Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Kuopion LO 11.2.1988 72/II AI generated

Firearms Act requires firearm possession for farmers to be deemed necessary for livestock farming.

Case Number Kuopion LO 11.2.1988 72/II
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The County Administrative Court of Kuopio quashed the mayor's decision denying a secondary license for a farmer to possess a pistol. The court found that the applicant's annual slaughter of 2-3 animals for a herd of approximately 30 livestock made the firearm necessary for his profession. Consequently, the court ruled that the mayor erred in rejecting the request based on the necessity criterion.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Ampuma-aseL 1 § 1 mom; Ampuma-aseA 19 § 1 mom; 19 § 2 mom: A firearm possession license must be granted if the applicant can demonstrate that the weapon is necessary for the performance of their specific profession, such as livestock farming.

Keywords

AI generated
firearms license necessity livestock farming profession secondary firearm license farmers firearm rights administrative necessity test

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Ampuma-aseL 1 § 1 mom
Ampuma-aseA 19 § 1 mom
Ampuma-aseA 19 § 2 mom
AI generated
insurance_1984_4566-1983
Farm owner selling cows and reducing milk production did not fully surrender farming activity.
admin_2021_vaasa__30
Administrative court dismissed appeal against environmental authority's decision to approve expanded animal protection facility.
appeal_1986_rovaniemi__617
Hunting offense dismissed for hunting dog; penalty upheld for driving motorbike with hunting gear off-road.
appeal_1979_rovaniemi__290
Appeal court dismissed case due to pending constitutional court dispute over same property rights.
admin_1989_mikkeli-county__476
Carrying a concealed weapon deemed unnecessary for taxi driver's job under firearms act.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Oliko taskuase karjatalouden harjoittajan ammatin vuoksi

välttämätön.

Asetta käytettiin vuosittain 2-3 eläimen teurastukseen. Tilalla

oli karjaa n. 30 eläintä.

Nimismies hylkäsi maatilan isältään ostaneen maanviljelijän

rinnakkaislupaa isänsä omistaman pistoolin hallussapitoon

koskevan hakemuksen sillä perusteella, ettei asetta voitu

pitää maanviljelijän ammatin vuoksi välttämättömänä.

Aseen käytöstä esitetty selvitys huomioon ottaen pistooli

oli katsottava maanviljelijälle karjatalouden harjoittajana

työssään välttämättömäksi. Lääninoikeus kumosi päätöksen ja

palautti asian nimismiehelle. Äänestys 2-1

Ampuma-aseL 1 § 1 mom

Ampuma-aseA 19 § 1 mom

Ampuma-aseA 19 § 2 mom