What do you all think of this?

Grizzly 45

The National security/Black OPS tickle only works so far.FI the Para course Jimbo claimed to have done,one lad researched it and found even the leader of the team on the Iranian embassy balcony and even Andy Mc Nabb's[author] jump card.He found also five Shorts who have got their wings,none of them are Jimbo.

There is no reason to keep all that secret on anyone's service record. It's like their rifle marksmanship scores[Which no doubt some would like theirs locked down as secret.:)] End of all this is simply he overstepped his mark with BS and Waltism in an organisation which will have records, knowledge and experience to tear him apart and promptly did so. Fatal mistake. Never belittle the people you are pretending to belong to and are making money off.

The lad Gunny is referring to is also a bit of a Walt himself too.So it's ironic that a Walt was taken by the Uber Walt. But I will give Jimbo this.He could spin a tale that must have taken in the best of them. I know one US PI with more street smarts and BG time under his belt than I ever had or will have, and he was duped by Jimbo too.

Walter Mittys Brother

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Yes.I am VERY for real. if people stopped looking at a problem locally and actually looked EU wide once in awhile, they might find a country that
[1] Knows its arse from its elbow in firearms matters and law
[2]Outlaws "combat training" and has done for decades,but has a burgeoning IPSC community.
[
3] Has the EXACT SAME prohibitions as we do on moving with a loaded firearm[ii] Shooting off ground
[iii] Shooting partially exposed targets
[
iv]Movement must be at walking pace with unloaded firearms

[v] Has one of the best counter-terrorist units in the World and are more than happy to send one of their experts over to testify on the total fallacy of IPSC being anyway suited to "combat training" as much as a Fiat Bambino is to formula 1 racing.

[vi] AGS has accepted their opinion from their Federal technical labs on whether semi-auto sporting rifles are actually such and not war weapons,or easily convertible to select fire. Their weapons or ballistic experts hold titles such as Doctor or Professor, not Seargent or Inspector [of weekend-long course qualifications.:rolleyes:]

A place called Germany.Might have heard of it?

Of course,if no one wants to even make an enquiry on this possibility,of even a review and sit and bemoan the fates,or are just quite happy shooting in "Norn Iron"...Well then we WILL eventually die out here with CF pistols. even get it going with .22 stuff.Or sit and be intimidated by "the law" for another 35 years. [Won't bother me I'll be 96 by then.]

OMG ! You ARE serious :eek:

Cadpat_cowboy

gunny123 wrote: »

Because they believe the hype. They think all the far fetched tales are true, all the knockers have it wrong, and jimbo cannot go public because of "security". I knew one of them, everything was black-op's ultra ninja mode, He'd like to tell you more but "national security" would be endangered.

He was the same wally who caused a major panic in a small wicklow town, when he decided to pop into a shop one sunday morning on the way to the range, in full tacticool gear and a glock strapped to his hip. The shop assistant had a conniption and rang the gardai.

Arv's etc out in force, disaster.

In fairness the shop assistant may have not know pistols are legal.

solarwinds

Legal or not you dont go brandishing it about like dirty harry.
I for one would not like the level of attention an act like that would bring.

solarwinds

Is it movement with firearms,or movement with LOADED firearms law? 


Just wondering about this.
Did they actually bring in a law against the moving about with a loaded firearm and if so is it specific to handguns ?
If not does that mean every hunter out there is breaking the law ?

Walter Mittys Brother

solarwinds wrote: »

Just wondering about this.
Did they actually bring in a law against the moving about with a loaded firearm and if so is it specific to handguns ?
If not does that mean every hunter out there is breaking the law ?

Have a look on utube for videos on practical shooting & then relate that to a hunter out hunting.....................

Walter Mittys Brother

Cadpat_cowboy wrote: »

In fairness the shop assistant may have not know pistols are legal.

Using a wee bit of common sense .............. most of us try to hide the fact we've got/are transporting firearms and this is the way some people carry on :rolleyes:

solarwinds

Have a look on utube for videos on practical shooting & then relate that to a hunter out hunting.....................



I know the difference between the two but if there is such a law then does the law distinguish between them or is it the usual catch all we have in this country.
And as we all know common sense does not prevail here.

Walter Mittys Brother

**where's my tin foil hat?**

Seriously? Come on :eek:

gunny123

I don't understand the problem you have with practical Walter. You can do it with airsoft, or you can shoot paint ball. In fact you can shoot other people with paintball, that the whole point. If its so super duper deadly, how come you can do it in practically every other country on earth ?

Walter Mittys Brother

I do not have a problem with practical shooting. In fact I'd love to do it! The problem I have is that it previously was used to restrict pistol ownership. Any hint of an attempt to return to it would most probably be used to take more from us. There is no point us looking to other jurisdictions & what they do/allow. It's like comparing apples & oranges & the "gun culture" stick will once again be used to beat us

We should consolidate what we have & build on it within current limits. I'm trying not to be a defeatist more so a realist

gunny123

Walter Mittys Brother wrote: »

The problem I have is that it previously was used to restrict pistol ownership.

But it wasn't. It was the gangland murder of an innocent man Shane Geoghan, and baron shortarse running bodyguard courses that got rid of centrefire pistols. That and a biased minister of justice, who openly said he disliked shooting.

Walter Mittys Brother

gunny123 wrote: »

But it wasn't. It was the gangland murder of an innocent man Shane Geoghan, and baron shortarse running bodyguard courses that got rid of centrefire pistols. That and a biased minister of justice, who openly said he disliked shooting.

There were a number of contributory factors.

A practical shooting demo for DOJ raised a few eyebrows & was probably the final straw.
.

Grizzly 45

This is our big problem. We never are Proactive, here just Reactive. Always kowtowing to the PTB and adapting a thank you Massa dat u be allowing us to be keepin us pistols dere. Maybe,for once we might approach this with an attitude of we are not criminals or planning an overthrow of Govt and if a country that actually does have the same prohibitions and stricter gun ownership laws than we ever have, can allow IPSC, why can't we adopt the same laws and guidelines to it here?CF pistol will die out here anyway, as it is naturally reducing itself, so there is no reason to gun grab, with the consequent embarrassing compensation payouts and court cases. So what is there to lose to make some polite and discreet feelers to the PTB that can satisfy the law as it stands and allow a sport to be legal here again?
I'm not suggesting table thumping demanding diplomacy here for one second, but some softly, softly behind the scenes talk in the FCP and Dail bar for starters to see how it would be received or considered. [Something that might be beyond our organisation's capability, I realise...:rolleyes:] It's been a decade since 2008,the politics of Ireland has changed a lot in the firearms scene. There have been no massacres or blood in the streets from the Irish shooting community.We have acquitted ourselves well in courts,Dail and Brussels.Is there really THAT much harm in asking nicely??

Grizzly 45

Walter Mittys Brother wrote: »

There were a number of contributory factors.

A practical shooting demo for DOJ raised a few eyebrows & was probably the final straw.
.

As I mentioned in one of my posts.:P Yes,that definitely didn't help,along with no fallback position to shotgun or .22 rifles.It went too far too fast. That was then, this is now.A week is a long time in politics,a decade is Jurassic era history.

Walter Mittys Brother

I cannot see ANY Minister for Justice signing off on anything that may come back to haunt him/her no matter how nicely we ask. That's not being a defeatist, that's being a realist.

Grizzly 45

What have we got to lose to ask?? You never know until you ask. Put a proper diplomatic, logical suggestion and rationale to those in power and see what happens? Word it properly and point out that even the law does not need to be changed,which it doesn't,as genuine "combat training/shooting" can stay banned, as IPSC is NOT that in the first place,and that we agree to no funny shooting off ground, unstable platforms, abseiling down the side of buildings etc, running with loaded firearms,"hostage targets" or the like in any courses of fire. Now the dynamic aspect is gone from the scene,as is anything remotely martial.
Ergo,it has removed all the scary bits and is no more different in reality than biathlon. Itself an original martial shooting sport developed from Finnish and German ski troops in the 1920s.

After all,it seems that ,multi target and WA1500, which were genuine police target training courses of fire up to the 1960s are accepted now as perfectly ligit forms of shooting, why shouldn't IPSC?

Walter Mittys Brother

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

What have we got to lose to ask??

That's a question I'd hope we won't ever have to answer.........again.

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

You never know until you ask. Put a proper diplomatic, logical suggestion and rationale to those in power and see what happens? Word it properly and point out that even the law does not need to be changed,which it doesn't,as genuine "combat training/shooting" can stay banned, as IPSC is NOT that in the first place,and that we agree to no funny shooting off ground, unstable platforms, abseiling down the side of buildings etc, running with loaded firearms,"hostage targets" or the like in any courses of fire. Now the dynamic aspect is gone from the scene,as is anything remotely martial.
Ergo,it has removed all the scary bits and is no more different in reality than biathlon. Itself an original martial shooting sport developed from Finnish and German ski troops in the 1920s.

After all,it seems that ,multi target and WA1500, which were genuine police target training courses of fire up to the 1960s are accepted now as perfectly ligit forms of shooting, why shouldn't IPSC?

Wasn't WA1500 on the DOJ's undesirable list. Probably still is. I'm not disputing you're argument or logic. Unfortunately, I'm not the one you have to convince

Grizzly 45

Walter Mittys Brother wrote: »

That's a question I'd hope we won't ever have to answer.........again.



Wasn't WA1500 on the DOJ's undesirable list. Probably still is. I'm not disputing you're argument or logic. Unfortunately, I'm not the one you have to convince

It certainly was. Insp Google was trying to push it as being a police course of fire. Maybe with the AGS..No one else has used it since ..I think...The mid-1960s or thereabouts. Needless to say, it went down like a lead balloon, esp when district courts directed Insp Google and the CS to attend a match to see was there...important words here...DYNAMIC ASPECT to the shoot. Seeing that there isn't any in 1500 it is clear.

This is the kernel of the law, if there is movement with loaded guns, or they are fired off the solid earth, it falls foul of the legislation. If you walk with an unloaded gun from one point of the course of fire to another and load up there it is not dynamic, any more than moving position in DTL or Skeet.

This is why I am saying we need to push the German model of IPSC. They already have the rules in place to make it as non-combatative as possible[Eventhough the Watermelons, aKA Green party still weep and wail about its martial aspect:rolleyes:]And in the fact we have this inbuilt "Ah shure it's a German law or product, so it must be good!" mentality We are giving the PTB an excuse that this is already German/EU norm, so its safe enough.

Iknow I don't have to convince you:),or many others. But what we do have to convince is ourselves is to put feelers out and ask can we at least talk about the possibility of talking about this with the PTB?? It's our self-censoring mindset in shooting sports at work again here.:(

I cant do this, but I can get an EU wide organisation to certainly help and assist, even possibly financially to get talks about talks underway, but It needs an Irish group to propose this and put feelers out on this, and preferably one who understands diplomacy of the finer art,not table thump infighting,my
dick is bigger than yours diplomacy.:(

Walter Mittys Brother

While online this came to my attention. He's covered a fair bit of practical type shooting in both UK & US. In light of above discussion re looking to get practical back here, while this is in UK, knowing the way things here seen to follow UK, I defo wouldn't be sticking my neck above the parapet seeking to loosen up stuff here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tr3Ze0qt33s

gunny123

Already been done walter

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057732393&page=35

Walter Mittys Brother

gunny123 wrote: »

Already been done walter

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057732393&page=35

You may not believe this but that's the only thread I don't read on this forum :eek:

Thanks I'll mooch on over there.

Grizzly 45

As one DC judge said about these topics."That's America...This is Ireland...We have to deal with Irish and EU law!". And seeing that there is a lot more to this story than what Callum and the UK thought police are saying on this topic...It's hardly a valid example.

Walter Mittys Brother

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

This is why I am saying we need to push the German model of IPSC.

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

As one DC judge said about these topics."That's America...This is Ireland.".

Contradiction much? Especially as Government have control over firearms law once the minimum EU law is observed they can make them as strict as thy want thereafter

How can we ask the PTB to consider what others do in one breath & ask then to ignore what others do in another?

gunny123

Walter Mittys Brother wrote: »

Contradiction much? Especially as Government have control over firearms law once the minimum EU law is observed they can make them as strict as thy want thereafter

How can we ask the PTB to consider what others do in one breath & ask then to ignore what others do in another?

The ptb only obey laws from the eussr quango when it suits them, otherwise we would not be paying vrt on cars. The point Grizz is making is ipsc allow rules to be catered to take into consideration local laws.

So we are not allowed move with loaded firearms ? Then run practical matches where you are static.

gunny123

Walter Mittys Brother wrote: »

I defo wouldn't be sticking my neck above the parapet seeking to loosen up stuff here

I heard the same "the sky will fall, the sky will fall" rubbish before, when people pushed for rifles over .22 for deer stalking, and again when rifles over .270 were required for target shooting, and a third time when Frank Brophy went to court for his pistol licence.

Its not perfect, but we are absolutely miles ahead of where we were back in the 70's and 80's, when if was not a .22 lr, .22 hornet, .22-250 or 12 bore shotgun, you couldn't have it.

I have a centrefire rifle, a pistol and three shotguns, when i was into shooting first back in the mid 80's i never dreamt i would own those, and relatively painlessly too.

We own these things, mostly by asking for them, and the proof is the sky has not fallen.

Walter Mittys Brother

gunny123 wrote: »

The ptb only obey laws from the eussr quango when it suits them, otherwise we would not be paying vrt on cars.

One of many anomalies

gunny123 wrote: »

The point Grizz is making is ipsc allow rules to be catered to take into consideration local laws.

Can't see how that would be done as then it wouldn't be IPSC anymore.

gunny123 wrote: »

So we are not allowed move with loaded firearms ? Then run practical matches where you are static.

Which is more or less what's being done as it is? Gallery shooting has timed events with static practices?

Walter Mittys Brother

gunny123 wrote: »

I heard the same "the sky will fall, the sky will fall" rubbish before, when people pushed for rifles over .22 for deer stalking, and again when rifles over .270 were required for target shooting, and a third time when Frank Brophy went to court for his pistol licence.

Re deer stalking was to allow bigger calibres for more humane dispatch (still not convinced there was a problem there apart from people wanted to be quasi snipers shooting at longer range instead of actually stalking)

Re target shooting was probably down to the opening of rifle ranges catering for "long range" shooting.

Te pistols DOJ apparently offered .22 pistols & they were refused. What calibre was Mr Brophy's case taken for?

gunny123 wrote: »

Its not perfect, but we are absolutely miles ahead of where we were back in the 70's and 80's, when if was not a .22 lr, .22 hornet, .22-250 or 12 bore shotgun, you couldn't have it.

I reckon, just my opinion, that the situation in the North & the opening of more ranges done us a lot of favours that the local "gun club" (read game/clay club) did.

gunny123 wrote: »

I have a centrefire rifle, a pistol and three shotguns, when i was into shooting first back in the mid 80's i never dreamt i would own those, and relatively painlessly too.

Snap Not doing too bad myself

gunny123 wrote: »

We own these things, mostly by asking for them, and the proof is the sky has not fallen.

It may not have fallen in but it still could

solarwinds

Jaysus tis a long way from a bolt conversion kit the op asked about.

I have always been of the opinion that you will never know till you ask. And while yes i agree that things are better now than they were thirty years ago i am of the opinion that things seem to have regressed in the last five at least.
I think the question could be asked and if it goes well then good but if not well at least it was tried and we know where we stand.
Nothing happens on its own without someone pushing it or taking a chance.

gunny123

solarwinds wrote: »

I have always been of the opinion that you will never know till you ask. And while yes i agree that things are better now than they were thirty years ago i am of the opinion that things seem to have regressed in the last five at least.

Most of that regression is down to half a dozen plonkers looking to commercialise the shooting sports in Ireland, not the ptb really. If someone runs to the minister with "recommendations" and he takes the opportunity of a wide open goal, we have no one but ourselves to blame. This is the security recommendation for gun dealers recently i am on about.