chat with the super

declan1980

my local super intendent called me in today to have a chat about the .223 i applied for.
it basically consisted of him trying to trip me up for a half an hour asking me questions on my understanding of the capabilities and ballistics of the gun, my shooting area, why i wanted it, why i wanted a moderator etc.
has anybody else had to go through this when applying for .223's before, and has anyone eer been refused a licence?

endasmail

went through all of this as well the super for .22
have to say everything worked out ok ,and i answered his questions no probs and he obviously was happy with me cause he granted me the license

mac80

Have you had a gun license before or is this your first time applying?

When I was younger I got a bit of grief from the FO because I kept chasing him for my licence, he got a bit awkward with me. I waited 12 weeks for the licence because of the idiot.
Last year I had a .22 and wanted to go up to .223, walked in to Sergents office and told him this, he asked me "Is there much of a difference in the 2 calibers"
Of course I said no and he said well then no problem work away.
I think I could have asked for any caliber I wanted he just didnt care less and hadnt a clue about calibers etc.

I ended up getting a HMR instead though

In saying that other guys in the area have had problems with him on "NEW applications"

All you can do is be honest with them and give the impression that your a honest,decent person and are looking for the license for the right reasons. Most of them will play ball with you if your straight with them.

Milan

declan1980

mac80 wrote: »

Have you had a gun license before or is this your first time applying?

When I was younger I got a bit of grief from the FO because I kept chasing him for my licence, he got a bit awkward with me. I waited 12 weeks for the licence because of the idiot.
Last year I had a .22 and wanted to go up to .223, walked in to Sergents office and told him this, he asked me "Is there much of a difference in the 2 calibers"
Of course I said no and he said well then no problem work away.
I think I could have asked for any caliber I wanted he just didnt care less and hadnt a clue about calibers etc.

I ended up getting a HMR instead though

In saying that other guys in the area have had problems with him on "NEW applications"

All you can do is be honest with them and give the impression that your a honest,decent person and are looking for the license for the right reasons. Most of them will play ball with you if your straight with them.

Milan

i've already got a hmr and a shotgun. i want to move up from the hmr because its too light for charlie.

mac80

Can see a problem then

declan1980

mac80 wrote: »

Can see a problem then

what problem do you see?

mac80

Sorry typo, I meant to to say "Can't see a problem"

Time for bed I think !

Tackleberrywho

Its quite common, I had my Chat with the Chief Sup, Could not meet a nicer man.

Most guys who wanted non standard had same in my area.

Half-cocked

Your local Super is perfectly entitled to call you in for a chat and query the reasons why you want a particular firearm, it's how he comes to the opinion that you are/aren't fit to hold a license. However, there is a difference between forming an opinion and being downright rude, bullying, arrogant, dismissive and uncooperative. Unfortunately, rather a lot of Supers seem to cross that line. Throw in ignorance of the very firearms they are granting licenses for and problems multiply.

For example, a few years back a friend of mine applied for a .223 and was called in to meet the Super. The Super was discourteous and had a really bad attitude and had already formed the opinion that my friend was up to no good because he wanted a 'military' calibre gun. He tried to bully him into withdrawing the application but my mate dug his heels in. Eventualy they reached a compromise - a .22-250!!!!! We often wonder did the Super ever realize he had licensed a far more powerful firearm that that originaly applied for. At least now you can complain to the Ombudsman if the Super is rude and discourteous.

Grizzly 45

Plus one on that HC.
I t reminds me of a saying of a famous general [Patton?] "There are no such thing as bed men,just bad officers leading them".
With all what you describe ,and more in some CS and Supers attitude to the gun owning public.We have a lot of "bad officers" leading by and large a very good corps of people trying to do their job and be right by the Irish people.
Everyone says Garda morale is at an all time low, wonder why??:rolleyes:
Apply the "Peter principle" to this and any Govt organisation and you will see why the country is in the state it is in.

declan1980

Half-cocked wrote: »

Your local Super is perfectly entitled to call you in for a chat and query the reasons why you want a particular firearm, it's how he comes to the opinion that you are/aren't fit to hold a license. However, there is a difference between forming an opinion and being downright rude, bullying, arrogant, dismissive and uncooperative. Unfortunately, rather a lot of Supers seem to cross that line. Throw in ignorance of the very firearms they are granting licenses for and problems multiply.

For example, a few years back a friend of mine applied for a .223 and was called in to meet the Super. The Super was discourteous and had a really bad attitude and had already formed the opinion that my friend was up to no good because he wanted a 'military' calibre gun. He tried to bully him into withdrawing the application but my mate dug his heels in. Eventualy they reached a compromise - a .22-250!!!!! We often wonder did the Super ever realize he had licensed a far more powerful firearm that that originaly applied for. At least now you can complain to the Ombudsman if the Super is rude and discourteous.

the man wasn't rude in any way, quite the contrary actually.
i felt he was very much hung up on the calibre though and its military origins, and seemed to have very little understanding of ballistics even though he quizzed me on my understanding of the ballistics of the calibre.
he asked me what type of rifle i have now, i said a 17hmr.
he then asked me why not get a .22 and shoot foxes with that, i told him a 17hmr was more powerful than a .22, which he could not understand until i told him that it was a magnum rimfire travelling 2550 fps and has over 1.5 times the muzzle energy of a hv .22 round.
you would imagine that the people regulating the licencing would actually go to the bother of learning about the capabilities of these guns instead of only focusing on how big the number of the calibre is.
its the same old "22/250 is a bigger number than .220 swift therefore it must be more powerful" crap

Half-cocked

declan1980 wrote: »

its the same old "22/250 is a bigger number than .220 swift therefore it must be more powerful" crap

Quite often you come across .22lr = .22wmr = .22 hornet = .22 swift = .22/250, they're all .22's aren't they????:D

Flawed and all as their logic is, they make it even worse by not checking the actual calibre - .22/250 is .224, 'bigger' than the .223 that they have panic attacks over. At least their ignorance of ballistics etc can work in our favour sometimes, I swapped a .22lr for a .22/250 because the guard came from the 'all .22's are the same' school of thought. I believe many shooters over the years did the same to get swifts and hornets - the guards thought they were all the same because they weren't deer calibres.

Traumadoc

.22 air rifle= 22/250:rolleyes:

Half-cocked

Traumadoc wrote: »

.22 air rifle= 22/250:rolleyes:

I'm sure you'd get away with it in some places.......

deerhunter1

Half-cocked wrote: »

Quite often you come across .22lr = .22wmr = .22 hornet = .22 swift = .22/250, they're all .22's aren't they????:D

Flawed and all as their logic is, they make it even worse by not checking the actual calibre - .22/250 is .224, 'bigger' than the .223 that they have panic attacks over. At least their ignorance of ballistics etc can work in our favour sometimes, I swapped a .22lr for a .22/250 because the guard came from the 'all .22's are the same' school of thought. I believe many shooters over the years did the same to get swifts and hornets - the guards thought they were all the same because they weren't deer calibres.

I can remember when the 220 Swift first got popular, a guy I know applied for his first rifle (18yrs Old) never had or fired a gun prior to this. He applied for a 220 swift had his licence quite quickly without much fuss or reason it was wanted, the guy did not koow what to shoot or what to use it on. I know the guard and mentioned it to him, he was not concerned as it only a .22 what was the problem, I waited a day or so met the guard and I took out a .220 swift round from my pocket and asked would it be possible to get a licence for a calibre like this;), he said what the f--k do you want a powerful bullet like that for, are you going to shoot deer?, I said this is the .22 BULLET (as he called it) that you have given the young lad the licence for. He nearly S--t himself. This is what you are dealing with.

mac80

My last licence for a .22 lr was down as a .220

johngalway

mac80 wrote: »

My last licence for a .22 lr was down as a .220

I think that was standard on the old licenses, probably not much different on the new. My .22lr was down as 220 Inches :rolleyes:

Rovi

The new licences are the same.

Sparks

Yup. I'm licenced for a .220 myself...

Grizzly 45

Same here.

johngalway

chem wrote: »

Been a firearms owner in this country makes you alot wiser as to how this country really works

Having anything to do with anyone or anything related to the legal system in this country has the same effect!

pachey100

My shotgun licence came through the other day. It has .17 inches shotgun what ever the hell that is. I had a word with the local gard and he said "its grand". I guy I know got 4 licences for the same gun:eek: what the hell is wrong with them?

declan1980

Half-cocked wrote: »

Quite often you come across .22lr = .22wmr = .22 hornet = .22 swift = .22/250, they're all .22's aren't they????:D

Flawed and all as their logic is, they make it even worse by not checking the actual calibre - .22/250 is .224, 'bigger' than the .223 that they have panic attacks over. At least their ignorance of ballistics etc can work in our favour sometimes, I swapped a .22lr for a .22/250 because the guard came from the 'all .22's are the same' school of thought. I believe many shooters over the years did the same to get swifts and hornets - the guards thought they were all the same because they weren't deer calibres.

well if he refuses me the .223, i'll use this to my advantage and swap the hmr for a .17 remington centerfire

Jonty

declan1980 wrote: »

well if he refuses me the .223, i'll use this to my advantage and swap the hmr for a .17 remington centerfire

have you considered a .204 instead of the 17 centrefire

declan1980

Jonty wrote: »

have you considered a .204 instead of the 17 centrefire

i did, but the 17 centrefire would just be a substitution from the hmr.
hence no 80 euro and it would probably be processed straight away.
i dont think there's much of a difference in the price of the rounds for either of them but i could be wrong about that.
any way if he lets me have the .223 i'll stick to that

Tackleberrywho

declan1980 wrote: »

i did, but the 17 centrefire would just be a substitution from the hmr.
hence no 80 euro and it would probably be processed straight away.
i dont think there's much of a difference in the price of the rounds for either of them but i could be wrong about that.
any way if he lets me have the .223 i'll stick to that

Best of luck with it!

declan1980

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Best of luck with it!

thanks tack i'll be posting some pics when i get it

eagleriver

Having been called in for the first time in 20 years for a chat with the Super, I asked my local FO what the reasoning for the chat was. I had figured it was just that they were doing a bit of cleaning house because of the new 3 year system, but I was informed that it was only about the moddy. My super was quick, efficient and friendly. Although when he asked me why i wanted it and i explained to him the trouble with all the other bunnies with a mile going to ground when the first one is shot, he said... "but do you not think thats fair?"
When i replied " not when they are going in my pot" he laughed and said "grand... it will be approved". Think it was just a check to make sure i had two arms, two legs and wasn't foaming at the mouth. I wonder is the moddy the common theme between the call-ins??

endasmail

eagleriver wrote: »

Having been called in for the first time in 20 years for a chat with the Super, I asked my local FO what the reasoning for the chat was. I had figured it was just that they were doing a bit of cleaning house because of the new 3 year system, but I was informed that it was only about the moddy. My super was quick, efficient and friendly. Although when he asked me why i wanted it and i explained to him the trouble with all the other bunnies with a mile going to ground when the first one is shot, he said... "but do you not think thats fair?"
When i replied " not when they are going in my pot" he laughed and said "grand... it will be approved". Think it was just a check to make sure i had two arms, two legs and wasn't foaming at the mouth. I wonder is the moddy the common theme between the call-ins??

could be
or it could be name to face type thing

fodda

For those who dont know, the .22 or .303 .223 etc comes from the old British Imperial measurement which was and is perfectly correct before the EU forced decimilisation on us. If your cert is .22 inches or .220 inches then this is correct as .22 or .220 means 220 thousands of an inch diameter, and .223 means 223 thousands of an inch diametre and .303 is 303 thousands of an inch diametre.....same goes for .38, .45, .357, .50, etc etc etc.

Thousandsth of an inch was and is an extremely accurate way of measuring metal in engineering terms, and the thickness of a human hair was around 2 thousands of an inch.

Showing my age:o

Mr.Flibble

fodda wrote: »

For those who dont know, the .22 or .303 .223 etc comes from the old British Imperial measurement which was and is perfectly correct before the EU forced decimilisation on us. If your cert is .22 inches or .220 inches then this is correct as .22 or .220 means 220 thousands of an inch diameter, and .223 means 223 thousands of an inch diametre and .303 is 303 thousands of an inch diametre.....same goes for .38, .45, .357, .50, etc etc etc.

Thousandsth of an inch was and is an extremely accurate way of measuring metal in engineering terms, and the thickness of a human hair was around 2 thousands of an inch.

Showing my age:o

There's nothing wrong with showing your age, nor with Imperial measurements.

But you are exposing your lack of knowledge of calibres, the problem being what you see as measurements accurate to 3 places of decimals are in many cases just names.

Try this little game. Put the following in order of bullet diameter:

.218 Bee
.219 Zipper
.22LR
.22 Hornet
.22 Hi Power
.22 PPC
.22/250
.220 Swift
.221 Fireball
.222 Remington
.222 1/2
.223 Remington
.224 Weatherby
.225 Winchester