FCP Conference and Reloading

Vegeta

Sparks wrote: »

I know what you're saying Veg, but my point was that any Joe Soap can buy a gas cylinder because the gas cylinder manufacturers, retailers, refillers, inspectors and servicers all have more onerous regulations to comply with; and when it comes to reloading, the law seems to think of us more as manufacturers than consumers.

I wont argue on that point as you're right

Strict manufacture regulations do not negate post purchase mischief or potential for said mischief.

In other words strict manufacture regulations do not prevent the misuse of a gas barrel after its been bought, and anyone can buy a large barrel of gas!

Lets face it, its the misuse of powder the DoJ must be worried about, which is understandable

Dvs

Sparks wrote: »

I know what you're saying Veg, but my point was that any Joe Soap can buy a gas cylinder because the gas cylinder manufacturers, retailers, refillers, inspectors and servicers all have more onerous regulations to comply with; and when it comes to reloading, the law seems to think of us more as manufacturers than consumers.

Hello Sparks,
the regulations that relate to the bulk storage of gas,
the regulations for re fillers of gas cylinders and the regulations for transport of large quantities of gas cylinders by road and regulations for retailers of gas cylinders are not applied to consumers.

who purchase a few gas cylinders from their local retailer,
one for their gas cooker, one for the gas heater and one for using with the gas gun for the torch on felt they are putting on the extension on their granny's house, guidelines for best practice exist and it is left to the individual to apply and abide by them for their own safety.

In other jurisdictions the individual reloader is exempt from the regulations for storage, transport and of large quantities of propellant that importers, transporters and retailers are regulated by, because the commonsense approach is taken that, they are a consumer that buys a few tubs of propellant and primers, guidelines for best practice exist and it is left to the individual to apply and abide by them for their own safety.
as an individual in the same way as they do with other potentially flammable compounds in their home.

Is this such an alien concept for Ireland?
is it not the case that this same commonsense approach has been applied to the Irish consumers buying gas cylinders, petrol, diesel, fuel oil and it has proved workable, consumers are even permitted to reload their own vehicles fuel tank without special training or certification in a public filling station,
they can even fill a petrol can and bring a few litres home to reload the lawnmower in the comfort of their own garage.

Dvs.

Sparks

They sure can Dvs, if they use an approved can...

Look, I'm not saying I think they're right here - I think they're off-base quite a bit. I'm just saying it's not as libertarian-simple as folks think.

Kryten

02:41, Sparks up late on a school night The issue as I see it is that the end result is ammunition for firearms, and they are bad :( (according to the minister)

Yes there are more dangerous substances and use of these substances can lead to a greater explosion risk. But the authorities just cannot get past the whole firearms thing

Sparks

Kryten wrote: »

the authorities just cannot get past the whole firearms thing

Y'know, I just can't get behind that generalisation. The Minister, for example, doesn't hate firearms. He, so far as I can tell, doesn't give a tuppenny bleep about them. They only popped up on his radar when they began to affect his job rating and re-election prospects. That's not being anti-firearm, that's being highly cynical. Equally unpleasant, but not the same. As to the civil servants in the DoJ, to be honest, I think they privately support target shooting and the other legitimate uses of firearms. These guys aren't stupid - they can see the statistics as well as we can. They can't say much publicly - civil servants are not permitted to represent themselves publicly (which is why you won't hear from the DoF mandarins over the current contraversy in the DoF about who read what report). But if you look at what they have done over the past few years, and compare it to what their predecessors did, and compare it to the course of action that would have resulted in the least amount of work for them, and you compare it to the behaviour of certain other groups of civil servants our sport comes into contact with; well, you get a nicer impression of the firearms unit.

The Gardai.... well, I don't have enough contact with the FPU to give a solid impression, but I've a fair amount of leeway for Gardai most of the time - but the 'no evidence' statement from last week has been eating away at that since I heard it and I'm increasingly unhappy about it. But there are lots of Gardai who are supporters of us (feck's sake, some of the Gardai there on Friday are shooters themselves). So I'm not about to light the torch and pick up my pitchfork just yet (well, not for them anyway. Some of the slow readers in the DoF, now, that's for another forum).

lordarpad

OK, how do I make a reply to the MOJ on this subject?