Firearms renewal question.

rrpc

dimebag249 wrote: »

Wrong rrpc, read Rovi's post again. A firearm that can take more than 10 22. shorts cannot necessarily take more than 10 .22 lr, the SHORT is shorter than the LONG RIFLE. That means that you can fit more of them into a tubular magazine.

Correct, it's not rocket science, it's the law. And it's a law that has us all guessing, because it isn't clear on this point.

Sorry, I got that the wrong way around

The point is that if iyou are going to use it as a restricted firearm, than it's up to you to licence it as such. Saying that a Garda is going to stop you somewhere and say "Aha, you can get 15 .22 shorts in that rifle, it should be restiricted" when it's chambered for .22lr and loaded with .22lr, is just not going to happen.

If it's one of those rare beasts that will take both and is chambered for both and you're going to use both and will hold more than the ten rounds, then license it as a restricted firearm.

I've already asked this question of the Department in another context and the response was that most firearms ownership issues rely on trusting the applicant.

I would also like you to introduce me to the Garda who knows the difference between the .22 short, .22lr and .22 long.

But of course they'll be out on patrol with handfuls of .22 short ammo in their pockets looking to pull lads with .22 tube loaders and catch them for not properly licensing their rifles. :rolleyes:

ezridax wrote:

Quick question on that subject, are some people trying to avoid the restricted classification, because of some inherent fear of being regarded as a restricted firearms holder, fear of being too intensely scrutinised on the application process. I'm just curious as alot of people i know or meet are trying to restrict/alter/curtail a firearm they own so as it falls into the unrestricted classification.

I think for some it's fear of the unknown. Nobody has been through the system before (obviously) and just don't know how it will work or whether they will in fact get a licence for a restricted firearm.

Then there's the three restricted and security jump issue which some people may fall into and don't want to step up to the next security level.

Grizzly 45

Sparks wrote: »

I wouldn't say no probs grizzly, they're grossly different in size:

There are rifles stamped for use with .22short, .22long and .22lr; but they're not terribly accurate when you load in the .22short; and if you loaded a .22short into a .22lr rifle, the bullet won't engage with the lands as nicely as it should.

It wouldn't explode in your face or anything, but you're not doing a good rifle any favours doing that kind of thing to it.

Indeed there is a difference in actual size Sparks.But what I was replying to was the fact that we were discussing wether they would work in a semi or lever action tube fed rifle and wether13.22 shorts count as 8.22lr for future legal reasons..And I cant see a mechanically operated rifle operating very well on .22 shorts.Yes some of the older rifles will feed .22 short and.22lr.The actual bullet is still.22 so it will engage.It is Case length length/chamber length that will cause the problem.
BTW whats the difference between .22long and .22lr??

Ezridax.
Maybe it is more fear,that these will be the next type to be jumped on by our gun banning minister and Gardai,as "especially dangerous".

dimebag249

rrpc wrote: »

The point is that if iyou are going to use it as a restricted firearm, than it's up to you to licence it as such. Saying that a Garda is going to stop you somewhere and say "Aha, you can get 15 .22 shorts in that rifle, it should be restiricted" when it's chambered for .22lr and loaded with .22lr, is just not going to happen.



I would also like you to introduce me to the Garda who knows the difference between the .22 short, .22lr and .22 long.

But of course they'll be out on patrol with handfuls of .22 short ammo in their pockets looking to pull lads with .22 tube loaders and catch them for not properly licensing their rifles. :rolleyes:

Well in fairness rrpc, we may as well start saying "sure don't plug your shotgun magazine tube, the Guards probably won't check it" or "licence yer auld AR-15 as a bolt action, no guard is going to load and fire it to see whether it's really self-loading".

If they're relying on the trust of the applicant there wouldn't be any need for these stupid f***ing restrictions like restricting shotguns with 'pistol grips' or .22's with standard capacity magazines.

All this bullcrap legislation and it's still full of grey areas. You can't say that no one's going to get done for having a rifle that'll take 10 .22lr and 13 shorts, no one here can. Didn't the guards try to prosecute some one for having empty brass that he didn't have a licence for? I'll try find a post that mentions it, Sparks mentioned it before I think. The judge threw the case out with prejudice if i remember correctly. You can't trust anyone, neither the Guards nor licencees, to "do the right thing" in the case of unclear, make it up as you go along legislation.

Again, these things should be crystal clear for us, for the guards, and for the judiciary. I find it pretty odd that anyone could disagree with that.

dimebag249

Sparks wrote: »

There was a case a year or two back where someone was charged with having component parts of firearms he had no licence for because he had empty brass when the gardai searched his home (the descriptions of which make for rather spectacular reading). However, the case was thrown out of court, which would to me indicate that the judge looked at the case and looked at the Act and his first thought was not that the case had sufficient merit to warrant the time spent reading it

Sure the Guards will be reasonable, we can trust them. Reasonable people that we know for sure will respect the letter and the spirit of the law. We can be so sure of that that there's no need to clarify unecessary vaguaries in the restricted list.

dimebag249

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

BTW whats the difference between .22long and .22lr??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.22_Long

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.22_Long_Rifle

The long has the same case as the lr, just a lighter loading. It's only about half as powerful as the lr.

rrpc

dimebag249 wrote: »

Well in fairness rrpc, we may as well start saying "sure don't plug your shotgun magazine tube, the Guards probably won't check it" or "licence yer auld AR-15 as a bolt action, no guard is going to load and fire it to see whether it's really self-loading".

No dimebag, we're not saying that at all. We're saying that if you're using your rifle in a way that either makes it restricted or unrestricted, it's up to you to declare that use correctly. The same as filling in the form to say that you are going to use your firearm for hunting, but instead are using it on an uncertified range, or that you are actually in possession of the number of rounds that your license says you can have.

If they're relying on the trust of the applicant there wouldn't be any need for these stupid f***ing restrictions like restricting shotguns with 'pistol grips' or .22's with standard capacity magazines.

But they are relying on trust that you don't have these things and aren't declaring them, you've pointed out as much above. And all of the above are restrictions, not prohibitions.

All this bullcrap legislation and it's still full of grey areas. You can't say that no one's going to get done for having a rifle that'll take 10 .22lr and 13 shorts, no one here can. Didn't the guards try to prosecute some one for having empty brass that he didn't have a licence for? I'll try find a post that mentions it, Sparks mentioned it before I think. The judge threw the case out with prejudice if i remember correctly. You can't trust anyone, neither the Guards nor licencees, to "do the right thing" in the case of unclear, make it up as you go along legislation.

It's not unclear to me. There's no issue of putting rounds in a firearm that it's not chambered for. If you want to do it, then you declare it as restricted. If you don't you don't and there's just as many ways a Garda can play the 'Aha, caught ya boyo' game without having to look at your tube magazine. In fact I very much doubt if any of these firearms would function without jamming if the wrong ammo was used.

But we played this game before about grey areas with the 2008 restricted list and all the complaints about the grey areas there resulted in a nice black and white list.

That's generally the way these things work. If you want a yes or no answer, well the easiest one is no.

dimebag249

rrpc wrote: »

No dimebag, we're not saying that at all. We're saying that if you're using your rifle in a way that either makes it restricted or unrestricted, it's up to you to declare that use correctly.

There's no issue of putting rounds in a firearm that it's not chambered for. If you want to do it, then you declare it as restricted. If you don't you don't and there's just as many ways a Garda can play the 'Aha, caught ya boyo' game without having to look at your tube magazine. In fact I very much doubt if any of these firearms would function without jamming if the wrong ammo was used.

For the second time, several firearms and types of firearms ARE CHAMBERED AND DESIGNED TO RELIABLY FIRE AND CYCLE CARTRIDGES OF DIFFERENT LENGTHS INTERCANGEABLY. They are chambered for these different cartridges, just like a revolver that can fire .44 mag and .44 spl. Every shotgun is designed to fire shells of varying lengths. A 3.5" magnum pump action shotgun is designed to fire 2.75" shells. Almost every new shotgun has at least 3" if not 3.5" chambers, yet few people will ever use monster supermagnum 2 ounce loads. It's nothing to do with using 'the wrong type of cartridge', or "putting rounds in a firearm that it's not chambered for", they ARE chambered for different rounds.

http://www.remington.com/products/firearms/shotguns/model_870/model_870_express_super_magnum_specs.asp

http://www.remington.com/products/firearms/rimfire_rifles/model_552_speedmaster.asp

Sorry for shouting, and i'm not trying to be a dick or to score points over some pedantic detail. Like I said, it's not an issue now anyway. It won't be an issue until someone get's charged.

And it's not a about "using your rifle in a way that either makes it restricted or unrestricted", the restricted list says firearms are restricted due to discernable (or not, in this case) physical characteristics. It's either restricted or it's not. It's about magazine capacity, not how many rounds of a particular type you load in your firearm at any given time.

johngalway

Sparks wrote: »

John, it doesn't matter what pellet you use in an air rifle, if it's sub-12 ft/lb with one, it will be sub-12 with all of them. The speed of the pellet at the muzzle will assuredly vary, but the muzzle energy will always be the same.

It was some while ago now and I may well have gotten the details mixed up now.

DMZ

Sparks wrote: »

I wouldn't say no probs grizzly, they're grossly different in size:


There are rifles stamped for use with .22short, .22long and .22lr; but they're not terribly accurate when you load in the .22short; and if you loaded a .22short into a .22lr rifle, the bullet won't engage with the lands as nicely as it should.

It wouldn't explode in your face or anything, but you're not doing a good rifle any favours doing that kind of thing to it.

There are no firearms stamped as such in general use in Ireland and to say so would cause confusion with the people who use .22lr in the field and elsewhere.
It is very foolish to advise anyone to chamber a round in a firearm that the particular firearm has not been designed to fire, I would even go further to say it is dangerous and it is surprising to see a moderator on these pages give such advice.
Much has been written about this with respect to .22 magnum and .22lr, the same holds true, the firearm has information written usually on the barrel and this is what should be used in it and nothing else, even if it fits!
I have no desire to go into the technical aspects of this but it can be easily researched, a basic principal of safe use of firearms is to identify the correct ammunition for the gun, this is done as described above, then identify the ammunition by what is written on the box, no deviation allowed save in well documented cases such as .38 in a .357. Let keep safe folks and unless you know what you are talking about best not to give advice on these matters. The issue of restricted or non restricted is academic in this case, use what the gun is designed to be used for and nothing else!

Sparks

DMZ wrote: »

It is very foolish to advise anyone to chamber a round in a firearm that the particular firearm has not been designed to fire, I would even go further to say it is dangerous and it is surprising to see a moderator on these pages give such advice.

So am I, since that's not what I actually said.
In fact, if you read what I wrote, I was advising against doing that.

rrpc

dimebag249 wrote: »

For the second time, several firearms and types of firearms ARE CHAMBERED AND DESIGNED TO RELIABLY FIRE AND CYCLE CARTRIDGES OF DIFFERENT LENGTHS INTERCANGEABLY. They are chambered for these different cartridges, just like a revolver that can fire .44 mag and .44 spl. Every shotgun is designed to fire shells of varying lengths. A 3.5" magnum pump action shotgun is designed to fire 2.75" shells. Almost every new shotgun has at least 3" if not 3.5" chambers, yet few people will ever use monster supermagnum 2 ounce loads. It's nothing to do with using 'the wrong type of cartridge', or "putting rounds in a firearm that it's not chambered for", they ARE chambered for different rounds.

And three won't fit no matter what size they are if it's reduced to take two of even the largest shells.

But it's back to the issue of trust. We were talking about a rifle chambered and stamped to take .22lr which is all it's supposed to take. If you're going to go against the reccommendations of the manufacturer then you deserve everything that's coming to you.

Sorry for shouting, and i'm not trying to be a dick or to score points over some pedantic detail. Like I said, it's not an issue now anyway. It won't be an issue until someone get's charged.

And no-one will get charged unless they actually have more rounds loaded in their magazine then they are entitled to by virtue of their licence.

Grizzly 45

DMZ wrote: »

There are no firearms stamped as such in general use in Ireland and to say so would cause confusion with the people who use .22lr in the field and elsewhere.

So there no shotguns chamberd for 2.5in, 2 3/4in and 3in magnum loads here???? I must have a doozey then as my Remington will handle all three lengths. ditto my Savage.22 Mag/20 GA :rolleyes:

It is very foolish to advise anyone to chamber a round in a firearm that the particular firearm has not been designed to fire,

Uh huh seeing that we now know that . .22 bullet is the same diameter irrespective of a .22 short,22 long,.22 long rifle or .22 magnum.The difference is CASE LENGTH& DIAMETER.
Ergo a .22lr semi will proably not feed reliably with a .22 short,due to the shortproably not having enough power to cycle the action.
There is nothing to stop you handloading a .22 short and using your semi as a single action,but whats the point of that??Which was the original hypothetical post of say,you were using a old winchester pump action.22 rifle.[Only one that Iknow that will do this]
These are still common enough and you had one restricted to eight.22 lr ,but it will take 10 .22 shorts,are you breaking the law,if somhow this was checked??You are not going to shove a .22 magnum up there,it is physically impossible.

Much has been written about this with respect to .22 magnum and .22lr, the same holds true, the firearm has information written usually on the barrel and this is what should be used in it and nothing else

Sure you dont mean the 5.56 NATOvs.223? or the famous Irish "A.222 will work in a .223 rifle,so it's bannedas well??" arguement

A .22lr in a .22magnum will just fall out the barrel or worse jam,as the chamber dia is bigger than a .22lr .Unless you use a chamber insert.Yes this will work,dont expect sub MOA groupings,but it is a good bunny and beer can buster.Iwould also advise shooting glasses on this one if your gun is somwhat old,as the tolerances will be out and you can powder flashback.Not pleasent.
BTW chamber inserts are pretty common,they give you a chance to use smaller ammo in bigger calibres.EG a common one is a .410 in a 12 ga.22lr in a 22WMR

have no desire to go into the technical aspects of this but it can be easily researched, a basic principal of safe use of firearms is to identify the correct ammunition for the gun, this is done as described above, then identify the ammunition by what is written on the box, no deviation

Indeed it is.But it is pretty difficult to screw up on this here in Ireland.
I doubt we have many 9mm Largo or 9mm Glisenti handguns that you could mistakenly load with 9mm+P.Or .38 S&W that are so old that putting a .38 special in them can transform them into grenades.That is the more common firearm failure .Too hot a load in a gun that was out of proof or not designed for it.

allowed save in well documented cases such as .38 in a .357. Let keep safe folks and unless you know what you are talking about best not to

Not to mind 44 special in a 44 magnum as another one..22lr in .22 magnum is the same principle.Mass surrounding smaller powder charge /shell