Gardai proposals to ban firearms

Sparks

First, sorry for bumping your post down one Grizzly, you're the one who spotted this first.

For those just joining us, some useful links:

The original Working Group review's proposals

Various submissions made to the Working Group in response to their review:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=93122152&postcount=319
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=94082249&postcount=1270

Various submissions made to the Joint Oireachtas Committee for their review:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=93122152&postcount=319
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=93725277&postcount=692
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=93733725&postcount=702
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=93739352&postcount=718
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=93751741&postcount=735
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=93761029&postcount=747
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=93762167&postcount=750


The opening statements made to the Joint Oireachtas Committee in January:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oz9abBuPPOo

The Joint Oireachtas Committee's interim report.

Grizzly 45

http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/2014.WG.Report.pdf/Files/2014.WG.Report.pdf

Department of Justice and Equality /
An Garda Síochána
Working Group on Review of Firearms
Licensing November 2014


It s time to get political!!!

yubabill1

The report refers to the Garda Commissioner as "he" in several places.

"he" didn't exactly leave in a blaze of glory.

The whole proposal seems to hinge on holders of certain firearms being a concern to public safety.

I don't see anything about compensation for private property, but it does mention surrender of firearms to Gardaí.

Haven't read the full thing yet, but smack very much of divide and conquer.

yubabill1

Sorry to harp on, but the whole following section says to me:

"We hoped the 1800 handgun owners would give them up, but since 1076 + 590 handguns are still licensed, that didn't work, so we need this new legislation we reserved for ourselves in 2009"


During 2012 and 2013, the Gardaí have reported to DOJE on public safety
concerns connected to certain firearms. In the initial report of the Garda
Commissioner, recommendations were put forward in relation to short
firearms. In this report, reference is made to the then Minister for Justice in
November 2008 proposing that he will “keep under review….the outcome of
the licensing procedure and, if the outcome of that procedure leaves a
situation which still poses an unacceptable risk to the community, will use new
powers which the Bill will contain to ban outright any type of firearm”.
Following on from the commitment made in 2008, the Criminal Justice
(Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009 Act included Section 27, inserting a new
Section 2C into the 1925 Act. This provided that the Minister may, in the
interests of public safety and security, by order declare specified firearms to
be prohibited.
The Garda Commissioner has recommended to the Secretary General of the
Department a prohibition on the licensing of certain handguns. An Garda
Síochána have also recommended in the interests of public safety that semiautomatic
centre-fire rifles and semi-automatic shotguns (capable of holding
more than 3 rounds) are firearms that should no longer be licensable in the
State.
Statistical information from An Garda Síochána states that as of the 28th of
March 2014 the total number of non restricted handguns licensed was 1,076
and the total number of restricted handguns licensed was 590.

Tea drinker

yeah I heard on the radio this evening some working group has come out with a recommendation to ban handuns and only allow specicly Olympic pistols. Also under attack are semi auto shotties, semi auto rifles.

I reckon there's something for everyone there and those who foolishly thought the problems were only going to remain on the pistol side are shown for naivety and self interest.
So I think that adequately explains missing Annex etc. remember, if they change something in Ireland it's
a) bad
b) going to cost you money

Vegeta

Ouch

LikeTheseOdds

Wow. I'm just after reading the Draft head 4 & 5 notes. This is absolutely shocking. These Drafts essentially ban centerfires once their current renewal cycle is up. .22 pistols that arn't on a new "White list". Explains why the old one was removed... Also stats that a process would be in place to allow people to make additions to the list. Bans renewal of semi auto centre fire rifles + shotguns manufactured to hold more than 3 round. Not to mention that their is proposals in there for blanket bans. I'm only a couple of years in the sport now and this is really disheartening for the future of the sport .

Witcher

Just got my own .22 pistol licence recently too, probably one of the last ever issued here:pac: I'll enjoy it while I have it anyway :pac:

BattleCorp

I actually did my best to read it all and it's not good reading for us.

Apart from the proposed bans, some of the other stuff in it makes things even more murky than before.

An individual Super can refuse a licence based on the crime in their district and on the amount of licences issued. They use the word 'proliferation'. Crazy stuff.

That'll lead to an even greater postcode lottery than at present.

If the Gardai get this through, it will decimate pistol shooting.

yubabill1

Tea drinker wrote: »

yeah I heard on the radio this evening some working group has come out with a recommendation to ban handuns and only allow specicly Olympic pistols. Also under attack are semi auto shotties, semi auto rifles.

I reckon there's something for everyone there and those who foolishly thought the problems were only going to remain on the pistol side are shown for naivety and self interest.
So I think that adequately explains missing Annex etc. remember, if they change something in Ireland it's
a) bad
b) going to cost you money

We really have to stick together on this one.

These are only recommendations.

Some of the recommendations are put there to provoke concern and be repealed - e.g. every semi/pump shotgun is mentioned - they are hoping to divide shooters.

See a lot of stuff in the report that's been in thejournal.ie and other media recently - followed by radio reports today.

The sophisticated media management tells me there is political will behind this.

Fulminating, spewing brimstone, claiming victimhood will not work here.

Reasoned argument only, please - even if it's not fully-formed.

Tea drinker

yubabill1 wrote: »

We really have to stick together on this one.

These are only recommendations.

Some of the recommendations are put there to provoke concern and be repealed - e.g. every semi/pump shotgun is mentioned - they are hoping to divide shooters.

See a lot of stuff in the report that's been in thejournal.ie and other media recently - followed by radio reports today.

The sophisticated media management tells me there is political will behind this.

Fulminating, spewing brimstone, claiming victimhood will not work here.

Reasoned argument only, please - even if it's not fully-formed.

Well, yes these are the recommendations, the point being most likely to settle for less restrictive regs at some point. Inevitably the point of this exercise is to make it more restrictive for as many groups as possible this time. Further restrictions will be brought in at a later date, it makes sense to me.

So yeah either we all stick together and defend our legitimate shooting interests or we will all get caught in the long grass.

Vegeta

So how do we tackle this maturely?

No point in whining, bitching or shouting n pointing out that firearms in the hands of criminals is a failure of AGS, nothing to do with private ownership. Or that an under pressure force is deflecting on to us.

If there are concerns over crime stats we need to objectively point out examples of how there is no causation between private ownership and our murder rates. Hand gun ownership per capita in Northern Ireland is similar if not higher to here I imagine, are the hand gun murder rates the same?

What about the UK, these firearms are banned there, I'm guessing there are still gangland murders with handguns?

yubabill1

Vegeta, just been reading the Mansfield judgement and it seems that many answers RE: public safety etc are addressed in these documents.

What worries me more is that we won't be afforded a voice in this debate - they've stolen a march on us already; the sophisticated media management machine is under full steam.

We need an organised, coherent and penetrating argument.

Heckler

Just when I thought thing were getting better with appeals being granted they come out with this. This is bad news.

This "designed for olympic competition" ruse is a joke. Its like telling someone with an interest in cycling they can only use an ultra expensive olympic standard bicycle.

As if every shooter has and should have an interest and ultimate goal in being an olympic competitor. Utter nonsense.

yubabill1

Vegeta wrote: »

So how do we tackle this maturely?


What about the UK, these firearms are banned there, I'm guessing there are still gangland murders with handguns?

I believe there is an explosion of knife crime over there.

Tea drinker

Heckler wrote: »

Just when I thought thing were getting better with appeals being granted they come out with this. This is bad news.

This "designed for olympic competition" ruse is a joke. Its like telling someone with an interest in cycling they can only use an ultra expensive olympic standard bicycle.

As if every shooter has and should have an interest and ultimate goal in being an olympic competitor. Utter nonsense.

How many people are dying being injured thru participating in cycling vs those in legitimate shooting sports? Not an attack on cyclists, it's a healthy sport I recently started to enjoy again, but lets come out from the shadows and compare our sport to others. We shouldn't be shunned because there is potential danger in our sport, every active sport from walking/hillwalking to motor racing and flying has a danger element. Responsible sporting use, by responsible sportsmen should not be attacked.

Witcher

NASRPC building bridges as always. This is definitely the time to get in a cheap shot.

NASRPC has been aware of this review for some time, despite ongoing misinformation via other groups.

http://www.nasrpc.ie/hot-news-1/gardadojrecommendations

yubabill1

Tea drinker wrote: »

We shouldn't be shunned because there is potential danger in our sport, every active sport from walking/hillwalking to motor racing and flying has a danger element. Responsible sporting use, by responsible sportsmen should not be attacked.

You've hit something there.


We need to identify ourselves as PART of the public.

This is where we start IMHO and build everything from there.

yubabill1

Blay wrote: »

NASRPC building bridges as always. This is definitely the time to get in a cheap shot.



http://www.nasrpc.ie/hot-news-1/gardadojrecommendations

I'm going to shut up for a while after this;

The report says it met with (names all/practically all) shooting organisations, but that said organisations were not informed of the proposals/recommendations at the time.

Says shooting organisations made observations RE: 2009 Act and implementation.

Not a member of any shooting organisation/club, myself.

Grizzly 45

Just reading thru some of the other countries laws specifically Germany.I really love the way they have reduced Germanys gun law down to a half page and then concentrated on "assault weapons" [yet again...In fact this whole description is UTTER BULLSHT! The fact is that semi auto rifles are the fastest ,still growing sales niche in the German gun industry.They dont mention the hunting lisvense and the fact you can own unlimited long guns or what you need to do to become a sports shooter.

Well, at least they have now nailed their colours firmly to their mast and have stated in writing in this that we the people are NOT TO BE TRUSTED and are considerd a public danger to the state and AGS. This is what our current and previous govts have thought of us..WE, not the criminals or subversives are the danger....Nice to know.

What to do..Well ,much as I feared the time has now come to become political on this matter.We need to bury amongst ourselves ALL petty differences,we are now gunowners first,whatever disiplines second.There is NO MORE excuses or time for the "Fk you I'm alright Jack.I've got my double barrel and bolt action so they wont touch me."
READ the bit about the Supers being given power to decide on your liscense by how much crime is in your district on that idea.You could be living in the best area of Dublin and a spate of break ins could suddenly give your super a reason to refuse your Purdiys liscense due to the "high crime" in your area.

We need to be lobbying our TDs and ministers and encourage them to attend the breifing in Buswellls hotel on Nov 20th in Dublin.[Literally a week away].
In short they need to be told if this goes thru it will have devastating consequences for shooting in Ireland and for any of their election hopes come 2016 or sooner. Would suggest also that we see about starting the "Email blizzard" that we used once before so successfully here on boards when there was an increase on fees on the way many years ago.

JUST IN
The NARGC email on this. stating pretty much the same thing I said about lobbying your TDs especially FG !!!
We now have a WAR on our hands people...Want to keep your sport...Get off your Ass and fight for it!!
Grizzly 45.

yubabill1

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Well, at least they have now nailed their colours firmly to their mast and have stated in writing in this that we the people are NOT TO BE TRUSTED and are considerd a public danger to the state and AGS. This is what our current and previous govts have thought of us..WE, not the criminals or subversives are the danger....Nice to know.

.

Grizzly, I luv ya!

That's exactly how we identify ourselves as PART of the public.

(AGS/DoJ say we are a danger to the public a la Breivik - we say big brother does not trust the public - the simple ones are the ones that get the message through. now keep repeating it).

I'm definitely shutting up now. someone else's turn.

Ya did it Griz.

Scalachi

Hey Sparks ? Cass

Your gone very quiet ? can we replay your comments now ?

Did the NASRPC and the NARGC not send out notification that this was happening up to about 10 months ago ?

Did we not say Pistols/Semi CF rifles and Shotguns over 3 rounds were up for the chop? were we correct ?

Did you not tell us bold children to be quiet that we were scaring everyone ? were we right ?

I look forward to reading the apology.

yubabill1

Scalachi wrote: »

Hey Sparks ? Cass

Your gone very quiet ? can we replay your comments now ?

Did the NASRPC and the NARGC not send out notification that this was happening up to about 10 months ago ?

Did we not say Pistols/Semi CF rifles and Shotguns over 3 rounds were up for the chop? were we correct ?

Did you not tell us bold children to be quiet that we were scaring everyone ? were we right ?

I look forward to reading the apology.

This kind of thing does no-one any good, lad.

We are in a fight, now. And we are in it together.

I know it's a stupid platitude, but together, we are stronger.

.243

yubabill1 wrote: »

This kind of thing does no-one any good, lad.

We are in a fight, now. And we are in it together.

I know it's a stupid platitude, but together, we are stronger.

ill second that,
i think the " i told you so" line just shows imaturity

Grizzly 45

PLUS one...Thousand!!!! FFS lets can the "He said,they said,you said !" BS for ONCE on an individual and organisational and national level!! We have a common enemy and they are coming for us.They rely on this typical Irish "divide and conquer" and infighting to be able to roll over us easily enough.Chop each other up when this is over for all we care...But not now!

yubabill1

Can't wait for tomorrow's papers - seemingly the whole thing is under discussion; funny, I read somewhere in the report tonight that they had NOT informed the shooting organisations of today's proposals.

nice picture of a revolver...

http://www.thejournal.ie/gun-control-restrictions-1779301-Nov2014/

Wadi14

guys if our representative groups draft a letter that we can individually sent to our local representatives, we will all be signing of the same hymn sheet, a united front weather your a game shooter or a target shooter, my idea anyway. Better than one guy deciding to right a letter in Cork and 2 guys in Donegal and 10 guys in Dublin all picking up of what they don't like about the proposals.

Sparks

Scalachi wrote: »

I look forward to reading the apology.

I look forward to seeing the documents you said you'd seen but couldn't show us because Reasons.

Bit of a shame the AGS got to do this in a quiet end run, isn't it. I mean, there they were, having to come to the same table as us in the FCP, and then someone figured if they walked away and scuppered it we'd be better off and in the process, they untied the hands of the few in the AGS that didn't like us. You'd almost say they got played. And now, right as the government is staring at dissolution over the water charges, a dozen things suddenly get thrown at the media, and we're one of them (And we're almost an afterthought, again)

This is what happens when you're outside the tent.

What happens next is one of two things:

• We all as individuals start yelling at our TDs the way we did over the licence fee hike while all the NGBs (starting with the most important, the IFA) start talking to the Minister. Or, and I think this is the more likely one because the FCP scuppering debacle burnt out a lot of good people:
• We all yell at each other, nobody talks to their TDs on a grassroots level because this affects 0.5% or so of licencees, a few NGBs I can think of try to pull a fast one with "idea papers" sent to the PTB without telling anyone else, one or two of the obviously ablative bits in there don't go through but the rest does and the ratchet comes down a little tighter.

Twenty years ago, I'd have been sure the first of those two would be what would happen.
Today, the last twenty years is telling me the second is far more likely.
It'd be very nice to be wrong.

Sparks

Wadi14 wrote: »

guys if our representative groups draft a letter that we can individually sent to our local representatives, we will all be signing of the same hymn sheet, a united front weather your a game shooter or a target shooter, my idea anyway. Better than one guy deciding to right a letter in Cork and 2 guys in Donegal and 10 guys in Dublin all picking up of what they don't like about the proposals.

The opposite is true, says the only time we ever managed to do this. Large numbers showing up everywhere when an election was in the offing is about the only thing that ever managed to do this. Every time we wait for all the NGBs to do the legwork, things go wrong.

hurlsey

First off.............. SIIIIIIIIIIIIIGH!!

When I first read the Commissioners Guidelines my heart dropped, and now having read the Firearms Policy Review, quite frankly, I cannot begin to describe how disheartening it was.

I truly believe that no amount of lobbying, emailing or disquiet will get us as a collective anywhere, AGS have decided that, on foot of the flood of HC decisions, they don't want firearms licensed in the ROI

IMHO, through the legislature, first they will revoke CF Pistol licences and ban them.... Ban "high capacity" shotguns, .22lr Pistols and Semi-Auto CF rifles....
Then through the mechanism of discretion refuse licenses and renewals based on rising crime levels

I have previously licensed 3 firearms, but unfortunately had to forgo my sport for a few years. I finally reached a position where I could take it up again, I will be purchasing a shotgun in the coming weeks, with a view to picking up a CF rifle for foxing and eventually a CF for Deer, this was my hope, one I'm beginning to think I will never realise as imo I am being "criminalised" before ever having broken a law.

I don't believe that the pettiness I have seen in the various interest groups will be put aside, even on foot of the publication of these two new documents, and somebody(pistol owners) will be thrown under the bus, if and I mean IF, the shooting bodies are actually consulted about this policy review....

And that will be the first group that will be sacrificed as ever infringing measures are introduced by AGS/DOJ to counteract the one and only truth, AGS/DOJ are powerless to prevent Unlawful acts committed by criminals in this country, plain and simple, they have gone for the soft target, the ones that make headlines and make up for the fact that there is a spiralling gangland problem in this country that they, through under resourcing AGS are powerless to counteract!!

As a soon to be member of the shooting community I would call upon the governing bodies of all disciplines, IF THERE ARE ANY ON THIS BOARD TO PLEASE READ THIS NEXT PARAGRAPH CAREFULLY,

Do not act in your own interests, act in the interest of every firearm owner, every aspiring hunter and target shooter across all disciplines, whether for recreation or competition. This is quite simply an attack by AGS on firearms owners AS A WHOLE, this is no time for parish pump politics.

I feel the above post may have been a waste of time I really and truly hope it was not.

**has anyone got a link so the emailing can begin? for respective TDs? Can questions be put forward by us, ordinary firearms owners through TDs?

yubabill1

Sparks wrote: »

• We all as individuals start yelling at our TDs the way we did over the licence fee hike while all the NGBs (starting with the most important, the IFA) start talking to the Minister. Or, and I think this is the more likely one because the FCP scuppering debacle burnt out a lot of good people:

Anyone with semi/pump manufactured to hold more than 3 rounds is going to have to pay to get the mag permanently restricted.

They mat then be at the loss of their modified property without compensation if the Super decides a modified mag is not acceptable on renewal.

There's a few thousand potential lobbyists to get started with.

Sparks

I'd imagine that sort of thing's ablative. That whole document is written like a sabot for the pistols stuff and the licencing decisions stuff, ie. discardable and expendable.

Deaf git

Maybe I'm cynical but....
This BS is released within a few days of AGS being publicly slated in the Policing Commission report. Seriously, it sounds like AGS taking a 'strong stance' on gun crime like back in 2008 as a means of distracting attention.
I suggest (a) Discredit the details & statistics contained (b) Discredit the motives (c) Start piling in complaints re delays, lost forms etc to the Ombudsman (d) Highlight incompetences (e) Declare no confidence in current system and unwillingness to continue as silent victims.
If anything could be achieved by gentlemanly discussion none of the above would be required, but I'm tired of being genteel on this topic.

yubabill1

Sparks wrote: »

I'd imagine that sort of thing's ablative. That whole document is written like a sabot for the pistols stuff and the licencing decisions stuff, ie. discardable and expendable.

Would imagine so, but in Italy I believe they have to get the mag walls welded all along the tube by a certified gunsmith.

From the .22 pistol experience here, that would not satisfy some.

Like I said a few posts back, hindsight shows AGS thought the 1,800 handgun owners would reduce to nothing with the 2009 Act.

When that didn't happen, they changed the goalposts and when they lost a large number of court appeals/JR's they went to Shatter. They really don't want citizens owning handguns.

Even during the '70's and '80's you could have a semi auto shotgun and their own report cites the low lethality of "low velocity" shotguns.

(Y'know what, I'd rather be hit by a high velocity 5.56 FMJ at 30 yds than an ounce-and-a-bit of low velocity buckshot from a shotgun).

Shotguns - probably wishful thinking on working group's part.
Maybe next time - maybe never.

Sparks

Split out into a new thread and stickied.

Deaf git

First off, anyone know EXACTLY how many .22 licenced pistols have been stolen and not recovered since 2006? It might need a Minister's question to find out. I wonder how many AGS service pistols have been lost, if any?
Second, if the Commissioner believed a Ruger to be suitable and not restricted in 2009 what has changed? Was the then Commissioner incompetent? Or is the current encumbent incompetent. Releasing a guideline that refers to an Annex that doesn't exist smacks of incompetence.
How many doctors were contacted re the mental capacity of an applicant since the 9 page wonder was introduced? My guess is a very few. But if preventing another Anders Breivig was paramount it should happen regularly- I asked my GP recently if he had been contacted, he said he hadn't nor was he even aware that I owned any sort of gun nor had he ever been asked about any other patients.
How many referees have been contacted? Or their existence verified?
The intrusive nonsense we are subjected to needs to be highlighted.
And the Water protestors think they have it bad.....



Hi Mods, can this be moved to the other thread? Thanks....(i'm not good with tech)

Grizzly 45

Deaf git wrote: »

Maybe I'm cynical but....
s(c) Start piling in complaints re delays, lost forms etc to the Ombudsman (d) Highlight incompetences (e) Declare no confidence in current system and unwillingness to continue as silent victims.

From experiance the Garda Ombudsman is about as useful as a ashtray on a motorbike RE firearms complaints.We in Limerick have put in at least fIVE complaints against our CS and the guy keeps coming back whiter than white.Freshly whitewashed so to speak.Either that or they find some wriggle room to avoid dealing with the complaint like it being a WEEK outside their remit time limit.Sure send in the complaints ,as many as possible,maybe some brown stuff might finally stick,and they cant ignore the vast amount of complaints,but as far as I am concerned I have NO FAITH in GSOC investigating these complaints properly and /or the AGS assistant cheif comissioner doing anything about them either.Seeing that AGS /DOJ has decided that I am not to be trusted with my firearms I absolutely have NO trust anymore in any Irish govt body regarding firearms matters anymore.

BattleCorp

So what's the best course of action for us to take now?

Serious question.

clivej

I don't like to say "I told you so" from this thread in 3/2/14 that ran to 701 posts

BUT

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=88814349
post 86

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=88814349&postcount=86

.243

clivej wrote: »

I don't like to say "I told you so" from this thread in 3/2/14 that ran to 701 posts

BUT

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=88814349
post 86

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=88814349&postcount=86

well then why say it,
dragging up the past aint gonna solve our future

Sparks

clivej wrote: »

I don't like to say "I told you so" from this thread in 3/2/14 that ran to 701 posts

You get to say that when you show the documents you had back then.
At which point, we will all be asking "Why, if you had them, did you not release them and let us have a headstart on all of this, instead of treating everyone like children in a way far worse than the AGS do?"

yubabill1

BattleCorp wrote: »

So what's the best course of action for us to take now?

Serious question.

IMHO - Take the initiative.

Grizzly said it earlier - Big Brother does not trust its citizens:

How does some guy with 4 points on his licence and the 3 month's tax just out, maybe hasn't registered with IW, feel when he sees the State enacting legislation to prevent squeaky-clean, vetted guys (that's us, BTW) committing future crime?

Get the public on our side first and work together from there.

http://www.politics.ie/forum/current-affairs/231878-licensed-gun-owners-threat-public-safety-public-consultation-underway.html

Grizzly 45

If Frannie and Noreen think it was loud in the Dail when this was first mooted this time last year[Why is this sht always around the end of the year??:mad:]
They had better get their Peltors on as there should be now a non let up of coherent noise from us all about this via emails,letters ,dail questions,visible protests[for once].It has been admitted by their dept heads that any submissions by us are just going to be politely recived and dumped in the bin,as they openly admitted in a meeting minute that these consultations with intrested parties will be "sham consultations":mad: What kind of a freakin country is this at all??:mad::mad:

clivej

Sparks wrote: »

You get to say that when you show the documents you had back then.
At which point, we will all be asking "Why, if you had them, did you not release them and let us have a headstart on all of this, instead of treating everyone like children in a way far worse than the AGS do?"

I didn't have any documents but was saying it as I was told by those that knew.

And still ppl would not believe this would happen, as you did not.

Sparks I'm not getting into a slagging match over this. I have firearms that they are looking to take from me. You do not.

Sparks

clivej wrote: »

I didn't have any documents but was saying it as I was told by those that knew.

Then ask them what I just asked you.

You do not.

Well, I've not seen "I'm alright Jack" inverted before, that's a new one.
So if I don't have firearms mentioned by the AGS, should I not do anything?
(Hint: Read the ISSF rules some day. The ones pointing out that we compete with centerfire pistols up to .38 calibre are interesting.)

yubabill1

Ah, jaysus lads - come on, will ye.

BTFH, we're all big enough.

AND nobody gives a f**k about %who said %he said% anymore after today.

Heckler

I see they're also using the argument of how many licensed firearms are used in crime by stating that many firearms used in crimes are never recovered so they can't say if they were legally held but stolen and used in crime.

Far as i know in some countries when you buy a new firearm it comes with a spent casing. This is a casing from a test shot fired and kept in a database to reference against any ballistics testing from any possible future crime. So simple and effective.

I reckon we're shagged and I hope years down the line when it's seen that the curtailing of responsible firearms ownership had absolutely no impact on gun crime that someone is held to task. But I doubt that will ever happen.

In the meantime if someone could advise me on how to go about fighting this please let me know.

yubabill1

Heckler wrote: »

In the meantime if someone could advise me on how to go about fighting this please let me know.

Handguns and semi autos have been used for mass murders in other countries - ban them before the same happens here

Compare with

Muslims are fighting Jihad in other countries - deport them all before the same happens here.

Heckler

yubabill1 wrote: »

Handguns and semi autos have been used for mass murders in other countries - ban them before the same happens here

Compare with

Muslims are fighting Jihad in other countries - deport them all before the same happens here.

I understand your frustration but this thread is going to be viewed by god knows who so lets leave things like muslim and jihad out of it. Only gives fodder to the anti-firearm contingent. I think its imperitive that we all keep our cool.

wexfordman2

Jesus, and they claimed Mary Lou was using distraction tactics yesterday, and then they released this themselves.

Feckin hell.

Take a look at this

Head 2 This Head inserts a public safety provision as an additional ground to be considered by An Garda Síochána in deciding whether or not to grant or renew a firearms certificate
An Garda Síochána expressed concerns that solicitors representing applicants at appeal stage are often able to assure a Judge that there is no public safety concerns regarding the application, mainly by referring to Section 4(2)b of the Firearms Act, 1925, as amended, and stating that the applicant does not pose any threat to public safety.
An addition to Section 4 is being proposed to reflect that deciding officers need to take account of general public safety concerns in relation to a firearm and a particular type of firearm, and not just concerns specific to the particular applicant concerned.

Basically, ags have taken a beating in the courts because they have been unable to show that a law abiding upstanding citizen with good reason to hold a firearm cannot have one. They have been slapped in the face on so many occasions in court when refusing licences that they now want to invent a new reason which has nothing to do with either the firearm or the person who is applying for the licence.

Imagine for example if the RSA decided to implement a policy ofnrestricing the number of driving licences in an area because of the number of drivers in the area was too high, or because the crime rate had risen for example.

Do we really trust AGS to have discretionary powers such as this ?

And this is not just related to firearms, do people genuinely think that AGS should be able to use their own inability to tackle crime as a justification for imposing restrictions on law abiding citizens ?

Look what happens when AGS have discretionary powers, look what they did with the discretionary element of the penalty points system.

Look at the alleged manipulation of crime statistics, and now they want to be able to use crime statistics as a reason to refuse an application from a law abiding citizen

wexfordman2

Just on how we react to this, the first thing we should be doing is getting the support of all country sports orgs, including coursing, racing etc. We have supported and stood by them when needed, so we need to get their support now also.