New Restricted List SI 337 is now available

fat-tony

rowa wrote: »

seems daft that they haven't gone with ten rounds as a magazine capacity , i could understand with the likes of glocks etc taking 17 rounds - a limit of ten , but why not go to six and include revolvers as unrestricted ,
so a buckmark or ruger mk 2 or 3 is restricted with one magazine and unrestricted with another , stupid !

We still don't have a definition (in the SI) as to what is acceptable (to the authorising Superintendent) as a short firearm "designed for use in connection with competitions governed by I.O.C. regulations". So you can't really say with any certainty that one pistol or another is restricted or unrestricted, regardless of magazine in use, until this definition is qualified in some way.:(

rowa

also is it the firearm or magazine that is restricted to 5 rounds , that would mean a 4 round magazine with one up the spout ?

rrpc

IRLConor wrote: »

There seems to be a continuous confusion among law-makers here (and in some other countries) that shotguns are safer than rifles and rifles are safer than handguns. If some scumbag points a firearm at you it doesn't matter if it's a battered old single barrel .410 shotgun or a Deathbringer 5000™ 9mm (:eek::rolleyes:) pistol, it's still lethal.

I think (all things being equal) that I'd prefer to be shot with the Deathbringer 5000 9mm, than the shotgun.

A lot less messy and some chance of having a quality of life if you survive

rrpc

rowa wrote: »

also is it the firearm or magazine that is restricted to 5 rounds , that would mean a 4 round magazine with one up the spout ?

Magazine capacity.

Grizzly 45

rowa wrote: »

seems daft that they haven't gone with ten rounds as a magazine capacity , i could understand with the likes of glocks etc taking 17 rounds - a limit of ten , but why not go to six and include revolvers as unrestricted ,
so a buckmark or ruger mk 2 or 3 is restricted with one magazine and unrestricted with another , stupid !

A ssomone pointed out in Klintoons gun ban AKA the crime bill of 1994.
Whats to stop somone from carrying two or more ten shot magazines if they intend going on a shooting spree????
It's the same illogicality behind the shotgun magazine restriction..How long does it take out/put in a dowel.Screw on or off an extension?Change a stock? 5mins at most....Still no one has explained how a 9 shot prominent pistol gripped shotgun is more dangerous than a SXS cut criminally down to 12ins??? Hollywood has alot to answer for.

rowa

i am pretty sure the magazine followers on the ruger mk3 and buckmark etc are just simple plastic blocks (what isn't these days) if i make a replacement set for my two magazines and i am pretty certain i could , does this mean that the pistol suddenly becomes unrestricted and nanny state friendly ?

foxshooter243

rrpc wrote: »

I think (all things being equal) that I'd prefer to be shot with the Deathbringer 5000 9mm, than the shotgun.

A lot less messy and some chance of having a quality of life if you survive

In history theres a popular misconception that the colt 45 or winchester 73 won the west, truth be told it was the shotgun that won the west and stopped manys a gunfight before they started, best close range battle weapon going and still carried today US forces:eek::D:D

rowa

foxshooter243 wrote: »

In history theres a popular misconception that the colt 45 or winchester 73 won the west, truth be told it was the shotgun that won the west and stopped manys a gunfight before they started, best close range battle weapon going and still carried today US forces:eek::D:D

There is a certain crumlin "business man" we all know from the news that was shot on numerous occasions , the last count of hits he took from a 9mm was 9 or 10 , he's still here , one lick of a 12 bore with bb, ssg or similar and it would have been curtains first time out ,

i think the people to blame for this obsession with magazine are gaston glock for achieveing 17 rounds into his first pistol and bill ruger who sent a letter to congress in the states saying that " no law abiding man needed more than 10 rounds in a gun "

i don't think it makes much odds if you want to fire more rounds simply carry more magazines /speedloaders.

Hibrion

Does anyone reckon that companies making the ruger mks, buckmarrks, xesse etc. will bring out 5 round mags?? Would solve the problem pretty quickly??

dresden8

Hibrion wrote: »

Does anyone reckon that companies making the ruger mks, buckmarrks, xesse etc. will bring out 5 round mags?? Would solve the problem pretty quickly??

There's no market for them. I doubt Ireland features on their radar as a happy hunting ground, as it were.

rowa

Hibrion wrote: »

Does anyone reckon that companies making the ruger mks, buckmarrks, xesse etc. will bring out 5 round mags?? Would solve the problem pretty quickly??

i wouldn't think it would be worth there while , ireland is such a tiny market for pistols and accessories , i have just checked the magazines for the ruger and they are restricted by a small steel pin controlling how far down the follower can go into the body of the magazine , 20 mins on the lathe will have the new ones made and the problem solved .

fat-tony

Hibrion wrote: »

Does anyone reckon that companies making the ruger mks, buckmarrks, xesse etc. will bring out 5 round mags?? Would solve the problem pretty quickly??

See my post (#32). First the Supers need to accept that the Rugers, Buckmarks, eXesses fall within the definition of "designed for use in connection with competitions governed by International Olympic Committee regulations:"

rowa

fat-tony wrote: »

See my post (#32). First the Supers need to accept that the Rugers, Buckmarks, eXesses fall within the definition of "designed for use in connection with competitions governed by International Olympic Committee regulations:"

i did see that fat-tony but how can one 5 shot .22lr pistol be anymore dangerous than another 5 shot .22lr pistol , there will have to be some sort of lee-way to allow beginners to take up the sport using a cheaper pistol
mine is stamped competition target in two or three places , i'd say most supers would be happy with that .

rrpc

The only problem with the five shot limit is that it screws up WA1500 and timed and precision matches where it's all based on six shots.

rowa

rrpc wrote: »

The only problem with the five shot limit is that it screws up WA1500 and timed and precision matches where it's all based on six shots.

yes for the sake of one extra round , but maybe ahern doesn't like wa1500 etc either .

daveob007

The minister could have left revolvers alone for the the sake of 1 round.
Fine if he wanted pistols to take only 5 but has anyone told him that revolvers take just 6.

Would love to know who advised him on these new regulations,must have been someone who never seen a gun in their lives except for in a terminator movie...

asta la vista baby

foxshooter243

daveob007 wrote: »

The minister could have left revolvers alone for the the sake of 1 round.
Fine if he wanted pistols to take only 5 but has anyone told him that revolvers take just 6.

Would love to know who advised him on these new regulations,must have been someone who never seen a gun in their lives except for in a terminator movie...

asta la vista baby

Maybe its because some revolvers take more than six, taurus make an 8 shot 22 magnum , they could have left i at 6 shot revolvers though for the sake of competition:)

Sparks

Not all revolvers take six rounds. I think the highest I've seen is a revolver that took thirty rounds...

edit: Yeah, here it is:

rowa

that makes a ten round limit look paltry !

foxshooter243

rowa wrote: »

that makes a ten round limit look paltry !

one on each hip and your good to go!:D

G17

rowa wrote: »

yes for the sake of one extra round , but maybe ahern doesn't like wa1500 etc either .

He just 'tolerates' the Olympics, five shots is all you need.

An emerging gun culture was perceived and thwarted, no-one in the movies fires .22s, no one shoots one handed (unless there's another gun in the other hand), quite simple logic. The sad fact is other European countries have lots of guns with no gun culture aside from a GAA type culture in town and village gun clubs that many clubs here were working very hard to achieve.

But we sadly follow Britain in almost all things (I love Britain by the way generally) including their policies influenced largely by the Heat magazine generation who only know Churchill as that dog from the insurance ad. Look what was allowed to happen with the fox hunting debate, look at the obscene amount of parliament time that was taken up to produce an unenforceable law that benefits, well, no one, including the foxes. That is the way Ireland is going, the media prints/broadcasts it, the people who couldn't pick out Canada on a globe take it as being fact and then spineless politicians take an easy ride on a wave of ignorance, fluff and bunkum.



Little can be done about it now I guess. Maybe if the current government is voted back in they'll re-think the legislation a bit and be a bit more lenient, to the genuine sporting shooters, eh?

Grizzly 45

Little can be done about it now I guess. Maybe if the current government is voted back in they'll re-think the legislation a bit and be a bit more lenient, to the genuine sporting shooters, eh?

[/QUOTE]

Plenty to be done! They obviously didnt get the message in the local elections.Maybe we just have to make sure a resounding NO for the second time in Lisbon might cure their deafness,and get their bosses in Brussels somwhat peeved off with them,and then maybe a general election might get the message across.

Mellor

rrpc wrote: »

You need to read it in conjunction with the original SI (21/2008) to make sense of it.

Well to be fair, its an amendment, that's how all amendments are written/read

gunshy wrote: »

if all these s.i...restrictions,announcements etc...where in plain english think how easy it would be for us ,the gardai...and anyone else involved in f.a licensing :P

IRLConor wrote: »

I dunno, if everything was in simple English then maybe we could talk about shooting rather than legal/political stuff.

Plain english and the law are not good friends, for good reason

rowa wrote: »

why not go to six and include revolvers as unrestricted ,
so a buckmark or ruger mk 2 or 3 is restricted with one magazine and unrestricted with another , stupid !

tbh, I think the reason its five is very much to do with revolvers, if revolvers were 8, wa1500 6 shot pistol would of had better chance of being off the list

rowa wrote: »

i did see that fat-tony but how can one 5 shot .22lr pistol be anymore dangerous than another 5 shot .22lr pistol , there will have to be some sort of lee-way to allow beginners to take up the sport using a cheaper pistol
mine is stamped competition target in two or three places , i'd say most supers would be happy with that .

See, that's the misconception among most people. Here included.

The general premise of firearm ownership is "adequate reason for ownership and fit for purpose".
Therefore, any gun that isn't fit for any genuine reason, really shouldn't be in the hands of anyone.*(see note below)

So, we shouldn't be trying to prove that restricted gun type A or B is just as safe for ownership and as safe to the public as unrestricted gun X or Y. Which appears to be most of the complaints so far.
But instead we should be saying that guns A and B are required to compete in <insert sport>, which on par with the Olympics etc. This route will return far more firearms from the restricted list, and is the reason for some of the returns so far.

Bananaman

This five round thing is a complete joke. Who said there is no list being provided - the only guns I know of that come with 5 round magazines are that now infamous ISSF poster.

A Pardini, Walther etc. can take a 10 round magazine the same as a 22a, Buckmark, Xsesse can so unless the magazine is internal to the firearm there is no way it can be limited to 5 rounds.

6 rounds in a magzine is such a standard it beggars belief that they did not get this. All Revolvers take at least 6 - they ARE the standard - sure you can get higher capacity but they don't call them six shooters because they shoot at sixes. The vast majority of revolvers are 6 shot. The vast majority of Pistol competition uses 6 rounds in the magazine (I know you can argue that it's one up the spout and 5 in the magazine but you are splitting hairs)

I assume that you can license a buckmark, xsesse, 22a fine and the law now says you can only have 5 rounds in a magazine, regardless of that magazines capacity - same as you can have a shotgun with a 5 round magazine on it but you are only allowed to have two in it,

I suppose we will see but someone has been playing silly buggers with the advice and screwed everyone else that the 'powers that be' even came up with the concept of a 5 round magazine limit when it is so unsuitable to target shooting.

B'Man

IRLConor

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Maybe we just have to make sure a resounding NO for the second time in Lisbon might cure their deafness,and get their bosses in Brussels somwhat peeved off with them,and then maybe a general election might get the message across.

Arrrrghhhh.

Please, please, vote on the issues for Lisbon. Whether you're for or against it, it's too important a vote to waste trying to poke at a government that won't listen anyway. There'll be a general election soon anyway.

Also, does anyone see the sense in rejecting ever closer union with a bunch of countries with better firearms laws than ours as a means of protest against our own flawed laws? Talk about biting off your nose to spite your face!

G17

IRLConor wrote: »

Arrrrghhhh.

Please, please, vote on the issues for Lisbon. Whether you're for or against it, it's too important a vote to waste trying to poke at a government that won't listen anyway. There'll be a general election soon anyway.

Also, does anyone see the sense in rejecting ever closer union with a bunch of countries with better firearms laws than ours as a means of protest against our own flawed laws? Talk about biting off your nose to spite your face!

I'm with you on this one, Europe (IMHO) = better for sporting shooting

guns4fun

This Lisbon thing is a non runner for shooters because it's not just FF who want it but many others also.
What needs to be done is that the likes of fine gael and labour should be approached by us and our reps to formulate a common firearms policy for the future.
Ahern and his people simply don't listen and thats why we have this situation,even after the fcp made representations on our behalf Ahern still did his own ill informed thing.
The closer aligned to europe the better for the sake of shooting sports.

The other thing is that newcomers who are on training certs are only allowed to use non restricted firearms and this would make shooting beyond the pockets of most as the 5 shot olympic guns can be very expensive.

We can still have any .22 we wish but most fall into the restriced category,it's the young blood who will suffer here because they can't even use a 6 shot revolver.

Its a bit like Laurel and Hardy NICE ONE DERMOT THATS ANOTHER FINE MESS YOU GOT US INTO.

rrpc

G17 wrote: »

I'm with you on this one, Europe (IMHO) = better for sporting shooting

+1

As well as the fact that every disaffected group out there will vote against Lisbon 'as a protest' and our voice will be lost in the racket they'd create.

An election is much more personal

Half-cocked

I don't own a pistol but I used to have a .22 rifle that had a wonderful collection of magazines with it - everything from 5 to 15 rounds. If it were a pistol, I could switch from restricted to unrestricted and back again in a few seconds:D

For semi-auto pistol owners and importers, the answer to this 5 round capacity will probably involve fixing a stop to the underside of the magazine platform so that it won't push down further than required to fit 5 rounds. Cheap and easy. But if you have a 6 shot revolver I'd imagine you're looking at permanently plugging one chamber. So the semi's can be easily returned to original capacity (new mag or remove stop from old one) but the revolvers will require a new cylinder:mad: A real pain for rev owners if the 5 round capacity is ever lifted.

By the way, does anyone know what the story will be on importing magazines? Are they now considered part of a firearm and requiring an import license? I imported some rifle magazines from the U.S. a few years back and cleared with Garda HQ. They said they didn't consider a magazine part of a firearm, only an accessory.

rrpc

Half-cocked wrote: »

I don't own a pistol but I used to have a .22 rifle that had a wonderful collection of magazines with it - everything from 5 to 15 rounds. If it were a pistol, I could switch from restricted to unrestricted and back again in a few seconds:D

Except that more than 10 rounds in a magazine makes a .22 rifle restricted.

But if you have a 6 shot revolver I'd imagine you're looking at permanently plugging one chamber. So the semi's can be easily returned to original capacity (new mag or remove stop from old one) but the revolvers will require a new cylinder:mad: A real pain for rev owners if the 5 round capacity is ever lifted.

Many .22 revolvers are 8 shot capacity :eek:

By the way, does anyone know what the story will be on importing magazines? Are they now considered part of a firearm and requiring an import license? I imported some rifle magazines from the U.S. a few years back and cleared with Garda HQ. They said they didn't consider a magazine part of a firearm, only an accessory.

No, not here, but I think the US consider them a firearm or a restricted item and won't ship unless the dealer has special permits.