Statement from NASRPC

rowa

Without wanting to insult anyone, its still a case of so and so said this , so and so said that over the phone. Things can forgotten or misunderstood over the phone. Can we ask for a written statement from the ags/doj etc please ?

Sparks

rowa wrote: »

Without wanting to insult anyone, its still a case of so and so said this , so and so said that over the phone. Things can forgotten or misunderstood over the phone.

True, but listening to the voicemail again today, I didn't spot anything like that...

Can we ask for a written statement from the ags/doj etc please ?

If by we, you mean me in some way, I'm not a representative of anyone and don't ever plan to be silly enough to be one again - ten years is enough to watch get pissed away for one lifetime thanks.

If you want to ask for one, you're perfectly entitled to do so (you do not have to be on a committee or anything, you're a citizen and they're your government), the email address is Firearms_INBOX@justice.ie

Or if you want to do it by post,
Firearms Unit
Department of Justice and Equality
92-94 St Stephen's Green
Dublin 2
Ireland



edit: I would advise though, to be polite - mainly because it's a nice thing to be and only arseholes want to be nasty people...

J.R.

Buggs wrote: »

The Nargc is after posting this.

http://www.nargc.ie/spotlight-container/moves-to-ban-firearms.aspx

Also received an e-mail from them today asking all supporters to contact Minister Shatter




Dear Supporters,

We are in urgent need of your assistance. There are proposals from An Garda Siochana (The Irish Police) with our Minster for Justice to seriously restrict the possession of firearms for sporting purposes. A full brief on the issue is attached.

We would appreciate your support by emailing our Minister for Justice, Mr. Alan Shatter, T.D. at minister@justice.ie and express your deep concern that law abiding citizens could possibly be penalised in this way in favour of a discredited Government institution which has been repeatedly held by the Courts to have broken the law and ask him to please retain the status quo.

With much appreciation,

Des Crofton,
National Director, NARGC

And


Representative of the listed Irish Sports Shooting Interests

For more information please view this page on our website for more detailed information


http://www.nargc.ie/firearms.aspx

Hibrion

What is the point of them asking people to send emails when they cannot even clarify the details of what has supposedly been suggested to be banned?

Dian Cecht

Sparks wrote: »

Yes, but the DoJ have specifically stated that's not the route that would be taken, and they've seen the proposals and we haven't.

If the Minister planned to just dump all over the DoJ by signing an SI tonight, nothing anyone could do would stop it anyway - it's the nuclear option, to borrow a US phrase. Call whomever you want, you wouldn't be able to stop him, because that's a power granted his office by statute law.

That's why so many people get wary of legislative changes - because really bad stuff can, legally, happen overnight.

But (a) everyone's denying that's the case here and if it was the case, nobody would bother; and (b) we haven't seen a single proposal yet.

Look, you show me a proposal that went to the Minister saying "ban everything" and I'll be sitting in Shatter's constituency clinic the next time the doors open with my shoebox of medals and a press photographer, but until I see that, I don't see the point in panicing.

Sorry, but I'm a wee bit more cynical than you & I don't think people are as nice or as honest as you seem to believe they are, from my own experience

Sparks

Dian Cecht wrote: »

Sorry, but I'm a wee bit more cynical than you & I don't think people are as nice or as honest as you seem to believe they are, from my own experience

Well, as everyone who's ever met or listened to me can tell you, if I have any fault it's that I'm too optimistic. I always think the best of absolutely everyone. I never have any doubt that they'll bend over backwards to do the right thing and do well by me. I never, ever have a bad word to say about anyone, and I trust those who are "my enemies" every last bit as much as I trust those who are "my friends" and as a result, I never ever get screwed over by anyone and my life is full of sunshine, roses, steak and fast cars and tons of money and next week I'm taking a flight on Virgin Galactic just to watch sunrise from low earth orbit.

Dian Cecht

I think it's time to take up archery, probably be less hassle :cool:

Sparks

Tried that, it's a lot of fun, until you lose an arrow through the target, backstop, safety net and a stand of trees, into a field of cows.

Mind you, the look on everyone's face is priceless when that happens...

Tackleberry.

Sparks wrote: »

True, but listening to the voicemail again today, I didn't spot anything like that...


If by we, you mean me in some way, I'm not a representative of anyone and don't ever plan to be silly enough to be one again - ten years is enough to watch get pissed away for one lifetime thanks.

If you want to ask for one, you're perfectly entitled to do so (you do not have to be on a committee or anything, you're a citizen and they're your government), the email address is Firearms_INBOX@justice.ie

Or if you want to do it by post,
Firearms Unit
Department of Justice and Equality
92-94 St Stephen's Green
Dublin 2
Ireland



edit: I would advise though, to be polite - mainly because it's a nice thing to be and only arseholes want to be nasty people...

Hi Sparks, tis morning I sat down with my local TD, I had previously sent him the Nargc brief, we discussed the brief and also the Garda court cases and the Judge Lucy case of which he asked i send him a copy of which I have done.
He has shooting interests and has promised he will look into this a lot more but that he could confirm that there is some sort of firearms proposal on Ministers Shatters desk and this info came from his secretary. He does not know what is proposed but its there.
Now can we all pull together and start writing to our local TDs and Ministers..please, time is passing us bye..

Sparks

So your local TD's secretary knows what's on a Ministers desk (sorry, but I think that's bullshine), but not what's actually on the Ministers desk (which seems terribly convenient to me - every single Minister has dozens of reports in the air at once, so if you find out they're shining your bull later on, they can just say "whoops, sorry, out bad, wrong report, we thought you meant this one") , so we all need to write off to our local TDs and tell them we want something stopped but don't know what it is or what exactly is wrong with it and they have to go up against a sitting Minister with that (yeah, I can't see too many TDs being happy about that notion).

Tack, if you want to do that, you're your own man/woman, but I'll pass until I actually see the proposals thanks. I don't think that's too much to ask for, is it?

Witcher

There seems to be some serious confusion between the review of restricted firearms licencing which we know Shatter is undertaking this month and some mythical proposals from AGS.

This review is nothing new, it's been on the cards for months. People are hearing review and are jumping to the conclusion that bans are on the way and we're all fcuked.

Tackleberry.

Sparks wrote: »

So your local TD's secretary knows what's on a Ministers desk (sorry, but I think that's bullshine), but not what's actually on the Ministers desk (which seems terribly convenient to me - every single Minister has dozens of reports in the air at once, so if you find out they're shining your bull later on, they can just say "whoops, sorry, out bad, wrong report, we thought you meant this one") , so we all need to write off to our local TDs and tell them we want something stopped but don't know what it is or what exactly is wrong with it and they have to go up against a sitting Minister with that (yeah, I can't see too many TDs being happy about that notion).

Tack, if you want to do that, you're your own man/woman, but I'll pass until I actually see the proposals thanks. I don't think that's too much to ask for, is it?

You might never see any proposal, and wake up some morning only to see a new SI in place with all our fears come tru...the Minister has that power, what then boo hoo...
Correct I am my own man and I will continue down the road I'm on, I don't believe that asking our local TDs to ask the Minister what the truth is on a rumour that is causing a ****e loads of letters of concern in to each and every TDs mailbox across the country.
Even if this is all bull, today's meeting with my TD ain't a waste as it highlighted the Garda lack of interest in complying with the current SI.

Sparks

Tackleberry. wrote: »

You might never see any proposal, and wake up some morning only to see a new SI in place with all our fears come tru...the Minister has that power, what then boo hoo...

Yes, and if he chose to do that, there would be nothing we could do to stop that. Like I said, it's the nuclear option.
And panicing and going to the TDs now on the threat that he might do that, would be the exact opposite of keeping your powder dry (to borrow a phrase).

Correct I am my own man and I will continue down the road I'm on, I don't believe that asking our local TDs to ask the Minister what the truth is on a rumour that is causing a ****e loads of letters of concern in to each and every TDs mailbox across the country.

Nope, and that specific question's not too harmful....
...unless our reps made a mistake and 160-odd TDs all ask and find out it's nothing and now we're all branded as Chicken Little in their eyes and then when we do need to go lobby, they all dismiss us as panicy eejits to be placated and soothed and sent home without actually bothering a Minister over and potentially making life more awkward for their careers.

That's the risk, that's why it's a question of needing to choose the right time, instead of just spamming them continually.

Even if this is all bull, today's meeting with my TD ain't a waste as it highlighted the Garda lack of interest in complying with the current SI.

Tack, if you had to meet with your local TD to learn that there are elements in the AGS (eg. Ballistics and the Commissioner) who don't think private firearms ownership is a good thing, then maybe you have been asleep. In a cave. Behind a rock. On mars. For the last fifty years. Wearing earplugs. And ear defenders. And a blindfold. :pac:

Tackleberry.

Sparks wrote: »

Tack, if you had to meet with your local TD to learn that there are elements in the AGS (eg. Ballistics and the Commissioner) who don't think private firearms ownership is a good thing, then maybe you have been asleep. In a cave. Behind a rock. On mars. For the last fifty years. Wearing earplugs. And ear defenders. And a blindfold. :pac:

I think you misread the post I'm well up to speed on the goings on, I posted the full extent of this rumour here first, but to put you straight it's my TD that needed the wake up call, and Sparks if ever need anything spelled out again just ask, no need for sarcasm.

Amonisis

Hey, how about sending this to Minister Shatter:


[SIZE=-1]"The practice of sport is a human right. Every individual must have the possibility of practicing sport, without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play." –Olympic Charter[/SIZE]

Sparks

Amonisis wrote: »

Hey, how about sending this to Minister Shatter:


[SIZE=-1]"The practice of sport is a human right. Every individual must have the possibility of practicing sport, without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play." –Olympic Charter[/SIZE]

I think you'd get back the exact same thing the DoJ has been telling us for years - "Our job is not to grow your sport, that's your job. Our responsibility is to the entire public."

Well, that, or you'd get the phone number of the Minister for Sport, depending on how annoyed his secretary was feeling.

Also, funny thing - the Olympic Charter doesn't actually define human rights, so while it's nice, we couldn't base a legal case on that quote. And the press would eat us alive for trying to tie ourselves to state-sponsored gay-bashing in Russia...

Amonisis

Good points, but I don't see that stating that guote from the Olympic charter in any way aligns us with "state sponsored gay bashing" in any way shape or form!?

Grizzly 45

While a very lofty aspiration that Olympic quote..In reality is is like the Molon Labe an utter heap of old manure.:(Sport and especially the Olympics has been an utter political tool for various countries for generations now.

rowa

Apparently michael healy-rae td will be raising this issue in the dail next week, and asking shatter what is happening. The ags proposals that is , not the russian gay bashing.

Amonisis

rowa wrote: »

Apparently michael healy-rae td will be raising this issue in the dail next week, and asking shatter what is happening. The ags proposals that is , not the russian gay bashing.

Looking for his GSG back.

rowa

Amonisis wrote: »

Looking for his GSG back.

Two birds, one stone.

.270 remington

This is not good news for me as i have just re submitted my applications for re consideration by the chief super :mad::mad:

Amonisis

I have two applications in, and if the proposals (as speculated) go through, will lose two of the three guns I currently own as well. Very, very peed off. :mad:

Cass

I'm not worried. I am pissed off, but not because of some imaginary proposals, but at the scare tactics used to panic people unnecessarily. Look at what we have so far:

• A notice of proposals that the minister is considering regarding te banning of a lot of firearms.
• No specifics on details.
• A lot of "we believe", "best guess".
• Then we find out no one has seen the proposals so everything that is being "banned" is pure guess work and speculation.
• We find out that this all started 5 months ago, but only now have these groups decided to release "what they know".
• When direct word from an official DoJ representative was posted some people were still skeptical.
• When we posted how the Garda commissioner MUST, by law, submit reviews and proposals as his predecessors have done people still are dubious.
• Then the rebuttals came from the original people responsible for this situation were they said "Get the DoJ/AGS to show us these proposals, but even if they do we won't believe them because they lie/are untrustworthy". Alienating the very people they must deal with.
• Despite everything to the contrary these groups continue to urge people to e-mail/write to TDs & Ministers.
• We are then told this is counter productive as nothing has been issued and nothing confirmed.

My point is some people are so up for the fight that they have come out swinging before the bell has rung.

So as has been said numerous times by all means fight your corner, but for God's sake do it armed with good and accurate information, and at the right time.

Sparks

Amonisis wrote: »

Good points, but I don't see that stating that guote from the Olympic charter in any way aligns us with "state sponsored gay bashing" in any way shape or form!?

That Google Doodle was in direct response to complaints of homophobia from Russia in the runup to the winter olympics this year (yes, the same place whose president can't keep his shirt on when a camera's pointed his way). So if we used it, we'd look bad.

cerastes

Cass wrote: »

My point is some people are so up for the fight that they have come out swinging before the bell has rung.

So as has been said numerous times by all means fight your corner, but for God's sake do it armed with good and accurate information, and at the right time.

ok so nothing wrong with people having to get the facts right, but at least some people are prepared to stand up and have a bit of fight in them.

Some seem prepared to just roll over and say there's nothing that can be done.
I think the facts not being able to be gotten right may have something to do with the way information is disseminated, ie in a way that is piecemeal and maybe ambiguous, making suggestions on what might or might not come to pass? is that to test the response of licence holders? It seems the gardai have the upper hand as they are coming from a unified position and are in possession of the facts.

Would it not be better to have a unified front of individuals with equal say to represent all from all shooting disciplines. And take the stance that no one will be left hung out to dry to save someone else's license.

Sparks

cerastes wrote: »

ok so nothing wrong with people having to get the facts right, but at least some people are prepared to stand up and have a bit of fight in them.

Some seem prepared to just roll over and say there's nothing that can be done.

You need to stop thinking of the popular stereotype of Chamberlain (oh, could the history people give you an education if you believed that stereotype...) and starting thinking of Don Quixote. You don't win at lobbying by going off half-cocked with no idea of the facts of what you're arguing about - you just do more harm than good that way.

Would it not be better to have a unified front of individuals with equal say to represent all from all shooting disciplines. And take the stance that no one will be left hung out to dry to save someone else's license.

We had that. And the very people asking you now to storm the barricades are the ones who either burned down that unified front; or ignored it and tried to go have a private cozy chat with the powers that be to get to run everything.

We really do have very short memories, don't we?

Sparks

rowa wrote: »

Apparently michael healy-rae td will be raising this issue in the dail next week, and asking shatter what is happening.

...and we're fecked.

Anyone else remember the last time TDs started badgering the Minister for Justice about something firearms related?

I do. It was Jim Deasy -v- Dermot Aherne, and we got the Misc.Provisions Act 2009 and the de facto ban on centerfire pistols as a result. And now we have that slope-cap wearing excuse for an extra from Darby O'Gill and the Little People doing it just after he breaks the firearms acts on national tv and gets his gun confiscated?

Ah feck it lads, I give up, I need a pint. Just call me when everything's been banned... which should be ten minutes after that fecking eejit gets done with stuttering in the Dail...

Cass

It seems the call to arms continues.

More talk of "impeccable sources" yet unlike the earlier post where we name the source of our information they seem unwilling to name their source. If it so impeccable then name them. Tell us what position they hold and how they have such information.

cerastes wrote: »

ok so nothing wrong with people having to get the facts right, but at least some people are prepared to stand up and have a bit of fight in them.

Some seem prepared to just roll over and say there's nothing that can be done.

First off excuse my gruff response. It's not directed at you personally but i've heard this attitude for so long now that is sickens me.

There is a difference between fighting for what you believe in, an fighting for the sake of fighting. Secondly do you honestly believe that everyone in the country with firearms sings from the same hymn sheet? They don't. To label those that do not have the same interest or commitment to keeping their firearms as gutless, cowards, weak, useless, etc, etc. is completely unfair and totally inaccurate.

Sports target shooters, people with multiple firearms, and those with restricted firearms have more to loose. If you ask the majority of single firearm owners, farmers or those that have a single gun as a "tool" more than a hobby, recreational or sporting use will not give a rats ass about further restrictions/banning of certain firearms. Call them gutless if you like, but the simple fact is they don't concern themselves with such issues, never have, and never will.

Lastly while all this talk of a "unified front" is all well and good the other FACT is only 2% of people actually get involved in the running, promoting, and survival of their sport. Everyone else sits back, whinges and moans about what has happened or may happen.

I think the facts not being able to be gotten right may have something to do with the way information is disseminated, ie in a way that is piecemeal and maybe ambiguous, making suggestions on what might or might not come to pass? is that to test the response of licence holders?

In this scenario it's simple, and contrary to what was said in the link at the start of this post it is not the DoJ, but An Gardaí. They submit reviews, and where they see fit proposals to the minister. This is a regular and standard occurrence. Once the Minister gets them he reviews them, and then either chooses to implement them or not.

At the moment NO ONE knows what they proposals are. Only AGS and by now or the end of the month the DoJ/Minister's office. Ye for weeks we have been scared with talk of the majority of guns being banned when NO ONE was/is in a position to make such comments. If they are, which has already been established, guess work then they should have kept it to themselves (the groups mentioned) and waited for definite confirmation that these proposals are real, what they entail, and that they are actually being considered before scaring the rest of us with the hype of them. As NGBs it is they who are going to liaise with the DoJ/AGS on any ACTUAL changes. It is at this point that they should start to and keep us informed.

It seems the gardai have the upper hand as they are coming from a unified position and are in possession of the facts.

As the Commissioner is the Author of any proposals of course he'll/they'll be in a position of having the "upper hand". He knows what they are before even the DoJ, and definitiely before us.

There is no other option than a "united front" from AGS. It's the commissioner making these proposals. The rank and file, and higher ranking officers do not get a vote here. IOW it's a chain of command and not a sporting NGB/association that must rely on the votes of it's members before acting. Although that is not done by some of the NGBs either.

Would it not be better to have a unified front of individuals with equal say to represent all from all shooting disciplines. And take the stance that no one will be left hung out to dry to save someone else's license.

As Sparks said we had this. The FCP. The coalition of shooting organisations that represented us up till a few years ago. The same FCP that these groups walked away from, and now seek to set up again yet without the other major NGBs such as the NTSA, NRAI, IPC, and without other associations that were previously involved.

cerastes

Sparks wrote: »

You need to stop thinking of the popular stereotype of Chamberlain (oh, could the history people give you an education if you believed that stereotype...) and starting thinking of Don Quixote. You don't win at lobbying by going off half-cocked with no idea of the facts of what you're arguing about - you just do more harm than good that way.



We had that. And the very people asking you now to storm the barricades are the ones who either burned down that unified front; or ignored it and tried to go have a private cozy chat with the powers that be to get to run everything.

We really do have very short memories, don't we?

im not being critical, but you seem like you're jumping down my throat.
I wasnt some part of burning that previous unified front down, I admit Im hardly aware of what goes on at that level. I dont even know how long ago that occured? so my memory isnt an issue, I didnt even know about it and may not even have been involved in shooting then.
But is there any reason that cant be fixed?
If it cant be, then it looks like a the same situation that you can see at a club level, with people complaining about what others do or dont do, no matter what they do and then suprised when people dont make an effort, if thats the case then we are in a bit of a problem.

edit, I just read Cass reply after I posted mine, well
dont know what to say, Id be happy to know more about what went on at the FCP and the bodies that are not involved anymore, it seems information at the club level is guarded and there doesnt seem to be much for a person that is a member of a club to get the facts straight as to who said what and when. I may be in the wrong association and I dont know when these people were given the go ahead to lead the organisation, not even sure how they get into these positions.