MORE crap on the way.

yubabill1

I want to keep this comment I posted on the EurActive article, may want to cut and paste in the future, so I'm putting it on here;

"The EU Commission wants to restrict civilian target shooters/hunters etc. to bolt-action rifles and to ban semi-auto rifles.

Bolt-action rifles appeared around 1886, before automobiles or the electric light bulb. Semi-automatic rifles appeared shortly afterwards, but were not widely adopted by military/police as the early models were unreliable and less accurate than the bolt-action.

While the US military adopted small numbers of the heavyweight BAR automatic/semi-automatic rifle around WW1 and police began using them around the time of Bonnie and Clyde, hunters had been using the Remington Model 8 semi-auto rifle for almost 20 years before this.

With time, semi-auto rifle designs improved and many armies had significant numbers of such rifles (usually capable of both semi- and full- auto fire by selecting a switch) by WWII.

Numbers of semi-auto rifles in civilian use remained small at this time, as bolt-action rifles had superior accuracy (in fact, most military sniper rifles were bolt-action until recently), less weight and better reliability.

Recently, advances in manufacturing techniques (CNC machining, blueprinting, etc.) mean that top-end semi-auto rifles are just as accurate as bolt-action rifles and they have become light and very reliable.

Many target shooting competitors have come to realise the technical advantages of modern semi-auto rifles and they are the firearm of choice for new entrants into the sport, including female and disabled participants. As semi-auto rifles have springs and internal mechanisms which reduce the effect of recoil, and they reload themselves each time the trigger is pulled, physically-challenged participants are enabled to compete on an equal basis with their peers – many shooting ranges are now wheelchair-accessible.

But the Commission would rather we used technology from the 1880’s instead."

tac foley

Sadly, yupabill1, you've got it wrong when you wrote - 'But the Commission would rather we used technology from the 1880’s instead.'

Truth is, they really don't want us to have ANY kind of gun at all.

The burning question, the true 'elephant in the room' remains.

Just WHY are these people so afraid of their own law-abiding citizens?

tac

yubabill1

tac foley wrote: »

Sadly, yupabill1, you've got it wrong when you wrote - 'But the Commission would rather we used technology from the 1880’s instead.'

Truth is, they really don't want us to have ANY kind of gun at all.

The burning question, the true 'elephant in the room' remains.

Just WHY are these people so afraid of their own law-abiding citizens?

tac

I'm sure they would rather ban all firearms, but they can't really say that...yet.

It's a game they are playing and I'm trying to beat them at their own game - using their own language and high-held beliefs.

gunny123

tac foley wrote: »

The burning question, the true 'elephant in the room' remains.

Just WHY are these people so afraid of their own law-abiding citizens?

tac

Societal breakdown, so i am told. Someone in the uk drew up a report, saying that if things continue the way they have been, by around 2050 the whole of society will be completely broken or very near it.

When you consider whats happened since the second world war, they might have a point. The willingness of people to resort to violence, the rise of the drug culture and the gangwar that comes with it, more and more people earning less and less, and losing jobs to technology, the rich getting richer, the gap widening. The rise of nutty religions bullying for their own way etc etc.

If you have an armed public, it can only make things worse, according to the police. Personally if things ever did get that bad and it all kicked off, i would like to be armed.

onetimecypher

https://firearms-united.com/2016/12/13/letter-vicky-ford-member-parliaments/

Can anyone on twitter confirm that she is boasting about destroying some rifle disciplines??

yubabill1

onetimecypher wrote: »

https://firearms-united.com/2016/12/13/letter-vicky-ford-member-parliaments/

Can anyone on twitter confirm that she is boasting about destroying some rifle disciplines??

From your link, it seems to me that a compromise situation is being discussed, where semi auto centerfires are being reclassified as Cat A (prohibited) but with exceptions.

Apparently, this reclassification means that anyone granted an exception will not be able to travel with their firearm, as no airline or courier will handle Cat A firearms.

onetimecypher

https://twitter.com/vickyford/status/808660660896890880?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

onetimecypher

Any shooting disciplines that use a magazine fed firearm, and centrefire ammo, whether rifle or pistol, will now be moved to Category A-Prohibited Firearms/Munitions of War, which will HAVE AN EXEMPTION, IF YOU ARE PRACTICING OR PARTAKING IN INTERNATIONAL COMPETITIONS but no airlines/ferry companies will transport Category A firearms.

It does not matter if you only have 10rd mags for rifle or 20rd mags for pistol.
If your firearm has the capability to take a magazine, IT MUST BE REGISTERED IN CATEGORY A, and they will give you an exemption but you cannot travel with it, and if you don't compete you are in contravention of your authorisation and will have your firearm seized.

TOTAL SELL OUT BY VICKY FORD

Grizzly 45

Still not over by a long shot,and if you just have a ten round mag it stays CAT B.
.[This is to shut the hunters and FACE up BTW].As the majority of the "modern sporting rifles" can take after market 10 shot mags as well,which are legal or not depending on which country you are hunting in in the EU.
In fact it just shows what a god awful abortion this whole thing is.As it still doesn't address the folding stock and below 60 cms guns out there.Nor how do they square the circle on you cannot be forced to join anything under the UNCHR to be made you for benefits. IOW this also has a question for our laws,in the fact that making it a precondition that you must join a club before getting a liscense consideration is violating our UN civil rights....

onetimecypher

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Still not over by a long shot,and if you just have a ten round mag it stays CAT B.

Grizz, you are wrong,

If it can take a magazine, of 20+ in pistol, or 10+ in rifle, IT IS CLASSIFIED AS CATEGORY A (No if's,buts, or begores).

A Firearm CANNOT be classified in TWO categories, it is in one or the other.

Same story in Irish Law, up to you to classify your application, and your fault if licencing authority get it wrong

Rimfire Shooter

onetimecypher wrote: »

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Still not over by a long shot,and if you just have a ten round mag it stays CAT B.

Grizz, you are wrong,

If it can take a magazine, of 20+ in pistol, or 10+ in rifle, IT IS CLASSIFIED AS CATEGORY A (No if's,buts, or begores).

A Firearm CANNOT be classified in TWO categories, it is in one or the other.

Same story in Irish Law, up to you to classify your application, and your fault if licencing authority get it wrong

So how come a .22lr pistol with a 5 round or a mag reduced to 5 rounds is unrestricted yet if the same pistol has a mag that can hold more than 5 it is restricted? Or a 10/22 that can take a 5, 10, 15, 25 or more in separate magazines where anything over 10 makes it restricted?

yubabill1

Rimfire Shooter wrote: »

onetimecypher wrote: »

So how come a .22lr pistol with a 5 round or a mag reduced to 5 rounds is unrestricted yet if the same pistol has a mag that can hold more than 5 it is restricted? Or a 10/22 that can take a 5, 10, 15, 25 or more in separate magazines where anything over 10 makes it restricted?

That is the situation under the present Irish Firearms Act.

The EU is amending its Firearms Directive and it's then up to the Irish legislators to make our law conform to the Directive after it is adopted.

The EU Directive sets minimum rules/limits but Irish law can be more (but not less) restrictive. i.e.; Irish law could dictate that magazines can only contain 3 rounds, say.

Rimfire Shooter

yubabill1 wrote: »

Rimfire Shooter wrote: »

That is the situation under the present Irish Firearms Act.

The EU is amending its Firearms Directive and it's then up to the Irish legislators to make our law conform to the Directive after it is adopted.

Not good news for 10/22 owners so? Most 22lr pistols & rifles should be ok?

yubabill1

Rimfire Shooter wrote: »

yubabill1 wrote: »

Not good news for 10/22 owners so? Most 22lr pistols & rifles should be ok?

No, the EU is proposing 10 round limit for S/A centerfire rifles and 20 for C/F handguns only.

22LR S/A are unrestricted here up to 10 rounds mag capacity, you need a restricted licence for larger 22LR mags.

Don't think they are going to change that.

Also, while I'm here, Mairead McGuinness missed out on the EP presidency, but stands a chance of the VP role.

Antonio Tajani, a Berlusconi supporter from Forza Italia, has won the role of President of the EU Parliament. Better than Schulz for firearms holders, I hope.

Grizzly 45

onetimecypher wrote: »

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Still not over by a long shot,and if you just have a ten round mag it stays CAT B.

Grizz, you are wrong,

If it can take a magazine, of 20+ in pistol, or 10+ in rifle, IT IS CLASSIFIED AS CATEGORY A (No if's,buts, or begores).

A Firearm CANNOT be classified in TWO categories, it is in one or the other.

Same story in Irish Law, up to you to classify your application, and your fault if licencing authority get it wrong

Quoting from VF breif

Instead of using “resemblance” criteria both Parliament and Council proposed to add to Category A semi-automatic centre-fire firearms when a high-capacity loading device is fitted. Firearms have been categorised depending upon loading capacity already in the current Directive, and the new rules extend this approach. This only affects firearms which use centre-fire and not rimfire percussion ammunition.
Sop to Ireland and the UK,that have lookalikes in .22.

NB
The categorisation applies when the firearm and magazine is in combination together, and does not depend merely on whether the firearms is capable of having a higher capacity magazine inserted.
This has been made explicit in the text for adoption.
I stand by my previous statement.Going by this summation.

I guess the EU is going to learn the hard way like the US liberal gun banning satates that this is just cosmetic politics and will Do ab slo ute ly NOTHING to stop any further terrorist attacks.

Cass

tac foley wrote: »

Just WHY are these people so afraid of their own law-abiding citizens?

Gunny123 touched on it above and, to me, is spot on. They fear us.

I remember being told some time back by a person that i would consider to be "in the know" (however how true it is i don't know) that when unemployment reaches a certain level the armed forces and An Gardaí are put on a higher level of alert. Same thing with any sort of civil unrest regarding a political issue (say a enw law, water taxes, etc).

We are are better armed and better in terms of ability than the defence forces and police and that goes for all countries across the EU.

One thing i would argue is this:

gunny123 wrote: »

If you have an armed public, it can only make things worse, according to the police.

Interpol in a recent release said that if citizens were better armed and trained it would reduce terrorist attacks and lets not forget that terrorism is what all this started over. Yet like the impact statement, or any committee that was NOT set up to investigate this that fact was simply ignored because it did not sit well with the "Reichs" agenda.

yubabill1 wrote: »

From your link, it seems to me that a compromise situation is being discussed, where semi auto centerfires are being reclassified as Cat A (prohibited) but with exceptions..

The exceptions beeig if you can prove you shoot international comp, but still, as you said, cannot travel with them internationally.

The kicker of all this is Cat A are prohibited in Ireland as i'm sure they are in other states. So anything that falls into Cat A are essentially banned/prohibited.

BattleCorp

Cass wrote: »

The exceptions beeig if you can prove you shoot international comp, but still, as you said, cannot travel with them internationally.

The kicker of all this is Cat A are prohibited in Ireland as i'm sure they are in other states. So anything that falls into Cat A are essentially banned/prohibited.

Does it have to be an international competition or will national competitions suffice?

Cass

I only had a glancing read and it said international. ITs why it stood out. You can only get an exception if you shoot international, but you cannot use the cat A firearm internationally as you cannot transport a Cat A firearm.

Grizzly 45

I remember being told some time back by a person that i would consider to be "in the know" (however how true it is i don't know) that when unemployment reaches a certain level the armed forces and An Gardaí are put on a higher level of alert. Same thing with any sort of civil unrest regarding a political issue (say a enw law, water taxes, etc).

Enda let that particular cat out of the bag,with his "Army gaurding the ATMS in th 2008." While hotly denied ,in my 50 years on this earth I can remember at least THREE incidents when the Irish army was on the streets of Ireland as armed back up for AGS en mass.

We are are better armed and better in terms of ability than the defence forces and police and that goes for all countries across the EU.

Uh Huh! Did you notice in one of the proposals that is a sop to stop the Swiss from going ballistic and triggering a possible Swisexit,is the clause about reservists?
No country in the EU will be able to form a new reservist or terroritial defence force,or the like,if it hasn't been in existance for the last 50 years?? But then again Irish defence forces come under Brussels control ,along with ALL EU military forces at the end of April 2017.
We signed off on that folks in the Masstricht treaty.It was buried in the 800 pages,that our glorious leaders didnt bother to read.:rolleyes: Does explain ewhy our ships are pullung refugees out of the water in the Med and we have been sending officers to Nordic battle group exercises?
One thing i would argue is this:

Interpol in a recent release said that if citizens were better armed and trained it would reduce terrorist attacks and lets not forget that terrorism is what all this started over. Yet like the impact statement, or any committee that was NOT set up to investigate this that fact was simply ignored because it did not sit well with the "Reichs" agenda.

In fact "just look at America" would have proven that point with concealed carry,or even in the few states in the EU that allows it EG Czech republic,who have a non existant gun crime rate or mass shootings per ratio of guns owned. But the reason is simple,and without going into RTKBA domain or sounding pithy,but "Fear the govt that fears your guns." is most appropriate.

The exceptions being if you can prove you shoot international comp, but still, as you said, cannot travel with them internationally.

Ergo another mess to sort out .

The kicker of all this is Cat A are prohibited in Ireland as i'm sure they are in other states. So anything that falls into Cat A are essentially banned/prohibited.

Yet they intend to make this an exception to the EU rules.So in that case you could in theory apply for a full auto anyway.As you already own a prohibited CAT firearm in the first place.
This is the one that worries me most in an Irish context.

Grizzly 45

BattleCorp wrote: »

Does it have to be an international competition or will national competitions suffice?

Both AFAICS.

tac foley

Switzerland is neither an EU nor EEA member.

tac

Grizzly 45

But it is Shenegen...And under those terms of Shenegen CH has to comply with certain EU edicts of the free trade and goods movement,which this legislation is coming under.Thats why they are going mental about this in the shooting circles over there,and why there was a Swiss rep at the EU meeting in november,who stated quite clearly,that if the EU enforced this,they would call for a referendum on Swiss membership of Shenegen.[ And they would carry it too]
This proposed legislation even affects Iceland and Greenland too,neither are EU members either.

Cass

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Uh Huh! Did you notice in one of the proposals that is a sop to stop the Swiss from going ballistic and triggering a possible Swisexit,is the clause about reservists?

As Tac said:

tac foley wrote: »

Switzerland is neither an EU nor EEA member.

tac

Along with Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Albania, Turkey, Russia, Macedonia and Montenegro. Juncker has made more sensational statements like if any other country pulls out of the EU then they won't be a country within 20 years.

Now whether he thinks they'll fail without the EU (ask Norway and Switzerland how "badly" they've suffered) or its a veiled threat about possible future trade agreements, etc is anyone's guess.

........,along with ALL EU military forces at the end of April 2017.
We signed off on that folks in the Masstricht treaty.

Be interesting to see where Ireland's neutrality lies with that.

In fact "just look at America" would have proven that point with concealed carry,or even in the few states in the EU that allows it EG Czech republic,who have a non existant gun crime rate or mass shootings per ratio of guns owned. But the reason is simple,and without going into RTKBA domain or sounding pithy,but "Fear the govt that fears your guns." is most appropriate.

I'm not calling for everyone to be "tooled up" because frankly not everyone should have or be able to get a gun. I'm not talking about dodgy people or criminals, etc. i mean average people.

There has to be a happy medium between being completely vulnerable and everyone having a gun. If you look at the truck attack, what could someone with a firearm have done there? Not much in my opinion.

We do need armed police and in the majority of situations they are the ones to deal with such attacks, issues, problems, etc. The problem we find ourselves in now is as a result of the failure to deal appropriately with the terror groups that attack our cities and citizens and the response of the EU to further restrict sports shooters under the guise of gun control.

I've said this umpteen times and we all know it, but if they ban all guns in the morning not only will it make no difference to terrorist attacks, but most likely create a "safer" environment for those that would carry out such atrocities.

The breakdown/problem we have is the EU cannot or will not acknowledge and address that difference. That we, the people, are not the problem and the measures that started as attempts to stop terrorist attacks has very quickly and almost silently turned into a, legally held, gun grab.

Yet they intend to make this an exception to the EU rules.So in that case you could in theory apply for a full auto anyway.As you already own a prohibited CAT firearm in the first place.
This is the one that worries me most in an Irish context.

It won't affect Irish law as Irish law is already much stricter than than with an outright ban on Cat A firearms, meaning if they get moved into that category they're banned in Ireland and EU law, being lesser, will not allow us to license them.

gunny123

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

But it is Shenegen...And under those terms of Shenegen CH has to comply with certain EU edicts of the free trade and goods movement,which this legislation is coming under.Thats why they are going mental about this in the shooting circles over there,and why there was a Swiss rep at the EU meeting in november,who stated quite clearly,that if the EU enforced this,they would call for a referendum on Swiss membership of Shenegen.[ And they would carry it too]
This proposed legislation even affects Iceland and Greenland too,neither are EU members either.

Thats why brexit happened, the eussr wouldn't relent and allow the uk to take back control of its borders. If they had done so, then possibly brexit might not have happened.

Everyone says the eu isn't a united states of europe, but from where i am sitting it certainly looks like it to me. One thing is for certain, no matter what crap the eu throws out enda the eejit will nod obediently and say "yes sir, no sir, three bags full sir", just before getting his pat on the head from jean claude drunkard or merkel.

Rimfire Shooter

Cass wrote: »

We are are better armed and better in terms of ability than the defence forces and police and that goes for all countries across the EU.

Is this based on your own police & military experience? Would you please elaborate on your claims? Do you have any idea of the range of weapons (have to use that term in this instance) that police & military have access to? Reckoning that any civilian shooter used to shooting from fixed distances at stationary targets that ain't gonna be shooting back makes civilians "better in terms of ability" compared armed police or military is at best laughable & at worst dangerous thinking.

Cass

Rimfire Shooter wrote: »

Is this based on your own police & military experience?

Nope.

Would you please elaborate on your claims?

You misunderstand, it's not a claim, it's an opinion. If it were a claim i'd support with figures and facts. Neither of which i have. Hence opinion.

Do you have any idea of the range of weapons (have to use that term in this instance) that police & military have access to?

Not really. I know some of the Gardaí firearms, but not the Defence Forces.

Reckoning that any civilian shooter used to shooting from fixed distances at stationary targets that ain't gonna be shooting back makes civilians "better in terms of ability" compared armed police or military is at best laughable & at worst dangerous thinking.

Oh, you think, ah i see the problem. You have completely misunderstood my post.

With over 140,000 people with firearms and over a third of us with a good degree of experience in sports shooting at moving, static and various position shooting we have much more in terms of pure numbers and in my opinion experience.

However i am not comparing us to the Armed forces. I wouldn't insult them in such a way. I have 4 uncles and 9 cousins that are or were in the armed forces and think that they are a severely under paid and under valued part of our society.

I was referring more to An Gardaí with less than 1% of the force being armed and of that 1% even less that are part of the armed response or similarly names "tactical" teams.

However I absolutely won't get into a debate on civilian vs AGS/DF as such talk could be considered sedition and i am most definitely not talking like that. It's why i said above about it being something i was told, but cannot verify the validity of it.

Also it could break the rules of the forum so don't want to get my collar felt for bringing the thread off on a tangent that is not allowed to be discussed.

Grizzly 45

I think our own history of the last 45 years might put paid to the idea that just having might and the bigger guns and better gear on your side is an automatic win..:)

Along with Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Albania, Turkey, Russia, Macedonia and Montenegro. Juncker has made more sensational statements like if any other country pulls out of the EU then they won't be a country within 20 years.

Now whether he thinks they'll fail without the EU (ask Norway and Switzerland how "badly" they've suffered) or its a veiled threat about possible future trade agreements, etc is anyone's guess.

Junker is a drunken buffoon who would be making more of a hames of things if it wasn't for his young German hatchet man Martin Selmayr.This is like Reinhard Heydrich and Heinrich Himmler those two and I suggest having a look at an article [google] "Monster at the Berlymont",to see what kind of an autocrat is actually ruling us all.:(

'm not calling for everyone to be "tooled up" because frankly not everyone should have or be able to get a gun. I'm not talking about dodgy people or criminals, etc. i mean average people.

A given...

There has to be a happy medium between being completely vulnerable and everyone having a gun. If you look at the truck attack, what could someone with a firearm have done there? Not much in my opinion.

It would have ,happened no question,but maybe there would have been fewer fatalities and it being ended sooner by having a couple of CWP holders in the crowd. A better example where the threat of violence is very real on a day to day basis is Israel,and contray to pouplar belif Israel is a very stringent gun controlled society.But you can get a carry permit alot easier than most EU countries,and it seems that the last fatwah has died a death so to speak where the faithful were called on to stab Israelis with knives as the chance of getting to meet Allah increased 100% once the PM called on all Israelis who had concealed carry permits to do so.

We do need armed police and in the majority of situations they are the ones to deal with such attacks, issues, problems, etc.

They are indeed,however as even the police themselves will say "when seconds count we are minutes away."They are a reactive force,not proactive and until they get there ,you are on your own.

The problem we find ourselves in now is as a result of the failure to deal appropriately with the terror groups that attack our cities and citizens and the response of the EU to further restrict sports shooters under the guise of gun control.

Precisely...If the EU want to blame anyone for Charlie Hebdo.They can look at themselves.They never implimented the directive for SEVEN YEARS on deacts.S o of course shoddily deacted AKs and even in our cases here in Ireland ,a few Sterling SMGs and Ingrams made their way around the union.
Did the EU directive on moving and transporting explosives,which almost gives real time of where any explosive materials are in the EU,and cost billions to set up,stop Brussels airport being blown up with explosives made out of household products this year??

Now, they are lashing about for an easy target,IE law abiding shooters EU wide as their "Sin goat" for their incompetance and inactivity,and are trying to stick our heads on the petard to show the sheeple out there "See we are doing somthing to stop terrorism,but the evil gun lobby of the EU is putting your children in danger by not agreeing to our reasonable demands."

The breakdown/problem we have is the EU cannot or will not acknowledge and address that difference. That we, the people, are not the problem and the measures that started as attempts to stop terrorist attacks has very quickly and almost silently turned into a, legally held, gun grab.

Of course it has!
When you have people in power who think they know better than us mere mortals and are idealogicly driven by their political indoctrination to make the world a utopia of multi culti,green,socialist,communist rainbow of whatever you are having yourself gun free society," While surrounded by armed provided for by the EU tax payer,body gaurds and living in a rich enclave of Brussels or Stockholm with instant response armed security..Of course you can be anti gun if you have armed mercenaries to protect you.
We are treated like serfs and really are no better off than we were 150 years ago in Monarchial Europe.Just today our serfdom is owned to the banks by our own hands by aquiring debt. There is a very good reason the founding fathers in the US made the 2nd about arms and keeping and bearing thereof. It is the ultimate check and balance of the states power Vs the citizenery.

Colin Greenwood,the editor of the now sadly defunct Guns Review magazine wrote three excellent articles in the mid 1980s called "Dangerous Directives" where he for saw this kind of situation coming out of the EU.A combination of Leftist,Corporate,and Federalist Europe trampling on peoples rights.Written well before Hungerford and Dunblane,he didn't predict the UK having the 2nd worst gun banning legislation in the EU,but saw the EU doing everything to control all EU citizens arms.


It is horrific that what could have been sorted out nice and easily seven years ago by implimentation of a directive and some technical directives here and now has developed into one massive clusterfuk,because of some Swedish socialsit/ green bint didn't get her way in a previous gun ban attempt a couple of years back decided to use a terrorist attack to push her agenda again .
The ONE good thing out of this all is it has now started a "EU NRA" style movement with countries that have a lot more to lose in freedoms than we ever have or ever will here.It was one thing the eU also wanted to avoid like the plauge ,as they know once it gets traction it does stymie alot of their and the UNs plans of global disarmament.. This is a battle still unfinished,but the war has just started,and not to mind it is waking alot of people up onto exactly what sort of a dictatorship is in Brussels and how unaccountable it is,and how it really does affect each and every one of us .

Cass

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

It would have ,happened no question,but maybe there would have been fewer fatalities and it being ended sooner by having a couple of CWP holders in the crowd.

Thing is "would of", "Could of" and "maybe" just don't cut it.

I'm sure anyone with a CWP or in countries where home defence is legal have the best of intentions. The issue is what do you do in that moment. We can discuss this till the cows come in, but the fact is until you are in that position you don't know. I've been in spots and after it was over gone to myself "well i saw that going differently" and they were not close, not even in the same galaxy, as the atrocities those people had to face in France.

A better example where the threat of violence is very real on a day to day basis is Israel.................

With all due respect Grizz, i think that is a completely different ball of wax and frankly outside the remit of the thread and topic.

They are a reactive force,not proactive and until they get there ,you are on your own

Then again look at the sh*t the British police are getting at the moment in the papers. Armed police on the streets and the problem people have is that they are:

1. There to begin with
2. Are smiling while holding their firearms

These men and women are there to ensure security (regardless of what you think of their effectiveness) and people are upset and need a hug after seeing a smiling armed police person.

Wonder what they'll say if something happens and they're not there. Thats rhetorical by the way.

Grizzly 45

This might also explain why FACE only woke up to this gun ban around the 2nd week in Jan 2016...They have a serious leadership crisis.!!! tHIS certainly does affect us in Ireland as well,as NARGC is under the FACE umbrella as well.

Taken from a German hunting website,so the translation is a tad bit lumpy in places.

Do you know what FACE is? No, no english vocables are requested here. FACE ("Faatze") stands for "Federation of Associations for Hunting and Conservation of the European Union". In English: "The European Federation of Hunting and Conservation Associations". Members are the national hunting federations from 36 countries, including all EU Member States as well as other countries of the Council of Europe. German member is the DJV.

Since its establishment in 1977, FACE has successfully represented the hunters of Europe at the European Institutions in Brussels. Topics included the full range of hunting - the hunting of woodcock and grouse to hunting weapons and trophy hunting up to the Habitats Directive. FACE gives the European hunters a voice, it is said on the website of the association. But this voice has been heard by the politicians and the bureaucrats, who determine the destinies of hunting in Europe, less and less in recent months. For two years, the FACE has slipped through a management crisis. As a result, two-thirds of the skilled workers who were concerned with hunting policy took their hats.

EFFECTIVE LOBBYING FOR HUNTERS WOULD BE MORE IMPORTANT THAN EVER BEFORE

Effective lobbying would be more important to hunters than ever before. There have never been so many front laws on the hunt in the Europaparlament as in the past twelve months. The huntsmen work the Parliament and the Commission diligently like the honey bees. "Animal protectionists are putting themselves in my hands," says the office manager of a European deputy. "Hunters have never been present with me."

A hostile group of parliamentarians joined forces at the beginning of last year. It is called "Europe's deputies for wild animals" and makes a common cause with the worst animal rights organizations. Only with difficulty could one brought in by these members of the European Parliament ban on hunting trophies recently prevented ( we reported ). But if one application is rejected, the next one follows. Convinced of their sentiments, these parliamentarians are resistant to any facts. The argument of the experts in the European Commission that sustainable hunting tourism will help the conservation in Africa, falls on deaf ears.

THERE SEEMS TO BE A LACK OF LEADERSHIP THAT COULD GIVE GUIDANCE TO THE ASSOCIATION

If you listen to the European hunting federations, what FACE is doing right now, you can roll with your eyes, but keep yourself covered. Already a year ago, the FACE employees described the situation relentlessly in a two-page letter to the new President Dr. Michl Ebner and the Management Board and demanded the resignation of the CEO. In a few weeks, a new CEO will now address everything. Is that enough? Hardly likely. There seems to be a lack of leadership which could give guidance to the organization and turn it into an effective instrument of representation. Some European hunting associations have already thought of being present in Brussels. But fragmentation is not a solution.

Only two specialists in Brussels today are working on all aspects of European hunting. These are qualified and highly committed professionals, who do their utmost in the circumstances. However, they face a three-digit number of anti-hunting and pro-animal rights lobbyists. FACE has an annual budget of less than one million euros, a petitesse compared to the financial resources of the other side. Just 85,000 euros are paid by Germany hunters for their interests - without Bavaria, because the Bavarian Hunting Association is not a member. The International Jagdrat CIC has proposed that each fighter applied one euro for the international defense of his interests. But this has been deaf on most national associations.

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENTARIANS CONTINUE TO DRIFT IN THE DIRECTION WHICH THE HUNTSMEN CLAIM TO THEM

Meanwhile, the members of Parliament, drifting across all parties, are drifting further in the direction which the huntsmen claim to them. In a decision to poaching crisis in Africa, the European Parliament, underlined with the votes of liberals, Christian and Social Democrats a few days ago, "that the trophy hunting for large-scale decline in endangered animal species listed in Annex I and II of the CITES Convention , Has contributed ... "

This is a plain lie. There is no evidence for this statement. The opposite is true. The wording of the wording of "European Commissioners for Wild Animals" in the Parliament's Committee on the Environment, and then in the plenum, was prepared only electronically.

With just such a resolution, today's total ban on the trade in seal products was launched.

There is a different opinion about America's hunting and shooters' associations. But one thing is not: they represent their interests effectively. If the European hunters are not better placed in Brussels than before, they can no longer be helped. Then hunting in Europe will soon be reduced to the management and control of "problem-solving".

Grizzly 45

Cass wrote: »

Thing is "would of", "Could of" and "maybe" just don't cut it.

I'm sure anyone with a CWP or in countries where home defence is legal have the best of intentions. The issue is what do you do in that moment. We can discuss this till the cows come in, but the fact is until you are in that position you don't know. I've been in spots and after it was over gone to myself "well i saw that going differently" and they were not close, not even in the same galaxy, as the atrocities those people had to face in France.

One thing that can be done in those countries is,you can train to overcome "the what you do in the moment,fight ,freeze, or flight adrenaline" dump.And anyone is advised to do so who has a CWP.After all those supposedly "qualified" and authorised by law to do so must train as well to overcome these exact same emotions...They put their pants the same way you and I do every morning,only difference is training.

With all due respect Grizz, i think that is a completely different ball of wax and frankly outside the remit of the thread and topic

.
Not if you need to find solutions to the problems we are facing here of terrorism in the EU.They have seen it all since 1948.

Then again look at the sh*t the British police are getting at the moment in the papers. Armed police on the streets and the problem people have is that they are:

1. There to begin with
2. Are smiling while holding their firearms

These men and women are there to ensure security (regardless of what you think of their effectiveness) and people are upset and need a hug after seeing a smiling armed police person.

Wonder what they'll say if something happens and they're not there. Thats rhetorical by the way.

Piffile, you should have seen the hue&cry back in the 1970s when the first ARMED police men were deployed in Heathrow!!When terrorism was running rampant in Europe The World was ending,the "Dixon of Dock Green bobby" was gone,England would soon be under martial law ,etc.Nowadays,no one even gives them a second glance as they tote their[literal] semi auto HKs about the place.

I'm not surprised that the average Brit reacts to the sight of a gun like it's Satan personified,is simply ALL of the Western world has become "Pussified"and it's simply because we have become an utterly complacent and weak and decadent society since ww2.

We cant imagine, least of all in the UK and Irl ,having to fling a life's worth of possesions into a suit case and ruck sack and leaving house and home because an invading force is an hour behind you laying waste to all in front of it.[Happened to my mother when was 7 getting out of Berlin in 1945]
We haven't a clue what real hunger is,or to do without electricity for anything more than maybe a day.
So this is as outlandish to them as Martians.Go to Switzerland,and seeing 18 year old kids hefting SIG 550 assault rifles going to the range is as normal as ours toting GAA bags going to a match.It's a perspective of their "normal" that upsets them.We are pretty adaptive as a race.Once the new normal sets in.