Statement from NASRPC

rowa

BillyBoy13 wrote: »

I noticed something interesting in that article. It says there is an ongoing criminal investigation into the tampering with FAC1 forms? I thought that we made a deal, the AGS would licence the pistols and we accept there was no wrong doing on their part..?

No that was separate to the deal, as it was potentially a criminal offence.

Sparks

BillyBoy13 wrote: »

I noticed something interesting in that article. It says there is an ongoing criminal investigation

Whoa there, you just added the word "criminal" and that's not a small trivial typo, it utterly changes the meaning and tone of that statement...

Grizzly 45

[

QUOTE=Sparks;88832278]Yes, he can. "I'm the minister, I say you'll do this." Done.
We're not talking about Minister-to-Minister can-kicking here, we're talking about a Minister kicking a problem down the chain, where inevitably it keeps going till it lands on some poor schmuck late on a tuesday evening when he gets a job but no resources or authority and it's either muddle on and mangle it, or quit and hope the savings cover the mortgage and bills until he finds a new job.

The expression "the buck stops here" is obviously not well known in Irish political circles.Eventually bad decisions do come back and bite one in the ass.

And the moment he hands it off to the Army, the Minister says "that would be an operational matter" and as far as he's concerned, job done, and now it's not his problem anymore.

Yup.
Mind you, we've all known that for years. So does it help to complain about it?

Naw just accept the status quo,bend over spread them and hope there isnt too much sand in the KY lube..Seems we prefer that...:rolleyes:

*

hahahahahaha*

Yeah, that'd be a start. The lads who burned down the only avenue we had into the PTB and the lads who did an end run around that avenue to hand in the most draconian pistol ban I've ever heard of as a suggestion to the PTB, have now teamed up to save us all from a proposed pistol ban that nobody has seen or heard of yet outside of the hallowed few who don't pass these things on to the rest of us.

So do you think this is somones ulterior motive to come out looking like the hero of the hour in this??By either saving us all from a total gun ban or saying it was all a tea cup tempest?? TBH it reads like a total AGS fantasy wet dream list and they have been always known for trying to get the 1972 days back for the last decade or so.

It's a start allright, though where that start leads to, I don't think you're going to like very much

True,but then again they were on the FCP and would be part of it were it reformed so d'ya now want to selectively pick who of those organisations is goig to sit on the comittee??


Nope, I don't bother jumping, I just keep in mind that sometimes two things can be true and yet quite far apart on the spectrum.

Gosh, where have I heard that before...

You illustrate my point

Sure, if your case has merit and you pay enough for the legal team.
The thing is, it's very much like the lottery in that you have to pay to play.
And me, as I said, I'd rather spend the money on college funds than scratch cards.

Because other people have more money than me and SLAPP lawsuits aren't illegal in Ireland?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation
For those who dont know what a SLAPP lawsuit is..
Very shaky ground depending on what state you might be in as well.

Because if it's published here, then other people get sued too without having had any say in things and that's not right? Because if I was to go to court, I'd like to pick the battles and this isn't worth the fight?

Never said it was "right" ,I'saying you seem always to be expecting one with the morning emails every day,and that is or would be a long time before it goes to a court.I mean at this stage I and others could now be happily suing ICABS and AHS for defamation and incitement to hatred legislation,but wont or cant due to the legal aspect of not having the monies to waste on this.

xcept for a few lads down the country who lost it already and had to fork over five figure sums in the past when that was a lot more money than it is even today, and who probably don't want to play anymore.

[/QUOTE]??????????????????????????? PM me that I have no idea WTF that is referring to

Cass

I have ask, and it might seem like a small/trivial point considering what they say we are in for, but:

There are semi auto or pump action shotguns manufactured to take only 3 rounds.

My Beretta cannot hold more than 3. It is not plugged, the magazine/tube/cylinder that holds the cartridges (under the fore end stock) is only long enough to hold two cartridges then the one in the chamber. There is no plug to remove. That is the design of it from Beretta. It is explained in the user manual. Beretta supply a second rod but all it does is further restrict the two cartridge tube to one cartridge for clays or personal choice. To make it hold more, and hence restricted, i have to buy a new tube, and as it's attached to the barrel that means new barrel too. If i go that far to change my unrestricted gun to a restricted gun without the necessary license then i'm either purposely breaking the law, in which case i deserve what is coming to me, or i've gone through the trouble of applying for the necessary licenses to import and have a restricted shotgun.

BillyBoy13

Sparks wrote: »

Whoa there, you just added the word "criminal" and that's not a small trivial typo, it utterly changes the meaning and tone of that statement...

That wasnt a typo. I didnt just add it in.

Go to linked document, 2nd page, last two sentences on the first paragraph:

senior Garda officer was found to have interfered with evidence even as the cases were before the court. That matter is currently the subject of a criminal investigation by the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission (GSOC).

rowa

Cass wrote: »

I have ask, and it might seem like a small/trivial point considering what they say we are in for, but:



My Beretta cannot hold more than 3. It is not plugged, the magazine/tube/cylinder that holds the cartridges (under the fore end stock) is only long enough to hold two cartridges then the one in the chamber. There is no plug to remove. That is the design of it from Beretta. It is explained in the user manual. Beretta supply a second rod but all it does is further restrict the two cartridge tube to one cartridge for clays or personal choice. To make it hold more, and hence restricted, i have to buy a new tube, and as it's attached to the barrel that means new barrel too. If i go that far to change my unrestricted gun to a restricted gun without the necessary license then i'm either purposely breaking the law, in which case i deserve what is coming to me, or i've gone through the trouble of applying for the necessary licenses to import and have a restricted shotgun.

Isn't the beretta unusual in that it is only capable of holding 3 rounds though ? In my limited experience of pumps and semis most can hold 5 when unplugged.

Sparks

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

The expression "the buck stops here" is obviously not well known in Irish political circles

Nope, never has been.

Naw just accept the status quo,bend over spread them and hope there isnt too much sand in the KY lube..Seems we prefer that...:rolleyes:

Well, you go right ahead if you want to, but you might want to consider the other alternatives that are available, like accepting that that's how the world of Irish politics is, and work within those rules to achieve your goals...

So do you think this is somones ulterior motive to come out looking like the hero of the hour in this??By either saving us all from a total gun ban or saying it was all a tea cup tempest?? TBH it reads like a total AGS fantasy wet dream list and they have been always known for trying to get the 1972 days back for the last decade or so.

I think that I haven't seen the proposals as yet and that I don't have much reason to just accept what I'm given by those two groups because of their past actions.

True,but then again they were on the FCP and would be part of it were it reformed so d'ya now want to selectively pick who of those organisations is goig to sit on the comittee??

No, I don't; but that doesn't mean they would automatically be on the FCP either.

Mind you, they were calling themselves for an FCP 2.0 earlier on, just one run by them (which made as much sense as a chocolate kettle since it was a DoJ panel). Is all this just an attempt to create that FCP 2.0, but without the access to the Minister, AGS or DoJ that the FCP had?

Very shaky ground depending on what state you might be in as well.

I happen to be in the state of Ireland, where they're not illegal...

Never said it was "right" ,I'saying you seem always to be expecting one with the morning emails every day

Yup.
We have a lot more viewers than any print media does Grizz, by a very very large margin. And yes, these kind of things do come in fairly regularly to the boards office and yes, quite a few have come in from people in our community who wanted this place shut down and/or me personally punished for stuff posted on here. Hell, I've had lads threatening to sit outside my home with signs saying nasty things about me, because of stuff other people here have posted and which I had sod all to do with.
Just because it's not happened to you doesn't mean it's not a real concern.

at this stage I and others could now be happily suing ICABS and AHS for defamation and incitement to hatred legislation

Yup. Though I wouldn't be as strongly convinced of your chances - I doubt they've ignored all legal advice on defamation, they just write what they do in ways that are within the law (while still being offensive claptrap).

Sparks

BillyBoy13 wrote: »

That wasnt a typo. I didnt just add it in.

Sorry Billy, my bad.

Cass

rowa wrote: »

Isn't the beretta unusual in that it is only capable of holding 3 rounds though ? In my limited experience of pumps and semis most can hold 5 when unplugged.

I know some can, but the statement that all semi-automatics will be banned as none are manufactured to hold only three is wrong.

As Beretta own Benelli, etc. i wonder are other makes/models the same?

fiacha

I've been trying to sell my mint Beretta Urika 391 for months, and now this. I'll never sell the thing now .

You'd think the Gov would have better things to be spending money on than this mess. Hopefully it won't read so bad when we see the official proposal.

cookimonster

Cass wrote: »

I know some can, but the statement that all semi-automatics will be banned as none are manufactured to hold only three is wrong.

As Beretta own Benelli, etc. i wonder are other makes/models the same?

Exactly, I've seen pumps here with machined crimps on the tube restricting them to a max of 2 in the tube.

Only just read my emails, FU#K, FU#K, FU#K, FU#K, FU#K, FU#K, FU#K, ................. I've two potential losses my semi and my pump............ Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh............ made it through 2013 with out any bad luck and now this...... Just have to wait it out.....

(enough venting, as soon as this wind dies down I'm off stalking)

Cass

They are only speculated. Don't sell just yet.

Grizzly 45

On another minute point.The UK had this situation post Hungerford and all they did was tell shooters if you didnt want a Sect 1 firearm either sell it or get the mag CRIMPED and certified by a gunsmith to hold three rounds...Back onto shotgun cert..
Now WHY would this be a major problem to do here if we did.???

rowa

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

On another minute point.The UK had this situation post Hungerford and all they did was tell shooters if you didnt want a Sect 1 firearm either sell it or get the mag CRIMPED and certified by a gunsmith to hold three rounds...Back onto shotgun cert..
Now WHY would this be a major problem to do here if we did.???

"I don't like the sound o dat, there would be lads in sheds all over the country uncrimping them"

Grizzly 45

rowa wrote: »

"I don't like the sound o dat, there would be lads in sheds all over the country uncrimping them"

So everyone just happens to have a hydraulic tube expanderr in a correct size and know how to use it then??Reckon a lot of bollixed semi autos more like.:rolleyes:

rowa

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

So everyone just happens to have a hydraulic tube expanderr in a correct size and know how to use it then??Reckon a lot of bollixed semi autos more like.:rolleyes:

You know thats the line that would be thrown back at you.

Grizzly 45

rowa wrote: »

You know thats the line that would be thrown back at you.

True and without one sintilla of proof either for these crazy assertations.

Kryten

why bother? Its like the 10 shot mags on semi auto pistol making them restricted. You can plug them to accept 5 rounds. Why would you want them unplugged again to take 10 and be breaking the law?

Hibrion

This is crazy. The pistols and the shottys are bad enough, but this 30 cal business is absolutely crazy! I have a 30-30 lever and a 30.06 bolt, two calibres that have probably taken more deer between them than all the others put together, how can someone justifiably say they are unsuited to hunting?

BattleCorp

Hibrion wrote: »

This is crazy. The pistols and the shottys are bad enough, but this 30 cal business is absolutely crazy! I have a 30-30 lever and a 30.06 bolt, two calibres that have probably taken more deer between them than all the others put together, how can someone justifiably say they are unsuited to hunting?

My pistol is every bit as important to me as your deer rifles are to you.

That's why people should get on to their local politicians to let them know that they would be none too happy if any changes were made to the legislation.

Hibrion

BattleCorp wrote: »

My pistol is every bit as important to me as your deer rifles are to you.

That's why people should get on to their local politicians to let them know that you would be none too happy if any changes were made to the legislation.

My pistol is important to me too, but I'll be really pissed if they try take my rifles!

rowa

Kryten wrote: »

why bother? Its like the 10 shot mags on semi auto pistol making them restricted. You can plug them to accept 5 rounds. Why would you want them unplugged again to take 10 and be breaking the law?

Thats why the ags are asking for any pistol that has a 10 round mag to be banned, in case you do unplug it. The number of pistols on the list that genuinely have factory 5 round mags are few.

Kryten

Possibly every non restricted pistol owner will abide by the law, because, for a start they are generally people of good character (you have to be to get the licence in the first place) and it's not worth the hassle. When will they get the message. We are not the bad guys. I really despair at this country.:(

yubabill1

This smacks so much of the 1972 "temporary" custody of firearms order.

Except back then we had refugees housed around the place from the North (who were treated despicably, BTW) and the country was in a state of emergency.

Email the local politicians, lads. It works.

Tackleberry.

Cass wrote: »

I know some can, but the statement that all semi-automatics will be banned as none are manufactured to hold only three is wrong.

As Beretta own Benelli, etc. i wonder are other makes/models the same?

My Benelli is the same wont take more than 3 the tube has a crimp on it from the factory, I can't even get a shell under the bolt it's designed very well ..

ace86

I find the thing on gardai proposing bans on all firearms they feel and don't like in particular pump action shotguns and semi auto's as they always been used for game hunting and clays and all pumps have a capacity to take more then 3 shots plus how many thousands of these are licenced to people across ireland and the big thing is what is the finacial cost people will have to bear, a fellow I know bought a new benelli semi auto last yr for close on to 2 grand it i'd be a fine thing if he pissed or snorted up his nose if these changes come in. One thing I have to remark on his when the gardai had pump action shotgun in their hands,outside a bank raid close to the capital in the early 90's one member shot another and after that then they were carrying the Uzi for themselves.
Also whats going to happen with French lads coming here shooting with their semi-autos will they get the cead mile failte and us the finger?

Dian Cecht

yubabill1 wrote: »

This smacks so much of the 1972 "temporary" custody of firearms order.

Except back then we had refugees housed around the place from the North (who were treated despicably, BTW) and the country was in a state of emergency.

Email the local politicians, lads. It works.

Sorry to divert thread BUT I have to add a fair amount of those "refugees" treated the Irish DF lads charged with looking after them & their accommodation as despicably !

yubabill1

Dian Cecht wrote: »

Sorry to divert thread BUT I have to add a fair amount of those "refugees" treated the Irish DF lads charged with looking after them & their accommodation as despicably !

I don't know about that, but my father was in PDF at the time and worked with the refugees in his spare time, he never spoke about them until a year or two ago and it seems he kept in contact for a long time after.

The ones near us were moved to the Wicklow mountains, miles from any shop or other facilities. Naturally, they eventually returned to the North when they realised they were getting the cold shoulder.

It's burned into my memory, as I saw them with my own eyes. Those were different times.

We live in different times now, why the need for a ban?

Dian Cecht

Can't tar 'em all with same brush, eh

There will be stuff banned I reckon.

Threatening to ban shotguns & .30 cal rifles along with what we all accept they REALLY want to ban eg fullbore pistols & semi auto fullbore rifles?

Not rocket science, Garda suggest "let us ban fullbore pistols & non Olympic ones, fullbore semi auto rifles or we'll ban all these".

Interesting to see that NRAI/Midlands are not signed up to the new united front?

yubabill1

Looks to me like the system has worked since the new legislation came in, just that AGS don't like it.

Plus they have a D4 metrosexual minister to cry to.

So lots of people got together and forge a compromise and when one party doesn't like the compromise, they drag their heels and when that doesn't work, they seek to change what was agreed unilaterally.

The words "police" and "state" come to mind.

Of course that's not fair. If they were monitoring our communications, or interfering with our freedom of association or did away with Habeas Corpus (innocent until proven guilty) then those words might be justified.

I have a sarcastic wit, I know.