Non-restricted license and mag size (centre fire)
Comments
-
That section says most all firearms, currently licensed as of 31st August 2019 in Cat A, stand revoked as off the 1st September 2019.
Ah my apologies, it would appear that I have misread that section. Not sure why they had to have so many random dates and temporary exemptions, but that's beside the point.
The only Cat A firearm I know you can license is a CF pistol and SACF rifle, however under part 7 of the Category A listings those are restricted to loading devices of not more than 20 rounds and 10 rounds respectively.
Yeah, it would appear so. But then of course they're Cat B firearms then.
You might have a case which could be brought to court. I personally think you'd loose the case on the terminology used, but may win on the banning of your ability to own your own property. The costs would be huge compared to the pay out and also the "ban" was not immediate. They announced it months before and gave people X amount of time to sell their, soon to be, banned items.
Well I'm not presently affected by the ban, but it does seem like the legislature forgot a very important few parts of the procedure. ie basic definitions and compensation. Not going to have any real impact on current legislation though, which is a shame.
With all due respect its a case of you reading it wrong, not that the law says two different things. The main issue you have is that they call magazines loading devices. I completely agree it could be named better and a court case would settle the matter, but not in the way you hope it might go and they law is actually clear enough (assuming you accept loading device as meaning magazines) that such mags are banned. Its why I'm replying as I don't want anyone falling foul of the law nby thinking they are legal.
Yeah, to put it bluntly I did f*ck that up a bit. But that was only one of my two avenues of approach to prove that there is no maximum magazine capacity. I'll address that in my next message because you address some of my points there, and for the sake of argument I'll assume that loading devices and magazines are the same thing, so 10 rounders and 20 rounders for CF SA and pistols respectively. At the end of the day, I think we can all agree that the EU directive was completely unnecessary and is going to have no impact on crime levels.
Apologies about the delay, I just prefer to answer all posts in the same sitting.
0 -
It doesn't just deal with semi-autos but that aside, the SI specifically lists SACF rifles with loading devices of no more than 10 rounds. So you believe because this is a Cat A firearm and section 2(f) only deals with Cat B. So in essence you think that because there is "ambiguity" of the categorisation of SACF rifles that the law doesn't apply?
Have I got that right?
Not quite. I may have confused you with the whole Cat A debacle in my previous messages, so I'll just clarify my position. I believe that there is truly no magazine capacity limit for CF rifles. I'll admit that there is a limit for CF SA, but not for any other rifles that we can license. So I'm no longer talking about Cat A, but I will be focusing much more on Cat B. And for the purposes of this discussion I'm going to say that loading devices and magazines are the same thing. Not my opinion, I'm just saying that for clarity.
So if I'm still following you, and continuing on from my point above, you belive because of the categorisation of the firearm that the laws don't apply to them, and by default the mags (because I don't want the primary issue of the magazines being lost in other points)?
Sort of, but I think you might have a different idea of what my point is.
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
My point is that the magazine limit only applies to firearms categorised in Cat B because the punishment is the revocation of your Cat B firearms license, which realistically is only CF SA and CF pistols for us here in Ireland. So if you have a license for a bolt action rifle with a 30 round magazine but not a license for a Cat B firearm, how can you have your license revoked for your Cat B firearm if you don't have one?
The difference being that was finally clarified in 2015 with SI 391.
This is sort of outside the scope of my initial point about magazines, so I just want to clarify that this isn't related to my point earlier in this post.
Once again semantics play their part. The laws says "can hold". Even with a block/dowel the magazine can hold more, ableit with such a blocker not at that moment.
The wording of SI 391/2015 is "accommodate" which is a synonym of "can hold", and that's just for pistols. For shotguns its "incapable of containing". My point is that blocks and dowels are already accepted as methods of restricting capacity for magazines, why are CF SA and pistol magazines any different when the wording is almost identical in meaning?
0 -
No, it wasn't!
Misread the legislation, my apologies.
OR have it converted into a Cat B straight-pull bolt action.
Repeating rifles are Cat C. Not being picky, it's relevant to one of my other points regarding magazine capacity.
Won't work with the CF SA mags.It's there in B&W in the EU directive as to what they are after and that's the body of the mag. Believe me ,this has been argued back and forth in Brussels, the Bundestag and all over Europe that was affected. If it could have been done, to keep or block the mags to 10 rounds it would have been done.In short,it is and became a gigantic clusterf22k, all over the EU.With this vagueness
Don't mean to call you out or anything, but I haven't seen any definition of a loading device in EU or Irish legislation. So please link me to a definition in a directive. Otherwise I don't see why a block wouldn't work.
Check again,I think it is in the directive[final version and adapted] a definition of a loading device?
Couldn't find anything mentioning it.
If the law treats a bunch of wooden stock screws as firearm components. How do you think it will treat you as possessing a critical piece of a firearm?
Bit of a tangent, but wooden stock screws aren't firearm components as you can fire a firearm without them. Just the same as a magazine.
0 -
Bit of a tangent, but wooden stock screws aren't firearm components as you can fire a firearm without them. Just the same as a magazine.
Absolutely and logically true. They are non-vital components. However dealing with IRISH firearms laws they are classified as " firearm component parts", and are thusly dealt with under our regime as possession of an unlicensed firearm. Anywhere else, they concern themselves with CRITICAL and functioning component parts.IE barrels,receivers,bolt components etc. You saw what sort of a debacle we had with Irish customs and a custom rifle stock here last year.No one else in any other EU customs /police dept would bat an eye at a lump of wood passing their borders,bar here of course.
Repeating rifles are Cat C. Not being picky, it's relevant to one of my other points regarding magazine capacity.
Quite correct there! My misreading of this head wrecking legislation.
Don't mean to call you out or anything, but I haven't seen any definition of a loading device in EU or Irish legislation. So please link me to a definition in a directive. Otherwise I don't see why a block wouldn't work.
No worries, am trying to find the paragraph on this in the thousands of paragraphs on this topic.But I'll give you this anecdotal evidence for consideration.
Go onto Egun or Naturabuy etc and see if you can find any [1] magazine bodies or complete mags for sale above 20 or 10 rounds respectively by[2] any retailers or private sales by collectors in the EU? They have been wiped off the market. Even for those with CAT A exemptions.IE even the IPSC crowd Its 10/20 or nothing out there for sale. Likewise, even Switzerland that has the CAT A exemption on the service rifles are stuck with 10 rounders for their SIGS.IOW they are not being even imported anymore for the public market in the EU. I haven't even see the "fake 20 rounder" for sale here in the EU yet.[Basically a 10 round with a fake extension built onto the bottom of the mag,for aesthetic and easier use in mag pouches] So if they arent importing any,there must be something about the design being a problem?
"If you want to keep someone away from your house, Just fire the shotgun through the door."
Vice President [and former lawyer] Joe Biden Field& Stream Magazine interview Feb 2013 "
0 -
Absolutely and logically true. They are non-vital components. However dealing with IRISH firearms laws they are classified as " firearm component parts", and are thusly dealt with under our regime as possession of an unlicensed firearm. Anywhere else, they concern themselves with CRITICAL and functioning component parts.IE barrels,receivers,bolt components etc. You saw what sort of a debacle we had with Irish customs and a custom rifle stock here last year.No one else in any other EU customs /police dept would bat an eye at a lump of wood passing their borders,bar here of course.
Yes I do remember reading that thread a while ago, any idea what became of it? Did he have to go to court to get customs to give him his stock? Correct me if I'm wrong, but no specific part of a firearm is mentioned and it just says the operating of a firearm, which is typically vague.
Quite correct there! My misreading of this head wrecking legislation.
I've done it myself too. It really doesn't help that it's ridiculously hard to find the original directive and not an amendment.
No worries, am trying to find the paragraph on this in the thousands of paragraphs on this topic.But I'll give you this anecdotal evidence for consideration.
I generally look at riflemags.co.uk just to compare prices, so it's not like they're impossible to get. I also saw a Cat C rifle with a standard length AR mag in it on triebel guns, restricted to 10 rounds of course. Just took a look there at triebel guns again and I saw a few normal looking AR and mini 14 mags.
0 -
Advertisement
-
Yes I do remember reading that thread a while ago, any idea what became of it? Did he have to go to court to get customs to give him his stock? Correct me if I'm wrong, but no specific part of a firearm is mentioned and it just says the operating of a firearm, which is typically vague.
He won the court case which was an HC court case too. In which it was decided that bits of wood and plastic are not firearms in as of themselves, and therefore can be imported by licensed holders without applying for an import permit. Now,I will make an ASSumptiion here that this also applies to things like trigger parts,gas blocks,etc under that decision, and other non-critical non-pressure bearing parts. From either the US or the EU. Yes it is vague alright and that's what they will use to catch you.IE this operating the firearm or being in possession of firearm components is the other one
I generally look at riflemags.co.uk just to compare prices, so it's not like they're impossible to get.
Remember now that the UK is now out of the EU,and has its own peculiar gun laws.S o I dunno what is the status with Cat C type firearms and mag capacity or whatever it is under their Sections?So maybe they are still possesable and sellable in the UK? But try buying anything out of the UK and ship to the EU.It's a freakin nightmare!!
I also saw a Cat C rifle with a standard length AR mag in it on triebel guns, restricted to 10 rounds of course. Just took a look there at triebel guns again and I saw a few normal-looking AR and mini 14 mags.
This kind of lads?https://sportwaffen-triebel.de/en/hera-arms/xr15/ar15-tan-h3magt/-223rem
A small bit of pertinent info in the description.
Provision of these interchangeable magazines within Germany:
Licensing only to authorities and armed forces within the meaning of Section 55, Paragraph 1 of the Weapons Act
and to holders of a special permit in accordance with Section 40, Paragraph 4 of the Weapons Act from the Federal Criminal Police Office
Export of these interchangeable magazines:
Transfer only at
- prior consent of the recipient country or
- the exemption to the prior consent of the receiving state or
- a legal regulation (including the full text of the law), which is why prior consent is not required.
IOW unless you are shopping for a certain Ukrainian gent by the name of Vladimir Zelensky wh has a bulk order for 60 K plus. Or you are going out that direction to do some Govt approved minding of VIPs Or you can produce some super dooper results in the last IPSC season matches you shot... You won't get.
I'd be amazed that Katja Treibel,who is probably THE most knowledgeable woman on the entire EU and German legislation, and who did the research and published a report, that the EU itself should have but didn't produce, but used hers instead as their own work on this topic was selling these mags to all and sundry.😮
Post edited by Grizzly 45 on"If you want to keep someone away from your house, Just fire the shotgun through the door."
Vice President [and former lawyer] Joe Biden Field& Stream Magazine interview Feb 2013 "
0 -
He won the court case which was an HC court case too. In which it was decided that bits of wood and plastic are not firearms in as of themselves, and therefore can be imported by licensed holders without applying for an import permit. Now,I will make an ASSumptiion here that this also applies to things like trigger parts,gas blocks,etc under that decision, and other non-critical non-pressure bearing parts. From either the US or the EU. Yes it is vague alright and that's what they will use to catch you.IE this operating the firearm or being in possession of firearm components is the other one
Good to hear that, it's rare enough to get good news regarding firearms laws but it's good to see that customs were put in their box. I don't know how far that would extend but maybe there's some hints in the judge's comments.
Remember now that the UK is now out of the EU,and has its own peculiar gun laws.S o I dunno what is the status with Cat C type firearms and mag capacity or whatever it is under their Sections?So maybe they are still possesable and sellable in the UK? But try buying anything out of the UK and ship to the EU.It's a freakin nightmare!!
Oh yeah I know that, but the Brits don't have any laws on magazine capacity for anything other than a section 2 shotgun certificate. So 100 round drug mags are grand if you have a straight pull AR or whatever abomination they have. As far as I know you have to declare the number of mags you have up North, but I think that's the extent of their regulations. I only go onto that website to compare prices of mags.
This kind of lads?https://sportwaffen-triebel.de/en/hera-arms/xr15/ar15-tan-h3magt/-223rem
A small bit of pertinent info in the description.
Something similar to that, looking back I think they're export only. Buy TROY Defense SPMP AR0 Pump Action Rifle | Triebel Online (sportwaffen-triebel.de) this is the rifle I was looking at. They're common enough in Canada and I know for a fact they just pin the mags to 5 rounds up there for this specific rifle. Not sure if they ship to Europe with 10 round magazines rather than pinning a 30 rounder.
0 -
Something similar to that, looking back I think they're export only. Buy TROY Defense SPMP AR0 Pump Action Rifle | Triebel Online (sportwaffen-triebel.de) this is the rifle I was looking at. They're common enough in Canada and I know for a fact they just pin the mags to 5 rounds up there for this specific rifle. Not sure if they ship to Europe with 10 round magazines rather than pinning a 30 rounder.
You'd have a set of biceps on you after a day on the range after holding and pumping 90 rounds thru that yoke!😁 I'd say it would arrive here with a dehorned mag as well,as before they can sell you the gun it has to be German proof marked* So the mag would be the first thing to be picked up on. Even if Canada allows those kinds of mags for export.
As far as I know you have to declare the number of mags you have up North
Think that was thrown out as well as unworkable, with that proposal to license each and every mag on import.
- Unless it is sold to another dealer or exported out of Germany from a dealer.
"If you want to keep someone away from your house, Just fire the shotgun through the door."
Vice President [and former lawyer] Joe Biden Field& Stream Magazine interview Feb 2013 "
0 -
You'd have a set of biceps on you after a day on the range after holding and pumping 90 rounds thru that yoke!😁 I'd say it would arrive here with a dehorned mag as well,as before they can sell you the gun it has to be German proof marked* So the mag would be the first thing to be picked up on. Even if Canada allows those kinds of mags for export.
Getting a workout in as well as getting some shooting done, killing two bird with one stone😁. Probably for the best that they ship with a 10 round mag. I'm pretty sure Troy is based out of America but sell these rifles more in Canada than the US. To be fair, I'd imagine the pictures were just stock photos from Troy, rather than pictures from Triebel themselves.
Think that was thrown out as well as unworkable, with that proposal to license each and every mag on import.
Was it? I heard they were trying to change the rules recently, but I haven't really followed up on it.
0 -
Are all SA/rf calibre rifles unrestricted with a mag capacity under ten?
0 -
Advertisement
-
Yes, semi auto rimfire rifles are unrestricted if you use it with a 10 round or less mag. Go over 10 rounds and you need a restricted licence.
1 -
All rimfire calibres
Post edited by itisnotgrand on0 -
Yup both those calibre are ok too.
"If you want to keep someone away from your house, Just fire the shotgun through the door."
Vice President [and former lawyer] Joe Biden Field& Stream Magazine interview Feb 2013 "
1 -
If a certain rimfire only comes with say 20 round mag from manufacturer then does that alone satisfy the chief as reason enough grounds for a restricted? Surly if that’s all that’s available then it should be? Or would he say go find a rifle with 10 then
0 -
Nope, "it comes with it" is not a valid reason to justify anything, restricted or not.
I know guys who used that as the reason for justifying a suppressor as they bought a rifle, mount, optic and suppressor as a package, and their suppressor was denied as that wasn't a good enough reason.
Zero chance that would satisfy the restricted requirement of "why a non restricted firearm would not be suitable", on top of the usual requirements.
Never forget, the end goal is zero firearms of any type.
S.I. No. 187/1972 - Firearms (Temporary Custody) Order - Firearms seized
S.I. No. 21/2008 - Firearms (Restricted Firearms and Ammunition) Order 2008 - Firearm types restricted
Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009 - Firearms banned & grandfathered
S.I. No. 420/2019 - Magazine ban, ammo storage & transport restricted
Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2023 - 2023 Firearm Ban (retroactive to 8 years prior)
0 -
Browning Buckmark is restricted as it's a "bullpup" design?
0 -
Yup, magazine behind trigger.
So as the rifle version it is restricted by design, but as a pistol it is non restricted.
Sensible and reasonable restriction eh :-P
Post edited by otmmyboy2 onNever forget, the end goal is zero firearms of any type.
S.I. No. 187/1972 - Firearms (Temporary Custody) Order - Firearms seized
S.I. No. 21/2008 - Firearms (Restricted Firearms and Ammunition) Order 2008 - Firearm types restricted
Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009 - Firearms banned & grandfathered
S.I. No. 420/2019 - Magazine ban, ammo storage & transport restricted
Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2023 - 2023 Firearm Ban (retroactive to 8 years prior)
0 -
I can’t see any reason why having more than 10 on tap can be justified unless it’s manufactured that way
0 -
Well the manufactured capacity is no reason for having a restricted, since it does not satisfy the requirement for a restricted vs non restricted:
"has demonstrated that the firearm is the only type of weapon appropriate for the purpose for which it is required."
Meaning you, on top of all the usual stuff like good reason, compliance with the firearms acts etc, you also need to fulfill this above quoted section to apply for a restricted, and a manufacturer magazine capacity of over 10 rounds is not going to satisfy the above.
Besides which, there are restricted size magazines for nearly every firearm in existence these days, because of the prevalence of magazine capacity restrictions, even unusual mag designs like the P90 have restricted mags available so "that's what the manufacturer makes" is not a valid argument.
In the same vein that most semi and pump shotguns are manufactured with a capability of holding more than 3 rounds, but here for them to be non restricted that capacity must be reduced to 3. Manufactured capacity means nothing when it comes to licencing, because of the above quoted requirement.
Otherwise everyone who wants a semi/pump shotgun would go for restricted, because who doesn't want the benefit of having to reload less? 😋
Never forget, the end goal is zero firearms of any type.
S.I. No. 187/1972 - Firearms (Temporary Custody) Order - Firearms seized
S.I. No. 21/2008 - Firearms (Restricted Firearms and Ammunition) Order 2008 - Firearm types restricted
Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009 - Firearms banned & grandfathered
S.I. No. 420/2019 - Magazine ban, ammo storage & transport restricted
Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2023 - 2023 Firearm Ban (retroactive to 8 years prior)
0 -
MODERATOR NOTE
Content removed.
LATER EDIT.
Again, there is NO definition in the Irish legislation as to what a" Bullpup" rifle actually is! DID YOU KNOW that this design goes back to the muzzle-loading period in the UK,where it comes from?. It is even unknown how the term "Bullpup" became synonymous with these types of guns.It just became a handy catch all term,the same way we describe any 4WD vehicle as a "Jeep".
Even this "mag behind the trigger" description is NOT a legal precedent here in Irish legislation!!! It is just a rule of thumb that someone in the DOJ/AGS made up to cover these types of guns with the applications. Because were we to work on that definition ALL pistols,[bar maybe things like Bergmanns and Mauser Broommhandles] would technically fall into that definition. This is another challengeable point of legislation,as again like "assault rifles"
Post edited by Cass on"If you want to keep someone away from your house, Just fire the shotgun through the door."
Vice President [and former lawyer] Joe Biden Field& Stream Magazine interview Feb 2013 "
2 -
Advertisement
-
A RF with a mag capacity 10 or less could still be restricted for another reason.
No. That a reason why that rifle is only available as restricted, it doesn't address why you need it. What's the rifle in question, and what's it for? It's availible is not really a reason to justify it.
Grizzly 45 - Again, there is NO definition in the Irish legislation as to what a" Bullpup" rifle actually is! DID YOU KNOW that this design goes back to the muzzle-loading period in the UK,where it comes from?. It is even unknown how the term "Bullpup" became synonymous with these types of guns.It just became a handy catch all term, the same way we describe any 4WD vehicle as a "Jeep".
The first sentence is not true, as you are well aware. I have seen that muzzleloader you refer to, strange one. There is uncertainty where the word came from, but they has no legal relevant today. They could invent a word for such rifles, and it would be still be a legal definition. Jeep is a popular brand of 4WD, that caught on it ireland as a catch all. Like Hoover, Aspirin, Velcro, Taser etc. Bullpupu was never a brand term that I am aware of. And even it it were, it wouldn't matter.
Even this "mag behind the trigger" description is NOT a legal precedent here in Irish legislation!!! It is just a rule of thumb that someone in the DOJ/AGS made up to cover these types of guns with the applications.
It's not a legal precedent. It's a written law No precedent is required. The 10-round RF mag limit, or the folding stock on a shotgun is also not a legal precedent. They are simply laws.
Because were we to work on that definition ALL pistols,[bar maybe things like Bergmanns and Mauser Broommhandles] would technically fall into that definition.
Also not true. If you check the law it's pretty obvious why.
Post edited by Cass on1 -
Without going into all this again as we have done numerous times and actual court cases have proven you wrong,as well as some utter inaccuracies from your examples.i'll humbly beg to disagree with all of the above yet again.
"If you want to keep someone away from your house, Just fire the shotgun through the door."
Vice President [and former lawyer] Joe Biden Field& Stream Magazine interview Feb 2013 "
0 -
We’ve never mentioned bullpups Grizzley that I remember. You are thinking of assault rifles. And in that case you didnt to prove anything. You couldn’t or wouldn’t provide references to the “actual court cases”. You also conflated EU law, and Irish law.
The fact is there is a definition in Irish law. It exists, full stop. I’d to have a friends wager with anyone insisting otherwise.
The fact you think mag behind trigger refers to pistols suggests you haven’t read the law. You probably should.
Grizz you’re an absolute wealth on knowledge on firearms lore, history, the US and I think Germany too. Honestly.
But your interpretation of Irish law is imaginative - but I don’t believe it’s down to not being aware of what the law says.
0 -
Re your above point of the court cases.
There you go.All are researchable and on record for a bright lad like you to research. The ones with the asterisks are the important ones.
*Oct 2014 District court Limerick c Grizzly 45& others V CS Sheehan. Win in all six cases for the plaintiffs. First costs awarded against the state
May 2014 " " " Grizzly 45 V CS Sheehan Win for the plaintiff. Technically the 1st case with costs awarded in Ireland.Judge reserved his decision on costs.
*July 2012 " " " multiple plaintiffs V CS Sheehan Win for the plaintiffs. Particularly on the FAILURE of the state to prove that the firearms in question were "assault rifles" as the judge remarked, "With no definition of such in Irish legislation, the state cannot prove its case" Plaintiffs witness ,a firearms expert and personal trainer of aGS ballistics dept Stated. "Form does not follow function in engineering or legal aspect.It is impossible to use "looks like" to describe a particular type of firearm when its function is clearly impossible to be what it is supposed to be under an accepted international definition of many years standing"[para phrase].
Also have a look at the act. The Irish legislation clearly states now in the definition
An assault rifle is
“assault rifles” means—
(a) rifles capable of functioning as semi-automatic firearms and as automatic firearms,[ even this is a mangled definition and more or less right]
(b) firearms that resemble such rifles;
[b] is the kicker!! What does an "assault rifle" look like??? an M16?an AK?a G3 ?FAL? M2 carbine? Ruger mini14 ACR?... It's not defined in LAW! And it is defeated easily as done in Germany from 1972 to 2002 and in the US under the Crime control bill 1994. You REMOVE the features that make it look scary, and it then doesn't resemble an "assault rifle" FS I even owned one in CA in that time frame I had a Chinese MAK 90 sporter with the stupid thumbhole stock. It's an utterly stupid way of going about regulating anything basing it on looks.
The second point was the failure of the state to prove that they were used in dynamic shooting. After a demonstration on An Riocht range mandated by the judge a week later.
Present at this was Grizzly 45, numerous other SA CF owners involved in this case,CS Sheehan,Insp Brooks of the Garda ballistics.There is a vid of this shooting demo still out there somewhere Both grudgingly accepted in the follow on hearing that these rifles were not used in the dynamic shooting disciplines.
*May 2010 Limerick Dist court Grizzly 45 & others Vs Cs Sheehan Win for the plaintiffs.
Those are my personal cases. Safe to say in personally THREE cases and at least 12 others the state tried this "looks like" argument and failed miserably.
There are at least two dozen others like this across the land that must be on record in the same timeframe and searchable in a law library or online?
So yeah,I think I know WTF I,m on about Re this assault rifle lark.!
As for the Mag behind the trigger definition RE pistols. That's not me. That's a LEGAL OPINION of A JUDGE when asked about this privately. Whether he is right or wrong...I'll let you argue that one.
Also has anyone noticed in all this that bullpup SHOTGUNS are not mentioned in the legislation?
"If you want to keep someone away from your house, Just fire the shotgun through the door."
Vice President [and former lawyer] Joe Biden Field& Stream Magazine interview Feb 2013 "
0 -
Also have a look at the act. The Irish legislation clearly states now in the definition
An assault rifle is..
We agreed it a terrible definition. The point was that it exist. You previously claim it didn’t exist.
We’re talking about restricted list (not EU ban). In which case was the judgement the firearms in question were not restricted? Not any involving SA CFs presumably.
Regardless, we’re talking about Bullpups. So I don’t see the relevance. The design of a Bullpup is not appearance.
As for the Mag behind the trigger definition RE pistols. That's not me. That's a LEGAL OPINION of A JUDGE when asked about this privately. Whether he is right or wrong...I'll let you argue that one.
He is clearly wrong. And one who read the definition (that you claim doesn’t exist) would see why.
Also has anyone noticed in all this that bullpup SHOTGUNS are not mentioned in the legislation?
Not included in the SI. Dealt with via other criteria.
0 -
We’re talking about restricted list (not EU ban). In which case was the judgement the firearms in question were not restricted? Not any involving SA CFs presumably.
EVERY.SINGLE.ONE .OF.THESE.MENTIONED.CASES. WERE. ABOUT.CFSA and CF HANDGUNS.AND.SHOTGUNS!!! why would you think I would be mentioning them continuously in these damn arguments??? I was a PLAINTIFF in THREE of them!!!You claimed I couldnt prove these happened or was reluctant to give this info publically.Well there it is!! As I have for years shown and if you could be bothered go back to the archives on those dates here on boards ,and you will find my initial reports of the court cases as they happened. You have proof now aplenty END OF
"If you want to keep someone away from your house, Just fire the shotgun through the door."
Vice President [and former lawyer] Joe Biden Field& Stream Magazine interview Feb 2013 "
0 -
Bullpup defined in SI No. 21/2008
"bullpup rifles" means rifles with a magazine located behind the trigger;"
0 -
EVERY.SINGLE.ONE.OF.THESE.MENTIONED.CASES. WERE. ABOUT.CFSA and CF HANDGUNS.AND.SHOTGUNS!!! why would you think I would be mentioning them continuously in these damn arguments??? I was a PLAINTIFF in THREE of them!!!
I've no idea why you keep mentioning those cases, re-read what I said. "...[that] the firearms in question were not restricted?" If they were in relation to SACFs, the they are still restricted. As I've said many times, you are conflating the EU ban, and the SI. I pointed this out the last time too. No proof, again.
The assault rifle definition in the SI is terrible, but its still the law. It's also largely redundant. The point all along has been that it could be challenged in court but it has not been. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe any of those cases did that. They were still licensed as restricted firearms, correct?
So even though you were successful (well done), it doesn't follow that the restricted SI doesn't apply. And to stay on topic. I don't see how you've made the leap that the bullpup definition doesn't exist or doesn't apply. You claim it was proven in court, which of those cases result in a bullpup being non-restricted?
Yup. It's right there is plain English. Also very clearly say rifles and not pistols.
It's a bit baffling as to why Grizzly is suggesting I was wrong (or lying about it). We all know it exist, its nearly 15 years old now.
1 -
Saw one for sale here before though. Anyway a ruger mk iv with a shoulder stock is fine you can get a shoulder stock off sak
0 -
Advertisement
-
Which could make it a rifle? and therefore restricted as mag is behind trigger? and the serial no. Is for a pistol?
I'd not be chancing it
1
