Extension letters

elius

Sparks wrote: »

That's an odd one actually.
Technically, yes, a moderator for any firearm other than a rimfire rifle is restricted; but at the same time, a moderator is itself a firearm under the act.

So you dont need permission for a moderater on a rimfire rifle??

It wasn't me!

elius wrote: »

So you dont need permission for a moderater on a rimfire rifle??

Yes, you do. The difference is a fullbore moderator is a restricted firearm.

elius

ooooo right...

fat-tony

Looks like the moderator (silencer) might not be a "restricted" item, according to the new FCA1 form. It never made sense that a "mod" for a .22 rifle was unrestricted, but a "mod" for a centrefire rifle was restricted. A moderator (silencer) still needs to be authorised, though - but it looks like sense is prevailing and that it will be noted on your application and therefore, on your credit-card licence.

endasmail

i ticked the box for the "silencer" on my .223
i then wrote a cover note to explain why i needed it ,stated for noise reasons '
scaring horses and neighbours in the middle of the night
be interesting to see wot comes of it

johngalway

I can see a truck load of little credit card sized objects being returned to Dublin after November to get silencers added, various things amended

Sparks

fat-tony wrote: »

Looks like the moderator (silencer) might not be a "restricted" item, according to the new FCA1 form.

Doesn't matter what the form says, the form cannot override the SI.
(That's related to that whole "the form says carry, so I can carry my pistol in a holster into the shop with me" meme a year or three back...)

tiny-nioclas

Got mine today..

fat-tony

Sparks wrote: »

Doesn't matter what the form says, the form cannot override the SI.
(That's related to that whole "the form says carry, so I can carry my pistol in a holster into the shop with me" meme a year or three back...)

The form has a "tickbox" to indicate that you want a moderator/silencer authorised. This is a giant leap forward surely on the current situation, where you have to go into pages of explanation as to why you need one?
The "carry my pistol in a holster into a shop" crapola is surely just the ravings of a cowboy mentality

Sparks

fat-tony wrote: »

The form has a "tickbox" to indicate that you want a moderator/silencer authorised. This is a giant leap forward surely on the current situation, where you have to go into pages of explanation as to why you need one?

It's a leap forward, definitely; but what it does with regard to moderators for centerfire firearms is currently a bit gray. (For rimfire rifles, it's pretty much sorted at this point).

The "carry my pistol in a holster into a shop" crapola is surely just the ravings of a cowboy mentality

You'd think, but it's been asked about before. The point though, was that a misprint or ambiguous wording on a form does not mean the SIs or Acts get overturned.

fat-tony

elius wrote: »

So you dont need permission for a moderater on a rimfire rifle??

You need permission for any moderator. The current regulations require a Superintendent's authorisation. It looks like (IMHO) the new application form requires you to tick a box for a moderator, which will result in your new credit-card licence (which none of us has seen!) having a corresponding indication that you are allowed use a moderator/silencer with the said rifle.

techguy

Not yet..

Called the local station yesterday and they told me to sit tight for another week or two.

Hairy Hunter

Got my two letters in the post yesterday both 30/4/10:D
Air rifle and 12ga u/o.

Need to chase up my FO regarding an application for .223 submitted 1 1\2 months ago:(, I am gussing that rit has been gathering dust somewhere:mad:

HH

rrpc

Sparks wrote: »

Doesn't matter what the form says, the form cannot override the SI.
(That's related to that whole "the form says carry, so I can carry my pistol in a holster into the shop with me" meme a year or three back...)

I was told this issue was brought up at FCP level last year. Namely that if you have an unrestricted rifle you could end up with it being restricted just by the addition of a mod. It was accepted I believe, that this was an anomaly and that the mod should always be in the same class as the firearm.

Certainly the form bears this out, as if your rifle is restricted then by extension your mod will be as well and the same if not restricted.

Hezz700

rrpc wrote: »

I was told this issue was brought up at FCP level last year. Namely that if you have an unrestricted rifle you could end up with it being restricted just by the addition of a mod. It was accepted I believe, that this was an anomaly and that the mod should always be in the same class as the firearm.

Certainly the form bears this out, as if your rifle is restricted then by extension your mod will be as well and the same if not restricted.

That's a very reasonable argument, lets hope it bears true.

johngalway

rrpc wrote: »

I was told this issue was brought up at FCP level last year. Namely that if you have an unrestricted rifle you could end up with it being restricted just by the addition of a mod. It was accepted I believe, that this was an anomaly and that the mod should always be in the same class as the firearm.

Certainly the form bears this out, as if your rifle is restricted then by extension your mod will be as well and the same if not restricted.

It's quite an enlightened view on the subject. Along with Hezz I hope it bears true.

Sparks

It's a very reasonable argument indeed, and I'm told informally that the relevant changes will be brought in by SI soon; but two things arise from this:

1. Right now, the situation is that adding a mod to a normal bolt-action .223 rifle takes it from unrestricted to restricted. It's stupid and probably an oversight and will hopefully be changed in the future, but right now it's the way it is.
2. When the SI gets changed, it will highlight another issue (namely that the handgun ban part of the act is dependant specifically on SI 21 of 2008; and if you bring in a new SI to supersede that, you get the interesting situation where a new SI (call it SI X of 2009) describing the restricted list, but the CJ(MP)A2009 refering to a now-superseded SI.

I hope that (2) there won't cause too many problems but it does point out that the whole edifice of the Firearms Acts have become somewhat like a long-running game of Jenga at this point. Roll on the restatement...

Sparks

Oh, and one other thing - check Section One of the form. You have to select whether this is a Restricted Firearm Certificate or a normal Firearm Certificate you're applying for. This stems from the 2006 changes to the firearms act - the onus is on the applicant, not the local Super, to decide which is the appropriate one, and you're meant to apply to different people for each according to the law (its Section 30 of the 2006 Criminal Justice Act for those interested, which amends Section 3 of the Firearms Act).

In practise, hopefully, the Super seeing a tick on "Restricted Firearm Certificate" in Section One will forward it on to the Commissioner, or the Commissioner will designate the local Supers as being his agents for licencing work (though that rather completely obliterates the point of the changes Section 30 of the 2006 Act brought in). Because otherwise, there's the messy possibility (especially with the centerfire moderator issue) that someone will accidentally apply for the wrong kind of certificate, the local Super won't catch it, and that person will then be carrying an unlicenced firearm and have provided false information on their application form, both of which are rather serious offences.

Like RRPC was saying about the firearms range form, this form has the potential to ruin your whole day.

G17

Sparks wrote: »

or the Commissioner will designate the local Supers as being his agents for licencing work

From what I hear, the Chief Supers will be delegated this task.

Sparks

But then you'd have to apply to them instead of the local super G17, which is the same problem.

G17

Sparks wrote: »

But then you'd have to apply to them instead of the local super G17, which is the same problem.

The problem remains, granted, just a FYI re: the Chief Supers.

To be honest if someone can't take the time to fill out a form correctly, maybe they shouldn't have a firearm at all. If they're unsure or the form is in some way ambiguous, wait for the guidelines, seek clarification, what is the panic for?!

kakashka

While most here have a good grasp of the new set up a LOT of ppl generally DONT,to say they dont deserve to have a gun is just silly
Spoke to two ppl i know earlier and both thought they had a new licence already and shocked when i (tried)explained,i would urge ppl to contact friends,family and neighbours to check that they know what to do
Nobody should be beaten by this,i also think that the lack of info from relevant departments about this new system is nothing short of a DISGRACE,apart from Boards.ie(and thanks to all) i for one would be completely oblivious.

G17

kakashka wrote: »

While most here have a good grasp of the new set up a LOT of ppl generally DONT,to say they dont deserve to have a gun is just silly

I reckon a firearm is a huge responsibility and someone who hasn't the wherewithal to seek out this info should perhaps take up another interest, The onus is on the shooter. I recently had an SVI shooter ask "what centre fire means", that's my point, some who have, got them too readily/easily. But we'll agree to differ on this one.

G17

kakashka wrote: »

i also think that the lack of info from relevant departments about this new system is nothing short of a DISGRACE,apart from Boards.ie(and thanks to all) i for one would be completely oblivious.

+1

They really should have waited to publish all the forms/info at once.

rrpc

Sparks wrote: »

When the SI gets changed, it will highlight another issue (namely that the handgun ban part of the act is dependant specifically on SI 21 of 2008; and if you bring in a new SI to supersede that, you get the interesting situation where a new SI (call it SI X of 2009) describing the restricted list, but the CJ(MP)A2009 refering to a now-superseded SI.

There's a little known (at least to me until recently) piece of legislation called the Interpretation Act of 2005. (It replaced Interpretation Acts going back to the 19th century).

And it says:

(2) Where an enactment (“former enactment”) is repealed and re-enacted, with or without modification, by another enactment (“new enactment”), the following provisions apply:
(f) reference in any other enactment to the former enactment shall, with respect to a subsequent transaction, matter or thing, be read as a reference to the provisions of the new enactment relating to the same subject-matter as that of the former enactment

“enactment” means an Act or a statutory instrument or any portion of an Act or statutory instrument;

GreatGayHunter

Score!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I received my yesterday issued on the 28/07/09 received on the 05/08/09, we won’t comment on the delay.
Extension until 31/05/10 almost 10 months free... I’ll be out and about this evening.
Happy shoot’n
Newbeeeeee

ivanthehunter

Got them yesterday. Extended till June 2010

Anybody seen the new Firearms Application Form?

SeaFields

Got mine today. Extended until 30/4/10. happy days

Sparks

Yes Ivan, see the announcement at the top of all the shooting forums.

deerhunter1

Bananaman wrote: »

No sign of forms on Garda website.

Went into local station yesterday to apply for a new shotgun license - they simply used the old form.

B'Man

Got all five of mine last week. www,gardai.ie has applications

SpannerMonkey

got mine yesterday, about time