Evilv
-
Posts
817 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
PW Shop
Posts posted by Evilv
-
-
What would happen when the US builds its Anti missile defence system in Poland and Czech. Could this be the start of another Cold war?
we'll all be ******
Never underestimate the stupidity and simple mindedness of Bush and American hawks. They think they can interfere all along Russia's borders by recruiting nations Bush has probably barely ever heard of into NATO and installing military projects right in Russia's backyard as a sort of macho signal that they won the cold war. Sadly the cold war can spring up again now that Russia has some money and a president that isn't drunk all the time as Yeltzin was. Putin is not a nice man, and he is surrounded by even nastier ones and wounded Russian pride is likely to put more people like that into power. Bush if he had any sense would be making big moves to be friends with Russia. We can all benefit from good relations with them and are all likely to suffer if they go pear shaped. I can remember in the 1960s my parents rehearsing us kids as to what we would do when the Russians fired missiles at us. The tension over the Cuban Missile Crisis really did have the Pentagon urging Kennedy to strike first on Russia. it nearly happned and the Russians were ready with theirn own triggers to respond on the west.
-
The US is sending humanitarian aid and urging the observance ofc ease fires.
That is fine with me. It is a dangerous situation and in any case, whatever implications it has for us outsiders and NATO members, it is tragic when any people are displaced or killed in military actions which is why I am so dead set against their unwise use or the threat thereof.
Make no mistake though, Georgia's hot headed use of force killed about 2000 South Ossettian mostly Russian national civilians, which is why Russia was bound to react violently. Saakosville's troops shelled civilian people in a province that has had independence since 1992. What was he thinking of?
I heard a BBC report this afternoon in which Georgians were interviewed and were denouncing Saakosville for his stupid use of force against South Ossetia caliming that they had lost all they had because of the reaction to it.
Governments who use violence against others, even if they are wishing to separate from their control have it coming when they get a bloody nose.
Don't forget that South Ossettia separated from Georgia inn 1992 and has been running as an autonomous territory since then. Most of its citizens are ethnic Russians.
Even GWB has more sense than to send troops to Georgia to do more than deliver humanitarian supplies. It would be much more provocative than the Russians sending fighting men to Cuba. Georgia actually borders Russian territory.
-
I would argue that reloading is not dangerous in the slightest, providing that you use common sense. Being VERY STUPID (your words not mine) you risked losing one or both eyes.
You hit with a nail, an item that is designed to fire when struck with a nail-like object and you were surprised that it went off in your face? Jesus H Christ man, that is way beyond the realms of VERY STUPID. Personally, I would not even sell you a box of matches, not born in Suffolk were you?
I have been reloading for rifle, pistol and shotgun, for around 50 years and not had a "brown trouser moment" yet.
I was having a conversation with a laboratory technician in the research department at an explosives factory along these lines several years back, he said "If petrol had been invented today, it would be banned from public use, it's the most dangerous thing that anybody will handle in their lifetime".
P.S. Read my signature.
I entirely accept your well deserved rebuke Bob.
It was beyond stupid. I was young and ignorant of how much energy was contained in a rifle primer. I suppose I had the view that it was like a cap or something. Looking back on it - and at the time nursing my injured digits, it was an incredibly stupid and wanton thing to have done.
I learned a lesson, but not as hard a one as I might have had. Perhaps I had been drinking a little after dinner - it is so long ago, I can't remember. thirty two years is quite a while.
-
It's very disconcerting when it happens.
When removing the cartridge from the gun after a couple of minutes, it is a good idea to keep your head and other body parts away from the breach. In the extraordinary event that the thing went off with the breach open, the case would come back out of there with extreme violence. Point the open breach in such a case away from you and others.
Just in case anybody is as syupid as I was at the age of twenty five, I once had a reloaded .303 cartridge that went wrong as I pushed the bullet in and the neck folded a bit. It was obviously useless so I pulled the bullet and emptied the powder. Now I had a capped case and didn't want to put it in the bin.
Being VERY STUPID, I decided to set off the primer before disposal. I am now ashamed to say that I put the case in a vice and put a punch and hammer to the primer...........
Yes - I know it was VERY DANGEROUS. I found out the hard way, though not as hard a way as I might have had. The primer left the case with great violence and injured me in the hand . It ripped a lump out of my thumb and left me with a considerable bruise. I think I was lucky. If I had arranged things differently I could have shot myself in the eye.
Maybe dealers should insist on an intelligence test before they supply reloading equipment. this would have saved me an injury because obviously, I wouldn't have been supplied with the stuff to hurt myself. Reloading is more dangerous than some people think.
-
My gun went off accidently officer
It was such a tragedy that the poor defenceless rabbit was in the direct line of the flight of the bullet : 
Ah - it went off accidentally did it laddie. Well then, let me see. That probably means you can't be trusted to have a gun without endangering the public. Hand it over here then like a good lad eh. Evenin' all.
-
"""This is true, (also taking into account the accurate remarks about Stalin of Starlight32). And never forget that Americans sponsored the IRA for decades until 2001 when paying for people to set of bombs suddenly became unpopular for some reason one September morning."""
NORAID
North American Aid to the IRA. Protected by the Kennedy's and others in Congress, massively supported in Boston, New York by ex-patriot Irish, (though not in general the Irish themselves) and the main source of funding for a thirty year war against the Irish government and the UK by terrorist scum (notwithstanding the fact that the UK should have handed Ireland back a hundred years ago except that power is all corrupting and governments often don't do the right thing).
I'm no longer replying to your posts Evilv as you seem to have a deep need to personalise debates I've left out segments of your posts earlier that have done this, but now since this is all you seem to be "debating" with I no longer see the point in talking to you.If John is offended by my robust commentary on his opinions that's a shame. The publishing of naive exhortations to war with major powers (or warlike responses and threats of the use of force) is very likely to elicit strong responses. It has been my experience that the most warmongering people on the Internet are rarely inclined to put themselves in harms way, and since I have family in the British forces who are very much in harms way at this very moment, I take a strong view of anyone from a more or less pacifist nation who advocates the ratcheting up of tensions with by far the largest and most dangerous nation in Europe, which would were they to come to pass involve people close to me coming into a lot more trouble. If you advocate the John Wayne style of settling problems John, and post a picture of John Wayne as an avatare, don't be shocked and offended if someone offended by your exhortations to force, refers to you as John Wayne.
Still - I have no intention to offend, but am by nature obnoxious and unpleasant. I tell it how it is though ALWAYS.
-
I think many posters here are doing the Russian People a great injustice! Over 20 million Russian/Soviet people died defeating the Nazis in WW11 and the entire enormous country was devastated. Do you not think they might be a little concerned about the ever encroaching influence of "Uncle Sam" in their backyard? I'm sure many still remember and lived through the atrocities the Nazis perpetrated there! USA can hardly take the moral ground and preach about infringing borders etc. After all they are one of the main instigators of State sponsored terrorism in places like Cuba, Nicaragua and many others. The CIA has sought to undermine and topple any government that has taken a different Political path or lifestyle to their own , even when elected by a democratic means! This has bred huge mistrust amongst the International communities as to their actual intentions. The only thing that motivates American foriegn policy is the dollar!
This is true, (also taking into account the accurate remarks about Stalin of Starlight32). And never forget that Americans sponsored the IRA for decades until 2001 when paying for people to set of bombs suddenly became unpopular for some reason one September morning.
It was the Russians that defeated the Nazis, not us, though people of my mother's generation like to take the credit themselves since she and my father were both in the forces at the time. Russia has always been a formidable power in Europe, and mostly, we have been rivals. We fought the Russians in the mid nineteenth century in the Crimea and the Afghan wars of the mid and late nineteenth century were really over Russia and drawing a line to stop their spreading influence. Large and powerful countries effect their neighbour and they always have. The idea that in these matters we can get the lion to lie down with the lamb is a joke, unworthy of serious consideration. Show me the large power on the planet that is not dominating its neighbours.... And please John Wayne - an obvious recipient of American bull **** and propaganda, don't tell me that America isn't throwing its weight about everywhere on the planet... Tell that to the Iraqis and the Afghans, or the Iranians, or the South Koreans or anywhere that sells stuff cheaper than they can, or doesn't want their corporate rapists into their markets. America prefers to let its corporations invade and dominate. If countries don't allow that, they get big time force let loose. Interestingly, Iraq's oil is now being extracted (for the benefit of Iraq's people of course) by American oil corporations.
-
You keep going on about Russias partners and their sphere of influence, exactly how many former Soviet countries are rushing towards closer relations to Russia please? Not too many. Naturally they would want good relations with Russia but they're not naiieve enough to rush blindly back into the motherlands loving arms, they've good experience of how that goes. I hope not too many people have the same opinions as yourself Evilv as it'll need to stay fine for ye in the future if ya think Russia will happily now head home and not be seriously thinking of more foreign adventures in the near future.
I'm not getting drawn into a discussion about Iraq. Forces went in there for the wrong reasons, not that it was wrong to go in and topple Saddam, that would have been a much better reason.
It doesn't matter whether their neighbours like them or not. The REALITY is that Russia is there, has dominated the whole region for hundreds of years (not just seventy) and who is going to stop them besides you John?
Why crisis this is not an open and shut case:
-
Get an HMR. You'll never want to go back to anything less once you've tried shooting with it. The idea of shooting rabbits at 80 meters with an air rifle is not the best I'd say. The precision of shot placement required even witha rifle at 20 ft pounds at the range you mention would be very exacting, especially given the trajectory of a projectile travelling at maybe 750 fps. That would be a very tall order for me in practical field conditions. 'Is that rabbit at 75 or 80 meters or is it 70?' The answer to that question being correctly resolved would dictate whether you maimed the thing or killed it. Not so with an HMR. The question is then, 'Is the cross anywhere on the bunny's front half?' The animal is then instantly dead as soon as you pull the trigger.
You can't fire an air rifle if the backdrop is a road or a cow anyway, so that makes no difference. The HMR is very much better than 22LR for ricochet, but there will always be plenty of places you dare not fire, whatever you are using.
-
In the old days, you had to have a referee of professional standing like a doctor, solicitor, MP etc. Nowadays you can ask anyone who is sensible and of good character who has known you for the specified time. I think it is three years. If you are concerned that the previous referee might object, you can ask someone else. Just pick a sensible person who can vouch for you. I asked the farmer who was the owner of my named piece of land. She was a very ordinary lady with no pretentions, but she has known me a good while.
You could even ask your keeper friend. The questions asked refer to stuff like whether they think you are of good character and trustworthy, how you handle firearms and your experience of them and are you responsible, as well as whether you have mental health problems, personal difficulties in relationships and whether you abuse alcohol. Your keeper mate if he is of good character might be ideally placed to answer these since he obviously trusts you.
I don't think the Scottish legislation is any different on this, but check with your firearms dept about what kind of people are eligible as referees where you are.
Hope that helps.
-
Since 2001, and before that as well, western idealogues allowed their rhetoric about 'freedom' to over-rule their heads about what is practical and sensible. They spout Hollywood bullsh it ideals about 'standing up to', 'freedom', 'evil empires', 'better dead than red', and other such clichés. In America, this cra p goes down a storm. That's because they are utterly naive. Sad to say, our idiot ex-Primeminister led us into a war to promote this kind of neocon nonesense. What happened? We made a bad place VERY much worse. I am reading the same kind of stuff here, standing up to bullies, letting these people be 'free'. Sadly, what this nonsense is free of is REALITY. We neither have the power, nor right to dictate to Russia. Any serious attempt to force the hand of Russia by 'standing up to' them militarily would be a disaster. In my experience, the people who advocate this kind of intervention are rarely the ones who stand behind a rifle, ready to disembark from a troop carrier to go into battle - that's a job for other people.
All we can do is seek out other energy resources and cease trading with a belligerent Russia, but I doubt that this would work for reasons earlier stated, they have something that is in high demand. Russia has its sphere of influence like we do. If the Bear were to be installing anti-missile equipment and forming alliances with our partners in Europe - lining up against us, we would take issue with it. It is the same for them. Had not Saakosville sent in troops and killed 2000 people in South Ossettia, none of this would have happened. It amazes me that some people don't see what a catastrophic move that was.
-
Yeah - I see why you have John Wayne as your avatare now. Growing some balls and other macho references are not what is needed.
Russia is nasty. I know. Russia has vast energy reserves and is selling huge amounts of gas into Europe- we go elsewhere, but God knows where that is.
We should stop interfering with Russian satellites and leave well alone in my view. I don't care a F for these places and their ambitions. I have a strong interest in a continued stable and prosperous UK and Europe. We can talk to the Russians and we can if practicable stop buying their product to run our power stations and heating systems, but we can not seriously seek out conflict with them.
See I don't accept that the Georgian side started the trouble. I believe the Russians wanted this war, so they could punish Georgia for going against Russias demands. Thereby providing a harsh reminder of the past to countries like Ukraine etc. Basically saying, we're back, if you don't do as we say then you're done for. I don't accept for one second that the Western world should let that kind of bullying go on without some type of intervention wherever in the world. The West has become too reliant on dodgy regimes. Russia has most of Europe over a (oil/gas) barrel and China owns a lot of US debt. Both of these situations need to change not become more entrenched as the Russians would like - by Russia controlling a government in Georgia which in turn would control the only major pipeline (BTC) in the region not at the moment under Russian control. I would have no problem with Ireland building Nuclear power plants to supply us and other countries with power, I have no problem with the Irish army (such as it is - we do have a great ranger wing) joining more international forces such as Nato. I think democratic countries do have an obligation to support one another, especially in neighbourhoods that are less than friendly. Grabbing the biggest tube of KY on the shelf and bending over for the likes of Russia will only make the situation worse, bullies always become bolder the more they're let away with. The good things I've heard are Poland and the Baltic states are going to veto any Russia EU co-operative agreement, G8 seriously talking about reverting to the G7 again so excluding Russia, and apparently it's WTO entry is on ice. I don't for a second see the point in enriching Russia so they can start more wars like this and regain former dominance in the region. Remember, all through out history political influences come and go and none are set in stone. Europe needs to grow some balls and become more energy independent, and more independent in general. -
I brought in Ulster as an illustration of how not to treat minority peoples. Ulster is a done deal now between the UK and Ireland and it ws solved by discussion, not invasions or warfare.
There is some sensible commentary on here about this subject:
-
There will never be a soildier on soildier war with russia, its not in our intentions or anyone else's id imagen, what there could be is another cold war, we point our WMD they point theirs and basically the first person to shut up loses.
However what is concerning me is the increased so called probing by russian aircraft into british aerospace in order to gain information on the RAF response times, this is something to think about, why all of a sudden has russia decided to start probing us again?
NATO need to step in on this one id agree, they cant be left to bully their neck of the woods simpily on the basis that it is the biggest wolf, someone needs to put a stop to it...
Well what will we do when they shut off our gas?
Russia is belligerent, I agree. The only thing we can do with them besides getting back into a cold war situation is to isolate them economically. But that won't work because energy - something they have more of then Saudi Arabia is the most in demand product on the planet. If we don't buy it, the Chinese will. So where do we go?
I think the resurgence of belligerent Russia is a result at least in part of the humiliation of Russia by the west in Yeltzin's time. There is a pattern here: Germany humiliated by the treaty of Versailles in 1918 and up comes Hitler. Russia humiliated by America and intrusion into its vassal states by NATO in the period between 1990 and 2000, and Putin gets tough as his economy rises through energy sales. Russia's wealth and power can only increase as they sell more and more hydrocarbons to a world that will pay nay price to get what they have.
-
It may well not be clear cut and with one side entirely innocent and the other totally at fault, but I'll tell you this, had this been happening on the edge of the USA, they would have done exactly as the Russians did. Great powers or even once great powers have natural sphere's of influence that they regard as THEIR TURF. People who start trouble right on their doorstep can expect them to come rampaging out and they will get trampled. EVERYONE should know this and just as the Russians would have no business becoming militarily involved in a territorial dispute between the UK and Ireland over the status of Ulster, neither do we in the west have any business at all other than some finger wagging, over what happens in Georgia. I happen to believe that the Americans have been very stupid in meddling in Russia's back yard. Military conflict with Russia is unthinkable for NATO, I mean I ask you - we can't even handle some raggey ar sed brigands in Afghanistan, so how would we do there?
Military conflict is in almost all cases a bad idea and often hideously so in situations that don't involve us fighting for our own territory, or that of our immediate neighbours in defence. We should not get involved in protecting the Baltic Republics, nasty little countries in the Middle East or anywhere else that is not a vital interest of our own. I have relatives in Afghanistan and I'd hate to see them blown away over some stupid plan to make the willdest land, most Godforsaken land on the planet into a representative democracy. It ain't going to happen, and neither am I going to get excited if Saakosvili gets a black eye after launching full scale military attacks on Russian Militia in a part of his territory that doesn't want him and mostly wants to be Russian. That would be as foolhardy as the UK fighting America to try to keep N Ireland British when the majority of its inhabitants wanted to become independent. Totally stupid in other words.
EDIT:
By the way the references to Ireland were not a cheap jibe at all. I happen to believe that the UK's interference in Ireland at the behest of a bunch of radical Ulsterites has been a disaster. In the same way, if South Ossettians see their future with Russia, so be it. Now you may think I'm being inconsistent, but I'm not. The groups who want to escape some colonial power like in one case the UK or in another 'Mother Russia' had better take care before they start military operations against them or their proxies. Neither power will allow military attacks to go unpunished. It is one thing to say that South Ossettia, ought to be able to free itself of Georgian influence, or that Georgia should of Russia's, but it is quite another to think that Russia will allow a Georgian assault on a Russian population in break away South Ossettia to go unpunished. It is simple 'real politigué' that Russia would always have responded as it did, and it is nothing to do with us. Can you imagine the implications on us and our economies of any kind of war with Russia?
Also - now I'm on my ranting box - since there are only about three countries in NATO prepared to actually fight anybody (USA, UK & Canada) in the wars we are already involved in, the call for NATO involvement is rather amusing. We seem to have a lot of NATO countries that like to have their people do admin roles. They won't even supply helicopters to us Brits in the Afghan badlands. NATO is full of big mouthed hangers on - lots to say, but no stomach for a fight themselves.
-
It may well not be clear cut and with one side entirely innocent and the other totally at fault, but I'll tell you this, had this been happening on the edge of the USA, they would have done exactly as the Russians did. Great powers or even once great powers have natural sphere's of influence that tey regard as THEIR TURF. People who start trouble right on their doorstep can expect them to come rampaging out and they will get trampled. EVERYONE should know this and just as the Russians would have no business becoming militarily involved in a territorial dispute between the UK and Ireland over the status of Ulster, neither do we in teh west have any business at all other than some finger wagging, over what happens in Georgia. I happen to believe that the Americans have been very stupid in meddling in Russia's back yard. Military conflict with Russia is unthinkable for Nato, I mean I ask you - we can't even handle some raggey ar sed brigands in Afghanistan, so how would we do there?
Military conflict is in almost all cases a bad idea and often hideously so in situations that don't involve us fighting for our own territory, or that of our immediate neighbours in defence. We should not get involved in protecting the Baltic Republics, nasty little countries in teh Middle East or anywhere else that is not a vital interest of our own. I have relatives in Afghanistan and I'd hate to see them blown away over some stupid plan to make the wildest ladn on the planet into a representative democracy. It ain't going to happen, and neither am I going to get excited if Saakosvili gets a black eye after launchung full scale mimlitary attacks on Russian Militia in a part of his territory that doesn't want him and mostly wants to be Russian. That would be as foolhardy as the UK fighting America to try to keep N Ireland British when the majority of its inhabitants wanted to become independent. Totally stupid in other words.
-
I'm surprised no one has mentioned it on here. I hope either the Georgians are capable of defending themselves or that they get help from the outside world (unlikely). The Russians have been bullying almost every nation on it's borders that can't fight back against them. It's a pity NATO won't get involved, make Russia think for a second that they can't do as they please just because they're the biggest bear in the local woods at the moment. Bah, bloody Russians.
Yeah John - that's just what we want, a war with Russia. Will you be going yourself, or is it other people and their sons you want to die? I have three sons who would be eligible and two nephews currently serving in Afghanistan. How about you?
We had a fantastic opportunity with Russia in the 1990s and we, or more precisely the Americans humiliated them, by psuhing NATo and missile defence right into their backyard. Why is it that we can invade countries half a world away 'with justification' and Russia can not step into a war situation on its very doorstep involving its own citizens coming under attack without being denounced for monsters. Always remember that in this matter Saakashvile sent forces into South Ossettia and created mayhem there among Russian citizens in a province who want nothing to do with his corrupt and villainous government. The casualties among the south Ossettians from Saakashvili's attack amount to around 2000 dead civilians, and 35,000 displaced, by the way, but maybe that's OK eh? Sarkosville is a villain, who provoked the whole problem and thought NATO would step in and protect him. Well it didn't and neither should it.
By the way, as an Irishman, I am sure that the situation of the South Ossettians wish to escape from the control of a larger and more powerful neighbour - Georgia, unpopular among its patriotic people, will not escape you as a parallel of that of Eire and Great Britain in the early to late twentieth century. I think you may be backing the wrong side old chap.
-
I saw some of the progamme and was completely revolted by the scenes in China. There was a skinned animal blinking and moving its face - some kind of dog or maybe a fox. I never saw such barbarity in my life and turned it off. The Chinese are worlds apart from us in their attitude towards animals and cruelty. Clearly, many of us here would be regarded as cruel barbarians by some in our own society for shooting animals for sport. I don't think I was cruel last evening in shooting 21 rabbits. Most died within a second, and one where I got the windage wrong, received a second shot within thirty seconds as soon as it stopped moving so I could shoot again. Whatever those who disapprove of shooting would have thought of that, the focus of the activity was to bring instant death to the rabbits. In this film, they deliberately didn't kill the creatures quickly, because they didn't want to spoil the fur. They were simply subdued by a few blows and then completely skinned alive and conscious. This was a vile thing to see and I turned it off.
I am usually very much against government intervention in almost anything because they mess up so much of what they do and just bind us all up in regulations, but in this case I would favour an ethical fur trading scheme where it is against the law to source fur from any non accredited source. Acreditation would involve animal inspectors being present on scene wherever fur is produced to ensure that humane conditions apply from beginning to end. So fur would cost a lot more? Good. No harm in that. At least we could be confident that animals were not being skinned alive and that dogs were not being tortured to death which is what happened.
-
I'm not a vet, but I wouldn't even think about a sedative myself. The problem is the bitch is deciding to act this way. Doping her won't help in the long term. She needs to re-learn her reactions to the pup. She needs to do that in her right mind, and not while zonked out on something. I doubt anyone learns much while sedated anyway.
Aggression can occur because the animal feels uneasy and restless. Sorry about these questions - I'm not implying anything, but does she get plenty of attention and regular outings for exercise? If she was locked up a lot and bored and full of energy or feeling left out and too much in the kennel, she might have good reason to feel aggrieved about an interloper pup.
Maybe we should go back to the most basic thing of all; does she obey you absolutely when you give the command NO!! in a firm voice?
That is the very first thing to get sorted. If she won't obey you in everything, even when she feels she needs to sort out another dog, she is not in your control.
If there is a problem of her doing what SHE wants rather than obeying you and accepting your pack leadership status, it could be that some fun training with her ON HER OWN would help her behaviour. Take her out, just you and her and do exercises like - sit, stay, lie down, fetch, but only when you give the order. Give her plenty of attention and commands and DEMAND her full attention and COMPLETE compliance to your authority, but use rewards when she does right as well as a stern voice when she does not. Make her run beside you totally at heel, basically anything that makes her give total and unquestioning attention to you and what you want. Make her mix with strange dogs and COMMAND NO!! at even the slightest sign of aggression (hair going up on her shoulders, head down looking aggressive anything that precedes her actually breaking into violence. They always give signs by their posture before they kick off - you need to be sensitive to those signs and she needs to know you wont tolerate them for a second.
So - after this kind of training, bring on the puppy and stop her if she in any way starts to give the signs, hair, head down, ears back any sign of tension, bring her up short and command NO!!. When she stops the bad behaviour in any of the training, make a fuss of her, girly voice, good dog, that's a good dog, loads of patting and rubbing her fur. She will eventually get the idea that you are pleased when she's nice and very strong on her when she isn't.
REMEMBER TO GIVE HER MOST OF YOUR ATTENTION WHEN SHE AND THE PUP ARE TOGETHER. THERE WILL BE TIME ENOUGH TO TRAIN HIM WHEN SHE ACCEPTS HIM, BUT PART OF THAT WILL DEPEND ON YOU NOT RUBBING HER NOSE IN THE FACT THAT SHE HAS TO SOME EXTENT BEEN REPLACED.
Have you ever watched a guy called Caeser Milan on Sky 3? He is often on there at about six in the evening. He's a mexican American in California and he does a lot of training with dogs that are showing aggression. Some of them are totally out of control, large dogs biting owners and family members and savaging the neighbour's dogs. he seems to get them totally submissive and nice in a few minutes. Watch that guy and study his methods. He is the most effective socialiser of really bad dogs that I've ever seen.
-
Bitches are usually quite tolerant of pups, especially male ones.
I think that if you let them interact while you are there and use shock tactics like the water squirter or a rattle with a storng command like NO!!! at the first sign of aggression from your old bitch, she will stop.
The key things about dog training in cases like this are:
a) that you have full authority over the bitch. She must accept you as totally in control or stopping the behaviour will take longer
b. ) you have to be completely consistent; first sign of aggression, you REACT with your shock tactic and the command. The instant the behaviour starts, you REACT, and do the same thing all the time (as long as she is shocked away from the aggression with the pup) if not, find a new way to get the bitches attention and her submission to you over the matter.
-
This is the kind of activity that serial killer types would enjoy. Sad to say there are people who have twisted souls and enjoy that ind of thing. They probably like torturing women to death as well.
A long time ago I read in Shooting Times of a comical incident supposed to hav happened in East Germany or Russia where they were organising canned hunting for rich businessmen. In this case, the outfit had been having trouble getting bears for hunters to shoot. The story goes that the wealthy West German businessman was set up in a hide near a cottage in the woods and he was promised a bear would come soon. Sure enough a brown bear ambled out of the woods towards the cottage. Businessman gets ready and is about to shoot when the bear grabbed an old bicycle which was leaning against the cottage wall, mounts it and rides off on it......
That's the gist of the story printed about 1979 in Shooting Times - probably too far fethced to be true, but I really wouldn't put it past these kinds of outfits to lay on retired circus animals for souless people to shoot at.
-
Could he have fouled he trigger with his clothing - a button maybe? I once saw a guy shoot himself through the hand when loading a flintlock Scottish pistol that had no trigger guard. He had the damned thing on full cock and it blew a great big hole in his right hand as the .75 bullet and ramrod went right through his palm and up in the air. Tough one that - he was a gunsmith. Fortunately, this fool had the gun pointed skywards there were dozens of people around at the time.
When I was starting out it was impressed on me that you don't even close a shiotgun until you are ready to shoot. With a semi auto this is not possible, but presumably you can carry it without a round chambered and then cycle the gun when ready to fire. I would never trust a man who let of an accidental (negligent) discharge. It is a heinous offense in my book and is always avoidable. If the chamber /chambers are unloaded until ready to shoot, you're never going to have this potentially tragic experience.
About thirty years ago a mate let of a twelve bore right behind me and blew a dirty great hole in the mud. The hole was less than a foot behind my leg. I was covered in mud, but otherwise very luckily undamaged. I still occasionally go out with this guy, but I have never trusted him since and watch him like a hawk. I could have been hobbling around with an artificial leg for the last thirty years. That would have been a truly life changing event.
Unless I am shooting alone, I never walk with a round chambered and I never remove the safety catch unless a shot is imminent. Even alone, I unchamber loaded rounds before crossing a fence or a gate, or when in some situation where a fall is likely. I shoot in some rugged terrain so slipping is perfectly possible.
-
it is tempting, and almost makes sense, as they may not lile me applying for the 243 for foxes as well as deer.
will getting the .17 be more difficult then a .22?
Hi Flash.
Good to be starting out so young. Think of all the fun you have ahead of you mate.
I just want to chime in with something about the .17.
I just got one and it's a hell of a lot of fun. I've been shooting .22 rimfire for 28 years on and off and working out hold over can be a right pain. My misses are usually either over or under because the terrain has deceived my judgment of distance. Not so with the HMR. Just point it and squeeze and the bunny drops or explodes. I'm really loving mine and 100 yard rabbits are now commonplace instead of a dubious, unethical gamble. Got another one at 140 yards last night and that's with a naff little Nikko Sterling 4x32 scope I got free with an air rifle. I still get out the old CZ452 and stroke it. I even cleaned it yesterday. Anointed it with Hoppes No 9 and put it back in the cupboard.
Then there's the cost of ammo to think of. Twenty pence a shot as against a lot less.
Good luck anyway mate - having the land and a good character means you'll almost certainly get whatever you decide you want.
EDIT:
By the way, 17HMR as you likely know already has a safety advantage over .22 - lower risk of ricochet. When I applied for my recent hmr variation, I just wrote a short letter saying there were situations on some of my shooting places where the high risk of ricochet meant I needed an HMR. I got it back 8 days later, duly altered. I think in some ways, the cops like them better than .22, and listening to some of the whining ricochets I got in July when the ground was dry, I'm not surprised.
-
Dares anyone to go see it, and half way through break out the U-Caller in the cinema
LOL - they'd turn on you like a pack of hounds and you'd be torn to pieces in a minute. Your mangled remains would later be found under a heap of pop corn and spilled buckets of coca cola.
Scary!!
in Bullets, Cartridges and Reloading
Posted · Edited by Evilv
You weren't OTT at all. It was a VERY stupid thing to have done.
I was lucky that it ended with a sore hand.
I bought a chain saw on Ebay last winter. Now there's a thing that could really bite you in the ar se.
As for wartime explosives, about eighteen years ago I was brewing a cup of tea with two of my sons on a walk in the country and I noticed some aluminium fins sticking out of the rocks in the bracken beside our little fire. I investigated and discovered a two inch mortar shell. Forgetting the tea, I put out the fire and looked again. It certainly looked like a small finned bomb stuck in the rocks. I marked the spot and went to the nearest police station at Ponteland in Northumberland and returned with a cop in a car. On the way out he told me that the place was a war time training range and that folk were often discovering hand grenades and mortars there. We looked it over and he pulled it out of the ground with a rope I had brought with me. He sent for the bomb disposal people from Caterick and they destroyed it, It was a live mortar and when I went back there were a number of new and severe scratches on the sand stone cliffs. I'm kind of glad my fire was where it was and not a foot to the right really. I suppose the moral of the tale is 'Don't light fires in the bracken on old artillery and other ranges - even if you've no idea that that's what they were.
Shaftoe Crags - an old training range for hand grenades and mortars - not that anyone wold know to look at it ->