMO, National Papers (Independent, Times etc.) & Nargc.
Griz reckons that if we sent this letter with as many names and details of its supporters as possible that it'd give the letter a better chance of being published and taken seriously.
If any of ye would like to ad their names and what part of the country ye're from (you dont have to give full addresses in case you're nervous about giving out too much personal details), just PM me with the details and I'll add them to the end of the letter and I'll print it off and sent it on to the various papers, IMO, NARGC etc.
The more united we show we are the better.
Please find below a copy of the proposed "Open Letter"


An open letter to Doctors Egan and Tobin,et all,and the Irish medical organisation

To whom it may concern,
We are replying to you in regards to the item in your forthcoming AGM in regards to your members wishing to call on the Department Of Justice And Law Reform to cease issuing firearm licenses until a proper health assessment of each individual wishing to have one has been carried out.

This is the strangest proposal we have seen in quite a while by any group especially one where those making the proposals are quite obviously not very knowledgeable in both fields that they are trying to cover in this proposal i.e. Suicide & Firearm Ownership In This Country

On the subject of firearms being used prevalently as a method of committing suicide in Ireland, recent publications released by the HSE show that in a study of all suicides in Ireland between 2003 and 2007 and taking into account the methods used by the individuals to carry it out i.e. "Poisoning", "Hanging", "Drowning", "Firearm" & lastly "Other" (as in jumping from a high place), that Hanging accounted for a whopping 61% of all suicides male or female followed by Drowning at 16% then followed by Poisoning at 12% and finally by the use of a Firearm which only accounted for "5%".

We find it very strange then indeed to hear the good Drs. Richard Tobin & Ken Egan coming up with their proposal about firearm licenses not being issued in case the individual may harm themselves with it
If the Doctors above are concerned about the "Methods" which are used to commit suicide in Ireland today, then according to the above statistics from the HSE, they should propose that any individual wishing to purchase a length of rope in any hardware store in the republic should firstly get the all clear on a mental health assessment by a suitably qualified person - which we hasten to add GPs in general are NOT suitably qualified to determine any individuals mental health where as a practicing psychiatrist or psychologist IS.
Perhaps anyone wanting to walk near a river or purchase a box of Paracetamol should also be mentally assessed also in case they intend drowning themselves or overdosing themselves.
As daft as the above may seem, the percentage of suicides carried out in Ireland using those methods far out weigh the percentage of times suicide is carried out using a firearm.

It seems that through public misinformation (and when we say public we also mean GPs as they are the "Public" too) and media disinformation, firearm ownership as a sport whether it be target shooting or hunting, is a taboo subject which is all too easy to be picked upon by individuals that wish to get a name for themselves (as certain politicians have done in the not too distant past now being closely followed by a couple of Doctors) and as a means of perhaps down the road, generating more income for themselves by carrying out "Mental Health Assessments".

We find it also reprehensible that an organisation like the Irish medical organisation ,which is a supposedly independent thinking organisation could possibly be influenced by their US collegues and the New England Journal of Medicine which for some reason has decided to support "junk science" and a particularly extreme anti firearms ownership stance by numerous anti firearm ownership doctors in the USA,who have been proven totally incorrect in their assurances on firearms ownership and suicide.

We would also be most interested in knowing how the IMO proposes to square this idea,with patient confidentiality ? An anti firearms GP who might point blank refuse to issue a clearance cert out of his/her beliefs?? It would put many shooters on national health cards at a disadvantage of being unable to to change their GP for a second opinion of their sanity.
Where or to whom could a gun owner appeal their GPs decision? At least if the Gardai refuse a license there is a recourse to the district court..
Also,what is to say that this will not be extended to another "dangerous sports" the IMO might consider in the future,or what would the situation be if a person who has a genuine psychological problem stops attending his GP ,for fear of loss of their license?

Are times so tough that the IMO and its members are now considering using the Irish shooter as another cash cow to bolster its somewhat faltering coffers under the guise of public health? Certainly Dr Egan[?] hinted at such in one media interview.
Were this the case ,we will certainly endeavour to highlight this hideous attempt to extract further income from the Irish shooting community by a call to boycott all GPs who belong to the IMO. It is an outrageous suggestion by the IMO to suggest that Irish shooters are a danger to themselves and the general public at large.
Clearly this is an attention grabbing ,and possibly money spinning ploy,[when you consider 200,000 gun owners multiplied by numerous GP visits at 70 euro per visit] by the IMO and the doctors Egan and Tobin to further a non existant public health issue as gun control.
We have been driven from pillar to post with legislation in recent years which has denuded our sport ,and we will not be pushed further by a non govt organisation who considers us an easy cash cow to milk.
We await your reply

Copies to IMO,Irish independant,Irish Times,Cork Examiner,NARGC, any other press and media outlet
Sincerely


Signed

bunny shooter

I agree they need to be challenged but I reckon the shooting organisations would be better doing it

Sparks

bunny shooter wrote: »

I agree they need to be challenged but I reckon the shooting organisations would be better doing it

I think most of them don't see the point in starting a scrap with the IMO, they'll write this off as just one crackpot loon and won't do anything to give it any more media time than it's already gotten unless it comes up from someone who actually matters. Otherwise, the papers will latch onto the "IMF -vs- <Shooting NGB of your choice> battle" headlines and that's how we lost pistols, for those who don't remember how Deputy Deasy started that particular avalanche.

bunny shooter

Sparks wrote: »

I think most of them don't see the point ..................

Maybe if they were a bit more proactive against this type of ****e we might not be in some of the positions we are.

They probably considered Deasy a lone crackpot loon too and look what he managed to do !

Action instead of reaction might be a better idea

Sparks

bunny shooter wrote: »

Maybe if they were a bit more proactive against this type of ****e we might not be in some of the positions we are.

Sometimes I think so. Sometimes I don't. There's merit in the viewpoint that they're sporting bodies, not lobbying bodies - divert too far from the sporting focus and there's a risk of losing credibility as a sporting body and we just don't have or want a lobbying body. Well. Some of us say we want a lobbying body, but mainly because we've not thought the idea through fully.

They probably considered Deasy a lone crackpot loon too and look what he managed to do !

Actually, Deasy was predicted a long time back and people were warned about the scenario a long time back. Nobody bothered to listen.

Action instead of reaction might be a better idea

Could we have the third option (thinking it through first) for a change?

bunny shooter

Sparks wrote: »

Sometimes I think so. Sometimes I don't.

Indecision :eek: Not something we usually see from you

Sparks wrote: »

There's merit in the viewpoint that they're sporting bodies, not lobbying bodies

They can be both, surely?

Sparks wrote: »

- divert too far from the sporting focus and there's a risk of losing credibility as a sporting body and we just don't have or want a lobbying body.

Not really..............GAA seem to have plenty of political clout

Sparks wrote: »

Well. Some of us say we want a lobbying body, but mainly because we've not thought the idea through fully.

What we have is enough IF they did what they're supposed to

Sparks wrote: »

Actually, Deasy was predicted a long time back and people were warned about the scenario a long time back. Nobody bothered to listen.

Or do anything to prevent his vendetta, which Ahern jumped on as he saw a soap box :mad:

Sparks wrote: »

Could we have the third option (thinking it through first) for a change?

One deep breath should be enough

vixdname

Sparks wrote: »

Could we have the third option (thinking it through first) for a change?

How long do we think about it for ? Just enough time for us all to forget about it until the IMOs proposal is actioned upon by the authorities, and then say "How Did this Happen ?"
This proposal is being put forward at the IMOs AGM on Thursday of this week, which means the ball will already be rolling for them.
Dont you think it would be a safer bet that we have our ball rolling along side theirs incase theirs gathers a bit of speed ?

bunny shooter wrote: »

I agree they need to be challenged but I reckon the shooting organisations would be better doing it

Howya Bunny,
You're probably 100% right in what you say BUT will they challenge it ? And even if they do, this letter can only help in showing further opposition to this IMO proposal and support for the shooting organisations.
My fear is that if we A.\ Wait to see if any of the shooting organisations do challenge this or B.\ Wait and see if it all blows over, that we may wait too long and all of a sudden, down the road, we are faced with yet another obstacle placed in front of us when we want to renew our licenses. Do we take those chances ?

All,
From the number of PMs I've received today, its clear that theres quite a lot of support from the lads on here for the sending of the open letter.
But if anyone doesnt think we should send this letter, then tell us what you think as everyones opinion is as important as the rest.
I'll leave this open until Saturday and will let ye know what kind of response this has gotten from ye and I'll let ye know how things progress.
This isnt a personal crusade or anything like that, I'm simply pissed off with this kind of crap being thrown at shooters on a regular basis.
Thanks again lads.

Sparks

bunny shooter wrote: »

Indecision :eek: Not something we usually see from you

Normally we don't talk about very hard problems here

They can be both, surely?

The NRA don't think so. They seperate their sports (NRA) and lobby (NRA-ILA) sides. And frankly, it still doesn't work. We get seen as one or the other and if we do one, we're not seen in the context of the other.

Not really..............GAA seem to have plenty of political clout

That's a cultural oddity at best. But frankly, think of GAA head office and tell me if the first thing that you think of is an elite sporting body or a bunch of old men in blazers?

What we have is enough IF they did what they're supposed to

No, it's not. We have a total of what, four people in the country who are working full-time in one NGB or another? And with just that much, we have more infighting than I can keep track of before you ever involved the PTB - and it's not helped by the 98% of the shooter who say "Erra, politics, I don't want that" when asked to help and "Fecking X, all their fault" when anything goes wrong (you can do either one or the other easily enough - but doing both... ).

Or do anything to prevent his vendetta, which Ahern jumped on as he saw a soap box :mad:

Like what?
And don't say "Do something about it". Tell us specifically what they could have done, given the manpower and money constraints?
And remember, we've already seen one example of "just doing something". Hence the reason why I think you need to know which way to jump before you jump.

One deep breath should be enough

You'd think, wouldn't you? But most of our problems come from taking that one deep breath so we can SHOUT EVEN MORE LOUDLY afterwards...

Sparks

vixdname wrote: »

Dont you think it would be a safer bet that we have our ball rolling along side theirs incase theirs gathers a bit of speed ?

I think it would be safer to not help them push their ball along at all. I've yet to see a law come out of an IMO AGM. If you have any examples of one, please, cite them. But right now, it's just the IMO trying to get into the papers by coming up with the most outrageous headline that they can, and this open letter plays right into that because it goes from outrageous headline (which tabloids like) to outrageous headlines about a scrap between two outraged groups (which tabloids love). By responding, we're legitimising their assertion - it goes from being some stupid outrageous talk at an AGM done as a PR stunt, to being a matter of debate between the medical association and the shooting community.

If we ever heard the DoJ bring up the IMO talk or if it ran for more than a day or two past the AGM, then it would be time to start protesting. Right now, because we have a fairly close relationship with the DoJ (relative to the IMO at any rate), it's just time to listen.

bunny shooter

vixdname wrote: »

..........
Howya Bunny,
You're probably 100% right in what you say BUT will they challenge it ? .............

No I don't think they will and if they do it will be too late. Vix fair dues for trying to do something but I think we need a bit of clout, eg nationally recognised organisation, if we're going to go head to head with IMO

Sparks wrote: »

Normally we don't talk about very hard problems here

Don't we

Sparks wrote: »

The NRA don't think so. They seperate their sports (NRA) and lobby (NRA-ILA) sides. And frankly, it still doesn't work.

THIS .... IS .... NOT .... AMERICA :P

Sparks wrote: »

.........But frankly, think of GAA head office and tell me if the first thing that you think of is an elite sporting body or a bunch of old men in blazers?

A bunch of cute f**kers who know who to milk the system

Sparks wrote: »

No, it's not. We have a total of what, four people in the country who are working full-time in one NGB or another?..........

They can't be that busy

Sparks wrote: »

Like what? And don't say "Do something about it". Tell us specifically what they could have done, given the manpower and money constraints?
And remember, we've already seen one example of "just doing something". Hence the reason why I think you need to know which way to jump before you jump.

There was always gonna be trouble with c/f pistols. It was just a matter of time. We are lucky we still have .22's IMVHO. Practical shooting was just the excuse :rolleyes: If it wasn't that it would have been something else.

Sparks wrote: »

You'd think, wouldn't you? But most of our problems come from taking that one deep breath so we can SHOUT EVEN MORE LOUDLY afterwards...

Just depends who's doing the shouting

Sparks wrote: »

I think it would be safer to not help them push their ball along at all. I've yet to see a law come out of an IMO AGM. If you have any examples of one, please, cite them. But right now, it's just the IMO trying to get into the papers by coming up with the most outrageous headline that they can, and this open letter plays right into that because it goes from outrageous headline (which tabloids like) to outrageous headlines about a scrap between two outraged groups (which tabloids love). By responding, we're legitimising their assertion - it goes from being some stupid outrageous talk at an AGM done as a PR stunt, to being a matter of debate between the medical association and the shooting community.

Have to agree

Sparks wrote: »

If we ever heard the DoJ bring up the IMO talk or if it ran for more than a day or two past the AGM, then it would be time to start protesting. Right now, because we have a fairly close relationship with the DoJ (relative to the IMO at any rate), it's just time to listen.

This "we" again I don't feel like I'm in this "we"

vixdname

Sparks wrote: »

I think it would be safer to not help them push their ball along at all. I've yet to see a law come out of an IMO AGM. If you have any examples of one, please, cite them. But right now, it's just the IMO trying to get into the papers by coming up with the most outrageous headline that they can, and this open letter plays right into that because it goes from outrageous headline (which tabloids like) to outrageous headlines about a scrap between two outraged groups (which tabloids love). By responding, we're legitimising their assertion - it goes from being some stupid outrageous talk at an AGM done as a PR stunt, to being a matter of debate between the medical association and the shooting community.

If we ever heard the DoJ bring up the IMO talk or if it ran for more than a day or two past the AGM, then it would be time to start protesting. Right now, because we have a fairly close relationship with the DoJ (relative to the IMO at any rate), it's just time to listen.

I hear where you're coming from Sparks, so the best thing to do is see what the majority of the lads here think is the best course of action to take on this, to send the letter or not send the letter ?
We'll see by the end of the week from the amount of PMs of support (or not) for this whether the majority of lads think this is worth doing right now or not.
A poll can be put up as a "For or Against" also if people want true transparancy .
Lastly, Grizzly45 had a family bereavement and wont be on boards for a few days as he has to travel, but as the idea of sending this open letter was originally Grizzlys I'd like to get some input from him as he has his opinions on this aswell.

Sparks

bunny shooter wrote: »

THIS .... IS .... NOT .... AMERICA :P

Yup. We're a lot more handicapped. But even they keep the two seperate and even then it doesn't really work in the mind of the general electorate.

A bunch of cute f**kers who know who to milk the system

Pretty much. And that's what the shooting NGBs (or some of them at least) don't want to be seen as, hence the reticence to take on lobbying roles outside of the bare minimum.

They can't be that busy

How much time do you think is spent on the stuff they can't avoid (the sporting functions, the FCP and related work, financial stuff and so on)?
And remember, this is by people with day jobs, who do this on a volunteer basis, not full-time paid professionals.

There was always gonna be trouble with c/f pistols. It was just a matter of time. We are lucky we still have .22's IMVHO. Practical shooting was just the excuse :rolleyes: If it wasn't that it would have been something else.

I don't know if that's completely true, but it's close. Practical had serious PR issues. But that doesn't mean c/f pistols were marked from day one. Practical was probably just a step too far too fast. But nothing's permanent - when I started shooting, the DoJ wouldn't speak to us at all and we couldn't have fullbore anything or any form of pistol and you'd be laughed at for a fool by most if you'd thought that could change. C/f pistols are in trouble right now, but that's not been carved in stone, as we've mentioned several times in the last few weeks on here.

Just depends who's doing the shouting

And what they're shouting and to whom...

Have to agree

Kinda sucks, but that's what seems best right now - it took several shouting sessions from Deasy and several other TDs on the bandwagon before it got to the point where it became a serious worry. One stupid speech that's so obviously a PR stunt in and of itself shouldn't set off the red alarm lights. Yellow, maybe, but not red. Otherwise we'd have to jump at everything and you'd basicly need a professional PR monitoring and response service and pretty soon, you're thought of in the same light as the Church of Scientology in regard to public statements and lawsuits.

This "we" again I don't feel like I'm in this "we"

You ought to, you shoot longside several FCP reps...

bunny shooter

Sparks wrote: »

Yup. We're a lot more handicapped.....

Sparks wrote: »

Pretty much. And that's what the shooting NGBs (or some of them at least) don't want to be seen as, hence the reticence to take on lobbying roles outside of the bare minimum.How much time do you think is spent on the stuff they can't avoid (the sporting functions, the FCP and related work, financial stuff and so on)?
And remember, this is by people with day jobs, who do this on a volunteer basis, not full-time paid professionals....

I was only referring to the "full-time paid professionals"

Sparks wrote: »

Practical was probably just a step too far too fast...

+1

Sparks wrote: »

But nothing's permanent - when I started shooting, the DoJ wouldn't speak to us at all and we couldn't have fullbore anything or any form of pistol and you'd be laughed at for a fool by most if you'd thought that could change. C/f pistols are in trouble right now, but that's not been carved in stone, as we've mentioned several times in the last few weeks on here....

+1

Sparks wrote: »

You ought to, you shoot longside several FCP reps...

:eek: oh ya

Sparks

vixdname wrote: »

I hear where you're coming from Sparks, so the best thing to do is see what the majority of the lads here think is the best course of action to take on this, to send the letter or not send the letter ?

I'm not saying do or don't -- it's not like anyone can do that -- I'm just giving my opinion here. I just think hold off and see if this grows legs. If it does, yes, grassroots protest would be called for, same as with the licence fee hike (check the thread if you don't remember that - grassroots protest can work effectively, but you don't want to use it on a hair trigger or it gets less effective).

Grizzly 45

There are both pro and con for sending this letter.
Pro,it might be a good "Do not Fcuk with us,as we are getting tired of being a scapegoat for societies illls,and an untapped source of income for your overpaid GPs under a guise of a public health problem."message

Personally,I always felt it was going to be tried on here one day once as is usual in Ireland you give an outside body any sort of a say in an authorthive decision making process,they will try and muscle in both financially and authorithvly[sic]to throw their weight around.

Con as pointed out,it could be considerd as giving it oxygen to a smouldering spark of a crackpot idea by the IMO.
But then again Ireland is well known for adapting stupid crackpot ideas and the least flow of resistance.I think our current society's mess speaks volumes on this.
Who knows what coniving goes on in the true govt corridors of power in Ireland?

So ,I suggest the following,no doubt this has been followed by agents of our respective shooting communites and bodies or been reported back to them.I suggest that if either NARGC or NTS....whatever![not thinking too straight today!:(]
Does not issue a public statement on this within the next six days.Hold a poll and decide it by democratic vote here to send it or not.

If it is a tempest in a tea cup,than it will amount to such.if it is being considerd somwhat actively,it will be benefical to show the IMO members that they could stand to lose more fiscaly than gain by this,and would put them in the spotlight to provide figures to back up this claim.


Maybe it is time to say to them and our "betters" in Irish society, Enough!Justify your demands,and prove them that they will be of benefit to us and not encroach on my lifes miserable few personal liberties or "priviliges" :rolleyes:any further.Trying to claim a public health problem,when their own stats says there isnt one is a hard one to justify.

Now,I'm off as Vix pointed out got a funeral to sort out.
Grizz

Half-cocked

Hi Vixdname, I think your letter is fine, but perhaps more emphasis on the fact that GP's are not qualified to make an assesment? Also, ask if action could be taken against a GP who approves some one for a firearm and that some one then commits suicide with said firearm?

vixdname

Half-cocked wrote: »

Hi Vixdname, I think your letter is fine, but perhaps more emphasis on the fact that GP's are not qualified to make an assesment? Also, ask if action could be taken against a GP who approves some one for a firearm and that some one then commits suicide with said firearm?

I'll try and integrate those points in, no probs.
A couple of other lads have asked me to include points for them aswell which I'll also try and do and post up a final draft over the weekend for everyone to see and by then we'll know whether the organisations that are supposedly there to represent us have done anything on our behalf.