Over 1,200 licensed guns stolen in five years

Satan Polaroid

Rew wrote: »

All those are in the current legislation, like I said we have extreamly tight laws but the people that matter don't seem to know that!

My understanding was that there was too much left to interpretation, and thus implementation varies from district to district.

Is this not the case?

Rew

Satan Polaroid wrote: »

My understanding was that there was too much left to interpretation, and thus implementation varies from district to district.

Is this not the case?

Not at all, its all in black and white there arn't too many gray areas. The main problem that the law has been updated a number of times in the last few years and relevent people haven't updated that understanding or policies.

Only parts of the new law have been enacted so far by the minister leaving some gaps, but every power that the Supers could wish for is in there for them to use right now. The commissioner has been quoted as saying he has no powers in the area but thats not true he has direct power over handgun licencing for example because they are a restricted firearm (restrictyed firearms are designated by the minister as he sees fit). He (commissioner) is well within his rights to issue guidelines to all supers on firearms licencing and they have it in their power to grant licences (for non-restricted firearms) with any and all conditions that they see fit (including access to medical records). If those arn't met or if after the licence is granted they are failed to be maintained (ie you leave your gun club) he can revoke the licence and therefore the firearm. The relevent legislation is well worth a read. Sparks on the shooting forum is very well read about it and can answer questions very easily.

Whats happeing ATM is the gardai are operating on adhoc system for licencing. There are no guidelines laid down or standardisation so one applicatrion to the next district to district its radically differant. I was granted every one of my licences withing 2 weeks other people have waited 12 months+. One super will refuse all pistols another will grant them. Some supers will require safes others wont etc. Even down to stations and even different Gardai within satations you will get different practices. All because there is no master policy coming down the line. The shooters have been seeking a stable, standard system for years. Some supers have openly said they will only grant a pistol licence if there taken to court and the tax payer forks out for the bill.

A Firearms Consultative Panal exists which is made up of all interest parties (hunters, target shooters, DoJ and Gardai). They have hammered out alot of this in the past but Ahern seems to be bypassing them on all this to a certain degree.

Ill piece together some highlights from the legislation tomorrow, Too late now

budda15c

metman wrote: »

What many of our 'new contributors' to the ES forum seem to be forgetting, is that many of the posters here on ES are the ones cleaning up the mess when someone gets shot. Its all well and good shooting little holes in your little paper targets, but some of us see the reality of shootings and the carnage involved. Some of us have also had firearms pointed at us and even fired at us in the course of our work, so yes you're damn right its an emotive issue.

I can't speak for everyone here, but I have the greatest respect for all members of the ES and its a dangerous and much of the time thankless job. But metman, don't be so patronising, to people who have listened to your points and are attempting to debate an issue.

budda15c

metman wrote: »

In response to the question, what would you take into the afterlife? Heckler replies:



I have no further questions your honour :rolleyes:

Fairplay, Hopefully your CID, otherwise your talents are really being wasted. You have managed to take a joke, from a ridiculous thread and take it completely out of context:rolleyes:

Rew

Some general info taken from the shooting forum:

Licenced firearms figures:
TYPE|2007/08|2006/07|2005/06|2004/05|2003/04
Shotgun|177,455|174,832|171,916|173,556|170,236
Rifle|56,689|50,986|48,536|47,596|44,967
Crossbow|79|76|72|76|73
Pistol|1,551|1,125|751|289|1
Revolver|284|214|131|58|0
Other|62|54|43|34|27
Total|233,120|227,287|221,449|221,609|215,304


Firearms Acts 1925-2006:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=51833658&postcount=1

Fachtna Murphy in front of the public accounts committee:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=57951977&postcount=190

Fachtna Murphy wrote:

The issue about which the Deputy speaks is the licensing authority, which is essentially the local superintendent. The person who has absolute charge of licensing is the local superintendent, subject, of course, to the courts. The court decided that the Garda Commissioner of the day could not issue guidelines or directions to superintendents, and that every superintendent had to deal with each case on its own merits.

But since the 1st of Aug 2006:

Section 3A

Issue of guidelines etc. by Commissioner.

3A.—(1) The Commissioner may, with the consent of the Minister, from time to time issue guidelines in relation to the practical application and operation of any provision of the Firearms Acts 1925 to 2006.

(2) In particular, the Commissioner may issue such guidelines in relation to applications for firearm certificates and authorisations under this Act and to the conditions which may be attached to those certificates and authorisations.

Note pistols are restricted firearms and:

Section 3
(2) Application for a restricted firearm certificate shall be made to the Commissioner.

Here are the requirements to get a licence:

Section 4
Conditions of grant of firearm certificate.


4.—(1) An issuing person shall not grant a firearm certificate unless he or she is satisfied that the applicant complies with the conditions referred to in subsection (2) and will continue to comply with them during the currency of the certificate.

(2) The conditions subject to which a firearm certificate may be granted are that, in the opinion of the issuing person, the applicant—


(a) has a good reason for requiring the firearm in respect of which the certificate is applied for,

(b) can be permitted to possess, use and carry the firearm and ammunition without danger to the public safety or security or the peace,

(c) is not a person declared by this Act to be disentitled to hold a firearm certificate,

(d) has provided secure accommodation for the firearm and ammunition at the place where it is to be kept,

(e) where the firearm is a rifle or pistol to be used for target shooting, is a member of an authorised rifle or pistol club,

(f) has complied with subsection (3),

(g) complies with such other conditions (if any) specified in the firearm certificate, including any such conditions to be complied with before a specified date as the issuing person considers necessary in the interests of public safety or security, and

(h) in case the application is for a restricted firearm certificate—

(i) has a good and sufficient reason for requiring such a firearm, and
(ii) has demonstrated that the firearm is the only type of weapon that is appropriate for the purpose for which it is required.


(3) An applicant for a firearm certificate shall supply to the issuing person the information requested in the application form and such further information as the issuing person may require in the performance of the person’s functions under this Act, including, in particular—

(a) proof of identity,
(b) proof of competence in the use of the firearm concerned,
(c) written consent for any enquiries in relation to the applicant’s medical history that may be made from a health professional by or on behalf of the issuing person, and
(d) names and addresses of two referees who may be contacted to attest to the applicant’s character.


(4) A member of the Garda Sıochana may inspect the accommodation for a firearm provided by an applicant for a firearm certificate or require the applicant to provide proof of its existence.

(5) The Minister, in consultation with the Commissioner, may by regulations provide for minimum standards to be complied with by holders of firearm certificates in relation to the provision of secure accommodation for their firearms.

(6) In this section “health professional” means doctor or psychiatrist registered under any enactments governing the profession concerned or a clinical psychologist.

And you cannt apply at all if:

Section 8
Persons disentitled to hold a firearm certificate or a permit.

8.—(1) The following persons are hereby declared to beThe disentitled to hold a
firearm certificate, that is to say:—


( a ) any person under the age of sixteen years, and

( b ) any person of intemperate habits, and

( c ) any person of unsound mind, and

(d) any person who has been sentenced to imprisonment for—

(i) an offence under the Firearms Acts 1925 to 2006, the Offences Against the State Acts 1939 to 1998 or the Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) Act 2005, or
(ii) an offence under the law of another state involving the production or use of a firearm, and the sentence has not expired or it expired within the previous 5 years,


(e) any person who is bound by a recognisance to keep the peace or be of good behaviour, a condition of which is that the person shall not possess, use or carry any firearm or ammunition, and

(f) any person not ordinarily resident in the State (except a person who is temporarily so resident) for a period of 6 months before applying for a firearm certificate.


(2) Any person who is by virtue of this section disentitled to hold a
firearm certificate shall also be disentitled to hold a permit under this Act
in relation to any firearm or ammunition.

civdef

I'm going to chime in here too to back up TheNog (though I'm trying not to get too involved in the thread here personally because I have strong opinions on the subject).

Robust debate on issues relating to Emergency Services is the very purpose of this forum, but where it descends into incivility and back seat modding, infractions will and have been handed out.

eroo

Rew wrote: »

Also the UK banned handguns and their gun crime is up 700%.

Yes you but you cannot attribute the rise in gun crime to the ban. Gun crime is on the rise here in Ireland too.

Rew

eroo wrote: »

Yes you but you cannot attribute the rise in gun crime to the ban. Gun crime is on the rise here in Ireland too.

Im not saying that handguns keep crime down what im saying is a ban doesnt prevent a the massive rise in gun crime.

lostexpectation

can anyone put forward the commisioners view on this. explain it.

lostexpectation

so who is it that checks gun owners? checks they have safe etc?

Eru

whats been lost here and pro-gun people like to ignore is the difference between a firearm and a golf club, hammer or whatever other item they decide to use. The difference is a Glock (as an example) has only 1 purpose. It was designed, manufactired and is priimarily purchased to shoot living things dead. Thats a simple fact concerning firearms. hammers are for diy in my hands, a car is for transport. A firearm used to kill someone is not being misused, its being used for its intended purpose. legal or not.

Now, people have asked for some evidence. Obviously as I said, I will not use PULSE for such purposes nor will I post any information obtained from it on a message board so instead I will point you in the direction of good auld Mr Williams who can freely state the facts withouit fear or being sacked.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Crime-Wars-Paul-Williams/dp/1903582830/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1229411583&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Gangland-True-Crime-Dublin-Ireland/dp/0862785766/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1229411583&sr=8-2

Both books detail numerous murders commited by legally held firearms that had been stolen either for use in a specific crime or simple for future use. Actually, every chaper in Crimelords mentions a case involving a stolen firearm including one case where the entire gun safe and its contents were taken from a house.

In fact its now being suggested that the gun used in east Wall may have been stolen from the victim within a few days of being used.

Also, the ban will come in. Less than 5% of this country legally hold a firearm and I would suggest that the anti-ban side would not even double that figure leaving about 90% welcoming a ban.

Vegeta

Karlitosway1978 wrote: »

whats been lost here and pro-gun people like to ignore is the difference between a firearm and a golf club, hammer or whatever other item they decide to use. The difference is a Glock (as an example) has only 1 purpose. It was designed, manufactired and is priimarily purchased to shoot living things dead. Thats a simple fact concerning firearms. hammers are for diy in my hands, a car is for transport. A firearm used to kill someone is not being misused, its being used for its intended purpose. legal or not.

Firstly karlito I mean no offence by this so take it at face value, there are no digs here.

You are not a firearms expert, neither am I, but I know a lot more about them than you. So I can safely say that the above paragraph is not accurate.

You better tell every target shooter in the country that they're using their firearms wrong and they should be killing living things with them rather than shooting paper.

You better tell the manufacturers that they're designing, making and selling the wrong kind of firearms too. They should be designing them for killing things rather than punching the tightest groups possible in paper.

Just how many target shooting disciplines in Ireland are you familiar with, how much of the hardware do you have first hand knowledge of?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=58249628&postcount=498

Tell me how the air pistol being used by the lady in the link above was designed to kill things?

Your lack of knowledge on this subject is very evident in the above paragraph. There are thousands of firearms in this country which are actually quite bad at killing things due to accuracy being their key design feature. They are simply not designed to kill anything.

Yes there are quite a few firearms designed to kill (especially hunting types) but to say that all firearms have a sole purpose to kill, is quite bluntly, wrong.

Now, people have asked for some evidence. Obviously as I said, I will not use PULSE for such purposes nor will I post any information obtained from it on a message board so instead I will point you in the direction of good auld Mr Williams who can freely state the facts withouit fear or being sacked.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Crime-Wars-Paul-Williams/dp/1903582830/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1229411583&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Gangland-True-Crime-Dublin-Ireland/dp/0862785766/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1229411583&sr=8-2

Both books detail numerous murders commited by legally held firearms that had been stolen either for use in a specific crime or simple for future use. Actually, every chaper in Crimelords mentions a case involving a stolen firearm including one case where the entire gun safe and its contents were taken from a house.

I have to say I admire Mr. Williams, especially when the Minister was asked for this information (on behalf of shooting organisations) twice in Dail questions in the last 2 years, he said the Gardai did not have the figures.

In fact its now being suggested that the gun used in east Wall may have been stolen from the victim within a few days of being used.

Did Aidan O'Kane have a licensed handgun?

Also, the ban will come in. Less than 5% of this country legally hold a firearm and I would suggest that the anti-ban side would not even double that figure leaving about 90% welcoming a ban.

I think you'd be surprised by the public, there were two threads discussing this is politics and legal issues and both of them heavily criticised the Minister for trying to be "tough on crime" but his actions having no effect, they can see right through this. Also in a radio interview one of the people from East Wall said the same thing. How will banning licensed handguns effect Johnny Scumbag when he can buy one for 200 quid from one of his buddies?

Do you honestly think this ban will have an effect on crime and the number of firearms you will face while on duty?

I do not think this ban will make being a member of AGS any safer.

Consider the ban in England, has this stopped gun crime rising? No

Look at the figures, 2002, 2003, 2004 there were 28 handguns reported stolen. There was only 1 licensed handgun to a civilian in 2004. Where did the others come from? 1200 firearms stolen in 4-5 years, single illegal shipments contain up to 180

Northern Ireland has over 10,000 licensed handguns. That's 5 times the amount here yet they have half the population. Criminals are 10 times more likely to find one there to steal.

Also the ban is on new licenses, there will still be 1800 handguns (about 1200 actual pistols/revolvers) if the applicants meet the criteria.

You think the anti-ban folk want loose laws, that's the last thing we want. We want to see the Minister actually do something useful compared to this smoke and mirrors bullsh1t he is currently pulling. This will have no effect bar kill the future of a sport.

How about enforcing all the legislation that Rew has posted up, that'd be an excellent start.

lostexpectation

you want people to buy a book from a self grandising hack rather then get their information from the minister and gardai?

"legally held firearms" so what? he's not banning legallly held firearms, only legally held handguns. legally firemans (shotugns etc) will continue to be issued.

eroo

Vegeta wrote: »

Look at the figures, 2002, 2003, 2004 there were 28 handguns reported stolen. There was only 1 licensed handgun to a civilian in 2004. Where did the others come from? 1200 firearms stolen in 4-5 years, single illegal shipments contain up to 1800

I find that hard to believe unless you are referring to shipments brought in by PIRA during the 80's.

Vegeta

eroo wrote: »

I find that hard to believe unless you are referring to shipments brought in by PIRA during the 80's.

Apologies, you're right, its a typo, the figure I meant to quote is 180.

Article here

hk

lostexpectation wrote: »

"legally held firearms" so what? he's not banning legallly held firearms, only legally held handguns. legally firemans (shotugns etc) win continue to be issued.

The following is taken from the statement issued by the dept, his review of the leglislation will not only cater for a handgun ban, it is clear that rifles and shotguns could be banned also in the not to distant future depending on a series of annual reviews.

"the Minister will keep under annual review, in consultation with the Garda Commissioner, the outcome of the licensing procedure and, if the outcome of that procedure leaves a situation which still poses an unacceptable risk to the community, will use new powers, which the Bill will contain, to ban outright any type of firearm"

considering the figure of 1200 guns being stolen in the past few years, apparently includes only 27 firearms classed as a hand gun (class covers more than semi auto centerfire or even rim fire pistols) the majority of gun stolen were rifles or shotguns, if those kinds of figures continue over the next few years an outright ban on any type of firearm may be more forthcoming than expected.

I hold three FAC btw, one for a handgun, you could guess the type. I have plenty of family involved in the fight against the gangland culture, some of whom carry a firearm off duty as a concequence, I also carry a firearm at work and I am involved in combating this area also. I am most annoyed for two reasons, a) I really do not like having my holding a FAC for a particular type of firearm mentioned every time a criminal uses one. b) I am sick of where our country has gone and im sick of the rapid decent of our society into a drugs and crime culture, the government of this country should focus on real solutions to the problem rather than tackeling this issue by bringing in pointless leglislation which will provide no protection to the people of the state or to the people who have undertaken to maintain its security for those people. Sports shooting presents no threat to the security of the state, criminality does and nothing is being put forward to stamp this out.

eroo

Vegeta wrote: »

Apologies, you're right, its a typo, the figure I meant to quote is 180.

Article here

That was a rare enough seizure. Gardai believe most illegal weapons come in as part of drug shipments, not through big weapons shipments, with only maybe 1 or 2 guns with each shipment.

Eru

I apologise, clearly firearms arent being manufactured for the millions of military and police that use them. Its obvious they are being manufactured for shooting at paper thus needing large 5.56 ammunition or is the us military simple altering every weapon they buy? Please also dont assume just because I dont own a gun doesnt mean I have no knowledge or dealing with them, Im simple not trying to muddy the water with pellet guns or air rifle.

Also, Williams isnt a hack, hes a respected reporter that the majority of Gardai will tell you knows what hes talking about. He also doesnt state stats about legal V illegal use. He speaks about individual cases where the origins of the weapon are known. In many cases the origin of the weapon is unknown. And while were on this sibject, can anyone back up the claim thats being repated here multiple times? Can anyone show evidence that the majority of illegal guns in Ireland were smuggled in?

Do I think removing legally held firearms will make it safer as a Garda? yes I do. I think it will reduce the amount I could find in a criminals hands by 1200 while greatly reducing the chances of me responding to a Dunblane, Abbylara,London or the multitide of other incidents where legal weapons were used against police.

Also, Im not even suggesting that a ban will be the greatest move ever in combating crime but you cant ignore the fact that everyday in this world a legally held firearm is used against police, in murders and in many violent situations. People need to also realise that showing violent crime on the rise is a smoke screen. Simple reality is that a lot of non violent crime is on the up as well such as bank fraud.

Rew

eroo wrote: »

That was a rare enough seizure. Gardai believe most illegal weapons come in as part of drug shipments, not through big weapons shipments, with only maybe 1 or 2 guns with each shipment.

There was 27 on that shipment along with 20kg of heroin and cannabis:

Rew

Karlitosway1978 wrote: »

I apologise, clearly firearms arent being manufactured for the millions of military and police that use them. Its obvious they are being manufactured for shooting at paper thus needing large 5.56 ammunition or is the us military simple altering every weapon they buy?

5.56 is small in the grand scheme of things. You can't legally shoot a dear with the civilian version of 5.56 (.223) in this country as it would be considered to small to bring it down clean. It also has issues for police use like numerous failures to penetrate glass/widscreens.

Firearms vary massivly alot of models and makes would be very unsuitable for military or police use. There is more of a cross over between the guns used by police and the average target shooters whats expected of them is similar in terms of use and abuse and accuracy. Once you get in to compeditive shooting at any kind of serious level the guns are either custom made from scratch or a stock gun has a **** load of work done to it by a pro gun smith.

You wouldnt take a Hummer H2 to Iraq

ScubaDave

Id say there are many soldiers that wouldnt take a standard hummer to iraq if they had the choice!

dresden8

Karlitosway1978 wrote: »

Well this is going faster than I can keep up but having read the latest posts allow me to clear something up, Garda stations are not the subject of attacks. It probable has something to do with all the police wandering around the places.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2008/0122/breaking20.htm

http://www.tribune.ie/news/article/2008/oct/26/garda-station-burglaries-targeting-sensitive-data/

Hmm.....................

Vegeta

Karlitosway1978 wrote: »

I apologise, clearly firearms arent being manufactured for the millions of military and police that use them. Its obvious they are being manufactured for shooting at paper thus needing large 5.56 ammunition or is the us military simple altering every weapon they buy? Please also dont assume just because I dont own a gun doesnt mean I have no knowledge or dealing with them, .

Look Karlito I don't want to come across as insulting but you do not know a great deal about firearms. I am not assuming, your posts on the topic make this clear. I have huge respect for your profession so please don't take this stuff personally.

A) 5.56 is not a big centre fire rifle round. It is considered small-to-medium. For example my brother has had a .270 and currently has a .300 winchester magnum
B)5.56 is a NATO round, it is not used by civilians here.
C) The closet thing is the .223 remington, it is plain stupid to put 5.56mm ammunition in a .223 rifle. See here

Is your arguement that just because the army use guns that all guns the world over have to be designed the same? Surely you can see the false logic in this.

Im simple not trying to muddy the water with pellet guns or air rifle

Air rifles are classed as firearms here, so where is the mud
Air rifles can be dangerous just like any garden tool can be lethal if misused.

Look I have no problem with you taking the stance you are, its your opinion and you are perfectly entitled to it.

But when you say that all guns are designed to kill, well I cant sit by and see that kind of incorrect 'fact' being thrown about the place.

Rew

ScubaDave wrote: »

Id say there are many soldiers that wouldnt take a standard hummer to iraq if they had the choice!

Very true and some that wouldn't take 5.56mm or 9mm given the choice. This could spark a whole new thread from Manic Moran

lostexpectation

I thought Karlitoway meant 5.56 was big for just shooting a piece of paper...

Manic Moran

Rew wrote: »

Very true and some that wouldn't take 5.56mm or 9mm given the choice. This could spark a whole new thread from Manic Moran

I kindof had both extremes. I had one of those hillbillly-armoured Hummers and an Abrams tank, some days I'd ride one, some the other. Face it, you can't make social calls in a tank. Well, you could, but probably only in situations requiring a specific social statement. I've no problem with the 5.56mm, though I'd have preferred a different rifle, and I rather like the 9mm for the capacity, but I needed to buy better magazines.

However, I think you're both arguing past each other. It is true that 99% of Glocks were designed with the killing people bit in mind. They're pretty good at it (I don't like them, myself, I'm in the SIG camp, but that's beside the point). However, it is also not true to say that there are no international sports which involve the shooting of said Glocks against targets, be they steel plates, bowling pins, or whatever else happens to be used. For example, the Euro-2009 ISPC championship is being held in the Czech Republic. (In recent years, the European ISPC handgun competitions were held in France, Greece, Germany, Sweden and Switzerland. The next World championship will be in Bali, Indonesia. Even the UK hosted the world championship in 1993. It's a true dual-use item, used in a popular, world-wide sport. You cannot say that someone cannot have a legitimate sporting purpose to own a Glock.

NTM

lostexpectation

yes a 'legitamte sport' *wink* *wink*

can't wait for some rpg manufacture to start up an rpg target shooting competition, it will do wonders for its reputation.

Traumadoc

never pulled my chain, but it is a sport that is taken very seriously,by a lot of shooters

Manic Moran

lostexpectation wrote: »

can't wait for some rpg manufacture to start up an rpg target shooting competition, it will do wonders for its reputation.

Be a bit pricey, I think, no? I mean, just imagine the cost in range improvements required to conduct such a sport safely. And that's not counting the ammo.

Then again, I'm saying this from a country where privately owned artillery and tanks are legal. Oddly enough, they've never had a incident that I'm aware of, probably because we've got lots of room for overshoot.

[ETA: Besides, we're not talking about inventing a new sport which has no traction around the world. We're talking about participating in a sport which most of what we would consider the first world seem to have no difficulty with and already exists.]

NTM

ART6

metman wrote: »

I used the term, as it encompasses a number of weapons that are privately owned, not just Glocks. As I said, I don't personally have a problem with private ownership of weapons, provided checks and balances are in place. Despite this there's no arguiing with the figures; 1,200 licensed weapons have been stolen. .

I haven't read all of the posts in this thread but a casual visit to the shooting forum recently suggested that 1,200 weapons is about the total licenced guns in civilian hands (as far as I recall - the figures for some incomprehensible reason seem to be unclear). So are we to believe that everyone had their guns stolen in the period of the statistic, or is this another of our government's massaging of the statistics to justify their initiatives? Let's face it, they have been caught at that enough times for it to become an insult to the people's intelligence.