Acquiring Rifle not on IE Market

Peppa Cig

Hi, looking for some expert advice please.

Looking to acquire one of the rifles below. Both commonly available in UK but neither available in the foreseeable future from Ireland RFD.

https://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms/mp-15-sport-ii-or-magpul-moe-m-lok-carbine-length-handguard

https://kriss-usa.com/rifles/rimfire/dmk22

Will an Ireland RFD import rifle for me from UK/other if it is a brand they do not normally deal?

I guess second option is buy in UK, ship to Northern Ireland RFD and import to an Ireland RFD or collect myself with necessary permits?

Doable or too much hassle?

Thanks

Savage93

Peppa Cig wrote: »

Hi, looking for some expert advice please.

Looking to acquire one of the rifles below. Both commonly available in UK but neither available in the foreseeable future from Ireland RFD.

https://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms/mp-15-sport-ii-or-magpul-moe-m-lok-carbine-length-handguard

https://kriss-usa.com/rifles/rimfire/dmk22

Will an Ireland RFD import rifle for me from UK/other if it is a brand they do not normally deal?

I guess second option is buy in UK, ship to Northern Ireland RFD and import to an Ireland RFD or collect myself with necessary permits?

Doable or too much hassle?

Thanks

Hope you dont experience
"Idontlikethelookof that" or
"black rifle too dangerous to license"

Irishphotodesk

Sorry for my ignorance on gun related matters but what is this type of weapon used for in Ireland?

Given my lack of knowledge in this area - safe to say I’m unable to contribute to how you would best import such a machine.

Peppa Cig

Savage93 wrote: »

Hope you dont experience
"Idontlikethelookof that" or
"black rifle too dangerous to license"

I was wondering about that myself. Would they be reasonable grounds to refuse?

Ref black - I currently have an application in for https://www.air-arms.co.uk/ultimate-sporter-xs.html in black

Peppa Cig

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Sorry for my ignorance on gun related matters but what is this type of weapon used for in Ireland?

Given my lack of knowledge in this area - safe to say I’m unable to contribute to how you would best import such a machine.

It is a .22 long rifle typically used for target shooting, hunting and/or vermin control on farmland etc.

Luckysasha

Cill dara hunting in kildare had a similar Smith and Wesson recently. I enquired about licensing it and was told i could only be granted a restricted license because of the style of it. Restricted means it would be for rang.e use only so no tramping through fields with it. Give cill dara a call they are S&W agents for Ireland

Peppa Cig

Luckysasha wrote: »

Cill dara hunting in kildare had a similar Smith and Wesson recently. I enquired about licensing it and was told i could only be granted a restricted license because of the style of it. Restricted means it would be for rang.e use only so no tramping through fields with it. Give cill dara a call they are S&W agents for Ireland

Thanks. Rang Cill Dara last week. Said not in stock for 3 months+. Was wondering about UK option as available now from loads of dealers.

BattleCorp

Luckysasha wrote: »

Restricted means it would be for rang.e use only so no tramping through fields with it.

Eh, sorry there boss but that's not strictly correct. I use on of my restricted rifles (legally) for vermin control.

I applied to use it for target shooting and vermin control and there was no problem.

Grizzly 45

Luckysasha wrote: »

Cill dara hunting in kildare had a similar Smith and Wesson recently. I enquired about licensing it and was told i could only be granted a restricted license because of the style of it. Restricted means it would be for rang.e use only so no tramping through fields with it. Give cill dara a call they are S&W agents for Ireland

You have been fed a line there of quality horse sht!! Restricted does NOT mean just range use.You can also use it for hunting too ,iF you specify such in your application.As it is a restricted rifle,not a shotgun,you can also have a high capacity.22lr mag with this as well if it is granted as restricted. As for the "Idontlikedelookodatnow!" clause you might want to advise your dealer and CS of numerous cases in Limerick city around 2012/2014.Where liscenses were granted on semi auto centrefire rifles where this nonsnse of the "Idontlikedelookodatnow" clause was put to bed,under the proof of 100% that "Form does not dictate function" and that there is no definition in Irish firearms laws as to what an "assault rifle " looks like or how it functions. Also it cost the CS at the time,[who is now in charge of road saftey as an assistant comissioner], over 30 grand in lost cases in one single day in court costs to learn this point.

Grizzly 45

Peppa Cig wrote: »

Hi, looking for some expert advice please.

Looking to acquire one of the rifles below. Both commonly available in UK but neither available in the foreseeable future from Ireland RFD.

https://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms/mp-15-sport-ii-or-magpul-moe-m-lok-carbine-length-handguard

https://kriss-usa.com/rifles/rimfire/dmk22

Will an Ireland RFD import rifle for me from UK/other if it is a brand they do not normally deal?

I guess second option is buy in UK, ship to Northern Ireland RFD and import to an Ireland RFD or collect myself with necessary permits?

Doable or too much hassle?

Thanks

Good luck getting Kriss anywhere in the EU for starters.Its a US brand that isnt really known here,and you will pay thru the snot to get one in from the US.IF it can be shipped under ITAR regulations.
As you seem to want to get expensive stuff from the UK...:p and like the look of them.Why not have a look at what is available in .22 AR style rifles in the UK?The Brits are making exellent .22 black rifles these days.

Have a look at LANTAC UK. They will almost build you a custom rifle with genuine AR parts as much as possible,from their parent company LANTAC in the US under UK law for the price of getting either of those two brands into Ireland.:)

Peppa Cig

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Good luck getting Kriss anywhere in the EU for starters.Its a US brand that isnt really known here,and you will pay thru the snot to get one in from the US.IF it can be shipped under ITAR regulations.
As you seem to want to get expensive stuff from the UK...:p and like the look of them.Why not have a look at what is available in .22 AR style rifles in the UK?The Brits are making exellent .22 black rifles these days.

Have a look at LANTAC UK. They will almost build you a custom rifle with genuine AR parts as much as possible,from their parent company LANTAC in the US under UK law for the price of getting either of those two brands into Ireland.:)

Thanks Grizzly.

Kriss appears available from plenty sources in UK e.g:

https://firingsolutions.co.uk/products/kriss-defiance-dmk22c-black-dm22-cbl00

http://www.dauntseyguns.co.uk/proddetail.php?prod=DM22-CBL00

I did briefly look at Lantac but will look again based on your recommendation

My original question remains about how best to get it into Ireland.

I see S&W is available from some NI dealers. Maybe the easier option if a nearby RFD would sort for me but would mean paying up front and assuming I’d get license = bit risky?

Grizzly 45

You dont need an RFD to do this at all.:)
Once you have a liscense granted to you with the guns specific serial nr. Thats the only problem,you need to get the dealer to hold a specificly serialised numberd gun that you have applied for.
You can have the gun deliverd to your door.You just need the dept of Justice to issue you an import cert for that particular gun and get it shipped from the UK dealership to you here.The trick is finding a courier who will handle the shipment in the UK at a reasonable price. You can save a few hundred,by doing it like this

Only reason I'd use a dealer here is I discover a buy it or its gone type deal,and I need to get it secured in Ireland pending getting a liscense for it.

tac foley

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Sorry for my ignorance on gun related matters but what is this type of weapon fiream used for in Ireland?

Given my lack of knowledge in this area - safe to say I’m unable to contribute to how you would best import such a machine.

Here in UK we use them for fun, and for three-gun comps, and for general futzing around with what is probably the most prolific .22 rimfire look-alike - and the cheapest.

The Kriss IS here in UK, BTW, and although it costs a good deal more, but also offers a good deal more, since it is entirely metal, and has a solid barrel, not sleeved like the S&W. I shot one last year when they were new here, and was mightily impressed.

Lantac are good, but then, if you want to go to an Irishman with your business, then Mark Bradley is the go-to guy. He builds whatever you want, and with many trophies and medals for CSR behind him on the shelf [he founded the discipline, BTW] I'd look to him before anybody else.

If I had a spare slot on my FAC I'd have one like a shot, if I wasn't already looking for a StG44.

Cass

Peppa Cig wrote: »

My original question remains about how best to get it into Ireland.

Two options:

1. Import it yourself by getting a serial number for the gun (the exact one you intend to buy) download the personal import paperwork, get the import license, apply for and get the firearms license, send off firearms license and import paperwork to supplier, have firearm shipped directly to you.
2. Get an RFD to do all that above via their RFD license, and for a fee.

Peppa Cig

Cass wrote: »

Two options:

1. Import it yourself by getting a serial number for the gun (the exact one you intend to buy) download the personal import paperwork, get the import license, apply for and get the firearms license, send off firearms license and import paperwork to supplier, have firearm shipped directly to you.
2. Get an RFD to do all that above via their RFD license, and for a fee.

Thanks Cass. So import license first then apply for firearms license. Cheers.

Good to know.

Cass

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

........ and that there is no definition in Irish firearms laws as to what an "assault rifle " looks like or how it functions..

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;

Peppa Cig wrote: »

Looking to acquire one of the rifles below.

Maybe i missed it above, which caliber you looking at?

Cass

Peppa Cig wrote: »

Thanks Cass. So import license first then apply for firearms license. Cheers..

Nope, sorry. I didn't put it in exactly the right order as i wasn't thinking. I just blurted out the steps.

Apply for the firearms license first, then the import. No point applying for the import if they cannot ship it to you because you've no license. Plus the import license has a "sell by date" iirc.

Also if you get refused the firearms license the gun will not be shipped, or if going through an RFD will be paid for and shipped but you won't be able to possess it.

So get the firearms license first for anything you're considering.

aaakev

My young lad wants a 22 in a couple of years for his 14th birthday so I was gonna get the s&w and get him his training license, be food craic on the range and for bunny bashing in the fields! It's one of them or a 10.22 with an adjustable AR type stock so we can both use it

If Cilla dara have them coming in 3 months why not see if they can get a serial number for one that's coming and apply for that? Could be perfectly timed

Peppa Cig

Cass wrote: »

SI 21/2008



Maybe i missed it above, which caliber you looking at?

.22 thanks

Peppa Cig

aaakev wrote: »

My young lad wants a 22 in a couple of years for his 14th birthday so I was gonna get the s&w and get him his training license, be food craic on the range and for bunny bashing in the fields! It's one of them or a 10.22 with an adjustable AR type stock so we can both use it

If Cilla dara have them coming in 3 months why not see if they can get a serial number for one that's coming and apply for that? Could be perfectly timed

That sounds like a plan - thanks

Peppa Cig

Cass wrote: »

Nope, sorry. I didn't put it in exactly the right order as i wasn't thinking. I just blurted out the steps.

Apply for the firearms license first, then the import. No point applying for the import if they cannot ship it to you because you've no license. Plus the import license has a "sell by date" iirc.

Also if you get refused the firearms license the gun will not be shipped, or if going through an RFD will be paid for and shipped but you won't be able to possess it.

So get the firearms license first for anything you're considering.

That makes sense, thank you.

I was checking out range membership fees today and was very surprised with €600+ fees in first year. I plan/had planned to join range for two reasons:

1. I would like to target shoot at range with this AR15 lookalike

2. I have it in my head that being a member of shooting range will help my license application for a firearm that some Supers may not like the look of due to the ‘assault rifle look’.

I have my own land that requires vermin control. That should be reason enough to have license for firearm below approved? - Thoughts?

(If I don’t tick shooting range on application form at this time, can I still use shooting range in future or will it require extension of license?).

N.B. I currently have a firearms application in for Air Rifle for vermin control in my own land and this will be my first license.

Thanks

https://www.google.com/search?q=wesson+mp+15/22&rlz=1C9BKJA_enIE777IE777&hl=en-GB&prmd=misvn&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj12viek6jiAhUgRBUIHUatAEoQ_AUoAnoECAkQAg&biw=834&bih=1003#imgrc=WumaSIUAVG8QzM

Cass

Peppa Cig wrote: »

I was checking out range membership fees today and was very surprised with €600+ fees in first year.

Surprised good or bad.

I've said this umpteen times in the past years. The MNSCI (which i assume is the range you are referring to) is the largest in the country and one of the largest in Europe. As such it has brand name, high running costs and more importantly is open to abuse.

People know that joining it will almost guarantee you get whatever license you are seeking. So the MNSCI, like most other ranges, introduced a first year fee to weed out those looking to get a license for a firearm they normally wouldn't get without membership.

As for the price. 600 for the first year, but 300 for each successive year. Other range charge 250, 450, 600, 850 and 1,000+ for the first year with yearly fees running at 250, 300, 850 and 1,000+ and not one of them can match the midlands in terms of facilities.

So if you want to shoot 50 yards only then most any range will do. If you want to shoot 100 yards you have the choice of three ranges. You want to shoot more than 100 yards you have the Midlands or An Roicht in Kerry. If you want to shoot more than 300 yards, but also have pistol ranges, sheltered ranges (out to 300 metres) clay ranges, Gallery ranges and long ranges out to 1,200 yards then the only place in Europe, other than Bisley with this is Midlands.

not bad for 300 a year.

2. I have it in my head that being a member of shooting range will help my license application for a firearm that some Supers may not like the look of due to the ‘assault rifle look’.

It will help, but won't guarantee the Super will grant it.

I have my own land that requires vermin control. That should be reason enough to have license for firearm below approved? - Thoughts?

Why not a Ruger 10/22?

I'm not getting at you just asking the same question the Super will. Even though both are unrestricted (once limited to 10 round mags) this may come up. Make sure you have a good answer and don't get caught off guard.

(If I don’t tick shooting range on application form at this time, can I still use shooting range in future or will it require extension of license?).

This is tricky. The law says you apply for the firearm and supply your good reason. If you don't join a range then your only good reason is hunting. If you apply for it for hunting, and only tick hunting on the FCA1, then if you go target shooting later you may be in breach of the conditions of your license.

You really should tick both hunting and target shooting if you intend to do both within the lifespan of the 3 years license, but that means joining a range before applying.

N.B. I currently have a firearms application in for Air Rifle for vermin control in my own land and this will be my first license.

then the next question the Super may ask, as with the one above about why a Ruger won't suffice, is why you need this for hunting too when you have the air rifle. So you need another good reason which would be target shooting.

By the by while my mouth is warm. Just do your homework on the rifle, which ever you choose, before buying. Semi auto .22lr rifles are not that inherently accurate. They look cool and are fun as hell to shoot, but you won't be winning competitions with them in their original format and take it from someone with one and has shot them before, the novelty wears off.

rugerfanatic

Cass wrote: »

.............the novelty wears off.

No it doesn't

Grizzly 45

SI 21/2008
Quote:
assault rifles” means—

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

(b) firearms that resemble such rifles;

First part is irrevelant as they are CAT A [prohibited] under EU law,so owning one ,while theoritically possible here,is an academic question.

Once again... Form does NOT follow function!:) I refer again,to the "Waterford tractor" court case of 1983 or 1984 There has to be a written legal definition in the act as to what the item is. And as in this case,what army anywhere in the world has ever issued .22 cal as its mainstay battle round?So it even falls on tht point too.

Cass

First off i'm not advocating for the other side.

Secondly that definition while in an SI (secondary legislation) is law. So unless there has been a court case where this SI has been amended, repealed then it still stands.

Grizzly 45

It might still stand,but it is not implied or used as it is simply very bad law,with a multiple precidents to shoot it down.Were it to go to the HC ,and this is expert judicial opinion,it will be lost by the state,hence it is not used by DC judges.

Cass

I agree with ya about it going to court, but even recently people are still being warned about the "idontlikethelookofit" law.

If its so easily dismissed as non workable then there should be no need to consider it when looking for a firearm as the OP is.

The pigeon man

A gun like that is going to attract unnecessary attention from the superintendent. Tbh a cz 455 would be far better for vermin control.

It's up to you but I think the superintendent will think you have some ulterior motive when you say you want to shoot rabbits with an ar look a like

Cass

The pigeon man wrote: »

Tbh a cz 455 would be far better for vermin control.

Hence the need for a dual purpose such as target shooting where events/details are timed and a semi auto reduces bolt cycling time, stops you coming off target to cycle the bolt, etc.

It's up to you but I think the superintendent will think you have some ulterior motive when you say you want to shoot rabbits with an ar look a like

He/she can think what they want. the law says if the applicant can show good reason, and the person is not disentitled the Super can (not must) issue the license.

To refuse it based on looks or a personal opinion, of the Super, would not hold up in court as Grizz said above.

Also as a .22lr, unrestricted firearm it won't draw the same side way looks as a semi auto centrefire. Those really get the hair standing on the backs of the necks of AGS.

Grizzly 45

Cass wrote: »

I agree with ya about it going to court, but even recently people are still being warned about the "idontlikethelookofit" law.

If its so easily dismissed as non workable then there should be no need to consider it when looking for a firearm as the OP is.

Remember what we have said about self banning ourselves on these types of guns?

Also,what exactly is the difference between this type of .22 and taking a Ruger 10/22 and tacticooling it with bits?All you are doing is really buying all the stuff at once on the AR?

Cass

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Also,what exactly is the difference between this type of .22 and taking a Ruger 10/22 and tacticooling it with bits??

Because when the Super Googles Ruger 10/22 he gets this:



As opposed to this:



Or this when he Googles S&W M&P15




There is nothing wrong, illegal or anything like that from converting the Ruger into something that looks like the S&W (as long as the mags are always 10 rounds or fewer) by buying the accessories and it's a lot easier to buy a Ruger, and adapt it to "tacti-cool" than try and fight to bring in a S&W MP15.


Just sayin.

1349

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

It might still stand,but it is not implied or used as it is simply very bad law,with a multiple precidents to shoot it down.

District courts do not set precedent.

BattleCorp

Cass wrote: »

There is nothing wrong, illegal or anything like that from converting the Ruger into something that looks like the S&W (as long as the mags are always 10 rounds or fewer) by buying the accessories and it's a lot easier to buy a Ruger, and adapt it to "tacti-cool" than try and fight to bring in a S&W MP15.

Because of the dumbass way that our laws work, there might be something illegal about doing that.

As long as that stupid 'idontlikedalookadat' law is on the books, you risk turning an unrestricted firearm into a restricted firearm based on the Super's opinion.

In essence, you are turning it into something that 'resembles' a restricted firearm which, dumb and all as it is, needs a restricted license.

Yes, there is the chance that it won't be enforced, and there is the chance that you could go to court and win, but it's better to be forewarned and be armed (pardon the pun) with all the facts and then decide your tactics.

Cass

My point is if you buy, apply for, and license the standard Ruger 10/22 and someone were to Google it they get the pics i posted above. What you add to that afterwards is your own business. You're already licensed for it, and each three year period is a renewal.

There is nothing illegal about adding a pistol grip stock to a rifle as it only applies to shotguns, and as for the "idontlikethelookofit" well you're already licensed. If someone called to your house to inspect the firearm(s) and you show them the new "tacti-cool" version as long as the serial number matches your license and you don't have 20/25/30 round mags (the only thing that makes it restricted) i don't see how it would be a problem.

Believe me, i'm overly cautious when it comes to things like this. I didn't buy the 16" CZ years back because of the grey area with barrel length and instead bought the 20" version which i didn't want. So i wouldn't suggest anything illegal. Sneaky? Perhaps. Illegal, no.

BattleCorp

Cass wrote: »

There is nothing illegal about adding a pistol grip stock to a rifle as it only applies to shotguns, and as for the "idontlikethelookofit" well you're already licensed.

I normally don't argue with you but being already licenced doesn't cut it if you are in possession of the wrong type of licence. A pistol grip mightn't be a problem but a full AR or AK clone stock might be.

If the Super decides to enforce the 'idontlikedalookodat' clause, then it's restricted based on his/her opinion of what an assault rifle looks like and a court case is needed to prove otherwise. You may well win, but nothing is 100% when it comes to court.

It may not have been restricted when you bought it (and got the license for it), but according to the law it's restricted now. The 'idon'tlikedalookodat' is just as much a law as the one that says anything over 10 rounds makes it restricted. I know, it's stupid, but that's what's written.

If someone called to your house to inspect the firearm(s) and you show them the new "tacti-cool" version as long as the serial number matches your license and you don't have 20/25/30 round mags (the only thing that makes it restricted) i don't see how it would be a problem.

I'll agree with you here unless the Garda knew what they were doing or were sent out with instructions from the Super to see if it looks restricted (very very unlikely).

Cass

BattleCorp wrote: »

I normally don't argue with you but being already licenced doesn't cut it if you are in possession of the wrong type of licence. A pistol grip mightn't be a problem but a full AR or AK clone stock might be.

Agree with 100% and i'm normally the one taking your stance. However, and without pushing the boundaries of the law, how can i put this

=====================
Read here
=====================

:D

It's subjective. The SI says an assault rifle is anything that is one or looks like one, not verbatim. However as it does not describe the details of what accessories/parts make an assault rifle, an assault rifle, it leaves the designation of a rifle being an assault rifle to the interpretation/opinion of the issuing person (Super)

If the Super decides to enforce the 'idontlikedalookodat' clause, then it's restricted based on his/her opinion of what an assault rifle looks like and a court case is needed to prove otherwise. You may well win, but nothing is 100% when it comes to court.

Exactly.


If you stick on a scope to the standard model Ruger and the Super believes this makes it look like an assault rifle then it is. So you essentially take a chance with everything you do. SEcondly the M&P 15 leaves no room for doubt.

Look at the Anschutz MSR RX22. The two i've seen are both on unrestricted licenses.

It may not have been restricted when you bought it (and got the license for it), but according to the law it's restricted now.

But it's not or mroe accurately not automatically. If you stick a 25 round mag in the gun it's automatically a restricted firearm but the "looks clause" is subjective and down to the Super.

The 'idon'tlikedalookodat' is just as much a law as the one that says anything over 10 rounds makes it restricted. I know, it's stupid, but that's what's written.

It is a law, but again its subjective.

I'll agree with you here unless the Garda knew what they were doing or were sent out with instructions from the Super to see if it looks restricted (very very unlikely).

Exactly.

Think of this. How many lads shooting Gallery rifle with pictures all over social media and their own websites are shooting rifles with barrels shorter than 20"? Must be in the hundreds. How many have been brought to court? None. It's illegal, and the law says so in black and white. Yet the Super(s) issue licenses for them every year and some of them have the same accessories stuck to them we are talking about now and still no revocation of licenses.

For the first time i can remember i'm the one saying there is a difference in what the law says and how it's implemented. So when it's something as innocuous as these issues AGS seem happy enough to let it pass once it's not abused.

Grizzly 45

1349 wrote: »

District courts do not set precedent.

BUT they DO confer amongst themselves and accept their own decisions as precedent amongst themselves for cases where the law isnt clear.;) Always remember they are now " ultima persona designate" under the firearms act as it now stands.So which Super or Cheif is going to be brave enough to say to a dist justice in his own court "You are wrong your honour on that!" I and witnessed such an event in a dist court in Ennis where an inspector was foolish enough to do so on a point of firearm law,and was so tounge lashed by the lady judge,he literally must have felt all of 3ins tall with his hat on by the time she finished.
There is "the law" and there is "THE LAW" in Irish courts.Gotta know which one you are dealing with.;)

Grizzly 45

BattleCorp wrote: »

I

If the Super decides to enforce the 'idontlikedalookodat' clause, then it's restricted based on his/her opinion of what an assault rifle looks like and a court case is needed to prove otherwise. You may well win, but nothing is 100% when it comes to court.

Opinion is NOT law!!! He has to go and take the matter to a court,where he /she will lose and end up paying your costs simply because of the precedent set in appx 155 other cases on the exact same subject in the DC's the length and breath of Ireland up to 2016...Dealing with modern sporting rifles that were claimed to be "assault rifles".That even included a fricken Benelli Argo IIRC,which is ,was and never was an "assault rifle",or even "looks like" one. So if this is the case of this part of the act being used.WHY have there been no further refusals of CF SA rifles?How come M1 carbine is growing in Gallery rifle?

This is not an issue anymore...It is I belive an actual test of your mettle to see do you really want this gun and are willing to go the whole way on this by AGS,and it is cutting out the "I just want one for the craic like" type of applications.

I

t may not have been restricted when you bought it (and got the license for it), but according to the law it's restricted now. The 'idon'tlikedalookodat' is just as much a law as the one that says anything over 10 rounds makes it restricted. I know, it's stupid, but that's what's written.

The only thing that is of a definition that is of any sound legal footing is the mag capacity of over 10 rounds.[Another ridicilous thing,but another days work] The "idontlikedelookodatnow!" clause is Very.Bad.Law,because of wording and lack of clear definitions and recognised as such by judicary and AGS,and has been thrown out in both rifles and shotguns by dist courts.

The pigeon man

On the topic of rifle barrels less than 50cm it's not illegal to be in possession of one provided you have lawful authority or reasonable excuse.

Peppa Cig

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

BattleCorp wrote: »

I

If the Super decides to enforce the 'idontlikedalookodat' clause, then it's restricted based on his/her opinion of what an assault rifle looks like and a court case is needed to prove otherwise. You may well win, but nothing is 100% when it comes to court.

Opinion is NOT law!!! He has to go and take the matter to a court,where he /she will lose and end up paying your costs simply because of the precedent set in appx 155 other cases on the exact same subject in the DC's the length and breath of Ireland up to 2016...Dealing with modern sporting rifles that were claimed to be "assault rifles".That even included a fricken Benelli Argo IIRC,which is ,was and never was an "assault rifle",or even "looks like" one. So if this is the case of this part of the act being used.WHY have there been no further refusals of CF SA rifles?How come M1 carbine is growing in Gallery rifle?

This is not an issue anymore...It is I belive an actual test of your mettle to see do you really want this gun and are willing to go the whole way on this by AGS,and it is cutting out the "I just want one for the craic like" type of applications.

I

t may not have been restricted when you bought it (and got the license for it), but according to the law it's restricted now. The 'idon'tlikedalookodat' is just as much a law as the one that says anything over 10 rounds makes it restricted. I know, it's stupid, but that's what's written.

The only thing that is of a definition that is of any sound legal footing is the mag capacity of over 10 rounds.[Another ridicilous thing,but another days work] The "idontlikedelookodatnow!" clause is Very.Bad.Law,because of wording and lack of clear definitions and recognised as such by judicary and AGS,and has been thrown out in both rifles and shotguns by dist courts.

Is intended use a factor in licensing decision in your opinion? i.e target vs hunting vs vermin.

Considering all of the failed cases at DC referenced above that should almost eliminate prospect of refusal when applicant meets normal conditions? i.e supers should be aware of expected DC ruling.

If super sees you are appealing does he have option to reverse decision before DC hearing?

Peppa Cig

Thanks for all input. Really interesting info and thread (for me).

Grizzly 45

Peppa Cig wrote: »

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Is intended use a factor in licensing decision in your opinion? i.e target vs hunting vs vermin.

Considering all of the failed cases at DC referenced above that should almost eliminate prospect of refusal when applicant meets normal conditions? i.e supers should be aware of expected DC ruling.

If super sees you are appealing does he have option to reverse decision before DC hearing?

My own opinion and experiance...Dont think it really matters.I had both target shooting and hunting down for my DPMS 308.

It shall I say,give you a qualified "should" make no difference anymore.Since 2015 there has been a slow increase of semi auto CF rifles around the place.Mostly M1 carbines for gallery rifle.

This is why I say this "idontlikedelookodatnow!" clause is showing up again is to weed out the genuine people who want one,and will put in the effort to get one,and some idiot who just "wants one for the craic like",and to generally be an idiot with it. Could be 100% wrong too,but it has the flavour of this if it is .22 related.I haven't heard of any CF SA's being refused since 15. Scrutinised more than a normal rifle yes,refused no.

You might just get some hotshot who wants to make a name for him/herself and try to take it to court,but they might be "reminded" of the fact that if they lose the court costs,which are now triple what they will be in 2015 due to costs being awarded if they lose will be coming out of the Justice depts /Garda budget...

Yes ,they can withdraw right up to the moment in court that the case is beginning to be heard.So it becomes the judges responsibility to either,refuse,grant,or tell both parties to work out the problem.
They did that to a couple of people I know,as back then it was no skin off their nose,as it was a paid day out of the office,and you the applicant were carrying the costs of it all.Now I dont think they would be all that happy doing it again,as some judges wee also getting annoyed at having to shoulder thier responsibility of granting liscenses.

Cass

The pigeon man wrote: »

On the topic of rifle barrels less than 50cm it's not illegal to be in possession of one provided you have lawful authority or reasonable excuse.

You need to read the whole section as you missed a critical piece:

Section 12(a) as Amended by Section 65 of 2006 Firearms Act.

(6) It is an offence for a person (except a registered firearms dealer) to possess without lawful authority or reasonable excuse—

(a) a shot-gun the barrel of which is less than 61 centimetres in length,

(b) a rifle the barrel of which is less than 50 centimetres in length,

So only RFDs are covered, not regular applicants.

The law says, quite clearly, the barrel must be built back to 50 cm (or above) if it was cut to repair damage. The "lawful authority" or "reasonable excuse" are legal terms and not something you can think up. Lawful authority is infact your license. That gives you the legal authority to possess the gun. The grey area arises from the fact that the legislation says you cannot have a rifle with such a short barrel, yet because the FCA1 does not ask barrel length the issue does not come up in the application process, meaning when you are granted the license you have lawful authority.

Then we are back to the fact that a Super, by issuing the license, cannot supercede the law and so the license might even be void (not even going to touch that can of worms) when issued. Also it's up the person, and the legal onus is on you, to know what is legal and what license is appropriate and obtainable. Much like the "do i need a restricted/unrestricted license" issue. It's up to you.

The pigeon man

Cass wrote: »

You need to read the whole section as you missed a critical piece:

Section 12(a) as Amended by Section 65 of 2006 Firearms Act.



So only RFDs are covered, not regular applicants.

The law says, quite clearly, the barrel must be built back to 50 cm (or above) if it was cut to repair damage. The "lawful authority" or "reasonable excuse" are legal terms and not something you can think up. Lawful authority is infact your license. That gives you the legal authority to possess the gun. The grey area arises from the fact that the legislation says you cannot have a rifle with such a short barrel, yet because the FCA1 does not ask barrel length the issue does not come up in the application process, meaning when you are granted the license you have lawful authority.

Then we are back to the fact that a Super, by issuing the license, cannot supercede the law and so the license might even be void (not even going to touch that can of worms) when issued. Also it's up the person, and the legal onus is on you, to know what is legal and what license is appropriate and obtainable. Much like the "do i need a restricted/unrestricted license" issue. It's up to you.

A registered firearms dealer does not need lawful authority or reasonable excuse to have a short barrel. If it was the case that they needed this it would not be in brackets.

Everyone else must have lawful authority or reasonable excuse.

All this said, this debate is largely academic because it is unlikely to have an affect on anyone licensing or being prosecuted for having such a firearm.

Cass

Its not academic. It's in black and white. I've also explained the problem with "lawful authority".

The firearms act says it's illegal to have a rifle with a barrel shorter than 50cm. As no one has been taken to court about this it's gone unverified for years however to say it's not illegal is dangerous because you don't know that, don't legislate and won't be the one in court if someone decides to push it.