History...

Sparks

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

But werent you saying like please stop going to the DC as it might upset others as well?

You keep saying this, and keep getting told that there's a long long walk between going to court as a necessary last resort; and using the courts as a stick to beat the government with. The former's a necessary evil; the latter is a very bad idea for everyone in the shooting community.

BattleCorp

Sparks wrote: »

You keep saying this, and keep getting told that there's a long long walk between going to court as a necessary last resort; and using the courts as a stick to beat the government with. The former's a necessary evil; the latter is a very bad idea for everyone in the shooting community.

Sparks, I have a question.

What do you do if a C Super incorrectly refuses your pistol license renewal? You have pretty much no option other than going to court.

What else can you do other than give up your sport?

Grizzly 45

Sparks wrote: »

You keep saying this, and keep getting told that there's a long long walk between going to court as a necessary last resort; and using the courts as a stick to beat the government with. The former's a necessary evil; the latter is a very bad idea for everyone in the shooting community.

Sparks,I understand that completely. I mean it in the context of Dians statement of the previous post.

was more so saying that as you've been to the DC & others to the HC, that you have upset DOJ/Minister of Justice and now we're (as in other shooters) are going to/ might have to pay the price with some more draconian legislation.

And this is my burr in my hide on a personal level RE these cases,not in relation to the HC..WHAT DID PEOPLE ME/US EXPECT US TO DO ON A PERSONAL LEVEL???

It seems now that I and others should have lay down and be quiet as it might upset the minister for the "greater good of Irish shooters":rolleyes: and let some fragmented organisations handle the matter on an" expert level" at the non existant FCP meeting when these said organisations at the moment cant organise a pissup in a brewery between themselves??Oh and please give us money too so the Royal WE can spend my money as we see fit for your own good???
I just cant get over that one it is just so.... IRISH!!!:eek:

The simple fact that I and others followed the option of appealing this via the legal route of the act now seems to be pissing off both shooters and govt is actually laughable.Its not my fault that AGS cant produce valid reasons and has to use wikipedia information and that their expert looks like a complete fool,and that most sane judges are not falling for the "oh it looks dangerous,so no one should have it" reasoning the state is offering as "good reason".
I mean that whole reasoning is a paramount example of "Fuk ye !! YeCF pistol shooters are rocking the boat and it might upset MY seat,because I'm in first class in this leaky lifeboat with my DBBL." We are ALL in this lifeboat people and there is no first class!Dont think for one instance because you own a certain type of gun that you are 100% safe either.
As I said long before ,as I and others were told "Ye are on your own boys deal with it".So we did...Too bad that it looks like Me Fein because thats what it had to be.

Grizzly 45

Dian Cecht wrote: »

I'm very much outside the Pale. That's hardly the deciding factor :mad:

Actually,it might have quite abit to do with it. It seems that you have a better chance of having a case taken if you are living inside the Lensteir region than anywhere else..Demographics aside, it has been remarked on by legal counsel outside the Dublin region how little the legal rep from Dublin seems to be out here in the stix for those in these prediciments.

Sparks

BattleCorp wrote: »

Sparks, I have a question.
What do you do if a C Super incorrectly refuses your pistol license renewal? You have pretty much no option other than going to court.
What else can you do other than give up your sport?

First step, get the refusal in writing and have a chat with him first to see if you can sort it out. If that fails, step two is talk to your NGB and have them talk to the FPU who might be able to sort it out quietly. If that fails (and despite what you hear, we're in the tiny minority of cases at this point), yes, step three is that you go to the District Court (not the High Court) and get a hearing there.

But, you go through this procedure because it's the procedure. You do so dispassionately. You don't start demanding that people be fired from the civil service, or asking in public if senior members of the AGS or DoJ or the Minister, have "lost it". In other words, you do things pragmatically and with your focus on the end result, and with full knowledge of the risks and costs involved.

Yeah, it sucks. That's our sport for you. Decades of Irish history and poor PR and poor governance dumped us here; it'll take decades of good PR and good governance to undo that, not pounding away on tables. There are plenty of people saying they have shortcuts; there are also plenty of people who'll sell you ownership of the Brooklyn bridge, pills to make your gonads larger, and who will pay you a percentage of their Nigerian princely inheritance if you'll just help pay the necessary banking charges for them.

Dian Cecht

I reckon DOJ & Garda didn't envisage there being so many cases taken or so many being won. I reckon they though the restricted status, especially the way it's set up, would make lads "walk away", which a lot of us did, for lots of reasons.

These victories have been in a way, in my opinion, a cause of serious embarrassment to the DOJ & Garda. And as we've seen before they don't take loosing lying down

Interesting re the legal representation & NARGC........................wouldn't be the first time those inside the pale were put on a pedestal within that organisation !!!!! I think I'm going to take my money elsewhere this year!

Sparks

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

It seems now that I and others should have lay down and be quiet as it might upset the minister

Offhand guess? We're waaaay too late for that boat. It's sailed, over the horizon, through it's course and docking at its destination at this stage.

these said organisations at the moment cant organise a pissup in a brewery between themselves?

Really? They seemed to work pretty damn well together in the FCP. Yeah, I know, counter-intuitive, and I was more surprised to see it than most, but no, turns out that when everyone sat down together, it worked pretty damn well.

The simple fact that I and others followed the option of appealing this via the legal route of the act now seems to be pissing off both shooters and govt is actually laughable

Yeah, it's also actually wrong Grizz. The politicisation of cases, that pissed off quite a few shooters. Individual cases taken as a genuine last resort where the claimant wasn't taking the piss don't annoy anyone, they're just the procedure being followed.
As I've said more times than I remember to you.

rowa

Dian Cecht wrote: »

These victories have been in a way, in my opinion, a cause of serious embarrassment to the DOJ & Garda.

If they are embarrassed its their own doing, the continuation of centrefire pistol licencing for those who had them pre 2008 was agreed with the minister, it wasn't a nod and a wink to the chief supers to bring in a de-facto ban on c/f's. Many people such as me had no change in licencing circumstances, but yet were found not to have sufficient reason to own a pistol we had owned without incident for years previously ! We lost our sport overnight. To then go to a court of law with evidence obtained from youtube and wikipedia and expect not to be embarrassed is daft.

rowa

Sparks wrote: »

Yeah, it's also actually wrong Grizz. The politicisation of cases, that pissed off quite a few shooters. Individual cases taken as a genuine last resort where the claimant wasn't taking the piss don't annoy anyone, they're just the procedure being followed.

Surely the whole thing became politicised the moment a lame duck minister in a disasterous government, decided to scapegoat us for a murder in limerick sparks ? It automatically started an "us and them" scenario.

Sparks

rowa wrote: »

Surely the whole thing became politicised the moment a lame duck minister in a disasterous government, decided to scapegoat us for a murder in limerick sparks ? It automatically started an "us and them" scenario.

Rowa, if someone invites you to a game of roshambo, do you immediately accept because that's the only game you can think of playing, or do you decide that playing a game that involves being kicked in the fork as hard as possible would be a bad idea, and seek instead to play a different game?

Seriously, you get into us-v-them with the DoJ and AGS and you might as well just sell your firearms now and go take up pottery, because the law of this country - and the law in the EU - is written explicitly giving them full authority over all aspects of firearms licencing in Ireland. Think anything else at any time and you're only fooling yourself. You sure as heck aren't going to fool them. And if you do want to go to court over it, they won't mind - it's your money, after all, both for your half of the case and for theirs (as it's taxpayers money).

No, instead you play it smarter than that, you don't get into us-v-them, you try to work together because that suits all parties better and gets you more in the end.

For some reason though, we got bored getting what we wanted, didn't want to wait for all of it to come in and so burned the whole damn lot of it chasing some shortcut that didn't exist and getting nothing in return. And if the rumours are true, we're looking at reaping what we sow in the near future.

Dian Cecht

rowa wrote: »

If they are embarrassed its their own doing, the continuation of centrefire pistol licencing for those who had them pre 2008 was agreed with the minister, it wasn't a nod and a wink to the chief supers to bring in a de-facto ban on c/f's. Many people such as me had no change in licencing circumstances, but yet were found not to have sufficient reason to own a pistol we had owned without incident for years previously ! We lost our sport overnight. To then go to a court of law with evidence obtained from youtube and wikipedia and expect not to be embarrassed is daft.

Therein lies a lot of the problem. The Minister made a promise he couldn't keep. Under the legislation he could/can not tell the Super or Chief Super what to do with regard to firearms licencing. Under the newer legislation a DC Judge can now but a lot of them simply advise the Super or Chief Super to reconsider their decision and as a last resort may over rule it.

I too was one of the "we" that lost our sport. I considered the legal route but for various reasons I didn't go there. In hindsight, which is a great thing, I was probably better off as it may have only been delaying the inevitable.

The DOJ/Garda came up with what they thought would solve the problem but now we know it didn't work.

I bet the next solution will work though

Sparks

Dian Cecht wrote: »

Therein lies a lot of the problem. The Minister made a promise he couldn't keep. Under the legislation he could/can not tell the Super or Chief Super what to do with regard to firearms licencing.

Correct, but under the legislation he could just rule certain firearms to be prohibited and therefore unlicencable.
There's more than one way to skin a cat, but the cat always ends up the same way afterwards...

Grizzly 45

[

QUOTE=Sparks;88439678]Offhand guess? We're waaaay too late for that boat. It's sailed, over the horizon, through it's course and docking at its destination at this stage.


Really? They seemed to work pretty damn well together in the FCP. Yeah, I know, counter-intuitive, and I was more surprised to see it than most, but no, turns out that when everyone sat down together, it worked pretty damn well.

Yeah..Hindsight is always 20/20,:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Sparks

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Yeah..Hindsight is always 20/20,:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Is it hindsight when you warn people ahead of time and they don't listen and you're later proven correct, and that cycle keeps on happening over and over again?

Grizzly 45

Sparks wrote: »

Is it hindsight when you warn people ahead of time and they don't listen and you're later proven correct, and that cycle keeps on happening over and over again?

Its called a Cassandra prediction...
After the sooth sayer of Troy who for saw the destruction of Troy by the actions of Paris and Helen.She proclaimed it on the streets of Troy and was ignored before Paris headed off to Sparta for a bit on the side with Helen.:P

But now in this case we are going over the history of what happened,more importantly is will we learn from history or be destined to repeat it??

OTOH ,Dont know if we realise it,but pistols have been back here with us for ten years this year in some shape or form,and despite all the bickering and fighting,I think that is an achivement in itself?:)

Sparks

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Its called a Cassandra prediction

Yup.

But now in this case we are going over the history of what happened,more importantly is will we learn from history or be destined to repeat it?

Well, this isn't the first time we've gone round the same loop and had the same argument, so my inner cynic has left a note to say it'll be the latter, and has gone to the pub to get pissed.

OTOH ,Dont know if we realise it,but pistols have been back here with us for ten years this year in some shape or form,and despite all the bickering and fighting,I think that is an achivement in itself?:)

Gosh no, I'd never have said that, ever, because we either get everything all at once, gilded, wrapped in a bow and with a personally signed (in blood, naturally) apology from the Minister for everything that's ever happened, ever) -- or it's a total and utter failure that means we must immediately fire everyone from everywhere, tear everything up and start over from scratch so we can do it right.




It may be possible my inner cynic got back from the pub early carrying a half-finished flask of laboratory-grade pure ethanol, a donor kebab and a traffic cone. But in fairness, it's hard to blame him.

Grizzly 45

And that post Ladies& Gents is Sparks early enterance for the "most humourus cynical post on boards.ie/shooting for 2014" competition.:D:pac:
:D
Just goes to show that to be a gun owner in Ireland you need a WONDERFUL sense of humour!

pedroeibar1

Sparks wrote: »

Yup. ....It may be possible my inner cynic got back from the pub early carrying a half-finished flask of laboratory-grade pure ethanol, a donor kebab and a traffic cone. .....

Jeez, Sparks you have some patience. I read the first page and the last and it seems little happened in between, apart from your inner cynic going out to the pub for a quickl one. He would be dead if he drank a half flask of ethanol and thus unable to Turkishly rotate (döner) like a dervish around the traffic cone, even if he was a donor recipient.

Sparks

I think that was why he selected it pedro, all the patience I used to have has been (mostly) used up I'm afraid

BattleCorp

Has anyone got concrete information regarding proposed changes to the licencing laws.

I was reading that a guy from a shooting range was told today in 2 different Garda stations that the Gardai don't want to issue any new .22lr pistols as they are trying for an all out ban on all .22lr semi auto pistols.

Apparently the thinking behind it is that a pistol owner could change an unrestricted pistol into a restricted pistol simply by changing the magazine to a full capacity magazine. Sounds like a stupid reason to me as we don't go around breaking the law.

And by going by that logic, an unrestricted rifle owner could do the same if they put in a high capacity magazine. Are they planning on banning them too?

Has anybody got any more concrete info?

Sparks

BattleCorp wrote: »

Has anyone got concrete information regarding proposed changes to the licencing laws.

Short answer, yes - the Minister and probably three or four guys in the DoJ. Outside of that, no, but many are saying they do. They are... mistakenly confident

Also, that doesn't just apply to us, but to the vast majority of those in the AGS as well.

rowa

BattleCorp wrote: »

I was reading that a guy from a shooting range was told today in 2 different Garda stations that the Gardai don't want to issue any new .22lr pistols as they are trying for an all out ban on all .22lr semi auto pistols.

So you cannot have a semi-auto, but an uncompetitive revolver is ok ?

BattleCorp

rowa wrote: »

So you cannot have a semi-auto, but an uncompetitive revolver is ok ?

It's pure daft, that's what it is.

And if semi auto pistols are banned because you can change them from unrestricted to restricted by changing the magazines, then they'll ban revolvers in case somebody removes the plug blocking one of the chambers in a revolver thus making it restricted.

There's no logic to it at all.

And what would they do with all the semi auto pistols and rifles that are out there now? Grandfather them?

Whether there is truth or not in the rumours, I'm going to annoy the sh1te out of my local TD to try and see what's happening, or at least let him know that, as a voter, I'm not happy with the way FG are potentially going about things.

Witcher

Not too worried about it tbh. That particular range operator is doing more harm than good spreading rumours like that when nothing is know atm.

If you took what every Garda said about firearms at face value you'd be all over the place. We see it all the time here..people being told X is illegal and Y can only be used on a range. All bs.

The Gardai knew 10 round mags could be used illegally in a pistol before they allowed them, same with people taking the plug out of a shotgun. This is nothing new, they didn't just realise this and suddenly decide to clamp down on it. They give the licence for a .22 pistol or s/a or pump action provided they're plugged..it's no skin off their nose if you break the rules of those licences..you'll be the one doing time if you're caught.

BattleCorp

Blay wrote: »

Not too worried about it tbh. That particular range operator is doing more harm than good spreading rumours like that when nothing is know atm.

If you took what every Garda said about firearms at face value you'd be all over the place. We see it all the time here..people being told X is illegal and Y can only be used on a range. All bs.

The Gardai knew 10 round mags could be used illegally in a pistol before they allowed them, same with people taking the plug out of a shotgun. This is nothing new, they didn't just realise this and suddenly decide to clamp down on it. They give the licence for a .22 pistol or s/a or pump action provided they're plugged..it's no skin off their nose if you break the rules of those licences..you'll be the one doing time if you're caught.

Hopefully they are all rumours so, with no fact behind them.

Sparks

BattleCorp wrote: »

Hopefully they are all rumours so, with no fact behind them.

Hopefully so, because if they're not, we're screwed. We wouldn't have any way to stave them off.

Grizzly 45

BattleCorp wrote: »

Apparently the thinking behind it is that a pistol owner could change an unrestricted pistol into a restricted pistol simply by changing the magazine to a full capacity magazine. Sounds like a stupid reason to me as we don't go around breaking the law.

And if your intent was to "break the law " so to speak..Whats to stop you having a whole bunch of legal five round mags on your person and achive the same effect???
Stupid is as stupid does...:rolleyes:

Sparks

Yeah, I wouldn't think that was the actual thinking.
"180-odd cases in the high court, saying all manner of ****e about us in the press, eh?", that might be closer to the thinking.
Mind you, that's assuming the rumours are true, and that's not always a smart assumption to make.