Weapons Culture in Ireland

IrishTrajan

nokia69 wrote: »

we don't live in the US

only the most extreme Irish criminals have guns,

Not so, quite a lot of criminals have guns. Wasn't there estimates of 250,000+ unregistered firearms in the country?

nokia69 wrote: »

in the US every cheap dime store hood can get his hand on serious fire power

No, actually, they can't. You need to fill out forms/background checks (it's federal law, I believe), wait for the ATF to approve it, and you also need to satisfy the people selling you the weapon (they reserve the right to refuse anyone without explanation).

The problem with guns in the US, is the saturation of weapons (though gun availability has had no affect on violent crime: in the UK, they banned firearms. Firearm-related incidents dropped, but knife-crime rose to almost a parity of pre-ban firearm incidents) and the extremism of both wings.

Look at Canada, Switzerland, Czech Republic. They have laxer gun laws than us, with relatively little gun crime. Laxer gun laws != more criminals getting guns, because the criminals would be disbarred from getting said weapons because of background/security checks.

HardenendMan

IrishTrajan wrote: »

Not from getting them, you can probably find a gun in Dublin quite easily (it's probably used in a murder though) if you know where to look.

Even so, making it unnecessarily stringent for responsible gun owners (who are the only ones going to be affected by such legislation) is naive.

Sorry but I disagree. I want gun owners to have lots of red tape to cross to show that they are very serious. Pain in the bum yes, but it's for the greater good. Stops people building up a war chest just for a bit of fun.

HardenendMan

IrishTrajan wrote: »

Not so, quite a lot of criminals have guns. Wasn't there estimates of 250,000+ unregistered firearms in the country?



No, actually, they can't. You need to fill out forms/background checks (it's federal law, I believe), wait for the ATF to approve it, and you also need to satisfy the people selling you the weapon (they reserve the right to refuse anyone without explanation).

The problem with guns in the US, is the saturation of weapons (though gun availability has had no affect on violent crime: in the UK, they banned firearms. Firearm-related incidents dropped, but knife-crime rose to almost a parity of pre-ban firearm incidents) and the extremism of both wings.

Look at Canada, Switzerland, Czech Republic. They have laxer gun laws than us, with relatively little gun crime. Laxer gun laws != more criminals getting guns, because the criminals would be disbarred from getting said weapons because of background/security checks.

No no no! I only want guns to be sold legally for farmers and sport. Never lower the restrictions I say. We need guns to be non existent for average joe.

IrishTrajan

HardenendMan wrote: »

No no no! I only want guns to be sold legally for farmers and sport. Never lower the restrictions I say. We need guns to be non existent for average joe.

Why is that? Every statistic points to gun control not impacting gun crime in any meaningful way (economic circumstances, general crime rates and better indicators). The FBI have said the affect of their bans has not had any measurable affect, iirc.

Should there be restrictions? Yes. Background/security checks, psyche evaluations, and proficiency tests. Should they be kept out of the hands of the average person? I don't believe so. So long as the person displays proper skill, why not allow them to have them?

Arsemageddon

IrishTrajan wrote: »

No, actually, they can't. You need to fill out forms/background checks (it's federal law, I believe), wait for the ATF to approve it, and you also need to satisfy the people selling you the weapon (they reserve the right to refuse anyone without explanation).

I'm pretty sure hardened criminals don't fill out application forms when they're buying guns. They're kind of sneaky that way.

Look at Canada, Switzerland, Czech Republic. They have laxer gun laws than us, with relatively little gun crime. Laxer gun laws != more criminals getting guns, because the criminals would be disbarred from getting said weapons because of background/security checks.

Czech and Switzerland have both had mass shooting this year perpetrated by fellas using legally held firearms.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31608932
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32680212

nokia69

IrishTrajan wrote: »

The problem with guns in the US, is the saturation of weapons (though gun availability has had no affect on violent crime:

yes guns are ubiquitous, legal and illegal, I hope we never have the same problem, but yes gun availability has to have an affect on violet crime

IrishTrajan wrote: »

in the UK, they banned firearms. Firearm-related incidents dropped,

of course

IrishTrajan wrote: »

but knife-crime rose to almost a parity of pre-ban firearm incidents) and the extremism of both wings.
.

a different problem, but not as bad IMO

IrishTrajan

Arsemageddon wrote: »

I'm pretty sure hardened criminals don't fill out application forms when they're buying guns. They're kind of sneaky that way.

And that was not the claim. The claim was that anyone could walk into a shop and get some "serious firepower", which was not true.

By your own logic, banning firearms does not hinder criminals.

Arsemageddon wrote: »

Czech and Switzerland have both had mass shooting this year perpetrated by fellas using legally held firearms.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31608932
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32680212

Haha, I knew both of them would be brought up.

Yes, they were carried out with legal firearms, but they can be studied as statistical anomalies, not a standard rule of thumb.

The IRA used legally bought cars (well, someone legally bought them) in car bombs in Britain. But that does not mean restricting car sales would stop it or lessen the impact. They would still have used them. Thus, car bombs would be statistical anomalies when studying car-related deaths.

IrishTrajan

nokia69 wrote: »

yes guns are ubiquitous, legal and illegal, I hope we never have the same problem, but yes gun availability has to have an affect on violet crime

It doesn't. It's counter-intuitive, I know, but every statistic shows that gun bans (even from the people who instated the bans) have no noticeable affect on overall violent crime.

nokia69 wrote: »

a different problem, but not as bad IMO

Not a different problem, the same problem. Violent crime. It is hardly coincidence that knife crime rose to an almost parity with pre-ban gun crime, is it?

You can point to statistical anomalies (mass shootings) but I can also point to mass stabbings in China, that doesn't mean knife availability should be looked at.

nokia69

IrishTrajan wrote: »

Not a different problem, the same problem. Violent crime. It is hardly coincidence that knife crime rose to an almost parity with pre-ban gun crime, is it?

You can point to statistical anomalies (mass shootings) but I can also point to mass stabbings in China, that doesn't mean knife availability should be looked at.

I think its different

mass shootings are not that rare, the american right to bare arms dates back to the war of independence when a gun was a one shot, stop, and reload weapon

in the modern world its very different, the rate of fire is far higher, what Jefferson, Madison, and co called guns is very different to what we call guns

IrishTrajan

nokia69 wrote: »

I think its different

It isn't, though.

nokia69 wrote: »

mass shootings are not that rare, the american right to bare arms dates back to the war of independence when a gun was a one shot, stop, and reload weapon

And they can be safely considered statistical anomalies, as they are not the norm. Several thousand are killed every year in violent crimes, whilst only a handful are killed in mass murders. Yes, it is abhorrent, but it is relatively few in comparison to other violent crimes.

nokia69 wrote: »

in the modern world its very different, the rate of fire is far higher, what Jefferson, Madison, and co called guns is very different to what we call guns

What does this have to do with responsible gun ownership?

nokia69

IrishTrajan wrote: »

What does this have to do with responsible gun ownership?

because if someone with a flintlock goes mental the number of potential victims is far lower than a mentalist with a mini gun

guns of today are far different to guns of the past, you can't deny this

Schrodingers

To start Ireland has the most restrictive "FIREARMS" (not weapons unless used in a crime) laws within Europe

Samaris wrote: »

- be it pepper spray, knife, etc. Actually, I'm not sure of the legalities of that, so feel free to not answer that question if you don't want to!

Pepper spray is covered under the Firearms Act 1925 amended 2000 where its claseed as a Firearm that cannot be licenced as its prohibited (only guards/army/navy can have it). Carrying a knife without cause means your carrying a weapon and possibly with intent, a builder carrying a stanley knife for work purposes is ok but in a pub or nightclub will result in arrest.

Chloris wrote: »

we're thinking of getting a pair of .22 rifles so we can go shooting pigeons together. Never fired a gun before,

You will never learn all the laws but understanding of the basics will prevent you from been arrested from braking the law (the basics is alot)

swiftblade wrote: »

Shooting a .22 into trees is a no, no.

As stated on most .22lr boxes, a round can travel upto 1.3km, it all depends on angle of shot/weather conditions (altitude humidity height above sea level) plus the .22lr is most prone to ricochet than any other round, so if its not on the ground with a safe background then you dont take the shot

ProudDUB wrote: »

. Never could quite figure out why I shot so much better left handed, even though I am right handed. Weird that !

You are probably left eye dominant so shooting right handed is a disadvantage to you, gets more tricky with right handed shooters who are left eye dominant with a right hand shotgun

Strider wrote: »

If you don't also have a licence for it, then you're not even allowed hold it legally speaking. If you were both on an authorised range it's a different story but just out in a field, you shouldnt be holding it. Sometimes it's necessary, if two lads are out shooting with their own guns for example and they need to cross a fence, one might unload the gun and hand it to the other guy to hold while he crosses it and then they'll switch to let him cross, that's necessary from a safety standpoint but legally speaking, they are breaking the law unless they have licences for the other gun they're holding. That's an example of the type of laws you deal with when you get into shooting.

Another example is that the spent brass/shell from a bullet/shotgun cartridge being fired is considered a live round of ammunition and being caught with one unless you have a licence for it is illegal. So if you were walking through a field where someone had fired a gun and you found a piece of brass or a shell and you picked it up and brought it home just as a curiosity, you have broken the law.

All the above is true plus some

IrishTrajan wrote: »

Not so, quite a lot of criminals have guns. Wasn't there estimates of 250,000+ unregistered firearms in the country?


in the UK, they banned firearms. Firearm-related incidents dropped, but knife-crime rose to almost a parity of pre-ban firearm incidents) and the extremism of both wings.

I think it was 150,000 but that was from a report done within Europe without any check within Ireland but based on Illegal Guns recovered across Europe divided by the amount of people per country so it could be more or less but chances within Ireland are more

The UK only banned certain types of Firearms at a huge cost to the state (think it was
over 100million sterling)


If people within the republic had to abide to the same laws as the North then Centrefire pistols would no longer be banned here and the reloading of ammo within a persons home would also be allowed.

There are several thousand Centrefire handguns licenced up North but are banned down here as of 2009.

Those who had a centrefire pistol previous to 2009 have had to go to the high court after they were refused by the cheif superintendent in their district, too date ~700 cases have been taken against the AGS who refused to licence short arms to those entitled to apply for them where AGS have lost costing the tax payer millions

Those legal firearms shooters in the North are allowed to relaoad at home where only a select few (less than 50) are allowed to reload here in a club bunker only, whereas most EU countries reloading to prevent thief's robbing loaded ammunition

Right now the AGS are looking to restrict Firearm ownership even more and have published false figures (even the MOJ admits they are false) and claimed that stolen pistols were used in the murder of the Corbally brothers yet the pistols were not licenced but issued to members to the PSNI then stolen but yet use these as examples of handguns stolen within the Rep. of Ireland

In the 1970s the Guards asked firearms owners to hand in their firearms for 1 month due to the troubles, when these owners went to get their Firearms back they were told that their licence had expired and would no longer be issued with a licence (expect for 12guage,.22lr.22swift,.22-250), it wasnt until over 2 decades later that a court case was taken where the Guards were found to have acted illegally by not issuing licences to those who were entitled to them

From the last figure ive seen firearms licences contribute 5.6million to the economy just for a licence let alone purchase of the firearm, security,accessories,clothing,ammunition,range fees/targets for the range plus travel expenses/tax/test/insurance/fuel

Arsemageddon

IrishTrajan wrote: »

And that was not the claim. The claim was that anyone could walk into a shop and get some "serious firepower", which was not true.

That depends on what state you are in America

By your own logic, banning firearms does not hinder criminals.

Eh no, the wide availability of legal firearms means that there will be more available on the black market.

Haha, I knew both of them would be brought up.

Yes, they were carried
out with legal firearms, but they can be studied as statistical anomalies, not a standard rule of thumb.

Some crazy fvcker running around shooting people at random is a bit more than a statistical anomaly.

The Aussies withdrew all assault weapons after the Port Stanley massacre in Tasmania in the 90s. They haven't had a similar scale incident since. The Brits withdrew assault weapons and most pistols after Hungerford and Dunblane. They have had one major incident in the fifteen years since then which was perpetrated with a legally held shotgun.

The IRA used legally bought cars (well, someone legally bought them) in car bombs in Britain. But that does not mean restricting car sales would stop it or lessen the impact. They would still have used them. Thus, car bombs would be statistical anomalies when studying car-related deaths.

That's a really, really sh1t analogy. Cars have a very obvious legitimate function other than car being filled with explosives. You can't really say the say about assault rifles and pistols.

Schrodingers

As for the criminals who have guns, its because they are been brought in with the drugs either by request or a deal sweetener, the guns are easy (guns even the army dont have) but its the ammo they have trouble getting so they can hand out a gun to someone but charge rent on the ammo, any shot fired is a serious cost. Where as other countries allow reloading so if a criminal comes into your house unless you were going to the range the next day they would have to steal powder/scales/primers/dies/press/brass/heads /calipers plus several other accessories and load data with the knowledge of how to put them all together to produce a round that can actually shoot without creating pressure that takes the shooters hand off

HardenendMan

On the Aussies and banning assault rifles after the port Arthur massacre.

Like when is it ever sensible to let people by assault rifles?! The clue is in the name...assault. Only army and swat teams should have access to these. They should be controlled like military weapons.

Schrodingers

HardenendMan wrote: »

On the Aussies and banning assault rifles after the port Arthur massacre.

Like when is it ever sensible to let people by assault rifles?! The clue is in the name...assault. Only army and swat teams should have access to these. They should be controlled like military weapons.

You mean they are banning semi auto rifles.

Please define to me what an assault rifle is?

As even California the most restrictive firearms state within the US doesnt know what an assault rifle is but makes its own definition of an assault rifle

HardenendMan

Schrodingers wrote: »

You mean they are banning semi auto rifles.

Please define to me what an assault rifle is?

As even California the most restrictive firearms state within the US doesnt know what an assault rifle is but makes its own definition of an assault rifle

Of course it's open to various definitions. I would class all fully automatic rifle as assault rifles. There is never a need for 200 rounds a minute outside of maybe warfare.

Thespoofer

Fired a rifle with telescopic sight. Also fired a big old handgun a few times ( weighed a ton and powerful kick ).

Shoot a compound and recurve bow regularly.

Carry a nice size pen knife in my pocket during the week, mainly used for work and stuff.

HardenendMan

Thespoofer wrote: »

Fired a rifle with telescopic sight. Also fired a big old handgun a few times ( weighed a ton and powerful kick ).

Shoot a compound and recurve bow regularly.

Carry a nice size pen knife in my pocket during the week, mainly used for work and stuff.

What length is the pen knife blade! Think rhe max allowed is 3 inches is it?

Just a little Samba

Chloris wrote: »

I was talking to my dad about getting a gun yesterday. They moved to a house, to the country and we're thinking of getting a pair of .22 rifles so we can go shooting pigeons together. Never fired a gun before, but I shot a crossbow in Prague castle and got near the outside on the target, 80 points if that means anything.

A .22 for pigeons? WTF?

sjb25

Samaris wrote: »

I'm curious as to Boardies opinions on it.

Have you ever fired a gun?

Actually, have you ever SEEN a working gun?

Have you ever carried a weapon when walking alone - be it pepper spray, knife, etc. Actually, I'm not sure of the legalities of that, so feel free to not answer that question if you don't want to!

Would you like to be able to freely carry a weapon?

Do you have any training in weapons?

Would you be more or less comfortable with a more openly "weaponised" society, more freedom to own a gun or carry it, the police being more likely to be armed - and consequently, more criminal gun!

Yes I have and still fire various wepons several different shotguns rifles and also a hand gun
I fired a shotgun for the first time at about 14/15 I think clay pigeon shooting (a lot of my family in a club so got me into it early)

Yes got some training

No to openly weaponised community no Need to change I have a gun liecence and am happy to jump trough all the hoops you don't want a system that anybody can get a legal firearm but think more gardai should be armed more anyway tho to easy to get illegal and very highpowerd weapons for criminals

Just a little Samba

To answer the op.

I own a .22 (for rabbits, other small mammals), a .270 and .308 for deer / larger mammals and a few shotguns for various sizes for birds.

These are spread over 3 cities in 2 countries and all live in locked, hidden strong boxes in the cellars or homes of relatives and only get taken out for hunting, pest control and maintenance.

The .308 and 2 of the shotguns live in the same house as a batsh*t crazy grandparent who is known to also hunt deer and small boar with a compound bow when there's a cull on.

Samaris

Just a little Samba wrote: »

The .308 and 2 of the shotguns live in the same house as a batsh*t crazy grandparent who is known to also hunt deer and small boar with a compound bow when there's a cull on.

That is quite possibly the most awesome sentence I've heard all week.

IrishTrajan wrote: »

Why is that? Every statistic points to gun control not impacting gun crime in any meaningful way (economic circumstances, general crime rates and better indicators). The FBI have said the affect of their bans has not had any measurable affect, iirc.

I'm interested in some of the conversation going on up above there about legality/criminal gun ownership, etc. It does seem to me that we really can't compare the situation in the US to the situation here. Guns have been a part of US culture and legal in the US for a very long time. Any Federal gun laws that try to restrict gun ownership in the US is going to have to deal with problems that Ireland just doesn't have. The guns are already out in the population for a start. It is a hell of a lot harder to get guns -back- than it is to prevent them getting into the population to start with. I'm not sure we can really point to US attempts at gun control and say that it doesn't work in general, when we're comparing them to a country that has never had a high gun ownership percentage.

IrishTrajan

nokia69 wrote: »

because if someone with a flintlock goes mental the number of potential victims is far lower than a mentalist with a mini gun

guns of today are far different to guns of the past, you can't deny this

Once again, what does this have to do with responsible gun owners?


Also, your point is not necessarily true. Take the Port Arthur massacre in Australia. The man was using semi-automatic weapons but killed around 20 people in 90-120 seconds (and injured 12), a great many of them being head-shots, meaning he averaged one shot every three to four seconds. Had he had an automatic weapon, the recoil likely would've made his shooting less effective.

IrishTrajan

Arsemageddon wrote: »

That depends on what state you are in America

The ATF is a Federal Department, no?

Arsemageddon wrote: »

Eh no, the wide availability of legal firearms means that there will be more available on the black market.

And banning firearms will somehow get rid of the 280 million firearms in circulation?

Arsemageddon wrote: »

Some crazy fvcker running around shooting people at random is a bit more than a statistical anomaly.

It can be considered a statistical anomaly for purposes of discussion. Yes, it was a terrible thing to happen, but statistically, more people die in car accidents in one year than have died in all mass shootings.

Arsemageddon wrote: »

The Aussies withdrew all assault weapons after the Port Stanley massacre in Tasmania in the 90s. They haven't had a similar scale incident since.

More to do with economic circumstances than gun availability. There was a siege in 2013 that killed 3 and injured 3. There was another shooting that killed 2 and injured 5.

Arsemageddon wrote: »

The Brits withdrew assault weapons and most pistols after Hungerford and Dunblane. They have had one major incident in the fifteen years since then which was perpetrated with a legally held shotgun.

And the UK has had knife crime rise in tandem. If you think knives aren't as deadly as guns, I'd recommend reading this (25 dead, 115 injured) or the Kunming attacks (33 dead, 143 injured)

Arsemageddon wrote: »

That's a really, really sh1t analogy. Cars have a very obvious legitimate function other than car being filled with explosives. You can't really say the say about assault rifles and pistols.

Well, you can't get "assault rifles" in the US, that's an arbitrary term. People have branded weapons with synthetic stocks as "assault" rifles whilst the very same weapon with a different finish/stock is not.

Cars legitimate function also kills as many people a year as gun-related violence.

stefanovich

I've fired several handguns. I wish I could own one for self defence and for leisure. I am really considering moving to the US because I want the freedom I am denied here. I want to be able to arm myself. Have my home and be able to protect it. To be able to say whatever I like without reprimand from the government.

I'm sorry I hurt your feelings??? **** off.

IrishTrajan

Samaris wrote: »

I'm interested in some of the conversation going on up above there about legality/criminal gun ownership, etc. It does seem to me that we really can't compare the situation in the US to the situation here. Guns have been a part of US culture and legal in the US for a very long time. Any Federal gun laws that try to restrict gun ownership in the US is going to have to deal with problems that Ireland just doesn't have. The guns are already out in the population for a start. It is a hell of a lot harder to get guns -back- than it is to prevent them getting into the population to start with. I'm not sure we can really point to US attempts at gun control and say that it doesn't work in general, when we're comparing them to a country that has never had a high gun ownership percentage.

In which case I would point to Canada, the Czech Republic and Switzerland. They have much laxer gun laws than us, and both the attacks in Canada and Czech Republic were carried out by mental unstable (one of which was religiously motivated, I believe) people. In which case, discussing laws to restrict weapons are not entirely relevant, as they only pertain to those responsible gun owners.

BoJack Horseman

Here's mine.... A 30th birthday present.

I've only ever used it twice & actually wasn't that fond of the heavy barrel (wasn't using the tripod when I used it)

As said previously, by another poster, though I quite enjoy shooting when I'm stateside, I'm happy the proliferation of weapons in Ireland is very limited.

IrishTrajan

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Here's mine.... A 30th birthday present.

I've only ever used it twice & actually wasn't that fond of the heavy barrel (wasn't using the tripod when I used it)

As said previously, by another poster, though I quite enjoy shooting when I'm stateside, I'm happy the proliferation of weapons in Ireland is very limited.

It's a black synthetic stock... S-scary salt rifles.

Why do you want to kill children, Jacky M'boy?

stefanovich

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Here's mine.... A 30th birthday present.

I've only ever used it twice & actually wasn't that fond of the heavy barrel (wasn't using the tripod when I used it)

As said previously, by another poster, though I quite enjoy shooting when I'm stateside, I'm happy the proliferation of weapons in Ireland is very limited.

That's a nice looking gun. How come you only used it two times??

BoJack Horseman

IrishTrajan wrote: »

Why do you want to kill children, Jacky M'boy?

Everyone should have a hobby!

BoJack Horseman

stefanovich wrote: »

That's a nice looking gun. How come you only used it two times??

It isn't in Ireland and visits are annual at best... I was given it last year & went to a range twice to try it out.

cloud493

Yeah I've seen and fired a few pistols/rifles. The kick back was something the video games didn't prepare me for.

Irelandcool

must dangerous thing I ever carried around is a pen, which is really my only weapon. That is just for self defense the nearest thing to firing a gun for me is playing video games. Although I do wish I would be allowed to carry gun just to defend myself, so long I have gone through a background check and I am not mentally unstable I am fine.

Thespoofer

HardenendMan wrote: »

What length is the pen knife blade! Think rhe max allowed is 3 inches is it?

It's about that size. Bought it over the counter here and questioned the seller about that side of things, so should be ok.

aaakev

These are mine, haven't been out shooting in weeks but after reading this thread I'm in the mood now so the rifle is now out and will be used in the morning!

Irish Guitarist

My father used to own a rifle for shooting rabbits and pheasants. It never held any interest for me. After my father died my brother held onto the gun for a while before handing it in to the gardai as no one wanted it.

Depraved

I've fired a .22 in Ireland.
I've fired an AK47 and thrown a grenade in Thailand (a little bribe to local soldiers).
I've fired at AR15 in the US.

And at the moment I own a M1911 handgun which I keep for self defense (I live in a poor area of the Philippines with relatively high crime). The gun and ammunition is kept in a secure safe as I volunteer for a homeless children charity and so there are lots of kids around. One of the big problems with guns in countries like the US is that so many are not stored securely. Kids get their hands on them and accidentally fire them, or they get stolen in robberies.

stefanovich

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

went on a rampage twice to try it out.

My morning brain read it as the above :P

2011

Samaris wrote: »

Have you ever fired a gun?

Yes, many times. I have shot many different types of pistols, shotguns and rifles.
I am a target shooting enthusiast, I shoot most weekends.

Have you ever carried a weapon when walking alone - be it pepper spray, knife, etc. Actually, I'm not sure of the legalities of that, so feel free to not answer that question if you don't want to!

No.

Would you like to be able to freely carry a weapon?

No.

Do you have any training in weapons?

I have participated a number of firearms courses.

I have also run some basic firearms safety courses on a voluntary basis for my local target shooting club.

Would you be more or less comfortable with a more openly "weaponised" society, more freedom to own a gun or carry it, the police being more likely to be armed - and consequently, more criminal gun use.

Definitely not.

Civilian gun use seems to lead to a rapid increase in criminal arms use, and guns in Ireland are still, at the moment, relatively rare.

When it comes to sporting firearms I strongly disagree.
Ireland "enjoys" some of the most restrictive firearms laws in the world.

In Ireland civilians can only have licensed firearms for two reasons, target shooting and hunting. We are not the type of people that get involved in criminality, if there was the slightest suggestion of this our firearms would be taken form us (and rightly so).

If Ireland were to permit people to carry firearms and use them as weapons for "self defence" it would be a whole different ball game that would in my opinion lead to an escalation in gun crime and violence in general.

Compared to most EU countries such as the UK, France etc. we have very few, but there are still over 200,000 firearms licensed to civilians in the ROI.

MathDebater

Grand_Rajnah wrote: »

There's a lot of stupid rules though - I've got a shotgun and it's licenced. I've passed whatever tests the Gardai do on you to get the licence, so in their eyes, I'm ok to own a shotgun. Yet if I wanted to but a different shotgun instead after owning my one for a year or so, I'd need to apply all over again!

It makes it easier for the Gardai to monitor and keep a register of all legally held firearms in the state. Ask licensed arms holders to kindly register any of their new firearms with them and some will skip it. Make it an offence not to have a license for new firearms and people will register.

MathDebater

stefanovich wrote: »

I've fired several handguns. I wish I could own one for self defence and for leisure. I am really considering moving to the US because I want the freedom I am denied here. I want to be able to arm myself. Have my home and be able to protect it. To be able to say whatever I like without reprimand from the government.

I'm sorry I hurt your feelings??? **** off.

Move to Czech Republic or Switzerland. They have more lax gun laws than an awful lot of US states.

MarkY91

In 2 weeks i will fire a gun in vegas for the first time. I go airsoft a few times which is a kind of simulation for the real deal. I would never like to legalise guns here as thatd be ridicilous.

Lets leave the freakshow 'muricans to their guns

aaakev

MarkY91 wrote: »

In 2 weeks i will fire a gun in vegas for the first time. I go airsoft a few times which is a kind of simulation for the real deal. I would never like to legalise guns here as thatd be ridicilous.

Lets leave the freakshow 'muricans to their guns

You do realise guns are already legal in ireland? There is a few hundred thousand of them in the hands of civilians for hunting and target shooting.

Conall Cernach

How does one go about getting involved in shooting, whether hunting or target, in Ireland if you don't know any one else currently involved and live in a town without your own land to shoot on?

Witcher

Conall Cernach wrote: »

How does one go about getting involved in shooting, whether hunting or target, in Ireland if you don't know any one else currently involved and live in a town without your own land to shoot on?

Get to know some farmers or join a gun club or a range.

Conall Cernach

Strider wrote: »

Get to know some farmers or join a gun club or a range.

Would it be normal for someone to join a club if they didn't have a gun? Would it not be like joining a biker gang without a motorbike?

Witcher

Conall Cernach wrote: »

Would it be normal for someone to join a club if they didn't have a gun? Would it not be like joining a biker gang without a motorbike?

Most people that join don't have a gun, the club is how they get one.

Conall Cernach

Thanks, I'll look into it locally.

Tony Beetroot

swiftblade wrote: »

Shooting a .22 into trees is a no, no.

Who said about shooting into trees?