Shooting season suspended due to lockdown?

tudderone

Cass wrote: »

This ties into the point above about no entitlement to firearms. Hell i know a guy that had his guns revoked and only got back his shotgun because he wasn't buying ammo and the Gardaí deemed if he is not buying it he is not shooting so therefore his good reason for having the firearms was gone.

They could have made themselves look a right bunch of wallys there, A lad i know gave up shooting and gave me three slabs of shotgun ammo, good hunting stuff too. I didn't buy ammo for years. If the same happened with that chap, they would look a right shower in court.

JCJCJC

tudderone wrote: »

They could have made themselves look a right bunch of wallys there, A lad i know gave up shooting and gave me three slabs of shotgun ammo, good hunting stuff too. I didn't buy ammo for years. If the same happened with that chap, they would look a right shower in court.

I have a lot like that too, a lot of my buddies have given it up and people have given me gifts of boxes of cartridges too. One goose-shooter from Wexford gave me a box of shells that would knock a bear, I’ll probably never use them.

Cass

JCJCJC wrote: »

Do you know it was unsolicited?

Ok so, did the NARGC seek your advice?

I’m entitled to exercise any shooting rights I hold.

What entitlements and rights do you think you have?

Because I saw no need. If I had been challenged by the Gardaí I would have defended myself, and as we have seen, I would have succeeded.

How have we seen that? Your case would have preceded the NARGC one and it never happened its only speculation. The fact you believe their success is some way validates your own theory is dangerous and deluded in equal measure.

Shooting lawfully is not a sign of intemperate character.

No its not, but then again that is not what you said. You said:

JCJCJC wrote:

You have to commit a Firearms Act offence or perhaps some violent crime to lose your guns.

That is not the only reason(s) you can lose your firearms/licenses.

Cass

JCJCJC wrote: »

What is NARGC policy on that?

Ask the NARGC otherwise any reply here will be someone's opinion.

Cass

tudderone wrote: »

They could have made themselves look a right bunch of wallys there, A lad i know gave up shooting and gave me three slabs of shotgun ammo, good hunting stuff too. I didn't buy ammo for years. If the same happened with that chap, they would look a right shower in court.

I do the same. I haven't bought ammo in over 18 months, but i spent the previous few months essentially filling the limits on my licenses. Between the time i bought the ammo and the introduction of lockdowns i haven't gotten to fire more than a box of ammo.

This chap hadn't bought a round, because he hadn't fired a round in nearly 5 years.

As i said earlier we don't enjoy a 2nd amendment right to firearms and are constantly having to fulfill our license conditions in ever new and annoying ways, but its Ireland and we abide by the law(s).

JCJCJC

Cass wrote: »

Ok so, did the NARGC seek your advice?


None of your buiz my friend.


What entitlements and rights do you think you have?


entitlements to shoot on any land I own, and land where I have the owner's permission, and land where I own the sporting rights and any land where shooting rights are held by a gun club of which I am a paid-up member.


How have we seen that? Your case would have preceded the NARGC one and it never happened its only speculation.


Nope, if it came up before today, I would have asked the District Court Judge to await the decision of the High Court, simple. Standard District Court procedure.


The fact you believe their success is some way validates your own theory is dangerous and deluded in equal measure.


They haven't any success because the High Court didn't rule on the question. All they have is a partial climb-down by the guards, but within its limits it still confirms what I've been saying - rough shooting doesn't contravene the regulations made under the Health Act.


No its not, but then again that is not what you said. You said:

That is not the only reason(s) you can lose your firearms/licenses.


I'll bow to your experience in that area, I've never lost mine and I have a license for about forty years now.

stay safe my friend.

Cass

JCJCJC wrote: »

None of your buiz my friend.

That is a no. So my comment about unsolicited legal advice stands.

entitlements to shoot on any land I own, and land where I have the owner's permission, and land where I own the sporting rights and any land where shooting rights are held by a gun club of which I am a paid-up member.

That is land permission. I asked what shooting rights you have. If you want me to be more specific, what rights or entitlements have you for firearms?

Nope, if it came up before today, I would have asked the District Court Judge to await the decision of the High Court, simple. Standard District Court procedure.

So you bemoan the NARGCs case yet would rely on it to "prove" yours? That is a double standard the likes of which i rarely see.

Then the fun part of having a firearm taken and facing a court case is having to declare on every future application, under section 2.4 of the FCA1 at least one of the following:

1. Have you ever been found guilty of, or do you have charges pending for, any offence in Ireland or abroad?
2. Have you ever been the subject of an order issued by a court in a case involving the use, attempted use or threatened use of force against
3. another person?
4. Have you ever had a firearms certificate revoked?
5. Have you ever been refused a firearms certificate?

They haven't any success because the High Court didn't rule on the question. All they have is a partial climb-down by the guards, ............

Yet you say above that you would use their case as precedence. As you said yourself above that it never went to judegment and was settled "outside of court" there is no case to cite as precedence.

I've never lost mine and I have a license for about forty years now.

Could be your superior legal ability and prowess in the court room but more likely its as simple as you never breaking the law.

cavan shooter

All in All great day for the NARGC, least they are standing up for the their members. Good legal representation helped build a solid argument, and the Govt. new they were wrong what with the pleading they were doing for the NARGC to withdraw.

Remember Folks The SC reckoned what the Govt did was correct in banning shooting and the Country sports lads threw in the towel with a "Ta se Ufaseach ar fad". The fact is the detractors were measured and found wanting.

Enjoy the rest of the season.

Traumadoc

This will be important in January as there could well be another lockdown.

Max H

Oh dear, hindsight JC is a wonderful science

tudderone

Cass wrote: »

Wrong. You have zero entitlement when it comes to firearms. None. Absolutely nothing is an entitlement, its a privilege (and i'm not being overly courteous, the law specifies shooting with firearms as a privilege that can be revoked if by nothing else but the simple lack of a 2nd amendment type law in our constitution).

It wouldn't matter to the modern Irish if there was a right to own a firearm under law or not, look at the hate speech law. Restricting what people can and cannot say or express, in case some cranky, thin skinned minority has their feelings hurt. Not many seem bothered.

Vegeta

JCJCJC wrote: »

Ever heard of free legal aid?

I have, it requires a trip to court, the judge could refuse it (don't believe it can be appealed), you cannot pick your solicitor and I would very likely not qualify. Even if someone does qualify, it would not reduce the time lost (which has it's own associated costs) to defend yourself from an incorrect allegation.

You know all this of course.

JCJCJC

Vegeta wrote: »

I have, it requires a trip to court, the judge could refuse it (don't believe it can be appealed), you cannot pick your solicitor and I would very likely not qualify. Even if someone does qualify, it would not reduce the time lost (which has it's own associated costs) to defend yourself from an incorrect allegation.

You know all this of course.

Yes, it does require a trip to court. The Judge could of course refuse it irrationally, but you have three remedies to that, an appeal (lodge within 14 days), a judicial review and a case stated to the High Court, which might be a bit extreme not to say expensive. You can pick any solicitor off the free legal aid panel, if you qualify.There's really no remedy for the time lost if your firearm is unlawfully confiscated, unfortunately. Be thankful you live in a country where the rule of law prevails over the police, that's the big point.

grassroot1

JCJCJC wrote: »

Yes, it does require a trip to court. The Judge could of course refuse it irrationally, but you have three remedies to that, an appeal (lodge within 14 days), a judicial review and a case stated to the High Court, which might be a bit extreme not to say expensive. You can pick any solicitor off the free legal aid panel, if you qualify.There's really no remedy for the time lost if your firearm is unlawfully confiscated, unfortunately. Be thankful you live in a country where the rule of law prevails over the police, that's the big point.

I cant decide Willie or Des?

Grizzly 45

JCJCJC wrote: »

Yes, it does require a trip to court. The Judge could of course refuse it irrationally, but you have three remedies to that, an appeal (lodge within 14 days), a judicial review and a case stated to the High Court, which might be a bit extreme not to say expensive. You can pick any solicitor off the free legal aid panel, if you qualify.There's really no remedy for the time lost if your firearm is unlawfully confiscated, unfortunately. Be thankful you live in a country where the rule of law prevails over the police, that's the big point.

Next question would be is ...what kind of ""FREE" legal aid will you get? A professional who actually knows, will research the law and will engage with the case and do some work, and possibly know when to call in Silk or independent experts?

Or some fresh out of law school newbie doing their time on the DC, and wouldn't know the butt from a barrel as well as a Hollywood education on the subject?
I remember having to literally "train up" my solr of 10 years legal experience on the terminology and aspects of firearms and the law from a laymans POV for months before we filed anything,and then luckily got a JC who was a former Garda firearms instructor himself to do the heavy work.

So with "free legal aid" some times you are probably better off getting that 2nd mortgage and get professional help, or defending yourself...And we all know the saying about the man who defends himself, having a fool for a client.
Coined no doubt by someone in the legal trade...:pac:

Grizzly 45

Cass wrote: »

T
Then the fun part of having a firearm taken and facing a court case is having to declare on every future application, under section 2.4 of the FCA1 at least one of the following:

1. Have you ever been found guilty of, or do you have charges pending for, any offence in Ireland or abroad?
2. Have you ever been the subject of an order issued by a court in a case involving the use, attempted use or threatened use of force against
3. another person?
   [
   B]
4. Have you ever had a firearms certificate revoked?
5. Have you ever been refused a firearms certificate?[/B]

Believe it or not.I, and just about anyone with a CF pistol or SA rifle have this hideous mark of Cain on us... And not because we committed any crime, bar owning these firearms and having them revoked and refused by the AGS themselves in a political move.

I always get a total kick in filling in the multiple dates of my refusals and revocations anytime my renewals come up:p:)
It has to have a context too to the reason it was "R&R'd" that makes sense in relation a crime committed or being possibly committed. IE I'm langers in the pub firing my G17 into the ceiling. Not because I own one and a politician /AGS CS doesn't like them and won't license them out of spite and makes up some spurious excuse to R&R it.

Being found guilty of a crime isn't an end-all either. It has to be taken into consideration obviously by the Super as to whether to grant or not and what the crime was/is and how long ago, and ASFIK it is within a limited range of indictable crimes that carry over 30 days jail time? IOW are you a regular customer for AGS services,or did you last come to their attention 20 years ago ?
So being charged and found guilty of having a slash in a public place while under the influence,isn't going to be as weighty a crime as battering the missus and firing your shotgun at the neighbours on a weekly basis.:eek:

JCJCJC

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Next question would be is ...what kind of ""FREE" legal aid will you get? A professional who actually knows, will research the law and will engage with the case and do some work, and possibly know when to call in Silk or independent experts?

Or some fresh out of law school newbie doing their time on the DC, and wouldn't know the butt from a barrel as well as a Hollywood education on the subject?
I remember having to literally "train up" my solr of 10 years legal experience on the terminology and aspects of firearms and the law from a laymans POV for months before we filed anything,and then luckily got a JC who was a former Garda firearms instructor himself to do the heavy work.

So with "free legal aid" some times you are probably better off getting that 2nd mortgage and get professional help, or defending yourself...And we all know the saying about the man who defends himself, having a fool for a client.
Coined no doubt by someone in the legal trade...:pac:

You make good points. The amounts paid to solicitors on the legal aid panel are low, and you will get what they get paid for, same in family law. That severely limits the amount of time they will spend on research. Solicitors doing criminal law day in, day out will fly through it, but someone who might be Ireland’s greatest at aviation leasing won’t have a notion. I have suggested to the NARGC that they form a panel of solicitors who are shooters and thus likely to be sympathetic, I’m not holding my breath for a reply.

cavan shooter

Don't forget there is I believe €750 towards an appeal through your fund membership if you have a chance of winning it.

tudderone

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Cass wrote: »

T
[*]Have you ever been refused a firearms certificate?[/B]
[/LIST]

Believe it or not.I, and just about anyone with a CF pistol or SA rifle have this hideous mark of Cain on us... And not because we committed any crime, bar owning these firearms and having them revoked and refused by the AGS themselves in a political move.

There should be a time limit on this crap, 10 years ? Why ask you anyway, its all on the pulse system, if they are that concerned it should be easy to see on the computer screen.

Cass

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Believe it or not. I, and just about anyone with a CF pistol or SA rifle have this hideous mark of Cain on us... And not because we committed any crime, bar owning these firearms and having them revoked and refused by the AGS themselves in a political move.

You've met me right? Guilty on both counts (CF and SA).

Being found guilty of a crime isn't an end-all either.

I know, it says so on the form, but that is not what i was discussing with JCJCJC above were it was said only a serious offence would be cause to revoke a license:

JCJCJC wrote:

You have to commit a Firearms Act offence or perhaps some violent crime to lose your guns.

Grizzly 45 wrote:

So being charged and found guilty of having a slash in a public place while under the influence,isn't going to be as weighty a crime as battering the missus and firing your shotgun at the neighbours on a weekly basis.:eek:

Perhaps not, but lets look at the 6 reasons that make someone disentitled, which includes reason for revocation of an existing license:

1. Anyone under 16 - Obvious enough.
2. A person of intemperate character - The Super or Chief Super will determine a person's suitability while factoring in their consumption of alcohol/drugs and its impact on their ability to safely own a firearm. A pattern of behaviour would need to exist and while this does not rule out the "one off" event a pattern of behaviour should be considered a greater threat than a single incident. This pattern includes, but is not limited to aggressive, abusive, hostile and violent incidents.
3. A person of unsound mind - Doesn't need explaining i hope.
4. Prison time - Any person sentenced under the any firearms act, criminal offense act or state terrorism act. Any person sentenced under state law that expired within the 5 years.
5. A person that was bound to the peace
6. A person who is a resident in the state for less than 6 months

tudderone wrote: »

Why ask you anyway, its all on the pulse system,............

To see if you are truthful on your application.

tudderone

Cass wrote: »

To see if you are truthful on your application.

Stupid carry on, looking to trip people up. Like i said in another thread, if the gardai gave the lowlife as much hassle as they do shooters and motorists, Ireland would be Shangri-la.

Cass

But they know who we are, so its easier. I'm sure if they knew who all the scummers were and what they were up to they would do the same to them.

tudderone

Cass wrote: »

But they know who we are, so its easier. I'm sure if they knew who all the scummers were and what they were up to they would do the same to them.

Nope, one local worthy was being stopped and searched by the guards whenever he went out. So he made a complaint with the help of a socalist td who will remain nameless, and now they don't look at him. He still causes trouble and is involved in his unofficial pharmacutical activities, and the cops don't want to know.

I chucked it in the face of the local inspector when he was moaning at me over the guns i owned, he couldn't get me out of the place quick enough.

Grizzly 45

tudderone wrote: »

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

There should be a time limit on this crap, 10 years ? Why ask you anyway, its all on the pulse system, if they are that concerned it should be easy to see on the computer screen.

.Keep your nose clean for 10 years and they will look favourably on you if it was a first off and no major crime was committed or jail time was involved,and you haven't shown up on their radar again.

Grizzly 45

Cass wrote: »

Y
.
[*]A person of intemperate character - The Super or Chief Super will determine a person's suitability while factoring in their consumption of alcohol/drugs and its impact on their ability to safely own a firearm. A pattern of behaviour would need to exist and while this does not rule out the "one off" event a pattern of behaviour should be considered a greater threat than a single incident. This pattern includes, but is not limited to aggressive, abusive, hostile and violent incidents.
[*]A person of unsound mind - Doesn't need explaining i hope.

[/LIST]

Thought it was intemperate habits?As character can give it a whole different and dangerous meaning.
In its original old English form when this was written it would mean obviously an alcoholic,or drug addict.But character could be well open to interpretation then. Say you are an anti-mask/ vaccine/Covid lockdown believer? Does that make you a danger and of intemperate character because you belive contrary to the norm?Or that you think Hitler was right?Or that you belong to a certain biker group? Or you liked a FB post advocating self-defence training for everyone with firearms in the wake of yet another religion of Pieces conversion attempt by lorry.
People have lost their gun licenses for all of those reasons in Germany...Granted AGS hasn't gone this far ...Yet... But what's to say some snowflake with "Muh feelings" being hurt doesn't go and makes a complaint about you being an intemperate character because they disagree with you on something? It's one to watch out for in the future?

What is a person of" unsound mind?"
OK obviously someone sitting there in a Napoleon costume and tutu dribbling on their shoes going "Nurrr I like bicycles!" is a good candidate...

But how about nowadays people who identify as various and multiple genders and as an elephant on every 2nd Wednesday? And fly into total wobblers,and haul their "Muh rights" pressure group if you refuse to accept their belifs and outlooks esp if they are dealing with authority figures?

You having a bit of a depressive episode might disqualify you of unsound mind,but the genderqueer, CISneutral, gay lesbian,hemadrophiditic elephant on Wed type who believes in unicorns and fairy dust as a solution to global warming might actually get a firearms license,as this is accepted as "normal and sane" these days. When this act was written it was easy enough to put someone in the puzzle palace for being a bit "bewildered"...But nowadays...?

Who is going to determine this? Certainly not a Garda Superintendant,no GP is going to sign off on whether you are nuts or not,and a head shrinker will need months to even start to get a grip of whether you have a few screws loose .I can see this one coming back to haunt us as well sometime soon.

tudderone

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

What is a person of" unsound mind?"
OK obviously someone sitting there in a Napoleon costume and tutu dribbling on their shoes going "Nurrr I like bicycles!" is a good candidate...

Good description of the green party that.

Cass

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Thought it was intemperate habits?

It is. I just used character but my choice of word doesn't change the meaning of the law as it'll use the right word.

But what's to say some snowflake with "Muh feelings" being hurt doesn't go and makes a complaint about you being an intemperate character because they disagree with you on something? It's one to watch out for in the future?

It has happened already.

But how about nowadays people who identify as various and multiple genders and as an elephant on every 2nd Wednesday?

Not going to list everything you said, but i understand your point and the simple answer is, i don't know what constitutes unsound mind. Baring the obvious it would be at the discretion of the Super/Chief Super.

Who is going to determine this?

Agree with you on the medical side, but again i think the bigger points are being lost in the context of this thread.

If you have a history of anti social, abusive, violent, or other habits that are deemed to be part of a pattern those individual acts can be and should be (according to the law) viewed as a whole and will go against you or in the case of someone already with a license, used as reason(s) to have it revoked.

Cass

Annndddd................... we're back into level 5 come Christmas eve.

I thought it was St. Stephen's day, as that was the banner on SKY news, but it now says Christmas eve.

With the recent court case, and confirmation/decision, we should be legally allowed to go out solo but group days/events are gone and range visits will be reduced to "within county" only.

tudderone

Cass wrote: »

Annndddd................... we're back into level 5 come Christmas eve.

I thought it was St. Stephen's day, as that was the banner on SKY news, but it now says Christmas eve.

With the recent court case and out of court decision we should be legally allowed to go out solo but group days/events are gone and range visits will be reduced to "within county" only.

Is there no end to this bloody thing ? Pig sick of it at this stage :mad:.

GolfVI

I got to spend Saturday and Sunday at the midlands, my first time back since the summer, had a great weekend.

None of these restrictions bother me apart from the inter county travel. I live 20 mins from the midlands range, and the offaly border is 2 mins from my house, but cant travel because I live in a different county, it’s beyond ridiculous , especially when you can have 30 GAA players running around together in any county as they please.