Boards.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more x
Post Reply  
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
29-07-2020, 08:43   #1
CJhaughey
Registered User
 
CJhaughey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 13,998
New rules from Revenue?

Interesting article here about a Garda who imported a stock which was subsequently seized by revenue.
He is taking a case to the High Court regarding this.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40023698.html
CJhaughey is offline  
Advertisement
29-07-2020, 10:29   #2
Cass
Moderator
 
Cass's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 23,003
Send a message via MSN to Cass
Well if nothing else it'll solve this matter once and for all.

We also have to be careful about what we discuss on this topic. As an ongoing case it may be sub judice. I'll ask for a review as this is an important case.
Cass is offline  
29-07-2020, 19:00   #3
meathstevie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 4,576
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cass View Post
Well if nothing else it'll solve this matter once and for all.

We also have to be careful about what we discuss on this topic. As an ongoing case it may be sub judice. I'll ask for a review as this is an important case.
Indeed Cass, a classic scenario for a test case to determine what’s a component part of a firearm and what isn’t.

By the interpretation used by Revenue it looks like every piece of hardwood timber and every screw and spring coming into the country is liable to seizure.
meathstevie is offline  
(4) thanks from:
29-07-2020, 21:33   #4
Cass
Moderator
 
Cass's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 23,003
Send a message via MSN to Cass
Just had a quick chat with someone that knows more than me on legal issues.

The consensus is that as long as our discussion remains on the topic of the case, up to the start of the case, we're fine. IOW once the case starts we can no longer discuss actions/comments made by either party or the justice as this is sub judice and could venture into technical contempt of court.

So we're grand for the time being.
Cass is offline  
29-07-2020, 22:40   #5
tudderone
Registered User
 
tudderone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 833
Reading the article, it seems the garda did it right. The gardai say yes no problem import the parts, the revenue say no they cannot be imported without a licence. Surely it should be only pressure bearing components that should be controlled like this ? A wooden stock is completely harmless on its own.
tudderone is offline  
Thanks from:
Advertisement
29-07-2020, 22:47   #6
Witcher
Registered User
 
Witcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,626
Revenue have been seizing stocks for years, this is nothing new. They seized one on me about 5 years ago, scanned licence and sent it to them and they released it.

Their interpretation of the legislation is technically correct, there is no allowance for 'pressure bearing' components. Each and every part is considered a firearm component and requires a licence.
Witcher is offline  
30-07-2020, 00:52   #7
tudderone
Registered User
 
tudderone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 833
Quote:
Originally Posted by Witcher View Post
Revenue have been seizing stocks for years, this is nothing new. They seized one on me about 5 years ago, scanned licence and sent it to them and they released it.

Their interpretation of the legislation is technically correct, there is no allowance for 'pressure bearing' components. Each and every part is considered a firearm component and requires a licence.
What if its a firearms part for a non firearm, such as a new stock for a de-activated rifle ? You have no licence to show, and even if the part was used as intended, its still a wall hanger and not a firearm.

What if i buy a slab of walnut from abroad and it lands here marked with a return address "Fritz bloggs gunstocks, Berlin" ? Is that shapeless slab of wood classed as a firearms component and seized ? I mean where does it all end ?

Bolts, bolt heads, action bodies, and barrels i could understand, we have all heard the Johnny Cash song "One piece at a time". But i would imagine the Judge will think someone is pulling his wig when the stock is produced as evidence.
tudderone is offline  
30-07-2020, 01:18   #8
juice1304
Registered User
 
juice1304's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by tudderone View Post
What if its a firearms part for a non firearm, such as a new stock for a de-activated rifle ? You have no licence to show, and even if the part was used as intended, its still a wall hanger and not a firearm.

What if i buy a slab of walnut from abroad and it lands here marked with a return address "Fritz bloggs gunstocks, Berlin" ? Is that shapeless slab of wood classed as a firearms component and seized ? I mean where does it all end ?

Bolts, bolt heads, action bodies, and barrels i could understand, we have all heard the Johnny Cash song "One piece at a time". But i would imagine the Judge will think someone is pulling his wig when the stock is produced as evidence.
If its deactivated you have a letter of autorization from the local superintendent.

You can buy the walnut but if you make it into a stock you are manufacturing a firearms compnent without a firearms dealers licence and can be charged as such.

This can go two ways clarity or they make you get an import licence for everything.

It has nothing to do with revenue anyway they are there to collect revenue not dictate or inturpate the firearms act. That is down to the department of justice. Its more than likely some ignorant fool on a mission.
I wouldnt hold my breath that anything good will come of this. They do whatever they want anyway and cant even implement european law that they are told to. The level of ignorance within AGS and the DOJ is unbeleiveable.
juice1304 is offline  
Thanks from:
30-07-2020, 02:35   #9
tudderone
Registered User
 
tudderone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 833
Quote:
Originally Posted by juice1304;114173271[B
]If its deactivated you have a letter of autorization from the local superintendent. [/B]

You can buy the walnut but if you make it into a stock you are manufacturing a firearms compnent without a firearms dealers licence and can be charged as such.

This can go two ways clarity or they make you get an import licence for everything.

It has nothing to do with revenue anyway they are there to collect revenue not dictate or inturpate the firearms act. That is down to the department of justice. Its more than likely some ignorant fool on a mission.
I wouldnt hold my breath that anything good will come of this. They do whatever they want anyway and cant even implement european law that they are told to. The level of ignorance within AGS and the DOJ is unbeleiveable.
But thats not a firearms cert and you are not subjected to the same rigours to get an authorisation as you do a licence. A gunstock is a component part of a firearm, but not a really a critical part, a gun can be fired without one. I've seen plenty of pictures of sawn off shotguns without a stock and just duct tape around the tangs.

Who is funding this case ? Is it the garda himself ? Its a bit drastic isn't it, get a relatively cheap stock seized, and rather than going to the customs and showing them his licence, he heads to the High court ?
tudderone is offline  
Advertisement
30-07-2020, 02:43   #10
Zxthinger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 667
Quote:
Originally Posted by juice1304 View Post
If its deactivated you have a letter of autorization from the local superintendent.

You can buy the walnut but if you make it into a stock you are manufacturing a firearms compnent without a firearms dealers licence and can be charged as such.

This can go two ways clarity or they make you get an import licence for everything.

It has nothing to do with revenue anyway they are there to collect revenue not dictate or inturpate the firearms act. That is down to the department of justice. Its more than likely some ignorant fool on a mission.
I wouldnt hold my breath that anything good will come of this. They do whatever they want anyway and cant even implement european law that they are told to. The level of ignorance within AGS and the DOJ is unbeleiveable.
Revenue is customs too! ...?

What about importing from outside the EU especially when you have a licence fir the firearm in question. Weren't some firearms owners told that rhey didn't need a import licence as long as they weee importing a firearm from outside EU and for which they already had a licence.

There is also the part of the firearms act that states that your entitled to spare or replacement parts..
Zxthinger is offline  
Thanks from:
30-07-2020, 03:33   #11
Mellor
Registered User
 
Mellor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 34,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by meathstevie View Post
By the interpretation used by Revenue it looks like every piece of hardwood timber and every screw and spring coming into the country is liable to seizure.
No. Because hardwood is a raw material and hasn't been manufactured into anything.

Eg, I can legal buy metal blanks. And with some time in the shop, I could turn that into a banned knife or weapon, an illegal car part, etc.
The point at which it becomes the object in question is the point I have broken the law.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tudderone View Post
Surely it should be only pressure bearing components that should be controlled like this ? A wooden stock is completely harmless on its own.
Of course is should be that way.
I don't think customs and revenue are saying a stock is dangerous. But they are saying that's what the law says.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tudderone
But thats not a firearms cert and you are not subjected to the same rigours to get an authorisation as you do a licence. A gunstock is a component part of a firearm, but not a really a critical part, a gun can be fired without one.
Nor is a suppressor a critical part, but still it's deemed a firearm.
Additionally, change a stock could change a firearm to a restricted firearm.


In your example replacing the stock on a deactivated firearm, makes the stock a part of a deactivated firearm. So that'd be the angle to go down when producing the letter of authorization.

Quote:
Who is funding this case ? Is it the garda himself ? Its a bit drastic isn't it, get a relatively cheap stock seized, and rather than going to the customs and showing them his licence, he heads to the High court ?
It's drastic, he could have fixed his situation easily. But then the next guy has the same bother.
This guy taking the hassle of the high court, so that hopefully, the situation can be clarified for everyone else.
Mellor is offline  
(3) thanks from:
30-07-2020, 11:53   #12
Cass
Moderator
 
Cass's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 23,003
Send a message via MSN to Cass
Quote:
Originally Posted by tudderone View Post
Who is funding this case ? Is it the garda himself ? Its a bit drastic isn't it, get a relatively cheap stock seized, and rather than going to the customs and showing them his licence, he heads to the High court ?
From reading his comments on FB he is funding it himself.

My understanding, and i could be wrong as i'm reading between the lines, is the stock was seized as essentially an "illegal import" and is up for destruction or they're (customs) simply not going to return it to him.

The case is an important one and i don't think it drastic that he is taking the case. The EU has free movement of people and goods yet were forced to apply for import paperwork for goods, we're hit with VAT, charges, and Taxes on products under the guise of some bullsh*t green initiitave (NOx on cars, etc).

This case will, for better or worse, settle this issue once and for all. Much like someone taking a court case against the barrel length issue. It won't be pleasant but its going to have to be done at some point.
Cass is offline  
30-07-2020, 13:46   #13
tudderone
Registered User
 
tudderone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 833
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cass View Post
From reading his comments on FB he is funding it himself.

My understanding, and i could be wrong as i'm reading between the lines, is the stock was seized as essentially an "illegal import" and is up for destruction or they're (customs) simply not going to return it to him.

The case is an important one and i don't think it drastic that he is taking the case. The EU has free movement of people and goods yet were forced to apply for import paperwork for goods, we're hit with VAT, charges, and Taxes on products under the guise of some bullsh*t green initiitave (NOx on cars, etc).

This case will, for better or worse, settle this issue once and for all. Much like someone taking a court case against the barrel length issue. It won't be pleasant but its going to have to be done at some point.
The firearms laws here are a cobbled together mess by all accounts. The original British law, redrafted to be Irish law, bits tacked on here and there, bandaids stuck on as issues came up, like crossbows being restricted firearms, the centrefire handgun ban, practical shooting going. The plonkers in the dail get paid enough, they should do a better job. How many other things like this import nonsense, possession of blackpowder for muzzleloaders, reloading etc are there falling between two stools ?
tudderone is offline  
(3) thanks from:
30-07-2020, 13:56   #14
Grizzly 45
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 11,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zxthinger View Post
R

What about importing from outside the EU especially when you have a licence fir the firearm in question. Weren't some firearms owners told that rhey didn't need a import licence as long as they weee importing a firearm from outside EU and for which they already had a licence.

There is also the part of the firearms act that states that your entitled to spare or replacement parts..
From outside the eU you use this form .free from the DOJ website.The Non eU import document.
By rights this is only done by the DOJ to satisfy many quieries they were getting from the US side of things for some sort of paperwork to show the Feds on expoerting stuff to Ireland under ITAR rules. From the DOJ website.

Individuals importing from a country which is not a member of the EU:
Read these instructions carefully before submitting your application.
Complete the application form fully
Make sure you have filled in:
(a) the exact make and model of the firearm
(b) the correct Category A-C (PDF - 88KB)
Category B (PDF - 88KB)
Attach to the application a copy of the valid firearms certificate for the firearm or ammunition to be imported.
You can fill in the form using type or in handwriting. If completing it in handwriting please use black ink and block capitals.
New marking requirements under the EU Firearms Directive came into effect on 1 September 2019. In accordance with Statutory Instrument No. 420 of 2019, firearms and their essential components being imported into the European Union must be marked in compliance with the Directive. 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.
Forward the documentation to the Firearms Unit of the Department of Justice and Equality. We will issue a transfer document to you so that you can use it to legally import the firearms and/or ammunition.


I dont know how the Hell this is supposed to be enforced from the US side,as the only marked component there is the Reciver,the upper and everything else is a component part under US law,so technically freely exportable[ITAR notwithstanding]. This will be fun with Brexit too.
Grizzly 45 is offline  
Thanks from:
30-07-2020, 14:04   #15
Grizzly 45
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 11,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by tudderone View Post
The firearms laws here are a cobbled together mess by all accounts. The original British law, redrafted to be Irish law, bits tacked on here and there, bandaids stuck on as issues came up, like crossbows being restricted firearms, the centrefire handgun ban, practical shooting going. The plonkers in the dail get paid enough, they should do a better job. How many other things like this import nonsense, possession of blackpowder for muzzleloaders, reloading etc are there falling between two stools ?
They were told this by Sparks here at the Dail public enquiry almost six years ago now.But in the good tradition of can kicking with difficult matters,it will never be dealt with properly by our glorified county councillors running this country.
We can see the fiasco of the TCO 1972 still.t
The Army is left sitting gaurding basically now heaps of airguns and air pistols,and other scrap,with the odd gem still in there forever more,incase someone does come back after finding grand dads old firearm cert,and wants to reclaim their property.When in fact AGS/Govt is supposed to be making the effort to trace these peoples next of kin to return this stuff.

Last edited by Grizzly 45; 30-07-2020 at 19:45.
Grizzly 45 is offline  
Post Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Remove Text Formatting
Bold
Italic
Underline

Insert Image
Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text
 
Decrease Size
Increase Size
Please sign up or log in to join the discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Share Tweet