Yeah, scruffy cardboard box is just window dressing.
Filled with random reams of paper, plus what could be an instruction manual for a printer or some such.

gunny123 wrote: »

"Honesty and diligence" ? Would they ever take a day off ffs ?

:rolleyes:
:rolleyes::rolleyes:

I posted a letter to the minister on the 8th of March, and so far have received no reply/acknowledgement.

gunny123 wrote: »

I received an email this morning from Minister Stanton's private secretary. It gave a brief history of the FCP and said after two and a half years, that now was an appropriate time to review the issue of membership of the FCP, and that he recently chaired a meeting of the FCP solely on this issue. He asked at this meeting that written submissions be made to him on the composition of the panel.

Was it the same letter that I received? I posted it a few pages back.

gunny123 wrote: »

Could well be Battlecorp, i had a quick look and could not see it.

It's on this thread alright, put up 2 weeks ago.

Emails to politician's, just like texts (and phones in Garda possession) can be overlooked or lost!

gunny123 wrote: »

Playing devils advocate here, but whats the next step if the sc are accepted back on the FCP ? If we have lobbied the minister to get rid of them, what if chooses to ignore us and carry on with them ?

Unfortunately they are still part of the FCP. For the moment anyway. They boycotted the last meeting but they haven't been kicked out nor have they resigned their positions on the FCP.

We have lobbied the Minister and that's all we can do really. I wrote and said that the SC do not represent me or the majority of shooters, as did a lot of others. I'd guess the Minister will evaluate all the paperwork submitted by the various members of the FCP to see if all organisations are bona fide organisations representing who they claim to be representing. I'd guess shell organisations will be kicked the fcuk out. That's what Id be hoping anyway. All of this is pure speculation on my part of course.

The FCP will probably remain stalled until either the row between the SC and the NARGC gets sorted or until either of those organisations are kicked off the SC. It remains to be seen whether the allegations that the SC made about the NARGC have any substance. Personally I think the SC are clutching at straws with their allegations but I'm not a legal expert.

To quote Clint Eastwood, "It's a clusterfcuk" at a time when we need to be sticking up for each other and defending shooter's interests instead of shooting ourselves in both feet, ankles and knees.

Ignoring the financial aid for farmers, which is a red herring anyway, I wonder what role "The Sports Coalition of Vested Interests " see themselves playing in their proposed scheme of deer management?
No doubt training courses will feature, and be administered by their members.

They use the phrase "recreational stalkers " several times, and declare these to be an "under utilized " resource.
Apart from poachers killing deer for sale, every deer hunter is what you might call a "recreational stalkers."
The number of "professional" stalkers must be miniscule.

So what is their plan? To provide courses for foreign visitors?
To become a one-stop travel bureau ?

Whatever their latest attempt at legitimatecy turns out to be, it seems unlikely to be to the benefit of the ordinary shooting person on the ground.

Is there any relationship between the Sports Coalition and Country Sports Ireland?

Wexshot1 wrote: »

cavan shooter wrote: »

It might be too late. I see the Country sports lads are pushing hard there deer courses even though no training is needed till 2020. It was on there Facebook page.

I have it on good authority that the SC are quoting that they represent 120000 people in Ireland.
Where I hear you ask do they come up with that number ??
Well I’ll enlighten you,
Remember a few years back every gun shop and every gun club in the country had a petition which all their members and customers signed to stop the “semi auto ban”
Well now it seems the SC are using all our data to mislead the minister and other parties into believing that they are a huge organisation with plenty of support.
Well I for one will be looking for my name to be removed from their list and I will also be informing the relevant people in the justice dept that they don’t have my support.
If everyone who has been conned did the same these boys would eventually fade away.

Politicians dont care....they wont even ask to see the date. It will be up ro the NARGC, CAI, etc to fight that corner. No one wants or needs an organisation who has the best interests of a select few at heart.

berettaman wrote: »

That is a very good question.

I think the S.C. may be running out of road. (Even some politicians see it for what it is now.)

CSI is the most likely destination for the "personalities" involved.

NARGC and CAI would not be rolling out any welcome mats I think.

And yet the NASRPC (probably the largest shooting body in the SC) still have their wagon hitched to the SC.

Sparks wrote: »

Interesting. Under GDPR, less than a month away, that'd be rather strictly illegal.
Even under existing Irish law that's a rather... risky action to take, from the viewpoint of legal liability and the duties imposed on a data controller by the law.

The problem with existing data protection legislation in Ireland is that there are no realistic sanctions for even the worst breaches of a person's data protection rights. The only offences in the act relate to failure to honour a request from the commissioner, in which case the offending data controller gets told off for being very very naughty and make sure they don't do it again (to all intents and purposes)

Should we canvass our clubs to write to the Sports Coalition and go on record telling them not to use our names in any attempt to justify there existence, in my case considering the NARGC have left your table. You'd be sick if they got in to FCP on that stroke.

That would make me nervous too...last I heard countryside Ireland costing up to them or vice versa and the rumour our petitions are being rolled out to prove support and there active membership

Strange that Firearms United [IRL] was turned down from the FCP as an EU-wide and an EU parliamentary registered lobbying organisation.Probably too small,as we only represent 200 million give or take EU wide.:rolleyes:

Y'see..THIS is the reason we need EU representation or feedback on whats going on in the EU on legislation... Statement from FU on the directive.

We need to face the fact that many Countries will likely overshoot the deadline.

If that happens, all the EC could do would be to start an "Infringement Procedure" (https://ec.europa.eu/…/applying-e…/infringement-procedure_en) against them, but that's it.

It's a lengthy procedure and is unlikely to start if the number of Countries that overshoot the deadline on the directive implementation is high.

At this point, those of us who are worried that their governments may want to hastily implement the directive in a restrictive or generally bad way[IE Gold plating,quite common in Irish EU legislation] at the last moment should wonder whether or not it's possible to lobby so that their governments will "take their time" in the implementation of the procedure.

If you have any influence on them, remind them that the cost of the financial penalties for the Countries found to be in infringement would still be small compared to the financial cost of a bad implementation.

Ask your governments to formally consider the idea of suspending the implementation until the ECJ ruling, reminding them (if feasible in your Country) that should they adopt a gun law based on a directive later struck down by the ECJ, lawsuits could ensue and national finances would be overburdened with the cost of compensations.

Has anyone mentioned this of the "recognised organisations" at the FCP table to the minister???Somehow I doubt it..But if anyone is reading this of the FCP elite...Please feel free to bring it to the minister's attention and claim the credit too...

yubabill1 wrote: »

Personally, I wouldn't trust either of these authorities to write a Santa letter at the moment, never mind transpose a contested EU directive.

The real danger for us is if the directive is 'gold plated'. In other words that our guys don't include stuff in our legislation that the directive didn't require.

By the way, has that EU directive been passed at EU level?

For an orginization that claims to represent 24000 of us, they are very shy of social media. You'd think they'd want to shout it from the rooftops how great they are and engage with their loyal flock. Wonder why theyre staying off the airwaves? Are they afraid of something?

http://www.sportscoalition.org/sports-coalition-delivers-submission-to-justice-department/


Anybody able to shed any light what was in the submissions by the SC made to the DOJ back in March?