Dail exchange on the recent court cases

Sparks

Following on from the earlier Seanad exchange on the recent court cases, this time in the Dail...

Tuesday, 27 March 2012

Topical Issue Debate - Control of Firearms
Deputy Dan Neville: I thank the Ceann Comhairle for the opportunity to raise this issue and the Minister of State, Deputy Perry, for taking it, which is very well known to the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter. A problem has arisen with firearms licensing system. There have been a number of challenges by individuals in the District Court and the High Court. In 95% of the challenges, the decision went against the State. We are looking towards a solution. Mr. Justice Hedigan stated that we cannot continue with the system and that it clearly needs review.

The National Association of Regional Game Councils supported these cases in court despite being the strongest advocate of the new firearms legislation when it was introduced in 2009. The National Association of Regional Game Councils played a pivotal role in the consultation process, including chairing the most important user group of the Minister’s firearms consultative panel. The National Association of Regional Game Councils recognises and supports the idea that dangerous weaponry should be licensed on a restricted basis. There is an onus on the State to apply its responsibility to those who are given such restricted arms licences. The National Association of Regional Game Councils recognises the State’s grave responsibility in this area because of the consequences of making a mistake as regards the allocation of licences.

The firearms consultative panel warned of deficiencies in the administration of the system but its warnings were ignored. Its concerns included the absence of a statutory declaration under the Wildlife Act on the licence application form to give effect to the hunting licence endorsement of the firearms licence. Ignoring this resulted in an unnecessary High Court challenge, which had the effect of forcing the State to amend the Wildlife Act on a temporary basis. Licences will be renewed in the coming months and the State will face this problem because a permanent solution has not been found.

The Garda Commissioner issued an amended licence application form, which does not address the absence of the statutory declaration. As a result of these issues, the National Association of Regional Game Councils feels unable to continue to support the licensing system and the recent court cases are a consequence of this. It states that we must examine the benefit of a centralised licensing system. As chief superintendents administer the system, there are 150 different interpretations of the regulations. The interpretations are genuine but subjective, which causes grievances. Applicants see inconsistency as unfair and the test of fairness is consistency across the board.

Minister of State at the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation (Deputy John Perry): I thank Deputy Neville for raising this matter. I am speaking on behalf of the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter, who regrets he is unable to be present due to other business.

Regarding the hunting licence issues the Deputy refers to, the Minister understands from his colleague, the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, that the relevant provisions of the Wildlife (Amendment) Act 2010, which are due to lapse on 31 July 2012, will be continued with on an interim basis. The Act will be amended to give effect to this decision in due course, pending a major review of the Wildlife Acts which is promised under the National Biodiversity Plan 2011-2016.

The High Court case settlement the Deputy refers to involved judicial reviews of decisions by chief superintendents in firearms licensing cases where applications for licenses for high calibre handguns were refused. The case was settled with an undertaking to consider applications afresh and give reasons to applicants where applications are turned down.

Contrary to the picture the National Association of Regional Game Councils, NARGC, may try to paint, the Minister has asked me to highlight that the vast majority of licensed firearms holders have encountered no problems with the new licensing regime and, therefore, I disagree with the Deputy’s assertion. In general terms, the House may recall that for more than 30 years prior to 2004 all handguns were effectively banned in this jurisdiction. Following a series of judicial decisions, however, almost 2,000 handguns were licensed between 2004 and 2008.

This situation did not come to pass as a result of a decision by the Oireachtas. The return of handguns also gave rise to new forms of target shooting which are a cause of concern to the Garda Commissioner. It is also worth noting that the use of handguns is illegal for hunting under the Wildlife Acts, nor are they licensed for personal protection in the State, and therefore there is a very limited potential use for them. The Minister is conscious of Mr. Justice Hedigan’s remarks that “The licensing of powerful handguns and rifles is a matter of the gravest nature” and that “The strictest regulation of dangerous weaponry is essential if society is to be spared the menace of proliferating gun crime”.

The reality is that An Garda Síochána are the people best placed to make decisions on firearms licensing and it would be helpful if the NARGC came to terms with that reality. It has to be said, frankly, that the intemperate material produced by that association undermines any requests they make for a spirit of co-operation in this area. On a point of clarification, the Minister would like to point out to the Deputy that the NARGC was but one of a number of shooting groups on the Firearms Consultative Panel and did not chair it, as he stated. It was chaired by a departmental official.

The Minister expects to receive a full report from the Garda Commissioner in the near future on the issues which arose in the High Court cases. The Commissioner has indicated that he shares the concern expressed by the judge but has indicated also that he is satisfied that the applications were decided upon in accordance with the decision maker’s understanding of the relevant firearms legislation, that decisions were recorded in notifications to applicants, and that those decisions were informed by understandable concerns of public safety.

Tragically, the House will have been reminded in recent weeks of the dangers licensed firearms can pose for members of An Garda Síochána and others and of the dangers of firearms generally. For his part the Minister is determined to ensure that in the operation of the firearms licensing system, the question of public safety is paramount.

Deputy Dan Neville: I put it to the Minister that the National Association of Regional Game Councils is a very knowledgeable and responsible association. I have spoken with the leaders of the association and I am satisfied that they only wish to have a firearms licensing system which is secure, fair, transparent, free of prejudice and administered in a consistent manner with due regard for the provisions of the legislation as enacted by the Oireachtas, which it fully supports. It believes this can be achieved by a centralised system with independent oversight and a non-judicial system of appeal. I put it to the Minister that the courts of law should be the last source of the appeal which should be in place.

The current system, as stated by Mr. Justice Hedigan, is flawed and does not work. I suggest that all those involved - the Ministers, the Department, the Garda and the representative of the game councils - should sit down together and rather than talk at a distance come to an agreement because until they sit down and discuss all aspects of it and examine the different opinions, we will not have a resolution to this issue. Certain people who are involved in the area of competition feel very strongly about the situation. They may be in the minority but they are an important group as well.

Deputy John Perry: On a point of clarification, the Minister has stated that there was a consultative panel, and obviously it is important that collaboration and dialogue would take place.

I thank the Deputy for providing me with an opportunity to respond. As I have already mentioned, the Minister awaits a report from the Garda Commissioner on the settlement of the cases which were before the High Court and therefore it is not possible for me to comment in any meaningful way on that aspect of the debate but I will relay

---

Deputy Dan Neville: When is that due?

Deputy John Perry: The Minister, Deputy Shatter, will revert to the Deputy on that point.

On the hunting issue, I will impress upon the Minister, Deputy Deenihan, the need to have a timely resolution to this matter in time for the next hunting season. I am sure the Deputy will welcome the Minister’s commitment to conduct a major review of the Wildlife Acts, which I believe will be comprehensive, promised under the National Biodiversity Plan 2011-2016. I assure Deputy Neville that I will bring the points raised by him to the attention of the Minister, Deputy Shatter, for direct reply to him.

demonloop

Any chance of a five line summary?

rowa

demonloop wrote: »

Any chance of a five line summary?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_speak

Anyone looking for a centrefire handgun licence is a hitman/subversive/nutter/wannabe gangster/mass murder waiting to happen.

BattleCorp

Tragically, the House will have been reminded in recent weeks of the dangers licensed firearms can pose for members of An Garda Síochána and others and of the dangers of firearms generally. For his part the Minister is determined to ensure that in the operation of the firearms licensing system, the question of public safety is paramount.


Once again this f**king sh**e is wheeled out :mad::mad::mad: :mad: When will anybody in power realise that it isn't the legally held handguns used to commit a crime.

Cars are used to commit crime. Lets ban them too :mad::mad::mad::mad:

BattleCorp

Also, from the above Dail statement, it really sounds that the DOJ are seriously pissed off with NARGC, bridges burned n all that.

Grizzly 45

Not wanting to re ignite the whole lets praise/bash the NARGC topic again.Or having a pro /contra axe to grind on the subject.

But there was an intresting article in the Irish country sports and country life magazine[The very glossy and expensive one that is published in NI and looks and reads like "The Field" magazine from the UK] This month.

Written by Des Crofton and laying out his resons for going down the route he did with the courts and his attitude to the DOJ/FCP.

It is worth reading and to see the other POV on this before sitting in judgement on the man or organisation.Wether you want to take it as gospel or BS is up to you,but at least read it.If you can get hold of it.

Only quiery I'd have is why wasnt it in the ISD where more Irish shooters would see it,not some high brow countryside mag??

rowa

I think the doj should look at the best firearms practices in the other european countries, and then try to apply it here , the inconsistencies in who gets what licence and where is very unfair, its a postcode lottery really.

tac foley

Whilst agreeing with Rowa's point, it is interesting to note that

'The Minister is conscious of Mr. Justice Hedigan’s remarks that “The licensing of powerful handguns and rifles is a matter of the gravest nature”

...IMO, that should read - 'the even-handed, unbiased, equable and fair licensing of handguns and rifles - across the Republic - is a matter of the greatest urgency'

and that “The strictest regulation of dangerous weaponry is essential if society is to be spared the menace of proliferating gun crime”.


...again, IMO, that should read - 'the full weight of the present Laws should be used to attempt to exercise some control on the untold numbers of illegal and unlicensed firearms rife throughout the Republic, if Society is to be spared any further proliferation of gun crime committed using them.'

tac

Local-womanizer

I can't understand politicians lack of research into the Gun crime problem in this country.

It really is astounding for someone to stand up and try and dictate legislative changes on an issue, any issue, without having a research and structured opinion on the matter. I wonder do they even know the process of applying for a firearm

In my opinion, the licensing of firearms in this country by sport enthusiasts and game hunters should be a separate issue to the mis-use of firearms by those in the criminal fraternity. Separate issues that should be dealt with as such.

At Battlecorp, I think that bit in bold relates to yer man in Co. Tipp who held legally licensed firearms and was extremely close in taking the lives of 2 Gardai on duty when he was stopped at a checkpoint for drink driving, although that case does more to highlight the deficiencies in Garda equipment and the need to arm them! Still, cases like the above are rare for licensed firearm holders.

Sparks

demonloop wrote: »

Any chance of a five line summary?

Strip away the boilerplate and I think this bit pretty much summarises what the story is:

The reality is that An Garda Síochána are the people best placed to make decisions on firearms licensing and it would be helpful if the NARGC came to terms with that reality. It has to be said, frankly, that the intemperate material produced by that association undermines any requests they make for a spirit of co-operation in this area. On a point of clarification, the Minister would like to point out to the Deputy that the NARGC was but one of a number of shooting groups on the Firearms Consultative Panel and did not chair it, as he stated. It was chaired by a departmental official.

Or, to state it in less polite parliamentary language, the Minister looked at the NARGC taking hundreds of court cases against him, decrying him in every media outlet that'd print their statements, and refusing to work with the personnel in the department; and then looked at their calls for reform of the system with the NARGC being made into a central part of the system; and told them to take a walk. And didn't even do it in person, which adds another layer to the message.

All of which, to be blunt, you could have seen coming ten miles off, and everyone (not just people here) has been saying this over the past few years.

sfakiaman

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

But there was an intresting article in the Irish fieldsports and countryside magazine[The very glossy and expensive one that is published in NI and looks and reads like "The Field" magazine from the UK] This month.

Article is here on pages 74-75. The magazine is a long download but well worth the time. Thanks to Grizzly for pointing it out.

http://www.countrysportsandcountrylife.com/pdf/magazine/Spring2012.pdf

Sikamick

Sparks I don't want to be disrespectful to you but it's about time you stopped beating the anti NARGC DRUM and continually playing the FCP card.

If the other shooting bodies got behind the NARGC in these cases there might have been a different outcome and I will add here that a lot of the cases where brought on behalf of the very people as individuals that are members of these organizations.

The NARGC are trying to open the door to discussion please see below.

Quote from the article in the Magazine: 1

Minister Shatter was previously offered the opportunity to have a full briefing on an off the record basis on the problems as arose in the recent cases, how they might be resolved and how the enormous exposure for the taxpayer could be avoided in the future. He declined that opportunity. Since the settlement, he has made no effort to engage with NARGC, the pivotal party involved in the recent High Court challenges.

Quote from the article: 2

The NARGC has previously called for a centralised system and we now request yet again, that the Minister establishes a centralised firearms licensing system which comprises the three pillars of the Department of Justice, the Garda Siochana and the Shooting community with independent oversight.

Is the suggestion above not similar to the FCP but more impartial.

Re decrying the Minister / powers that be, or i.e. the Church, well if this had happened in earlier times there may have not been so many children sexually abused.

Sikamick


________________________________________________________________

Sparks wrote: »

Strip away the boilerplate and I think this bit pretty much summarises what the story is:

Or, to state it in less polite parliamentary language, the Minister looked at the NARGC taking hundreds of court cases against him, decrying him in every media outlet that'd print their statements, and refusing to work with the personnel in the department; and then looked at their calls for reform of the system with the NARGC being made into a central part of the system; and told them to take a walk. And didn't even do it in person, which adds another layer to the message.

All of which, to be blunt, you could have seen coming ten miles off, and everyone (not just people here) has been saying this over the past few years.

rowa

Its all a done deal now anyway, all the above is a postmortem. Its the future thats the worrying bit ,i don't see the minister , doj , police taking being shown up in the full public glare in the courts and mejia lying down, its what vindictive twist of the knife are they planning now ?

Concerned Shooter

From the opening post

"The High Court case settlement the Deputy refers to involved judicial reviews of decisions by chief superintendents in firearms licensing cases where applications for licenses for high calibre handguns were refused. The case was settled with an undertaking to consider applications afresh and give reasons to applicants where applications are turned down.

That is all the High Court cases got, better i's dotted and t's crossed

BattleCorp

Local-womanizer wrote: »

At Battlecorp, I think that bit in bold relates to yer man in Co. Tipp who held legally licensed firearms and was extremely close in taking the lives of 2 Gardai on duty when he was stopped at a checkpoint for drink driving, although that case does more to highlight the deficiencies in Garda equipment and the need to arm them! Still, cases like the above are rare for licensed firearm holders.

I agree that the man in Co. Tipperary is probably what he was on about in the debate. My problem though is that this example was dragged up in a debate about the NARGC and the recent court cases which exclusively relate to centrefire handguns.

This tactic is employed to tarnish us all with the one brush. Any time that there is a debate about pistols, they drag up any recent incident involving firearms (any type of firearms) and therefore by mentioning us and the illegal incident in the same sentence, we are painted in a darker light. It's very f**king frustrating. :mad::mad::mad:

Grizzly 45

Concerned Shooter wrote: »

From the opening post

"The High Court case settlement the Deputy refers to involved judicial reviews of decisions by chief superintendents in firearms licensing cases where applications for licenses for high calibre handguns were refused. The case was settled with an undertaking to consider applications afresh and give reasons to applicants where applications are turned down.

That is all the High Court cases got, better i's dotted and t's crossed

Think you WILL find there is alot more than just that shallow reading of it friend!Like everything in Ireland it takes its time to come out.;)

homerhop

reading what has been said, it looks like the minsiter is getting tit bits off boards and putting them into his replys.
What these guys seem to forget, Ireland and its people no longet take things at face value. the days of the Guardi, people in power saying something and how dare you question them is long gone. But yet they are still promoting people who like to bend the rules or thing that they dont have to abide by them.
On the other hand they are laughing all the way to the bank, the old divide and conquor rule couldnt be more easily applied to the shooting community and we have no one to blame but ourselves. between back biting,egos and just general bitchiness we get what we deserve.

Kryten

And the aforementioned incident had nothing to do with licenced centerfire handguns. So stop beating us pistol shooters over the head with this crap

BattleCorp wrote: »

I agree that the man in Co. Tipperary is probably what he was on about in the debate. My problem though is that this example was dragged up in a debate about the NARGC and the recent court cases which exclusively relate to centrefire handguns.

This tactic is employed to tarnish us all with the one brush. Any time that there is a debate about pistols, they drag up any recent incident involving firearms (any type of firearms) and therefore by mentioning us and the illegal incident in the same sentence, we are painted in a darker light. It's very f**king frustrating. :mad::mad::mad:

Sparks

Sikamick wrote: »

If the other shooting bodies got behind the NARGC

Yeah, that notion can go jump in a river really Mick.

The other shooting bodies are not at the beck and call of the NARGC. If the NARGC want to take their own counsel and choose their own course, that's up to them; but if someone expects that their doing that then requires everyone else -- who had no say in that counsel -- to march to the NARGC drum, then that someone hasn't really thought things through and is in for a disappointment.

The NARGC are trying to open the door to discussion please see below.

I read the article. I disagree strongly that anyone's tried to open any doors. Having the Minister talk to the NARGC is not a step forward for anyone in the community bar Des, because the Minister should be talking to the entire community, and Des is not a spokesperson for anyone bar the NARGC. There was a mechanism in place for the Minister to talk with the entire community; Des walked away from it. Now he wants it back, but wants all the personnel who made it happen fired first.

And if it doesn't happen, he expects to be in court... well, now actually.

You would only sit down and talk to someone under those conditions if you wanted to forment strife in the shooting community; because you'd be punishing all those groups that worked with the system and made compromises and did a lot of hard work to make things better than they would have otherwise been. You'd be ignoring them and their efforts in favour of dealing only with someone who's waving court actions at you and demanding that you fire your own principal officer, investigate all the gardai involved, and only deal with one group who represent around 10% of the shooting community and who've spent the last few years badmouthing you in the press and taking you to court.

That might not be popular with the ra-ra-pound-the-table mob (and that's not the people going to court, it's the ones using the court cases as a political action), but it's how it is.