Is this where we are heading?

chem

Vid showing how gun bans were introduced into the UK and OZ.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkS2BRoCd2I&feature=related

Philush

ah stop,they're all clueless, all idiots who believe theres no reason for anyone to have a gun, put the same argument to them about there being no reason for them to have two cars and they'd be stumped, annoys me the way they're goin on about it, dont see why they cant just expalin in basic terms that all the gun crimes are commited with illegal guns like, any crime done with a legally held one can be traced,muppets, whole argument annoys me, its ignorance. the way its going we will be following with protests but there'll a lot more than gun owners protesting

pullandbang

That's where we're heading! Stand up and be counted - more importantly make your vote count in next summers elections and let your local councilor know you have him in your sights (pardon the pun)!

Just an aside - I can't watch videos on U-Tube using my Google Chrome browser even though Google owns U Tube!

rrpc

pullandbang wrote: »

Just an aside - I can't watch videos on U-Tube using my Google Chrome browser even though Google owns U Tube!

That's usually not a browser issue, more likely because you don't have a suitably configured player on your system. Real Player or some such would be needed.

chem

pullandbang wrote: »

That's where we're heading! Stand up and be counted - more importantly make your vote count in next summers elections and let your local councilor know you have him in your sights (pardon the pun)!

QUOTE]

I`ve phoned and emailed everyone I can. Have invited my local FF TDs Kirk and Ahern, to a day on the range. Have invited my local councilors to the range. And guess what everyone of them said after I invited them?? Eh... sure id probably be shot if I went to the range with you!!!!!

Mr. Kirk told me he will ask Mr. Ahern if he might reconsider the plan. He asked me how I would go about solving gun crime!! He said guns had to be removed from circulation.

I said that no licenced gun was used for any gangland murder and said more damage, was done in a year with hurly sticks. Relpy was eh well three people were shot over the weekend! I reminded him that they were NOT licenced guns.

Folks we need to make contact with these people on a ground level. Get them to the range. Show them we are not "gun nuts" but ordinary people who enjoy our sport. Invite your local TDs to a days shooting. No matter what type of shooting it is, clays, target etc! make the conection.

pullandbang

rrpc wrote: »

That's usually not a browser issue, more likely because you don't have a suitably configured player on your system. Real Player or some such would be needed.

Don't want to bring this too much off thread but I can watch them on IE or Firefox no problem. Just tried the Chrome to see waht it was like. I do like the spell check feature on it 'cos it checks everything you type.

I did wath the video on IE and it made interesting viewing.

chem is right, we need to get our fingers out and get in contact with our local reps and make our feeling known. Kirk is right, we need to remove guns from circulation - but remove them from the right people - not us, the law abiding citizens.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

It's a load of bull lads, really is. It's our constitutional right to own a firearm, I really don't get how they can do this. What bugs me even further is that people didn't do a fking thing about it. Think will they ever ban shotguns and bolt action rifles?

We only recently were able to purchase pistols and larger calibres and now they are taking them away? If they are going to take my gun from me I would like to be compensated for my investment.

It would make the controlling of vermin quite difficult.

Nodin

Makenna Unimportant Tigress wrote: »

It's a load of bull lads, really is. It's our constitutional right to own a firearm, I really don't get how they can do this.

are you sure you've got the right country...?

rrpc

are you sure you've got the right country...?

Indeed. That video should come with a health warning. When pretty much the first words in it are about people's 'rights', it loses all credibility.

I have a feeling it was made to frighten a US audience rather than as any assistance to their UK cousins.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Nodin wrote: »

are you sure you've got the right country...?

Yea I know where it took place, I was placing Ireland in the same situation... Being so close to Britain we do tend to follow their ways in some cases.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

rrpc wrote: »

Indeed. That video should come with a health warning. When pretty much the first words in it are about people's 'rights', it loses all credibility.

Explain that one, will ya? They did have the right to own them weapons, that was taken away from them and I see it as being extremely unfair. Especially when you have officers from the police force saying it's not going to make a differance.

Some nutjob kills someone with a gun and innocent people get punished for it...

chops1990

politicians are retards, do they not realize that gangsters dont use registered guns? gangsters arent thick. registered guns can be traced and they're certainly not goin to use a gun if it was registered to them. Banning all guns is hypocritical, the police have them and they could abuse the guns and shoot people unnessarily like what happens in america alot I'm sure.

Sparks

They did have the right to own them weapons

Except that they did not have a right to own them and neither do we. Rights are defined by the Irish Constitution under article 42. We don't have a right to own firearms. Not in law. Neither did people in the UK, despite some rather imaginative legal approaches that were taken in the last few years claiming that they did.

And if you're going to deal with the government, you can't go around claiming you have legal rights that you don't have - you're immediately seen as not knowing the law, not having due regard for the other 95% of the population, and if you'll make a mistake that basic, your credibility is nearly nonexistant.

And I haven't even mentioned there that you can't have a right to own a weapon, because a weapon is intended to cause harm to another - none of our laws permit that. You can use a weapon in extremis, but planning ahead of time to do so, that's not permitted, it's called premeditation...

Nodin

Makenna Unimportant Tigress wrote: »

Yea I know where it took place, I was placing Ireland in the same situation... Being so close to Britain we do tend to follow their ways in some cases.

Well the kneejerk reaction is a universal. I was referring to "It's our constitutional right to own a firearm". Sparks there covers the ground, if you'd care to read his post.

chem

rrpc wrote: »

Indeed. That video should come with a health warning. When pretty much the first words in it are about people's 'rights', it loses all credibility.

I have a feeling it was made to frighten a US audience rather than as any assistance to their UK cousins.

rrpc I know its aimed at the US but just look past that and look at the way people in the same position we are in lost there sport. Anything semi auto is banned in OZ now. Shotguns and .22 semi included. What I get from the video is everyone just set around, done notting because they taught the government would see it was not them that were the problem. If we sit back and say notting it will be too late when its your licence under the hammer.

Look at the UK.

Semi auto rifles banned 1st
Handguns 2nd
Brocock 3rd
Now imatation and replicas aswell as blankfire guns need a permit and so now the police know who has replicas and starting pistols. There was also talk of a blanket ban on de-acts!

Its also been reported that air pistols are been converted to 9mm. So with the track record of the UK government it will prob lead to a blanket ban on air pistols!

See a pattern?

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Sorry I should have said fire arm instead of weapon.

There is nothing that I know of, that states that I cannot purchase, therefore owning, a fire arm. You may not have the right to posess the fire arm, but it is yours.

So what exactly does it state then?

Don't rip me apart here guys, I don't know every detail about the acts and such. I know some of course. Take it easy, yea?

dimebag249

Sparks wrote: »

And I haven't even mentioned there that you can't have a right to own a weapon, because a weapon is intended to cause harm to another - none of our laws permit that. You can use a weapon in extremis, but planning ahead of time to do so, that's not permitted, it's called premeditation...

I own several weapons. I use them to kill pheasants and rabbits. It's legal.

Merriam-Webster dictionary:

Weapon: something (as a club, knife, or gun) used to injure, defeat, or destroy

Or web 2.0 style (Wikipedia):

A weapon is a tool used to apply or threaten to apply force for the purpose of hunting, attack or defense in combat

Oxford English Dictinary have a narrower definition though:

1. a. An instrument of any kind used in warfare or in combat to attack and overcome an enemy.

Weapon, piece, gun, firearm, gat, cop-killer, who gives a spit what you call it? (except maybe that last one)

Nodin

Makenna Unimportant Tigress wrote: »

Sorry I should (.........), yea?

There is no mention of a right to own firearms in the Irish constitution. Thats the American constitution. Here, there are strict legal restrictions on (a) the purchase and ownership of firearms generally and (b) further restrictions the purchase and ownership of certain types of firearm, with no overall guaranteed right whatsoever. There are many here who know far more about it than me who will doubtless explain further if required.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Nodin wrote: »

There is no mention of a right to own firearms in the Irish constitution. Thats the American constitution. Here, there are strict legal restrictions on (a) the purchase and ownership of firearms generally and (b) further restrictions the purchase and ownership of certain types of firearm, with no overall guaranteed right whatsoever. There are many here who know far more about it than me who will doubtless explain further if required.

Thanks, I always thought that the gun that I own, is in fact mine...

If I don't actually own this fire arm, then who does? That confuses me somewhat. Excuse my ignorance.

Nodin

Your original statement -

It's a load of bull lads, really is. It's our constitutional right to own a firearm, I really don't get how they can do this.

You don't have a consitutional right to own a firearm. Should the Government decide to pass a measure confiscating all firearms tommorrow, they could, without any need to amend the constitution.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Nodin wrote: »

Your original statement -



You don't have a consitutional right to own a firearm. Should the Government decide to pass a measure confiscating all firearms tommorrow, they could, without any need to amend the constitution.

I see, thanks for clearing that one up for me I will however, ask the multiple people that have told me I have the "right" to own a firearm... maybe they are a little mixed up...

G17

dimebag249 wrote: »

Weapon, piece, gun, firearm, gat, cop-killer, who gives a spit what you call it? (except maybe that last one)

I give a spit. It's called political correctness, like it or loathe it, it's what we have to deal with.
I shoot holes in paper for instance and by posting this sort of nonsense in a public forum about sporting shooting you are not helping the shooting community, especially those hoping to hold on to their pistols. Just put yourself in a tabloid journalist's shoes and re-read your post. Then make up the headlines, here are a few starters...

Cypress Hill has affiliated to the NTSA.
Woodcock toasted by a hummin gat.
Pardini cop killer wins gold.

Seriously, what are you thinking? Stop, please, I beg you.

Nodin

Makenna Unimportant Tigress wrote: »

I see, thanks for clearing that one up for me I will however, ask the multiple people that have told me I have the "right" to own a firearm... maybe they are a little mixed up...

This explains what I'm trying to get at, as evidently I'm failing miserably here.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=58125294&postcount=13

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Nodin wrote: »

This explains what I'm trying to get at, as evidently I'm failing miserably here.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=58125294&postcount=13

Not sure if you can read, or bothered to read what I actually said, maybe your brain mixed it up. I said "thanks for clearing that up for me". Does this not give you the hint that I understand what I meant already? Don't insult me by linking to previous post in the same thread, I have already read what sparks read...

thank you

fat-tony

G17 wrote: »

Cypress Hill has affiliated to the NTSA.

No feckin' hippety-hop groups in the NTSA:D

G17

fat-tony wrote: »

No feckin' hippety-hop groups in the NTSA:D

I'm sure I've seen some pics with baseball caps turned backwards which is the start of it!!

dimebag249

G17 wrote: »

I give a spit. It's called political correctness, like it or loathe it, it's what we have to deal with.
I shoot holes in paper for instance and by posting this sort of nonsense in a public forum about sporting shooting you are not helping the shooting community, especially those hoping to hold on to their pistols. Just put yourself in a tabloid journalist's shoes and re-read your post. Then make up the headlines, here are a few starters...

Cypress Hill has affiliated to the NTSA.
Woodcock toasted by a hummin gat.
Pardini cop killer wins gold.

Seriously, what are you thinking? Stop, please, I beg you.

Yup, I leave political corectness to the idiot media, and idiots in general. Don't bother with it myself.

Again, from Webster,

Weapon: something (as a club, knife, or gun) used to injure, defeat, or destroy

Gun is weapon. Injure or defeat game or vermin? Is weapon. Destroy clay targets? Weapon.

Shoot Nazi with Lee-Enfield? Weapon.
Shoot paper with Lee-Enfield? Still weapon.

You can call them what you like G17, I don't mind. We can just agree to use different dictionaries.:) To be honest, I never even refer to guns as weapons myself, I just hate political correctness!

G17

dimebag249 wrote: »

I just hate political correctness!

Me too.

You've missed my point I gather; however I do respect your freedom of speech (well typing).


I think we can agree that political and correct are rare in the same sentence in Ireland!:rolleyes:

Sparks

You might leave political correctness to the idiot media, but the idiot media are the ones who've just gotten the Minister to say he'll ban your pistols.

Your sport's participants do not make up a majority in the electorate; You don't have legal rights to own the equipment involved (yes, property rights are seperate from possession and use, but even if you buy one without worrying about licences, you couldn't import or possess it, and you'd still be subject to other laws); And any sport that ignores PR is dead on its feet from a funding point of view and in our case will be actively stamped out because it sells papers to decry things.

In other words, learn to box clever or lose your sport. Your choice, do as you will.

dimebag249

I agree, it is more pragmatic to avoid using the W word. The media will use it anyway though, as will the Guards and the politicians. I'm pretty sure I remember a Labour T.D.,think it was Joan Burton, refer to airsoft toys as weapons!

But if you used an airsoft to hunt flies, then wouldn't it be a weapon? Hmm...

IRLConor

G17 wrote: »

I'm sure I've seen some pics with baseball caps turned backwards which is the start of it!!

That may have been me. No hippity-hop for me though. Can't stand the stuff.

dimebag249 wrote: »

Yup, I leave political corectness to the idiot media, and idiots in general. Don't bother with it myself.

Political correctness is loathsome tripe but avoiding calling guns weapons is a matter of PR not PC.

Not all guns are weapons (even by your dictionary definitions) so by avoiding calling any of them weapons you can challenge the false notion that gun and weapon are interchangeable terms. Politicians and the media use the word weapon to describe what we use in our sports because they don't know better. We do know better.

Sikamick

Sparks wrote: »

You might leave political correctness to the idiot media, but the idiot media are the ones who've just gotten the Minister to say he'll ban your pistols.

Your sport's participants do not make up a majority in the electorate; You don't have legal rights to own the equipment involved (yes, property rights are seperate from possession and use, but even if you buy one without worrying about licences, you couldn't import or possess it, and you'd still be subject to other laws); And any sport that ignores PR is dead on its feet from a funding point of view and in our case will be actively stamped out because it sells papers to decry things.

In other words, learn to box clever or lose your sport. Your choice, do as you will.

_________________________________________________________________

Discontinued Olympic Shooting Events:

Shooting was a popular pastime in the early 1900s, and there have been quite a few different shooting sports incorporated into the Olympic program. Here are a few of the more interesting ones.

Live Pigeon Shooting — the only time animals were killed as part of the Olympic Games

Other discontinued shooting events held between 1896 and 1936 include Army Gun, Running Deer, Military Rifle.

+ + + how many more will go.

In my opinion removed because of the Effect of PC.

Sikamick

Sparks

I think those were removed more because events in the early years of the modern olympics were changed with every games. In recent years though, we've lost events like 300m rifle and 25m fullbore pistol; and that's because in recent years modern events have come under enormous pressure to appeal to the lowest common denominator of ADD-suffering couch potato TV addicts - hence beach volleyball, head-to-head archery matches, 10-shot finals in target shooting, etc, etc, etc. Some events can't make the transition, so they're dropped. Remember, groups like NBC have paid billions of dollars for the Olympic TV rights (and when NBC's contract runs out after 2012, that amount will probably rise).

rrpc

In addition to the ones Mick and Sparks have mentioned: the 1000 yard rifle match held in 1908 only and won by an Irishman, the team events in 1000 yard and 300 meters and all the running target matches, the last of which was dropped after Athens.

Nodin

Sparks wrote: »

I think those were removed more because events in the early years of the modern olympics were changed with every games. In recent years though, we've lost events like 300m rifle and 25m fullbore pistol; and that's because in recent years modern events have come under enormous pressure to appeal to the lowest common denominator of ADD-suffering couch potato TV addicts - hence beach volleyball, head-to-head archery matches, 10-shot finals in target shooting, etc, etc, etc. Some events can't make the transition, so they're dropped. Remember, groups like NBC have paid billions of dollars for the Olympic TV rights (and when NBC's contract runs out after 2012, that amount will probably rise).

Indeed, the joint bid from Europe (including RTE and the Beeb) was rejected there yesterday or the day before.....
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2008/dec/03/olympics-2012-bbc-itv-sky

Of course the big question is how the f/uck synchronised swimming got back in, in it's current form......my suggestion for the addition of animal blood and sharks into the pool didn't get much of a response.