Range Danger Areas - Now apply to deerstalking ground!!! - Update.

[Guest Tiff]

Well I have spoken to my licensing department and they have refused to grant my ticket for .338 for deer stalking (target is fine) until the issue of high muzzle energy rifles is put before a review of 'experts' at the Home Office.....Which could take several months or more!

 

So basically are they allowed to stall me until this review? Since currently there is no law saying .338 cannot be used on deer? I know many people locally with .375 for red.

 

As I see it they should grant me the rifle currently and then stop it, if the review (which could be ages/if at all) causes a change in the law. What do you think?

[charly hunter]

I think your pushing your luck, What can a 338 do that a 308 or 300win mag can't??? If you need a 338 you must have Deer like elephants in your area, even then a 300 would bring one down. Or is it that you want it because you want to shoot them at extremely long ranges?

[Guest Tiff]

Charly Hunter there is nothing wrong with .338 for deer (if you understand the ballistics with hunting rounds my .300 RUM was much better than the .338), but that's not the issue here.

 

This HO review also appears to also effect the .300's and other rifles in the 6000-7000 joule region!

 

I just want to know what people think I should do now.

[baldie]

If your land is suitable for fullbore rifle, they have no legal right to stall or refuse such a calibre.There is no protocol for all this broccoli that the bloody army and NRA have foisted on target shooters, that applies to land shooting. As far as i know, there is none in the pipeline either, i think they are pissing up your back.

The only person who can officially refuse a calibre, if all conditions are met to legally own one....is your forces chief of police. He can only refuse it on the grounds that he fears for the public safety in granting it. he would obviously have to put all this in writing, which you can then use in a court of law. If sporting shooters who wish to use such calibres dont stand up to the police, this will become "law".

A change in the law will require primary legislation from westminster, which would also mean the scots could apply for a total ban on airguns, and believe me, the government have no stomach for that hot potato at this moment in time.primary legislation usually involves a little bit of give and take, and the government dont want to "give".

[Guest Tiff]

Baldie - Thank you very much, your comments are exactly what I figured. For a while I was thinking I had missed part of the firearms law/guidance......

 

As I see it there is no way the Chief of Police could use the excuse of refusing due to public safety; since my .300 RUM was granted on the same land and produces the same energy levels as the .338 Lapua. The RUM pushes a 200 grain bullets at 3,200 fps and the Lapua the same at 3,200fps : i.e. the same energy and the .30 cal RUM bullets have a better B.C. and thus long range ballistics.

 

I thought it would have been easy to swap over, since I only want a .338 for the better barrel life compared to the RUM. Apparently I was being optimistic thinking the police would understand basic ballistics!

[Ronin]

Tiff

 

 

the guidelines are pretty clear:

 

Page 77 of this link:

 

http://www.basc.org.uk/media/ho_guidance.pdf

 

 

 

I suppose one could interpret a rutting stag as dangerous game though, you dont happen to have wild boar on your ground per-chance?

[baldie]

I cant see why, according to the home office guidelines there, that he cant have a .338 Andy ? its "sub" .the minimum limit of .375 specified for dangerous game.

The top and bottom of it is that the phrase .338 lapua magnum, frightens the f***ing shite out of the police, who have listened to far too much crap from the military about it.

If it produces the same ft/lbs as the .300rum already certificated, they havent a leg to stand on.

If it was me, i,d make them bloody well have it....legally.

[Ronin]

Dave

 

I totally aggree with you, there is no such thing as too much gun (unless the applicant wants a .50 cal) but all FEO's use the ACPO Home Office Guidelines (or should) when looking at individual applications for weapons.

 

The 338 is in the table for Dangerous Game only, it isnt suitable (in the guidelines eyes) for vermin, fox or deer of any kind in the uk.

 

The applicant who wants a 338 for Deer will have an uphill struggle, I am not aware of anyone who has one for deer (only) in my area or surrounding areas.

 

Now if the applicant can form a reasooned argument to say that the deer on his authority are dangerous (Sika can be very aggressive and rutting Reds can be a bugger to get down) then there is a chance of them obtaining permission.

 

I doubt that BASC would take this on as its clear in the guidelines where the line is drawn - I know it isnt what anyone wants to hear, but this is how I see it for "the other side"

[dogfox]

Why the hell are we made to jump through all these hoops for .You are either safe or not safe to shoot a firearm. The calibre has nothing to do with being safe. It is just the police having a grip on what you can use and flexing their power. The B.A.S.C SHOULDS DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS MISS USE OF THE LAW.

 

Dogfox

[Ronin]

I stand to be corrected but I am led to believe that prior to the publication of the ACPO guidelines there was alot of discussion at a national level with relevant parties (NRA, BASC etc etc) over what calibres were and were not suitable for each type of quarry (amongst other things)

 

 

Like I said in the previous post, I dont see what the problem is with the larger more powerful calibres, but as the document is already in use and has been for several years I think it would be a task to say the least to get a grant for anything outside the "box".

[Guest Tiff]

Hi Ronin the clue is in the word 'Guidelines' they are NOT law. See 1.2 of the guidelines below:

 

1.2 It must be stressed that this is not a

definitive statement of the law but a

cohesive explanation of the often complex

area of firearms licensing.

 

The ONLY calibre restriction for England is that it must be .240 and above and over 1,700 ft/lbs of energy. Both of which the .338 obviously meets.

 

Here it gets interesting, because as Baldie mentions, .338 is under the regarded minimum for dangerous game of .375. See an extract from 13.35 from the guidelines below. Here is the main part of my case:

Why is not suitable to use a .338 rifle (obviously smaller than .375 which is at the 'lower end of those suitable.....') in the UK for deer shooting, unless it has been granted for use aboard?

 

13.35 Some rifles intended for

antelope and other Plains Game may also

be suitable for deer, boar or other quarry

shooting in this country. Calibres such as

the .375 (9.5mm) are at the lower end of

those suitable for shooting “dangerous game”

but may, once initial “good reason” has been

established, also be used for shooting the

larger deer species in Britain. Expanding

ammunition may also be authorised for an

applicant whose certificate allows for the rifle

also to be used for shooting deer in Britain.

[Ronin]

Tiff

 

 

I aggree with you, you should be allowed to have it for deer.

[Guest Tiff]

Tiff

I aggree with you, you should be allowed to have it for deer.

 

 

Hi Ronin sorry if my last reply sounded like an attack at you, it was just a comprehensive reply. I welcome anyone who can try and find a flaw in my case, since it's better to find holes here (and find a suitable plug) than when in court.....(if it goes that far).

[brown dog]

when in court.....(if it goes that far).

 

I suspect it will go that far; the licensing authorities know that almost no one is able to fund challenges to their random edicts; and are therefore not interested in technical and legal debate. They know that their word is, in effect, the Law.

 

In my forays into this area (243 for vermin and 375 for deer) I soon learnt that logical legal and technical argument will get you nowhere; 99.9% of FEOs are not capable of engaging in such debate.....and the bottom line is that they know they don't have to!

 

I was particularly underwhelmed by BASC's assistance. Their contribution is best summarised as 'all fart and no that which promotes growth and vigour'. I fear they sell the talk, but don't then walk the walk. I was even told by them that my letters were better than they could manage!

 

So....standby to self-fund the argument legally or offer a compromise......without re-reading the guidance; I suspect your most pragmatic route would be to establish 'primary good reason' for the new Plain's Game interest you just remembered that you've developed. With that 'primary' established, get it authorised for UK deer.

[Ronin]

Tiff

 

no problem at all, I quite understand your frustration. I would also like to use 338 for deer in "hard to get to" places, but realised long ago that I hadn't much chance of being granted this.

 

My largest deer cal is now 7mm magnum, this does the job perfectly well.

 

Brown Dog is quite right, it will take a plucky soul with own funding to follow through any litigation to fruition in the courts.

 

 

 

May be worth considering the plains game approach, -I know of people who have deer permission with 375 HH etc who go abroad and use their rifles here, but (and this is a BIG but), they only have one or two rifles, not several that already comply with UK deer regs.

 

May be a bitter pill, ?

[Redfox]

Good old BASC sold us all down the river many times and yet there are still some on here who sing their praises, wake up lads nice fat well paid jobs, cosy junkets in whitehall with MPs, agreeing to all sorts of crap and we morons are expected to pay the bill and trust them.

Not me no money , no trust and happy to tell those that will listen. Any of the others have to be better.

I was in BASC since it was WAGBI but saw sense about 8 yrs ago.

Redfox

[Guest Tiff]

I think I will pursue the getting granted aboard, then use here route.

 

Half the reason I want to use the .338 is I'm trying to down-size to only 4 rifles, .17HMR, .22 RF, .308 and .338.

 

The .308 is ok but some of the very very steep valleys I shoot in, getting closer than 300 yards to the deer is just not possible. At these sort of distances I find the .308 starts to run out of steam against rutting reds. It drops them ok, but just not as quick as I'd prefer.

 

So where could I say I'm going to shoot aboard and what, with a Sako TRG .338???? Are european wild boar dangerous enough to be granted a .338 on?

[Tikka 260]

Except that .338 may be regarded as 'military calibre ' in many parts of the EU and therefore not permissible for civilian hunting. I had that problem with 7x57 and went to 7-08 as a consequence.

 

Just a thought

 

Best of luck

 

ATB

[Guest Tiff]

Apart from France, which other countries in Europe do not allow military calibers. I'm guessing turning up in South Africa with a military looking .338 would probably not be a good idea either.......

[Redfox]

Black bear hunting in Canada with possibly some Caribou would be a fair reason and it isnt so expensive particularly if you book a flight in advance which even in these mad fuel price days will save something like 30% on the flight.

Somewhere like Thunder Bay has a couple of good outfitters and they do give you a good deal using local indian guides and comfy lodgings. Definitely a trip to consider and you will have photos and memories the rest of your life and a 338 would be perfectly ok. Friend of mine went about 5-6 yrs ago and he used a 338winmag, brought home a lovely full skin and skull and loads of photos. Enjoy>

Redfox

[Guest Tiff]

Thats a very good point Redfox. It sounds daft but I hadn't really considered Canada, even though I go there every 2 or so years visiting my uncle.......I've actually got my passport stamped from the last couple of trips. So I suppose I could post this off to the police to show I really do go there. I will speak to them in the morning and see what they say.

[Redfox]

Hope it helps we are increasingly under pressure from Idiots.

Redfox

[Ronin]

Hope it helps we are increasingly under pressure from Idiots.

Redfox

 

 

 

Surely not