Gardai proposals to ban firearms

bravestar

bpb101 wrote: »

, but he never mentioned the name, but they he kept saying 9mm . Does anybody know if its the dreaded glocks the detectives have

Detectives are not the only armed Gardai and for the most part it is a 9mm sig sauer p226.

yubabill1

bpb101 wrote: »

The garda are mad on this idea of assult rifles , when they say themselves that they arent legal here. I was very annoyed at the fact they said that shooters are going to the courts because they know if they go to court they will get them.

That's actually well-constructed.

I haven't got to that part yet in my submission, but I'll be mentioning that.

Assault rifles banned under Irish law but AGS seek to prohibit firearms that LOOK like assault rifles.

If anyone said that out loud and listened to themselves....

yubabill1

bravestar wrote: »

Detectives are not the only armed Gardai and for the most part it is a 9mm sig sauer p226.

Their issue sidearms are lethal weapons in the committee hearing, but criticised as inadequate following the murder of the detective outside the credit union a few years ago.

Now I don't like mentioning things like that and that Garda was very unfortunate, to say the least but the gloves are off on this one - we licensed firearms holders are accused of crimes that we MAY commit in the future.

And they effectively did away with habeas corpus (innocent till proven guilty) a few years ago.

BTW take a look at this interesting article from the UK where state firearms are being stolen by crime gangs
"In December 2007, the Ministry of Defence revealed the gun used to shoot WPC Rachael Brown, 24, in the stomach in Nottingham in 2006 had been stolen from the Army"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2850115/Gone-AWOL-Military-tasers-pistols-automatic-rifles-lost-stolen-MONTH-Coalition.html[/URL]

I wonder how far a FOI request for such info from AGS would get before "operational reasons" gets invoked?


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2850115/Gone-AWOL-Military-tasers-pistols-automatic-rifles-lost-stolen-MONTH-Coalition.html

Sparks

yubabill1 wrote: »

I wonder how far a FOI request for such info from AGS would get

Not very, the AGS are exempt from the FOI act, aren't they?

bravestar

Sparks wrote: »

Not very, the AGS are exempt from the FOI act, aren't they?

http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=9372&Lang=1

Sparks

bravestar wrote: »

http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=9372&Lang=1

Thought so, thanks bravestar.

bravestar

yubabill1 wrote: »

Their issue sidearms are lethal weapons in the committee hearing, but criticised as inadequate following the murder of the detective outside the credit union a few years ago.

Now I don't like mentioning things like that and that Garda was very unfortunate, to say the least but the gloves are off on this one - we licensed firearms holders are accused of crimes that we MAY commit in the future.

And they effectively did away with habeas corpus (innocent till proven guilty) a few years ago.

BTW take a look at this interesting article from the UK where state firearms are being stolen by crime gangs
"In December 2007, the Ministry of Defence revealed the gun used to shoot WPC Rachael Brown, 24, in the stomach in Nottingham in 2006 had been stolen from the Army"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2850115/Gone-AWOL-Military-tasers-pistols-automatic-rifles-lost-stolen-MONTH-Coalition.html[/URL]

I wonder how far a FOI request for such info from AGS would get before "operational reasons" gets invoked?


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2850115/Gone-AWOL-Military-tasers-pistols-automatic-rifles-lost-stolen-MONTH-Coalition.html

While I admire your passion for our sports and willingness to give up your time to defend it,
The murder of a colleague has nothing to do with this fight.

It is an insensitive, ill constructed argument, about which, you clearly know very little, if you think the firearms available were a main cause. That's the last I'll be saying on the subject.

Grizzly 45

However Brave star you have got to admit that AGS own handling of firearms over the last five plus years has been less than perfect.
Things that were they happening in a civillian situation would have lost anyone their licence and rightly so for utter recklessness.
Everything from a" Blue on Blue" with fatality in a bank raid.To a member decidng to store his issue firearm under his bed pillow.Where it was stolen in a house burglary. To an ex member still in charge of the station armoury keys Two weeks after retirement and using his issed UZI to end it all.Any police force in the US has a policy and procedure of collecting your gun on the mornin g of your retirement to prevent such an event from happening.
Simply saying here that those without guilt can chuck rocks aplenty and for a force who seems to be worried that accidents can happen and therefore having these kind of firearms in the public domain ........etc etc. Seem to have had the biggest bunch of mishaps with the exact type of firearms they are seeking to ban. More sothan any civillian ownership of same in the same tim period.I do think that this a revelant question tobe asked of AGS as well is their own competance and personel and saftey up to scratch in this issue and is this nother reason they want these banned?

bpb101

Sparks wrote: »

Not very, the AGS are exempt from the FOI act, aren't they?

things were changed a few months ago
foi, foi everywhere

http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/1014/652358-foi/

yubabill1 wrote: »

Assault rifles banned under Irish law but AGS seek to prohibit firearms that LOOK like assault rifles.

firearms that look like assault rifles are already banned

Sparks

"limited areas" - yeah, I think that'd be your bugbear right there.
Also, if the Dail gets the phrase "disproportionate use of Garda time" when asking for firearms statistics as the AGS appear in the Joint Committee asking for a review of the Firearms Act based on those statistics, then I think the FOI requests wouldn't get very far.

Still, twenty euro ain't much...

bravestar

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

However Brave star you have got to admit that AGS own handling of firearms over the last five plus years has been less than perfect.
Things that were they happening in a civillian situation would have lost anyone their licence and rightly so for utter recklessness.
Everything from a" Blue on Blue" with fatality in a bank raid.To a member decidng to store his issue firearm under his bed pillow.Where it was stolen in a house burglary. To an ex member still in charge of the station armoury keys Two weeks after retirement and using his issed UZI to end it all.Any police force in the US has a policy and procedure of collecting your gun on the mornin g of your retirement to prevent such an event from happening.
Simply saying here that those without guilt can chuck rocks aplenty and for a force who seems to be worried that accidents can happen and therefore having these kind of firearms in the public domain ........etc etc. Seem to have had the biggest bunch of mishaps with the exact type of firearms they are seeking to ban. More sothan any civillian ownership of same in the same tim period.I do think that this a revelant question tobe asked of AGS as well is their own competance and personel and saftey up to scratch in this issue and is this nother reason they want these banned?

Shooting is my passion, work is just that, work. You know there's only so much I can say, so I'll say this, I don't disagree with you.

yubabill1

bravestar wrote: »

While I admire your passion for our sports and willingness to give up your time to defend it,
The murder of a colleague has nothing to do with this fight.

It is an insensitive, ill constructed argument, about which, you clearly know very little, if you think the firearms available were a main cause. That's the last I'll be saying on the subject.

Admittedly, I know very little about the incident and I utterly condemn the actions of the criminals involved.

I do not argue that the firearm was the main cause of the murder, I argue that the firearm was said to be inadequate after the event. I am aware that the serving officer was not given a chance to defend himself, but as I said, the gloves are off and I am going to give as good as I get.

Nothing personal against any serving or retired officer, as I likewise take no personal offence in this, but this is going to be not nice, to say the least.

And I will be surprised more than most if AGS get their proposals through - you can quote me on that - and it won't be on the back of your brave colleagues.

I personally know and have known, many Gardaí over the years, one even at top brass level and I have to say, that the majority are exceptional people: But, like shooters, it only takes one to tarnish the reputation of all.

bravestar

yubabill1 wrote: »

Admittedly, I know very little about the incident and I utterly condemn the actions of the criminals involved.

I do not argue that the firearm was the main cause of the murder, I argue that the firearm was said to be inadequate after the event. I am aware that the serving officer was not given a chance to defend himself, but as I said, the gloves are off and I am going to give as good as I get.

Nothing personal against any serving or retired officer, as I likewise take no personal offence in this, but this is going to be not nice, to say the least.

And I will be surprised more than most if AGS get their proposals through - you can quote me on that - and it won't be on the back of your brave colleagues.

I personally know and have known, many Gardaí over the years, one even at top brass level and I have to say, that the majority are exceptional people: But, like shooters, it only takes one to tarnish the reputation of all.

I was going to hit the thanks button but thought that a bit impersonal. Thanks for your post and all your efforts.

BattleCorp

bpb101 wrote: »

firearms that look like assault rifles are already banned

They aren't banned, they are restricted.

If it's banned, you can't get it, full stop. If it's restricted, you have a shot (pardon the pun) at getting it if you can provide a reason for needing it.

yubabill1

bravestar wrote: »

I was going to hit the thanks button but thought that a bit impersonal. Thanks for your post and all your efforts.

Note to self: Pay more attention to who is on your side.

Deaf git

I looked at the full session of the sub committee again. There are some similarities to the way the bank guarantee scheme was granted i.e. a couple of gullible politicians, a civilservant and some 'experts' being selective in the evidence put forward. Half expected to see some damning statistic being pulled out of someone's ar!e.

Meanwhile, at a local level the new 'legislation' is already being applied.

Cass

Deaf git wrote: »

Meanwhile, at a local level the new 'legislation' is already being applied.

I have been contacted by numerous lads that are having the "legislation" applied to them as of now. So with that in mind i would urge everyone that is being dealt with in this manner to record everything.

Keep letters, applications, refusals, anything that shows that the law is not being applied as it is now. There is no point in us making accusations as we will be asked for proof. If we cannot provide proof then we look foolish and it undermines everything else we say.

The same thing applies to blanket bans, etc. While we know it's happening unless we can show or prove it is then it's only speculation.

Record everything.

Deaf git

Cass wrote: »

I have been contacted by numerous lads that are having the "legislation" applied to them as of now. So with that in mind i would urge everyone that is being dealt with in this manner to record everything.

Keep letters, applications, refusals, anything that shows that the law is not being applied as it is now. There is no point in us making accusations as we will be asked for proof. If we cannot provide proof then we look foolish and it undermines everything else we say.

The same thing applies to blanket bans, etc. While we know it's happening unless we can show or prove it is then it's only speculation.

Record everything.

A letter? What if they just sit on it? My paperwork for a substitution was 'lost' until I royally kicked off. Then it was found. Been waiting since first week of November, am fuming.
One of the earliest Commissioners stated that AGS could only perform their function with the support of the ordinary citizen. Well, I'm ordinary and they no longer have my unreserved support.

Cass

Deaf git wrote: »

A letter? What if they just sit on it? My paperwork for a substitution was 'lost' until I royally kicked off. Then it was found. Been waiting since first week of November, am fuming..

Only where you can. Somethings are going to happen, and you'll have no way to prove it or have a record of it.

I'm in the same boat. A sub i'm waiting on since last week of November.

Witcher

Cass wrote: »

I have been contacted by numerous lads that are having the "legislation" applied to them as of now. So with that in mind i would urge everyone that is being dealt with in this manner to record everything.

Keep letters, applications, refusals, anything that shows that the law is not being applied as it is now. There is no point in us making accusations as we will be asked for proof. If we cannot provide proof then we look foolish and it undermines everything else we say.

The same thing applies to blanket bans, etc. While we know it's happening unless we can show or prove it is then it's only speculation.

Record everything.

As Deaf Git said above, in my own case it was all verbal. I met my super face to face about a pistol and he just told me out straight that it had come down from on high that applications for pistols just weren't to be even considered. As he said himself, he had no issue with them but I can understand that he has to toe the line that the people at the top draw out for him.

In fairness to him, that wasn't just him BS'ing me, I know lads from my own club in other districts heard the same from their own people.

The meeting was in April last year, the application had been in since Sep. '13 at that stage. It eventually came through before Christmas but it was 14 months in total of a wait. I don't know what changed between April and November but it's here now and I'll probably end up having to sell it soon because of all this for 1/4 of what I paid for it, along with my other guns if the worst comes to the worst.

I've a couple of grand invested in my guns, but if they go on the market up the North etc. they won't be worth brass tacks because it would be a buyers market. I'm in deep as I said but I know lads that must have twice the amount invested that I do and I wouldn't be suprised if they'd be looking to move them now while there is still an arse in the market, because if that committee meeting a few weeks ago is anything to go by this review will be a hatchet job and we'll all be selling up. I don't know about anyone else but my own district must have one of the highest gun crime rates outside of Dublin so personally I'm absolutely fcuked if licences hinge upon that in the future.

Deaf git

Cass wrote: »

Only where you can. Somethings are going to happen, and you'll have no way to prove it or have a record of it.

I'm in the same boat. A sub i'm waiting on since last week of November.

I got a printout of calls made to and from my phone up to 19th December. The number of the local station and div hq feature a lot on the 'to' list but nowhere on the 'received' list.
I'm a public servant, if I treated a customer like that I'd be subjected to a disciplinary.

Cass

When did you get the receipt letter?
Did you ask for a receipt when you submitted the FCA1?
Did you keep a record/copy of the FCA1?


You got the gun in the end so it's not a case of it being refused for no reason, just taking longer than the 3 months. AGS have already admitted, however lenient they are with the truth on the scale of it, that they are slow on some applications.

When you are handing in an FCA1, get a receipt. If they won't provide you with a receipt when you submit the FCA1 then bring one with you and have the guy/gal at the desk sign for it. If they refuse, then make a note on the receipt of the Garda's name, number, and bring the FCA1 with you. Then send it via registered post. Someone has to sign for it, and An Post will give you a record of when it was delivered, and who signed for it.

Lads, it'll take some work on our behalf. If you are throwing up roadblocks and reasons as to why you cannot do some things, then why bother with any of it?

knockon

Deaf git wrote: »

I got a printout of calls made to and from my phone up to 19th December. The number of the local station and div hq feature a lot on the 'to' list but nowhere on the 'received' list.
I'm a public servant, if I treated a customer like that I'd be subjected to a disciplinary.

Complaint to GSOC made?

SVI40

Lads,

If you are having issues with the 'new legislation coming down the line' response, take a note of the date, time and person you spoke to. If you have records of calls made, even better. Keep these records. It is important to note them as soon as possible after the fact. Where possible, have everything in writing. It always is better to take out a file with date, times and persons you spoken to, than try and rely on memory. Documentation speaks volumes, rather than recalling something from memory.

Witcher

Cass wrote: »

When did you get the receipt letter?
Did you ask for a receipt when you submitted the FCA1?
Did you keep a record/copy of the FCA1?


You got the gun in the end so it's not a case of it being refused for no reason, just taking longer than the 3 months. AGS have already admitted, however lenient they are with the truth on the scale of it, that they are slow on some applications.

When you are handing in an FCA1, get a receipt. If they won't provide you with a receipt when you submit the FCA1 then bring one with you and have the guy/gal at the desk sign for it. If they refuse, then make a note on the receipt of the Garda's name, number, and bring the FCA1 with you. Then send it via registered post. Someone has to sign for it, and An Post will give you a record of when it was delivered, and who signed for it.

Lads, it'll take some work on our behalf. If you are throwing up roadblocks and reasons as to why you cannot do some things, then why bother with any of it?

I've never gotten a receipt letter for any of my applications personally. Paperwork going 'missing' isn't an issue in my district what what I've seen and heard. I had one sub actually go missing but as soon as I re-submitted it was done straight away.

I've never felt like I was deceived etc. by the Gardai in my own district. In my own case, the FO is often out of the station but I know the district clerk on a first name basis so she sorts any issues I have. I really can't fault the people I actually deal with in the station.

In my own case I posted above, it wasn't a case of me being deceived or underhanded tactics being used or the paperwork being delayed..the super had my application in front of us on the table, went through it there and then and told me straight to my face he couldn't give it to me because directions had been circulated from above.

In some instances it's not the people you're dealing directly with that are ****ing you over, it's the people above them as in my case.

Grizzly 45

Strider wrote: »

As Deaf Git said above, in my own case it was all verbal. I met my super face to face about a pistol and he just told me out straight that it had come down from on high that applications for pistols just weren't to be even considered. As he said himself, he had no issue with them but I can understand that he has to toe the line that the people at the top draw out for him.

In fairness to him, that wasn't just him BS'ing me, I know lads from my own club in other districts heard the same from their own people.

The meeting was in April last year, the application had been in since Sep. '13 at that stage. It eventually came through before Christmas but it was 14 months in total of a wait. I don't know what changed between April and November but it's here now and I'll probably end up having to sell it soon because of all this for 1/4 of what I paid for it, along with my other guns if the worst comes to the worst.

I've a couple of grand invested in my guns, but if they go on the market up the North etc. they won't be worth brass tacks because it would be a buyers market. I'm in deep as I said but I know lads that must have twice the amount invested that I do and I wouldn't be suprised if they'd be looking to move them now while there is still an arse in the market, because if that committee meeting a few weeks ago is anything to go by this review will be a hatchet job and we'll all be selling up. I don't know about anyone else but my own district must have one of the highest gun crime rates outside of Dublin so personally I'm absolutely fcuked if licences hinge upon that in the future.

We have to deal with no matter what rubbush advice the state and ags have been given with this compensation if it comes to this.There is no way in Hell that under irish or EU law and with precedent in the UK that they can simply ban certain types of fire arms and not pay out.I d even go sofar that those two legal statements are cherry picked from a greater discussion and are wrong anyway. A liscense is not a gift from the state but a permission to do something or own something in that state.But it wont be the first time the irish state has been given crap legal advice either.

Cass

Strider wrote: »

I've never gotten a receipt letter for any of my applications personally.

That is fault. You should. I do, and have them all filed away.

Paperwork going 'missing' isn't an issue in my district what what I've seen and heard. I had one sub actually go missing but as soon as I re-submitted it was done straight away.

I don't get ya. You say it's not a problem, then say you've had it happen to you. This is another failure.

I've never felt like I was deceived etc. by the Gardai in my own district. In my own case, the FO is often out of the station but I know the district clerk on a first name basis so she sorts any issues I have. I really can't fault the people I actually deal with in the station.

My FO is as sound as they come. As were the two lads before him. However it's not him personally, but the institution he is a member of, that i have the problem with and by making excuses for any failures, no matter how small, only allows them to continue in this trend.

In my own case I posted above, it wasn't a case of me being deceived or underhanded tactics being used or the paperwork being delayed..the super had my application in front of us on the table, went through it there and then and told me straight to my face he couldn't give it to me because directions had been circulated from above.

But it was delayed.

The law says an application must be processed within 3 months. It says that after 3 months, if you have not been granted the firearm, you are automatically refused. So to "fudge" the figures AGS are saying that only 2% are late or delayed. However they take the application processing time from the time/date they enter it onto PULSE, which usually only happens when the application has sat for weeks/months on different tables while awaiting signing off on. So they can support this lie. Hence the reason i say to ask for receipts and it's the reason you will find it hard to get a receipt.

In some instances it's not the people you're dealing directly with that are ****ing you over, it's the people above them as in my case.

As i said above all these small (and big) problems are signs of institutional failures. Our relaxed "sure it'll be grand" attitude or as i say to my Father the cap in hand attitude must end.

We keep ignoring the small problems, and when it comes to times like this when 1,000 small problems would be of more benefit to 10 large ones and we don't have it.

Witcher

Cass wrote: »

I don't get ya. You say it's not a problem, then say you've had it happen to you. This is another failure.

We both know when it comes to firearms applications here there is a difference between paperwork going 'missing' and actually going missing. I've heard, anecdotally, of paperwork disappearing 2/3 times in a row, that's systematic and is what I mean by 'missing'. At the time, the district clerk did ask me did I know who took it in but I didn't. Since then I've quietly taken note of their shoulder number but it hasn't happened again and I've put through a good bit of paperwork between address changes etc.

We all know these are failures but there hasn't been a forum to actually make these known until this review and it may be too late now, I don't think Ivana Bacik or any of the others in that committee give a crap about my paperwork going missing, their mind is made up already imo.

My FO is as sound as they come. As were the two lads before him. However it's not him personally, but the institution he is a member of, that i have the problem with and by making excuses for any failures, no matter how small, only allows them to continue in this trend.

I'm not making excuses but as I said above there has been no forum for these type of complaints up until now. Back when I had my paperwork for the sub go missing I didn't know this was coming down the road and to record it all, I think we've all chalked something down to experience when it comes to firearms applications and firearms ownership in general here.

We've all seen this type of stuff going being discussed on the forum- mods refused or only to be used on a range or mods granted with letters, ammo limits of 100 etc. There was nobody to complain to, you could make a thing out of it on the phone with the FO but all you would get is a sorry. We can make these failings known over the next while and publish statistics about refusals, the culture of 'delaying' paperwork as you said yourself below etc. They'll look at them and say; 'Yeah, these were failings and we'll address them in the future but in the meantime..all these guns that are out there, do we want a Dunblane here? etc.' I think any pretext that this was actually a review and that our concerns will get proper airtime and consideration went out the window with that meeting a few weeks ago.

But it was delayed.

The law says an application must be processed within 3 months. It says that after 3 months, if you have not been granted the firearm, you are automatically refused. So to "fudge" the figures AGS are saying that only 2% are late or delayed. However they take the application processing time from the time/date they enter it onto PULSE, which usually only happens when the application has sat for weeks/months on different tables while awaiting signing off on. So they can support this lie. Hence the reason i say to ask for receipts and it's the reason you will find it hard to get a receipt.

I get what you're saying about 'delayed' being a term for paperwork existing in limbo between your hand and Pulse so that it never actually has to be dealt with. I meant it wasn't delayed in a; 'the super is out of the office/sick, we've a load of applications to deal with at the moment etc' sense. It wasn't being kicked down the road on me so I didn't know where I was, I was actually told why it wasn't forthcoming.

As a side note to my own case, one lad I shoot also lives in this district and applied for a pistol around the time my own came through in November and had it in two weeks. Whatever order was in place from the higher ups seems to have been retracted and now they must be relying on this review to do the job for them.

As i said above all these small (and big) problems are signs of institutional failures. Our relaxed "sure it'll be grand" attitude or as i say to my Father the cap in hand attitude must end.

We keep ignoring the small problems, and when it comes to times like this when 1,000 small problems would be of more benefit to 10 large ones and we don't have it.

I get what you're saying completely. As I said in this thread before this thing of supers being able to decide crime rates are too high or there are too many firearms in their district etc. is effectively a complete ban.

I'm sure some supers and c.supers will gladly make use of it by choice but for those that don't and are willing to give licences we'll have more of these orders coming down from on high telling them to issue refusals.

SVI40

The transcript is now available:

http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/Debates%20Authoring/DebatesWebPack.nsf/committeetakes/JUJ2014121700001?opendocument

Deaf git

knockon wrote: »

Complaint to GSOC made?

I think it's advisable to exhaust the local route first. I've drafted a letter to the Super asking the reasons for this inordinate delay. I'll send by registered mail. If the response is not forthcoming I will lodge a complaint to the CS. After that, complaint to AC level and finally Commissioner. Then comes the external appeals authority after all other avenues have been explored. That's a lot of post to 'lose', even by AGS standards.