Organise appeals by county

Chipboard

I had my meeting with the Super recently and although he didn't tell me straight out, it is apparent that he is going to decline my application for a centrefire pistol. I know for a fact that you would be as well off spending your money on magic beans as giving it to some small town solicitor to bring a District Court appeal on cases like these and unless Willie Egan has a sleigh and a time machine he won't be able to do them all so I have a suggestion;

We could start a dedicated thread and as people are declined they could post this fact (including the date of the decline) and their county of residence. When each individual brings their appeal they could seek an adjournment to a sitting date of the District court agreed with Willie Egan (your local solicitor could do this for a few quid) and Willie Egan might agree to travel to represent 8 or 10 appellants on the one date.

What do you think?

Victor

Surely it would be better to organise based on court districts or Garda divisions.

jwshooter

Chipboard wrote: »

I had my meeting with the Super recently and although he didn't tell me straight out, it is apparent that he is going to decline my application for a centrefire pistol. I know for a fact that you would be as well off spending your money on magic beans as giving it to some small town solicitor to bring a District Court appeal on cases like these and unless Willie Egan has a sleigh and a time machine he won't be able to do them all so I have a suggestion;

We could start a dedicated thread and as people are declined they could post this fact (including the date of the decline) and their county of residence. When each individual brings their appeal they could seek an adjournment to a sitting date of the District court agreed with Willie Egan (your local solicitor could do this for a few quid) and Willie Egan might agree to travel to represent 8 or 10 appellants on the one date.

What do you think?

there was a meeting with the top brass and the firearm panel , what i have heard is the supers are been told to licence centre fire pistols where the applicant has ALL the right boxes ticked . thats on a fairly good grape vine.

murph226

jwshooter wrote: »

there was a meeting with the top brass and the firearm panel , what i have heard is the supers are been told to licence centre fire pistols where the applicant has ALL the right boxes ticked . thats on a fairly good grape vine.

Meaning?

jwshooter

murph226 wrote: »

Meaning?

not a big job work that out.

do you want me the spell it out

LB6

yes please! spit it out man! lol

jwshooter

this is 3th hand but form a good source.

the supers have been sent a memo, stating to licence pistols where the applicant and every thing in order .
ie.
a licenced pistol pre the cut off date , home security in order ,member of a pulse reg club etc.

also to grant mods to people that have note all ready for them and look at new ones with opened eyes .

Chipboard

JW you sound like that Bertie Ahern clip from 2006 that was on RTE1 tonight where he said he couldn't see anything wrong with the economy. Your statement also infers that anyone who has been refused didn't tick the right boxes. Its a bit of a statement to make and totally out of line with the reality of the situation on the ground. Now can we get back on topic.

LB6

Thanks JW - but I'll believe that when I see it. Bit of a doubting ThomasINA in me!

homerhop

Why the sudden change of heart?

bunny shooter

Might be worth my while trying for a moderator again

homerhop

Is there anywhere we can see information on these cloke and dagger meatings with those who are represention our sports and the relevant government bodies. It would be nice to have a main source of information from the firearm panel saying yes they will meet us on this or no they wont budge on that.

jwshooter

well most of the info im getting on this is not far off the mark.

bunny the meeting was yesterday so leave it till the new year .il find out more in the next few days .

i think they were told by there legal team there in breach of the act and it would not stand up in the courts .

homerhop

Will that have any bearing on the result of the case Patrick Herlihy took?

Grizzly 45

LB6 wrote: »

Thanks JW - but I'll believe that when I see it. Bit of a doubting ThomasINA in me!

Best way to be..Until you have that bit of card in your paw saying you are entitled to a CF for another 3years.Belive it then!!
Not saying that you are talking baloney here JW,its just we have had too good rumours,half truths and general rumours of Christmas in the Turkey farm type stories over the last 12/18 months that nothing is beliveable until cold hard evidence is produced to say to the contry.

jwshooter

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Best way to be..Until you have that bit of card in your paw saying you are entitled to a CF for another 3years.Belive it then!!
Not saying that you are talking baloney here JW,its just we have had too good rumours,half truths and general rumours of Christmas in the Turkey farm type stories over the last 12/18 months that nothing is beliveable until cold hard evidence is produced to say to the contry.

ya but not for me .

murph226

jwshooter wrote: »

not a big job work that out.

do you want me the spell it out

Well JW if Pat Herlihy did'nt have all the right boxes ticked We're all F*cked!

jwshooter

murph226 wrote: »

Well JW if Pat Herlihy did'nt have all the right boxes ticked We're all F*cked!

lets just wait and see murf.

murph226

jwshooter wrote: »

lets just wait and see murf.

I hope your right JW, just a bit frustrating hearing about a possible about turn now!
I had to offload mine as I got it after the cut off date, luckily I was able to trade it in up North for a rifle.

rowa

sorry to say i don't believe a word of this , for a start the gardai weren't listening to there own firearms policy unit only a few weeks ago , i know this for a fact .
the way i think ahern had this set up was to split pistol shooters in three , first the centrefire lads who had them pre nov 08 , the people who had centrefires after that date and then the issf .22 target shooters , he played one off the other and only had the intention to keep the .22's .
if we get to keep them for another 3 years the chances are that there will be a fine gael minister for justice and that opens a whole other can of worms .

Bananaman

I also do not believe a word of this.

Chief Supers cannot be told what to do by the Commissioner, Minister or anyone else.

Mar ya.

Now - they are hoping for a go at the commissioner job themselves one day so they will row with the current - so there is room for the Minister and Commissioner to makethri wishes known - as I have no doubt they have done.

For the Minister or Commissioner to issue an edict of this nature is unlikely at best.
What would have brought it about?
Is one of the National Associations in communications with the Minister and Commissioner?
More likely they are looking at the number of appeal lodged in the DC which must be substantial at this stage.

At the same time I would question your sources - I hope these are not the same sources that toured the land telling us all 'to keep your heads down lads and you'll keep what you have' because those sources were talking through their hole then and will be now.

I dunno were they just being led by the snout or were they making it up to try and curry favour.

What they taught me was to believe none of the rumour mill - it is all bollix - you hear something you would like to hear - doubt it - seek proof - you hear something you did not want to hear - doubt it and seek proof. There are no end of people will ing to tell people what they wnat to hear but when you dig into it they have been making it up all along.

Without proof it is rubbish.

On the other hand, if this is a reputable source and you have seen evidence of this claim - i.e. the memo - it would give me some hope.

I would recommned contacting your national association (NASRPC) to keep them abreast of what you have seen.

B'Man

rrpc

murph226 wrote: »

Well JW if Pat Herlihy did'nt have all the right boxes ticked We're all F*cked!

Unless Pat has a time machine he couldn't get the benefit of any decision made the day before yesterday :rolleyes:

I wouldn't be surprised if what jwshooter says is true. The Minister made assurances about current licence holders last November and the number of refusals is making a mockery of those assurances. I have no doubt that his intention at the time was (as he said) to put a halt to the growth of centre fire pistol ownership; and we've had many instances of people who got licences in the past without ticking any of the boxes the vast majority of us here have done.

Certainly people who have not met the standards under the new regime should not be accommodated, but people with a long track record of club attendance and a history of involvement in the shooting sports should not be treated in the appalling manner we have seen.

It's possibly not coincidental that the Minister's statement in the Dail last week about the number of licences issued, brought the problem to light and questions may well have been asked of the licensing authority as to what exactly is going on. Hundreds of cases in the district court would not be the most ideal way of demonstrating the sincerity of the Minister's assurances.

It's a given that we don't like what the Minister has done to our sports, but all his legislation has implemented exactly what he said he would do to the letter. There is nothing inconsistent between the legislation and his statement last November. Where the inconsistency lies is within the licensing system itself and there have been statements made either in refusal letters or in the district courts that purport to represent the Minister's aims when in fact they do not. There are even inconsistencies between the refusals and the Commissioner's guidelines which in itself may be problematic when taken in the context of a court case.

Obviously as others have said, we need to wait and see what (if anything) is the outcome of this information, but as we've been waiting some time already for clarity, that's no loss. In fact seeing as the vast majority of applications do not seem to have been dealt with yet: if there's any benefit to be gained from this, those people whose applications have yet to be adjudicated upon may well be the first to know.

happyjack

jwshooter wrote: »

there was a meeting with the top brass and the firearm panel , what i have heard is the supers are been told to licence centre fire pistols where the applicant has ALL the right boxes ticked . thats on a fairly good grape vine.

In Kerry my head Garda for the County told me he would not issue any restricted certs of any kind unless the applicant won an appeal through the courts, So I don't know, maybe others are being reasonable, but for sure most Chief Supers are choosing not to issue any restricted certs, they are all quoting the Charlton case. Thats from the horses mouth, All Limerk city and County, All Kerry, and most of Cork and I hear only a couple issued in Clare and Cork, and they are saying now they were issued in error!

From what I can make out it looks like over 90% of restricted firearms are not being renewed.

Frustrated target shooter in Kerry,

Not so happyjack:(

CJhaughey

happyjack wrote: »

In Kerry my head Garda for the County told me he would not issue any restricted certs of any kind unless the applicant won an appeal through the courts, So I don't know, maybe others are being reasonable, but for sure most Chief Supers are choosing not to issue any restricted certs, they are all quoting the Charlton case. Thats from the horses mouth, All Limerk city and County, All Kerry, and most of Cork and I hear only a couple issued in Clare and Cork, and they are saying now they were issued in error!

From what I can make out it looks like over 90% of restricted firearms are not being renewed.

Frustrated target shooter in Kerry,

Not so happyjack:(

Nope I know of one 9mm CF pistol licensed in Clare and it was not an error.

happyjack

murph226 wrote: »

Well JW if Pat Herlihy did'nt have all the right boxes ticked We're all F*cked!

Thats so true, I agree, I've seen and heard dozens of shooters here in Kerry being refused licenses for one gun unless they get a gun vault with 4 4"inch dead bolts, when I told the Gardai, (a few) that it was not a requirement according to the GC guidelines, I was told well it's law here! Believe what you see, not what you here, guns are being crushed the lenght of the country because thats what Supers want.

HJ:)

rrpc

Refusals based on the Charleton case may just as well be based on the Bible. It's about as relevant.

The only possible grounds that a licensing authority could have used from the Charleton case (the proliferation of short firearms) has been effectively neutered by the CJA(MP)A 2009 where the Minister took steps to deal with the proliferation 'problem' which happened since the Charleton judgement.

lead loader

I got a grant letter this morning for a restricted .22 pistol (sig mosquito). I had application for 9mm and .357 refused. I contacted the Firearms Policy Unit this morning to enquire if there was any other avenue of mediation open to me other than a District Court appeal. I was told that the matter was between the Chief and myself, and that if the chief had refused the application after meeting me to discuss the matter, then its very unlightly that he would reconsider. I was told my only option was to take a District Court appeal and hope for the best:mad:

knockon

CJhaughey wrote: »

Nope I know of one 9mm CF pistol licensed in Clare and it was not an error.

Correct CJ - One in Shannon Town and the other in Killaloe area.

CJhaughey

knockon wrote: »

Correct CJ - One in Shannon Town and the other in Killaloe area.

I believe that you have been in touch?

rowa

happyjack wrote: »

In Kerry my head Garda for the County told me he would not issue any restricted certs of any kind unless the applicant won an appeal through the courts, So I don't know, maybe others are being reasonable, but for sure most Chief Supers are choosing not to issue any restricted certs, they are all quoting the Charlton case. Thats from the horses mouth, All Limerk city and County, All Kerry, and most of Cork and I hear only a couple issued in Clare and Cork, and they are saying now they were issued in error!

From what I can make out it looks like over 90% of restricted firearms are not being renewed.

Frustrated target shooter in Kerry,

Not so happyjack:(

i think what he has done there is completely illegal as every application should be judged on its own merits under the law , a publically announced "ban" by him in his area should get him suspended or sacked , but then again this is ireland and no public figure is ever held accountable for their actions .

bunny shooter

lead loader wrote: »

I got a grant letter this morning for a restricted .22 pistol (sig mosquito). I had application for 9mm and .357 refused. I contacted the Firearms Policy Unit this morning to enquire if there was any other avenue of mediation open to me other than a District Court appeal. I was told that the matter was between the Chief and myself, and that if the chief had refused the application after meeting me to discuss the matter, then its very unlightly that he would reconsider. I was told my only option was to take a District Court appeal and hope for the best:mad:

Seems the FPU have no "teeth" now either :rolleyes:

I got same answer on my moderator refusal

That was the only thing of any use to come from the FCP. Now it seems more than ever that was a complete waste of time

murph226

A friend of mine got his refusal letter today for a 22 revolver:rolleyes:

Forgot to add, he had " all the boxes ticked".

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

Seems the FPU have no "teeth" now either :rolleyes:

I got same answer on my moderator refusal

That was the only thing of any use to come from the FCP. Now it seems more than ever that was a complete waste of time

Bunny, have you ever actually read the firearms acts?

Nobody can tell an issuing officer what to do. The Commissioner can issue guidelines, the district court can overturn a decision, but the decision to grant or refuse is that officers to make and only his or hers.

BornToKill

rowa wrote: »

a publically announced "ban" by him in his area should get him suspended or sacked

Do you have a link to this publicly announced ban? I must have missed that announcement. Thanks.

bunny shooter

rrpc wrote: »

Bunny, have you ever actually read the firearms acts?.

Yes, and your point is ?

rrpc wrote: »

Nobody can tell an issuing officer what to do.

Agreed, but "he who pays the piper calls the tune" seems appropiate

rrpc wrote: »

The Commissioner can issue guidelines.

Guidelines :rolleyes:.................I am going to use my copy as loo paper same as some Supers and Chief Supers are

rrpc wrote: »

the district court can overturn a decision

and in the real world ........................ ?

rrpc wrote: »

but the decision to grant or refuse is that officers to make and only his or hers.

So why have guidelines and legislation ?

Don't piss on me and tell me it's raining

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

Yes, and your point is ?

You obviously don't retain well so

Jeez, did you have to chop what was a small post in the first place in to so many tiny pieces??? I'm not sure what I meant any more

Agreed, but "he who pays the piper calls the tune" seems appropiate

Back to the firearms act with you so, with a quick pitstop at Dunne v Donohoe on the way

Guidelines :rolleyes:.................I am going to use my copy as loo paper

Ooooohhhh! Hope you didn't use that heavy bond paper to print them out on

and in the real world ........................ ?

We've only seen one case so far, January's going to be a busy month from what I hear, and guess who's got jury duty that month?

So why have guidelines and legislation ?

So far, and I'm open to correction on this, I don't recall hearing of any laws being broken. There certainly isn't a "thou shalt apply and verily thou shalt get a licence forthwith" in the firearms act.*

*Please read this in the spirit of bunny and I taking pot shots at each other in the absence of bunnies and targets. It in no way reflects on any person living, dead or in limbo on a shooting range or their aaplication and/or grant or refusal of said application.

rowa

BornToKill wrote: »

Do you have a link to this publicly announced ban? I must have missed that announcement. Thanks.

it was contained in the letter of refusal given to one of the former centrefire pistol owners on here , and i think the chief super in question is not particularly shy about what he says on the matter.

rrpc

rowa wrote: »

it was contained in the letter of refusal given to one of the former centrefire pistol owners on here , and i think the chief super in question is not particularly shy about what he says on the matter.

I don't think it was in the letter rowa. It was mentioned in the post that it was said, but it transpired that the letter didn't contain any such wording. I remember asking at the time and it being confirmed that the letter was the standard one.

rowa

rrpc wrote: »

I don't think it was in the letter rowa. It was mentioned in the post that it was said, but it transpired that the letter didn't contain any such wording. I remember asking at the time and it being confirmed that the letter was the standard one.

my mistake .

bunny shooter

rrpc wrote: »

You obviously don't retain well so

Memory (and hung) like an elephant

rrpc wrote: »

Jeez, did you have to chop what was a small post in the first place in to so many tiny pieces??? I'm not sure what I meant any more

It makes it easier for people, like you seemingly, to digest my comments

rrpc wrote: »

Back to the firearms act with you so, with a quick pitstop at Dunne v Donohoe on the way

Seems like more loo paper to me at this stage

rrpc wrote: »

Ooooohhhh! Hope you didn't use that heavy bond paper to print them out on

Recession here, feeding loo paper into printer as it's ****e I'm printing onto it anyway

rrpc wrote: »

We've only seen one case so far, January's going to be a busy month from what I hear, and guess who's got jury duty that month?

Pointless waste of time

rrpc wrote: »

So far, and I'm open to correction on this, I don't recall hearing of any laws being broken. There certainly isn't a "thou shalt apply and verily thou shalt get a licence forthwith" in the firearms act.*

Same as no politican or priest has ever broken one :rolleyes: There are listed reasons when I can't have one so therefore why can't I if I ain't excluded by said reasons ?

rrpc wrote: »

*Please read this in the spirit of bunny and I taking pot shots at each other in the absence of bunnies and targets. It in no way reflects on any person living, dead or in limbo on a shooting range or their aaplication and/or grant or refusal of said application.

Ya right :P

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

Memory (and hung) like an elephant

Elephants never forget because they never remember anything to forget

It makes it easier for people, like you seemingly, to digest my comments

Well seeing as it was you that did the cutting...

Same as no politican or priest has ever broken one :rolleyes: There are listed reasons when I can't have one so therefore why can't I if I ain't excluded by said reasons ?

You're almost always given a reason for a refusal. You may not like it or agree with it, but its up to you to make something of it if you want to. If no reason is given then you get to have them trot into court and give one to the judge.

Are you still going to court?

bunny shooter

rrpc wrote: »

...............Are you still going to court?

Got legal advice and the advice was "forget it ...................."

knockon

bunny shooter wrote: »

Got legal advice and the advice was "forget it ...................."

I am dissapointed to hear that Bunny. The advice could not have come from a solicitor or did it? I can only speak for myself but I will fight tooth and nail starting with the appeal in early January. It might seem like a lot of hassle and cost but the decision to take on the State was not started by me but as sure as hell I will do my utmost to conclude it in a satisfactory manner (to myself).

Lastly, both you and RRPC need to do dinner or something over Christmas!

bunny shooter

Seems the "public safety" argument might be hard to overturn and a possible legal bill of €500ish is just a bit too much to swallow for the sake of a moderator

RRPC would be welcome at my place for dinner anytime and we could discuss how all the things we were promised the FCP would achieve have come to nothing :P

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

Seems the "public safety" argument might be hard to overturn and a possible legal bill of €500ish is just a bit too much to swallow for the sake of a moderator

I'll give you three good answers to the public safety issue and they're free

1. High velocity rounds create a sonic crack which is non-directional, so people hearing you shoot won't know which direction it's coming from. They may as easily walk towards you as away from you.

2. You've already been approved for a licence for a rifle to shoot game/vermin. If you're not capable of ascertaining if it's safe to shoot, you shouldn't have been given the licence in the first place.

3. It's not up to walkers or other members of the public to take evasive actrion if you're shooting. It's up to you to make sure there's no-one anywhere near your line of fire before taking a shot. Whether you have a moderator or not will have no bearing on that procedure.

RRPC would be welcome at my place for dinner anytime and we could discuss how all the things we were promised the FCP would achieve have come to nothing :P

And I'd be happy to take up that offer . Before I do, perhaps you'd outline those promises that were made and not kept and who exactly made those promises and when?

jwshooter

there is a problem with the chef super , stating a mod on a fullbore is a danger to public safety.

firstly and most importantly they would be talking MY professionalism into question also there bringing into question my capability to use and operate my firearm in a safe manor.
therefore they are directly implying im not fit to use my firearm with a mod on it.
why give me a licence for the firearm in the first place if there is any doubt in there minds of my capabilities.

i would challenge them on these grounds .as basally there saying im unfit to operate a firearm.
there lack of understand and knowledge of firearms/mods is outstanding .

these people are being paid a large amount of money to enforce and be knolageable of the laws there being paid to enforce.

but they are not .

kakashka

jwshooter wrote: »

there is a problem with the chef super , stating a mod on a fullbore is a danger to public safety.

firstly and most importantly they would be talking MY professionalism into question also there bringing into question my capability to use and operate my firearm in a safe manor.
therefore they are directly implying im not fit to use my firearm with a mod on it.
why give me a licence for the firearm in the first place if there is any doubt in there minds of my capabilities.

i would challenge them on these grounds .as basally there saying im unfit to operate a firearm.
there lack of understand and knowledge of firearms/mods is outstanding .

.

And if you lost such a challenge would the powers that be not be left with no choice but to revoke your gun licences?

rrpc

kakashka wrote: »

And if you lost such a challenge would the powers that be not be left with no choice but to revoke your gun licences?

How? This isn't some game of jeopardy. The issue is whether or not you're fit to hold a firearms licence; they've already said you are by issuing it and renewing it for a number of years. Are they going to suddenly say they're wrong and they didn't understand what they were doing? :rolleyes:

kakashka

rrpc wrote: »

How? This isn't some game of jeopardy. The issue is whether or not you're fit to hold a firearms licence; they've already said you are by issuing it and renewing it for a number of years. Are they going to suddenly say they're wrong and they didn't understand what they were doing? :rolleyes:

Is that not whats going on?have you not just outlined what is actually happening,several cases here where they have said they were wrong and refused to re licence supp???my point was that if its a competence issue and you lost your case how on earth could a judge let you walk out of court with a gun licence if your found to be unfit to hold a suppressor licence?? now i would also argue that you could not loose such a case if you already had gun licence,but your smarter than me rrpc,i use question marks for good reason...

Chipboard

jwshooter wrote: »

this is 3th hand but form a good source.

the supers have been sent a memo, stating to licence pistols where the applicant and every thing in order .
ie.
a licenced pistol pre the cut off date , home security in order ,member of a pulse reg club etc.

This is looking less and less credible by the minute.

Grizzly 45

About as likely as Dermot Aherne taking up pistol shooting!!!:rolleyes: