Handgun ammunition

rabbit assassin

Hey , I shoot Rifles and Shotguns , clays and game.. I am looking to start pistol shooting. A huge influence for me is ammunition price as im sure it is for alot of people.. Im wondering what kinda price a box of 50 rounds is for say a .357 , 9mm , etc... i expect to pay up to €1000 for the gun which is to be expected, but I once owned a .308 and paying near €40 for 20 rounds was sickening , i mean i love shooting its in my blood...but i dont love it that much.. so just wondering if anyone can give me an idea on ammo prices ? ive found a price on www.shoot.ie for 9mm ammo , it was €13 for 50 which isnt as bad as i was expecting ! ,


thanks

Grizzly 45

Are you serious???:eek:
Unless you have had a handgun liscense for any calibre over .22lr before Nov 2008....Somone is about to fleece you out of a Grand for a handgun you will find impossible to liscense here.Unless you are exporting it to NI,Isle of Man,or mainland EU,and ammo is cheap and plenty over there.
Which seeing that there only now 397 legally liscensed handguns of big calibre here...So a question on ammo prices would be academic for your calibre.

The only pistol shooting you will be doing here for the forseeable future post Nov 08 is .22lr Olympic style target shooting,as mandated by our superiors and betters :rolleyes: At least the ammo is cheap.12 quid??[Been awhile since I bought any] a box of 50s:)

rabbit assassin

wow so it appears my local garda station doesnt know **** !!! im so sick of this !! so can you still get .22 pistols licensed here and does it have to be an olympic style pistol? Ive been interviewed by the gaurds , had house calls about wanting to possess a pistol and i havent even put a deposit down on a gun yet...
So if i put money down on a .22 pistol tomorrow will they license it ? and can I just use it at the range or do i have to partake in serious other competitions?

Cass

As mentioned by Grizzly45 unless you held a license for a centrefire pistol before the 18th of November 2008 you CANNOT license one, hence CANNOT get one now.

You can buy and license (up to your Super of course) a .22 caliber pistol. It amy not hold more than 5 shots so this should factor into your choice. Anything over a 5 shot and it is deemed restricted, hence CANNOT be licensed. You ARE NOT limited to Olypic events/style shooting. You can take part in numerous club and national rimfire competitions. If Olympic is your cup of tea then go for a designated Olympic style pistol otherwise you have a few other options. Check out the NASRPC. They are the main organisation ovber pistols and hold numerous competitons and events country wide.

As to getting a license only your Super can say for sure. If your good reason is deemed enough you will get it. The only reason for having a pistol is target shooting so any other options" are out. You do not HAVE to take part in competitions immediately. Obviously there will be a "bedding in" period while you learn the basics and get shooting. You will find yourself competing more and more as your confidence and competency grows.

I do not own a .22 pistol, but some of the other lads here do and recommend a good starter pistol thats not in the thousands of euro price range.

rabbit assassin

Ive owned guns since i was 16 so Ive been shooting since I were a young lad , currently I own 4 guns I used to have 7 , I just want a pistol I can spend an hour or two at the range with maybe 1 weekend a month or whenever I can (depending how far away it is) so I can only license a 5 shot .22lr pistol? what would be good cause for getting a license for more than a 5 round (obviously not more than a 10 round mag) My local Garda station is absolutely no use , its rediculous Im basically finding out that all the info i have got from them about licensing a pistol is bullplop !

Cass

rabbit assassin wrote: »

............... what would be good cause for getting a license for more than a 5 round (obviously not more than a 10 round mag) .............

You can't, unfortunately. Its legally NOT POSSIBLE.

As said only those that held restricted pistol licenses (usually centrefire, but not all) before 18th November 2008 can re-apply for a new license. Anyone after this date CANNOT apply for a restricted license as they are no longer being issued.

A .22 pistol with a mag capacity of more than 5 rounds is deemed a restricted firearm and you cannot get a license for them now.

You CAN apply for a .22 caliber pistol with a mag capacity of 5 (or less) shots. These are processed by the local Super. Also not to forget revolvers, but again they cannot hold more than 5 rounds in the cylinder, and the 6 hole may need to be permanently plugged to satisfy a Super that the firearm is incapable of holding/firing a sixth round.

rabbit assassin

thanks for the info lads this is a major eye opener , ive found some .22's on that shoot.ie website but they all have 10 round magazines, would i have to have this modified to just fit 5 yeah?

Cass

The last thing i want to do is try and "scare" you away from pursuing a pistol license. Its a great sport and a huge amount of fun. however there is no point in "sugar coating" answers to make it seem more atractive, to let you get hit by all this later on.

A super will demand that the pistol cannot hold more than 5 shots otherwise your application will not be entertained. The two methods i know of from lads i have met are:

1. Have the magazine(s) plugged to render them incapable of holding more than five shots.
2. Buy 5 round specific mags that cannot hold more than 5 rounds, and cannot be altered at a later date to accept more than 5 rounds.

Whichever your Super chooses will be the right one. Only he can say for sure. I know you'd probably like a more definitive aswer, but really anything i say about his decision would be pure guess work.

Shoot.ie is a great source for types/makes/models, etc, but please ring around all dealers you can. Alot of lads have sold their old guns, not bothered to relicense them or could not get a license for them so there are a few pistols out there to be gotten, second hand at good prices. Worth a few phone calls.

bunny shooter

Good non olympic style semi-auto pistols include Ruger MK I, MK II & MK III (had one of these, lovely pistol); Browning Buckmark (currently have one of these myself, great pistol).

S&W 22A, lovely .22lr revolvers (will get one of these myself EVENTUALLY! ..... Super has to go sometime )

sfakiaman

Google 'Commissioners Guidelines' and go to Annex F on page 41. There is a list (though not exclusive) of pistols that may be licensed provided they are no more than five shot. Do not expect the local station to know anything but if you have the list in your hand you're off to a good start.

clivej

sfakiaman wrote: »

Google 'Commissioners Guidelines' and go to Annex F on page 41. There is a list (though not exclusive) of pistols that may be licensed provided they are no more than five shot. Do not expect the local station to know anything but if you have the list in your hand you're off to a good start.

Just because its not on the list does not mean you can't get it. And then you need to decide if its a true target pistol you want or a a pistol for 'plinking' at targets at the range as that dictate the type of pistol you will get. You will also need to be a member of a range that 'shoots/is cleared for pistols' (AFAIK), because your only allowed to shoot at a range (AFAIK).

This is from the 'Commissioners Guidelines'

ANNEX F: SUITABLE OLYMPIC STANDARD PISTOLS

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]The following .22 calibre firearms come within the definition of section 4(2)(e)(iii) of the Firearms (Restricted Firearms and Ammunition) Order, 2008 as amended. Accordingly, applications for certificates for these [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]NON RESTRICTED [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]firearms should be made to the local [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]superintendent [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]of the Garda Síochána where the applicant resides. [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]

Baikal

IZH 35

Baikal

IZH 35M

Benelli

MP90S

Benelli

MP95E

Beretta

U22 Neos\87

Browning

Buckmark

FAS Domino

SP602

FAS Domino

SP607

FAS Domino

SP 607 Light

Feinwerbkau

AW 93

Feinwerbkau

AW 93 Light

Frankonia

Favorit

Hammerli

208\S

Hammerli

280

Hammerli

SP 20\SP 20 RRS\Xesse

Matchguns

MG2\E

Matchguns

MG2\E-RF

Morini

CM102E\CM22E\M\RF

Pardini

SPE

Pardini

SP or SP Rapid Fire

Pardini

SP1 or SP 1 Rapid Fire

Sako

Tri-Ace

Smith & Wesson

22A\41\617

Ruger

Mark I\ II\ III

Taurus

94

Tesro

TS 22-2

Unique

DES 69\U

Walther

GSP or GSP expert

Walther

SP22\SSP\M4

Walther

KSP\SSP

[/FONT][/FONT]

clivej

Looking to get this sometime myself (pipe dreams here) its the Feinwerkbau AW93. One of the best Olympic style 22lr pistols out there and its on the 'List'.

Sparks

The AW93 is a lovely piece of kit. If you're more looking for something a bit cheaper though, the Ruger Mk2, the buckmark, the S&W41 are basic entry level pistols which do well in the NASRPC style matches, and there are cheap pistols like the Baikal IZH35 which do well in ISSF style matches.

Also, Ezri's completely correct on the legal side of things above with one caveat - it's the restricted status of the pistols that makes them impossible to licence at present. If we could change that status (with a single SI signed by the Minister, no new primary legislation - and the Bill and Act stuff that goes wtih that - would be required) then you could licence centerfire pistols again. But for now that's a long-term goal and the smallbore (or air) pistols are all we'll see for the immediate future.

BTW, nobody's mentioned it yet, but a decent air pistol can be had for less than €300, there are more ranges that can cope with them, and the ammo costs about €8-12 for 500, rather than €12 for 50, and you'll learn all the basic fundamentals of pistol shooting with one, probably a lot faster because you're focussing on how to fire the shot, rather than being distracted by the recoil (which you can learn to deal with later on).

Also, I've not heard of any Super getting bent out of shape over an air pistol yet.

sfakiaman

clivej wrote: »

Just because its not on the list does not mean you can't get it.

Which is why I said the list was not exclusive, but armed with the list and details of the pistol you want, it should be possible to show that what you want falls within the parameters of the legislation.

Mr.Flibble

Ezridax wrote: »

Also not to forget revolvers, but again they cannot hold more than 5 rounds in the cylinder, and the 6th hole may need to be permanently plugged to satisfy a Super that the firearm is incapable of holding/firing a sixth round.

Unlike an ISSF semi auto, which is capable of holding a 6th.

Go figure :mad:

Sparks

An ISSF semi auto is not capable of holding a 6th shot unless you put an illegal magazine in it.

In other words, ISSF pistols, if you do illegal things to them, can become illegal.
Just like, oh, I don't know, every other pistol out there?

It wasn't me!

I presume he means you could chamber one, load another in the mag and have six in the pistol. This is true, however, it's also perfectly possible to buy more ammunition than is on your licence. It's still illegal. It's possible to buy an unrestricted 10/22, license it as an unrestricted firearm, then stick it in an AR clone stock, at which point it "resembles an assault rifle" (And let's not get picky. There are plenty of judges out there who would rule on that between heartbeats.) and is therefore a restricted firearm for which you do not have a licence, and therefore illegal. Best just to stick with the really obvious spirit of things.

Mr.Flibble

It wasn't me! wrote: »

I presume he means you could chamber one, load another in the mag and have six in the pistol.

Pretty much. In that regard you are evidently smarter than Sparks!

It wasn't me! wrote: »

It's still illegal.

Why? My reading of the regulation is that it refers to the magazine capacity of the pistol, not the total capacity.

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Best just to stick with the really obvious spirit of things.

I agree. The "obvious spirit" is that a conventional sixgun capable of holding one shot aligned with the barrel ready to fire and five others in the gun ready to be brought into position for subsequent shots should be treated essentially the same for legal purposes as a 5+1 capable semi-auto.

Sparks

Mr.Flibble wrote: »

Pretty much. In that regard you are evidently smarter than Sparks!

Except that he just said the same thing I did. Do something illegal to an ISSF pistol and it becomes illegal.

Why? My reading of the regulation is that it refers to the magazine capacity of the pistol, not the total capacity.

Your reading is wrong. The correct reading is as it applies to shotguns and always has - total amount of ammunition in the firearm, regardless of whether or not it's chambered. You're looking at the real definition while reading the law - that's why there's confusion.

I agree. The "obvious spirit" is that a conventional sixgun capable of holding one shot aligned with the barrel ready to fire and five others in the gun ready to be brought into position for subsequent shots should be treated essentially the same for legal purposes as a 5+1 capable semi-auto.

And it is. Both are illegal. That's why ISSF pistols don't get loaded with six shots.

It wasn't me!

Mr.Flibble wrote: »

Why? My reading of the regulation is that it refers to the magazine capacity of the pistol, not the total capacity.



I agree. The "obvious spirit" is that a conventional sixgun capable of holding one shot aligned with the barrel ready to fire and five others in the gun ready to be brought into position for subsequent shots should be treated essentially the same for legal purposes as a 5+1 capable semi-auto.

That's not the obvious spirit at all, and well you know it. Quite the contrary. The widespread insistence on restricting revolvers to five shots by plugging the cylinder would indicate that to abuse the spirit of the legislation by having a sixth round chambered with five in the mag of a semi-auto was not how they envisioned the legislation working in practice and that it would be frowned upon.

Mr.Flibble

Sparks wrote: »

The correct reading is as it applies to shotguns and always has - total amount of ammunition in the firearm, regardless of whether or not it's chambered.

Based on what?

Sparks

Mr.Flibble wrote: »

Based on what?

About 140-150,000 shotgun licences over the last few years, where the same condition applies (3 shells in the firearm or it's restricted - meaning if you have 3 in the magazine and one chambered and have an unrestricted licence, then you're in possession of an unlicenced firearm).

None of us like this law Fibble, but we don't have the option of pretending we don't know what it says.

Mr.Flibble

Sparks wrote: »

About 140-150,000 shotgun licences over the last few years, where the same condition applies (3 shells in the firearm or it's restricted - meaning if you have 3 in the magazine and one chambered and have an unrestricted licence, then you're in possession of an unlicenced firearm).

None of us like this law Fibble, but we don't have the option of pretending we don't know what it says.

I can see what it says. You're implying it means something different. But a brief comment about shotgun licensing is not sufficient evidence to back up that implication.

Chapter & verse?

Mr.Flibble

It wasn't me! wrote: »

That's not the obvious spirit at all, and well you know it.

No, I don't. I appreciate it's the practice in some ISSF competitions to shoot in strings of five, but you're missing the point. The law refers to the capacity of the pistol, not the competition rules. Shooters of ISSF s/a pistols are being granted unrestricted licences for 6-shot pistols (quite legally in my opinion, but Sparks may yet prove me wrong) on the basis that it's an acceptable security risk offset against their convenience for 5-shot competition. The obvious spirit, common sense if you prefer, is that revolver shooters should get the same treatment.

It wasn't me! wrote: »

The widespread insistence on restricting revolvers to five shots by plugging the cylinder would indicate that to abuse the spirit of the legislation...

...isn't uncommon amongst the authorities.

It wasn't me! wrote: »

how they envisioned the legislation working in practice and that it would be frowned upon.

I'm unconvinced that visions and frowning are a good basis for a legal system.

It wasn't me!

"Visions" are exactly why we end up with a bucket of case law, and frankly, I don't much fancy the chances of the first person in front of court arguing that it's a six-shot pistol, so therefore his six-shot revolver is unrestricted (when the more obvious conclusion is that a revolver's cylinder represents its magazine and therefore can only have five, same as the detachable mag of a semi-auto pistol).

rrpc

Regardless of the spirit/letter/# angels on head of pin, I would be extremely wary of advising or even countenancing doing what Mr. Flibble suggests.

In most five shot pistols that I'm familiar with, chambering a sixth round requires inserting the magazine, chambering a round, removing the magazine, putting another round in it and re-inserting the magazine.

That's a lot of handling of a loaded pistol with the exponentially increased risk of something going awry. In a competition scenario, this might have to be done in a short time span, thus increasing the risk of something going wrong.

Having acted as RO in many pistol competitions, I can attest that I have had to tap competitors on the shoulder during normal loading operations to remind them to keep their pistol pointed downrange. Even the most experienced competitors can and have erred in this regard under the pressure of a competitive environment.

Not something I would be even close to comfortable with and I haven't even touched on the 'how many have I loaded and how many have I fired' scenario...

To the OP. I give the same advice to everyone who wishes to start pistol shooting. Go along to some competitions and have a look at what people are using. There's only one way to find out what suits you and it's not going to be learned from looking at pictures on the interweb. I know too many people who bought on that basis and lived to regret it.

Bananaman

+1 on RRPCs advice

firstly you are making a mistake by referring to some pistols as ISSF pistols - sure there may be a propensity for a certain type in a particular sport but that should only help inform your decision

there is no reason you could not be competitive with a revolver in an ISSF rimfire match - maybe not in the Olympics but unless you're 10 years old that is unlikely to be a concern

go see hat people are using - get first hand descriptions of problems likes dislikes etc and then make your mind up

B'Man

Sparks

First off, RRPC's advice is right on the money.

Mr.Flibble wrote: »

I can see what it says. You're implying it means something different. But a brief comment about shotgun licensing is not sufficient evidence to back up that implication.
Chapter & verse?

I see where you're coming from with the chapter and verse - but I don't agree with your reading of the statute because you're ignoring case law to make it. It says "capacity" for shotguns and "magazine capacity" for handguns, yes. You could go to court on that point, yes. It does not mean you'll win the argument in court or in the real world, for two main reasons, and you shouldn't make the argument for a better reason.

Pragmatically, the restricted list is an SI, it can be changed without going to the Dail, so the word magazine could be deleted from the law before you got to the steps of the court to make your case, without the Minister having to break a sweat.

Legally, it's already been made clear in case law that the interpretation is for overall capacity, not someone mucking about chambering a round by hand on the range then reinserting a magazine.

And in the long term, you're harming centerfire pistol owners to spite ISSF pistol shooters, because the amendment we all want to the SI is to take centerfire pistols off the restricted list (and thus allow their relicencing), not to get into pissing contests between disciplines, which is where this is coming from and leading back to.

xesse

pardini stock mags hold 6 rounds
:eek::eek::eek:

Sparks wrote: »

An ISSF semi auto is not capable of holding a 6th shot unless you put an illegal magazine in it.

In other words, ISSF pistols, if you do illegal things to them, can become illegal.
Just like, oh, I don't know, every other pistol out there?

Sparks

xesse wrote: »

pardini stock mags hold 6 rounds
:eek::eek::eek:

And they would be illegal. At least in Ireland. Until you modify them to take only 5 rounds.

Guys, this isn't rocket science. The law says 5. Yes, it's a stupid law. No, nobody outside the AGS wanted that limit. Yes, we'd all like to see it changed. But pretending it doesn't exist when it was put forward by the people who will enforce the law is a recipe for landing yourself in court unnecessarily and bringing down all manner of crap on everyone else's head. We've already seen what harm even one bad judgement in a court case can do to everyone. Risking another over such a weak argument seems deeply flawed.

Bananaman

And it's all conjecture anyway.

We can all think we are experts but as has been shown above

• One person reads the law and takes it verbatim
• Another reads the law and draws conclusions based on similar laws
• Another reads the law and draws conclusions based on past performance of the lawmakers
• Another reads the law and draws conclusions based on past performance of the courts.
• And we can be sure that plenty of other people will draw yet more conclusions.

Personally - i would read the law verbatim and apply the rule of cop on "If it feels like your are in the wrong or 'bending' the rules - you are most likely in the wrong"

My view - and I am no expert so cannot offer advice - in essence if you have a non-restricted rimfire pistol license and have no more than five rounds in your magazine you are not in breach of the law.

Whether that would be interpreted differently by the Gardai - should they have occasion to check - only they can tell you.

if they had occasion to check you would probably have more to worry about.

B'Man

clivej

OK a question to all you that know far more than I do/will.

I attended a competition where T&P 1 was the detail. One of the details was 6 shots x 2 with a change of mag to reload. Those with 5 round mags loaded one in the chamber with 5 in the mag to shoot the detail and did the same for the last 6 shoots.

What way is that legally????

bunny shooter

clivej wrote: »

OK a question to all you that know far more than I do/will.

I attended a competition where T&P 1 was the detail. One of the details was 6 shots x 2 with a change of mag to reload. Those with 5 round mags loaded one in the chamber with 5 in the mag to shoot the detail and did the same for the last 6 shoots.

What way is that legally????

Good question Clive

I have a un-restricted .22lr pistol licence and I have a Browning Buckmark.

Could the practice not be changed to 5 rounds x 2 ?

And as I eventually want a S & W 22A, which will have to be restricted to 5 rounds too, wouldn't changing the round count be a simpler solution.

clivej

bunny shooter wrote: »

Good question Clive

I have a un-restricted .22lr pistol licence and I have a Browning Buckmark.

Could the practice not be changed to 5 rounds x 2 ?

And as I eventually want a S & W 22A, which will have to be restricted to 5 rounds too, wouldn't changing the round count be a simpler solution.

Save up the extra and get the S&W model 41. Great bit of kit. I shot one over the weekend and want one. But thats not going to happen now is it. ;)

I got the good news today , I only have to tell her indoors now:o:o

NASRPC: Nigel

The SBP T&P1 - Smallbore Pistol Timed & Precision 1 discipline is shot in 6-shot strings. The Discipline pre-dates the NASRPC and was initially designed by the NRA UK.

For those who cannot compete in the Smallbore T&P disciplines, due to lack of capacity in their firearms, NASRPC designed a new discipline last year.

GP40 - Gallery Pistol 40

This was designed from the outset to include only 5 shot strings
As the discipline calls for a holstered start some new rules and penalties were defined and are being rolled out through the clubs at the moment.

If you have any questions on it please contact your local club who should themselves be running an introduction to GP40 in due course or drop a line to competitions@nasrpc.ie

clivej

NASRPC: Nigel wrote: »

The SBP T&P1 - Smallbore Pistol Timed & Precision 1 discipline is shot in 6-shot strings. The Discipline pre-dates the NASRPC and was initially designed by the NRA UK.

For those who cannot compete in the Smallbore T&P disciplines, due to lack of capacity in their firearms, NASRPC designed a new discipline last year.

GP40 - Gallery Pistol 40

This was designed from the outset to include only 5 shot strings
As the discipline calls for a holstered start some new rules and penalties were defined and are being rolled out through the clubs at the moment.

If you have any questions on it please contact your local club who should themselves be running an introduction to GP40 in due course or drop a line to competitions@nasrpc.ie

Thanks for that reply as that is the right way to go so that people with the smaller mags can compete .

thanks
cj

Sparks

And hopefully the restricted list can get amended in the future and the entire problem can just go away and let us get on with the sport part of all of this...

Mr.Flibble

Sparks wrote: »

Legally, it's already been made clear in case law that the interpretation is for overall capacity,

Still insufficient detail to back up your assertion.

Chapter & verse.

Sparks wrote: »

you're harming centerfire pistol owners to spite ISSF pistol shooters,

No I'm not. I don't think I even mentioned centrefire pistols, and I only used the term "ISSF s/a pistols" as a convenient way of describing a sub-category of unrestricted firearm.

Sparks wrote: »

pissing contests between disciplines, which is where this is coming from and leading back to.

Not from me it isn't. Maybe it is from other posters, or if you're reading it into my posts perhaps that says more about you than me.

It wasn't me! wrote: »

"Visions" are exactly why we end up with a bucket of case law, and frankly, I don't much fancy the chances of the first person in front of court arguing that it's a six-shot pistol, so therefore his six-shot revolver is unrestricted (when the more obvious conclusion is that a revolver's cylinder represents its magazine and therefore can only have five, same as the detachable mag of a semi-auto pistol).

I don't know about obvious; after all the obvious conclusion is that the sun goes round the earth.

Your conclusion is far from obviously the logical one. With a decent brief and an unprejudiced judge I'd say the "chances" mightn't be bad at all.

In any case I never said anything about going to court; I'd just like equal treatment from the PTB for guns of equal firepower.

Sparks wrote: »

Yes, it's a stupid law.

Now you understand.

If you'd just said that the first time..........

Sparks wrote: »

And hopefully the restricted list can get amended in the future and the entire problem can just go away and let us get on with the sport part of all of this...

Yes, that I do agree with.

clivej wrote: »

OK a question to all you that know far more than I do/will.

I attended a competition where T&P 1 was the detail. One of the details was 6 shots x 2 with a change of mag to reload. Those with 5 round mags loaded one in the chamber with 5 in the mag to shoot the detail and did the same for the last 6 shoots.

What way is that legally????

I think it's legal.

Sparks & IWM say it isn't.

RRPC thinks it's dangerous.


Looks like I'm outvoted.

Tackleberrywho

Sparks wrote: »

And hopefully the restricted list can get amended in the future and the entire problem can just go away and let us get on with the sport part of all of this...

Myself and my 15 round Glock hope so too!

Silly Rules IMvHO :cool:

I want a Remington 1911 to complete my collection!:pac:

rrpc

xesse wrote: »

pardini stock mags hold 6 rounds
:eek::eek::eek:

Speak for yourself!

Mine will only take five. Impossible to get a sixth in - just won't fit. But you can easily fix yours to be the same as mine

Sparks

Mr.Flibble wrote: »

Now you understand.
If you'd just said that the first time..........

I did. I think the first time I pointed out that it wasn't a great law was in 2005, but I may have repeated myself on that point once or twice over the last few years.

I think it's legal.
Sparks & IWM say it isn't.
RRPC thinks it's dangerous.
Looks like I'm outvoted.

Well, if you happen to have the price of a new car just burning a hole in your pocket and don't mind the law being tightened even further to get around any possible victory in the courts, you could always go get judicial ruling on the point.

I just think that there are better uses for that money...
...and less risk in just trying to fix the root of the problem rather than it's end effects.

Mr.Flibble

Sparks wrote: »

I did. I think the first time I pointed out that it wasn't a great law was in 2005, but I may have repeated myself on that point once or twice over the last few years.

I meant on this thread. Incidentally, when was that SI drafted?

Sparks wrote: »

Well, if you happen to have the price of a new car just burning a hole in your pocket and don't mind the law being tightened even further to get around any possible victory in the courts, you could always go get judicial ruling on the point.

I just think that there are better uses for that money...
...and less risk in just trying to fix the root of the problem rather than it's end effects.

I know. That's part of the reason for the sense of frustration & injustice.

rabbit assassin

The only thing putting me off an air pistol is the fact that for the same amount of hassle I may aswell just go for a .22lr , sure the ammo is cheap for the air pistol, but I can actually get a bulk box of .22lr ammo for €25 for 525 which is amazing ! granted its not as good as €12 for a tin of 500 but still !

Sparks

Mr.Flibble wrote: »

I meant on this thread. Incidentally, when was that SI drafted?

SI would have been drafted over late 2007/early 2008. But the restricted list itself was mooted in the 2004 Bill (which became the 2006 Act), specifically at committee stage, which came out at the time of that post in 2005.

I know. That's part of the reason for the sense of frustration & injustice.

I think everyone who ever looks at the law shares that sense of fustration - it's not limited to any one sub-group.
The thing is, every time we've given into that fustration and tried a short-cut to getting what we want, whether we do it by pulling a stroke or whether we get shouty or go to court on unnecessary cases, we learn the hard way that we don't have any legal rights in our sport, and usually lose another little piece of what we have The only gains we've ever made that have stuck have come from the long, continous, unsexy, fustrating, tiresome and thankless grind of talking to the PTB rather than trying to go round, under, over or through them.

Mr.Flibble

Sparks wrote: »

SI would have been drafted over late 2007/early 2008. But the restricted list itself was mooted in the 2004 Bill (which became the 2006 Act), specifically at committee stage, which came out at the time of that post in 2005.

What was on (or off if it's easier to express it that way) the list regarding pistols at that time?

Sparks wrote: »

the long, continous, unsexy, fustrating, tiresome and thankless grind of talking to the PTB

Normally fruitless as well.

bunny shooter

Mr.Flibble wrote: »

....... the list ......................

:eek: I'm having a flashback :eek:

rrpc

rabbit assassin wrote: »

The only thing putting me off an air pistol is the fact that for the same amount of hassle I may aswell just go for a .22lr , sure the ammo is cheap for the air pistol, but I can actually get a bulk box of .22lr ammo for €25 for 525 which is amazing ! granted its not as good as €12 for a tin of 500 but still !

I don't know what the brand or type of ammo you're talking about, but I suspect that it would not be suitable for target shooting or at best pretty poor quality. The pellets at €12/500 would be the equivalent of spending €30/100 for .22 target ammo.

Sparks

Mr.Flibble wrote: »

What was on (or off if it's easier to express it that way) the list regarding pistols at that time?

There wasn't a list until 2008 (calm down Bunny, deep breaths), there was just the provision to have a restricted list (the reason I thought it was a daft law in 2005 was that the idea of a list was a daft idea, and had been a major PITA everywhere from California to Canada where it had been implemented - and why we'd introduce a three-tier system of our own when there was already an EU system in place with four tiers made no sense to me).

Normally fruitless as well.

But not always; and while I have a lot of respect for the effort and risk taken by those that go through the courts, I still maintain that that's not the way to improve our lot because every single time we won something in the court that the Minister didn't want us to have, he rewrote the law; so you cannot win in the courts in the long term. Whereas everything we ever got from talking to the DoJ, we've kept; and we've avoided a lot worse than we're facing now through the same mechanism.