High Court Case - anybody get their centrefire pistol back?

BattleCorp

Just being nosey here, but did any of the 168 involved in the January High Court case get their centrefire pistols back yet or what is happening?

Anybody refused their licence again?

Mike87

I know a chap who has a 10 shot 22lr, he only just got it (got it back ) recently after he went to court. Not sure if hes one of those 168 lads, but 10 shot is restricted all the same- so maybe.

homerhop

Mike87 wrote: »

I know a chap who has a 10 shot 22lr, he only just got it (got it back ) recently after he went to court. Not sure if hes one of those 168 lads, but 10 shot is restricted all the same- so maybe.

10 shot is not restricted but anything over 10 is. All the ruger 10/22 are 10 shot

It wasn't me!

homerhop wrote: »

10 shot is not restricted but anything over 10 is. All the ruger 10/22 are 10 shot

In a pistol, ten shots is restricted.

homerhop

Apologies there Mike wasn't minding the cf part when I replied.

juice1304

if you have a cf pistol then you can have as many in the mag as you want as it's a restricted licence it's rimfire that you have to plug the mag to 5

tac foley

It's a well-known 'fact' that any five shot .22 handgun is fearsomely more dangerous than any 17-shot centre-fire handgun in the wrong hands.

One day we'll see some sense in gun laws here in Europe, but prolly not in MY lifetime.

Sigh...............

tac

Mike87

tac foley wrote: »

It's a well-known 'fact' that any five shot .22 handgun is fearsomely more dangerous than any 17-shot centre-fire handgun in the wrong hands.

One day we'll see some sense in gun laws here in Europe, but prolly not in MY lifetime.

Sigh...............

tac

Dont be saying that. Sure at the next election you should sign up and we'll get all the shooters in the country to vote for you. Then when you're in the office you can sort out this reloading business and get us our handguns back and when thats all done if you have the time you could see about getting us full auto or 50bmgs

spudy1991

id vote for him lol, but relly tho.:D

Sparks

Thought about that for a bit... the highest density of firearms licences is in the wicklow/dublin area according to the last statistics I saw on this (check the PQ thread), where in the last election the quota was 11,768 votes (but where the last TD elected did it with 9,966 votes because of the way the count went). Does anyone think we could put together, say, a block of 10,000 first-preference votes in Wicklow?

Mike87

Sparks wrote: »

Thought about that for a bit... the highest density of firearms licences is in the wicklow/dublin area according to the last statistics I saw on this (check the PQ thread), where in the last election the quota was 11,768 votes (but where the last TD elected did it with 9,966 votes because of the way the count went). Does anyone think we could put together, say, a block of 10,000 first-preference votes in Wicklow?

Not trying to be negative or anything... but how many people are going to have their "favourites" who gets a number 1 vote regardless of what else is on offer.

ALso me and you might vote for a politician because he supports our sport... but how many other brahs who just hold say a shotgun or a rifle, and couldnt care less for reloading etc and would vote for the opposite politican just because he promises an extra €5 on social welfare/college grants/pension etc

All that aside (just trying to be realistic brahs), show me the politician who supports pistols/conceal carry/home defence etc for everybody and he's got my vote.

BattleCorp

So I take it that the silence on this thread means that nobody got their pistols back yet?

Grizzly 45

Maybe they dont post here either??:pac:

German pointer

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Maybe they dont post here either??:pac:

or maybe they don't want to broadcast the fact that they have pistols in their posession on the web

rowa

German pointer wrote: »

or maybe they don't want to broadcast the fact that they have pistols in their posession on the web

You don't have to give your name and address you know.

I asked some of the appealers in the club yesterday what the situation is with the cf pistols, it seems its going slowly but the first re-applications have gone in. What the outcome will be is still up in the air.

Grizzly 45

Give it about another 12 weeks or so then...:rolleyes:

Chiparus

Sparks wrote: »

Thought about that for a bit... the highest density of firearms licences is in the wicklow/dublin area according to the last statistics I saw on this (check the PQ thread), where in the last election the quota was 11,768 votes (but where the last TD elected did it with 9,966 votes because of the way the count went). Does anyone think we could put together, say, a block of 10,000 first-preference votes in Wicklow?

It was done in Australia, the shooters party got a couple of MPs in the NSW parliament

Sparks

Chiparus wrote: »

It was done in Australia, the shooters party got a couple of MPs in the NSW parliament

Yeah, but could it be done here?
Not to beat a dead horse, but what happens in other jurisdictions is nice to look at, but doesn't benefit us very much (most of the time).

I've been saying for a while that we can't really do this; looking at the math, I'm not seeing a reason to change my mind yet, but if anyone can think of a way, I'm all for it.

Mind you, the NARGC gets to appoint a senator, and that doesn't seem to have done us that much good in the past few decades...

Grizzly 45

Kind of the bumble bee situation.Technically,mathemathically,and engineering wise a bumble bee shouldnt be able to fly..Yet it does.:)

Even if the maths says it wont work,maybe we should just try it anyway?
So maybe if ,and its a big if we did get the wexford/wicklaw block to put forth a single issue canditate on shooting,even if it didnt get much further than a few newspaper articles,it might rattle those in power.Thing is we are getting to a point in Irish politics that everyone is being disillusioned with the main parties and are going to look about for somthing different and new..

I mean our opposition here in the Dail,a turf cutting stoner,a bankrupt building contractor who is obviously colour blind going by the shirts he wears,and a posh kid who is left of Lenin... God Bless them one and all!!:pac:
We need more of these kind in the Dail to rattle the cage,and I feel there will be plenty more joining them in the coming years,so why not a pro gun TD?Do we really have anything to lose??

Sparks

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Kind of the bumble bee situation.Technically,mathemathically,and engineering wise a bumble bee shouldnt be able to fly..Yet it does.:)

I have to point out, in defence of engineers everywhere, that that particular story is as badly understood as the space pen. Engineers knew there was a problem with the mathematical model of how an insect's wings generate lift, and they spent years studying why, and learnt a lot about aerodynamics from it. It wasn't a case of the bee defying maths, it was a case of maths knowing there was a limitation in the model.

*ahem*

Sorry, but that story's up there with the one about the space pen in terms of being daft.

Don't get me started on the space pen, or I'll show you why the americans bought the pen after fisher spent years building it, and why the russians desperately wanted it themselves...

Even if the maths says it wont work,maybe we should just try it anyway?

See, that's why knowing the *real* bee story would be useful, because it's *real* lesson is that if the maths says it cannot work, you want to study it more before committing resources to it.

Grizzly 45

Why did the Russians want it so bad[space pen]??
I thought they had a pretty good solution,called a pencil.Or a wax crayon??

Sparks

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Why did the Russians want it so bad[space pen]??
I thought they had a pretty good solution,called a pencil.Or a wax crayon??

Pencil nibs break. Down here, no biggie, just sharpen the pencil.
In orbit, in microgravity, those nibs and all the tiny fragments and dust float around. They have a nasty habit of shorting out electronics, being inhaled, and bouncing off eyeballs at the worst possible moment, thanks to Murphy's laws. And it's no fun when the only thing keeping you alive is a bit of electronics that just shorted out because of floating graphite dust (and spacecraft do not carry spare parts...)

The space pen (which was not developed for millions by NASA but was a completely privately developed product made by a commercial company and then sold to NASA the same way the astronauts watches were), solved all those (fairly serious) safety problems.

But all you ever hear people say is "oh, NASA, spent millions reinventing the clever Russian low tech solution". Which is not only not what happened, but which is the exact opposite of the real lessons learnt.

rowa

How many of the fg and labour td's now in power made endless noise criticising in the dail the cf pistols ban and the ending of practical pistol shooting ?

Pat rabbitte , charlie flanagan certainly did , so why haven't they worked to sort the current ff initiated mess ? They promised the earth regarding what they would do with the banks etc and have welched on the lot.

BattleCorp

All the shooting organisations can't even sit together on the FCP so I think it is "pie in the sky" to expect them to be able to come up with a strategy capable of getting a TD elected. It would be great to explore the possibility of it though.

Great in theory but I doubt you'd even get to the start line.

Sparks, your point about the publicity that would be achieved by this (even if it failed) is very valid and that would have to be good for the sport.

BattleCorp

rowa wrote: »

How many of the fg and labour td's now in power made endless noise criticising in the dail the cf pistols ban and the ending of practical pistol shooting ?

Pat rabbitte , charlie flanagan certainly did , so why haven't they worked to sort the current ff initiated mess ? They promised the earth regarding what they would do with the banks etc and have welched on the lot.

That's the beauty of being a politician, you can "run with the hare and hunt with the hound" as us country folk say.

Rabbitte, Flanagan etc don't give a sh1t about cf pistol bans. All they were doing is what any opposition do, they oppose whatever the government of the day is proposing. That said, do Ministers hold clinics like other TDs do? If so, maybe someone in their constituency should schedule an appointment and remind them of what they said in the past and is there anything that they can do about the ban.

Sparks

BattleCorp wrote: »

All the shooting organisations can't even sit together on the FCP

I dunno - all bar one seemed like a pretty decent first stab at it to me...

BattleCorp

Sparks wrote: »

I dunno - all bar one seemed like a pretty decent first stab at it to me...

Fair enough, point taken.

Grizzly 45

BattleCorp wrote: »

That's the beauty of being a politician, you can "run with the hare and hunt with the hound" as us country folk say.

Rabbitte, Flanagan etc don't give a sh1t about cf pistol bans. All they were doing is what any opposition do, they oppose whatever the government of the day is proposing. That said, do Ministers hold clinics like other TDs do? If so, maybe someone in their constituency should schedule an appointment and remind them of what they said in the past and is there anything that they can do about the ban.

Of course No Irish politican will honour an election promise..
There is an old political saying "Promises are like pie crusts,made to be broken!" The Irish add on should be "Unless of course,it will put plenty of cash in your pockets,or get you some favours somtime!:rolleyes:

I do recall that FG was going to roll back the stag hunting ban this year...Until Labour started getting uppity about it and then went back to sleep on every other 1000% more important issue facing the country.
As the Late and not lamented Charles J Haughy once said when in opposition,"the job of the opposition is to oppose" ...IOW just act the bollix no matter what because the other shower might have suggested somthing worthwhile that we didnt do or think of in the first place,we are in opposition so make the Govt look bad no matter what.Even if they were suggesting everyone gets a thousand quid for free every Wed,moan that it isnt two thousand!!!


No when they get in power ,Ministers dont meet the Peasentry...er their constituents anymore ,unless there is a PR opportunity or somthing in it for the aul vote,or you are on speaking and drinking terms.. You go and grovel to a Minion of the Minister AKA " ministers personal sectary" at the clinic who ferries your concerns to the Minister in Dublin or wherever.

Sheilds them from the annoyed riff raff who put them in office and gives some trusty underling a job on the taxpayers expenses.:(

No wonder this place is screwed!!

sfakiaman

BattleCorp wrote: »

That's the beauty of being a politician, you can "run with the hare and hunt with the hound" as us country folk say.

Rabbitte, Flanagan etc don't give a sh1t about cf pistol bans. All they were doing is what any opposition do, they oppose whatever the government of the day is proposing. .

The problem with politics is that it likes to present it's self as operating on what is sometimes known as the Hegelian dialetic of Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis. In reality, Thesis is, (what the ruling party wants)and will be done, Antithesis is what the minority party says in the hope that we will vote for them next time and Synthesis (an agreement following reasoned arguement) is only a pipe dream.

Sparks

While true, I think in the Irish case, it's complicated by a large proportion of elected representatives who wouldn't have understood your post sfakiaman...

meathshooter1

Politicians are like babies nappies and need to Be changed regular for the same reasons

rowa

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TsnLyHKWtrg&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Too much of this more like.

BattleCorp

The next chance I get, I'll go to my local Fine Gael TD, Michael Deering in Co. Carlow and see what he has to say.

Maybe if some other boardsies did the same with their local TD, then maybe (pipe dream) something could be done to further the chances of cf pistols being licenced.

Personally, I think that they should bring in a system along the lines of the system that they have for motorbikes.

Do your lessons.
Get a 125 or lower,
Drive for a year.
Then move up to a 250 if you wanted.


So if this was applied to pistols:
Do a pistol safety course.
Get a .22 pistol.
After a year or two of using the .22 pistol, showing the authorities that you are both competent and sensible, then be allowed to move up to a larger calibre pistol.

I dunno, it kind of makes sense to me.

Witcher

BattleCorp wrote: »

So if this was applied to pistols:
Do a pistol safety course.
Get a .22 pistol.
After a year or two of using the .22 pistol, showing the authorities that you are both competent and sensible, then be allowed to move up to a larger calibre pistol.

I dunno, it kind of makes sense to me.

The NASRPC wanted something similar to that along with a stepped system of eligibility based on competition or such.

Sparks

Blay wrote: »

The NASRPC wanted something similar to that along with a stepped system of eligibility based on competition or such.

If by 'something similar' you mean 'an illegal monopoly and only 266 pistols in Ireland owned by those they liked'...

JasonBourne

BattleCorp wrote: »

The next chance I get, I'll go to my local Fine Gael TD, Michael Deering in Co. Carlow and see what he has to say.

Maybe if some other boardsies did the same with their local TD, then maybe (pipe dream) something could be done to further the chances of cf pistols being licenced.

Personally, I think that they should bring in a system along the lines of the system that they have for motorbikes.

Do your lessons.
Get a 125 or lower,
Drive for a year.
Then move up to a 250 if you wanted.


So if this was applied to pistols:
Do a pistol safety course.
Get a .22 pistol.
After a year or two of using the .22 pistol, showing the authorities that you are both competent and sensible, then be allowed to move up to a larger calibre pistol.

I dunno, it kind of makes sense to me.

it sounds like a fair idea BUT it would end up like the HCAP. one body in full control and a monopoly on the situation. personally i did the HCAP and passed 1st time (so i have sour grapes towards it) but i found the whole thing overkill (no pun intended) yes there was some great information and i did learn plenty but i just think its expensive and doesent REALLY solve any of the real issues surrounded by deer stalking. i see it as a club for some of the right people to make a few pound and have an excuse to meet up with there old friends & discuss old times. everything else is a distant second.

BattleCorp

JasonBourne wrote: »

it sounds like a fair idea BUT it would end up like the HCAP. one body in full control and a monopoly on the situation. personally i did the HCAP and passed 1st time (so i have sour grapes towards it) but i found the whole thing overkill (no pun intended) yes there was some great information and i did learn plenty but i just think its expensive and doesent REALLY solve any of the real issues surrounded by deer stalking. i see it as a club for some of the right people to make a few pound and have an excuse to meet up with there old friends & discuss old times. everything else is a distant second.

At least after all that you got to go stalking. We can't licence centerfire pistols if we didn't have them before November 2008.

Any system that gets you where you want to go eventually, even with additional hoops that you have to jump through, has got to be better than the *No you're not getting it, now fcuk off* system that we have at the moment.

Personally I think that NASRPC document went way way way too far, but a much simplified version of it would probably be the way to go.

Just my two cents.

JasonBourne

BattleCorp wrote: »

JasonBourne wrote: »

it sounds like a fair idea BUT it would end up like the HCAP. one body in full control and a monopoly on the situation. personally i did the HCAP and passed 1st time (so i have sour grapes towards it) but i found the whole thing overkill (no pun intended) yes there was some great information and i did learn plenty but i just think its expensive and doesent REALLY solve any of the real issues surrounded by deer stalking. i see it as a club for some of the right people to make a few pound and have an excuse to meet up with there old friends & discuss old times. everything else is a distant second.

At least after all that you got to go stalking. We can't licence centerfire pistols if we didn't have them before November 2008.

Any system that gets you where you want to go eventually, even with additional hoops that you have to jump through, has got to be better than the *No you're not getting it, now fcuk off* system that we have at the moment.

Personally I think that NASRPC document went way way way too far, but a much simplified version of it would probably be the way to go.

Just my two cents.

I take your point, but do you really think a trusted shooter (if you already have firearms you are considdered as such) should have to jump through hoops to further your use of firearms?? Its a silly system wide open to abuse, cronisym and nepitysim (please excuse spelling using an iphone!!) as i said its just an excuse for "the old boys" to meet up for a chat and make some money in the mean time.

This country was built on brown envelopes and shady dealings what makes you think this system any differenet.....

Sparks

BattleCorp wrote: »

Any system that gets you where you want to go eventually, even with additional hoops that you have to jump through, has got to be better than the *No you're not getting it, now fcuk off* system that we have at the moment.

What we've got at the moment is two rules.
One says you may not licence a restricted short firearm. That rule is in the Firearms Act, and changing it would be a chunk of work - you'd have to convince the Minister to draft a Bill (or add the change to another Bill), then fight to protect that change as it went through the AG's office, then the Dail, then the Committee, then the Seanad, then the Dail again.

The second rule says what is and is not a restricted short firearm. That rule is in a statutory instrument, and changing it would require convincing the Minister to make the change, drafting the new SI, and signing it.

You'll notice there's a fairly short and easy path through that second rule as opposed to the first. And that short and easy path has been there since 2008. And known about for as long.

The truth is, centerfire pistols are currently not licenced on a Minister's decision. He could bring them back overnight if he wanted to.

Which is why that NASRPC document was so stupid, why the FCP was so vital, why losing it was so damaging to our sports, and it's why taking the Minister to court as a political ploy is so bad for all of us.

In short - the problem is fixable, and quickly, but not unless we all sit at the same table with the powers that be and get along. We have been, and still are, our own worst enemies here.

BattleCorp

Sparks wrote: »

In short - the problem is fixable, and quickly, but not unless we all sit at the same table with the powers that be and get along. We have been, and still are, our own worst enemies here.

If the problem is fixable, why not see if the FCP can be reformed. I know one party won't sit at the table but why not try and move forward without them?

Grizzly 45

Proably because they are the second biggest organisation repersenting gunowners in Ireland,next to the IFA,and without them it isnt going to go very far.

Cass

As a member myself they don't represent me or my opinions on most matters. I wonder how many more are of the same opinion. I mean it's thought that they represent the views of all their members, but if put to a vote of their members i wonder how many would actually go with the "party line"?

BattleCorp

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Proably because they are the second biggest organisation repersenting gunowners in Ireland,next to the IFA,and without them it isnt going to go very far.

Why wouldn't it go very far? It's not as if we are moving forward the way things are.

Surely some sort of FCP must be better than no FCP? Would it not be better to get it going in some form, even if certain members won't agree to join in, because no progress is being made at the moment.

The organisation that won't come to the table has approximately 28,000 members and as far as I am aware, there are over 220,000 firearms licenced in the state. That's not much more than 10 % of shooters in the country represented by them. And as Ezridax said, they don't represent the views of all 28,000 members. Now I'm not knocking them, if they want to persue a different avenue, so be it. I'm just saying why not try move ahead with the FCP. Surely somebody should be engaging with the powers that be so that the voice of the other 90% of shooters is being heard.

ace86

just a question there does any political party at present have any problem with people actual owning pistols? why can't Ireland be in par with other European country's since the drink driving limit has come in line with there's and other laws its like they pick and choose the ones they want.

Witcher

ace86 wrote: »

just a question there does any political party at present have any problem with people actual owning pistols? why can't Ireland be in par with other European country's since the drink driving limit has come in line with there's and other laws its like they pick and choose the ones they want.

EU can't dictate firearms legislation once the state prohibits CAT-A firearms. Anything outside that is left to each member states discretion, that's how I understand it.

rowa

ace86 wrote: »

just a question there does any political party at present have any problem with people actual owning pistols? why can't Ireland be in par with other European country's since the drink driving limit has come in line with there's and other laws its like they pick and choose the ones they want.

It wasn't a question of having a problem with handguns , they were simply used as a scapegoat by a highly unpopular and ineffectual minister for justice (ahern) because he was under pressure from deasy in fg and the media over a murder in limerick. He claimed at first it wasn't because of this , but eventually did admit it.

Grizzly 45

Whole point shouldnt be argued on the firearms laws with the EU,but on a EQUALITY issue.IE why are we as Irish discriminited as a minority against our own Govt on the issue of owning handguns of a large calibre when people in the remainder of the EU CAN own them under their firearms laws...Even the UK still allows it under extreme circumstances.

There will be no doubt eventually a challange on this here as well in the courts..If say Rowa hasnt got a 9mm but wants one,there is a very good legal arguement that he could say,well Grizzly,Battlecorp,and Sparks all have one,why cant I?"Thats discriminiation.
However it could just happen then that the PTB say "fine ,ban them all above .22" To which then anyone who has one and a pistol range,etc are saying "COMPO!!"And back to the courts we all go again!!

The problem with taking it to the EU court is it is a very long and expensive procedure that has to exhaust the Irish judical system options first,and we know how long that could take!:rolleyes:
And then those who could dump a million euros to start getting the ball rolling on somthing like this wouldnt be arsed,as if you have a million euros for a shooting hobby ,how many cheap Ryanair flights is that to Germany or Belguim to go shooting for a long weekend??:(

Those that dont have the money do care about this,and those who do have the money dont care!:(

@Battlecorp..
a few months ago Sparks and I had a big long debate about this very point here.Yes I agree a FCP is needed but I got the impression from Sparks that it needs to be a all together option or not at all.[He will be along soon no doubt to correct me on this:p]

However FWIW after reading the main mans reasons of that organisation for throwing his toys from the pram,and it seems to be there was a heck of alot of very underhanded and dirty dealings by both DOJ and AGS with relation to that organisation and that man personally,both overtly and covertly and if true.Seeing that he published this in various shooting magazines,I will have to assume they are..I wouldnt be surprised that he took the course that he did and is steering.No one throws a wobbler like that without some good reason...
As to why the remainder arent talking...Well,take that up with your organisations...Thats up to the top brass.:rolleyes::p

Sparks

It wouldn't work Grizz. If it had half a chance, don't you think the UK lads would have pursued it? They had a lot more cash and people at the time (and they did pursue some court actions to get the long-arm pistols in).

As to the FCP and the main man you're talking about, I'll just say that he's printed stuff in public; the other side can't respond freely (not without the nod from the Minister, and he doesn't care enough about us to bother). And I'm of the opinion that just because you read it in the Digest, doesn't mean it's so...

I will say that I think it's telling that the NARGC has been calling for FCP version 2.0, just with anyone that ever disagreed with the main man fired from the AGS and Civil Service. I wouldn't be of the opinion that disagreeing with Des was grounds for dismissal...

rowa

Sparks wrote: »

It wouldn't work Grizz. If it had half a chance, don't you think the UK lads would have pursued it? They had a lot more cash and people at the time (and they did pursue some court actions to get the long-arm pistols in).

As to the FCP and the main man you're talking about, I'll just say that he's printed stuff in public; the other side can't respond freely (not without the nod from the Minister, and he doesn't care enough about us to bother). And I'm of the opinion that just because you read it in the Digest, doesn't mean it's so...

I will say that I think it's telling that the NARGC has been calling for FCP version 2.0, just with anyone that ever disagreed with the main man fired from the AGS and Civil Service. I wouldn't be of the opinion that disagreeing with Des was grounds for dismissal...

If the nargc do rejoin the fcp , what are their main objectives going to be when dealing with the doj etc ? Whats head of the list ?

Grizzly 45

[

QUOTE=Sparks;78859675]It wouldn't work Grizz. If it had half a chance, don't you think the UK lads would have pursued it? They had a lot more cash and people at the time (and they did pursue some court actions to get the long-arm pistols in).

ASFIK the Shooters Rights Assoc and a few others of the lesser groups were/are looking at this.BUT as I said monies is the problem.Those that have the monies have moved to more gun friendlier countries,with a "FU I m alright Jack..Not wasting my money on somthing futile in this dump." Those that are left behind are the poor SOBS who have no money to fight it..IE us all here both IRL and the UK. The whole long arm pistol is a fudge and sop anyway,its neither fish or flesh,and was just a way of still giving the UK PTB an up yours !! We still have pistols.

As to the FCP and the main man you're talking about, I'll just say that he's printed stuff in public; the other side can't respond freely (not without the nod from the Minister, and he doesn't care enough about us to bother). And I'm of the opinion that just because you read it in the Digest, doesn't mean it's so...

Dunno about that,I still belive civil servants are entitled to sue for libel and slander in their professional capacity??Albert Reynolds and libel trials spring to mind??However I suppose being the former PM for Ireland does have its advantages.:rolleyes:

I will say that I think it's telling that the NARGC has been calling for FCP version 2.0, just with anyone that ever disagreed with the main man fired from the AGS and Civil Service. I wouldn't be of the opinion that disagreeing with Des was grounds for dismissal..

From what he described "disagreeing with him "would be putting it mildly.

Sparks

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

ASFIK the Shooters Rights Assoc and a few others of the lesser groups were/are looking at this.

But it came to naught because the EU law is very clear - member states are free to impose stricter laws than the EU directive when it comes to firearms. There's no issue of equality raised, any more than there would be if I sued the Irish government because a dutch citizen can smoke pot and I can't, or because an italian can get better pizza than I can.

We might not like it, but that's the way it is.

Dunno about that,I still belive civil servants are entitled to sue for libel and slander in their professional capacity??Albert Reynolds and libel trials spring to mind??However I suppose being the former PM for Ireland does have its advantages.:rolleyes:

One or two!

From what he described "disagreeing with him "would be putting it mildly.

I've highlighted the most important part of that sentence Grizz!