Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Irish Gun Control - To Strict?

1…5791011

Comments

  • #182
    Odysseus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,752 ✭✭✭Odysseus


    crazy cabbage wrote: »
    madsl and codex

    there is clearly a difference in opinions.

    In my arguments i was pulling sastics of the internet that i dont really understand but here is my honest view.

    I have never once come across a gun in the 21ish years of my life. Never even seen a gun outside of a film/movie. I have never been robed or muged or physicly treatned in anyway.
    I then look at the news and see 4 high profile cases in america that involved someone legly geting a gun and killing lots of people (not to mention what they do abroad but that is another discussion) What am i supposed to think? yea lets give everyone in ireland a gun like they do in america (sterotyping i know but you get the point)

    I know people do use for hunting or whatever in ireland. I have never come across people hunting though and i live in the country but i know that if people want to they can. They can leagly own a gun for that purpose or sporting purpose. The provisions are there.

    I dont see why we need to loosen gun control in ireland. I have never come across a gun in my life and would rather keep it that way

    Just because you have never encountered one, due to lack of interest I guess, why should I have to undergo some of the strictist gun laws around? I have an interest in shooting and should not be held back in it just because some people associate firearms with what they see on TV.


  • #183
    clashburke
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 172 ✭✭clashburke


    codex1 wrote: »
    Proof of your claims that someone, under todays laws can obtain a licence for a DE .50?


    you cannot as per the legislation that you can find and read. the link is above.

    what would you need a .50cal handgun for that a smaller gun could not accomplish?? the paper targets are not that tough over here:rolleyes::rolleyes:


  • #184
    BillyMitchel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,324 ✭✭✭BillyMitchel


    Blay wrote: »
    BillyMitchel wrote: »
    Cheers. No idea about the subject.

    If there's 220k legal guns and never any media coverage or hysteria. Would I be right in saying then that the laws regarding ownership is perfectly good and no need for it to be changed?

    I've no problem with the application process here really. I've never encountered a problem with my licences..had them inside 2 weeks. I think that's the complaint most people would have about the system...it can be slow sometimes. There are things within the legislation on what is/isn't restricted that I would like to see changed but apart from that it's ok.

    Thanks. I remember I went to a shooting range in America before and some of the machine guns that you could fire were freighting. They were the length of my leg and the weight of a donkey. Scary feeling holding a gun with live ammo, won't lie. Think we fired glocks 9mm if that makes sense? Can still remember how much my hand was shaking!! Lol


  • #185
    codex1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 67 ✭✭codex1


    Blay wrote: »
    I never said they could..read the last two lines of this post:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80419222&postcount=113

    I stated several pages back that you can't have a CF pistol so did Garv. Nobody is saying the system here is perfect but we can have firearms here that are banned 60 miles away in Britain so I'm happy with it.

    Well dude, I only came here for some opinions / little debate & to learn....lot of people came here to pick a argument. I agree with you, no laws are perfect - but no reason why they cannot be improved upon & in turn that won't happen without some sort of grass roots effort, which I might be interested in pursuing when I eventually get back home.


  • #186
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,867 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    garv123 wrote: »
    But if you possessed a centrefire pistol before the law in 2008 you can still legally own that pistol and buy other centrefire pistols.


    Sorry to pipe up here but no, you can't replace your centrefire pistol. You are allowed to keep your centrefire pistol if you had it before Nov 2008 but you can't change it for another centrefire pistol.

    This will cause serious problems when people start to get problems with their centrefire pistols or when they just simply wear out.

    I'm open to correction but I think I'm correct in interpreting the legislation.

    Very dumb fcuking law, seriously.


  • Advertisement
  • #187
    crazy cabbage
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 738 ✭✭✭crazy cabbage


    Odysseus wrote: »
    Just because you have never encountered one, due to lack of interest I guess, why should I have to undergo some of the strictist gun laws around? I have an interest in shooting and should not be held back in it just because some people associate firearms with what they see on TV.

    Which is right. The masacur at batman has a lot to do with guns :confused:

    And you can get guns. I said that. If you want shoot melons or whatever you can go through a process and get a gun

    I dont see why we should relax the laws around a dangerous weapons when the people who want/need them for sporting purposes can get them already


  • #188
    Witcher
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,429 ✭✭✭✭Witcher


    BillyMitchel wrote: »
    Scary feeling holding a gun with live ammo, won't lie. Think we fired glocks 9mm if that makes sense? Can still remember how much my hand was shaking!! Lol

    Yeah the feeling is something else alright, I always thought I'd have no problem with holding a gun and it would be a laugh, then when I was given one to fire for the first time I thought 'I have to be serious here..no ****ing around'. That's a while ago now and I shoot clays every week with a group of lads and we have a great laugh and safety is just natural now..you should try it again.


  • #189
    codex1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 67 ✭✭codex1


    clashburke wrote: »
    you cannot as per the legislation that you can find and read. the link is above.

    what would you need a .50cal handgun for that a smaller gun could not accomplish?? the paper targets are not that tough over here:rolleyes::rolleyes:

    hehe

    I guess the problem I have with the current laws is that they, in my opinion, are overly restrictive. I don't see why as a tax payer with no criminal history, a lot of firearms training & a history of responsible gun ownership I cannot purchase the guns that I want - within reason.

    I also don't see why I should have to explain to the government why I want one, its to subjective & nanny state-like, if I meet the legal criteria - take my money & give me my licence.


  • #190
    Odysseus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,752 ✭✭✭Odysseus


    marshbaboon wrote: »
    Nothing. It was a comment pertaining to US lax gun laws. The point is where do you place the upper limit if the laws are relaxed? If you enjoy shooting for sport, and you're able to own several weapons surely the laws aren't too strict.

    Just because I own 3 firearms don't mean that I think the system is not too severe over here, shooting needs to be understood as a sport and be accessible like a sport. We have some very good people competing at a high level for Ireland, often this is not acknowledge, as if shooting is a dirty/seedy sport.


  • #191
    Witcher
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,429 ✭✭✭✭Witcher


    codex1 wrote: »
    Well dude, I only came here for some opinions / little debate & to learn....lot of people came here to pick a argument. I agree with you, no laws are perfect - but no reason why they cannot be improved upon & in turn that won't happen without some sort of grass roots effort, which I might be interested in pursuing when I eventually get back home.

    I'm with you on changing the laws..I see people firing CF pistols in my club and I can't..all I can use is a 5 shot .22lr..I'd love the law to change, I'd have my cash down on the table tomorrow for a Glock 17.

    I think shooters on the forum here have debated the law changing so much and come to the conclusion that it probably won't happen anytime soon that we've become tired of debating it all:pac: We just have to live with the system as it is for now, there have been pushes for a change in the pistol situation by some organisations but the appetite doesn't seem to be there with the Minister for Justice to remove the ban.


  • Advertisement
  • #192
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,013 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    Why does 'too strict' have to equal "The US as an alternative"?

    How about using Italy, Austria, France, Belgium, Germany, Switzerland, Spain, or Andorra as a 'less strict' alternative? Does anyone immediately object to Dutch gun laws?
    mikemac1 wrote: »
    Governer Schweitzer of Montana was over in Waterford a few months back honouring favourite son of the Deise, Thomas Francis Meaghar.
    The governer seemed a very nice and genuine man

    Completly offtopic, sorry

    Not so off-topic. He's well known as a popular and successful Democrat politician who claims to have "more guns than I need, and not as many as I want." Much to the annoyance of some of the senior leadership of the party.
    some states such as California will not issue CWP's.

    Not a valid example. Issuance is at the discretion of the county Sheriff. Some Sheriffs have a 'nearly no issuance' policy (San Francisco County), some have a 'when you become a resident of the county, please come by the Sheriff's office and pick up your permit application' policy (Amador County). Annoyingly, permits are valid State-wide, so I cannot carry a fiream in San Francisco, but a visitor who lives about 30 miles to my East can do so.

    NTM


  • #193
    clashburke
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 172 ✭✭clashburke


    codex1 wrote: »
    hehe

    I guess the problem I have with the current laws is that they, in my opinion, are overly restrictive. I don't see why as a tax payer with no criminal history, a lot of firearms training & a history of responsible gun ownership I cannot purchase the guns that I want - within reason.

    I also don't see why I should have to explain to the government why I want one, its to subjective & nanny state-like, if I meet the legal criteria - take my money & give me my licence.


    Your post is contradicting itself.:confused:

    The legal criteria is that you explain to AGS (Government if you like) why you want the firearm.
    Thus to meet the legal criteria you need to explain.


  • #194
    MadsL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    Anita Blow wrote: »
    And the fact is that 4 times more people per capita have to be killed just so you can have that right.
    Except you haven't proved a link between that statistic and the fact that Americans have a right to own arms. The Swiss and Czechs have the right to arms and have no such murder rate. There is more complexity about the reasons that the US has a high crime rate. Not the least of which is an active drug cartel war happening on its border and an insane gang warfare culture.
    Your argument has been completely shot down but you keep harping on with this same lame argument "I can buy X in America but I can't buy it in Ireland.
    I'd agree with this, silly nonsense about .50 cal cannons (what is the obsession with those anyway, my local range just got one ffs.) is pointless in the Irish context, no justifiable reason anyone should own that in Ireland.
    I'm all for liberty and freedoms, but owning a machine whose sole purpose (outside of sport use which is legal here) is to end another person's life or harm another person is not a basic freedom as it violates another person's freedoms.
    It only violates freedoms is you use it. Then there are consequences. Your sole purpose argument is a bit thin, there are lots of reasons to own a firearm.
    Anita Blow wrote: »
    The US has an Intentional Homicide Rate of 4.2 per 100,000 people. Ireland has an IHR of 1.2 per 100,000 people.
    The US has widespread gun ownership, Ireland does not.

    I really don't need to point out the incorrect logic there do I?
    The US grows more rice than Ireland.
    The US has more Chinese people than Ireland, therefore there are more Chinese people in US because they grow a lot of rice.
    In the past month there has been 4 high-profile killings of multiple innocent people by people who would've been considered sane/innocent before they carried out these attacks.
    Generally, most people are considered sane before they commit crimes, most even after they commit crimes. As to finding people guilty before they commit crimes, wasn't that a Tom Cruise movie?
    They were Denver, Chicago, New York and Wisconsin.
    I don't think I could name a similar incident in Ireland where a previously sane person with no previous violent convictions killed multiple civilians so easily
    .
    Really? You have a short memory.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bombings_during_the_Northern_Ireland_Troubles_and_peace_process
    You can twist and turn the figures and try to come up with any and every excuse, but those are the facts.
    There are facts, and then there are interpretations. There is also assumption. You have shown all three.
    crazy cabbage wrote: »
    http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri-crime
    here is another stastic from the same wedsite as you took yours. Shows america has the highest crime rates by far. doesn't mention guns but i wounder what might have caused america to have twice the crime rate than its nearest 'competator' :confused:
    I'd love to know, but clearly it isn't as simple as "guns".

    That data you quoted is from 2002. In the last 10 years the US has reduced crime rates to become 5th rather than 1st.
    http://www.numbeo.com/crime/rankings_by_country.jsp
    No. i was saying if people are so worried about there safty then why not learn self defence. Wouldn't work in america becouse ye already have that many guns circulating but in ireland where there is very few i would think that is enough
    So you agree with me on self-defence then in the US.
    Tasers are worse than guns. I dont see why. Why cant they be highly regualated and only given to people who are seriesly worried about there safty and are sane. You dont want to get close enough to use a taser but if someone breaks into you house they are not going to be a million miles away. If you can shoot them you will be able to taser them (unless you live in a mansion)

    Because it is widely assumed they are non-lethal when in fact they have caused many deaths. Over 500 in the US. URL="http://electronicvillage.blogspot.com/2009/05/taser-related-deaths-in-united-states.html"]Source[/URL
    You also ignored some of my points indication the corralation between child homicide/susicide/death with guns lieing around the house
    I look forward to the study linking having bits if rope lying around leading to hanging suicides.
    crazy cabbage wrote: »
    madsl and codex

    there is clearly a difference in opinions.

    In my arguments i was pulling sastics of the internet that i dont really understand but here is my honest view.

    I have never once come across a gun in the 21ish years of my life. Never even seen a gun outside of a film/movie. I have never been robed or muged or physicly treatned in anyway.
    I then look at the news and see 4 high profile cases in america that involved someone legly geting a gun and killing lots of people (not to mention what they do abroad but that is another discussion) What am i supposed to think? yea lets give everyone in ireland a gun like they do in america (sterotyping i know but you get the point)

    I know people do use for hunting or whatever in ireland. I have never come across people hunting though and i live in the country but i know that if people want to they can. They can leagly own a gun for that purpose or sporting purpose. The provisions are there.

    I dont see why we need to loosen gun control in ireland. I have never come across a gun in my life and would rather keep it that way

    I think you misunderstand that I am not arguing for looser gun control in Ireland. I sympathise with gun owners in Ireland who have to put up with the decisions of their local Garda Superintendent rather than a fair and consistent application of the law. There is far too much "I don't like the look of that" for lads who are just out shooting bunnies and foxes.

    However, I am not supporting relaxing gun controls in Ireland, merely taking issue with the frankly lazy view that guns are the root of all evil in the US.


  • #195
    crazy cabbage
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 738 ✭✭✭crazy cabbage


    Why does 'too strict' have to equal "The US as an alternative"?
    becouse the op mentions the US in opening post :confused:


  • #196
    codex1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 67 ✭✭codex1


    crazy cabbage wrote: »
    Which is right. The masacur at batman has a lot to do with guns :confused:

    And you can get guns. I said that. If you want shoot melons or whatever you can go through a process and get a gun

    I dont see why we should relax the laws around a dangerous weapons when the people who want/need them for sporting purposes can get them already

    My issue is that I cannot get the type of guns that I want - its like being a petrol head, having the money to buy a Lamborghini and the government telling you NO WAY, you can only buy a fiat 500 or a Nissan Micra....it sucks.

    They should take my money, checkout my background & if all checks out give me a licence for my exotic guns - if I'm a dick, then take them all away, fair enough :D


  • #197
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,013 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    PieForPi wrote: »
    and "accidents" such as people "cleaning their gun and it went off" that seem to happen an immense amount in the US.

    Protecting us from ourselves, eh? Not an argument I'm incredibly in favour of. Reckless endagerment laws already exists.


  • #198
    codex1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 67 ✭✭codex1


    Manic Moran wrote: »
    Why does 'too strict' have to equal "The US as an alternative"?

    How about using Italy, Austria, France, Belgium, Germany, Switzerland, Spain, or Andorra as a 'less strict' alternative? Does anyone immediately object to Dutch gun laws?



    Not so off-topic. He's well known as a popular and successful Democrat politician who claims to have "more guns than I need, and not as many as I want." Much to the annoyance of some of the senior leadership of the party.



    Not a valid example. Issuance is at the discretion of the county Sheriff. Some Sheriffs have a 'nearly no issuance' policy (San Francisco County), some have a 'when you become a resident of the county, please come by the Sheriff's office and pick up your permit application' policy (Amador County). Annoyingly, permits are valid State-wide, so I cannot carry a fiream in San Francisco, but a visitor who lives about 30 miles to my East can do so.

    NTM

    The guns laws in CA have gotten much stricter in the last two years, I've a forest ranger buddy who patrols the Emigrant Wilderness in the high sierras who cannot get a CWP for love nor money, he even considered moving to Carson City, but a Nevada issued CWP is not recognized in CA....its a real pain.


  • #199
    crazy cabbage
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 738 ✭✭✭crazy cabbage


    codex1 wrote: »
    My issue is that I cannot get the type of guns that I want - its like being a petrol head, having the money to buy a Lamborghini and the government telling you NO WAY, you can only buy a fiat 500 or a Nissan Micra....it sucks.

    They should take my money, checkout my background & if all checks out give me a licence for my exotic guns - if I'm a dick, then take them all away, fair enough :D

    My problem is that from what i hear on the news here the people in america who get guns and then kill people such as at batman were sane and there backround checked out and all the rest of it.

    I think this tread would have went more in your favour if you didn't mention america.

    I am tired of this discussion and i dont think anything will be done in the short term so am leaving unfollowing this tread. We have much more important stuff for our goverment to be at. wish ya well


  • #200
    codex1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 67 ✭✭codex1


    clashburke wrote: »
    Your post is contradicting itself.:confused:

    The legal criteria is that you explain to AGS (Government if you like) why you want the firearm.
    Thus to meet the legal criteria you need to explain.

    That is the current legal situation, I disagree with having to explain yourself - like a child to the government & I disagree with the limitations applied to what you can currently buy.


  • #201
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,013 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    codex1 wrote: »
    The guns laws in CA have gotten much stricter in the last two years, I've a forest ranger buddy who patrols the Emigrant Wilderness in the high sierras who cannot get a CWP for love nor money, he even considered moving to Carson City, but a Nevada issued CWP is not recognized in CA....its a real pain.

    Erm. No, they haven't.

    I've been living here over ten years and have a modest collection. California has a terrible reputation, but it's nowhere near as bad as some of the Eastern States. About the only true annoyance the last few years which has been enacted is the .50BMG ban.

    What is your buddy's county of residence? Check with this map for issuance.

    http://media.photobucket.com/image/recent/clownburner/OCCCWS/ca_ccw_map-big.png


  • Advertisement
  • #202
    garv123
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,576 ✭✭✭garv123


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    Sorry to pipe up here but no, you can't replace your centrefire pistol. You are allowed to keep your centrefire pistol if you had it before Nov 2008 but you can't change it for another centrefire pistol.

    This will cause serious problems when people start to get problems with their centrefire pistols or when they just simply wear out.

    I'm open to correction but I think I'm correct in interpreting the legislation.

    Very dumb fcuking law, seriously.


    You probably are right. I'm not gonna argue :D


  • #203
    codex1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 67 ✭✭codex1


    Manic Moran wrote: »
    Protecting us from ourselves, eh? Not an argument I'm incredibly in favour of. Reckless endagerment laws already exists.

    Someone who cleans their gun while its loaded deserves what they get...its stupidity defined in a nutshell.

    Stupid people like this will always find ways to injure themselves and others, guns are not required.


  • #204
    codex1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 67 ✭✭codex1


    crazy cabbage wrote: »
    My problem is that from what i hear on the news here the people in america who get guns and then kill people such as at batman were sane and there backround checked out and all the rest of it.

    I think this tread would have went more in your favour if you didn't mention america.

    I am tired of this discussion and i dont think anything will be done in the short term so am leaving unfollowing this tread. We have much more important stuff for our goverment to be at. wish ya well

    America is a vastly different culture though & we are not comparing like for like. Its nothing like Ireland, we might speak the same language, at least a little, but you have to live here to really understand what I mean....often times its living living on a different planet.

    I did mention that I live in the US, but never advocated cloning their gun laws.


  • #205
    twinytwo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,584 ✭✭✭twinytwo


    You are also required to now have a gun safe, i suggest you be very carefull on your choice of safe. Some of the ones that were recommended by the cops are unkown to them at the time complete and utter ****. Even though constructed of heavy duty steel etc, the locking hinge can be poped with a crow bar in under 30 seconds.


  • #206
    V_Moth
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,423 ✭✭✭V_Moth


    codex1 wrote: »
    Do you think the cartels & criminals are buying their firearms legally?

    Well, the BATF was more than happy to sell guns to them :rolleyes:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal


  • #207
    codex1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 67 ✭✭codex1


    Manic Moran wrote: »
    Erm. No, they haven't.

    I've been living here over ten years and have a modest collection. California has a terrible reputation, but it's nowhere near as bad as some of the Eastern States. About the only true annoyance the last few years which has been enacted is the .50BMG ban.

    What is your buddy's county of residence? Check with this map for issuance.

    http://media.photobucket.com/image/recent/clownburner/OCCCWS/ca_ccw_map-big.png

    Come on yes they have lol, Jerry Brown is not doing the pro-gun crowd any favors - last year banned the open carry of non-loaded guns, retaining sales records of long guns and is currently trying to require ID checks & thumbprints taken for the purchase of ammo.

    The .50 cal thing is crazy, I don't know for sure but I would wager the number of people hurt.....eh...what am I saying.....killed by a 50 cal round compared to 9mm, 45 etc.. has to be minuscule.

    Thanks for the link, he is in placer county & been denied at least once.


  • #208
    PieForPi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭PieForPi


    You're not intending on coming back, right?


  • #209
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,867 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    codex1 wrote: »

    They should take my money, checkout my background & if all checks out give me a licence for my exotic guns - if I'm a dick, then take them all away, fair enough :D


    I'm half on your side and half totally against your arguments.

    Target shooting is my hobby so I have a huge interest in the types of firearms available here in Ireland.

    I have to take issue with your comment above. If somebody is a dick, then it might be too late to take away their guns. You won't know that they are a dick until they do something dumbass with their firearms.

    I believe that gun control is a little too strict here in Ireland. However, the powers that be are totally correct with their fully auto centrefire ban. These are military weapons and should not be available to the general public. There is no reason for me or anybody else in Ireland to have one.

    That said, I do believe that the CF pistol ban is totally ridiculous. Never has a legally held CF pistol been used to commit a crime in the state (open to correction) so how banning them cuts down gun crime is totally beyond me.

    I'm a responsible person, very safe with my firearms but because of the stupid CF pistol laws, I can't take part in some of the competitions held at my club because I didn't have a CF pistol before the ban came in.

    I favour gun control because guns shouldn't be handed out willy-nilly to anybody that fancies having one. If I had to pick the US system of gun control or the Irish system, then I'd reservedly pick the Irish system. The Irish system isn't that bad, it just needs a bit of tweaking here and there to iron out some of the dumb rules that were put into legislation by people who hadn't a fcuking clue about firearms.

    I agree that people should have a need for a gun in order to get one. Irish legislation says that if you can prove that you need a high caliber rifle, you can get one. Why anybody needs a .50 cal rifle over here is beyond me. What would you be hunting with that? The longest target range here is 1300m. Plenty of smaller calibers (.308) would easily hit targets at that distance.

    I don't agree with your "I want it so I should be allowed to get it" theory. There has to be a line drawn somewhere.


  • #210
    codex1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 67 ✭✭codex1


    PieForPi wrote: »
    You're not intending on coming back, right?

    Why, you afraid of a little fresh thinking and change? :D


  • Advertisement
  • #211
    codex1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 67 ✭✭codex1


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    I'm half on your side and half totally against your arguments.

    Target shooting is my hobby so I have a huge interest in the types of firearms available here in Ireland.

    I have to take issue with your comment above. If somebody is a dick, then it might be too late to take away their guns. You won't know that they are a dick until they do something dumbass with their firearms.

    I believe that gun control is a little too strict here in Ireland. However, the powers that be are totally correct with their fully auto centrefire ban. These are military weapons and should not be available to the general public. There is no reason for me or anybody else in Ireland to have one.

    That said, I do believe that the CF pistol ban is totally ridiculous. Never has a legally held CF pistol been used to commit a crime in the state (open to correction) so how banning them cuts down gun crime is totally beyond me.

    I'm a responsible person, very safe with my firearms but because of the stupid CF pistol laws, I can't take part in some of the competitions held at my club because I didn't have a CF pistol before the ban came in.

    I favour gun control because guns shouldn't be handed out willy-nilly to anybody that fancies having one. If I had to pick the US system of gun control or the Irish system, then I'd reservedly pick the Irish system. The Irish system isn't that bad, it just needs a bit of tweaking here and there to iron out some of the dumb rules that were put into legislation by people who hadn't a fcuking clue about firearms.

    I agree that people should have a need for a gun in order to get one. Irish legislation says that if you can prove that you need a high caliber rifle, you can get one. Why anybody needs a .50 cal rifle over here is beyond me. What would you be hunting with that? The longest target range here is 1300m. Plenty of smaller calibers (.308) would easily hit targets at that distance.

    I don't agree with your "I want it so I should be allowed to get it" theory. There has to be a line drawn somewhere.

    Given that no one can predict the future, the only gauge of a persons mental competency to own a gun is their past - both criminal history & firearms training. For this reason I stand by my original statement, if they get issued a licence are later found to violate the rules - take the guns away. How else would you determine this in an objective way?

    I agree with you that a fully auto anything is not necessary for civilian purposes.

    I don't agree with you on the .50 cals though, I love shooting a desert eagle & if I had the cash would absolutely have a barrett for hunting, both are a LOT of fun, sure they are a little excessive - but so what, why drive a Fiat if you can afford a BMW, not that I can - but would like the option to if I ever had enough spare money.

    I draw the line at fully automatic weapons or anything larger than a .50


Advertisement