Licensing/shooting restricted firearms

Luckysasha

Can you buy a C/F pistol and not license it. For example you can buy a rifle and shotgun and keep it at the range strictly for range shooting only. Can the same be done with a C/F pistol

LIFFY FISHING

You must by law posess a Restricted firearm licence to fire a restricted firearm, pistol or rifle.
As no new restricted pistol licences are been issued, an individual can not purchase or fire a restricted pistol.

Captainaxiom

Luckysasha wrote: »

Can you buy a C/F pistol and not license it. For example you can buy a rifle and shotgun and keep it at the range strictly for range shooting only. Can the same be done with a C/F pistol

Technically You can't even fire a shot out of someone's centre fire pistol at the range.

Cass

LIFFY FISHING wrote: »

You must by law posess a Restricted firearm licence to fire a restricted firearm, pistol or rifle.
As no new restricted pistol licences are been issued, an individual can not purchase or fire a restricted pistol.

You need a restricted license to shoot/possess one, not to own it. Many lads own C/F pistols and due to not licensing them or being refused are sitting in dealers around the country. There is a legal difference between ownership and possession. It's why there has never been an outright ban as compensation would be a factor.

Same as owning a car. You can own it without having a drivers license, but not drive it unless licensed.

Captainaxiom wrote: »

Technically You can't even fire a shot out of someone's centre fire pistol at the range.

Correct.

The section of the Act/SI that covers people shooting other firearms on a range does not cover restricted firearms (that includes rifles, shotguns and pistols).

juice1304

Not unless you are a restricted firearms dealer then you can do exactly that, however obviously an expensive option ha. €2000 a year and a building up to scratch.. It may be possible to do in the north though. I know for a fact people were doing just that some years ago now.
My solution to the Irish firearms problem was both an easy one but also a pain in the arse at times. ha Just move to a country with better laws...

Cass

juice1304 wrote: »

Not unless you are a restricted firearms dealer then you can do exactly that, ...................

Do what?Fire them on a range?

juice1304

Cass wrote: »

Do what?Fire them on a range?

There is nothing preventing a restricted firearms dealer from "test firing" a firearm especially if they have done work to it or are simply checking it it functions properly. :pac:

Cass

An RFD is no more "special" than anyone else. There were a few RFDs that were refused licenses for their C/F pistols, and one RFD that got into bother when found with "excessive" amounts of ammo.

An RFD license, restricted or unrestricted, does not allow an RFD to fire any firearm outside of a range. They can use an unrestricted firearm on a range like everyone else, and can transport firearm(s) for the purpose of transporting in the course of their business, but an RFD license does not entitle the person with the RFD license to shoot a restricted firearm anymore than a normal person.

When someone becomes an RFD they must remain as a "standard" RFD for 3 years and only after that time can they go for the restricted license. Otherwise everyone an their Granny would apply for the license to get their firearm and many more to circumvent the current legislation/ban. I mean €1,500 is cheaper than a court case or multiple court cases.

juice1304

Cass wrote: »

An RFD is no more "special" than anyone else. There were a few RFDs that were refused licenses for their C/F pistols, and one RFD that got into bother when found with "excessive" amounts of ammo.

An RFD license, restricted or unrestricted, does not allow an RFD to fire any firearm outside of a range. They can use an unrestricted firearm on a range like everyone else, and can transport firearm(s) for the purpose of transporting in the course of their business, but an RFD license does not entitle the person with the RFD license to shoot a restricted firearm anymore than a normal person.

When someone becomes an RFD they must remain as a "standard" RFD for 3 years and only after that time can they go for the restricted license. Otherwise everyone an their Granny would apply for the license to get their firearm and many more to circumvent the current legislation/ban. I mean €1,500 is cheaper than a court case or multiple court cases.

I dunno i think i will have to disagree.. i have never read a law preventing it.
And considering as a licneced Restricted firearms dealer you are allowed manufacture firearms along with undertaking Gunsmithing services it would be rather stupid if it were illegal to test said firearms as this is essential part of both manufacturing and repairing. Even if only purchasing a firearm..
Quite like a good friend of mine in the states, He is a class iii 07 / type 10 manufacturer he cannot manufacture new machine guns or destructive devices for himself however the company can for research and development or for sale to law enforcement or military.

Cass

juice1304 wrote: »

I dunno i think i will have to disagree.. i have never read a law preventing it.

The absence of something does not signal permission.

Also section 2(6) clearly says that restricted firearms and ammunition are not included in those firearms allowed to be used on a range under section 2(4).

And considering as a licneced Restricted firearms dealer you are allowed manufacture firearms along with undertaking Gunsmithing services it would be rather stupid if it were illegal to test said firearms as this is essential part of both manufacturing and repairing.

How many gunsmiths are restricted dealers? As i said above anyone starting out cannot get that license for a period of three years. If they get it after that then it allows them to work on:

• C/F pistols
• Semi auto C/F rifles
• Semi auto shotguns with more than 3 shots
• .22 pistols with more than 5 shots.

Now how many gunsmiths are going to get the restricted RFD license to work on the above considering the amount licensed are probably in the low hundreds.

Secondly how many would need gunsmithing work? C/F pistols are easy to upgrade by the owner. Shotguns, easy enough to do yourself. .22 pistols are the same as C/F ones. Leaving semi auto rifles. Only 167 or so in the entire country.

All this is academic as the law says it cannot be done.

Even if only purchasing a firearm..

You mean the RFD after buying in some restricted firearms or someone wanting to buy one? Either way the law says you cannot.

Its not my interpretation. One of the few times the law is very clear and straight forward. Its not allowed.

Quite like a good friend of mine in the states, He is a class iii 07 / type 10 manufacturer he cannot manufacture new machine guns or destructive devices for himself however the company can for research and development or for sale to law enforcement or military.

Not Ireland though so somewhat irrelevant.

You are comparing a country with the most liberal gun laws in the world to a country with some of the strictest. A country that has some of the worse written laws, ever. This coming from the shooters, the governing bodies, Ministers and the law reform commission.

Grizzly 45

Cass wrote: »

An RFD is no more "special" than anyone else. There were a few RFDs that were refused licenses for their C/F pistols, and one RFD that got into bother when found with "excessive" amounts of ammo.

And that was the joke,they could hold the firearms and test fire them[as proven in the Kerry cases] on the RFD liscense but not on a private lic.Hence the reason they were granted their private lics.

If I am thinking of the case of the excessive ammo and its the same fellow.He was no more an RFD than you or me,He was a RO,[more or less]with quite a few other bits he shouldn't have had.Like current Irish army cammo,helmet and flack jacket.As well as sloppy ammo storage etc.A whole lot more to that case than just this,but that was the revelant point to here.

When someone becomes an RFD they must remain as a "standard" RFD for 3 years and only after that time can they go for the restricted license. Otherwise everyone an their Granny would apply for the license to get their firearm and many more to circumvent the current legislation/ban. I mean €1,500 is cheaper than a court case or multiple court cases.

Not to mind,you can have coppers in their dirty big boots clumping anytime int o your house to check the books and storage and inventory.You need a tax clearence cert and prove that you are making income from the busisness,living miles from nowhere.With X thousands invested in security an building renovation.
The utter sick joke is you are a RFD you are a gunsmith as well.Like a car mechanic also being the car salesman as well.Two totally different trades and one being a proper apprenticeship and guild trade in Europe for a very good reason.

gunhappy_ie

OP Sorry the days of C.F pistols being licences are gone and a C/F Pistol cannot be a range gun (I believe nor can any restricted Firearm). The only option there is to talk to some of the ranges in NI as some were at one stage holding pistols of southerns at one stage.

Cass wrote: »

Secondly how many would need gunsmithing work? C/F pistols are easy to upgrade by the owner. Shotguns, easy enough to do yourself. .22 pistols are the same as C/F ones. Leaving semi auto rifles. Only 167 or so in the entire country.

Far too big a discussion and off topic for my coffee at this hour of the morning so just a point.....

Saying a C/F pistol (or any pistol/shotgun for that matter) is "easy" upgrade is like saying that you can rebarrel a rifle because you bought a pipe threading kit from your favorite German grocery store while it was on sale.

I make this comparison because:

1. Mechanically a bolt action rifle is far simpler than any pistol unless it too is a bolt action pistol
2. Threading a pipe is "easy" to achieve
3. People with enough knowledge to be dangerous and without proper tools are repairing/upgrading their firearms without knowing what they are doing.

What makes firearms "easy" to upgrade is the amount of companies that are selling aftermarket parts. What Ive seen and it keeps me busy, is people who have want these parts installed or have attempted themselves and they realize that such parts require fitting.

There is no substitute for paying someone who has been trained to work on firearms, who has money invested in the correct tools for repairing/customizing and who knows what their doing.

GH

Cass

That is a very simplistic and critical view of what i said. You took me up wrong, and probably because of the simplicity of the wording i used.

When i say easy to upgrade i'm not comparing it to rebarreling a rifle. I know how rebarreling is done but i could not rebarrel nor would i attempt to try it. However for pistols it's usually a rail, new mag funnel, sights, etc. IOW "stick on" parts. Pistol shooting in Ireland is not so huge that there is a large market for gunsmithing connected to it. Hell even if you wanted to rebarrel a pistol it usually involved buying the new barrel and just putting it into the firearm. Don't tell me i should use a gunsmith for that, as i take out the barrel of my pistol weekly for cleaning.

Same theory behind the Ruger 10/22. The majority of upgrades are direct attach.

Now when it comes to stuff like barrels of rifle that need professional and competent workmanship then absolutely go to a gunsmith. I never for oe second sugested doing otherwise. However my point is not relating to every gunsmith that holds a standard or unrestricted RFD license but to those that hold the restricted RFD license. With some 160 restricted rifles, a little more for restricted pistols, and possibly a little more again for shotguns there is no where near the same size market for restricted gunsmithing as unrestricted.

Getting back on topic, none of that allows for an RFD, regardless of license type, to fire a restricted firearm on a range or elsewhere.

BattleCorp

Not being able to handle a restricted firearm unless it's licenced to you poses a serious safety question.

Supposing Mr. BattleCorp is working as a range officer and Mr. Cass or someone else has a problem with their restricted firearm, how does the range officer help out?

With a smallbore pistol, I have talked shooters through clearing their gun following a misfire etc. but occasionally I have had to take control of the firearm and clear it myself. Legally, I'd be breaking the law if I did that with a restricted firearm.

I've a question regarding restricted firearms below.

Why isn't a restricted firearms dealer allowed to fire a restricted pistol that they aren't licenced for on a range? I'm not talking about them shooting competitions, but test firing etc. Does the law distinguish between possession and actually shooting the gun?

The restricted firearms dealer is allowed to possess the gun but if the law doesn't distinguish between possession and shooting, then the dealer would be allowed to shoot it on the range. That's my take anyway. Am I incorrect in thinking that whatever isn't prohibited is allowed?

Cass

@ gunhappy_ie - Read back through my post and the start of it seems rather nasty. It was not intended that way. I was trying to show my use of the word "easy" has lead to a belief that gunsmithing can be performed regardless of the type of gun. That is not what i'm saying.

My point is some works can be done by the owner and don't require a gunsmith. For everything else go to a professional.

BattleCorp wrote: »

Not being able to handle a restricted firearm unless it's licenced to you poses a serious safety question.

I'm not arguing that at all, and i'm not saying the law is not an ass because we all know it has produced some doozies over the years.

However the law does not distinguish between an RFD or "normal" gun owner in terms of ability to shoot at a range. If it does i have not found it and am happy to be corrected.

Why isn't a restricted firearms dealer allowed to fire a restricted pistol that they aren't licenced for on a range?

Without being a smart arse that is the point of this thread as well as can others fire one.

The law says you cannot fire a restricted firearm. It is very clear about making the distinction between restricted and unrestricted. As said above it does not say "all except firearm dealers or those in the course of their duty".

Now whether it was not intended to prevent gunsmiths or RFDs from testing/checking restricted or not is irrelevant to some extent as it simply doesn't differentiate between the people or reasons. Look at the zeroing issue. Illegal to do so outside a range, yet the Minister himself said he did not intend for that to happen and zeroing is an essential part of gun ownership and safety. Yet it was never changed or amended.

Does the law distinguish between possession and actually shooting the gun?

Not that i'm aware of. In the eyes of the law there is possession and, well, not possessing. Nothing about who, reason(s) for, exemptions, ownership, etc.

The restricted firearms dealer is allowed to possess the gun but if the law doesn't distinguish between possession and shooting, then the dealer would be allowed to shoot it on the range. That's my take anyway.

Possession is subjective.

The dealer has "possession" of all his firearms for the purpose of his job. Selling them. He can also transport firearms during the course of his work, but without the necessary license(s) has no right to use/shoot them. The same applies for unrestricted firearms, except unrestricted are allowed to be fired on a range. No where else. IOW a dealer cannot empty his shop, invite all the lads down to the local field/quarry and have a good 'ould day blowing the crap out things. This applies to unrestricted as well as restricted.

He doesn't have possession like we do as owners of the items. We have a license to say we have authorisation to possess and use them.

Now for an example. We have spoken so far about possession in terms of the RFD needing/having to do it. If he had such authorisation under his RFD license then it would not simply apply to guns he sells or repairs. He could, based on that thinking , shoot anyone's restricted firearm under the guise/authorisation of his RFD. Taking your example Mr Battlecorp the RFD meets Mr Cass on the range. Sees Cass shooting his restricted firearm and asks for a shot. His RFD covers him for this and now he can legally fire my gun (not sure if that is the end of a statement or a question )

Am I incorrect in thinking that whatever isn't prohibited is allowed?

Prohibited firearms are legal, but cannot be licnesed. You know this, and i know you know, but covering all bases.

If you mean prohibited as in anything that is not legislated against is legal, then i'd say no. Not the case. Again open and happy to be corrected.

However try name something that doesn't have a law attached to it and then we can discuss whether it's allowed. For the moment i'm working off the fact that the Act says no.

Perhaps someone with a keener mind, or better understanding of the Act, can explain and correct me.

juice1304

Here was where my thinking came from.

2.—(1) Subject to the exceptions from this section hereinafter mentioned, it shall not be lawful for any person after the commencement of this Act to have in his possession, use, or carry any firearm or ammunition save in so far as such possession, use, or carriage is authorised by a firearm certificate granted under this Act and for the time being in force.

(2) Save in any of the cases hereinafter excepted from this section, every person who after the commencement of this Act has in his possession, uses, or carries any firearm without holding a firearm certificate therefor or otherwise than as authorised by such certificate, or purchases, uses, has in his possession, or carries any ammunition without holding a firearm certificate therefor or in quantities in excess of those authorised by such certificate, or fails to comply with any condition subject to which a firearm certificate was granted to him, shall be guilty of an offence under this Act and shall be punishable accordingly.

(3) This section shall not apply to any of the following cases and such cases are accordingly excepted from this section, that is to say:—
(c) the possession, use, or carriage of a firearm or ammunition by a registered firearms dealer in the ordinary course of his business as such dealer;

10.—(1) On and after the commencement of this Act it shall not be lawful for any person to manufacture, sell, repair, test, or prove, or expose for sale, or have in his possession for sale, repair, test, or proof, by way of trade or business, any firearm or ammunition unless such person is registered in the register of firearms dealers.


the expression “firearms dealer” means a person who, by way of trade or business, manufactures, sells, lets on hire, repairs, tests, proves, purchases, or otherwise deals in firearms or ammunition;

In relation to prohibited firearms you can be granted a licence by the minister. it is the same in Sweden or Germany if you are granted authorization for a class A full auto etc..

Cass

Jaysus haven't done this much work since i was in school.

juice1304 wrote: »

Here was where my thinking came from.

That is the 1925 Act.

Look at the amendment to Section 2, namely 2(6) from the 2006 act:

.............. references to a firearm or ammunition do not include references to a restricted firearm or restricted ammunition.”.

• Section 3(g) deals with blanks/blank firers for sporting reasons
• Section 4(d) is gun clubs and their members (iow me and you)
• Section 4(i) is the proof act which was repealed

Then add to that this piece from the same act:

(4A) It is an offence for—

(a) a registered firearms dealer (notwithstanding subsection (1) of this section),

(b) a person engaged in the business of carrying or warehousing goods for reward, or

(c) an auctioneer who stands authorised under section 13 of the Firearms Act 1964 ,

to possess, use, carry, sell or expose for sale a restricted firearm in the ordinary course of business,unless authorised to do so by an authorisation under this section.

So within the same act you have that no one can use a restricted firearm, and in the exact same Act it says its an offence unless authorised. Surely the RFD license is their authorisation?

So in the same act it's legal, but not!!!!!!!!!!!

Now i'm utterly confused.

This stinks of the same crap as the barrel length issue. Cut it below 20" and its an offence. To have it in your possession is an offence unless authorised to do so. However your license is your authorisation and as the FCA1 does not ask for barrel length there is no means to refuse/highlight this when applying.

In relation to prohibited firearms you can be granted a licence by the minister. it is the same in Sweden or Germany if you are granted authorization for a class A full auto etc..

For the sake of this thread assume i'm talking in general terms because the amount of category A prohibited firearms out there for civilian use could probably be counted on one hand. IOW they are not for the general population.

gunhappy_ie

Cass wrote: »

That is a very simplistic and critical view of what i said. You took me up wrong, and probably because of the simplicity of the wording i used.

When i say easy to upgrade i'm not comparing it to rebarreling a rifle. I know how rebarreling is done but i could not rebarrel nor would i attempt to try it. However for pistols it's usually a rail, new mag funnel, sights, etc. IOW "stick on" parts. Pistol shooting in Ireland is not so huge that there is a large market for gunsmithing connected to it. Hell even if you wanted to rebarrel a pistol it usually involved buying the new barrel and just putting it into the firearm. Don't tell me i should use a gunsmith for that, as i take out the barrel of my pistol weekly for cleaning.

Same theory behind the Ruger 10/22. The majority of upgrades are direct attach.

Now when it comes to stuff like barrels of rifle that need professional and competent workmanship then absolutely go to a gunsmith. I never for oe second sugested doing otherwise. However my point is not relating to every gunsmith that holds a standard or unrestricted RFD license but to those that hold the restricted RFD license. With some 160 restricted rifles, a little more for restricted pistols, and possibly a little more again for shotguns there is no where near the same size market for restricted gunsmithing as unrestricted.

Getting back on topic, none of that allows for an RFD, regardless of license type, to fire a restricted firearm on a range or elsewhere.

Cass..... afternoon coffee... this will have to do me for the night haha.

Chliax :P

Sparks

BattleCorp wrote: »

Not being able to handle a restricted firearm unless it's licenced to you poses a serious safety question.

Correct. Yet another serious problem caused by bad law.

Supposing Mr. BattleCorp is working as a range officer and Mr. Cass or someone else has a problem with their restricted firearm, how does the range officer help out?

Legally, by talking them through it.
In reality, by talking them through it and occasionally pointing things out or demonstrating while everyone turns a blind eye. The same way that a blind eye is turned to the gadget shop selling restricted short firearms to the general public without licences, and to the entire paintball industry existing at all.
In my reality, "I have no clear memory of that your honour".

Why isn't a restricted firearms dealer allowed to fire a restricted pistol that they aren't licenced for on a range? I'm not talking about them shooting competitions, but test firing etc. Does the law distinguish between possession and actually shooting the gun?

Yes. The restriction refers to "possession, use or carrying". Possession meaning you have access to it, whether that's in your hand, in your gun safe, in your car or wherever; use is... well, use; and carrying refers to transporting, not to the US practice of concealed carry.
Section 2(3) and 2(4) then give a list of exceptions. RFDs are covered under 2(3)(c):

(c) the possession, use, or carriage of a firearm or ammunition by a registered firearms dealer in the ordinary course of his business as such dealer;

And the intern is covered identically under 2(4)(a):

(a) the possession, use or carriage of a firearm or ammunition by an employee of a registered firearms dealer in the ordinary course of business of the dealer as a firearms dealer,

While the average joe shooting at a range without a licence is covered by the widely-known 2(4)(d):

(d) the possession, use or carriage of a firearm or ammunition during a competition or target practice at a club, shooting range or any other place that stands authorised under this section or section 4A of this Act

Up to this point, this applies to all firearms, restricted or not; but then you get section 2(6) which goes back and says that some of those exceptions don't apply to restricted firearms (which is where 2(4)(d) gets shut down)

(6) In subsections (3)(g) and (4) (other than paragraphs (i) and (k)), references to a firearm or ammunition do not include references to a restricted firearm or restricted ammunition.

Anyone paying attention now knows that the RFD is allowed shoot a test shot or two of a CF pistol at the range; but their intern is breaking the law if they do that. Because the law is an ass.

Also, since "target shooting" isn't part of "the ordinary course of his business as" an RFD (and it's nice that the law doesn't think women can be RFDs, but hey, it's an ass through and through), Joe Q RFD can't cite his licence as permission to take a pistol out of stock and go shoot a match with it.

Well. He could but he's likely to lose the court case.

jb88

Could I ask some questions in relation to this?

Can an RFD compete with a CF Pistol or Pistols at local and National as well as international shooting competitions if they do not have a licence for the Centrefire Pistol.

Can they use their dealers licence to compete if they are an RFD in the Republic of Ireland?

Sorry my question may already have been answered above already.
Exactly where is this stated in the law? Thanks.

Cass

jb88 wrote: »

Can they use their dealers licence to compete if they are an RFD in the Republic of Ireland?

Sorry my question may already have been answered above already.
Exactly where is this stated in the law? Thanks.

Just above your post:

Sparks wrote: »

Anyone paying attention now knows that the RFD is allowed shoot a test shot or two of a CF pistol at the range; but their intern is breaking the law if they do that. Because the law is an ass.

Also, since "target shooting" isn't part of "the ordinary course of his business as" an RFD .............. Joe Q RFD can't cite his licence as permission to take a pistol out of stock and go shoot a match with it.

Well. He could but he's likely to lose the court case.

Sparks

As far as I can tell, they basically cannot do that jb88, for the reasons in that post just above yours. The relevant law would be the Firearms Act 1925, as amended, section 2(1). There are exceptions to that section, but none of them would seem to apply to an RFD using his dealers licence to compete, because that's not the ordinary course of business for an RFD. Test shots, sure. Accuracy tests, sure. Competing internationally? I don't see how that could ever be covered by 2(3)(c), it's just too far outside the lines.

jb88

Sparks wrote: »

As far as I can tell, they basically cannot do that jb88, for the reasons in that post just above yours. The relevant law would be the Firearms Act 1925, as amended, section 2(1). There are exceptions to that section, but none of them would seem to apply to an RFD using his dealers licence to compete, because that's not the ordinary course of business for an RFD. Test shots, sure. Accuracy tests, sure. Competing internationally? I don't see how that could ever be covered by 2(3)(c), it's just too far outside the lines.

Thanks for that, greatly appreciated.

So in essence its not clearly stated, so open to interpretation if it came to a case in the courts?

Sparks

I wouldn't say it was that open to interpretation.

Just because there isn't a line that says "you are expressly forbidden from doing X", it doesn't mean that you can do X. It can be banned just as completely through three or four lines or even the absence of lines (eg. our restricted list).

But I'm trying to stress here that I'm not a solicitor or a barrister and this isn't professional legal opinion. If the law says clearly that something is banned and some person does it anyway, then yes, it's illegal but that doesn't mean they're going to jail for it. Someone has to take enough of an interest to report it, AGS and the DPP have to take enough notice to investigate and prosecute it, and then you finally get into court (assuming there's no deal struck on the steps), and *then* a judge will hear the argument for the defence and decide whether or not you can "officially" call international competition part of an RFD's ordinary business. Or for that matter, whether the facts of the case were wholly and completely reported and accurate or whether a detail that was missed out proves to be critical in some way.

It's just that I find it really stretches my imagination to breaking point to try to see a judge in such a case going along with the argument that 2(3)(c) coves the RFD here. It's just too far a walk.

On the other hand, there's no such thing as a sure thing in a courtroom. Its an adversarial system and one bad day for a barrister or a judge can decide a case more than the facts (hell, they've studied courtrooms and found they can tell from the verdicts when the judge ate lunch because that affected the verdicts in a noticable way). So I won't bet my kid's college fund on it and this is why I keep saying that court cases are something you should undertake with the same kind of reluctance you normally save for prostate surgery.

Mind you, I wouldn't bet the price of a copybook on the defendant in such a case.




Edit: Or to put it more simply, if I was an RFD, I'd never claim 2(3)(c) covered me to compete because I'd be terrified of losing my house in a court case that I was almost certain I couldn't win. What someone else wants to do with their house, that's up to them.