slipperyox wrote: »

1.2 million .22LR cartridges is cool then?

tudderone wrote: »

Is there a move on to allow blackpowder to be used by shooters interested in muzzleloading ? Its something i always fancied getting involved in. A nice cap and ball revolver would be nice.

juice1304 wrote: »

No, You have to have a magazine built and certified by the local authority. It cant be in or near a dwelling. And everything has to be fireproof.
Nitrocellulose powder is much more stable and safe and they wont allow people have it. So not a hope in hell them allowing people own black powder.

juice1304 wrote: »

Was that their expert who did an online ballistics course?

Zxthinger wrote: »

I'm still at a loss to see why mode b (a wooden lock box) is not accepted. There is a unfair onus being place one any private individuals who wish to examine the possibility of reloading and that is a system that places industrial metrics on a private citizen..
I have personally given up on the idea that reloading will even be considered for hunters..

Clareman wrote: »

I get the impression that here in Ireland we see anything to do with firearms as being capable of being used as terrorist weapons so they will go to the furthest realms of common sense and making their ruling on that, for example, black powder is banned cause it could be used to blow something up, yes that is right and that's what it's designed to do but there are far more suitable alternatives more readily available so the chances of a modernday Guy Fawkes coming in is slim but because it is impossible to apply common sense they just ban it.

This isn't just in firearms, look at what happened when a discussion on drink driving started to happen, everyone was going to be drinking driving and killing everyone, no that's not what the discussion was but because that's the extreme that's what people jump on so nothing changes.

Cass wrote: »

Not really. There are, as i've said above, certain conditions that have to be met which can limit the people that can actually do it (as opposed to anyone applying for a "license") but applications need to be submitted to keep pressure on the powers that be that its not a forgotten topic and people really do want it to become more available.

40.— The following section is inserted after section 10 of the Principal Act:


“Reloading of ammunition.


10A.—(1) A person (except a registered firearms dealer or the holder of a licence under this section) who reloads ammunition is guilty of an offence.


(2) An application for a licence under this section shall be in the prescribed form, be accompanied by the prescribed fee (if any) and be made to the superintendent of the Garda Síochána of the district in which the applicant resides.


(3) A superintendent shall not grant a licence under this section unless satisfied that the following conditions are complied with:


(a) the applicant holds a firearm certificate;


(b) the reloading of ammunition will not, in the particular circumstances, endanger public safety or security or the peace;


(c) the person has a special need which, in the opinion of the superintendent, is sufficient to justify granting the licence;


(d) the applicant is competent to reload ammunition;


(e) the premises where the reloading is to take place are sufficiently safe and secure for that purpose.


(4) The superintendent may at any time—


(a) attach to the licence such further conditions as he or she considers necessary for the purpose of preventing danger to members of the public or the peace or for ensuring that ammunition is reloaded only to satisfy the special need of the applicant, and


(b) for that purpose vary any of those conditions.

BattleCorp wrote: »

Out of curiosity, where does one find the prescribed form mentioned in the Criminal Justice Act 2006 legislation below? I've never heard tell of it.

BattleCorp wrote: »

Sorry if I seem dumb with these questions.

So what actual Act or SI makes it an offence to reload without a licence/permit/authorisation?

Or is it legal to reload without authorisation, it's just having the components is the problem?

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Thanks! I was wondering had I imagined or misremembered that case. As no one else out there in the shooting community seems to have ever heard of it.




What that article is NOT telling us is the bombs used in Gotheburg or Sweden are Russian, Soviet era black market anti-personnel hand grenades and the Russian version of LAW 72 single-shot bazookas. All coming from the Russian 13th Oblast , Kaliningrad or from Russia itself across the Baltic.

A very far cry from a bit of folded copper pipe with an improvised fuse and a match head or sugar chlorate payload. Yeah, BP can be used too as can nitro powder, but then what's to stop you pulling a bunch of shotgun shells apart to get the same powder amount? Or mixing some stuff up from easily available household chemicals and stuff found in your local Co-op?

Cass wrote: »

Again only my opinion so others may disagree.

The initial cost is not off-putting because like everything shooting there is always an initial cost. My idea of drawback is the end result for the workload involved. You could spend weeks even months (and i've done this) developing the absolute perfect load. Now i know for 1,200 yard shooting most people won't ever need that sort of precision but as i don't load for anything under 600 yards i wouldn't know.

There are days of prep, weeks of testing, all of which incur costs. Speaking of costs you save NOTHING by reloading. The first batch using new bras actually costs more than buying factory and the first batch may be a failure. The second batch will be cheaper as you get to reuse your brass but when i say cheaper i mean the cost is about he same as a factory round, maybe slightly cheaper. Every reuse of brass, and assuming you have some components left (bullets/primers/propellant) gets a little cheaper, but then you get to the point you've used up everything and the brass has been used multiple times and needs replacing then you're back up to the initial cost of every component new.

As all reloading has to be done on the range it means hours of sitting in an authorised container doing all this. Remember no at home reloading. I was hesitant to say any of this because it seems i'm making a case for it being too much grief or not worth it. I'm not. Its absolutely worth it but It's an Irish problem. In other countries the components are far, far cheaper. Those able to reload elsewhere can do so at home and because any RFD can stock the components the price of them is cheaper. The same applies to the cost of importing and transporting. At present that cost is spread over the few in F-Class, but imagine that cost spread of thousands even tens of thousands of people. Becomes pennies not pounds of cost per person.

Again, and i must say this so there is no confusion, reloading is good. It can improve the performance of the worse rifle and the lads in the Midlands absolutely need it to remain competitive on the international competition front. Reloading would also be of huge benefit to the "plinker" shooter who only seeks to load a specific round or wants a little more from his set up. However unless more people seek it out and it becomes more widespread as it currently stands there is no reloading for 99.3% of firearm owners and in its current format the program is a lot of work. As it's all i've ever known perhaps my viewpoint is skewered, and the guys in America, UK, Germany, France, Spain, Italy, etc, etc. that do it at home may say the complete opposite, but when some of them (when they come here for comps) see what we have to do they say are even amazed at the hoops that have to be jumped through and admit it might put them off.