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

Restricted justification and joint usage

Options
  • 18-08-2009 12:39am
    #1
    .50 (MOA)
    Registered Users Posts: 170 ✭✭


    Being in the same boat as everyone else i'm working on filling out the reapplication forms (for my father at the minute i got extended till june next year:D) and have come across a couple of problems, it was simple enough for the shotgun, but the rifle(.22lr semi-auto/bolt-action) has become restricted due to the high magazine capacty (18).

    This capacity isn't really required but its the gun he's had for years and myself for 6 months, we don't want to change it or go to the bother of altering it. so in section 4.2 - reason why this type of firearm is required, aside from stating that it is a normal rabbit hunting type (following the nargc sample form) does the capacity need to be justified? bearing in mind that the reason why the restricted licence box has been ticked previously is not clarified by any other section of the form.


    Also for both of his guns I have joint usage of them. in section 4.1 do we just put my old certificate number (even though there is 7 boxes and the old certificate number only has 6 digits) or wait till I apply and then i put his new certificate number. The problem I see for this is that the information that I have joint usage won't exist on his certificate.


    Finally, just to clarify 2 unrestricted and one restricted is level 3 security?


    Hope i haven't repeated someone elses questions, i looked about and saw nothing on any of these problems (except maybe the security one but it was still confusing me).

    Thanks for any replies, very much appreciated.
    50


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Mellor
    Registered Users Posts: 39,358 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    Why don't you buy a new smaller capacity magazine. Would move it to unrestricted (if available)


  • Options
    #3
    Rovi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,570 ✭✭✭Rovi


    Mellor wrote: »
    Why don't you buy a new smaller capacity magazine. Would move it to unrestricted (if available)
    I'd suspect it's something with a tubular magazine.
    Might be possible to restrict it to ten rounds with a dowel or rod of some sort though.


  • Options
    #4
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    Rovi wrote: »
    I'd suspect it's something with a tubular magazine.
    Might be possible to restrict it to ten rounds with a dowel or rod of some sort though.
    +1

    It's probably the tubular type of magazine, but AFAIK, they were most commonly used on the lever action Marlins. Not that it matters really, but this came up for discussion at one of the FCP conferences I think and the solution was to either crimp the tube for 10 rounds or put a dowel in it.


  • Options
    #5
    .50 (MOA)
    Registered Users Posts: 170 ✭✭.50 (MOA)


    Yea its a krico with a tubular magazine.

    What you all seem to be saying is that the only option will be to get it limited to 10, that there's no point in trying to apply for the restricted licence. Then again no-one really knows what will happen yet with applications like this do they?, with the process being so new and the creation of restricted firearms- this gun wasn't restricted till 1st august.

    And what about the joint usage licence no. problem?


  • Options
    #6
    Cass
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 28,558 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cass


    .50 (MOA) wrote: »
    Yea its a krico with a tubular magazine.

    What you all seem to be saying is that the only option will be to get it limited to 10, that there's no point in trying to apply for the restricted licence. .....................And what about the joint usage licence no. problem?

    You can of course apply for the licence for the .22 as it is. To reduce the magazine capacity by whatever means to bring it back to an unrestricted firearm would simply make te process easier, but you can apply for it as is.

    With regards to the joint holding of a firearm, my father is licenced on my pistol so i put his original cert number on my application and he put mine on his. FO told me my application and his were spot on. Don't mind the fact that there are extra boxes, just fill in what numbers you have. You can't put in a new cert number as you won't get it till your application is processed and it can't be processed till all details are filled in and submitted.
    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
  • Options
    #7
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    .50 (MOA) wrote: »
    Yea its a krico with a tubular magazine.

    What you all seem to be saying is that the only option will be to get it limited to 10, that there's no point in trying to apply for the restricted licence. Then again no-one really knows what will happen yet with applications like this do they?, with the process being so new and the creation of restricted firearms- this gun wasn't restricted till 1st august.

    And what about the joint usage licence no. problem?
    Technically it was a restricted firearm from February 2008. It was a meaningless distinction until now though.

    The difference for you is that the Commissioner (or his designate) will decide on your application. The security level you require would probably not change.

    But realistically, it would be a lot simpler to just reduce the mag capacity. Surely a ¼" dowel would fit neatly in the tube and reduce the capacity to 10?


Advertisement