Seizing a legally held firearm

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

The Bishop Basher

Grolschevik wrote: »

While I appreciate that ‘shootists’ might have their own preferred terminology, I humbly proffer the following (Oxford Dictionary of English; 2nd ed, 2005) :P

Firearm: a rifle, pistol or other portable gun.

Gun: a weapon incorporating a metal tube from which bullets, shells or other missiles are propelled by explosive force, typically making a characteristic loud, sharp noise.

Weapon: a thing designed or used for inflicting bodily harm or physical damage.

Exactly. So It's a firearm.

Grolschevik

Swanner wrote: »

Exactly. So It's a firearm.

It's also a weapon, and is defined as such in law.


http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1925/en/act/pub/0017/sec0001.html#sec1

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1972/en/si/0251.html

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1924/en/act/pub/0009/sec0001.html#sec1

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1990/en/act/pub/0012/sec0003.html#sec3

IRLConor

Grolschevik wrote: »

It's also a weapon, and is defined as such in law.

It's a weapon if (as quoted by you) it's "a thing designed or used for inflicting bodily harm or physical damage" which my rifle most certainly is not.

I have a Firearm Certificate issued as according to the Firearms Act in which section 1 defines the term firearm which it then uses throughout the rest of the act. People who shoot get tetchy when people use "weapon" to describe our guns since typically they're the people who are doing their best to have them taken from us.

Cass

Grolschevik wrote: »

It's also a weapon, and is defined as such in law.

Getting way off topic here, but felt i needed to respond.

A suppressor is defined in law as a silencer. A silencer does not exist, as it's impossible to completely silence a shot from a firearm. So don't take what it is called in law as Gospel. Plus from a personal point of view in Ireland the only legal reason for having a firearm is the pursuit of sports shooting (targets) or fieldsports. IOW we do not have firearms for RTKBA or home defence. That is illegal. So the term weapon will appropriate in some circumstances is not valid here.

seamus

Don't see any issue with the Gardai having entered the property for the purposes of contacting family/investigating, etc, and subsequently removing the firearm for safekeeping, in the public interest.

Whether they are allowed to hold it indefinitely depends on what reasons they've given for not returning it? For example, if the licence expired before the owner came out of hospital and the Gardai subsequently refused to renew the licence, then they would be entitled to refuse to return the firearm, presumably.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Cass

I would need to read the law/SI again to be fully correct, but basically it works like this (IIRC):

• They revoke the license and the firearm must be surrendered (in this case moot as it's already in Garda custody).
• The Superintendent will give you 3 months in which time you may sell the gun in a manner not breaking any law.
• If after 3 months the gun has not sold the Super will give you 1 more month (this notice is supplied in writing) to sell the gun after which time it will be sold for any amount or destroyed.
• If it does not sell at all the gun is then destroyed.

If sold the money goes to the original owner. If not then the gun is cut into pieces or drilled in such a manner as to make it unusable/unrepairable.

Grolschevik

Ok, we are way off topic admittedly, but I'm talking about ordinary language usage.

IRLConor wrote: »

It's a weapon if (as quoted by you) it's "a thing designed or used for inflicting bodily harm or physical damage" which my rifle most certainly is not.

What do you use it for, then? Hunting? That involves bodily harm (to something) and/or physical damage.

Clay pigeon or similar? That involves physical damage.

And in the Firearms Act that regulates your ownership of your firearm, a "firearm" is defined as a "weapon". I'm just sayin'...

Cass wrote: »

Getting way off topic here, but felt i needed to respond... So don't take what it is called in law as Gospel. P

Again, it's defined like that in the dictionary as well as in a law that is open to interpretation. And there are many many words and concepts that are also open to multiple or varying definition.

However, I see where you're coming from: yes, a hammer is a tool that can also be used as a weapon, but its primary purpose is not as a weapon. I just don't think the use of the term "weapon" is something to get tetchy about, but then again, I'm not in your shoes. If you don't like the term being used, fair enough.

Cass

Grolschevik wrote: »

Again, it's defined like that in the dictionary as well as in a law that is open to interpretation.

As IRLConor said they may be called weapons in law, yet the Gardaí (issuing authoirty) called them Firearm License. Why not call it a weapons license?

You must also be aware that most of our laws in relation to guns are almost carbon copies of English, German, and Canadian laws where the word weapon may nt be viewed so negatively.

However, I see where you're coming from: yes, a hammer is a tool that can also be used as a weapon, but its primary purpose is not as a weapon.

Pretty much.

I just don't think the use of the term "weapon" is something to get tetchy about, but then again, I'm not in your shoes. If you don't like the term being used, fair enough.

It's more about the people that are not familiar or around firearms. The word weapon immediately conjures images of guns used for killing people, tools of destruction, etc. It's a small point TBH, but as firearm owners we prefer the use of the word firearm.

It's like calling a car a "metallic, speeding, death machine" (stretching the metphor a bit here i know). It's apt, but not used.


However for the purposes of this thread all this is academic. The OP has/knows someone in a situation so i think i'll restrict further replies to that, and save derailing his thread further.:)

Slyderx1

All firearms are weapons but not all weapons are firearms and then again a weapon may be deemed a firearm depending on the circumstances that its found.....I still do not think that the Garda could gain lawful entry without invitation , warrant , or reasonable cause that a crime was being committed. If a Garda sees a suspicious herbal plant through a house window he will invariably return with a warrant.... This would be the prudent course in this case.

Cass

Slyderx1 wrote: »

I still do not think that the Garda could gain lawful entry without invitation , warrant , or reasonable cause that a crime was being committed..

According to the OP they were given the keys, and sent to the address to enter the premises to find contact details for next of kin, etc. I'm not a solicitor so don't pretend to understand all the laws regarding the powers of the Gardaí, but in such a situation if they enter a premises for one purpose, and see something that is breaking the law or a possible danger to public safety they are obliged or entitled to act on that threat/infringement.

IRLConor

Grolschevik wrote: »

What do you use it for, then?

Target shooting. Some of the targets are paper. Some of the more modern targets are a grid of lasers to measure the fall of the shot. Only the most pedantic person in the world (yeah, yeah, I know) would consider the paper targets damaged after being shot at considering that it is their purpose to have holes put in them. I would like to say the targets are improved by me shooting at them.

Grolschevik wrote: »

And in the Firearms Act that regulates your ownership of your firearm, a "firearm" is defined as a "weapon". I'm just sayin'...

No, there's an or in there.

“ firearm ” means—

(a) a lethal firearm or other lethal weapon of any description from which any shot, bullet or other missile can be discharged,

which I read as "firearm in the legal sense" is the union of the set of things which are "lethal firearms" and the set of things which are "other lethal weapons of any description from which any shot, bullet or other missile can be discharged".

The second part of that definition is to cover things like rocket launchers, slingshots, rail guns and other such esoterica. They didn't put it in there to define firearms as weapons.

If you're not convinced by that, have a look at (b) in the same definition. They did the same job, just for airguns with >=1 Joule muzzle energy. Considering most of the rest of the world (with the notable exceptions of Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man) considers those things to be toys. You'd have to be completely taking the piss to consider a <7.5 Joule ISSF air rifle to be a "weapon".

Slyderx1 wrote: »

All firearms are weapons

Not true. The intent of the user is what matters. This is why a hammer is mostly not a weapon since it's not usually intended to cause harm. Likewise, my rifle is not intended to cause harm and would only be a weapon if I aimed it at someone with the intent to harm them (or hit them with it, which would probably be more effective).

SB2013

Slyderx1 wrote: »

All firearms are weapons but not all weapons are firearms and then again a weapon may be deemed a firearm depending on the circumstances that its found.....I still do not think that the Garda could gain lawful entry without invitation , warrant , or reasonable cause that a crime was being committed. If a Garda sees a suspicious herbal plant through a house window he will invariably return with a warrant.... This would be the prudent course in this case.

They were on a humanitarian mission. If you had fallen down the stairs of your home and were unconscious at the botttom of the stairs would you expect the Gardaí and paramedics to wait for you to regain consciousness to invite them in?

Once a Garda is in a place lawfully he has a legal power to seize anyhting he sees which may be evidence of an arrestable offence.

ResearchWill

Its simple this is not the investigation of a crime, so there are no issues of unconstitutionally obtained evidence.

So the issue returns to at hand, if AGS entered the house with a stated purpose (to get info on family of a person in a coma) then there is no trespass, if the home owner believes there has been a trespass then he can take action.

Next AGS when in House notice an unlocked on display gun/firearm/shotgun what ever, and say lets take that. Again if the owner has an issue he can bring an action, for recovery of gun/firearm/shotgun whatever.

If the owner believes that his gun/licence has been revoked incorrectly, then he has remedies.

If as I think the owner is in a coma the this is all moot, as the only damage if any has been done to him.

It seems to me AGS correctly entered house, it seems they correctly secured firearm, it seems to me they correctly are keeping said firearm while the person remains incapacitated. If any member of his family want to push the issue, then I can bet the licence and firearm will be correctly taken from this man under the relevant legislation. If he remains in a coma then best bet is to wait till he recovers and he can seek legal advice on the issues.