NARGC

MrTom1 · 06-08-2016 6:29pm

cavan shooter wrote: »

From what I here from the Cavan delegates it was over by lunch time. The guys that took the EGM where "savaged" and struggled with their agenda.

Then a vote of confidence in the Executive and Chairman was supported. After that the counties that where pushing the EGM with drew all there points.

EGM for election of Officers was taken. DAN Curley in Monaghan is Vice Chair and Paul Doran Wexford is Tresurer.

So does this mean their coup was all for nothing ? Loved to of been there to see

berettaman · 06-08-2016 6:42pm

I went there for a look see today. Very good meeting.
The 5 counties raised their concerns but did not really stick to their own agenda.

The Executive had a presention ready and a fair amount of eye opening stuff in that.

The disident counties got a mauling and rightly so in my view.

The standout performers on the floor were Cavan and Louth.

The new treasurer will have to hit the ground running. There is a lot of emphasis on finances and clarity at that..

All in all i think this Executive is doing a good job in difficult circumstances.

Good to see the support for the national Compensation Fund Administrator..

cavan shooter · 06-08-2016 6:50pm

berettaman wrote:

Good to see the support for the national Compensation Fund Administrator..

I only heard yesterday from one of our Executive members the stress and personal barrage he was getting.

wirehairmax · 06-08-2016 7:52pm

berettaman wrote: »

Good to see the support for the national Compensation Fund Administrator..

That's because he's an abseloute gentleman, pure and simple. If you're straight with him, he's straight with you, no messing about.

Backbarrel · 06-08-2016 10:09pm

wirehairmax wrote: »

That's because he's an abseloute gentleman, pure and simple. If you're straight with him, he's straight with you, no messing about.

Chris Gavican is a complete professional and a gentleman to his fingertips. I was there today and to see the mealy mouthed grudging apologies that he was offered for the sickening assault that he was under beggars belief. In my opinion certain people got off too lightly.

However it is obvious that the changing of the guard is underway in the Association and that the NARGC will come out better and stonger for it.

John the delegate from Louth spoke very well today and was the wise head at the back. Keith delegate from Cavan laid the straight facts out to the meeting and was a rock of sense.

The Chairman held his own in a difficult meeting and those that spoke from the Executive were strong.

The presentation was good but the content should not be overlooked. This is why we need change.

Congratulations to the two lads elected. Well done.

I will not discuss the disident 5 as the less said the better. Shameful conduct.

Vegeta · 06-08-2016 10:10pm

berettaman wrote: »

Good to see the support for the national Compensation Fund Administrator..

Have heard the same thing down this way. Great to hear and fair play to the man.

SureHowBad · 06-08-2016 10:43pm

Who were the 5 counties that brought the EGM?

grassroot1 · 06-08-2016 10:55pm

The lessons for today were to have a little more faith in the executive, communication needs to be improved with all RGCS and our association has been blighted by legal issues for far too long this needs to change.

cavan shooter · 07-08-2016 8:50am

SureHowBad wrote:

Who were the 5 counties that brought the EGM?

Dublin, Kildare, Kilkenny, Laois, Offally.

Bad_alibi · 07-08-2016 9:09am

Did the main man make an appearance

cavan shooter · 07-08-2016 10:52am

grassroot1 wrote:

The lessons for today were to have a little more faith in the executive, communication needs to be improved with all RGCS and our association has been blighted by legal issues for far too long this needs to change.

Delgates need to be doing more than just attending meetings and RGCs need to expect more from there delegates.

cavan shooter · 07-08-2016 10:53am

Bad_alibi wrote:

Did the main man make an appearance

Didn't hear..in fairness didn't ask. He's history as far as I can see

richiedel123 · 07-08-2016 1:00pm

cavan shooter wrote: »

Delgates need to be doing more than just attending meetings and RGCs need to expect more from there delegates.

Have to agree with this. Was there myself and a person from laois spoke up and said he is a member in a laois club and they heard nothing about what was happening and they couldn't give their backing to laois unless he said it to his club and got their backing first. It took guts for him to go and say that. I can see backlash in laois for that

wirehairmax · 07-08-2016 1:25pm

What exactly was the basis of the 5 county's seeking an egm? What was their agenda? And how was it dealt with by the executive? There was a couple of them in a FB group during the past few weeks being very smart and playing politics but its radio silence since yesterday's meeting.

cavan shooter · 07-08-2016 2:30pm

"That would be an ecumenical matter...."
Ã°Å¸ËœÅ½Ã°Å¸Ëœ

MrTom1 · 07-08-2016 4:03pm

Anyway to get the minutes or presention from the meetings that took place ?

cavan shooter · 07-08-2016 4:30pm

The County delegates will get them. They should come out with the notice for the next meeting.

Backbarrel · 07-08-2016 6:24pm

wirehairmax wrote: »

What exactly was the basis of the 5 county's seeking an egm? What was their agenda? And how was it dealt with by the executive? There was a couple of them in a FB group during the past few weeks being very smart and playing politics but its radio silence since yesterday's meeting.

One thing I noticed yesterday was how ill informed the 5 counties seem to be about why they were there.
The did not seem to grasp their own agenda which was written in legalese, to be honest I could not make head nor tail of it.
They did not know the contents of letters sent on their behalf.:eek:
I think there are good lads in those counties after being fed a pile of sh1t and led up thegardn path.

Backbarrel · 07-08-2016 6:28pm

richiedel123 wrote: »

Have to agree with this. Was there myself and a person from laois spoke up and said he is a member in a laois club and they heard nothing about what was happening and they couldn't give their backing to laois unless he said it to his club and got their backing first. It took guts for him to go and say that. I can see backlash in laois for that

I think he was treated outrageously by the Laois delegates. I think we will be hearing more about that. It took balls to stand up and speak at a meeting like that and for a first time speaker he was bang on the money. A lot of shooters in those 5 counties didn't know their delegates we calling EGMs!!

cavan shooter · 07-08-2016 6:59pm

Backbarrel wrote: »

I think he was treated outrageously by the Laois delegates. I think we will be hearing more about that. It took balls to stand up and speak at a meeting like that and for a first time speaker he was bang on the money. A lot of shooters in those 5 counties didn't know their delegates we calling EGMs!!

I heard about this in the pub last night......Is that the fella that was told by the Laois Fund Officer his Club hadn't sent in the fund returns and therefore shouldn't be at the meeting.....talk about county delegates alienating the people that vote them in....ouch

MrTom1 · 07-08-2016 8:21pm

cavan shooter wrote: »

I heard about this in the pub last night......Is that the fella that was told by the Laois Fund Officer his Club hadn't sent in the fund returns and therefore shouldn't be at the meeting.....talk about county delegates alienating the people that vote them in....ouch

That's mad , wonder what the 5 counties will do with themselves now that their great ideas got washed down the drain. Did we find out who is paying for all these court cases yet

cavan shooter · 07-08-2016 8:44pm

MrTom1 wrote:

That's mad , wonder what the 5 counties will do with themselves now that their great ideas got washed down the drain. Did we find out who is paying for all these court cases yet

I'm sure we will find out soon enough. I'd bet NARGC considering..

Rimfire Shooter · 07-08-2016 8:50pm

Lads, I couldn't make the meeting & I'm trying to piece together what's happening from this thread. I can't get an answer from my club reps as they claim this is going on above county level??????

Can someone please outline the gist of what's going on?

This regional set up is a big problem & allows too much to be hidden from members !!!!!! :mad:

berettaman · 07-08-2016 9:00pm

cavan shooter wrote: »

I'm sure we will find out soon enough. I'd bet NARGC considering..

Well we learned yesterday that the NARGC is paying. Here is why:

In the first case hi is an employee / lay litigant.

In the second case it is the NARGC suing itself sort of..
The 5 counties had a right to call an egm that was never in doubt. The question arising was whether it was the appropriate time considering the other case was at a sensitive juncture. It was because the 5 counties would not trust the Executive and give them time that they called the EGM and that left the Executive no choice and on the best legal advice available they injuncted the EGM.

They couldn't take the risk that something would be said that would jepordize the other case.. It was a great meeting to be at yesterday to hear why these decisions were being taken.

The Chairman Michael Fenlon always said that he would tell the Governing Body everything when he was legally allowed to do so and by God that was done yesterday..plenty of warts alright.

cavan shooter · 07-08-2016 9:32pm

Rimfire Shooter wrote: »

Lads, I couldn't make the meeting & I'm trying to piece together what's happening from this thread. I can't get an answer from my club reps as they claim this is going on above county level??????

This regional set up is a big problem & allows too much to be hidden from members !!!!!! :mad:

It works if you have a good Region, its up to the Club delegates to make sure your region works for you same way as its up to the Club members to make sure the Club executive works for them.

Our Region covers matters arising at NARGC level (that covers everything from issues like this to The weapons directive and what politicians we should be backing). This is covered at our quarterly meetings and an Agenda is handed out.

If you ring anyone on the executive with a question they will answer and if they don't have an answer they will be back on to you with one.

MrTom1 · 08-08-2016 1:53pm

So when will we know about the NARGC vs Crofton case ? Should be coming to a close

richiedel123 · 08-08-2016 4:32pm

cavan shooter wrote: »

I heard about this in the pub last night......Is that the fella that was told by the Laois Fund Officer his Club hadn't sent in the fund returns and therefore shouldn't be at the meeting.....talk about county delegates alienating the people that vote them in....ouch

I hear today that their money was in and that they were affiliated. Heads could roll for that. Did anybody else hear Dublin say that they didn't give the go ahead for Chris gavican to get that threatening letter even though it was signed off in their name

berettaman · 08-08-2016 9:54pm

richiedel123 wrote: »

I hear today that their money was in and that they were affiliated. Heads could roll for that. Did anybody else hear Dublin say that they didn't give the go ahead for Chris gavican to get that threatening letter even though it was signed off in their name

I heard that too. Shocking if true. The guy from Dublin was trying to make a go of it but even he realised it was all bullsh1te half way through and he did seem genuinely shocked that the letter to Chris G. Mentioned prison.

Let that sink in.. their solicitor threatened prison on a decent man...and they did not know. .. WTF?

Who was calling the shots then because it wasn't them...makes you wonder.

If i was in one of the 5 counties i would be looking for a general meeting ..today. Big change needed..

berettaman · 08-08-2016 9:57pm

MrTom1 wrote: »

So when will we know about the NARGC vs Crofton case ? Should be coming to a close

I reckon it will take a month or so because the independent investigator will be very thorough.

No rush. Do it right and let the truth come out.

MrTom1 · 08-08-2016 10:19pm

berettaman wrote: »

I reckon it will take a month or so because the independent investigator will be very thorough.

No rush. Do it right and let the truth come out.

Hopefully it does and everyone can see what went on , the 5 counties are going to have heads rolling if they where the pawns people seem to think they where .

cavan shooter · 09-08-2016 9:27am

MrTom1 wrote:

Hopefully it does and everyone can see what went on , the 5 counties are going to have heads rolling if they where the pawns people seem to think they where .

Not wishing to sound like Mother Theresa...but bridges have to be built aswell with the counties.

We can't have it that The Executive and Chairman are looking over there shoulders or constantly knowing someone is waiting in the long grass.

Does anyone know if it was a solo run?? Or did they actually have the counties backing, is it true for example Cork where initially named and then at a meeting the guy initiating it all was told Cork wanted nothing to do with it.

MrTom1 · 09-08-2016 11:06am

cavan shooter wrote: »

Not wishing to sound like Mother Theresa...but bridges have to be built aswell with the counties.

We can't have it that The Executive and Chairman are looking over there shoulders or constantly knowing someone is waiting in the long grass.

Does anyone know if it was a solo run?? Or did they actually have the counties backing, is it true for example Cork where initially named and then at a meeting the guy initiating it all was told Cork wanted nothing to do with it.

To be honest I'd say they where puppets on a string for a certain person to the derail the chairman and excecutive for their own game ðŸ‘ðŸ‘ðŸ‘

Backbarrel · 09-08-2016 3:55pm

Lads, there is no great mystery here.

The lads representing the 5 counties were seriously misguided at best and downright mischievous at worst.

Yes they allowed themselves be used.

But let this be a wakeup call to anyone sitting back in those counties. They need to step up and hold their delegates accountable. They decided to take on this Executive and Chairman? One of the most reforming regimes the NARGC has ever seen.

There are a good few thousand views on this thread now and very few contributors. I would like to see more lads say " I am from county x, we did not discuss it but I will bring it up at the next meeting..."

We have too many lads that are full of ideas but too quiet-my advice for what it is worth- go to the next meeting and ask questions of your delegates.

Better still, invite the National Chairman or some of the Executive over and pepper them with questions.

The Chairman went to Donegal to address one of their general meetings. He lives in North Wexford...:eek:

He is nothing if not committed to the NARGC.

cavan shooter · 09-08-2016 9:24pm

Birr will be very interesting this year the NARGC tent (Assuming there will be one) is either going to be very quiet or a hive of activity.....everyone chatting in there will have a creek in their necks;)....:rolleyes:

Seriously I wasn't going to go this year but have told the missus today I'm heading down...softening the blow by inviting the children.

berettaman · 09-08-2016 10:26pm

cavan shooter wrote: »

Birr will be very interesting this year the NARGC tent (Assuming there will be one) is either going to be very quiet or a hive of activity.....everyone chatting in there will have a creek in their necks;)....:rolleyes:

Seriously I wasn't going to go this year but have told the missus today I'm heading down...softening the blow by inviting the children.

Thats right!! Quickest year ever..Birr already..

Really looking forward to Birr.
Will deffo bring the kids this year. Got a nice larsen teap there last year at a good price.

cavan shooter · 10-08-2016 8:51am

berettaman wrote:

Really looking forward to Birr. Will deffo bring the kids this year. Got a nice larsen teap there last year at a good price.

Got a nice soft shell 3/4 jacket..need a shooting vest.

yourvote · 13-08-2016 2:58pm

none of the concerns about wild comments affecting any other association business were realised. obviously all the delagates knew the boundaries and didnt cross them.

seemingly the rule booksays that 14 days notice are needed for an ordinary meeting but only 11 days notice was given.......

no substantial answers given to the issued raised with a lot of the egm agenda items not put forward.

top table committee got the support of the majority at the meeting.

no attempt to build bridges or find out what was motivating the 5 counties. or visa versa.

more giving out about who was hired to defend the reps of the counties than why they needed to hire someone in the first place.

like most difficult meetings 2 widely different accounts of what went on.

august 6th was to have been the date of presentation of the investigator report.

arrowloopboy · 13-08-2016 4:05pm

Welcome to boards yourvote,that's a big first post :P

grassroot1 · 13-08-2016 9:57pm

yourvote wrote: »

none of the concerns about wild comments affecting any other association business were realised. obviously all the delagates knew the boundaries and didnt cross them.

seemingly the rule booksays that 14 days notice are needed for an ordinary meeting but only 11 days notice was given.......

no substantial answers given to the issued raised with a lot of the egm agenda items not put forward.

top table committee got the support of the majority at the meeting.

no attempt to build bridges or find out what was motivating the 5 counties. or visa versa.

more giving out about who was hired to defend the reps of the counties than why they needed to hire someone in the first place.

like most difficult meetings 2 widely different accounts of what went on.

august 6th was to have been the date of presentation of the investigator report.

1.No issues were raised because the judge said they could be mentioned [Mod edit]
2.The constitution says 14 day must be given, it seems the 5 sets of officers wanted an EGM but not a quarterly meeting quite ironic, oh and special thanks to their legal team.
3. The 5 sets of officers could not read their own agenda, well the one their legal team wrote for them.
4. The majority of the meeting know the source of the problems at this stage.
5. It may take time to build bridges, but some talking took place over dinner with parties that were not at either end of the argument.
6.Why did the 5 sets of officers hire the legal team that they did or were they approached. They would have got all the answers they required if they were willing to wait for the independent report.
7. Human nature but I expect it depends what side of the fence your on, (and whether you were there or not)
8.My understanding is legal holidays have held up the report.

yourvote · 14-08-2016 9:35am

i didnt realise there was a set time for legal holidays.......

so it is true, based on the above reply, that they got a hammering for the legal team that defended them rather than why they were needed a legal team.

most people hire the legl people that they think will give them the best chance to win a case. i dont know the answer to 6

i heard that a straight forward general question on finances was asked and no reply given. the state of the finances have nothing to do with the investigtion ??.

i read in the papers, yesterday maybe friday, about a judge commenting on the costs being charged in general. basically nothing cheap about being in the HC

an agenda of 12 (?) questions. sounds like way to many

if the rules say that 14 days notice is to be given but only 11 were then i dont get why the 5 counties are being questioned for pointing that out .

Sparks · 14-08-2016 10:32am

yourvote wrote: »

i didnt realise there was a set time for legal holidays.......

It's called the long vacation and it basically shuts down the high and supreme courts for August and many (but not all) solicitors, barristers and judges would be unavailable.

cavan shooter · 14-08-2016 9:29pm

yourvote wrote:

if the rules say that 14 days notice is to be given but only 11 were then i dont get why the 5 counties are being questioned for pointing that out .

Very good point, if the rules says 14 days it should be 14 days. But why threaten to sue the Chairman and Executive if they were to go ahead with the meeting.???

yourvote · 16-08-2016 12:07pm

cavan shooter wrote: »

Very good point, if the rules says 14 days it should be 14 days. But why threaten to sue the Chairman and Executive if they were to go ahead with the meeting.???

I don't know..........

a reason could be because such a meeting would be against the rules and any decisions made not valid so why hold it. who wants to be explaining the validity of decisions made at meetings not called properly...

or because if the top table went ahead with a meeting that was not valid they would be ignoring the rules and an exec ignoring the rules isn't really great so they were just being told in advance not to break the rules!!

the long vacation ...well for some!

Backbarrel · 16-08-2016 1:51pm

Hi yourvote

~Some observations on your posts..

I would say that this Executive sits with a copy of the constitution in front of them at each Executive meeting given what has gone on since they took over.

The lack of sufficient time for the Governing Body meeting was an oversight due to a lot of things happening simultaneously rather than an act of malice. You are talking volunteers here, things will slip through the cracks sometimes. (Not saying that you are accusing anyone of anything, just providing background.)

Build bridges with the 5 counties? I would say that process is well under way and it began right after the last vote on Saturday. I saw opposing delegates having a meal together and that is the way it should be.

Based on my experience I would say that this Executive is very approachable if anyone has questions.

I am looking forward to going to Birr and picking their brains...

cavan shooter · 16-08-2016 8:15pm

yourvote wrote:

a reason could be because such a meeting would be against the rules and any decisions made not valid so why hold it. who wants to be explaining the validity of decisions made at meetings not called

I'd hope that those very valid reasons are true...however from what our delegates have told us of what's going on....there is more to it than that. Not giving enough time for a meeting contrary to a 14 day rule is an oversight. Instructing a Solicitor to threaten legal action is deliberate.

yourvote · 17-08-2016 4:00pm

oversight, busy, volunteers, no malice , slip through the cracks.....does that possible explanation extend to the 5 rgc's who might also use those words to describe themselves in relation to that letter. the solicitors letter did not end up in the postal system in error neither did the letter calling the GB meeting.

Vegeta · 17-08-2016 5:08pm

yourvote wrote: »

oversight, busy, volunteers, no malice , slip through the cracks.....does that possible explanation extend to the 5 rgc's who might also use those words to describe themselves in relation to that letter. the solicitors letter did not end up in the postal system in error neither did the letter calling the GB meeting.

The goal of communication is understanding. So I can fully understand your point, are you saying that threatening legal action and calling a meeting, without checking the minimum time allowable, are both mistakes or that both are similar?

MrTom1 · 17-08-2016 7:53pm

To be honest lads from seeing it unfold and speaking with others my own opinion is that the 5rgc where puppets and where duped into going against the executive committee , one man was behind hand and standing in the shadows watching to see how it would unfolded. For me it's not that the 5 rgc wanted to somehow derail the NARGC court case it's how in some cases actually believed that they where acting in the interests of their rgc when it was quite oblivious who they where acting for .

Hopefully this makes the NARGC stronger and brings out more people who want better for it and not use their own agendas to get to the top table .

Anyone know when independent report is out ?

yourvote · 18-08-2016 11:30am

Vegeta wrote: »

The goal of communication is understanding. So I can fully understand your point, are you saying that threatening legal action and calling a meeting, without checking the minimum time allowable, are both mistakes or that both are similar?

my point is that neither letter went into the postal system in error. I am not comparing the contents of the letters.

I am also wondering why it is ok to propose that the top table was under pressure and made a mistake and not accept the sample principal in relation to the other letter.

berettaman · 18-08-2016 1:56pm

yourvote wrote: »

my point is that neither letter went into the postal system in error. I am not comparing the contents of the letters.

I am also wondering why it is ok to propose that the top table was under pressure and made a mistake and not accept the sample principal in relation to the other letter.

It depends on your point of view but here is why it is not ok and why the two are not comparable.

I am not wanting to over do the point but you are talking 9 months of sustained pressure on an Executive and Chairman.

The Governing body meeting was called and cancelled and called again. They were in court at this time and trying to keep up with volumes of paper work while maintaining their own jobs etc.

The dissident 5 were offered the chance to have the meeting on the 6th of August at the start of the court proceedings. By the time the case was over the meeting of the 6th was still going ahead but the 14 day time limit had slipped. It happens. Honest error due to being spread too thin. The people involved are no doubt playing catch up at home and with their families too.

Now are you comparing that to the situations where a solicitor sends out a letter on the instructions of his clients...I was often tired and spread thin at work but I never accidentally instructed my solicitor.

The reps of those 5 counties have to own this. I think it is either one of two things:
1 They engaged this guy and let him off without any oversight...
or
2. They instructed the solicitor to send the letters and they are trying to backpedal from the fall out.

I think it is no. 1 because some of the reps seemed genuinely surprised at the content of the letters, particularly to the Comp Fund Administrator...the apologies on the day through gritted teeth are poor comfort.

Bridges will be built eventually but the reps of the dissident counties need to hold their hands up and realise that they were using the worst tactics for (perhaps) the best of intentions.

One dissident complained of pressure over the last month? From who? The Executive or the people pushing him forward into the abyss?
He waved a letter he got from the NARGC solicitor asking him to hold off until matters could be clarified properly. At the front of the stage on Saturday the 6th was a large box filled with folders representing half of the legal correspondence that the Chairman got since this whole thing started. Don't talk about pressure or letters..

Shooting Forum - Firearms licencing information

NARGC

Comments