Guest Tiff Posted June 19, 2008 Report Share Posted June 19, 2008 I recently sold my .300 RUM that WAS granted for deerstalking and worked very well. I applied for a .338 Lapua Magnum to replace it. However the Senior Firearms Clerk refused this application giving this as a reason: Direct quote from the letter: The information in respect to this type of ammunition shows there is a 3700 metre (4034 yd) danger area and a 3000 foot aerial danger are, which is, much more than standard range and hunting rounds. This danger area is obviously likely to exceed the boundaries of most farmland/forest in which deer are likely to be hunted. The ammunition has such a danger area that even the range complex at Bisley, which is considerable, has been prohibited from the use of that type of round. In view of this considerable increase in danger areas for the 8.6mm round, to such an extent that the military are restricting its use considerably, the guidance I have received is that it should not be authorised for use for deer control, due to the potential dangers presented by that ammunition. End of quote So I called them up and requested an explanation. Apparently the fact that the land I shoot on has no public rights of way, dwellings or anything else and has a 100 metre high clear grass valley side as a backstop does not matter! They still apply the range danger area to the land! Also the .338 is NOT as ballistically efficient with HUNTING rounds as even a 6mmBR , but apparently it warrants this large imaginary fall out zone, regardless of the backstop! Also he commented that due to rifles with a ME over 4,500 joules being restricted for use only with prior zeroing on ranges they are now looking at banning all hunting rifles with a muzzle energy over 4,500 joules!!!! So guys what do you make of this and where should I take things now?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orka Akinse Posted June 19, 2008 Report Share Posted June 19, 2008 Speak with BASC Tiff, there the experts and they should help. You need to be a member tho' Keep us posted this has serious implications for all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baldie Posted June 19, 2008 Report Share Posted June 19, 2008 Absolute bullshit. The restrictions apply to military ranges only, because the army dont want to trust civvies. Get back on to them and tell them to put it in writing, because you intend to take it further, then contact your shooting organisation.This pillock is trying it on, and if you let him, it will stick.He is way, way off . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alycidon Posted June 19, 2008 Report Share Posted June 19, 2008 Send a copy of your letter to BASC Firearms Dept with all your supportive evidence and let them argue the case for you. They are quite excellent in this aspect. A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tiff Posted June 19, 2008 Report Share Posted June 19, 2008 Baldie I've got all of this I quoted and more of it in writing in front of me now, he even personally singed it. Looks like its time to add BASC to my portfolio along with existing membership of the NGO and CA. I will keep you all posted on this as it develops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigun Posted June 19, 2008 Report Share Posted June 19, 2008 phone up the NGO and ask for george wallaces number ..there nothing that man dont no on the laws on shooting he will be more than happy to tell you how it is ..he may even phone them up for you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wireviz Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 [sAD IF THIS ONE GOSE DOWN THEN IT WILL BE CALIBRE AFTER CALIBRE. qUOTE ME IF I AM WRONG BUT JUST ABOUT EVERY RIFLE WILL FIRE A BULLET OFF THERE GROUND AT SOME POINT .ISNT IT ABOUT SAFE SHOOTING YOU GO GIRL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tiff Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 I have taken advice and sent a return letter back to the firearms department. My worry is, that like others have suggested, this is the thin edge of the wedge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vermincinerator Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 Tiff, become a member of the FCSA and get your 338LM, they cant refuse you if you are a member, then ask for a 338 RUM or 338 Win Mag for deerstalking, i think you will find that it is the 338 lapua that they dont want you to have Ian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redfox Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 Basc are the ones advising home office/police that you dont need such large calibres so dont expect too much help there. George Wallace is only a grasshopper on firearms, Bill Harriman ( Basc) and Michael Yardley (SAGBI) are way ahead of him in every sense. I hope you can get some sense into this argument as you say it is very much the thin end of the wedge and as Wireviz has said there is no CF rifle that would actually meet the criteria he has put forward, they are all capable of going off your land. The real argument is that larger calibres travelling slower do less damage and kill the animal cleanly first time. The responsibility of where the bullet is likely to end up is yours not theirs and why you have been entrusted with a FAC, it gets ever more stupid!!. Redfox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orka Akinse Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 Sorry Red but I got to disagree I would stand in any court with either George W or Mike E next to me as expert witnesses. I may be wrong but whilst Bill Knows alot about firearms I am not aware he has acted as expert witness in firearms cases in a court. Happy to stand corrected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brown dog Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 OA (LLB), I'm not clear what it is that enables the individuals named above to describe themselves as firearms 'expert witnesses' ...other than working for BASC ...or writing magazine articles. For eg Bill Harriman was in the TA (!) and has an unrelated BSc (...more the background of an enthusiast than an expert!) similarly, I've a feeling that Yardley didn't even make it through RMAS. Rather less qualified than me (and maybe even you )! Not what you or I would describe as experts ...how have they become legally recognised as such? BD (no LLB) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vermincinerator Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 Redfox, We all know that a 45-90 firing a 500grn lead bullet at 1100fps will fell a ton of North American Bison as if it had been struck by Thors hammer, but the cartridge generates nowhere near the required ME for it to be legally used for deer in this country. In order for us to use large slow moving calibres for deer in this country we will all have to be equipped with 375 H&H's and above because anything less that is bigbore is too slow to meet the ME requirements. Ian. PS. I will have a 416 Rigby for vermin please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redfox Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 You have missed the point Ian. A 30 cal 185/220gr bullet at say 2450fps is just as effective as say a 6mm at 3000fps and does a great deal less meat damage, easily meets the ME requirement too, so a 338 200+ gr at say 2750 fps would be very good for the larger deer species. Any of the mainstream cf cals is well capable of going off the ground where you are shooting, although the heavier bullets will of course retain energy and velocity longer, but that doesnt make them unsuitable in the right circumstances. I think this will run on for a good while yet and there may be some tears if they get away with this sort of reasoning, particularly from those amongst us that have things like 300Wm at the moment. There must be more important things to occupy them, like terrorists with all kinds of nasty things. Redfox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wireviz Posted June 21, 2008 Report Share Posted June 21, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigun Posted June 21, 2008 Report Share Posted June 21, 2008 all im going to say about george wallace is that he is on are side ,he was that top firearms man at basc once ,but has moved on to better things ,he told me him self that basc tied his hands on some cases .but now he helps out the NGO he can do what he likes ..he has helped win meny cases as a expert witnesses and what he dont no on the firearm laws aint printed yet ..he is there to help if you need it is all im going to say and he knows how to talk to the police they cant run rings round a man that knows more than them unlike me ect ..police will use words like under sec 5 paragraph 15 ect when you ring you just wish you new the awnser to throw back at them ..george does .. fight fire with fire .its the only way ..hope you have a good out come on this one, if your know your right stick to your guns ..so to speek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bambi-basher Posted June 21, 2008 Report Share Posted June 21, 2008 I'm not clear what it is that enables the individuals named above to describe themselves as firearms 'expert witnesses' The court has a register of “Expert witness” you can only be recognized as an expert witness if you are in the register. The question is; how you get in the register, that I am not sure of. Best rgds B-b Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tiff Posted June 21, 2008 Report Share Posted June 21, 2008 The court has a register of “Expert witness” you can only be recognized as an expert witness if you are in the register. The question is; how you get in the register, that I am not sure of. Best rgds B-b I'm hoping this doesn't go that far....Just a case of if they see sense now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orka Akinse Posted June 22, 2008 Report Share Posted June 22, 2008 B-b How do you get on the list? good question, there is a list and you have to meet certain criteria. I can tell you one thing, the expert witness list bears NO bloody ressemblence to the so called experts the BBC or ITV wheel out to discuss terrorism or the housing market who look like they're still wet behind the ears from a wash their mothers just gave them with Johnsons baby shampoo I can tell you. Sadly the word expert is more abused than any other word I know. I'm pretty sure George when appearing as an expert witness has not had a case lost on expert evidence he has presented. Would I have in my tent? you betcha without a blink everytime. He knows his stuff. All the experts I know (with the greatest respect to you all) are all grey haired old duffers who have worked in their field for most of their lives, it is their passion not just a job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(200x135).jpg.0fd0a94f065c6cb243fdff1b40e0819a.jpg)
.jpg.0972b4e2bdf0b5a4109eb96f2b1b62ad.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.