Mags

AFAIK if the magazine is rimfire any capacity and centrefire rifle under 10 and centrefire pistol under 20 then they are not classed as component parts and should be legal.

List of essential components can be found here:
http://www.inis.gov.ie/en/JELR/Pages/eu_individuals_importing
"Essential components are defined as the barrel; the frame; the receiver (including both upper and lower receiver); the slide; the cylinder; and the bolt or breech block."

Over that centrefire capacity and they are classed as prohibited firearms and thus without a prohibited licence would be illegal in the same class as if you had an illegal machine gun.

Grizzly 45

Sham20 wrote: »

Is it legal or illegal for a civilian to own a mag from a any type of gun without having a gun licence. Just wondering bc technically the mag isn't a registered part of the gun.

In the rest of the EU, it is a normal hobby for folks who dont want to go to the bother of licensing and permits for firearms.
Here in Ireland, despite them not being considered critical parts.
You might have a bit of explaining to do with the boys in blue as to how and why you acquired a selection of different AK mags from the former Warsaw Pact countries for example.
IOW proceed with caution with this one here.It's "grey area" and untested in law as to what the exact legality of this could be.

Open to correction here but isn't any part of a firearm (not just essential components) considered a firearm in itself under Irish legislation? And if so, then wouldn't a mag without a licence mean that you are in possession of an unlicenced firearm?

CJhaughey

I think you are correct Battlecorp, a screw is considered a firearm under the law as I understand it.
That's why you need a separate license for a Mod as it is technically a firearm under Irish Law, even if it has no markings or is not a registered part of a rifle.

CJhaughey wrote: »

I think you are correct Battlecorp, a screw is considered a firearm under the law as I understand it.
That's why you need a separate license for a Mod as it is technically a firearm under Irish Law, even if it has no markings or is not a registered part of a rifle.

That sounds wrong. What about a riflescope or a spare stock, they don't need a licence to be sold/purchased.

Rows Grower wrote: »

That sounds wrong. What about a riflescope or a spare stock, they don't need a licence to be sold/purchased.

You can have multiple stocks, triggers and barrels (if same calibre) for any firearm you are licenced for.

The problem (I think) is where you have a stock or trigger or barrel for a calibre you aren't licenced for, then you might be in trouble. There are some grey areas though. What happens if you have a stock that fits an airsoft gun and a real firearm? That's a tricky one.

An ordinary riflescope isn't counted as a firearm in our legislation. Certain ones need authorisation such as thermal/night vision but not standard ones.

Under Section 1(f) & (g)(iii) of the firearms act it is classed as a firearm and requires the necessary license. Once you have the license, as Battlecorp said, you can have as many as you like in terms of parts (for that firearm), but with no license you're in breach of the firearms act.

I was under the impression that the recent case involving a boards member importing firearm parts(including mags) which were deemed to be essential components and imported without an import licence and thus revenue seized them.

However the court ruled that such were not component parts and thus did not require an import licence, as only essential component parts require such an import licence.

The post with ruling, for reference:
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=115975805&postcount=170

A pertinent section - "My three items as sought to be imported represent features which affect the appearance of my firearm but are not necessary to its functioning. My firearm is complete and functioning without any of these new items and as such under the firearms act they cannot be classified to be component parts, only accessories.", referring to the rifle stock/chassis, spacer kit and 2 magazines which were seized.

This seems to me that precedent was set, and so if they are not essential components they could be imported without an import licence(basically a verification that the holder holds a firearm certificate for same here) and thus possessed by a non licence holder too.

With the provisos on mag capacity in my earlier post.

Different issue.

The items he imported were not seized because he didn't have a gun license it was because Customs (not PTB) declared them component parts and seized them saying he did not apply for an import license which you must for component parts.

Iow the issue of that case was importing item, when you hold a firearms licenses, and what is deemed essential component or not. The OP of that thread had a gun license and the court ruled that customs were wrong to seize them as the OP had a license.

The OP of this thread is asking to have such items WITHOUT a firearms license. Different kettle of fish altogether.

Cass wrote: »

Different issue.

The items he imported were not seized because he didn't have a gun license it was because Customs (not PTB) declared them component parts and seized them saying he did not apply for an import license which you must for component parts.

Iow the issue of that case was importing item, when you hold a firearms licenses, and what is deemed essential component or not. The OP of that thread had a gun license and the court ruled that customs were wrong to seize them as the OP had a license.

The OP of this thread is asking to have such items WITHOUT a firearms license. Different kettle of fish altogether.

I understand the differences in the two scenarios, but my thinking was if the precedent set by that case results in the items, including magazines, being declared to be accessories and thus not component parts, then owning firearm accessories(slings, scopes, etc) would be fine sans licence(which as you say allows you to possess firearm components)?

As in if they were firearms components which required a licence to possess then they would require an import permit to import them.
Thus if they were deemed to be accessories and not components then they would not need an import permit, and thus nor would the possessor have to have a gun licence.

The only issue here being are mags classed as essential firearm components or not(which I think the case result above states they are not, or they would need an import permit, which can only be obtained with a firearms licence).

My interpretation of the result that is, not legal advice OP

otmmyboy2 wrote: »

I understand the differences in the two scenarios, but my thinking was if the precedent set by that case results in the items, including magazines, being declared to be accessories and thus not component parts, then owning firearm accessories(slings, scopes, etc) would be fine sans licence(which as you say allows you to possess firearm components)?

The precedence set by that case means anyone with a firearms license can import "accessories" and non component parts without an import license. Not that you don't need a gun license to do it.

As in if they were firearms components which required a licence to possess then they would require an import permit to import them.

Not the point of that case. It was that the importer had a license and did NOT need an import license for them.

Thus if they were deemed to be accessories and not components then they would not need an import permit, and thus nor would the possessor have to have a gun licence.

The case did not cover the gun license aspect in so far as the importer HAD a gun license so the point is/was moot.

The only issue here being are mags classed as essential firearm components or not

The firearms act deems them to be firearms, not essential components, according the above linked sections.

(which I think the case result above states they are not, or they would need an import permit, which can only be obtained with a firearms licence).

We're circling back to discussing the court case and moving away from the topic. The OP, of this thread, made no mention of importing merely /buying/owing/possessing. Under Irish law they are firearms and all firearms require a license. The issue of importing components, be they essential or not, was addressed by the court case and is somewhat unimportant to this topic.

We add little bits of our own when discussing such matters. The OP called them "registered parts" when the law makes so such reference. We're discussing essential component parts when the law doesn't mention essential.

Section (f)

any article which would be a firearm under any of the foregoing paragraphs F3 but for the fact that, owing to the lack of a necessary component part or parts, or to any other defect or condition, it is incapable of discharging a shot, bullet or other missile or projectile or of causing a shock or other disablement, as the case may be,

Section ( g )

except where the context otherwise requires, any component part of any article referred to in any of the foregoing paragraphs and, without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, the following articles shall be deemed to be such component parts:

(iii) any object —

(I) manufactured for use as a component in connection with the operation of a firearm, and

Had the OP in the court case thread NOT had a gun license i could have imagined that case going somewhat differently for him.

There was a case some years back, and we've discussed this before, where a chap was brought before the court for possessing a bullet clock. A clock with ammo as the hours markers. The Judge dismissed the case even though under the firearms act any component part of a bullet, as well as the whole article, is classed as ammunition and hence requires a license. IOW that guy should have had a license for each caliber on the clock.

The Judge remarked that while the law states a license must he had for each round, it must also take into account the common sense approach of realising that such articles could not and were never intended for use as ammunition, merely as decorative (i'm paraphrasing here).

My point with the above is that while the law states, very clearly in this case, that it requires a license for any article that is deemed a firearm the real world consequences of possessing such without a firearms license may not be what is laid out in legislation. Of course that would have to be tempered with intent.

If you were caught with one magazine, and no firearms license, you bought or found and claimed it was a once off with no further mags were found on your person or home then its possible you'd get a warning to be more careful.

If you were caught with crates of mags then any attempt to pass this off as a harmless hobby, especially when not in possession of a firearms, license would soon die a death.

I'm not actually arguing whether the OP can or cannot possess one. I'm stating what the law says and it says such parts are firearms and as the law says all firearms must be licensed, the logical "leap" is they require a license.

Look at NV scopes. Not attachments, but the actual scopes. Whether you own a gun or not to possess such a scope requires a gun license because its deemed a firearm in its' own right.

Just my take too so like you said its not legal advice, but my opinion is, yes you need a license to own/possess one.

By the by, one little point.

I wouldn't like to see anyone tell anyone else to just go out and try/actually buy firearm parts when they don't have a license. As this topic proves it can be messy and "some guy on the interweb told me it was okay" won't stand up in court as a defense.

Understood.

My read of that result is that if it is not a component part then it doesn't require a licence but I get your point Cass.

OP if you want a definitive answer I'd suggest emailing the DoJ or the AGS Firearms Policy Unit and ask can an unlicenced person possess firearms magazines.
Reference the case above if you wish as they may not be aware of it and the precedent it set, whether that precedent be relevant to your scenario or not.

And if you do so and get a reply please let us know, I'm quite curious.

Sham20

So it's basically a grey zone to either own and buy mags and occasional parts. It's weird even on ebay you can't buy everything besides the bolt and receiver of a lee enfield no3 mk1. People are selling tank shells and random tank/gun parts bullets and whatnot. By law most would be deemed illegal? But its left as a grey zone for the court to bite some person who thought they were in the clear more less picking and choosing when to do anything with no clear innocent or guilty verdict until the very end.

BattleCorp wrote: »

You can have multiple stocks, triggers and barrels (if same calibre) for any firearm you are licenced for.

The problem (I think) is where you have a stock or trigger or barrel for a calibre you aren't licenced for, then you might be in trouble. There are some grey areas though. What happens if you have a stock that fits an airsoft gun and a real firearm? That's a tricky one.

An ordinary riflescope isn't counted as a firearm in our legislation. Certain ones need authorisation such as thermal/night vision but not standard ones.

My reply was specifically to the post that I quoted and in particular to the part I made bold which was.....

"A screw is a considered a firearm under the law as I understand it".

This is not correct.

Rows Grower wrote: »

My reply was specifically to the post that I quoted and in particular to the part I made bold which was.....

"A screw is a considered a firearm under the law as I understand it".

This is not correct.

If the screw is part of the firearm, such as an action screw, it is my belief that it is considered a firearm in itself. I can't see how it wouldn't be given the legislation that Cass quoted earlier. If a stock, barrel, trigger etc. is considered a firearm because it's part of a firearm, why wouldn't a screw that's part of the firearm be classed the same?

As always, I'm open to correction but I doubt I'm wrong on this one. See the part highlighted in bold below. I would think that 'any object' would include a screw that was part of the firearm.

( g ) except where the context otherwise requires, any component part of any article referred to in any of the foregoing paragraphs and, without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, the following articles shall be deemed to be such component parts:
(i) telescope sights with a light beam, or telescope sights with an electronic light amplification device or an infra-red device, designed to be fitted to a firearm specified in paragraph ( a ), ( b ), ( c ) or ( e ),
(ii) a silencer designed to be fitted to a firearm specified in paragraph ( a ), ( b ) or ( e ), and
(iii) any object —
(I) manufactured for use as a component in connection with the operation of a firearm, and
(II) without which it could not function as originally designed,

Sham20 wrote: »

So it's basically a grey zone to either own and buy mags and occasional parts. It's weird even on ebay you can't buy everything besides the bolt and receiver of a lee enfield no3 mk1. People are selling tank shells and random tank/gun parts bullets and whatnot. By law most would be deemed illegal? But its left as a grey zone for the court to bite some person who thought they were in the clear more less picking and choosing when to do anything with no clear innocent or guilty verdict until the very end.

Unfortunately the law doesn't have to always make logical sense, and firearms law in particular does not in a lot of areas.

And then there is a lot which is just turned a blind eye to.

As an example knife laws here prohibit purchasing machetes, but they are relatively easily sourced in many hardwares country wide.

Law as written and practical implementation of the same are sometimes drastically differing sides

Vegeta

BattleCorp wrote: »

(II) without which it could not function as originally designed,

Is this not a critical part of the legislation? A barrel, action and trigger will still function as a firearm i.e. cock and fire. It could be argued that action screws are not necessary for a firearm to function. The originally designed bit does throw a curve ball in there though.

BattleCorp wrote: »

If the screw is part of the firearm, such as an action screw, it is my belief that it is considered a firearm in itself. I can't see how it wouldn't be given the legislation that Cass quoted earlier. If a stock, barrel, trigger etc. is considered a firearm because it's part of a firearm, why wouldn't a screw that's part of the firearm be classed the same?

As always, I'm open to correction but I doubt I'm wrong on this one. See the part highlighted in bold below. I would think that 'any object' would include a screw that was part of the firearm.

( g ) except where the context otherwise requires, any component part of any article referred to in any of the foregoing paragraphs and, without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, the following articles shall be deemed to be such component parts:
(i) telescope sights with a light beam, or telescope sights with an electronic light amplification device or an infra-red device, designed to be fitted to a firearm specified in paragraph ( a ), ( b ), ( c ) or ( e ),
(ii) a silencer designed to be fitted to a firearm specified in paragraph ( a ), ( b ) or ( e ), and
(iii) any object —
(I) manufactured for use as a component in connection with the operation of a firearm, and
(II) without which it could not function as originally designed,

You've got your belief's and I've got mine, it would be a boring old world if we all thought the same.

Vegeta wrote: »

Is this not a critical part of the legislation? A barrel, action and trigger will still function as a firearm i.e. cock and fire. It could be argued that action screws are not necessary for a firearm to function. The originally designed bit does throw a curve ball in there though.

There's more to the original design of the gun though than just will it fire.

For example, a Ruger 10/22 rifle is designed to be shouldered with the stock sitting firmly against your shoulder. How do you do that without a stock? And the receiver is designed to fit snugly into the receiver and be held there with the set screw. Again, all part of the original design.

A car will drive without a steering wheel but it won't go where you want it to go without it. Same principle for a receiver wobbling around in a stock, the bullet won't go where you want it to go. That's why I'd argue that a screw could be an integral part of the firearm.

Same with a lever action gun. Get rid of one screw and the lever comes off. Then you can't rack the firearm so it won't work as originally designed.

Richard308

Vegeta wrote: »

Is this not a critical part of the legislation? A barrel, action and trigger will still function as a firearm i.e. cock and fire. It could be argued that action screws are not necessary for a firearm to function. The originally designed bit does throw a curve ball in there though.

And as such a bolt action rifle can be manually fed and loaded fired without a magazine. So technically it still functions as designed. Most bolt actions designed with internal magazine. So it’s a very good point.

Sham20 wrote: »

So it's basically a grey zone to either own and buy mags and occasional parts.

No. The law is actually clear on this. You cannot possess a firearm without a license and the law list what it defines as firearms. Doesn't make sense but neither does a lot of the law regarding firearms.

It's weird even on ebay you can't buy everything besides the bolt and receiver of a lee enfield no3 mk1. People are selling tank shells and random tank/gun parts bullets and whatnot. By law most would be deemed illegal?

By very careful. Check the location of the items. Most would/may not be in Ireland. In other countries the law is not as strict and there is no restrictions on owning such items with or without a gun license. Ireland is very strict when it comes to gun laws so we're the exception. IOW it might be legal for the person to sell it, but not for you to own/possess it let alone import it.

The other part of that may involve the person selling it not knowing such items may require a gun license, even if its in Ireland. They may not get in trouble for selling but you may for buying.

But its left as a grey zone for the court to bite some person who thought they were in the clear more less picking and choosing when to do anything with no clear innocent or guilty verdict until the very end.

Under Irish law the onus is all on you, as the buyer/licensee, to know if you need a license, what kind of license, and to have it. So the courts won't single you out for persecution, but they won't look favorably on firearms offences.

Vegeta wrote: »

Is this not a critical part of the legislation?

It is indeed, but like the rest only one part.

A barrel, action and trigger will still function as a firearm i.e. cock and fire. It could be argued that action screws are not necessary for a firearm to function.

Correct, but part (f) makes, if i'm reading it right, no such allowances. In essence saying any article, whether it works or not or is capable of discharging a shot or not is a firearm.

The originally designed bit does throw a curve ball in there though.

It surely does, but again taking the whole section, then including things like the 1990 offensive weapons act, and subsequent SIs including the 2019 EU one they seem to have most bases covered.

I still believe all this is clearly stated, if the person has a firearms license, and the only grey area comes from whether you need to be licensed at all to have possession of certain parts as with the OP.

Grizzly 45

otmmyboy2 wrote: »

As an example knife laws here prohibit purchasing machetes, but they are relatively easily sourced in many hardwares country wide.

Oh you mean "beet topping knives"?:P as again a "machete" has no legal definition in Irish law as to what it actually is.:D

jb88

CJhaughey wrote: »

I think you are correct Battlecorp, a screw is considered a firearm under the law as I understand it.
That's why you need a separate license for a Mod as it is technically a firearm under Irish Law, even if it has no markings or is not a registered part of a rifle.

You dont need a seperate licence for a MOD it is stated on the firearm licence if you have the ability to legally possess one or not, any you can have as many as you like of that calibre for that firearm its licenced too. ;-)

jb88

otmmyboy2 wrote: »

Unfortunately the law doesn't have to always make logical sense, and firearms law in particular does not in a lot of areas.

And then there is a lot which is just turned a blind eye to.

As an example knife laws here prohibit purchasing machetes, but they are relatively easily sourced in many hardwares country wide.

Law as written and practical implementation of the same are sometimes drastically differing sides

Had an RFD try and sell me a machete, a few years ago, at a very cheap price.
I had no interest, even though ive been in the jungle many times.

jb88 wrote: »

You dont need a seperate licence for a MOD it is stated on the firearm licence if you have the ability to legally possess one or not, any you can have as many as you like of that calibre for that firearm its licenced too. ;-)

You're on the ball there jb88.

I could be wrong but I don't think you can even apply for a licence for a mod unless you have a firearm.

This theory being thrown about that a screw can be classed as a firearm is balderdash in my own opinion.

Richard308

Rows Grower wrote: »

You're on the ball there jb88.

I could be wrong but I don't think you can even apply for a licence for a mod unless you have a firearm.

This theory being thrown about that a screw can be classed as a firearm is balderdash in my own opinion.

Can you imagine being before a judge and saying this 5/8 screw is a firearm. Poor prosecution would probably be held in contempt