nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

ISAA Membership

Panserborn

An issue was raised at the IAAA delegate meeting at the weekend concerning vetting of all over 16s in all clubs.

One of the upshots of this was that any member of the ISAA also had to be vetted. AFAIK, currently as soon as someone "joins" a college club they are members of the ISAA, this means we need to vet all the sign ups every year - not really feasable I'm sure you will all agree.

With this in mind, should we formalise a more realistic method of ISAA membership? Some ideas that were thrown around were:

Length of time in the club
Attendence at x number of training sessions
Participation in an IV
Gain at least the White Arrow FITA Progression Award

What say ye? This will need to be done before sign-ups, which is soon for most of us. Also, the vetting is not an IAAA thing, its is a legal thing that the Fuzz say we have to do.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Cosine

I don't see why we would have to ask the college's permission. Maybe its different in other colleges but we're left run ourselves and are not really tied to our sports dept.

@Sparks: Would it not make sense to email the president of the IAAA with your grievances so that something might be changed rather then arguing the same points over and over here?

Sparks

@Cosine: No, it'd make more sense to mention this to their vetting officer to confirm that the things we're worried about over here are in fact correct; which is what I did yesterday.
As to why we're talking about it here, it's because here is where it was first mentioned...

Aryzel

Cosine wrote: »

I don't see why we would have to ask the college's permission. Maybe its different in other colleges but we're left run ourselves and are not really tied to our sports dept.

Hmm, the colleges hold the ultimate responsibility for the clubs in them. If a college archery club is vetting people then the college must know. If anything goes wrong, of anyone has a compliant that ye are vetting them, or if ye find anyone that fails the vetting, the issue will go to the college. If the college doesn't know everything about your process there will be serious trouble. The college is also the ones that will embarrassed and condemed in the media for letting students have access to secure garda files on fellow students.

This is a seriously major issue, if ye go the route of an individual in each college club vetting every (or even some) of the members in that club then you are asking for serious trouble, as in getting your club suspended, reviewed and shut down by the college.

Either:
Get the colleges to do the vetting
Get the IAAA to do the vetting on the few top members of a club
Tell the IAAA to get lost

Panserborn

Sparks wrote: »

See, I could agree with vetting as done in the UK - where coaches, team managers, people who are in charge of u-18s are vetted, and where the police give a report on suitability instead of handing over confidential files.

This would be a far better way of doing it, but (no disrespect to any members of the force) that sounds like something that I imagine the Irish garda would consider too much work and "not our problem". I could be mistaken and unfair, if anyone knows any different then correct me.

Sparks

I wouldn't be surprised panser - I also wouldn't care. They get paid for doing the work, volunteers don't, and that's just for a start.

philmire

i have just red true this topic i am very intrested in this privercy lark sparks is talking about because from boards i have found out your name where you are from what club you shoot in and what your job is and what position you have in the club.
from Wilkinstown Target Shooting Club i found your bebo account and what air gun you have

from just that information i could do anything with that info. so if you have a clean garda file from this for me a complete stranger i have found out alot about you with out garda vetting in minits (by the way garda vetting is for protecting me i'm a jounier):D:D:D:D:D:D:D:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

i'll finish my rant now

Panserborn

The kind of info you (kind of intrusively) acquired on Sparks is info that he himself (or any of us) posted in one way or another on the internet. Garda vetting is different in that is provides info on records they have on a person. And, if the guards had records on a person you can be sure it is info more sensitive than anything you would find on a bebo page.

Sparks

Thing is phil, when you look into what job I had, you'll find it was the PRO for the shooting governing body, the NTSA. My job required that I give up anonymity on boards. I would not be considered usual as a result of this - in fact, most shooters won't even let their neighbours know they shoot. If you try to find any of that data on any other shooter in here, it will usually (about nine times out of ten) be a different story.

Also, despite my "outed" status, you didn't find out what house I live in, where in that house I store my firearms, what model and make of safe I use and where I have it located at the moment, or any of the other things that are in the Garda file on me - and remember I'm probably the most "outed" shooter on the boards.

I can understand you not knowing, because you're not a shooter and don't know what my reputation in shooting, small as it is), but if I think that this vetting is putting too much information out there, well, that's sort of like getting your table manners criticised by Idi Amin.

philmire

my point is not that silly litle things of bits of information mean every thing but there are ways of fishing for information that could be used to get more information

Sparks

And my point is that when I voluntarily agreed to become the PRO for the NTSA, I had the time and the ability to sit down and deliberate on what items of information on me I would make public (those are the bits you've found by the way) - but this vetting procedure not only takes away that voluntary aspect, but also the selection. Unless we've all read this wrong, it makes it mandatory to surrender all personal information held on you by the Gardai to two third parties with no real guarantee of confidentiality or security that I can see.

Panserborn

OK, got requests from various parties to close this thread.

What I'll do is I'll close it temporarily until the facts of the vetting proceadure are known, then I'll open it again so it can be discussed without hear-say and rumour, but with facts and figures instead.

Anyone has issues with this then PM me but please don't start a new thread whining about it.

Panserborn

The meeting concerning the vetting issue took place at the weekend. Thread is re-opened so those present at the meeting can give the rest of us the facts around this matter.

Feel free to discuss the issues but try and keep it to archery related vetting and how the clubs and colleges can deal with it. A sociological analysis of vetting is more suited to the soc boards.

If anyone who was at the meeting is in attendence then you have the stand .............. do tell.

Sparks

Please do!

Private Ryan

IAAA are to hold a meeting with the ISAA to discuss the implementation of vetting in our clubs.

In non vetting matters but still ISAA related have recently contacted CUSAI (college univarsity sports association of Ireland). They are more than willing to help us and they can provide certain best practices policies inc years grace but they do recommend that college clubs are members of the national governing body.
In case I start getting hounded for being proactive the reason I contacted them is that UCD have asked that I confirm the Intervarsity status of the competition I've booked in the hall. CUSAI are the body who confirm the Intervarsity status of cmpetitions.
Any comments?

MOD NOTE: I've copied this comment into a new thread all to itself, it deserves its own for what could be a big discussion. To comment on this please post here.

Panserborn

Private Ryan wrote: »

In non vetting matters but still ISAA related have recently contacted CUSAI (college univarsity sports association of Ireland). They are more than willing to help us and they can provide certain best practices policies inc years grace but they do recommend that college clubs are members of the national governing body.
In case I start getting hounded for being proactive the reason I contacted them is that UCD have asked that I confirm the Intervarsity status of the competition I've booked in the hall. CUSAI are the body who confirm the Intervarsity status of cmpetitions.
Any comments?

Hmm, thats a big one. I'm going to move that post of Private Ryans to a thread all to itself, so it can be given its own legs. Post here for comments on this issue.

Sparks

Does this mean that the vetting discussed in this thread is to go ahead?

Panserborn

Sparks wrote: »

Does this mean that the vetting discussed in this thread is to go ahead?

Hopefully someone can clarify this. For the benefit the clubs who post here that are outside the IVs, if anyone has any info following the meeting in addition or clarification of the posts in this thread then post away.

Private Ryan

All the major issues regarding to vetting were discussed at the meeting. The session was an informal questions and answers session At the end, each line manager was sent back to their respective club with the task of discussing vetting with their members and if they have any further questions they can contact the national vetting officer. If enough questions remain unanswered another training day will take place.
As for posting here the issues of the meeting there is not enough space, time and I feel it is not the correct forum. The IAAA is still finalising their rules in regard to vetting and publicly argueing the resulting teething problems with people who are not IAAA members could lead to even more problems.

Aryzel

Private Ryan wrote: »

As for posting here the issues of the meeting there is not enough space, time and I feel it is not the correct forum. The IAAA is still finalising their rules in regard to vetting and publicly argueing the resulting teething problems with people who are not IAAA members could lead to even more problems.

Fair enough (ye are probably sick of me pointing out problems on issues lately), however ye should probably at least begin to mention it to some of your College Sports departments, as you don't want to get into the situation where ye have something worked out with the IAAA and then when ye get close to implementing it, some of the colleges refuse to allow it. Also any word on what other college sports clubs are doing?

Sparks

Private Ryan wrote: »

The IAAA is still finalising their rules in regard to vetting and publicly arguing the resulting teething problems with people who are not IAAA members could lead to even more problems.

Or it might lead to people and clubs who are not currently IAAA members but who are considering it to decide either to go with the IAAA or to get insurance elsewhere and go their own way.

Frankly, I've seen these "lets not talk about policy in public" decisions before. It always, every single time, without one single exception, means that something stinks and if you brought it out into public, people would be looking for heads to roll.

It's a bit sad to find it in here as well, I was finding all this a refreshing break from finding it elsewhere

toxof

If people have nothing to hide then they should not be worried

Aryzel

toxof wrote: »

If people have nothing to hide then they should not be worried

For 99% of people that is true, their police file will contain little more than their age and address. However the remaining 1% might have extremely sensitive information on their police file that has nothing to do with their safety around kids in archery but that information will be viewed by 19-20 year old college student. So it needs to be clear how that information will be stored, who will view it, and what legal rights does the individual have if the vetting officer so much as makes a hint about that personal information to anyone, ever.

Example case, someones father is in jail, vetting officer sees that on the file. Months later some archery night out, drunk vetting officer whispers to the individual "I know about your dad!", can the individual concerned sue the ass off the vetting officer and the club itself, perhaps also the University and IAAA?

Sparks

Or, as I pointed out above, my file would have my exact address, what firearms I have there, what the house security is like... if I get vetted and a month later I'm burgled and someone makes off with five grand's worth of firearms, do I sue the IAAA because they didn't keep my information secure? And how do the IAAA prove that their vetting officer didn't pass on the information? He or she might be completely honourable individuals - but proving that in court in those circumstances would not be something I'd want to have to do.

Sparks

Besides, if toxof is right and those with nothing to hide have nothing to fear, why not discuss it here? What have the IAAA got to hide, after all?

toxof

If you need to discuss it with the IAAA talk to them in person!

Renegade_Archer

So we're not allowed discuss it here as concerned archers?

Perhaps we need a sticky, or a definitive post that gives the actual _facts_ about this vetting process?

Reku

If it goes through on clubs I'll probably quit the sport, if it goes through on IV's I'll let them vet me, nothing in my file anyway AFAIK, but I won't compete.
It's a slippery slope, next we'll need to register our fingerprints and DNA to engage in the sport, then full medical assessment to keep anyone not in prestine health off the range in case they kick the bucket mid-draw. In fact should we not be worried about participating in a sport where injuries happen when for all we know other members have HIV?:rolleyes:
Oooh, and think of all the dirty-dirty things folks may have done without washing their hands and are then touching the same targets as the rest of us...:rolleyes:

Quite simply my issue is less with who knows what as opposed to the sheer idiocy of the entire matter, had they at least put it forth as us requiring firearms licences, and so being covertly vetted for this, I could have accepted the reasoning behind that, but that the fear is we can't be trusted around kids as opposed to we'll try kill someone with the bow, just sheer idiocy IMO. When you give into one idiotic idea why not the next one?

Coaches of kids are the only ones who should be vetted, and even there I still think there's much better codes of practice that could be brought in instead so that the chance simply never presents itself rather than hoping that all the paedophiles have actually got prior convictions for such behaviour.

Panserborn

Renegade_Archer wrote: »

So we're not allowed discuss it here as concerned archers?

Perhaps we need a sticky, or a definitive post that gives the actual _facts_ about this vetting process?

Discuss away, unless it gets silly I'm not locking the thread. (Public sport + public policy) = public discussion, as far as I'm concerned. But, keep it to archery rather than sociology please.

When facts are available and written in stone I can sticky it, or add it as a post to one of the stickyed threads.

toxof

Renegade_Archer wrote: »

So we're not allowed discuss it here as concerned archers?

Perhaps we need a sticky, or a definitive post that gives the actual _facts_ about this vetting process?

Yeah discuss away, but if there is something you need to know, why not give one of the IAAA exec a ring.

As for quiting the sport! Thats idiotic!

If all this vetting prevents one kid from being abused, then its worth it!

Aryzel

toxof wrote: »

If all this vetting prevents one kid from being abused, then its worth it!

Thats making it a bit too simplistic, what if the cost of saving that one kid, is ruining the lifes of 10 other people (as in causing a suicide etc) which is just as likely an outcome as saving the kid. But thats not really anything to do with the discussion, just being picky on that one, people should not assume the side effects are less than the good goal being aimed for. Some good goals do cost (I don't mean money) too much to be implemented.

Anyways back to the discussion the question is:
What are the full and exact details being proposed for the vetting in terms of College Archery Clubs. What are the opinions and options given by the IAAA and the Coleges to the clubs to meet each of the requirements. Without that information we can only go in circles, there isn't really anything else to say.

@Sparks, if the IAAA, College and the ISAA are still unsure on the answers to those questions, if they are still doing alot of back on furth on what will happen, then there is nothing wrong with them holding back talking about it on the forum. There is a difference in not talking about it because it is not refined enough to take public, and hiding the information because they can't answer the questions that might be asked. I'm sure they will make it public once they start to know what might be implemented, and want people to ask questions they might not have thought off, so they can have the solutions before the policy goes live.