High Court Case - anybody get their centrefire pistol back?

BattleCorp

rowa wrote: »

yes, but to the public a gun is a gun , ahern gave an interview on the radio after the shooting in limerick saying he was banning handguns, to joe public and the media he was seen to "be doing something".

I agree with rowa above, this centrefire pistol ban has no logic behind it. It was implemented to placate certain members of the cabinet who wanted to be seen to be doing something about gangland murders.

Funny though, it had zero effect on scumbags and gangland murders, and the only people it hit was law abiding citizens. This ban has done nothing to make the country any safer. It's the illegal guns that are being used by scumbags. The only people who suffered because of this ban are law abiding shooting enthusiasts.




Here's a question that I'd like answered but I'll guess that the answer is no. Has a legally held pistol ever been used to commit a crime in the State? If not, why is this a fact that I have never ever seen in the media? And if no legally held pistol has ever been used to commit a crime in the State, how does banning them make it safer?





Sparks, I think that there might be some merit in what Grizzly was saying about discrimination. Fair enough, you are probably right in saying that differences in gun law between European countries doesn't necessarily translate to discrimination.

But please answer this. Is it not discrimination if myself and Grizzly are on the firing line and maybe he is allowed a centrefire pistol and I am not? Why is that not discrimination? Is he any safer than me? We are both in the same country so why doesn't the law apply equally to him and me? He's allowed by law to have it and I am not. He's allowed to take part in his chosen sport, and I am not (if it was WA1500). Is this not a discriminatory law?

I know you could use the argument that some people are allowed to fly planes and some are not, and that this isn't discrimination, so the firearm issue should be similar.......but it's not. I could train to be a pilot and then be allowed to fly a plane, but there is legally fcukall I can do to get a centrefire pistol. It's not as if there is anything I can do to get one, there's a blanket ban on me getting one.

Seems like discrimination to me.

Sparks

BattleCorp wrote: »

Seems like discrimination to me.

Legally, it'd be discrimination if Grizz got his pistol licence and you didn't get yours because of "age, gender, religion, race, sexual orientation, marital status, family status or membership of the Traveller community" (that's right out of the Equal Status Act).

But that's not the case. He can have his licence and you can't because he applied before the law changed. That's not discrimination, because it applies equally to everyone. We were all equally eligible to apply for a licence at the time; he did, we didn't. Today, we're all equally ineligible to apply for a new licence, him included. It's a stupid situation, but it's not discrimination and pursuing that line would be a waste of time and money.

Grizzly 45

I suppose we could start a new religion then..After all our enemies call us "gun worshippers",[amongst other things].:D:D:D