Gardai proposals to ban firearms

bpb101

we say we have more restricted law than the rest of europe but to be fair , our laws are debatable stricter than china

Cass

bpb101 wrote: »

There is not act that sets out what level is needed to compete at.

Gothca. Brain has already gone to sleep.

Who was asked to show a proof of competition ?

Other than it being mentioned above, i was asked at one meeting (for a renewal) to show proof of taking part in comps. I replied that it was not a pre-requisite. Got the renewal.

Heckler wrote: »

Its just another hurdle they can put in your way. You say your need for a particular firearm is for the sake of just shooting. Sorry, nope not good enough..

Its for competition, Ok. .

For the purpose of this it only refers to pistols as they can only be gotten if you are a member of a range. Other firearms (shotguns, rifles, etc) can be gotten for other reasons not related to range shooting.

Don't pigeon hole yourself (not you personally, anyone). The law says "Good Reason". It also says only on an authorised range. So a pure beginner cannot say they want it for comps until they have gained the experience and competence that comes from practice and plinking. Then the issue i mentioned above about what constitutes enough.

Cass

Sparks wrote: »

Actually, the Minister himself back in '06 stated that being competitive was not a requirement, .

I know, hence my question. I should have used pissed off tags.

Heckler

Cass wrote: »

Gothca. Brain has already gone to sleep.


Other than it being mentioned above, i was asked at one meeting (for a renewal) to show proof of taking part in comps. I replied that it was not a pre-requisite. Got the renewal.


For the purpose of this it only refers to pistols as they can only be gotten if you are a member of a range. Other firearms (shotguns, rifles, etc) can be gotten for other reasons not related to range shooting.

Don't pigeon hole yourself (not you personally, anyone). The law says "Good Reason". It also says only on an authorised range. So a pure beginner cannot say they want it for comps until they have gained the experience and competence that comes from practice and plinking. Then the issue i mentioned above about what constitutes enough.

I understand that. Obviously long guns can be used for hunting etc. I just meant that I think in some Supers eyes shooting for the fun of it at a range isn't good enough reason to grant a licence. We all know it should be but thats where the individual bias comes in that makes the whole process a lottery.

Cass

This is where you need to know what's lawful and not.

Asking for comp attendance is not. The law only asks for membership to an authorised range and for it to be used there only. So to refuse it for a personal reason needs you to be able to call bullsh*t on it (not literally) and in the worst case scenario demand a letter of refusal with his/her personal reasons as opposed to legal ones.

This not only applies to pistols, but for every type of firearm. Over the years on the range, and on here, i've spoken to lads who have been refused because they wanted a scope with the rifle, would only be granted the new license if they surrendered a gun they already had, and other such tosh.

Heckler

Cass wrote: »

This is where you need to know what's lawful and not.

Asking for comp attendance is not. The law only asks for membership to an authorised range and for it to be used there only. So to refuse it for a personal reason needs you to be able to call bullsh*t on it (not literally) and in the worst case scenario demand a letter of refusal with his/her personal reasons as opposed to legal ones.

This not only applies to pistols, but for every type of firearm. Over the years on the range, and on here, i've spoken to lads who have been refused because they wanted a scope with the rifle, would only be granted the new license if they surrendered a gun they already had, and other such tosh.

I get not calling "bull****" i.e. being more diplomatic. When I went for my first license (.22 rifle) I had never had any interaction with the guards. The FO I met in my district was, to put it bluntly, a prick. I felt like I was on trial. "Why do you want it ?", "I don't like your security arrangements" etc etc. Very aggressive. A real ball breaker. I just sat there and nodded along hoping that I'd get the licence assuming if i opened my mouth he'd just write down not approved or whatever. 6 weeks later got it.

When I applied for my pistol licence in a different district I didn't even have to meet a FO. Handed in my paperwork at the front desk (as I was told to do) and 3 weeks later got the licence. And the Guards there were really friendly.

My point is it would be hard for me to challenge a Guard, be it argue a point with an FO or a Super, because I have no history with them and always saw them as not to be questioned least you get on their wrong side.

Grizzly 45

Thats a point alright,was just discussing this today at the range.Aot of them cant handle us "questioning my authorithity" [As Eric Cartman said in South Park ].
At one stage their word was accepted as gospel on anything and if no one was the wiser in Ireland in days gone by,who would dare question the preist,politican or Garda??Times they are a changin,and people question "The man",and we are just getting round to do this nowadays here in Ireland,and they just dont like this,especially if you have had it indoctrinated into you from Templemore and reading your Garda guide,that "Handguns are especially dangerous ,and should not be liscensed to civillians as much as possible."Should we be surprised at this attitude to them??

Heckler

Everything I've seen so far has a Super signing off on licences.

I got my pistol licence about 5 months ago. As far as I can remember on the AGS paperwork it was signed off by an Inspector which (not being an expert on garda ranks) is below a Super.

So is an Inspector allowed to sign off or am I in breach of something ?

hexosan

Heckler wrote: »

Everything I've seen so far has a Super signing off on licences.

I got my pistol licence about 5 months ago. As far as I can remember on the AGS paperwork it was signed off by an Inspector which (not being an expert on garda ranks) is below a Super.

So is an Inspector allowed to sign off or am I in breach of something ?

When super isn't there inspector becomes acting super

Each rank can act one rank higher.

Heckler

hexosan wrote: »

When super isn't there inspector becomes acting super

Each rank can act one rank higher.

Nice one. Thanks.

meathstevie

hexosan wrote: »

When super isn't there inspector becomes acting super

Each rank can act one rank higher.

What happens in reality with the vast majority of applications is simply a matter of trust between you the applicant, the FO and the Super. You talk to the FO and in rural stations often the local skipper and they'll quite quickly figure out if you're sound or not, they pass their bit on to the Super and he/she goes by the advice from below. There's no way in hell a Super can deal with every application or renewal passing through every station in a district and have time to do the other mountain of work on their desk.

knockon

Given the massive costs award against the state last Oct in the Limerick DC has there been any other DC appeals since then and what way have costs gone?

Am I incorrect in thinking if there is no change and the proposals by AGS and DOJ die a death and are pushed off the Ministers desk and the next time my CS says "I am refusing you"......Can I reply "work away cos I ain't paying for the appeal"?

In other words Grizzly45 case and the €30,000 costs..... Has that caused a sea change in appeals? Anyone in the DC soon on appeal?

Grizzly 45

knockon wrote: »

Given the massive costs award against the state last Oct in the Limerick DC has there been any other DC appeals since then and what way have costs gone?

Am I incorrect in thinking if there is no change and the proposals by AGS and DOJ die a death and are pushed off the Ministers desk and the next time my CS says "I am refusing you"......Can I reply "work away cos I ain't paying for the appeal"?

In other words Grizzly45 case and the €30,000 costs..... Has that caused a sea change in appeals? Anyone in the DC soon on appeal?

There was another appeal last Wed in Ennis.Seems to be adjourned due to a legal question of the judge having the authority to grant an extension to an elapsed application. Also , apprently everyone's favourite Detective inspector was there too In some sort of official capacity. But apart from that.......nothing .
But to answer your question,yes you could do that,and this is why they are trying to get a ban on just about every gun that has been involved in these cases.
They still haven't ponied up the 30 grand either yet.Like anything here money matters get everyone's undivided attention.

Gormley85

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

There was another appeal last Wed in Ennis.Seems to be adjourned due to a legal question of the judge having the authority to grant an extension to an elapsed application. Also , apprently everyone's favourite Detective inspector was there too In some sort of official capacity. But apart from that.......nothing .
But to answer your question,yes you could do that,and this is why they are trying to get a ban on just about every gun that has been involved in these cases.
They still haven't ponied up the 30 grand either yet.Like anything here money matters get everyone's undivided attention.

Grizzly, where/how do you hear about all these cases? Is there a website or something that has all these cases?

Grizzly 45

Gormley85 wrote: »

Grizzly, where/how do you hear about all these cases? Is there a website or something that has all these cases?

My spies are everywhere!!

Cass

Heckler wrote: »

......... and always saw them as not to be questioned least you get on their wrong side.

I know. A trait that is too common here. BE polite, but not to the extent you get stood on.

Recently i challenged the local lady that deals with all applications (not the FO the woman that gets them ready for the Super). She told me that waiting 11 weeks for a sub is still okay because she has three months. I told her she had 14 days, and to be polite 14 working days, and she is 8 weeks over the limit. She immediately got snotty, and short in her answers. Now my application has been sent back to my local station twice for "questioning" even though i supplied paperwork to everything that was asked.

IOW i dared push her to stay within the confines of the law and i'm now paying for it. It's annoying and infuriating, but she is in control and any complaint would only serve to delay it further. I'm now on week 16.

Heckler wrote: »

So is an Inspector allowed to sign off or am I in breach of something ?

I've had an inspector sign two of mine when a Super was not available. It was signed by Inspector "X" on behalf of Super "Y"

It was only a sub though. Never had it with a renewal or full application so not sure on the legalities.

meathstevie

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

There was another appeal last Wed .....

.
They still haven't ponied up the 30 grand either yet.Like anything here money matters get everyone's undivided attention.

Is there a time limit set on those cost awarding rulings to be fulfilled ? Would love to see the faces when the powers that be get a little note kindly inviting them to come and explain their contempt to the Court.

Grizzly 45

meathstevie wrote: »

Is there a time limit set on those cost awarding rulings to be fulfilled ? Would love to see the faces when the powers that be get a little note kindly inviting them to come and explain their contempt to the Court.

TO BE CONTINUED...;)

turismo2142

Re costs timeframes. Nothing to do with contempt of court. They'd be dealing wth the state solicitors office who'd drag things out before the matter would ultimately have to be taxed. Most likely by a district court judge. Your lawyers won't be seeing that money anytime soon.

Grizz. Where did the recent power to award costs against the ags come from? I'm not familiar with it.

Grizzly 45

Revised District court rules 2014.Sect 50{??} Its about three sentences long that allows the seeking of costs in firearms liscensing appeals.In amongst 56 odd pages of other legal stuff.No I dont suppose they will,as we wont see the appx 4.5 million due from the high courts from the dtate/AGS on their little jaunt four years ago either,as its still in the taxing masters office....

Heckler

Cass wrote: »

I know. A trait that is too common here. BE polite, but not to the extent you get stood on.

Recently i challenged the local lady that deals with all applications (not the FO the woman that gets them ready for the Super). She told me that waiting 11 weeks for a sub is still okay because she has three months. I told her she had 14 days, and to be polite 14 working days, and she is 8 weeks over the limit. She immediately got snotty, and short in her answers. Now my application has been sent back to my local station twice for "questioning" even though i supplied paperwork to everything that was asked.

IOW i dared push her to stay within the confines of the law and i'm now paying for it. It's annoying and infuriating, but she is in control and any complaint would only serve to delay it further. I'm now on week 16.



I've had an inspector sign two of mine when a Super was not available. It was signed by Inspector "X" on behalf of Super "Y"

It was only a sub though. Never had it with a renewal or full application so not sure on the legalities.

I'm gonna play dumb. I submitted the correct paperwork as I was instructed and was granted the licence. Its not up to me to know who has the authority to sign off.

meathstevie

Heckler wrote: »

I'm gonna play dumb. I submitted the correct paperwork as I was instructed and was granted the licence. Its not up to me to know who has the authority to sign off.

Don't worry, it's fine. Acting sergeants, inspectors, supers etc happens all the time. Even the Commissioner was acting Commissioner for a while before she was confirmed in the rank. Doesn't make her decissions during temporary promotion any less legit.

Sparks

Heckler wrote: »

Its not up to me to know who has the authority to sign off.

Just to nit-pick because it's a monday morning, it can be. That's why the whole "is it restricted or not" question is such a critical one. You, as the applicant, are supposed to know if it's restricted so you apply to the correct person.

In terms of who's signing off on it though, that delegation's covered by law, so you're fine there so long as you applied to the right place. Don't forget, for a restricted firearm, section 3(2) says:

(2) Application for a restricted firearm certificate shall be made to the Commissioner.

But you apply to your chief super - that's a delegation from the Commissioner which is covered by the law.

Limerick Sovereigns

In the opinion of posters, is there any point in applying for a licence (not a renewal) for a Hammerli Xesse at the moment?

In the absence of the old "approved pistols list" (I know, I know) can it now be legitimately refused under the clause that bans pistols that look like "law enforcement" pistols. Sorry but I can't find the relevant SI.

Thanks in advance.

Sparks

Is there any point? Yes, if you want to take up target shooting.
Can it be legitimately refused? Well, it could be refused on that specific point I suppose, but they'd probably lose in the district court if you challanged it. But that is not a guarantee and absolutely nobody could ever give you such a guarantee about court cases.

Personally, I'd go for it, but your milage may vary.

hexosan

Since the old approved list is out the window have they released an amended list

Sparks

Not yet. I don't know if they plan to either, given that the reaction to the original list was to treat it as the law instead of treating the law as the law.

BoatMad

Limerick Sovereigns wrote: »

In the opinion of posters, is there any point in applying for a licence (not a renewal) for a Hammerli Xesse at the moment?

In the absence of the old "approved pistols list" (I know, I know) can it now be legitimately refused under the clause that bans pistols that look like "law enforcement" pistols. Sorry but I can't find the relevant SI.

Thanks in advance.

My super , saw the removal of the Annex as freedom to allow him to license a wider variety of pistols within the existing legislation . He re-issued my pistol license in one week from application recently

Grizzly 45

Has anyone read this months ISD?Specifically the submission by IFA /countryside??
Talk abou tramping in in your big dirty boots and shoving both into your stupid gob!!!

"There is no need for semi auto rifles as they have no sporting, target, or hunting value ."
Pistols should be on a three year apprenticeship and stored at the ranges until you have shot for three years then you can store at home....
Would someone tell these utter edjits that it is better to keep the gob shut if you dont know the full story and that there are more types of guns used here than farner murphys double barrel.While you are about it.Tell your members to go away and knock themselves out and buy a 60 euro gunsafe and stop giving criminals an opportunity to steal your guns and for AGS to hammer us all the time???
Very annoyed!
Grizzly

BoatMad

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Has anyone read this months ISD?Specifically the submission by IFA /countryside??
Talk abou tramping in in your big dirty boots and shoving both into your stupid gob!!!

"There is no need for semi auto rifles as they have no sporting, target, or hunting value ."
Pistols should be on a three year apprenticeship and stored at the ranges until you have shot for three years then you can store at home....
Would someone tell these utter edjits that it is better to keep the gob shut if you dont know the full story and that there are more typeas of guns used here than farner murphys double barrel.While you are about it.Tell your members to go away and kock themselves out and buy a 60 euro gunsafe and stop giving criminals an opportunity to steal your guns and for AGS to hammer us all the time???
Very annoyed!
Grizzly

The IFA always looks after its own and has never acknowledge the rights of anyone else. The foolish are this that think it would do otherwise

farmers are not our friends in this debate