Statement from NASRPC

It wasn't me! · 28-01-2014 9:21pm

chem wrote: »

Folks lets look at the bigger picture here! If any or all of the romours are right the following questions would come into play.

Will the DOJ balk at paying compensation for confiscating private property?

They don't have to. Just make them illegal, then the current owners can no longer possess them. Absolutely no responsibility to compensate on the part of the state.

Do they have the stomach for hundreds of high court cases?

Yes, indubitably.

Will thousands of letters get the government & opposition mobilised?

Maybe, if the letters made it clear that there were a concrete advantage to paying attention, but that's not terribly likely. Nor is getting thousands of people writing letters, for that matter.

What about Public opinion and wasting taxpayer's money?

It would quickly be spun as nuisance gun nuts wasting taxpayers' money dragging the state to court over what they see as their given right. It would be made a farce faster than you can dream it.

How much unity is there among shooters and their organisations?

What is unity? People are fighting their corners. That's their responsibility. Unity in this context seems to have some nebulous attributed meaning along the lines of "why isn't everyone deeply sympathetic to my specific position and willing to throw their resources into a fight they don't see as their own?"

How much money will they commit to a legal and public relations campaign?

The imaginary "shooting community"? I doubt you'd get the coins out of all their pockets. So, er, *jinglejingle* none?

Are the guards bluffing and what is the minimum they would settle for?

Bluffing about what? They're a stakeholder in the process and are engaging with it I'm sure. As servants of the law, however, they'll deal with it as it emerges from the government, as will the rest of us.

rowa · 28-01-2014 10:13pm

What do you think ?

Grizzly 45 · 29-01-2014 1:18pm

Or the "Well I should get the last parachute,because I'm great!" sentiment might also be applied too.:(

Sparks · 29-01-2014 1:29pm

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Or the "Well I should get the last parachute,because I'm great!" sentiment might also be applied too.:(

I love how people think there's a parachute to be had. Or that it might be worth the scramble...

animals-shark-fin-danger-dangerous_situation-parachutes-cgr0389l.jpg

animals-shark-fin-danger-dangerous_situation-parachutes-cgr0389l.jpg

Dian Cecht · 29-01-2014 2:09pm

Ah sure worst case scenario we can all start shooting stuff that's in the Olympics, be it rifle, pistol or shotgun. They'll hardly ban any of that stuff.

Sparks · 29-01-2014 2:11pm

You mean like Olympic Pistol, which was banned along with everything else (unless you were in the army) until 2004?

Sparks · 29-01-2014 2:12pm

Or do you mean like ISSF 300m rifle, which was banned along with everything else until 2004?

Dian Cecht · 29-01-2014 2:19pm

Then they were banned by default not by design, which is what we're possibly looking at now though.

Sparks · 29-01-2014 2:22pm

Dian Cecht wrote: »

Then they were banned by default not by design, which is what we're possibly looking at now though.

Yeah, that's poop. The "design" was "ban everything other than shotguns, air rifles and .22lr rifles", and it was well known what that would do. And it was pointed out anyway back in the early 70s and ignored.

Dian Cecht · 29-01-2014 2:43pm

I must not be explaining it properly or you simply took offence as I mention Olympic shooting possibly being treated differently or as has already been pointed out, my posts are/may be condescending. My point is that surely for them now to possibly ban some Olympic discipline by design or even default there would/could be a good argument made to keep these options open, surely.

Sparks · 29-01-2014 2:45pm

If (and it's still a big if) the rumour mill is correct, then I get the feeling we're past the point where good arguments are heard, let alone where they have an impact...

Dian Cecht · 29-01-2014 3:35pm

The rumour mill, if we're to believe what's been said, means that every facet of the shooting sports could/will be affected, even down to a game shooter with a currently unrestricted semi-auto or a pump action shotgun.

So, from a small minority of target shooters pursuing a small minority of Chief Supers through various courts and in the process they've made a Garda ballistics "expert" look "silly" (apparently this has happened in a lot of these cases if anecdotal evidence can be believed) now nearly every shooting enthusiast is looking at further restrictions at the behest of the Gardaí. If our little country has deteriorated to this then I think it reflects badly on our society as a whole. What group will be next for "special" treatment? It looks like those who stand up the Gardaí, for whatever reason, should fear being targeted afterwards for special treatment. A country where the populace is policed through fear of recrimination and/or sanctions against them in whatever form that takes makes me wonder what's next !

Grizzly 45 · 29-01-2014 9:38pm

Dian Cecht wrote: »

My point is that surely for them now to possibly ban some Olympic discipline by design or even default there would/could be a good argument made to keep these options open, surely.

Ask the UK Olympic pistol team about that one post Dunblane when they are back from their monthly week of training in Geneva.

So, from a small minority of target shooters pursuing a small minority of Chief Supers through various courts and in the process they've made a Garda ballistics "expert" look "silly" (apparently this has happened in a lot of these cases if anecdotal evidence can be believed

Well nothing very ancedotal about that point.... Its now confirmed in a DC judgement!:P

Mississippi. · 30-01-2014 10:19pm

Hello all
I dont want to be coming at this with a totally defeatest attitude but say for example you did have a .308 and it was on the totally restricted list what are your options?

1. Could you take it in to the north and sell it on if you knew your license was going to be rejected or if you waited till it was rejected would your paper work being out of date leave you not able to export it?

2. If the Guards were lifting it would you be able to screw the scope and bipod off?

3. How should you go about oiling or greasing it if you thought it was going away for 20 years? would even gun oil go to glar? would a light grease be better? any particular kind of grease?

Just some thoughts. Thanks Guys

Witcher · 30-01-2014 10:36pm

Mississippi. wrote: »

Hello all
I dont want to be coming at this with a totally defeatest attitude but say for example you did have a .308 and it was on the totally restricted list what are your options?

1. Could you take it in to the north and sell it on if you knew your license was going to be rejected or if you waited till it was rejected would your paper work being out of date leave you not able to export it?

2. If the Guards were lifting it would you be able to screw the scope and bipod off?

3. How should you go about oiling or greasing it if you thought it was going away for 20 years? would even gun oil go to glar? would a light grease be better? any particular kind of grease?

Just some thoughts. Thanks Guys

1. You could hand it into a dealer who could sell it abroad for you.

2. Yes.

3. Pack it in grease and wrap it in grease proof paper, that's the army did with the firearms taken in 1972. Know a lad that got one back a few years ago and it was as good as when it was handed in.

Mississippi. · 30-01-2014 11:24pm

Blay wrote: »

3. Pack it in grease and wrap it in grease proof paper, that's the army did with the firearms taken in 1972. Know a lad that got one back a few years ago and it was as good as when it was handed in.

Just ordinary lithium based grease and baking type kitchen paper?
I suspose you would put some on a patch and put a good layer on the inside of the barrel as well.

Witcher · 30-01-2014 11:29pm

Mississippi. wrote: »

Just ordinary lithium based grease and baking type kitchen paper?
I suspose you would put some on a patch and put a good layer on the inside of the barrel as well.

I've no idea what type but I think I've read somewhere that it should be brown, stops bleaching of the stock or something. Dunno how true that is, it would probably be in a crate or something anyway out of sunlight so bleaching wouldn't be an issue.

Cass · 30-01-2014 11:49pm

Mississippi. wrote: »

.......... say for example you did have a .308 and it was on the totally restricted list what are your options?

Restricted does not mean banned or cannot be licensed. It means it requires a higher level of scrutiny, via a Chief Super rather than a Super, to decide on the application.

1. Could you take it in to the north and sell it on if you knew your license was going to be rejected or if you waited till it was rejected would your paper work being out of date leave you not able to export it?

You can store it in a gun dealers (RFD), and leave there while you sell it here. If you were rejected, and only if, (never sell anything based on what might happen) it does not mean someone else may not get licensed for it.

You do of course have the option to sell abroad, but it's messy and the prices would not be near what were paid for them here. So take the hit and cut your losses or try sell it here.

2. If the Guards were lifting it would you be able to screw the scope and bipod off?

Yes. Only the firearm is licensed.

Secondly it would require an outright ban, and for you to still be in possession of the gun for the Gardaí to come and remove it from you. The smart thing to do is to store it in a gun dealers if your license has expired, and then you are not in possession of it, and can move forward with another plan.

Lastly if the Gardaí did seize the gun, it's still your property. You paid for it, and as such are entitled to the monies from any sale of it.

3. How should you go about oiling or greasing it if you thought it was going away for 20 years? would even gun oil go to glar? would a light grease be better? any particular kind of grease?

Would not even come into my thought process. I'll store it, and sell for a Euro before i allow it to sit for years in some barracks. We need to learn from the mistakes of the past (The Firearms (Temporary Custody) Order 1972). Hundreds/thousands of guns taken, and never returned to rightful owners. Disgrace.

All this is moot. They will not outright ban .308 rifles. They are not military firearms regardless of the spouting of some TDs and most media sources. To make them restricted, along with all the other rumors i've heard, would increase the workload of Chief Supers by over 25-40%. Given that Supers (of which there are more) cannot keep up with the current workload what are the chances of making all pistols restricted along with semi auto rimfires, semi auto shotuguns (all of them), anything over .243, etc, and increasing the workload of Chief Supers and by doing so relegating them to the level of Super and FO?

Apologies if i come across as gruff, it's not directed at any one here. Just we are all in a tizzy about all these proposed changes, even though no one knows what they are, and we have rubbish being spouted about deals being done on non existent legislation, rumors about banning and restrictions by people in positions of "authority" that should know better, etc. It boils my blood that we are so easily scared into a flurry of panic.

This legislation change will occur regardless. We all have something to loose, myself included, but it will happen with or without our panicking. I'm not saying there is no cause for concern, but lets wait and see what comes. We cannot challenge or stop any possible law changes before they become law. We also have no more input via a group like the FCP. For better or worse we pissed that away, so now we sit and wait.

Mississippi. · 30-01-2014 11:59pm

Apologies if i come across as gruff, it's not directed at any one here. Just we are all in a tizzy about all these proposed changes, even though no one knows what they are, and we have rubbish being spouted about deals being done on non existent legislation, rumors about banning and restrictions by people in positions of "authority" that should know better, etc. It boils my blood that we are so easily scared into a flurry of panic.

This legislation change will occur regardless. We all have something to loose, myself included, but it will happen with or without our panicking. I'm not saying there is no cause for concern, but lets wait and see what comes. We cannot challenge or stop any possible law changes before they become law. We also have no more input via a group like the FCP. For better or worse we pissed that away, so now we sit and wait.

No you did not come across as being too gruff or anything I was just thinking outloud some of the options going round my head.

Cass · 31-01-2014 12:02am

Just wanted to make it clear that none of what i said, other than the direct responses to your questions, was directed at you or any one else.

Grizzly 45 · 31-01-2014 2:34am

Lads.
Technology HAS moved on a tad in deep storage of firearms since 1972.
Where that to happen,I cant see how,the army is kicking up Hell about having to store the now unreturnable amount of guns stuck in barracks armouries across the land,so I dioubt they want a fresh supply of arms to baby sit for another fourty years plus.

But knowing that dumber things have happened...:rolleyes:
There is a rake of systems that should deep store your gun for decades if not centuries. Everything from chemically treated "socks" or sleeping bags,to actually storing in customised nitrogen filled cases.
Even bog standard vaccum sealers in Lidil can be used along with these kind of bags

http://www.brownells.com/gunsmith-tools-supplies/shop-accessories-supplies/gun-storage-materials/gun-storage-bags/vacuum-seal-storage-bags-prod42749.aspx

https://www.zcorrproducts.com/

Just ordinary lithium based grease and baking type kitchen paper?
I suspose you would put some on a patch and put a good layer on the inside of the barrel as well.

Nope,you want to use COSMOLINE.Its a Vaseline type gel,but much thicker and is specifically designed for guns.Anyone who has handled an older military firearm will tell you how hard it is to get off properly,they were virtually submerged in this stuff before being crated up the brown wrapping paper is just to keep this goop from running all over the place if there was a temp change on the hotter side of things. As the military isnt too worried bout how "pretty " your rifle looks when issued to you they arent too worried about what colour the stock is when you get it. So it might not be prudent not to go slopping it straight off on your fancy wood walnut burl stock straight off.
Indeed you can put this stuff in the barrel,but make damn sure you can clean it out again in a few decades maybe,this stuff is a mega pain to clean off guns as anyone who has been issued a new gun in the army "out of the box " will tell you.:P

Mississippi. · 01-02-2014 11:00pm

Thanks Grizzly,
Thats the kind of bits of info I was looking for.

03-02-2014 12:33pm

I'm not concerned.
Storm in a teacup I reckon.

BattleCorp · 03-02-2014 4:22pm

2011 wrote: »

I'm not concerned.
Storm in a teacup I reckon.

I hope you are right.

clivej · 03-02-2014 5:13pm

2011 wrote: »

I'm not concerned.
Storm in a teacup I reckon.

Well here's my 2 cents worth and all from reliable sources

1. Cap on the total number of firearms you can have.
2. All handguns to be banned.
3. All semi-auto, pump action shotguns to be banned.
4. All semi-auto centerfire rifles to be banned.

This is only some of what the commissioners want. That's not to say they will get all or any .

Sparks · 03-02-2014 5:20pm

I think I could have a really bad accident with fireworks and still count on the fingers of one hand how many reliable sources there are. There's the Minister and the Minister. And after a while the Principal Officer, but generally just the Minister.

There are lots of folks who reckon they're reliable sources. There are also lots of diets that say they can get you to lose a hundred pounds while eating all the chocolate you want. I think there's a similar degree of connection with reality between those two groups

I would be unsurprised if the commissioner wanted all of the above - he's the commissioner, if all private firearms were banned tonight, he'd be a happy man.

rowa · 03-02-2014 5:44pm

Everytime the minister/doj etc fanny around with the the firearms laws , its comes back to bite them in the arse, there has been no huge amount of crime committed with legally held firearms recently, no immediate reason to start banning anything, apart from some hurt feelings after the pistols court cases. Add to that callinan isn't flavour of the month with shatter after the points scandal. Maybe shatter will let the hare sit.

03-02-2014 5:55pm

clivej wrote: »

Well here's my 2 cents worth and all from reliable sources

1. Cap on the total number of firearms you can have.
2. All handguns to be banned.
3. All semi-auto, pump action shotguns to be banned.
4. All semi-auto centerfire rifles to be banned.

All of my "reliable sources" said that things will stay the same.

Over the years I have come across so many "reliable sources" I have lost count. Inevitably some of them have to be correct some of the time, but I would take most of what they say with a large pinch of salt.

Either way in a few weeks we will know who is correct

Cass · 03-02-2014 7:13pm

I have said from the start of this thread that i don't believe in what i'm told till i see it. There is far too much speculation, "wink wink, nudge, nudge" and other hype going on.

There has been nothing from the DoJ about any changes. Either rumor or events that would lead to them changing anything. Like so many other rumors that have circulated over the years the majority of them come from people with active imaginations letting the smallest amount of information (correct or otherwise) turn it into something it's not.

The second point, that i have made numerous times, is the information we are being fed which includes:

Unnamed groups ceding to these changes even though no changes have been announced.
The fact that no organisations have come out with anything inkling of what these supposed changes may be (bar one).
The severe range of "changes" from banning everything to anything over .243, semi auto everything, etc, etc. IOW no specifics. Just speculation.
Lastly if these changes are going to be so severe why have no other NGBs been notified. No heads up, etc. Regardless of the fact the DoJ don't need to give courtesy notifications, it's ran by people, and secrets have a way of being leaked to friends, etc. Yet nothing from anyone to the NGBs or from the NGBs to members.

I'm not saying that there 100% will be no changes. I am, however, very, dubious about the level of changes some are saying will come, the sources they claim (yet never name) to have gotten this from, and the sheer silence/lack of factual information from any other reliable (& verifiable) source.

As Sparks, and others have said above (any in hundreds of previous threads) An Gardaí do not want firearms in the hands of citizens (that's a generalisation and not directed at all members of An Gardaí) so their opposition to firearms or any recommendations to the minister are nothing to be surprised about. Until the DoJ do something, everything else is simply white noise.

I truly hope i'm right, and will be disappointed, annoyed and angry if i'm wrong. However i'll wait to see what happens rather than panic of nothing which at this point it is.

BillyBoy13 · 03-02-2014 7:44pm

Sparks wrote: »

He's the commissioner, if all private firearms were banned tonight, he'd be a happy man.

Sparks,

Thats something I was hinting at in the history thread. We have so many people that would love to see firearms gone. Joe soap wouldnt give a damn. The minister could wipe them out tomorrow with one pen stroke and nobody would bat an eyelid.... as a matter of fact he might even gain a few votes from the "look at American school shootings we dont want that over here" crowd.

But for whatever reasons it hasn't been done.

Now you could argue the farmers would kick up.... but we both know it wouldnt be hard to work around that. I mean just of the top of my head he could put an outright ban on target shooting including clays. Farmers can still apply for licenses or can nominate 5 lads to look after his land. Only shotguns and 22lrs, hummers for fox, 243 for deer and everything else banned.

What Im getting at is that we always think of them as... well Im sure you know what some people on here call them. But it always turns into an us against them and you know for the most part I dont think they are "out to get us" like I said- if they wanted us gone we'd be gone in the morning. That's why Im still convinced we can work with them, despite all the nonsense that happened the last time around. I know you're skeptical (or just generally sick of having your time wasted) but I still think we can do it.

Shooting Forum - Firearms licencing information

Statement from NASRPC

Comments

Forum Charter - Useful Information - Photo thread: Hardware - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads - Upcoming Events - RFDs by County

Forum Charter - Useful Information - Photo thread: Hardware - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads - Upcoming Events - RFDs by County

Forum Charter - Useful Information - Photo thread: Hardware - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads - Upcoming Events - RFDs by County