Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Private profiles - please note that profiles marked as private will soon be public. This will facilitate moderation so mods can view users' warning histories. All of your posts across the site will appear on your profile page (including PI, RI). Groups posts will remain private except to users who have access to the same Groups as you. Thread here
Some important site news, please read here. Thanks!

Would you pay more?

  • 08-09-2021 7:48pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 548 ✭✭✭ slipperyox
    Registered User


    Was thinking recently about the system in place for licences.

    Does the fee of €80 per 3 years, actually cover the cost of running the system. An if not, would you be willing to pay more for a more consistent service?



«1

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 548 ✭✭✭ slipperyox
    Registered User


    Really? A piece of paper?

    Civilian staff/ Gardai occupied outside of normal duties, character checks, inspecting safes, collecting paperwork from rfd's, paper, postage, machine to make licences etc etc Doesn't come without a price.

    I argue, a cost analysis/ FOI would suggest it actually costs the state.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 548 ✭✭✭ slipperyox
    Registered User


    The Northern Ireland system, costs more to run than it receives in fees.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,052 ✭✭✭✭ Del2005
    Registered User


    Should we start charging people more than €100 for rocking up to A&E without a doctors letter or life threatening injury? Especially if they call an ambulance, then you are paying for the ambulance staff, nurses, doctors, admin, cleaners and porters all for €100 (when they have a sore finger).



  • Registered Users Posts: 235 ✭✭ judestynes
    Registered User




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6 Barber2021


    having been told earlier this week that my application, for a substitution of one 12g for another, was in fact stuck between 2 other summons documents for the last 4 weeks......no i wont pay more.


    i cant imagine that there is more than a half hours work in the administration of an application.....80 for an hours work plus print and post is plenty.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 27,555 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Cass
    Moderator


    I'd love to see a proper breakdown of the numbers on that and why it costs so much, if what you say is true. Actually can you cite the source for that claim?

    Population of Ireland (only in the news the other) is just over 5 million for the first time in hundred(s) of years. Population of Northern Ireland is 1.885 Million. So we have 2.65 times the population.

    According to the PNSI there are 153,459 registered firearms in Northern Ireland "over" and estimated 100,000 people. So that is an ownership rate of 5.3%. Irelands is 3.25% approx with (at last count) 225,000 firearms "over" 150,000 licensed persons.

    Northern Ireland certificate costs £98 (€115) but over 5 years. A variantion (our version of a substitution I believe) costs £30 (€35). Their license lasts 5 years so 40% longer, but they pay 35% more for it so in essence we're the same in terms of cost for a license, but the substitution here is free.

    The Northern system receives £15,000,000 (€17.6 million) per 5 years in license fees and I don't have access to the data on the monies raised through variations or other charges. Lets call it a million over the 5 years in variations fees. That would leave it at around 6,000 per year in "subs". So the Northern system generates appox. £16,000,000 (€18.8 Million Euro) every 5 years or £3.2 (€3.75) million per year.


    • Ireland generates €6 million per year with a larger shooting community of 150,000 people with 225,000 licenses.
    • Norhtern Ireland generates £3.25 (€3.75) million with 100,000 people and 153459 license over 5 years.
    • If you "level" the population, costs etc in Northern Ireland compared to IReland on a per head/capita then Northern Ireland would generate £8,600,000 per year or €9,600,000 per year with the same number of licenses.


    Conclusion - So Northern Ireland would generate over 35% more in revenue from licensing fees than Ireland based on per head capita. As it stands they generate the same revenue as Ireland with a 35% reduced revenue stream (smaller shooting community) and they claim it is not paying for itself? I find it hard to believe to be honest.

    Forum Charter - Useful Information - RFDs - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads


    If you see a problem post use the report post function, "FLAG" & let a Moderator deal with it.


    Your Shooting Forum Moderators - Cass, Cookimonster, Vegeta, Sparks, It wasn't me!



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,342 ✭✭✭✭ Grizzly 45
    Registered User


    Suggesting that 90 days are needed to come to a decision already suggests a grossly inefficient system when handling these applications.I cant think of any other licensing requirement that takes so long anywhere else in Ireland or Europe.

    Confucius say."He who says one man cannot change World. Never has eaten bat soup in Wuhan!"



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,875 ✭✭✭✭ denartha
    Registered User


    If it costs the state, then the state should get it's arse in gear, and overhaul/revamp so it doesn't cost the state.

    OT, but its the same with the TV License, If there is one TV License inspector per county, earning 40k a year(very conservative estimate), then it costs 1.04 Million a year to "inspect" TV Licenses. At 160 per TV license, 6,500 people have to buy a TV License, just to pay for the inspection. Thats before you get onto Joe Duffy's salary. A very wasteful way of doing it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,223 ✭✭✭ Chiparus
    Registered User


    error



  • Registered Users Posts: 548 ✭✭✭ slipperyox
    Registered User




  • Registered Users Posts: 548 ✭✭✭ slipperyox
    Registered User


    The guardian, enough said? It was a FOI reprint.


    Target shooters use firearms, hunters use firearm /weapons. what's the issue?



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 27,555 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Cass
    Moderator


    Ten year old article which mentions nothing about costs vs revenue.


    Slipperyfox - Target shooters use firearms, hunters use firearm /weapons. what's the issue?

    We don't use weapons, we use firearms. We have a firearms act and a firearms license. The word weapon is inflamatory and a misnomer for sporting firearms.

    Forum Charter - Useful Information - RFDs - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads


    If you see a problem post use the report post function, "FLAG" & let a Moderator deal with it.


    Your Shooting Forum Moderators - Cass, Cookimonster, Vegeta, Sparks, It wasn't me!



  • Registered Users Posts: 548 ✭✭✭ slipperyox
    Registered User


    You need to read article again, 19th line down from "The detail".

    The full FOI is available for download in any event.


    Regardless of your euphemisms, the Oxford contains definition of the word "weapon" inflammatory or not. The dead fox was harmed and physically damaged.


    Add prefixes, eg "offensive weapon" then you got a different kettle of fish.


    In the meantime, judging from the responses on here, by my OP, I guess the status quo and moaning continues regarding the system.🤣😜



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 27,555 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Cass
    Moderator


    Slipperyfox - You need to read article again, 19th line down from "The detail".

    It says: "The lower age limit is now 16 and it currently costs the PSNI more to run the licensing scheme than they recover in fees." Then nothing. No data, no breakdown of costs vs revenue, etc. So I'll say it again. The article is outdated and explains nothingbar making an unfounded/unproven assertment.

    Slipperyfox - Regardless of your euphemisms

    Its not "my" anything. Its English, what we have, what is in law and yes some "PR" thrown in for good measure.

    • Weapon: a thing designed or used for inflicting bodily harm or physical damage
    • Firearm: a rifle, pistol, or other portable gun.

    Slipperyfox - In the meantime, judging from the responses on here, by my OP, I guess the status quo and moaning continues regarding the system.

    Are you happy with the system? Are you happy that the promises made in 2009 were never followed through on? As for "moaning on here", well we're in good company because the Garda Inspectorate has said that the system is wholly outdated and not fit for purpose. Not just the firearm section either, but all of PULSE. So its not moaning to be moaning, but with cause and proof from the least biased soruce there can be.

    Forum Charter - Useful Information - RFDs - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads


    If you see a problem post use the report post function, "FLAG" & let a Moderator deal with it.


    Your Shooting Forum Moderators - Cass, Cookimonster, Vegeta, Sparks, It wasn't me!



  • Registered Users Posts: 548 ✭✭✭ slipperyox
    Registered User


    Point 1:

    You still didn't download the full FOI.,

    outdated? all members on here give me cash and I'll get a more recent one? Its a starting point regardless, and getting off topic if its a little old.


    point 2: subjective, and semantics. though I would now add that damage to paper targets constitutes the use of a weapon, as the paper is damaged.😜


    point 3: Am I happy with the system? No. This is why I posted a possible solution. Unlike the masses who say nothing, moan, but then attack a proposal.

    Kinda sorry I bothered posting now frankly.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 27,555 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Cass
    Moderator


    Slipperyfox - Point 1: You still didn't download the full FOI.,

    You made the assersion so the onus is on you to provide data. If you have the full FOI then post it. If you have other data then post it. Its not up to me, or anyone else, to support your point. If it exists, the data, then post it. Its not that I don't believe you, its that I asked for numbers as I don't see how the revenue form license fees is not enough to maintain a firearms database when, per head of capita, Northern Ireland appears to generate the same revenue as the South.

    Slipperyfox - outdated?

    Yes, by almost ten years.

    Slipperyfox - all members on here give me cash and I'll get a more recent one?

    Again, the onus is on you to privide supprting data/arguments for your point. Not on me or anyone else to do it for you.

    Slipperyfox -  Its a starting point regardless, and getting off topic if its a little old.

    Starting point for what? As for off topic, not at all. The discusssion on cost/benefit while pertaining to the South has relevancy to the north given your point about what it costs to run such a system. Its not about who is right because I'm not arguing you're wrong. However the PSNI system is run, its not ours and they [Northern Gun owners] pay more for licenses than we do, but over the longer temr of their license it works out the same as our three year license. So could be argued its very relevant. We won't know until we have data.

    Slipperyfox - subjective, and semantics. though I would now add that damage to paper targets constitutes the use of a weapon, as the paper is damaged

    If the targets can sue then I'd agree, but until then we use the term firearm.

    Slipperyfox - Am I happy with the system? No. This is why I posted a possible solution.

    Its not a solution, to throw more money at something. It'd be different if the revenue from license fees went directly into licensing, but it doesn't.

    Slipperyfox - Unlike the masses who say nothing, moan, but then attack a proposal.

    Moaning is saying something. 😁 You did not offer a proposal, you suggested throwing more money into the exchequer. Nothing more. Lobbying/petitioning for licensing monies to go directly into firearm licensing, an updated PULSE registry, new license format (credit card type), RFD interface with immediate substitutions changed on PULSE while at the RFD, one license with mulitple firearms listed on the license, etc. They're proposals and if they cost a little more then I'd be open to listening to arguments on why the license fee should/would be increased however more money for the same crap, no thanks.

    Slipperyfox - Kinda sorry I bothered posting now frankly.

    Debate, difference of opinion, and even arguments are vital for finding all the pros and cons of a point. Attacking and defending the opposing view points will root out whether something has merit or not. If it has it'll stand up to scrutiny, and if not then well done for the effort regardless and keep at it. Not every idea is a winner but it only takes one [good idea] to make a diffference.


    Lastly, and this is not a personal attack, if you wanted a load of "yes" replies without debate, rebuttal or argument then a blog is more the way to go. Hell, even if you were right you'll still get an argument from someone saying you're wrong. Joys of the interweb.



    Forum Charter - Useful Information - RFDs - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads


    If you see a problem post use the report post function, "FLAG" & let a Moderator deal with it.


    Your Shooting Forum Moderators - Cass, Cookimonster, Vegeta, Sparks, It wasn't me!



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,342 ✭✭✭✭ Grizzly 45
    Registered User


    This pic should be stickied on the top of the OT thread!!!🤣

    Confucius say."He who says one man cannot change World. Never has eaten bat soup in Wuhan!"



  • Registered Users Posts: 194 ✭✭ keith s
    Registered User


    " Was thinking recently about the system in place for licenses"


    Yeah, basically it's a sh1T3 system, where:

    Turnarounds on application times and decisions are based on your location and the station you submit to.

    Everybody is not exactly treated the same.

    One person can be granted x amount of rounds, when (with the same criteria) another person is denied this amount.

    Stories recently of issues being granted a moderator.

    I know one lad waited over 6 months for a substation (one 22lr to another 22lr) .

    That's 6 MONTHS, where he had to hand in the first rifle while waiting on the application to be approved.

    In fairness I think most of the FAO's have been lumped with an extra title and in turn more work, on top of their normal duties and some, may have no more interest in firearms than I do in crochet hooks!

    With all the flaws that the current system does have, a new system would need to be carefully considered.

    The NDLS car license system and process is standard and much more efficient, if you are banned or need glasses or have endorsements, that can be checked in no time at all. But, a centralized system could have some other issues, if you look at the amount of cyber attacks this year (and they are on the rise) - The HSE probably getting the most airtime this year, but by no means the only victim. If the NDLS database was hacked it might revile a lot of PII, but if a firearms owners database was hacked, it could pose more serious concerns. A recent breach in a UK based site hit the news recently and I'm sure a lot of the users now regret using that site.


    So yes, the system in place can be slow and unfair based on where you reside and I do not think anyone here has a problem with that point.

    I think it's the fact that you then jumped straight to a proposal of paying more money, that people would take issue with.

    Like, why would more money automatically fix it? A new system would of course cost money, but it would not (SHOULD DEFINITLY NOT), add to the day to day effort.

    A better system would save time and reduce the effort and redundant tasks needed to accomplish the process.

    While I might call up Sky or Virgin and complain if my broadband is slow this week, I would never start that conversation with: "Hey lads if I throw more money at you, will you take a look.. No, I would get on to them and complain and tell them that I am paying for a service that is not getting delivered as promised.

    If they replied to say that they are understaffed or their system is in rag order, again I would not say, Ah jaysus sorry to hear that, would it help if you charged me more money, or better still if I proposed that every customer will pay them more money.


    For my two cents on using Firearm vs Weapon:

    A lad on the radio recently referred to duck shooting as a bloodbath, he did so to stress his view and embed an image in the minds of the listeners of the program.

    I have never looked up the difference so I cannot tell for sure if it's correct, but (to me at least) a Weapon paints a picture in my mind of anything that is used against someone to hurt or kill; and while you may well kill duck or damage paper, I feel the term firearm is a more appropriate term to use, if you are licensed and acting in a legal capacity.



  • Registered Users Posts: 548 ✭✭✭ slipperyox
    Registered User


    I'll end with this.

    I'm having a lot more constructive feedback, in a more active forum than this graveyard, so I'll focus my attention there.



  • Registered Users Posts: 228 ✭✭ BSA International
    Registered User


    Guardian is left wing borderline tabloid trash.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,877 ✭✭✭ minktrapper
    Registered User


    225,000 firearms at €80 a go. That is €18 Million every three years or €6 Million per year in revenue from licensing.

    More commonly known as a "licence" to print money. If you will excuse the pun. Just as well the rod licence never came in. How could it cost €6,000,000 a year to print a few bits and pieces on a piece of paper. Think about it. €6 million.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,614 ✭✭✭ deerhunter1
    Registered User




Advertisement