Power of Government

Sikamick

It seems that what is supposed to be a democracy (UK), the UK Government have made the decision to put in an additional Runway at Heathrow against the will of the local people who will lose two villages, 700 hundred houses, Schools, shops etc.

And some of us think that pistols cant be taken off us here.?

Sikamick

meathstevie

I suppose the UK government will do the same with those home owners and businesses as they done with pistol owners : pay a fair and realistic compensation. Our crowd looks like it's going down the road of not renewing licences defacto saddling you with an illegal firearm which you can only dispose of without compensation. It's hard to have to dispose of something you know is not going to do any harm to anyone but getting a kick in the teeth as a thank you is pure offensive.

BornToKill

Sikamick wrote: »

It seems that what is supposed to be a democracy (UK)... against the will of the local people

I don't understand how doing something that may be against the will of some local people is anti-democratic. The incinerators, landfills and motorways have to go somewhere.

Sparks

And we've wandered right into a Politics thread (as in, this really should be over in the politics forum). Moving it to their baliwick (as BTK has a nice devils advocate position going there).

Sikamick

BornToKill wrote: »

I don't understand how doing something that may be against the will of some local people is anti-democratic. The incinerators, landfills and motorways have to go somewhere.

_________________________________________________________________

BornToKill what if it was your house, Village, or parents home, school, local pub that's been there for over a hundred years, I'm sure you would be saying like most of us not in my back yard.

The reason I put this post up at all was to draw attention to the shooting community in Ireland that if the government make a decision on the pistols there doesn't seem to be much we can do, if the UK government can destroy villages, homes, communities, involving some thousands of people our situation re pistol, Think?

Sikamick

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Sparks

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

*shakes head in despair*
Yes, and all cars are black.

DF, my pistol is an air pistol, and the only way I could kill a human with it is by bludgeoning them about the head with it. It is, nevertheless, a firearm and subject to all the law that applies to firearms. And mine is not unique - surprisingly few firearms are designed to kill humans and most of those (the modern ones at least) are not legal to own anywhere in the EU, including Ireland.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

turgon

I suppose it all comes down to the will of the locals, who dont want it, and the will of the whole nation of people, who probably do.

Its the same with incinerators. Loads of people want them, once there not near their own house.

Sparks

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

The argument goes "cars kill hundreds every year in Ireland but we've had no injuries in target shooting since the 1840s, therefore ban cars not target shooting". The response is always "cars are designed to transport, guns are designed to kill". If you don't say that all firearms are designed to kill you, but instead say that a firearm which is not designed to kill can cause serious injury if abused; then the whole argument goes out the window, because cars cause such large numbers of deaths and injuries every year due to abuse that logically you must ban cars, not firearms because cars are thousands of times more dangerous in practise.

Look, simply put, there's only one real way to stop gun crime, and that's to stop the crime part. More funding and training and oversight for the Gardai, a greater emphasis on undercutting the economic basis for the drugs trade that funds the gun crime, and less of the stereotypical Irish admiration of the 'cute hoordom' and more of the stereotypical continental respect for social rules. Unfortunately for our sport, that's harder than saying "guns are bad, m'kay" and ordering all law-abiding firearms owners to surrender their firearms (which they will do, allowing the Minister to say to the press that he's addressed gun crime despite the reality of the situation).

My point was that the OP is drawing what seems to be a false analogy between destroying buildings around Heathrow for the purpose of building a new runway, and banning pistols in Ireland. I don't see the connection, myself.

The connection is the basic principle of good policy-making, namely giving all stakeholders a voice. In both the heathrow and pistol cases, some stakeholders feel they have been ignored and that their interests and quality of life have been sidelined for the baser interests of others - in Heathrow, for the commercial profit of the airport and airlines, and in the pistol case, for the political career of the Minister (and the ratings/circulation figures of the various media outlets).

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Sparks

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Leaving aside that you're arguing for group punishment of innocent people for the criminal acts of others, there's the point that the same argument argues that we should ban cars lest they be stolen and used in criminal acts like joyriding, robbery and so forth.
And you still won't have solved the problem of gun crime, because the amount of unlicenced, illegal firearms which are being shipped into the country every year with drugs and other contraband is enormously more than those being licenced, let alone those being stolen from licenced owners (and the figures on those stolen from licenced owners, by the way, aren't really available - you can get how many pistols were stolen, for example, but when you look into it you find that "pistol" actually means "pistols, paintball markers, airguns, starter pistols and a bunch of other stuff we don't have seperate forms for in the local station").

Yes, I agree with this too. The purpose of a crackdown should be to prevent guns from falling into the hands of criminals. The question, though, is how do these guns get into the hands of criminals? What is the route that a gun travels from its lawful manufacturer to its criminal user?

Primarily, in Ireland at least, through smuggling of narcotics and other contraband.

I don't think you can boil it down so simply to the "commercial profit of the airport and the airlines." Isn't it more a question of the greater public good? That an extended airport will better serve the needs of passengers and commercial traffic, facilitating the needs of exporters, importers, tourists, &c.? And that the overall beneficial effect outweighs the disadvantage of having to relocate those people whose homes will be affected?

It's an argument, but those on the receiving end don't feel their voice was given sufficient weight - more that they came to the table to find a fait accompli, not a process.

Similarly, I don't think it's legitimate to argue that the government is banning pistols so as to promote the circulation of newspapers.

Not the argument - the argument was that the Minister is banning pistols to further the Minister's political career, and the media are covering it in such a tabloid fashion in order to increase their ratings/circulation.