Advertisement
Boards are fundraising to help the people of Ukraine via the Red Cross at this horrific time. Please donate and share if you can, you will find the link here. Many thanks.

Revoking of SACF rifles & New Legislation (thread banned users in first post)

15678911»

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,504 ✭✭✭ Traumadoc


    Have not seen any zombie knife injuries , mostly I see domestic steak knives - they tend to be few and far between anyway.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,063 ✭✭✭✭ Grizzly 45


    @Traumadoc... On average, what is the most common type of knife injury you see inflicted by what type of blade would you see in an ER in Ireland? IE bottle job,stanley blades,steak knife,kitchen/butcher knife?Or is there any sort of stats kept that could be used to show common knife injuries in Ireland?

    Confucius say."He who says one man cannot change World. Never has eaten bat soup in Wuhan!"



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 27,275 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Cass


    MODERATOR NOTE

    Lads, not pointing at anyone in particular, but can we stay on topic. The issue of knives/injuries is not suited to this thread, but if you wish to discuss it bring it to the Off Topic thread please.

    Forum Charter - Useful Information - RFDs - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads


    If you see a problem post use the report post function, "FLAG" & let a Moderator deal with it.


    Your Shooting Forum Moderators - Cass, Cookimonster, Vegeta, Sparks, It wasn't me!



  • Registered Users Posts: 411 ✭✭ Munsterlad102


    Just a thought about the proposed legislation, it states that "For the purposes of this section, “semi-automatic centre-fire rifle” means rifled long firearms which use a round which is greater than .22 inch calibre and can reload automatically from a magazine or cylinder each time a round is discharged but can fire not more than one round with a single pull on the trigger". So, how are they defining calibre? Is it a case of if the round is named less than 0.22 inch is it allowed, or are they going by the diameter of the bullet? If the former, then 5.56 NATO would be allowed but not .223 Remington and if the latter, 22lr wouldn't be allowed but something much more powerful like a .204 Ruger would be allowed. Also, we should try and avoid putting the word "rimfire" anywhere in the act.



  • Registered Users Posts: 37,043 ✭✭✭✭ Mellor


    So, how are they defining calibre?

    I don’t think they need to define it. Calibre is the diameter of the barrel, not the round. Although that depends on whether it’s a British or US measurement. (Eg .308 British being >.308)

    Is it a case of if the round is named less than 0.22 inch is it allowed, or are they going by the diameter of the bullet? If the former, then 5.56 NATO would be allowed but not .223 Remington and if the latter,

    5.56 NATO is .22 caliber, rounded

    The lack of rimfire is weird



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 411 ✭✭ Munsterlad102


    I think they do need to, because 22lr barrels are slightly bigger than 0.22 inches and that difference either have 22lr semi autos being banned or having .223 semi autos being legal.

    I bring it up because it was mentioned that .303 British has a bigger diameter to the .308 cut off for restricted/non-restricted rifles but rifles in that calibre are non restricted. So like I said, if they take it at face value, ie if the round has a name greater than 0.22 inches it's allowed, then people could have their .223 ARs "rebarreled" into 5.56 and having that under the cut off.

    Yeah, it's in our best interests to make sure rimfire isn't mentioned anywhere in the amendment.



  • Registered Users Posts: 516 ✭✭✭ BattleCorp1


    T'wud be nicer if there was no amendment, just sayin'.

    I've my renewal coming up shortly. It'll be interesting to see what the story is.



  • Registered Users Posts: 411 ✭✭ Munsterlad102


    Agreed, but if there is, which let's be honest, there is almost certainly going to be so the best we can do is ask for clarity and minimize what's banned.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 27,275 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Cass


     Munsterlad102 - So, how are they defining calibre?

    Not sure until we see it, but remember the title. Semi-auto centrefire.

    Much like the SI regarding minimum caliber for Deer stalking. They specify centrefire ammunition and then the rest of the criteria. So rimfire is not mentioned as its not applicable.

    The other point is they may well leave it vague so the 22 centrefire covers all categories of that caliber/round/bullet. They won't want you having a swift semi-auto no more than a 338 semi-auto. What this will mean if anyone evers develops a 17 Remington centrefire I'm not sure, unless they include sub 22 calibers with the semi-auto definition. IOW if its one [centrefire semi-auto] or the other [.22 cal or over], its gone.

    Post edited by Cass on

    Forum Charter - Useful Information - RFDs - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads


    If you see a problem post use the report post function, "FLAG" & let a Moderator deal with it.


    Your Shooting Forum Moderators - Cass, Cookimonster, Vegeta, Sparks, It wasn't me!



  • Registered Users Posts: 37,043 ✭✭✭✭ Mellor


    .22lr are not centrefire, that aspect needs to be clear. I agree that the "clause" above doesn't distinguish. But CF/RM is independent of the word caliber not being defined. Without a definition, the technical meaning would most likely apply.

    A .223 is .223 caliber. It's a US calibre, so its measure via groove diameter. Based on the above wording it would be out.

    I bring it up because it was mentioned that .303 British has a bigger diameter to the .308 cut off for restricted/non-restricted rifles but rifles in that calibre are non restricted.

    I mentioned it above. .303 British has a .312 bullet, but it is .303 calibre. The restriction is based on calibre not bullet diameter.

    So like I said, if they take it at face value, ie if the round has a name greater than 0.22 inches it's allowed, then people could have their .223 ARs "rebarreled" into 5.56 and having that under the cut off.

    The name doesn't always reflect the calibre, so that might be tricky. But yeah, the 5.56 is smaller than .22", and as it's measure under the european convention. It's in.

    There are means to get around that bypass. They certainly could define calibre differently to be more restrictive. But but let's not give anyone ideas ;)

    Post edited by Mellor on


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 411 ✭✭ Munsterlad102


    Yes, the minister did state centrefire but they don't mention that anywhere in their definition of what a semi auto centrefire rifle is. I don't know why they couldn't use any definitions from the 2008 act, but that's the legislature for you.

    They actually do need to specify rimfire as the proposed legislation is based off the 2008/09 pistol ban, ie they say what you're allowed and everything else isn't.

    True, and let's be honest, AGS is 100% going to try and implement another blanket ban off all SA CF rifles, just like they did with the Temporary custody order and with the pistol ban. Whether or not it's vague, AGS isn't going to license a 22 SA CF rifle. So if anyone is feeling safe because you've licensed a rifle prior to September 2015, just remember, they've done this before and they'll do it again.



  • Registered Users Posts: 411 ✭✭ Munsterlad102


    Correct, it's fairly common knowledge that 22lr is rimfire, but nowhere in the proposed legislation does it mention the word rimfire so 22lr and all other rimfire rounds will be subjected to the legislation, in it's current state. I'm not versed enough to say what would apply if there is no definition, but that is a very good point to bring up.

    Yes, but that brings up a very interesting problem, where .223 isn't allowed but 5.56 is allowed despite being the same round (ignoring pressure differences). So then could rounds be "modified" to be less than the 0.22 inch cut off, by modify I mean renamed and nothing else. But that being said, they do take calibres at face value at the moment, so I'd imagine they'll continue that practice.

    I'm going to emphasise how much important the words "rimfire" or "centrefire" do not appear in the legislation. If it isn't specified, then there are plenty of substitute rounds under 22 calibre, but not that many of those are rimfire.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,063 ✭✭✭✭ Grizzly 45


    Hell, No! we should be pushing for an explanation from the minister as to why he is on a crusade against these rifles licensed post-2015,and not accept any sort of aul plaver about "public safety and them falling into the wrong hands" BS. That's not fooling anyone anymore. And that he needs to justify this action in the public court of opinion, and not try sneaking this in on as a tack on abit of amendment to a proposed statute.After all,it is making more of a mess of an unoverseeable body of legislation.

    Let's not go into this with the usual cap in hand,please Sir, may we have this kind of firearm. Thanks for your kindness, your Honour. Let's remind this minister he is from Wexford, and there are actually going by the stats, the biggest number of gun owners in the 26 in that county who might not vote for him and Fianna [gunbanners] Failure if they are told he is after their semi-auto shotguns next!

    Confucius say."He who says one man cannot change World. Never has eaten bat soup in Wuhan!"



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,063 ✭✭✭✭ Grizzly 45


    it's allowed, then people could have their .223 ARs "rebarreled" into 5.56 and having that under the cut off.

    You already have that if you have a ."223 Wylde" calibre.😉 It's a half/half between 5.56 and .223 and allows both to be shot from it.

    What this will mean if anyone evers develops a 17 Remington centrefire I'm not sure,

    Already exists in both an AR upper and a dedicated .17 SA rifle design


    True, and let's be honest, AGS is 100% going to try and implement another blanket ban off all SA CF rifles, just like they did with the Temporary custody order and with the pistol ban. Whether or not it's vague, AGS isn't going to license a 22 SA CF rifle. So if anyone is feeling safe because you've licensed a rifle prior to September 2015, just remember, they've done this before and they'll do it again.

    Be another round of DC and HC court cases and more egg on AGS faces if they went the same reason/route as the CF handguns as no "good reason" to own. They tried that because there was an assumption that all CF pistols were being used in IPSC, and they forgot that there were other competition styles out there. In the case of the rifles, there is plenty of comps and disciplines out there for this, and Ireland would be also breaking with its goody two shoes EU class teacher's pet image, by going against something the EU grownups said they weren't doing 6 years ago because of the compensation factor. Better to leave it as grandfathered with pre-2015 licenses.But even there we need clarification on legislation regarding substitutions of firearms, like the CF handguns.

    How about a proper procedure in law,if you want to sub one rifle for another, rather than having to rely on a dubious "legal loophole " procedure as with CF handguns?

    No,if this minister wants to play with the firearms legislation, well he can't leave a massive pile of warm &brown matter for us and AGS to sort out while he runs off to a press conference to say how tough he is on gun laws, but he can sit down and work out with all parties how this should and will be implemented and function in real life. In fact, we have enough gripes and legit complaints to keep him busy on this legislation on things that need sorting that he might never get near doing anything about this in the 1st place.

    Confucius say."He who says one man cannot change World. Never has eaten bat soup in Wuhan!"



  • Registered Users Posts: 411 ✭✭ Munsterlad102


    Key word being "should". We should be doing a hell of a lot of things, but here we are. Don't go looking for the court of public appeal, I think the majority of people in Ireland, and fudd gunowners, would support this ban. The key to controlling the public narrative is controlling the media, which we do not have. All of us here know how illogical the ban would be, but the public see a black gun and hear "semi auto assault rifle" and want to have them banned. You have a position of influence with your association with FUNI, what have you done? I don't mean to be confrontational or a pr!ck, but it's a valid quesion.

    Come on Grizz, just because he's from a county with the highest rate of gun ownership that doesn't mean he's going to care. It's been mentioned here time and time again about the 250,000+ licenses and however many tens of thousands of licenseholders, that doesn't mean we're a united group. How many thousands of those people are farmers and hunters who don't have any interest or care about sports shooting? The slippery slope argument only works with us rational people, and we're heavily outnumbered.



  • Registered Users Posts: 411 ✭✭ Munsterlad102


    Ah, I see. I was looking at some ARs and I saw that was an option but I hadn't heard about it before. I was a bit redundant though, since the next option was 5.56/223.

    Yeah, I saw the 17 Remington upper too. I'd there would be an AR upper for most calibres at this point.

    Yep, agreed, but still that's a lot of legal costs which I'm sure you're all too familiar.

    At the end of the day, we need a larger and coordinated campaign of petitioning the minister and local politicians rather than our current strategy of taking this lying down.



  • Registered Users Posts: 137 ✭✭ BSA International


    17 Rem is €80 for 20 rds, if you can find it ..........



  • Registered Users Posts: 37,043 ✭✭✭✭ Mellor


    I agree completely re:Rimfire. We all know what RM/CF means and what the title refers to. But you are completely correct, the the paragraph you quoted doesn't distinguish. I wouldn't be concerned about that not being corrected though, as long as its raised.


    @Grizzly 45 You already have that if you have a ."223 Wylde" calibre.😉 It's a half/half between 5.56 and .223 and allows both to be shot from it.

    A handy calibre in a practical sense. But it this instance it would be tossed out with the .223, only the metric sneaks through.

    5.56 Wylde 🤣



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,063 ✭✭✭✭ Grizzly 45


     Don't go looking for the court of public appeal, I think the majority of people in Ireland, and fudd gunowners, would support this ban. The key to controlling the public narrative is controlling the media, which we do not have. All of us here know how illogical the ban would be, but the public see a black gun and hear "semi auto assault rifle" and want to have them banned. You have a position of influence with your association with FUNI, what have you done? I don't mean to be confrontational or a pr!ck, but it's a valid quesion.

    You took that the court of public opinion statement too literally there Munsterlad.😀 I meant that more amongst ourselves as shooters, not with the general flock of the unwashed



    Come on Grizz, just because he's from a county with the highest rate of gun ownership that doesn't mean he's going to care. It's been mentioned here time and time again about the 250,000+ licenses and however many tens of thousands of licenseholders, that doesn't mean we're a united group. How many thousands of those people are farmers and hunters who don't have any interest or care about sports shooting? The slippery slope argument only works with us rational people, and we're heavily outnumbered.

    Two things an Irish politician fears; Loss of local votes and being held responsible for their actions or inactions. What happened when the last time the AGS tried the gun grab in 2016? Fear motivated people with no interest to get active esp in the farming community IFA. Going by the stats we had back then the 2nd most common gun in Ireland is the semi-auto shotgun. So what if we bend the truth abit here and say that there is a proposal to ban both semi-auto shotguns and rifles? Which is true to a point so why not amplify it to the uninterested? After all they lie to us like rugs,why shouldn't we use the same tactics against them insofar a lie is halfway around the world...etc.

    Yep, agreed, but still that's a lot of legal costs which I'm sure you're all too familiar.

    Well aware,and if I have to do it again I will, and this time there is EU backing and support thru FUN

    At the end of the day, we need a larger and coordinated campaign of petitioning the minister and local politicians rather than our current strategy of taking this lying down.

    Agreed 100% Trouble is;you have to ask the 2 main orgs to why they are doing the usual behind closed doors out of sight and mind on this?One certainly has a mandate from its members via the clubs to stop this proposal at all costs.

    Confucius say."He who says one man cannot change World. Never has eaten bat soup in Wuhan!"



Advertisement