Is there anything a average shooter can do to help loosen gun laws in this country

Sparks

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Sympathies that you are working for a bunch of snowflakes and beta males.:D

They probably just don't like russians :P

1349

Sparks wrote: »

They probably just don't like russians :P

judestynes

OK So whats been resolved here? A campaign by the NARGC to influence their membership not to vote for a FG candidate in anything until cf pistols are back and all the 1972 hand ins are returned to their owners?? I'm good with that, feel free to add to the list gents.

Sparks

A campaign by the NARGC to influence their membership not to vote for a FG candidate in anything until cf pistols are back

Looks at the recent political turmoil in the NARGC on this general area


hmmmmmmmmmmmm.....

Grizzly 45

Sparks wrote: »

They probably just don't like russians :P

That's racist discrimination by that company! Im'triggerd and woke!!! We mustn't judge ALL Russians by the actions of a few Russians!:P

Sparks

I was more thinking of this one 1349:



Doesn't even need the silly photoshop job :P

Grizzly 45

judestynes wrote: »

cf pistols are back and all the 1972 hand-ins are returned to their owners??

Good luck with the latter...Many of those folks have gone to the great shooting range in the sky,or emigrated to the 4 corners,or forgotten all about them and whatever documentation their relatives might have been left is probably gone or lost. I believe the documentation and records might be a tad...er...sketchy at best too on the PTB and was damaged or lost in the decades since 1972.

So because of successive Govt can kicking and indifference over the decades. We are now stuck with the Army/GS having to guard , like the dormant bank accounts in the banks,lots of various small arms of various conditions and value forever more ,just in case the great great grandson or other relative appears with a mouldy ticket looking for great grandpappy's SMLE and Luger that was used in an ambush in Killyweewee in the 20s.

Sparks

It's not even the firearms that was the problem there; it's the ammunition, which long ago stopped being safe and stable. I think they've had to destroy a lot of it for safety.

recipio

The system the Scots brought in seems a lot better than here. You are issued a licence to own airguns basically and there is no limit on what you own as long as they are under 12 ft/ lbs. This keeps airguns 'out of the hands of children ' ( the original reason for Irish licencing ) and would allow a second hand market here.
I wish retailers would lobby for it.:rolleyes:

tac foley

recipio wrote: »

The system the Scots brought in seems a lot better than here. You are issued a licence to own airguns basically and there is no limit on what you own as long as they are under 12 ft/ lbs. This keeps airguns 'out of the hands of children ' ( the original reason for Irish licencing ) and would allow a second hand market here.
I wish retailers would lobby for it.:rolleyes:

You have cannily overlooked a couple of things here, sir.


Just like the rest of mainland UK, Scotland previously had NO form of licensing for sub-12ft lb air rifles. A couple of drugged-up scroates managed to shoot their own baby in the head whilst in an argument and behold, half-a million airguns are now required to be licensed. Good little earner, that.


The current system in RoI, whereby every individual gun has its own license, is part of a problem that will never be solved under existing law.

recipio

tac foley wrote: »

You have cannily overlooked a couple of things here, sir.


Just like the rest of mainland UK, Scotland previously had NO form of licensing for sub-12ft lb air rifles. A couple of drugged-up scroates managed to shoot their own baby in the head whilst in an argument and behold, half-a million airguns are now required to be licensed. Good little earner, that.


The current system in RoI, whereby every individual gun has its own license, is part of a problem that will never be solved under existing law.

Well. we are never going to get unlicensed airguns in the ROI for the foreseeable future. Our only hope is some face saving legislation to allow a change in the law. The industry is dead here thanks to the nanny state.

meathstevie

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Oh..Never underestimate the value of ANY firearm to a freedom fighter friend Gunny.:) If you read that lovely Argentinian/Irish fellow Che Guevara's book on how to conduct a guerrilla war. His second order is of any successful guerrilla operation is to GATHER ARMS off the enemy anytime, anywhere, any place of any type.

Didn't we have some of the younger bloods of the Continuity/Real/Really Real/Most Real IRA:rolleyes: not try this kind of a stunt with a gun dealer not too far from the Midlands year before last?? In this case, they got a house load of ERU,and not a haul of firearms.

Having stuff all stashed in one big place is never a good idea when it comes to firearms or war material.It has a nasty tendency to be either stolen, or shot up and destroyed.

Lol....they came close to some firearms alright. Minor problem was the lads holding them.....not a fight you want to pick as an aspiring bar stool guerrilla.

Grizzly 45

Republican college kids for ya.:) Always up to messin and high jinks and pranks.

Cadpat_cowboy

recipio wrote: »

The system the Scots brought in seems a lot better than here. You are issued a licence to own airguns basically and there is no limit on what you own as long as they are under 12 ft/ lbs. This keeps airguns 'out of the hands of children ' ( the original reason for Irish licencing ) and would allow a second hand market here.
I wish retailers would lobby for it.:rolleyes:

I thought I heard on feildsports Britain that you have to get a medical in Scotland now to hold a face and some lovely doctors forgot there oath not to profit and are charging up to 95 quid to sign off on it. Will check if I can find link.

http://www.rifleshootermagazine.co.uk/features/guidance-on-firearms-licensing-to-pay-the-gp-or-not-to-pay-the-gp-1-5029808

recipio

Cadpat_cowboy wrote: »

I thought I heard on feildsports Britain that you have to get a medical in Scotland now to hold a face and some lovely doctors forgot there oath not to profit and are charging up to 95 quid to sign off on it. Will check if I can find link.

http://www.rifleshootermagazine.co.uk/features/guidance-on-firearms-licensing-to-pay-the-gp-or-not-to-pay-the-gp-1-5029808

Yes, that is true. Doctors in the UK can charge what they like outside of their NHS contract. My point is that anything would be better than what we have here. With a Scottish licence you can buy anything over the counter, buy and sell secondhand and import airguns under 12 ft/lbs. We are the only EU country to equate airgun with firearm licencing as far as I know,

tac foley

Except for Northern Ireland.

Cadpat_cowboy

recipio wrote: »

Yes, that is true. Doctors in the UK can charge what they like outside of their NHS contract. My point is that anything would be better than what we have here. With a Scottish licence you can buy anything over the counter, buy and sell secondhand and import airguns under 12 ft/lbs. We are the only EU country to equate airgun with firearm licencing as far as I know,

That dose sound better than the Irish system, is it realistic to try push for it?

recipio

tac foley wrote: »

Except for Northern Ireland.

Yes and no doubt there is a cozy arrangement to keep the legislation identical on both sides of the border. Any attempt to change the laws up there would be greeted with horror by the greysuits in the DOJ.

Sparks

Cadpat_cowboy wrote: »

That dose sound better than the Irish system, is it realistic to try push for it?

It's not so much about realism, because pushing for changes isn't tied to realism.
It's that it's rather unlikely to succeed because of how it'd be reported "Minister arms populace, invites crime".
That low likelihood means that it has a lower return on invested time than other things that could be pursued.

Personally, my wishlist for all of this stuff hasn't changed in a decade - I would like to see, above everything else currently in play, a restatement of the Firearms Acts so that instead of a dozen or more acts, EU directives, and sixty-plus SIs, we only had to go and read one document in one place to understand the law we're supposed to follow.

No changes to what that law is today. No cranking down or releasing the ratchet. No alterations, no tweaks, nothing. Just take all the documentation, and instead of it being scattered to the four winds, write it down in one, single, authoritative place, and then repeal all the others so we have a single cohesive body of law.

After that, we could talk about fixing the mistakes that are in it - the drafting mistakes, I mean, like where we have two different definitions of "firearm" that conflict with each other and that sort of thing.

After that, well, then we could start talking about actual changes to how the law works and it'd be a bit safer to do so, because we would know what each change actually did. Right now, you alter one line over here, it invalidates another paragraph over there that you'd forgotten about, that feeds forward to change how this section here is interpreted and you're basically trying to level a coffee table by hacking bits off the legs and you wind up with a six inch tall table before you know where you are.


And remember that all of that is ignoring the problems with changing any act with our system - even with an on-board Minister and Department, you still have to fight the changes past the AG's office to get it to the oireachtas, and then every backbencher who can smell an election puts in their two cents to try to get a few euro's worth of media coverage (and guys like Finian McGrath don't care for details like knowing what the law is, how it operates, what its safety record is, what the proposed changes are, why they're needed, what country they're in, what time it is, what harm they do or that sort of thing).
Next thing you know, your simple no-change law is a tangled rats-nest of a thing that accidentally bans sticks.

Cadpat_cowboy

Sparks wrote: »

It's not so much about realism, because pushing for changes isn't tied to realism.
It's that it's rather unlikely to succeed because of how it'd be reported "Minister arms populace, invites crime".
That low likelihood means that it has a lower return on invested time than other things that could be pursued.

Personally, my wishlist for all of this stuff hasn't changed in a decade - I would like to see, above everything else currently in play, a restatement of the Firearms Acts so that instead of a dozen or more acts, EU directives, and sixty-plus SIs, we only had to go and read one document in one place to understand the law we're supposed to follow.

No changes to what that law is today. No cranking down or releasing the ratchet. No alterations, no tweaks, nothing. Just take all the documentation, and instead of it being scattered to the four winds, write it down in one, single, authoritative place, and then repeal all the others so we have a single cohesive body of law.

After that, we could talk about fixing the mistakes that are in it - the drafting mistakes, I mean, like where we have two different definitions of "firearm" that conflict with each other and that sort of thing.

After that, well, then we could start talking about actual changes to how the law works and it'd be a bit safer to do so, because we would know what each change actually did. Right now, you alter one line over here, it invalidates another paragraph over there that you'd forgotten about, that feeds forward to change how this section here is interpreted and you're basically trying to level a coffee table by hacking bits off the legs and you wind up with a six inch tall table before you know where you are.


And remember that all of that is ignoring the problems with changing any act with our system - even with an on-board Minister and Department, you still have to fight the changes past the AG's office to get it to the oireachtas, and then every backbencher who can smell an election puts in their two cents to try to get a few euro's worth of media coverage (and guys like Finian McGrath don't care for details like knowing what the law is, how it operates, what its safety record is, what the proposed changes are, why they're needed, what country they're in, what time it is, what harm they do or that sort of thing).
Next thing you know, your simple no-change law is a tangled rats-nest of a thing that accidentally bans sticks.

Yeah I get you man, you ever think they don't bother fixing it because it suits them? More complicated it is to get a firearm means less people will bother, then firearms owners are a small pool of voters.

I'm not sure who Finian McGrath is but I'm going to guess he wants/wanted loads of stuff banned?

Would anyone who has written there local representatives mind forwarding me the email I'm not good at writing as I tend to babble but would like to contact my local TD.

Grizzly 45

The return of CF handguns, even on a basis of trading like for like in the calibres you were originally liscensed for, and IPSC under German rules, which negate the "combat shooting" clause would fo fine.

Yes and no doubt there is a cozy arrangement to keep the legislation identical on both sides of the border. Any attempt to change the laws up there would be greeted with horror by the greysuits in the DOJ.

Going to be an almighty can of worms opened, if and when Brexit somehow, gives us back the 4th province.As it is as comparable to chalk and Dairygold slices in firearms legislation.

I'm not sure who Finian McGrath is but I'm going to guess he wants/wanted loads of stuff banned?

A self-important independent alliance little big man with a moustache [Gota watch those types!:) They get ideas about themselves in politics.] Mada bit of noise for himself in the Dail hearings and claimed that road signs were being shot up in his constituency...Which seems to extend from Dublin up into Northern Irelan d,as the sign in the picture was a NI road sign. Zero creditability after that and a Twitter attack seems to have shut him up for the moment.

tac foley

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Going to be an almighty can of worms opened, if and when Brexit somehow, gives us back the 4th province.

Are you seriously thinking that the UK government would hand over the six counties, considered part of the sovereign UK territory?


A poisoned chalice indeed, with such a large part of its population of a mind to literally fight you to stay part of the UK.




It would make the terrible years between 1969 and 1995 look like a holiday.

Sparks

Cadpat_cowboy wrote: »

you ever think they don't bother fixing it because it suits them? More complicated it is to get a firearm means less people will bother, then firearms owners are a small pool of voters.

I'm not sure there's a "plan" on that level as such. Never attribute to malice what's equally well explained by people just not thinking you're all that important, and all that.

I'm not sure who Finian McGrath is but I'm going to guess he wants/wanted loads of stuff banned?

No, he just wants into the press for coverage before an election, same as the Healy-Raes so he picks whatever the topic de jour is and screams some Sun headline about it.
Problem is that when you do that on the street, it's just annoying; do it from the back benches or in a committee, and it can leave a mess for others to clean up (which they never get the chance to).

Actually caring about what he's shouting about, that's not something he worries about.

BattleCorp

Cadpat_cowboy wrote: »

I'm not sure who Finian McGrath is but I'm going to guess he wants/wanted loads of stuff banned?

He wanted the smoking ban repealed a few years ago. That pretty much tells you the calibre of the man.

Sparks

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

if and when Brexit somehow, gives us back the 4th province

Dude.
We have the 4th province today. We never ever didn't have it. Dublin might forget about Donegal all the time, but it's still there.
The six counties are not ulster. Isn't it bad enough we have to explain that to London and the UK newspapers all the time these days? :P

Also, I think this idea that the laws north and south of the border having to match up is being just a little bit over-read here; in firearms terms, we've already reached all the parity the EU calls for because of how the EU firearms directive is laid out. I think that one's a red herring from the strict point of view of firearms legislation (the bit where we all wind up seeing the economy collapse, a resurgence of violence in the North, a famine or rationing or both in the UK, Scotland building hadrian's wall just a few feet higher, all of those are going to be a lot more important).

Sparks

tac foley wrote: »

Are you seriously thinking that the UK government would hand over the six counties, considered part of the sovereign UK territory?

I think "hand over" might be the wrong verb. There's no "handing over" involved; firstly the people living there have to vote to leave the UK and rejoin Ireland politically; and then the people living here would have to vote to take them in. And that latter one is a lot less likely because dumping 11 billion euros from the exchequer into the moneypit that is the northern Irish economy, plus another three to shore up the half of their exports Brexit will cost them, that's a big ask from a country that by that point will already be feeling a hell of an economic wallop from a no-deal brexit (to the tune of several % of GDP and a per-person cost somewhere north of four grand a year).

What happens after that point, with us not taking them in and them having left the UK (which by that point would probably have already seen Scotland leave and the Welsh would be making funny noises) permanently - that's a nightmare to consider. They'd be starving on the far side of a border that's so tightly woven that the people on one side of the street would be badly off but surviving while the other side of the street were beyond destitute and into famine territory.

Compared to that, the petty "who owns this bit of the rock" nonsense we see today would be a dim and happy memory of brighter days.

gunny123

Sparks wrote: »

I think "hand over" might be the wrong verb. There's no "handing over" involved; firstly the people living there have to vote to leave the UK and rejoin Ireland politically; and then the people living here would have to vote to take them in. And that latter one is a lot less likely because dumping 11 billion euros from the exchequer into the moneypit that is the northern Irish economy, plus another three to shore up the half of their exports Brexit will cost them, that's a big ask from a country that by that point will already be feeling a hell of an economic wallop from a no-deal brexit (to the tune of several % of GDP and a per-person cost somewhere north of four grand a year).

What happens after that point, with us not taking them in and them having left the UK (which by that point would probably have already seen Scotland leave and the Welsh would be making funny noises) permanently - that's a nightmare to consider. They'd be starving on the far side of a border that's so tightly woven that the people on one side of the street would be badly off but surviving while the other side of the street were beyond destitute and into famine territory.

Compared to that, the petty "who owns this bit of the rock" nonsense we see today would be a dim and happy memory of brighter days.

AWWWWWW, but reunification would make all the unemployable, semi-alcoholic, beardy, barstool warrior, wolfe tone fans happy.

Grizzly 45

BattleCorp wrote: »

He wanted the smoking ban repealed a few years ago. That pretty much tells you the calibre of the man.

Wasnt that the now backbencher Deasey from Waterford who had his mitts in egging on Aherne with the pistol ban in 2008?The same guy who was crying because all the nasty gun owners were writing to him expressing their displeasure?

Grizzly 45

gunny123 wrote: »

AWWWWWW, but reunification would make all the unemployable, semi-alcoholic, beardy, barstool warrior, wolfe tone fans happy.

Dumber and crazier has taken over or been voted into other countries around the world.So never rule it out happening here...:rolleyes:

jb88

gunny123 wrote: »

One of them wanted all "weapons" to be kept in garda stations. If you wanted to go shooting, you would have to go to the station and sign it out, then sign it back in when you had finished.

Thats what used to happen years ago and not too many years ago eithier.

Dont be suprised if they think of reverting back to the senario of a gun owner having to call up their local Garda to see when they are available to escort your gun and you to and from the range and back to the garda station with your gun.

That Gun staying in a locked safe in the Garda station, and good luck if its not manned 24/7.