should guns/ bloodsports be fully legalised in ireland?

Sparks

snorlax wrote:

therefore access to a gun does increase risk of death through either homicide/ suicide.

In the same way that access to a knife increases risk of being stabbed or slitting your wrists, I would imagine!
Also you should know that those statistics are in hot contention in the US, where this is a huge political issue, and since you copied them from the Illinois Council against Handgun Violence, they're getting a touch of spin
On the other hand, of course, the pro-gun lobby there spins it's figures just as badly - John Lott's being the most infamous example.
Truth is, that there's not been a sufficiently indepth independent study made to date that determines the answers to several key questions on the issue like the impact of firearms ownership on crime levels, the risk of firearms ownership or other such factors. Personally, I'm somewhere in the middle - I've no problem with responsible people who own firearms and use them safely, but the idea of any untrained person being able to purchase a firearm or the idea of someone carrying a firearm around with them, scares the bejaysus out of me. Happily, neither is true in this country in practise. There are at most a dozen personal protection weapons issued in this country, and mostly that'd be for people who would be under a known threat. There are far more up North (some 12,000 issued, mostly to government workers), but to be honest, there are things up there that should scare a sane person more than legally held and licenced firearms! As an RUC officer once said, it's not the ones with licences that we worry about...

dangerous drugs are only sold by prescription to avoid unrestricted access to potentitally fatal chemicals

And yet I could walk into any chemists or DIY store or shop in the country and buy lethal doses of aspirin, pesticide, or any number of nasty chemicals, or even just go buy a knife. Denying means will not solve the problem, and may not even be possible in the first place. What's needed is to address the root cause!

makes it harder for a person to make any rash decisons eg if viable means of killing themselves are unavailable/ or more difficult to come by.

I'm typing this upstairs at the moment, by an open window. Care to tell me how you'd stop me making a "rash decision"? Nail the window shut? Take away my penknife? Force-feed me? Wrap me in cotton wool and bubblewrap and have me cared for by other, wrapped and bubble-wrapped nurses for the rest of my life?
Denying means does not work!

also: look at the number of unintentional deaths, 3% may seem low but thats 3 out of every hundred people dying by accident!

It's also not representative of the situation in Ireland. I can think of only one death cause by an accident with a rifle since I started shooting twelve years ago, and there are far more experienced people than me out there who can't remember any others. Firearms owners are careful.
At the same time, we're expecting deaths on the roads through unintentional accidents this weekend. Expecting. So saying "let's ban an olympic sport, several non-olympic sports, a pastime enjoyed by a hundred thousand people, and a valuable agricultural tool", all over an accident rate that in fifty years hasn't matched what we've come to expect from one bank holiday weekend's driving... well, it's not just daft, it's immoral.

also: id say that the American society (where there is a greater portportion of guns per capita compared to other western societys) is highly correlated with a greater death rate.

Indeed. However, correlation is not causation. There are western societies with higher proportions of gun ownership per capita than America's - Canada and Switzerland for example, which also have less stringent firearms laws than in the US - and which yet have rates of gun crime that are lower than nearly any other western country. It's not the firearms, it's something else, and I'm looking squarely at the people holding the firearms as the cause.

snorlax

points taken, but i just believe that no matter what a fire arm owners best intentions are they can not do much to stop the gun falling into the wrong hand and lets face it guns are designed to kill. also as you mentioned above they do not have to undergo any tests to see if they have sufficent knowledge of the safety.

i myself served in the FCA for 2 months and spent that 2months just learning the safety until i was blue in the face with it. then we were only entitled to shot them if we passed the TOETs/ test to ensure we understood how the safety worked. as my stats above have mentioned an increase in guns is linked to an increase in gun related crime, and yes guns do make it easier to kill a larger amount of people because that is what they wer'e desiged to do. perphaps you would be for stringent safety regulations with backround checks rather then just opening up the market to them as in the states?

Con9903

I think the current gun laws in this country are quite good. But an Air rifle shouldn't be considered as lethal as a rifle. Also I think that Gun cabinet law should be brought in, to reduce the robbing guns for use in crime.
If a person has a genuine interest in firearms he will get his/her hands on a gun somehow, why not support and control the interest.
And I don't see why people should lash out at others for hunting, each to their own. As for blood sports, are you referring to the likes of badger baiting and pit bull fights? I think those "sports" should remain outlawed.

Sparks

i just believe that no matter what a fire arm owners best intentions are they can not do much to stop the gun falling into the wrong hand

Only if you think that a trigger lock, a gun safe, and only assembling the rifle at the range counts as "not much"...

lets face it guns are designed to kill.

If I had a euro for every time I heard that one...
Look. Some guns are designed to kill. No denying that, it'd be pretty silly for an infantryman's rifle to not be designed to do so. However, the majority of firearms are designed not to kill humans, but other animals; and a very large chunk of guns aren't designed to kill at all. My air rifle, for example, is designed to hit a 1mm wide target at a range of 10 metres, and is as useful as a weapon as a 2x4 because you'd have to use it like a 2x4 to kill someone with it. My .22 rifle is designed to hit a 10mm target at a range of 50 metres, and it's design is so oriented towards that goal that it'd be useless as a weapon, except again, as a rather expensive (€2500 or more) club. And, like all .22 rifles (perhaps the more common kind of cartridge rifle in the world today), while it could kill you if you were shot with it, it's not likely to unless you were hit in the cranium or the heart or one or two other vital spots. They're about as dangerous as powerdrills. Which means that if used as designed and intended, they're useful tools that add to our lives, but if you put one to your head and pull the trigger, it's not going to go well for you.

perphaps you would be for stringent safety regulations with backround checks

We already have stringent safety regulations at the moment, fully supported by all the shooting associations. Individual clubs would have even more safety rules on top of those in legislation, look at TCD's safety regulations for example. And background checks are a bit more complex than you'd think. Criminal convictions are already checked for, and in principle you can't have a licence if you're of "unsound mind" or "intemperate habits", but actually legally enforcing that is difficult because of our mental health system in this country. Which is why abbeylara happened in the first place - McCarthy's GP said he shouldn't have a shotgun, his psychologist said he should, and the Superintendent had to take the psychologist's advice as he was the specialist. So background checks aren't a simple thing and if not done right, are worse than useless!

snorlax

more along the lines of fox/ game hunting


if the gun laws are stingent why did my sergant tell me it was now possible to purchase a steyr rifle in ireland?

restrictions are only as complicated as you make them. cars are potentially lethal and are subject to strict regulation with regard to licencing and all drivers must undergo a test before they are deemed fully licenced drivers.
what makes guns any different ? what should they not be strictly policed?


also you may have the best intentions regarding safety of your gun but what about the other 100, 000 gunowners in ireland? do think they are all responsible gunowners?

Con9903

Not sure about the fox population in this country so I won't comment. But I don't see anything wrong with Game hunting as long as the wildlife stocks are nurtured and kept plentiful, and the laws are abided.

Sparks

Con9903 wrote:

But an Air rifle shouldn't be considered as lethal as a rifle.

Some types of air rifle, yes. Other types (the ones used for hunting bunnies) need to be considered firearms. The rest of europe solve this by not requiring licences for air rifles or air pistols where the kinetic energy of the pellet as it leaves the muzzle is less than a set threshold - 7.5 joules in Germany if I remember right, and 12 foot-pounds in the UK (6 for air pistols). There are drawbacks to that solution as well, as recent events in Scotland have shown, but on the whole it does appear more sane than our situation where technically even toy guns that fire suction-cup darts (which we all played with as children) are legally firearms and need licences...

Also I think that Gun cabinet law should be brought in, to reduce the robbing guns for use in crime.

Firstly, it is coming in, it's part 30 of the Criminal Justice Bill 2004 (and the fact that it's in a Criminal Justice bill has offended a lot of shooters allready). Secondly, few shooters wouldn't have secure storage for their firearms allready. Thirdly, gunsafes aren't a silver bullet - you can still rip the safe off the wall and make off with it if you're determined enough. It stops opportunistic criminals, which account for over 95% of burgalries, but nothing's going to solve every problem in one stroke.

And I don't see why people should lash out at others for hunting, each to their own. As for blood sports, are you referring to the likes of badger baiting and pit bull fights? I think those "sports" should remain outlawed.

That's an important point to make - "blood sports" and "hunting" are NOT the same thing. No matter what anyone tells you.

Con9903

Sparks wrote:

Secondly, few shooters wouldn't have secure storage for their firearms allready.

The majority of people I know do not have any form of gun cabinet because it's not the law so they do not feel like forking over the money. Silly I know, but people feel that they are unlikely to ever be robbed

Sparks

snorlax wrote:

if the gun laws are stingent why did my sergant tell me it was now possible to purchase a steyr rifle in ireland?

Steyr are like Ford, they make lots of different models of firearm from air pistols and air rifles to .22 target rifles to hunting rifles to military rifles like the AUG that the Irish army uses. For example, a lot of the air rifles used by the olympic shooters at the moment are Steyr LG-100s:

restrictions are only as complicated as you make them. cars are potentially lethal and are subject to strict regulation with regard to licencing and all drivers must undergo a test before they are deemed fully licenced drivers.

And yet, how many deaths do we see per year from cars?

what makes guns any different ? what should they not be strictly policed?

Who's told you that they're not? We already have rather strict firearms legislation and an excellent safety record, so the phrase "If it's not broken" comes to mind. Where the problem lies is with illegal firearms, which have nothing to do with licenced shooters!

also you may have the best intentions regarding safety of your gun but what about the other 100, 000 gunowners in ireland? do think they are all responsible gunowners?

Where do you think I learnt how to be a responsible gun owner, but from the other gun owners? The gardai certainly didn't teach me it, neither did the army or anyone else. I learnt through my club, and the other shooters I came in contact with. And these people aren't shadowy secretive figures, they're all known by their local garda because you have to go see him at least once a year to get your licence renewed (a process, by the way that nets around forty million euro a year for the exchequer, which we don't see more than a few thousand euros of again through sports grants from the Sports Council), and when you want to get a new rifle or whatever for trying a new kind of competition or replacing a worn barrel in your old rifle or whatever.

Sparks

Con9903 wrote:

The majority of people I know do not have any form of gun cabinet because it's not the law so they do not feel like forking over the money. Silly I know, but people feel that they are unlikely to ever be robbed

Really? Of all the shooters I've met in twelve years, only one didn't have a gunsafe and that was because she was living in rented accomodation at the time and the landlord didn't want her bolting a safe to a structural wall. Hell, I even know of shooters (admittedly DIY fans) who've made whole gun rooms - rooms with reinforced walls, steel doors and a gunsafe inside. Plus, it'll be a legal requirement soon enough so those few without secure storage will have to obtain it.

Ri_Nollaig

these kinda arugments are always going to happen there is not much you can do to stop them, however i believe its mainly from the huge uproar there is if there ever is one of these "incidients", that people see the bad side of guns
just look at air travel, people are afraid of flying, afraid of the plane getting hijacked but how often does that actaully happen?
but whats the points in banning them? something else would just be used instead a sword, a knife or maybe a pointy stick? it would only effect the people who legaly own them anyway.
and as for blood sports? (the hunting ones now, that sparks pointed out) how many people that live in the country actaully complained about them and wanted them banned? rather then people who might have never even seen one other then what they saw on some doc. on tv that showed the "real" thing...

ergo

Sparks wrote:

However, correlation is not causation. There are western societies with higher proportions of gun ownership per capita than America's - Canada and Switzerland for example, which also have less stringent firearms laws than in the US - and which yet have rates of gun crime that are lower than nearly any other western country. It's not the firearms, it's something else, and I'm looking squarely at the people holding the firearms as the cause.

this is very true, it really depends on who has the guns

wahtever you may think of Michael Moore, it's interesting to watch Bowling For Columbine which, for those who haven't seen it, looks at gun ownership and attitudes to guns in the US, I think the most staggering statfrom the film, quoted above by Snorlax compared the number of gun-related deaths world-wide

the film didn't really answer the question though as to why the US attitude is different (obviously big generalisation there but statistically anyway...), think it might have brought up the wild west as a starting point for the whole thing

but an example of access to guns there was an offer of a free gun when you open a bank account in one US state

as for here, well status quo is OK, no?

and I'm glad that in most places here people don't feel the need to be protected by having a loaded gun by their bed,

that's one US attitude I hope doesn't go global

snorlax

sparks the steryr 5.56mm that is issued to the irish army was/and i dont know if it still is, on sale in ireland.

id also say it would be hard to vouch charachter references for 100, 000 people most of whom you'v probably never met before. again remember the boy that was shot (and nobody admitted to doing it) while he was playing in his school yard..hardly a perfect safety record? ...........

Ri_Nollaig

dont they use 5.56 NATO? ive never seen ammo smaller then 4.5mm?

snorlax

try http://www.rdfra.ie/unitsandCorps.htm and click under equipment

Ri_Nollaig

give me a 404 sums up the irish army really error not found

snorlax

well you should of a t least been able to see the little picture of it anyhow.

i think a lot of people join the fca because they don't have to pay to shoot and shooting is suppossed to be quite expensive

here's a better link http://gofree.indigo.ie/~acoy20bn/equipment.html

Ri_Nollaig

well a rifle will cost 100min ( second hand ) right up to 2000-3000 plus the license which is 80 i think (will b paying soon anyway)
and u should/need a gun safe at about 200 also any other equipment needed so yeah its an expensive hobby

Barry Aldwell

snorlax wrote:

sparks the steryr 3.5mm that is issued to the irish army was/and i dont know if it still is, on sale in ireland.

*sigh* I'd hate to see how you did in your TOETs. The Steyr AUG fires 5.56mm ammunition (either M193 or SS109 standard ammunition, but that's an aside). While it is true that there is a company in germany producing AUG copies which could theoretically be imported, it wouldn't be easy, and anybody trying it would be treated very suspiciously by the Gardai

As said by sparks, steyr make a lot of rifles, in calibres ranging from .22lr up to the rather insane 15.2mm. Steyr is a company, not a single rifle.

snorlax

luckily i didnt stay long enough to find out, there was too many trigger happy ppl there ...and im just quoting what my sergant said, he wasnt refering to the smaller versions either and yes i do know that steyr is a company

Ri_Nollaig

yes u can mod a gun to look like a a Steyr Aug such as the Ruger 10/22 but it is NOT an Aug i.e. it is not an assault rifle it will not fire full-auto only semi and with a smaller round

/edit the link you posted says the cal. in the Specification for it

Barry Aldwell

Ri_Nollaig wrote:

yes u can mod a gun to look like a a Steyr Aug such as the Ruger 10/22 but it is NOT an Aug i.e. it is not an assault rifle it will not fire full-auto only semi and with a smaller round

http://www.oberlandarms.com/index.php?category=Waffen&id=ST_1&page=details
It's in German, but on the top it distinctly says ".223Rem", meaning it fires .223 Remmington, a lower pressure version of 5.56mm NATO. If I was buying it I'd enquire with the company about one designed for 5.56mm, but my point still stands.

Ri_Nollaig

would u b able to import a gun like that what reason would you give for owning one?

Barry Aldwell

Ri_Nollaig wrote:

would u b able to import a gun like that what reason would you give for owning one?

Firstly, it's a rifle. This is a gun

Some use .223 rifles for (large) vermin control. A poster on the shooting board recently recieved a license for a .223 rifle, imported from Germany

Rovi

Ri_Nollaig wrote:

would u b able to import a gun like that what reason would you give for owning one?

Target shooting, vermin control, and hunting spring to mind straight away.
It wouldn't be perfectly suited to 'proper' target shooting, but it'd be fine for informal fun targeting.
There are plenty of people out there using .223 Rem for fox and dog control around sheep and other livestock.
It's not big enough (IIRC) for deer, as the smallest calibre for which you'll be issued a deer permit is .22/250, which is a bit too small in my opinion.
The fact that it's a semi-automatic is immaterial, as there are no restrictions on action type or magazine capacity in our legislation that I know of.

The only impediment to importing one (provided you fulfil all the other criteria) is the perception of your Garda Superintendent, who may decide that it 'looks scary.'
The same thing applies to civilian versions of the AR15, AK47, and a bunch of other firearms with a (recent!) military heritage.


.

Umiq88

yes it is possible to import a gun like that it takes a bit of paperwork and you'd need a good reason for owning one people seem to get the impression that the guards will hand out a licence to anyone. The german company will not send out the gun until you send them a licence for the gun and a eu import licence along with a copy of your passport.

Again this is not to be confused to look like the guns the armys use its is a much smaller calibre the gun is pretty useless for hunting with only would be used be target shooters

And people should really stop comparing the irish situation with america its completey different a friend of mine from america knows someone that was able to leagally buy an ak47 which is able to fire huge calibre rounds and is automatic in ireland your not able to licence a semi- automatic over .22lr with a 10shot magazine. In some states you can buy a gun as easily as a chocolate bar here in ireland you have to have a good reason for owning a gun and permission to shoot it somewhere and it has to be passed by the garda superintendant

And also id agree with the gun safe rule we have one in our house which is bolted to a wall and is in a not very obvious place at all the rifle also has the bolt removed and stored in a seperate location and the ammo is stored seperate as well so even if we were robbed the gun safe is hard enough to see let alone break into.

Saying there should be more strict regulations for shooting like a car is ridiculus when i applied for my first car licence (2 months ago) i fill out a form hand it in and get a licence 6 days later and i can drive wherever i want and can potentially kill alot of people to get my gun licence i had to get permission of a local farmer to shoot on his land then go in to the station and apply for the licence was sent away to be approved by the guarda super and if he finds any reason not to pass it he wont the whole process takes over a month the only reason i was able to get a licence is because i have expierence with a shotgun and have it licenced for a year my friend bought an air rifle and his application took 6 months and thats only an air rifle so if you think its easy to get your hands on a gun think again

regarding that incendent with the boy being shot accidents happen that was one in i dont know how many years im not saying its not tragic and its acceptable at all its just that if you look at how many people get killed on the roads every year im sure its in the 1000's and thats one incedent probably not by a licenced shooter some idiot might have got a hold of a gun and you think that shooting should be banned so 20,000 or so people should have to suffer because of one idiot

i have yet to here one valid reason why hunting is cruel, unsafe or should be banned

as for it being cruel hows raising animals and mass slaughtering you dont stop easting your beef/chicken/ pork do you

Umiq88

have to disagree with you there rovi my father used a .22/250 to hunt deer with and any deer he shot dropped i think its a mater of the shooters ability to hit where he's aiming the person he sold the rifle to dropped a deer at 475 yards with the gun

netwhizkid

Guns should be outlawed, currently they are only used by farmers to shoot anything that eats as much as one blade of grass, stingy F*****s and by people who just like to kill off whatever small bit of wildlife that is left in Ireland. I think they should removed for good.

Regards netwhizkid

Rovi

psittacosis wrote:

have to disagree with you there rovi my father used a .22/250 to hunt deer with and any deer he shot dropped i think its a mater of the shooters ability to hit where he's aiming the person he sold the rifle to dropped a deer at 475 yards with the gun

Fair enough psittacosis, I just said that IN MY OPINION it's not really enough cartridge for deer.
This has to do with the loadings of commercially available cartridges and a bunch of other criteria that are really off topic for this thread.
This is a discussion better suited to the Shooting forum.

.

Rovi

netwhizkid wrote:

Guns should be outlawed, currently they are only used by farmers to shoot anything that eats as much as one blade of grass, stingy F*****s and by people who just like to kill off whatever small bit of wildlife that is left in Ireland. I think they should removed for good.

Regards netwhizkid

Exceedingly well argued points, how did I not see these self-evident truths before???