If you could change one law...

Zxthinger

Hack12 wrote: »

Because if it's a right.... leads to problems.... anyone who has spent time with firearms knows there is people that should never be allowed near them.

A new law would deal with this potential nutters. Same way the current law deals with them.. back ground checks and medical assessments.
Once a man has been passed as fit he should be allow to buy any fizzing gun he likes..
the current system is no better a stopping nutters.

iscoed

GarIT wrote: »

I'd outlaw all guns completely except for the Gardaí and the army.

And Criminals of course

GarIT

iscoed wrote: »

And Criminals of course

There's not much you can do to stop them but if there was less access to guns in the country it would prevent one supply line for them.

I'm not against shooting, I can enjoy it and understand why others do too. I just think if a ban could save a few lives even over a really long term it could be worth it. Maybe I'm being overly optimistic.

Zxthinger

GarIT wrote: »

I'd outlaw all guns completely except for the Gardaí and the army.

You'd be right too, once the law abiding citizens had over their guns the way he cops would only have the criminals to deal with.
People forget that law abiding citizens who hold licences firearms are simply law abiding citizens. If they are ordered to had over guns they will,
So your ban would nothing to lessen crime!

GolfVI

GarIT wrote: »

There's not much you can do to stop them but if there was less access to guns in the country it would prevent one supply line for them.

I'm not against shooting, I can enjoy it and understand why others do too. I just think if a ban could save a few lives even over a really long term it could be worth it. Maybe I'm being overly optimistic.

Considering most of the gun crime in the country is with centrefire pistols , which are already illegal.. it wont make a slight bit of difference

Hack12

GarIT wrote:

I'd outlaw all guns completely except for the Gardaí and the army.

Welcome to communism.....

It's used a sport by most people or else hunting. Ireland has a long tradition of firearms and are World.Champions or highly rated in the world as target shooters.

Outlawing will not change the scumbags having them and all true firearms sportsmen and women would never want to be associated with anything to do with them.

Gun owners in Ireland hand over a lot of freedoms for there sport.

- Garda can run background checks.
- Access your doctor to see if mental health problems
- Visit your home to ensure firearms secured .

Firearms owner's in Ireland are overall the most veted people in the state and are extremely law abiding.

Zxthinger

GarIT wrote: »

There's not much you can do to stop them but if there was less access to guns in the country it would prevent one supply line for them.

I'm not against shooting, I can enjoy it and understand why others do too. I just think if a ban could save a few lives even over a really long term it could be worth it. Maybe I'm being overly optimistic.

Ban cars, maybe bouncy castles too, but number of deaths attributed to legally held guns is nearly non existent save for suicide. But if people can't get a gun they use a rope and a bridge or just a bridge.

GarIT

Zxthinger wrote: »

You'd be right too, once the law abiding citizens had over their guns the way he cops would only have the criminals to deal with.
People forget that law abiding citizens who hold licences firearms are simply law abiding citizens. If they are ordered to had over guns they will,
So your ban would nothing to lessen crime!

I've no statistics on it but I've occasionly seen mentions in new reports where guns used in crime had serials removed, I'm assuming they could have been obtained legitimately.

An alternate suggestion would be to introduce a gun inspector who can randomly check if the owner of a gun still has it and if not they could face criminal charges for not reporting it stolen.

Nekarsulm

GarIT wrote: »

I'd outlaw all guns completely except for the Gardaí and the army.

Better if you outlawed the importation of drugs by criminal cartels, and the parallel importation of illegal firearms.

But hey, the Gardai know where the legally owned guns are, so it'd be handier to confiscate them instead.
Would look good for the Press Office too...

GarIT

I'm learning a lot here. I'm going to bow out, as I said earlier on maybe I'm being overly optimistic that it would have an effect on gun crime. Not that I am in any way associating legitimate gun owners with criminals. Just that I suspected criminals may pose as legitimate gun owners.

Hack12

GarIT wrote:

I'm learning a lot here. I'm going to bow out, as I said earlier on maybe I'm being overly optimistic that it would have an effect on gun crime. Not that I am in any way associating legitimate gun owners with criminals. Just that I suspected criminals may pose as legitimate gun owners.

Criminals would not be granted a firearms certificate by AGS.

Nekarsulm

GarIT wrote: »

I'm learning a lot here. I'm going to bow out, as I said earlier on maybe I'm being overly optimistic that it would have an effect on gun crime. Not that I am in any way associating legitimate gun owners with criminals. Just that I suspected criminals may pose as legitimate gun owners.

Of course you are associating legitimate sportsmen and women with criminal behaviour, why elsecall for confiscation of their firearms to combat crime?

If the serial number is filed off, its because a criminal dosen't want to be associated with a particular burgulary.
And of course Gardai check owners guns.
Mine were inspected this past year.
Criminals pose as legitimate gun owners? You do know applicants are vetted , and any criminal record will disqualify them from ownership?

Do you think criminals would waive their right to privacy?
Sign a form allowing the Gardai enter their homes without a warrant at any time to inspect their guns?
Sign a form allowing their Doctor hand over their medical records to the Gardai?

How many crimes were committed by licenced gun owners this past 12 months?

gunny123

GarIT wrote: »

I'm learning a lot here. I'm going to bow out, as I said earlier on maybe I'm being overly optimistic that it would have an effect on gun crime. Not that I am in any way associating legitimate gun owners with criminals. Just that I suspected criminals may pose as legitimate gun owners.

Nearly everything was "temporarily" banned here in 1972, when the poo storm broke out in the north, Pistols were gone as were rifles over .22 calibre, everything was seriously restricted, even the amount of ammo you could have. Despite this there were shootings everyday. I certainly remember watching Charles Mitchell or whoever on the rte news, giving details of often multiple shootings all over the north. It became background noise.

So if most guns were banned, how come there were so many shootings ? People like Col Gadaffi, sent very effective military grade firearms and explosives, by the trawler-full. Also another paragon of virtue, Whitey Bulger, sent huge shipments of serious firepower here.

Simplistic "lets ban everything" just does not work.

Nekarsulm

And thats without senior politicians illegally importing guns ....

Grizzly 45

[Deleted User] wrote: »

F#ck no. Enough nonsense out of America because of that.

Really??Do elborate ....
You obviously have an execellent insight about that "nonsense out of America"Go away and educate yourself where it came from first off.(England).Second .It would solve all our nonsense liscensing problems in this country. Third .Funny that the Czech republic has just adopted a version of this" nonsense" in their constitution.

Grizzly 45

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Really??Do elborate ....
You obviously have an execellent insight about that "nonsense out of America"Go away and educate yourself where it came from first off.(England).Second .It would solve all our nonsense liscensing problems in this country. Third .Funny that the Czech republic has just adopted a version of this" nonsense" in their constitution.

No, you're proposing the change. You demonstrate why making something a right is necessary.

I have no "right" to my over and under. I must show that I am responsible enough to have it, and rightly so. I need a license to use a car and must prove my ability. Why do you think a fire arm should be a right?

Don't feel the need to go away either, for education. Have several degrees already thanks.
So you see nothing wrong with America's "right to bear arms"? That ammendment hasn't caused any issue in fighting their shooting epidemic (using legally purchased weapons). Nothing at all?

Grizzly 45

Hack12 wrote: »

Because if it's a right.... leads to problems.... anyone who has spent time with firearms knows there is people that should never be allowed near them.

You could say that about any "right"
Right to freedom of speech= "Hate speech" from Islamists and Neo-Nazis, let's do away with that,as it might offend or incite people to violence,or someone might yell Fire! in a crowded theatre.Plus if the founding fathers could never foresee "rapid-fire weapons"[BS as there were such in existance].They could never foresee the internet and the abuse of freedom of speech.

The right of freedom of the press= Seditious literature or hardcore porn,or extremist literature or mean tweets. Let's ban those as well.

Freedom of the right to not self incriminate oneself of an accused crime=Well prosecution can now infer to a court or jury that by maintaining one's silence, the accused has something to hide on the crime.

The right to be secure in one's possessions and papers. "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear!" Been to the USA recently??Gone thru TSA/Homeland security where they can demand you switch on all electronic equipment,and that they can demand to see the file content of your machine?? But hey that bothersome "right "of yours might be preventing a 5$an hour high school dropout peon, from preventing the next terrorist attack on the USA! So that has been done away with too.

Like guns, rights are inanimate objects that can be used for good or evil intent. However your "security" or "the state security" does not trump my inalienable rights either. So I'd rather have and deal with the problems of rights, than not have them in the first place. Thanks!

Describe why you need gun ownership as a right?

Grizzly 45

]

No, you're proposing the change. You demonstrate why making something a right is necessary.

No I'm an expressing an opinion of an impossible situation occurring here in Ireland. You stated opinion from either ignorance or lack of knowledge of a country who has an utterly unique position in the World of granting its citizens, more or less a constitutional right to keep arms.It up to you to prove your assertion that this is "nonsense" of a right that has existed for over 200 years.

I have no "right" to my over and under. I must show that I am responsible enough to have it, and rightly so. I need a license to use a car and must prove my ability. Why do you think a fire arm should be a right?

Too right you don't have a "right" as you are not living in the USA.:D:D

Second, you are not comparing correctly in that car example. You need a license to drive on a public road, both here and in the US*. There is nothing stopping you buying as many cars as you want here in Ireland and driving them on private property in any manner you chose, as is in the US. Try buying X number of guns and shooting them on your private property here.Nor does your license here prove that you are capable of using a firearm safely or responsibly here in public or in a private capacity. It simply grants you conditional usage that can be withdrawn at any given time on an official whim. Same as your driver's license, you got it for demonstrating at a point in time that you proved competence in certain situations.Not that it guarantees safety and competence all the time either,as proven by our road carnage.

Also,I don't think it is a "right" it is a inalienable right of any person to have means to protect their right to live with any means possible.If that includes "arms" Ie anything from a rock to a state of the art full auto firearm,to protect yourself and yours. Then have to.

Don't feel the need to go away either, for education. Have several degrees already thanks.

There are plenty of fools with degrees in the world. Do any of yours happen to be US constitutional law? Specifically related to 2nd amendment law? Because you are arguing against about 200 years of some of the most brilliant legal minds that the US legal system has produced, and the consensus so far is that 2a is an individual inalienable right.

So you see nothing wrong with America's "right to bear arms"? That ammendment hasn't caused any issue in fighting their shooting epidemic (using legally purchased weapons). Nothing at all?

No none at all!As it is a constitutional right and has worked quite well for the last 230 years as have all their other rights too. As for epidemics, Id suggest you research what actually kills more Americans in "epidemics" But I'll make it easy for ya... Lung cancer, obesity, alcohol, medical misdiagnosis,car accidents, falling off ladders, down flights of stairs, and choking on hot dogs. Shootings don't even make into the top ten of killings in the US, contrary to popular belief
But don't take my word for it.The Atlanta centre for disease control and the FBI provide the stats every year for what kills Americans the most,and funnily enough, since concealed carry permits came in 25 years ago this year, personal gun crime has dropped in every state and nationwide.Apart from those states that prohibit it.




*Questionable whether needed by some as some state laws do not mention a need for licensing to use motor vehicles on a public road. It is argued that it is a Federal requirement not a State requirement]

Grizzly 45

Deleted User wrote: »

Describe why you need gun ownership as a right?

I dont "Need " gun ownership right ,it is an inalienable right already granted under US law and English common law going back to Magna Carta.Also because a very smart bunch of men 200 plus years ago saw that RTKBA would grauntee all the other rights in the US bill of rights .Otherwise what would enforce those rights on a govt determined to remove them?

solarwinds

GarIT wrote: »

I'd outlaw all guns completely except for the Gardaí and the army.

I dont know where to start with your statements.
You say you dont intend to equate us to criminals, but you do by saying AGS and army are the only ones who should have guns. I have no criminal record never been in trouble with the AGS so why am I not allowed to shoot. I know some gardai and there is some I wouldn't let near firearms. E.G. the incident earlier this year where a bag of automatic weapons "fell" from their car, then had to be handed in by a private individual because they couldnt find parking to pick it up, pull the other one. Just because you are the gardai doesnt make you automatically dirty harry.
Why would a thug be interest in trying to get my firearms ?. Break in to my property, get past dogs, intruder alarms, cameras, search the property for safes, break into steel safes for bolt action hunting rifles then get away. I dont know about you but that seems like an awful lot of work for not much reward, I imagine they would be just as happy to sit on their arse watching their 80" tv, counting their dole waiting on the take away to arrive to the door. All these lads need to do to get their hands on guns is wait for their next shipment of drugs to be delivered to their house with the included automatic weapons the gardai could only dream of.
You want to stop gun crime sort out the criminals, stop the importing of drugs and illegal guns into the state.
Give more money to Customs, AGS, CAB and the Navy to do their jobs and stop this attitude of one scumbag kills another with an illelgally imported gun so lets take John Joes side by side he got from his father 50 years ago. An idiotic reaction that will not save one life in the gang warfare in our cities and the inevitable killing of innocent bystanders. A typical government response to keep the people happy to something they couldnt be bothered to face head on.

gunny123

Deleted User wrote: »

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Really??Do elborate ....
You obviously have an execellent insight about that "nonsense out of America"Go away and educate yourself where it came from first off.(England).Second .It would solve all our nonsense liscensing problems in this country. Third .Funny that the Czech republic has just adopted a version of this" nonsense" in their constitution.

No, you're proposing the change. You demonstrate why making something a right is necessary.

I have no "right" to my over and under. I must show that I am responsible enough to have it, and rightly so. I need a license to use a car and must prove my ability. Why do you think a fire arm should be a right?

Don't feel the need to go away either, for education. Have several degrees already thanks.
So you see nothing wrong with America's "right to bear arms"? That ammendment hasn't caused any issue in fighting their shooting epidemic (using legally purchased weapons). Nothing at all?

I have worked in two major dublin colleges, i have seen people with degrees of all types, most degrees are barely worth the paper they are written on.

As for america being too free, fair enough, have a look just across the water to cuba, or the old ussr, which would any sane person live in ?

solarwinds

As for the US shooting epidemic ? you'd want to look at their own Law Enforcement first and other representatives of the state. Every other day you hear of someone being shot in the back by the police out there and thats just the ones that make it into the media.

Chiparus

GarIT wrote: »

I've no statistics on it but I've occasionly seen mentions in new reports where guns used in crime had serials removed, I'm assuming they could have been obtained legitimately.

An alternate suggestion would be to introduce a gun inspector who can randomly check if the owner of a gun still has it and if not they could face criminal charges for not reporting it stolen.

You think many people pay licences for firearms they dont possess?
You think that firearms owners rather than reoprt their gun stolen, carry on like they still posess the gun?

Grizzly 45

GarIT wrote: »

I'd outlaw all guns completely except for the Gardaí and the army.

And these guys would agree with you.

We don't let them have ideas. Why would we let them have guns?
Joe Stalin.

All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The Communist party [XYZ
Govt] must command all the guns. That way no guns can ever be used to command[The XYZ govt] the party.
Mao Zedong

Its never been about gun control, it's about people control and political power.

gunny123

Not to forget also what yamamoto said during ww2, "To invade the USA would prove very difficult, as behind every blade of grass, would be an American with a rifle".

Ok he didn't say it, but it was true.

1349

Deleted User wrote: »

Describe why you need gun ownership as a right?

That's not how rights work. Humans are born with rights, not granted them by their benevolent masters.

gunny123

1349 wrote: »

Deleted User wrote: »

Describe why you need gun ownership as a right?

That's not how rights work. Humans are born with rights, not granted them by their benevolent masters.

Yes, government should only interfere in peoples lives when it is absolutely unavoidable. The problem is government/civil service became an industry in itself.

I heard a saying " He who governs least, governs best". Its difficult to disagree.

yubabill

gunny123 wrote: »

Nearly everything was "temporarily" banned here in 1972, when the poo storm broke out in the north, Pistols were gone as were rifles over .22 calibre, everything was seriously restricted, even the amount of ammo you could have. Despite this there were shootings everyday. I certainly remember watching Charles Mitchell or whoever on the rte news, giving details of often multiple shootings all over the north. It became background noise.

So if most guns were banned, how come there were so many shootings ? People like Col Gadaffi, sent very effective military grade firearms and explosives, by the trawler-full. Also another paragon of virtue, Whitey Bulger, sent huge shipments of serious firepower here.

Simplistic "lets ban everything" just does not work.

AFAIK (was really too young to know all the ins and outs, but remember my father and grandfather handing everything in) ALL firearms were initially confiscated and only 22's and shotguns licensed after a 30 day period.

TeaBagMania

Deleted User wrote: »

Describe why you need gun ownership as a right?

If the majority of citizens are armed England might think twice before they launch their next invasion of Ireland