Question About Round Limit

goz83

I am wondering about the round limits applied to licenses and hopefully some light can be shed on this, as the wording (imo) is very much open to interpretation.

"You are hereby authorised to purchase cartridges or rounds of ammunition therefor, provided that you shall not have in your possession or carry at any one time more than (insert limit) cartridges or rounds thereof."

Now, the key words there are "have in your possession or carry".

Lets say Joe Bloggs has one rifle and a limit of 500 rounds. Joe is a member of two ranges and has lockers at both ranges. He also keeps his rifle at home in his safe with 500 rounds of ammunition.

Now, as I see it, Joe is in possession of 500 rounds, because he owns the safe which is on his property.

But lets say Joe also rents safes at the two ranges. Can Joe keep 500 rounds in those safes? They are not in his possession. While he has access to them, they are not in his possession and he is not carrying more than his limit. However, he could have 1500 rounds in his ownership, far above the possession limit.


I got thinking about this when I had close to my limit in my safe and I made a visit to the range. My limit is 1000 and I had about 850 rounds in my safe at the time. I bought 100 rounds for a short spell with the rifle, which at the time of purchase, meant I owned circa 950 rounds. So, what if I bought 200 rounds? I would have owned 1050 (50 over the limit), but I would have been carrying only 200 rounds. The word "possession" is what throws me here, as in my view, i now possess 1050 rounds, even though I have no immediate access to the other 950 rounds, which are a good 30 plus miles away.

Any thoughts on this? If people can get into trouble for having spent casings and displays, I would at least like to be informed and I can go from there. I do keep some rounds at the range and at my premises and would like to know what the limits actually mean in the real world.

Luckysasha

My take on that is if you bought them then there in your possession. I.E. If you have three storage facilities and you have 500 rounds in each locker then you have in your possession 1500 rounds. I don't think distance between lockers comes in to it. Another way of looking at it is if like me I only have one safe at home for storing my rifle and ammo and a limit of 500 on my license then I'm not going to put 1500 in my one safe.

goz83

Luckysasha wrote: »

My take on that is if you bought them then there in your possession. I.E. If you have three storage facilities and you have 500 rounds in each locker then you have in your possession 1500 rounds. I don't think distance between lockers comes in to it. Another way of looking at it is if like me I only have one safe at home for storing my rifle and ammo and a limit of 500 on my license then I'm not going to put 1500 in my one safe.

As possession is defined with "owning" or "in control" of, I understand and would agree with you. But then there is also the "keeping" "custody" "charge" which skews things a little. The range would keep them, but you own them.

I think erring on the side of caution is best, if not a bit frustrating. Take your limit of 500 for example. If you want to buy a bulk box of remingtons, they come in boxes of 525, so legally you cant avail of a discount bulk buy. Legally speaking, you would have to buy a box at the range, leaving 25 rounds in the ownership of the rfd, then go fire off 25 rounds before going back to the rfd, where he sells you the loose 25 rounds :pac:

Nuts!

Cass

In that specific situation it's not a concern. Ammo stored on, bought on, used on a range don't (and this might be poor word choice) matter. It why a person can shoot on a range without a license.

The amount is what you have in your possession. That is at home, on you, at any one time, but it's also subjective depending on your actual location when you're stopped/checked.

So if you were stopped with 550 with a limit of 500 on your license, you're outside the conditions of your license. If you were stopped with 400, you are within your limit. However if you were stopped, while driving say, with 400 on you and the Garda came back to your house and you had another 200 there then you are now outside the conditions of your license.

That is the way i see it.

goz83

Cass wrote: »

In that specific situation it's not a concern. Ammo stored on, bought on, used on a range don't (and this might be poor word choice) matter. It why a person can shoot on a range without a license.

The amount is what you have in your possession. That is at home, on you, at any one time, but it's also subjective depending on your actual location when you're stopped/checked.

So if you were stopped with 550 with a limit of 500 on your license, you're outside the conditions of your license. If you were stopped with 400, you are within your limit. However if you were stopped, while driving say, with 400 on you and the Garda came back to your house and you had another 200 there then you are now outside the conditions of your license.

That is the way i see it.

Exactly my thinking....though I would avoid having a combined amount between carrying and in my safe, which would exceed the limit on the license. This is what I would consider to be in my possession.

I wonder how many rounds I can fit in my locker on the range jk

Sparks

goz83 wrote: »

I wonder how many rounds I can fit in my locker on the range jk

If you went down that road, you could invite the question from the PTB as to what constitutes safe storage for ammunition and whether the club is permitted to have such lockers...

goz83

Sparks wrote: »

If you went down that road, you could invite the question from the PTB as to what constitutes safe storage for ammunition and whether the club is permitted to have such lockers...

Sorry Sparks, forgive the ignorance, but what is the PTB? There is a match on in less than an hour and the soup is out :pac:

Googling the PTB shows the Private rental Tenancies Board and Pat The Baker

Though at my range, all the lockers are in a room, which is a safe in a room, which itself is a safe, monitored by cctv and with staff always there when people are there...otherwise the lockers are off limits and secure. Not sure the same security applies to all ranges.

Cass

Powers That Be.

Those in control. The Dept of Justice and An Gardaí. Mostly An Gardaí as they are directly responsible for licensing, enforcement, etc.

Sparks

Cass wrote: »

Powers That Be.

^^^^^ this. Blame Joss Whedon for that acronym.

The problem with the lets-find-a-loophole game is that the other player tends to rewrite the rules of the game in order to win and those rewrites often invoke the law of unintended consequences.

Rimfire Shooter

Sparks wrote: »

^^^^^ this. Blame Joss Whedon for that acronym.

The problem with the lets-find-a-loophole game is that the other player tends to rewrite the rules of the game in order to win and those rewrites often invoke the law of unintended consequences.

& they read here and places like it so they're always well versed on what lads are doing.

Sparks

Rimfire Shooter wrote: »

& they read here and places like it so they're always well versed on what lads are doing.

As if they needed the help given the stuff in the magazines over the years
Though some of the stuff people put up on facebook and youtube does rather boggle the mind...

Rimfire Shooter

Sparks wrote: »

As if they needed the help given the stuff in the magazines over the years
Though some of the stuff people put up on facebook and youtube does rather boggle the mind...

I'm not even going there. Yep, you're dead right. Some numpties out there !

scwazrh

Is the ammo limit noted on the grant letter or the certificate ?

German pointer

scwazrh wrote:

Is the ammo limit noted on the grant letter or the certificate ?

The certificate

bluezulu49

Slightly off topic but on a related matter are ammunition limits cumulative?. If I have say two shotguns with a limit of 500 on each am I entitled to have 1000 in my possession?

Bad_alibi

bluezulu49 wrote: »

Slightly off topic but on a related matter are ammunition limits cumulative?. If I have say two shotguns with a limit of 500 on each am I entitled to have 1000 in my possession?

Yes 1000, 500 per gun

turismo2142

Short answer to the initial question, notwithstanding the range scenario. If you have ammo all over the place in different storage units, safes, whatever. You exert control over it. Even if you've not been to said place for a protracted amount of time.

A poor analogy (apologies). If you were storing drugs (instead of the ammo as initially posted) in various places you'd be deemed to posses them all for the purposes of a prosecution in the context as described.

Trying to force/dream up loopholes (and there's not one in the instant case) is the rock that you and indeed all of us subsequently, will perish on.

SpannerMonkey

i applied for my licences yesterday for my shotgun and .22 rifle and the cop on the desk said the super isnt approving anything more than 100 round limit on each gun.


my current limit is 700 for each . can you argue this ? 100 would be useless to me for clay shooting . not a big deal for the rifle but still a 100 is ridiculous unless your talking about larger calibres .

Cass

SpannerMonkey wrote: »

can you argue this ?

Yes.

When applying or during renewal/reapplication you provide a separate letter stating the reasons why you need the limit you've requested.

It's outlined in the commissioners guidelines, but in general if you show a reason they must consider it. For example if i shot clays every weekend and in a few/lot of comps then 100 is pointless. I provide a written statement saying how i shoot most weekends and take part in comps along with training that i could use 300 - 500 per day. Between trips to the dealers, buying in bulk to save traveling everytime i need ammo and the fact that empties are classed as live rounds i need an allowance of 1,500.

Same applies to target shooting with a rifle. Be it rimfire or centrefire. I take into account the three things i mentioned above and write all this down.

Now when it comes to a lad in a gun club or not in a club at all that does a bit of hunting then the case gets harder for a higher limit. However the one i find best, and it's the law, is i need double the allowance to account for empties. So if i need say 250, then i ask for 500 to account for the empties too.

Rimfire Shooter

Why would you need to keep empties especially used shotgun shells?

Cass

You don't need to keep anything. If you have (example only) 101 empties for whatever reason along with 150 live rounds and your limit is 250 then you are in breach of the conditions of your license.

However if you have 100 empties, and 150 live rounds and your limit is 300 then you are legally covered.

Rimfire Shooter

Cass wrote: »

You don't need to keep anything. If you have (example only) 101 empties for whatever reason along with 150 live rounds and your limit is 250 then you are in breach of the conditions of your license.

However if you have 100 empties, and 150 live rounds and your limit is 300 then you are legally covered.

So does your Super believe this is a genuine reason? Mine apparently won't accept any reason to give out more than 100 rounds on any licence.

Cass

What kind of question is that? Its like asking if the Super thinks the firearms act is a valid enough reason to grant a higher limit.

Its the law. Empty cases are classed as live rounds under the law. So if i never had a "live" round but had 100 empties with a 100 limit i legally cannot buy, own or possess a round until i dispose of some/all of the empties.

The law actually says component part of ammunition so that includes the bullets, primers and (however they measure this) the propellant. Without getting into the whole reloading debate if i had 50 cases, 40 bullets, and 10 primers with a 100 limit i still cannot buy a round until i dispose off/use some of what i have.

My membership to the range, being on the reloading scheme, as well as a need to have different ammo for hunting & target shooting for most of my firearms (including the shotgun) coupled with the law regarding empties allows me to apply for a higher limit than others. So far i have gotten every amount i've requested.

Rimfire Shooter

It's a simple question.

I was talking about shotgun shells. Not sure why you're bringing the rifle scenario in this.

I tried to get a 500 limit on my shotgun certificate as informally shoot clays. I was refused. I have to buy shells at the clay ground when I go there which is more expensive than buying from my local dealer.

I'll explain again. You've said empties can count towards the limit you can have. I cannot see how this would work for .22 rimfire or shotgun shells. Now it seems you were talking about fullbore rifle ammo.

Cass

I'm covering all types of firearms. Its why i said rimfire, centrefire and shotgun.

If i'm out in the field, pigeon shooting, and i'm finished up i always collect my empties and bring them home to be disposed of later. Now on a clay ground/range this can be done immediately, but when in the field situation i might end up having dozens if not hundreds of empties in my possession for either days or weeks until i can make it to the range to dispose of them.

As i said above there is no reason where you NEED to keep the empties but in situations where you do keep them they must be covered on your license.

The fact you seem to have a difficult Super does not mean your situation applies to everyone. Much like my situation with my Super does not apply to everyone either. However my Super applies the law as it is, your Super seems to allow his/her personal opinion influence their decision making.

The fact that i use the law to make my case makes it more difficult to refuse my application as any refusal must also be based in the law.

Rimfire Shooter

I'm with ya now. As I've on 4 boxes to use on pigeons I have to pick my shots & make 'em count. Most game shooting a few shells will cover me for the day so not too bad. 100 on the .22 is enough for the amount I need. Been this way for so long now I just get on with it.

goz83

A 100 limit for shotgun is a very restrictive number and is really rather pathetic. This also racks up the cost (excluding petrol/diesel) because you can't buy cases! I'm quite satisfied with my limit, which is only a small bit less than requested.

100 for a .22 I suppose you could get away with most of the time, but again, yiu can't buy in bulk. I was slightly annoyed that I got a 1000 limit which is half of what I asked for, or maybe less. 1100-1200 would have been nicer, allowing me to have 2 bulk boxes (which come in 525 rounds). I would be 50 rounds over the limit. Makes it more expensive.

Rimfire Shooter

I come from a time where a box of 50 .22 was a lot of money so I learned to hit what I aimed at and made the rounds count. When i was younger I'd buy a box of Eley shotgun shells and make it stretch for the whole season. Thankfully these days things aren't that bad money wise but old habits die hard for us old folks. back then the bullets & shells provided much appreciated meat & game for the table. Hadn't Lidl & Aldi then in every town.

J.R.

Rimfire Shooter wrote: »

I come from a time where a box of 50 .22 was a lot of money so I learned to hit what I aimed at and made the rounds count. When i was younger I'd buy a box of Eley shotgun shells and make it stretch for the whole season. Thankfully these days things aren't that bad money wise but old habits die hard for us old folks. back then the bullets & shells provided much appreciated meat & game for the table. Hadn't Lidl & Aldi then in every town.

Remember it well - Winchester even sold cartridges in boxes of 10 which were easier on the pocket. They were a brilliant, hard hitting cartridge.

BrownTrout

Out of curiosity, how do ye "dispose" of used cartridges/ bullet casings? I usually just throw them into the recycling bin.

I suppose if I cut the plastic away from the brass and collected it I could get a few bob for scrap, but then the whole round limit and used ammo being live ammo thing applies.

Throwing empties in the bin seems like a very irresponsible way to dispose of "live ammo"!

Rimfire Shooter

J.R. wrote: »

Remember it well - Winchester even sold cartridges in boxes of 10 which were easier on the pocket. They were a brilliant, hard hitting cartridge.

Glad I'm not the only oldie here

Winchester Westerns. Used to love them. haven't seen them for donkies years

BrownTrout

Rimfire Shooter wrote:

Winchester Westerns. Used to love them. haven't seen them for donkies years

I still have about 15 of them in the cabinet. Cracking yokes. Gonna hang on to the few I have.

Cass

BrownTrout wrote: »

Out of curiosity, how do ye "dispose" of used cartridges/ bullet casings?

Bring them to a range or any depot/refuse centre that is authorised to take them. Range is usually handier, plus they normally don't mind people coming in to dispose of brass/cases.

Bad_alibi

Cass wrote: »

Bring them to a range or any depot/refuse centre that is authorised to take them. Range is usually handier, plus they normally don't mind people coming in to dispose of brass/cases.

And how do the range dispose of them

Cass

I don't know. Why don't you ring each range and ask them? Here is a list of the various ranges. Give some of them a call and ask. Let us know what they say.

Rimfire Shooter

Bad_alibi wrote: »

And how do the range dispose of them

Sell em to a scrap metal dealer I'd say.

Bad_alibi

Cass wrote: »

I don't know. Why don't you ring each range and ask them? Here is a list of the various ranges. Give some of them a call and ask. Let us know what they say.

Wasn't trying to be smart but you'll find even the ranges don't have a defined policy on how to dispose of them. Even the FPU won't give you an answer.

Cass

Bad_alibi wrote: »

Wasn't trying to be smart ..........

I didn't think you were.

Not directed at you, but just a general comment. We all need to take a deep breath. An air of "what did you say" has crept back into the forum when 99% of the time nothing is intended and i've noticed an increase in "no offence" type posts.

The written word has no context. If i'm speaking to someone face to face you can tell by my tone what way i mean what i say. As there is no way to get this tone across in writing it can sometimes read completely opposite to what is meant.

When i said ring them i was serious. I really don't know what they do with the brass. All i know is the range has magic bins tat take all my unwanted brass and they are emptied whenever they get full. However what one range does may not be what another does. Hence my idea to call a few/all of them and ask.

I'd imagine with the quantity a range would see that they have some scrap place to bring them that would be vetted/authorised by the local Super because as i said earlier spent cases are live rounds in law so any scrap yard would need some sort of license/authoriation to take the brass/casings from any person or range.

BrownTrout

I think under the exemptions from the firearm certs are people who's job it is to carry/ move guns and/or ammunition so maybe scrap dealers have this kind of authorisation for spent ammo?

Bad_alibi

Cass wrote: »

When i said ring them i was serious. I really don't know what they do with the brass. All i know is the range has magic bins tat take all my unwanted brass and they are emptied whenever they get full. However what one range does may not be what another does. Hence my idea to call a few/all of them and ask.

I'd imagine with the quantity a range would see that they have some scrap place to bring them that would be vetted/authorised by the local Super because as i said earlier spent cases are live rounds in law so any scrap yard would need some sort of license/authoriation to take the brass/casings from any person or range.

We discussed this at length one day on the range and there are no such authorized scrap yards and no one vetted by the gardai/Supt to accept the shells.
While the legislation allows the range to have an unlimited amount of ammo on site it doesn't allow for a member of the range to remove the brass off site while been delivered to a scrap yard. I would assume the brass could be escorted by a Garda off site to be destroyed.
If it was brought to a scrap yard once it was all crushed it would cease been ammunition.

Yet more nonsense from our firearms act.

Sparks

Bad_alibi wrote: »

We discussed this at length one day on the range and there are no such authorized scrap yards

Nor any legal means made available to authorise them, except by "borrowing" other sections from 2(3) and 2(4).

and no one vetted by the gardai/Supt to accept the shells.

And given that there's no mechanism to authorise them seperately from 2(3) and 2(4), you don't want there to be such a vetting mechanism (or it would apply to all shooters as well).

While the legislation allows the range to have an unlimited amount of ammo on site it doesn't allow for a member of the range to remove the brass off site while been delivered to a scrap yard. I would assume the brass could be escorted by a Garda off site to be destroyed.

Yup, though I'm not sure anyone's ever done that; historically, the main concern was whether or not the scrap merchants involved were able to handle the toxic components involved (unburnt primer/propellant, the arsenic and antimony in the lead, that sort of thing).

If it was brought to a scrap yard once it was all crushed it would cease been ammunition.

Would it?
Find the section in the firearms act that talks about destroying ammunition and read the definition there of what has to be done for it to stop being ammunition, it's quite interesting.

Yet more nonsense from our firearms act.

Yup. Barely readable, not terribly coherent, flat-out wrong (and borderline illegal) in places, and not possible to comply with in the real world...

...and yet, somehow, still the law.

/sigh

The real kicker is that the original act in 1923* wasn't all that bad. It wasn't until we started fiddling with something that had been polished over a century or so that we made a dogs breakfast out of it.



*yes, 1923 - I'm counting the 1924 and 1925 acts as the start of the fiddling because that's when we went from licencing the person to licencing the firearm for no reason other than to have something different from British law.