Are you happy with the "new" firearms licencing system ?

bunny shooter

How do you feel about new licencing regime ?

I think we have been shafted big time :mad:

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

How do you feel about new licencing regime ?

I think we have been shafted big time :mad:

You might want to add: (un)happy with the system but/and (un)happy with how it's being applied.

Number of options there.

boc121

bunny shooter wrote: »

I think we have been shafted big time :mad:

+1 :mad:

Sick of being screwed at this stage, a couple of pensioners took to the streets and got them to change their minds,supposedly there's 200,000 of us and we're bending over and taking it up the ass:eek: Surely we can organise some sort of protest.

bunny shooter

How it is being applied could be fixed if things were made more black and white.

As long as there is room for a Super or a Chief Super to "interpret" things and we have vague "guidelines" which cannot be enforced the system is no good.

hence my choices

There is an old army term "KISS" ................. "keep it simple stupid"

Grizzly 45

At this stage of the game I would rather do all the strenous paperwork and tests of a continental country to get my gun liscense,and know bar doing somthing daft I have it then for life,and can literally walk into a gun shop,purchase what I want and walk out the door,and it will be registerd within a week on my gun liscense with the county council....Rather than put up with this arbitary,goal post moving,playing against a stacked deck of officals in both Govt and police who are deciding that their interpertation of what the law of the land is .Not to mind the financial cost of having to fight this thru our "justice system"
No other country in the world would tolerate this kind of nonsense.That a high ranking member of a police force can stand up in a court of law and freely admit that he and his colleuges conspired to pervert the law to their ideals and interpertation beggers belif!!!

BornToKill

Happy/unhappy is subjective and subject to change from day to day. It might be better to ask if the new system is better or worse than what went before.

bunny shooter

:rolleyes:

I'm working on the KISS principle

On your current experince of the current system if you have been through it and if you haven't there is an option

BornToKill

bunny shooter wrote: »

:rolleyes: I'm working on the KISS principle

Well, I'd say you got the SS part right anyway then.

bunny shooter

BornToKill wrote: »

Well, I'd say you got the SS part right anyway then.

Make a good Minister for Justice then wouldn't I

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

How it is being applied could be fixed if things were made more black and white.

As long as there is room for a Super or a Chief Super to "interpret" things and we have vague "guidelines" which cannot be enforced the system is no good.

But that was present in the 'old' system as well, so there's no differentiation between new and old.

For example, I'm very happy with the way the CS in my division is doing things. He's properly considering each application on it's merits and talking to the applicants directly.

Whatever about the end result, you couldn't ask for more than that. I know of at least two other divisions that are doing the same thing, but others are being less than cursory in the way they're carrying out their functions.

It's a much more complex question than you make it out.

bunny shooter

Where you live should not determine how the firearms system is administered.

The sysytem should be if you fulfill crieria xyz you can have abc not how "sound" your Super Chief Super is .....................

One man one licence, "one on, one off" etc

It's only complex because it's made complex

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

Where you live should not determine how the firearms system is administered.

The sysytem should be if you fulfill crieria xyz you can have abc not how "sound" your Super Chief Super is .....................

As I said, that was present in the old 'system'. The new system has been partly in place and well documented since 2006. The issue (as before) is the implementation, not the system itself.

Odysseus

I relatively new to shooting so I would have to say I'm happy at the moment. I have applied for three licences in the past year, this time last year for a Gamo .22 air rifle, I got the licence on the 13rd of July. I applied for an O/U in Sept and revieved the licence in Dec. However, they seem to had made some changes as I applied for a .17hrm last month and I recieved the grant letter yesterday.

So I happy enough with the system at the moment, and looking at the difference in waiting times they seem to improving in my area. However, I'm conscious that my interest in this sport has not been negatively effected by the recent changes in the law. So I would be happy enough in relation to how it has effected me, I would be unhappy with it when I see how it has effected other sport shooters on this site. It may not be a discipline that I currently engage in, but I support others rights to engage in any dicipline they chose to engage in.

I hope that makes some sense.

rrpc

Odysseus wrote: »

I relatively new to shooting so I would have to say I'm happy at the moment. I have applied for three licences in the past year, this time last year for a Gamo .22 air rifle, I got the licence on the 13rd of July. I applied for an O/U in Sept and revieved the licence in Dec. However, they seem to had made some changes as I applied for a .17hrm last month and I recieved the grant letter yesterday.

So I happy enough with the system at the moment, and looking at the difference in waiting times they seem to improving in my area. However, I'm conscious that my interest in this sport has not been negatively effected by the recent changes in the law. So I would be happy enough in relation to how it has effected me, I would be unhappy with it when I see how it has effected other sport shooters on this site. It may not be a discipline that I currently engage in, but I support others rights to engage in any dicipline the chose to engage in.

I hope that makes some sense.

+1

The actual 'system' itself; the application, licence and for the majority of applicants the speed and efficiency of the whole process has improved immeasurably.

That's the 'system' to my mind.

johngalway

I can't find an option which suits me.

I got the .223 and the 12ga no probs. My HMR is up in the air, still not got the full proper licence for it, just a halfassed mistake.

It's worked OK for me, but I don't like how it is being applied to others. There but for the grace of God and that.

Dusty87

I have to say in my experience im happy with the way i was dealt with. Put in an application for a .223 rifle on the 23rd of december. Had the licence in my hand less than 3 weeks later:eek: I licenced a shotgun in the old system and it took over 4 months.
Im happy with the way my application turned out. No messing around. However, i dont have a handgun or a restricted firearm, and i dont think its right to refuse a licence that has been granted before over some new stupid excuse that the Super never thought of when licencing the guns for the past x amount of years.

ghostmantra

i voted not happy it took forever :(but saying that i have what i wanted,so i should be grateful

boc121

ghostmantra wrote: »

(but saying that i have what i wanted,so i should be grateful

Why should we be grateful, we've proven we are capable,honest,law abiding and not f###ed in the head:eek::eek: and payed a lot of money for a service.We would'nt put up with it from phone,electricity,gas etc but we take all kinds of s##te from the government.We need some leadership on this.
Waiting patiently bunny:P

skipz

Application sent in August, acknowledgement letter in November, final date after 3 months the 20nd January. No liecene yet:mad:. Rang the G's, "uummhhh, we'l ring back in 2 days". 3 weeks, no call.:mad:

Kryten

No I cannot say the new system is better, There is still the Gardai making up their own rules. Many of my team mates in Hilltop have had centerfire pistols renewed. The rest of us have been given the PFO by our chief supers. We have attendance lists at ranges and Nationals and Internationals the length of our arms. Still we are refused. Des Croften put it elequetly. Licencing by postcode lottery. Not acceptable. I wont have it.

Idiots!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

bunny shooter

boc121 wrote: »

..............We need some leadership on this.
Waiting patiently bunny:P

If we could be sure we could get enough people off their asses to do something I'm sure we could make a difference

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

If we could be sure we could get enough people off their asses to do something I'm sure we could make a difference

The only way to make a difference is to appeal every refusal. There have only been three so far as I know with the score running at 2-1 in favour of the applicant.

The costs of defending these cases bear directly on the divisional budget and pretty soon the realisation will dawn that this isn't a cost effective exercise.

It's stupid and unnecessary and a waste of taxpayer's money. If these guys properly carried out their functions under the act as some of their colleagues have, it wouldn't be a problem.

bunny shooter

Have you been refused anything ?

It's easy say appeal when you don't have to

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

Have you been refused anything ?

It's easy say appeal when you don't have to

If the prerequisite for giving advice was that you had to have been in the same position yourself, 90% of the lawyers/accountants/[insert profession of your choice here] would be out of a job. :rolleyes:

bunny shooter

The short answer to my question would be

rrpc wrote: »

No

Appealing is grand but .................................

It costs the applicant money (even if they win?) not just legal fees time off work etc

The applicant will/could be recognised in open court and the less desirable members of society will/could be listening to the detailsof the case

Most people are not used to the court environment and this leads to stress/anxiety for the applicant and maybe his/her family

There is a belief in this country that to "stand up" to the Gardai will/could lead to reprisals against the applicant and his/her family by members of the Gardai or there may be discrimination against them in future firearms licence applications

etc etc

rrpc wrote: »

..............90% of the lawyers/accountants/[insert profession of your choice here] would be out of a job. :rolleyes:

And that's a bad thing because ?

Grizzly 45

If you are appealing make sure your legal team states that you will be looking for costs as well.
At least if you win ,you are coverd for your expenses.

Taking a few of Bunnies points.
Insist that the case is in camera or if the judge wont allow this that he directs that any press/media types do not publish pertinent details like your name and address.That is the least any judge could do.Some might also say they will hear these cases after normal court hours,when the scumbags have been dealt with.

Simple way to sort out the court stress, go down to your local DC and sit there for a couple of hours and watch how it works..It can be great free entertainment for all the family,and cheaper than the pictures.You are entitled to be there too even if you have no busisness with the court. It does also give you a chance to see how your solicitor performs in a working enviroment.
Yes,it can be stressy for those who have never been in the witness box.But remember two things;[1] they are counting on you being intimidated by this whole procedure to not want to go thru with this appeal and [2] if you tell the truth and stick to your facts you cant be caught out.

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

The short answer to my question would be

No.

The short answer to your first post is we are very good at telling us what we should do.

I just gave specific advice and immediately you look to shoot the messenger. You don't want to appeal, that's your decision, but don't go telling us what we should do in some unspecified manner. That's real easy too

And that's a bad thing because ?

I didn't say it was bad. The implication is it's impossible. Otherwise, criminal lawayers would need to have been criminals etc.

bunny shooter

rrpc wrote: »

The short answer to your first post is we are very good at telling us what we should do.

But I don't remember asking "us" to speak for me

rrpc wrote: »

I just gave specific advice and immediately you look to shoot the messenger.

I didn't shoot the messenger. I asked him a question. Big difference

rrpc wrote: »

You don't want to appeal, that's your decision, but don't go telling us what we should do in some unspecified manner.

All I did was offer some reasons why people, not necesarrily me, might not want to

rrpc wrote: »

That's real easy too .

Ya, it's very easy giving advice when you don't have to use it yourself

rrpc wrote: »

I didn't say it was bad.

Again, I asked a question. I did not say you did

rrpc wrote: »

The implication is it's impossible.

Nothing is impossible ............ look at this country boom to bust in 24 months or so

rrpc wrote: »

Otherwise, criminal lawayers would need to have been criminals etc.

True..............a criminal is someone who has been convicted by a jury/judge of a crime not someone who commits a crime (FTR ..... I am not saying criminal lawyers are criminals although I'm sure some of them might be able to twist it so it looks like I have :D:D:D:D)

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

If we could be sure we could get enough people off their asses to do something I'm sure we could make a difference

Remember now? :rolleyes:

bunny shooter

No "us" in mine

I'm a "we" kinda guy

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

No "us" in mine

I'm a "we" kinda guy

I'm a grammatically correct kind of guy. The subjective pronoun couldn't be used in an objective statement.

bunny shooter

Your so right

I agree

That's so blatantly obvious :P

Nice to see I'm not alone in my appreciation of grammer and the proper use of language on this site

rrpc

bunny shooter wrote: »

Your so right

I agree

That's so blatantly obvious :P

Nice to see I'm not alone in my appreciation of grammer and the proper use of language on this site

You let yourself down there

bunny shooter

rrpc wrote: »

You let yourself down there

Be more a spelling than a grammer mistake OR .................. maybe I did it to see would you catch it :P

noodle650

the only things i am not happy about are....The price....the restrictions and the conditions, although the later 2 did not affect me im sure they have hit hundreds below the belt.
regards,
DF

jwshooter

if a goverment is big enough to give you everything you want ,its big enough to take away every thing you have .

gunhappy_ie

I am happy with the new system...

hoewever im not happy with the way that it is being applied in certain areas

daveob007

HAPPY with the speed of the new system.
HAPPY with the 3 year licence.
HAPPY with the cost.
HAPPY with the security bit.

UNHAPPY with the ristriced list,all .22 pistols should be non restricted
the more dangerous thing because of pistol grips looks is crap.
UNHAPPY with the way its been enforced.
UNHAPPY with the ammount of paper work,would like to see an online version paperless.
UNHAPPY with the way the licences were outsourced to an post and the security implications it could have if the info got into the wrong hands.
UNHAPPY that the old 6 euro shotgun licence for vermin control is gone.

cavan shooter

I have no issues with the new system, the forms arent all bad Ive filled out 15 and not one was my own (yet).

I dont have a pistol and the local FO/Superintendent is a very reasonable chap and works with us in relation to issues and is open to discussion/clarification and advise.

I am disappointed with the quality of the cards issued (cheap and shoddy)

I am disappointed with the carryon I read about and the return to court,(I thought we were passed that)

I am disappointed with the two faced approach from the State (the everyone is a criminal approach, and the I have the right to protect the public, so I shall ban) it shows ignorance in relation to lawful sport shooters.

anyway I wont keep ranting...

bunny shooter

Interesting results seems that currently nearly 70% of those polled are unhappy.

yubabill

Been licensed eor over 25 years and was asked for cert of competence. Also had to resubmit shooting permissions in long form. Highly embarrassing for me.
Would be ok if we got something in return, but the jury is out.

ivanthehunter

Not happy!

Garda are still making up their own rules!! Just one look at the Commissioners guild lines will show it to all in black n white... Yet it sits there unchallenged.

Not happy with the security requirements!!
I think that air-rifles under 18ft/lbs should be licenced as normal and stored under lock and key but they should be counted in terms of calculating ones security status!!
I also believe that the same should apply to muzzle loaders and crossbows.

How ridiculous is it that crossbows are now restricted!! ffs This just adds insult to injury! And what about Sabots being restricted?? What if reloading comes in and i want to stick a .224 in my .308--Well..?>?? If they even knew what they were talking about I'd be amazed..

Even though the life blood has been sucked out of handgun sports, the government still sits on the reloading fence! Lets face it- they (the policy makers) know nothing about ballistics or bullet quality control. They are unable to comprehend the passion that some of us would love to pursue by experimenting with our own loads and bullet designs..
Can they not fathom that reloading is an art in its self! and is as justifiable as rifle building or fly tying or even photography.
FFS if i wanted powder and primers I'd just have to wipe open a few cartons of shot gun cartridges. These people are scared sh1tless about the storage of powder and primes and TBH they have no call for this excessive fear other than ignorance of the facts!!
Considering that they have killed legal handgun sports is it too much to ask that they allow rifle sports to blossom by allowing the sport to go full circle via reloading..

I'm am happy that the issue of second barrels has been highlighted but this will soon be clamped down on when Sako quad sale go to high and one the politicians looks a little deeper and discovers that we're getting a two for one deal!!-

ivanthehunter

BTW
I'm not happy with alot of the legislation relating to firearms! It is purely designed to deal with the criminal element within society.

I for one fee that separate laws should have been drafted for legal firearms holders or that the law should give concession to those with permits on some issues.

For too long now, the sport which i love has been governed by anti criminal laws. ffs it really sickens me that stuff like picking up some spent brass down at the club could land me in jail, or ordering a part for the gun over the net is deemed as importation of a firearm ffs.:mad:

TargetWidow

daveob007 wrote: »

UNHAPPY with the way the licences were outsourced to an post and the security implications it could have if the info got into the wrong hands.

Hopefully as someone who works within this system I can be of help in allaying this particular fear on your part.
When you hand your approved letter/request for fee payment across the counter at the Post Office, the bar-code is scanned by the clerk, the fee and name showing up on screen checked as being the same as on the letter, cash accepted, receipt printed, stapled to your letter and handed immediately across the counter to you again. No record remains in the post office of your name, address, calibre, make or model of firearm. All that comes up on screen is the name address and fee. No paperwork is left, as it is all done online though the An Garda Siochana database, to which we do not have access without aforementioned barcode on your aforementioned firearms letter. Your information cannot be accessed by anyone again in that or any other Post Office. All staff that work in the Post Office must sign a declaration every year that they cannot disclose any information they learn in the course of their duties to any person outside of work. (Many of my customers would know of my hubby's involvement in shooting and are always comforted when processing their payments when I reassure them that I do not ever discuss any firearms licences I process with anyone, including the hubby at home and that if they want to tell him their licences have come through they can do so themselves but I don't get into that with him). Our An Garda Siochana contract (for processing both fines/penalty points and firearms) require that we only read certain sections of the paperwork to verify details as necessary. Disclosure of such information is a sacking offense and generally the clerks are very highly vetted. In an environment where there are large sums of cash and vulnerable elderly people whose trust we need to keep our business going it is in our best interests that only the most very discreet and trustworthy and honest of people are employed in our offices.

Personally I feel that the firearms certificate itself poses a far greater risk to your security as it contains your name, address, make, model and calibre of firearm. A shopping list for any crim if the tiny thing should ever be lost or picked from your pocket. All it is short of is a list of the times you may not be a home and a small map of your house showing exactly where you have your gunsafe and small-parts stored.

moan 77

In all fairness lads what did we expect them to make it easy for us when all the do- gooders want us to melt down our guns. I nearly empolyed a secretary to fill out the forms cause i had three gun and to make you laugh i had to call back twice cause form not right. When all was done and dusted i had noted that they didnt come and look at safe also i didnt supply pluse numbers, and i know lads that were nearly raid to look at their safe, some joke the whole thing, what was wrong with the old way.

rrpc

moan 77 wrote: »

In all fairness lads what did we expect them to make it easy for us when all the do- gooders want us to melt down our guns. I nearly empolyed a secretary to fill out the forms cause i had three gun and to make you laugh i had to call back twice cause form not right. When all was done and dusted i had noted that they didnt come and look at safe also i didnt supply pluse numbers, and i know lads that were nearly raid to look at their safe, some joke the whole thing, what was wrong with the old way.

You don't supply pulse numbers, that part is for Garda use only.

moan 77

The dealer's pulse number has to be supplied and i told the cop i cant remember where i got guns from which shop as the three came from different shops.

I also checked with a couple of lads around at the time and they had to supply pulse numbers

rrpc

moan 77 wrote: »

The dealer's pulse number has to be supplied and i told the cop i cant remember where i got guns from which shop as the three came from different shops.

I also checked with a couple of lads around at the time and they had to supply pulse numbers

That's only required if it's a new application and the first time you've licensed the firearm.

It's totally irrelevant if you're re-licensing a firearm under the new system. The dealer you bought the firearm from could have gone out of business. One of my rifles is over twenty years old and was bought from Watts in Dublin (out of business), the other was bought from the UK and my pistol came from Switzerland.

No pulse numbers from any of them :rolleyes:

bunny shooter

This poll is very interesting. Looks like 68% + unhappy.

Maybe DOJ looking in will take note

Grizzly 45

TargetWidow wrote: »

Hopefully as someone who works within this system I can be of help in allaying this particular fear on your part

. .......

Ya know...This post by TW is a minor point that could have been discussed with the FCP and passed onto the revelant shooting bodies who could have informed US shooters that such fears would be groundless.
But No!!! the Irish Govts culture of suspicion and secrecy and non information when it comes to firearms,such information should never be disseminated to the sheeple out there!!
Although I would still be doubtful on how secure this system is when you send off your application to Clare,where it is processed manually still??
Maybe TW you could inform us on that one?
And thanks for the info too it is nice to get some info from the inside,rather than wait for announcements from Govt minions.:(

BornToKill

bunny shooter wrote: »

This poll is very interesting. Looks like 68% + unhappy.

Maybe DOJ looking in will take note

It is very interesting. It shows 52 people to be unhappy (for a variety of reasons) with aspects of the new system. That's out of the approximately 60,000 applications already processed or being processed. Looks like a resounding success if viewed in those terms.