Minimum distance from roads when shooting

ezra_

I remember reading before that there was a minimum distance (50yards I think) that you needed to be from a public road.

Can't recall the legislation though, so can't check.

Does anyone here know/

cavan shooter

No its actually 60ft now becareful, That is referring to a very old Act called the Summary Jurisdiction Act 1851 it prohibits the discharge of a firearm within 60 feet of the center of a road or a dwelling house. (Cant scare the horses)

In 2017 The firearms and offensive weapons Act is more likely to be used

"A person who discharges a firearm being reckless as to whether any person will be injured or not, shall be guilty of an offence, whether any such injury is caused or not, and shall be liable—

a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding €1,270 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding twelve months or to both, or
b) on conviction on indictment, to a fine or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or to both.

This Section of the 1990 Act is now often used to prosecute for the discharge of a firearm near a road as it provides the member greater flexibility than the older one.

As to whether or not its reckless will be based on the opinion of the Garda etc etc

meathstevie

cavan shooter wrote: »

No its actually 60ft now becareful, That is referring to a very old Act called the Summary Jurisdiction Act 1851 it prohibits the discharge of a firearm within 60 feet of the center of a road or a dwelling house. (Cant scare the horses)

In 2017 The firearms and offensive weapons Act is more likely to be used

"A person who discharges a firearm being reckless as to whether any person will be injured or not, shall be guilty of an offence, whether any such injury is caused or not, and shall be liable—

a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding €1,270 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding twelve months or to both, or
b) on conviction on indictment, to a fine or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or to both.

This Section of the 1990 Act is now often used to prosecute for the discharge of a firearm near a road as it provides the member greater flexibility than the older one.

As to whether or not its reckless will be based on the opinion of the Garda etc etc

Cavan shooter; don't want to be a petty twat but your last line should read: the prosecuting Garda will have to supply evidence beyond all reasonable doubt for the court to find someone guilty.

It's very unlikely that the offence of recklessly discharging a firearm in relation to proximity of a road is complete unless the shot was actually fired in the direction of or across the road.

If you observe basic safety principles you should never fall foul of that legislation anyway.

cavan shooter

meathstevie wrote: »

Cavan shooter; don't want to be a petty twat but your last line should read: the prosecuting Garda will have to supply evidence beyond all reasonable doubt for the court to find someone guilty.

It's very unlikely that the offence of recklessly discharging a firearm in relation to proximity of a road is complete unless the shot was actually fired in the direction of or across the road.

If you observe basic safety principles you should never fall foul of that legislation anyway.

I agree with you...your been a petty twat.
Only kidding your right the state has to prove beyond reasonable doubt and if you apply basic safety principals you should never fall foul/

I was trying to say becareful everything is based on opinion and while the state has to prove beyond reasonable doubt.......it can take a while for that same garda to be proven wrong in the mean time your guns are lifted and you may have to go to court to prove your innocence.