Firearms Licencing (Making it up as they go along)

Glensman

Just had the 'Senior Firearms Licencing Officer' on the blower.

and by God he can blow. He basically ate me because my 10/22 is down as needed for Vermin and Targets. Apparently Targets are not legal unless you are in a Target club (thats fine). I said I don't shoot targets competitively, I use them to zero my rifle and check groupings.

He says, checking groupings is illegal. To cut it short we argued back and forth- he's a clown.

Then we got to the main part. I have traded my .22WMR for a .223.
He said, 'I'll grant you the .223 for foxes' I said that I had put down for crows and rabbits as well. He said that a .223 was a FAR too big and heavy bullet to use on these, and that this would therefore not be legal.

I told him my .22lr was .224" 40gr my .22WMR was .224" 40gr and that the .223 would be firing .224" 40gr as well!!! All that was different was bullet composition and velocity.

He begrudgingly agreed. But the tone of his voice from start to finish was unbelievably combative and he was talking down to me like I was a kid. :mad::mad:

Sparks

Glensman wrote: »

He says, checking groupings is illegal. To cut it short we argued back and forth- he's a clown.

To cut it short, he's saying what we've been saying here for the last five years. Target shooting off an authorised range is illegal under the act and the dolt who forced that act through might have told everyone he didn't really mean zeroing, but he never put it in writing, so legally speaking, zeroing is probably illegal. It needs sorting out, but you'd need either (a) a new Firearms Act, or (b) a test court case taken as far as it has to go (which basicly means the supreme court). But (a) isn't going to happen anytime soon from what little I can see, and (b) would be very expensive and would be in the queue behind the 180-odd JRs up for the courts soon. So we're stuck, at least for the moment.

The law's daft, don't get me wrong - but if your complaint is that Gardai shouldn't make it up as they go along, and the law itself is stupid, well, what exactly are they supposed to do?

Then we got to the main part. I have traded my .22WMR for a .223.
He said, 'I'll grant you the .223 for foxes' I said that I had put down for crows and rabbits as well. He said that a .223 was a FAR too big and heavy bullet to use on these, and that this would therefore not be legal.

Now that's just plain wrong. It's in the Commissioner's guidelines, yes, but those are as much a part of Irish Statute Law as the charter on here is.

Glensman

Sparks wrote: »

To cut it short, he's saying what we've been saying here for the last five years. Target shooting off an authorised range is illegal under the act and the dolt who forced that act through might have told everyone he didn't really mean zeroing, but he never put it in writing, so legally speaking, zeroing is probably illegal. It needs sorting out, but you'd need either (a) a new Firearms Act, or (b) a test court case taken as far as it has to go (which basicly means the supreme court). But (a) isn't going to happen anytime soon from what little I can see, and (b) would be very expensive and would be in the queue behind the 180-odd JRs up for the courts soon. So we're stuck, at least for the moment.

The law's daft, don't get me wrong - but if your complaint is that Gardai shouldn't make it up as they go along, and the law itself is stupid, well, what exactly are they supposed to do?


Now that's just plain wrong. It's in the Commissioner's guidelines, yes, but those are as much a part of Irish Statute Law as the charter on here is.

Sparks, thanks for the Reply.

I should have said though that this is NI Licencing.
I still felt like the rant and thought it might show people that there are other jurisdictions just as backward as you are facing (possibly moreso)...

Sparks

Ah...

/headdesk

Sorry Glensman, more caffeine needed here. I've just heard that story from down here once or twice

Glensman

Sparks wrote: »

Ah...

/headdesk

Sorry Glensman, more caffeine needed here. I've just heard that story from down here once or twice

It's just ridiculous the way they talk to you as well. He was acting like i'm trying to get away with something.

All I'm doing is trading a friggin WMR for a .223!

I asked him how he expected me to shoot grey crows on the mountain with a .22lr. He said the lr was fine except for Very long range like 150yards. I told him he was right, except that 150yards would not be considered long range for vermin shooting...

He was well sickened when I explained that all the bullets were the same diameter and weight! :P

The worst of it is, up here it is against the law to use a .270 on fox. Even though I have a load developed using heads especially for coyotes. If the licencing wasn't so backward I wouldn't need the .223 at all!!

rowa

I had a similar run in years ago with a sergent in the local station , he rang me with a list of firearms i had at the time and DEMANDED i tell him what each and everyone was for, i was at work and couldn't speak, i told him that if the super was satisfied with the reasons i had given on the application forms that should be good enough for him. I thought things would be fairer and more efficient in ulster.
The problem down here is a stupid law drafted by a minister with zero knowledge of firearms but a hatred of them and a police service run by a trade union.

Glensman

rowa wrote: »

I had a similar run in years ago with a sergent in the local station , he rang me with a list of firearms i had at the time and DEMANDED i tell him what each and everyone was for, i was at work and couldn't speak, i told him that if the super was satisfied with the reasons i had given on the application forms that should be good enough for him. I thought things would be fairer and more efficient in ulster.
The problem down here is a stupid law drafted by a minister with zero knowledge of firearms but a hatred of them and a police service run by a trade union.

Here you have to justify every gun. Before you just put down 'Vermin and Sporting purposes' now they want you to go into detail naming every type of vermin. But then they jump all over you when you tell the truth because they don't understand. Also, you now have to justify the guns you ALREADY hold and try to remember what you put down years back word for word.

The guy even went on about 'his experience of a .223' etc. I'm changing the magnum for the .223, it's not a massive difference and I already have a .270!! I would hazard I have fired more .223 rounds than he ever has, and considering I am reloading for .223 already my technical knowledge would likely shade his too!!

demonloop

Glensman wrote: »

Also, you now have to justify the guns you ALREADY hold and try to remember what you put down years back word for word.

It's now a re-grant instead of just a re-issue, and has been for some time. The aim was to get rid of firearms not being used; the old guy with a shotgun under the bed gathering dust, for example. Have to say I see the logic, and sort of agree. I don't like filling in forms anymore than the next guy, but it was/is the only way to make sure the 'good reason' as called for in the firearms act is tested constantly, not just on the initial application.

Probably best practice to keep a copy of your last application so you can have the same information on the form, I do this and thought most did?

Glensman wrote: »

I would hazard I have fired more .223 rounds than he ever has, and considering I am reloading for .223 already my technical knowledge would likely shade his too!!

Not really relevant to your application though. I've most likely fired more .22LR than most in the F&E dept of PSNI but as long as they are making the decisions on my applications, I'll let them think they know best

It's a theory that has served me well, I've really pushed them at times, getting rifles on at really short notice etc and they have always helped me.

I once got a rifle on my certificate same day and had the FAC faxed through to my work, so I could lift the rifle the same night

Glensman

demonloop wrote: »

It's a theory that has served me well, I've really pushed them at times, getting rifles on at really short notice etc and they have always helped me.

I once got a rifle on my certificate same day and had the FAC faxed through to my work, so I could lift the rifle the same night

This application is looking like coming through in around 5 weeks. Which isn't bad, but a lot longer than the 2 weeks they are talking about these days.

My last one took 11months! Unless the the Chief Constable is your brother I don't know how on earth you are getting it through in a day!

On a brighter note, my local FEO is a joy to deal with. It's just them'uns in Belfast that would drive you mad

Ghost.

Hi Glensman,
Ive been lucky and never had to deal with someone like that. Anyone Ive ever dealt with regarding my licence have been really sound. My local sargent is a gent.

Sounds like he had more than a bit of a attitude problem and a very questionable knowledge of the firearms he was responsible for licencing.

But sure look at the bright side, your bad day could have been a whole lot worse. Imagine if he had refused your .223 application:eek:

Thankfully I think people like this gent you described are becoming fewer in number, but like the tayto add, theres always one. And unfortunately there always will be.

demonloop

Glensman wrote: »

My last one took 11months! Unless the the Chief Constable is your brother I don't know how on earth you are getting it through in a day!

On a brighter note, my local FEO is a joy to deal with. It's just them'uns in Belfast that would drive you mad

It was a few years ago admittedly, before civilian staff were in the department, but even nowadays it's amazing how accommodating they can be when asked nicely. I'm no Tom Jones, but if you are pleasant with them, and ask nicely I've found it pays dividends. That's the guys in Belfast too, although my local station staff will always give them a quick call too, on my behalf.

As they say in Tesco, every little helps.