Our Sport is Under Attack Again

Cass

One last thing, and i mentioned this somewhere else. If such a blocking were allowed i doubt it'd be long until it's either targeted for to make it not so, or it'd be a practice carried out by only a couple of hundred.

Bear with me on this.

Anyone with a mag that is now classed as prohibited is prohibited from acquiring more. EU wide. So whatever you have you have. That is our grey bit.

The very clear bit is the SI and the EU directive states you cannot acquire them so if you were to buy one with the intent of blocking it you'd be guilty of an offence straight away. Same for the person selling them.

So you may see a sharp increase in buying in the next week or so across the EU, then a sudden and infinite cessation in the numbers being sold after that.

dc99

Cass wrote: »

The date of 14th September 2018 means any firearm imported into the EU or manufactured in the EU (Ireland included) from that date to present must have these markings.

2018???? Surely this should be 2019? Can you retro implement a law of this kind?

Cass wrote: »

I believe, and again it's an opinion, that the majority of firearms if not them all, will fulfill this requirement from "birth" as the action, receiver, barrel, slide, etc, etc. are all usually marked. Even those imported into the EU will have these markings.

Pardon my ignorance, but are you saying the all legally manufactured pistols from the US manufacturers (i.e. S&W, Ruger, other US .22lr makers) are already marked correctly ?

Cass

dc99 wrote: »

2018???? Surely this should be 2019? Can you retro implement a law of this kind?

No its not, and stop calling me Shirley.

The directive was implemented in 2018 and its taken this long for the Irish Government to enact an SI to reflect the changes in Irish law.

Pardon my ignorance, but are you saying the all legally manufactured pistols from the US manufacturers (i.e. S&W, Ruger, other US .22lr makers) are already marked correctly ?

Any Remington, Sako, Savage, Browning, Tikka, Beretta, Hammerli, Sig, Ruger, Baikal, Blaser (can't forget the Blaser lads), etc, etc i've ever seen in a shop has had serial numbers and other identifying markers on it. You need only look to your FCA1 application and license to know this.

Does every brand or make have serial numbers/identifying markers? I don't know, haven't seen every make and model of gun. All i know is i've never been able to license a gun without a serial number, and never seen a firearm without a marker/stamp in over 30 years of shooting.

The SI and EU directive address the manufacture and importation of all firearms and essential components and its that bit, essential components that is of interest. Barrels, actions, and other essential components that are used by gunsmiths to build custom rifles is what is really being targeted, again in a bid to keep a registry and record of all parts and firearms to avoid the "ghost gun" situation.

Grizzly 45

Hack12 wrote: »

Taught's on restricting semi auto CF mags to 10 rounds as done for 22LR pistols?

The QUICKEST solution to this entire problem for us and the Govt TBH.

I'll answer a few points made here on this to show how much of a hames the EU made of this,and then dumped it on EU countries to sort it out themselves.

There was an option to grandfather them but our Government didn't do that and have fcuked several of us because we are stuck with mags that will be illegal to have in the next two weeks and they've offered us no compensation for them.

Correct...And that can work to our advantage as time is pressing,in the fact we have grounds for a possible injunction,as this is confiscation without recompense. We do need to get shifting and howmany of you have already been in touch with NASRPC/NARGC on these points?

If anyone modifies a mag to reduce the capacity, while it may be "permanent" it can only really be done a couple of way by adding or removing and then braising or welding, but not sure how really permanent it would really be to someone will tools and determination

And what happens if they are Polymer?? Anyone with a 3D printer could run up a mag body in a couple of hours these days. I know some IPSC lads in Germany have this problem and have sorted it out legally by carrying a pop riviter and a cordless drill in their kit,and where it is legal to use in IPSC matches they drill out the pop rivit to use on 20 rounds,and re rivit it where it isnt.
Either the Govt trusts us to not break the law on this and grandfathers these mags and the rifles,or they dont and then are obliged to offer compensation under EUCHR article 14 and article 46 of the Constitution. Those are the only two options here...

I]QUOTE]its a grey area because it's not specifically addressed so if one CS allows it, but another doesn't you have a court case. [/QUOTE[/I

Its a NON EXISTENT area...As the legislation doesnt address it at all as an option!!!

The very clear bit is the SI and the EU directive states you cannot acquire them so if you were to buy one with the intent of blocking it you'd be guilty of an offence straight away. Same for the person selling them.

So you may see a sharp increase in buying in the next week or so across the EU, then a sudden and infinite cessation in the numbers being sold after that.

Mmm ...Not quite...There is the EU directive exemption that states.... [praphrasing it]If you shoot an internationally recognised sport,and are a member of a organised rifle club of your country,and participate regulary in a disipline that requires this high capacity,you can appy for an exemption from your national govt. IOW if you shoot IPSC ,Nordic challenge,etc,you can apply for an exemption on these mags,even here.

So there wont be any panic buying on these across the EU.As not all EU countries have impliented the directive into their law yet. Germany it's causing utter eructions with their national firearms law. As it kicked up a huge problem on things like different cals that need 20 round bodies to hold a legal ten rounds.[458 SOCOM]

Another problem. Two weeks is not enough time for anyone to search out a viable option of disposing them out of the state. We need to be onto our reps and we need to be doing this NOW!

Grizzly 45

dc99 wrote: »

2018???? Surely this should be 2019? Can you retro implement a law of this kind?

Pardon my ignorance, but are you saying the all legally manufactured pistols from the US manufacturers (i.e. S&W, Ruger, other US .22lr makers) are already marked correctly ?

IF they are sold thru a wholesale dealer in Europe from the USA or other,they will be marked by the dealer and proof shot before they can be marketed to the public.
The US never had a proof house requirement and they consider the reciver/frame as the gun itself,and evrerything else an add on bit that is changeable. Hence they never had a need to mark everything pressure bearing.

This is really aimed at personal US/other imports,and proably also at stuff coming onto the market like Turkish /Paki made guns,whos quality might be abit dubious as well. IOW EU product liability,is now also being applied to Irish gunsmiths as well.

dc99

Cass wrote: »

No its not, and stop calling me Shirley.

The directive was implemented in 2018 and its taken this long for the Irish Government to enact an SI to reflect the changes in Irish law.

Sorry CASS! LOL

I see where my confusion was - SI date and directive date.....

Cass wrote: »

Does every brand or make have serial numbers/identifying markers? I don't know, haven't seen every make and model of gun. All i know is i've never been able to license a gun without a serial number, and never seen a firearm without a marker/stamp in over 30 years of shooting.

The SI and EU directive address the manufacture and importation of all firearms and essential components and its that bit, essential components that is of interest. Barrels, actions, and other essential components that are used by gunsmiths to build custom rifles is what is really being targeted, again in a bid to keep a registry and record of all parts and firearms to avoid the "ghost gun" situation.

I’m used to seeing a serial number on the frame or “upper”, but I was reading from this new SI that this required multiple parts on the same firearm to have markings (like 3 or 4 parts of one unit being marked - not just the frame?)

Grizzly 45

dc99 wrote: »

Sorry CASS! LOL

I see where my confusion was - SI date and directive date.....



I’m used to seeing a serial number on the frame or “upper”, but I was reading from this new SI that this required multiple parts on the same firearm to have markings (like 3 or 4 parts of one unit being marked - not just the frame?)

Barrel,Reciver, Breech,Cylinder, Frame,Upper &Lower receiver,Bolt[ What part do you mark if it is a bolt carrier group?:rolleyes:]. IOW ALL the "pressure bearing parts" of the gun,which are the critical and restricted parts in the EU.

Cass

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

And what happens if they are Polymer?? Anyone with a 3D printer could run up a mag body in a couple of hours these days. I know some IPSC lads in Germany have this problem and have sorted it out legally by carrying a pop riviter and a cordless drill in their kit,and where it is legal to use in IPSC matches they drill out the pop rivit to use on 20 rounds,and re rivit it where it isnt.

Utterly irrelevant to us as we don't have the EU directive but the Irish SI which prohibits anything over 10 rounds regardless of the sport being shot.

So anyone doing this here will be breaking the law.

Either the Govt trusts us to not break the law on this and grandfathers these mags and the rifles,or they dont and then are obliged to offer compensation under EUCHR article 14 and article 46 of the Constitution. Those are the only two options here...

Based on past experiences which do you think is the more likely?

Its a NON EXISTENT area...As the legislation doesnt address it at all as an option!!!

It does address it in the form of you cannot have a loading device which is capable of holding more than 10 rounds, and then with the bit about no being able to acquire them.

What is doesn't clarify is can permanent blocking be used or is it a case of round mags only with anything else, however modified, to be banned.

This is not the first piece of legislation that has been vague, and unclear. The same issue arose for mags for unrestricted pistols, for rifle barrels that are manufactured to under 20" instead of being cut down, etc.

The problem with such vagueness is it leaves the door open for each district CS to implement their own policy which is never a good thing.

Mmm ...Not quite....

Ok that bit is my fault as i'm talking about Irish issues, not EU ones. I know the directive is EU and the mention of it cannot be helped but i'm not focused on the EU as they got it "easy" compared to us and if they didn't it still doesn't change the SI we got landed with.

So there wont be any panic buying on these across the EU.As not all EU countries have impliented the directive into their law yet.

Funny bit is they can face sanctions and possible court (the entire country) if it's not done in a timely manner.

Another problem. Two weeks is not enough time for anyone to search out a viable option of disposing them out of the state.

Do you think they care? As far as they are concerned we need only crush them or break them up and they're destroyed. You're applying shooter logic to Government thinking.

We need to be onto our reps and we need to be doing this NOW!

If two weeks is not enough time to dispose of mags what the hell do you think our reps can do in the same time period. No SI or legislation has ever been repealed or made more lenient.

Not blaming any group as everyone got caught out with this, but in 9 days, from tomorrow morning, it's go time.

Cass

dc99 wrote: »

I’m used to seeing a serial number on the frame or “upper”, but I was reading from this new SI that this required multiple parts on the same firearm to have markings (like 3 or 4 parts of one unit being marked - not just the frame?)

Yeeaaahhh............... I wouldn't be overly concerning myself with this. Firstly anything that is here is pretty much safe. I doubt even 0.5% of current firearms fall into the "needing markers" category if its event hat high.

Secondly if anything is imported then the onus is on the RFD to mark them before sale. Imported from outside the EU btw, not all imports.

Thirdly, the same onus of responsibility is on the gunsmith who makes a firearm.

This SI is as bad for RFDs as us. With the Sept 2018 time frame it means only guns that fall into that narrow margin and sold in the last 11 months need to be checked.

Sorry CASS! LOL

No hassle, i mean its ok, sure, whatever. I'm not bothered.

Grizzly 45

Cass wrote: »

Utterly irrelevant to us as we don't have the EU directive but the Irish SI which prohibits anything over 10 rounds regardless of the sport being shot.

SIGH!!! Ok Again...Utterely revelant,as it is an escape clause in the directive that could have been transposed into national law The directive created this sI so therefore it is absolutely revelant to this mess.

So anyone doing this here will be breaking the law.

So shooting IPSC outside the ROI and having the revelant equipment to do so is illegal??Intresting..



It does address it in the form of you cannot have a loading device which is capable of holding more than 10 rounds, and then with the bit about no being able to acquire them.

What is doesn't clarify is can permanent blocking be used or is it a case of round mags only with anything else, however modified, to be banned.

If it was an option,dont you think it would have been included??

This is not the first piece of legislation that has been vague, and unclear. The same issue arose for mags for unrestricted pistols, for rifle barrels that are manufactured to under 20" instead of being cut down, etc.

Yeah,national law,not an EU directive banning certain types of items,and guns,but leaving lots of door open,so as not to have to ban them either as the EU realised what sort of clusterfuk ,it had created with this legislation on national levels in implimentation.

The problem with such vagueness is it leaves the door open for each district CS to implement their own policy which is never a good thing.

As the law stands they have NO option to decide policy on this.Its two options. neither of them workable within the timeframe given.You now need an export liscense for those mags as well,and how fast can DOJ in Summer process possibly 500 plus individual CAT A applications to God alone knows where???

Ok that bit is my fault as i'm talking about Irish issues, not EU ones. I know the directive is EU and the mention of it cannot be helped but i'm not focused on the EU as they got it "easy" compared to us and if they didn't it still doesn't change the SI we got landed with

.

Funny bit is they can face sanctions and possible court (the entire country) if it's not done in a timely manner.

Do you really think the big boys care a toss about directives when it suits their national intrests??:rolleyes: Germany and France have broken and bent more directives in their national intrest in the last 10 years than we have had hot dinners.
Also,maybe they dont belive in rushing things and actually see who and how they will be affected so they wont get bit by legal challenges and dont have to cover their inferiority complexes about being seen as Merkels and Junkers pink socked little Euro Bitch???:rolleyes:

Do you think they care? As far as they are concerned we need only crush them or break them up and they're destroyed. You're applying shooter logic to Government thinking

.

. They can then explain in the high court,as to why they decided to confiscate ligitimate property off Irish citizens,with no compensation.Or in Europe,thats how far I'm ready to go.

If two weeks is not enough time to dispose of mags what the hell do you think our reps can do in the same time period. No SI or legislation has ever been repealed or made more lenient.

Get off their asses and take legal consultation on putting an injunction on this for a start?Or do I as a civillian have to go and do this myself,as they are all swing their dicks ...Again?? Like in 2008???:rolleyes::mad::mad They have a FCP meeting next week,so this should be the ONLY thing on the agenda from shooters sideI had to virtually breif one comittee member of NASRPC on this today as to our options.There are options and things can be done,but people need to move.

Not blaming any group as everyone got caught out with this, but in 9 days, from tomorrow morning, it's go time.

Just call me "Cassandra" in future will you??:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: We've only been rattling on about this on the "more crap on the way" thread for the last what FOUR years? I predicted enough times that this would turn and bite in the ass and we would be unprepared...Because of our indiffernce to things EU.

Hope ,for once and all our sakes our organisations have got their sht together with the lead ban,otherwise this will look like a minor hiccup....But I doubt it somehow.:rolleyes:

Now if I could only predict the euro millions numbers ...:rolleyes:

Cass

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

SIGH!!! Ok Again...Utterely revelant,as it is an escape clause in the directive that could have been transposed into national law The directive created this sI so therefore it is absolutely revelant to this mess.

Highlighted the relevant bit that pertains to Irish law and Irish shooters. It wasn't, so on we go.

So shooting IPSC outside the ROI and having the revelant equipment to do so is illegal??Intresting..

I'll highlight the bit you missed when you quoted my post:

Cass wrote:

So anyone doing this here will be breaking the law.

If it was an option,dont you think it would have been included??

They didn't do it in 2009 for unrestricted semi auto rimfire pistols until it was eventually clarified by SI391/2015. Permanently block you mags and continue using them if you want, but make it known that it's your choice and not a loophole to be exploited or worse again completely legal because none of us can say for sure.

Sometimes vagueness is intentional, not accidental.

Yeah,national law,not an EU directive banning certain types of items,and guns,but leaving lots of door open,so as not to have to ban them either as the EU realised what sort of clusterfuk ,it had created with this legislation on national levels in implimentation.

The intent of the EU directive is now moot with the drafting of the SI.

As the law stands they have NO option to decide policy on this.

Are you not arguing FOR the ability to block the mags instead of destroying them? If a CS agrees with your interpretation of the SI and allows the permanent, and irreversible, blocking of a mag instead of destruction or surrender is this not what you want?

Its two options. neither of them workable within the timeframe given.

What two?

they can then explain in the high court,as to why they decided to confiscate ligitimate property off Irish citizens,with no compensation.

€100,000+ for each high court case for what, €50 - €150 p/p worth of mags? (depending on individual ownership rates)

Or in Europe,thats how far I'm ready to go.

Bring sandwiches.

We've only been rattling on about this on the "more crap on the way" thread for the last what FOUR years? .

I know, as do some others, but when you shout the sky is falling for four years people tend to loose interest until it actually happens. Also the amount of people engaged on that thread probably numbers in the..................... tens.

When i say caught off guard the EU stuff was coming and known, but the SI, according the few releases/contacts i've made to various groups, was completely out of the blue, did not go through the FCP, and so was unexpected.

Brontosaurus

I'm a bit confused here:

I have a 10/22 for the past 2 years, do I need to now go and get the bolt carrier/barrel/stock marked?

Also when they say restrictions on the "import or manufacture" of firearm parts needing to be marked, there are plenty of airsoft lads who use real stocks, grips, handguards, pins,charging handles etc., so do they now need to get their toys marked with serial numbers for firearms they don't possess?

Will airsofters now be prosecuted for having unlicensed firearms in the guise of non-essential parts?

And due to them getting away with it for years, I'd imagine they won't be, which begs the question why they don't enforce the law equally?

Also I suppose if I ductape my rifle to a 2x4 I've just manufactured a firearm/firearm part?

BattleCorp

Brontosaurus wrote: »

I'm a bit confused here:

I have a 10/22 for the past 2 years, do I need to now go and get the bolt carrier/barrel/stock marked?

Also when they say restrictions on the "import or manufacture" of firearm parts needing to be marked, there are plenty of airsoft lads who use real stocks, grips, handguards, pins,charging handles etc., so do they now need to get their toys marked with serial numbers for firearms they don't possess?

Will airsofters now be prosecuted for having unlicensed firearms in the guise of non-essential parts?

And due to them getting away with it for years, I'd imagine they won't be, which begs the question why they don't enforce the law equally?

Also I suppose if I ductape my rifle to a 2x4 I've just manufactured a firearm/firearm part?

If you have your 10/22 for over 2 years, then you don't have to get it marked. That's only for guns that came into the EU after September 2018.

Grizzly 45

I have a 10/22 for the past 2 years, do I need to now go and get the bolt carrier/barrel/stock marked?

NO! And you have never had to get the stock marked either.

Also when they say restrictions on the "import or manufacture" of firearm parts needing to be marked, there are plenty of airsoft lads who use real stocks, grips, handguards, pins,charging handles etc., so do they now need to get their toys marked with serial numbers for firearms they don't possess?

None of those are B]critical pressure bearing parts[/B],which are coverd by EU legislation..So you can tart up your airsoft with all sorts of genuine BCM and Magpul stuff no problem

Will airsofters now be prosecuted for having unlicensed firearms in the guise of non-essential parts?

No,as they have good reason to own on an airsoft .Plus how can you tell genuine parts from fake Chinese parts? Its all made in China these days, just seems to grow in price once it hits a dealer.
But best ask the DOJ on that one...They write this stuff...
:rolleyes:
[
QUOTE]And due to them getting away with it for years, I'd imagine they won't be, which begs the question why they don't enforce the law equally?[/QUOTE]

Cos airsofties arent considerd a threat or using real guns in any shape or form.:rolleyes:

Also I suppose if I ductape my rifle to a 2x4 I've just manufactured a firearm/firearm part?

No,you just duct taped your rifle to a 2X4.:) Did you produce any shavings?Spall,metal chips,etc? You didnt manufacture anything,as you haven't converted a piece of raw material into somthing useable for your rifle.

Grizzly 45

Cass wrote: »

Highlighted the relevant bit that pertains to Irish law and Irish shooters. It wasn't, so on we go.

On we go to ask whenever we get a meeting,why wasnt it considerd?Why was no one in the organisations consulted on this?Why was this rushed thru in a Summer recesses?

They didn't do it in 2009 for unrestricted semi auto rimfire pistols until it was eventually clarified by SI391/2015. Permanently block you mags and continue using them if you want, but make it known that it's your choice and not a loophole to be exploited or worse again completely legal because none of us can say for sure.

Which took , I belive 2 HC cases to sort out the first bit,which then gave us the
SI.And on the other two points,we will need legal opinion and decision to have legal provenance.:(

Sometimes vagueness is intentional, not accidental.

In yopur experiance has this govt ever been vauge on EU directives?We literally try and transpose them verbatim into national law.Why would e,specially this, be any different?

The intent of the EU directive is now moot with the drafting of the SI.

The contents are not moot tho.

Are you not arguing FOR the ability to block the mags instead of destroying them? If a CS agrees with your interpretation of the SI and allows the permanent, and irreversible, blocking of a mag instead of destruction or surrender is this not what you want?

I am,but as THE LAW is now written,it doesn't seem to be an option.Just because it is not written,does'nt make it legal either...And a CS opinion is not law either as we know,[as well as being transient for as long as they are in charge of your district] and have said ourselves plenty of times.
This is law they have to deal with ,and as far as they are concerned,it has two options on what they have to to do with these. They are obliged to work and uphold the law as it stands,no matter how right or wrong...And they will tell you this too,that you will need a judge to give you a ruling on this,and they will follow that ruling too.
And in fairness to them,this time they are not at fault and didnt cause this, or on presumption of innocent until proven guilty, played no part in drafting this either.

No,this has more the smell and taste of some Jobsworthies in the DOJ,reading and looking at the calender for the holidays,picking somthing,and stiking it in an act for Charlie to sign off on,to keep our class swot position in Europe lest Angela looks with disfavour at us.

What two?

Export or surrender for destruction.

€100,000+ for each high court case for what, €50 - €150 p/p worth of mags? (depending on individual ownership rates)

Depending on make ...SIG 551@ E110 per mag X16 as someone we both know =1760 as an extreme case...But lets take a ballpark sums here .

Say generic mag @80 euros and average semi auto owner has possibly 2 each,whether unconverted or blocked to 10 =160 euros per shooter and we are what 180?SA owners here....32,500 euros +/- 5,000 [for variations on amounts,types,rarity value etc] Grand total ESTIMATED 37,500.

Replacement 10 shot mags generic,and if can be got at the moment, with a possible 4month pre order time for such between 50 to 100 euros:(

I belive a HC injunction costs 1,500[?] All in. But I also belive there is an actual mechanism,to be able to legally stop or challenge SIs and EU directives being implimented.But its in utter legalese and I'll let legal counsel work and explain that one next week.

Bring sandwiches.

And my sleeping bag,and Tolstoys "War and Peace "[unabridged version, all 1,653 pages]:) Hell of a book to show someone you intend to wait them out .

I know, as do some others, but when you shout the sky is falling for four years people tend to loose interest until it actually happens. Also the amount of people engaged on that thread probably numbers in the..................... tens

.

25,807 views 1,314 replies over 3 years 9months. [one of the longest threads here on boards]You mean to tell me there was no one in any of our orgs or DOJ didnt read and heed or follow?Especially when the former chairman of the NARGC himself,arranged a meeting with an Irish MEP to discuss this "sky fall" event,and then the self same organisation assured their membesr right up to this year in Galway that "they are on it!",yet are utterly blindsided in their own country?

When i say caught off guard the EU stuff was coming and known, but the SI, according the few releases/contacts i've made to various groups, was completely out of the blue, did not go through the FCP, and so was unexpected.

What it tells me is that our orgs,dont have that great an insider info as they used to have on events like this happening.It's also why they should be budgeting retainers for Dail lobbyists. An absolute necessity these days for pro gun groups.

Well, lets see if they can redeem themselves next week and we'll see if this FCP is an actual co operative and two way information street as claimed,and whether our side can respond ?

Anyhoo,at this stage,we are now just chasing our tails and engaging in what and If aboutery here ,which is an unproductive use of time. We need people acting,and moving and getting together to go and meet their TD's and ministers and start getting legal advice and remedy,if we wnt this clarified properly and not have to go a court route,if at all possible.

Cass

Gonna cut down on the length of my responses because we're wandering into page long replies and it's getting tiresome reading and writing them, for everyone.

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

On we go to ask whenever we get a meeting,why wasnt it considerd?Why was no one in the organisations consulted on this?Why was this rushed thru in a Summer recesses?

Answer to all three is this simple. Because they can, and they don't need our input. Sickening, but true.

I am,but as THE LAW is now written,it doesn't seem to be an option.Just because it is not written,does'nt make it legal either...

Heh, heh. I was arguing this very point a few posts back. We're aligned on this point, to an extent. If the SI does not specifically prohibit it and permanent blocking means the 30 rounds mag is 30 round in spirit only, and forever and more is now a 10 round mag then it's legal. The SI says

"An issuing person shall revoke a firearm certificate in respect of a firearm classified in Category B of the Directive granted by the person where the holder of the certificate is found to be in possession of :

b) a loading device which can hold more than 10 rounds and is capable of being fitted to a centre-fire semi-automatic or repeating long firearm".

Permanently blocked is now no longer capable of holding more than 10. Still looks like a 30 round mag, but it's not. Yet ANOTHER aspect of this SI that creates more problems than it solves.

25,807 views 1,314 replies over 3 years 9months. [one of the longest threads here on boards]You mean to tell me there was no one in any of our orgs or DOJ didnt read and heed or follow?

Sure you and i could account for a hundred or more of those views. Each.

They probably read it, but my point it the attention span when there is no immediate threat is usually fairly short.

Especially when the former chairman of the NARGC himself,arranged a meeting with an Irish MEP to discuss this "sky fall" event,and then the self same organisation assured their membesr right up to this year in Galway that "they are on it!",yet are utterly blindsided in their own country?

So they say. Can only take their word for it and i've no reason not to.

Here is an idea and a constructive use of our time. Create a list of issues. Not gripes, but actual issues with the SI. Contradictions, messes it creates, the vagueness that may cause unintentional illegal action, etc, etc.

Zxthinger

Maine its time to stop posting every tiny loop hole here and highlighting the weaknesses in the system. The the no-good civil serverts are using this site as a tool and we keep telling the everything

yubabill

As regards to the confiscation of private property - mags over 10 rounds - in the SI, it has occurred to me that confiscation has been happening at airports for years now - they won't let you fly with sharp objects or liquids (over 100 mL, I think), so you either surrender them or post them to yourself.

People accepted this and heightened security checks after 9/11 and other terrorist attacks since, because they thought them tedious, but necessary.

So it's not surprising that politicians/civil servants feel comfortable imposing the requirement to surrender/export mags over 10 rounds.

But this is a clear contradiction of the right to private property which is one of the fundamental principles of law and of any functioning society outside of Mogadishu or Idlib.

Grizzly 45

As such they will argue,unless you have been living under a rock for the last 20 years...That it is a well known fact that you cant bring liquids or whatever into the secure area.So you are choosing to have your stuff confiscated by doing so.By accident or design.

This otoh is/was perfectly legal to posses,with a liscense here in the ROI a harmless inanimate box for your firearm.Thete are no recorded misuse of them in civillian hands that we the public are aware of.No one has shot up any schools or fast food outlets[VERY thankfully] with one,they are owned by less than 0.1% of the shooting pouplation,yet are now suddenly illegal courtsey of a dept misreading and hastily rushing thru a SI.

Ergo,this does fall foul of article 14 of the EUCHR.Which states quite clearly that if a Govt does make a item illegal that ws previously legal and enjoyed peacefully.It MUST offer recompense at good time market value for such.
As does to a lesser extent Article 46 of our own constitution,in the fact the state must protect the ownership of private property,and the fact that there is almost daily legal precedent for the state or bodies to pay compensation for loss of private property or livly hoods.I refer to cumpulsory purchase orders of "property".It says property,and that doesnt just mean "land or houses",which is the most common use of this. Or loss of livlyhood.IE turf cutters on protected bogs or the Shannon drift net fishermen.

Cass

Zxthinger wrote: »

Maine its time to stop posting every tiny loop hole here and highlighting the weaknesses in the system. The the no-good civil serverts are using this site as a tool and we keep telling the everything

Its good to think that people believe we have enough clout to influence legislation.

If there are any "loopholes" then the discussion of them here will not force an amendment or change to the legislation. It never has afaik.

What discussing it will do is inform people and warn them that any perceived loophole may or may not be a loophole and to try and implement it may result in loss of firearms. The SI specifically says anyone caught with a Cat B firearm and such a mag will have their license revoked.

Now some people can afford both the time and money to fight this in court and there is no doubt a court case will define what exactly is legal or not, but for those that cannot afford it who wants to chance loosing their firearm, not just the mags, over a supposed loophole.

Worse again those that are unaware that such an act/loophole (blocking a mag for example) may not be completely or even a little bit legal and proceed to do it under the advice of a friend or something they read, while unaware of what the SI says, will run the same risk of losing their firearm.


This is not one of those situations where being quiet and speaking about it as little as possible is the best course of action. No groups, organisation or association was involved with or consulted on the drafting of this SI. So its clear to see how much they value our input.

If there are loopholes, and if the loopholes we mention help to notify, advise, or even inform any person involved in a group thinking about taking action then there is no harm.

Lastly there is an FCP meeting scheduled for next week, or so i'm told, at which point all this "loopholes" and other problems with the SI are going to be laid out for the Minister (via his rep on the FCP).

Cass

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

As does to a lesser extent Article 46 of our own constitution,in the fact the state must protect the ownership of private property,............

Hence the reason we are a Republic.

knockon

....and John Deasy will be retiring shortly ..”Asked about the highs and lows of political life, Mr Deasy said the high was banning the use of hand guns in 2008”

Source: RTE News

Good riddance!

solarwinds

knockon wrote: »

....and John Deasy will be retiring shortly ..”Asked about the highs and lows of political life, Mr Deasy said the high was banning the use of hand guns in 2008”

Source: RTE News

Good riddance!

He obviously doesnt watch the news otherwise he would have seen his ban had absolutely no effect on the native scumbag. Does not say much about him if he classes that as a high point in his career.

Brontosaurus

Can't wait to see ganglanders surrender their 30 round mags for their AKMs and UZIs

Grizzly 45

knockon wrote: »

....and John Deasy will be retiring shortly ..”Asked about the highs and lows of political life, Mr Deasy said the high was banning the use of hand guns in 2008”

Source: RTE News

Good riddance!

The man is a legend in hie own mind,and deluded...Hopefully his own vice for cancer sticks,will hasten his early demise. If it isnt already doing him in.

Grizzly 45

Zxthinger wrote: »

Maine its time to stop posting every tiny loop hole here and highlighting the weaknesses in the system. The the no-good civil serverts are using this site as a tool and we keep telling the everything

IF they had been paying attention and reading here,this large bucket of warm and smelly brown matter would have been prevented from landing on the ministers desk next week and in the forseeable future. ALL of this was pointed out TWO years ago as being potential problems for the Govt with this legislation.
So we can draw two conclusions here.[1] They thought they know it all better [2] They rushed this thru,not considering the full implications or ramifications byactually starting a confiscation.

Cass

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

.Hopefully his own vice for cancer sticks,will hasten his early demise. If it isnt already doing him in.

Duuudddeeee. No Mod hat on or anything like that (for clarification), just a personal opinion. Attack his policies, actions and previous history, but stooping to that is just.............. no.

I'll be glad to see the back of the man and his ignorant and short sighted policies that only serve to pad his political wallet while having absolutely NO effect on criminality.

Like the guy, cannot remember his name, from Sinn Fein during the Oireachtas sessions a few years back and he refused to call them firearms, but rather weapons. Knowing it'll be a key buzz word. Sinn Fein of all people, but again they won't be there forever.

Grizzly 45

Cass wrote: »

Here is an idea and a constructive use of our time. Create a list of issues. Not gripes, but actual issues with the SI. Contradictions, messes it creates, the vagueness that may cause unintentional illegal action, etc, etc.

OK here goes;
The ban of magazines with a capacity above 20 rounds in short firearms,and 10 rounds in long firearms,and the banning of firearms with a "length[???]" of 60 cms with a folding stock[1] and the banning of former select fire firearms that have been converted to semi auto only is both farught with constitutional pitfalls under Article 46 of the Irish constitution and under Article 14 of the European Charter of Human Rights.As the Irish constitution in this article grauntees a citizens right to posses private property,and persue a livly hood,and shall only be deprived of it save under the common good,but to which a citizen has remedy in law to apply for compenation for their "property.Which is not specified in laws as to what property is defined as

Article 14 of EUCHR.States that where property that was legal and peacefully enjoyed by any EU citizen,and a state makes its possesion illegal,it must recompense the citizen to market value on a good day,before it was made illegal,and within a timely manner.

Therefore as the SI now stands on those points,it is a clear intent to confiscate such items or deprive Irsh gunowners of their use and enjoyment of legally held firearms and accessories.
As it now stands also,the owner is realistically only left with surrender without recompense.
As these items are now CAT A [prohibited] under the EU directive,they cannot be exported within the EU to another EU state for sale.

Nor can they be exported to the USA,as there is a prohibition on importing high capacity mags under the arms control act,and of "machine guns" under the Mc Clure /Volkmer act 1986

Nor can they be exported to any other country,as Ireland is a signtory of various UN arms export treaties that prohibit "military arms and dual use equipment" from being exported from the Republic

Were it even possible to export these items,it is impossible to do so in the time frame of 31 calender days for the mags and now 190 calender days for the arms.As the paperwork for the Dept of both Justice and AGS is simply overwhelming.Each individual firearm and magazine must require an export and corrosponding import certificate. Considering most staff would also be on vacation handling this work possible,it is a impossibility to shift the mags out in this timeframe.

There has been no public announcement as to this SI[,and many are still utterly unaware of this new SI and requirements.Not everyone follows social media in the shooting community,so they are in the utter dark of these changes.

There is no accurate count of these types of guns or mags here in the ROI,Gusstimates,put the number of guns as below 60 and greater than 20.The mags could be possibly more than 50 and less than 800


There seems to be no consideration given to the various " escape hatches" in the EU directive as to grandfathering these types of firearms,and magazines by the Irish govt for some reason

Such as the rendering incapble of magazines to hold either 20 or 10 shots respectively.There is precedent to do such under Irish firearms laws, Ref the .22 pistol mags renderd to 5shots,and the directive allows nations to transpose
this directive into national firearms laws as they see fit,as well as grandfathering said firearms to the national legal pool of firearms.

What can the Govt do to sort this out?

Easiest.
Add an addendum to the legislation grandfathering said rifles,and mags like the CF handguns to a national pool of restricted rifles,that may be liscensed by anyone with a restricted liscense.As it will be impossible to aquire such a surplus rifle in the EU anymore,as all future surplus military and police fiream stock will now be destroyed by the respective national govts under this directive.These rifles have suddenly also increased in value to their owners as well.

Easy.
Add an addendum on the mags that,if they were imported before Sept 2018,they are hereby grandfatherd,OR they may be renderd incapable of holding more than 20 or 10 shots respectively.Irrespective of magazine body size.

On the less than 60 cm firearms,that if the folding stock is permantly pinned in an extended position,or replaced with a solid stock.AND/OR a muzzle device is permantly afixed to the barrel to bring it above the 60 cms length it is no longer a CAT A firearm and may be moved to CAT B10

Messy
Allow said firearms holders,if practicable to their specific model the option of replacing their recivers and/or fire control parts,with civillian only semi auto recivers and fire control parts,and barrels,and surrendering the converted former select fire parts and recivers,and barrels and re issuing the liscenses then as CAT B firearms,as they are now civillian firearms with same serial numbers made with some non pressure bearing parts or select fire recivers, surplus parts.[Germany has a precedent to do this and does sell such firearms]If not practible,the state will have to compensate the owner,and GRAUNTEE that the new issued liscense WILL NOT fall foul of the Amendment Francis Fitzgerald brought in.That post 2017 all future semi auto liscenses stand revoked ,as this sI has not been enacted,and these were previously legal liscenses issued before 2017

Hideoulsly messy.
Ignore any and all suggestions.Demand confiscation,Expect legal HC challenge from individuals and organisations,drag this thru courts,fork out taxpayers money in a "gun buyback scheme" as the media wil brand it,lose the good will of a group that did vote for you five years ago because of FG's fair play and listening to Irish shooters in the Dail hearings,in an upcoming election within the next 6months,and with a crisis facing the state on Oct 31st the equivilent of the Emergency"


[1] Its unclear what this 60 cms with a folding stock means? Do they mean overall lenght of the firearm with the stock extended or closed? The barrel length itself?

Grizzly 45

Cass wrote: »

Duuudddeeee. No Mod hat on or anything like that (for clarification), just a personal opinion. Attack his policies, actions and previous history, but stooping to that is just.............. no.

I'll be glad to see the back of the man and his ignorant and short sighted policies that only serve to pad his political wallet while having absolutely NO effect on criminality.

Like the guy, cannot remember his name, from Sinn Fein during the Oireachtas sessions a few years back and he refused to call them firearms, but rather weapons. Knowing it'll be a key buzz word. Sinn Fein of all people, but again they won't be there forever.

I'm sorry,but I cant show mercy to hyprocrites in power,who attack us and make us out to be the problem and make us out to be law breakers, then when his own vice of smoking was being legislated.He was stamping his entitled foot and demanding his "right" to poision others with his nicotine fumes inside in the Dail bar and stating that as his Right " he would ignore the law and smoke there anyway!" How would that have gone down with him if it was a Pro gun TD that said the same about handguns at the time?
The guy was an asshat then,obviously stil is one now then,his star moment in his carreer was just this event,and he spent the rest of his political life on the backbench where he obviously couldnt improve his lot,and thus failed as a politican,which is a hard thing to do.

So lets wish him well in his future [hopefully] more productive and useful career of ditch digging or shoe mending.As Mark Twain said on that point its usually people of those two professions who end up in politics after an unfruitful career in those fields.:rolleyes:

The Shin Feiner with the attitude was Angeus O Snoddigh? Shnodig? Snotty? Somthing like that...

meathstevie

knockon wrote: »

....and John Deasy will be retiring shortly ..”Asked about the highs and lows of political life, Mr Deasy said the high was banning the use of hand guns in 2008”

Source: RTE News

Good riddance!

Absolutely, achieved the grand total of feck all.

The gangsters are shooting each other with sub machine guns and assault rifles now, just in case they get caught with an illegal handgun and get a cross look from one Mr Deasy....