Prime Time 10th March 2015

13-05-2015 1:39pm

@ Sparks: God bless your perseverance.
Thankfully you are on "our side"

Sparks · 13-05-2015 1:53pm

It just gets right under my fingernails when people deliberately do things wrong, knowing that that's what they're doing, you know?
That kind of asshattery is why we can't have nice things.
Honestly, if they'd just do the right thing, I could go back to having fun and lots of people would have quieter lives...

yubabill1 · 13-05-2015 2:06pm

Sparks wrote: »

It just gets right under my fingernails when people deliberately do things wrong, knowing that that's what they're doing, you know?

I believe it's literally blind prejudice.

The RTE arguments/counter arguments are condescending, to say the least.

yubabill1 · 18-05-2015 5:05pm

Had to attach as could not cut/paste from pdf.

Have not had time to consider response, but immediately it looks like we have them on the Corbally murders, as the PSNI firearm, while stolen - was not licensed, but issued.

Found this link RE; the PSNI issue Glock used in the above attack - was another handgun used also?

The article indicates only the Glock found in the burnt-out car was used.

http://www.herald.ie/news/corbally-murder-weapon-was-a-stolen-psni-gun-27956671.html

And this article categorically states the stolen PSNI Glock was the murder weapon, also used in a 2009 gang murder.

http://www.herald.ie/news/contract-murder-of-corballys-man-held-27964992.html

Page 11 of AGS/DoJE WG report says two centrefire handguns -one stolen from its licensed owner in Dublin - were used in the Corbally brothers' murder.

Can anybody shed any light?

Nekarsulm · 19-05-2015 11:13pm

Received e-mail from the BAI today, outlining RTE's response to my initial complaint.
I was not surprised to learn that RTE believe they have no case to answer on any of the points I raised, and that, indeed, I was incorrect in all my assertions.

My objection to the use of suicide statistics by Finian McGrath, TD, as a reason to enforce stricter controls on gun ownership, was also dismissed.
Apparently,
"These statistics were legitimately included in the programme because "This was an issue raised in a Communication from the European Commission to the Council and the European Parliament entitled "Firearms and the internal security of the EU: protecting citizens and disrupting illegal trafficking". An extract of the report was quoted in the November 2014 report of the Department of Justice and equality/ An Garda Siochana Working Group on Review of Firearms Licencing."

It appears that in the 28 member countries in the EU, some 4000 suicides take place annually by firearm.
They did not specify if these were legally held guns, or not.

However, RTE claim that
"The link between suicide and legally held firearms was therefore one which it was reasonable for Deputy McGrath to raise, and RTE to broadcast during a discussion on the licencing of firearms"

knockon · 20-05-2015 3:31pm

Got an email from the BAI too....

Response....

Dear Jean,

This formal response from the RTE is wholly unsatisfactory and clearly never addresses any of the issues with the responsibilities one would expect from the State broadcaster. The reply is astounding given the fact that I have made a complaint to the BAI.
1. The proposals from of Justice and Equality / An Garda Síochána Working Group on Review of Firearms Licensing, were never examined in any detail.
2. The Studio “debate” and the presenter chairing of such was unprofessional and unbalanced. Mr Egan was brushed aside and interrupted numerous times.
3. RTE ‘s letter never addressed my original complaint regarding the email and information I sent to Deputy Editor Paul Ferris prior to the broadcast.
Dear Paul,
Please excuse me for writing to you again. I understand that the feature on firearms licensing takes place on Tuesday night. I assume that you are in possession of critical information supplied on Tuesday 3rd March by Minister Francis Fitzgerald in reply to Dail Questions by Deputy Niall Collins. The data she supplied to the Dail is the PULSE information supplied by AGS and is a list of Firearms stolen between 2010 and 2014. In regard to the figure of approximately 1700 firearms that were listed by the Gardai as having been stolen from 2010 to 2014 raised interesting written questions in the Dail on Tuesday this week, which saw an info dump of raw data from PULSE regarding the figures. Here's the breakdown.
The breakdown which transpired upon the release of the raw data by the Minister in the Dail on March 3 to include hundreds of items which are not legally firearms in Ireland. In other words the whole basis for the proposed ban is based on these incorrect data figures by An Garda Siochana. Despite Mr Ferris having this critical information it was not delivered on this the leading investigative current affairs programme in the State.
4. The interview with Mr Des Crofton, Director of the National Association of Regional Game Councils was edited to such a degree they may as well not have had his piece on the programme. Mr Crofton's interview did not cover the basics of Firearms ownership and was edited to such a degree that fundamental facts were left out giving a wholly unbalanced report.
5. RTE's letter goes to great lengths explaining the inclusion of the Murder of Anthony Campbell and The Corbally Brothers. None of these horrific crimes were carried out by firearms belonging to Licensed Firearms holders which you acknowledged in the case of Anthony but not for the Corbally Brothers. Why include these dramatic and sensational interviews with sensational music to follow if the whole context was to examine the proposals by the Gardai and Dept of Justice Working Group? The interview with a distraught Mother conducted by RTE wholly inappropriate.
6. Barry Cummins allowed Chief Superintendent Healy to supply flawed information and not once challenged him on anything he said. Healy showed a host of firearms that cannot even be licensed in the State and which had been confiscated from criminals. This point was not made in the report. Why didn't Mr Cummins challenge the new expert on Olympic Shooting who is the only person apparently who knows what an Olympic Pistol is! The programme seemed to accept everything the Gardai said as true despite being offered evidence on the contrary regarding the data from Pulse.

In conclusion the Broadcaster response BAI Ref: 59/15 was inadequate and for the most part did not address my complaint. For this reason I am informing the BAI that I am not satisfied with their response.

Yours sincerely,

Knockon

yubabill1 · 25-05-2015 12:55pm

yubabill1 wrote: »

Had to attach as could not cut/paste from pdf.

Have not had time to consider response, but immediately it looks like we have them on the Corbally murders, as the PSNI firearm, while stolen - was not licensed, but issued.

Found this link RE; the PSNI issue Glock used in the above attack - was another handgun used also?

The article indicates only the Glock found in the burnt-out car was used.

http://www.herald.ie/news/corbally-murder-weapon-was-a-stolen-psni-gun-27956671.html

And this article categorically states the stolen PSNI Glock was the murder weapon, also used in a 2009 gang murder.

http://www.herald.ie/news/contract-murder-of-corballys-man-held-27964992.html

Page 11 of AGS/DoJE WG report says two centrefire handguns -one stolen from its licensed owner in Dublin - were used in the Corbally brothers' murder.

Can anybody shed any light?

BAI,

I remain unsatisfied with RTE’s second response to my complaint, which essentially restates their original reply.

As an addendum and in addition to my complaint, I wish to observe the following -

the latest reply says;

“The video report examined proposals from the Dept. of Justice and Equality/ An Garda Siochana Working Group on Review of Firearms Licensing, in particular the proposals to ban most handguns and semi-automatic rifles and shotguns.....”

the actual review document was not examined in any detail.

“The complaint ...alleges an unfair portrayal of licensed firearm holders”

“An Garda Siochana are on the record...... as stating that the belief that stronger regulation and prohibition of certain firearms is (sic) required to prevent massacres such as Hungerford in 1987 and Norway in 2011, where the culprit used their legally-held firearms.”

The video report gave no examination of the Garda assertion - specifically the circumstances surrounding police failures in licensing - rather it blindly accepted the Garda view and pejoratively presented interviews with Irish family members of people murdered with legally-held firearms, in an attempt to portray a risk of similar massacres happening here, without an examination of the strict suitability requirements recently introduced in Ireland following Abbeylara to avoid exactly these kind of incidents and atrocities.

“As referenced in the complaint, the Prime Time report also pointed out that stolen licensed firearms have been used to kill people; for instance, the murders of brothers Kenneth and Paul Corbally were carried out using stolen guns. The complaint alleges that this fact is in dispute; however listening to the link...it is clear that this dispute is not in fact about whether or not a legally held firearm was used, but about when and where it was stolen.”

2 observations:

1. Gardai have failed to provide evidence for the second firearm they claim was used in the murders

2 April 2015

139. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the number of legally held shotguns or handguns reported stolen from households in each of the past ten years and in 2015 to date; the extent to which such weapons have subsequently been used in the committal of crimes; the number of gun-related crimes committed, which indicate the use of weapons acquired through other sources; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [13813/15]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Frances Fitzgerald):
I have asked the Garda Commissioner for a report in relation to this matter and will write to the Deputy when I have further information.

2. Media reports at the time record one firearm was used, which was a Glock handgun issued (i.e.; not licensed) to a PSNI officer – an issue firearm cannot be offered as evidence in a discussion about firearms licensing.

The article indicates only the Glock found in the burnt-out car was used.

http://www.herald.ie/news/corbally-m...-27956671.html

And this article categorically states the stolen PSNI Glock was the murder weapon, also used in a 2009 gang murder.

[URL="wlmailhtml:{5E67008F-B227-465A-A8A7-DAC48010210F}mid://00000002/!x-usc:http://www.herald.ie/news/contract-m...-27964992.html"]http://www.herald.ie/news/contract-m...-27964992.html[/URL]

“In relation to the figures used in the debate, they were all official figures and served to inform viewers about the current number of firearms
licensed..”

RTE failed to mention the substantial decline in the figure since the 2009 regulations, or the long-term decline in stolen firearms, as my complaint previously mentioned. The figure was given out of context and the rate of firearms ownership per capita quoted has since been proven to be patently incorrect. The figures for stolen firearms were provided to RTE prior to the video report and the interviewer failed to present the correct figure in the studio debate.

I request the BAI examine my original complaint and this addendum.

Sincerely,

garrettod · 29-05-2015 2:47am

It should be intersting to see what the outcome from these complaints having been submitted to the BAI is.... not least, because they will struggle to tell a number of people they are all wrong.

Nekarsulm · 03-06-2015 3:40pm

Just a quick reminder to all those who complained to the BAI.

Don't forget, after the BAI forward your complaint back to RTE, and then notify you of the RTE response, you have only 14 days to notify them (BAI) if you wish the complaint to go forward to committee.

You can do so by phone (01 6441200) or by email or letter.

They say it is not necessary to resubmit your objections, but I would, anyway.

Nekarsulm · 05-06-2015 10:54pm

Dear Mr Nek,
I acknowledge receipt of your request to have your complaint considered by the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland.

For your information, the written material on file together with a copy of the relevant broadcast footage will now be assessed. I will write to you when a decision has been reached.

Yours sincerely,
Jean Crampton

Broadcasting Authority of Ireland – Údarás Craolacháin na hÉireann
2-5 Warrington Place, Dublin 2, Ireland
T: + 353 (0)1 644 1200
F: + 353 (0)1 644 1299
E: complaints@bai.ie
W: www.bai.ie

yubabill1 · 15-06-2015 7:45pm

15th June 2015

Complaint Ref: 52/15

Dear Mr. YB

Please find an additional response from RTÉ attached. Please be advised that this is for information and a reply is not required. However, if you do intend on responding then you should do so by tomorrow Tuesday, 16th June. The Compliance Committee is due to make a determination on your complaint at their next meeting and any further reply from either party may result in a delay to your complaint being considered.

Please contact me if you have any queries.

Yours sincerely,

BAI Compliance.

BAI

I am not satisfied by the further response received from RTE RE: Prime time 10/3/15.

The RTE responses to my complaint seek to divert the conversation from my original complaints and I ask the BAI to consider my original complaint communication thus;

ORIGINAL COMPLAINT 11/3/15

Sir/ Madam

I was very upset by your report on proposed new firearms legislation last night, which portrayed people like myself – licensed firearm holders – as potential rampage murderers, despite my having undergone substantial background checks, provided character referees, access to my personal medical record and agreed to access to my home at any time by Gardai and also having committed no criminal offences whatsoever.

Was there a Prime Time examination of the above –possibly defamatory - Garda assertions regarding 140,000 vetted citizens and of Garda concerns regarding the licensing of certain firearms and was Prime Time’s investigation of said assertions and concerns 1. Accurate, 2. Impartial, 3. Fair?

The programme contained a piece with Superintendent Fergus Healy, who was allowed mention his fear of a gun culture emerging, while demonstrating handguns which can no longer be licensed by new applicants under 2008 legislation. The only handgun in the piece which can be licensed today by a new applicant was the one Superintendent Healy “approved”. This clearly presented a biased impression of gun ownership.

Was the Prime Time piece above 1. Accurate, 2. Impartial, 3. Fair in reporting Chief Superintendent Healy’s fear?

The report also failed to mention the origination of the proposed ban, which came only after a large number of court cases were lost by Gardai regarding firearms licensing following 2009 legislation born out of round table agreement between stakeholders, greatly strengthening applicant suitability and firearms storage regulation.

Again, was the Prime Time examination of the origin of the issue at hand 1. Accurate, 2. Impartial, 3. Fair?

The report indulged in scaremongering around gun murders – citing a firearm stolen in ROI used in the murder of the Corbally brothers, which is in dispute1 – despite a background of multiple-year falls in gun crime2, gun seizures3 and a 50% reduction in thefts of legal firearms between 2010-2013 according to CSO statistics.

Finally, was the inclusion of the Corbally brothers’ murders in the report an 1. Accurate, 2. Impartial, 3. Fair and appropriate reflection of the use of stolen firearms, given that the main murder weapon was an official PSNI pistol (issued by a police force and not licensed for civilian use) stolen in a jurisdiction not covered by the Irish Firearms Act and that an alleged use of a second firearm could not be clarified despite several Parliamentary Questions asked of the Minister for Justice and Equality in a timely fashion (all as yet unanswered to date)? Further, was the alleged second firearm a low-calibre pistol or a high-calibre military/police (to use Garda terminology) type and what is the risk to the public from stolen formerly-licensed

military/police –style firearms?

1.
http://www.sportscoalition.org/kilda...erview-512015/

2. http://www.thejournal.ie/frances-fit...22872-Jun2014/

3. http://www.thejournal.ie/firearms-se...83874-Jul2014/

Nekarsulm · 16-06-2015 11:47am

Received same today.
In every point raised, RTE consider that failure of the complainant to come up with new examples from the programme, somehow add legitimacy to their earlier response.

So if you have already outlined your objections to each inaccuracy/manipulation/failing of the programme, the fact that you cannot list any new failings somehow (in RTE-think) negates your initial objection.

As with your self, Yubabill1, I was given 24 hours from this morning to reply.

Sparks · 16-06-2015 11:54am

Got the same yesterday, but only the one point, RTE throwing Healy up as saying that both the firearms were used in the Corbally murders, and sidestepping the difference between "were used in" and "the murder weapon". Didn't reply in order to prevent any further delays to the hearing.

yubabill1 · 16-06-2015 12:08pm

Sparks wrote: »

RTE throwing Healy up as saying that both the firearms were used in the Corbally murders, and sidestepping the difference between "were used in" and "the murder weapon". Didn't reply in order to prevent any further delays to the hearing.

An important distinction - you still have today to reply - got confirmation of my final reply this morning.

RTE must have talked to Ch Sup Healy about the Corballys.

At the very, very least the Corbally murders were a poor and unrepresentative example, to prove a point about stolen licensed firearms: I mean the main murder weapon was a PSNI Glock stolen in NI and if the alleged second gun was a .22, then what has either got to do with banning civilian licensing of "Military/ Police high calibre" firearms?

Can't justify the example as accurate, impartial or fair in this context.

Let's see what BAI make of it.

Nekarsulm · 03-07-2015 9:00pm

Anyone hear any further on this matter?
Any indication as to whether the BAI will consider each complaint individually, or lump them all together?
About three weeks now since the "reply within 24 hours" email sent.
Or will RTE string it out till the summer break etc. and claim that "key" personel are unavailable tillSeptember?

yubabill1 · 04-07-2015 10:33am

Nekarsulm wrote: »

Anyone hear any further on this matter?
Any indication as to whether the BAI will consider each complaint individually, or lump them all together?
About three weeks now since the "reply within 24 hours" email sent.
Or will RTE string it out till the summer break etc. and claim that "key" personel are unavailable tillSeptember?

Heard nothing either - not holding my breath; they only seem to meet every quarter or so.

Read some of the BAI decisions for pig iron - the framework affords very little control over media sources and c.90% of complaints are dismissed.

However, the BAI do seem to take into account the number of complaints received about a report and I reckon we have about 6 or 7 complaints in, which is more than the BAI would get in an entire quarter.

Don't be surprised when BAI decisions come from a "big picture" "overall" perspective - they like to hide behind this kind of thing.

I reckon Sparks' complaint has the best chance of being upheld in part (mostly because he went into obsessive detail).

garrettod · 05-07-2015 4:08pm

Nekarsulm wrote: »

Anyone hear any further on this matter?...

All quiet of late. It's disappointing that they can put tight time deadlines on us for responses, if we want to press forward with a complaint, then they go elect to go for full radio silence. That said, I will say that my dealings with the BAI have been both plesant and professional so far, so I don't want to be unfair here. Perhaps a friendly follow up email from those of us with complaints, might be appropriate ?

Nekarsulm · 05-07-2015 5:12pm

Would agree that contact with the BAI was cordial. They even emailed me to check a response I made before submitting it, as I had mistakenly attributed a quote to the wrong named person.
Shall be interesting to get the official response.

Sparks · 07-07-2015 3:00pm

Or we could just ask...

Please be advised that your complaint was considered at the meeting in late June and a decision should be circulated to you within the next week.

Doubt my complaint was that much better btw.

yubabill1 · 07-07-2015 5:09pm

Sparks wrote: »

Or we could just ask...

Doubt my complaint was that much better btw.

Didn't get that email yet.

Let's hope we kept them busy.

knockon · 07-07-2015 11:10pm

yubabill1 wrote: »

Heard nothing either - not holding my breath; they only seem to meet every quarter or so.

Read some of the BAI decisions for pig iron - the framework affords very little control over media sources and c.90% of complaints are dismissed.

However, the BAI do seem to take into account the number of complaints received about a report and I reckon we have about 6 or 7 complaints in, which is more than the BAI would get in an entire quarter.

Don't be surprised when BAI decisions come from a "big picture" "overall" perspective - they like to hide behind this kind of thing.

I reckon Sparks' complaint has the best chance of being upheld in part (mostly because he went into obsessive detail).

Very disappointing that only 7 or 8 of us bothered our ass to make a complaint to the BAI.

Grizzly 45 · 08-07-2015 12:52pm

knockon wrote: »

Very disappointing that only 7 or 8 of us bothered our ass to make a complaint to the BAI.

Hey its an improvement on the last time! Only four of us made a complaint then.:rolleyes::rolleyes:
Think maybe the 95% rule should be retitled "the less than 1%" rule. The US has a group of pro gun activists called the 3% and without going to RTKBA terrority their claim is 3% of the gun owners need to be hard core to stop any further legislation[Harping back to the American revolution where only 3% of the pouplation supported a revolt against the king]..
In Ireland it seems it is less than 0.1% that do anything positive in keeping this shooting sport alive.:rolleyes:

Nekarsulm · 08-07-2015 3:55pm

knockon wrote: »

Very disappointing that only 7 or 8 of us bothered our ass to make a complaint to the BAI.

People are too ready to accept every edict and proposal from on high.
Back in March I went to a local Gun Clubs "game night" Iin a local pub/restaurant.
listened to two lads discussing the Gardai proposals, and they were chatting like it was already in law! Telling each other how semi auto .23 were going tobe banned, and also all pumps and semi shotguns.
i don't know what it is, that despite all the scandals down the years, lads will swallow any old guff in a fatalistic way. Is there an Irish gene that makes us happy to be oppressed?

yubabill1 · 08-07-2015 6:39pm

knockon wrote: »

Very disappointing that only 7 or 8 of us bothered our ass to make a complaint to the BAI.

As griz said, that's a 100% improvement on the last time (and I'm one of them).

6 or 7 BAI complaints is a significant number, all the same. They don't get that many in 3 months, usually - and nearly never that amount about a single broadcast.

garrettod · 08-07-2015 7:24pm

Nekarsulm wrote: »

.... Is there an Irish gene that makes us happy to be oppressed?

Yup, apparently it got into the gene pool initially around the Wexford / Waterford region, about 800 years ago and then spread throughout the nation

yubabill1 wrote: »

....6 or 7 BAI complaints is a significant number, all the same. They don't get that many in 3 months, usually - and nearly never that amount about a single broadcast.

I think this is the key point to consider, no matter how small the number its large in terms of the number of complaints the BAI usually get about anything... I'm expecting a favourable ruling from the BAI (albeit, as soft as they can possibly get away with).

Anyone think it might prove worthwhile if we all contacted the BAI now and made it known that we were all in contact with each other and can easily communicate with the press, to let them know that they won't be able to simply "brush us off" on a one by one basis ?

Nekarsulm · 09-07-2015 12:12am

garrettod wrote: »

Yup, apparently it got into the gene pool initially around the Wexford / Waterford region, about 800 years ago and then spread throughout the nation

I think this is the key point to consider, no matter how small the number its large in terms of the number of complaints the BAI usually get about anything... I'm expecting a favourable ruling from the BAI (albeit, as soft as they can possibly get away with).

Anyone think it might prove worthwhile if we all contacted the BAI now and made it known that we were all in contact with each other and can easily communicate with the press, to let them know that they won't be able to simply "brush us off" on a one by one basis ?

On your last point, Garret, I wouldn't let them know. Wait till we see what kind of response is received, and whether everyone's response is consistent.

garrettod · 09-07-2015 12:45am

Nekarsulm wrote: »

On your last point, Garret, I wouldn't let them know. Wait till we see what kind of response is received, and whether everyone's response is consistent.

Hi,

My concern would be that it would then be too late, I seem to recall something about not bieng able to appeal a BAI decision (although I'm open to correction)...

Obviously, I'm not suggesting that we invite them over to chat with us here (although in theory, they could if they wanted to engage here), but just to let them know that we "compare notes" etc.

With reference to the recent response that Sparks received, regarding the decision having been made in late June... it hardly takes ten days to send response to each of us saying "Your complaint has been upheld" does it ?

Nekarsulm · 09-07-2015 12:52am

Well then, if the decision is made, and cannot be appealed, then so be it. It's done and dusted.
But if two people got different findings to the same or similar complaints, Then you might be able to get an investigative journalist interested.

Grizzly 45 · 09-07-2015 5:37pm

Even better than looking for a creature as rare as an Irish investigative journalist,which has a rarity as much as a breeding pair of unicorns. It can be taken to the Dail and raised as a matter of concern,same as the GSOC finding blameless AGS CS and supers all the time in firearms cases.The more found the better the presentable case.

Nekarsulm · 13-07-2015 12:55pm

Dear Mr. Nekarsulm,

Your complaint was considered at the most recent Compliance Committee meeting and the decision is currently being finalised. It should be circulated later this week.

Yours sincerely,
Jean Crampton

Sparks · 22-07-2015 9:36am

Decision in the post this morning. Not upheld. Haven't read through the full thing yet.

yubabill1 · 22-07-2015 10:19am

Sparks wrote: »

Decision in the post this morning. Not upheld. Haven't read through the full thing yet.

Same here - got a cut-and-paste decision based on Spark's complaint, mostly - they glossed over the Corbally murders and addressed stuff in detail that I didn't complain about.

Whitewash, but that's what I expected, from reading previous decisions.

Reckon we had up to 16 or 17 complaints in (previous maths was wrong).

Only the courts from here - don't have the resources.

Grizzly 45 · 22-07-2015 10:33am

Why am I in the least bit not surprised?Learn from it.Irish broadcasting media is as anti gun as any other country and the broadcasting complaints authorithy wont hang their comrades in the canteen class of RTE out to dry.Quit thinking the media is our friend or even neutral on this .It isnt ,never has been or will be.

yubabill1 · 22-07-2015 10:53am

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Why am I in the least bit not surprised?Learn from it.Irish broadcasting media is as anti gun as any other country and the broadcasting complaints authorithy wont hang their comrades in the canteen class of RTE out to dry.Quit thinking the media is our friend or even neutral on this .It isnt ,never has been or will be.

Totally agree.

However, we've shown a bit of fight and that they better be more careful.

They hid behind the words of a senior Garda, whose opinion we have shown to be not exactly rock-solid.

Happily accept this if WG proposals shelved.

Sparks · 22-07-2015 11:30am

I think we don't need to learn much at all Grizzly; everyone who filed complaints with the BAI would never have trusted Prime Time in the first place (some of us didn't even when asked to). This has been about trying to clean up a mess made by other people.

Had a chance to read the decision; after the reprint of the original complaint/responses/counter-responses, we got a near copy of what RTE had written in their first response. I'll post it when I get a chance to get near a scanner, but it'll be published soon enough anyway.

It would appear that the takeaway is that we were right not to trust Prime Time in the first place; that the SC should never have been gullible enough to trust them; and that in the future, we shouldn't go near them with a barge pole because we don't have an effective means of redress for the inevitable hatchet job.

Grizzly 45 · 22-07-2015 12:04pm

My comment wasnt meant for us here as a group per se Sparks,it was meant for those in the SC and others who think dealing with the media is a childs play and they will be fair.You would get fairer treatment by sticking your head in a sack full of rattle snakes than dealing with gun issues in any global western media.Dunno,guess some people are hard of learning from previous experiances of others out there.:rolleyes:

BattleCorp · 22-07-2015 12:50pm

I have a question.

What would have happened if the complaints had been upheld?

Nekarsulm · 22-07-2015 12:58pm

BattleCorp wrote: »

I have a question.

What would have happened if the complaints had been upheld?

Probably a short letter to the programme makers, advising that "in line with established Best Journalistic Practice, all facts are checked before publication"

Sparks · 22-07-2015 2:25pm

BattleCorp wrote: »

I have a question.
What would have happened if the complaints had been upheld?

Prime Time would have been required to air a retraction and/or correction.
Wouldn't have done much to alleviate the damage the original airing did, but it would have been useful further down the line.

BattleCorp · 22-07-2015 2:55pm

Sparks wrote: »

Prime Time would have been required to air a retraction and/or correction.
Wouldn't have done much to alleviate the damage the original airing did, but it would have been useful further down the line.

I'm trying not to be thick here but how would it have been useful further down the line? Useful in discussions with the Minister, Dept. Justice etc?

An apology might also have been bad press for us. An apology along the lines of "We provided wrong information in that programme, there wasn't 1700 guns stolen, it was actually 1000 guns stolen" wouldn't help our cause. They could play down the stats that they got wrong and emphasise stats that aren't in our favour. That's the kind of apology we don't need and there's no knowing what kind of apology they would have come out with.

The general public, having seen an apology, wouldn't remember that a gun used in a murder was stolen from a PSNI officer in Northern Ireland. They would remember "stolen gun", and that wouldn't do us any favours.

Sparks · 22-07-2015 3:27pm

BattleCorp wrote: »

I'm trying not to be thick here but how would it have been useful further down the line? Useful in discussions with the Minister, Dept. Justice etc?

Well, yes.
"Deputy McGrath says you lot are an accident waiting to happen".
"Well he says a lot of things, but last time he said them in public, the BAI said..."

An apology might also have been bad press for us.

Very true. But the content of the apology wouldn't have been the point, and we're not talking about the day after it comes out, but months and years afterwards.

To be blunt, the SC should never have jumped at the bait for this in the first place, but since they did and we all got this **** sandwich dumped in front of us, we all had to line up and take a bite.

Personally, I think there's a lesson there, but you know me, I'm biased :rolleyes:

The general public, having seen an apology, wouldn't remember that a gun used in a murder was stolen from a PSNI officer in Northern Ireland. They would remember "stolen gun", and that wouldn't do us any favours.

I think they'd remember the disparity between "privately owned handgun in Ireland" and "stolen service issued handgun from Northern Ireland" though. And so long as they remember the disparity, that's the important bit, if the idea gets out there that what the Gardai say in regard to firearms is not in all cases by default the last word on the situation, that would be useful. When the head of the FPU and the head of the Firearms Unit can present numbers that are provably, mathematically, wrong to the Dail and nobody even thinks to factcheck them because they're the FPU and the Firearms Unit, then the pendulum is a bit too far over to one side and needs some balance.

I'm not exactly in the Fight Da Powa camp and I have a lot more time for the FPU and the Firearms Unit than some

but even I check the math.

Grizzly 45 · 22-07-2015 11:23pm

Going by most of these apologies from that programme,unless you happen to have been accused of kiddy fiddling or somthing like that.It is usually somthing along a paragraph read at the end of a programme.Along the lines of" We apologise for the facts or case being presented in our programme on firearms last march 2015...Some inaccuracies were pointed out to us,we accept them as such and wd are sorry for them and any hurt caused....Next!"Thats as much as they have to say under law about this.
As Sparks said maybe handy in the future..I would say never give the pigs in the media an excuse for a story relating to guns.Best comment on subjects like this is "No comment and PFO."

garrettod · 23-07-2015 9:10pm

Letter received from the BAI, complaint not upheld... I'm far from happy !

Nekarsulm · 23-07-2015 11:32pm

Same here, just in from silage so will study it tomorrow.

yubabill1 · 28-10-2015 9:21pm

Can anyone make sense of this?

Complaint 68/15 decision Sept 15

"The Committee found that the risk highlighted in the programme was that legal gun
ownership does present potential risks in terms of theft for criminal activity and also
from the fact that there is always the potential that someone certified to hold a firearm legally may use it to kill. A number of examples were used to highlight these risks and the Committee did not agree that the highlighting of these risks could be taken to mean that those who hold firearms legally are a risk to society."

Grizzly 45 · 28-10-2015 10:07pm

Translated.."Despite you having undergone stringent liscensing qualifications here..We in prime time still consider you a potential dangerous nutter eventhough you are liscensed,and we will quote examples utterly irrevelant to the facts." Thats basically what that convoluted BS statement is saying in both .

Nekarsulm · 28-10-2015 10:29pm

Or alternatively, "We have made a populist programme, with a strong "scare factor", aimed at the easily alarmed and gullible, and by God, we are going to defend our programme and presenter's to the last"

yubabill1 · 29-10-2015 12:43am

I've spent most of the day reading highly technical chemistry and interpreting a slew of patents and I certainly can't understand the reasoning above.

I hope we gave them a headache.

I mean, how does it follow that by highlighting the potential for a licensed firearms holder to kill members of the public, you don't mean that those who hold firearms legally are a risk?

Makes Robert Mugabe look like a reasonable man.

garrettod · 29-10-2015 4:01am

Maybe it's time the shoe was on the other foot....

Instead of RTE giving us a bit of a hard time with the sort of nonsense they broadcast, why don't we all start giving them a bit of a hard time ?

No reason why a campaign could not be started, calling for a reduction in the number of Radio and TV stations the State provides (after all, there is plenty of choice in the open competitive market, so the State does not need to provide so many services). The sale or both Radio stations and one of the TV stations could bring in siginificant money for the Government, while it would also frighten the life out of many of those very nice people on high salaries, out in Dublin 4.

Sorry for taking the thread a little off topic btw.

Shooting Forum - Firearms licencing information

Prime Time 10th March 2015

Comments