Another Press clipping with a twist!!

Grizzly 45

Another court case with a twist.
The Gardai being somwhat not very truthful!! The second link is what DS John Higgins was referring to!!



Later.Removed original blanked out article and replaced with a better scan from NO 6.
Thanks!;)



http://www.tribune.ie/news/home-news/article/2010/jul/11/double-murder-carried-out-with-stolen-psni-gun/


Mods move when necessary please.

kildare.17hmr

I love the way the paper puts the words sport and weapon together

Rosahane

It seems that the "weapon of choice of criminal gangs" either changes over time or geographically;)

It was the evil Glock in Leinster and the Sig in Munster:p

Dublin_Gunner

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Another court case with a twist.
The Gardai being somwhat not very truthful!! The second link is what DS John Higgins was referring to!!

Read the scann attachment first.

http://www.tribune.ie/news/home-news/article/2010/jul/11/double-murder-carried-out-with-stolen-psni-gun/

Why would you blank out pieces in the scan?? Its in the paper, therefore public domain knowledge.

I don't see how the Garda in question was being untruthful. It was a legally held firearm that had been stolen.

But yeah, the choice of weapon of the criminal underworld does indeed seem to change with each story time.

Greenacre

It appears that the firearm in question was stolen in another State and smuggled in to this State where it was an unlicensed illegally held firearm. I must assume that it was never legally held in this country.

Dublin_Gunner

Greenacre wrote: »

It appears that the firearm in question was stolen in another State and smuggled in to this State where it was an unlicensed illegally held firearm. I must assume that it was never legally held in this country.

The Garda in question makes no reference to where the licence was held.

OP making something out of nothing. The gun WAS a legally held / licenced firearm, which was stolen.

kildare.17hmr

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

The Garda in question makes no reference to where the licence was held.

OP making something out of nothing. The gun WAS a legally held / licenced firearm, which was stolen.

its more the source from where it was stolen, to joe blogs public it reads like a private individual had it stolen when infact it was stolen from police in another country! if it was being mentioned they should have mentioned that too.

EDIT how many of the guns smuggeld into this country would you reckon have not been stolen from a licence holder originally??? id reckon most are stolen in other countries

Bananaman

He was correct to redact the scan of the article.

The fact that the Papers feel free to identify who owns what firearms does not mean that we should endorse that practice by circulating their articles intact.

Basic common sense would dictate that the first step in firearms security is to not inform anyone that you own them. Identifying someone, who has a license, in the press, is breaching that security.

Giving someones name and the town they are from is tantamount to giving their address.

It would be better - and in my opinion should be directed by the court - that the appelant in a firearms license appeal is not identified in the press.

There is no need to name them. Court reporters are so used to reporting on who was opposite the Gardai because they have invariably been the ones brought to court.

In this instance it is the Gardai Chief Superintendent that have been brought to court for making an incorrect decision.

In reference to where the firearm was stolen - it was stolen in a different jurisdiction and was not licensed for the same purpose as the appelant so therefore there is no correlation - any attempt to insinuate otherwise - as happened in this article - is, at best, smoke and mirrors and, at worst, an attempt to besmirch this individual and by association, all of us that hold licenses for similar firearms.
.

B'Man

Rovi

Grizz, is that scan from a recent newspaper?
I'd like to stitch it into the Press Clippings thread, but I need to include a proper attribution.

pedroeibar1

Rovi wrote: »

Grizz, is that scan from a recent newspaper?
I'd like to stitch it into the Press Clippings thread, but I need to include a proper attribution.

Save Grizz the effort - it is from the July 11 2010 edition of the turbine
P.

Rosahane

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

The Garda in question makes no reference to where the licence was held.

OP making something out of nothing. The gun WAS a legally held / licenced firearm, which was stolen.

I beg to differ. The gun was not a legally held or licenced firearm!

It was a firearm, stolen from outside the juristiction and brought into this country illegally. Thus, it was an illegal firearm and no different to any other illegal firearm imported with a drug shipment or whatever!

Rovi

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

Save Grizz the effort - it is from the July 11 2010 edition of the turbine
P.

Is that a 'Tribune' of some sort?
I'm not finding it searching the Sunday Tribune.

Grizzly 45

Hi Rovi,
Yes it is the Sunday Tribune report 11 July 2010.
The other one I ASSume is a Mayo paper.As I was asked to post this for a fellow shooting Boardsie whom this concernes,and is unable to post this himself,due to necessary scanners etc.However I or he will post a link for you,no doubt.

BTW thanks guys for saying everything in your posts as to WHY we DO NOT ID intentionally our own fellow gun owners,their addresses,or even in this case their unique professions. Saves me a bunch of typing...:D;)
In actuality that was a WELL BELOW the belt punch from the Gardai:mad:
That gun was never liscensed here in any shape or form,it was stolen in NI of the police,sold to a bunch of thugs posing as Irish freedom fighters,used to off a pair of drug dealers,and then our police force have the audacity to try and link it with legally owned firearms appeals??

The DS that said this and by doing insuniated that we civillians are somhow negligent,considering that in the last couple of years the Garda record of secure firearms use has been less than exemplary too,what with three sucidies,one by an ex member with a UZI SMG and an accidental discharge leading to a fatality in the last two months is a downright disgrace to the Gardai..:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

pedroeibar1

Rovi wrote: »

Is that a 'Tribune' of some sort?
I'm not finding it searching the Sunday Tribune.

Follow the link Grizz gave and it will bring you to the Tribune page - if you don't want to do that just look at the link -the edition date also is embedded in it:p. I though everyone knew that the Tribune is called the Turbine (even, god help us, by those who bother to read it). Next you'll want to know what the Grauniad is;)

http://www.tribune.ie/news/home-news/article/2010/jul/11/double-murder-carried-out-with-stolen-psni-gun/

Rovi

I'm talking about the provenance of the scanned image attached to the OP.

Rovi

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Hi Rovi,
The other one I ASSume is a Mayo paper.As I was asked to post this for a fellow shooting Boardsie whom this concernes,and is unable to post this himself,due to necessary scanners etc.However I or he will post a link for you,no doubt.

Thanks for that, I'll carry on the search in the meantime.

I've been told elsewhere that it's from the Connaught Tribune, but I'm having no luck there either.

No6

It is the Connaught Telegraph page 14a published tuesday 14th september. I have an original page here, I meant to scan it and post for you all but was beaten to it (ok I forgot!!)

thebeef44

No6 wrote: »

It is the Connaught Telegraph page 14a published tuesday 14th september. I have an original page here, I meant to scan it and post for you all but was beaten to it (ok I forgot!!)

Can You Scan the Page again as some of the original scan is missing
Thank You

Rovi

Thanks for that No6.

Unfortunately, they're looking for a subscription to access the digital edition, and there's no sign of the article on their main site.

As requested above, can you (or Grizz?) scan it again please, and if you can, also scan the text at the top of the page noting the name of the newspaper and the date, so that it can be included in the image?

Like what was done with this one:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=66394307&postcount=169

maglite

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

I don't see how the Garda in question was being untruthful. It was a legally held firearm that had been stolen.

There is a certain amount of humour to be had from your handle.

Also I would assume every illegal firearm was at one point in time legally held, unless Glock sell illegally to the black market. The inference in the article was to suggest the gun was legally held in this state.

Bananaman

And the inference in your post that all Illegally held firearms are made by Glock is hardly of help either. :eek:

I own a Glock - I target shoot with a Glock. I am quite happy with my Glock.

I am not a criminal.

What was in that article was wrong - dissecting it to find out what syllables were not wrong is a waste of time.

B'Man

Half-cocked

I wonder if fashions ever change in the criminal underworld and a different type of firearm comes into vogue, will the Gardai stop objecting to Glock, SIG and Beretta ownership on the grounds that these are the weapon of choice among criminals? If sawn off shotguns become the weapon of choice, will all of us shottie owners find our license renewals being rejected by the Gardai?

senordingdong

I thought the Baretta was never acceptable in this country?

Grizzly 45

Doubtful,as the shottie is the most common firearm in Ireland in public hands ,and who in Govt or Gardai would dare risk alienating and rousing the "real Goverment :rolleyes:" of Ireland ...the Irish Farmers Association:D
This is just the Garda standard line that handguns are the criminals weapon of choice to try and tar all with the same brush,and scare the unknowing with it..wouldnt matter wether they were Sigs,Glocks,Colts or a an antique Bergmann[predecessor to the Luger pistol].They just have this intense paranoia here and apprently always have had about handguns since the foundation of the State.:(

Rovi
Have kicked your request back to the person involved.Loooks however like it was a bottom page article.Hence no dateline or banner.Would a phone call to the newspaper not verify the authenticy of the article??

Bananaman

The 'of choice' thing is a crock

Paul 'Glock' Reynolds and his ilk are largely to blame for this.

I'm sure his first interview question is always - "Was there a Glock involved?" and if the answer is in the positive he goes off to have a little one on one quiet time with himself prior to doing his piece for camera.

It is simply a matter of brand recognition. He and his colleagues recognise the name, know what it means and use it whenever possible.

They use the term 'sawn-off shotgun' for all shotguns - rather than a 'Sawn-off Browning' or 'Sawn-off Beretta' or 'Sawn-off Holland&Holland' as they do not recognise the brand.

Whenever there is handgun involved - they never mention the manufacturer - unless it is a glock - on occasion they get told it is a different brand but they do not know if that is the real name or a pejorative so they do not use it - 'the crime was committed with a Walther' becomes 'a handgun was involved'

Much like many people refer to all types of Vacuum cleaner as a 'Nilfisk' or 'Hoover'

The 'Brand du Jour' in this context will always be villified.

B'Man

No6

I hope this works!!

kildare.17hmr

worked alright

Half-cocked

Bananaman wrote: »

'Sawn-off Holland&Holland'

:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

What a waste! And I believe it did actually happen.

Half-cocked

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Doubtful,as the shottie is the most common firearm in Ireland in public hands ,and who in Govt or Gardai would dare risk alienating and rousing the "real Goverment :rolleyes:" of Ireland ...the Irish Farmers Association:D

A fairly senior Garda told me a few years back that the biggest problem with legally held firearms being stolen in Ireland was shotguns being robbed from isolated houses in rural Ireland. Many of these were being recovered during Garda raids on halting sites. Nothing was going to appear in the media about this because there would be accusations of racism against travellers levelled at the journalists. And, as you point out above, nothing would be done to upset the IFA, sure didn't they get the DOJ to back down on their gun safes for all policy and exempt owners of a single shotgun, the very ones who were the targets of thieves looking for guns to steal? So no gun safes for the most at risk group of owners, while the rest of us have our homes converted into minor Fort Knoxes!

firefly08

BTW thanks guys for saying everything in your posts as to WHY we DO NOT ID intentionally our own fellow gun owners,their addresses,or even in this case their unique professions. Saves me a bunch of typing...

Surprised no one mentioned this (maybe I missed it), but the guy's name is really obvious in your scan of the paper. It shows up through the black marker!

You've gotta love the statement that the Beretta is favoured my the military "for it's ability to kill". Jesus. I thought just they liked it because Mel Gibson has one in Lethal Weapon.

maglite

Bananaman wrote: »

And the inference in your post that all Illegally held firearms are made by Glock is hardly of help either. :eek:

Amm.... serious go read the ting again, fool of a post

chem

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

They just have this intense paranoia here and apprently always have had about handguns since the foundation of the State.:(

Its funny you say that. I was told a story by the gran daughter of Frank Aiken. After her gran dad died, they went up to his house in Dublin to clear it out. They opened a press door and found alot of handguns and ammo. They called the army and they were taken away. One of them was a small silver pocket pistol. Family history has it that it was carried by Frank into the Dáil on the first day of the free state government. Its said most if not all had some form of firearm incase things kicked off.

sidneyreilly

Attached.

Edit: Apologies to Telegraph!

pedroeibar1

Great letter, full marks. Cool, factual, unemotive. Love the bit about F1 and the bicycle. And, in fairness, fair play to the Tribune for publishing it in full.
P.

No6

The Connaught Telegraph not tribune!! Only important if you are from Mayo!!

bunny shooter

Surprised some of the quasi legal eagles here have missed this :P

"As the national governing body in Ireland for non Olympic pistol shooting I would like to state some facts for the record."

Good letter but to the those outside and even the majority within the shooting sports it is outside their knowledge base.

Tackleberrywho

bunny shooter wrote: »

Surprised some of the quasi legal eagles here have missed this :P

"As the national governing body in Ireland for non Olympic pistol shooting I would like to state some facts for the record."

Good letter but to the those outside and even the majority within the shooting sports it is outside their knowledge base.

I'm confused by that statement?

Bananaman

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

I'm confused by that statement?

+1

Sparks

bunny shooter wrote: »

Surprised some of the quasi legal eagles here have missed this :P

Did you read the author's byline? I did and I haven't commented because he's banned from ever posting on this site again. But I think you could probably guess my thoughts on the matter reasonably accurately even without much information...

Good letter but to the those outside and even the majority within the shooting sports it is outside their knowledge base.

I think the author was hoping that people would gloss over the "non-" in that sentence (or even that the editor would edit it out). It's using the Olympic name because it's well-recognised by Joe Public.

Bananaman

Sparks wrote: »

Did you read the author's byline? I did and I haven't commented because he's banned from ever posting on this site again. But I think you could probably guess my thoughts on the matter reasonably accurately even without much information...

I think the author was hoping that people would gloss over the "non-" in that sentence (or even that the editor would edit it out). It's using the Olympic name because it's well-recognised by Joe Public.

I take umbrage at your insinuations - I cannot respond on behalf of the author of this letter or the organisation he represents - as that is not allowed on boards - so I will respond as myself.

You are welcome to your opinion but I am sick and tired of people allowing personal opinions to colour their comments as they have in this instance.

As you are a multi mod I would have thought it would be verbotten to make such comments and allow personal opinions and hearsay to come into it.

---

The NASRPC IS the NGB for non olympic pistol shooting in Ireland. They run competitions - throughout the country - every month and the majority of them include pistol shooting. They send teams and individuals to internationals to represent Ireland in pistol shooting.

What they do not do is the Olympic Pistol Disciplines -as these are already covered by others.

The reason they make this distinction is so that the organisation who do represent Olympic pistol shooting in Ireland would probably get all squeaky bummed if they did not make the distinction.

It says it on their website, as far as I know.

Do you think NTSA would prefer if the article had said NASRPC represent 'pistol shooting in Ireland'? I think not. I think you, sparks, would have been a bit more vociferous in your comments had that been the case.

---

It was a very good article. It needed to be said. The Gardai needed to be pulled on their statements and the paper needed to be shown they were hoodwinked.

The paper, very graciously, printed the letter - without edit - in order to put the story straight.

All in all a good outcome.

Yet - as usual - the anonymous whingers have to look for a reason to nitpick and knock holes in it - did you check if all the commas were in the right places.

B'Man

Sparks

Bananaman wrote: »

Yet - as usual - the anonymous whingers have to look for a reason to nitpick and knock holes in it - did you check if all the commas were in the right places.

Anonymous whinger? :rolleyes:

This isn't anonymous whinging, it's me, identified in full, answering a specific question from Bunny. If you have a problem with that, it's your problem, I suggest you deal with it off-boards, because this isn't the place for it.

As for the "oh, poor me" crap above, it's not worth an answer. Mentioning the Olympic word in the letter is a PR thing, something I just explained above to Bunny. I know it is because I've said on here before that it should be done like that. Sometimes, I could swear you just don't know who supports you and who doesn't, I really could.

edit: But just in case you're still guessing wrong, my thoughts (explicitly) on this are as follows:

• It was good that the letter was written.
• It was good that the letter was published.
• The letter could have been better worded, but only by a few percent so it's not worth commenting on.
• The author ... you know what, your sport, your funeral. He's banned from here for a multitude of good reasons so on reflection, I don't want to talk about him anymore.

pedroeibar1

Personally I don't give a rats a$$ about some internecine pi$$ing contest - it is beyond the interest of many on this board. Never even heard of the guy and like many would have to look up what the initials stand for.

The simple fact - for me- is that a well-composed letter was written, it clearly outlined the facts and was published. The rest is just BS.

P.

Bananaman

Sparks wrote: »

............I know it is because I've said on here before that it should be done like that .........

Contrary to popular belief I only occasionally scan boards and don't read half of what is on the shooting forums.

B'Man

Sparks

Frankly, I was happy to let the whole lot just sit there, and did for a few days. Bunny asked a question, I answered it, and then B'man went nonlinear. That's the whole story pedro. As for the BS, well, yeah, it's mosly BS, but ignore it too long and before you know it, you're filling out a 9-page application form including character references and medical details, your club has to fork over a grand (and another if it's also a range), and you've now got fifty more rules you have to follow every day.

That's why the BS sometimes riles some of us up more than it looks like it should.

Sparks

Bananaman wrote: »

Contrary to popular belief I only occasionally scan boards and don't read half of what is on the shooting forums.

No rule says you have to; but it'd be nice if you didn't bite the head off of someone when you don't, because you won't have read all the background.

pedroeibar1

Sparks wrote: »

Frankly, I was happy to let the whole lot just sit there, and did for a few days. Bunny asked a question, I answered it, and then B'man went nonlinear. That's the whole story pedro. As for the BS, well, yeah, it's mosly BS, but ignore it too long and before you know it, you're filling out a 9-page application form including character references and medical details, your club has to fork over a grand (and another if it's also a range), and you've now got fifty more rules you have to follow every day.

That's why the BS sometimes riles some of us up more than it looks like it should.

Thanks. I'm not getting at anyone, I don't want to comment further as I have no idea of the background. Life is difficult enough already without bringing that stuff into it:)
Rs
P.