Moderator Refused

Robotack

My buddy just applied for his first F.C. For a .22 magnum CZ452 w/ Mod.

It was taking a while so he called the station yesterday and enquired... He was told that he, and a number of others, had had his application granted but silencer refused.

Innitially he did everything right. Sent in a letter with the FCA1 explaining why he wanted the mod as per the commissioners guidlines for "good reason" etc.

What does he do? Seek clarification or just go the legal route.

rabbit assassin

exact same happened me ! Im still waitin to get the substitution I got a phone call from the supers secretary saying that it was nothing personal to my application but I wasnt granted to use a silencer. She said that its a new rule and in co.meath you cant use a silencer on farmland while hunting. It can only be used at a shooting range........

Mentioned it on here and some of the lads, like myself say Bullsh*t ... I havent even received the substitution and its been in since 1st of feb :eek:

kildare.17hmr

This is not the us where different states have different laws, i would think what you were told is illigal about bot being able to use them hunting in meath? Someone who knows about the legal side will know better!

Op if its a 22 mag your mate got i dont think a mod makes much of a difference on them anyway from what iv heard

It wasn't me!

Blanket rules like that are not legal.

johngalway

Standing by to be corrected here but...

Is it not the case that if you apply and your application is granted, then you are also granted silencer permission once you had the silencer box ticked?

I thought they would refuse the entire application otherwise.

And not using a mod on farmland is utterly f'ing ridiculous. I don't go to ranges but I don't think mods are even used there? (for competitions and the like).

It wasn't me!

No. It'd be much the same as the ability to impose conditions as they see fit. Same way as I can apply for a million rounds and be granted the licence but only get a hundred rounds on it. They aren't obliged to grant or refuse the whole thing, but can pick and choose to a limited extent.

declan1980

Your super is legally obliged to give you a reason in writing for why he refused you your moderator

tomtucker81

Seems strange that a mod is a legally allowed piece of equipment that you can own, but it basically depends on the local superintendents own view of them as to whether you can have one.
So, a fella gets refused one by his super, even though he could be shooting on land in a different district where that super has no problem with them?
It's very unfair almost, that you can have one and a fella that lives less than a mile away can't because there's a different super.
Surely if its a legal piece of equipment then you should be granted it as part of your application.

Jonty

Lads,

If I am invited to hunt in Meath by a landowner, and having been granted my moderator permit, am I in breach of the law????

Does one Super's decision over rule the other's?

Some country, its full of little "kingdoms".

J

johnnymolloy

this happened to me aswell gave all the correct reasons as to why i need the moderator and was told that i shouldnt be shooting near houses think he literally took it that id be shooting at one i ment their will be houses of in the distance and with shooting at night didnt want to give myself or the farmer any grief. i rang up to ask why only to find out i the super had retired and i was told they would sort it out once a new super was put in that was atleast 2 months ago now and still no word think ill ring them next week

It wasn't me!

Jonty wrote: »

Lads,

If I am invited to hunt in Meath by a landowner, and having been granted my moderator permit, am I in breach of the law????

Does one Super's decision over rule the other's?

Some country, its full of little "kingdoms".

J

No. Whoever said that is wrong. Laws aren't made at district level. You can use the moderator if you're legally entitled to.

dbrock

i had major probs with one only recently and finally when i got it, it has this condition
so you just dont know what there going to do

tomtucker81

There can't be a rule for co meath that's different to others. Irish law does not distinguish counties, it is countrywide.in the u.s. they might have local laws like that, but certainly not here.

Longranger

dbrock wrote: »

i had major probs with one only recently and finally when i got it, it has this condition
so you just dont know what there going to do

A crock of poo if ever I heard one:mad:
just because one super doesn't like them it doesn't mean he can make up his own policies which are contradictory to the law.

It wasn't me!

Longranger wrote: »

A crock of poo if ever I heard one:mad:
just because one super doesn't like them it doesn't mean he can make up his own policies which are contradictory to the law.

No. However, the condition attached to dbrock's licence is perfectly legal.

Longranger

Feck me! I never heard of that before. I'm not doubting you, I'm just surprised. Does that mean that when I apply for a firearm cert,the issuing super can choose where I'm allowed to use my firearm?

It wasn't me!

Longranger wrote: »

Feck me! I never heard of that before. I'm not doubting you, I'm just surprised. Does that mean that when I apply for a firearm cert,the issuing super can choose where I'm allowed to use my firearm?

Essentially, yes. If you say "I need it to shoot vermin which are causing problems on my farm" he could attach a condition that it's only to be used on your farm. It's a restriction, but one in keeping with your reasons for applying. For dbrock, I suspect his application mentioned something about needing the moderator due to horses or the like at the address mentioned. As such, the super allowed him to do so, but he's not allowed use it elsewhere. It makes a sort of clumsy sense really.

tomtucker81

So if an application states that the rifle and mod will only be used on farmland so as not to startle livestock, and also the mod ensures you can cull enough vermin, it could be more readily accepted?

Longranger

Will they(government)EVER cop on to the fact that there needs to be ONE office to make these decisions and not this district to district crap....

Farmlife

dbrock wrote: »

i had major probs with one only recently and finally when i got it, it has this condition
so you just dont know what there going to do

My licence arrived in the post and it had the 500 round limit in that box, first time i ever seen it used. then when i paid in the post office they kept it, after a disagreement over who kept the letter post office rand FPU who told post office to keep it.

So if mine had what yours has, unless they print it on the licence will it stand as an additional condition?

Jonty

It wasn't me! wrote: »

No. Whoever said that is wrong. Laws aren't made at district level. You can use the moderator if you're legally entitled to.

I agree fully, but I'd like to see what would happen if you were in possession of a licensed moderator, issued by another superintendent in another division, and to come to the attention of the gardai, while shooting with permission in Co. Meath?


It would make interesting reading if it went to court.


J

It wasn't me!

Jonty wrote: »

I agree fully, but I'd like to see what would happen if you were in possession of a licensed moderator, issued by another superintendent in another division, and to come to the attention of the gardai, while shooting with permission in Co. Meath?


It would make interesting reading if it went to court.


J

It couldn't go to court. For the DPP to take a case, there has to actually have been a law broken.

Chiparus

i really think they base their opinions on moderators from watching James Bond.

Someone needs to get an audiogram and send it in with their application to this super.

Explain that while hunting it is not practical to wear ear defender, and a moderated rifle is less likely to cause noise induced hearing loss.

Jonty

It wasn't me! wrote: »

It couldn't go to court. For the DPP to take a case, there has to actually have been a law broken.

Not necessarily, in a district court, for less serious crimes, don't the Gardai prosecute not the defendant?


http://www.dppireland.ie/filestore/documents/information_booklets_-_revised_july_2010/ENGLISH_-_Role_of_the_DPP.pdf

Just going from the above link.


Not trying to be a troll here or anything either.

J

tomtucker81

As far as I know for small things gardai prosecute, but for more serious stuff the dpp has to direct and run the case.the gardai basically become state witnesses in that case.
Anyway, there really should be a national body that runs the licencing process, and refer with the gardai for character checks as necessary.the whole local super thing causes such differences from town to town, and is basically stupid and unfair.
If the super believes that a silencer could be used for sinister motives, surely that applicant shouldn't have a gun at all?!!!

Farmlife

Jonty wrote: »

Not necessarily, in a district court, for less serious crimes, don't the Gardai prosecute not the defendant?

Would be a brave Gard to take that case to a district court

rabbit assassin

Longranger wrote: »

Will they(government)EVER cop on to the fact that there needs to be ONE office to make these decisions and not this district to district crap....

Itll never happen. Sure itd make sense so why would they do that

German pointer

Jonty wrote: »

Not necessarily, in a district court, for less serious crimes, don't the Gardai prosecute not the defendant?


http://www.dppireland.ie/filestore/documents/information_booklets_-_revised_july_2010/ENGLISH_-_Role_of_the_DPP.pdf

Just going from the above link.


Not trying to be a troll here or anything either.

J

To issue a blanket ban is unlawfull as each case must be judged on it's own merits.
Just because the super in Lets say aera A wont licence a moderater in his district does it not mean a hunter from another district aera B cannot use it in aera A as long as he has a licence with the s on it. If he hes a licence with the s on it there is sweet Fukc All the super or anybody else can do about it.
ie he has a licence for it and licences are nation wide not county wide. The super is trying to write the law when all he can legally do is enforce and or uphold the law.
He cannot not make the law, that is the job of the law makers in the Dail and nowhere else.

Hunter21

Doesn't the original poster have 30 days to appeal the decision?

German pointer

Hunter21 wrote: »

Doesn't the original poster have 30 days to appeal the decision?

Yes, but it can be costly. I was refused about 2 years ago and went to court, I won in court :D and got my licence but it cost me €500 for the solicitor:(:(

johngalway

Chiparus wrote: »

Someone needs to get an audiogram and send it in with their application to this super.

Explain that while hunting it is not practical to wear ear defender, and a moderated rifle is less likely to cause noise induced hearing loss.

Been there, done that got the silencer(s) and hearing loss to prove it.

Hidden hearing do a report, but if you go there make sure afterwards if you don't want letters and calls from them every high tide to have them take you off their database.