Jump to content

Balistic tip "hunting"


Recommended Posts

1)Your email to Hornady proves nothing

2) I agree completely that in shooting terminology, a polymer tip is neither a soft nosed or hollow nosed bullet.

3)Nowhere in the Act does it define what it means by the term Soft-nosed or hollow-nosed.

4)polymer is softer than the copper jacket.

5) hollow cavity under the polymer tip, which by definition is a hollow nose.

 

1) It proves that the manufacture defines their produce as neither a soft or hollow nosed bullet.

2) Good so you agree with Hornady then.

3) From Wikipedia :

 

A hollow point is an expanding bullet that has a pit or hollowed out shape in its tip, generally intended to cause the bullet to expand upon entering a target in order to decrease penetration and disrupt more tissue as it travels through the target. They are also used to control penetration, such as in situations where over penetration could cause collateral damage (such as on an airplane). Jacketed hollow points (JHPs) or plated hollow points are covered in a coating of harder metal to increase bullet strength and to prevent fouling the barrel with lead stripped from the bullet. The term hollow-cavity bullet is used to describe a hollow point where the hollow is unusually large, sometimes dominating the volume of the bullet, and causes extreme expansion or fragmentation on impact.[1]

 

A soft-point bullet, also known as a soft-nosed bullet, is a lead expanding bullet with a copper or brass jacket that is left open at the tip, exposing some of the lead inside and is thus an example of a semi-jacketed round. Side by side comparison with a hollow point bullet and FMJ ammunition will quickly illustrate the difference.

 

Why do you have such an issue defining what in essence is common knowledge ?

 

4) Are you sure that all polymers are softer than copper :)

5) You are contradicting yourself again.

 

Again, please supply FACTS and not your opinion. FACT you seem to miss understand the whole concept of law. It make no difference what is most suitable, it matters only if you comply with the law and reading the above you plainly admit that you know that you are not. How long have you owned firearms?

 

John

Edited by HUnter_zero
Link to post

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hunter_zero,

 

I think you'll find the law is set out a little differantly in Scotland. :whistling: The term "expanding ammunition" is used, of which a BT certainly is.

 

Having said that I have to agree with Mr Logic, the law is clearly set out to stop people using match bullets on deer.

 

I us nothing but soft points when stalking, I'll save the BT's for the foxes!

 

Mark.

Link to post

Is wikipedia referenced in law? Nope, 'fraid not.

 

I understand the law pretty damn well thanks. I understand that without a supporting definition, a term cannot have any implied definition. So if you say to a lawyer, this bullet, with a soft plastic tip (because the polymer used most definitely IS softer than copper, and yes, I am aware there are some hard plastics in the world, but they aren't used in bullets) with a hollow cavity underneath it - is that a soft or hollow nosed bullet? he'd say "It's both"

 

It matters not what the hunting community refers to. In addition, the Act pre-dates the common availability of polymer tip ammunition, hence it's not specifically referred to. I agree that it would make life easier if it was - it would put you back in your box, where you belong.

 

Ultimately, you cannot get away from the simple FACT that this ammunition has both a soft nose, and a hollow point. it's a simple fact.

 

I absolutely refute that I have acted outside the law by using these bullets on deer, and I absolutely refute your assertion that thousands of people break the law every year by humanely killing deer with these bullets as well.

Link to post

Hunter_zero,

 

I think you'll find the law is set out a little differantly in Scotland. :whistling: The term "expanding ammunition" is used, of which a BT certainly is.

 

Having said that I have to agree with Mr Logic, the law is clearly set out to stop people using match bullets on deer.

 

I us nothing but soft points when stalking, I'll save the BT's for the foxes!

 

Mark.

 

I am very much aware of the Scottish laws. Many people claim to use A-max bullets which are match bullets.

Just because people use polymer tipped bullets for deer stalking does not mean it is legal to do so and until a court has ruled that polymer tipped bullets are legal for deer control it is always going to be a very grey area. The manufactures of such bullets will openly admit that the bullets are neither soft or hollow nosed, the opinions of people such as Mr_logic are of little use when you are stuck defending your actions in a court. The law is an ass at the best of times, what is needed is fact and not opinions and if a person uses polymer tipped bullets on deer, then so be it. I have a few friend who use nothing but silver tips on deer but just because that is what they have "always" done makes little difference to legislation and the fact that polymer tipped bullets are not soft nosed of hollow nosed is sufficient for a case to be made in breach of the Deer act. Debating is futile as the law is stated as it is and we all know many of the laws relating to guns, gun control and hunting are in need of review because many are simply out dated and contradicting.

Taking or relying on advice given across the Internet is worth about as much as you pay for it, I for one will refrain from using polymer tipped bullets for deer control until a definitive ruling has been made and that's not because I do not believe these type of bullets can effectively kill deer or because I believe the bullets are any less effective than traditional bullet types, it is simply because I believe given factual information from the manufactures of the bullets that the use of such bullets in England and Wales is illegal.

 

 

John

Link to post

Is wikipedia referenced in law? Nope, 'fraid not.

 

 

Again, how long have you owned firearms and how long have you stalked deer?

You have not stated any factual information, just your inadequate opinion. I will not waste time debating with a tub thumper.

 

John

Link to post

You're not debating shit, you're just restating the same argument over and over.

 

The length of time I have owned firearms is considerable, my deer stalking is much more recent and has absolutely no bearing on the legality of the bullet. If we were talking the rights and wrongs of the use of such bullets, it might be relevant, but we're not.

 

I have stated plenty of facts, the key one is the construction of polymer tip bullets - they ARE soft in the point and they ARE hollow in the nose - the bloody websites show you a bloody great big picture!

 

I'm tired of this - neither of us is going to budge here, so let's leave it. Just when you tell less experienced folk it's illegal, be sure and add the phrase "in my opinion". I've had a long and shitty day, and I can do without your ill-informed opinion.

Link to post

Hunter_zero,

 

I think you'll find the law is set out a little differantly in Scotland. :whistling: The term "expanding ammunition" is used, of which a BT certainly is.

 

Having said that I have to agree with Mr Logic, the law is clearly set out to stop people using match bullets on deer.

 

I us nothing but soft points when stalking, I'll save the BT's for the foxes!

 

Mark.

 

I am very much aware of the Scottish laws. Many people claim to use A-max bullets which are match bullets.

Just because people use polymer tipped bullets for deer stalking does not mean it is legal to do so and until a court has ruled that polymer tipped bullets are legal for deer control it is always going to be a very grey area. The manufactures of such bullets will openly admit that the bullets are neither soft or hollow nosed, the opinions of people such as Mr_logic are of little use when you are stuck defending your actions in a court. The law is an ass at the best of times, what is needed is fact and not opinions and if a person uses polymer tipped bullets on deer, then so be it. I have a few friend who use nothing but silver tips on deer but just because that is what they have "always" done makes little difference to legislation and the fact that polymer tipped bullets are not soft nosed of hollow nosed is sufficient for a case to be made in breach of the Deer act. Debating is futile as the law is stated as it is and we all know many of the laws relating to guns, gun control and hunting are in need of review because many are simply out dated and contradicting.

Taking or relying on advice given across the Internet is worth about as much as you pay for it, I for one will refrain from using polymer tipped bullets for deer control until a definitive ruling has been made and that's not because I do not believe these type of bullets can effectively kill deer or because I believe the bullets are any less effective than traditional bullet types, it is simply because I believe given factual information from the manufactures of the bullets that the use of such bullets in England and Wales is illegal.

 

 

John

 

John I am sorry to tell you this, actually I'm not at all sorry at all, if you had not been such an arse about this i might have phrased this differently, you are sooooooooo wrong :boxing: You should apologise to mr Logic :yes:

 

Try reading and quoting the Law, not spouting spurious rubbish.

 

Follow the link; http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199900/cmselect/cmhaff/95/95ap64.htm

 

And if you are too embarrassed to do so, I quote; " In the other type of missile, the jacket is open at the front and closed at the base. These are called nose-filled, hollow point, or soft point. For a number of reasons, this manufacturing process produces more accurate missiles. For best accuracy, such missiles are made with nose cavity and/or plastic tip (to shift the centre of mass rearward) a thin jacket (to improve concentricity) and a soft lead core (to make it easier to form without including air pockets). All of these features contribute to rapid expansion on impact. Whether such products are advertised as "designed to expand" depends largely on the marketing department and how the product is to be positioned in the market place.

 

If the missiles are to be marketed for shooting large game, the designer will incorporate features which delay, reduce or control expansion. Whether such missiles are truly "designed to expand" or whether they do so merely as a result of an accuracy-related design decision is not always apparent to the user. To illustrate the confusion surrounding this definition, we have showed four missiles (two of each kind) to experienced riflemen, senior police officers and firearms administration staff. No-one has yet correctly identified which missiles are prohibited and which are uncontrolled."

 

Here is the definition from the amended firearms act of 1997;

 

Prohibited ammunition: expanding ammunition and missiles for expanding ammunition

 

9

General prohibition of expanding ammunition etc .In section 5(1A) of the 1968 Act (weapons and ammunition subject to general prohibition), for paragraph (f) there shall be substituted the following paragraph—

“(f)

any ammunition which incorporates a missile designed or adapted to expand on impact;”.

 

 

 

 

Now apologise, or be gone, either will do :feck:

 

ft

Edited by flytie
Link to post

BT are certainly not illegal for use on deer but in curious to why anyone would use them if they prodominantly shoot deer in woodland off sticks! They are designed as a varmint bullet to expand very quickly and be violent and cause a lot of damage so why the big suprise when it blows some ribs out! I have used BTs for years and shoot the majority of deer in the head (which is perfectly good practice if you have a good rest and are within a reasonable distance before anyone starts!) because i love their accuracy and how flatt they shoot as well as the fact that you never lose vermin when using them! Having said that i have shot quite a lot of deer in the shoulder with them and the amount of damage they do just depends if you hit bone or not! By point is they are a varmint bullet so if you have no use for that level of fragmentation stick to your hollowpoints and softnoses!

Link to post

BT are certainly not illegal for use on deer but in curious to why anyone would use them if they prodominantly shoot deer in woodland off sticks! They are designed as a varmint bullet to expand very quickly and be violent and cause a lot of damage so why the big suprise when it blows some ribs out! I have used BTs for years and shoot the majority of deer in the head (which is perfectly good practice if you have a good rest and are within a reasonable distance before anyone starts!) because i love their accuracy and how flatt they shoot as well as the fact that you never lose vermin when using them! Having said that i have shot quite a lot of deer in the shoulder with them and the amount of damage they do just depends if you hit bone or not! By point is they are a varmint bullet so if you have no use for that level of fragmentation stick to your hollowpoints and softnoses!

 

GP, Just for you, I will post this again, there are two types of Ballistic Tips; Hunting and Varmint; http://www.nosler.com/bullets.htm

 

ft

Link to post

 

John I am sorry to tell you this, actually I'm not at all sorry at all, if you had not been such an arse about this i might have phrased this differently, you are sooooooooo wrong :boxing: You should apologise to mr Logic :yes:

 

amended firearms act of 1997;

 

Now apologise, or be gone, either will do :feck:

 

ft

 

I quote but one thing.

 

we have showed four missiles (two of each kind) to experienced riflemen, senior police officers and firearms administration staff. No-one has yet correctly identified which missiles are prohibited and which are uncontrolled

 

and the firearms act has little to do with the deer act.

The above is exactly what I am doing my level best to point out, and that is that polymer tipped bullets have not been defined accurately in legislation, which the above proves.

Yes, we know that certain polymer tipped bullets are designed for deer shooting and may even be better than the more traditional bullets but whilst we have the deer act stating as it does, we have an issue and that is by definition polymer tipped bullets to not fit in to either category stated in the act, to further add to the confusion the manufactures state that their polymer tipped bullets are neither soft or hollow nosed, as already stated this is a grey area and I prefer to stay legal and not use polymer tipped bullets. There is no need for you to have a hissy fit about things, I fear the slightest bit of flatulence from MR_Logic will leave you flat on your back.

 

John

Link to post

Not sure I understand the argument my certificate states,

 

The certificate holder may possess,purchase or acquire expanding ammunition,or missiles of such ammunition,in the calibers authorized by this certificate and use only in connection with,

a,the lawful shooting of deer,wildboar and Fox

B,the shooting of vermin or,in connection with the management of any estate,other wildlife,

C,the humane killing of animals

 

So as ballistic tips expand that will be just fine then :thumbs:

Edited by danw
Link to post

Not sure I understand the argument my certificate states,

 

 

So as ballistic tips expand that will be just fine then :thumbs:

 

 

My (and others) worry is simple. The Deer act defines or describes bullets that can be used for shooting deer as either soft nose or hollow nose. If there was a legal ruling or a manufacture that would state polymer tipped bullets are soft nose or hollow nosed bullets, there would be no issues at all and in fact would make my life for one much easier as I could use bullets in a length that would be more suited to my needs and the bullets would be much easier to purchase. The important thing to understand is that the firearms act to which your certificate relates can not over rule the Deer act. It is true to say that the wording of the deer act is to stop the use of FMJ bullets being used for deer shooting, however the description give in the deer act is not precise and at the time of being passed polymer tipped bullets were available on the commercial market. The Scots have it in the bag, they need only bullets that expand in a predictable manner, BT's fit this bill. However until there is a definitive ruling by either a court or a manufacture states that polymer tipped bullets are and can be classed as either soft or hollow nose then an issue exists with regards to the deer act. The government, police authorities and shooting organisations all have differences of opinion over polymer tipped bullets as can be seen with previous posts. There is very little else I can add, other than this is my opinion, right or wrong and the opinion of others. I have yet to see any published data to the contrary.

 

 

John

Link to post

John I am sorry to tell you this, actually I'm not at all sorry at all, if you had not been such an arse about this i might have phrased this differently, you are sooooooooo wrong boxing.gif You should apologise to mr Logic yes.gif

 

amended firearms act of 1997;

 

Now apologise, or be gone, either will do feck.gif

 

ft

 

I quote but one thing.

 

we have showed four missiles (two of each kind) to experienced riflemen, senior police officers and firearms administration staff. No-one has yet correctly identified which missiles are prohibited and which are uncontrolled

 

and the firearms act has little to do with the deer act.

The above is exactly what I am doing my level best to point out, and that is that polymer tipped bullets have not been defined accurately in legislation, which the above proves.

Yes, we know that certain polymer tipped bullets are designed for deer shooting and may even be better than the more traditional bullets but whilst we have the deer act stating as it does, we have an issue and that is by definition polymer tipped bullets to not fit in to either category stated in the act, to further add to the confusion the manufactures state that their polymer tipped bullets are neither soft or hollow nosed, as already stated this is a grey area and I prefer to stay legal and not use polymer tipped bullets. There is no need for you to have a hissy fit about things, I fear the slightest bit of flatulence from MR_Logic will leave you flat on your back.

 

John

 

yes that's right, quote the one bit in there that's completely irrelevant... we're talking about the difference there between match and hunting bullets, which are so similar as to be unrecognisable. Which means absolutely jack-shit in this.

 

Ah well. Keep your opinion if it keeps you happy.

 

Me, I'll keep killing deer with my soft, plastic tipped, hollow point bullets, and getting more accuracy downrange as a result. They're completely legal - otherwise why exactly would manufacturers advertise them for use in England on deer, which they do? Why would shops sell them for this, and why do a great many people use them....

 

As I said before, there's no telling you, keep spouting shit at anyone who'll listen. You're so stubborn that I don't think I've come across anyone more stubborn. Not sure I've come across someone so willing to defend a poor, flawed argument either. But keep at it if it keeps you happy. Think you need to get out more personally...

Link to post

I still can't see the problem does any one really think that you will be prosecuted for using bt as apposed to hp/sp the cps haven't got the time nor money to take people to court on a technicality that I would guarantee they would loose, my noslers have a polymer tip which is clearly softer than the rest of the jacket and as such must qualify as soft point although I don't have access to a rockwell meter a simple test with a knife proves that the tip is of a softer construction.

Link to post

 

As I said before, there's no telling you, keep spouting shit at anyone who'll listen. You're so stubborn that I don't think I've come across anyone more stubborn. Not sure I've come across someone so willing to defend a poor, flawed argument either. But keep at it if it keeps you happy. Think you need to get out more personally...

 

So your lack of any REAL evidence to support your claims gives way to personal insults, why does this not surprise me.

 

John

Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...