Spent cases = Live cases ????????

Zxthinger

====================================================================================================

MOD NOTE


Thread split off from original thread in the Hunting section. Here.

====================================================================================================



Some fair points cass!! BbbbbBut!! Yer all wrong on the zeroing out side a range issue! Yes it illegal to target shoot at an unapproved range without reasonable excuse!!
"Reason able excuse" that's the ticket! I'm just being reasonable in assuring that I know where the bullets are going and that the animals welfare is being considered by proofing my zero or drop at an extended range where I might expect to encounter game!!
Pull out the wording from the act and you'll see that reasonable excuse or other such caveat is provide for the reasonable man.
Target shooting is the promotion of marksman skill with training etc etc. Zeroing is not target shooting!!

Another one I heard tonight gave me a giggle! Spent brass counts towards your ammo limit!! BS our ammo limits are set in cartridges! Cartridges are full rounds. Component parts will get you burnt without a licence for a particular calibre but once you have a licence it entitles you to hold 'ammunition'.Period!
Your only limit is the amount of rounds as per the pack page of your physical licence and the amounts of powder/set put within the 1875 explosives act. Rant over! Lol sorry for changing course there!!'lol

cookimonster

Zxthinger, your rebuttal certainly contradicts many of the trains of thought outlined here on the forum, which would be based on the present-day fire arms legislation.
I have fortunately been lucky that the local FO has been a rock of sense over the last 30 odd years and the various changes to fire arm licensing. But by his own admissions one or two Supers have been a bit sticky with the 'lettering of the regs'. My point is that no matter what we may think or assume the law will always be interpreted and manipulated differently dependent on your view stance, many a reasonable man has ended up in the dock when he thought his excuse was valid.

The Aussie

Zxthinger wrote: »

Another one I heard tonight gave me a giggle! Spent brass counts towards your ammo limit!! BS our ammo limits are set in cartridges! Cartridges are full rounds. Component parts will get you burnt without a licence for a particular calibre but once you have a licence it entitles you to hold 'ammunition'.Period!
Your only limit is the amount of rounds as per the pack page of your physical licence and the amounts of powder/set put within the 1875 explosives act. Rant over! Lol sorry for changing course there!!'lol

Wrong, you can giggle and rant all you want, you can even roll in the grass if it tickles your fancy, the 2006 act supercedes a 1875 explosives act....

BTW, concentrate on the line that starts with the (b) in front of it with the operative words being Ingredient and Component.

“(1) In this Act—

“ ammunition ” (except where used in relation to a prohibited weapon) means ammunition for a firearm and includes—

(a) grenades, bombs and other similar missiles, whether or not capable of being used with a firearm,

(b) any ingredient or component part of any such ammunition or missile, and

(c) restricted ammunition, unless the context otherwise requires;

Section 26 of the Criminal Justice Act 2006

Cass

Zxthinger wrote: »

Some fair points cass!! BbbbbBut!! Yer all wrong on the zeroing out side a range issue! Yes it illegal to target shoot at an unapproved range without reasonable excuse!!
"Reason able excuse" that's the ticket! I'm just being reasonable in assuring that I know where the bullets are going and that the animals welfare is being considered by proofing my zero or drop at an extended range where I might expect to encounter game!!
Pull out the wording from the act and you'll see that reasonable excuse or other such caveat is provide for the reasonable man.
Target shooting is the promotion of marksman skill with training etc etc. Zeroing is not target shooting!!

I'm afraid you're wrong there. Especially the highlighted bit.

That may well be a definition to you or others, but it has no basis in law and no distinction either. To zero your rifle you must aim at a target. The term target is covered by a multitude of items as said above such as cans, bottles, paper, etc. What exactly constitutues zeroing has never been fully explained or defined. However the act of shooting at a target makes it target shooting, and as such it must be done on an authorised range.

Frankly it needs looking at, and to be specifically defined, but i fear this will only happen when a test case comes before the courts, and this does not guarantee it will turn out for the shooter. Plus who wants to be the test case.

However if you care to quote the specific piece of legislation that you found that allows target shooting outside an authorised range or even specifically names "Zeroing" as not being target shooting and legal outside an authorised range i would genuinely love to see and read it. It would make our lives much easier and open the doors to so many other lads that need this available to them, legally.

Another one I heard tonight gave me a giggle! Spent brass counts towards your ammo limit!! BS our ammo limits are set in cartridges! Cartridges are full rounds. Component parts will get you burnt without a licence for a particular calibre but once you have a licence it entitles you to hold 'ammunition'.Period!
Your only limit is the amount of rounds as per the pack page of your physical licence and the amounts of powder/set put within the 1875 explosives act. Rant over! Lol sorry for changing course there!!'lol

As Aussie pointed out you're wrong on the ammo. Limits are set in numbers and not cartridges. This is the reason why most lads on the reloading squad in the Midlands have such high limits. We have to account for the live rounds and empty brass.

J C

wrote:

Originally Posted by Zxthinger

Another one I heard tonight gave me a giggle! Spent brass counts towards your ammo limit!! BS our ammo limits are set in cartridges! Cartridges are full rounds. Component parts will get you burnt without a licence for a particular calibre but once you have a licence it entitles you to hold 'ammunition'.Period!
Your only limit is the amount of rounds as per the pack page of your physical licence and the amounts of powder/set put within the 1875 explosives act.


The Aussie
Wrong, you can giggle and rant all you want, you can even roll in the grass if it tickles your fancy, the 2006 act supercedes a 1875 explosives act....

BTW, concentrate on the line that starts with the (b) in front of it with the operative words being Ingredient and Component.

Quote:
“(1) In this Act—

“ ammunition ” (except where used in relation to a prohibited weapon) means ammunition for a firearm and includes—

(a) grenades, bombs and other similar missiles, whether or not capable of being used with a firearm,

(b) any ingredient or component part of any such ammunition or missile, and

(c) restricted ammunition, unless the context otherwise requires;

Section 26 of the Criminal Justice Act 2006

Hi guys ... just exploring the 'wonders' of the boards.ie and came across your forum.

Far be it for me to question experts in gun law (as you guys seem to be) ... but does Zxthinger have a point in his post?
I understand that gun licences express ammunition limits as a number of cartridges for shotguns and a number of 'rounds of ammunition' for rifles.
Is a 'round of ammunition' not a live complete bullet? ... and not merley spent brass from a fired bullet?
Are ye sure that ye are not confusing the prohibition on people who aren't licenced to have a rifle from having any component part of rifle ammmunition, including spent brass (as expressed in 1 (b) above) with the legal limit on live rounds of ammunition for somebody with a licenced rifle?

If Zxthinger is wrong, then are you saying that spent shotgun cartridges also count towards the cartridge limit on a shotgun FAC?

Again I can understand that somebody in possession of spent shotgun cartridges (without having a shotgun licence) could be in breach of (1) (b) above ... but isn't the cartridge limit on a shotgun licence the number of live shotgun catridges that the licence holder can posses or carry?

BTW the 2006 Act doesn't differ to the 1925 Act on this particular point ... the 1925 Act uses identical words to define 'ammunition' to include "any ingredient or component part of any such ammunition or missile" ... for presumably the same reason ... the ability to charge someone with an offence where they are found in possession of spent ammunition for a firearm for which they haven't a licence ... and therefore prima face evidence of having an unlicenced firearm - without the need to find them in possession of the firearm (or live ammunition for it).
(1) (b) would also appear to have a role to play in prosecuting somebody who was illegally re-loading ammunition, where the possession of ammunition components, including spent brass, would be critical evidence ... but I can't see the link to the number of rounds of ammunition on somebodies FAC.


I could be totally wrong ... as I only came upon your forum and saw this debate ... and had a quick 'look-see' at the legislation.

Witcher

J C wrote: »

Hi guys ... just exploring the 'wonders' of the boards.ie and came across your forum.

Far be it for me to question experts in gun law (as you guys seem to be) ... but does Zxthinger have a point in his post?
I understand that gun licences express ammunition limits as a number of cartridges for shotguns and a number of 'rounds of ammunition' for rifles.
Is a 'round of ammunition' not a live complete bullet? ... and not merley spent brass from a fired bullet?
Are ye sure that ye are not confusing the prohibition on people who aren't licenced to have a rifle from having any component part of rifle ammmunition, including spent brass (as expressed in 1 (b) above) with the legal limit on live rounds of ammunition for somebody with a licenced rifle?

If Zxthinger is wrong, then are you saying that spent shotgun cartridges also count towards the cartridge limit on a shotgun FAC?

Again I can understand that somebody in possession of spent shotgun cartridges (without having a shotgun licence) could be in breach of (1) (b) above ... but isn't the cartridge limit on a shotgun licence the number of live shotgun catridges that the licence holder can posses or carry?

BTW the 2006 Act doesn't differ to the 1925 Act on this particular point ... the 1925 Act uses identical words to define 'ammunition' to include "any ingredient or component part of any such ammunition or missile" ... for presumably the same reason ... the ability to charge someone with an offence where they are found in possession of spent ammunition for a firearm for which they haven't a licence ... and therefore prima face evidence of having an unlicenced firearm - without the need to find them in possession of the firearm (or live ammunition for it).
(1) (b) would also appear to have a role to play in prosecuting somebody who was illegally re-loading ammunition, where the possession of ammunition components, including spent brass, would be critical evidence ... but I can't see the link to the number of rounds of ammunition on somebodies FAC.


I could be totally wrong ... as I only came upon your forum and saw this debate ... and had a quick 'look-see' at the legislation.

Your limit is for a specified amount of ammunition, it doesn't mention live or spent. Anything which makes up a round of ammunition...is defined as ammunition in itself here...cases, primers, bullet head, even the wad from a shotgun cartridge. Doesn't matter what people have been told by their firearms officer, or their mate who is a guard...that's the law.

Cass

J C wrote: »

Is a 'round of ammunition' not a live complete bullet? ... and not merley spent brass from a fired bullet?

No.

Your license for a firearm enititles you to carry, possess and use ammo for that firearm. To do so without a license is an offence. However it is also an offence to breach the conditions of your license, being more ammo than you are allowed to possess.

Having 500 on your license entitles you to 500 "rounds". Now if you have 500 fully complete rounds, 500 brass, 500 bullets, you are now no longer in possession of 500 rounds but have 1,500 or the ability to make another 500 complete ones and have 1,000 in total.

As said above it was stressed to us on the reloading squad about this specific piece of law. At any one stage i could have 300 empty brass, 500 bullets, 200 live rounds, etc, etc. Meaning my license had to have a large enough amount to cover what i had ready to fire, and the individual component parts of the ammo as each item, as outlined in the Act, is classed the same a live round.

Are ye sure that ye are not confusing the prohibition on people who aren't licenced to have a rifle from having any component part of rifle ammmunition, including spent brass (as expressed in 1 (b) above) with the legal limit on live rounds of ammunition for somebody with a licenced rifle?

Again no.

Someone without a license cannot have any component part of ammo, live rounds, or even a gun for that matter. It's Section 2 of the principal act that deals with that.

If Zxthinger is wrong, then are you saying that spent shotgun cartridges also count towards the cartridge limit on a shotgun FAC?

Shotgun, rifle, pistol, air rifle, etc. Anything classed as a firearm.

Again I can understand that somebody in possession of spent shotgun cartridges (without having a shotgun licence) could be in breach of (1) (b) above ... but isn't the cartridge limit on a shotgun licence the number of live shotgun catridges that the licence holder can posses or carry?

The license does not make a distinction. It states an amount. It;s the act that determines what a round is. In it, it's classed as a fully complete, or any component part of a round.

BTW the 2006 Act doesn't differ to the 1925 Act on this particular point ... the 1925 Act uses identical words to define 'ammunition' to include "any ingredient or component part of any such ammunition or missile" ... for presumably the same reason ... the ability to charge someone with an offence where they are found in possession of spent ammunition for a firearm for which they haven't a licence ... and therefore prima face evidence of having an unlicenced firearm - without the need to find them in possession of the firearm (or live ammunition for it).
(1) (b) would also appear to have a role to play in prosecuting somebody who was illegally re-loading ammunition, where the possession of ammunition components, including spent brass, would be critical evidence ... but I can't see the link to the number of rounds of ammunition on somebodies FAC.

I'm by no means a legal expert. Not even close, but the 1925 Act is the principal act and every one thereafter is an amendment, addition to the principal Act. As there are 18 Acts, 61 SIs, and 2 EU directives i doubt more than a handful of people are experts. However some things, such as the ammo limit, is clear cut.

It is designed to prosecute those:

• Without licenses
• Illegally reloading
• More ammo than they are allowed to possess
• Interferring/modifying factory ammo

If it were not the case then i could buy 10,000 rounds, pull the bullets off them, and only keep 100, 200, 500 or whatever my license allowed for as live rounds.

Same thing with factory ammo. I have a limit of say 500 rounds. I buy 500 rounds. I strip them and reload them to a higher charge. I end up with 450. During the process i am guilty of having propellant & primers which are not covered by my firearms license, and of having 500 bullets & 500 brass. IOW 500 over my license limit.

I could be totally wrong ... as I only came upon your forum and saw this debate ... and had a quick 'look-see' at the legislation.

As said above none of us are experts. However we are more than familiar with the key pieces of legislation that are vital to us being legal shooters. Others can say, believe or do as they please. We are not An Gardaí so other than informing people we have no power to make them do one thing over the other.

The other aspect to consider is people claiming that in their opinion the law reads "this way" as opposed to "that way". That is all well and good for a debate on the range, or in th pub, but as the only person with any weight behind their opinion, the Superintendent will have the last say. Meaning your opinion & €3.50 will buy you a cup of coffee while you wait for your brief to come bail you out and fight your case in court.

J C

Blay wrote: »

Your limit is for a specified amount of ammunition, it doesn't mention live or spent. Anything which makes up a round of ammunition...is defined as ammunition in itself here...cases, primers, bullet head, even the wad from a shotgun cartridge. Doesn't matter what people have been told by their firearms officer, or their mate who is a guard...that's the law.

Thanks Blay.

I am in full agreement with you guys that all gun owners should adopt the most conservative interpretation of gun laws in order not to accidentally or technically find themselves on the 'wrong' side of the law.
This includes reading exactly what the law says and complying with it to the letter and the spirit.

For example, when it comes to the ammunition limits on FACs it does appear to be live shotgun cartridges or live rifle rounds (and only live ammunition) that is being authorised.
I base this on a plain reading of the authorisation as well as on how the limits are expressed.
The FAC authorises the holder to purchase "cartridges or rounds of ammunition" provided that the holder shall not have in their possession or carry at any time more than X "cartridges or rounds of ammunition".
An identical description (cartridges or rounds of ammunition) is used in relation to what the FAC holder can purchase as well as in relation to what they can possess or carry.
The two phrases (cartridges or rounds of ammunition) therefore have to have the same legal meaning, because they are used on the one authorisation - and the meaning has to be live factory produced ammunition as this is the only type of ammunition that a licenced gun owner can legally purchase from an RFD on a FAC .
... and this therefore seems to be the only type of ammunition that they are authorised to possess or carry on their FAC as well.

So where does this leave them in relation to spent cartridges or empty brass ?
... it doesn't seem to be authorised on the FAC ammunition limits, by the looks of it.

The possession of spent cartridges or brass seems to be authorised under the authorisation to use the firearm to which the licence relates.
I base this on the fact that it logically follows from the use of a firearm, that spent ammunition will be produced and this production of spent ammunition is therefore implicitly authorised under the authorisation to use the firearm.
FAC holders should, of course, dispose of spent ammunition responsibly and immediately after firing it, in line with their authorisation to use the firearm (implicit in which is the safe and timely disposal of any spent ammunition that results from using it).
If this is done, there should be no issue in relation to their ammunition limit, once they stay at or below it, as they will only be in possession of live rounds of ammunition (for which they are authorised under the ammunition limit), except when they are firing their gun and generating spent ammunition under the FAC authorisation to use it (which they dispose of immediately upon firing it).

It may all add up to the same thing that you are saying, in practice ... but the above seems to be the actual law on the matter.

None of this is related in any way to licenced re-loaders who are a totally separate category, subject to totally different authorisations to possess a full range of ammunition components, which FAC holders are not authorised to ever possess.

Cass

The entire problem with your argument is the words:

• Appears
• Seems
• Might be
• Must mean
• Assume

I can say the same about my own stance, but the difference is my opinion/interpretation of the law will always keep me on the safe side. Don't forget that the onus is always on the license holder to understand and comply. Closely followed by "Ignorance is no excuse".

The ammo limits are what they are. Spent brass and cases should never be a problem for the very reason you mention above. Once fired, and as reloading is not available, they are useless.

The other issue is reading one part of the law only. With the amount of Acts, Sis, amendments, additions, changes to wording, etc. you cannot read one part and interpret that as final. The law states that ammunition is classed as any component part. So whether you believe this only applies to a live round or not is irrelevant as the law says it's ANY component part.

You say that the FAC (gun license) authorises only live ammo. It does not state that. Not on the grant or the license itself. Again interpretation can mean the difference between being legal, and not.

The possession of spent cartridges or brass seems to be authorised under the authorisation to use the firearm to which the licence relates

Here is the key bit. The authorisation you speak of is your Firearms License. Meaning you need one, of the caliber of live or spent ammo you are in possession of, to have it.

I really don't see where the confusion comes from. I also do no understand people's attitude of defiance, simply so they can say they "stood up to the man". It;s the same with the zero issue. I asked above and over 3-4 days ago to be shown the legislation that allows for zeroing/target shooting outside an authorised range. It is not a trick question. If someone can show me where it says zeroing is NOT target shooting and is legal then i'll happily agree and we can change the forum rules about discussion of such topics.

When i say show me, i mean the actual law. As was done above when i quoted a section or act i linked to it. It's not my interpretation, it's what the law says. Same with the Zero issue. The law, whether you or anyone believes it right or wrong, says that shooting at an object such as paper, cans, etc. is target shooting and such shooting can only be done on a range. The Minister at the time apologised for basically banning zeroing outside a range, but never amended the law to allow for it.


This is not me arguing for the sake of it. As i have said a couple of times if the law says these things are legal and you don't need to have component parts of ammo, spent ammo covered on your license and you can shoot targets or for zeroing outside a range then show me. All the threads that have been closed and people warned not to try discuss this because it's illegal will then be allowed to discuss it.

Seriously that is the only reason i'm asking.

The Aussie

And here me thinking it was all fairly straightforward.

“(1) In this Act—

“ ammunition ” (except where used in relation to a prohibited weapon) means ammunition for a firearm and includes—

(a) grenades, bombs and other similar missiles, whether or not capable of being used with a firearm,

(b) any ingredient or component part of any such ammunition or missile, and

(c) restricted ammunition, unless the context otherwise requires;

I've always thought of the operative words ingredients and components as a 1+1=2 type equation, one spent shell plus one live round equals two, you could try and read more into it if you want but why gamble your Firearms Licence, for those of us who actually have one or two...

J C

Cass wrote: »

The entire problem with your argument is the words:

• Appears
• Seems
• Might be
• Must mean
• Assume

I can say the same about my own stance, but the difference is my opinion/interpretation of the law will always keep me on the safe side. Don't forget that the onus is always on the license holder to understand and comply. Closely followed by "Ignorance is no excuse".

The ammo limits are what they are. Spent brass and cases should never be a problem for the very reason you mention above. Once fired, and as reloading is not available, they are useless.

The other issue is reading one part of the law only. With the amount of Acts, Sis, amendments, additions, changes to wording, etc. you cannot read one part and interpret that as final. The law states that ammunition is classed as any component part. So whether you believe this only applies to a live round or not is irrelevant as the law says it's ANY component part.

You say that the FAC (gun license) authorises only live ammo. It does not state that. Not on the grant or the license itself. Again interpretation can mean the difference between being legal, and not.

Here is the key bit. The authorisation you speak of is your Firearms License. Meaning you need one, of the caliber of live or spent ammo you are in possession of, to have it.

I really don't see where the confusion comes from. I also do no understand people's attitude of defiance, simply so they can say they "stood up to the man". It;s the same with the zero issue. I asked above and over 3-4 days ago to be shown the legislation that allows for zeroing/target shooting outside an authorised range. It is not a trick question. If someone can show me where it says zeroing is NOT target shooting and is legal then i'll happily agree and we can change the forum rules about discussion of such topics.

When i say show me, i mean the actual law. As was done above when i quoted a section or act i linked to it. It's not my interpretation, it's what the law says. Same with the Zero issue. The law, whether you or anyone believes it right or wrong, says that shooting at an object such as paper, cans, etc. is target shooting and such shooting can only be done on a range. The Minister at the time apologised for basically banning zeroing outside a range, but never amended the law to allow for it.


This is not me arguing for the sake of it. As i have said a couple of times if the law says these things are legal and you don't need to have component parts of ammo, spent ammo covered on your license and you can shoot targets or for zeroing outside a range then show me. All the threads that have been closed and people warned not to try discuss this because it's illegal will then be allowed to discuss it.

Seriously that is the only reason i'm asking.

I agree with everything you say.
The objective should be to stay safely and well within both the spirit and the letter of the law.

However, misreading the law can also land somebody in trouble. For example, if somebody believes that the FAC for a rifle with a limit of 500 rounds of ammunition allows them to have 40 live rounds and to set up a collection of 450 spent brass cases and keep them indefinitely after firing them, because somebody told them that they are authorised to have spent brass as part of their ammunition limit. Could this potentially land them in trouble for having ammunition components without a re-loading licence, if the FAC authorised limit is actually only live rounds, like the law appears to be.

I also fully agree with you that the key thing is to find out exactly what the law actually states ... and then give yourself a wide margin of error, on any ambiguities, to ensure that you are always safely within it.

... and don't take anything anybody says as true until you fully check it out for yourself.

J C

The Aussie wrote: »

And here me thinking it was all fairly straightforward.



I've always thought of the operative words ingredients and components as a 1+1=2 type equation, one spent shell plus one live round equals two, you could try and read more into it if you want but why gamble your Firearms Licence, for those of us who actually have one or two...

A FAC doesn't allow anybody to possess ingredients or components of ammunition ... they need a re-loading licence for that.

The Aussie

J C wrote: »

A FAC doesn't allow anybody to possess ingredients or components of ammunition ... they need a re-loading licence for that.

Component = Spent Shell, I can come back from a shoot with a bucket load of spent shells, I don't need a licence to reload as they are a component or part of my allotment so to speak, nice try though...

J C

The Aussie wrote: »

Component = Spent Shell, I can come back from a shoot with a bucket load of spent shells, I don't need a licence to reload as they are a component or part of my allotment so to speak, nice try though...

... having spent shells after returning from a shoot would be the expected result from using your gun, for which you are fully authorised under your FAC.
... and provided you dispose of the shells responsibly and as soon a possible and have no other ammunition ingredients, you couldn't reasonably be accused of re-loading or in illegal possesion of ammunition components.

That seems to be the law ... I'm no expert ... and I could be wrong ... everybody will have to decide for themselves on this one.

You seem to be a great bunch of guys (and gals) always helping each other and very supportive of younger people asking questions on your forum.

What's the chances that we will have an Irish shooter 'in the medals' at the next Olympics (yes or no will do as I don't wish to derail the thread) ?

Cass

J C wrote: »

However, misreading the law can also land somebody in trouble. For example, if somebody believes that the FAC for a rifle with a limit of 500 rounds of ammunition allows them to have 40 live rounds and to set up a collection of 450 spent brass cases and keep them indefinitely after firing them, because somebody told them that they are authorised to have spent brass as part of their ammunition limit. This could potentially land them in trouble for having ammunition components without a re-loading licence, if the FAC authorised limit is actually only live rounds, like the law appears to be.

This is where misunderstanding or lack of understanding is the problem.

The FAC does not declare live or spent rounds. It is simply an amount. People cannot get reloading licenses. Not as an individual, and not yet. Some have looked into this and think it's only the cost is the problem, but personally i think it's a bit more than that. However your FAC includes brass and bullets (heads, pills, or whatever ye young folk call them). That means you can have live complete rounds, brass and heads and all to be counted individually as live rounds. The only thing a reloading license would be necessary for is propellant and primers and it's not a reloading license, it's an explosive license as the law in Ireland declares these to be explosives. So you can have as many live rounds, bras and bullets as your license allows, but for the propellant and primers you need a completely different license not to mention a sh*t load of security, and money to comply.

I also fully agree with you that the key thing is to find out exactly what the law actually states ... and then give yourself a wide margin of error, on any ambiguities, to ensure that you are always safely within it.

... and don't take anything anybody says as true until you fully check it out for yourself.

I've given this example a few times but it's germane to this point. A lad i met had a restricted firearm, but an unrestricted license. I infromed him that the license was invalid or moot as soon as the Sper signed it as the Law does not allow for a super to grant a restricted lciense, it must be a Chief Super. Also the firearm was clearly a restricted firearm (semi auto centrefire) and a not an unrestricted so the license was at it's fundamental point, wrong. The chap involved took serious offence, insulted me, and said "if i'm brought to court, i'll blame the Super. It;s his mistake, i'm not to blame.".

Now that is grand. The head in the sand attitude has always worked so well. However he has, legally, no license for the firearm he is using. Yet his interpretation was the Super was at fault (which he might have been), but the onus is on the applicant to know what license is needed and to make sure that is the one applied for and received.

Dian Cecht

The ammunition thing or who's responsible if the wrong licence is issued has not, to the best of my knowledge, been "tested" in Court & until it there is a legal precedent set there is no definitive answer to the best of my knowledge.

tac foley

Cass wrote: »

People cannot get reloading licenses. Not as an individual, and not yet.

What is it, then, that you and the few other F-Class shooters have that allows you to reload at The Midlands?

tac

Cass

That is a scheme that can only be used on site at the midlands. We do not have individual licenses. We cannot bring it home. All propellant, primers, etc are stored on site. Each member on the scheme has his name registered with the DoJ, via the range.

tac foley

Cass wrote: »

That is a scheme that can only be used on site at the midlands. We do not have individual licenses. We cannot bring it home. All propellant, primers, etc are stored on site. Each member on the scheme has his name registered with the DoJ, via the range.

Thanks for that. I know that number of posters on another forum were unclear how it worked out.

tac

IRLConor

J C wrote: »

What's the chances that we will have an Irish shooter 'in the medals' at the next Olympics (yes or no will do as I don't wish to derail the thread) ?

The current best hope would be Derek Burnett in Men's Trap. He's currently ranked 24th in the world. Rio would be his 5th Olympic Games.

Ghost.

If its illegal to have spent shell casings as they are a component of ammunition how are you supposed to dispose of them legally? If the only person who can be in posession of them have to have a licence to reload or a gun licence?

Cass

• Any range can take spent cases. You don't need to be a member.
• Any scrap yard that is authorised to take spent cases.
• For those that don't care, a ditch.

Its not like you don't have options.

J C

Cass wrote: »

This is where misunderstanding or lack of understanding is the problem.

The FAC does not declare live or spent rounds. It is simply an amount.

The FAC authorises the holder to purchase, possess and carry "cartridges or rounds of ammunition" up to a specified maximum number. As spent rounds (or any other ammunition component) cannot be legally purchased it would appear that what is being referred to is live complete rounds, appropriate to the licenced gun.

Cass wrote: »

However your FAC includes brass and bullets (heads, pills, or whatever ye young folk call them). That means you can have live complete rounds, brass and heads and all to be counted individually as live rounds.

Whatever about live complete rounds (authorised under the ammunition purchase, possession and carry limit on the FAC) and spent brass (created as the direct result of the authorisation to use the gun on the FAC), I don't think that the possesion of naked bullets is authorised on a FAC.

A conservative approach to staying safely within the law would be to keep the possession of total live and spent ammunition within the FAC limit and to safely and responsibly dispose of all spent ammunition as soon as practicable after firing it.
A conservative approach would also imply never being in possession of any ammuntion component (other than spent cartridges or brass) - and then only for the shortest possible time necessary to ensure their safe and responsible disposal, after firing them.

Which seems to be roughly what you are also saying - all be it, for slightly different reasons.

I know nothing about re-loading ... or the law in relation to it - so I'll bow to your obvious expertise on this issue.

Cass

J C wrote: »

. As spent rounds cannot be purchased ......

Yes they can. Spent meaning bullets and brass. Can be bought via the range i reload at or via any dealer willing to import them or via a dealer abroad if i fill in the appropriate import documentation. How do you think i reload at the range? I buy the brass, and the bullets as individual components and assemble at the range.

.........,I don't think that the possesion of naked bullets is authorised on a FAC. ..........

Wrong again.

Under my FAC i am legally allowed to buy, own possess these as component parts. They are part of the firearms act and as such covered by the FAC/Firearms laws. This applies not only to me as a reloader, but any individual.

....... This would also be evidence of possible re-loading and/or somebody taking live ammunition asunder and thereby also coming into illegal possesion of other components such propellant and primers.

As above, wrong.

Buying the individual components can be done legally as long as it's bras and bullets. As i have said numerous times propellants and primers are not covered under the FAC and as such i cannot bring them home from the range.

Taking apart live ammo is an offence, even for me as a reloader if done outside of the range. As i am only covered to have propellant and primers in my possession on the range to do so outside is illegal. As such anyone else doing the same can be done for the same offence. But ONLY for the propellant and primers. NOT the brass and bullets.

I can purchase propellant through the range, but as i do not have an individual reloading license i cannot remove these from the range. As propellants and primers are classified as explosives under a completely different Act then the FAC does not cover them.

You can legally own and possess brass, bullets, and all the reloading gear you want. The reloading gear are only tools. No offence to have them. The offence comes when you start using/trying to buy/having in your possession propellant and primers AT HOME without the necessary "explosive" license. Not to mention the security/storage.

If someone has been buying/importing ammo and the reloading gear once they are not in possession of the propellant & primers they can have it. If they choose to try and get these then it's their head on the block. If they decide to use the gear to strip factory ammo and reload it then it's their ass on the line again.

A conservative approach to staying safely within the law would be to never be in possession of total live and spent ammunition in excess of the FAC limit and to safely and responsibly dispose of all spent ammunition as soon as practicable after firing it.
A conservative approach would also imply never being in possession of any ammuntion component (other than spent cartridges or brass) - and then only for the shortest possible time necessary to ensure their safe and responsible disposal.

Correct.

Which seems to be roughly what you are also saying - all be it, for slightly different reasons.

I am saying it not because it is my opinion, but the law. Another thing that might drive this home. When reloading was introduced on the range we all got a VERY long introduction. Not to the practice (that came later), but to the legalities. All these issues were addressed hence the reason i speak with such "authority". An Gardaí, the DoJ, etc all had to sign off on this scheme and these laws were foremost on their list of things that needed told to the members.

I know nothing about re-loading ... or the law in relation to it - so I'll bow to your obvious expertise on this issue.

Again i'm not claiming to be an expert. I have just enough (a dangerous amount if you will) knowledge to stay well on the legal side of things, and intend to remain that way.

J C

Cass wrote: »

Yes they can. Spent meaning bullets and brass. Can be bought via the range i reload at or via any dealer willing to import them or via a dealer abroad if i fill in the appropriate import documentation. How do you think i reload at the range? I buy the brass, and the bullets as individual components and assemble at the range.

Wrong again.

Under my FAC i am legally allowed to buy, own possess these as component parts. They are part of the firearms act and as such covered by the FAC/Firearms laws. This applies not only to me as a reloader, but any individual.

Thanks Cass.

I can understand that somebody, who is a licenced re-loader, can legally buy ammunition components, like brass and bullets ... and that they are authorised under their FAC, to do this, as they cannot re-load without these components.
However, I cannot understand why somebody who isn't a re-loader could claim such authorisation to purchase and possess ammunition components when they can legally do nothing with them.

A FAC authorisation authorises the purchase of cartridges or rounds of ammunition for the licenced gun, as indicated by the use of the word "therefor" (in relation to the gun).
This implies authorisation for the purchase of only complete live factory ammunition for any FAC holder who isn't a licenced re-loader ... because components cannot provide functional ammunition for a gun.

Cass

Excuse me if i seem blunt or ignorant. it is not intended, but there is only so any ways and times i can explain this. I have given you law, links, and instructions directly from Doj/An Gardaí. you still cling to implications, suppositions, assumptions, and guesses.

J C wrote: »

Thanks Cass.

I can understand that somebody,like you, who is a licenced re-loader, can legally buy ammunition components, like brass and bullets ... and that you are authorised under your FAC, to do this, as you cannot re-load without these components.

I am not a licensed reloader. I cannot be as an individual. The range is the licensed reloading facility. So the range control who is allowed to reload. As a member of the F-Class squad i can. However as soon as i try to step foot outside the range with even a kernel of propellant i am guilty of an offence.

However, I cannot understand why somebody who isn't a re-loader could claim such authorisation to purchase and possess ammunition components when they can legally do nothing with them ... and their possession is prima face evidence of, at least, the intention to illegally reload.

My FAC allows me, as it does anyone else with an FAC, to buy the component parts of ammunition covered by the firearms act and hence the FAC itself as issued under the same firearms act. As the propellant and primers are integrated into the complete round you are not legally in possession of these components, as components, so are still perfectly legal.

You cannot prosecute someone for intention (only in relation to this topic). So if someone has bullets, brass and all the reloading gear then they are still legal. What they intend to do is irrelevant until they come into propellant and primers and are in fact in breach of the law.

This implies authorisation for the purchase of only complete live factory ammunition for any FAC holder who isn't a licenced re-loader ... because components, such as brass cases and naked bullets, cannot logically provide ammunition for any gun (unless the FAC holder is a licenced re-loader and can produce live ammunition from the components).

Implies!!!!!

It does not state it. Not on your FAC or in law. And after me telling you at least 3-4 times that is does not, coupled with the law, and coupled with what i was told for the purpose of the reloading scheme does this not convince you. If not then i'm out. I cannot say it any more, any other way or in other language that will make you understand. However in one last ditch effort here are the summarised points:

• Live ammo or spent ammo - Same thing under the law.
• Both require a valid FAC for the caliber ammo, brass, bullets you have.
• No personal lcienses for reloading.
• No reloading at home
• No personal possession of propellant or primers
• Bullets and brass are covere dunder FAC & Firearms Acts/SIs.
• Primers and propellants covered under the explosives act.
• Tools for reloading (press, dies, etc) completely legal to own.
• Stripping & reloading of factory ammo is illegal

Again apologies for the blunt answers or shortness of manners. no offence intended. As said above though i can only say what i ahve an dhow i have said it. Whatever you or anyone else chooses to do after that is their own business.

Same with zeroing. It;s target shooting and illegal. If ya want to do, then go for gold just don;t expect to be allowed to talk about illegal activity on this forum. That is as simple as i can make things.

J C

Cass wrote: »

Again apologies for the blunt answers or shortness of manners. no offence intended.

No offense taken ... just thanks to you for your patience in explaining the details of the law on FACs and ammunition authorisation.

... and apologies if my questions are nieve or have been asked before ... I'm new to your forum so please forgive me.

Cass wrote: »

Same with zeroing. It;s target shooting and illegal. If ya want to do, then go for gold just don;t expect to be allowed to talk about illegal activity on this forum. That is as simple as i can make things.

I should think that all FAC holders want to stay safely within the law, especially hunters, who need to zero their rifles for safety and humane reasons (in relation to ensuring a clean kill for their target quarry) - and if zeroing can only be done in an authorised range ... then so be it.

Could I ask where in the particular law/SI does it state that it is illegal to target shoot outside an authorised range ?

Again, if this has been asked before, my apologies in advance.

Dian Cecht

Cass wrote: »

So the range control who is allowed to reload.

I was told the DOJ decide who or more so what "disciplines" can reload. Are you still part of the F Class squad?

Ghost.

Cass wrote: »

• Any range can take spent cases. You don't need to be a member.
• Any scrap yard that is authorised to take spent cases.
• For those that don't care, a ditch.

Its not like you don't have options.

Thanks for clearing up the options available. I wouldnt really consider the first two options for many people. I dont know of any scrap yard locally that is authorised to take them. Driving to a range to take them would be an option maybe, but sure it would have to be a centerfire range wouldnt it if it was cf brass. Not many of them around. As for the third option you suggested im fairly certain that would be illegal wouldnt it, dumping ammunition. So yes, its not like I dont have options, they just arent very good ones.

Sparks

J C wrote: »

a re-loading licence

There's no such animal in Irish law. The part of the 2006 Act that introduced the idea was repealed by the 2009 Act before it was ever commenced. The relevant parts of the Explosives Act are for possession of the propellant and primers, not for reloading itself.

Also, just on a piddling point, we don't have FACs, that's a UK thing. We have firearms certificates (we usually just call them licences but that's not the actual term). I know what you mean and so do we all, but if you're going to argue the semantics of the firearms act, your life gets a lot easier when you use the right terminology.

However, I cannot understand why somebody who isn't a re-loader could claim such authorisation to purchase and possess ammunition components when they can legally do nothing with them ...

Because it's not illegal. Our system of law is proscriptive in nature - if something's not explicitly illegal, it's legal to do.

and their possession is prima face evidence of, at least, the intention to illegally reload.

It's no such thing and expressing that about an identifiable person would be grounds for them to sue you for defamation (and we've seen shooters sue shooters for that over lesser comments).

Sparks

Ghost. wrote: »

Thanks for clearing up the options available. I wouldnt really consider the first two options for many people.

Pretty much every target shooter uses the first one and the range then uses the second one.

I dont know of any scrap yard locally that is authorised to take them.

I'd say ring the local garda and ask. That's your due diligence there. Just take his name so you can refer to him if someone ever makes life awkward