
Alsone
Members-
Content Count
2,133 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Articles
Gun Dealer's and Fieldsports Shop's
Reloading Room
Blogs
Calendar
Store
Classifieds
Everything posted by Alsone
-
What Deer Calibre For First Deer Rifle.
Alsone replied to shropshire dan's topic in Rimfire, Centrefire & Shotguns
From the little I know about big game, (about everything I've written here!), .308 is on the light side. .338 lapua or .375 mag much more suited to bear. Problem with these is both are severe overkill on deer and likely to pass through and then some, so only answer might be to get the .308 and borrow a rifle for bear shooting when over there. (Cross posted with SS) -
Yes and no. Last time I spoke to the BASC on this subject, I was told many forces now insist you have a cabinet fitted and approved prior to grant and it may lead to a refusal if one isn't fitted. However, why should you be forced to spend £100+ on something which, if you only have the intention of borrowing guns, will never get used? It's also interesting to note that the new form actually uses the wording (at least on my copy) "Details of current (or in the case of grants, proposed) security arrangements", suggesting that it's not a requirement to fit before grant. In fact I curr
-
If it's rabbits mainly then HMR, .22LR or .22 Magnum really as anything else becomes too expensive to run. If you're eating them, then anything other than LR needs a headshot. Check out this thread here as plenty of advice on HMR vs fox: http://www.thehuntinglife.com/forums/topic/340816-same-old-question-maybe/
-
Personally, I have no experience of deer shooting so can't comment beyond what I've read which is varying views from deer running on due to nerve activity even though technically dead to deer bleeding out. I'm sure others will have views and real life experience. There is a difference with deer though in that the rounds are designed to minimise meat damage and so tend to be of a controlled expansion (jacketed / semi-jacketed) design rather than a fragmenting or out and out hydrostatic shocking design. How much that affects the humaneness of the kill, again I wouldn't know However, make
-
I said it above and I'll say it again, there's a question between what is humane and what will kill. It's reported that David killed Goliath with a catapult, but it doesn't mean that hunters should be using catapults against bears! There's no doubt in theory you could kill a fox at 200 yds with a HMR as it still has 72 ftlbs of retained energy (17 gr). However, it would be irresponsible to attempt it because it's highly unlikely you could still introduce hydrostatic shock at that range, which in the absence of bullet weight and huge amounts of retained energy, is likely the major killi
-
You can shoot a fox dead at any range in theory provided you have around 40-50ft lbs of energy left in the bullet. Whether or not it's both humane, and an instant death that is repeatable, time after time is another matter. Personally I wouldn't shoot an animal the size of a fox without a headshot with a HMR and even then at limited range not least of which because of the wind drift as much as the lack of energy at range. A 20gr is a small light bullet. The HMR extends the humane range beyond the .22LR but not as far as the CF calibres. As I said above, a CF is a much better tool for f
-
HMR is a small low power round for fox. It will kill it but you need to keep distances relatively short and shots accurate. Many forces will no longer authorise it as good reason for foxes although if you have it authorised for other reasons with AOLQ, then there's nothing to stop you shooting them with it, provided you ensure clean kills. Do otherwise, and you may fall foul of cruelty legislation. However, there are better tools for foxing - think most CF's between Hornet through the .22X's to .243 depending on distance, noise and ammo cost considerations. @ James, If you have a P
-
yes mate Yes and the magazine is nice but at £72 per year, it's a very expensive magazine subscription. I know the BASC do some good conservation and representation work, but I personally think more work should be done to push back some of the restrictions we face and the non sensical rules eg. 1. Air rifles being FAC when SGC would be just as safe at lower pressures (eg up to 35ft lbs), and make them more accessible as an alternative to a shotgun where stealth is required and 2. Criminal penalties for licensing breaches when 95% could be dealt with via warnings, 5% by civil
-
Who knows, but I don't think this is quite the same as the Badger cull, after all, not many Badgers go around eating your livestock, pets children or you! One thing for sure, if they did, I bet the publics attitude would be quite different.
-
That explains it. The excess is still a bit nasty though for representation on refusal.
-
At £2. a pop thats £56 for a box of 20 wtf are they, depleted uranium? time to start loading your own. I'd want exocet misslies for that. 1 shot and it's killed, disected and barbequed in 1 go. Now that's what I call shooting! Now where's the beer!
-
Hi, I just received my renewal through and noticed there appear to have been some significant changes to the policy. I thought I'd bring them to everyone's attention so they can comapre this to SACS or other bodies as I personally don't think the BASC insurance represents very good value anymore: The restrictions are: 1. £500 Excess to pay in respect of a Refusal to Grant a Certificate! (This is a significant expense for anyone needing legal assistance following a refusal to grant.) 2. Increased to £1,500 if you want to use your own Solicitor or Barrister on refusal and £1,
-
That is a 5" spread between 100-300 yards, on the Hornady, it isn't a 4", and nothing in that chart says .7" was the peak of the arc! Indeed that is a 5" spread, my error. So far as top of the arc is concerned, it's highly likely 0.7 is the peak because if you run the figures for regular 50gr V-Max, Gun data suggests it peaks around the 150 yard mark at 0.85". As superformance is faster and thus flatter, 0.7 would make sense.
-
I have to say I agree with both sides here. Deker is entirely correct in that tables are only a guide and no substitute for actual zeroing / working out you're own drop tables based on actual observed performance. Equally Dan, is correct Deker with the 4" spread if you believe the Hornady 50gr superformance figures which show on a 200yd zero, the bullet to be .7 high at 100 yards and 4.3 low at 300yds: http://www.hornady.com/store/22-250-Rem-50-gr-V-MAX-Superformance/ It also looks possible on gundata: http://gundata.org/ballistic-calculator/ Although that shows a 4.9 drop
-
.22Lr On An 8 Acre Stable, A A New Fac Holder
Alsone replied to David Aiken's topic in Rimfire, Centrefire & Shotguns
I believe that's what the BASC want to achieve. I believe that in Scotland there are no land checks and yet there are no more accidents than in England. -
Calibre choice really comes down to exactly what you're shooting and how large the land is as this affects suitability for the prey, cost and chances of the land getting / being passed for the calibre concerned. For rabbits most people would recommend .22LR (see also Cedric's comments above), or .17hmr (but the latter does have some ammo quality supply issues). For fox, you really want a CF in a calibre from .222 - .243, although there are one or two outside of this range, most notably .22 hornet for shorter ranges and some might recommend .20 for mid range although this has some drawb
-
.22Lr On An 8 Acre Stable, A A New Fac Holder
Alsone replied to David Aiken's topic in Rimfire, Centrefire & Shotguns
Equally I agree Deker but I guess that's where it comes down to a matter of personal choice of either risking it or walking away from a new permission. Personally I'd rather walk away than potentially put my freedom in the hands of a unkown 3rd party. Maybe the best thing here would be if it become compulsory to obtain written permission, as then farmers / landowners would either be forced to grant it in writing or do without shooting / pest control. To that extent, I have some sympathy with the Kent approach because although it's heavy handed under current regulations, it does at least pr -
.22Lr On An 8 Acre Stable, A A New Fac Holder
Alsone replied to David Aiken's topic in Rimfire, Centrefire & Shotguns
I know some on here may disagree but personally I'd suggest as a matter of policy, it's always a good idea to get every permission in writing as it's the only defence you have against an allegation of armed trespass if the landowner should later deny he gave you permission for some reason (it has been known to happen). If you really aren't happy about getting written permissions, then talk to the BASC as I believe there's now a national licensing policy agreed with the police against forces introducing their own rules or forms that go over and above what the law requires. I'm unsure as to -
Don't you have a built in wardrobe you can put it inside? Another option is in the loft as most non detached houses have the party wall made out of brick. Some detached houses have brick gable ends. Worst comes to the worst, buy a cheap wardrobe, don't fit the back, fasten the cabinet to a solid wall and then place it over the cabinet. Cabinet is now out of sight. Better still is a custom hidden cabinet but they cost mega £'s.
-
.22Lr On An 8 Acre Stable, A A New Fac Holder
Alsone replied to David Aiken's topic in Rimfire, Centrefire & Shotguns
I appreciate that Roy and I wasn't trying to be pedantic. It's just very slightly dangerous putting up an abbreviated version as the OP asked that if the land was passed for "FAC" was it OK to use his rifles. So he could take it as read that if eg it's passed for FAC Air, it's automatically been passed for all FAC including eg .22LR, or if it's passed for .22LR, it's automatically passed for .17 HMR, which isn't the case unless it says the calibre or in the case of a generalised rimfire permission, "rimfire". -
.22Lr On An 8 Acre Stable, A A New Fac Holder
Alsone replied to David Aiken's topic in Rimfire, Centrefire & Shotguns
I think that should read if it's been passed for firearms of your calibre. -
Agree with Charlie. If you're open, you just apply simple common sense such as if houses are close by, shoot from that perimeter direction directly into the land ie away from the houses or if that direction isn't safe, find a diagonal direction away from the houses that is and ensure you have a good backstop and enough land to allow for a ricochet then bait it to bring it into the safe zone. If it isn't possible, then at that point you need to resort the to shotty. However, remember a shotty isn't spent to around 120 yards with large shot and even then, anything, even if spent, exiting th
-
Why not just use a guitar case as in Desparado? You could even get the monkey to look over your shoulder!
-
Clabedoo you're statement is interesting because I obtained a Crown Court judgement, in which the Judge issued an Order, ordering the Police to Grant a Certificate following a refusal (where he did not consider the grounds for refusal were valid) and specifically stating that there are no grounds to refuse the Appellant a Certificate. That said, so far as the OP's friend is concerned, he's in the hands of the CC because his conduct has given rise to a situation where the CC has to made a review decision based on the evidence as to whether or not he still a suitable person to hold a firearm
-
I too agree with SS. I understand you have a legal right to hold a firearms licence provided you satisfy the requirements and there are no good reasons why you shouldn't hold one. It's not at the Chief Constable's discretion (provided you meet all the requirements). That's why if the CC fails to grant a certificate, you have the right to take the police to Court and why the Court will order a grant if you met the requirements. The only reason a Chief Constable can refuse a grant or revoke a certificate is if you don't meet the requirements or if he can show good reasons as to why y