.22 Allowed But .17Hmr Not Allowed

[Beefbeefbeef 10]

I recently applied for a FAC. The firearms officer came to visit and he agreed that the .17HMr was the right calibre for my needs. I put forward the two farms where I have permission. The FAC duly arrived so I went out and purchased my new .17HMR.

 

I then had a letter saying that one of the two farms I had put forward could not be cleared for .17HMR but .22rf was okay. It seems they issued the FAC on the strength of one farm but had not inspected the other farm at that point.

 

Having just spent £600, I feel pretty let down by the process. It also seems pretty odd that they say I can't use a .17HMR but a .22 would be okay on the same bit of ground (part of it adjoins a village so I guess that's their concern) - a .22 is still a dangerous round after all.

 

Should I have been more aware of this scenario before I went out and bought my .17HMR?

[paulus 26]

The theory is the HMR is safer than the 22lr because of the reduced chances of a ricochet. however a rimfire is a rimfire, maybe someone in the office is confusing the HMR with a centrefire

[DeerhoundLurcherMan 997]

I had my FAC interview a couple of weeks ago. I had originally applied for a HMR, but during the interview the FEO basically said no chance and said its more like .22lr or nothing due to lack of experience.....

 

I argued my point based on half of my permission is literately full of flint and I don't want any ricochets. He said its rubbish. So unlikely with the .22lr that its almost not worth worrying about, He said even if it did it wont matter because it wont come back towards me and I wont be shooting near anything that could be damaged........

 

The reason he didn't like the first time FAC grant to have .17HMR on it was because it shoots so flat. He said if you miss your target the HMR will fly alot further than the .22 before coming down on its own..........

[kruby01 114]

correct me if im wrong as well but a HMR has a greater range than a .22lr by a noticeable margarine?

[blackfox 9]

Hmmmmm i find that a little srange, in Somerset i would be very suprised if you requested a .22lr & .17hmr and were denied the .17

 

It could be worth getting in touch with BASC about this http://www.basc.org.uk/en/departments/firearms/

[dadioles 68]

My guess is that your FEO has probably never fired any rimfire and does not have first hand knowledge. It may be that he is a shotgun man, or equally possibly has little or no first hand experience of shooting at all!

[Beefbeefbeef 10]

correct me if im wrong as well but a HMR has a greater range than a .22lr by a noticeable margarine?

 

 

You're right, but if it's an unsafe shot with a .17HMR then I reckon it's still unsafe with a .22 - although my local force obviously don't agree with this. I'd be interested to hear if anyone else has a take on this.

 

 

 

[mick20 23]

I don't understand how they can refuse the hmr.

In their letter to you, they say that 'one piece of land cannot be cleared for HMR', so from this you can say that the other must be suitable for this round, ok.

You only need 'one suitable piece of land' for a particular round to be issued the certificate.

I would contact BASC and get them to help you sort it.

I had no problem with getting mine and the land is only 70 acres, 22,17hmr and 223, the firearms officer only asked me to get out with someone to get more experience using the larger calibre.

Good luck in getting sorted mate.

Happy shooting, atb Mick

 

[Beefbeefbeef 10]

I don't understand how they can refuse the hmr.

In their letter to you, they say that 'one piece of land cannot be cleared for HMR', so from this you can say that the other must be suitable for this round, ok.

You only need 'one suitable piece of land' for a particular round to be issued the certificate.

I would contact BASC and get them to help you sort it.

I had no problem with getting mine and the land is only 70 acres, 22,17hmr and 223, the firearms officer only asked me to get out with someone to get more experience using the larger calibre.

Good luck in getting sorted mate.

Happy shooting, atb Mick

 

I think what's happened is that they granted me the certificate off the back of the one piece of land they had inspected at that point. I assumed they had checked both although wasn't told. So I bought my .17 rifle and now they are saying they have got around to checking the other piece of land and it's apparently not suitable for .17 - although they did say it was cleared for .22. I don't know how it can be safe for one and not for the other.

[SportingShooter 0]

It sounds to me as though they haven't inspected the second piece of land at all and have no intention of doing so again.

 

They are both rimfire calibres, both are capable of ricochets and one is not infinitely safer than the other.

 

I wouldn't take it lying down and would be contacting whichever shooting organisation I belonged to because to me it sounds like a) they're trying to fob you off or b ) they have confused the calibres with a .17 centrefire.

 

Couple of other things on this thread about FEO's saying "no chance" about having a certain calibre because of lack of experience, if you have good reason to possess a firearm then they are legally obliged to grant it. FEOs believe they have some form of bargaining power but it's purely in their own minds and those of their managers.

 

Challenge it

[DeerhoundLurcherMan 997]

It sounds to me as though they haven't inspected the second piece of land at all and have no intention of doing so again.

 

They are both rimfire calibres, both are capable of ricochets and one is not infinitely safer than the other.

 

I wouldn't take it lying down and would be contacting whichever shooting organisation I belonged to because to me it sounds like a) they're trying to fob you off or b ) they have confused the calibres with a .17 centrefire.

 

Couple of other things on this thread about FEO's saying "no chance" about having a certain calibre because of lack of experience, if you have good reason to possess a firearm then they are legally obliged to grant it. FEOs believe they have some form of bargaining power but it's purely in their own minds and those of their managers.

 

Challenge it

I hear what your saying but id rather not contest anything just yet, when I get my FAC then ill put in for it if I still think I need it. Just be happy to get on the ladder to start with

[zx10mike 137]

having had both it is my opinion the hmr is much safer not better but safer as 22lr is very prone to bouncing.you firearms officer is either not qualified for post of has made the decision on noise and the concern it would cause for people who live close trying to sleep etc.that would be a fair reason but at the very least a decent firearms chap would talk you through how he made his call.if you get basc on it or just ask him how he thinks 22lr is safer i think he might get embarresed unless its noise .

good luck sorting it

Edited May 12, 2013 by zx10mike

[Beefbeefbeef 10]

having had both it is my opinion the hmr is much safer not better but safer as 22lr is very prone to bouncing.you firearms officer is either not qualified for post of has made the decision on noise and the concern it would cause for people who live close trying to sleep etc.that would be a fair reason but at the very least a decent firearms chap would talk you through how he made his call.if you get basc on it or just ask him how he thinks 22lr is safer i think he might get embarresed unless its noise .

good luck sorting it

Cheers Mike. Weird though because I shoot my shotgun there (keeping a polite distance from any house) and it's far noisier than a .17HMR.

[Beefbeefbeef 10]

It sounds to me as though they haven't inspected the second piece of land at all and have no intention of doing so again.

 

They are both rimfire calibres, both are capable of ricochets and one is not infinitely safer than the other.

 

I wouldn't take it lying down and would be contacting whichever shooting organisation I belonged to because to me it sounds like a) they're trying to fob you off or b ) they have confused the calibres with a .17 centrefire.

 

Couple of other things on this thread about FEO's saying "no chance" about having a certain calibre because of lack of experience, if you have good reason to possess a firearm then they are legally obliged to grant it. FEOs believe they have some form of bargaining power but it's purely in their own minds and those of their managers.

 

Challenge it

 

I'm pretty sure they did inspect it because the landowner said she had made an appointment to inspect it a few days before. The letter from the police also said the landowner did not want foxes shot (i know that already - not sure why they said that) so they had obviously spoken.

[TWOTWOTHREE 152]

Hi

Yet another firearms department making their own rules up! As said many of them don't understand.when I phone my local department I like to take a few paracetamol before hand because if i don't speak to Lindsay i end up with a blinder of a migraine.its laughable sometimes.but on this topic they seen to say if land is clear for .17 hmr then it's clear for the .22 and visa versa.but try to explain that you are using one moderator on two rifles,it took some doing,I tell you somet the best thing that ever happened to me all them years ago was getting open condition on my rimmys and cf,I no longer need the pills.

Good luck

223