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 :)

Shooting Forum - Firearms licencing information


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

FCP Conference this week

  • 06-05-2008 8:10pm
    #1
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭


    Someone mentioned the upcoming FCP conference in this thread and Bananaman expressed interest in it, and it struck me it's not been mentioned in detail here yet, so I threw some stuff up on my training diary about it.
    May 6, 2008
    Firearms Consultation Panel conference

    One of the odd things about target shooting administration in Ireland is that there aren’t many people in it. Most of the shooters want to, well, shoot. Meaning that about 2% of the people do 98% of the work involved in running matches, keeping clubs going, meeting the Powers That Be and so forth - and also meaning that when something large like the FCP happens, a lot of the old hands who were involved in specific areas get called back in to lend a hand (or frontal lobe, as the case may be).

    In my case, I was pretty involved in the meetings and analysis which followed the changes to the Firearms Acts laid out in the Criminal Justice Act 2006. As a result, I’ve been tapped once or twice since I stepped down from the NTSA committee last year to give an opinion on some stuff that led on from that. Hence the invitation to this week’s FCP conference that dropped in my letterbox last week. There’s no confidentiality agreement involved here so far as I know, so here’s the agenda. I’ll report on it afterwards (and maybe during).

    FCPConferenceAgenda1_small.jpg

    FCPConferenceAgenda2_small.jpg


«1345

Comments

  • #2
    chem
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,230 ✭✭✭chem


    So now we have a man on the inside:D;)


  • #3
    thehair
    Closed Accounts Posts: 624 ✭✭✭thehair


    great keep up the good work sparks:cool:


  • #4
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    chem wrote: »
    So now we have a man on the inside:D;)
    Several actually. Anyone else want to decloak as having been invited?


  • #5
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    Sparks wrote: »
    Several actually. Anyone else want to decloak as having been invited?

    Decloak :D:D

    Is that a trekkyism or a stargateism?

    I'm going along to make sure Sparks doesn't start a fight with anyone (except me of course) :)


  • #6
    chem
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,230 ✭✭✭chem


    mmmmm has all the marks of a bond evil villan meeting:) who is at the top of the table stroking the white cat:rolleyes:

    Do you think this is the big one Sparks? Unvailling of the Ark of the Covenant? Or finish up like a lost episode? more questions then answers.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Leupold
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 176 ✭✭Leupold


    The Agenda has all the apperance of window dressing. There seems to be no account taken of the implications of the recent court cases/Attoney General's opinion etc.. Also no body seems to be speaking on behalf of the rifle/pistol target shooters in Ireland or will the guy from the UK be representing us?


  • #8
    It wasn't me!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,034 ✭✭✭✭It wasn't me!


    Leupold wrote: »
    The Agenda has all the apperance of window dressing. There seems to be no account taken of the implications of the recent court cases/Attoney General's opinion etc.. Also no body seems to be speaking on behalf of the rifle/pistol target shooters in Ireland or will the guy from the UK be representing us?

    There are several open forum slots, and the Olympic shooting spokesman seems to have the ISSF stuff on his table too.


  • #9
    IRLConor
    Subscribers Posts: 4,076 ✭✭✭IRLConor


    chem wrote: »
    Unvailling of the Ark of the Covenant?

    I hope not, that ends up like this:

    toht.jpg

    My view on the meeting is that it's a very good step along a very long process. The more people we get together in the same room talking to each other and realising that nobody has hooves and horns, the better.


  • #10
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    chem wrote: »
    mmmmm has all the marks of a bond evil villan meeting:) who is at the top of the table stroking the white cat:rolleyes:
    I don't much care so long as neither I nor rrpc have to wear bikinis...
    Do you think this is the big one Sparks? Unvailling of the Ark of the Covenant? Or finish up like a lost episode? more questions then answers.
    I seem to remember the Ark of the Covenant ending with the Ark being locked away in storage, never to be looked at again :D

    I don't think we'll have "a big one" to be honest chem, I think it's going to be a lot more anticlimatic than that. But this should be a pretty large step allright.


  • #11
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Leupold wrote: »
    The Agenda has all the apperance of window dressing. There seems to be no account taken of the implications of the recent court cases/Attoney General's opinion etc.. Also no body seems to be speaking on behalf of the rifle/pistol target shooters in Ireland or will the guy from the UK be representing us?
    • Window dressing is not how I'd describe a conference that gets this many people to discuss firearms legislation with garda superintendents. We've been saying for decades that we needed this sort of thing; well, here it is.
    • The recent court case judgements aren't even available yet, so how could they be specifically addressed in a conference whose agenda was set before the ruling last friday?
    • I'm sure Des Crofton would feel aggrieved at the thought that he doesn't represent rifle and pistol shooters, when the NARGC did the heavy lifting in regard to the court cases in the past decade. But even if not, Kevin Kilty's an ISSF class A coach - you cannot be a class A coach if you can't coach at least two disciplines (which for Kevin was shotgun and pistol IIRC).
    • The guy from the UK is from the Surrey Police - and I'd love to know how you could be a policeman in Surrey and not know about firearms licencing and target shooting, since you'd be sitting right longside Bisley...
    • No-one said it was perfect. No-one promised it'd be perfect before now either. For one thing, the IPSA won't be there (I understand), which is a major flaw in the process. However, it's a damn sight better than things were when I started shooting.
    • Have you a specific question to be put? Have you forwarded your concerns on to your representatives on the FCP, or failing them, the chairman of the FCP?


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    cantona
    Closed Accounts Posts: 154 ✭✭cantona


    You are right Sparks, that an invitation was not forthcoming to the IPSA.

    But this is hardly surprising considering that the official response we recieved stated that the members of the FCP were left to decide who to invite.

    So after all the recent uproar, the FCP were not going to back down and admit that we should have been there from the start.


  • #13
    Bananaman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,641 ✭✭✭Bananaman


    I'd be interested in seeing or reading these presentations at some point if they can be placed in the public domain.

    With IPSC being one of the (I don't know the stats so I cannot say it IS THE) fastest growing shooting sports on the island do we think that it will be discussed in this forum? Workshop 3 perchance?

    Could the question of IPSA inclusion on the FCP be chaired?

    I'm not stirring the sh1t here or waving some conspiracy flag but I have a vested interest, as do another couple of hundred active shooters.

    To me that is a very large, very quickly growing group, to remain disenfranchised.

    That is but one group in the area of centrefire pistols - I sense a certain trend towards Hunting and Olympic disciplines in the agenda.

    If other people on the FCP feel that IPSA should be there is it not their duty to voice their opinion?

    B'Man


  • #14
    packas
    Closed Accounts Posts: 411 ✭✭packas


    Bananaman wrote: »
    I'd be interested in seeing or reading these presentations at some point if they can be placed in the public domain.

    With IPSC being one of the (I don't know the stats so I cannot say it IS THE) fastest growing shooting sports on the island do we think that it will be discussed in this forum? Workshop 3 perchance?

    Could the question of IPSA inclusion on the FCP be chaired?

    I'm not stirring the sh1t here or waving some conspiracy flag but I have a vested interest, as do another couple of hundred active shooters.

    To me that is a very large, very quickly growing group, to remain disenfranchised.

    That is but one group in the area of centrefire pistols - I sense a certain trend towards Hunting and Olympic disciplines in the agenda.

    If other people on the FCP feel that IPSA should be there is it not their duty to voice their opinion?

    B'Man


    I agree. Is anyone in the know willing to tell me why the IPSC NGB for Ireland is not being invited this time around? IPSA are getting large number of applications for membership monthly. The sport is growing rapidly in Ireland and as such should it not have a voice as to the future of target shooting sports in Ireland. Shooters are travelling to International compeitions monthly. This week for examply we've 8 shooters gonig th Germany. Next month we've some going to Norway & in Oct. we've a squad going to the world shoot in Bali. What's the problem lads?????? Anyone on the outside looking at this would think IPSA & IPSC are being discrimated against unfairly.


  • #15
    IRLConor
    Subscribers Posts: 4,076 ✭✭✭IRLConor


    packas wrote: »
    I agree. Is anyone in the know willing to tell me why the IPSC NGB for Ireland is not being invited this time around? IPSA are getting large number of applications for membership monthly. The sport is growing rapidly in Ireland and as such should it not have a voice as to the future of target shooting sports in Ireland. Shooters are travelling to International compeitions monthly. This week for examply we've 8 shooters gonig th Germany. Next month we've some going to Norway & in Oct. we've a squad going to the world shoot in Bali. What's the problem lads?????? Anyone on the outside looking at this would think IPSA & IPSC are being discrimated against unfairly.

    I'm open to correction, but it's my understanding that the FCP was put together by the DoJ. They decided who to invite and who not to invite. I suspect the conference is the same deal again.

    As to why the IPSA aren't invited, I have no idea. There are a bunch of reasons ranging from oversight to deliberate exclusion with everything in between.


  • #16
    Vegeta
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,393 ✭✭✭✭Vegeta


    Personally I think the IPSA should have been invited. That's my view on that topic.

    Secondly Sparks, will you be there the first day, the 8th (tomorrow).

    Could you keep an ear out for mention of the following

    One man one license, or could someone ask the question of him. Simply if the gardai would be in favour of such a system. (maybe in the 12.00 talk by Super Noel Clarke)

    Use of moderators for full bore rifles and permission to reload (at 11.00 by Garret Byrne, maybe or again could a sit rep of those issues be requested of him)

    Informal target shooting and its legality (don't know who might bring this up)


  • #17
    Bananaman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,641 ✭✭✭Bananaman


    A real thorn in the side for many competitors trying to come to Ireland is the lack of acceptance of the European Firearms pass on its own and failing that the requirement to surrender the original pass itself during the application process.

    As the "competition season" tends to be VERY busy people will not be willing to do this for the period of time (~ 8 weeks) it may take to be issued their Irish cert. In our won cases we invariably need only the EFP to attend a competition abroad. Usually the Competition Invite to show the reason but it is usually an easy process.

    Perhaps a motion could be tabled to look at a mechanism for people to send in a copy of their European Firearms Pass when applying for an Irish permit - perhaps notorised by their local Police.

    B'Man


  • #18
    Bananaman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,641 ✭✭✭Bananaman


    I realise - have heard this second hand - that the current process is in place as people had a problem with hunters from abroad not having to pay for a license whereas those here did. Prior to that we had a better permit process.

    Obviously the answer there is to have a hunting license - much like a fishing license - for foreign nationals, who wish to hunt but do not hold an Irish Firearms Certificate. Then for, foreign nationals, attending competitions, a basic permit (EFP) would be fine.

    B'Man


  • #19
    IRLConor
    Subscribers Posts: 4,076 ✭✭✭IRLConor


    Bananaman wrote: »
    A real thorn in the side for many competitors trying to come to Ireland is the lack of acceptance of the European Firearms pass on its own and failing that the requirement to surrender the original pass itself during the application process.

    As the "competition season" tends to be VERY busy people will not be willing to do this for the period of time (~ 8 weeks) it may take to be issued their Irish cert. In our won cases we invariably need only the EFP to attend a competition abroad. Usually the Competition Invite to show the reason but it is usually an easy process.

    Perhaps a motion could be tabled to look at a mechanism for people to send in a copy of their European Firearms Pass when applying for an Irish permit - perhaps notorised by their local Police.

    B'Man

    That's certainly a big problem with our licensing system. The only consolation is that the cert issued for a visitor is valid for a year (it's just a regular FAC as far as I know).

    There are a bunch of people on the FCP who represent organisations who are affected by this silliness, so I can't see why at least one of them wouldn't bring it up for discussion at some stage.


  • #20
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    Bananaman wrote: »
    A real thorn in the side for many competitors trying to come to Ireland is the lack of acceptance of the European Firearms pass on its own and failing that the requirement to surrender the original pass itself during the application process.
    This has been already raised at the FCP. According to the FCP briefing document issued last month:
    [FONT=Calibri,Bold][FONT=Calibri,Bold]
    EU Firearms Passport.
    [/FONT][/FONT]
    We wish to see this fully implemented as originally intended. We also want the Gardai to consider early renewal of the EU Firearms Passport to facilitate foreign travel where necessary.
    The shooting associations are seeking to have a copy of the EU Pass being acceptable to the Gardai instead of the original, as this causes huge problems for sports shooters wishing to travel to other events while the Gardai are holding the original document for up to one month.


  • #21
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    Vegeta wrote: »
    One man one license, or could someone ask the question of him. Simply if the gardai would be in favour of such a system. (maybe in the 12.00 talk by Super Noel Clarke)
    That's been raised at every opportunity and rejected due to pulse incompatability AFAIK. Will be raised again and again and again and again and again.......
    Use of moderators for full bore rifles and permission to reload (at 11.00 by Garret Byrne, maybe or again could a sit rep of those issues be requested of him)
    These are being worked on AFAIK. SSAI are working hard on the reloading issue.
    Informal target shooting and its legality (don't know who might bring this up)
    Really needs a definition of target shooting and ranges in the act. Will try.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    The EFP problem is also going to be helped enormously by the new EU directives regarding the EFP which basicly say "do it the way you should have been doing it lads".


  • #23
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Vegeta wrote: »
    Personally I think the IPSA should have been invited. That's my view on that topic.
    And of many others as well.
    Secondly Sparks, will you be there the first day, the 8th (tomorrow).
    Yes, I'm there both days.
    Could you keep an ear out for mention of the following
    Will do, but as rrpc's said, they've been brought up several times before. No harm in asking again though...


  • #24
    meathshooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 329 ✭✭meathshooter


    can you also bring up the issue of reloading


  • #25
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    meathshooter wrote: »
    can you also bring up the issue of reloading

    RTFT :). This has already been covered.


  • #26
    Bananaman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,641 ✭✭✭Bananaman


    The last definitive statement we heard on the "restricted list" was that when we come to renew our license we must inform the Garda in question that the firearm in question is now restricted as per the prescribed list.

    Is this still the case or does the require clarification at the conference?

    B'Man


  • #27
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    Bananaman wrote:
    The last definitive statement we heard on the "restricted list" was that when we come to renew our license we must inform the Garda in question that the firearm in question is now restricted as per the prescribed list.

    Is this groundhog day?

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055277876

    :)


  • #28
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    All these things have been raised before by the FCP; but this would be the first opportunity to get a public statement on them really. And certainly the planned approach to the restricted list in light of O'Leary v Maher would be something to ask about.


  • #29
    Grizzly 45
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,076 ✭✭✭✭Grizzly 45


    One other to bring up is the story with the restricted list.Is this go /no go/pending??Also as to why pistol gripped/folding stocked shotguns are now on this ?
    Basically a clarification/update on this would be most appreciated.

    "If you want to keep someone away from your house, Just fire the shotgun through the door."

    Vice President [and former lawyer] Joe Biden Field& Stream Magazine interview Feb 2013 "



  • #30
    cantona
    Closed Accounts Posts: 154 ✭✭cantona


    Just to clarify the lack of invitation to the IPSA, and the fact that invitations came from FCP not DOJ, below is excerpt from an official DOJ e-mail

    "With regard to the invitations, I understand that some have issued. Due to
    the limited numbers than can be accommodated at the venue, we requested
    nominations from the shooting community to be channelled through the FCP."

    We lobbied both DOJ and FCP members for an invite, but again to no avail.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    packas
    Closed Accounts Posts: 411 ✭✭packas


    cantona wrote: »
    Just to clarify the lack of invitation to the IPSA, and the fact that invitations came from FCP not DOJ, below is excerpt from an official DOJ e-mail

    "With regard to the invitations, I understand that some have issued. Due to
    the limited numbers than can be accommodated at the venue, we requested
    nominations from the shooting community to be channelled through the FCP."

    We lobbied both DOJ and FCP members for an invite, but again to no avail.


    it would be good to know what issue other shooting bodies have with IPSA :confused::confused::confused:


  • #32
    bunny shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,096 ✭✭✭bunny shooter


    Did the member of the NTSA who gave ye support not get ye an invite then ? He's on the invited list.


  • #33
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    I didn't have the means to get them an invite Bunny.


  • #34
    bullets
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,612 ✭✭✭bullets


    The Agenda looks interesting. It would be fantastic if someone could
    record the audio or better still video. I would love to hear what is being said.

    I am presuming that it would be OK to do this considering its not some Top-Secret
    information that people would be talking about and that as members of the Public
    we would be allowed to know whats going on if it effects us as firearms owners.

    ~B


  • #35
    Bananaman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,641 ✭✭✭Bananaman


    +1


  • #36
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    packas wrote: »
    it would be good to know what issue other shooting bodies have with IPSA :confused::confused::confused:

    That's more than unhelpful packas. Invitations were given to members of the FCP for their organisations. Would you have people lying to the DoJ as to who represents who, especially as this would not be sustainable.

    So far on this thread I've seen absolutely nothing that hasn't already been taken up by the FCP and been briefed to everyone on.

    That's apart from stuff that's just happened which you could hardly expect anyone to have acted on as yet.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    cantona
    Closed Accounts Posts: 154 ✭✭cantona


    rrpc wrote: »
    That's more than unhelpful packas. Invitations were given to members of the FCP for their organisations.

    Disagree with you on that RRPC. As can be seen below, invitations were for the shooting community not for their organisations.

    "we requested
    nominations from the shooting community to be channelled through the FCP"


    Can anyone give me the breakdown of the invitations i.e which groups got 9 invites, which ones got 5 invites etc


  • #38
    Rovi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,570 ✭✭✭Rovi


    rrpc wrote: »
    That's more than unhelpful packas. Invitations were given to members of the FCP for their organisations. Would you have people lying to the DoJ as to who represents who, especially as this would not be sustainable.
    That's certainly the impression I'm under as regards the invitations; FCP members were issued spaces at the conference and asked to nominate attendees from their own membership.

    I'll be there too, by the way. :)


  • #39
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Bugger, now I have to actually talk to a moderator...

    Cantona, I've no idea on how many are coming from where.


  • #40
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    cantona wrote: »
    Disagree with you on that RRPC. As can be seen below, invitations were for the shooting community not for their organisations.

    "we requested
    nominations from the shooting community to be channelled through the FCP"
    Disagree all you like Cantona, but that sentence can be read both ways.
    Can anyone give me the breakdown of the invitations i.e which groups got 9 invites, which ones got 5 invites etc
    Don't know, most got less than they asked for, and some handed back invites to be reallocated so I couldn't tell you any numbers.

    Why do you need to know?


  • #41
    Bananaman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,641 ✭✭✭Bananaman


    Not that old chestnut again....... I officially have a pain in my h0le with this stuff now.

    I don't want this to turn into another "it's my ball, so there" kind of conversation - we have enough of those.

    IPSA were told by the DOJ that it was up to the FCP to decide who attended the conference.
    With regard to the invitations, I understand that some have issued. Due to the limited numbers than can be accommodated at the venue, we requested nominations from the shooting community to be channelled through the FCP

    Therefore, The FCP decided, explicitly, not to invite IPSA. Even though they asked to be represented and as the sport(s) they represent are some of the fastest growing on the island.

    As IPSA did not even have an invitation to have one attendee I have to ask how many people from each of the other attending organisations will be present.

    All animals are equal.......the rest of us have to ho abroad for it.

    B'Man


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Bananaman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,641 ✭✭✭Bananaman


    nominations from the shooting community

    Does that not include all of the shooting community?
    to be channelled through the FCP

    Like tickets for a match going through the clubs - you don't have to be a member to get one - but if you happened to have gone to the right school and still have the tie it helps.

    B'Man


  • #43
    macnas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 324 ✭✭macnas


    Here's another unhelpful comment, it's amazing what a free lunch will buy!


  • #44
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    You're both making the assumption that 'shooting community' equals everyone.

    That is not the way it happened. Each organisation was asked to nominate people, it's kinda hard to know who's been asked and who's not been asked in that situation.

    Each organisation is directly reponsible to it's own members, not to the shooting world at large.

    Hving said that, I've yet to hear anything said on this thread (or any other one for that matter) that hasn't been adequately or actively addressed by members of the FCP representing shooting organisations.

    I've asked repeatedly for such issues to be aired, and still get the same tired old ones repeated despite ample evidence that they are already being addressed.


  • #45
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    macnas wrote: »
    Here's another unhelpful comment, it's amazing what a free lunch will buy!

    If you're suggesting that this is free, think again. So far it's cost me €112 and I haven't got there yet.


  • #46
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Y'know macnas, as unhelpful comments go, that's right up there. I mean, I was off committee work before any of this ever got started, and even I'm taking offence at that one.
    Seriously, you really think everyone who's going to this thing is going to turn around for no good reason and call for practical shooting to be banned or something? Or do you think this might be a good place to point out that the process has some holes that could be fixed by bringing the IPSA in?


  • #47
    IRLConor
    Subscribers Posts: 4,076 ✭✭✭IRLConor


    Bananaman wrote: »
    IPSA were told by the DOJ that it was up to the FCP to decide who attended the conference.
    With regard to the invitations, I understand that some have issued. Due to the limited numbers than can be accommodated at the venue, we requested nominations from the shooting community to be channelled through the FCP

    That may be what the DoJ told the IPSA, but what did they tell the various members of the FCP? I don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was something like "Here's N invites to hand out to your members".

    Assuming that there's some nefarious plan on the part of the members of the FCP to exclude the IPSA is not necessarily a safe assumption. It could be true but the simplest explanation is that there's a misunderstanding somewhere and that it's not malicious.


  • #48
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    If I was in the IPSA, I'd be doing the following:

    As the letter in the ISD is the best indication of how the DoJ are thinking about practical shooting and since the range standards to be introduced here are to be the Canadian ones. I'd be on to the Canadian IPSC people to find out how they have been able to convince their athourities that IPSC shooting is safe.

    All the other concerns the IPSA have seem to come down to:

    Fullbore pistols: Not an issue anymore, 1) because the restricted list is in abeyance and 2) because the IPSA are not the only ones looking for full bore pistols.

    Anything else?


  • #49
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    IRLConor wrote: »
    That may be what the DoJ told the IPSA, but what did they tell the various members of the FCP? I don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was something like "Here's N invites to hand out to your members".

    Assuming that there's some nefarious plan on the part of the members of the FCP to exclude the IPSA is not necessarily a safe assumption. It could be true but the simplest explanation is that there's a misunderstanding somewhere and that it's not malicious.

    You're forgetting Conor that in another letter/email to the IPSA, the DoJ referred to the 'shooting community' being adequately represented and hence the IPSA were not invited.

    So there's a 'shooting community' and a 'shooting community' depending on who you are.

    It was always understoood that the places were per association. All names and addresses had to be submitted well in advance.


  • #50
    Grizzly 45
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,076 ✭✭✭✭Grizzly 45


    .
    All the other concerns the IPSA have seem to come down to:

    Fullbore pistols: Not an issue anymore, 1) because the restricted list is in abeyance and 2) because the IPSA are not the only ones looking for full bore pistols.

    Anything else?
    [/QUOTE]
    Yup, Semi auto large calibre rifles and modified pumpand semi auto shotguns. As this will eventually be part of practical shooting sports equipment,it would be a concern as well as to restricted/unrestricted and attitudes from the Gardai Civvie service to this.
    I would think.

    "If you want to keep someone away from your house, Just fire the shotgun through the door."

    Vice President [and former lawyer] Joe Biden Field& Stream Magazine interview Feb 2013 "



  • #51
    cantona
    Closed Accounts Posts: 154 ✭✭cantona


    rrpc wrote: »
    If I was in the IPSA, I'd be doing the following:

    As the letter in the ISD is the best indication of how the DoJ are thinking about practical shooting and since the range standards to be introduced here are to be the Canadian ones. I'd be on to the Canadian IPSC people to find out how they have been able to convince their athourities that IPSC shooting is safe.


    Anything else?

    RRPC, the Canadian document was produced in conjunction with IPSC Canada. When we approached DOJ to meet us and discuss range standards, they said that IPSC was not covered in the Canadian system, whereas Chapter 3 deals specifically with Action Shooting eg IPSC Style.

    My reading of this-DOJ have not even read the document.

    And by the way, we had the document in our hands 48 hours after being told by DOJ that they were considering this system, so they have no excuse.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement