notsosureshot

Just to throw out a suggestion. Have you had a look at Kimber? Some of their 45's shoot as lightly as a 9mm. They also make several models in 9mm. Build quality and engineering is middle-high end. Prices the same. Not quite a Wilson, but definitely not a Taurus either.

Finally a bit of good news. Congratulations Good luck with your wedding also!

Charlie. What I can't get my head around is if the police seriously believed he had gone with the deliberate intention of using a firearm against a person, why was he not charged with anything? The findings of the judge indicate that Bill and his Mother concocted a story after the fact. The thing is, if that was what the police believed, and were prepared to stand up in court and say so (which they did), having, in their opinion, evidence to support their position, I just do not understand how a charge was not pursued by the CPS. Considering people have been convicted of offences (not necessarily firearm related) on the verbal evidence of a single individual, surely the simple fact that he went "tooled up" and looking for trouble, in their opinion, would constitute conspiracy to xxxxx. How is it that they have lack of proof for a criminal offence of conspiracy in some form, yet the young mans appeal failed because the judge thinks he lied. Surely, at the very least, that would be contempt of court. I am absolutely sure that there are legal technicalities affecting the above, but to me it seems as though this was a whitewash to protect the police, simply because, if there was sufficient evidence against the farmer to deny his rights to his firearms with that judgement, then there was sufficient evidence for to attempt prosecution in some form. Yet there wasn't one. He was merely bailed, for four months. Does that make any sense? Something is very wrong with this case. It just does not sit well with me at all, regardless of guilt or innocence.

We are in agreement on many of those points. Wishful thinking, but wouldn't it be nice to have a set of truthful statistics (never going to happen) relating to how many people are killed or injured each year by other items of sporting equipment or kitchen implements? Guns just have a bad reputation due to the flawed, yet popular argument, that they are designed only to kill. It can't do any harm to sign. My reluctance is due to the fact that I feel like I should reason out the goals and consequences of a cause, before I put my name to it. There are so many petitions these days, on so many issues. It's a bit like requests for sponsorship or charity donations. You can't agree to them all. On balance, I think I have come around and will sign. I think it is our best shot, no pun intended, at having pistols back in any form. I also think that it is ludicrous that our Olympic team, or promising shooters, need to travel to Belgium to practice and I wouldn't force that on anyone... Absolutely agree Bitfitter. I think overall, after a few twists and turns, I accomplished my goal at getting a few people talking and hopefully, that is a positive thing. As a side note, one thing I'd like to correct, is that someone mentioned that 45 ACP is not considered to be a competition calibre. I beg to differ, it's just not used as such over here for obvious reasons. It's a competitive discipline just like any other in many countries. Anecdotally, the reason I prefer it to any other calibre is a bit unusual. The first experience I ever had with pistols, I shot a range of calibres from .22lr up to .44 mag. A typical public range experience I suppose. Out of all the different pistols, I was the most accurate, by far, with a bog standard (old) Colt 1911 in 45acp which someone let me borrow. That has never changed in the 15 years since. A bit odd really, as I have fairly small hands and it is not considered particularly accurate as a calibre, especially not alongside a buckmark 22. Anyway, I stuck with it and I've been fortunate to try all manner of tricked out 1911 competition pistols. If you ever get the chance, shoot a Wilson Combat, any model. Utterly astonishing pieces of engineering. 2.5" 5 shot group on a playing card at 15 yards and I am far from a good shot. To coin a phrase, those things are "nail drivers".

That would be a crying shame. I hope that once the dust settles, you are all able to find some measure of peace.

Me too, I even say "action clear" fairly loudly, so anyone at the same stand knows I've checked. Maybe a bit over the top, but who cares. We do what we can.

I hadn't considered HD, it's a compelling reason for the use of pistols, but that is already lawful under section 5 i think?

You misunderstand my intention. I am not against law abiding people owning a .22lr, or for that matter, anything else, for target shooting. Quite the opposite. What I said was, I cannot think of a compelling reason. What I mean by that, is a reason which would be acceptable to the wider public and make it likely that the ban be overturned, other than the fact that it is used for the olympics, which is of interest to many people and transcends the issue of gun control. The point I'm driving at, is that it is not shooters that we need to convince. They mostly already support a repeal of the law. But how do we show the general public outside of the shooting community, that we are to be trusted to pursue our hobby without placing them at additional risk and as I said earlier, if we can justify and be trusted with a .22lr why not any other calibre? So the petition is self limiting in a way. Do you see what I mean?

I "misspoke", should have said olympic style disciplines or something along those lines and my follow up posts clarified. As for practical applications, I don't think use against humans qualifies as practical on a hunting forum such as this... Thank you for taking the time to read my post so throughly.

In addition to what has been said, when I switched to a semi auto, I made sure to read the manual for it several times to familiarise myself with the procedures for jams, misfires and so on, which of course is slightly more complex than for an over under. There are lots of videos on youtube for popular models of gun and even watching these can help you with what to expect. I also found it very helpful to dismantle the gun for cleaning a few times, right down to its individual components. It helps familiarise you with your gun. If you're not comfortable doing this alone, I'm sure a more experienced shot might pop around for the price of a cup of tea and a biscuit. As someone said, have a go with club guns first, you might find you prefer a SxS!

Gopro in a chest harness. I can't believe I'd never thought of doing that. Top notch idea.

The divide and conquer approach is exactly what I was suggesting be avoided. I'm not against this petition at all, but in my view it only enhances a single aspect of our shared interest, versus for example, a petition enhancing our collective rights. The petition on lead shot being an example of a community wide issue. I enjoy target pistol (45 ACP) amongst other disciplines, and have to travel abroad to do it, which is a rare luxury these days for me. For example, I look at lads with their LBR's and feel sad, knowing many of them are former pistol shooters, that we can't unite and make it clear to the public that we are decent, law abiding people, with a niche sporting interest and all we seek is fairness and the freedom to pursue our passtime. I deliberately didn't come down on one side or the other on certain issues, because I like to hear what other people have to say, as many of you have more life experience than I do, which is valued. Anyway, I don't wish to derail this thread further, I probably should have made a new thread in which to encourage debate. So apologies to the OP and good luck with the petition. I am reconsidering whether to sign it or not, in light of some interesting points made here.

Agree. However, this judgement, at first glance, sits very uncomfortably next to the judgement against the young farmer, Bill Edwards, who lost his appeal for his certificates yesterday, despite never having been charged with any offence, let alone convicted.

Hi David. In terms of the UK, their use was limited to target shooting yes. I don't disagree with what you are saying in general. We have some excellent target shooters and target shooting is integral to the shooting sports, absolutely! My point is why are shooters petitioning for just the .22lr? What about the guys who lost their revolvers in .357 through no fault of their own, or historic pistol shooters who now have abide by such restrictive rules, that unless you happen to live near an approved site, it's very inconvenient to take up as a hobby. Even if a ban on .22lr is overturned on the basis that it is a current olympic discipline, what next? I honestly do not think a repeal of the .22lr pistol legislation would lead to any additional calibres as I cannot see any justification which would appease voters across the political spectrum without a major change in law. The Olympics is a reason even some of the anti's understand. We should stand together, which is exactly why I'd like to see the community come together, not to lobby for a single calibre, but for the restoration of pistol target shooting in any calibre, as a sport. Have we given that possibility up as a lost cause though and decided to settle for .22? Reading around, it sort of does feel that way, sadly. Hi deadeye, thanks for your response. My post, as a "devils advocate", was intended to generate discussion and I hope will do so. I apologise if it came across like I don't care about .22lr pistol shooting, I do and I would try to help in any way if I believed it would lead to fair access to all pistol shooting disciplines for responsible people, which is where I think collective energy should be focused. *edit* I was trying to highlight the fundamental differences in attitude towards firearms in the UK and USA and why they exist. Hence the reference to "self defence", which is what entrenches firearms ownership in US law and indirectly allows sport/target shooting with almost any gun. We have nothing of the sort, so it could be even more important that we stand together and focus on the bigger issues. Put it this way, by campaigning for a single calibre, are we saying that shooters are responsible enough for .22lr, but not for 9mm? See my point?

The judgement is an opinion also, based on evidence presented and the judge's interpretation of the law, rather than strict facts. The full facts are never known, in any case before any court. It is always opinion, with some factual evidence. The judgement does beggar belief, because technicalities are irrelevant to anyone other than the judge, who is bound by the law, however absurd it is. The circumstances of the theft and subsequent altercation are not in dispute and never were, as far as i can ascertain. Had they been, the young man would have been charged with an offence. Edit: I am aware that you do not consider a lack of charge as proof of innocence but personally, I would say that is wrong, both morally and legally. It is entirely against the fabric of our society to suggest otherwise and even cases where the most heinous of crimes is suspected, I do not consider trial by police, or trial by the press, as acceptable. They both amount to the same thing. What the police think about a person should be entirely irrelevant, it is not their job, their area of expertise, or within their remit to make such judgements. They exist to enforce the law. We have a court system to interpret it and pass judgement. Take a look back into the history of police services around the world if you do not think this is a valid point! The amount of systematic abuse, by police services worldwide, that has taken place in the past, is astonishing, and is the entire reason the justice system was modelled the way it is today, yet clearly, we have a way to go. I still do not think the police were entirely at fault here though, I believe the law failed Bill Edwards in an astonishing manner.

Playing devils advocate, please hear me out. I cannot think of a single compelling reason to allow legal posession of .22lr pistols in the UK for the general public Outside of the Olympics, they have no useful application whatsoever in the UK, or arguably, anywhere in the world. Granting of their possesion has no benefit to the shooting community at large, outside of a niche sector of Olympic shooters (which I appreciate very much, but it is a relatively minor issue on the whole). Having shot countless pistol calibres over the years, I can safely say that .22lr is the least interesting of all. .22lr is a tiny calibre which has virtually no practical applications when used from a pistol, outside maybe killing dangerous snakes with shotshells when out hunting in the Middle of Nowhere, USA. We British harp on about how it has the potential to kill or maim at a mile, but it is still a pathetically small calibre in the great scheme of things and over in the USA, such pistols are treated as kids toys, or pea shooters. They are a right of passage to daddy's 30-06 rifle. Which is the correct attitude for them, assuming basic safety has already been instilled, and mostly it is, in the US at least. I am very conscious of firearm safety. But good safety standards should be applied to everything, be it a shotgun, rifle, pistol, crossbow, broom handle, axe, power saw or baby cot. Safety is not an issue unique to firearms. Whether we like it or not, the ban on pistols of all calibres, could easily be justified by the fact they are more easily concealed, thus, could be used more conveniently when committing an offence, than a long barrelled equivalent (notice there is no mention of sawn off shotguns or machine guns etc.). The law completely disregards the fact that .22lr, unless used by some sort of professional assasin, it is unlikely to be fatal, although it would certainly smart a bit. However, I have yet to see a single compelling argument against the legislation from the pro gun folks, nor do I have one myself based on calibre alone. I am being deliberately awkward but British shooters on the right side of the law, do not seem to understand that, in general, that we would never be allowed access to pistols in any form, until other lawful justifications come into the argument. The judiciary, when considering the legal ownership of firearms, often fails to consider the ownership, by criminals, of sawn-off shotguns, machine guns or anything of that sort and how little impact losses by legal owners have on crime statistics in general. In short, criminals do not need legal owners to create an armoury of weapons. One point which I have always found really rather sad/amusing is the mention of Brocock type guns in police statistics. As if a criminal with any standing whatsoever, would ever actually stoop so low as to convert an air gun, when down the road you can buy a .38 for £100 or chop the barrels off a shotgun. They are hardly going to be worried about compliance with their certificate anyway? Perhaps a few kids converted the Brococks, but we're hardly talking about Al Capone and mass murder are we, yet legal owners of such airguns suffered as a result and nothing was done. The preservation of a hobby is not sufficient for the enactment of legislation and this has been proven time and again. Even centuries old traditions, like fox hunting with hounds (you don't have to agree with it to get my point) have be regulated to the point where they cannot be practiced as intended. The simple fact of the matter is, the USA has pistols because self defence is a reason to own a firearm in most states of the USA. It is NOT a legal reason to own a firearm in the UK. Until this changes, you are barking up the wrong tree entirely when it comes to pistol ownership. Nibbling at the edges wont get people anywhere on this topic, in my opinion. The US constitution is based on English principles. If you wish to fight for anything meaningful, fight to reclaim those rights to self defence, not some pointless small calibre in pistol form. This is not a situation where slowly, slowly, catchy monkey would ever work. The entire reasoning behind firearms in the UK would need to be challenged directly. Honestly, I am not sure I'd want firearms for self defence in the UK and as a pro-gun person in general, that places me in a dilemma. On one hand, criminals here do have guns available, but on the other, they do not seem to be considered as necessary in the commission of crime, and are not as freely available to criminals as in say, the USA, but may become so if firearms were more freely available to potential victims. It's a tough call, even for me as a supporter of gun rights, to argue against the reasons they are so restricted. I would not really want the UK to become like the USA. Perhaps I'm old fashioned. I still have visions of a Victorian gentleman brandishing a pistol and arresting a thief, holding him until the police arrive blowing their whistle. Remember, it is only 100 years since a pocket pistol, often a Webley .455, was as much a part of a gentlemens daily dress as his tie. Why suddenly, did we become so generally irresponsible as a society in the eyes of the judiciary and our own, self elected, government? I am conflicted about the entire subject but please, lets not beat around the bush and try to convince the judiciary that somehow the right to own a .22lr pistol is important to anyone aside from a tiny proportion of international class shooters. Because, it isn't. There are wider issues at stake no matter which side of the fence you stand. If you have read my entire post then you need to decide which side of the fence you are on. Are you for self defence with firearms, or against? It really is that simple. Opinions will vary on this forum, as the subject is centered on hunting. But I assume there is no reason we cannot have healthy debate. I didn't sign the petition, I'll say that. Simply because I think it is pointless in so far as to detract from the wider issue of gun attitudes in the UK. Although I do agree with it in principle, I feel like it is a microscopic part of a more serious debate, which needs attention. I am very much a community minded person and I would never object if someone elected to shoot .22lr as a hobby, I would actively support them. My point is, that you will never, ever, get legislation alterered on that basis alone. That is the sole reason I did not sign the petition. Rightly or wrongly, I feel it is misdirected sentiment and I try to be, pardon the pun, targeted, in my approach to such things. If you made a petition for the right to self defence style community protection by individuals, one has to wonder, how many signatures that would attract? My guess? Not very many. And therein lies the whole problem in being a shooter in the UK, we don't stand together, irrespective of the support we may receive for our concerns. We are fragmented. Pigeon shooters, game shooters, target shooters, rifle shooters, pistol (LBR) shooters, bench rest shooters, clay shooters, farmers, home defense advocates. In the US, all of those people may be called "gun owners", or, arguably, NRA members. Think about it. It's not difficult to see why we struggle in making ourselves heard. Long post, but sometimes I find it an emotive subject. On one hand I want to help the author of the petition, on the other, I feel it is utterly futile to try in such a manner. I hope I have made some relevant points and I welcome feedback. Cheers.

I use a semi auto and will use a flag when appropriate to show the action is open. In reality, on a sporting clay shoot, this is not always practical. Between stands, I keep my gun pointed at the floor at all times with the action open and facing outward. I slip the gun, action open, if there is more than a 20 feet between stands. I load a maximum of two cartridges and I only load on stand with muzzle awareness, obviously. Regarding empties, I usually ask at the ground whether or not picking up is required. Not because I am lazy to do it, it's just the time taken to do so might impact other shooters. Any shotgun is messy if the user is not paying attention, so this isnt a problem limited to shots using semi autos, but also pumps and well, anything with an unattended ejector mechanism. More often than not I'm told not to worry about picking up. On private land, I'm conscious of picking up all my spent cartridges. Then again, we all should be, right?

Edit: *We all understand your enthusiasm for the shooting sports and that getting an FAC is an almost right of passage within them. However, think about your attitude to firearms in general. What I mean is, rather than look for reasons for a grant of an FAC on this, seemingly difficult, permission. Look at the permission objectively and decide yourself if an FAC gun would be required, or appropriate. Also, do you genuinely feel you have the knowledge and skills as of this moment to use an FAC firearm safely, on this permission. I hope you see what I mean. But it sort of comes across as though you're really motivated to get an FAC and searching for reasons to be granted one. This isn't the best way to be a safe shot, in my opinion. An FEO may well see it the same way. I am certainly not putting you down, far from it. But as a shooting community, what we do as individuals, impacts us all.* My original answer is below... I use a fully moderated Baikal single barrel on a permission I have which is right next to stables, like literally 20ft away along one side. It logically necessitated discussion with the owners of the horses before I started shooting the land. Communicating with them and receiving feedback was really important and also my FEO was appreciative that I'd taken the time to do so. I viewed it as a simple courtesy. The topography and geology of the permission was such that shotgun was chosen. A moderated .22lr would be just as quiet (if not moreso) as the Baikal but has a higher chance of ricochet. Cannot speak for ricochet potential of .17 HMR as I've never used one, I know it is higher velocity than a .22lr, but with a lower chance of ricochet as the bullets are ballistic tipped. I'd bow to the knowledge of others in that area. If you are shooting in close proximity to livestock or housing for livestock, you really need to choose your angles very well indeed. You may need a high seat. A single pellet, let alone bullet, in the side of a stable block and you are quite literally, toast, as far as safety (and your licence) is concerned. Not to mention the safety of the livestock. To clear pests, a small calibre rifle is the most efficient choice without doubt under ideal circumstances. But pick what is practical and safe. The answer may not involve guns at all, in some cases, or may involve a non-FAC air rifle, in others. If you are a relative beginner, you may wish to seek advice from an experienced shooter before taking on such a permission. I would strongly suggest this anyway. Nothing wrong with a second opinion. I say this because around livestock or human housing, as I say, it only needs a single bullet (or pellet) of any type to be astray, for you to be in serious trouble.

I have a permission that is near a school. Actually within sight of a school but perhaps 150 yards away. If I shoot there I call both the school and the police. I get an incident number from the police, for reference, in case a complaint is made. There is no legal requirement to do so, but I view it as a courtesy, primarily to the school. I'd like to say that using common sense is enough, but after what I just read about the judgement against young Bill Edwards in his appeal, I'm not sure it is. However, I'd rather notify than not, depending on the situation.

This is terrible news for all of us. It could literally happen to any certificate holder because I doubt there is a single person on this board who, faced with such an immediate threat, would not use anything at his or her disposal to protect another human being from the risk of serious harm, let alone your own mother. In fact, are we not legally obliged to use any and all means to prevent another human being from serious injury or death? I'm sure I read that somewhere once. The problem may be, that the amount of threat toward Bills mother was never established in court, thus placing poor Bill in an impossible position. I cannot wait to hear the summing up, because frankly, the judgement beggars belief to any of us with an ounce of common sense. However, I think the law is the problem here, rather than the Judge, who may have no choice when presented with the evidence. None of us know where we stand in relation to many aspects of firearms legislation. Arbitrary questions on application/renewal, draconian restrictions, negative attitudes towards firearms in general, the list is endless. It is all made possible by the ambiguity of the existing legislation. It is absurd and as any first year law student would tell you, it must never be possible to consider a law as absurd. In some bizarre way, I feel sorry for the Police also. They are caught between a rock and a hard place. The legislation is so poor that the Chief Constable, or whomever is named on the FAC's for a particular area, would undoubtedly lose his entire career should he make a single mistake in the granting of a certificate, probably others in the firearms licencing section also. They would simply become sacrificial lambs to appease the anti's. So, no wonder they bend the law as much as possible to restrict certificate grants. Placed in such a position, who wouldn't? Basically, they would feel their careers and reputations were far safer if there were no legally held firearms at all. The governments who implemented the law are at primary fault. We all know it was rushed legislation, knee jerk reactions to tragedy, and it has yet to be corrected. GHE, is there anything further to be done or must young Bill simply accept it and move on? Can he ever reapply? I am absolutely gutted for the lad. Genuinely.

If you had a pee in a doorway when caught short, so be it. Bad form but pay the fine and move on. Taking this to court is probably not something you want to do, but I guess it depends on what you stand to lose if found guilty in court. You admit to doing it, so pay the fine, smack yourself on the head and don't do it again.... It has happened to most people, after all.

I've been following this case and the young farmer is innocent of any crime. He was never even charged. Despite this, they took away his licences and refuse to give them back, forcing him to go to court and spend a fortune to represent himself. The appeal is for the return of licences by an innocent man, to restore his career. I don't know Bill but the case is familiar in tone to certain other revocations which have taken place and it's our job to make sure that the police cannot simply do this on a whim, for political reasons. Any one of us placed in his position would have acted in the same way. There is no premeditation here, no malice. He reacted to an immediate threat to life and limb and happened to have a shotgun with him at the time, as was his right. This is a young kid who was forced into a situation he didn't ask for, forced to act and now finds his entire future career at stake, all because some idiot decided to steal metal and try to hurt him and his mother with a massive van. On the issue of costs, I believe the police have a special dispensation which means that win or lose, the lad could be responsible for paying the police costs. So his current bill of £50k, could skyrocket. Yet he still did not do anything wrong and only wants his licence restored, as an innocent man. Surely we have a duty to help this lad out?

Image Gallery at: http://imageshack.us/g/607/cimg4205.jpg/ It seems to have messed up some of the images and listed them without thumbnails but hopefully its ok and you can all see them.

Quite a lot which would be suitable I think. I'm in the process of uploading 65 of the pictures as I type this. As soon as I have, it should be easier to manage this thread. Wish I could lure fish for bass, water is just too murky in my part of the world. I'd have loved to try my luck down south as they are fantastic fish to catch, even on standard tackle.

Payment received and the lure has been posted. 2nd class Im afraid. It cost £2.20 to post for a 50g parcel...outrageous!!!