Reply from Minister Ahernes office

Frank the Manc

This is the response i received from the DOJ, when i send it i made no reference in the subject to guns ect. in the hope that it would actually be read, apparently this didnt work as they appear to have scanned through the first few lines & generated a standard reply.



"Dear Mr. XXXXXX

I refer to your recent representations expressing your concern about the
recent announcement concerning handguns.

It is important to say, first of all, that the Minister’s proposals in
relation to handguns will not impinge directly on the activities of the
vast majority of licensed firearms holders. The Minister recognises that
those firearms holders pursue their legitimate interests in a law abiding
way and is anxious to have a well regulated sector in which those interests
can be successfully pursued, in cooperation with the relevant authorities.

As you may be aware, for over 30 years prior to 2004, all handguns were
banned in this jurisdiction. Following a series of judicial decisions that
is no longer the case and about 1,800 handguns have been licensed since
then. This was not the result of a considered or deliberate public policy
decision. While, thankfully, violence related to the troubles in the North
has largely been brought to an end we are now faced with a gun culture
operating in criminal gangs. It is a matter of great regret that the
activities of criminal gangs should impinge on the interests of law abiding
licensed firearms owners but the Minister cannot overlook the fact that the
overall level and kind of licensed firearms prevalent in the community is
relevant to the prevention of crime, in the same way the prohibition on
handguns was considered appropriate from the early seventies on.

The Minister has been conscious too of the remarks of Mr. Justice Charleton
in a recent judgement that a reasonable person is entitled to feel alarmed
at the proliferation of handguns. He is aware too of calls made by members
of the Oireachtas from a number of parties to address this situation.

The Minister is aware that some people have a strongly held view that once
they are of good character and make the necessary secure arrangements for
the storage of their firearms they should be free to have firearms of any
kind licensed to them. The Minister feels that that would represent an
unacceptable situation where our gun laws could mirror those of countries
such as the United States and that, if the present situation continued
unchecked, this would happen.

It was against this background that the Minister directed his Department
and An Garda Síochána to carry out an urgent and intensive review of the
firearms law. Proposals arising from that review will be reflected in a
Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous) Provisions Bill which will be published
shortly.

His proposals for reform in this area include a ban on issuing new licenses
for handguns, although there will be limited exceptions in relation to
Olympic sports. Those who have licenses already can, when they are due for
renewal, apply to have them renewed under a new licensing procedure where
the safety of the community will be paramount. Together with the Garda
Commissioner the Minister will keep under annual review the outcome of the
licensing procedure and, if the outcome leaves a situation which still
poses an unacceptable risk to the community, will use new powers to ban
particular types of firearm.

There have been suggestions in some quarters that this move arose, in some
way, as a response to recent gangland crime. It did not.

The Minister has been on record for many months saying he was looking at
this issue, especially in light of Judge Peter Charleton's remarks in July.
The Minister felt that it was incumbent on him and the Oireachtas to
respond to those views. Otherwise in the light of tragic incidents the
public would correctly ask the question: Why, when they were warned, did
the politicians not do something about it?

It is important to stress that these proposals will not impinge on the vast
majority of licensed firearms holders. While any inconvenience caused to
those who will be affected by the proposals is, of course, regretted the
Minister is satisfied that his proposals are essential in the public
interest.

Yours sincerely,



_________________
Private Secretary

December 2008"

delta-boy

Im a bit confused...
So will this affect Airsoft in any way. As i thoguht it only affected replica firearms over 1 Jolt or the legal 325FPS?

kdouglas

Sounds very much like a canned response to be honest.

Frank the Manc

kdouglas wrote: »

Sounds very much like a canned response to be honest.

exactly, have there been any developments on your side?

kdouglas

delta-boy wrote: »

Im a bit confused...
So will this affect Airsoft in any way. As i thoguht it only affected replica firearms over 1 Jolt or the legal 325FPS?

1 Joule is the legal definition

328fps with a 0.2g BB is 1 Joule


And with regard to the reply Franc has received, it looks like they didnt really pay attention to the content of the mail, saw some reference to guns and copy and pasted a standard reply.

Dr_Pepper

Sadly the response you got is all about handguns and says nothing about airsoft.

The IAA published their response on their forums.
http://www.irishairsoft.ie/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=198

delta-boy

*Goes to find a bat and take his rage out on a tree*.

Frank the Manc

Dr_Pepper wrote: »

Sadly the response you got is all about handguns and says nothing about airsoft.

The IAA published their response on their forums.
http://www.irishairsoft.ie/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=198

had a look round the forums but couldnt find exactly what the "proposal/s" was/were?

are the written up anywhere or can you let us know here?

kdouglas

On the main page of the website: http://irishairsoft.ie/?p=293

Frank the Manc

kdouglas wrote: »

On the main page of the website: http://irishairsoft.ie/?p=293

sound lad.

Hivemind187

Read through that response a few times. Canned: Yes. But whats wuite interesting is how many times it contradicts itself or contains outright shameless lies.

I'll do a better analysis later when I can think straight (last nights beers took its toll heh) but this stuff about not infringing on the vast majority of firearms owners is in direct opposition to the fact that pistols licenses will not be renewed/issued.

I smell yet another class action in the near future.

This, howeevr, has little baring on the airsoft issue and begs the question of how exactly the minister is going to define "a pistol" (which certainly good be a major issue to us).

G3-Nut

I tried to warn you that he is not even gonna look at it himself...i also told you lads once the see a ****load of people sending stiff on the same subject they wont even have a gander at them..

BornToKill

Hivemind187 wrote: »

Rthis stuff about not infringing on the vast majority of firearms owners is in direct opposition to the fact that pistols licenses will not be renewed/issued.

I think it says 'impinge' rather than 'infringe' if that makes any difference. Given that there are about 233,000 firearms licensed and, of that, about 1,800 are handguns then it has to be true that any action on handguns won't impinge on the vast majority of firearms owners. Even of the 1,800 not all will be affected.

Frank the Manc

its not amatter of whether he reads it or not, nor is it that he will suddenly see the light after some profoundly logical & sane point put forward in someones letter.

it matters when the volume of reasonable & sensible letters become too much to ignore, coupled with things like petitions, good media coverege, constant challenges to mistakes, from the opposition, media (unlikely here, given the subject matter of the sport.)and wit any luck the general public who might have some connection to the sport through friends & relatives ect.

i wasnt expecting any reply back from them at all so now that they have reverted and given its "inaccuracies", this now allows us to correspond again with more counter arguments, rather than sending the same letter repeatedly.

Hivemind187

BornToKill wrote: »

I think it says 'impinge' rather than 'infringe' if that makes any difference. Given that there are about 233,000 firearms licensed and, of that, about 1,800 are handguns then it has to be true that any action on handguns won't impinge on the vast majority of firearms owners. Even of the 1,800 not all will be affected.

I'm well aware of the statistics BTK thanks.

The area I'm looking at is moral equivalency. There hasnt been a useful, legal or scientific answer or justification given as yet so banning handguns is equitable to banning shotguns.

In fact, more shotguns are stolen and used in crimes every year than pistols have been in the last few years.

Still, in terms of how that particular statement affects airsoft ... I'm wondering why the ministers office has chosen to respond using a firearms related response which has absolutely no legal implication for airsoft. Quite telling of the ammount of attention that is being paid to what comes across the desk in the ministers office. The help should have gone to spec savers.

Stone.cold

Hivemind187 wrote: »

Still, in terms of how that particular statement affects airsoft ... I'm wondering why the ministers office has chosen to respond using a firearms related response which has absolutely no legal implication for airsoft. Quite telling of the ammount of attention that is being paid to what comes across the desk in the ministers office. The help should have gone to spec savers.

With the current situation that airsoft is facing do you believe that that comment about the Minsters office staff is warrented? Not only is it rude and unhelpful it is also not very good PR for airsoft coming from someone who is the "Former Vice-Chair and Acting Chair of the Irish Airsoft Association".

BornToKill

Yeah, it'll have been just another letter or email saying something about guns. What did you write in Frank the Manc to get the response - if you don't mind sharing it?

Hivemind187

Stone.cold wrote: »

With the current situation that airsoft is facing do you believe that that comment about the Minsters office staff is warrented? Not only is it rude and unhelpful it is also not very good PR for airsoft coming from someone who is the "Former Vice-Chair and Acting Chair of the Irish Airsoft Association".

You've been taking pot shots at everyone for days now.

"Not having a go at the IAA but ..." is exactly the same kind of two-faced commentary as saying "Some of my best friends are black ..."

Yes. I think it is fair comment. As can see yourself, clearly the letters and emails etc which have been sent to the minister are not being read. Its called "fair comment" and is intended to satarise the fact that either a) the topic was overlooked or b) it was never read or c) those doing the reading were unable to read the words clearly enough. Since they are meant to be paid professionals one can only assume option "c". Its slightly different than attacking them as individuals or calling them names as some are want to do.

Stone.cold

I don't know what Frank the Manc wrote to the DoJ so it could have seemed to the Minsters staff to be in relation to the banning of hand guns and not airsoft. My problem is with this comment

Hivemind187 wrote: »

Quite telling of the ammount of attention that is being paid to what comes across the desk in the ministers office. The help should have gone to spec savers.

And please explain this comment

Hivemind187 wrote: »

You've been taking pot shots at everyone for days now.

Hivemind187

Stone.cold wrote: »

I don't know what Frank the Manc wrote to the DoJ so it could have seemed to the Minsters staff to be in relation to the banning of hand guns and not airsoft. My problem is with this comment

Thats a typo which is now ammended.

The rest is explained here;

"clearly the letters and emails etc which have been sent to the minister are not being read. Its called "fair comment" and is intended to satarise the fact that either a) the topic was overlooked or b) it was never read or c) those doing the reading were unable to read the words clearly enough. Since they are meant to be paid professionals one can only assume option "c". Its slightly different than attacking them as individuals or calling them names as some are want to do."

Stone.cold

I had assumed that you made a typo there. Once again this is the comment that I have problem with

Hivemind187 wrote: »

Quite telling of the ammount of attention that is being paid to what comes across the desk in the ministers office. The help should have gone to spec savers.

We will agree to disagree on what should be said about the Ministers staff on a public forum that they may at some stage read.

Now can you pleas explaine this comment

Hivemind187 wrote: »

You've been taking pot shots at everyone for days now.

Spetzcong

Ah take it to PM lads, nobody wants to see yiz get yer handbags out.

Back to the topic however: I reckon it's the old pre-christmas blues, everyone has so much work on their desks that their eyes are falling out of their sockets and sometimes things don't get read, or dealt with properly. With this new bill coming up I'd say the DoJ lads are pretty snowed under, I think even getting a response out of them is an achievement, even if the response would indicate that the letter was misinterpereted.

gandalf

Stone.cold wrote: »

We will agree to disagree on what should be said about the Ministers staff on a public forum that they may at some stage read.

Well given the fact they have sent a reply designed for actual firearms when the query was about airsoft then I would say that comment while not what I would choose to post is understandable.

It shows that these people had such disrespect for the person that sent the original query that they didn't even bother to read it and had the arrogance to send a reply that had nothing to do with the query at hand.

Now can you pleas explaine this comment

Actually I would also say this is understandable also considering your response on the thread about Minister Aherns comments in the Dail when information was shared from the IAA AGM.

Now I am putting my mod hat on. I expect both of you to stand down and relax. There is enough stress coming from outside the Airsoft community without pressure and issues building up out of nothing within it.

Frank the Manc

ill bang the letter tomorrow but in the mean time can we give the shít a rest, it was predominantly about fire-arms but i did specifically mention airsoft.

i would have been anti-IAA on some things but its a waste of time arguing about the shíte here, all yere doin is wastin time and effort amongst ourselves instead of directing our efforts towards the politicions & general public, and possibly have the thread locked.

if you want to say fúck the IAA then join up and vote for how you want the organisation ran.

if you dont want to the just do your own thing to represent the sport in as best a way you can.

But its pointless bitching about them unless youre activly doing one thing or the other.

Spetzcong

gandalf wrote: »

It shows that these people had such disrespect for the person that sent the original query that they didn't even bother to read it and had the arrogance to send a reply that had nothing to do with the query at hand.

It could also show that the person responding had no idea of what airsoft was (which would be slightly worrying), or was unaware of any impending ban of airsoft (which could even be good news) and as a result presumed the query was relating to the impending handgun ban.

Hivemind187

Spetzcong wrote: »

It could also show that the person responding had no idea of what airsoft was (which would be slightly worrying), or was unaware of any impending ban of airsoft (which could even be good news) and as a result presumed the query was relating to the impending handgun ban.

Which shouldnt be possible since that office confirmed receipt of IAA documentation mentioning airsoft in the text specifically.

Spetzcong

Hivemind187 wrote: »

Which shouldnt be possible since that office confirmed receipt of IAA documentation mentioning airsoft in the text specifically.

Ah yes, but this is the civil service we're talking about, there's no such thing as shouldn't be possible where they're concerned. I live with a girl who works in the Dept. of Health. Some of the stuff she tells me makes me picture it like the Unseen University straight out of discworld.

Hivemind187

Spetzcong wrote: »

Ah yes, but this is the civil service we're talking about, there's no such thing as shouldn't be possible where they're concerned. I live with a girl who works in the Dept. of Health. Some of the stuff she tells me makes me picture it like the Unseen University straight out of discworld.

QFT (meme of the week).

I am assuming it was sent to the Louth address and not to Leinster house. However if did go there then the response is unsuprising.

Edit: also, +10 cool points for the Disc World reference.

ASI Casper

Personally Franc the Manc, If I was you I'd be inclined to send your original query and their reply straight back to them and ask them to try again.

BornToKill

Frank the Manc wrote: »

it was predominantly about fire-arms but i did specifically mention airsoft.

Sorry folks, did anyone actually read Frank the Manks' response above? It was predominantly about fire-arms. It's gas how quick we can be to criticise based on prejudices when we don't know the whole story. Frank said he'd stick up the original letter later and I'd like to see that before insulting anyone further. But don't let me stop you when you've already drawn your own conclusions ...

Frank the Manc

Here is the letter i sent, i have deleted one line as it contains personal info, if they had read the entire first senntance, they would have been mane aware of my concerns regarding airsoft, it would appear they did not.


"Dear Mr Aherne,

I wish to bring to you're attention you're recent comments during the Dail debate, specifically those relating to handguns and airsoft.
I am an avid shooter, hunter & airsofter and find these comments most distressing.


As we all now the banning of handguns will not make the slightest difference to how criminals will get their hands on firearms, criminals by their very definition and nature do not obey the law and will continue to acquire firearms alongside their drug shipments and will continue to use the to settle all manner of dispute, regardless of what is illegal or not.
i noted with great interest the figure of 27 handguns being stolen since 2003, can you provide me with a further breakdown of these 27? How many were actual handguns capable of firing live ammunition, and not blank-firers, replicas, humane killers ect? Also, how many of these handguns were in the possession of private individuals and not members of an Garda Siochana or the PDF, in their professional capacity?

A ban on the private ownership of pistols will serve nothing further than to punish the most honest and safety conscious members of the public, many of whom have invested thousands into their sport, be it through equipment, alarms, safes, range fees ect.
These sportsmen and women will no longer be able to practice their chosen sport nor shall they ever represent their country in an international competition again.

Also there is the matter of ranges, clubs and associations that have a considerable amount to lose if they can no longer accommodate the sport, in this time of economic uncertainty it is really wise to deliberately cut a significant number of jobs, due to the illegal activity of criminals.

The very fact that most of the general public was unaware that handguns were being licensed in the state is extremely significant testimony that there is no handgun culture existent in this country. Handgun owners are licensed to possess their gun at home, at the range and going to and from the range, the situation does not exist where people are carrying their handguns in public, be it openly or concealed.

The problem lies in the sentencing of criminals who already have numerous serious convictions, be they of the age of majority or not. It comes as no surprise that the main suspect in the Aidan O'Kane murder case was out on bail at the time of the murder, nor will it surprise me when the killers of Sean Geoghan are brought to justice that they were either out on bail or had a lengthy list of previous convictions.
It is the judiciary that needs to be examined and held accountable if necessary, for these crimes, not innocent sportsmen and women.

In relation to the banning of Airsoft, i find it reprehensible that this sport would be attacked, again, due to the illegal activity of criminals, simple because they look like guns. This has become the fastest growing sport in Ireland at the moment, with sites and reputable retailers opening up across the country. It is a safe, fun and harmless activity, participated in by a significant number of people each weekend, much the same as paintball, only without the expense.
When will the actual people who commit these crimes be held accountable and not the objects they use?

However the fact that there is no regulation on the retailers is where I believe the problem has stemmed from. The fact that a shop which sells drug paraphernalia can also legally sell airsoft is how these devices end up in the hands of unsavoury persons, these retailers care not one iota about our sport and are simple after the quick buck.

I think that the regulation of airsoft retailers would go along way to the prevention of criminals obtaining these devices, rather than an outright ban. At the moment there are very few countries where airsoft is outlawed, Australia is currently reviewing its policy after seeing how the sport has flourished in neighbouring New Zealand and South East Asia.

I thank you for you're time and hope that you may take into account what I have said, and act accordingly & with prudence.

Kind regards,


Mr. X"

Hande hoche!

Well done bud a very sensibly worded letter.

OzCam

gandalf wrote: »

Well given the fact they have sent a reply designed for actual firearms when the query was about airsoft...

It shows that these people had such disrespect for the person that sent the original query that they didn't even bother to read it and had the arrogance to send a reply that had nothing to do with the query at hand.

Ummm, possible. But it's also at least possible that the person involved may have been really busy. Sending a preprepared response would at least allow them to mark that letter as "responded to" with minimum effort, assuming that it would be dealt with in detail by the higher-ups later.

Yes, it wasn't the right response, but it at least allows a correspondence to be entered into. That's progress. Not much, but more than we had two weeks ago.

Everybody chill. We need less heat and more light here.

Frank the Manc

I was extremely surprised to get a response in the first place, so in that sense it was some bit of an achievement, but on the other hand if someone wrote to me and i responed as that individual did, aside from my own feelings of professionalism, i would be given a good talkin to by my superiours to say the least.

Regardless of how busy i was, i would go fobbing people off, i prioritise my workload and deal with it as best i can for the important stuff and put the least pressing or serious matter on the back-burner until i can in fact deal with them appropriately.

madmaxi

well done, Frank the manc, on your letter....... it was well written.

Chuck the Buck

Hivemind187 wrote: »

Which shouldnt be possible since that office confirmed receipt of IAA documentation mentioning airsoft in the text specifically.

Maybe they had to go to specsavers and hadn't read it yet?


As for the letter I had a strong felling that it was all about firearms and not airsoft. Is there a ban on the cards for airsoft like there is for pistols? If there isn't and the Minister was thinking out loud in the Daíl then why would anyone in the Ministers office know about airsoft or have any response to something the Minister said in passing? Remember if you ask about firearms (where its my understanding there are massive changes coming in) and throw in airsoft all you're going to get back is a replay about firearms and not some toys.


Now what's the chances of the people who have been insulting the Ministers staff (the people the new IAA committee will have to deal with) to edit their posts to remove those unhelpful comments? Free speech only works when you have the common sense when NOT to exercise it.

Spetzcong

Chuck the Buck wrote: »

Now what's the chances of the people who have been insulting the Ministers staff (the people the new IAA committee will have to deal with) to edit their posts to remove those unhelpful comments? Free speech only works when you have the common sense when NOT to exercise it.

Never! My comments were about the Department of Health, and I liked my Unseen University analogy! I refuse to retract a thing!

Besides, if they've got enough time to be browsing an airsoft forum, then they should have enough time to read and properly respond to a letter.

Chuck the Buck

Spetzcong wrote: »

My comments were about the Department of Health

I've no problem with your comment, its a remark made by another individual who advertised himself (I assume its a male) as the "Former Vice-Chair and Acting Chair of the Irish Airsoft Association". That type of comment from what could have been perceived as the leader of Irish airsoft is most unhelpful, and I would assume that someone holding that office would have a bit more common sense than to say such a thing.

And as for browsing an airsoft forum if you want to research something most people google it and work from there. After looking at the IAA's site and a few shops you arrive on boards, not to mention that the fact that the DoJ staff apparently are known to look around on here.

Frank the Manc

Chuck the Buck wrote: »

Maybe they had to go to specsavers and hadn't read it yet?


As for the letter I had a strong felling that it was all about firearms and not airsoft. Is there a ban on the cards for airsoft like there is for pistols? If there isn't and the Minister was thinking out loud in the Daíl then why would anyone in the Ministers office know about airsoft or have any response to something the Minister said in passing? Remember if you ask about firearms (where its my understanding there are massive changes coming in) and throw in airsoft all you're going to get back is a replay about firearms and not some toys.


Now what's the chances of the people who have been insulting the Ministers staff (the people the new IAA committee will have to deal with) to edit their posts to remove those unhelpful comments? Free speech only works when you have the common sense when NOT to exercise it.

Whils the letter is predominantly about firearms, it mentions Airsoft at the begining of the opening paragraph, and goes on to mention it further down, i wouldnt exactly classify that as all about firearms.

the fact that the minuster has indicated his intentions re: airsoft in the dail is enough for me to worry about, despite un-substantiated claims to the contrary.

i dont know that airsoft will be bannen, but given the current climate, i for one am not goin to just hope it isnt & bury my head in the sand.
until we get written assurances that he is not goin to ban it, i dont see why we should act as if we are safe.

Chuck the Buck

Frank the people I know (along with people they know) who have pistol licences or were in the process of applying for a pistol licences are all writing off to the Minister (to his office in Dundalk, the DoJ and Leinster House) saying the same sort of thing as you did. My point is that if in the current climate (for all intents and purposes a ban on pistols) if you send in a letter to the Minsters office talking about firearms and mentioning airsoft then you'll get a response about firearms and NOT airsoft.

Airsoft may not register very highly with them compared to firearms due to the numbers of letters from individuals, clubs, governing bodies etc, not to mention the amount of money that has been invested by both clubs/ranges and individuals in their sport. Compared to firearms airsoft is chump change.

extremetaz

first - why are we discussing firearms on the airsoft boards?

second - nobody advertised themselves as "Former Vice-Chair and Acting Chair of the Irish Airsoft Association", that was stone.cold having yet another needless pop at the IAA. :mad:

third - hiveminds comment about specsavers was not only quite apt given the response received to the question asked but also perfectly obviously meant to lighten up the mood.

finally - no doubt the relevent govt. departments are well and truely overwhelmed with various unilateral attempts from people to get their attention. Whilst these actions do help them to realise the gravity of their proposed actions they also put them onto autopilot where responses are concerned. This is perfectly understandable if you've ever been in the position of having to reply to the same questions time and time again. I for one am delighted to note that by virtue of the fact a response was received, we know that they are still actually checking their mail reasonably regularly.

Now can we please all stop bickering pointlessly - it helps nobody and this is a time when we REALLY DO all need to be pulling together rather than needlessly nitpicking and donning the whole wonderous variety of tinfoil hats.

Stone.cold

second - nobody advertised themselves as "Former Vice-Chair and Acting Chair of the Irish Airsoft Association", that was stone.cold having yet another needless pop at the IAA. :mad:

When have i had a pop at the IAA please explain this because it is starting to get a little old, i am doin as much as oanyone to secure airsofts future, but seriously get your facts straight before u make comments on here oh and read peoples signatures

extremetaz

Stone.cold wrote: »

When have i had a pop at the IAA please explain this because it is starting to get a little old, i am doin as much as oanyone to secure airsofts future, but seriously get your facts straight before u make comments on here oh and read peoples signatures

what signature?

and I'm refering to your outbursts in this thread stating that:

- the IAA had declared they had no contact with the DoJ - which is blatently untrue.

- and stating that although you're not a member you think they should have informed you of such correspondance.


and brother - I'm the one who's had every fact straight for the last two years. :cool:

Chuck the Buck

extremetaz wrote: »

second - nobody advertised themselves as "Former Vice-Chair and Acting Chair of the Irish Airsoft Association", that was stone.cold having yet another needless pop at the IAA. :mad:

Oh? So Hivemind187 never had that as part of his sig before it was removed late last night/this morning? I'm sorry I must have been mistaken :rolleyes:

As for needless pops at the IAA is it not for the benefit of the IAA that posts like the one I have issue with should not happen in the first place?

TheDoc

Now that theres been a shuffle in the iaa structure, that leaves one of the most articulate and witty writers free to pretty much start posting as a regular person again

And there is going to be a world of pwnage been handed out around here

Stone.cold

extremetaz wrote: »

what signature?

and I'm refering to your outbursts in this thread stating that:

- the IAA had declared they had no contact with the DoJ - which is blatently untrue.

- and stating that although you're not a member you think they should have informed you of such correspondance.


and brother - I'm the one who's had every fact straight for the last two years. :cool:

Brother? far out man. well now that the IAA have changed commitee members for the better i hope, they will get a lot more members. what is they say "new broom" etc.,

gandalf

gandalf wrote: »

Now I am putting my mod hat on. I expect both of you to stand down and relax. There is enough stress coming from outside the Airsoft community without pressure and issues building up out of nothing within it.

What part of this did people not understand. I will ban the next person that has a snipe at another on this thread. I don't care if you are the Grand Wizard of the KKK or you are the Mother f****** Theresa of Airsoft or whatever title or team you are a member of stand down now or I will ban and I will lock this thread.

Last warning.