Balistic tip "hunting"

[Mr_Logic 5]

I do indeed admit that it is a grey area, never been in doubt. I would like to see the law clarified. I just think they're legal in the interim, and would like to see clarification just because it removes any argument.

 

Regarding the expanding ammo on foxes and vermin, this is absolutely 100% NOT required - it is perfectly legal to shoot a fox with FMJ. Personally I wouldn't, I like Charlie to fall over with a bloody great hole in him so I know it was humane, but there's no law against it.

[HUnter_zero 58]

I do indeed admit that it is a grey area, never been in doubt.

 

I have yet another reply from Hornady over SST bullets and again they state the bullets are NOT soft or hollow nosed. There is only a grey area because as yet no one has had cause to bring this to court and until then it is always going to be a stumbling point, I just don't want to be the first in the dock.

The facts are simple:

1) Many people use polymer tipped bullets for deer shooting. These bullets include A-max, V-Max, BT, SST.

2) The manufactures of these bullets state that the bullets are NOT soft nosed or hollow nosed.

3) As already stated the select com. has ruled for the purpose of the firearms act polymer tipped bullets are of expanding nature.

4) Many polymer tipped bullets are designed for deer shooting.

5) The Deer act states that a bullet must be soft or hollow nosed in construction to be legal for deer shooting, and there is the problem the manufactures do not class polymer tipped bullets as either.

 

We all know that the law is against owning guns and gun owners and we all know that in Britain more often than not you are judge guilty long before things get to trial. With the quantity of shooters now using polymer tipped bullets for deer shooting, it is only a matter of time until a test case is held.

If found at fault the shooter will loose his/her FAC and if not, the gates are open.

Just because 'we' have always done it or continue to do it, does not make it right.

So far I have kept only to fact, not opinion.

My honest opinion is that polymer tipped bullets are better and if the law was more clear I would use polymer bullets as I honestly belive the design to be better.

 

John

[Mr_Logic 5]

But HZ you are missing the point. Nobody doubts that in shooting terms a polymer tip is different to a soft nose or a hollow nose, in terms of traditional talk. BUT the polymer tip is a wedge on top of a hollow point. Therefore, those bullets ARE hollow nosed, from a literal interpretation - without the definition in the Act, this is what we have to go on. Therefore, there is sufficient doubt and confusion as to make any conviction impossible, and therefore you may use them.

 

I would like to see clarification to end this once and for all.

[HUnter_zero 58]

Therefore, those bullets ARE hollow nosed, from a literal interpretation - without the definition in the Act, this is what we have to go on.

 

I would like to see clarification to end this once and for all.

 

Which is exactly why I first emailed the tech dept at hornady, with hope they would email me back saying that the bullets are in fact classed as hollow points. I have emails from four bullet manufactures and all state the bullets are not soft or hollow nosed/points. It would be very easy for the local police to do the same.

As shooters we most certainly do need clarification which would clear things up and leave us with not doubt or worry at all.

 

John

[Fidgety 8]

Phew, at last Mr L and HZ have agreed that they are actually both correct. Personally, BT for fox, soft for deer.

[Mr_Logic 5]

BASC's official, legally-checked view, as quoted from David BASC on Pigeonwatch, and verified as being the view of BASC, and not him personally:

They are perfectyl legal, the bullit is still a hollow point with the plastic inserted, the tip helps with the expantion of the bullet on impact.Best wishesDavid

I'd still like to see clarification in law to prevent this debate though.

[HUnter_zero 58]

BASC's official, legally-checked view,

 

To be honest I would not stand too close to the BASC, my understanding is that they fully support a lead ban for stalking, if so a prosecution for not using soft or hollow nosed bullets would support their case.

 

John

[Mr_Logic 5]

er, yeah, whatever...

[HUnter_zero 58]

er, yeah, whatever...

 

??????

 

Not sure if you are disagreeing with me or suprised that the BASC are not the best orginisation to support stalkers needs. I will admit to being privi to only a small amount of information on the lead ban but from what I do know the RSPB & BASC have both moved to support the use of non-lead bullets for stalking deer due to very small amounts of lead contamination in venison, so in fact I doubt based on their stance they would support the use of high frag bullets (at a high level of managment). For a change even the Gov have stepped back and requested MUCH more information. The BDS do not support this move at this stage. In short, the polymer tipped debate may in the close future be of little worry as we may all be forced to use non-toxic rifle bullets where there is a potential risk of raptors eatting from the remains of a carcass and not just from stalking but also vermin shooting.

 

John

Edited March 26, 2010 by HUnter_zero

[black lab 3]

Guy's just enjoy the Sport

Edited March 27, 2010 by black lab

[Mr_Logic 5]

HZ my post was the way it was because a lead ban, or not, does not affect the advice of BASC's lawyers on this issue. It is irrelevant. I also doubt that they are pushing hard for this as all the members will be against it. Whether they are or not, does not change the advice about the topic we're debating.

 

You say you'd use these bullets apart from your incorrect viewpoint on the law. Can I suggest that you contact Basc and get that in writing to cover your arse, and then go use these bullets? They really are quite good.

[danw 1,748]

If the uk took the same attitude as australia has with the commercial shooting of kangaroo's and only permitted head shooting then the issue of lead contamination would not be a problem as the head is removed and does not enter the food chain

[waidmann 105]

er, yeah, whatever...

 

??????

 

Not sure if you are disagreeing with me or suprised that the BASC are not the best orginisation to support stalkers needs. I will admit to being privi to only a small amount of information on the lead ban but from what I do know the RSPB & BASC have both moved to support the use of non-lead bullets for stalking deer due to very small amounts of lead contamination in venison, so in fact I doubt based on their stance they would support the use of high frag bullets (at a high level of managment). For a change even the Gov have stepped back and requested MUCH more information. The BDS do not support this move at this stage. In short, the polymer tipped debate may in the close future be of little worry as we may all be forced to use non-toxic rifle bullets where there is a potential risk of raptors eatting from the remains of a carcass and not just from stalking but also vermin shooting.

 

John

 

 

as far as i'm aware(and this is the case in germany) the lead ban(all projectiles)is based on lead oxide poisoning in bop.they have banned all lead in forestry commission shoots/hunts in bradenburg and mecklenburg vorpommern(large areas of wet land).

 

If the uk took the same attitude as australia has with the commercial shooting of kangaroo's and only permitted head shooting then the issue of lead contamination would not be a problem as the head is removed and does not enter the food chain

 

the advocation or promotion of "headshots" on deer is not the way forward in any way,shape or form.

the risks of such shots far outweigh the clean kill factor imho.i know some will do it and do it cleanly,most are not able to shoot a moving(as they mostly are)head at any distance resulting in bad shots which are VERY difficult to follow up on(the fact that deer drop like a stone only to get up after a couple of min and leg it,leaving only blood and teeth is a nightmare for any team)

other risks of grazing the neck/head are just as bad as the deer cannot clean these wounds in summer and they fester,not worth it.

at the end of the day a 10-25cm target of the vital zone shot(depending on species) is always the better option when weighed up against a 5-10cm circle of the brain/skull.

 

waidmann

[danw 1,748]

er, yeah, whatever...

 

??????

 

Not sure if you are disagreeing with me or suprised that the BASC are not the best orginisation to support stalkers needs. I will admit to being privi to only a small amount of information on the lead ban but from what I do know the RSPB & BASC have both moved to support the use of non-lead bullets for stalking deer due to very small amounts of lead contamination in venison, so in fact I doubt based on their stance they would support the use of high frag bullets (at a high level of managment). For a change even the Gov have stepped back and requested MUCH more information. The BDS do not support this move at this stage. In short, the polymer tipped debate may in the close future be of little worry as we may all be forced to use non-toxic rifle bullets where there is a potential risk of raptors eatting from the remains of a carcass and not just from stalking but also vermin shooting.

 

John

 

 

as far as i'm aware(and this is the case in germany) the lead ban(all projectiles)is based on lead oxide poisoning in bop.they have banned all lead in forestry commission shoots/hunts in bradenburg and mecklenburg vorpommern(large areas of wet land).

 

If the uk took the same attitude as australia has with the commercial shooting of kangaroo's and only permitted head shooting then the issue of lead contamination would not be a problem as the head is removed and does not enter the food chain

 

the advocation or promotion of "headshots" on deer is not the way forward in any way,shape or form.

the risks of such shots far outweigh the clean kill factor imho.i know some will do it and do it cleanly,most are not able to shoot a moving(as they mostly are)head at any distance resulting in bad shots which are VERY difficult to follow up on(the fact that deer drop like a stone only to get up after a couple of min and leg it,leaving only blood and teeth is a nightmare for any team)

other risks of grazing the neck/head are just as bad as the deer cannot clean these wounds in summer and they fester,not worth it.

at the end of the day a 10-25cm target of the vital zone shot(depending on species) is always the better option when weighed up against a 5-10cm circle of the brain/skull.

 

waidmann

 

Cast a line and it don't take long to get a bite, if people used appropriate bullets then the risk of a poor head shot is negligible and I have to say I have seen some pretty poor attempts at heart shots, following up gut shot deer is no fun either, perhaps the shooting requirements set down by the bushy beard bds aren't stringent enough

[HUnter_zero 58]

 

 

as far as i'm aware(and this is the case in germany) the lead ban(all projectiles)is based on lead oxide poisoning in bop.they have banned all lead in forestry commission shoots/hunts in bradenburg and mecklenburg vorpommern(large areas of wet land).

 

 

waidmann

 

 

We will see a lead ban start in August of this year on certain estates, backed by the BASC & RSPB.

From what friends have told me non-toxic bullets are not half bad but if these things do start to take hold, then it's a massive change for us all. IIRC tests were done in Canada (?), meat was tested and tests were done on pigs (?), again I don't know all the info but the whole topic is centred around Venison entering the food chain and Raptors with the BASC jumping on the back of the waggon yet again.

 

 

John