ANY MORE COURT APPEALS PENDING????

daveob007

Just wondering if all the appeals have been heard yet and what kind of results are coming back.
Have not heard about any in a while,since the guy in Kerry and his sons case.

bunny shooter

Few of my friends cases due to be heard next week

freddieot

Mine is held over for mention until early January. I believe the Judge wants to see what will happen with about 8 High Court appeals due to be considered in December.

I think there are also 50-70 others in the same boat in Dublin. Perhaps more in the rest of the country and somewhere in the region of 170 more High Court Cases to be heard - so this is a long way from being over.

Heard of a couple of guys in Galway a few weeks ago that won in the DC and also had their costs awarded.

meathshooter1

mine is put back till january for mention pending high court case

dCorbus

Here's one more successful appeal recently granted, as published in the Athlone Advertiser last Friday (http://www.advertiser.ie/athlone/article/33474) :

Gun dealer successfully appeals Garda objection to pistol licence
Athlone Advertiser, November 12, 2010.

A Midlands gun and tackle shop owner has successfully appealed the chief superintendent’s decision not to grant him a certificate for a Heckler and Koch 9mm pistol.

The firearms dealer, whose address cannot be published by court order, already has certificates for three shotguns, one revolver, one rifle, and three restricted rifles for his own use.

However Chief Superintendent Willie Ryan refused his application to hold the pistol on the basis that there are other similar but less powerful weapons he could use for target practice.

He told the court it was a very powerful weapon which in the wrong hands could be a greater risk to the public than other guns.

This was disputed by the man’s legal team who argued that it is actually more difficult for untrained people to use this pistol.

The man is allowed to sell and hold weapons of a higher calibre at his shop and often has to check H&K pistols which may be faulty.

He has a gun licence for 40 years and has been a member of various game, pistol, and rifle clubs in Ireland and the world.

He described shooting as his sport and wanted the pistol for his own competitive shooting practice and to help prepare for big game shooting abroad which he hopes to do when he retires fully.

While rifles are used for shooting big game, he told the court he would be obliged to carry a pistol as a sidearm in the event of having to humanely kill a fallen animal.

Inspector Jarlath Folan insisted that the H&K pistol is designed solely for use as a military/police weapon and evidence was given by a Garda ballistics expert that they are designed “solely for taking human life”.

He suggested that an Olympic pistol would be just as suitable for the man’s sport but would be less dangerous as it carries fewer rounds, cannot be carried cocked and ready to aim, and cannot have a bullet in the chamber while holstered.

However the man said Olympic pistols are used for shooting paper targets and would be dangerous if used for large steel targets as the bullets would ricochet off the steel rather than knock them down.

“Anyone can shoot paper targets, there’s no challenge in it,” he said, adding that he gets satisfaction from seeing the steel-plate targets fall. They are used to simulate shooting large animals.

There was significant discussion of the physics of different firearms and of the legislation surrounding their use.

Barrister Mark Harty said it was “unfortunate” that chief superintendents feel they’re obliged to control the proliferation of guns.

Judge Clyne agreed and said that if the State wanted to get rid of handguns, they should have been banned completely in the recent changes to legislation.

He said it was undisputed that the man before him was of the highest integrity and said all firearms are dangerous in the wrong hands.

“It seems invidious that you can have a pistol and other guns of higher strength under your control yet you as a dealer cannot use one,” he said and granted the appeal.

What's even more interesting is the blatant nonsense that is put forward as "evidence" by so-called experts:

"He suggested that an Olympic pistol would be just as suitable for the man’s sport but would be less dangerous as it carries fewer rounds, cannot be carried cocked and ready to aim, and cannot have a bullet in the chamber while holstered."

Correct me if I'm wrong here - but is that not just a total fabrication and so far removed from reality and the facts as to be a joke, were it not such a serious distortion of the facts? 4 lies in one sentence?

Although in fairness and in the interests of balance, this statement: "Anyone can shoot paper targets, there’s no challenge in it” is also bullsh1t of the highest order or at least a gross misrepresentation of the skills involved in target shooting.

Sparks

dCorbus wrote: »

What's even more interesting is the blatant nonsense that is put forward as "evidence" by so-called experts:
"He suggested that an Olympic pistol would be just as suitable for the man’s sport but would be less dangerous as it carries fewer rounds, cannot be carried cocked and ready to aim, and cannot have a bullet in the chamber while holstered."
Correct me if I'm wrong here - but is that not just a total fabrication and so far removed from reality and the facts as to be a joke, were it not such a serious distortion of the facts? 4 lies in one sentence?

Can't really see very much in what was reported that I'd agree with. A firearm isn't less dangerous because it carries fewer rounds, not in any sane circumstances; you can carry most Olympic pistols around cocked and loaded without any impediment other than range rules and common sense; and while it is true that you can't have a bullet in the chamber while holstered, that's only because most Olympic pistols don't have holsters (there's no need for them and they live in a case normally rather than being carried around in a holster) - but if you had a holster made specially, then yes, you could have them holstered while cocked and loaded.

Utter tosh, in other words. I'd be worried about a waste of taxpayers money being spent on that expert if that was a verbatim report (however, I'm also somewhat skeptical of the expertise of journalists when it comes to reporting on firearms, and I'd want to read the transcripts... which probably don't exist since this was a DC case ).

Although in fairness and in the interests of balance, this statement: "Anyone can shoot paper targets, there’s no challenge in it” is also bullsh1t of the highest order or at least a gross misrepresentation of the skills involved in target shooting.

Yeah, that one's right up there with saying that Olympic shooting is like watching paint dry.

bunny shooter

3 more DC cases resolved in shooters favour today for restricted pistols :cool:

Rew

Anyone heard of a case won in the Meath area yet?

meathshooter1

Rew wrote: »

Anyone heard of a case won in the Meath area yet?

I have an appeal in the meath area there are 9 appeals with mine all have been put back till jan for mention pending outcome of our and other JR in the high court things are looking good but I cant elaborate for obvious reasons

Rew

meathshooter1 wrote: »

I have an appeal in the meath area there are 9 appeals with mine all have been put back till jan for mention pending outcome of our and other JR in the high court things are looking good but I cant elaborate for obvious reasons

Mines in there with yours... Cheers ;-)

Tac

i had a Glock 9mm and a SIG P226 9mm, but i got rid of last year cause i knew this "CRAP" was coming about the licencing. ANY firearm is dangerous in the wrong hands, its not the guns who kill people, its the people who kill.

correct me if im worng, but would'nt a sawn off 12guage be alot more destructive than a 9mm?

anyway, in rosscommon / longford / mayo most 9mm pistols have been revoked citing "no good reason for having the gun"

if one is a member of an authorised range, there's a reason,,,,hang on, its the only reason!! the arguement is that all semi 9mm's are police / military design and therefore used for killing humans, thats why chief-supt's are not inclined to grant them, but if it was a .22lr would it be a different story?

its not fair and hopefully our courts will put its trust in the decent target shooter who just wants to enjoy his sport.

Bananaman

Tac wrote: »

anyway, in rosscommon / longford / mayo most 9mm pistols have been revoked citing "no good reason for having the gun"

I assume you meant refused - revoking a license is a different animal altogether.

Tac wrote: »

its not fair and hopefully our courts will put its trust in the decent target shooter who just wants to enjoy his sport.

It's not about the gray of trust - it's about the black and white of the law and if that is the case most people should have nothing to worry about.

B'Man

Tac

yea, i meant refused alright,,but if it is about law, why are the 9mm refused? dosent membership of an authorsied range justify one's reason for having a pistol....alot of the pistol applications were refusd on the grounds "no good reason for having firearm"

if an authorised range is not a good reason, what is?? its about no one wanting to sign off on granting a 9mm semi auto to a member of the public incase things go pear shaped....and innocent people get hurt. which is wrong, if an applicant meets the Firearms Act criteria, and is a range member, why are they been refused on the probablity of an incident that may, and chances are, never will happen? bad apples in all parts of society, but the majority of firearms holders (of all types) are responsible people, and take their sport extremely serious.

Sparks

Tac wrote: »

yea, i meant refused alright,,but if it is about law, why are the 9mm refused?

Because any 9mm not licenced to the applicant prior to Nov 18 2008 is restricted according to the restricted list SI; and no restricted short firearm may be licenced according to section 3D of the Firearms Acts as introduced by section 30 of the Criminal Justice (Misc.Provisions) Act 2009:

3D.— (1) As and from the date of commencement of this section, no application for a firearm certificate in respect of a short firearm shall be considered by an issuing person other than for—

(a) a device capable of discharging blank ammunition and to be used as a starting gun or blank firing gun;
(b) a short firearm of a type specified at paragraph 4(2)(e) of the Fire-arms (Restricted Firearms and Ammunition) Order 2008 ( S.I. No. 21 of 2008 ) and designed for use as so specified;
(c) a short firearm for which the applicant for the firearm certificate held a firearm certificate on or before 19 November 2008.

(2) Any firearm certificate in respect of a short firearm, other than one to which paragraphs (a) to (c) of subsection (1) relates, granted between 19 November 2008 and the date of commencement of this section and in force shall stand revoked.

(3) For the purposes of this section, “ short fire arm” means a firearm either with a barrel not longer than 30 centimetres or whose overall length (excluding the length of any detachable component) does not exceed 60 centimetres.”.

BTW, I've not seen it tested, but shouldn't one of the UK's Long-Barrelled Revolvers not be a short firearm as defined in subsection (3) there?
So there might technically be a way to licence a restricted handgun, but you're talking about some pretty esoteric cases.

Bananaman

Sparks,

I __assume__ the OP is talking about being refused a license when he sought to renew a license he had before November 2008

if not, and if he is talking about licensing one now, he will not be able to do so at the moment.

in that case, provided he ihas kept his bib clean, Is and was a member of a club, has regularly attended the range and ideally taken part in competition or practice for a CF pistol discipline and meets the current requirements under law - he should have been licensed

unfortunately, as we are all well aware, your address is the primary deciding factor on whether or not you get licensed

You are also assuming that it is the firearm that people want - hence your comment about LBR - but you are wrong - it is the sport that they want - the one they have taken part in for years - for which they require CFPistols - not LBRs

people who play hurling do not have some inate need for a Hurl - but you need one to take part in the sport and a hockey stick just won't cut it

B'Man

Chipboard

My solicitor told me that mine wouldn't be taken until after a Judicial Review in the High Court which was due to take place this month.

I think it all boils down to the following (excerpt from my letter to the Chief Super with my application);

I note that page 19 of the Commissioners Guidelines specified that "reasonable inquiries ought to be made to verify the applicants good reason" and these "inquiries may incude verification of ...authorised rifle, pistol club or shooting range membership" (non applicable reasons omitted). Page 20 of the guidlines states that "membership of a particular club will generally be the core of the applicant's good reason". My application included details of my membership of XXXX XXXX which is a pistol range and club authorised by the Department of Justice to cater for centerfire target shooting (Pulse number *****). I am aware that the club supplies details of the frequency of my attendance to An Garda Siochana at regular intervals. I would contend that as the legislation provides that "each application is to be assessed on its individual merits" and if as stated in the guidelines, it is anticipated that "membership of a particular club will generally be the core of the applicants good reason" then were this not a good reason, the guidelines would say so. On the contrary the guidelines go on detail what constitutes an authorised rifle or pistol club, thus indicating that satisfaction of this requirement is a good reason as anticipated by the Act.

Bear in mind that this was written after he had told me in our meeting that he wasn't going to grant me the licence - no point being sheepish at this point, not that I was in any way sheepish at the meeting.

Its funny that every Garda I have spoken to since has told me its a pile of sh1te and wished me good luck with the appeal, and I am including the Chief Supers assistant, my FO, the guy who rang me to see if I had handed them in to a dealer and the guy I spoke to recently to see about transporting them from one dealer to another. In fact the CS's assistant told me that "the Chief doesn't mind me taking the appeal and doesn't mind if I get them from it."

Huge expenditure in these straightened times, for something that no one in the Defence side of the cases cares about.

Tac

[QUOTE/] Its funny that every Garda I have spoken to since has told me its a pile of sh1te and wished me good luck with the appeal, and I am including the Chief Supers assistant, my FO, the guy who rang me to see if I had handed them in to a dealer and the guy I spoke to recently to see about transporting them from one dealer to another. In fact the CS's assistant told me that "the Chief doesn't mind me taking the appeal and doesn't mind if I get them from it."

Huge expenditure in these straightened times, for something that no one in the Defence side of the cases cares about.[/QUOTE]


it just goes to show that none of them want to put their name down for signing off on someone that they dont know, to have a 9mm semi auto pistol in their posession...wheather they meet the legal requirements or not.

the law is an ass!! any rifle above .308 i believe is "restricted".. (i maybe wrong) ...but a .300 Win Mag (which is basically a .308 MAGNUM) is considered "legally" smaller than a .308 and is therefore not restricted. goes to prove that some of the people that write these laws really dont have a full blown knowledge of what they are talking about.