Statement from NASRPC

civdef

A fact addressed by Shatter's office as being annoying, and less than useful at this point

Of course it's annoying. It's supposed to be. I contend that it is useful because as has been pointed out here we don't have a whole lot to negotiate with. There is little or no official good will towards the shooting community. The only bargaining chip available is the ability to cause some ructions at constituency level.

And as for my attitude towards "the past", I'd say a re-read of this thread backs up my attitude nicely. Roughly 15 pages of "he said, she said" or "I told you so". Doesn't help anyone.

As for the accuracy of what NARGC are claiming, I'd love to think they've gone off half cocked on this. I just don't think they have.

rowa

civdef wrote: »

Of course it's annoying. It's supposed to be. I contend that it is useful because as has been pointed out here we don't have a whole lot to negotiate with. There is little or no official good will towards the shooting community. The only bargaining chip available is the ability to cause some ructions at constituency level.

And as for my attitude towards "the past", I'd say a re-read of this thread backs up my attitude nicely. Roughly 15 pages of "he said, she said" or "I told you so". Doesn't help anyone.

As for the accuracy of what NARGC are claiming, I'd love to think they've gone off half cocked on this. I just don't think they have.

What do you think annoying shatter will achieve ? He probably has had enough of us with the court cases already (7 more pistol cases won last week) and then has his office bombarded with pointless letters and emails. He could turn around and bite us very quickly.

civdef

I couldn't care less about what levels of annoyance Minister Shatter is experiencing. I'd say this week (and fairly frequently in the recent past) he has more to be annoying him anyway.

What is no harm at all is that a bunch of other TD's, Senators and County Councillors are registering the issue and passing on queries.

Sparks

civdef wrote: »

I couldn't care less about what levels of annoyance Minister Shatter is experiencing.

I would care a little bit more, because the last time we saw a Minister get annoyed by being challanged by backbencher TDs over firearms, centerfire pistols wound up being restricted by the 2009 act and its SIs...

Granted, I don't care much about the man himself being annoyed, but what he can do when annoyed should concern a lot more of us than it does.

rowa

civdef wrote: »

I couldn't care less about what levels of annoyance Minister Shatter is experiencing.

I repeat the question. what do you hope to acheive by winding shatter or any minister up ?

What the whistleblower maurice mc cabe was told about shatter.


"If stuff is to get into print, broadcast media, it becomes public before the court and not any other way. If Shatter thinks it’s you, or if he thinks that it is told by the Commissioner or the gardaí, here’s this guy again trying another route to put you under pressure, he’ll go after you".

The last sentence of that paragraph is what i'd be worried about.

2011

Nearly 400 posts, almost zero credible information yet this thread just keeps on going.

At this rate we will talk ourselves into a ban rather than going out and enjoying our sport

I would think that some politicians that never gave shooting a second thought would now consider banning everything just to stop the irritating emails and letters :mad:

Unbelievable!

Cass

civdef wrote: »

Of course it's annoying. It's supposed to be. I contend that it is useful because as has been pointed out here we don't have a whole lot to negotiate with. There is little or no official good will towards the shooting community. The only bargaining chip available is the ability to cause some ructions at constituency level.

So the table thumping, in your face (that has worked so well for us so far) is the way to go? As for good will towards the shooting community you need only look at the two bodies at the core of this as to the reason why.

Bargaining chip!!!! Seriously. WE HAVE NONE. Causing "ructions" is a joke, childish, petty, and has absolutely not effect other than to piss off the ones that hold the power to ban everything.

And as for my attitude towards "the past", I'd say a re-read of this thread backs up my attitude nicely. Roughly 15 pages of "he said, she said" or "I told you so". Doesn't help anyone.

It's beyond belief that people, yourself included, are so short sighted as to ignore the mistakes of the last 4 years (not exactly distant past) and allow not only the same mistakes to happen again, by the SAME people, but actually show a confidence in them that, imo, is neither warranted or wanted (again by me anyway).

As for the accuracy of what NARGC are claiming, I'd love to think they've gone off half cocked on this. I just don't think they have.

You're missing the point. They are meant to be the group representing a lot of shooters. Coupled with the NASRPC (which i think would show a lot of cross over membership) they should have some knowledge of howw to deseminate information both accurately and without the scare tactics that seemed to have been employed and serve no other function.

It's also mind boggling that people are completely ignoring what has been said as it cannot be explained away in their defence of recent events. Such as:

• The proposals that they announced that no one else, not even the DoJ, knew about, and still don't have.
• The groups that are "cavorting" with the DoJ on non existent/unpublished proposals.
• The manner in which they "informed" the public (NARGC/NASRPC)
• The unnamed sources
• No involvement of any other NGB

It has been said above about the AGS/DoJ being more open, and transparent. Well frankly i'd like to see that from the shooting groups claiming to represent the best interests of the shooters. ALL OF THEM. Not just the ones that deem it their responsibility to "handle" these issues.

2011 wrote: »

Nearly 400 posts, almost zero credible information yet this thread just keeps on going.

Post 186. As reliable, and official as we can get.

At this rate we will talk ourselves into a ban rather than going out and enjoying our sport

A more paranoid person would think the DoJ are looking at our responses and thinking to themselves:

"you know what, they did not react too badly to X proposal so lets focus on that".

Thing is the proposals that have been announced are not from the DoJ or an Gardaí. There are no proposals from them (at least not published) so we are talking ourselves into a hole. All started by those aimed at defending us from these "proposals"".

I would think that some politicians that never gave shooting a second thought would now consider banning everything just to stop the irritating emails and letters :mad:

Unbelievable!

Pretty much.

However some believe that is just tough luck on them. I mean why would we need to keep them on side?, not piss them off, etc. Not like we could use the support. :rolleyes:

yubabill1

Ok guys, let's look at all this logically;

Many people writing to the Minister or their TD once will have a certain amount of effect and show them that some people are upset;

Many people writing to the Minister or their TD many times will tell them there is an orchestrated campaign by a bunch of cranks;

We have got to play this as grown-ups and that means lobbying and donating, not court cases and bluster.

Simple as.

Sparks

More on the WDAI facebook page (reproduced with permission):

Wild Deer Association of Ireland
Update - Clarification on the suggestion that proposals to amend firearm licensing in Ireland have been made.

Further to our statement of February 5th 2014 regarding claims that proposals on firearm licensing in Ireland had been made by An Garda Síochána to Minister for Justice, Equality and Defence Alan Shatter TD, requesting the banning of almost all currently licensed handguns and all semi-automatic shotguns, pump action shotguns, centre fire semi-automatic rifles, 30 calibre rifles.

In addition to the responses already received from An Garda Síochána and others we have now received written confirmation from Minister Alan Shatter and Marion Walsh, Executive Director of the Department of Justice & Equality stating that no proposals regarding firearm licensing have been made.

As we pointed out in our previous statement, there is an ongoing review of restricted firearms (.308 and above, pistols etc) taking place and we expect recommendations to be forthcoming from this review. There is no obligation on the Minister to progress any recommendation(s) if he does there will be a consultation process with relevant stakeholders and ample opportunity to lobby if required.

The Firearms Acts 1925 to 2009 3e states: "The Commissioner shall conduct an annual review of the operation of the Firearms Acts 1925 to 2009 and shall submit a report to the Minister specifying the number and classes of certificates and authorisations issued under the Acts" thus An Garda Síochána are regularly in contact with the Department of Justice on such matters.

Until such time as actual or any proposals are known it is a pointless and damaging exercise lobbying politicians. Statements to the contrary are unhelpful and only serve to cause confusion amongst hunters and inflict further financial hardship on firearm dealers, as we are aware of several people who have put on hold or cancelled decisions to purchase firearms as a result of the alleging statement. In the absence of any factual evidence it would appear the statement alleging proposals had been agreed is based on perception rather than fact.

If proposals are made that restrict or amend current licensed hunting or competition shooting our association will not be found wanting in our support of our fellow hunting and shooting organisations as part of our continued strong representation of our members and sport, which is widely acknowledged by the hunting community, hunting organisations and the many stakeholders we work with.

We will continue to keep you informed of any further developments.

Wild Deer Association of Ireland

Fallow01

Good to see WDAI naming some of their sources and getting it in writing, will we see NARGC/NASRPC do the same?

yubabill1

yubabill1 wrote: »

Ok guys, let's look at all this logically;

Many people writing to the Minister or their TD once will have a certain amount of effect and show them that some people are upset;

Many people writing to the Minister or their TD many times will tell them there is an orchestrated campaign by a bunch of cranks;

We have got to play this as grown-ups and that means lobbying and donating, not court cases and bluster.

Simple as.

Just to say that there is a time and a place for court cases - some people have had no other choice, I understand.

I'm talking about long-term solutions.

meathstevie

If, and remember this is all hypothetical and speculation at the moment, further restrictions are considered it's up to us and our organisations to convince the decission makers in the DOJ with fact and reasoned argument, if needs be through the medium of a few friendly TD's, instead of a deluge of standard letters and e-mails that do nothing but cause annoyance.

cookimonster

This was just sent to me as a reply to my questions on any up coming changes etc.

Quote 'Please see reply below that I have received from Minister Shatter in relation to the matter you raised with me.

Warm regards,

Terence

Terence Flanagan T.D. Dublin Bay North

QUESTION NOS: 149, 153 & 143

DÁIL QUESTIONS addressed to the Minister for Justice and Equality (Mr. Shatter) by Deputies for WRITTEN ANSWER on Wednesday, 12th February, 2014.

* 153. To ask the Minister for Justice and Equality the position regarding changes to firearms licensing legislation (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Terence Flanagan

REPLY.

My Department is currently examining key issues relating to firearms licensing in conjunction with An Garda Síochána. I expect to receive recommendations as a result of this process in due course. No decisions will be made in advance of consideration of these recommendations. However, the issue of public safety will be paramount in such consideration.

Opportunities for consultation with relevant stakeholders will be explored when work on the proposals is further advanced.' End Quote.

Well nothing new here, but I did scratch that itch, back to the waiting game.

Sparks

Just beat me to it cookimonster

Sparks

From the PQ thread:
Feb 11 2014:

Tony McLoughlin (Sligo-North Leitrim, Fine Gael)

458. To ask the Minister for Justice and Equality his plans to introduce a Bill which will consider changes in firearms licensing which may have an impact on gun clubs and their members; if he will consider receiving a broad range of submissions from the aforementioned clubs before the Bill is introduced; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6692/14]

Pat Deering (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)

464. To ask the Minister for Justice and Equality his plans to introduce legislation to ban or restrict some or all handguns which are currently licensed and are unrestricted. [6776/14]

Alan Shatter (Minister, Department of Justice, Equality and Defence; Dublin South, Fine Gael)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 458 and 464 together.

My Department is currently examining key issues relating to firearms licensing in conjunction with An Garda Síochána. I expect to receive recommendations as a result of this process in due course. No decisions will be made in advance of consideration of these recommendations. However, the issue of public safety will be paramount in such consideration.

Opportunities for consultation with relevant stakeholders will be explored when work on the proposals is further advanced.

Feb 12 2014:

Michael Healy-Rae (Kerry South, Independent)

143. To ask the Minister for Justice and Equality the position regarding legislation to limit, restrict or remove firearms licences (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7126/14]

Michael Healy-Rae (Kerry South, Independent)

149. To ask the Minister for Justice and Equality his views on correspondence (details supplied) regarding firearms legislation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6989/14]

Terence Flanagan (Dublin North East, Independent)

153. To ask the Minister for Justice and Equality the position regarding changes to firearms licensing legislation (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7049/14]

Alan Shatter (Minister, Department of Justice, Equality and Defence; Dublin South, Fine Gael)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 143, 149 and 153 together.

My Department is currently examining key issues relating to firearms licensing in conjunction with An Garda Síochána. I expect to receive recommendations as a result of this process in due course. No decisions will be made in advance of consideration of these recommendations. However, the issue of public safety will be paramount in such consideration.

Opportunities for consultation with relevant stakeholders will be explored when work on the proposals is further advanced.

cookimonster

Sparks, you could be bizzy, I'm waiting to hear back from 4 other constituency politicians on this matter, I used an open choke approach to my email queries, all parties where covered. I made this fact clear to them all in my email.

yubabill1

"My Department is currently examining key issues relating to firearms licensing in conjunction with An Garda Síochána. I expect to receive recommendations as a result of this process in due course. No decisions will be made in advance of consideration of these recommendations. However, the issue of public safety will be paramount in such consideration."

Would somebody please remind the minister and commissioner that this is not America.

Apparently, the most restrictive firearms licensing regime in the EU requires further tightening, in case people proven to be psychologically stable and of even temperament turn into sociopaths.

Sparks

Would you take a bet that the answer you'll get will be:

I propose to take Questions Nos. X, Y and Z together.

My Department is currently examining key issues relating to firearms licensing in conjunction with An Garda Síochána. I expect to receive recommendations as a result of this process in due course. No decisions will be made in advance of consideration of these recommendations. However, the issue of public safety will be paramount in such consideration.

Opportunities for consultation with relevant stakeholders will be explored when work on the proposals is further advanced.

Asking PQs on the same topic, even with different wording, has a history of just getting back the same generic answer I'm afraid.

Sparks

yubabill1 wrote: »

Would somebody please remind the minister and commissioner that this is not America.

His first response would probably be to point out that mass shootings have happened outside of the US and his second would be...




You're on a hiding to nowhere taking up that line of argument with them, because you're associating your "side" with some truly heinous crimes when you do so, even just by saying "but we're not like that". It's like that anecdote about one of Lyndon Johnson's first elections:

At a strategy session Johnson instructed his staff to spread the rumor that the opponent had a proclivity for sex with animals, pigs in particular. “My God, we can’t say that,” protested a staffer, “it couldn’t possibly be true!” “I know,” said Lyndon, “but let’s make him deny it."

And before someone focuses on the wrong detail and asks questions about rashers, I'm saying that the resemblance is that in both cases even denying a link to something is too much of a link.
Only here, we'd be introducing that link instead of having it foisted upon us.

yubabill1

One time, such a consideration of public safety would have been dismissed out of hand, because we had a very different culture to America. Full stop.

Just remember, me you, every last man Jack of us is now actively being considered in terms of a threat to public safety.

Outrageous? Ask Minister Shatter and his Garda commissioner.

rowa

Sparks wrote: »

Would you take a bet that the answer you'll get will be:



Asking PQs on the same topic, even with different wording, has a history of just getting back the same generic answer I'm afraid.

In all fairness , there is nothing in his answers we didn't already know. We knew he and the gardai have to have a review of firearms every so often, and he has to stress the public safety angle, simply because he is the minister.

Sparks

yubabill1 wrote: »

One time, such a consideration of public safety would have been dismissed out of hand, because we had a very different culture to America. Full stop.
Just remember, me you, every last man Jack of us is now actively being considered in terms of a threat to public safety.
Outrageous? Ask Minister Shatter and his Garda commissioner.

Yup. We've pretty much always known that "public safety" was this massive undefined catch-all that could scupper us if abused - and abusing it was so easy as to be trivial.

That's why some of us saw that district court judgement in December as such a kick in the fork, because it was a Judge going along with that abuse of the term.

yubabill1

Sparks wrote: »

Yup. We've pretty much always known that "public safety" was this massive undefined catch-all that could scupper us if abused - and abusing it was so easy as to be trivial.

That's why some of us saw that district court judgement in December as such a kick in the fork, because it was a Judge going along with that abuse of the term.

You're right. Sparks.

We will have to think long and hard about this: I don't have an answer just yet.

Something smart.

yubabill1

aren't the Gardaí compelled to consider public safety when issuing licences already?

brainstorming.

Sparks

yubabill1 wrote: »

aren't the Gardaí compelled to consider public safety when issuing licences already?

Since 1925, by section 4:

4.—Before granting a firearm certificate to any person under this Act the superintendent of the Gárda Síochána or the Minister (as the case may require) shall be satisfied that such person—
...
(b) can be permitted to have in his possession, use, and carry a firearm or ammunition without danger to the public safety or to the peace, and
...

It's been modified over the years but that part's never changed much. If the Super thinks you'd be a danger to public safety, he's not allowed grant you a cert, even if he wanted to.

BattleCorp

Surely statistics here in Ireland would show that legally held firearms aren't a threat to public safety.

No legally held handguns used to commit crimes etc.

Amonisis

Tackleberry. wrote: »

I just got this reply to my inquiry


Reply on firearms licensing
F
firearms INBOX
to firearms_inbox
5 minutes agoDetails

Dear Sir / Madam.

This is a general notice to inform you of recent developments in relation
to the licensing of firearms in the context of a recent communication
received from you in relation to this matter.

The current position is that the Department of Justice and Equality is
currently examining key issues relating to firearms licensing, in
conjunction with An Garda Síochána.

No proposals have yet been finalised and it is expected recommendations as
a result of this process will be made in due course. No decisions will be
made in advance of consideration of these recommendations.

Opportunities for consultation with relevant stakeholders will be explored
when work on the proposals is further advanced.

Regards,

Crime 4 Division

12 February 2014


********************************************************************************

I also got this reply today.

BillyBoy13

BattleCorp wrote: »

Surely statistics here in Ireland would show that legally held firearms aren't a threat to public safety.

To be honest its not that pretty of a picture.

Just from my own experiences over the years I know a few lads that did stupid things with guns and ended up in jail (and I dont mean because of poaching either- those lads always seem to get away with it :rolleyes: ). Even recent events like there at christmas that horse that was shot dead over some stupid family feud. We have another lad in Dundalk getting a blast of a shotgun after robbing a house, and speaking of Dundalk about 2 years ago wasnt there an up and coming GAA player shot in the throat (and killed) with a legally held shotgun because he was dating some girl and didnt know he was only a bit on the side to some other lad.

BattleCorp wrote: »

No legally held handguns used to commit crimes etc.

Again. I woudn't say a legally held handgun was never used in a crime. I know at least 3 cases from my own club/area and I'm sure there are more in other parts of the country.

Zxthinger

BattleCorp wrote: »

Surely statistics here in Ireland would show that legally held firearms aren't a threat to public safety.

No legally held handguns used to commit crimes etc.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news...-29677478.html
There ye are!!!

How valid these are is anyone's guess but that's how they were presented! Sadistic Statistics.

And people! I have and I will again excerise my freedom to contact my TD and my other elected rep's without fear of reprisals..

Sparks

Yeah, I'd call bullcrap on that indo survey, since they're claiming they have proof that people broke the law and haven't reported them for it.

As to exercising your freedoms, if I cross the road when the little green man is showing and I ignore the truck that's barrelling down on me at 100kph, well, the law says I have the right of way, but reality and law might well diverge and it would be smarter to worry about the truck than the green cross code...