Has anyone successfully applied to have a sound mod on their pistol?

cosieman

Has anyone here ever got permission or tried to from the gardai for to be allowed have a sound mod on their pistol.

Grizzly 45

cosieman wrote: »

Has anyone here ever got permission or tried to from the gardai for to be allowed have a sound mod on their pistol.

Only know of one person who has one,and he got it pre 2008.What sort of good reason could you give for the variation for a handgun?

clivej

Yes I know of a person that has the 'S' on there 22lr handgun license.
But the handgun is not threaded for a mod. lol.
Maybe a spot of super glue?

clivej

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Only know of one person who has one,and he got it pre 2008.What sort of good reason could you give for the variation for a handgun?

"Neighbourhood Watch" after dark.

Cass

I've seen two.

While it might seem impossible, legally speaking it's no different than asking for one on a rifle. Same applies to a shotgun.

I'd hazard a guess most people don't even consider ticking the box when applying.

meathstevie

I think you might run out of "good reason" to support your application fairly quickly since most if not all civilian ranges have compulsory "eyes and ears" policies. And after the hearing loss cases I think you're bound to get a slap on a Defence Forces or Garda one not wearing "eyes and ears".

ezra_

meathstevie wrote: »

I think you might run out of "good reason" to support your application fairly quickly since most if not all civilian ranges have compulsory "eyes and ears" policies. And after the hearing loss cases I think you're bound to get a slap on a Defence Forces or Garda one not wearing "eyes and ears".

Improving gun balance?
Tightens groups?
Looks kick ass?

gunhappy_ie

clivej wrote: »

"Neighbourhood Watch" after dark.

General Mall Ninja-ing
Tacticool House Clearances in ones tunderpants :P:P

tac foley

Most pistol moderators obscure the target by being larger in diameter than the height of the foresight. Hard to explain why you'd need one on a precision target pistol, IMO.

Grizzly 45

Only thing I could think of is mass humane dispatch of large farm animals as a vet or the like.But then a captive bolt killer run on compressed air or blanks would do it as well.
Pre 08,if you had a safe private place to shoot or cellar and didnt want to scare the entire neighbourhood on Sunday with some target practise...Post 08 when we are all supposed to be on ranges,doing that...
Pity no one paid any heed to my suggestion that a handgun of cf calibre should have been mandatory kit for deer stalkers for humane dispatch where a rifle would be unsuitable.

meathstevie

ezra_ wrote: »

Improving gun balance?
Tightens groups?
Looks kick ass?

Nothing a muzzle brake or balancing weights won't do I'm afraid. "Looks kick ass" will unfortunately be countered by "Donlikethelookothat"........

gunhappy_ie

tac foley wrote: »

Most pistol moderators obscure the target by being larger in diameter than the height of the foresight. Hard to explain why you'd need one on a precision target pistol, IMO.

Not so true:

Yes while Factory guns will have a lower front sight, many factory suppressor ready guns (c/w threaded barrels) have a much taller front sight for that very reason.

As an example the many .22 1911 clones out there would be a perfect example, they have a very low front sight but the barrels can easly accept a suppressor. Depending on the pistol after market sights can be added to address that issue.

meathstevie wrote: »

Nothing a muzzle brake or balancing weights won't do I'm afraid. "Looks kick ass" will unfortunately be countered by "Donlikethelookothat"........

Where are you going to add balancing weights on the very little real estate that makes up a pistol ? What happens if your pistol does not have an accessory rail so cannot easily accept weights ?

Unfortunately adding a muzzle brake while reducing recoil will also:

1. Increase noise Substantially. This is a huge issue as must ranges are now semi enclosed..... this will cause sound to reverberate

2. Pi$$ off not just the shooter beside you but also the neighbors



A. It is important to note that when dealing with noise the scale in which it is measured on isnt linear but exponential (a few decibels can be 10000s of times louder than the previous level)

When suppressing a firearm in many cases the levels of noise that you are reducing the noise to is still considerably loud and in many cases still not hearing safe.

badaj0z

The best reason for having a sound moderator on any firearm used on a range is the effect of noise on the local area.This is a major issue for many ranges and sound moderators can help, especially on pistols.

Grizzly 45

badaj0z wrote: »

The best reason for having a sound moderator on any firearm used on a range is the effect of noise on the local area.This is a major issue for many ranges and sound moderators can help, especially on pistols.

It "could" be argued under the EU directives of noise abatement at source,and the fact that the directives specify that personal saftey devices are a poor second ary choice than muting the sound at source is the preferred option in all cases.
It's a good sell with long arms due to the fact that they can be used off a range for hunting,but with handguns and the inherent hoplopophobia of them by the PTB,we dont have that option really.

BattleCorp

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

It "could" be argued under the EU directives of noise abatement at source,and the fact that the directives specify that personal saftey devices are a poor second ary choice than muting the sound at source is the preferred option in all cases.
It's a good sell with long arms due to the fact that they can be used off a range for hunting,but with handguns and the inherent hoplopophobia of them by the PTB,we dont have that option really.

Without even going to EU legislation, Irish legislation would apply here. Ranges are places of work for the owners or any staff.

The 2005 Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act, 2005 states in the General Principles of Prevention -Section 8 (7) - that "The giving of priority to collective protective measures over individual protective measures". A sound moderator would comply with that as many people will be protected whereas ear defenders only protect one person.

Grizzly 45

Thanks.
You just quoted prettty much the EU directive !:)
Indeed,that is the point,of a range being a "workplace"
As the fact that a "professional deerstalker" should be entitled to a silencer automatically as well,[along with a CF handgun lic as in the UK IMHO.You'd proably end up with a big cal derringer no doubt:rolleyes:]
However,try selling this to people who seem to have a inexplicable phobia about noise reducers on the end of firearms,and an absolute hate for them lacking off motor vechicles...

tac foley

Odd you should mention that, only a short time ago our club secretary got a phone call from a large animal veterinarian who asked if he could come to the range to 'make sure his new revolver was working correctly'.

Of course it was not only impossible, but illegal too. His 'special condition Section 7-something' firearms certificate only allows him to discharge the firearm in the course of his veterinary duties, not shoot it on a target range.

All of this s***e, of course, has a VERY serious effect on the continuing level of gun-related crime in UK. [sarcasm off]

meathstevie

tac foley wrote: »

Odd you should mention that, only a short time ago our club secretary got a phone call from a large animal veterinarian who asked if he could come to the range to 'make sure his new revolver was working correctly'.

Of course it was not only impossible, but illegal too. His 'special condition Section 7-something' firearms certificate only allows him to discharge the firearm in the course of his veterinary duties, not shoot it on a target range.

All of this s***e, of course, has a VERY serious effect on the continuing level of gun-related crime in UK. [sarcasm off]

Would one of his veterinary duties not be to ascertain that his veterinary equipment works as expected ?

tac foley

meathstevie wrote: »

Would one of his veterinary duties not be to ascertain that his veterinary equipment works as expected ?

That is 'not the problem' of the firearms certificate issuing authority. Here in UK you have to have 'good reason' - a legal term - in order to satisfy the PTB that you are a safe pair of hands to have ANY firearms.

The 'good reason's in no particular order, are -

1. Target shooting - to be carried out on an authorised range only.

2. Pest control - over land that YOU own, or with the written permission of the land owner.

3. Deer stalking - as above.

4. Professional game management/gamekeeper/ghillie et al.

5. Veterinarian.

If you are a pest controller, then you cannot shoot your rifle on a range - nor can a target shooter use his rifle on a pest or a deer. To do that, or any combination, you must have that as a condition of your FAC.

However, rifles are NOT prohibited firearms on mainland UK, but handguns that use cartridges ARE. The special certificate therefore allows you, the veterinarian, to do something in the course of your professional duties as a vet to do something that very few of the rest of us can do - namely, shoot a cartridge-firing handgun that actually still LOOKS like a handgun.

If you have problems putting bullet in the head of an injured deer or cow/horse from the usual coup de grace distance, then perhaps you should not be in possession of any kind of licence, from driving to fishing. Trying the gun out on a range is therefore not permitted.