Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)

Shooting Forum - Firearms licencing information


Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Breaking the law or not breaking the law?

Options
  • 18-11-2013 5:42pm
    #1
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭


    Here's a theoretical question I have (leading on from a conversation in another thread).

    Supposing I apply for a rifle on the basis that it's an unrestricted rifle, the Super agrees with me and grants me an unrestricted licence for the rifle........so far so good.

    Then, a few years down the road, a new Super is appointed, and he doesn't think that my rifle is an unrestricted rifle due to the stock on it (same stock that previous Super thought was unrestricted).

    You've done everything by the book, got your licence fair and square and due to the differing opinions of the Supers, you could be in possession of a restricted firearm and face some serious problems.

    What's the story then? Have I broken the law by being in possession of a restricted firearm without the proper licence through no fault of my own?


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    cookimonster
    Registered Users Posts: 2,759 ✭✭✭cookimonster


    I think?, the new licencing renewal system would go some ways in preventing this. I base it on the fact that you are sent out a pre-populated renewal form. Once you have met the terms of the renewal I can't see a problem.

    In my own experience I found 'new applications' through new Supers were handled in different ways but none of my previous licences up for renewal were ever questioned.


  • Options
    #3
    Sparks
    Registered Users Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    The horrible answer is practically yes.

    I have strong doubts over anyone ever being prosecuted for such a change in opinion, mind you, because the theoretical answer is that the superintendent is no longer the persona designata for firearms licencing, that's now the district court judge (it's been that way since the '06 act). So in your hypothetical case, you could be charged with possession of an unlicenced firearm, but your defence would be that due diligence had been performed and you would contest the licence in the district court to establish what kind of licence it should be.

    Thing is, this is about the hairiest, grayest area in the firearms act that I know about, especially when a rifle is on the restricted list because it looks like an assault rifle (where "assault rifle" is the legal term in the restricted SI's definitions, not the real life term); and the way the law is written, it is all on the applicant to have the right kind of licence so you're hosed either way.

    In reality however this wouldn't arise; the new Super would just call you in and tell you his opinion had changed and you had to reapply and you'd just send in the new FCA1 to the chief super's office along with a photocopy of the old licence and a cover letter explaining the situation.



    edit: We probably should point out that there have already been cases where licences were issued in error for firearms which couldn't be held, either unrestricted licences for firearms which were definitely restricted, or for firearms which weren't even legal to possess; those licences were legally voided by the Super not having the authority to issue them, so they almost weren't worth the paper they were printed on...


  • Options
    #4
    iverjohnston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,242 ✭✭✭iverjohnston


    When will the new "Super" see your rifle? Do you think he has time to go through the list of firearms in his district and Google image them, one by one?
    Keep your nose clean, don't leave it lying around in plain view in the vehicle, and you will not be bothered, in my opinion.

    Of course, if the law changes regarding certain firearms, then they could be called in, as happened with hand guns. Those owners were not prosecuted for having held an illegal firearm, as the law cannot be applied retrospectively.


  • Options
    #5
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users Posts: 11,758 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    iverjohnston wrote: »
    When will the new "Super" see your rifle? Do you think he has time to go through the list of firearms in his district and Google image them, one by one?
    Keep your nose clean, don't leave it lying around in plain view in the vehicle, and you will not be bothered, in my opinion.


    It's just a hypothetical question.

    I don't have anything remotely resembling a restricted rifle. It was just something I thought of when reading another thread.


  • Options
    #6
    Cass
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 28,450 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cass


    Sparks wrote: »
    ..................... there have already been cases where licences were issued in error for firearms which couldn't be held, either unrestricted licences for firearms which were definitely restricted, ................
    On that note.

    Had a conversation with a person some time ago. Not relevant to the exact topic of thread, but to the point you raised above. He had a restricted firearm. A centrefire semi auto. His license was unrestricted, and granted/signed off by the Super.

    I informed him the license was invalid, and he was in possession of an illegally held firearm. He took serious umbrage to what i said. His response was "the Super issued it, as far as he is concerned it's legal, and even if it's not it's not his fault".

    I told him all he had to do was re-apply for a restricted license which given the fact he was already licensed (however wrongly) should be straight forward enough. I also informed him that the onus was on him to know what license he should have applied for. I got a barrage of abuse, and an obstinate attitude so left him to his devices.
    Forum Charter - Useful Information - Photo thread: Hardware - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads - Upcoming Events - RFDs by County

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

    Moderators - Cass otmmyboy2 , CatMod - Shamboc , Admins - Beasty , mickeroo



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    iverjohnston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,242 ✭✭✭iverjohnston


    CASS, a lesser man would have dropped a note to the super, signed "concerned resident":D


  • Options
    #8
    Cass
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 28,450 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cass


    I'm not An Gardaí.

    I've had many conversations with people over the years. Some don't know what they are doing, others don't care. It's the reckless ones that worry me. However as i've said before here many times. It's not my job to police people. Only inform them as best we can and then let then decide what to do.

    In this case i hoped the man was just surprised/shocked, and reacted poorly to the news. Here is hoping they done the right thing. Not for my sake or anyone else's, but for his own sake.
    Forum Charter - Useful Information - Photo thread: Hardware - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads - Upcoming Events - RFDs by County

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

    Moderators - Cass otmmyboy2 , CatMod - Shamboc , Admins - Beasty , mickeroo



  • Options
    #9
    Sparks
    Registered Users Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Cass wrote: »
    His response was "the Super issued it, as far as he is concerned it's legal, and even if it's not it's not his fault".
    It's cases like that that really worry me; all it takes is one such case, a Super or Chief Super who takes umbrage at the deliberate and studied ignorance involved (or even worse, a newspaper with a slow news day or a TD looking to get into the press); and we're right up to our necks in the **** all over again and who knows what we'd lose this time round.


Advertisement