Pothunter

Shame I'm also quite far, as I have several boxes of express 19g 28b which only today was actively getting in my way.

I have bought a new pair of waterproof trousers.

Where are you (mobile version doesn't say)?

There are two questions being mixed up: 1) is a single rifle from fox up to red deer the best approach? 2) if you DO select one rifle from foxes up to reds, what's your best bet? My answer to 1) would be that you might ideally be better with two: one smaller (eg .243) and one larger (eg .308 or 30-06). In my area, for instance, it won't be unusual to find land which is cleared for .243 but not .308. As the OP will presumably be on a closed FAC, this may be relevant. There is a very big difference in size between a fox and a large red deer, and it would be strange if the same calibre were ideal to shoot them both. If you do want just one rifle, though, I think there are probably quite a lot more people who will consider it appropriate and effective to shoot a fox with a .308 than a large red stag with a .243. Not to say that the most common view is necessarily the right one, but quite often it is a good pointer.

That's about the size of it.

+2

That's the nub of it. There are such people, but they're few. So the moral, imo, is dont spend too much, buy second hand, and assume you'll buy again after 6 months.

.

Auto. For sure.

This is not true. I don't doubt for a moment that it's what they said, but it's not true. You can only have one main residence, but you can have several residences, wherever you like, at the same time.

You're never quite sure how much of it is the mind (with shooting, I err on the side of most of it, for most of the people, most of the time), but I think you can tell the difference with a faster cartridge, and I think I shoot better with them.

I use these in the summer: http://www.altberg.co.uk/product/mens-desert-microlite-mod-brown/ They're not waterproof, but they are quick drying. You won't get anything undesirable inside them. They're extremely light and comfortable. I don't just wear them for stalking; I wear them all summer, every day.

Perhaps not quite bright enough for lamping, but easily so for camping, these have the andvantage of being very small and light (only 1 battery, though seems to last quite well), and quite well made. http://www.gerbergear.co.uk/Survival/Lights/Bear-Grylls-Hands-Free-Torch_31-001028

I think they're an outstanding organisation. Insurance, training, advice, representation, whenever I've dealt with them they've been excellent. High quality people, in my experience. The Arran scheme alone more than repays the total cost of membership. Even the magazine is good, and how often can you say that about those kind of products?

One thing I would say is to beware the folders. My lad has one of the yildiz folding single barrel .410s (his choice because he tried one and liked it). It's all fine except that he's not learning how to handle a conventionally broken gun, while the spring on the lever which breaks it is so stiff that he struggles to do do it by himself. He shoots well with it though. Extra long cartridges were bouncing it off his shoulder, but the 12.5g are fine and he hits more than he misses. I'll be glad to move him up to the wife's 28 gauge 26" spzme, though, which I would have started him on if he hadn't decided he wanted the folding .410.

+1 I also carry a small knife with a locking blade. I think it inconceivable that a respectable citizen would be prosecuted for carrying a knife with a little more than 2" blade among his keys and loose change, just because it locks, thus making it safer to use. Fallkniven U4, good steel, sharp out of the box and keeps its edge, and plain handle so it doesn't matter what happens to it in pocket. (Also no pocket clip. They annoy me.) http://www.heinnie.com/fallkniven-u4

Daniel you are right to be angry. I am shocked at the treatment you have received. Lol.

This is simply not true any more.

I agree I'm not saying the new regime is wrong. I'm just pointing out that the various previous posts saying they get "virtually unlimited" expenses, all employ their wives etc are wrong. These days that's all been stopped and they get no more than anybody else.

These days they don't get any extra expenses at all above actuals - cost of trains they actually take (standard class only), etc. They get £150 night max for hotel or rent in london, again actuals. They're not allowed to employ family or similar as staff. They don't get any income at all above their salary, which is less than that of the head of an average-sized primary school. These are the facts.

As I said above, the EU is the world's premium market (twice the size of the U.S. and almost as rich per capita). So they need us at least as much if not more than we need them. So why would we agree a voluntary trade deal unless it was in our interest?

Can you give us an example of a provision which was one-sided? It's kind of in the nature of trade agreements that unless they're mutually beneficial, they don't get signed. The EU is the world's premium market (twice the size of the U.S. and almost as rich per capita); why would we agree a voluntary trade deal unless it was in our interest?

If you want to spend the full £5k, this is what I would spend it on.

This is precisely my position. I'd also say that most weeks there are at least one or two articles that are actually pretty good.

It's not a test. Just be yourself, and if in doubt about anything just be honest. You don't have to be a ballistics expert or a sniper, all you have to be is not a danger to society. That's all they're assessing.