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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

ISAA Membership

13»

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 486 ✭✭Aryzel


    the IAAA are not going to release the exact process of admitance/refusal to the members.
    - Hmm, I'm not sure the IAAA would be allowed to not give the details of the process to members. You can't demand people take part in a process and then refuse to tell them what the process is. The flow of information (who and where) and the basis for the decisions (what facts will count against you in the vetting), are things that people should be able to demand before the process begins.

    It is for everyones benifit that everything is not made available on the net as it lends itself to risk of people finding loop holes and exploiting them. At least if this process is conducted in private the issues can be resolved without embarrassment.
    However making information public, allows more people to indentify the loopholes and help you fix them. What happens when you don't, is that the limited number of people involved can only see some of the loopholes, and all further loopholes are only solved after they have being exploited. Its ye're call, but not making something public because of the fear of loopholes or embarrassment is a really poor argument. The goal should be to make the system as robust as possible, you should want embarrassment and loopholes pointed out, each means you have learnt a way to make the system better.

    I'm not saying don't post your quieries just don't expect answers.
    I don't like the non-disclosure, but its fine, its ye're call. You can see my questions a few posts up, ye don't need to tell me the answers, just so long as your happy ye have solutions to all those questions. I could probably think of more questions if I saw the full details, but the above should cover most of the general concerns.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Aryzel wrote: »
    It is for everyones benifit that everything is not made available on the net as it lends itself to risk of people finding loop holes and exploiting them. At least if this process is conducted in private the issues can be resolved without embarrassment.
    However making information public, allows more people to indentify the loopholes and help you fix them. What happens when you don't, is that the limited number of people involved can only see some of the loopholes, and all further loopholes are only solved after they have being exploited. Its ye're call, but not making something public because of the fear of loopholes or embarrassment is a really poor argument. The goal should be to make the system as robust as possible, you should want embarrassment and loopholes pointed out, each means you have learnt a way to make the system better.
    Indeed. Security through obscurity has been about as thoroughly discredited as a valid approach as is possible. Also, full public disclosure of the procedure is being taught as being the correct approach in the Code of Ethics workshops the ISC is running to train club children's officers at the moment, so where this particular approach of hiding it away is coming from or what it's supposed to achieve would be a question to my mind. If the ISC don't think this is the right approach, and none of the other sports NGBs (even Swim Ireland, where the precipitating events took place) are doing this, and no other archery body is doing this, why is the IAAA doing this?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 807 ✭✭✭Panserborn


    Sparks wrote: »
    So anyone getting a copy of my file would get that information.

    Do the fuzz keep that specific info as part of the disclosable file, or is the file to be disclosed just criminal records. I can't imagine (and hope not) that they would give security details like that to another individual. I'm hoping the file that goes out is like, 13yrs old - stole apples from farmer Hogget and whatnot. I hope.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Do we even get to know what gets sent on us to the IAAA under this scheme?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 486 ✭✭Aryzel


    Panserborn wrote: »
    Do the fuzz keep that specific info as part of the disclosable file, or is the file to be disclosed just criminal records. I can't imagine (and hope not) that they would give security details like that to another individual. I'm hoping the file that goes out is like, 13yrs old - stole apples from farmer Hogget and whatnot. I hope.

    Unless we hear otherwise, we'd have to assume that it will be a complete uncensored file, containing every interaction you've had with ANY government agency. Arrests, Passport details (info on your travels?), Drivers Licence details (Points + Offences), Taxes? (or tax offenses anyways), Rifle licence details, what else, hmm perhaps similar information on your parents, siblings. Any police investigations that included you in any way. Full transcript of any statement you gave to police. Police reports for Insurance claims. Court cases involving you. Anything you can imagine is possible until it this is cleared up by the IAAA.

    Which reminds me, what are the details on how long the IAAA will need to mantain these records, 5-10 years? And how about Freedom of Information, people being able to request copies all files mentioning them with 30days etc.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 76 ✭✭Private Ryan


    Aryzel wrote: »
    the IAAA are not going to release the exact process of admitance/refusal to the members.
    The reason for this was explained at the meeting ask your line manager
    Aryzel wrote: »
    What happens when you don't, is that the limited number of people involved can only see some of the loopholes, and all further loopholes are only solved after they have being exploited.
    It's not limited people, all 30 or so line managers gave their suggestions at the meeting and any further problems that are brought to the line managers attention by their club members will be dealt with within the month.
    Aryzel wrote: »
    I could probably think of more questions if I saw the full details, but the above should cover most of the general concerns.
    I know i'm being a b@$!@&d at the miniute but 1. i haven't been appointed official PRO for vetting and 2 It will naturally all become common knowledge once everything is finalised. I might make a list of all the questions here and make sure that each one has an answer for everyones piece of mind.
    Worst case senario something is discussed here and the solution and prevention and basis for decisions are laid out here. Now if this scene plays out in reality and the solution proved to be inadaquate and now even if the person who advocated the chosen solution was not involved in the incedent the blame can be shifted away from the IAAA and leave this very person exposed.
    For people who seem averce to their records being relased I don't know why you'd sacrifice your annonimity in the decision making process.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 486 ✭✭Aryzel


    The reason for this was explained at the meeting ask your line manager
    I'm just not convinced its legal to withhold information on a process from the people taking part in the process. But it depends on the exact details that your withholding. I understood what you said to mean that the new member would sign the forum and would be given no information on what happens to their confidential files or what information is used to decide if someone passes or fails the vetting process, or how to appeal the process if they fail, or be able to see if the process and appeal is fair and impartial. You might mean something different.

    Worst case senario something is discussed here and the solution and prevention and basis for decisions are laid out here. Now if this scene plays out in reality and the solution proved to be inadaquate and now even if the person who advocated the chosen solution was not involved in the incedent the blame can be shifted away from the IAAA and leave this very person exposed.
    Not even remotely true i'm afriad. This process is being setup and run by the IAAA and the College Clubs, they decide it and implement it. They get all the blame when things go wrong. However if a problem/solution is pointed out here alerting the IAAA/Clubs to it, and a problem then occurs somewho related to the problem/solution (like the solution implmented didn't cover the announced problem perfectly), then the IAAA/Clubs get even more ****ed over, its an even bigger screw up for them. Blame falls fully on those who get to make the decisions and implement them.


    For people who seem averce to their records being relased I don't know why you'd sacrifice your annonimity in the decision making process.
    Hmm, if you talking about annoucing the names of the people making the decisions, then your misunderstanding, thats not important information, it has nothing to do with the process, keep it hidden all you want. Rather its the process and appeal process that needs to be detailed. As in using job titles to describe how the information is being moved about.


  • Registered Users Posts: 152 ✭✭tenacious-me


    Im in agreement here with Private Ryan, this information shouldn't be released via boards or on the net. As has been said by private ryan ask your line manager any questions you have and if they can't answer them they can relay it back to the national line manager. Its not fully finalized so cool yo horses, information will be available when its ready.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 198 ✭✭ruiner


    The club line managers have an information pack that they are showing to each of the people in their club that have to be vetted. It explains everything about the process, information that will be required and returned to the vetting officer and who will have access to information.

    I have seen the pack being handed around in 3 different clubs in the last week so I don't see any holding back of information. If your line managers aren't doing something similar you should ask them about it, best place to get all your info.

    Sorry to parrot the above posts, posted at the same time


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,766 ✭✭✭Reku


    Well on the plus side the IAAA is probably already too late to bring this in this year since some of the colleges have already had their clubs/socs day and as such they've already accepted memberships. Really don't see the college SUs allowing folks to be kicked out without having done anything against the universitys' code of conduct.

    Still think they're going about things the wrong way though....


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 743 ✭✭✭Renegade_Archer


    Well, that's that then, I'm never shooting (competitively, at least) in the Republic again. Hopefully if I ever do come home there will be some other like-minded individuals I can shoot with.



    E


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 486 ✭✭Aryzel


    ruiner wrote: »
    The club line managers have an information pack that they are showing to each of the people in their club that have to be vetted. It explains everything about the process, information that will be required and returned to the vetting officer and who will have access to information.

    So members aren't being refused information then ... ???


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Is there an information pack available for clubs who haven't joined yet? And do we have to sign the official secrets act before seeing it, or can we talk about it when we have seen it? :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 493 ✭✭Redjeep!


    I've heard that quite a few clubs affiliated to the IAAA are refusing to accept this, so wait and see what happens now.

    No names yet.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 76 ✭✭Private Ryan


    The 4 previous comments are exactly the kind of conjecture which would convince me not to post all the in formation up here. Grow up, wake up and stop being so narrow minded.
    To answer the question on the Refusal of admitance by colleges. I was in with my sports ofice yesterday and they have no problem with refusing people entry and I was told that people have always been refused entry to the rifle club as a result of vetting. When it is introduced in Archery, even though the vetting is for a different reason the college will make no distinction between them and people can be refused.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    The 4 previous comments are exactly the kind of conjecture which would convince me not to post all the in formation up here. Grow up, wake up and stop being so narrow minded.
    I've not had much archery experience PR, it's decidedly true. But I've been doing sports administration for longer than this forum or the ISAA has been around. I started on the NGB committee in olympic shooting back in 2000 and was running a college club for a few years before that, and I've been running clubs outside college ever since. So you're not arguing with narrow-mindedness, you're arguing with someone who's had ten years of experience with dictatorial people running sports organisations and the damage they can do despite being only one bad apple in a large barrel.

    And what I'm trying to point out above, is that the IAAA seems to want to vet me to see if I'd molest a child - but they're not willing to detail how that's done in public, nor what safeguards are there to protect my good name (ever heard of libel law? I have. It's nasty, unpleasant and the more you learn of it, the more scared you should be, and the IAAA are running head-first for it right now); nor what safeguards are there to protect my personal security by keeping my records secure; nor why they want to do something that no other sporting body here or internationally does. And the only logical thing I can deduce from that last point is that the IAAA thinks there is already either one or several people in the IAAA who are in some way dodgy from the point of view of child protection and this blanket approach is the easiest way the committee could think of to expose them. In which case, we have a duty of care to our juniors to stay out anyway.

    Do you understand my concerns any better now?
    To answer the question on the Refusal of admitance by colleges. I was in with my sports ofice yesterday and they have no problem with refusing people entry and I was told that people have always been refused entry to the rifle club as a result of vetting.
    Then you're in UCD and it's a new policy because it's not something that TCD do at all (I've been in the TCD rifle club since '94), and frankly I've never heard of it happening in UCD either and I've known the people who've run that club for a decade.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 486 ✭✭Aryzel


    The 4 previous comments are exactly the kind of conjecture which would convince me not to post all the information up here. Grow up, wake up and stop being so narrow minded.

    You had stated that: "the IAAA are not going to release the exact process of admitance/refusal to the members." Then tenacious-me said that "The club line managers have an information pack that they are showing to each of the people in their club that have to be vetted", which indicates that information IS being given to members. My 'narrow minded' post was "So members aren't being refused information then ... ??? ". Basically asking where the contradiction was coming from.
    To answer the question on the Refusal of admitance by colleges. I was in with my sports ofice yesterday and they have no problem with refusing people entry and I was told that people have always been refused entry to the rifle club as a result of vetting. When it is introduced in Archery, even though the vetting is for a different reason the college will make no distinction between them and people can be refused.
    - Thats good. Did you check with them that if someone fails a vetting does and can the archery club tell the college that there person has failed the vetting because they are considered dangerous to children? College might like to know, but we might not be allowed to tell them.

    Ryan, your getting arkward and somewhat frantic posts in this thread because noone is giving a clear indication of how things will work. At the moment it seems like the whole process is being made up as it goes along. Which I don't think is the case but it is a consequence of the dribs and drabs of information being released. Basically can you do something like this, a step by step process of what happens when a new club joins the IAAA and needs to start doing this vetting process.

    - New club tells the IAAA they want to join.
    - IAAA gives the club and information pack on the various archery requirements, membership fees etc to join. Also gives the club an information pack detailling the vetting processs.

    - The vetting process info pack contains the following.
    -- Who will be required to be vetted and when. (Like, Officers within 2 weeks, Senior members within 4 weeks and all Beginner or new members within 6 weeks of joining the club.)
    -- Explaination of the flow of info like:
    ---Permission form received from individual by club vetter, who gives it to national vetting officer, who talks to guarda and gets the file.
    ---National vetting officer then views the files and makes a Yes/No answer. Files are locked away in storage along with reasoning behind the National Vetting officers decision for 10 years.
    ---The decision is passed to the club vetting officer, who then tells the individual. If the answer was Pass, then the person continues in the club as normal.
    ---If the answer was Fail, then the person leaves the club, or appeals. To appeal the person fills in the Appeal form and then gets to meet with the National Vetting officer (within 2weeks) to discuss the reasoning behind the Fail (who else will be at this meeting?(club vetter should be and problably someone independent also).
    ---If this appeal meeting results in the Pass then the person continues in the club as normal.
    ---If the appeal meeting results in another Fail, then the person should be able to appeal to some national league body, ombudsman or one of the courts(you will need to indicate what the next steps for the person are, including contact numbers and addresses of who he goes to).

    -- Sample forms that people would fill.
    -- List of information the guarda files will contain when sent to the National Vetting officer.
    -- List of key factors used to make a Fail decision. The arguement against telling people this is that if people know they might make excuses to not fill in their form because they know they will fail. But that isn't a proper excuse, clubs will give everyone deadlines on returning their permission forms and will need to enforce that rule. If a persons permission form has not being recieve the day of their deadline then they must be refused attendance to the club until it is recieved. You can't withhold the info because you think the clubs will be weak in enforcing deadline dates.
    -- Would be useful to have a sample case using fake names and forms to show exactly how one of these vettings works.
    -- A FAQ detailing answers to most main concerns, privacy, fairness, etc, basically the information for these will be in the main explaination of the process but just doing a FAQ format to be easier on people to understand.
    -- Probably need a separate Info sheet for college clubs detailing typical extra things that they would have to do, as such clubs are also subject to their colleges, not just the IAAA. Probably require clubs to get their Colleges support (in writing), and fully explain the process to the collges.

    - Once a new club has being given all this, they look it over, decide if they want to still join the IAAA. If they do they sign whatever acceptances they need to and start implementing the proceduces like vetting.

    Ryan, You don't need to post the actual information pack info here, but you should be able to post the explaination of what it contains. Bascially something that is almost the exact same to what I have just posted above, just edit it to reflect what is being actually done.

    Dermot


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 198 ✭✭ruiner


    Sparks, your concerns are valid but out of curiosity have you informed the IAAA directly of your intention to join?

    They aren't hiding things from people but an unfinished document being published for all to see can be a dangerous thing, especially for a sensitive topic like vetting. No one wants to rush it through before it has been thorougly examined and thought through.

    It's still being worked on and it all has to go through one person who is trying to get this up and running. It will take time to get everyone up to speed.

    The whole process has already changed once and parts could do so again hence the reason no one can give you a definite answer to the questions.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Through yourself I thought ruiner. And through Jim Conroy and there are other committee members who know by now as well, albiet by indirect means, including the national-vetting-officer-to-be.

    If the process is still being worked on (and that's a good thing to my mind), is the person trying to get this up and running aware that noone else in any sport in any country requires all members to be vetted? And is he aware of the privacy concerns? And is he aware of the fact that NGBs like Swim Ireland and Tennis Ireland publish their vetting procedures openly on the net for anyone to see (member or not)? And that this is how the ISC wants it done? (And no, I haven't mentioned this to him because we're in the awkward position of getting ready to join up but not being joined up - and if you're not joined up you're seen as an outsider who has no right to ask these questions from what I've seen here; but in order to join up and question the vetting procedure, we'd have to go through it in the first place - it's a bit catch-22).


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 198 ✭✭ruiner


    The club needs to do it formally, ie get the sec to send an email or letter from the club committee with a coreespondance address. It's been mentioned but word of mouth doesn't quite suffice here I'm afraid.

    Swim Ireland are already vetting people so they have a completed process. All the main sports do afaik. The smaller sports are catching up now.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,766 ✭✭✭Reku


    To answer the question on the Refusal of admitance by colleges. I was in with my sports ofice yesterday and they have no problem with refusing people entry and I was told that people have always been refused entry to the rifle club as a result of vetting. When it is introduced in Archery, even though the vetting is for a different reason the college will make no distinction between them and people can be refused.

    Except there is a noteworthy difference between refusing people and kicking them out after accepting them, people have already been accepted into college clubs for the year.
    Sparks wrote: »
    Then you're in UCD and it's a new policy because it's not something that TCD do at all (I've been in the TCD rifle club since '94), and frankly I've never heard of it happening in UCD either and I've known the people who've run that club for a decade.
    Can't say I've heard of anyone being vetted before being accepted for the dcu clubs/socs last week, might ask folks I know though, see if any did and just weren't too pushed on the issue.
    Aryzel wrote: »
    Thats good. Did you check with them that if someone fails a vetting does and can the archery club tell the college that there person has failed the vetting because they are considered dangerous to children? College might like to know, but we might not be allowed to tell them.
    Which is part of the idiocy of this since if college students are to be vetted before joining clubs/socs it should be done by the college itself and not individual clubs/socs, otherwise one club/soc being less throughough brings potentially brings them all into disrepute. You could well have folks rejected from one club/soc and accepted into others, then you have the whole debaucle of which clubs/socs actually need to be vetted for this? Should groups that have no-interaction with the public outside the university undergo it anyway? Will they be stuck with the stigma of being branded as paedophiles if they don't?

    Quite simply I see this as laziness on the part of the IAAA (or any other sporting body that tries to assuade us that this vetting will stop paedophiles from getting to kids through the sport) to institute an actual framework (e.g. never allow an adult to train alone with a kid/kids, members should not give/offer lifts to children that are not their own unless the parent of the child has actually requested they do so, etc...) that would prevent opportunities from presenting themselves to anyone in the clubs, instead lets just place the blame on the gardai for not catching the sicko sooner. The idea that this will stop paedophiles is rather short sighted considering the number on instances each year where a licenced gun owner, in otherwords someone who passed the vetting, misuses their gun and the gardai have to get involved or clean up the mess afterwards.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 76 ✭✭Private Ryan


    What's in the information pack is as good as exactly as what Dermot described. As Ruiner posted all this information would gladly be made available to anyone who expresses an official interest in joining the IAAA. And more than likely it will be publicly published when its finished. Sparks I accept you are a pending member and is not from you that I'm withholding the information its from every other tom dick and harry that has a computer and knows how to use the keyboard.
    What I said would not be released is the basis for refusal or acceptance or what constitutes as a reason for refusal of admittance. The reason for this is due to the individuality of the circumstances of each case.
    Back to ISAA, every UCD rifle club member fills in a fire arms vetting form ( I did it myself last year) luckily from what Sparks has to say no one to this day has failed and more than likely no one will in archery either. But as far as the college is concerned, If they get a recommendation from an NGB that someone is unfit to participate in a sport for code of ethics for children in sport reasons or the guards say that someone is unsuitable to use a firearm, they will refuse this person access to the club. They did question the necessity of vetting much the same as I do but are acceptant that it is coming down the line for other sports anyway.
    My big problem with this thread is the anti-IAAA/ anti IAAA executive undertone. The IAAA has enough of its own difficulties without people from outside the organisation trying to collapse a new initiative before it even gets off the ground.
    The easy option for me would have been to bite my tongue and let this argument perpetuate more and more rumours and conjecture. I have tried to let you all know that your questions would be answered (just not on this forum) but there seems to be an inability to anything other than gripe (I'm not immune to that either). What annoyed me most about the four comments was Renegades comment on never shooting again, I mistakenly? interpreted Aryzels comment as being smart @$$ed, sparks referring to the official secrets act and Redjeeps comment
    I've heard that quite a few clubs affiliated to the IAAA are refusing to accept this, so wait and see what happens now. No names yet.
    From being at the meeting I can give those names but this has no relevance to the argument if they are afraid to put their names to it. This is a cheap shot by someone with a personal vendetta against the current executive. At least all others are being constructive by having a debate.
    That all I have to say on the matter. Again if you want details contact the IAAA directly and they will give them to you. Keep posting questions if you have any an I'll make sure that they are considered. Be patient and once the process is finalised it will "all" be published before being officially adopted. Some basic IAAA specific vetting rules are in the rule book that is due for publication at the AGM for ratification at a later date.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,766 ✭✭✭Reku


    In fact looking over the Swim Ireland incident in the media I've yet to see any mention of O'Rourke having relevant convictions prior to his being made a coach, in fact the big f-up by swim Ireland seems to have been that they didn't have the sort of framework I'm talking about and suspend O'Rourke pending the outcome of investigations into the complaints against him.
    If he genuinely did not have prior convictions for sex crimes then vetting would not have done a thing to stop him.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 198 ✭✭ruiner


    The system wont catch first time offenders no but I think it's better to have something in place than nothing at all.

    There are other schemes in place like childrens officers that work in conjunction with vetting to reduce potential dangers to as small as possible.

    I've said it before but it's not just children that this is trying to protect.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    P.Ryan, if you filled out a form for UCDRC, it wasn't a vetting form. Neither UCDRC nor DURC have vetting in place - you filled out a membership form that gives them permission to give your name to the Gardai, where it goes on a list of members of the club. That's all that happens with it - they don't do any further processing with it, it's just data collection. That system's been there from the beginning, but it isn't vetting in any way whatsoever.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 120 ✭✭spudnick


    sorry if this has been covered before but i read throught a few pages then skipped a few,

    i think i would be right in saying that the irish sports council asked the iaaa tho do this,they being affiliated to the sports council agreed,so all iaaa afiliated clubs have to be vetted-annoying-but what can we do.

    however do NON affiliated clubs have to be vetted?!?

    my question is do the colleges who are NOT affiliated to the iaaa have to vet members??

    i realise that many colleges are affiliated but for those of us who arnt its seems that a body that were not affiliated to is telling us to do vetting?if were not affiliated how can IAAA ask us to vet our members??


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 807 ✭✭✭Panserborn


    Non-affialiated colleges are a kind of gray area I think. They are affiliated to the ISAA (as informal as it is), and ISAA is officially affialiated to the IAAA.

    You are probably grand as I'm not sure how binding the college affilation to ISAA is.


  • Registered Users Posts: 120 ✭✭spudnick


    National vetting officer then views the files and makes a Yes/No answer.

    so were saying that 1 person gets to decide who joins a club?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 84 ✭✭doogle deegan


    spudnick wrote: »
    so were saying that 1 person gets to decide who joins a club?

    This is not the case. A comitte of 3 people will decide, ( the vetting officer, someone indipendent of the organistation and one other person) The vettting officer will be the only person who knows the who is being reviewed so that the other committee members can remain unbiased.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 743 ✭✭✭Renegade_Archer


    This still involves giving 3 people (are these people known?) information about me that I would prefer remained internal to the gardai. No dice.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 198 ✭✭ruiner


    No, well apart from the vetting officer.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 743 ✭✭✭Renegade_Archer


    This thread has been going on for a month now. Lolocaust.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 743 ✭✭✭Renegade_Archer


    Was there ever any resolution to this?


    Does anyone in the IAAA actually *see* my record, or do they just get a yes/no from the cops?


Advertisement