Cops took mates rifle.

jellybaby21

Hi just a question about rifle scope.My mate has just got his first rifle and bought it with scope and silencer.He applied for both on his licence.He got his licence in the post last week and got his gun.Now the cops have told him he was granted the gun licence but not for scope or silencer.Today they came and took his gun to have the scope removed.Should he have received some sort of paper work stating this?So how does he go about getting the scope added to his licence?He is not bothered about the silencer.And one more thing when he told the cop he wanted the scope back today the cop told him he would see what he could do.Where does he stand on this can they keep his scope?

ATB Wayne

Sparks

You don't need a licence for a scope. Not unless it's thermal or night-vision.
You do need permission for the silencer though. Was there an S stamped on his licence?
Call the Superintendent immediately (not anyone of lower rank in the station) and explain what's happened and ask for the firearm, scope (and moderator if there was an S on the licence) to be returned.

Cass

jellybaby21 wrote: »

............Now the cops have told him he was granted the gun licence but not for scope or silencer.Today they came and took his gun to have the scope removed............

Unbelievable. Thats, for want of a better word, an illegal seizure.

Sparks wrote: »

You don't need a licence for a scope. Not unless it's thermal or night-vision.

Massive +1

Call the Superintendent immediately (not anyone of lower rank in the station) and explain what's happened and ask for the firearm, scope (and moderator if there was an S on the licence) to be returned.

Never one to argue, , but forget the phone call and get your mate to get his ass down to the station and see the Super. The only thing they have grounds for taking is the mod if as said above he hasn't gotten the license with an "S".

This is the 4th such incident i've heard off recently with Gardai overstepping their authority and basically making up laws themselves. A license for a scope does not exist so your mate could never satisfy such a demand.

DO NOT let him sit on his hands with this one. Get down and get it sorted. Use the Fireamrs Policy Unit and if necessary some other legal agent to back you up if they gve you grief. I would also report this incident to the relevant Garda authority or ombudsman once your mate gets his rifle back. A clear case of stupidty on the Gardai behalf and a massive over stepping off their authority.



EDIT - Did your mate get any paperwork or receipt for the "seized" gun?

poulo6.5

jellybaby21 wrote: »

Hi just a question about rifle scope.My mate has just got his first rifle and bought it with scope and silencer.He applied for both on his licence.He got his licence in the post last week and got his gun.Now the cops have told him he was granted the gun licence but not for scope or silencer.Today they came and took his gun to have the scope removed.Should he have received some sort of paper work stating this?So how does he go about getting the scope added to his licence?He is not bothered about the silencer.And one more thing when he told the cop he wanted the scope back today the cop told him he would see what he could do.Where does he stand on this can they keep his scope?

ATB Wayne

That sounds a bit odd as you don't need a license for a scope.
What caliber rifle is it. And why did they have to take it away to do it he could have taken it off there and then.

Did your mate do something to piss of the gards

Sparks

poulo6.5 wrote: »

Did your mate do something to piss of the gards

While I'm a great fan of the idea of not taking an unnecessarily adversarial approach to dealing with the AGS (ie. not pissing them off), this is one case where - assuming no salient details have been omitted - I would believe some degree of assertiveness is required. The AGS cannot simply seize a firearm on the grounds that a part of it which does not require a licence - and for which a licence is not legally grantable - doesn't have one.

I'd hazard a guess that this is a case of an inexperienced Garda screwing the pooch - in which case the Super is going to be rather annoyed at that Garda - but the error has to get corrected.

Hell, this is the sort of thing that Barr found was a contributing factor to the Abbeylara fiasco.

jellybaby21

Just a bit of an update.He has now got his .22 back but they have kept the scope and have told him its going into storage.They said they had to bring it to a gun dealer to have the scope removed thats why they had to take the gun.And no he has done nothing to piss them off.They are insisting he wasn't granted a scope on his licence.They have said its new law.At the end of the day the scope is my mates so how can they keep it/

ATB Wayne

Cass

jellybaby21 wrote: »

Just a bit of an update.He has now got his .22 back but they have kept the scope and have told him its going into storage.

Illegal and wrong.

They said they had to bring it to a gun dealer to have the scope removed thats why they had to take the gun.

Bullsh1t. They are making out they took every precaution when removing the "dangerous" scope.

And no he has done nothing to piss them off.

Even more cause to get onto them.

They are insisting he wasn't granted a scope on his licence.

Get him to go back and tell them very clearly .................


YOU DO NOT NEED A LICENSE FOR A SCOPE.

They have said its new law.

Yet more bullsh1t. This is the worse case of stupidity mixed with a little power.

At the end of the day the scope is my mates so how can they keep it/

ATB Wayne

They cannot keep the scope. Plus if they went to a dealer even he would have told them you do not need a license for a scope. Get onto the Super TODAY, and the firearms policy unit. They are on the ball and have no real "side" so will give you a correct answe and right course of action.

poulo6.5

jellybaby21 wrote: »

Just a bit of an update.He has now got his .22 back but they have kept the scope and have told him its going into storage.They said they had to bring it to a gun dealer to have the scope removed thats why they had to take the gun.And no he has done nothing to piss them off.They are insisting he wasn't granted a scope on his licence.They have said its new law.At the end of the day the scope is my mates so how can they keep it/

ATB Wayne

Ok if that's the case then straight into the super and have his solicitor on the phone. Demand the scope back and don't take no for an answer.

They stole his scope.

If this new law exists then every scope in the country is going to be taken off by the gards.

A bit of a slip up that needs to be jumped on straight away before they loose the run of them selves.

Was it an old or youn gard

tfox

jellybaby21 wrote: »

They are insisting he wasn't granted a scope on his licence.They have said its new law.
ATB Wayne

Id love to hear exactly what piece of legislation they are referring to and when it was passed and without anyone in the shooting community hearing about it :mad:

Has he been to speak to the Super yet ? The powers that be really need to educate the men on the street about the current firearms legislation and repremand those that try to create there own :mad:

deerhunter1

jellybaby21 wrote: »

Just a bit of an update.He has now got his .22 back but they have kept the scope and have told him its going into storage.They said they had to bring it to a gun dealer to have the scope removed thats why they had to take the gun.And no he has done nothing to piss them off.They are insisting he wasn't granted a scope on his licence.They have said its new law.At the end of the day the scope is my mates so how can they keep it/

ATB Wayne

talking out of where the sun does not shine, and if it was a gun dealer he should have known better and informed the gardai, do not sit on your laurels with this one:mad:

underthetumb

this sh**e sickens my hole, they(garda) waste resorces on harrassing decent law abiding poeple, but let the dirt drive aroud the countryside lamping with high powered rifles. i know there is some good gardai out there, but these stories just confirm how incompetent some are.

staghunter

90% of gards haven't a notion of the gun law's it's a disgrace.i'd love to know what they teach them in templemore.you'd have some respect for them if they would listen to reason but there always rite.you'l gets as much time out of super as you did would out of guards.straight to soliciter is my advice

Arcto

If this were to happen to someone 'more in the know' what would you do? Point blank refuse to give them the gun? I think I would....god knows where that would go though

Keep us updated on this one and best of luck to your mate, hopefully this won't turn into a drawn out bolloxology court fiasco.

landkeeper

how did they know it had a scope and moderator on it ?
did they just call on chance or did he do something to attract attention to himself .
we are only getting half a story here

No6

underthetumb wrote: »

this sh**e sickens my hole, they(garda) waste resorces on harrassing decent law abiding poeple, but let the dirt drive aroud the countryside lamping with high powered rifles. i know there is some good gardai out there, but these stories just confirm how incompetent some are.

I am sure you mean lamping deer which is of course illegal as opposed to lamping foxes and shooting them with high powered rifles, or even slightly lower powered ones too which isn't as long of course as you're not driving and are off the road!!!

4gun

sounds like a wind up...maybe not

but my question is are you entitled to refuse to hand over a firearm if you know the grounds for seizure is false.. as in this case
do they require papers to take it from your house? warrant ?
what happens if the Guard wants your gun for his own personal reasons...

underthetumb

No6 wrote: »

I am sure you mean lamping deer which is of course illegal as opposed to lamping foxes and shooting them with high powered rifles, or even slightly lower powered ones too which isn't as long of course as you're not driving and are off the road!!!

sorry, yes meant deer

poulo6.5

4gun wrote: »

sounds like a wind up...maybe not

but my question is are you entitled to refuse to hand over a firearm if you know the grounds for seizure is false.. as in this case
do they require papers to take it from your house? warrant ?
what happens if the Guard wants your gun for his own personal reasons...

That's a good question. Can a Gard just decide to take your rifle with some bull**** excuse. Like your gun is black which is a valid as the excuse your gun has a scope.

I wonder is it a case that the Gard mention to take the moderator/ silencer and was confused and took the scope instead.

jellybaby21

landkeeper wrote: »

how did they know it had a scope and moderator on it ?
did they just call on chance or did he do something to attract attention to himself .
we are only getting half a story here

First off you are getting the story how it is.Have you ever applied for a rifle licence?If so you would know there is a box to be marked to say the rifle has a scope and a another box for a silencer thats how the cops knew it had a scope.

ATB Wayne

Spunk84

4gun wrote: »

sounds like a wind up...maybe not

but my question is are you entitled to refuse to hand over a firearm if you know the grounds for seizure is false.. as in this case
do they require papers to take it from your house? warrant ?
what happens if the Guard wants your gun for his own personal reasons...

id stick it in the safe and hide the keys!!!! Tell them to arrest me if they want it:D absolutely terrible if it is a true story....Imagine the headlines, Hunter arrested for having a scope:rolleyes: but imagine the claim against the Gard for pain and suffering!

virminhunter

correct me if I'm wrong but surely your average bog standard guard wouldn't be checking up on licencses, calling around to houses and seizing firearms on his or her own initiative, he'd have to be ordered to do so by a sergeant or firearms officer and surely that person would be well read on the law???

jellybaby21

Ezridax wrote: »

DO NOT let him sit on his hands with this one. Get down and get it sorted. Use the Fireamrs Policy Unit and if necessary some other legal agent to back you up if they gve you grief. I would also report this incident to the relevant Garda authority or ombudsman once your mate gets his rifle back. A clear case of stupidty on the Gardai behalf and a massive over stepping off their authority.

EDIT - Did your mate get any paperwork or receipt for the "seized" gun?

How would he get in contact with the Firearms Policy Unit, is there a number or an e-mail address for them?

4gun wrote: »

sounds like a wind up...maybe not

Not a wind up mate.

Bit of an update, was talking to my mate for a few mins earlier and he rang the super who is to ring him back in the morning, so I will let you know then what the story is.

stick shooter

jellybaby21 wrote: »

First off you are getting the story how it is.Have you ever applied for a rifle licence?If so you would know there is a box to be marked to say the rifle has a scope and a another box for a silencer thats how the cops knew it had a scope.

ATB Wayne

This might sound bizarre, But a friend of mine was contacted from his local station after applying for a .22lr saying his application was incomplete . He ticked the box for a scope and they say he didnt give a sufficient reason for needing a telescopic sight . He ended up having to write a letter stating reasons for requiring a scope before they would process his application .

4gun

jellybaby21 wrote: »

First off you are getting the story how it is.Have you ever applied for a rifle licence?If so you would know there is a box to be marked to say the rifle has a scope and a another box for a silencer thats how the cops knew it had a scope.

ATB Wayne

so maybe you mate didnt tick the right boxes.... shouldnt matter for the scope, but this is where we live

jellybaby21

virminhunter wrote: »

correct me if I'm wrong but surely your average bog standard guard wouldn't be checking up on licencses, calling around to houses and seizing firearms on his or her own initiative, he'd have to be ordered to do so by a sergeant or firearms officer and surely that person would be well read on the law???

Nobody said it was done on their own initiative, and when he called to the barracks, he went with an experienced gun owner who questioned the sergeant about the scope and the legislation they are basing their actions on and he couldn't give him an answer.
He also asked him about getting the scope added onto his license if there is such law and he didn't know that either.

So you tell me if that sergeant knows anything about gun laws?

jellybaby21

4gun wrote: »

so maybe you mate didnt tick the right boxes.... shouldnt matter for the scope, but this is where we live

The sergeant told him he ticked the box but he wasn't granted the license for the scope.

landkeeper

yes i have applied for a rifle license i have several :rolleyes: the point i am trying to make is if he ticked the box's for a sight and moderator and they were not granted as far as the guards were concerned he was still given his licence for the rifle how did the ptb come to know that he had those items on his rifle and why did they come knocking looking for the rig

jellybaby21 wrote: »

First off you are getting the story how it is.Have you ever applied for a rifle licence?If so you would know there is a box to be marked to say the rifle has a scope and a another box for a silencer thats how the cops knew it had a scope.

ATB Wayne

jellybaby21

landkeeper wrote: »

yes i have applied for a rifle license i have several :rolleyes: the point i am trying to make is if he ticked the box's for a sight and moderator and they were not granted as far as the guards were concerned he was still given his licence for the rifle how did the ptb come to know that he had those items on his rifle and why did they come knocking looking for the rig

You have just answered the question for me, he ticked the boxes to say his rifle had these things and thats how they knew..

We don't know why they came knocking, that's what we are trying to find out is there such law?

Cass

As Sparks said above the only reason to tick the box on the FCA1 marked sights is for NV or thermal, etc. Telescopic sights are not covered in the FCA1 or any legislation for that matter as they are classed as optics. ie- not a componant part of a firearm as the firearm will function with or without them.

There are a number of reasons a Garda can remove a firearm from someone. A few would be;

• Brandishing it in a public place in a threatening manner.
• Poaching
• Threatening someone specifically.
• Being stopped by a Garda, and found to have an item not covered on your license.

however, personally, if a Garda called to me and demanded my firearm for any reason especially one as absurb as stated in the OP he would be handed it so quickly. I would demand proof of violaton of my license conditions. Proof of which law i broke. I would call both the FRU and my solicitor on the spot.

Problem here is if i surrender the firearm, and nothing is wrong and the Gardai made a mistake, i would still have some job recovering the firearm. A friend of mine went through this a few years ago and it took him 2.5 years to recover his guns even though he was cleared of all "charges"/allegations within a week and got a written apology from the Garda that made the mistake.

Now i'm not condoning the "pry it from my cold dead hand" approach, but if you know your rights you will not be taken for a fool. The problem in Ireland being there is still a certain amount of "fear" of the Gardai. The sight of the uniform and the assumption that they would not be at my door by mistake still runs true.

landkeeper

jellybaby21 wrote: »

You have just answered the question for me, he ticked the boxes to say his rifle had these things and thats how they knew..

We don't know why they came knocking, that's what we are trying to find out is there such law?

ok look at it slightly differently he was granted a licence for a bare rifle no scope no silencer(their description)
what alerted them to the fact that he had both a scope and a silencer
when i applied for a 223 i didn't tick the silencer part but did for the sight
the licence was granted no-one came to my door to check if i had in fact got the sight
when i applied for .17 i ticked the silencer and scope boxes and got a s on the licence again no-one came to check wether or not i had them

stick shooter

jellybaby21 wrote: »

You have just answered the question for me, he ticked the boxes to say his rifle had these things and thats how they knew..

We don't know why they came knocking, that's what we are trying to find out is there such law?

If you contact sgt paul greene who is over the firearms policy unit ,
He will be able to throw some light on it for you , He is straight forward and willing to help in any way he can ,;)
Pm sent with his number .

Tackleberrywho

I believe there has to be more to this story.........

jellybaby21

landkeeper wrote: »

ok look at it slightly differently he was granted a licence for a bare rifle no scope no silencer(their description)
what alerted them to the fact that he had both a scope and a silencer
when i applied for a 223 i didn't tick the silencer part but did for the sight
the licence was granted no-one came to my door to check if i had in fact got the sight
when i applied for .17 i ticked the silencer and scope boxes and got a s on the licence again no-one came to check wether or not i had them

As far as I am aware, when he was applying for the license the gards asked him if there was a scope and a silencer on the rifle and he told them there was, and they told him today that they had checked the paperwork and he was not granted the license for the silencer and the scope and that is why they came and took the gun.

ATB Wayne

landkeeper

well that makes more sense , keep us informed as to what happens he was a bit of a pillock though taking the rifle with the silencer without having a ticket for it.!especially if applied for and refused . i think on those grounds he may be lucky if he gets back on track , i heard of another lad a while ago who had his licence revoked when found in possesion of a moderator on a centrfire rifle with no s on his licence

bravestar

Scrolling through this thread I started multi-quoting things to respond to but I realized that it would entail responding to almost every post.

It's quite interesting to see how almost every post in this thread automatically sided with the OP, who's second hand information is the basis of the thread, and the usual "Feckin Gardai are a law unto themselves" started.

While one or two posters seem to have maintained an unbiased view, it appears some have used it to air their own grievances.

I'll tell you one thing Gardai are not taught to do in Templemore, jump to conclusions, and one thing we are, to investigate.

Who is to say the scope was not stolen property.

Edit: Only saw Jellybaby21's most recent post after posting the above, what a surprise... there was more to it than we were originally told.

It wasn't me!

bravestar wrote: »

I'll tell you one thing Gardai are not taught to do in Templemore, jump to conclusions

Followed by

Who is to say the scope was not stolen property.

I laughed...

stick shooter

bravestar wrote: »

Scrolling through this thread I started multi-quoting things to respond to but I realized that it would entail responding to almost every post.

It's quite interesting to see how almost every post in this thread automatically sided with the OP, who's second hand information is the basis of the thread, and the usual "Feckin Gardai are a law unto themselves" started.

While one or two posters seem to have maintained an unbiased view, it appears some have used it to air their own grievances.

I'll tell you one thing Gardai are not taught to do in Templemore, jump to conclusions, and one thing we are, to investigate.

Who is to say the scope was not stolen property.

I must say if noting else thats an interesting view :p

landkeeper

i doubt that is the case however a more likely scenario is that once it became apparant that there was a scope and moderator on the rifle and that in their eyes these were refused when applied for tptb decided to do it by the book probably if it were just a scope then there would have not been a problem , however a moderator is a different matter

shanmoll308

This is unbelievable :eek::mad:..By law a gard can not remove your firearm from your house or car without a letter from the sergeant stating why the firearm is to be removed.

Shanmoll308.

Cass

There is subtle difference here and another case where the law is a dick.

An RFD cannot sell a firearm without the necessaru license/paperwork. He CAN however sell a mod without the buyer needing the necessaey license paperwork. The onus is on the firearm owner to have the necessary "S" on his/her license.

When buying a rifle second hand sometimes it comes with a mod. If you are refused permission for the mod, but granted the license for the rifle you can store the mod in your safe once you do not possess, use the mod in public ( i'll have to verify that). The "S" on your license gives you permission to use the mod and have possession of one when out shooting, yet it is classed as a firearm in tself, yet you do not need a license to buy on off a dealer, but do of another private seller (not a dealer).

It would make your head spin.

bravestar wrote:

Who is to say the scope was not stolen property

No serial on most scopes plus why was the OP's friend not charged with receipt of stolen property?

and the usual "Feckin Gardai are a law unto themselves" started

Before you start making assumptions of your own perhaps you would be best advised reading bac through the years of posts/threads. Everyone on this forum is a legal and law abiding registered firearms owner. We know more about gun laws than most Gardai, and for the most part we have the upmost of respect for the job they do.

What i do no agree with nor shall i ever, is the few Gardai that either through not understanding the law or acting through a power buzz or incompetence act inappropriately themselves.

As a member of AG maybe you could answer so. Do you need an license for a scope? Irrespective of the statement of the OP this is not the first time this issue has come up. Another poster only a month or so ago went to buy a new rifle and new scope, and was refused a "License" for his scope. Why?

A few more.


Why are some people told:

• Its against the law for anyone under 18 to have a firearms license.
• You can only have 1/2/3 fireamrs. Its illegal to have more.
• A .308 bolt action rifle is restricted.

These are all topics that have been asked in the last few months. If you go back through more threads you will find more. All comments told to perspective firearm owners by AGS. All completely wrong.

jellybaby21

bravestar wrote: »

Who is to say the scope was not stolen property.

Edit: Only saw Jellybaby21's most recent post after posting the above, what a surprise... there was more to it than we were originally told.

What do you mean more to the story than what you were originally told?

And if the Gards said the scope was stolen I would hardly come on here and make a fool of myself :rolleyes:

Spunk84

jellybaby21 wrote: »

Hi just a question about rifle scope.My mate has just got his first rifle and bought it with scope and silencer.He applied for both on his licence.He got his licence in the post last week and got his gun.Now the cops have told him he was granted the gun licence but not for scope or silencer.Today they came and took his gun to have the scope removed.Should he have received some sort of paper work stating this?So how does he go about getting the scope added to his licence?He is not bothered about the silencer.And one more thing when he told the cop he wanted the scope back today the cop told him he would see what he could do.Where does he stand on this can they keep his scope?

ATB Wayne

Quick question how did they find out there was a scope on the rifle

bravestar

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Followed by



I laughed...

Questioning the legitimacy of if the scope is stolen or not was a beginning and is not a conclusion, a conclusion is
1.the end or close; final part.
2.the last main division of a discourse, usually containing a summing up of the points and a statement of opinion or decisions reached.
3.a result, issue, or outcome; settlement or arrangement: The restitution payment was one of the conclusions of the negotiations.

Ezridax wrote: »

No serial on most scopes plus why was the OP's friend not charged with receipt of stolen property?



Before you start making assumptions of your own perhaps you would be best advised reading bac through the years of posts/threads. Everyone on this forum is a legal and law abiding registered firearms owner. We know more about gun laws than most Gardai, and for the most part we have the upmost of respect for the job they do.

What i do no agree with nor shall i ever, is the few Gardai that either through not understanding the law or acting through a power buzz or incompetence act inappropriately themselves.

As a member of AG maybe you could answer so. Do you need an license for a scope? Irrespective of the statement of the OP this is not the first time this issue has come up. Another poster only a month or so ago went to buy a new rifle and new scope, and was refused a "License" for his scope. Why?

A few more.


Why are some people told:

• Its against the law for anyone under 18 to have a firearms license.
• You can only have 1/2/3 fireamrs. Its illegal to have more.
• A .308 bolt action rifle is restricted.

These are all topics that have been asked in the last few months. If you go back through more threads you will find more. All comments told to perspective firearm owners by AGS. All completely wrong.

I'll try answer your questions to the best of my abilities.

For a start, you did not know that the OP's friend was NOT charged with possession of stolen property. That's my point, most people ran to defend the OP's friend without knowing anything about why the firearm was taken, other than the fact that it was taken. Either way, we now have the reason clarified as to why the rifle was taken.

I am well aware most people here are law abiding registered firearms owners, I am also a law abiding registered firearms owner. I cannot excuse certain Gardai giving out bad advice regarding firearms. If they didn't know they should have said so, if someone asks me about traffic related offences i'll be the first one to say I have an awful knowledge of its various nuances, ask me about firearms/drugs/serious crime and i'll waffle the ear off you.

We all have our various areas of interest and I personally have no problems admitting when im stumped.

bravestar

jellybaby21 wrote: »

What do you mean more to the story than what you were originally told?

And if the Gards said the scope was stolen I would hardly come on here and make a fool of myself :rolleyes:

Firstly, to answer your question, If you had of said originally that your friend had no "S" on his licence, the reason for the firearms seizure would have been obvious to everyone. While you may not have known, because it was your friends licence, if there was an "S" or not, similarly you probably did not know the source of the scope unless you were with him when he bought it.

Tackleberrywho

Local Sarge asked me to give a guy a few tips for convo with CS as I was successful in my covo and knew more specifics than the sarge did about firearms, but we are biased, we are firearms enthusiasts so we have a yearning for firearm law and legislation.

There is always more to a story

eg someone reported OP's friend for USING a moderator without a licence

Horse,different,colour

Most gardaí do not craic the whip without probable cause

stick shooter

bravestar wrote: »

Questioning the legitimacy of if the scope is stolen or not was a beginning and is not a conclusion, a conclusion is
1.the end or close; final part.
2.the last main division of a discourse, usually containing a summing up of the points and a statement of opinion or decisions reached.
3.a result, issue, or outcome; settlement or arrangement: The restitution payment was one of the conclusions of the negotiations.



I'll try answer your questions to the best of my abilities.

For a start, you did not know that the OP's friend was NOT charged with possession of stolen property. That's my point, most people ran to defend the OP's friend without knowing anything about why the firearm was taken, other than the fact that it was taken. Either way, we now have the reason clarified as to why the rifle was taken.

I am well aware most people here are law abiding registered firearms owners, I am also a law abiding registered firearms owner. I cannot excuse certain Gardai giving out bad advice regarding firearms. If they didn't know they should have said so, if someone asks me about traffic related offences i'll be the first one to say I have an awful knowledge of its various nuances, ask me about firearms/drugs/serious crime and i'll waffle the ear off you.

We all have our various areas of interest and I personally have no problems admitting when im stumped.

Ok and fair points but when someone comes on here looking for help of advice i/we like to think that the story they are tell us is the full story and the truth.
We all bare in mind the story we have being told and base our best advice on them facts .We can only base our opinion on facts given .

Cass

Spunk84 wrote:

Quick question how did they find out there was a scope on the rifle

The OP's friend ticked the sights box on the FCA1 in error. He thought he was doing right, but as said above its only for NV, etc scopes.

bravestar wrote:

For a start, you did not know that the OP's friend was NOT charged with possession of stolen property. That's my point, most people ran to defend the OP's friend without knowing anything about why the firearm was taken, other than the fact that it was taken. Either way, we now have the reason clarified as to why the rifle was taken.

As with most things on Boards.ie we only have the OPs honesty to go on. I'm sure he would not be on here seeking opinions if his mate had a stolen scope or some other "skeleton" in his closet. Again this is not always the case and there have been a few threads where after questioning the OP rigourously we find out that they have infact done something to warrant the seizure/treatment they receive.

If they didn't know they should have said so, if someone asks me about traffic related offences i'll be the first one to say I have an awful knowledge of its various nuances, ask me about firearms/drugs/serious crime and i'll waffle the ear off you.

We all have our various areas of interest and I personally have no problems admitting when im stumped

Therein lies the problem. You can admit when you don't know, and if i was looking for an opinion or some friendly advise then i'd take what you or someone told me and see how it fairs out. However if we go by what some people are being told we either don't apply due to poor advice/instruction or we end up being in breach of the conditions of our licenses due to poor advice/information/instruction. The Garda that issued the poor advice can say he made a mistake, but the person involved could be charged with an offense and possibly prohibit them from owning a firearm again.

Now i know thats worse case scenario, but i'm truely surprised something like this has not happened before now with the level of threads of a similar theme as described above.

A quick example.

I was in a dealers a while ago and i know a few others have seen this, where he was handing out notes/letters from AGS. They were "mini" application forms to be completed with the FCA1 seeking permission for a scope on a rifle. I told him that there is no such law and they are not mandatory, and he shouldn't really be forcing the issue on people. He agreed, but as always he relies on a good relationship with his local Gardai to keep his business running smoothly. A month later i was back with him and the forms were gone. They had to be removed.

In relation to your statement that we immediately went into "Garda bashing mode" , well i'll both refute that and defend it as follows. If you seen the amount of posts, threads, e-mails, PMs i recieve and i'm sure there are many others that get the same, asking almost the exact same questions as the OP or something very similar it would shock you. I see alot more of this than some and not as much as others.

The Gardai i refer to above are the 5% that give the 95% a bad name. Why would they give poor advice if they don't know. I don't expect an answer its rhetorical. I was once told by a Garda that if he had his way we wouldn't have shotguns let alone "sniper rifles". This is the same person others have to go to to get the firearms licenses.

now maybe you see where some of the annoyance read above comes from.

bravestar

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

we are firearms enthusiasts so we have a yearning for firearm law and legislation.

Im with you 100% on that.

stick shooter wrote: »

Ok and fair points but when someone comes on here looking for help of advice i/we like to think that the story they are tell us is the full story and the truth.
We all bare in mind the story we have being told and base our best advice on them facts .We can only base our opinion on facts given .

Thats fair enough Stick Shooter, I guess im just somewhat more suspicious of peoples given my job. Hows about a hug?!

bravestar

Ezridax wrote: »

The OP's friend ticked the sights box on the FCA1 in error. He thought he was doing right, but as said above its only for NV, etc scopes.



As with most things on Boards.ie we only have the OPs honesty to go on. I'm sure he would not be on here seeking opinions if his mate had a stolen scope or some other "skeleton" in his closet. Again this is not always the case and there have been a few threads where after questioning the OP rigourously we find out that they have infact done something to warrant the seizure/treatment they receive.



Therein lies the problem. You can admit when you don't know, and if i was looking for an opinion or some friendly advise then i'd take what you or someone told me and see how it fairs out. However if we go by what some people are being told we either don't apply due to poor advice/instruction or we end up being in breach of the conditions of our licenses due to poor advice/information/instruction. The Garda that issued the poor advice can say he made a mistake, but the person involved could be charged with an offense and possibly prohibit them from owning a firearm again.

Now i know thats worse case scenario, but i'm truely surprised something like this has not happened before now with the level of threads of a similar theme as described above.

A quick example.

I was in a dealers a while ago and i know a few others have seen this, where he was handing out notes/letters from AGS. They were "mini" application forms to be completed with the FCA1 seeking permission for a scope on a rifle. I told him that there is no such law and they are not mandatory, and he shouldn't really be forcing the issue on people. He agreed, but as always he relies on a good relationship with his local Gardai to keep his business running smoothly. A month later i was back with him and the forms were gone. They had to be removed.

In relation to your statement that we immediately went into "Garda bashing mode" , well i'll both refute that and defend it as follows. If you seen the amount of posts, threads, e-mails, PMs i recieve and i'm sure there are many others that get the same, asking almost the exact same questions as the OP or something very similar it would shock you. I see alot more of this than some and not as much as others.

The Gardai i refer to above are the 5% that give the 95% a bad name. Why would they give poor advice if they don't know. I don't expect an answer its rhetorical. I was once told by a Garda that if he had his way we wouldn't have shotguns let alone "sniper rifles". This is the same person others have to go to to get the firearms licenses.

now maybe you see where some of the annoyance read above comes from.

I take your points on board and im sorry to hear that is going on. I can see why some people might be pissed off alright if that sort of thing is happening. I would be very much the oppostie of what that Garda told you regarding "sniper rifles".

jellybaby21

bravestar wrote: »

Firstly, to answer your question, If you had of said originally that your friend had no "S" on his licence, the reason for the firearms seizure would have been obvious to everyone. While you may not have known, because it was your friends licence, if there was an "S" or not, similarly you probably did not know the source of the scope unless you were with him when he bought it.

Ok I see where your coming from and he had no S and thats fine he has no problem with them having the silencer.And if I didnt say this earlier im sorry for that.And as far as I know they have taking the silencer before today so they only took the gun today to remove the scope and brought his gun back to him.

Sorry again if I left things out earlier or if I wasn't clear in what I was saying.

ATB Wayne

Cass

bravestar wrote: »

I can see why some people might be pissed off alright if that sort of thing is happening.

I'm a strong believer in "don't tar everyone with the same brush". It happens too often here when non shooting persons visit this forum and paint us all as gun nuts. So what i say is directed at that small percentage that are casuing problems.

I would be very much the oppostie of what that Garda told you regarding "sniper rifles".

I shoot with some Gardai both hunting and in a target capacity. I have the upmost of respect for these lads and my FO. The man is a gent and also an avid shooter so it makes all my applications easier when the person i am speaking to knows not only what i'm talking about, but can actually give an opinion on the caliber/rifle/make, etc.

I might come across as strong on this thread, and without insulting you, i make no apologies for it. However the majority of young lads just starting off take the word of any member of AGS as Gospel, and if given poor instructions will not fight/argue/dispute the point.

Anyway i am only repeating myself at this point. There are some Gardai that should not be involved in firearms/licensing due to lack of knowledge on the matter or their attitudes towards firearms and firearm ownership.No more than some firearm owners that should probably not have a firearm, however its not my call either way.