Gardai proposals to ban firearms

daragh8008

Just to be clear at the start I would not be in favour of a graduated licence for pistols or other firearms. I think people should be able to directly access the sport they want to participate. Also as a clay shooter... feel free to ignore me.

Years ago when I got my first bike, there was a graduated licence system. I wanted an R1 (998cc) but I got a Honda bros (398cc). The reason behind the system was simple, motorbikes are dangerous and if you didn’t know what you were doing, there was a good chance you would be dead before the ink on the licence was dry. It appear to me that the powers at be are applying the same logic but for different reasons. Pistols (from a crime perspective, concealability etc ) are perceived to be more dangerous than some other firearms. Therefore they want to slow down the process of being able to get one by making people start with airguns first. I think the idea behind it is that someone who just wants a gun cause they think they are cool are less likely to bother if they have to spend X amount of time showing that they have a more than just a passing interest.

While this is wrong and unfair, if the process was applied consistently and equally, meaning that there was a clear and unambiguous route laid out as to how to go about entering the sports of concern, then I think that this would be a more favourable approach than a blanket ban or this nonsense of Olympic athletes only. As with what they have done with the bikes, they could also include a direct access option to people who meet certain criteria (ie age or training or whatever is hammered out in discussions)

Again, I’m not supporting this idea but just asking if it the lesser of two evils?

Tippjohn

And the other groups were? and their experience and contacts are?

Tippjohn

Graduated system. Of course there is no need to formalise such a thing. It is natural to start with small bore and work your way up as and when one wants. It seems more like a money generating thing to me for the "trainers" who will certificate.
As for driving ( as mentioned above) just applied for new licence to find it is car and trailer only without a medical. So that is 45 accident free years driving just about everything up to 3.5 tonnes gone. Wait for it, I can see a yearly eye test for shooting next.

Nekarsulm

Have the Sports Coalition enough trained Optometrists to carry out annual eye tests?
If so, they will undoubtedly push for annual eye tests.

yubabill1

daragh8008 wrote: »

Just to be clear at the start I would not be in favour of a graduated licence for pistols or other firearms. I think people should be able to directly access the sport they want to participate. Also as a clay shooter... feel free to ignore me.

Years ago when I got my first bike, there was a graduated licence system. I wanted an R1 (998cc) but I got a Honda bros (398cc). The reason behind the system was simple, motorbikes are dangerous and if you didn’t know what you were doing, there was a good chance you would be dead before the ink on the licence was dry.

You've lost the argument right there, daragh.

"Motorcycle present a disproportionate risk to public safety, with 2% of all licence holders representing 10% of all road fatalities.

Motorcycles in public use serve no purpose that cannot be fulfilled by another class of vehicle.
Motorcycles in public ownership resemble those used for military/police use and should be restricted military/police use only."

This is the kind of thing that is being thrown at shooters. It's clear to me that a complete ban on handguns/ S/A rifles of all types is being considered - that's why we all signed the petition.

If you accept the argument on public safety, then you are sunk and no graduated system can be accepted.

It's all-or-nothing and I believe we were winning until the SC BS came out.

tac foley

I know that I'm going to get my butt kicked for mentioning this again, but the system employed in the UK DOES work, and it DOES work well. First, join the target shooting club and spend the next three or six months learning the ropes, shooting the club guns starting with .22 and working up as and when you feel like it to bigger stuff - IF you want to do it.

You'll also get to shoot dozens of guns and types of guns that you may never have thought existed - see some of them on my YouTube channel - tac's guns.

THEN, when you've decided that you have a distinct hankering for one element of the sport over another, after going to Bisley a few times and shooting somebody else's target rifle or gallery carbine, or long-range BP cartridge rifle - whatever - and had the benefit of all that good advice and experience being passed on to you, only THEN put your money where your mouth is with regard to the gun or guns that you'd like.

tac

yubabill1

Tippjohn wrote: »

And the other groups were? and their experience and contacts are?

I've made it easy for you:

Post #2555, 4 May 2015

Report on the consultation meeting on the firearm licensing system review;
hosted by Frances Fitzgerald, Minister for Justice and Equality.
10am April 29th 2015

Attendees:

Minister for Justice & Equality, Frances Fitzgerald,
Ministerial Advisors: William Lavelle, Marion Mannion
An Garda Síochána, Commissioner Nóirín O’Sullivan,
Assistant Commissioners John Twomey, John O’Mahoney,
Chief Superintendent Fergus Healy
Department of Justice & Equality, Acting Secretary General Noel Waters,
Deputy Sec. Ken O’Leary,
Director Marion Walsh,
Crime 4 Brendan O’Loughlin,
Crime 4 John Guinane,
Crime 4 Alan King

Damien Hannigan, Wild Deer Association of Ireland,
Patrick Scully, Wild Deer Association of Ireland
Kealan Symes, National Target Shooting Association,
Aisling Miller (NTSA),
Joe Costello, National Rifle Association of Ireland (NRAI,
Kaz Balinski,
Mark Maguire, Harbour House Shooting Club,
Lyall Plant, Countryside Alliance Ireland,
Thomas Ryan, (IFA),
Seamus Butler, (IFA),
Des Crofton, Sports Coalition spokesperson and NARGC,
Michael Tope, National Association of Sporting Rifle & Pistol Clubs,
Gerry McCarthy, WA1500 Ireland,
Sean Gilliland, Firearms Dealer and Range Operator,
Paul Walsh, Firearms Dealer,
Victor Quirke, Bullseye target shooting

yubabill1

tac foley wrote: »

I know that I'm going to get my butt kicked for mentioning this again, but the system employed in the UK DOES work, and it DOES work well. First, join the target shooting club and spend the next three or six months learning the ropes, shooting the club guns starting with .22 and working up as and when you feel like it to bigger stuff - IF you want to do it.

You'll also get to shoot dozens of guns and types of guns that you may never have thought existed - see some of them on my YouTube channel - tac's guns.

THEN, when you've decided that you have a distinct hankering for one element of the sport over another, after going to Bisley a few times and shooting somebody else's target rifle or gallery carbine, or long-range BP cartridge rifle - whatever - and had the benefit of all that good advice and experience being passed on to you, only THEN put your money where your mouth is with regard to the gun or guns that you'd like.

tac

When I was in trinity rifle club many years ago, you could use the club guns but it wasn't compulsory.

raykeane2015

I think the less guns that are around the better. They should maybe get the guns off the criminals first, before people that are in sports clubs, they don't go around shooting people.

Grizzly 45

Where this is coming from.EU harmanisation of firearms laws based mostly on the German system.And God help us all if that mode was was to be accepted chapter and verse here.
Im in favour of a system like the UK or EU IF it is making granting of firearms a 100% done deal once i've completed any tests etc.But I cant see that being done here on a practical or political level.

Nekarsulm

Years ago when I got my first bike, there was a graduated licence system. I wanted an R1 (998cc) but I got a Honda bros (398cc). The reason behind the system was simple, motorbikes are dangerous and if you didn’t know what you were doing, there was a good chance you would be dead before the ink on the licence was dry. It appear to me that the powers at be are applying the same logic but for different reasons.

You were doing well to start with a 400cc bike.
Most of us were lucky to have a 100cc starting out.
The difference is, there was not a high ranking Garda with an irrational dislike for GSXR's or R1's or Z1's orwhatever, who could decide "I don't like the look of that" and ban you from getting one. Even though you were fulfilling all conditions for ownership

daragh8008

Nekarsulm wrote: »

You were doing well to start with a 400cc bike.
Most of us were lucky to have a 100cc starting out.
The difference is, there was not a high ranking Garda with an irrational dislike for GSXR's or R1's or Z1's orwhatever, who could decide "I don't like the look of that" and ban you from getting one. Even though you were fulfilling all conditions for ownership

The bros was 33bhp so all legal there. The insurance companies effectively banned people from high powered bikes till they had a decent no claims bonus under their belt. It took me 10 years to get the quotes down to an affordable level for a newish 800cc.

If the decision was taken away from the GS on the type of pistol (looks make brand etc assuming the caliber is 22lr ) and the certs issued by an independent authority, the murky decision making process currently practiced would need to be replaced, most likely with some sort of formalised process. You may not support it (and as I have said I don't), but if an independent authority was established, I suspect it would come as part of the package.

Cass

Tippjohn wrote: »

So, can anyone tell me who, apart from the coalition has done anything about the attack on our sport?

As pointed out above every other group since the start of this has represented their own sport. Your inability to read seems to be playing havoc with your ability to follow this thread.

Plenty of bog talk on forums and on ranges but who else has actually had the backup and organisation to engage with the government.

You mean like the FCP, SSAI or FSIA before they were ripped apart by the members of the SC?

If anyone wants to consider some of my information fantasy or lies that is up to them.

Not lies, but with your excuse of "i can't talk about it" and your refusal to prove what you're saying then it's all just your say so. IOW fantasy.

If anyone can suggest another way of opposing this anti target shooting government then tell me, I will be with them 100%.

Perhaps back in December/January there might have been, but because of the proposals by the SC all other groups are now trying to battle their proposals and do dmage limitation.

My FG TD sat in my garden in 2011 and told me that they would not touch shooting, in fact that they would make it easier. He no longer gets my support.

More fool you for believing him. No single TD can make that claim. He must follow party line, and unless he is appointed Minister for Justice he doesn't even have the ability to put it to his party. Also in the history of the state no Government has relaxed firearms laws. Ever.

Note the government commitee are not trying to restrict shooting they are trying to stop it. Nothing to do with improvements or making it safe, just back to the 70s.

You can thank the SC for that.

Just remember without the NRGGC and some helpfull lawyers we would now be gone, along with all centre fire pistols.
The past is gone it is lost, the future is up to everyone to keep up the pressure.

Without them acting as they have we'd still have the FCP, still been at the meetings before it got to this point, and would not have to be defending ourselves against not only DoJ recommendations but those put forward by "our own". As for the lawyers, well if they are doing this on their own dime then yes they deserve credit and thanks, but i doubt any of them are going to go hungry.

Cass

daragh8008 wrote: »

Years ago when I got my first bike, there was a graduated licence system. I wanted an R1 (998cc) but I got a Honda bros (398cc).

I understand what you're saying, but think of this. You're given your motorbike license but told you can only drive the bike on Mondello track. You need to have the bike brought to the track in a trailer. You muct re-apply for your driving licnese every 3 three years. You must sit 3 - 6 months of interviews, meetings, medicals, etc.

Lastly you're told you run the risk of being refused a driving license because, as said above, the RSA don't like you having a red and white bike or anything over 500cc.

Now you're in the same boat as pistol owners.

tac foley wrote: »

THEN, when you've decided that you have a distinct hankering for one element of the sport over another, after going to Bisley a few times and shooting somebody else's target rifle or gallery carbine, or long-range BP cartridge rifle - whatever - and had the benefit of all that good advice and experience being passed on to you, only THEN put your money where your mouth is with regard to the gun or guns that you'd like.

tac

Because Irish law is different to UK law it simply won't work. Its been said a good few times now but i'll go through once more. If i have a "hankering" for F-Class but can only get a .22lr then to apply for one to get on the "firearm ladder" is a fradulent application. Why? Because i have on good reason for applying for the firearm i am applying for. In some sports, as i outlined earlier, it's caliber specific so anything else simply won't do. The cost, especially in these times, is prohibitive without spending treble that amount building your way up to the necessary caliber. Also who determines when someone is "ready" to move up? When is proficiency now a legal requirement?

There is simply no way to make this work, and most definitely not across all sports. It may, as the NTSA said, be applicable to some aspects fo their sport, but for most others, and even stalking and other field pursuits it's simply not going to feasible.

As i said with ballistic testing i'm not arguing against this simply to be heard to be saying no. If such a system were introduced i'm fine due to the amount of years and number of various calibers i've owned and currently own. My concerns are for the continued and sustainability of all sports. I see such a system as a death knoll to some sports and with far reaching consequences that people have not even thought of yet (ranges, dealers, etc).

Nekarsulm wrote: »

The difference is, there was not a high ranking Garda with an irrational dislike for GSXR's or R1's or Z1's orwhatever, who could decide "I don't like the look of that" and ban you from getting one. Even though you were fulfilling all conditions for ownership

Exactly. There really is no comparison between any other system and one for firearms. IMO anyway.

garrettod

Cass wrote: »

...There really is no comparison between any other system and one for firearms.

Agreed.

I'd rather see the Minister for Justice have her office communicate with a number of other European countries, possibly also the States, Canada & Australia etc. to review their firearms legislation and then try to take the best parts from each. Obviously, this would have to be done without any bias, from parties with a strong opinion on firearms.

Grizzly 45

garrettod wrote: »

Agreed.

I'd rather see the Minister for Justice have her office communicate with a number of other European countries, possibly also the States, Canada & Australia etc. to review their firearms legislation and then try to take the best parts from each. Obviously, this would have to be done without any bias, from parties with a strong opinion on firearms.

That will happen too .The chairman specifically requested that as well and wanted information and to possibly go to other countries with the comittee(junket alert!!!)to see them in work.
Just go an hour from Dublin to Belfast or London...Works pretty good there.

MacsuibhneR

tac foley wrote: »

I know that I'm going to get my butt kicked for mentioning this again, but the system employed in the UK DOES work, and it DOES work well. First, join the target shooting club and spend the next three or six months learning the ropes, shooting the club guns starting with .22 and working up as and when you feel like it to bigger stuff - IF you want to do it.

You'll also get to shoot dozens of guns and types of guns that you may never have thought existed - see some of them on my YouTube channel - tac's guns.

THEN, when you've decided that you have a distinct hankering for one element of the sport over another, after going to Bisley a few times and shooting somebody else's target rifle or gallery carbine, or long-range BP cartridge rifle - whatever - and had the benefit of all that good advice and experience being passed on to you, only THEN put your money where your mouth is with regard to the gun or guns that you'd like.

tac

I have experience of the UK system, in NI, and it does appear to work well and most there seem happy with it. Part and Parcel of such a system would be that if you fulfil the criteria then you get your licence. I accept that, as Cass points out, this would not work in an Irish system as it currently stands but would work as part of an amended system. I note in the WDAI document (thanks to Sparks for putting this up) that it states "Commissioner O’Sullivan, agreed that the establishment of establish a national firearms control and advisory licensing authority with an associated central database also accessible by an Garda Síochána, would be preferable."
A new and independent National Firearms Control and Advisory Licensing Authority would hopefully be a good thing and bring to an end a lot of the difficulties that a lot of us face.

It also appears that the issue with regards to shotguns manufactured to hold no more than three rounds is dead and again this appears to be a good thing.

In relation to the CAI querying the amendment to section 4 I was surprised that the Minister was not even aware of this. Hopefully this is also a signal that this issue is dead.

From the WDAI document it appears that what is likely to be dealt with in the near future are pistols and S/A centrefire rifles and it will be interesting to see what the SC have to say about these in the context of the meeting.

BattleCorp

Cass wrote: »

Without them acting as they have we'd still have the FCP, still been at the meetings before it got to this point, and would not have to be defending ourselves against not only DoJ recommendations but those put forward by "our own". As for the lawyers, well if they are doing this on their own dime then yes they deserve credit and thanks, but i doubt any of them are going to go hungry.

Cass, I have an opinion regarding your view on the above paragraph.

Just to be clear, I don't have a centrefire pistol so I'm not talking from experience or anything like that. I'm talking as an observer.

I don't see what option the centrefire pistol shooters had other than to go to court at that time. They were unfairly being denied licences for their firearms and the courts found in favour of the pistol shooters in nearly all the cases.

If they didn't go to court, then they probably wouldn't be shooting them today.

Realistically, what other option had they? They could have sat around and hoped and hoped and hoped that the Gardai would apply the law properly, but who is to say that the Gardai ever would have changed and applied the law properly.

I agree with you that the FCP shouldn't have been burned, it's better to be talking than shut out.

But the court cases and the FCP being burned are slightly different things.

garrettod

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

...(junket alert!!!)

One way to distract the civil servants for a while

clawback07

Still nothing up on the sports coalition update page - Jeff must be a very busy man...😕

Grizzly 45

In fairness to him Clawback,he is, and does travel abit out of ireland with his work.So give him a chance ...

Cass

MacsuibhneR wrote: »

I accept that, as Cass points out, this would not work in an Irish system as it currently stands but would work as part of an amended system.

The issue there,and i say issue not problem, is any amendment would be to the Act which means the minister cannot simply use an SI. It would require a re-write of the Act itself which can only be done through an act of the Dail. If we're going to go that route then a restatement of all the acts and an full consultation on all firearm issues (not just the proposals) would bee needed.

It also appears that the issue with regards to shotguns manufactured to hold no more than three rounds is dead and again this appears to be a good thing.

I would love to think so, but i'm nervous that the complete lack of mention of the shotgun issue is goingg to come back and bite us on the ass. IOW as no one is talking about it, its assumed everyone is fine with the proposal. The only way to know is for it to mentioned specifically and see what the reaction is.

BattleCorp wrote: »

But the court cases and the FCP being burned are slightly different things.

There not though. They are directly linked.

The FCP consisted of interested parties, the DoJ and An Gardaí. Once the first case was brought against An Gardaí they could not longer talk to the interested parties as they were involved in the court case (possible sub judice issues, etc). So this severed any chance of resolving the matter without court action. In doing this the Gardaí saw some interested parties walk away from the FCP which they were delighted at because now it was gone and the very thing they did not want (us fairly represented at the table with an equal voice) was gone.

Now with the FCP gone the only recourse for anyone in a similar position was to go to court.

You ask what else could have been done. I don't know. I won't say court was unavoidable because i was not privy to the contents/ specifics of meetings between the SSAI and An Gardaí but with the FCP was our conduit to resolve these issues was gone. My fear is the court case was used as a stick to try and beat An Gardaí into submission and that was never going to work. I'm also not saying the people involved did not have a case or "right" to challenge it, but i'd have made sure that every avenue via the FCP was exhausted before going this route.

Lastly i would have consulted with all the shooting bodies within the SSAI before acting because it also severed their ability to continue. Without all parties the SSAI was no longer the SSAI and hence the FCP was dead.

MacsuibhneR

Countryside Alliance have sent out their report of the meeting up now. Nothing really new in it.

http://www.countrysideallianceireland.org/shooting/brief-report-on-meeting-hosted-by-frances-fitzgerald-minister-for-justice-and-equality

mod note - Please feel free to tidy up the link

Tippjohn

Well Cass you should get a job in the civil service, you have attempted to bend my words, blatently called me a liar and been as provocative as possible. I was well aware of the others, my point was that no group has attempted to represent a broader amount of field sporters than the NRGC.

Cass

Tippjohn wrote: »

Well Cass you should get a job in the civil service, you have attempted to bend my words, blatently called me a liar and been as provocative as possible.

Not bend as completely dismiss.

You have continuusly denied the SC put forward proposlas when the group itself have not only said it, but printed it on their website, then continued to argue with people (numerous people) that point out how wrong you are. This is the actions of a troll or delusional person. I doubt you're delusional so went for the other option of troll. IOW someone whose only purpose is to create trouble and disrupt the harmony/flow of the thread.

] I was well aware of the others, my point was that no group has attempted to represent a broader amount of field sporters than the NRGC.

Then why ask who else, and how do you know what the other groups have or have not done?

You have "bragged" about your prowess in the court room with absolutely no supporting information that it even happened. You claim to have the inside track, but refuse to divulge any hints of what you know or how you know it. Basically you're a five year old with a secret saying "i've secret, but i can't tell you". Here is a tip, don't mention it if you cannot speak about it.

You registered solely to post on this thread and thus far have set the progress of the discussion back and contributed nothing constructive to it in the process. You are the very essence of a troll, and i treat all trolls with the contempt they deserve.

clawback07

Tippjohn wrote: »

Well Cass you should get a job in the civil service, you have attempted to bend my words, blatently called me a liar and been as provocative as possible. I was well aware of the others, my point was that no group has attempted to represent a broader amount of field sporters than the NRGC.

As a retired civil servant I find your aspersion that to be a civil servant one should be a liar, offensive to say the least . I am shooting for the last 37 years along with many , many civil service colleagues who also have a passion for field sports and want to see a positive outcome for what we love . Once I thought nargc represented my shooting sport but then I was quite niaive . But that's my opinion which I give in all honesty .

Sparks

Tippjohn wrote: »

Well Cass you should get a job in the civil service, you have attempted to bend my words, blatently called me a liar and been as provocative as possible.

And right there, you just crossed the line from tolerable to troll.
Stop now please.

Cass

Anyone hitting this meeting tonight?

Be interested to see if their accounting is the same as the NTSA, WDAI, and CAI's. Might also be a chance to ask why they keep recommending an illegal cap on licenses, and some of their other proposals.

Tippjohn

No problem, troll is the last resort when someone has a different opinion. I appreciate that everyone is wound up by the whole firearms debacle. Shooting the messenger is not the answer.
Appologies about generalisation concerning Civil servants, I should have said Government/Police.
I will leave you all alone and continue helping others who need help representing themselves.

Sparks

Tippjohn wrote: »

I will leave you all alone and continue helping others who need help representing themselves.

Mind how you go so, and we'll see you back here in a few years after you've spoken to a few more people and gotten the larger picture explained to your satisfaction.