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 :)
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

Ruger target lite

Options
2»

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 39,099 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    Interesting thread
    So what is your take (I know this isn't definitive) about
    a rifle that is over 60cm in length but with a barrel that is
    say 10"?
    It's not a rifle.
    (Does it even exist)
    It would seem to qualify as a long firearm on the basis overall length?
    Nope. It's a short firearm due to the barrel.
    Which means it's restricted (presuming it doesn't meet Olympic standard, open to correction)
    Another issue is how is this length decided - is it from the receiver to the end of the barrel or is it from the butt of the stock.

    Very badly drafted legislation IMHO as it provides a lack of clarity on things which should be simple to define

    Over all length is over overall. ie includes the stock.
    There are poorly drafted and ambigious firearms laws, this isn't one imo.
    Lengths in cm are pretty objective.


  • Registered Users Posts: 878 ✭✭✭Wadi14


    The ban on under 20 inch barrels seems to have gone County wide up here now. A friend of mine wants to change his .223 to a ruger 10/22. I rang the local FO on his behalf after talking to a RFD, she informed me they have received a circular about it , stating minimum 20 inch.

    She rang Dublin for me I think it was the firearms branch and they told her they were aware of this and had sent for some kind of review, sorry I cant remember where she said they had asked for guidance.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,280 ✭✭✭tudderone


    Wadi14 wrote: »
    The ban on under 20 inch barrels seems to have gone County wide up here now. A friend of mine wants to change his .223 to a ruger 10/22. I rang the local FO on his behalf after talking to a RFD, she informed me they have received a circular about it , stating minimum 20 inch.

    She rang Dublin for me I think it was the firearms branch and they told her they were aware of this and had sent for some kind of review, sorry I cant remember where she said they had asked for guidance.

    Firearms policy unit ? Sounds like the supers up your way are deciding to make up their own laws again. They seem to do that from time to time.


  • Registered Users Posts: 878 ✭✭✭Wadi14


    I got a call back on Monday from my local Super's office, up here in Donegal good to go if the rifle comes from the factory with a barrel shorter than 20 inches. I didn't ask about sticking a 12 inch carbon fiber on it lol.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,254 ✭✭✭Chiparus



    I would say it is related to this : "Idontlikethelookofthat"



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 878 ✭✭✭Wadi14


    No it wasn't related to that incident. I do know what the cause of semi auto barrel length problem was, but wont discuss it here. Or maybe I should have said cant discuss it here.



  • Registered Users Posts: 878 ✭✭✭Wadi14


    On the pic from the article, are the Guards going to leave evident of a firearms crime laying in the rain for a journalist to take pics of the rifle and ammo ?

    I think this is another one of the staged photo shoots.



  • Registered Users Posts: 39,099 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    Photo was likely taken by garda forensic team and passed to the papers. Even if a journalist got to the scene, they'd be unlikely to have the proper gear if unless that also moonlighted in photography.

    Claiming it's a stage photo is a big claim. The guy in in custody would have a pretty obvious defense if that were the case.

    Agree its not related to any barrel length. And still maintain the 20" limit doesn't exist.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,946 ✭✭✭✭Grizzly 45


    Another issue is how is this length decided - is it from the receiver to the end of the barrel or is it from the butt of the stock

    Measured internally from chamber face to muzzle tip.Muzzle tip also includes any permantly attached devices.


    So what is your take (I know this isn't definitive) about a rifle that is over 60cm in length but with a barrel that is say 10"?

    A very awkward contraption!😀

    "If you want to keep someone away from your house, Just fire the shotgun through the door."

    Vice President [and former lawyer] Joe Biden Field& Stream Magazine interview Feb 2013 "



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 28,449 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cass


    Mellor - And still maintain the 20" limit doesn't exist.

    You don't believe it exists? Sorry but I'm a little lost on context as I haven't read the entire thread. If so then its section Section 12(a) as Amended by Section 65 of 2006 Firearms Act.

    “Shortening barrel of shot-gun or rifle.


    12A.— (1) Subject to subsection (2), a person who shortens the barrel of—

    (a) a shot-gun to a length of less than 61 centimetres, or

    (b) a rifle to a length of less than 50 centimetres,


    is guilty of an offence.

    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
  • Registered Users Posts: 14,946 ✭✭✭✭Grizzly 45


    More like the guy also had a supply of wacky baccy for sale possibly?If a crime happens at your address,they will take everything legally held or not , as possible evidence of a crime. So maybe whoever this genius was he hadn't time to change his possibly legally held Ruger back into a longer barrel configuration?

    "If you want to keep someone away from your house, Just fire the shotgun through the door."

    Vice President [and former lawyer] Joe Biden Field& Stream Magazine interview Feb 2013 "



  • Registered Users Posts: 39,099 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    That describes the act of shortening a firearm. It does my say that factory rifles under 50cm are illegal.

    I haven’t stayed on top of recent posts in the thread. But it was outlined pretty clearly previously.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 28,449 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cass


    Mellor - That describes the act of shortening a firearm.

    Some of it. Part 6 deals with possession of such a firearm:

    (6) It is an offence for a person (except a registered firearms dealer) to possess without lawful authority or reasonable excuse—

    (a) a shot-gun the barrel of which is less than 61 centimetres in length,

    (b) a rifle the barrel of which is less than 50 centimetres in length,


    And its for this purpose we have the grey area that is so often spoken about on the forum. The law is very clear on shortening a barrel below the stated length, its illegal plain and simple, but not as clear on possessing one especially, and this is where the grey area originates from, one that is factory made with a barrel less than the listed legnth(s). Its been this way for decades and without a court case it'll never be settled.

    Mellor - It does my say that factory rifles under 50cm are illegal.

    Are you saying "it doesn't say that factory rifles under 50cm are illegal"? If so then you have arrived at the grey area. Part six of section 12 as amended by section 65 says its an offence for anyone, except a firearms dealer, to possess a firearm with a barrel length less than the specified length, without lawful authority.

    The "without lawful authority" bit is what creates this grey area. A firearms license is lawful authorisation and as the FCA1 does not ask for barrel length when filling it in and the act(s) do not expressly prohibit the firearms with barrel lengths less than the specified lengths under ALL circumstances then there is a tiny bit of grey which makes it illegal, yet not at the same time.

    Mellor - I haven’t stayed on top of recent posts in the thread. But it was outlined pretty clearly previously.

    What was outlined? As I said above I have not read the thread so seen nothing "previously", and only popped in when I seen your post where you say there is no legal limit:

    Mellor - And still maintain the 20" limit doesn't exist.

    My post points out there is a limit, a legal one, but it is and has been in a state of flux for some time now in one aspect only. Factory manufactured barrels less than the "legal" limit.

    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



  • Registered Users Posts: 39,099 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    To clarify, I did say there was no legal limit. I was saying the legal limit referred to doesn’t exist.

    For the reasons above, lawful authority to possess a firearm would include a license. If the intention was to make 20” the limit. They would need to fixed that section. There may well be guidelines coming. My comments were made at a given time.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 28,449 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cass


    Mellor - They would need to fixed that section.

    We've been saying that for years on this forum. I've no doubt the 20" limit was intended as a way to stop all rifles from having barrels of less than 20" and shotguns of less than 24", but the way it was worded (seemingly to allow for repairs, etc) leaves that loophole that both sides seem "happy" to allow to continue as is.

    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



  • Registered Users Posts: 39,099 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    I disagree. If we look at the shotgun length it strongly suggests that’s not the case. This was covered earlier in the thread.

    A shotgun under 24” is a restricted firearm under the 2008 SI. If the intention of the 2006 Act was the make such shotguns illegal, then there would have been no point in its inclusion in the SI. Which suggests that was not the intention and that the s.65 can be read at face value.

    Worth pointing out that the rifles below 20” were not added to the restricted SI. Have to also assume that the different treatment was intentional.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 28,449 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cass


    But the point you raise, and its a good one, only highlights what I said above about those who write the laws.

    The 2006 act, section 65 part 6, amends section 12 and makes it an offense to possess, without lawful authority, a shotgun with a barrel of less than 61cm (24"). IOW the same loophole as the rifle issue. SI 21/2008 says they are restricted, but an SI is not, afaik, able to supercede primary legislation as it gets its "authorisation/legitimacy" from statute law, but does not create it.

    Realistically section 65, part 6, of the 2006 would need to be repealed to have SI 21/2008 be 100% "foolproof" or without the ability to be challenged. Overall, and it was mentioned once again this last week given what has been in the news, what is needed is a complete restatement of all the acts to eliminate these issues.

    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



  • Registered Users Posts: 39,099 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    I agree that the various parts are not well written. Requires a bit of assumption to figure out the intent. Agree there are grey areas also.

    Regarding the shotgun above. It’s an offence to posses one without lawful authority. I’d argue that a restricted license for such a restricted shotgun is the authority to possess the shotgun. Although I’ve no idea if it’s possible to produce the required reason for one.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 28,449 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cass


    Mellor - I’d argue that a restricted license for such a restricted shotgun is the authority to possess the shotgun

    There is no need to argue the fact, I agree. Same situation with the rifles. A court case would settle the matter once and for all, but as we've said for years who wants to be the unlucky sod to go first and secondly when such cases are won, as with C/F pistols its not long before legislative change comes which means we lose in the long run. As it stands, while imperfect, it works so no one wants to rock the boat.

    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



  • Registered Users Posts: 39,099 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    I meant argue with the powers that be if they ever dragged me up over it.

    I certainly would be raising the issue on my own. In the meantime, I would be comfortable with a 18" barrel on a rifle being licensed.



  • Advertisement
Advertisement