This is the bones of your letter. 100 different letters is better than 100 copy and paste

Not going to disagree with you on that

Such an ignorant and uneducated viewpoint.

"Arguably we are in this place because a large portion of the media and a political side are very anti gun, and US propaganda related to that seeps over here along with the rest of the English speaking world. Also, control."

We're at this point down to a political establishment who have long since given up even the pretense of giving a sh1t about the people they're meant to represent, at best they do nothing at worst they stir manufactured outrage and make a bad situation worse. They keep on saying this isn't a gun issue, this is a mental health issue. So, OK put money into a decent mental health service then but they can't do that because that's evil "socialism" outraging even more ignorant people.

"They certainly have a lot of gang and socioeconomic problems, but treating a symptom of those(violence, in this case gun related violence) will not solve the underlying issues that caused the symptom. Look at the UK and Australia after their various gun bans and the violent crime stats afterwards. Or even US states with strict gun control laws. The goal was obviously not achieved by the means, so the result must be to redo the means even more severely, as the fallacy goes anyway. That same mentality is happening here, so the real question should be why, if this is ineffective at combating violent crime, is this course of action being pursued? Particularly in countries which do not have the same problems(or at least the same scale of problems) as the US."

As I've said so many times before, I'm blue in the face saying it. This ban is nothing to do with crime. Another school shooting only they other day in Nashville. That perpetrator wasn't a criminal up to that point, It was someone in a state of mental crisis who had easy access to a firearm because numpty's keep electing a$$holes who's policies or lack of policies are creating the mental crisis in the 1st place and won't pass proper gun control because of "your rights" they got no problem removing voting rights or work rights though have they?

"The 2nd amendment's sole intent was to allow the citizenry to rebel against a government in case that government became tyrannical, hence the need for the citizenry to have arms equal to that of the government. It was very exactingly worded with that very goal in mind, which you can see if you read any literature examining the exact wording of the 2nd amendment and the words in the context of the late 1700s when it was written."

The government WAS tyrannical, led by a tyrant. The people who supported the 2nd amendment supported the tyranny. it has to go and indeed it should have went after the civil war.

"But stating that the reason we are here is "because of the yanks" is patently untrue, and the tangent on the second amendment has nothing to do with this present gun control move in Ireland. It is copying other countries, like the UK, Australia, NZ, Canada, etc's moves to a T, with similarly hazy reasoning(where such reasoning has been stated, mostly it has not)."

It's completely true. Semi autos went in the UK because of the Hungerford massacre, 1 guy. Semi auto's went in Australia because of the Port Arthur Massacre, 1 guy. Ireland, Germany Canada and many other countries are now facing similar bans because of that 1 guy (the U.S.) can't or won't behave himself.

Think of it like this, your office won't through any more more Christmas parties because 1 guy uncle Sam , always gets p1ssed and pukes into flower pots and pees on the carpet and keeps insisting he has a right to do it and fxxk anyone else.

ya think? Because I certainly do and I think well beyond the parameters of it's just criminals.

Wonder if it is the same fella that recently threatened to seize firearms whose renewals went over 3 months, even if it was the gardai's fault?

Yes, I do, your post is clearly both ignorant and uneducated.

Anyone know if the members of the FEC are being paid, and if so, on what terms?

I'd expect that all public appointments are paid based on the civil servant scales, for example - but these roles are unlikely to be directly comparable given they are likely to have only been part time etc.

Am I correct in reading that, that all SACF licences issued after 18 Sept 2015 are now revoked, as the amendment to stall and wait for FEC report was defeated?

Is there any possibility of a legal challenge to the cut off date from a representative body with an individual as a test case?

Im not au fait enough with legal matters but surely you can't retrospectively ban a piece of legally owned piece of property based off a statement by a long gone Minister for Justice?

I don't own a SACF, and tbh don't ever see myself looking to licence one, but, and its easy for me to say as I won't bear the costs, I do feel that Representative Bodies should get out ahead of this, once it is enacted, and mount a legal challenge.

It is a firearm, but it is also a legally obtained piece of property that is now retrospectively banned.

Whats to stop government from banning any other piece of property, not even by way of legislation, but essentially through a statement.

Thats why I said Representative Bodies, obviously an individual would struggle to fund a challenge.

IMO Shooting Sports will be slowly eroded if every time something like this happens it goes unchallenged.

It was SACF pistols, now its SACF rifles... whats next?

You(and by You I dont mean you BSA) could say there won't be a next, but there will be a next.

When the FEC report comes out, and I do hope I'm wrong, I'd bet theres a further tightening on our ability to pursue shooting sports, be it target shooting or hunting.