Semi Auto Rifles contd

Cass

This thread was created by moving posts from this thread in the target forum out of the target forum as they were discussing topics not related to target shooting.

Original thread is here.

Grizzly 45

chris1038a wrote: »

I talked to an RFD, as semi auto rifle wouldn't be something that would be in stock. I'd have to pay the full price up front and it specially ordered in. Which I understand.
If I didn't get the licence for some reason. I'd have to wait for the rifle to be sold before getting any funds back.
Were you able to have a meeting with the Chief prior to the application, to get his view if the application would be allowed?

MANY sitdowns and MANY court cases with Cheifs to get this sorted out by many SA CF shooters over 8 years in the oughties and teens.

End result is that now post 2017 proposed legislation, there is now a Damoclean sword hanging over any new licenses granted for these firearm types post-June [?] 2017.In so much as they can be revoked at any given time en masse for as of yet unknown reasons. We SUSPECT it is if there is an arbitrary tipping point number reached in applications, like with the CF handguns, that they will shut it down.

Worse, because you knowingly applied for a license for this type of firearm, and are supposedly Aufe with the firearms law and this particular bit of law. You cant apply for compensation if those licenses are revoked.
It's another nasty bit of proposed legislation, that like the Temp custody order 1972,is causing a lot of self banning and putting people off.

Not wanting to pee on your parade, but just so to be aware of this before you plonk down a couple of grand for a nice 3 grand Oberland or Schmeisser or whatnot and are importing it:eek: So yeah, they[Cheof Supers] might get you to jump thru all sorts of hoops just to play you and are still safe in knowing the lic could be revoked tomorrow by a ministerial enactment of this order.

What I would do is two things were I doing another SA lic.
[1] Find something in price I could afford to lose fiscally in such a situation. Got an eye on a 400 euro mini 14 in Germany.Where with a bit of patience you can find some stuff for reasonable money 2nd hand.Took me the better part of 2 years to find one at that price

2]As said by others here. Go ask the dealers, what have they behind the counter on these rifles? Lots of them won't advertise or display them openly for obvious reasons. So asking with serious intent and showing and talking coin of the realm will get you places.;)I know of folks who are commenting here are in the trade and might make themselves known to you.;)

And yes your experience with a dealer here isn't unusual either.it was the same for me,[bar waiting for the rifle to be sold to be refunded:roll eyes:]
As the dealer knew I was going to go all out on this up to and including court cases.

Can't blame them really wanting the price upfront to do this. They'd be sitting on a special interest gun, with a difficulty rating to license, or it becoming obsolete and they retired by the way some licenses are dragged out here. Or the applicant losing the bottle halfway thru and the gun in limbo between them half paid and still in the wholesaler or here.

otmmyboy2

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

End result is that now post 2017 legislation, there is now a Damoclean sword hanging over any new licenses granted for these firearm types post-June [?] 2017.In so much as they can be revoked at any given time en masse for as of yet unknown reasons. wE SUSPECT it is if there is an arbitrary tipping point number reached in applications, like with the CF handguns, that they will shut it down.

Not that there is anything stopping them writing up another SI banning everything with a firing pin either, they've just made themselves known with that category :rolleyes:

BattleCorp

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

End result is that now post 2017 legislation, there is now a Damoclean sword hanging over any new licenses granted for these firearm types post-June [?] 2017.In so much as they can be revoked at any given time en masse for as of yet unknown reasons. wE SUSPECT it is if there is an arbitrary tipping point number reached in applications, like with the CF handguns, that they will shut it down.

I'm not knocking you here but there's no legislation stating that though. Nada. Zip. Zero. All we have is a Dail statement from 2015 that carries no legal standing (as far as I'm aware).

Worse, because you knowingly applied for a license for this type of firearm, and are supposedly Aufe with the firearms law and this particular bit of law. You cant apply for compensation if those licenses are revoked.
It's another nasty bit of legislation, that like the Temp custody order 1972,is causing a lot of self banning and putting people off.

Where's the law that says we couldn't apply for compensation if the licences are revoked?

Grizzly 45

BattleCorp wrote: »

I'm not knocking you here but there's no legislation stating that though. Nada. Zip. Zero. All we have is a Dail statement from 2015 that carries no legal standing (as far as I'm aware).

You are quite correct on that BC...My bad it is a statement...However, we do know how fast "statements" become LAW when it suits justice ministers, as Mr Aherne proved in the CF pistols drama.:(

Where's the law that says we couldn't apply for compensation if the licences are revoked?

They will throw the EU firearms directive, of the mag bans at us and claim despite us paying for everything we own it is still a privilege, and not subject to compensation, worse because we EU gun owners lost in the EUCHR on this by the cases the E blockers took, it can be taken as a precedent, and as EU directives transcend national law... And you can't do anything about it to clarify it at the moment either by taking it to a test case in the HC, as it hasn't happened yet.
The only precedents I could think of would be the licensed salmon netters being compensated to stop drift net fishing on the Shannon estuary back in the 90s,as to people being compensated for a loss. But would be this for a livelihood loss?? Cant think of any others that would fit this situation.

jb88

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

MANY sitdowns and MANY court cases with Cheifs to get this sorted out by many SA CF shooters over 8 years in the oughties and teens.

End result is that now post 2017 proposed legislation, there is now a Damoclean sword hanging over any new licenses granted for these firearm types post-June [?] 2017.In so much as they can be revoked at any given time en masse for as of yet unknown reasons. We SUSPECT it is if there is an arbitrary tipping point number reached in applications, like with the CF handguns, that they will shut it down.

Worse, because you knowingly applied for a license for this type of firearm, and are supposedly Aufe with the firearms law and this particular bit of law. You cant apply for compensation if those licenses are revoked.
It's another nasty bit of proposed legislation, that like the Temp custody order 1972,is causing a lot of self banning and putting people off.

Not wanting to pee on your parade, but just so to be aware of this before you plonk down a couple of grand for a nice 3 grand Oberland or Schmeisser or whatnot and are importing it:eek: So yeah, they[Cheof Supers] might get you to jump thru all sorts of hoops just to play you and are still safe in knowing the lic could be revoked tomorrow by a ministerial enactment of this order.

What I would do is two things were I doing another SA lic.
[1] Find something in price I could afford to lose fiscally in such a situation. Got an eye on a 400 euro mini 14 in Germany.Where with a bit of patience you can find some stuff for reasonable money 2nd hand.Took me the better part of 2 years to find one at that price

2]As said by others here. Go ask the dealers, what have they behind the counter on these rifles? Lots of them won't advertise or display them openly for obvious reasons. So asking with serious intent and showing and talking coin of the realm will get you places.;)I know of folks who are commenting here are in the trade and might make themselves known to you.;)

And yes your experience with a dealer here isn't unusual either.it was the same for me,[bar waiting for the rifle to be sold to be refunded:roll eyes:]
As the dealer knew I was going to go all out on this up to and including court cases.

Can't blame them really wanting the price upfront to do this. They'd be sitting on a special interest gun, with a difficulty rating to license, or it becoming obsolete and they retired by the way some licenses are dragged out here. Or the applicant losing the bottle halfway thru and the gun in limbo between them half paid and still in the wholesaler or here.

Are you still going on about this rubbish, look I know 3 lads inc myself who have had licences granted for semi auto .308 s recently and there is nothing in legislation about anyone taking anything after the fact. If they wanted to stop these firearms being issued they wouldnt grant licences.. End of.
Give up on this topic of yours. Your dreaming

jb88

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

You are quite correct on that BC...My bad it is a statement...However, we do know how fast "statements" become LAW when it suits justice ministers, as Mr Aherne proved in the CF pistols drama.:(

They will throw the EU firearms directive, of the mag bans at us and claim despite us paying for everything we own it is still a privilege, and not subject to compensation, worse because we EU gun owners lost in the EUCHR on this by the cases the E blockers took, it can be taken as a precedent, and as EU directives transcend national law... And you can't do anything about it to clarify it at the moment either by taking it to a test case in the HC, as it hasn't happened yet.
The only precedents I could think of would be the licensed salmon netters being compensated to stop drift net fishing on the Shannon estuary back in the 90s,as to people being compensated for a loss. But would be this for a livelihood loss?? Cant think of any others that would fit this situation.

If challenged in the courts anything has the propensity to fail, pass or repeal.

jb88

Griz and everyone else.

Look plenty of guys smarter than us have lots of CF Restricted licences granted.

Stop putting off prospective entrants into the market with claims of scare tactics, it didnt work on me.

If people were worried about just money they would never leave the house,, oh wait thats happened.



Oh the guns are mainly black as well.. maybe thats scary to some..

Cass

BattleCorp wrote: »

I'm not knocking you here but there's no legislation stating that though. Nada. Zip. Zero.

Correct.

All we have is a Dail statement from 2015 that carries no legal standing (as far as I'm aware).

Not quite.

As with the pistol ban of 2009 any pistols licensed after November 2008 when the Minister made his statement in the Dáil would be affected too. So while there is no "legislative" weight behind such a statement it wil and does have ramifications.

Where's the law that says we couldn't apply for compensation if the licences are revoked?

There is a legal difference between ownership and possession.

They're not taking away your gun as its still your property their simply saying they are refusing to issue new licensed and as its illegal to possess a firearm without a license, you're screwed. The problem with the rifles being restricted means you cannot even keep it on the range and use it there without a license as the firearms act prohibits the use of restricted firearms by anyone, even on a range, without a license for said firearm.

Cass

jb88 wrote: »

Are you still going on about this rubbish,

Giving people all the information available is NOT rubbish.

look I know 3 lads inc myself who have had licences granted for semi auto .308 s recently

Not sure what relevance this has to anything.

and there is nothing in legislation about anyone taking anything after the fact.

No one said there is/was, afaik as i have not read every post fully.

If they wanted to stop these firearms being issued they wouldnt grant licences.. End of.

Hence the statement in 2015 and the reminder in the updated Garda Comissioner's guildelines of 2018 stating their intent to do just that.

Give up on this topic of yours. Your dreaming

And you're in denial of what may occur and what is worse is you telling people there is nothing to be aware off let alone concerned about. Give people both sides and let them decide for themselves.

jb88 wrote: »

Griz and everyone else.

Look plenty of guys smarter than us have lots of CF Restricted licences granted.

Fail to see the relevance of intelligence and how it relates to this topic. Do you have to be of a certain IQ to apply for a restricted rifle? If not then you're spouting irrelevant nonsense.

Stop putting off prospective entrants into the market with claims of scare tactics, it didnt work on me.

No one is intentionally putting them off. They are being given all the information and not the sugar coated version you giving. What people do after that is up to them and according to you it hasn't had any effect so what is your problem with people being told everything?

If people were worried about just money they would never leave the house,, oh wait thats happened.

Irrelevant & nonsensical.

Oh the guns are mainly black as well.. maybe thats scary to some..

I see what you did there. Very clever.

:rolleyes:

jb88

Cass wrote: »

Giving people all the information available is NOT rubbish.

Not sure what relevance this has to anything.

No one said there is/was, afaik as i have not read every post fully.

Hence the statement in 2015 and the reminder in the updated Garda Comissioner's guildelines of 2018 stating their intent to do just that.

And you're in denial of what may occur and what is worse is you telling people there is nothing to be aware off let alone concerned about. Give people both sides and let them decide for themselves.

Fail to see the relevance of intelligence and how it relates to this topic. Do you have to be of a certain IQ to apply for a restricted rifle? If not then you're spouting irrelevant nonsense.


No one is intentionally putting them off. They are being given all the information and not the sugar coated version you giving. What people do after that is up to them and according to you it hasn't had any effect so what is your problem with people being told everything?


Irrelevant & nonsensical.

I see what you did there. Very clever.

:rolleyes:

One guys opinion.... mmm

Cass

jb88 wrote: »

One guys opinion.... mmm

Read that yourself, again, s-l-o-w-l-y. :rolleyes:

tudderone

jb88 wrote: »

Griz and everyone else.

Look plenty of guys smarter than us have lots of CF Restricted licences granted.

Stop putting off prospective entrants into the market with claims of scare tactics, it didnt work on me.

If people were worried about just money they would never leave the house,, oh wait thats happened.



Oh the guns are mainly black as well.. maybe thats scary to some..

While i agree with you that if you want something, and its licenceable, then go for it, but like the centrefire pistols be very aware that the trap can snap closed on you and you can end up out of pocket with no gun. It happened to me with a 3k sig pistol. I had my pride and joy and then it was gone.

Munsterlad102

tudderone wrote: »

While i agree with you that if you want something, and its licenceable, then go for it, but like the centrefire pistols be very aware that the trap can snap closed on you and you can end up out of pocket with no gun. It happened to me with a 3k sig pistol. I had my pride and joy and then it was gone.

Yeah exactly, there's no point in not getting something because it could be banned, at that point its as good as banned. The CF handgun ban was a reap shame, were you able to sell your pistol?

jb88

Cass wrote: »

Read that yourself, again, s-l-o-w-l-y. :rolleyes:

Cass - I think I have widely documented whats required to get a CF Restricted licence in another thread, which maybe you guys need to go look at.

There is no BS in there, its how its done, and I can say that because ive got 7 restricted firearms. If it worked for me the first time, it worked on every subsequent application.

If there is anyone with more wisdom or better information on this forum then kindly direct me to them and I will listen. Thusfar im at a loss for all the rubbish about legislation this and Garda Commissioner that, and TD this and TD that.
Absloute rubbish.

Its very easy to get anything if you know the correct process.

smmember20

tudderone wrote: »

While i agree with you that if you want something, and its licenceable, then go for it, but like the centrefire pistols be very aware that the trap can snap closed on you and you can end up out of pocket with no gun. It happened to me with a 3k sig pistol. I had my pride and joy and then it was gone.

? was your 3K Sig licenced before November 2008?

If it was there is no reason for it to have been gone!!! Even now you would be entitled to have an application considered as you had it before the cut off!

tudderone

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irXrxHZ6PAA

Rows Grower

tudderone wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irXrxHZ6PAA

Managed to watch the first ten seconds.

Munsterlad102

Let's be fair to JB88, he's put up loads of material on licensing CF SA and has helped me and many others in this area. About the potential to ban CF SA, there's no point in telling people not to get one based on a small possibility. Let's look at it in terms of the handgun ban, there was a large number of applications in a small time period which caused them to get banned. (Yeah I know people still have them and why they only started being licensed in 2004 but that's besides the point). So let's apply that logic to CF SA, they're only going to get banned if there's a large increase in applications, so not to name names but those who are warning against licensing these rifles could just be covering themselves. I've heard a lot about some 2017 cut off date for licenses and how they could be revoked at any point but I couldn't find any legislation to back this up so what is the point of this? To scare off potential applicants? There's no point in saying that there was plans to implement such a cut off date or saying that there already is one and new applicants have missed it, that's just disingenuous.

otmmyboy2

Rows Grower wrote: »

Managed to watch the first ten seconds.

Not a fan?

Munsterlad102 wrote: »

Let's be fair to JB88, he's put up loads of material on licensing CF SA and has helped me and many others in this area. About the potential to ban CF SA, there's no point in telling people not to get one based on a small possibility. Let's look at it in terms of the handgun ban, there was a large number of applications in a small time period which caused them to get banned. (Yeah I know people still have them and why they only started being licensed in 2004 but that's besides the point). So let's apply that logic to CF SA, they're only going to get banned if there's a large increase in applications, so not to name names but those who are warning against licensing these rifles could just be covering themselves. I've heard a lot about some 2017 cut off date for licenses and how they could be revoked at any point but I couldn't find any legislation to back this up so what is the point of this? To scare off potential applicants? There's no point in saying that there was plans to implement such a cut off date or saying that there already is one and new applicants have missed it, that's just disingenuous.

That and there is absolutely nothing stopping the minister of the day from issuing an SI banning all semi autos, centrefire, rimfire, shotgun, etc.
Similar to the legislation that grandfathered CF pistols.

Munsterlad102

otmmyboy2 wrote: »

That and there is absolutely nothing stopping the minister of the day from issuing an SI banning all semi autos, centrefire, rimfire, shotgun, etc.
Similar to the legislation that grandfathered CF pistols.

Exactly, that's the entire point. There is zero logic to people telling other not to apply for a firearm because they might be banned.

tudderone

smmember20 wrote: »

? was your 3K Sig licenced before November 2008?

If it was there is no reason for it to have been gone!!! Even now you would be entitled to have an application considered as you had it before the cut off!

Yes there was, the chief super said if i wanted it, go to court for it. As you might remember back in 08, there was a crash and loads of people lost their jobs, i was one of them. Spending thousands on a court case, made as much sense back then as putting a deposit on a new Rolls Royce.

Cass

jb88 wrote: »

Cass - I think I have widely documented whats required to get a CF Restricted licence in another thread, which maybe you guys need to go look at.

There is no BS in there, its how its done, and I can say that because ive got 7 restricted firearms. If it worked for me the first time, it worked on every subsequent application.

If there is anyone with more wisdom or better information on this forum then kindly direct me to them and I will listen.

Its very easy to get anything if you know the correct process.

So other than the patting of yourself on the back for applying for something anyone can apply for what is the point of the irrelevant rant above?

I never said it could not be applied for, either then or now.

Its utterly irrelevant.

Thusfar im at a loss for all the rubbish about legislation this and Garda Commissioner that, and TD this and TD that.
Absloute rubbish.

Your prerogative. If you choose to treat it as rubbish that is your choice, but your refusal to acknowledge the statements/guidelines does not mean they do not exist.

tonysopprano

.
Issuing persons and applicants alike should be mindful that, on 18th September 2015, the
Minister for Justice and Equality announced that any new restricted firearm certificates
for centre fire semi-automatic rifles, granted between that date and the enactment of
proposed legislation banning the future licensing of these types of firearms, shall stand
revoked.

https://www.garda.ie/en/about-us/online-services/firearms-licensing/commissioner-s-guidelines-2018.pdf

BattleCorp

tudderone wrote: »

Yes there was, the chief super said if i wanted it, go to court for it. As you might remember back in 08, there was a crash and loads of people lost their jobs, i was one of them. Spending thousands on a court case, made as much sense back then as putting a deposit on a new Rolls Royce.

Could you apply for it now? I suppose the gun is long gone and not sitting in a dealer's safe?

BattleCorp

tonysopprano wrote: »

.
Issuing persons and applicants alike should be mindful that, on 18th September 2015, the
Minister for Justice and Equality announced that any new restricted firearm certificates
for centre fire semi-automatic rifles, granted between that date and the enactment of
proposed legislation banning the future licensing of these types of firearms, shall stand
revoked.

https://www.garda.ie/en/about-us/online-services/firearms-licensing/commissioner-s-guidelines-2018.pdf

How does that statement have any legal standing?

Cass

Munsterlad102 wrote: »

Let's be fair to JB88, he's put up loads of material on licensing CF SA and has helped me and many others in this area.

Utterly irrelevant to the topic at hand.

About the potential to ban CF SA, there's no point in telling people not to get one based on a small possibility.

Nobody has done so.

Let's look at it in terms of the handgun ban, there was a large number of applications in a small time period which caused them to get banned.

Perhaps it was one of the causes but the catalyst was the murder of Shane Geoghahan in 2008. The knee jerk reaction to it was the cause of the ban.

(Yeah I know people still have them and why they only started being licensed in 2004 but that's besides the point).

Grandfathering and a court case. Simples.

So let's apply that logic to CF SA, they're only going to get banned if there's a large increase in applications,

The reason for any future ban is moot given the statement. The statement made in 2015 said that from then, the date of the speech, any licenses issued would stand revoked.

so not to name names

Go right on ahead and list anyone who has said not to buy/license one.

but those who are warning against licensing these rifles could just be covering themselves.

Your basing your logic on an incomplete pretense. Numbers will have an impact, but the "damage" is done and the old chestnut of "to prevent the proliferation of arms" will be trotted out to excuse this. Also implying that those already licensed can somehow "sway" the decision making of a Justice Minister not to mention control the sale and licensing of SA C/F rifles is ludicrous. Didn't work in 2008 and they had a much stronger case to argue (the actions of criminals having repercussions for legitimate gun owners)

I've heard a lot about some 2017 cut off date for licenses and how they could be revoked at any point

September 2015

but I couldn't find any legislation to back this up

Because there is NO LEGISLATION as has been said ad nauseum.

so what is the point of this?

Nothing more malicious than giving people all the information and a chance to make up their own mind.

To scare off potential applicants?

I'll refer you to my points above about ability of the shooting community to influence legislation and the above reply on intent.

There's no point in saying that there was plans to implement such a cut off date or saying that there already is one and new applicants have missed it, that's just disingenuous.

How is that disingenuous?

There is no plans to introduce a cut off date, its ALREADY done. September 2015. There is no legislation in place, as off this second, to impose a prohibition of licensing SA C/F but no one said there is. The Commissioner's guidelines, updated as off September 2018, reiterated this proposed prohibition backdated to the Minister's statement of 2015.


Half way down the page.

Minister's Statement September 18th 2015 wrote:

Immediate cap on licensing of any new centre-fire semi-automatic rifles

The Minister intends to introduce an immediate temporary cap on the licensing of any new centre-fire semi-automatic rifles pending the establishment and determination of the Authority.

Legislation will provide for the revocation of any licenses issued between today
(18 September 2015) and the enactment of the legislation and it is intended that anyone applying for licenses of this nature will be informed of that fact.

Page 23.

Commissioner's Guidleines update September 2018 wrote:

Issuing persons and applicants alike should be mindful that, on 18th September 2015, the Minister for Justice and Equality announced that any new restricted firearm certificates for centre fire semi-automatic rifles, granted between that date and the enactment of proposed legislation banning the future licensing of these types of firearms, shall stand revoked.

Let me say this one more time so there is no confusion, no misunderstanding, no lies and no cross wires. The above comments by me are not my opinion based on third, fourth, fifth, etc hand information or high stool gossip. It comes from my ability to simply read the statements as above.

• I am not saying they cannot be licensed.
• I am not saying people should not go for one if they want.
• I am not advocating for the limitation or "capping" of licenses (that was the sports coalitions doing).
• I have over and over and over rejected the lie that semi-autos cannot be licensed/are banned and the notion of any "stealth" ban of semi-autos as illegal and unworkable.

All i have ever done in this thread and other recent threads is point people to the above pieces about the Dáil statement, the Commissioner's guidelines and the prospect of future legislation to ban the licensing of these rifles with the retrospective nature of such legislation so they can make the most informed decision they can.

In response all i get int he form of a rebuttal is "its rubbish". If someone wants to point me to a new statement repealing the previous Minister's statement and the newly updated Garda Commissioner's guidelines which also repeals/redacts this intent then i'll happily accept that the situation has changed.

Cass

BattleCorp wrote: »

How does that statement have any legal standing?

Nothing in the Commissioner's guidelines has any legal standing, realistically.

The Garda Commissioner does not legislate. The idea behind the guidelines was to help both parties (Gardaí and applicants) understand the legalese of firearm ownership/licensing and help smooth any confusion on either side.

The guidelines merely clarify and elaborate on firearms acts/laws so people can more easily understand them, and the piece above about the revocation of the licenses is a reiteration of the Minister's statement from 2015 and its ramifications. Its why its addressed to both the authorising person and applicant.

Rows Grower

Cass wrote: »

Utterly irrelevant to the topic at hand.
Nobody has done so.

Perhaps it was one of the causes but the catalyst was the murder of Shane Geoghahan in 2008. The knee jerk reaction to it was the cause of the ban.

Grandfathering and a court case. Simples.

The reason for any future ban is moot given the statement. The statement made in 2015 said that from then, the date of the speech, any licenses issued would stand revoked.

Go right on ahead and list anyone who has said not to buy/license one.

Your basing your logic on an incomplete pretense. Numbers will have an impact, but the "damage" is done and the old chestnut of "to prevent the proliferation of arms" will be trotted out to excuse this. Also implying that those already licensed can somehow "sway" the decision making of a Justice Minister not to mention control the sale and licensing of SA C/F rifles is ludicrous. Didn't work in 2008 and they had a much stronger case to argue (the actions of criminals having repercussions for legitimate gun owners)

September 2015

Because there is NO LEGISLATION as has been said ad nauseum.

Nothing more malicious than giving people all the information and a chance to make up their own mind.

I'll refer you to my points above about ability of the shooting community to influence legislation and the above reply on intent.

How is that disingenuous?

There is no plans to introduce a cut off date, its ALREADY done. September 2015. There is no legislation in place, as off this second, to impose a prohibition of licensing SA C/F but no one said there is. The Commissioner's guidelines, updated as off September 2018, reiterated this proposed prohibition backdated to the Minister's statement of 2015.


Half way down the page.



Page 23.


Let me say this one more time so there is no confusion, no misunderstanding, no lies and no cross wires. The above comments by me are not my opinion based on third, fourth, fifth, etc hand information or high stool gossip. It comes from my ability to simply read the statements as above.

• I am not saying they cannot be licensed.
• I am not saying people should not go for one if they want.
• I am not advocating for the limitation or "capping" of licenses (that was the sports coalitions doing).
• I have over and over and over rejected the lie that semi-autos cannot be licensed/are banned and the notion of any "stealth" ban of semi-autos as illegal and unworkable.

All i have ever done in this thread and other recent threads is point people to the above pieces about the Dáil statement, the Commissioner's guidelines and the prospect of future legislation to ban the licensing of these rifles with the retrospective nature of such legislation so they can make the most informed decision they can.

In response all i get int he form of a rebuttal is "its rubbish". If someone wants to point me to a new statement repealing the previous Minister's statement and the newly updated Garda Commissioner's guidelines which also repeals/redacts this intent then i'll happily accept that the situation has changed.

Poster gets permission for 7 restricted firearms, creates a thread to help and advise others who may be thinking of applying for one.

Reminds posters talking rubbish and other people reading that he is actually the one who has been there, done that and bought the t-shirt and advises them it may be worth their while to find the thread and read it.

Poster is told numerous times his points are irrelevant and utterly irrelevant and is accused of doing nothing but patting himself on the back.

Cass

Rows Grower wrote: »

Poster gets permission for 7 restricted firearms,

At least 5 others on this thread have restricted licenses/firearms. Multiple licenses if you count them either simultaneously or consecutively over the years.

creates a thread to help and advise others who may be thinking of applying for one.

That is not this thread.

Reminds posters talking rubbish

And you'd know this from the how many restricted firearms you've owned/licensed. After all that is what you are claiming! An argument from authority. In other words the higher the number of licenses/firearms the more knowledge and respect that person should receive? So based on that principle i'll ask again, how many have you that you can make the claim that jb88 has every right to?

and other people reading that he is actually the one who has been there,

As have at least 5 others on this thread.

done that and bought the t-shirt and advises them it may be worth their while to find the thread and read it.

Absolutely they should find it and read it. Its good information. By the way here is a link for anyone looking for that thread.

Poster is told numerous times his points are irrelevant and utterly irrelevant

They are in the context of this thread. I don't care how many restricted licenses/firearms he has applied for or gotten. Its simply not germane to the topic. The topic has mutated from those using one to the ability to apply, not the amount of times or even the process.

and is accused of doing nothing but patting himself on the back.

Not accusing, stating. To accuse someone is to level a claim of wrongdoing. Patting yourself on the back is not a maleficence, but for the purpose of this thread irrelevant.

tudderone

BattleCorp wrote: »

Could you apply for it now? I suppose the gun is long gone and not sitting in a dealer's safe?

I know where it is, i could apply for it again, but the less contact i have with Gardai, the better.

JP22

Cass wrote: »

Nothing in the Commissioner's guidelines has any legal standing, realistically. .... The Garda Commissioner does not legislate.

Correct, however, coming from a H&S/Risk Management background (CMIOSH) with lots of legislation, anytime an approved Guideline/Code of Practice/Best Practice or similar such document is used and accepted, it get quasi legal standing.

Its not legislation per-se under the eyes of the law, nor should it be but by being accepted and used, it becomes a semi legal stick to ensure compliance.

If such document is used incorrectly and abused and with everyone interpreting it differently, them mayhem will occur.

Rows Grower

Cass wrote: »

At least 5 others on this thread have restricted licenses/firearms. Multiple licenses if you count them either simultaneously or consecutively over the years.

That is not this thread.

And you'd know this from the how many restricted firearms you've owned/licensed. After all that is what you are claiming! An argument from authority. In other words the higher the number of licenses/firearms the more knowledge and respect that person should receive? So based on that principle i'll ask again, how many have you that you can make the claim that jb88 has every right to?

As have at least 5 others on this thread.

Absolutely they should find it and read it. Its good information. By the way here is a link for anyone looking for that thread.

They are in the context of this thread. I don't care how many restricted licenses/firearms he has applied for or gotten. Its simply not germane to the topic. The topic has mutated from those using one to the ability to apply, not the amount of times or even the process.

Not accusing, stating. To accuse someone is to level a claim of wrongdoing. Patting yourself on the back is not a maleficence, but for the purpose of this thread irrelevant.

To use your word of the day, irrelevant.

Actually, utterly irrelevant.

This is a forum for discussion, it's for all to contribute if they so wish.

Cass

Correct, however, coming from a H&S/Risk Management background (CMIOSH) with lots of legislation, anytime an approved Guideline/Code of Practice/Best Practice or similar such document is used and accepted, it get quasi legal standing.

Its not legislation per-se under the eyes of the law, nor should it be but by being accepted and used, it becomes a semi legal stick to ensure compliance.

If such document is used incorrectly and abused and with everyone interpreting it differently, them mayhem will occur.

Absolutely.

Cass

Rows Grower wrote: »

To use your word of the day, irrelevant.

Actually, utterly irrelevant.

Brilliant.

You quote my "extension" of your reply/point and label it irrelevant. You do realise you've just called your own point irrelevant? Utterly irrelevant, actually.

This is a forum for discussion, it's for all to contribute if they so wish.

Correct and right.

tudderone

tonysopprano wrote: »

.
Issuing persons and applicants alike should be mindful that, on 18th September 2015, the
Minister for Justice and Equality announced that any new restricted firearm certificates
for centre fire semi-automatic rifles, granted between that date and the enactment of
proposed legislation banning the future licensing of these types of firearms, shall stand
revoked.

https://www.garda.ie/en/about-us/online-services/firearms-licensing/commissioner-s-guidelines-2018.pdf

While people correctly state that this doesn't have any legal standing, its a pretty good insight into the way the PTB, gardai/doj/minister are or were thinking about Semi-cf's. With the cf pistols, all i heard was "Oh they've learned their lesson with the Brophy case, they'll never do anything now, Pistols are safe". One poor git in Limerick getting shot, and even though it was nothing to do with us, it was used as a stick to beat us with and Cf pistols were gone. The sword of Damocles hangs over all our heads.

smmember20

tudderone wrote: »

Yes there was, the chief super said if i wanted it, go to court for it. As you might remember back in 08, there was a crash and loads of people lost their jobs, i was one of them. Spending thousands on a court case, made as much sense back then as putting a deposit on a new Rolls Royce.

So I don't get it, did you have a certificte before 2008 or not, was it that you applied and they turned you down, the only point I am making is that if you had a certificate before 2008 you can make application today under the current legislation and 95% you will be granted it as long as you fulfil the restricted firearms criteria the most important one being you had it before 2008.

From you post it seems like you lost the Sig to the value of 3K?

BattleCorp

tudderone wrote: »

I know where it is, i could apply for it again, but the less contact i have with Gardai, the better.

Your business is your business but it costs nothing to put in an application. Just sayin.

BattleCorp

JP22 wrote: »

Correct, however, coming from a H&S/Risk Management background (CMIOSH) with lots of legislation, anytime an approved Guideline/Code of Practice/Best Practice or similar such document is used and accepted, it get quasi legal standing.

Its not legislation per-se under the eyes of the law, nor should it be but by being accepted and used, it becomes a semi legal stick to ensure compliance.

If such document is used incorrectly and abused and with everyone interpreting it differently, them mayhem will occur.

The Commissioner's guidelines isn't viewed as having quasi-legal standing by the courts in the same fashion as H&S Guidelines/Codes of Practice you mentioned above so I guess we can be thankful for that.

otmmyboy2

BattleCorp wrote: »

The Commissioner's guidelines isn't viewed as having quasi-legal standing by the courts in the same fashion as H&S Guidelines/Codes of Practice you mentioned above so I guess we can be thankful for that.

Indeed, they are instead interpreted as gospel when it suits the S/CS, and a guideline otherwise. :P

Case in point, the CS said the 1000 rounds for target shooting was - a guideline I can choose not to follow.
Few minutes later, still the CS - the commissioners guidelines are what I go by, no exceptions. :rolleyes:

Sometimes it is comic to hear them, but I really wish those interviews were recorded. :P

tudderone

smmember20 wrote: »

So I don't get it, did you have a certificte before 2008 or not, was it that you applied and they turned you down, the only point I am making is that if you had a certificate before 2008 you can make application today under the current legislation and 95% you will be granted it as long as you fulfil the restricted firearms criteria the most important one being you had it before 2008.

From you post it seems like you lost the Sig to the value of 3K?

Yes.

BattleCorp

otmmyboy2 wrote: »

Indeed, they are instead interpreted as gospel when it suits the S/CS, and a guideline otherwise. :P

Case in point, the CS said the 1000 rounds for target shooting was - a guideline I can choose not to follow.
Few minutes later, still the CS - the commissioners guidelines are what I go by, no exceptions. :rolleyes:

Sometimes it is comic to hear them, but I really wish those interviews were recorded. :P

The fact that we have a postcode lottery when it comes to firearms licencing means that the guidelines aren't taken as gospel. Some Gardai interpret it differently, and sometimes incorrectly.

jb88

It seems when objective views on topics by some more experienced than others are not allowed they are pulled.

No one learns anything, we are back to the same merry go round.

Constructive discourse and knowledge based information seem to be very few and far between in these forums.

otmmyboy2

BattleCorp wrote: »

The fact that we have a postcode lottery when it comes to firearms licencing means that the guidelines aren't taken as gospel. Some Gardai interpret it differently, and sometimes incorrectly.

Indeed.
I do wonder whether the licencing system will ever be centralised, like was talked about years ago.

Not that that would necessarily make it better that is, but presumably more consistent at the very least. :rolleyes:

jb88

BattleCorp wrote: »

The fact that we have a postcode lottery when it comes to firearms licencing means that the guidelines aren't taken as gospel. Some Gardai interpret it differently, and sometimes incorrectly.

The case for firearms need to be presented as if you are attending court in my cases, have it written in an email and have lots of relevant information, the more information you send into AGS with as much detail as possible and know the laws and how to interpret them all this helps.

State facts not interpretation or fiction, and reply back when questions are asked with comprehensive answers.

BattleCorp

otmmyboy2 wrote: »

Indeed.
I do wonder whether the licencing system will ever be centralised, like was talked about years ago.

Not that that would necessarily make it better that is, but presumably more consistent at the very least. :rolleyes:

It would be much better if it was centralised.

Even as is, the current system could be improved through the use of technology.

Renewals and non-first time applications should be done online. This would save the Gardai having to type what we have written into the computer and it would also be a record of the application having been made.

It would also mean that it's much less likely for an application going missing in the post/behind the filing cabinet etc.

Cass

jb88 wrote: »

It seems when objective views on topics by some more experienced than others are not allowed they are pulled.

Which posts were pulled?

In the original thread I left a mod note directing people to this thread where the discussion can continue. As you continue to post in the original thread in target forum I have also moved this post into this thread.

So read back and tell me which posts were removed.

Constructive discourse and knowledge based information seem to be very few and far between in these forums.

"Its rubbish".

That is the sum of your "knowledge based information" and/or "constructive discourse".

jb88

Its swapping shells around CASS.
Confusion abounds and no one is any the wiser.. I get it.

Cass

Any way you need to justify it to yourself is fine by me.

I think everyone and their Mother has had enough of this by now, so I'll leave it at that too.

tudderone

BattleCorp wrote: »

It would be much better if it was centralised.

Even as is, the current system could be improved through the use of technology.

Renewals and non-first time applications should be done online. This would save the Gardai having to type what we have written into the computer and it would also be a record of the application having been made.

It would also mean that it's much less likely for an application going missing in the post/behind the filing cabinet etc.

Yes, as with much else we can learn much from abroad. I believe in many European countries, Germany for instance, the police provide a background check and thats it. The application is processed by a centralised office, staffed by civilians and is all far more efficient. The trouble is here, the guards don't want to do licencing, but they don't want anyone else to do it either.

Grizzly 45

tudderone wrote: »

Yes, as with much else we can learn much from abroad. I believe in many European countries, Germany for instance, the police provide a background check and thats it. The application is processed by a centralised office, staffed by civilians and is all far more efficient. The trouble is here, the guards don't want to do licencing, but they don't want anyone else to do it either.

In some Federal states, they also do the movement/export certs as well.

Thing is;if we got this by some miracle being done by a centralised authority,they would have to be 100% impartial to this, and not be an operation filled with "retired" senior ranking Gardai who are discussing this business over pints in the local, as is wont to happen around here.:rolleyes:
Nor having it filled with some Jobsworth of civil servants who know nothing about guns apart from a Hollywood education is going to be helpful either.IOW we need to have input into this as well from the coalface. Chances of that of course are....