Originally Posted by Bagpipe
Whats the actual criteria for refusing an application? Surely it isn't like "that firearm looks like something the military would use therefore you are not allowed to have it" or else maybe "that cartridge is too powerful for what you will be doing"?
And also thank you everyone for your input over the last two weeks!
What we christined the "I dont like de look o dat now!" clause here many years ago on boards.
It has fortunately fallen into disuse after many court cases in the DC level and where "Form does NOT follow Function" was proven deciseviely in favour of the Irish shooter,as well as the slight matter of "What does an assault rifle or military "weapon" actually look like under Irish legislation?.
Referencing back to "The Waterford tractor case" in the 1980s in the High court of the Revenue Vs a local Waterford farmer who modified a Toyota HI lux PU to a low ground pressure sprayer and was attempted to be done by customs for using marked fuel in it.As there was no definition in law as to what a tractor is, despite us all maybe knowing what one looks like, it was ruled in the farmers favour.
Ergo the same in the case of firearms that might look "military like".It destroyed the cheif AGS ballistics inspector/"expert" reputation,and with the addition of costs may being awarded against the AGS by the DC for loss,AGS has pulled in their horns abit on this clause.
The simple fact is,if you can prove an especial good reason to own a restricted firearm ,it wil be granted.If say you are going to go Wild boar hiunting on the continent,and can prove such and want a 45/70 lever action or AR in 458 SOCOM for your trip,or want a 10 stot shotgun for Embassy cup.That is good reason there.
Saying you are being refused,because of DOJ policy to reduce semi autos and because the 2017 legislation that Frannie Fitz left in a mess is not good enough,when there ARE lics been granted for such,WITH THE PROVISO,that they may be revoked at some stage in the future,under some reason is possibly an acceptable risk to some?[Despite it being IPSO FACTO legislation,again violating a bunch of Irish and EU and international laws is another days work]
So in the end a Super or Cheif saying they are refusing on the grounds of looks is talking out of his gold braided cap. Ask him for those reasons in writing which he is obliged to do and take it to your solicitor if you want to go down that road.