Think about that for a moment Strider. They don't really think that it will affect them but they say this anyway:

our focus now should be on supporting our competition target shooting colleagues, who represented themselves very well in the programme, and now need our support more than ever.

And on their page they also say:

I'm 100% with you on standing together and we need to this more than ever on target shooting.

this has nothing to do with deer stalking and everything to do with our colleagues in target shooting, who we should support them to the last.

some people want to chew my head off when I've been saying it since last year. We need to support our target shooters!!

You might think they're wrong about not being directly targeted, and it's an arguable point, but **** that ****. Read what they're saying about supporting people. They're putting their back into it on general principle! What more can anyone ask for, for pete's sakes?

I'm reading all these comments out there on the net about how people aren't rowing in together and I'm starting to think people are mistaking "being a member of the coalition" with "working to stop our sports being destroyed". The two are not the same thing and if people start thinking that not being a member of the coalition means an opposition to our sports, they need to sort their head out.

Sparks wrote: »

They're putting their back into it on general principle! What more can anyone ask for, for pete's sakes?

Well if they could stop emphasing that they're helping out 'target shooters' that would be nice. Telling their members that these proposals only affect target shooters is giving them a false sense of security and some of them will sit back and say 'Fcuk it, sure it won't have any bearing on me anyway.'

That's exactly what the Gardai have wanted all along, make it look like it's all about pistols and semi auto centrefires to divide the community but slip in the little bit about refusals based on firearms numbers/crime stats unnoticed. Then when the target shooters have been shafted they still have their Trojan horse in play for the rest. Now I'm not saying the community is divided, the WDAI have definitely stood up..but could they have done more if their members thought their firearms were in as much danger as those of target shooters? They'll definitely have lost a good few submissions because people thought it had nothing to do with them.

I've seen it myself...hunters asking me how the proposals are going, like they live on another world and it has no bearing on them then saying 'Sure they're only after your pistols'...Yeah, but your side by side will be on the scrap heap on top of my pistol if the Gardai have their way.

As I said you can see an element of 'Well we could cut ties and let you sail off down the river at any moment' creeping in a bit. They're not putting their back out for target shooters, they're putting their back out for everyone including themselves only they can't see it.

I really have no problem with how the WDAI have approached the proposals, I think their approach was better than some of the more shouty efforts which have become the signature of other organisations but they really need to acknowledge that these proposals affect everyone and that they're not just doing the target shooting community a favour by protesting against them. Their heads will be on the block should these go through.

Strider wrote: »

Well if they could stop emphasing that they're helping out 'target shooters' that would be nice.

Yeah, I can skip nice so long as necessity is being met.

could they have done more if their members thought their firearms were in as much danger as those of target shooters?

So (a) you could say precisely the same thing about the NARGC and it would make as much sense; and (b) what specifically do you think that they could have done but haven't?

they're not just doing the target shooting community a favour by protesting against them.

But they're not. They're saying all the right things and doing all the right things, even if they only think it's on general principle.

Seriously, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, you have to have a good reason to assume that it wouldn't go well with hoi sin sauce and some pancakes...

dear Sir/Madam,

I wish to make a complaint about Prime Time on Tuesday March 10th. The programme was poorly researched, lacked any investigative reporting and was delivered in an absolute biased manner by the reporter and studio chair.

The programme was titled "Guns In Ireland" never reported on the fact Ireland has the strictest gun ownership laws in the EU. No mention was made of this at all and what the prerequisites are to own a firearm in Ireland. Your reporter then proceed to lap up Garda propaganda with a knowing look on his face when presented with an accessorised semi auto sporting rifle. If he was a competent reporter he should have asked CS Healey are these common rifles in Ireland ?And why exactly is it Garda custody if it was legally licensed???But that would be seemingly above investigative reporting in Ireland and Prime Time to ask a simple but awkward question perhaps??

You then callously used Mrs Campbell whose sun was murdered with an illegal firearm for her opinions on gun ownership…Do you make a habit of interviewing parents of children killed by drunken drivers or speeding for their views on Formula 1 racing??Or parents of people who drown themselves on why people participate in swimming competitions? This was an utterly deplorable and callous ploy to link ligit gun ownership to criminal misuse of firearms.

The range interview was a farce that you chopped Mr Crofton and Mr Tope down to virtual sound bytes and asked nothing of WHY this legislation is proposed? But peppered the footage with scary shots of big handguns instead.
Many scary pictures then followed of a camera panning slowly and on under light AIRSOFT replicas. These are not firearms in this country and never have been classed as such, so again you were obviously trying to imply that these were commonly available firearms in Ireland. We had your reporter then trying to shoot a shotgun[badly] and saying how much he was awed by the lightness and the kick of shooting a little red clay disc.Well DUH! That’s why we shoot clays or targets or whatever and go home and go to work and come back next weekend and do it all again,without turning into psychopathic killers ready to go off on a shooting spree as implied by Finian Mc Grath TD[more on him later.]

Deer hunting.
This had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the proposed legislation and even your reporter was at pains to point it out…So why was this included??it was as irrelevant to the proposed legislation as asking a chicken on its opinions of the results of the 1972 Olympic shot put results!

More footage of Hungerford, Dunblane and Andreas Brevick followed, with the implications that this could happen any moment in Ireland if such guns are readily available. Surprised you didn’t bother with Sandy Hook, Columbine and any other American shooting…Well surprise, we as the shooting community didn’t expect anything less of you to do so and you obliged us. Yet again more shoddy research as the UK gun crime figures are steadily rising post those two tragedies. To about 300% pre Hungerford 25 years ago.

The studio “debate”
Another Prime Time shout your opponent down fest with Miriam O Callaghan in her usual slipshod researched questions ,well in this case it sounded like she had brushed upon the American anti-gun “Handgun control INC booklet for studio presenters”. As her first statement was “if it saves just ONE life”… is a classic and by now very old debunked chestnut. But it set the tone for a complete biased talked over in favour of Mc Grath cut off no chance to finish a point ,or even make it half way by William Egan before O Callaghan interrupted or was ranted over by Mc Grath spewing lies, untruths and utter sensationalism. Crowning statement was the “You will bamboozle the public with figures.!” And then let Mc Grath quote them ad lib and utterly wrong and proven to be wrong ones at that.
Does Miss O Callaghan think the Irish public are utterly thick as not to be able to understand figures??That sort of patronising and condescending attitude has hall marked Primetime over the years and has got it into trouble enough times too along with its shoddy research, biased reporting and interviews.

However I’m not surprised as I remember well Primetimes other hatchet job on shooting sports in 2008 with a stuttering Dr Tom Clonan with” rifles that can shoot over 3 miles “and the same programme format .So much that I predicted weeks ago to my fellow Irish gun owners that Primetime would deliver another hatchet job of shoddy reporting, superficial research, and sensationalism without any in depth back ground investigation into the who ,what when why, where. Followed by two talking heads with a loaded presenter.

In fact you didn’t ask the ONE pertinent question.. WHY do the Guards want the law changed??If you had bothered to research more in depth the answer would have shocked you utterly and you would have found, the most controversial disputed legislation that surpasses the abortion law in our courts and gross mismanagement of public monies by an Garda Siochanna as well as collusion and criminal acts by Garda chief superintendents and personnel in our courts. Including perjury, tampering with official documents, gross incompetence and in some cases human rights abuses and indifference by GSOC to investigate these cases! But that would probably have bamboozled the Irish public even more.

Please don’t try to fob me off with time of production and limited amount of info that can be put into a 20 min programme slot .I have worked with TV news crews[including briefly, Primetime back in the early 00s] have featured in a documentary filmed and screened on RTE in 2010 that involved a brief amount of firearms usage. So I know well what will and won’t go into a programme and how it can be warped ,twisted and taken and put out of context. Primetime excelled yet again in all the above categories.

And you want OUR tax Euros for this in your annual legal extortion known as a TV license??

I have to side with strider here. The w.d.a.i sent out an e mail yesterday saying there is a reference to Deer shooting in the report and they had nothing got to do with it. That they were asked and declined and they rang prime time to make sure to point out that Deer shooting wasn't affected in this report.
It was 1 of the first things mentioned in the show. They also criticised Nargc for filming it. They never said anything about we all need to stand together.
To me the way I read it was it was more of a dig at Nargc
To be honest I won't be renewing my membership to these association because I'm not happy with their behaviour in all of this

So because they thought it was a mistake to get involved in Prime Time, they're bad?

Dude, I thought it was a mistake, that's why I refused to be interviewed. Grizzly knew it was a mistake. The NTSA knew it was a mistake. The WDAI knew it was a mistake. Because we all remembered this:



Don't get me wrong, I can see why it was done - had it worked, it would have been worth the risk.


But saying "oh, group X is behaving badly" when they've just been proven to be correct, that's crap.
If the Coalition had done what the WDAI had done, we wouldn't have just been painted so badly in the media. And the WDAI's not acting against anyone, it's doing exactly what everyone's been calling for all this time.

So what exactly is the real issue here?

Cass wrote: »

Jesus, that prime time clip brought it all back. . Perhaps now we'll realise that sometimes saying nothing, while annoying, is the best option.

And if you do want to play with the media nuke reactor ,you had better have a Max Clifford [when he isnt in jail that is] type beside you for the PR and who knows the ins and outs of the media. Somone who lays down the rules of engagement from the word Go and has a say in the whole operation.There is a very good reason PR gurus are employed and make thousands per hour.

Cheaper option...Shut the frup up and do not engage with media whores as it will only end in tears .:(

Half-cocked wrote: »

Finian McGrath is one of my constituency TD's in the new Dublin Bay North. I can't wait for him to come knocking on my door looking for my vote. I'll tell him that not only will he not be getting my vote but that I have contacted a large number of licensed firearm owners in the constituency and urged them not to vote for him either.

Anyone else in this constituency should contact any firearms owners they know and urge them to have a suitable response ready for Mr McGrath when he comes a knocking. Keep it simple, something like:

I am shooting sport enthusiast, you have attacked my sport and assaulted my good character with your stance on firearm ownership. You won't be getting a vote from me or my family or anyone in my shooting association.

And don't forget to end it with "#Get it!"

SVI40 wrote: »

And don't forget to end it with "#Get it!"

*hehe*

How about a #GetIt tag on twitter?

BattleCorp wrote: »

I wouldn't wait for him to come knocking. I'd be going to tell him my views right now. Politely of course.

Does he deserve a polite response? I know I would be careful what I said but I would not be polite. At this stage it's too late in the day.. He is a grandstanding dinosaur and he needs to be gone gone gone from politics..

For those of you who are "Game of Thrones" followers the House of Stark family motto is "Winter is comeing".
A breif explanation for those not aufe with this seris The Stark family live in the North of this fictious island which is a semi artic region and where Winter can last seven years,as can the Summers but it also has a double meaning in the fact that it means there is also inevetiblely like the seasons there is always trouble and hardship on the way. So maybe instead of using Finians "Get it" we might remind him of "Winter[Elections] is comeing."?:D

Sparks wrote: »

I'd really love to know the background on that thing myself...

Actually, guys, there aren't that many centerfire semiautos in the country, even fewer that have had their certs revoked and been confiscated, someone has to know what the backstory is here?

Was it not just a ruger 10/22 with some bling attached.

I thought, just in the few moments it was on screen, that the major problem was the capacity of the two magazines. No law against a flash-light etc. (apart from the "I don't like the look of that" argument)
I think the CS stated that each magazine was 30 round capacity, but than this is from a guy who is happy to portray an Airsoft pistol, legally available in many shopping centres, as a dangerous weapon to a gormless journalist.

Sparks wrote: »

I don't recognise the tan thing on the rail in front of the Acog-alike scope there. Spirit level cant indicator or something?
(In which case, why would the owner have it in front where they couldn't see it?)

That is a flip up rear iron sight

Sparks wrote: »

I don't recognise the tan thing on the rail in front of the Acog-alike scope there. Spirit level cant indicator or something?
(In which case, why would the owner have it in front where they couldn't see it?)

That is a MBUS flip up sight from magpul I believe your actually looking at an Airsoft
M4 S system or similar with magpul pistol grip ,clone ACOG and grippod handgrip

The piece on top of the ACOG is actually a piece of fiber optic for the cross hairs

Nekarsulm wrote: »

Why do fellows with front wheel drive cars, put wider rims & tyres on the back? :rolleyes:

I'm more wondering if the owner actually set the thing up that way or if there was a degree of "for the camera" going on.
But I'm in an uncharitable mood at the moment. I could be completely wrong.

Grolschevik wrote: »

So you reckon that's *another* airsoft piece?

Yeah look at the far magazine it's plastic and you can see a horrible seam.

The crane stock ,the flip us sight,magpulls attached to the magazines all seen on most airsoft AR /M4's

jamo27 wrote: »

Yeah it's a .223 semi auto, looking at the bolt carrier and the magazine size itself! The only illegal thing about this rifle is the 30 round mags! It's fairly tricked out alright,but different strokes for different blokes..just a scare tactic using the dreaded "black rifle"..

30 round magazines are not illegal for centre fire rifles.

Only rimfires (10) and shotguns (3) have a restriction on magazine capacity.

I wouldn't be surprised if it was a stunt using an airsoft replica to scare the public.

patsat wrote: »

30 round magazines are not illegal for centre fire rifles.

Only rimfires (10) and shotguns (3) have a restriction on magazine capacity.

I wouldn't be surprised if it was a stunt using an airsoft replica to scare the public.

Oh man, if it was and could be proved........whatever about quick shots of airsoft pistols using an airsoft M4 or whatever it is in that manner would destroy any credibility Healy might have. Surely he wouldn't be that stupid.