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

Pistols Recalled in Wicklow

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    Sparks wrote:
    And it's not incorrect. All the Minister has to do is to draft an order making a class of firearm restricted and that's a de facto ban right there. No appeal, no consultation needed
    Actually civdef is right, there is right of appeal
    An applicant for a certificate under subsection (1A) or (1C) or an application for an authorisation under subsection (1D) whose application has been refused may, within 30 days of receipt of notice of any such decision, appeal any such decision to
    the District Court. In determining the appeal the Judge may -
    (a) confirm the refusal, or
    (b) allow the appeal, inform the Minister, the Commissioner or the person
    designated for the purpose by the Commissioner (as the case may require) of his or her decision and direct the Minister to re-consider the application, or
    (c) allow the appeal, inform the Minister, the Commissioner or the person
    designated for the purpose by the Commissioner (as the case may require) of his or her decision and direct the Minister, the Commissioner or the person designated for the purpose by the Commissioner (as the case may require) to grant the application."
    (1C) Any person wishing to obtain a firearms certificate under subsection (1), in respect of the firearm or ammunition which is deemed restricted by Order of the Minister under section 2A(1) of the Principal Act


  • Options
    #33
    Sparks
    Registered Users Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    rrpc wrote:
    Actually civdef is right, there is right of appeal
    I meant a right of appeal against the Minister's order - we specifically asked for that in the Dail and got smirked at by the Minister at the time. :(


  • Options
    #34
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    But it's not a de facto ban, seeing as any refusal to grant a certificate under the restricted section can be appealed to the district court.

    From the applicants point of view, there will be very little difference between a restricted firearm and an unrestricted one. The only one I could see would be the imposition of conditions above and beyond those for an unrestricted firearm.

    Onerous conditions could also be appealed against as being a de facto refusal to grant.


  • Options
    #35
    Sparks
    Registered Users Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    But it's not a de facto ban, seeing as any refusal to grant a certificate under the restricted section can be appealed to the district court.
    At which point you effectively have to convince a DC judge to overrule conditions on a firearms licence laid down by Ministerial order and provided for explicitly in primary legislation - because if you could meet them, you would have and would have skipped the court step.

    No offence meant, but if judges in the high court and supreme court won't do it, and have explicitly stated in the past that they believe it is not the judiciary's role to second-guess every ministerial decision (or even corporate decisions!), and the Minister himself made exactly the same point in the dail on exactly this point, why would anyone expect a DC judge to do so?

    And how would you argue that having 24 hour manned security for a firearm is onerous when at least two clubs in the country have that already?


  • Options
    #36
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    Sparks wrote:
    At which point you effectively have to convince a DC judge to overrule conditions on a firearms licence laid down by Ministerial order and provided for explicitly in primary legislation - because if you could meet them, you would have and would have skipped the court step.
    I was talking there about a refusal to grant under the restricted section. Right to appeal is written into the legislation, and is the same procedure as for an unrestricted firearm.
    Sparks wrote:
    And how would you argue that having 24 hour manned security for a firearm is onerous when at least two clubs in the country have that already?
    Because as an individual, I would not have access to the same resources as a club.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Sparks
    Registered Users Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    I was talking there about a refusal to grant under the restricted section.
    So was I. I said a de facto ban, not a legislative one - just put in place conditions which err so far to the side of caution (without actually being ridiculous) and you have a de facto ban without breaking the Firearms Act 2006. It's like the way pistols were never illegal to own - you just couldn't get a licence...
    Because as an individual, I would not have access to the same resources as a club.
    Hence the reason why you have to be in a target shooting club to get a target shooting licence.

    I didn't say any of this was right, proper, just or fair y'know. It's just that what's in the CJA2006 does not indicate a fair and just system, but one which maintains the appearance of fairness while having more mechanisms in it which can be used legally to damage the sport than anything that's ever come before.


Advertisement