Centre fire pistols?

Ketron

I've been doing a good bit of reading on the subject on the legalities of centre fire pistols in Ireland. I would like to eventually own one, I'll start with a .22 first, but it would be nice to know if I can upgrade!

Is there a complete blanket ban on issuing licences for them?

Regardless if you are gardai/army etc?

Thanks!

Cass

Ketron wrote:

Is there a complete blanket ban on issuing licences for them?

Short answer is yes.

Long answer - Unless you have held a firearm certificate for a centrefire pistol on or before the 18th November 2008 you cannot apply, own, possess a centrefire pistol.

The only caliber pistols being considered or that a person can apply for is a rimfire caliber once it is not capable of holding more than 5 shots. Or alternatively an Air pistol.

Being a member of An Gardai/Army makes no difference. If the pistol is a personal item, as in you hold the firearm certificate for it, and it was not issued to you as a member of either force for the purposes of your duties then you still cannot have one.

There are no centrefire pistol (restricted short arms) licenses being issued.

dax121

im afraid you dont have a hope of getting a CF pistol in ireland unless you had one licenced pre oct 2009? when they amanded the firearms act :mad:

Ketron

Thanks for the replies lads, had a feeling that was the story....now why didnt I apply in 2007!

Whats the future in regards to this looking like?

Can you apply for a .22 with a 10 round magazine in the restricted category?

Ketron

Ezridax wrote: »

There are no centrefire pistol (restricted short arms) licenses being issued.

That answered my last question

Cheers again!

rowa

Ezridax wrote: »

Short answer is yes.

Long answer - Unless you have held a firearm certificate for a centrefire pistol on or before the 18th November 2008 you cannot apply, own, possess a centrefire pistol.

The only caliber pistols being considered or that a person can apply for is a rimfire caliber once it is not capable of holding more than 5 shots. Or alternatively an Air pistol.

Being a member of An Gardai/Army makes no difference. If the pistol is a personal item, as in you hold the firearm certificate for it, and it was not issued to you as a member of either force for the purposes of your duties then you still cannot have one.

There are no centrefire pistol (restricted short arms) licenses being issued.

I have heard of members of the guards having a very difficult time licencing even .22 rifles and shotguns, so its not easy for anyone.

Cass

Ketron wrote: »

Can you apply for a .22 with a 10 round magazine in the restricted category?

No.

The 10 round mag limit makes the pistol a restricted firearm, and as its the restricted licenses that are not being issued you will not get a license.

The "misconception" is that all centrefires are banned (or whatever terminology you wish to use). The actual way it stands is instead of banning the pistols by make, model, mag capacity, they have simply "banned" the granting of restricted, short arm, license. This covers any C/F pistols, any pistol of rimfire nature that exceeds the mag limit. In other words it gives a much broader scope than naming a particuler caliber(s).

Whats the future in regards to this looking like?

An SI by the Minister could free up 80+% of C/F pistols within a couple of weeks. Sparks could give you a much more detailed explanation of this from a legal point of view as his understanding is greater than mine.

However for the time being there seems to be no movement on the subject so unfortunately we have to wait and see.

Cass

rowa wrote: »

I have heard of members of the guards having a very difficult time licencing even .22 rifles and shotguns, so its not easy for anyone.

There is the thing. We look at An Gardai as the "enemy" when infact they suffer the same restrictions and grief as every other shooter when trying to licens a firearm. I know of two RFDs that have had trouble getting their pistol licenses even though they met all the criteria.

Its based on the person irrespective of their standing, profession, etc.

Ketron

Its a touchy thing when it comes to politics, unfortunately, mainly due to ignorance on the subject.

I have heard stories on guards not being issued licences for centerfires before, some guy wanted to shoot in police competitions and the super put a damper on it.

Hopefully something will be done about, I'd like to own one at some stage!

dax121

Ketron wrote: »

That answered my last question

Cheers again!

their actually is restricted .22 pistols out their. i wanted 6 rounds for comp use so they gave me a restricted licence for my s&w 22a. saying because it was restricted i could have 6 rounds in the mag

Cass

When did you get the license?

rowa

dax121 wrote: »

their actually is restricted .22 pistols out their. i wanted 6 rounds for comp use so they gave me a restricted licence for my s&w 22a. saying because it was restricted i could have 6 rounds in the mag

Which is all nonsense in the first place because its the magazine which holds the rounds so if you have two magazines, one ten round and the other 5 round , the gun is restricted with one and non restricted with the other.

Witcher

What realistically speaking are the chances of the Gov. changing their stance on CF pistols? I know Shatter supported some anti bloodsport policies or such but what are his views on firearms?

tac foley

Blay wrote: »

What realistically speaking are the chances of the Gov. changing their stance on CF pistols? I know Shatter supported some anti bloodsport policies or such but what are his views on firearms?

Now, that, Sir, is one of the great imponderables. We simply do not know what Mr Shatter's POV is regarding current or future licensing, firearms or indeed anything else for that matter. AFAIK, he has not visited any of the shooting centres to meet up with people FTF and discuss matters - did he visit the recent International shooting competition venue at the Midlands?

tac

Cass

rowa wrote: »

............ if you have two magazines, one ten round and the other 5 round , the gun is restricted with one and non restricted with the other.

The problem is with the 5 round mag you are within the limitations/conditions of your license. With the 10 round mag you are in breach of your license conditions. Silly - yes, but thats what we have.

Blay wrote: »

What realistically speaking are the chances of the Gov. changing their stance on CF pistols? I know Shatter supported some anti bloodsport policies or such but what are his views on firearms?

As was said who knows. Only the man himself, and as we have not had any statment or discussions with him it remains a mystery. As to the anti bloodsport policies well i know he was president or some such title with ICABS, etc , but they give that "honour" to anyone that will accept, and it changes more often than the weather.

Perhaps an NGB/coalition of NGBs could lobby him with respect to some of our concerns. Perhaps they have, but have not yet received a response. Guess we'll see whether its sooner or later though is anyone's guess.

tac foley wrote:

did he visit the recent International shooting competition venue at the Midlands?

No, but in his defence he was only in the job a wet week, and i doubt the competition, as big as it was, was of little concern to him. Again only speaking from my own view point, but he has alot of other matters to deal with that fall under the remit of his position/title, and i suppose from his perspective that while changes are needed in firearms law/legislation for the time being with the 2009 Act things are "ticking along nicely" and there is no immediate need to address any issues.

Again its only my thoughts of what he may or may not be thinking, and its pure speculation/guess work. I could be way of the mark, and he is infact drafting new legislation that will see a return of C/F pistols to all, loosening of the restricted firearms list, etc.:D

rowa

tac foley wrote: »

Now, that, Sir, is one of the great imponderables. We simply do not know what Mr Shatter's POV is regarding current or future licensing, firearms or indeed anything else for that matter. AFAIK, he has not visited any of the shooting centres to meet up with people FTF and discuss matters - did he visit the recent International shooting competition venue at the Midlands?

tac

Well brian cowan made a big thing of turning up at the midlands rifle range in tullamore for handshakes and photos , had nothing but praise for the shooters of ireland and not long afterwards the poison dwarf ahern under cowans watch, done his best to destroy irish shooting. So shatters attendance or lack of it at shooting venues isn't an indication of how he stands on shooting sports.

dax121

Ezridax wrote: »

When did you get the license?

about 9 months after this new act came in. i argued that 5 rounds arent of any use to me for comps. so after he heard my arguement me gave me a restricted licence saying it will alow me to have 6 rounds in the mag. its a bollox law why not make it 6?
i think their just makeing it difficult on us :rolleyes:

Cass

Thats interesting and amazing in equal amounts.

You got a restricted, short arm, license in April (or there abouts) of 2010. Congratulations. You are literally the only person i've heard of, know of, spoken to that has one.

Don't pick me up wrong i'm delighted you got it, and fair play. I'm just wondering how the Chief Super "passed" this one off to his/her superiors. It would surely leave the door open for anyone else seeking one to take a case.

Just to be clear it was the Chief Super that issued it?

dax121

their is actually a few restricted short firearms issued with going to the district court. we have one in our club it was one if the first to be issued in the country. a few of the CF guys were lucky and got theirs granted be it by mistake of whatever but they got it.
im not actually going to name the person as i still have to deal with them but it was the chief super. and lets just say their beef was with CF pistols and not .22's.

firefly08

Does this 5 round business mean you can't have a .22 revolver? Or does it only apply to automatics?

Tackleberrywho

firefly08 wrote: »

Does this 5 round business mean you can't have a .22 revolver? Or does it only apply to automatics?

you have to plug one chamber
an f'in joke.


Thankfully my pistol is legal with 15 round mags

rowa

firefly08 wrote: »

Does this 5 round business mean you can't have a .22 revolver? Or does it only apply to automatics?

The smith and wesson is on the list , i seen a 10 shot one with half the chambers plugged, typical dense irish.

dax121

rowa wrote: »

The smith and wesson is on the list , i seen a 10 shot one with half the chambers plugged, typical dense irish.

i saw one also with 5 chambers plugged. ruined a lovely revolver :mad:

dax121

Ezridax wrote: »

Thats interesting and amazing in equal amounts.

You got a restricted, short arm, license in April (or there abouts) of 2010. Congratulations. You are literally the only person i've heard of, know of, spoken to that has one.

Don't pick me up wrong i'm delighted you got it, and fair play. I'm just wondering how the Chief Super "passed" this one off to his/her superiors. It would surely leave the door open for anyone else seeking one to take a case.

Just to be clear it was the Chief Super that issued it?

i just want to clear up something. i had got my licence for a restricted short firearm 8-9 months after they amended the firearms act. however it was not a new application it was a rewenal. just got stuck with all the other restricted pistols in the CS desk. reason why it ended up on the CS desk was i ticked restricted firearm box as i wanted to be able to load 6 rounds for comp use. hence the restricted .22 pistol.

Bananaman

For clarity it must be stated that there ARE restricted licenses for short firearms - both rimfire and centrefire

Some people, such as myself, were lucky to simply renew their license after.the great cull of 2008 - we still compete, both at home and abroad.

The vast majority, however, both rimfire and.centrefire, were not and were refused renewals of.their restricted licenses, for various spurious reasons

Many of those, numbering in the hundreds, appealled and. have been before the courts (NOTE: we may not discuss the specifics on this forum) going on three years now. I have no doubt, that in the fullness of time we.will see.them back on the.competition circuit

Some have been lucky to complete the appeals process and have already been back in competitiin.

So, for now, you may not apply for a.restricted short.firearm license - you may however, apply for an unrestricted license, limited to .22 calibre.

Most competitions now cater for.this having made adjustments to and.indeed having introduced new.disciplines.

So, it aint pretty, it aint ideal, but you can do it

B'Man

Cass

Bananaman wrote: »

For clarity it must be stated that there ARE restricted licenses for short firearms - both rimfire and centrefire

I understand as i have a restricted license myself, but AFAIK know anyone holding a restricted firearms license for a short firearm MUST have held a license for it on or before 18th NOvember 2008.

How many if any were issued after this date that did NOT hold a restricted license?

dax121 wrote: »

i just want to clear up something. i had got my licence for a restricted short firearm 8-9 months after they amended the firearms act.

They amended the firearms in July 2009. The minister made his statment in November 2008 (18th) stating anyone seeking a restricted firearms license may not apply for one after this date unless it was previously held. So by you getting yours 8-9 months after the new legislation, and i understand you say it was because of delays, but even if you got it immediately and did not hold a restricted license prior to 18th November 2008 then technically you shouldn't have been able to apply.

I held my license prior to the 18th Nov. 2008, yet was refused a license when i went ot substitute one 9mm for another 9mm in Feb 2009.

however it was not a new application it was a rewenal.

The thing with the new legislation is the licenses are all NEW APPLICATIONS. Every 3 years you must re-apply to get your licenses for your firearms. They are not actually classed as renewals. Yes you are asked did you hold a license for this firearm in the previous 3 years, but its still not classed as a renewal. Thats my understanding based on info from numerous Gardai, FPU, and people more in the know than i.

just got stuck with all the other restricted pistols in the CS desk. reason why it ended up on the CS desk was i ticked restricted firearm box as i wanted to be able to load 6 rounds for comp use. hence the restricted .22 pistol.

I understand what you're saying, but i have to ask. Prior to the 18th November 2008 did you hold a restricted or unrestricted license?

EDIT - I have to stress that i'm not trying to be awkward i'm just trying to clarify how a restricted license was issued after the "cut off date".

Mr.Flibble

Ezridax wrote: »

I understand what you're saying, but i have to ask. Prior to the 18th November 2008 did you hold a restricted or unrestricted license?

EDIT - I have to stress that i'm not trying to be awkward i'm just trying to clarify how a restricted license was issued after the "cut off date".

It makes no difference; the 2009 Act just says "..a firearms certificate.."

If his cert, which he clearly implies he had, was issued before Feb 2008 would there be any distinction anyway?


For someone who's not trying to be awkward you're succeeding admirably. You give a strong impression you think he shouldn't have this pistol.

dax121

sure before this ban werent all .22 pistols just normal certs?
also ezirdax my understanding of the this is you could not do a sub on a CF pistol?
maybe thats why even tho you had a licence they woulnt allow it?

Cass

Mr.Flibble wrote: »

You give a strong impression you think he shouldn't have this pistol.

Your inference is of no concern to me. I have continuously said that is not the case. I'm trying to understand all the aspects of his license because i was refused a substitution and he seems to have been granted a restricted license after the date. Nothing sinister in it.

For someone who's not trying to be awkward you're succeeding admirably.

You are simply provoking me for the purposes of an argument which quite frankly i'm not in form for so knock yourself out.

dax121 wrote:

also ezirdax my understanding of the this is you could not do a sub on a CF pistol?

Yes you could. I got the substitution. What i was refused was the import license. Then another lorry load of crap because of mix up in paperwork, then they tried to refuse my license because they said i was issued a new license for a new handgun. When i told them that i never got the firearm, and i was still licensed on my old pistol i got it resolved but they threw the 18th November 2008 thing in my face saying my "new" license was after this date and i was not getting the license. I got it all sorted, but the Nov date was key in their rasoning for trying to refuse me, and with all the other crap about the sub.


Hence my reason for asking so many questions. I believe they had no valid reason for refusing the import license, and i should have been allowed to get the gun. I was granted the sub so i obviously was deemed still responsible enough, yet the DOJ still refused the import license.

Anyway water under the bridge, and as i seem to be upsetting people i'll leave it be.

dax121

ur the first guy ive heard of to get a sub on a CF pistol. and i know guys that have tryn to get them. because their is alot of good cheap CF pistols out their. one guy i know wanted one that was all ready in the country and he was refused. suppose again it depends of ur CS

Cass

I got the sub in Feb 2009. Then all the crap mentioned above began. My license was amended back to the original firearm. hen when i found a gun almost the same already in the country i was refused the sub. :mad:

Cannot win. I was refused the import on the basis that they didn't want a "proliferation" of handguns. :rolleyes: So i thought with the gun already being in the country that this would be an easy one. Then i was told "we cannot sub it until the new act goes through, etc etc."

dax121

yes so u cant sub a CF pistol hence all the ****.
some just made a cock up and issued it. pity u didnt find the one in the country first instead of import

Cass

Well technically i wasn't refused, but it was strongly suggested to me to NOT apply for the sub again. If successful it would be deemed as a new license and come the new legislation i would loose it.

Bananaman

Ironically, ezri, yours is one of the good news stories, with a happy ending - they are a rare fish - most were not and have had to go the legal route to try to get theirs back

I have a Glock 34 and I remember people telling me I should switch it as that is all I was allowed do - but I like shooting it and am ok with it and wanted to keep it so I applied and got my license

I also have two restricted rifles (a .38 and a buckmark - restricted by incompetence alone)

I also have a Browning Buckmark Pistol but alas coukd not get a restricted license and am liimited to 5 shots per mag, for.the greater good, mar ya

A 6th round in the buckmark 22 pistol wiuld have made me a menace to society but the 9mm pistol, the 22 rifle and the '38 are ok.

There are more fish tales ariund this subject than I care to count - 'I heard .....', etc. Its good to hear a good one which starts with 'I did .......'

on the jubject of what date and whether it was before or after the chief supers breakfast - I would, personally, not get into specifics in matters like that

There is a tendency, here on boards, for people to tear a piece of good news to bits to the degree where people are made to feel guilty for succeeding - its not right

An individuals license is a matter for them and their super and not for the rest of us.

An individuals refusal, on the other hand, generally seems to be a part of a policy which, in my opinion, makes it fair game.

B'Man

Cass

Bananaman wrote: »

Ironically, ezri, yours is one of the good news stories, with a happy ending - they are a rare fish - most were not and have had to go the legal route to try to get theirs back

While i understand that my situation had a happy ending with not as much fuss as others, it did not come easy either. Months upon months of arguing providing paperwork, meeting, chasing up Gardai that had retired to get a letter signed by them, etc.

on the jubject of what date and whether it was before or after the chief supers breakfast - I would, personally, not get into specifics in matters like that

There is a tendency, here on boards, for people to tear a piece of good news to bits to the degree where people are made to feel guilty for succeeding - its not right

I think too many people are picking me up wrong here, and even with me stating thats not my intention allow me to say it again to clarify.

I'm delighted for dax121. I wish there were more like him. However my curiosity, eagerness to find out the details of how, etc came across as an "inquisition". Also if a person can get a restricted license, even for a .22, then it opens up things slightly for others.

An individuals license is a matter for them and their super and not for the rest of us.

Then, with all due respect, if its a matter you'd rather keep private perhaps Boards is not to place to discuss it at all. I have noticed over the last two years that when questions, polls, etc come up about pistols, locations, amounts granted per county there is very little to no answers because people are hestitant to reveal whether they got theirs, got it easily, etc. And thats fair enough, but if you're willing to come on and say you got X or Y then realistically you need to be prepared for questions from others.

I have no issue with discussing my situation. Its not as easy as some nor as difficult as others, but it shows people another route that had to be taken to get a license. Also the Gardai are well aware of my situation as i dealt with them on the matter. It comes back to our attitude of "tell them nothing, its none of anyone's business".

An individuals refusal, on the other hand, generally seems to be a part of a policy which, in my opinion, makes it fair game.

B'Man

Thats a shame though. If people got a license they should be able to come on here and post about it. Half the problems we have are if we get good news we hide it for fear someone will see it and take away the license (exaggerating there, but you get the idea). This leaves us with nothing but a long list of trouble stories, and horror situations, and it makes for discvouraging reading from a newbie perspective.

Sometimes its nice to read or hear a good news story.

Anyway, i apologise to dax121 as it seems my questions have come across as inqusitionional (for want of a better word), but genunely that was not my intention.

Bananaman

Ezridax wrote: »

......
Thats a shame though. If people got a license they should be able to come on here and post about it. Half the problems we have are if we get good news we hide it for fear someone will see it and take away the license (exaggerating there, but you get the idea).
.....

Right on the money.

rowa

You say we don't hear about the good news , but from my experience there is very little good news concerning pistols about, all except two or three individuals i know have had their licences refused for centrefire or rimfire pistols and have either had to go down the district court route or appeal directly to the gardai.
Dealing with the gardai is a tedious and frustrating task , i rang the firearms policy unit today to ask for clarification about the legality of my revolver for which i am seeking a licence and was told it was restricted for too reasons, it is six shot where as it should be only five, and secondly the barrel is 170mm where as it should be a maximum of 100mm according to the si ! I'll get the hacksaw out.

Cass

rowa wrote: »

You say we don't hear about the good news , but from my experience there is very little good news concerning pistols about, all except two or three individuals i know have had their licences refused for centrefire or rimfire pistols and have either had to go down the district court route or appeal directly to the gardai.

I'm not defending the numbers, its terrible so many have lost their licenses, but there are currently 400 or so licensed pistols out there whether they are restricted or not. I'm just saying we only hear of the refusals, it'd be nice to hear about someone who got theirs or kept it.

Dealing with the gardai is a tedious and frustrating task , i rang the firearms policy unit today to ask for clarification about the legality of my revolver for which i am seeking a licence and was told it was restricted for too reasons, it is six shot where as it should be only five, and secondly the barrel is 170mm where as it should be a maximum of 100mm according to the si ! I'll get the hacksaw out.

This is were knowing the law is handy. I think they are wrong if they told you that. The law says a short firearm is a firearm that does not exceed 30cm or 60cm with any detachable componant. Also to be unrestricted it cannot be shorter than 10cm.
SI 337/2009

other firearms using 0.22 inch long rifle rim fire percussion
ammunition provided that the maximum magazine
capacity of such a firearm does not exceed five
rounds and that the barrel length of the firearm is
greater than 10 cm.”.

None of them say it has to be a maximum of 10cm. If that were the case then all Olympic, Hammerli, Xesse, Ruger, Buckmark, and pretty much every other .22 on the famous list would be restricted as most are over 10cm in length. Plus look at Sig Mosquitos. They are also licensed and have a 3.9 inch barrel.

rowa

I had the si in front of me ezridax and knew he was talking crap , but it is shocking you can ring a firearms policy unit and no one apparently knows the rules or anything about firearms , typical irish logic strikes again.
He also told me the s+w 617 is a restricted firearm no matter what is done to it so i don't know. I'd have been better off ringing the speaking clock.

Cass

Did you mention or quote the SI to them? Did they still argue the point after you done this?

I'm surprised at the FPU being like this. I've had dealings with them and they have always been helpful and the info given by them was on the money.

As to the S&W 617. The 10 round thing is an issue. I know of 2 lads, and heard of one other that was refused a license, and wouldn't even have their application accepted for similar pistols even when given documentation by the manufacturer to say the extra cylinders would be plugged permanently.

rowa

Ezridax wrote: »

Did you mention or quote the SI to them? Did they still argue the point after you done this?

I'm surprised at the FPU being like this. I've had dealings with them and they have always been helpful and the info given by them was on the money.

As to the S&W 617. The 10 round thing is an issue. I know of 2 lads, and heard of one other that was refused a license, and wouldn't even have their application accepted for similar pistols even when given documentation by the manufacturer to say the extra cylinders would be plugged permanently.

I asked them was it the new policy that handguns be as short as possible and he grudgingly accepted a mistake was made , they weren't helpful and i certainly won't bother with them again.

tac foley

rowa wrote: »

I'd have been better off ringing the speaking clock.

Don't know about that, every time I call them up I get a different answer...

tac

dax121

rowa wrote: »

He also told me the s+w 617 is a restricted firearm no matter what is done to it so i don't know. I'd have been better off ringing the speaking clock.

they make it up as they go along the 617 is on the list for suitable olympic standard pistols. as long as it hold only 5 rounds its non restricted. so if you have 1 chamber or 5 plugged its still un restricted. its in the new guidelines in black and white.
the sooner ireland gets a independant body over the firearms and take the decisions away from the gardi the better. once you tick all the box's you should get ur firearm. and its not up to ur super or CS personal opinions it will be the same all across the board.
but again i couldnt see a body set up like this anytime soon :mad:
forgot to say i have a unrestricted 617 5shot as do 2 others in the club.

rowa

The whole thing is a dogs breakfast and also a postcode lottery , in some areas a super/chief super will give you something that in an other area is a no no.
It should be the same as germany , the police do the background checks etc and after that its an office staffed by civilians who complete the licencing process.
Whatever idiot came up with this restricted/non restricted thing should be ashamed of themselves.

dax121

rowa wrote: »

It should be the same as germany , the police do the background checks etc and after that its an office staffed by civilians who complete the licencing process

same as what im on about in the above post. i couldnt see it happening tho :mad:
hopefully the minister will re do the firearms act at some stage soon and maybe take some ideas from the shooters. or maybe go to some other goverment to see how they go about firearms licenceing. ie civilans who complete the licencing process after back round checks

Bananaman

Depending on which 'civilians' are running it you could have the same problem

At the moment licensing is catered for by the justice dept under the 'Criminal' justice laws

That, IMHO, is the nub of the issue - its a sports matter (albeit with security concerns) not a criminal issue

B'Man

dax121

Bananaman wrote: »

Depending on which 'civilians' are running it you could have the same problem QUOTE]

yes but it would be the same for everyone right across the board. once you tick all the boxs and prove that you need the firearm you wouls get it. not like here where a guY in the club i know gets a .38 spl for his first rifle 1984c. and i have to wait and battle for 9 months before i get mine. and i did tick all the boxs. this panel of civilans lets say would be instructed its the same for everyone and it would led to a fairer and better licenceing system
just my opinion on it im sure alot will disagree

Bananaman

dax121 wrote: »

Bananaman wrote: »

Depending on which 'civilians' are running it you could have the same problem

yes but it would be the same for everyone right across the board. once you tick all the boxs and prove that you need the firearm you wouls get it. not like here where a guY in the club i know gets a .38 spl for his first rifle 1984c. and i have to wait and battle for 9 months before i get mine. and i did tick all the boxs. this panel of civilans lets say would be instructed its the same for everyone and it would led to a fairer and better licenceing system
just my opinion on it im sure alot will disagree

Oh - I agree - 100% - I am just cynical, old and cranky.

There are too many little hitlers (aswell as a few big ones) who would love the "power" of people having to come to them with cap in hand, kiss the ring and be beholding to them should they get what they want. (Irish Politics 101)

There was a tentative attempt at this (taking advice from the people that know that is) with the FCP but it was just another ring kissing exercise - with a cherry picked panel of well skilled ring kissers and whole swathes of the shooting community explicitly excluded. The whole thing only met twice as far as I know - both photo ops for the man with the ring.

Now - don't get me wrong, everyone was, of course, "represented" - and that is why things are going so well. (just cynical, old and cranky) and we have hundreds before the courts.

I would be wary of people who would want such a role (they tend to be a bit too fond of the boot polish)

B'Man

tac foley

rowa wrote: »

It should be the same as germany , the police do the background checks etc and after that its an office staffed by civilians who complete the licencing process.

Same here in UK. You fill out the form and send it to the county police HQ firearms and explosives licensing department. The police do their bit and then the civilian staff do theirs. If all is good, then the Chief Constable of the county signs your ticket, and off you go to the gun dealers...

The premise behind it all is simple - if you have good reason to own a firearm, then the Chief constable SHALL issue the relevant license to you.

BTW, in the county in which I live in rural eastern England, which has a population of just over half a million, there are 30,644 shotguns and 7576 Section 1 firearms.

tac

Sparks

Bananaman wrote: »

There are too many little hitlers (aswell as a few big ones) who would love the "power" of people having to come to them with cap in hand, kiss the ring and be beholding to them should they get what they want. (Irish Politics 101)
There was a tentative attempt at this (taking advice from the people that know that is) with the FCP but it was just another ring kissing exercise - with a cherry picked panel of well skilled ring kissers and whole swathes of the shooting community explicitly excluded. The whole thing only met twice as far as I know - both photo ops for the man with the ring.

Seriously?
You're going to post that?
With a straight face?
How short do you think our memories are, exactly?

Sparks

tac foley wrote: »

The premise behind it all is simple - if you have good reason to own a firearm, then the Chief constable SHALL issue the relevant license to you.

That's the main source of our difficulties in most of the cases where there are difficulties - our law says SHALL NOT UNLESS, rather than SHALL IF. And it's one of the few places where SHALL is used at all - most of the time it's MAY.