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

Is there an increase in handgun numbers? I don't think so!

fat-tony

In light of recent media stories and outpourings of angst by certain Dail deputies regarding the "explosion" of licensed handgun numbers and their tenuous relationship to crime, I thought I might do some basic research on the current licence numbers vis a vis those existing up to the imposition of the Temporary Custody Order implemented in August 1972.

This is not a scientific analysis - just what I was able to glean from a cursory examination of the Dail records. I'm sure "serious" journos will have access to better sources of info.

In 1971 the breakdown of licensed firearms in the state was:

Shotguns: 88,500
Rifles(incl air rifles): 24,910
Pistols(incl air pistols): 1,565
This makes a total of over 114,000 licensed firearms in the state in 1971

The total figures for 1970, 1969 and 1968 were:
110,063
108,059 and
104,672
respectively. I haven't seen a breakdown by firearm type for these years.

The recent figures for 2007 were:

Shotguns: 177,455
Rifles: 56,689
Pistols: 1,835

Now kiddies, lets do some elementary maths:

For context we've had a 44% population increase between the census in 1971 (2.9m) and 2006 (4.2m).

In the intervening years we have had an increase of 100.5% in shotgun numbers. There has been a 127.5% increase in rifle numbers. Handgun numbers have only increased by 17.5%. So, in the space of 35 years we have had a increase of 270 handguns. This increase lags far behind the growth in population numbers, so could be argued as an actual decrease.

Just food for thought guys 'n gals. Some may be able to make more inroads into this subject.

Here's the references:
Dáil Éireann - Volume 262 - 06 July, 1972
http://historical-debates.oireachtas.ie/D/0262/D.0262.197207060055.html

Dáil Éireann - Volume 260 - 04 May, 1972
http://historical-debates.oireachtas.ie/D/0260/D.0260.197205040057.html

Dáil Éireann - Volume 253 - 28 April, 1971
http://historical-debates.oireachtas.ie/D/0253/D.0253.197104280023.html

(this one is interesting as it gives a breakdown by Garda Division!)
Dáil Éireann - Volume 251 - 25 February, 1971
http://historical-debates.oireachtas.ie/D/0251/D.0251.197102250070.html

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

An increase is an increase regardless...

You can argue that the ratio has changed though.

Also the references that the ministers have made is not compared to 1971 but in fact around 2004, where there was only 1 licenced pistol in Ireland (I think it was 2004 or there abouts) The increase from this time is daunting and the Gardai have a right to be worried. These guns get into the wrong hands and it's not a good thing.

It is still down to the local super wether or not a licence should be issued, as regards to pistols, it's damn hard. Even if one does follow the strict rules they are not guaranteed to getting one. I think it is somewhat unfair. I know the super in my area has vowed never to issue a pistol licence. I am unsure if anybody in my area holds a legal pistol.

fat-tony

Rayden Tall Sparrow wrote: »

Also the references that the ministers have made is not compared to 1971 but in fact around 2004, where there was only 1 licenced pistol in Ireland (I think it was 2004 or there abouts) The increase from this time is daunting and the Gardai have a right to be worried. These guns get into the wrong hands and it's not a good thing.

I think you are somewhat missing my point. There was an artificial situation between August 1972 and 2004 when handguns were unavailable for licensing. Starting from a base of 1, any increase will look substantial, but one could argue that current numbers are a return(almost) to the status quo which existed in 1971, when you take population growth into account.

Superintendents are the persons designated in law to control issue of licences. They perform background checks on applicants, specify the level of security required to store handguns safely and ultimately decide whether an individual has an appropriate use for a handgun. A statutory instrument issued in February this year strengthens the Gardai's hand as regards large calibre handguns and other classes of firearms, but is awaiting enabling legislation to implement it fully.

Sparks

Rayden Tall Sparrow wrote: »

An increase is an increase regardless...

Except when it's a decrease. From 1971 to 2008, the number of pistols per capita has fallen by 4.6 per ten thousand people. That's the thing about statistical analysis - you need to define your context or it's just a fancy way of lying. Ask any engineer.

You can argue that the ratio has changed though.

And you could also argue that the earth is flat, but neither would make much sense to argue when the facts are this clear.

Also the references that the ministers have made is not compared to 1971 but in fact around 2004, where there was only 1 licenced pistol in Ireland

Indeed - that's the importance of context. Pistols haven't changed their nature in the interim period. They're still as dangerous as power tools. What has changed in the interim is the Firearms Act - it's been tightened up three times since 1971, making the controls on who gets a pistol far more restrictive than they were in '71.

The increase from this time is daunting

Only if you're uninformed as to what pistols are and what we use them for. You've seen umpteen hollywood movies, but how many air pistol ISSF matches have you seen?

and the Gardai have a right to be worried.

Not about us they don't. Seriously. They don't have a right to be worried, because they already have a right to say no and to impose a wealth of preconditions on saying yes. Gun safes, home inspections, medical record inspections, membership of a suitable authorised range, home alarm systems, proficiency courses - if you can, and do, demand all these things then you do not have any right to continue to express "dauntedness", because you legally signed off on the licence and that, according to the law, means that you believed that issuing the licence did not pose a threat to the public safety or the peace.
You can't physically sign off on something as being safe (as the persona designata) and then say it's worrying.

These guns get into the wrong hands and it's not a good thing.

Sure would be. Someone gets a hold of my pistol and tries to rob a post office with it, he might lose the bits when it self-disassembles after he takes it out of the box and cranks it up

More seriously, yes, theft is a concern. Ergo the gun safes, the house alarms and the house inspection by the Crime Prevention Officer, who signs off on your secure storage being sufficient.
Besides, as the Gardai already proved, the people that are responsible for the rise in gun crime in Ireland get their firearms smuggled in from the continent, usually with drugs, and those firearms are usually illegal to own anywhere in the EU anyway (assault rifles for example). The simple fact is, noone in Ireland has a licence for the kind of firearms the ERU are most worried about facing in Limerick. You don't get RPG-7s for target shooting.

Besides all of that - there's the fact that the DoJ, DoAST, Gardai and all the shooting bodies sit down at the FCP table and they work through this stuff. And the majority of the Gardai have no problem with this. 99.5% or so of all firearms licences are granted every year without so much as a hiccup, and that number would be a damn sight lower if there was widespread opposition in the Gardai. We only have a handful of supers who have an aversion to licencing pistols, and that's down to them being saddled with the responsibility for licencing, but being given no training or support to actually do the job. So they react very conservatively and licence the bare minimum they can. Which is a perfectly human reaction, if an annoying one.

Simple end fact is that the local elections are coming up and there's a strong hint at a general election as well from some quarters; and some people are just making noise to try to secure their seats. Soon as election season's over, even if the people change, the system will continue as before, not because nothing ever changes, but because the system works.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Per capita is a differant matter (I was refering to that when I said "ratios may change")

The amount of licenced guns in Ireland has increased, not matter how you look at it.

Per capita it has fallen, we all agree on this, right?

How often is a licenced gun involved in a crime? I am talking about pistols here as they have completely differant critera than say a .22 swift or shotgun.

I still believe that the Guards have the right to worry. Regardless of what checks have been done or how safe the person in question may be.

I have watched many holywood films with guns etc... I am the one in the audience that normally criticises the use of guns and point out to others how unreal most of the gun scenes actually are. I have seen some competitions but have not yet been to one. Anyway we are not here to discuss my knowledge of firearms and firearm safety.

I do have a question for you though, why would I not be able to obtain a firearm pistol from say, the super in baltinglass but if I were living in mallow I wouldn't have a problem? I don't think it is fair to leave it down to the local super.

Sparks

Rayden Tall Sparrow wrote: »

The amount of licenced guns in Ireland has increased, not matter how you look at it.

Unless you look at it from the per capita side

Per capita it has fallen, we all agree on this, right?

For the sake of argument, sure, by 20% since 1971

How often is a licenced gun involved in a crime? I am talking about pistols here as they have completely differant critera than say a .22 swift or shotgun.

The Gardai don't know. We've asked in parlimentary questions several times, and the answer is always that they don't keep track of things like that and that it would take too much manpower to do so.

I still believe that the Guards have the right to worry. Regardless of what checks have been done or how safe the person in question may be.

No, they don't. Not legally, that's my point - if they are worried, the Act forbids them from granting a licence. If they do grant a licence and then say they're worried, that's tantamount to admitting having broken the law (albiet in a way that there's no defined penalty for).

I have watched many holywood films with guns etc... I am the one in the audience that normally criticises the use of guns and point out to others how unreal most of the gun scenes actually are.

It's the pits, isn't it? Having your sport ruin a perfectly good Angelina Jolie movie...

I do have a question for you though, why would I not be able to obtain a firearm pistol from say, the super in baltinglass but if I were living in mallow I wouldn't have a problem? I don't think it is fair to leave it down to the local super.

Leaving it to the local super is how it was always done because the local super knew the troublemakers in his district - head office wouldn't know to that level of detail. They'd have access to records and such, but they wouldn't know who was suspected of running about smashing car windows after a feed of drink every tuesday outside hogan's pub, or whatnot. The local lads would. As to whether or not that still works in a country with nearly twice the population and with population densities enormously larger in some areas is a different matter.
Also, you might get a licence in mallow but not in baltinglass because there's no range in baltinglass and there is in mallow (or there was until recently anyway).

It wasn't me!

Rayden Tall Sparrow wrote: »

Per capita is a differant matter (I was refering to that when I said "ratios may change")

The amount of licenced guns in Ireland has increased, not matter how you look at it.

Per capita it has fallen, we all agree on this, right?

How often is a licenced gun involved in a crime? I am talking about pistols here as they have completely differant critera than say a .22 swift or shotgun.

I still believe that the Guards have the right to worry. Regardless of what checks have been done or how safe the person in question may be.

I have watched many holywood films with guns etc... I am the one in the audience that normally criticises the use of guns and point out to others how unreal most of the gun scenes actually are. I have seen some competitions but have not yet been to one. Anyway we are not here to discuss my knowledge of firearms and firearm safety.

I do have a question for you though, why would I not be able to obtain a firearm pistol from say, the super in baltinglass but if I were living in mallow I wouldn't have a problem? I don't think it is fair to leave it down to the local super.

I've heard the super in Baltinglass is a hard-ass on pistols alright (He's my super too), but I can tell you for a fact that he has in fact signed off on several of them.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

But we have these things called cars, they transport you from one area to another, why would the distance of a range effect anything. There are places in wicklow that we could travel to.

Well I moved down from Dublin so my super won't know jack **** about me in that case. So if I was suspected, in a crime I have my chances of getting a pistol dashed? I could be a passer by, in the wrong place at the wrong time.

As for the super in baltinglass, he seems to be softening up? Nice

Sparks

why would the distance of a range effect anything

Because (a) not many shooters will drive more than 50 miles to get to their range, and (b) without a local range in the area, the super will think you fall into the category of people who won't drive that far.
It's just a human thing.

Well I moved down from Dublin so my super won't know jack **** about me in that case. So if I was suspected, in a crime I have my chances of getting a pistol dashed? I could be a passer by, in the wrong place at the wrong time.

No, basicly. If you were constantly in the wrong place at the wrong time, that might be a different story. And yes, if you're moving about, that does muck up the system, but the system was drafted in 1925 when most people didn't move outside their village except to emigrate. So it worked pretty well. And it's not horribly broken even now - don't forget that it works in 99.5% or more of cases at the moment.

Mellor

While the proof that pistols per capita are down since 71 is a good thing.
I don't think the numbers are that favourable.
For a start airpistols are included in the total. So unless numbers are broken down, we've no way of knowing if handguns have increased, per capita or otherwise.

Its just a potential hole in the facts, if we can plug it now, it will surely make the case stronger

maglite

The real "shocking" thing i read form this is the massive increase in shotgun ownership, particualry when you loos at teh decline in rural livingand the need for them as a tool.

Why dont the polititions go after shotgun owners, i mean a shotgun bast smarts way more than a 9mm. Are these the real danger? :P

fat-tony

Mellor wrote: »

While the proof that pistols per capita are down since 71 is a good thing.
I don't think the numbers are that favourable.
For a start airpistols are included in the total. So unless numbers are broken down, we've no way of knowing if handguns have increased, per capita or otherwise.

Its just a potential hole in the facts, if we can plug it now, it will surely make the case stronger

Air pistols have always been included in the totals. For some reason there is a split between revolvers and pistols, though. The numbers I quoted include all handguns - air pistols, revolvers, s/a's etc. I haven't seen a comparative analysis by calibre , though - e.g. .177, .22, .32, .38, .40, .45, 9mm etc. Apparently this analysis requires some intensive Garda time! One would have thought that it would be a relatively simple query on a database table within the Pulse system - but who knows?

Mellor

Revolvers, pistols etc have been separatedly counted(not by calibre though),
As the lobbist love to remind us of the increase from 1 to c.400 now.
These are the figures i'd most like to see, basically above with air-rifles removed.

Sparks

We've been asking for a while now to see the handguns total broken down by calibre. So have others - and the reply is always the same. Too much Garda time to collate that information. Like f-t said, it's probably a single SQL query against the PULSE database, but what Garda speaks SQL?
It's the same story when they say that stolen licenced firearms are used in crime - it's said repeatedly, but when you ask how many, you get told that it would take too much Garda time to collate that information...

Grizzly 45

It's the same story when they say that stolen licenced firearms are used in crime - it's said repeatedly, but when you ask how many, you get told that it would take too much Garda time to collate that information...

[/QUOTE]

Cant see how..If you report that as J Bloggs,your shotgun or whatever is nicked.Dont they have the details already to hand in PULSE??
How difficult is it to hit a keyboard to give out how many regd firearms were nicked in a given computorised year??
Doesn't make sense if it is computorised since 2000???

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

maglite wrote: »

The real "shocking" thing i read form this is the massive increase in shotgun ownership, particualry when you loos at teh decline in rural livingand the need for them as a tool.

Why dont the polititions go after shotgun owners, i mean a shotgun bast smarts way more than a 9mm. Are these the real danger? :P

Hardly taking into account that you have to modify it to conceal it.

Also, the age differance and ease of getting a shotgun licence... there is no real argument there.

rrpc

Rayden Tall Sparrow wrote: »

Hardly taking into account that you have to modify it to conceal it.

Also, the age differance and ease of getting a shotgun licence... there is no real argument there.

Age difference?

What age difference?

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

You tell me, the differance between getting a single barrel shotgun and a pistol is completely differant, or did they change that in the past year or two?

rrpc

Rayden Tall Sparrow wrote: »

You tell me, the differance between getting a single barrel shotgun and a pistol is completely differant, or did they change that in the past year or two?

You are not very clear. Assuming that you mean the age limit for acquiring a licence for a firearm, there has been no change in this since 1964.

That's all firearms.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

So obtaining a single barrel shotgun, rifle, or pistol you need to be the age of 17? I am sure they hold their own age limits... Actually I am certain of it.

My point is this:

It is easier to obtain a single barrel shotgun because the age restriction is less than that of a pistol, also it is a lot easier to obtain one so it's no surprise that there is a big increase in shot gun licences.

Sorry if I was unclear.

fat-tony

There's no difference in age limit for shotguns/rifles/pistols. The Firearms Acts don't stipulate any difference.

newby.204

the gardai have been known to enforce their own adhoc age limits on firearms viewing shotguns the most licenceable, then rifles(rimfire), rifles(centerfire) and finally pistols. Its the same as the inconsistent security measures enforced from district to district. Some people belivev it to be law, a friend of mine wished to purchase my rifle from me, a landowner himself, and was told you need to be a member of a gunclub. now why in gods name would someone pay to shoot on land they already own?? Its a joke sometimes, i told him to contact the NARGC but he has become disheartened and now no longer wants to bother with pursuing the licence. Thank god my FAO has a moducum of common sense.

fat-tony

newby.204 wrote: »

the gardai have been known to enforce their own adhoc age limits on firearms viewing shotguns the most licenceable, then rifles(rimfire), rifles(centerfire) and finally pistols. Its the same as the inconsistent security measures enforced from district to district.

You're saying exactly what all the shooting group reps on the FCP have been saying. The problem we have as shooters is the inconsistent nature of the service we receive during the licensing process. The Firearms Acts say one thing and the guidelines operated from district to district are different. The Superintendent in any district is the ultimate arbiter of licensing conditions in that district. What the FCP is working on is to get a consistent level of good service as customers of the Gardai. It's taking time, but I'm hopeful that the outcome will be good.

bunny shooter

newby.204 wrote: »

the gardai have been known to enforce their own adhoc age limits on firearms viewing shotguns the most licenceable, then rifles(rimfire), rifles(centerfire) and finally pistols. Its the same as the inconsistent security measures enforced from district to district. Some people belivev it to be law, a friend of mine wished to purchase my rifle from me, a landowner himself, and was told you need to be a member of a gunclub. now why in gods name would someone pay to shoot on land they already own?? Its a joke sometimes, i told him to contact the NARGC but he has become disheartened and now no longer wants to bother with pursuing the licence. Thank god my FAO has a moducum of common sense.

This "join a gun club" seems to have crept in recently. Wonder why? Probably because a lot of Gun Clubs are closed shops and this will limit number of firearms issued.

Sparks

More likely because the Gardai are thinking that a Gun Club, or a Target Shooting Club is proof that you've a safe place to use your firearm.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

bunny shooter wrote: »

This "join a gun club" seems to have crept in recently. Wonder why? Probably because a lot of Gun Clubs are closed shops and this will limit number of firearms issued.

Well the same goes for applying for a shotgun or a rifle, you need land to shoot on

bunny shooter

In this situation it is a "gun" club as in not a target club he was advised to join. It is a land owner seeking a rifle licence, he must land to use it on, namely, his own. Most "Gun" clubs as in not target clubs generally don't have any land per say. They may have permission from local landowners to use their land which is often on a nod and a wink basis.

Therefore, why should this applicant have to join the local "gun" club when he has a place. Has he not satisfied the reason for a rifle part of the application. Maybe he wants to shoot rabbits or foxes on his own land? Now I would advise him join the local "gun" club too as he will get insurance. However he could get this as an individual through IFA Countryside or Countryside Alliance. Or his own farm insurance would also cover him, although maybe only on his own land.

I have been thinking, there have been a few threads here from lads complaining a lot of "gun" clubs are closed shops and they can't get in............................(freaky music).................certain people in DOJ read this board....................(freaky music gets louder)...................maybe they reckon as a lot of these "gun" clubs are closed shops it would be a great idea to make 'em a condition of getting a licence......................or maybe I'm just a cynical git

bunny shooter

Rayden Tall Sparrow wrote: »

Well the same goes for applying for a shotgun or a rifle, you need land to shoot on

Not necessarily, I might only want a shotgun to shoot clays only at a recognised clay range or to shoot a rifle only at a garda approved rifle range :P, which I know comes under your description of "land" too technically

You don't have to be a cold blooded killer of furry and feathered things to have a firearm

Sparks

'course there's also the aspect that the Gardai may think joining a local gun club means that the others in the gun club will keep an eye on you in terms of showing you how to shoot if you don't know how; where to shoot if you don't know the lay of the land'; and so on.

As to suggesting the DoJ are instructing the Gardai to ask for the impossible in their preconditions, don't be daft, if that was their goal the FCP wouldn't exist - it was the DoJ who created it in the first place don't forget.

Bananaman

When I was a sprog - quite a while ago - there was a gun/tackle shop in the town - when you got old enouigh you went shooting with your dad and uncles. When you got old enough you got a license on your dads gun - however - as the old guy in the gunshop knew everyone you could not buy cartridges without your dad or one of your uncles with you - until the old guy in the shop decided you were "ready" - end of story.

Bottom line is the that Garda (there was only one in the town) was happy wnough that "Tom" would keep him informed on all things firearms related.

In this day and age the Gardai have no chance of knowing you - they may have you on file but they would have to look it up to see who you are - there are no local gunshops with a "Tom" sho knows everyone - I assume the gunclub requirement is so that the owner of the club and the members sort of vett each other. They should see you regularly and be able to judge your character and disposition and in general your safety. If the club is not willing to give you a letter or revokes your membership - then the Gardai know that something is up and that you need to be looked at.

With respect to handguns, it's only a matter of time before the Gardai will wish to see club attendance records and competition entries, in order to verify your "Use"

I could be wrong but it makes sense to me.....

B'Man

rrpc

Bananaman wrote: »

With respect to handguns, it's only a matter of time before the Gardai will wish to see club attendance records and competition entries, in order to verify your "Use"

I could be wrong but it makes sense to me.....

B'Man

You're not wrong and in fact it already exists with respect to club authorisations. As Superintendents have the power to attach any conditions to a club authorisation (here I'm speaking of authorisations under the 1964 act), they generally do so in great detail. Most commonly they require the list of members every year as well as the right to inspect the attendance records.

Under section 33 of the CJA 2006 which has yet to be commenced, the Gardai will have far greater involvement in this area and will require a great deal of information from club secretaries.

Interestingly this will give a statutory function to the club secretaries role which is probably the only place in the legal framework these (generally) voluntary positions have acquired such a function.