Gardai proposals to ban firearms

Sparks · 26-03-2015 10:02pm

24 March 2015

Niall Collins (Limerick, Fianna Fail)
428. To ask the Minister for Justice and Equality further to Parliamentary Question Nos. 331 to 342 of 3 March 2015, the number of the 276 rifles which she stated were stolen from 2010 to 2014 which were centre-fire rifles; the number which were rim-fire; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [11154/15]
429. To ask the Minister for Justice and Equality further to Parliamentary Question Nos. 331 to 342 of 3 March 2015, indicating those firearms which were linked to a firearms licence, if she will confirm the 40 air pistols listed as stolen in the Parliamentary Questions were therefore not in fact licensed or linked to a licence; in those circumstances, if she will indicate where these air pistols were stolen from; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [11155/15]

Frances Fitzgerald (Minister, Department of Justice and Equality; Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 428 and 429 together.
I have asked the Garda Commissioner for a report in relation to these matters and will write to the Deputy as soon as I have further information.

garrettod · 26-03-2015 10:08pm

For a guy who claims to be so worried about all of our safety, when it comes to firearms... he's shot himself in the foot, again !

How do TDs get selected to go on the Justice Committee and more importantly, what steps should be taken to have someone removed ?

At this stage, he should be removed due to pure incompetence and I reckon if there is something we can all do to seek his removal from the Committee, we should be doing it. Putting aside his personal agenda, he's clearly not suited to this sort work.

Limerick Sovereigns · 26-03-2015 10:29pm

Can someone clarify a point for me please?

Is there a section in the proposed legislation that states that the decision of a chief super on a licencing matter shall be final and no longer subject to judicial review?

What is this section if it exists? I would like to highlight it to my representatives.

I can't imagine the judiciary would be too pleased about it either.

Sparks · 26-03-2015 10:31pm

Limerick Sovereigns wrote: »

Is there a section in the proposed legislation that states that the decision of a chief super on a licencing matter shall be final and no longer subject to judicial review?

No, there isn't. And there couldn't be. It'd be unconstitutional.

Limerick Sovereigns · 26-03-2015 10:36pm

Sparks wrote: »

No, there isn't. And there couldn't be. It'd be unconstitutional.

Thanks. That's what I thought

Sparks · 26-03-2015 10:38pm

Limerick Sovereigns wrote: »

Thanks. That's what I thought

Can I ask who said there was such a proposal?

badaj0z · 26-03-2015 10:45pm

garrettod wrote: »

At this stage, he should be removed due to pure incompetence and I reckon if there is something we can all do to seek his removal from the Committee, we should be doing it. Putting aside his personal agenda, he's clearly not suited to this sort work.

We are paying him to do this sort of work and it is clear that the judgement and intelligence needed may not be present. Are there any residents of his constituency reading this that may be moved to take this up with his support organisation?

IRLConor · 26-03-2015 11:14pm

badaj0z wrote: »

We are paying him to do this sort of work and it is clear that the judgement and intelligence needed may not be present. Are there any residents of his constituency reading this that may be moved to take this up with his support organisation?

I'm one constituency over from him, unfortunately. I met him years ago (before he was a politician) and he seemed like a decent sort at the time. It's hard to judge people, I guess.

It's worth pointing out that he was the third person elected in a 3 seat constituency. That constituency is to be merged with another 3 seater to create a 5 seater, so the next election will be an interesting one for all involved in those two constituencies. The two to be merged have 2 x FG and 3 x Labour TDs in addition to McGrath. His seat will depend on how many candidates FF, FG, Lab & SF run and how well they manage their transfers. I'd give him good odds on keeping it though, since independents have been polling strongly for a while now and he did very well at attracting transfers the last time.

Cass · 26-03-2015 11:35pm

Firearms and ownership of them is a divisive topic and we're not going to rally a great lot of support from the general public on this topic. That being said you have to ask do people in his constituency know about his other views, opinions and especially his attempts at repealing the smoking ban, etc. IOW topics that people feel strongly about.

As a smoker myself i wouldn't like to see the return of smoking in public areas, bars, restaurants, cars, etc.

Sparks · 27-03-2015 1:12am

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/mcgrath-dismisses-claims-he-used-uk-road-signs-during-justice-meeting-31097122.html

Cass · 27-03-2015 1:45am

So its not incompetence, but stupidity. I say this because only this morning he said it "might be a UK sign"

Sparks wrote: »

http://www.thejournal.ie/finian-mcgrath-guns-2014273-Mar2015

Has no one copped on that the wrong sign is only one of the gaffs he made. If a constituent sent him the picture (he has no constituents in the UK afaik) then Fingal has got a lot bigger. If it was not an Irish sign then he used one he printed off himself and claimed it was. That leads onto something a lot more serious and sinister. I think you can all figure out what.

He is once again saying how "the gun lobby" (that saying is purposely provocative as no such thing exists) is fearful, annoyed, and angry at him. Well we could be annoyed at him, but not for the reasons he says/thinks. It's because he is exaggerating and making assumptions without any verified facts/proof as well as speaking out about certain topics when he has been provided with the exact information (as pointed out earlier in the thread) by An Gardaí, shooting organisations, us (boards.ie) and even members of the justice committee.

I also see a lessening, if you call it that, in his ardent stance. He now says he is only after those that are "poor firearm owners" and leave their guns lying around. Not the ones that lock them up. Well that is a matter for An Gardaí as they set the minimum standard and they already have the power to demand a safe for every person with a firearm which leads me back to my previous question - What extra measures in the form of new legislation would he like to see introduced that is not already in existence?

As for the rubbish about his constituents coming up to him to demand he act on their behalf. 99.9% of people don't know about, care about or understand guns or the laws governing them. So how they would know such intricate details such as how a person stores their firearms is a good one.

Another example of "banging the table" politics. All bluster, and no substance. Just keep pointing out his short comings and showing him to be the **insert appropriate description here** he is.

bpb101 · 27-03-2015 2:01am

lads does anybody else find it a bit strange that somebody would go around the country looking for road signs that have been shot at. Yeah , you may know of one , but apparently there was one in carlow , then the famous one in the north. the Castlerange stone in County Roscommon and other people saying the west .
Also some of them , especially the right turn one , would be very hard to see when driving imo

Something tells me that finian anonymous source has a rifle or 2 and a shotgun. :pac:

Also finian says he knows of rifle and shoguns lying in barns and what not , Surely he should report this to the gardas.

finally , who on god earth would buy a safe for a rifle and leave it in a barn?
if you didnt give a flying fúck about proper storage, wouldnt you still throw it in a safe for the sole reason that it wouldnt be in the way( spacewise)

Grizzly 45 · 27-03-2015 3:14am

His constituents consist of ICABS DHS and Bernie Wright types along with a bunch of Trotties and friends of Cuba on this issue.well, at least he has nailed his colours to the mast as an anti gun nut who as usual hasn't a clue what he is on about.He doesn't want American legislation here ,WTF .com does that mean when you think about it??
Really said and done is he fit to be on this comitte at all?They are supposed to be impartial and he has shown himself to be extremely anti gun,and has done nothing to seemingly go and enlighten himself and has purposefully ignored and avoided meeting any on our side,and has made a point to try and get a reaction out of us on social media..Is he becoming our best recruiting Sargent by his carry on or becoming a threat to having an unbiased committee report.

garrettod · 27-03-2015 5:23am

Hi Grizzly,

Thats the key question, as I see it also ... "is he fit to be on this committee" ?

He has now used incorrect or misleading information through intention or stupidity, on a number of occassions and on either grounds he should not be involved in the Justice Committee. This is why I asked a little earlier, if anyone knew how participants were selected etc.

I personally think we would all be well within our rights to start formally questioning his appointment to this committee in writting and if possible, calling for his removal from the committee given he is clearly not a suitable person for the role.

yubabill1 · 27-03-2015 9:39am

Sparks wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/mcgrath-dismisses-claims-he-used-uk-road-signs-during-justice-meeting-31097122.html

The media are ripping him a new a$$hole.

Who will believe his ranting, now?

Grizzly 45 · 27-03-2015 11:11am

yubabill1 wrote: »

The media are ripping him a new a$$hole.

Who will believe his ranting, now?

The best being that however his constituency goes now up to and past the border as he still claims a constituent sent this pic to him.
Could this be used against him in the fact that this is now an utter lie?As well as the fact that comrade Mc Garth is looking at starting a new political opposition party made up of independents for next year's elections ?

yubabill1 · 27-03-2015 12:06pm

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Could this be used against him in the fact that this is now an utter lie?

The fact that he very publicly embarrassed the garda commissioner with spurious evidence for an even-more spurious position on gun crime has caused the media to expose him for the fool he is.

The indo article is devilishly subtle and devastating for his credibility.

We gave him enough rope...he did the rest himself.

Cass · 27-03-2015 12:23pm

For all of you on social media that he uses there are questions that should be asked of him no matter what nonsense he comes out with. Keep asking them and ignore the topic he is speaking about. He may eventually answer them or ignore them. If he answers then we know what he is thinking off, if he does not then it shows that he truly is just grandstanding.

Which constituency do you represent where that sign is used?
Did you knowingly bring in a false sign without checking it?
Do you really get it from a constituent or print it off yourself?
Did you pass your driving test? (should know the difference)
You say you want further restrictions to control firearms so where does the current legislation fall short according to you?
What are your proposals to combat these deficiencies?
Was the Garda Commissioner wrong when she said An Gardaí already have "considerable powers" to combat illegal gun crime?
Why do you constantly ignore information provided to you by the Sports Shooting representatives, An Gardaí? The same information provided to your colleagues on the review committee?
Do you deny receiving this information?
If not then why do you refuse to use it?
Is it because the facts do not suit your agenda?
Where do you stand now on the smoking ban?
Are you still trying to relax or repeal aspects/all of the smoking ban?
Do you not realise more people die from smoking related illnesses than firearms, murder, traffic accidents, etc. combined?
You claim you are concerned with puiblic safety. If so why try to relax smoking bans at the risk of children and others by second hand smoke?

Add to the above as you see fit.

OzCam · 27-03-2015 12:33pm

Just a side request, Sparks. Would you tell whoever's (lol!) making those videos to leave the explanatory text up on the screen for another second or two?

I'm a quick reader, and even I had to pause the clip to read the last bit. Thanks

Sparks · 27-03-2015 12:45pm

Sorry OzCam, that was me. I guess I read fast

Grizzly 45 · 27-03-2015 1:34pm

for those who want to see more of Finians world views[or need a laugh this Friday:)]

http://www.thejournal.ie/smoking-ban-relaxed-1944555-Feb2015/

Sparks · 27-03-2015 5:06pm

Firearms Amendment Bill 2015

https://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2015-03-26a.418

http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/bills/2015/2915/b2915d-memo.pdf

Okay, so basically this is a private members bill (and thus has a relatively low probability of passing unimpeded unless the Minister agrees with it) which increases sentences for several offences in the Firearms Act. Mostly it doesn't affect us, except that it increases the penalties in Section 12A (the short barrel bit of the Act) without clearing up the gray area over licenced firearms that came with shorter barrels than the minimum from the factory and were licenced as such. But if the Committee recommends to the Minister to restate the Act and that gets the green light, this Bill would delay everything because the Act it would lead to would have to be worked into the restatement. Or the Bill would have to be gutted and restuffed with the new restated Act or whatever, but either way, it would take longer and be more complex than doing a restatement from where we are now.

Wrote to the TD presenting the Bill:

Deputy,
Firstly a word of introduction - this is me: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uQp_vpxPG0

As you might imagine from that, I have an interest in your bill

Unfortunately I cannot download it from the oireachtas website, this link currently does not work: http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/b...915/b2915d.pdf

I did read the explanatory memo though, and something jumped out:

Section 6
This section amends Section 12A of the Act of 1990, which deals with shortening the barrel of a shotgun or rifle, by increasing the maximum sentence from 10 to 13 years in section 7a and the presumptive minimum from 5 to 7 years in sections 9, 9A, 11 and 13B

In theory, this seems fine, but in practice that section of the Act currently has a serious problem.

It says you may not have a rifle or shotgun with a barrel below set minimum lengths without valid permission (as well as saying you cannot shorten a rifle or shotgun barrel below those minimums).

It does not currently say, however, if a rifle or shotgun that came from the factory with a barrel below those minimums and was licenced as such, is validly licenced because it doesn't state if an issued licence counts as valid permission. That's something that will need to be settled in a court and so far no test case has been brought. Some target shooting sports use rifles with such short barrels, and people have been holding their breath somewhat for a few years now hoping that the gray area would be cleared up in legislation rather than in court. But if your Bill increases the sentences for Section 12A, it will up the stakes for any innocent party caught in a gray area, without cleaning up the ambiguity in the law itself and so has the potential to do more harm than good.

Honestly, based on ten years of studying the Firearms Act, my advice would be that the Bill is a good idea but the approach you're taking is not the optimal one and a far more effective approach would be to encourage the Joint Committee on Justice to recommend to the Minister that the Firearms Act be restated as was discussed in the Committee meeting of Jan 21 and to roll your changes (which frankly, are something nobody would have a problem with with the exception of section 6 - though even there we could fix the gray area and introduce your new sentences) into the changes that would be made to the Firearms Act that way. Since that's looking very likely to be recommended to the Minister, your Bill would unfortunately slow down the process of fixing the Firearms Act because it would mean the Law Reform Commission would have to update their restatement of the Act again before work could commence, and that's a nontrivial task.

Respectfully Deputy, might I ask if you would reconsider your approach in light of this, and see more effective change faster as a result?

Regards,

Might be an idea to let him know - politely - that there's a faster, better way to do this.

And, remembering the committee stage of the 2004 Criminal Justice Bill, this goes on the list of things to keep an eye on...

Sparks · 27-03-2015 5:11pm

https://twitter.com/robert_dowdsTD/status/581475250304655360

Sparks · 28-03-2015 1:32pm

The actual bill (for some reason the oireachtas website download wasn't working):

extremetaz · 30-03-2015 9:31am

am I missing something - or does that just deal with punishments for violations of existing legislation?..

Sparks · 30-03-2015 12:03pm

That's all it does Taz (I said that three or four posts back I thought).
Problem is that it could slow everything else down - if the Committee recommends to the Minister to restate the Act and that gets the green light, this Bill would delay everything because the Act it would lead to would have to be worked into the restatement. Or the Bill would have to be gutted and restuffed with the new restated Act or whatever, but either way, it would take longer and be more complex than doing a restatement from where we are now.

mrbrianj · 30-03-2015 12:09pm

extremetaz wrote: »

am I missing something - or does that just deal with punishments for violations of existing legislation?..

Looks that way, and if so its a case of tough on gun CRIME. If the grey area and processes Sparks mentions are sorted out, then well done.

Unlike Fibber McGarth - who seems to be desperate to grab votes next year however spurious his policies and facts are.

turismo2142 · 30-03-2015 3:38pm

It's got very little to do with this thread really. Not really sure where it's coming from either. Is there some suggestion that the judiciary are overly soft on gun crime of the sort covered by the new Bill?

It's always politically cheap and easy to up minimum sentences by way of statute but some times there is very little thought behind it and it can cause problems.

I'm afraid it will not make even a tiny difference to gun crime stats...I wish it would but criminals don't consult their lawyers and weigh up their prison prospects prior to engaging in crime.

Sparks · 30-03-2015 3:42pm

turismo2142 wrote: »

It's got very little to do with this thread really.

It'll affect the timeline for the review this thread's talking about if it goes ahead in this form. I emailed the TD proposing it a few times and he's meeting the Minister and may just roll the changes into any restatement of the Act if the Committee recommends a restatement and the Minister goes with that, which is looking reasonably probable at the moment.

Not really sure where it's coming from either. Is there some suggestion that the judiciary are overly soft on gun crime of the sort covered by the new Bill?

Prompted by the Gardai according to the TD proposing it.

BattleCorp · 30-03-2015 5:11pm

Sparks, does a restatement of the act require a vote in the Dail?

Shooting Forum - Firearms licencing information

Gardai proposals to ban firearms

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