What should be discussed in the FCP

MacsuibhneR

Now that the FCP is up and running what issues do people think we should be lobbying our respective representatives to raise? What do people think are the important issues?

For my part I think the following should be raised and although they will likely be shot down (pun intended) should still at least be brought up (again and again and again):-

1. Licence the person and not the firearm;
2. reloading;
3. licencing of black powder firearms;
4. Centre fire pistols; and
5. Centre fire semi automatic rifles.

I didn't see any mention of any of the above in the report of the last meeting, other than a small reference to re-loading, but we should keep annoying our representatives to voice what we think are important and not just let the whole thing become a cosy little club.

In the context of the EU proposals we keep hearing how the UK has some of the strictest firearms laws in Europe, yet they deal with 1 - 3 above on a basis which I think most people would find acceptable.

We should be pushing to have the cap on semi-auto rifles lifted asap and should not let this keep drifting on. If they are banned at EU level so be it (but I seriously doubt that this will happen now) but in the meantime in Ireland this should not be put on the backburner for the next 20/40/60 years.

Likewise noises at least should be made about centre fire pistols and the ban on new licences.

There has been a lot of talk here about who should or shouldn't represent what group on the FCP but for it to be worth the effort it needs to discuss what we think are important issues.

Roundpack

Correct me if im wrong but was it not the sports coalition that called for the cap on centerfire semi auto rifles in the first place?

Deaf git

Set administrative procedures in stone that deliver basic acceptable customer service standards.
Develop proposals for firearms definitions that reflect reality, modern firearm types etc.
Look at grey areas. Eg zeroing a sight- is this target shooting or not?
Consolidation and simplification of the legal code.

They have a lot of work to do....

gunny123

The ending of rifles over .308" being restricted. Its a stupid idea in the first place, and simplistic to relate the power of a rifle to its calibre, eg. a .38 special lever action is more "dangerous" than a .300 win mag because the bullet is .080 larger in diameter. Absolute nonsense. Perhaps make pistol calibre rifles exempt from this rule ?

g00167015

A good many folks might appreciate the muzzle energy threshold for an FAC to be raised to something more realistic, as in mainland UK......, but this would necessitate changes to the Northern Ireland system in all likelihood as their energy threshold is similar to ours.

The archaeic and I guess ignorant way in which home reloading is viewed by the PTB in Ireland, in contradiction to the way many other countries deem those responsible enough to be granted an FAC also able to attain permission to reload for the licenced firearm.

Firearms licencing being administered by people with at least basic knowledge and training appropriate to fulfilling their task properly and fairly.

Getting rid of at least SOME of the "woopsies" in our current, vastly overcomplicated set of firearms legislation. Thanks Sparks for that very suitable description, provided in Committee Room 2 at Government buildings back in the day hehe

Seeing that the recommendation that was made donkeys years ago regarding creating a SINGLE piece of (properly worded) legislation to cover most aspects of the licencing of sporting firearms is acted upon. The current plethora of legislature is a shambles. You have acts being repealled by acts which are then repealled by an SI which is then amended by another SI, with no one knowing if the proper commencement order was issued for half of them (sarcasm in this instance being frighteningly close to the truth)

There's 5 that I think are probably worth an auld mention

Grizzly 45

Roundpack wrote: »

Correct me if im wrong but was it not the sports coalition that called for the cap on centerfire semi auto rifles in the first place?

Well if they did,they left numerous gun dealers high and dry on stockpiles of surplus ww2 stuff.:pac:
Er No...It's a typical Irish solution to an Irish problem.Delay it forevermore by making it a tempoary cap,or hope that the EU bans them in the meantime,as that proposal is knocking around Brussells for the last 3 years.Dont ban those who have as it will cost money,and they are too few to be worried about.
But a start would be to allow any design that is over 50 years old to be liscensed again.

Reloading,I think they will keep it on this ridicilous "club level" thing as it fits the industrial munitions making act of 200 and whenever.Will have a job getting them to put an add on onto that legislation for home reloading.

Liscense the man and not the gun would be a good start and bring it up to five years.

Consolidate the entire firearms acts into one act also.As well as the deer hunting liscense.Major PITH running around getting farmers to sign the same paperwork every year.

Define properly in law what exactly is "dynamic shooting and combat training"
As IPSC is a sport,not combat training.Why is an international sport banned in Ireland,when it is perectly legal in countries like China ,South Africa or Zimbabwae?Where "combat training" might be more of a threat to those govts?
What exactly is a "range" and "zeroing"?
Define exactly what a "stock with a prominent pistol grip" is on a shotgun?

While we are about it,get rid of this nonsense that putting an odd and uncomfortable telescoping,folding or otherwise stock on a shotgun somehow makes it suddenly inherently more deadly and concealable,because somone in the DOJ or the Park watched a few action movies and bad guys use them,so they must be dangerous.:rolleyes:

Remove cross bows and shotgun slugs from the restricted list.A weapon that was obsolete by the 13th century is treated like a modern high capacity firearm in legislation is ridicilous.In fact it shouldnt be liscensed at all. Shotgun slugs would allow more participation in the Embassy cup shotgun events even with non restricted firearms.

Enough work there already for a few years.

IRLConor

If I had a wish list:

• One person, one license.
• A centralised licensing authority for all firearm certificates where the only involvement for the Gardai would be for the background check and home security check. Everything else would be done by a civilian authority which applied the same rules to everybody around the country.
• A new definition of firearm that doesn't say "any part of..." and only applies to the bits that do work to make a gun a gun.
• Raise the minimum energy limit so that most airguns cease to be firearms.
• A clarification on "target shooting" so that nobody has to be the test case.
• Reloading rules similar to other countries.
• Removal of anything that changes a firearm from non-restricted to restricted purely due to a cosmetic feature.
• Deregulation of moderators.
• Consolidation of all the legislation into one Act.

I'd be surprised if they got any of those past an initial discussion because they'll either raise loud complaints from Gardai or require substantial enough changes to legislation that it would attract unwanted attention from the Oireachtas and/or media. I think the following could be done without much in the way of fuss or contention:

• A clarification to the definition of ammunition that requires there to be some sort of explosive or propellant involved. In other words, stop making spent brass into ammunition and deregulate pellets for air guns.
• Some sort of halfway house between home reloading and having to build a bunker. Home reloading would be a shite magnet if you put it in front of the Dail and the Gardai would almost certainly raise a stink if it was tried too but there should be some sort of reasonable compromise.
• A rewording of the "no day memberships" clause to make it clear that the prohibition is only on day memberships being used to support a claim for a firearm certificate.
• Better guidelines on ammunition limits. e.g. For a competitive rimfire shooter a limit of less than 10,000 is a bit silly and a limit of less than 5,000 is ridiculous.
• A clarification that you've only been refused a certificate if you receive the refusal in writing. No more "if you don't hear from us, you're refused". It also makes it clear that where a Super says "Look, I'm not going to give you a cert for ... please don't ask for one" that that's not a refusal that needs to be declared on future applications.
• Fix the paintball and crossbow mistakes. Even if both are kept as firearms it doesn't make sense to have them as restricted firearms.

None of those require massive or particularly controversial legislation and none of them are things that should attract undue media attention.

clivej

IMHO it's all only 'Lip Service' nothing will come out of it.

Talk the Talk but never walk the walk

jb88

Put all your information in writing to your FCP rep, posting it here isn't going to help

Cass

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Well if they did,they left numerous gun dealers high and dry on stockpiles of surplus ww2 stuff.:pac:

They did, you even reported on it:

Grizzly 45 wrote:

sport coalition wrote:

We could accept a temporary cap on licensing centrefire semi-automatic rifles with the exception of classic (old – pre 1950) models pending the outcome of a wider firearms licensing review. In other words, with immediate effect, no new licenses would be issued for this category until a full review is complete

Ok so in that case its fine to liscense a MP44 or Garand or M14 or FN FAL or a STEN gun??

You'll notice how they made allowances for the WW2 stuff. IOW feck everyone else as long as our stuff is not touched.

MacsuibhneR

jb88 wrote: »

Put all your information in writing to your FCP rep, posting it here isn't going to help

I agree, but it is useful to get people's opinions on what we should be saying to our reps to bring up at the FCP.

Grizzly 45

Cass wrote: »

They did, you even reported on it:

You'll notice how they made allowances for the WW2 stuff. IOW feck everyone else as long as our stuff is not touched.

Indeed I did:oand it just shows with so much crap flying about and this He said,they said,et c in our orgsnisations,anyone can lose track of who said what to whom and when.

Tried liscensing a SKS or Garand recently?? Stuff is just flying off the shelves in gun dealers:) So its an own goal.The cap befell even their own stuff for sale.

Roundpack

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Indeed I did:oand it just shows with so much crap flying about and this He said,they said,et c in our orgsnisations,anyone can lose track of who said what to whom and when.
.

The problem though is that the people who called for the cap have 4 or is it 5 seats at the FCP and by all accounts used the first meeting as an opportunity to allege that licence holders are engaged in rampant illegal activity with regard to reloading and used the second meeting to suggest that licence holders were not complying with conditions.

With friends like those, who needs enemies

RossiFan08

Would love to get some form of reloading that isn't exclusively for F class shooter in Ireland. Is there anything the Joe bloggs, such as myself do to aid in achieving this. I am sure a lot of lads would love to help/get involved but do not know of the FCP, Sport Council, NARGC etc. side of things. I know I fall into this category. Maybe something like a petition if nothing else to show the level of interest in reloading so the PTB can't say no one wants it.

I am sure the member better in the know have done all this before but never hurts to ask right?

Rimfire Shooter

I've sent submissions to my FCP reps & I've not even a reply acknowledging they got them so I reckon like the government they ain't listening. Unfortunately we can't vote our reps out in a few weeks

Snakezilla

Id like to see the need to license air rifles scrapped. Not that anyone could walk in and buy one , but if you have a firearms license already you should be allowed "add it on" without having to wait weeks, months in some cases for an air rifle just to pop rats and winged vermin like I do around the yard. I hate using the .22 as I see it as too powerful and the lower powered rounds like shorts and cb longs are too inaccurate past 25 or 30 yards.

Like a lot of lads on here I'm big into my shooting and its my only hobby. I shoot everything from rats to geese, pheasant, fox , pigeon and the odd deer if there's room in the freezer. I also shoot a lot of vermin and all classes of my shooting can't be done with 1 rifle and 1 shotgun. I take the odd social drink , I don't prop up a bar 3 nights of the week , I don't smoke or gamble , I work hard and my hobby is shooting and that's what I choose to spend my money on. I've never had my name taken by a Guard , I'd love to be able to enjoy my sport without having to feel like a criminal every time I choose to change a firearm or apply for a new license.

g00167015

Snakezilla wrote: »

I'd love to be able to enjoy my sport without having to feel like a criminal every time I choose to change a firearm or apply for a new license.

Wouldn't we all :-)

In no other type of interaction with public servants would such widespread and disgusting treatment be let go for years on end without folks standing up and demanding change.

Zxthinger

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Well if they did,they left numerous gun dealers high and dry on stockpiles of surplus ww2 stuff.:pac:
Er No...It's a typical Irish solution to an Irish problem.Delay it forevermore by making it a tempoary cap,or hope that the EU bans them in the meantime,as that proposal is knocking around Brussells for the last 3 years.Dont ban those who have as it will cost money,and they are too few to be worried about.
But a start would be to allow any design that is over 50 years old to be liscensed again.

Reloading,I think they will keep it on this ridicilous "club level" thing as it fits the industrial munitions making act of 200 and whenever.Will have a job getting them to put an add on onto that legislation for home reloading.

Liscense the man and not the gun would be a good start and bring it up to five years.

Consolidate the entire firearms acts into one act also.As well as the deer hunting liscense.Major PITH running around getting farmers to sign the same paperwork every year.

Define properly in law what exactly is "dynamic shooting and combat training"
As IPSC is a sport,not combat training.Why is an international sport banned in Ireland,when it is perectly legal in countries like China ,South Africa or Zimbabwae?Where "combat training" might be more of a threat to those govts?
What exactly is a "range" and "zeroing"?
Define exactly what a "stock with a prominent pistol grip" is on a shotgun?

While we are about it,get rid of this nonsense that putting an odd and uncomfortable telescoping,folding or otherwise stock on a shotgun somehow makes it suddenly inherently more deadly and concealable,because somone in the DOJ or the Park watched a few action movies and bad guys use them,so they must be dangerous.:rolleyes:

Remove cross bows and shotgun slugs from the restricted list.A weapon that was obsolete by the 13th century is treated like a modern high capacity firearm in legislation is ridicilous.In fact it shouldnt be liscensed at all. Shotgun slugs would allow more participation in the Embassy cup shotgun events even with non restricted firearms.

Enough work there already for a few years.

plus 1 on that

Zxthinger

Storage SI changed to omit low powered air rifles from the head count that's used to calculate the minimum storage standards. This wouldnt mean that they'd excempt from secure storage but it would mean that an owner that had 6 air rifles might not need the same security as another owner with one ar15.

Also bullpup air rifle should be excluded from restricted list crap.

Reloading pilot scheme to be arranged for hunters and a frame work formed that makes it practical and similar to other nature European countries.

Large crossbows to be removed from restricted list and the storage head count and to be honest they prob need a chain lock and not a monster safe.

Deer licence only require once

Limits on fixing calibre sixes for foxing and varmintimg done away with.

Sparks

One thing. Just one.

Take all the current Irish Firearms Legislation, merge it all to the one document (so start with the 1925 act, then amend it with the 1964 act, then amend that with the 1971 act and so on). Get all the law in one place. Pass it as one Act and repeal everything else, so everyone can actually sit down and read the law as it is without needing to do more legwork than the average law student does in an undergrad law course...

Then let's talk about things like massive changes to the structure of licencing firearms in Ireland.



Also, no harm to remember, the agenda of the FCP is set by the Minister. It's not our forum, we're attendees. That's not a criticism by any means; I'm just saying let's not lose sight of what the FCP actually is, the way people did last time. I'd rather not see people in a year going "Ah, I heard from Person X that the FCP's a load of ****e because it couldn't stop the Minister from doing Policy Y" -- which not only makes as much sense as saying a car is rubbish because it won't stop the driver from smoking cigars, but which is also exactly what we've heard people saying for the last few years when defending certain people who did certain unwise and damaging things.

barnaman

Agree with all but would say think crossbows need a licence but not restricted too many little shets around who might get them if not licenced.

berettaman

does the sports coalition represent itself at the FCP or do they represent it's constituent members?

I suppose I am asking, does the sports coalition still exist after all the lobbying etc.?

Does anyone have a list of the representatives/members of the FCP?

Apologies, I am just trying to get my head around the lay of the land..

Grizzly 45

barnaman wrote: »

Agree with all but would say think crossbows need a licence but not restricted too many little shets around who might get them if not licenced.

Instead of liscensing a mediveal one shot weapon that costs more than a decent CF rifle these days or two Ruger 10/22 rifles with 200 rounds of ammo per gun.Nor is a particullary accurate yoke either.Why not simply bring it onto a permit system like Deacts as well as blank firing guns? AGS still knows who has them and has control of who gets one.

Cass

berettaman wrote: »

does the sports coalition represent itself at the FCP or do they represent it's constituent members?

It represents all members of the sc. The recent issues with the NASRPC seem to be resolved in such a way that the NASRPC now holds its own seat(s). All the other shooting bodies have their own representatives.

I suppose I am asking, does the sports coalition still exist after all the lobbying etc.?

It does.

Does anyone have a list of the representatives/members of the FCP?

Not to hand. Each group will send forward one or two representatives so if you want to know contact each group and ask who are the FCP reps.

Apologies, I am just trying to get my head around the lay of the land..

No need for apologies.

recipio

Our airgun legislation is back in the Jurassic era. A whole industry has grown up around air rifle technology in particular and we are stuck with a 'one gun only ' law based on nothing but paranoia.Is it too much to ask that we be treated like everyone else in the EU. ?

Sparks

Nope. But it'd be nice if we had all the legislation written in one place so we could read it before we start trying to change it. And I say that as an air rifle and air pistol shooter.

MacsuibhneR

Sparks wrote: »

Nope. But it'd be nice if we had all the legislation written in one place so we could read it before we start trying to change it. And I say that as an air rifle and air pistol shooter.

The legislation should be consolidated, no doubt about it, but we should not put everything else on hold while that is done while this is being done (or rather not being done).

Sparks

MacsuibhneR wrote: »

The legislation should be consolidated, no doubt about it, but we should not put everything else on hold while that is done while this is being done (or rather not being done).

You literally can't do anything else until you do that. How the heck do you change legislation if nobody knows what it is?

Get it consolidated. Get it readable. Change this situation where there are maybe 30 people in the state who have a working knowledge of the damn law, and then not only will you be able to fix it properly, but you'll find the things that need fixing a damn sight more readily than you can now, when you have to read a dozen acts and even more SIs just to figure out what one section of the law says.

bpb101

firstly to the person who suggested a cross bow licenses, Grand no issues. But its not a firearm. it shouldnt be in it

As said above (kinda) i would suggest the firearms act of 20?? removing the rest.
its mad to think somebody who is new to the sport will never be allowed to get a cf pistol (at present).
central licensing authority with a built in appeals process.(with courts options thereafter)
maybe some type of reloading licenses(not an expert on it,but a way to reload if you have the right conditions)
a clear classification of what a firearm is as something that is over 16 joules of energy(ie allow air rifles)
a clear definition of what an assault rifle is.
a super couldnt reject an applicant based on the colour of their skin, so why the colour of the gun.
licenses the owner like a car( this person can own(instead of drive)
.22 calibers rifles
.22 pistols
up to .308 rifles
ect
provided he has no more than 3(or whatever)
then when you want to buy something you let the guards(or licensing place) know that yeah joe blogs now owns a rugar 10/22 and has got rid of his cz .22
allow zeroing a scope off a range.(clearly if only safe to do so)
allow .22 pistols and center fires at authorized ranges


a bit of common sense. Like they go on about how pistols are dangerous and have a risk of getting robbed and they are right. But how is the storage of a shotgun less than that of air rifle and the storage of an air rile is the same as a cf pistol.

dont go mad with the price.

Cass

bpb101 wrote: »

a clear definition of what an assault rifle is.

Already done:
[QUOTE= SI 21/2008]“assault rifles” means—

(a) rifles capable of functioning as semi-automatic firearms and as automatic firearms,

(b) firearms that resemble such rifles;[/QUOTE]
I'd like to see the "resemble" bit removed for the same reason you gave above. Just because something resembles another thing does not mean it is that thing.

licenses the owner like a car( this person can own(instead of drive)
.22 calibers rifles
.22 pistols
up to .308 rifles
ect
provided he has no more than 3(or whatever)

If i'm reading this right, i'd disagree. As it stands there is no limit on the amount you can have. To cede this for the sake of a single license is not a trade i'd make. Regardless of the total number.

Now if you mean 3 (i know its only an example number) of each then that would be better but still may cause issues.

However i would like to see a single license, in the proper credit card format that we were promised, were each new firearm can be added to the person that is licensed.

allow zeroing a scope off a range.(clearly if only safe to do so)

Absolutely. Just needs for zeroing to be classified as not target shooting and we're sorted.

allow .22 pistols and center fires at authorized ranges

They already are. In fact it's the only reason to have either.


IRLConor has covered pretty much everything i'd like to see happen bar one point. Mag limits.

This has been a pet hate of mine. I don't own an unrestricted pistol and my restricted license allows me to have more than 5 shots but for unrestricted pistol shooters (and unrestricted semi auto rifle owners) the 5 round (and 10 round) mag limit has been a constant thorn in the side. I know the new SI (391/2015) cleared up the issue regarding how a pistol mag is blocked which probably accounted for 95% of the issues, but what is the reasoning behind the 5/10 round limit.

As i said above you have been granted the license so you are deemed safe, competent and suitable to own and use that firearm. So the issue of "high capacity" mags is a moot one, to me anyway. If i'm unsuitable/dangerous with more than 5 in a pistol or 10 in a semi auto then how am i suitable to have the firearm AT ALL.

bpb101

Cass wrote: »

Already done:

I'd like to see the "resemble" bit removed for the same reason you gave above. Just because something resembles another thing does not mean it is that thing.

I mean a definition that is correct .ie get rid of "look like"

If i'm reading this right, i'd disagree. As it stands there is no limit on the amount you can have. To cede this for the sake of a single license is not a trade i'd make. Regardless of the total number.

Now if you mean 3 (i know its only an example number) of each then that would be better but still may cause issues.

However i would like to see a single license, in the proper credit card format that we were promised, were each new firearm can be added to the person that is licensed.

What I mean by this is you have the security to house 3.
I know a lot of people have 6/7 ect but with a licences a person approach you couldn't have a unlimited number as at present although people have the min security , they would always consider security again.
I would suggest saying you want x amount of firearms . You consider the security for that amount
[/quote]

Absolutely. Just needs for zeroing to be classified as not target shooting and we're sorted.

They already are. In fact it's the only reason to have either.
I mean allow them to be licenced. I know .22 are but I would like to see cf.(for new ppl)

IRLConor has covered pretty much everything i'd like to see happen bar one point. Mag limits.

This has been a pet hate of mine. I don't own an unrestricted pistol and my restricted license allows me to have more than 5 shots but for unrestricted pistol shooters (and unrestricted semi auto rifle owners) the 5 round (and 10 round) mag limit has been a constant thorn in the side. I know the new SI (391/2015) cleared up the issue regarding how a pistol mag is blocked which probably accounted for 95% of the issues, but what is the reasoning behind the 5/10 round limit.

As i said above you have been granted the license so you are deemed safe, competent and suitable to own and use that firearm. So the issue of "high capacity" mags is a moot one, to me anyway. If i'm unsuitable/dangerous with more than 5 in a pistol or 10 in a semi auto then how am i suitable to have the firearm AT ALL.[/quote]


Sorry my reply is all over the place. On phone

Cass

I still don't see how it works.

bpb101 wrote: »

What I mean by this is you have the security to house 3.

The secure accommodations SI has 4 levels of security. The first applies to a single shotgun only (broken up, trigger lock, stored in different places). The next level (level 2) covers three (or fewer) unrestricted firearms or a single restricted firearm. So asking for everyone to have security to house 3 already exists regardless of whether you have 3 or fewer.

I know a lot of people have 6/7 ect but with a licences a person approach you couldn't have a unlimited number as at present although people have the min security , they would always consider security again.

This would still be an issue with your proposal. As soon as you want to pass 3 you need a new level of security. This is also in place in the same SI that dictates a higher level of security for a higher number of guns.

The only way this "could" work is if everyone was made get the highest level of security regardless of number of guns. This would mean someone with a single rifle would need thousands in security. Not going to happen.

Maybe i'm taking you up wrong. Maybe i'm not fully understanding what you re proposing, but it just seems you are asking for a renaming/rehashing of what already exists just in a more complicated way.

I would suggest saying you want x amount of firearms . You consider the security for that amount

But this already exists. A friend recently went from never owning a gun to buying a rifle and shotgun. He had to know the minimum security level he needed and have this in place prior to getting his licenses. The security level he is at will allow him to have one more gun before he needs to consider going up a level for any future guns. All of this is a minimum of course.

I mean allow them to be licenced. I know .22 are but I would like to see cf.(for new ppl)

Yeah, it would be nice. A simply change to the SI would sort that. No need for complicated re-writing of an Act.

Sorry my reply is all over the place. On phone

It's a bit mad alright, but i think i got it all.

Grizzly 45

Cass wrote: »

Already done:

If i'm unsuitable/dangerous with more than 5 in a pistol or 10 in a semi auto then how am i suitable to have the firearm AT ALL.

Just for a point.There is no restriction on mag capacity on restricted SA rifles here.Either punching paper or going hunting.Default mag capacity is accepted as 10 rounds but its not a restriction.

Cass

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Just for a point.There is no restriction on mag capacity on restricted SA rifles here.Either punching paper or going hunting.Default mag capacity is accepted as 10 rounds but its not a restriction.

I know. As i said earlier:

Cass wrote: »

............ my restricted license allows me to have more than 5 shots..............

While referring specifically to my pistol i know my SA C/F has no such restriction such as the 10 round on unrestricted licenses. That is what i was referring to.

Grizzly 45

Ok, lot that point in the convoluted postings.:)

bpb101

Im going to try and quote myself here to clarify..

bpb101 wrote: »

firstly to the person who suggested a cross bow licenses, Grand no issues. But its not a firearm. it shouldnt be in it

As said above (kinda) i would suggest the firearms act of 20?? removing the rest.

its mad to think somebody who is new to the sport will never be allowed to get a cf pistol (at present).

central licensing authority with a built in appeals process.(with courts options thereafter)

maybe some type of reloading licenses(not an expert on it,but a way to reload if you have the right conditions)

a clear classification of what a firearm is as something that is over 16 joules of energy(ie allow air rifles)

a clear definition of what an assault rifle is. - What i mean by this is the current definition is wrong and what an assault rifle is something like section A of whats in the act, remove section b


a super couldnt reject an applicant based on the colour of their skin, so why the colour of the gun.

licenses the owner like a car( this person can own(instead of drive)
.22 calibers rifles
.22 pistols
up to .308 rifles
ect
provided he has no more than 3(or whatever) - What ever you can accommodate for your security . so if i have a 3 gun safe, i cant buy 10 firearms. Unless i decide that i want to upgrade (and then get this amended) . I know what you think i mean, but thats not what i mean(if that make sense). Unlimited number, but only if you have the security to have them .AFAIK, in the uk , you apply for 5 models you think your going to buy in the next 3 years, and if you change your mind about the model. you have to remove 1 and replace it. If our law said you can buy 5(7 or whatever you can securely accommodate) in this 3 years, and just send us an fyi when you buy them, that would be great.


then when you want to buy something you let the guards(or licensing place) know that yeah joe blogs now owns a rugar 10/22 and has got rid of his cz .22

allow zeroing a scope off a range.(clearly if only safe to do so)

allow .22 pistols and center fires at authorized ranges - yeah i know this is here, but allow people to get them(new cf). People saying about magazines, Maybe have a limit on the number by default and have a reason to have more(not a expert so somebody else could suggest a number) The main reason for this would be to stop something like a 50 round mag (in theory)


a bit of common sense. Like they go on about how pistols are dangerous and have a risk of getting robbed and they are right. But how is the storage of a shotgun less than that of air rifle and the storage of an air rile is the same as a cf pistol.

dont go mad with the price.

I also dont like a few of the way the bullpup rifles are auto restricted either.

At the end of the day, if somebody has a reason for needing a firearm, themselves do not cause a public safety risk , not their security has a public safety risk there shouldnt be an issue.

What was mentioned and overlooked by a lot in the original list of bullshít was amending article 2(4) to not allow the use of handguns for target practice and competitions at an authorized range ( without a licenses) . As somebody who runs a college club , this bans us from using handguns and it also effects a few clubs revenue streams. Protecting this is article is essential as it will be used by 100% of people who want to get into the sport. if this was removed, it would mean, the first chance you get to shoot is when you have your bought a firearm and have invested 1000s, only to find out this isent for you. And lets face it, nobody would invest this much on a gun without ever having fired one .

I know a lot already exists or could be change by an si, but i think a lot would agree a clean bill would be the best approach. This would be needed for the new licenses system with an build in appeal ( or repeal and replace a lot of articles)

goz83

Being very new to this, but having done a decent bit of research and nosing about, I would like to see the following (some of which is already mentioned):

A consolidation of the firearms legislation. There is a huge amount of information spread all over the place, which should be migrated to one document and updated from there.

Allow new pistol licenses. And I don't mean the gsg stuff. I think it's unfair to disallow newcomers the chance to get a license for larger calibre pistols.

Centralised firearms applications. The current system is full of problems and too much weight is given to the local super and the opinion they hold on firearms. There is no way of knowing if an application is being processed, or if it is a coffee coaster on the FOs desk. I could apply for a license in Cork and get granted in a week and I could do the same in Dublin and never hear a thing and there is no way to find out where you are along the line.

One license card. This makes so much sense. The license holder would have a license number on his card with photo id (maybe). I would go further and say have one fee for the license and be able to add firearms permissions to that license, which would last until the license expires, at which point all firearms expire on it, unless renewed. Would cut down on the number of licenses for each individual firearm. Charge a small fee (€10) if adding firearms to the license.

License type of firearm. If granted a license fir a 22LR rifle with a suppressor, one should be able to purchase another one, or change the current one out without the need to go through what can be a long process of applying for a fresh license. This would bring into question the "need" for another firearm of the same type, but I don't see the issue if someone owns 2, or 3 firearms of the same calibre, as long as they meet the security requirements for what they hold. You apply for a calibre, or category and you should then be able to add firearms of that calibre/category, or below. If licensed for a 308, you should be able to get a 22 cal without an issue.

Reclassification of spent brass. I think it is absolutely ridiculous that a used cartridge, or brass case is considered a firearm. I could get into less trouble for carrying a 12 inch hunting knife around town with me as I would holding a used 22 cal casing.

Cass

bpb101 wrote: »

Im going to try and quote myself here to clarify..

Not going to quote it all again.

I think i understand what you're saying, however from my reading of it, my understanding of it, and based on current legislation most of what you want is already in place just in a different format.

As was said previously a restatement of all the Acts would clear up a lot of this mess and then deal with the other issues after that.

Sparks

bpb101 wrote: »

What was mentioned and overlooked by a lot in the original list of bullshít was amending article 2(4) to not allow the use of handguns for target practice and competitions at an authorized range ( without a licenses) . As somebody who runs a college club , this bans us from using handguns and it also effects a few clubs revenue streams. Protecting this is article is essential as it will be used by 100% of people who want to get into the sport. if this was removed, it would mean, the first chance you get to shoot is when you have your bought a firearm and have invested 1000s, only to find out this isent for you. And lets face it, nobody would invest this much on a gun without ever having fired one .

This is a pretty good example of what I was talking about above, in that it's a valid concern raised by someone who should be concerned about it because they're running a club which would be directly and hugely impacted by this law... except that this law doesn't exist.

Section 2(4)(d) has been amended only once since the '25 act, and that was to say that the ranges had to be authorised under section 4A (which is, btw, the main difference between getting a 4A for your club and just having the local Super issue a section 2 authorisation as we always used to do (and still have to even with 4A authorisation today)).

There's a new section at the bottom of section 2(4) that says that 2(4) does not apply to restricted firearms; but there's nothing that says you can't use unrestricted pistols under 2(4)(d).

This is what I'm talking about - if you can't read the damn thing in the first place, how can you adjust the law to be better? Having it spread across almost a hundred Acts, SIs, Directives, Regulations and Guidelines is a stupid, ridiculous, incompetent, unprofessional, messy, unacceptable situation. Fix that first. After you do, how many of the existing worries will be seen to be just misunderstandings, and how many things we thought were fine will we suddenly notice are actually major problems in the making?