Gardai proposals to ban firearms

Sparks

Zxthinger wrote: »

Where Are you sparks? There is a car wreck on the radio.

Yelling at them on twitter. I don't get automatic invites to these things lad, I'm just an ordinary member of the public.

This fast media form is not a good place to discuss any issues

Neither of those two TDs were there to discuss anything. Healy-Rae wants his name in the paper by associating himself with what he sees as a controversial topic, and McGrath is doing the same thing but using the other side of the topic. Neither could give a flying fig about the actual topic itself.

Grizzly 45

F%%K! I forgot completely about this interview this AM.But it sounds like it was a complete clusterfk!For both sides!

Sparks

I've heard worse.
But not often.

Cass

Can i make a suggestion? An open letter, petition style, to Healy-Rae telling him that, from the shooting community as a whole, whatever he says are his own opinions and do not represent the majority or even the minority of what the shooting community actually think.

That his self serving rants in all forms of media will not be backed or supported by any shooting group or the community, and a copy of the letter sent to the relevant shooting bodies and/or departments.

This childish notion of a united front can do as much harm as good. IOW if we are not seen to disagree with people like him simply because he shoots (or used to) then we are effectively condoning what he says. He is an actual hazard to our goals and one interview of hm will undo any good or progress our shooting groups make on our behalf and give the opposition a great sound bite. It's only a matter pof time before the man says something we cannot come back from.

Seriously, we need to distance ourselves from him asap.

Sparks

https://twitter.com/MHealyRae
https://www.facebook.com/mhealyrae
michael.healy-rae@oireachtas.ie

knockon

Well, I just listened to it. It was all going well until Mc Grath went off on a spiel.... To be fair I cannot be too critical of Healy Rae's performance. He has not said too much wrong according to what I have heard.

It looks like McGrath has the Farmers in his sights!

Lemon3

http://www.rte.ie/radio1/today-with-sean-o-rourke/programmes/2015/0210/679108-today-with-sean-o-rourke-tuesday-10-february-2015/?clipid=1799000
its about 25min into program

Sparks

knockon wrote: »

He has not said too much wrong according to what I have heard.

• "Not one stolen firearm has ever been used in a crime". First off, that's wrong, and it's laughably easy to prove it's wrong and that then destroys his credibility. If he'd said "pistol" instead of "firearm" maybe, but he didn't care enough to listen.
• "Homeowners in the country should be allowed have firearms for self-defence". Seriously? This even needs comment on how bad it is?
• "You should be allowed to drive home from the pub after a skinful". Yeah, not firearms-related, but you have to mention it, it's the law.

Here's the main problem; Healy-Rae doesn't give a flying monkey about us. He wants his name in the papers before an election and that's all, and he's not just willing to throw us under the bus like McGrath is doing (and that's all McGrath's doing, he's the same coin as Healy-Rae, just the other side of it); but he's also willing to say stupid things while claiming to speak for us because he knows they'll sound so stupid that the media will cover them to mock them. He doesn't care; his name's in the press, that's all that he wants. He can correct the negative stuff closer to polling day. Right now, he just wants the coverage.

This guy is a lot more dangerous to us than McGrath or any other TD who's opposed to us, because they're more honest.

edit: Besides, you want someone who broke the Firearms Act several ways at once on a national TV3 programme as your spokesperson? Really?

PatterdalePup

Cass wrote: »

if we are not seen to disagree with people like him simply because he shoots (or used to) then we are effectively condoning what he says. He is an actual hazard to our goals and one interview of hm will undo any good or progress our shooting groups make on our behalf and give the opposition a great sound bite. It's only a matter pof time before the man says something we cannot come back from.

Seriously, we need to distance ourselves from him asap.

Agree with this. This guy has a platform and can reach a wide audience. Worse, the newspapers can spin what he says so that it comes across even worse.

In addition to an open letter/petition is there any TD or just anyone who'd have similar access to the media platforms, anywhere in the country, that is pro-shooting and is somewhat intelligent and measured in his responses that could become the 'go to guy' on shooting issues?

Zxthinger

His hearts in the right place, I think we should contact him and inform him of his errors.
Advise him about RTKBA as this is ireland and not USA.

He only comes across as a bit of a fool because he doesn't know the fact. That could be changed..

Tell him about stolen guns and how we ate talking about stolen pistols for the sake of averting any or further prohibition etc.

I'll email him tonight.
Trick is to keep it short.

Grizzly 45

Sent him a polite facebook message about this Either please tone it down or state that these are your own personal opinions on self defence and in no way representing the views of the average irish gun owner.While he undoubtly means well The bull in the china shop approach is doing more harm than good.

Zxthinger

Sparks wrote: »

https://twitter.com/MHealyRae
https://www.facebook.com/mhealyrae
michael.healy-rae@oireachtas.ie

Email sent, constructive criticism only..and some facts.

badaj0z

I just listened to this.Taking into account, that both were "grandstanding" and that the facts were few and far between, I think that Healey Rae did us some good today. At the gut level, he came across as better informed and fairer than McGrath. I also thought that the RTE intro at Harbour House did us a lot of good.

knockon

Sparks wrote: »

• "Not one stolen firearm has ever been used in a crime". First off, that's wrong, and it's laughably easy to prove it's wrong and that then destroys his credibility. If he'd said "pistol" instead of "firearm" maybe, but he didn't care enough to listen.
• "Homeowners in the country should be allowed have firearms for self-defence". Seriously? This even needs comment on how bad it is?
• "You should be allowed to drive home from the pub after a skinful". Yeah, not firearms-related, but you have to mention it, it's the law.

Here's the main problem; Healy-Rae doesn't give a flying monkey about us. He wants his name in the papers before an election and that's all, and he's not just willing to throw us under the bus like McGrath is doing (and that's all McGrath's doing, he's the same coin as Healy-Rae, just the other side of it); but he's also willing to say stupid things while claiming to speak for us because he knows they'll sound so stupid that the media will cover them to mock them. He doesn't care; his name's in the press, that's all that he wants. He can correct the negative stuff closer to polling day. Right now, he just wants the coverage.

This guy is a lot more dangerous to us than McGrath or any other TD who's opposed to us, because they're more honest.

edit: Besides, you want someone who broke the Firearms Act several ways at once on a national TV3 programme as your spokesperson? Really?

No need to jump down my throat.

I was only referring to this mornings interview not past car crash radio.

I never said anything about Healy Rae representation me or anyone else. Also its a bit disingenuous of you to include his thoughts on RBA and drink driving in your response to me. I advocate neither of those and replying as if I did....not really fair.

Sparks

knockon wrote: »

No need to jump down my throat.

I was only referring to this mornings interview not past car crash radio.

I never said anything about Healy Rae representation me or anyone else. Also its a bit disingenuous of you to include his thoughts on RBA and drink driving in your response to me. I advocate neither of those and replying as if I did....not really fair.

I'm not saying that's what you were talking about; it's what everyone who was listening to him was remembering him saying (based on what I was seeing on twitter, facebook and other places). Those were the three things that kept coming up in relation to what he said this morning.

bpb101

The reporter gave a very fair report in fairness to him. well done, Haven't got to the td's yet

Nekarsulm

I emailed M. H-Rae today, with a few salient facts, and in fairness got a reply tonight from him.

"Dear Xxxxx,
Thank you very much because I need people to advise me correctly and not to just complement me for the sake of it. That is why I am grateful with you being honest because I do not want to be incorrect in what I say. Thanks again.
Regards

Michael Healy-Rae T.D.
Sandymount, Kilgarvan Co.Kerry
Office Number:01 6183363"

Make off that what you will, but at least we know he, or someone in his office, reads his correspondence.

turismo2142

The reporter made a reference to individuals in Harbour House downing (to some extent) pheasant shooting. I know this was a throw away remark but I'm not impressed nonetheless.

Given that target shooters this site have appealed to more mainstream shooting interests such as rough shooting etc. not to throw more minority interests "under the bus" it is annoying to hear references to remarks made in Harbour House which suggest regular hunting is less civilised than target shooting.

I am paraphrasing but I'm sure anyone who has listened to that interview knows the comment to which I refer.

Again, I've said it before and I'll say it again...it seems that handgun/semi-auto large bore firearms interests are making this their fight and again no reference is being made to the majority of potentially effected gun owners who own pump action and semi auto shotguns (between 8,000 and 9,000). I'm concerned about this because as things stand I fear that nobody is making enough noise to say...yes there's no evidence to require a ban on handguns and semi auto rifles which have become popular over the past decade with a minority of competent and responsible shooters but pumps and semi auto shotties in civilian hands have been around since the foundation of the State, are ubiquitous and (in contra distinction to handguns and semi auto centre fire rifles) have never even been the cause of any disingenous and ill-founded concerns whatsoever (until the Gardaí proposed their banning of course). So when I hear comments like that on the radio taking a subtle dump on my sport I get quite angry and justifiably so.

I must say, I really am annoyed.

Grizzly 45

turismo2142 wrote: »

in contra distinction to handguns and semi auto centre .

speaking of throw away remarks....Any proof of your comment that a ligit owned semi CF rifle or handgun has ever been stolen and used in a crime here???If so we'd all like to hear of it?
What annoys me is that there are STILL shooters out therein our clubs and organisations who still haven't and won't bother their holes to put their signitures on the petition forms as they belive it doesnt concern them because they are game shooters Or clay shooters or those who use double barrels and haven't read or just want to be childish and put their hands over their ears and go" lala lala the problem doesn't concern me at all" Nodding donkeys is a very adapt description for some people in this country be they in politics or shooting.
This kind of thing annoys me more than throwaway remarks made by someone and yet one wonders how many of the people who own pumps and semis have not signed the petition because" it doesn't concern them?"If they are banned these will be the first people bawling about loss and compensation to the organisations,and don't think the db crowd are any safer under these propositions either. They might be choking on ther smugness too when their area becomes a postcode lottery license. Any person who has not signed the petition should be ashamed of themselves and be told so by fellow gun owners. It's a disgrace that either side should be running another down,but doubly more so that some of the biggest mouths complaining won't even sign a petition to help them keep what they have as it doesn't affect them.

Roundpack

turismo2142 wrote: »

The reporter made a reference to individuals in Harbour House

So just to clarify, you didn't actually hear anybody being interviewed make any reference to pheasant shooting or make any disparaging remarks with regard to any other sport.

Sparks

https://twitter.com/Finianmcgrathtd/status/565430816629874689

Finian McGrath wrote:

The gun lobby is big in Ireland. I could be in trouble! My only agenda is public safety.

Harumph.

meathstevie

Sparks wrote: »

https://twitter.com/Finianmcgrathtd/status/565430816629874689


Harumph.

You're right Mr McGrath, far bigger than you have voters and all of such character that the Gardai have deemed us fit to possess firearms for sporting purposes. And since none of us are in the business of walking into a busy pub and shooting a fellow scumbag in the head "gangsta style" with a smuggled pistol is it asking too much to leave us alone and get on with our sport ?

turismo2142

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

speaking of throw away remarks....Any proof of your comment that a ligit owned semi CF rifle or handgun has ever been stolen and used in a crime here???If so we'd all like to hear of it?.

I made no such comment....ever. I'd love to know where you think I did. Perhaps you should read my post again or ask me about what ever part you do not understand.

Is this the quote which is bothering you?
"and (in contra distinction to handguns and semi auto centre fire rifles) have never even been the cause of any disingenous and ill-founded concerns whatsoever"

I'm not going to explain that as it is clear enough in my view but I think you'll find it is entirely the opposite of what you think it means.

As for the rest of your remarks. Every double barrelled shooter I know signed that petition and I think the majority of gun owners in formal club settings have signed petitions and done their bit.

And Grizzly, I cannot help but think that the entirety of your post is aimed at me and that I in some way encapsulate these people whom irk you so much.

Read my posts before having a rant at me.

At Roundpack... no, you are correct. I did not. That said when speaking to reporters who've clearly been invited to the club for the purposes of making their point (and have done so very well) I think it's rather incumbant upon them not to say things admonishing other shooting disciplines to a journalist who's job it is to report what they've seen and head. Perhaps it was naive of them to do so but do so they did.

Time and time again I have seen target shooting advocates (whom I support 100%) rightly admonish more traditional shooting disciplines for not backing them so when I hear a reporter who's spent time in a target shooting club referring to their views on rough shooting in a negative way I feel that it must be pointed as as being a bad thing.

clawback07

Hi , I'd like to support the petition re. pump actions and semi auto shotguns . How do I go about it ? I can't find much online about it - I 'm probably looking in the wrong places . Thanks

LikeTheseOdds

clawback07 wrote: »

Hi , I'd like to support the petition re. pump actions and semi auto shotguns . How do I go about it ? I can't find much online about it - I 'm probably looking in the wrong places . Thanks

I think you're talking about the petition by the Sports coalition? If so it's on their website. sportscoalition org Sorry I can't link it in full it's under the petition and submission tab .

wexfordman2

turismo2142 wrote: »

The reporter made a reference to individuals in Harbour House downing (to some extent) pheasant shooting. I know this was a throw away remark but I'm not impressed nonetheless.

Given that target shooters this site have appealed to more mainstream shooting interests such as rough shooting etc. not to throw more minority interests "under the bus" it is annoying to hear references to remarks made in Harbour House which suggest regular hunting is less civilised than target shooting.

I am paraphrasing but I'm sure anyone who has listened to that interview knows the comment to which I refer.

Again, I've said it before and I'll say it again...it seems that handgun/semi-auto large bore firearms interests are making this their fight and again no reference is being made to the majority of potentially effected gun owners who own pump action and semi auto shotguns (between 8,000 and 9,000). I'm concerned about this because as things stand I fear that nobody is making enough noise to say...yes there's no evidence to require a ban on handguns and semi auto rifles which have become popular over the past decade with a minority of competent and responsible shooters but pumps and semi auto shotties in civilian hands have been around since the foundation of the State, are ubiquitous and (in contra distinction to handguns and semi auto centre fire rifles) have never even been the cause of any disingenous and ill-founded concerns whatsoever (until the Gardaí proposed their banning of course). So when I hear comments like that on the radio taking a subtle dump on my sport I get quite angry and justifiably so.

I must say, I really am annoyed.

I tend to agree with you. There are a number of aspects that affect all shooters, the most blatant one is the proposal that ags can refuse a licence based on crime levels in your area.

That to my mind is one of the most feightening proposals, yet barely a mention from most.

Grizzly 45

turismo2142 wrote: »

I made no such comment....ever. I'd love to know where you think I did. Perhaps you should read my post again or ask me about what ever part you do not understand.

Is this the quote which is bothering you?
"and (in contra distinction to handguns and semi auto centre fire rifles) have never even been the cause of any disingenous and ill-founded concerns whatsoever"

Yes please clarify exactly what you are trying to say there..??

I'm not going to explain that as it is clear enough in my view but I think you'll find it is entirely the opposite of what you think it means.

No it isnt and as you offered to explain it to me and us please do....

As for the rest of your remarks. Every double barrelled shooter I know signed that petition and I think the majority of gun owners in formal club settings have signed petitions and done their bit.

Unfortuneatly,thats not what I am hearing and the petition numbers are nowhere where they should be by now...And yes there are plenty of people out there in clubs or individuals who still think it doesnt concern them.

And Grizzly, I cannot help but think that the entirety of your post is aimed at me and that I in some way encapsulate these people whom irk you so much.

Well,unless you didnt sign it then why would it apply to you??For your info ,I have two semis and two pumps that would be hit along with my hand gun and semi rifle.So dont think I am picking on you specifically,I am stating that there is still a couldnt care less attitude out there that ius more irksome than some comment that could be interperted anyway.And trying to imply my shotguns didnt get mentioned enough by the nasty semi and pistol shooters.

FWIW one of the members on the panel in the comittee,has been fighting for the last three years court case ,court case after court case to reliscene his two shotguns [a SPAS15 and SPAS12],one of which was pictured in the booklet the AGS handed around in Dec.He also has a handgun and semi rifle.He was ripping to get stuck into this specific point in the Dail for everyone,but it didnt come up.Des Crofton mentioned it in the morning session that the facts were wrong.Joe Costello mentioned it too in the afternoon as to the fact how in some cases they are negilegently stored by the biggest segment of the shooting sports here who are the ones who sometime do display the couldnt care less..So dont think for one moment you are being ignored in the big picture of things.
Plus the only reason this became any sort of a big deal was because of AGS malignincy with the pistol mag capacity by their ballistics expert in a court case.The simple fact is this is a eyewash arguement,and has been since 1976 at least when and as all these guns have to be sold here in restricted format to comply with game hunting law. It was another "They could be modified" like the pistols "could take" ten shot mags spurious arguement.

Read my posts before having a rant at me.

I do and it struck me that you feel aggreived over something petty that could be interperted any which way as this point you say;

Time and time again I have seen target shooting advocates (whom I support 100%) rightly admonish more traditional shooting disciplines for not backing them so when I hear a reporter who's spent time in a target shooting club referring to their views on rough shooting in a negative way

In light of your above statement should anyone be not surprised if someone said they arent impressed by the support given by another segment??We dont know in what context this was said,what the persons backround was orqwhat gripe they might of had..Agree it is not a right thing to say,from either side but to try and imply that because you are shooting a specific type of shotgun you are somehow being ignored by the semi and pistol shooting segment is abit disengenious?

Sparks

Mod Note: Lads, dial it down just a notch, okay? Remember rule one of the forum.

Grizzly 45

Anyone know whats up on the website.Seems to be acting odd??

turismo2142

You seem intent upon finding offence. That's your difficulty. Sparks. I'm not going to engage in any rule breaking.

I said something measured and fair.

"pumps and semi auto shotties in civilian hands have been around since the foundation of the State, are ubiquitous and (in contra distinction to handguns and semi auto centre fire rifles) have never even been the cause of any disingenous and ill-founded concerns whatsoever"

This means that "disingenous and ill-founded concerns" (AKA lies if you wish me to put it simply) have been expressed (as far as I have read) throughout the working group proposals (and in Oireachtais submissions the AGS) re handguns and centre fire rifles. Shotguns haven't even been attacked with any such "disingenous and ill-founded concerns" (AKA lies) (in the report) other than a general "we want to ban those manufactured to hold more than three cartridges" aswell. That's all it means. Supportive of your position ironically...but no you decided to attack me without asking me to clarify what I meant first.

I watched the Oireachtais committee online. I'm aware of the SPAS 15 scenario. Another example of a scary gun which with a two shot mag which is no differnt in function to my hunting Beretta A400 (except it's awkward looking and heavier...but if it's to his taste...so be it). I saw what was said re shotguns. I still am concerned that it hasn't gotten enough air relative to the other aspects.

I stand by what I've said Grizzly. I'm sure others agree with the thrust of it. I'm not fighting with anyone. I feel passionate about what I say here and I joined Boards solely to try and do something about this whole unfair scenario.

So by all means continue to quote and query my post and misinterpret what I've said. I think you'll find your language to be inflammatory and your approach unwelcoming of newcommers who are most certainly equally entitled to express views. I made an observation and expressed annoyance. You don't agree and felt the urge to call my views petty. So be it.

I do not want to fall out with anyone here. That includes you Grizzly as you strike me as very passionate about the whole affair and you're making sterling efforts to fight your corner against downright unfairness. But I stand by my observations.