Lockpicking laws in Ireland

SB2013

The Mustard wrote: »

Ah now, that's an entirely different kettle of fish, because it also requires intention to cause injury or to intimidate or incapacitate, etc.

Just having a hammer in your possession is not an offence.

(6) In a prosecution for an offence under subsection (5), it shall not be necessary for the prosecution to allege or prove that the intent to cause injury, incapacitate or intimidate was intent to cause injury to, incapacitate or intimidate a particular person; and if, having regard to all the circumstances (including the type of the article alleged to have been intended to cause injury, incapacitate or intimidate, the time of the day or night, and the place), the court (or the jury as the case may be) thinks it reasonable to do so, it may regard possession of the article as sufficient evidence of intent in the absence of any adequate explanation by the accused.

Pat Mustard

SB2013 wrote: »

(6) In a prosecution for an offence under subsection (5), it shall not be necessary for the prosecution to allege or prove that the intent to cause injury, incapacitate or intimidate was intent to cause injury to, incapacitate or intimidate a particular person; and if, having regard to all the circumstances (including the type of the article alleged to have been intended to cause injury, incapacitate or intimidate, the time of the day or night, and the place), the court (or the jury as the case may be) thinks it reasonable to do so, it may regard possession of the article as sufficient evidence of intent in the absence of any adequate explanation by the accused.

Ok, I take your point, but it still doesn't make the simple possession of a hammer illegal.

Intention to cause injury, incapacitate or intimidate is still part of the offence, even if the burden of proof shifts to the defence.

That's not the case with the possession offence under S.15(1A) of the Theft Act.

TherapyBoy

*note to self: keep mouth shut about hammer & nail analogies in future*

Korgman

So is it definitely, absolutely illegal to ship some picks from amazon to Ireland.
I have read the laws about lockpicks and it is still unclear if they are allowed or completely banned. Anyone have any comments on shipping them to Ireland?

Pat Mustard

Korgman wrote: »

So is it definitely, absolutely illegal to ship some picks from amazon to Ireland.
I have read the laws about lockpicks and it is still unclear if they are allowed or completely banned. Anyone have any comments on shipping them to Ireland?

I haven't looked very hard to see if the importation of the item is an offence, but, subject to correction, I have found no law which outlaws the importation of lockpicks, as such.

However, I would say that as soon as lockpicks come into a person's possession, that person commits an offence under S.15.(1A) of the Theft Act. This assumes that none of the previously-discussed defences apply.

syklops

The Mustard wrote: »

However, I would say that as soon as lockpicks come into a person's possession, that person commits an offence under S.15.(1A) of the Theft Act. This assumes that none of the previously-discussed defences apply.

Well I disagree, but at this stage we should just agree to disagree.

So is it definitely, absolutely illegal to ship some picks from amazon to Ireland.
I have read the laws about lockpicks and it is still unclear if they are allowed or completely banned. Anyone have any comments on shipping them to Ireland?

The fact is its as clear as mud. I'd consult a lawyer if you feel strongly about it.

Or if you can't afford that, then learn how to pick using home made picks. "No your honour, that is not a tension wrench, its simply a bent hack saw blade"

Pat Mustard

syklops wrote: »

Well I disagree, but at this stage we should just agree to disagree.

I see that you disagree and I while would accept that the law appears to be unfair insofar as simple possession of lockpicks is an offence of itself, without intention to commit burglary etc, I can't understand how you have arrived at your interpretation of S.15(1A).

But, as you say, we can agree to disagree.

ResearchWill

The Mustard wrote: »

I see that you disagree and I while would accept that the law appears to be unfair insofar as simple possession of lockpicks is an offence of itself, without intention to commit burglary etc, I can't understand how you have arrived at your interpretation of S.15(1A).

But, as you say, we can agree to disagree.

My reading if someone ordered these items and same are delivered to his home he cannot commit an offence. I have not seen any legislation baning the buying or importation.

Possession of certain articles.

15.—(1) A person who is, when not at his or her place of residence, in possession of any article with the intention that it be used in the course of or in connection with—

While 15 (1) (A) does say

“(1A) A person who, without lawful authority or reasonable excuse, is in possession of any article made or adapted for use in the course of, or in connection with, the commission of an offence referred to in paragraphs (a) to (d) of subsection (1) is guilty of an offence.”,

These two sections seem to contradict each other.

Pat Mustard

ResearchWill wrote: »

I have not seen any legislation banking the buying or importation.

I tend to agree with you on this point.

ResearchWill wrote: »

Possession of certain articles.

15.—(1) A person who is, when not at his or her place of residence, in possession of any article with the intention that it be used in the course of or in connection with—

Yes, but there are two offences under S.15. You looked at S.15(1), but the other offence is under S.15(1A):

(1A) A person who, without lawful authority or reasonable excuse, is in possession of any article made or adapted for use in the course of, or in connection with, the commission of an offence referred to in paragraphs (a) to (d) of subsection (1) is guilty of an offence.

I posted a consolidated section 15 here.


EDIT: I see you have amended your post to refer to S.15(1A). I don't see a contradiction as such, as they appear to be two separate offences.

ResearchWill

The Mustard wrote: »

I tend to agree with you on this point.



Yes, but there are two offences under S.15. You looked at S.15(1), but the other offence is under S.15(1A):


I posted a consolidated section 15 here.


EDIT: I see you have amended your post to refer to S.15(1A). I don't see a contradiction as such, as they appear to be two separate offences.

I was in middle of editing post, my issue is by amending it as they have its not clear. If they wanted to make it an offence in the home then they really should have replaced 15 (1) not added 15 (1) (A) at best it very bad drafting.

The offence in 1 is being "in possession of any article" outside the home while 1(A) is "is in possession of any article made or adapted." Also 15 (1) (A) removes the intention.

Looking at the two sections

(1) A person who is, when not at his or her place of residence, in possession of any article with the intention that it be used in the course of or in connection with

(1A) A person who, without lawful authority or reasonable excuse, is in possession of any article made or adapted for use in the course of, or in connection with, the commission of an offence referred to in paragraphs (a) to (d) of subsection (1) is guilty of an offence.

Why I am confused is if they intended to expand the scope why not just replace 15 (1) with what is now 15 (1A)

Pat Mustard

ResearchWill wrote: »

I was in middle of editing post, my issue is by amending it as they have its not clear. If they wanted to make it an offence in the home then they really should have replaced 15 (1) not added 15 (1) (A) at best it very bad drafting.

Fair enough.

I agree, the drafting is poor.

However, the s.15(1A) amendment has created a slightly ridiculous situation where simple possession of lockpicks can be an offence, even when in one's own home.

S.15(2A) contains a defence to the offence created by S.15.(1A). I was unable to find any Irish caselaw on it. Do you know of any relevant English caselaw, out of interest?

Profiler

"simple possession of lockpicks can be an offence even when in one's own home"

News to me!

ResearchWill

The Mustard wrote: »

Fair enough.

I agree, the drafting is poor.

However, the s.15(1A) amendment has created a slightly ridiculous situation where simple possession of lockpicks can be an offence, even when in one's own home.

S.15(2A) contains a defence to the offence created by S.15.(1A). I was unable to find any Irish caselaw on it. Do you know of any relevant English caselaw, out of interest?

I'm not sure of case law on point in either jurisdiction I'm not sure if UK statutory law is the same in this area.

Tar.Aldarion

I think you are allowed lock picks, as I've attended a lock picking group who have no trouble with the law. It's held every two weeks in Dublin. Which is also a very good reason to have them on your person.

Pat Mustard

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

I think you are allowed lock picks, as I've attended a lock picking group who have no trouble with the law. It's held every two weeks in Dublin. Which is also a very good reason to have them on your person.

You are talking about reasonable excuse, which is a defence specified in the legislation. Presumably, you could argue that you had the lock picks for a recreational purpose, insofar as you are a member of a lock picking club.

Not everybody is going to fall into your category, so you may be something of an exception in that regard.

Tar.Aldarion

Seeing as it is public, everybody is a member. So anybody could say it? Or could you just say you have them for recreational activities anyway without anything got to do with such a club? There is a newspaper going to be at it tomorrow, so I'm sure we will see a piece soon.

ResearchWill

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

Seeing as it is public, everybody is a member. So anybody could say it? Or could you just say you have them for recreational activities anyway without anything got to do with such a club? There is a newspaper going to be at it tomorrow, so I'm sure we will see a piece soon.

The question is will a jury of 12 people accept the excuse. If cought with the stuff, the state have proved 1 you have them and then raised the presumption that the person has them for no good purpose, the accused then can raise a defence the standard of proof on that defence is the civil standard if the Jury or judge accept on the balance that the person has a legit defence then thats ok.

I for one would not like trying to run the defence of Im part of a lockpicking club, it really would depend on all the facts and the jury or judge.

Pat Mustard

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

Seeing as it is public, everybody is a member. So anybody could say it? Or could you just say you have them for recreational activities anyway without anything got to do with such a club? There is a newspaper going to be at it tomorrow, so I'm sure we will see a piece soon.

It's one thing to simply say that you are a member of a club or to simply say that you have lockpicks for a recreational purpose.

It can be another thing to satisfy a judge with such an argument.

I can't see a judge accepting an argument that the general public are all members of this club. It's not a plausible argument.

Tar.Aldarion

ResearchWill wrote: »

The question is will a jury of 12 people accept the excuse. If cought with the stuff, the state have proved 1 you have them and then raised the presumption that the person has them for no good purpose, the accused then can raise a defence the standard of proof on that defence is the civil standard if the Jury or judge accept on the balance that the person has a legit defence then thats ok.

I for one would not like trying to run the defence of Im part of a lockpicking club, it really would depend on all the facts and the jury or judge.

Interestingly it's what people in teh club say when found, the garda just say ok or some such, it's not ever been an issue afaik.

What reason would you use?
Also you know how with private clampers, you can remove them from your car if you don't damage them. Lock pics a re a simple, cheap, easy way to do this. I wouldn't have anohter way to remove them. How is that for a defence :pac:

The Mustard wrote: »

It's one thing to simply say that you are a member of a club or to simply say that you have lockpicks for a recreational purpose.

It can be another thing to satisfy a judge with such an argument.

I can't see a judge accepting an argument that the general public are all members of this club. It's not a plausible argument.

What I mean is, the club has a large turnover of people who have gone, if people knew about it, couldn't they just say they had gone to that? They even tell you where to get picks and give coupon codes. Also, if you jsut liked doing it at home yourself you could have them, what would a reasonable excuse be in your eyes?

Pat Mustard

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

Interestingly it's what people in teh club say when found, the garda just say ok or some such, it's not ever been an issue afaik.

What reason would you use?
Also you know how with private clampers, you can remove them from your car if you don't damage them. Lock pics a re a simple, cheap, easy way to do this. I wouldn't have anohter way to remove them. How is that for a defence :pac:


What I mean is, the club has a large turnover of people who have gone, if people knew about it, couldn't they just say they had gone to that? They even tell you where to get picks and give coupon codes. Also, if you jsut liked doing it at home yourself you could have them, what would a reasonable excuse be in your eyes?

I've heard of lock picking clubs. It sounds like they are a legitimate minority interest. If you are a member of such a group or if you can show that you have an interest in this as a hobby, then a defence of lawful excuse on the basis of recreational interest would be arguable, in my opinion. The closest comparison that I could make would be that the defence of reasonable excuse has been used successfully in arguing that possession of a knife was for fishing, as a recreational activity.

That said, you'd have to satisfy a judge of the fact, or a jury in the Circuit Court. You'd want to be pretty convincing, otherwise wideboys would be at this sort of craic every day of the week.

Tar.Aldarion

Would people really be using them if they thought they weren't restricted? Of anybody I have asked, nobody knows they are anyway. Criminals (I'm not sure what a wideboy is) don't tend to bother with lock picks in Ireland, they don't need them. They do seem to use them a lot more in other countries, japan. It's slower and inefficient to use them it seems, they just break in, would they be used in even a few % of break ins I wonder. Or is it a case that there is a large amount of criminals using these here? Anyway that doesn't matter, just interested. I suppose if you could buy them easier, they would be used more.

Pat Mustard

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

Would people really be using them if they thought they weren't restricted? Of anybody I have asked, nobody knows they are anyway. Criminals (I'm not sure what a wideboy is) don't tend to bother with lock picks in Ireland, they don't need them. They do seem to use them a lot more in other countries, japan. It's slower and inefficient to use them it seems, they just break in, would they be used in even a few % of break ins I wonder. Or is it a case that there is a large amount of criminals using these here? Anyway that doesn't matter, just interested. I suppose if you could buy them easier, they would be used more.

I accept your point that people are probably not aware that simple possession of lock picks is an offence.

The common or garden villain doesn't tend to be extremely sophisticated or organised, and is probably content to use a screwdriver or crowbar to open a door or window. Or a convenient blunt object. I doubt that many burglars carry lock picks. Personally, I don't ever recall witnessing a prosecution for possession of lock picks, specifically.

Wide boy: a man who is prepared to use unscrupulous methods to progress or make money.

syklops

This thread refuses to die.

Korgman

So say an online lockpicking club was set up, and lockpicks stayed inside your home, would that be reasonable enough. I mean a law is a law but in this case it does seem quite unreasonable. Say lockpicks are associated with robbery, so that is how they are labled, that is what makes it unreasonable. For example, by far more people are killed by cars in Ireland than guns. It is much easier to gt a car than a gun, and no one even thinks in the direction of cars being more harmful than guns. Lockpicks on the other hand seem to be more difficult to get than a crowbar. Which are sold in every hardwear store. I can bet that there
were more thefts commited in Ireland using a crowbar than lockpicks. Yet still lockpicks are more restricted than crowbars. Am I making a valid point or does it seem unreasonable?

Pat Mustard

I agree: the law goes too far here.

Korgman

So the idea of an online lockpicking club. If those who want lockpicks kept them in their home and joined an online club, would that be a reasonable enough to have them?

Pat Mustard

Korgman wrote: »

So the idea of an online lockpicking club. If those who want lockpicks kept them in their home and joined an online club, would that be a reasonable enough to have them?

It would really depend on all of the circumstances, but, in my opinion, quite possibly, yes.

Korgman

Does someone know how to set one up? What about a Facebook club? That is a club. If you were a member of one of them, that should be satisfactory?

SB2013

Have you considered getting a piece of card and a crayon and writing "Official Lockpicking Club Member" on it?

Korgman

If it proves to be necessary, yes.