Criminal Justice Bill 2004

rrpc · 29-10-2005 10:27am

Sparks wrote:

Look, you might think that's just animosity, but face it RRPC, in a few days you'll be sitting there over your coffee and you'll be wondering the same thing.

Well here I am sitting over my cup of coffee and wondering what you're banging on about. I don't particularly have to know who was there, just that I'm getting the information.

...which implies that Declan's seen the amendments and there are bits in there that aren't in what the Minister quoted...

Or it might imply that he was told broadly what was in the amendments. It's quite likely that they haven't been legally drafted yet.

Nope. Legally, the super was advised on the person's security background by GHQ, and he took that on as part of the decision - but it was always the super's decision. If GHQ said no and the super just rubberstamped, it was the super wound up in court if a case was taken, not GHQ.

Which is effectively the same thing. If the Super wound up in court, do you not think that head office might have a say as to whether he should defend or not?

That's apparent?...Look, I'm not a politician or a barrister, but I'm having trouble finding a way to take those statements and see that it's apparent that GHQ will just draw up guidelines and that the decision making will remain with the Superintendents.

It's apparent that GHQ will make decisions on restricted firearms, and will issue guidelines for all the rest. It will still be up to the Super to make his decision on these. That's apparent to me.

Ye what now? What, I shouldn't listen to what he says to figure out what he meant, but I should guess at what he meant based on other stuff he said?

Stop being obtuse, most of what he said was quoted from either ministers speeches or a briefing from the DoJ. These may be paraphrased, but you can't start shooting the messenger if you can't understand the message.

How many rural Garda Stations get 2000 new licence applications a week?

The country as a whole has not got 2000 apps a week. But many rural stations have to deal with that many licenses at renewal date. The workload is still extremely high in a very short space of time.

My point being that the fact that "restricted" and "banned" have different meanings does not mean that the de facto situation on the ground will see any real difference at the end of the day.

Still don't follow you

...that if asked for a few thousand to do EIAs or other things to keep it open, that UCD would find other uses for the money and the space the club takes up instead.

This has nothing to do with the CJB and more to do with current planning acts.

What would have helped was if reasonable questions were answered in a civil fashion by the man who is representing us to the DoJ.

Yes, but less with the scattergun approach. Get the main question down, and worry about the supplementaries later.

Sorry outta time gotta go l8r

Sparks · 29-10-2005 12:11pm

Clare gunner wrote:

Thats why maybe many new "indoor" ranges on the continent are somwhat open to the elements.IE only the firing point and the target area is coverd.The rest is open air.No need for fancy air conditioning.Somthing to consider in future building plans.

As RRPC pointed out, that won't satisfy the lead pollution regs, but it also means you wouldn't be able to shoot ISSF disciplines for 10m events. Those have to be held indoors, it's a part of the rules. (Rule 6.3.6.3.4 to be exact

)

civdef · 30-10-2005 8:22pm

Back on to the main topic, what perception do people who have dealt directly with the DoJ have of their general mindset towards shooting at the moment. In times past it wasn't great, has this changed?

FLAG · 30-10-2005 8:43pm

In 2004, we had a very negative Principal Officer in Firearms and Explosives, had he stayed we would have had significantly different legislation, we may have contributed to him being replaced but we will never be sure.

The current PO is open minded and very experienced in the formulation of legislation, we did a lot of work early in the year to convince him that there truly is a sport in shooting, in February we would have had a ban by late March when we had visited ranges in NI and some in North Co Dublin (our friends in the middle of the country refused us permission to bring the official from the DOJ to their range), there was a change, simply because we proved there was a sport and that we had very high standards of safety in our clubs.

With respect to a positive attitude, we will always be fighting an uphill struggle, but by maintaining a professional attitude that represents all disciplines of shooting sport we will keep our head above water. Building relationships and maintaining creditability is very important.

Even when the CJB comes in and we see the positive benefits to the sport we still have a significant amount of work to do to keep the sport progressing.

Remember truly we are a minority sport, both the Gardai and the DOJ deal with a million different issues, we are not in the top 50, what was done in recent years was to get us up there and as a result we have seen tangible benefits, did one ever think we would see pistols back! No well we have then and it was not one single action that resulted in them being licensed but continued presure over the past ten years that ensured a return of the sport.

Hope this answers your question!

Declan

FLAG · 05-11-2005 8:28pm

Attached is extracts from the 2nd stage debate of the CJB, I am delighted to report the Minister putting on the record the positive contributions made by the shooting organisations namely the NARGC and the SSAI. It is particularly pleasing to be recognised by the Minister for making positive contributions to the pending changes. Perhaps it may enlighten some of our critics that we truly have made a positive impact with government.

FLAG · 07-11-2005 9:02pm

Attached is extracts from the 2nd stage debate of the CJB, I am delighted to report the Minister putting on the record the positive contributions made by the shooting organisations namely the NARGC and the SSAI. It is particularly pleasing to be recognised by the Minister for making positive contributions to the pending changes. The extract provides an insight into the actual cahnges that are proposed in the CJB and also reflects an intention to seperate the amendments into their own section to include the Section 30 of the exisitng amendment to the CJB. Further changes to be proposed at committee stage will include reloading and some other amendments that have been looked for like the inclusion of the word "ammunition" in section 17 of the 1964 amendment.

Sparks · 15-11-2005 12:35pm

From the Clerk to the Select Committee:

Hi Mark
The Criminal Justice Bill 2004 is unlikely to start in our Committee until early December. I understand informally that the Ministers amendments are going to Cabinet shortly. If you contact me again at end November things should be a bit clearer. Thanks

Also from the Clerk:

Hi Mark
We will email you the Ministerial amendments when they've been released and printed.

I'll post them as soon as I receive them.

Sparks · 22-11-2005 6:12pm

Ray,
I noticed today that it was announced in the Irish Times that the Cabinet were to be presented with the amendments to the CJB; have you any idea how long it will be between this and the amendments being publicly available?
Thank you...

Mark
No formal word yet. It certainly wont be until early December at the earliest because of the volume and complexity of the amendments for the full Bill. Thanks

Oh well. Back to waiting.

cycllops · 22-11-2005 7:51pm

All,

The proposed amendments are available on http://www.justice.ie - follow the link at the bottom of the page - a downloadable version in PDF format is available

Very legal language so it will take a while (and a solicitor) to digest...

good luck

cycclops

Rovi · 22-11-2005 8:27pm

<quick scan of document>
EEEK! :eek:

There's a LOT of stuff there; 49 page heads in the Firearms part alone!
I do note however, quite a few references to pistol clubs and ranges, which would appear to be good on the surface of things.

I await our learned friend jaycee's considered opinion with interest

.

jaycee · 22-11-2005 9:17pm

Sorry to keep you waiting ....:D

Ok.. it is proposed ..that (Among other stuff)

Safe storage.

Training licences for 14 year olds , while under supervision of an over 21 yo
for target practice etc..

Firearm licences to have a 3 year life from the date they were granted.

Ammo can be imported with a firearm on foot of a FAC for that firearm.

Reloading , with a separate 1 year licence from the "Super"

Ahem..! no reference that I could see to particular "Banned" or "Allowed" calibres , but plenty of references to "restricted calibres" without a description .

Possession of ammo for which you don't have a licence.. an offence
(No surprise really)

That's about it , havent had much time to cross reference it to the earlier acts yet though.

Rew · 22-11-2005 9:27pm

jaycee wrote:

Safe storage.

Any definition on this?

Firearm licences to have a 3 year life from the date they were granted.

Great!

jaycee wrote:

Reloading , with a separate 1 year licence from the "Super"

Not bad...

no reference that I could see to particular "Banned" or "Allowed" calibres , but plenty of references to "restricted calibres" without a description .

I wonder will the restrictions come from the Garda Commissioner directly?

civdef · 22-11-2005 9:35pm

Some more thoughts:

Lot of grey areas being tidied up.

"Restricted firearms" can have conditions attached to their possesssion and use, rather than what currently is pretty much a blanket authorisation.

Firearm Training Cert for over 14s is to be granted by the Minister, not the local super.

Granting of a restricted cert is conditonal on the type applied for being the only thing sutable for the intended purpose.

Maximum period of 3 months for the grant or refusal of a "restricted" cert.

New offence of altering a firearms cert.

Commissioner can set general guidelines for approval of firearms certs and club authorisations.

Secure storage is required.

Membership of an approved club in order to get a firearm for target shooting is required.

Requirment to show competence before grant of a cert.

Applicant may give permission for his/her medical records to be examined.

Applicant may be required to provide two character referees.

Condtions to be met post granting of cert may be applied.

Storage facilites may be inspected.

Minister can set standards of required secure storage.

More to follow:

Rew · 22-11-2005 9:40pm

jaycee wrote:

no reference that I could see to particular "Banned" or "Allowed" calibres , but plenty of references to "restricted calibres"

Here is the relevent bit. Once its passed he will then make orders restricting specfic firearms and/or ammo.

CJB2005 wrote:

Head 44 (Minister to deem certain firearms as restricted firearms)

Provide that:
The Firearms Act, 1925 is hereby amended by the insertion after section 2 of the
following

"2A. (1) The Minister may make an Order deeming firearms, by reference to any or
all of the following criteria,:

(a) Category
(b) Calibre
(c) Action type
(d) Muzzle energy
(e) Description

as restricted firearms and the Minister may make an Order deeming ammunition, by
reference to any or all of the following criteria,:

(a) Category
(b) Calibre
(c) Weight
(d) Kinetic energy
(e) Ballistic coefficient
(f) design
(g) composition of ammunition

as restricted ammunition for the purposes of the protection of public safety and
security.
The Minister may, by Order, add to, delete from or amend previous Orders made
under this section.

(2) Subject to the exceptions from this section hereinafter mentioned, it shall not be
lawful for any person after the commencement of this Act to have in his or her
possession, use, or carry any restricted firearm or component part or parts, as defined
by section 4(1)(g) of the Firearms and Offensive Weapons Act, 1990, as amended, of
a restricted firearm or restricted ammunition, save in so far as such possession, use or
carriage is authorised by a firearm certificate granted under section 3(1C) of this Act
and for the time being in force.description .

civdef · 22-11-2005 9:59pm

Ranges / clubs must be authorised.

Authorisation can set conditions.

Security of the premises can be a condition.

Firearms can be stored on suitably authorised club premises.

Provision for the new appointment of Firearms Range Inspector.

A firearms cert can be revoked if the conditions under which uit was granted have not been met or the holder has allowed the firearm to be used by someone under the age of 16 without proper authorisation.

Appeal to district court now available in event of the refusal of a cert applciation.

Restricted firearms will not be allowed to be imported unless a cert has already been granted for that firearm.

An order may be made requiring any legal firearm holder to submit their firearm for ballistic testing.

Payments may be made to persons who having legally held a firearm before the introduction of the act, can no longer legally do so.

Licences last for 3 years.

New mandatory sentences for certain firearms offences - plus some mitigating factors.

New definition of >1 joule energy for airguns.

Deactivating a firearm is now an offence ->?

Converting a firearm to fully automativc or increasing claibre is an offence.

Shortening a shotgun barrel nelow 61cm (24") is an offence

Reloading licences can be granted if conditions are met (needing to do so for resonns of economy doesnt count), including competenc and safety/security of premises.

The minister can make regulations regarding the amount of components and relioaded ammo allowed.

civdef · 22-11-2005 10:01pm

There is loads and loads of stuff here, much of which seems to have already been unofficially introduced (eg import of restricted firearms and ammo and authorisation of clubs).

It'll take ages to digest, and no doubt amendments will be made as it passes through the Oireachtas.

The big questions now are:

What will be restricted.

What will be the allowable conditions for restruced firearms.

What will new security requirements be like.

FLAG · 22-11-2005 10:02pm

At last we can all see the detail related to amendments of the act, points of note, the extension of the validity of a firearms certificate to 3 years, 3 months limit in which a decision must be made on a firearms application, right of appeal to the district courts. Reloading permited at last. Have a look, it appears complex but it shows the effort needed to make the appropriate amendments, restricted firearms means exactly that, firearms deemed only to be licensed by the commissioner or appointed officer.............................Actual application of the amendments will be interesting to see.

Makes interesting bedtime reading.

Regards
Declan Keogh
http://www.justice.ie/80256E010039C5AF/vWeb/pcJUSQ6JDMLU-en

Keelan · 22-11-2005 10:15pm

Hi declan,
Restricted firearms, does this mean deer hunting calibers and .223s ect?

Rew · 22-11-2005 10:24pm

civdef wrote:

Payments may be made to persons who having legally held a firearm before the introduction of the act, can no longer legally do so.

Implies that some current legal firearms will become restricted. I think they should come clean with the calibers they are going to restrict and save us all some time and money! :mad:

FLAG · 22-11-2005 11:05pm

Folks

They will not put into legislation details of restricted firearms, only category by which they may be restricted as outlined in the heads of the bill, actual calibre type etc will be in the regulations that come later, what is really important to appreciate is that a restricted firearm is not a "banned" firearm, there is no ban in the legislation on any firearm, restricted firearm means one that can only be granted by the commissioner etc, remember before the high court appeals, highpower rifle applications were considered by Garda HQ, this will be what restricted means.

What is worrying however is the concept of purchasing firearms that may become illegal when the legislation is enacted! Lets see how this one develops.

I note also an ability to ballistically test firearms, a useless exercise and a total waste of time and money as proven in many other countries, but if it makes them feel more comfortable what the hell!

Clear positive things that are in the legislation, reloading, 3 year certificate, district court appeal process, 3 month max response time to a firearms application, impoeration of ammunition and firearms to which certificates relate. Training certificate for young people.

Granted they are introducing some things that will be hare to measure or implement, proof of compentency before the grant of a certificate......clear opportunity for clubs to develop competency programs, what will they be traceable to however and who will judge the competency of the trainers!

Interesting times ahead.

Clare gunner · 22-11-2005 11:51pm

Two things I would be intrested in knowing;Will the restricted weapons application s to the comissioner fall under the three month rules.And will you be able to then take the Garda cheif comissioner to the DC if need be?
2] The enlarging of calibres,does it mean that if you have a semi auto pistol and you buy a 9mm conversion kit for it say for example,will it be illegal to instal it or vise versa.Also this will affect the Sako quad type packages?
Intresting times ahead indeed.

civdef · 22-11-2005 11:57pm

Answers to those:

1, Right of appeal is for all cert applications.

2, It specifically states enlarging calibre, so I reckon it'd depend how big your original calibre was.

Rew · 23-11-2005 12:09am

3 month rule does apply to restricted applications.

I see plenty of improvemnts to the law in it but I think they shoud make it clear what they are going to restrict now.

FLAG · 23-11-2005 12:25am

The definition of what constitutes an illegal modification is what they are trying to get at, in the circumstances whereby an individual is licensed for a dual calibre in the case of a rifle with two barrels, say a 6.5 x 55 and a .308, exchanging the components in any way as long as the individual is licensed will not constitute a breach of the legislation, equally conversion of a 9mm to a .40 will not be an issue as long as both calibres are licensed, modification of a firearm by a registerd firearms dealer will also be OK, the situation with respect to the Sako Quad was the exact example we used in our discussions with Justice to ensure such conversions would not be seen as a breach of the legislation, in the case of the Quad clearly one would need to be licensed for .17 and .22, Mark2 .17 and .22 mag would be seen to be interchangeable with .17 and .22 so only the two calibres need be listed on the certificate. The time frame for publishing the actual classes and calibers to be restricted is yet to be determined but common sense will clearly indicate what will be restricted, I'd guess higher calibre pistols and high calibre rifles would be a good bet, wonder would Paddy Power start a book on it!

Rew · 23-11-2005 12:38am

I have a feeling ballistic testing means they can legally test a firearm to see if it was used in a crime.

I also see that Supers can be given the right to sign a restriced licence if the Commissioner grants them the power.

Clare gunner · 23-11-2005 12:42am

Thanks Flag,Rew,Civ.Thats a bit of a load of some of our minds.Good to know that the cheif can be dragged into any DC of the land as well.Guess he is going to be a very busy copper soon:D

Sparks · 23-11-2005 1:16am

civdef wrote:

Licences last for 3 years.

And they last for 3 years from the date issued, so no more of this granting 220,000 licences on August 1 anymore, excellent!

New definition of >1 joule energy for airguns.

Well, that's airsoft off and running so.

Lots of reading to do. And just after my two new shooting books arrived as well :rolleyes:

Sparks · 23-11-2005 1:27am

Oh boy. The legislation for the authorisation of ranges looks positively scary

jaycee · 23-11-2005 2:18am

Oh boy. The legislation for the authorisation of ranges looks positively scary

What I think is really scary is the sheer amount of non defined items, with real teeth to implement them.

E.G..
On ranges : " Minimum standards will apply " .. (Or else !)
Ok..great Idea.! ... But what standards ? .. I see all the penalties , but not all the guidelines..

Sparks · 23-11-2005 2:21am

Yeah. On the upside (if you can call it that), these aren't the final unalterable amendments, they still have to go through the Committee and the Seanad stages yet...

jaycee · 23-11-2005 2:32am

Ok ..heres a doosie for ya...

Head 49 (Amendment of the Firearms Act, 1925 - New section to enable
Commissioner to draft guidelines)
Provide that;

The Firearms Act, 1925 is hereby amended by the insertion after Section 3 of the following:

"3A - The Garda Commissioner, with the consent of the Minister, may from time to time issue directions, guidelines or guidance notes generally on the practical application and operation of the provisions, or any particular provisions, of this Act and on developments in the law relating to firearms. In particular he may issue directions, guidelines or guidance notes with respect to applications for firearm certificates and authorisations and the conditions which may be attached to firearm certificates and authorisations, and applications by rifle and pistol clubs for authorisations."

This is the "Make it up as you go along" clause..:mad:

Sparks · 23-11-2005 3:42am

There are all manner of little bites-in-the-ass in here...

On reloading, a licence to reload won't be given unless:

(a) having regard to all the circumstances, the reloading of ammunition will not endanger the public safety, security or the peace, and
(b) the person has a special need, which does not include reasons of economy, which, in the opinion of the superintendent, is sufficient to justify the granting of the authorisation to reload ammunition and,
(c) the applicant can provide evidence of competence to reload cartridges, and
(d) the premises where the reloading of ammunition is to be undertaken is
sufficiently safe and secure

So, no reloading to save on the €2 per shot it can cost to shoot fullbore and you need secure premises, another undefined term. And in case you'd think of varying your initial reason for reloading:

(4) The superintendent of the district where the holder of a licence under this section resides may, at any time, attach to the licence such conditions as he considers necessary for the purpose of preventing danger to the public or to the peace or of ensuring that the reloading of ammunition is used only to satisfy the special need for which the licence was granted.

Sparks · 23-11-2005 3:43am

On the whole restricted versus ban point, I don't think there's going to be a hell of a lot of difference on the ground if .45s are declared restricted:

(2) Subject to the exceptions from this section hereinafter mentioned, it shall not be lawful for any person after the commencement of this Act to have in his or her possession, use, or carry any restricted firearm or component part or parts, as defined by section 4(1)(g) of the Firearms and Offensive Weapons Act, 1990, as amended, of a restricted firearm or restricted ammunition, save in so far as such possession, use or carriage is authorised by a firearm certificate granted under section 3(1C) of this Act and for the time being in force.

And not only can the Minister declare any kind or class of firearm as restricted, if you want a licence you have to go through him or the commisioner for the licence; the local supers are directed by law to refuse you:

(1B) If the Superintendent of the Garda Síochána is satisfied that an application for a firearm certificate is in respect of a firearm or ammunition deemed restricted by Order of the Minister under section 2A(1), he or she shall refuse the issue of a firearm certificate

And the conditions for getting a restricted firearm?

The Commissioner, or the person designated for the purpose by the Commissioner, shall not grant a firearms certificate in respect of a restricted firearm unless he is satisfied that the applicant
(a) fully complies with the conditions provided for by section 4 of the Principal Act, as amended by section FF [HEAD 50] of this Act,
(b) has good and sufficient reason for having [requiring] the firearm, and
(c) the restricted firearm is of such a unique type as to be the only weapon appropriate for the purpose [sought].
For the purpose of deciding on whether to grant a firearms certificate for a restricted firearm, the Commissioner may require the applicant to supply any evidence as specified in writing by him or her.

At least you have the right of appeal to the DC, who can now order a licence be granted, thus chucking out 80 years of precedent in an undebated Bill. Wouldn't be my idea of the right way to do something that fundamental, to be honest. Given some judicial decisions of late, you'd have to wonder at the judge's qualifications to make such decisions!

Sparks · 23-11-2005 3:44am

Then there's the training licences for under-16s (and I'm annoyed that it wasn't lowered to 12 instead of 14 for airguns; and I suspect so will the Pony Club be too). All applications through the Minister; no right of appeal to the DC. He doesn't even have to give a reason if he refuses you:

(5) Where an application for a certificate under this section is refused, the Minister shall inform the applicant in writing but it shall not be necessary for the Minister to state the reasons for such refusal.
(6) Section EE [HEAD 60] of this Act does not apply to decisions taken by the Minister in relation to applications for certificates under this section.

(Head 60 is the part where you can get an appeal in the DC).

And it'll now be illegal for Junior to use Daddy's gun (up to now we just had the AG's legal opinion on the matter, not the same thing):

(8) Any person who is the holder of a certificate issued under section 3 of the Principal Act for a firearm which is found in the possession of a person under the age of sixteen years of age in circumstances other than those set out under subsection (1) of this section shall be guilty of an offence.

At least there is now a legal mandatory 3-month maximum processing time on an application...

Sparks · 23-11-2005 3:44am

Oh, and here's a doozy - there's a fifth amendment to section four of the act. Now, to get a licence, not only do you have to have good reason, not be a danger to the public or the peace, and be eligible to hold a licence, you must also have secure storage and be a member of an approved club if it's for target shooting. Which means not only do the club committees have to worry about authorisation; so do the individual shooters!

Oh, and when you're applying and you say "sure, I have all five of those fulfilled"? You'll have to prove it. How?

the person designated by the Commissioner or a superintendent of
the Gárda Síochána (as the case may require) may require the applicant to provide, for
the purposes of determining whether the conditions under subsection (1) have been
met,
(a) proof of identity, and
(b) proof of competence in the use of the firearm or ammunition which is the subject of the application, and
(c) consent for enquiries to be made by the Minister, the Commissioner, the person designated by the Commissioner or a superintendent of the Gárda Síochána (as the case may require) with and information to be received from the applicant's doctor or other medical personnel in relation to the applicant's medical history, and
(d) the names and addresses of two referees who may be contacted to attest to the character of the applicant.

Oh, and in case that wasn't akward enough, remember how Dunne v. Donoghue's judgements in the High and Supreme courts said it was likely that the superintendent adding individual preconditions to licences was a legal act? Now it's in Section 4 as well:

(3) In addition to the conditions set under subsection (1) above, the Minister, the Commissioner, the person designated by the Commissioner or a superintendent of the Gárda Síochána (as the case may require) may impose, in relation to the issue of a certificate under this section, such conditions (if any), to be fulfilled prior to or within a set period after the issue of the certificate, as he or she considers necessary to prevent danger to the public and, where a condition is imposed, it shall be specified on the certificate.

And if you have all that done, and then they change the minimum security standards, which the Minister can do:

(6) The Minister, in consultation with the Commissioner, may make an order specifying the minimum standards [which apply for the secure and safe storage of firearms] [to meet the secure accommodation requirements under subsection 1(d)]. .

Then you're back to square one, only more so as now you're in violation:

(7) Any person who holds a firearm certificate and who is found to no longer fulfil the conditions under section 4 (1)(d) or section 4(3) above shall be guilty of an offence.

Sparks · 23-11-2005 4:04am

And this is where it gets really unpleasant.

The basic idea is the Commissioner authorises ranges:

The Commissioner of An Garda Síochána, or a person designated in that behalf by the Commissioner, may, on application from an officer of a club who has been nominated for that purpose or the proprietor of a rifle or pistol shooting range and on payment of the appropriate fee, grant an authorisation for a rifle or pistol club or, subject to certification by a Firearms Range Inspector that the rifle or pistol shooting range complies with the statutory minimum standards, a rifle or pistol shooting range if he is satisfied that it can operate without danger to public safety, security or to the peace.

Hope noone in the sport annoys the Firearms Range Inspector or the Commissioner or his agent, or else everyone in that club not only loses their club, but also the club members won't be able to get their licences renewed...

No rifle or pistol club or owner or proprietor of a rifle or pistol shooting range shall allow any rifle or pistol to be stored or used on any of its premises in connection with target shooting, unless the club or rifle or pistol shooting range is authorised under this section.

So ranges like Courtlough now have to be authorised to store firearms, and it's become harder for clubs to maintain small armouries of club rifles/pistols/shotguns for beginners to use.

Think your club can use whatever it wants on it's own range? Think again...

The authorisation shall specify the premises on which the rifles or pistols may be stored or used and may limit the uses which may be made of the premises so specified or any part of them.

And while this bit's encouraging, it's the "may" instead of "shall" that worries me...

The Commissioner may publish such guidance as he considers appropriate for the purpose of informing persons seeking an authorisation a licence of criteria that must be met by a club and its premises or any range to be used by the club before any application for the grant of an authorisation in respect of that club and those premises or range will be considered.

And in case you don't run things in your club the way the Commissioner likes:

The Commissioner of An Garda Síochána, or a person designated in that behalf by the Commissioner, may, at any time by notice in writing, attach such conditions as he thinks necessary for securing that the operation of the club or range and the storage and use of rifles and pistols and ammunition for same on the premises or range specified in the authorisation will not endanger public safety, security or the peace.

And as soon as you think you're done...

The Commissioner of An Garda Síochána, or a person designated in that behalf by the Commissioner, may impose, in relation to the issue of an authorisation under this section, such conditions (if any), to be fulfilled prior to or within a set period after the issue of the authorisation, as he or she considers necessary to prevent danger to the public and, may at any time if he or she thinks fit, vary the terms and conditions attaching to an authorisation.

In fairness though, the next part at least makes some sense:

An authorisation shall, unless the Commissioner revokes it, continue in force for a period of five years from the date on which it is granted. Two months prior to the expiration of the authorisation the holder may apply on the prescribed form for a further grant of the authorisation.

And, should the range ever fall foul of the inspector or commissioner, then it can be closed down and all firearms stored there (club or not) can be confiscated.

And again, the Minister sets the standards:

(13) The Minister, in consultation with the Commissioner, may, by reference to any or
all of the following;
(a) security of a rifle or pistol club premises
(b) membership of a rifle or pistol club
(c) administration of a rifle or pistol club
make an order specifying the minimum criteria which a rifle or pistol club, seeking
authorisation under subsection (3), shall comply with.
(14) The Minister, in consultation with the Commissioner, may, by reference to any or
all of the following;
(a) security of a rifle or pistol range
(b) membership of a rifle or pistol range
(c) administration of a rifle or pistol range
(d) design, construction and maintenance of the rifle or pistol shooting range
(e) types of firearms or ammunition which may be used on the rifle or pistol
range,
(f) level of competence of persons using rifle or pistol range
make an order specifying the minimum criteria which a rifle or pistol range, in
respect of which an authorisation is being sought under subsection (3), shall
comply with.

Also, Gardai will have full search authority for ranges:

(15) Any member of An Garda Síochána authorised in that behalf by the Commissioner, or a person designated in that behalf by the Commissioner, may on producing his authority if required to do so - enter any premises occupied or used by a rifle or pistol club or rifle and pistol shooting range; and inspect the premises and anything on them, for the purpose of ascertaining whether the conditions of any authorisation granted under subsection (2) are being complied with.

And this old chestnut finally made it to law, I wonder if it'll be publicly available and if so, how will security be handled?

(16) The Commissioner shall cause a register of authorised rifle and pistol clubs and rifle and pistol shooting ranges to be established and kept.

(aka the Burglary List...)

Sparks · 23-11-2005 4:18am

Probably the best part of this whole mess:

15A- An applicant for a firearm certificate under section 3 of the Principal Act whose application has been refused, a holder of a firearm certificate which has been revoked under section 5 of the Principal Act or a holder of a firearm certificate which has been refused renewal under section 9 of the Firearms Act, 1964 may, within 30 days of receipt of notice of any such decision, appeal the decision to a Judge of the District Court. In determining the appeal the Judge may -
(a) confirm the refusal or revocation, or
(b) allow the appeal, inform the Superintendent or Commissioner (as the case may be) of his or her decision and direct the Superintendent or Minister (as he case may be) to re-consider the application or the decision to revoke a
certificate, as appropriate, or
(b) allow the appeal, inform the Superintendent or Commissioner (as the case may be) of his or her decision and direct the Superintendent or Minister (as he case may be) to grant the application or overturn the revocation, as appropriate.

Of course, this wipes out Dunne v Donoghue, which is a bit of a kick given how much time and money went into that case; but at least any further appeals won't cost quite so much for the most part.

Sparks · 23-11-2005 4:27am

FLAG wrote:

They will not put into legislation details of restricted firearms, only category by which they may be restricted as outlined in the heads of the bill, actual calibre type etc will be in the regulations that come later

Agreed, and with far less warning or debate or consultation than we've seen over the CJB

what is really important to appreciate is that a restricted firearm is not a "banned" firearm

In the same way that pistols weren't really banned for the last 32 years, it was just that you couldn't get a licence for them and you can't have an unlicenced firearm. Not a ban, just a cynical policy. On the ground though, same difference really. Same story here - it's not a ban, but if the Minister decides to make it a de facto ban, well, now he can with ease.

I note also an ability to ballistically test firearms, a useless exercise and a total waste of time and money as proven in many other countries, but if it makes them feel more comfortable what the hell!

Er, I'm pretty sure that that's comparing rifling marks on bullets; something that's not just useful, but which has been of use with civilian target shooters in Ireland in the past year when the accidental shooting of a young boy in a playground took place up North; ballistic testing finally matched that bullet to a rifle and allowed the case to proceed.

Clear positive things that are in the legislation

...are sadly few and far between

Seems that every good thing in there has a sting in the tail (see above)

Granted they are introducing some things that will be hare to measure or implement, proof of compentency before the grant of a certificate......clear opportunity for clubs to develop competency programs, what will they be traceable to however and who will judge the competency of the trainers!

And if you think that'll be hassle-and-complaint-free, you must have missed the deer hunting proficiency stuff...

Interesting times ahead.

This may shock people, but on that point you and I are in total agreement...

Rew · 23-11-2005 10:18am

Ill have to look again but it does seem that Supers can be given the right to sign a restriced licence if the Commissioner grants them that power.

Over all it seems to make the ad-hoc way they have been doing things for the last 30 odd years legal. The amendments them selfs arn't bad but they could be implemented in bad ways due to the vast amount of carte blanche and ambiguity it contains. The only thing that can keep them in check is the DC. It all comes down to the key people mentioned in the CJB.

jaycee · 23-11-2005 10:45am

A bit like most people on here I suspect , I logged off and got down to a more detailed reading of the proposed amendments last night .

I have to admit I am saddened by the mess that has been produced to us . True there are a few qualified sweeties in there , but I have been a fly fisher long enough to recognise bait when I see it .

What I had hoped for was something clear and direct, what we have been presented with is a document which is more open to fudging than anything I have ever seen before.

It is largely an exercise in attempting to cover ever known or imagined loophole in the current ACT while leaving enough wiggle room to instantly BAN anything that may crop up afterwards.

It grant's us very little , while at the same time leaves it possible to snatch back anything we may have gained thus far, it's a cynical response to the number of actions and court cases over the last few years.
It reminds me of a small boy crying "It's my ball ...and I want it back...now"

In the same way , the meat of the calibres issue , the pistols and the way guns will be classified in the future is not apparently open to discussion.
One section refers to classifing firearms by..

(a) Category
(b) Calibre
(c) Action type
(d) Muzzle energy
(e) Description

The first 4 are sensible enough , but by "Description" ..is a kind of official version of the (idontlikethelookofthat)..

Not only that but all the key elements will be shoehorned in afterwards , beyond the point where they can be discussed or changed.

Hmmm.. what would make life difficult ..
3 foot thick walls to a height of 30 meters to surround each range.. , or firearms cabinet, or reloading bench, what's to stop it..? or any other conditions ..:mad:

civdef · 23-11-2005 10:46am

Why is ballistic coefficient listed as one of the characteristics restricted ammunition can be defined by in head 44 (a)? Are "slippery" bullets that much of a risk?

This one has me baffled:

(3) A person, who converts into a firearm anything which, though having the appearance of being a firearm, is so constructed as to be incapable of discharging any missile through its barrel, shall be guilty of an offence.

Have they just banned the deactivation of firearms? No more authorisations available from a Super to hold a deactivated firearm? The way this is worded also seems to include anyone who taked the bolt out of their rifle, for one thing!! Sloppy drafting.

Some additional guidance on silencers would have been nice.

Sparks · 23-11-2005 11:13am

Rew wrote:

Over all it seems to make the ad-hoc way they have been doing things for the last 30 odd years legal.

And then some

The amendments them selfs arn't bad but they could be implemented in bad ways due to the vast amount of carte blanche and ambiguity it contains. The only thing that can keep them in check is the DC. It all comes down to the key people mentioned in the CJB.

Exactly. Up to now, we've existed on sufference, but eliminating us took a bit of work; now it's a single signed piece of paper and a whole club is wiped out in five minutes. That doesn't mean it'll happen; it just means that we'll become much more vunerable to the whim of the Minister, the Commissioner, the Superintendent, the Firearms Range Inspector, the local sergeant...

civdef wrote:

Why is ballistic coefficient listed as one of the characteristics restricted ammunition can be defined by in head 44 (a)? Are "slippery" bullets that much of a risk?

Is that some sort of underinformed attempt to ban the ammo used by the Five-Seven and the P90 do you think?

civdef wrote:

Why is ballistic coefficient listed as one of the characteristics restricted ammunition can be defined by in head 44 (a)? Are "slippery" bullets that much of a risk?

This one has me baffled:
Have they just banned the deactivation of firearms?

No, I think they've just banned the reactivation of firearms, it's "who converts into a firearm", not "who converts a firearm into".
So you can remove your bolt, you just can't put it back in

Some additional guidance on silencers would have been nice.

I suspect they'll cover that in subsequent orders. And then we'll wish they hadn't

Rew · 23-11-2005 11:14am

civdef wrote:

Have they just banned the deactivation of firearms? No more authorisations available from a Super to hold a deactivated firearm? The way this is worded also seems to include anyone who taked the bolt out of their rifle, for one thing!! Sloppy drafting.

I think you have that the wrong way round. They are saying its illeagle to convert a replica in to a working firearm. There is a big problem in the UK with this AFAIK.

Sparks · 23-11-2005 11:16am

jaycee wrote:

One section refers to classifing firearms by..
(e) Description
The first 4 are sensible enough , but by "Description" ..is a kind of official version of the (idontlikethelookofthat).

It sounds precisely like the US Assault Weapons Ban (where it was any semi-auto fullbore with "3 or more of the following cosmetic features"...)

And listening to the news this morning, it seems there's a line in there (not in our part) where the Minister makes it an offence "to carry certain items to commit certain offences". I don't even want to think about how that could be abused

Which about sums this up; could be okay, tightens a lot of loose things, but so open to abuse as to make you want to curl up and hide

civdef · 23-11-2005 11:18am

No, I think they've just banned the reactivation of firearms,

Yer right, I read it wrong.

rrpc · 23-11-2005 12:51pm

I am glad to see the introduction of the three year license, but does anyone know if this is to be still the same old 'one firearm, one license' system, or the UK 'one holder, one license' system?

civdef · 23-11-2005 12:58pm

the situation with respect to the Sako Quad was the exact example we used in our discussions with Justice to ensure such conversions would not be seen as a breach of the legislation, in the case of the Quad clearly one would need to be licensed for .17 and .22, Mark2 .17 and .22 mag would be seen to be interchangeable with .17 and .22 so only the two calibres need be listed on the certificate.

Does this indicate that it will be possible to have one cert with 2 calibres shown for one firearm?

Sparks · 23-11-2005 1:06pm

rrpc wrote:

I am glad to see the introduction of the three year license, but does anyone know if this is to be still the same old 'one firearm, one license' system, or the UK 'one holder, one license' system?

Think so. Didn't see much in there to the contrary. Still pouring over it though...

rrpc · 23-11-2005 1:17pm

Sparks wrote:

Think so. Didn't see much in there to the contrary. Still pouring over it though...

Think so; what? Mine was an either/or question. And what are you pouring over the Bill?, Acid?

Sparks · 23-11-2005 1:22pm

Think so; what?

I mean, I've not seen anything in there about making one certificate apply to more than one firearm.

And what are you pouring over the Bill?, Acid?

Coffee. Blast. Now I have to print those three pages again

Shooting Forum - Firearms licencing information

Criminal Justice Bill 2004

Comments