NIGHT SHOOTING

dto001

Does anyone have email addresses for the sports coalition and north Tipp rgc? I've been on the S.C. Website and I can't find any contact details. I've emailed the Nargc head office and countryside alliance on Facebook any other contact details would be helpful not great at finding these.

yubabill1

Just sent a short email to the best person I could find

MGWalsh@justice.ie

Cass

cavan shooter wrote: »

The NARGC set up the Sports Coalition back when all of a sudden the Dept of Justice was going to start seising all our guns around November 2014. It was funded by the NARGC and the National Director was the Chairman.

Again i don't want to derail the thread, but the NARGC used to sit on the FCP, so the notion that the SC was founded out of some "heroic" attempt to fight for the "little man" is badly mistaken. Court cases were taken by the NARGC against An Gardaí­, including some on the FCP, An Gardaí­ would not sit with them (and frankly who could blame them) so the FCP stopped being due to the withdrawal of the NARGC.

Instead of coming back to the FCP in 2014, the NARGC gathered a few "splinter" RFDs, ranges, and a fishing club and then formed the Sports Coalition. The NASRPC joined at some point in this time line. Now we have this new group claiming to represent all shooters which they don't, were responsible for the the splitting up of the shooting community even more so than it was, and sent in secret proposals on a couple of occasions that we have had to argue against or has anyone forgotten this?

My point is, and i'm really not out on a witch hunt, but the NARGC created this beast when there was no need. They have since seen sense and left it, but now it's rudderless, a shadow of it's former self, but still as dangerous because now they are still continuing with the secret proposals, hidden agenda and as this latest debacle shows working in secret with other groups WITHIN the FCP to undermine everyone else (including the rest of the FCP members).

IOW this is not the FCP, but the Sports Coalition once again creating a problem that previously did not exist.

I would like make it abundantly clear that i am not attacking the NARGC as it is NOW. With a new committee, chair, etc they have once again returned to the proper path and it's great to have their vote/power on the right side.

Cass

One thing that bothers me, and i wanted this in a separate post to see if i can get an answer.

Surely the people that make up the groups within the SC are members or participants of other sports. I shoot long range, but also clays, game, pistol, etc. So i wouldn't fit into one category and if someone tried to destroy one of the sports i take part in i'd be as upset about that one as all of them.

My point is surely there are those within the deer associations that also shoot foxes/hunt at night. Same as when the SC asked for a ban on pistols under 5" and semi autos, or the NASRPC tried to grab control of all pistol shooting and ban Glocks. Surely some on within the groups have these firearms and would be affected by it.

• Why are they not speaking up?
• Are they not being told?
• Does it not concern them when they find out that this is happening "in their name"?
• Why do they continue to stand for it?

yubabill1

Cass wrote: »

One thing that bothers me, and i wanted this in a separate post to see if i can get an answer.

Surely the people that make up the groups within the SC are members or participants of other sports. I shoot long range, but also clays, game, pistol, etc. So i wouldn't fit into one category and if someone tried to destroy one of the sports i take part in i'd be as upset about that one as all of them.

My point is surely there are those within the deer associations that also shoot foxes/hunt at night. Same as when the SC asked for a ban on pistols under 5" and semi autos, or the NASRPC tried to grab control of all pistol shooting and ban Glocks. Surely some on within the groups have these firearms and would be affected by it.

• Why are they not speaking up?
• Are they not being told?
• Does it not concern them when they find out that this is happening "in their name"?
• Why do they continue to stand for it?

Ans; Snobbery.

Remember that deer hunting used to be reserved for royalty only?

IMHO some are in love with that idea and behave accordingly.

cavan shooter

Cass wrote:

Surely the people that make up the groups within the SC are members or participants of other sports. I shoot long range, but also clays, game, pistol, etc. So i wouldn't fit into one category and if someone tried to destroy one of the sports i take part in i'd be as upset about that one as all of them.

I'd say not in any position of power especially when they see what is happening as a benefit to them there is also a vindictivness and a power play

Cass wrote:

My point is surely there are those within the deer associations that also shoot foxes/hunt at night. Same as when the SC asked for a ban on pistols under 5" and semi autos, or the NASRPC tried to grab control of all pistol shooting and ban Glocks. Surely some on within the groups have these firearms and would be affected by it. Why are they not speaking up?Are they not being told?Does it not concern them when they find out that this is happening "in their name"?Why do they continue to stand for it?

Not my problem...I remember a few years ago when they wanted to get rid of semi autos shotguns....do you remember that one...even at local club level the answer was...I don't have a semi auto...I'll be harsh but 90% of shooting men don't give a **** until it affects them directly and I'd say until it affects them personally they still won't budge. Sometimes trying to motivate shooting men is like playing handball against a blanket.

Cass

yubabill1 wrote: »

Ans; Snobbery.

I believe that, and also that it still exists, but is it really at the level it was decades ago? Also are the tiny few in committee level able to convince or dupe those not in such a position that this is the best way forward?

cavan shooter wrote: »

I'd say not in any position of power especially when they see what is happening as a benefit to them there is also a vindictivness and a power play

I remember during the NASRPC pistol grab there was one chap that was defending their actions. Fair enough you might think, and everyone is entitled to the opinions. However he owned the very gun that was being put forward to be banned outright.

Think about it, he was defending the actions of a few (i understand it was not the entire NASRPC membership at fault here) that would result in him loosing his own pistol. All others would be okay, just not his.

So while those at the top will still have their sport, their firearms, etc. the rest who i guarantee take part in at least one other type of shooting would loose out. And they're okay with this?

Not my problem...I remember a few years ago when they wanted to get rid of semi autos shotguns....do you remember that one...even at local club level the answer was...I don't have a semi auto...I'll be harsh but 90% of shooting men don't give a **** until it affects them directly and I'd say until it affects them personally they still won't budge. Sometimes trying to motivate shooting men is like playing handball against a blanket.

Exactly.

However if this were to go through how long do you think it'd be before they look to ban daytime shooting during some months, then completely. Then take the firearms associated with that shooting. It's never anyone's problem until it is, and then it's too late. At which point they turn to the very people they shafted looking for help and find none.

Then people wonder when i say there will never be a united front for the shooting community. This proposal was given in by "our own", being supported by "our own" and through the inaction of others allowed to happen by "our own".

it's why it's so important we write like and to the people involved. At all levels.

Grizzly 45

gunny123 wrote: »

We could take a leaf out of the French people book, mass disobedience against stupid unworkable laws.

THAT!Will be the day in Ireland!!:rolleyes:

Grizzly 45

Cass wrote: »

I believe that, and also that it still exists, but is it really at the level it was decades ago? Also are the tiny few in committee level able to convince or dupe those not in such a position that this is the best way forward?

I remember during the NASRPC pistol grab there was one chap that was defending their actions. Fair enough you might think, and everyone is entitled to the opinions. However he owned the very gun that was being put forward to be banned outright.

Think about it, he was defending the actions of a few (i understand it was not the entire NASRPC membership at fault here) that would result in him loosing his own pistol. All others would be okay, just not his.

So while those at the top will still have their sport, their firearms, etc. the rest who i guarantee take part in at least one other type of shooting would loose out. And they're okay with this?

Exactly.

However if this were to go through how long do you think it'd be before they look to ban daytime shooting during some months, then completely. Then take the firearms associated with that shooting. It's never anyone's problem until it is, and then it's too late. At which point they turn to the very people they shafted looking for help and find none.

Then people wonder when i say there will never be a united front for the shooting community. This proposal was given in by "our own", being supported by "our own" and through the inaction of others allowed to happen by "our own".

it's why it's so important we write like and to the people involved. At all levels.

All I have to say on this is..REF Irish IPSC debacle for sell outs,looking down noses,collusion etc and apply to this situation.

123shooter

gunny123 wrote: »

We could take a leaf out of the French people book, mass disobedience against stupid unworkable laws.

It would actually be impossible as there are only 24 hrs per day and 365 days per year.

The country is world famous for having stupid unworkable laws.

It seems to be a Irish politicians obsession to get their name in the media and just pass a law, any law just as long as they manage to do something to be remembered by.

dto001

"Hi Diarmuid there is only a report and recommendations at the moment nothing has been agreeded. We are currently working on a response. We want no curfew to be imposed and will also seek other changes to the code of conduct."

This is the response I got from countryside alliance Ireland on Facebook. I thought they were part of the Sports coalition? I have still to hear from the Nargc
Not sure what other changes they are looking for!

gunny123

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

All I have to say on this is..REF Irish IPSC debacle for sell outs,looking down noses,collusion etc and apply to this situation.

Amen to that. A brazen and shocking example of "pull up the ladder jack, i'm alright".

Nekarsulm

Cass wrote: »

One thing that bothers me, and i wanted this in a separate post to see if i can get an answer.

Surely the people that make up the groups within the SC are members or participants of other sports. I shoot long range, but also clays, game, pistol, etc. So i wouldn't fit into one category and if someone tried to destroy one of the sports i take part in i'd be as upset about that one as all of them.

My point is surely there are those within the deer associations that also shoot foxes/hunt at night. Same as when the SC asked for a ban on pistols under 5" and semi autos, or the NASRPC tried to grab control of all pistol shooting and ban Glocks. Surely some on within the groups have these firearms and would be affected by it.

• Why are they not speaking up?
• Are they not being told?
• Does it not concern them when they find out that this is happening "in their name"?
• Why do they continue to stand for it?

Well as far as I can see, Sean Gilliland is listed as a S.C. member on the FCP, and I believe that is the same Sean Gilliland who runs a clay range up in Monaghan.
He is also a Fine Gael County Councillor for Monaghan, so is easy contacted.
https://www.finegael.ie/our-people/councillors/monaghan/ballybay-clones/sean-gilliland/

(If it is a different Sean Gilliland, then I sincerely apologise)
So considering the numbers of shooters who pay good money to shoot at his grounds, as well as buy guns, clays, traps etc, you would think he would rather not alienate those who do a bit of foxing, etc.

Or those who vote for him!

Cass

dto001 wrote: »

I thought they were part of the Sports coalition?

According the SC's website there are currently seven members:

1. WA1500
2. Irish Bullseye
3. Federation of Irish Salmon and Sea Trout Anglers
4. IFDA - Irish Firearms Dealers Association
5. Range operators association of Ireland
6. ICPSA - Irish Clay Pigeon Shooting Association
7. NSAI - National Silhouette Association of Ireland

These seven had their own working group within the FCP, which include the WDAI, IDS, AGS, NPWS, or at least that is my taking based on the wording of the document and the fact the other members of the FCP did not know about it.

BattleCorp

Cass wrote: »

These seven had their own working group within the FCP, which include the WDAI, IDS, AGS, NPWS, or at least that is my taking based on the wording of the document and the fact the other members of the FCP did not know about it.[/QUOTE]

Not a great business model is it? One section of the FCP working on proposals and not telling another section of the FCP about it. Is that what happened or am I misunderstanding your post above?

Cass

From the document:

This best practice guidance has been drawn up by a working group of the FCP. The WG comprises of representatives or written inputs from AGS, IFA, NPWS, SC, IDS and WDAI.

See Appendix 1.

I read this as a working group "of" or "within" the FCP comprising of the above named groups who got together and drew up this.

The fact the NARGC did not know about it, and i hasten to guess neither do the NASRPC, or any other group within the FCP would show that they took this upon themselves without the knowledge or what can only be described as the majority of the FCP.

Hence my comment and Sparks' earlier about this not being the work of the FCP, but will most likely be bastardised as such.

Backbarrel

Cass wrote: »

From the document:



I read this as a working group "of" or "within" the FCP comprising of the above named groups who got together and drew up this.

The fact the NARGC did not know about it, and i hasten to guess neither do the NASRPC, or any other group within the FCP would show that they took this upon themselves without the knowledge or what can only be described as the majority of the FCP.

Hence my comment and Sparks' earlier about this not being the work of the FCP, but will most likely be bastardised as such.

I accept the point that it is not the work of the FCP but certain individuals attending.

I imagine the gardai and NPWS nudging each other going "Did they just propose that ?" Happy days..

Smacks of a solo run by certain people for the benefit of some ..

Expect 11th hour about face by an individual that will attempt to claim moral high ground and say "This is why I am needed".

And he can go F#@k himself....

Cass

What i'm waiting for is one or all of the following:

• No immediate press release by the SC
• No immediate press release by the deer crowds
• Statement in the next week discussing the meeting, but ignoring the fact it took place
• Ignoring the calls from members of the various groups involved for a meeting/EGM to discuss why this happened
• Media/Social media blackout
• In a couple of weeks a statement as to why they sought this, and why we (the great unwashed as some like to put it) did not need to know and why what they are doing is in the best interests of shooting.
• Continued ignoring for them to explain themselves
• More back handed dealings that we will only find out about at a later date.

When are we going to wake and stop these people from being in a position to screw us over. In the last ten years we've seen a plethora of such goings on. Time and again the same people or same type of people emerge to do the same crap to their own. Each time it's brought up we're told its in the past and to move on. This ignorance of the past only dooms us to repeat it. It's bad enough we have to fight for what little we have, but to have to continuously fight our own too.

Its about time they learned such actions have consequences. If they try to throw us under a bus, drive the fecking bus over them. :mad::mad::mad:

Hold them to account. Stop supporting them. Make them realise they represent us, the majority, not their own minority views.

Backbarrel

Cass wrote: »

Again i don't want to derail the thread, but the NARGC used to sit on the FCP, so the notion that the SC was founded out of some "heroic" attempt to fight for the "little man" is badly mistaken..

Founded by the little man not for the little man?

Cass wrote: »

My point is, and i'm really not out on a witch hunt, but the NARGC created this beast when there was no need. They have since seen sense and left it, but now it's rudderless, a shadow of it's former self, but still as dangerous because now they are still continuing with the secret proposals, hidden agenda and as this latest debacle shows working in secret with other groups WITHIN the FCP to undermine everyone else (including the rest of the FCP members).

IOW this is not the FCP, but the Sports Coalition once again creating a problem that previously did not exist.

I would like make it abundantly clear that i am not attacking the NARGC as it is NOW. With a new committee, chair, etc they have once again returned to the proper path and it's great to have their vote/power on the right side.

Have to agree with this.

Chairman and Executive elected in October 2015 asked some hard questions about S.C. and very few answers were forthcoming.

This organisation supposedly representing NARGC would not tell NARGC what was happening at FCP...

Once Darth Fiscal and the finance committee got a hold on things the Sports Coalitions days were numbered.. or at least NARGCs involvement in it..

BattleCorp

Just in case they don't already know about these proposals, I've emailed the IFA and sent them the FCP report.

Lets see if they'll get their finger out seeing as they are the most powerful shooting body in the country and it will mostly affect their members.

Cass

Wonder how sympathetic they'll be given proposal two years back.

BattleCorp

Cass wrote: »

Wonder how sympathetic they'll be given proposal two years back.

They can't really afford not to be sympathetic seeing as this affects most of their members.

dto001

Here's another nail in the coffin probably needs another thread but it's from the same crowd or at least the Deer Alliance as they have it on their page:
Here's the quote from the deer license application form:

The application form seeks information on whether you have a Certificate of Competency appropriate for the Republic of Ireland such as the ‘Hunter Competence Assessment Programme (HCAP)’ or equivalent in respect of firearms and matters relating to wild deer. This question is asked in response to a recommendation to the Department that certification from an accredited source in knowledge of wild deer species, disease recognition, management, culling and safe methods of control, together with marksmanship and safe usage and storage of firearms, be a mandatory requirement before the grant of a licence to hunt wild deer; and that mandatory certification be introduced on a phased basis over a five year period commencing on the 1st day of January 2018 for existing holders of deer hunting licences, and with immediate effect from the same date for all new applicants for deer hunting licences.

Just to add petrol to the fire!!

Cass

Thread on it over in hunting.

dto001

Just got a reply from the IFA:

This is not a curfew it is simply a guideline. It will not impact on Predator control and where we see that it potentially could we will be speaking out against such.

Regards,

Marcus O’Halloran

Looks like they agree with it.

Anyone heard anything yet?

BattleCorp

dto001 wrote: »

Just got a reply from the IFA:

This is not a curfew it is simply a guideline. It will not impact on Predator control and where we see that it potentially could we will be speaking out against such.

Regards,

Marcus O’Halloran

Looks like they agree with it.

Anyone heard anything yet?

I think they need to read the document again.

Nekarsulm

dto001 wrote: »

Just got a reply from the IFA:

This is not a curfew it is simply a guideline. It will not impact on Predator control and where we see that it potentially could we will be speaking out against such.

Regards,

Marcus O’Halloran

Looks like they agree with it.

Anyone heard anything yet?

No good the IFA "speaking out against such" after the event.
Especially when they are involved in creating such "guidelines".
How can a ban on shooting during hours of darkness be anything other than a curfew?

Cass

Lads i've split the deer stuff into the deer thread and moved that thread from hunting to the main shooting forum.

Both topics are linked, but for ease of reading try and keep responses about the deer in the deer thread - HERE - and responses to the shooting at night crap on this thread.

Cheers.

berettaman

Well lads,

Early rumour is that it is stopped for now, Gone from being a "done deal" to back on the table for discussion.(Can firmly kicked down road)..

Rumour is that stopped by NARGC with support from IFA, CA and WDA.

Credit credit must go to Mick Fenlon NARGC Chairman (and avid deer shooter) and Chris Gavican Compensation Fund Administrator for their efforts there today.

I am told they have worked on nothing else for the last 7 days.

Credit where its due for those that supported the reversal of these guidelines.

Fair play to everyone on here that did their bit- Don't effin stop now!!

gunny123

berettaman wrote: »

Well lads,

Early rumour is that it is stopped for now, Gone from being a "done deal" to back on the table for discussion.(Can firmly kicked down road)..

Rumour is that stopped by NARGC with support from IFA, CA and WDA.

Credit credit must go to Mick Fenlon NARGC Chairman (and avid deer shooter) and Chris Gavican Compensation Fund Administrator for their efforts there today.

I am told they have worked on nothing else for the last 7 days.

Credit where its due for those that supported the reversal of these guidelines.

Fair play to everyone on here that did their bit- Don't effin stop now!!

Great, have the name or names of those who dreamt this crap up been released ? I'd like to know who they are.