Press Release – 22/2/2017 – UPDATED 24/2/2017

Further to the release posted to the Sports Coalition website regarding an accord between the NARGC and An Garda Siochana at a recent meeting between the two sides, I am relieved to advise all gun owners that following an unsolicited phone call which I received yesterday evening from Inspector Paul Greene of the Firearms Policy Unit at Garda HQ, and who attended the meeting between the two parties, that he emphatically denies that any such accord as has been published by NARGC was reached with An Garda Siochana. Inspector Greene emphasised in our telephone conversation that NARGC members would not be treated differently to any other gun owners.

Paul Walsh
Acting Chairman Sports Coalition

Minutes from FCP Meeting, 24th October 2016

Please find attached the minutes from the Firearms Consultative Panel, held on 24th October 2016



FISSTA sees off Government plan for Mega Salmon Farms on the West Coast.


The Chairman of the Federation of Irish Salmon and Sea Trout Anglers (FISSTA), Paul Lawton, has welcomed Bord Iascaigh Mhara’s (BIM) announcement of the withdrawal of its Inis Oir/Galway Bay application for the first of ten mega salmon farms along the West Coast of Ireland.

“FISSTA was the first to mobilise and campaign against the plan which was first announced by Minister Simon Coveney TD in 2011. The process for awarding the license was further obstructed following FISSTA’s notice of legal action against the government and Coveney’s Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine last May which delayed the decision and put political pressure on the Minister to review his ill thought out mega farms plan of 2011.”  said Mr. Lawton.

This announcement by BIM now ends the long wait of the Attorney General’s response to FISSTA as the application is now withdrawn. FISSTA is delighted that the BIM Board has decided to scrap the ten mega farms plan following our national campaign which saw thousands of anglers and supporters of the wild salmon on the streets of Galway city, Castlebar (at the Taoiseach’s office) and Carrigaline (The Minister’s office) over the past five years.

FISSTA will now continue its campaign against the government’s open net sea cage salmon farming policy for which Minister Coveney granted a license in Bantry Bay in October and against which we have currently lodged an objection. FISSTA now calls on the Minister to further review such damaging polluting cages and bring them onshore to be managed under the existing more stringent EU waste management directives.

While no war has been won as yet, FISSTA acknowledges that the first of many battles has ended with the announcement of withdrawal of the Galway Bay application.

FISSTA thanks all who supported the campaign to save Galway Bay from the disaster which the BIM application for 15,000 tons of farmed salmon would have inflicted on the Bay and in terms of the damage which would have wiped out our wild fish resources on the West coast.

FISSTA especially wishes to thank our colleagues in the Sports Coalition and the National Association of Regional Game Councils (NARGC) who stood with us and gave their strong support to FISSTSA at this crucial time and to all our angling federations who work together for the good of our sport and our wild salmon. NARGC National Director and Spokesperson for the Sports Coalition, Des Crofton said “There can be no doubt based on every piece of research ever undertaken into fish farms that they pose unacceptable risks to wild fish stocks. The impact which the BIM application would have had on wild Atlantic salmon, had it been successful, would have been disastrous. It would likely have been quite profitable but at what cost environmentally? Had the application proceeded it would have represented an incredible act of hypocrisy, particularly following the Paris Climate Change Summit where the Taoiseach held forth about Ireland’s commitment to playing its part in saving the planet.”

 We wish all a very Happy Christmas and a successful 2016.

Letter to Justice department

Sent: 16 December 2015 12:48
To: ‘Marion G. Walsh’
Subject: Firearms Directive

Dear Marion,

As you know, Irish shooting interests are represented at the level of the European institutions by the Federation of Associations for Shooting and Conservation (FACE), which also represents the national associations of firearms owners in 36 countries, including all EU. In addition to my position as National Director of NARGC, I am also the Irish representative to FACE where I have served variously as a Board Member and also two terms as Vice President over the past 20 years.

Among many other issues, FACE has been dealing with the Commission’s proposals to amend the Firearms Directive. I understand the Council of the EU will meet on Friday in Brussels to discuss the Directive and the proposals for amendment Article by Article. Following discussion and consultation with all the member state shooting organisations, FACE has prepared a position paper in response to what is proposed. While many of the proposals will not significantly affect Ireland as our regulatory regime is already largely in “harmony” with what is being proposed, there are nonetheless some proposals which would alter our situation and which we, and FACE would oppose. In particular, we oppose the proposal to use this Directive for a purpose for which it was never designed for i.e. anti-crime/terrorism measures. The Directive was implemented to facilitate the free movement of citizens with sporting firearms and is not even within the brief of the Commission which is responsible for security. It deals with firearms which are not what are being used by terrorist groups. The Commission’s proposals will manifestly have no impact on criminal/terrorist access to their firearms of preference. The only effect of the amendments as proposed will be to make life more difficult for law abiding citizens without contributing any measurable improvement to safety and security of EU citizens.

Of real concern for shooting associations here in Ireland is the proposal on minimum age. This would simply strangle the lifeblood of shooting associations and is a measure we would have to vigorously oppose. There are also issues around de-activated firearms and standards for same which we could support in principle. An EU policy on sound moderators could be welcome, if it removes the inconsistencies as exist here which commonly result in prejudice being the deciding factor rather than merit with many licensing officers. The creation of new categories of certain semi-auto firearms is illogical.

I attach for your information a copy of the FACE position paper which we support and I would ask you to bring it to the attention of whoever will be attending Friday’s meeting representing Ireland. If you have any queries on any matter in the paper, please feel free to give me a call or email.

Kindest regards,

Des Crofton
National Director
& Spokesperson for the Sports Coalition

FACE Position with AM on Firearms Directive 15 Dec2015

Proposed Euro Legislation

The Sports Coalition is deeply concerned with the EU’s proposals to re-open the ‘Weapons’ Directive and impose new restrictions on law abiding shooting sports people as a response to the terrorist attacks in Paris and further attacks elsewhere.  While every lawful firearms owner is appalled at what happened over the past week and days, the EU proposals as published, insofar as they apply to the Directive, will do nothing to address this most serious terrorist threat.  It should not be forgotten that legal firearms owners are equally threatened by the terrorists and as such they do appreciate the seriousness of the situation.  However, the fact remains that terrorists operate outside the scope of all legislative provisions everywhere and the restrictions proposed by the EU will do nothing to curb access to weapons by terrorists.  The Sports Coalition supports the position adopted by FACE Europe which is taking a proactive position of opposition to the restrictive proposals and which has the best network of contacts at the level of the EU Institutions to influence the final decisions with the support of national delegations in all EU countries.


For our part in Ireland, we are seeking firstly to know what position the Irish government is adopting, secondly contacting all Irish MEP’s to ascertain their position and to try to gain their support for firearms owners, and thirdly to make contact with the Irish Permanent Representative to the EU in Brussels. 


We therefore ask all shooting people to start making contact with their MEP’s.  There are only 13 of them for the entire country.  We also ask supporters to contact their TD’s of all persuasions, and while being respectful and expressing our sympathy and support for confronting terrorism, impressing upon them the futility of making laws at EU level which will have no effect on terrorist access to weapons but will instead run the risk of alienating the support of Europe’s more than 7 million legal firearms owners for the actions of their governments.


Please see the text below for the well-considered position of the Finnish government and also the attached press release issued by FACE in Brussels.

FACE- Revision of Firearms Directive


Finnish Parliament Statement Regarding Revision of Weapons Directive E 60/2015 
Original Statement:

In the E-letter received there is a question regarding pre-emptive measures to potential changes to weapons directive. According to letter, we can expect that European Commission proposes restrictions to private ownership of at least automatic firearms and proposes moving the semiautomatic versions of assault rifles to category A and restricting private sales of firearms over internet.

Opinion of the Cabinet:
Banning of the automatic weapons and restricting semiautomatic versions: Finland believes that commission should restrict illegal trafficingof firearms instead. Illegal trafficing will become harder once deactivation standards are aligned. According to commission this is discussed in meeting of firearms committee on 3rd of November 2015. In addition trafficing can be curbed by aligning the legislation regarding ”essential parts” of firearms in member countries more efficiently. Restrictions to internet-trade and more supervision can also prevent firearms from falling into wrong hands.  Instead of banning private ownership permits process can be revised to control the possession of such firearms better than today for example requiring proof of need and membership in sports organization. In addtion permits could be re-evaluated periodically.

Restrictions to arms collectors:
Deactivated firearms have little to none collectors value and banning them does not harm shooting sports in Finland. Possession of automatic firearms should still be allowed to private collectors and museums. Also it is necessary to continue giving permits to full auto firearms for academic purposes.

Restrictions to Internet sales:
Instead banning internet sales, better option would be to control it. Permits should be required to purchase firearms online and sales over the bordes should controlled by improving exchange of information between the authorities.

Arguments of the Cabinet:
In the E-letter there is a question about pre-emptive measures regarding directive 91/477/ETY (firearms directive) revision. According to information commission has given statement on 18th of November 2015 to which U-letter is being prepared. In this statement cabinet addresses the questions regarding changes to weapons directive based on feedback received from the experts. In this weapons directive the minimum standards are set for weapons legislation in member countries. This directive only sets the minimum level for national legislation and it has proven to be inefficient regarding weapon definitions and essential parts. Due to this national legislation differs in member countries and because of this it is possible to legally buy parts and assemble firearms and transport them to another country where those parts are illegal. Therefore the current control system is inefficent and risk of getting caught is only minor.

Based on estimates, the European Commission proposes restrictions to private ownership of at least automatic firearms and proposes moving the semiautomatic versions of assault rifles to category A and restricting private sales of firearms over internet. No detailed information is available at this time.

Based on recent studies, these restrictions might have significant impact to private ownership of firearms and shooting sports in Finland. Depending on the proposed content, these restrictions will impact national defense, national reserve shooting events, sports shooting, hunting and weapons collecting. This also has a significant impact on gun manufacturers and retailers.

Cabinet proposes to pay particular attention to impact for voluntary military reserve activities. Voluntary reserve has a significant role in maintaining both will and skill of the reserve. Finlands defence relies on large reserve.

95% of the military personnel are reserve whose skills are maintained by Finnish Defence forces. Voluntary activities support this activity and ensures that reserve can support authorities.

According to studies restrictions to semiautomatic assault rifles and machine pistols will have significant impact to skills of the armed reserve. Shooting activities are mostly performed with weapons proposed to be restricted and over time this will impact both skills and morale of the reserve. According to cabinet restricting reserve activities sends a mixed signals outside. According to studies, change also impacts the position of maanpuolustuskoulutusyhdistys as a strategic partner to Finnish Defence forces specially if possession of weapons is not allowed to public organizations.

Banning of the private ownership of semiautomatic firearms leads to the end of the sports shooting activities like pistol shooting, IPSC and it also might impact weapons used for hunting. Banning of automatic firearms impacts collectors.

Based on E-letter, restrictions to internet sales are vague at best. There is no information whether selling, buying or both are proposed to be restricted. The weapon types mentioned in E-letter are already requiring permits in Finland and moving them over borders requires permits as well. Customs will monitor that weapons moving across the borders have all necessary permits. Proposed restrictions perhaps try to address illegal firearms sales where parts are sourced from multiple countries exploiting the differences in legislation when it comes to deactivation standards and definitions of ”essential parts”. According to studies received by the cabinet, there have been incidents where deactivated firearms have been found to be easily converted back to functional automatic weapons. These insufficiently deactivated firearms have been found from Finland. Cabinet agrees that common deactivation standards would be an efficient mean to prevent illegal firearms trafficing and process to align standards should be expedited.

In Finland all restrictions apply only to law abiding citizens who use firearms in authorized and controlled shooting sports. Restrictions to internet sales would introduce additional challenges to those transactions where the distance between buyer and the seller is long. This is common in Finland. Also weapon maintenance is essential part of firearm safety.

The goal of the commission is to improve internal security of the EU. According to cabinet measures in E-letter, it is not possible to efficiently prevent obtaining firearms illegally. Instead proposed measures target already restricted legal activities. Received statements also indicate that the more strict the firearms control is, the bigger the demand for illegal firearms is. 

The changes should address restricting the illegal firearms trafficing instead. In addition cabinet states, that preventing crime in EU area requires contant efficient communication between different authorities and expert knowledge of the firearms law.

It is the opinion of the cabinet that in Finland firearms law is strict but functional which enables safe and controlled weapons collecting, shooting sports, hunting and reserve shooting activities and participation to shooting competitions. Cabinet also believes, that EU restrictions should rather use Finnish firearms legislation as a model of a working firearms law ant try to harmonize EU legislation according to Finnish legislation. 



The NASRPC resigned from the Sports Coalition on the 24th of October.  This followed several weeks of difficulties which had arisen between the NASRPC and the other Coalition Members in the run up to the Minister’s announcement of 18th of September which accompanied a new S.I. bringing clarity to the licensing of .22 calibre handguns and setting out a road map to the licensing system into the future.  It is unfortunate that the NASRPC’s principal officers have sought fit at various gatherings of shooting people to misrepresent the reasons for the difficulties which arose leading to their resignation.  I am therefore now publishing the full exchange of correspondence between the NASRPC and the Sports Coalition which clarifies the position and will demonstrate beyond doubt that the NASRPC personnel concerned were at all times off-side.


Des Crofton

National Director
Spokesperson for the Sports Coalition


NASRPC To Des Crofton – 16/10/2015

NASRPC E-Mail to Sports Coalition – Resigning from Coalition – 24/10/2015

Des Crofton Response to NASRPC – 26/10/2015