[Winchester Model 23 XTR 3", Multichoke]

Is the price fixed? And can you RFD it?

[Winchester Model 23 XTR 3", Multichoke]

Is this still for sale?

[Clay ground attendances]

I went to my local clay ground this morning and commented on how quiet it was, only to be told that this was the new norm. This ground used to have a 100 or so people go through the gate on a sunday, and today they'd be lucky to have had two dozen. 

Are other grounds suffering from such poor attendances, or is this just a one off?

[I know it's too early!]

It's never too early for minced pies. I'd eat them all year round if I could find them (or if I could teach the missus to bake).

[Fauxdegla]

2 hours ago, HantsRob said:

£38 is great but not sure why you only had 50 cartridges for 100 clays? That’s going to affect your averages

As a Yorkshireman, I'll only shoot stands where the pair cross thus saving ammunition by killing two birds with one cartridge. 

I use a 12g and have a stash of them at home, whereas the missus uses a 20g and needed some ammo. 

I'll add that the £38 included the loan of the 20g gun too. But I don't think they bothered charging me for it.

[Fauxdegla]

On 06/01/2022 at 14:07, discobob said:

Now £32 at Faux (Non-members)

 

On 18/01/2022 at 14:38, sportsbob said:

And its £45 at Mendip shooting ground by Wells in Somerset.

 

On 19/01/2022 at 08:51, HantsRob said:

To be fair I was thinking the same, I'd love a local ground that did a hundred for £30! 

Am I right in assuming these prices are all clays only?

I've not been shooting recently, so been out of the loop on current pricing, but I did take the missus shooting this week - 100 clays and 50 20g cartridges cost me £38 (non-member). Which I knew was reasonable, but it looks like a bargain compared to the prices posted here.

[Mental health and sgc renewal]

On 18/01/2022 at 17:53, 1Ab said:

We both use the same GP so they will know we live at the same address.I would not be happy if I loose my guns over this.

Would you be happy to lose your family member over your guns? You really need to do what's best for that family member. 

Your family shouldn't have access to your guns anyway, so I would double down on the security of your cabinet and keys and take every precaution to keep everyone safe. It is something that you should and probably already do.

I don't know your situation, and mental health covers a broad spectrum, but I'd speak to and take advice from the FEO. He may be happy with your current security, or he may recommend that you to temporarily lodge your guns and/or ammunition elsewhere. There will be a solution that involves the safety of your family and you still being able to hold a ticket.

I wish your family member a speedy recover. 

[FEO On the Ball.]

Makes me wonder how many legitimately held guns are floating about that the police don't know the location of.

What would happen if I sold a firearm which ended up being used in a crime, and the police think I still own it?

The biro scribbles on scraps of paper stapled to SGC's are not a reliable record of sales and purchases. And it sounds like the police files are not any better organised.

[Just coming into the sport....]

On 17/01/2022 at 11:17, cardigun said:

The Hull Super fast pigeon will certainly break clays, but may not be within the Rules for Registered Grounds ?

Maximum is 28g almost everywhere, and certainly at registered grounds. So that would rule them out at 29g.

Shot size would be too large at most places too. They tend to stick to 7.5 as a maximum these days, even though 6 is still legal under CPSA rules.

[Churchills, Swinton,North Yorks]

I've shot a few registered shoots there. It's a nice ground with some interesting and varied target presentations. I don't think they have the same presentations on non-registered shoot days, but I imagine it is the same setter.

Expect some tricky battues, clever chondels and high towers targets.

On 07/10/2021 at 08:43, TRINITY said:

Just wondering if the 'clays' are finest bone China, because at that price I dont intend to visit to find out.

Judging by my scores, they are made from finest kevlar lined rubber.

I've seen people complaining about the colour selection on some of the stands, especially the blue and green clays, but I've never had a problem seeing them. Hitting them is my problem.

If you can get there on a Monday for the 25p clays, then I would say it is well worth the cost and drive out. 

[Shooting incident in Plymouth]

2 hours ago, RyanMc said:

+1 

Basic common sense. 

+2 

The FEO for West Yorkshire mentions the same things regarding social media.

11 hours ago, old'un said:

One of his videos I watched was “Missing out on teenage love and experiences and people who say its not a big deal” although he did not see himself as “Incel” he subscribed to their channel and ideology which is disturbing in its self, Incels often blame the ills of society for their plight, and find themselves angry at the world and women in particular for the lack of interest from the opposite sex, despite their best efforts.

The frighting thing is, there are over 17k followers of the incel (involuntarily celibate) ideology.

Someone on the UKGuns board on Reddit linked his Reddit account. It is a sad read through his previous posts, and he clearly identified as an Incel with a hatred for the world.

The signs were there. The guy was clearly ill and shouldn't have had a ticket.

Will more funding be allocated into the police firearms departments to help check eligibility? Probably not.

Will more doctors suddenly turn conchie and refuse to sign anyone off? Probably.

I was recently thinking of applying for an FAC. Maybe I should get a shuffle on before the goal posts change.

[Diary of my SGC grant]

5 hours ago, JTaylor91 said:

I asked that question at park lodge and “ricochet” was the response.

A ricochet risk would also apply to lead though, surely? I know it would be to a lesser extent.

Couldn't the course setter account for the risk when arranging the targets and archs of fire? I'm led to believe that steel has a much more predictable ricochet, and there shouldn't much to ricochet off at places such as Park Lodge.

3 hours ago, jan8p said:

It's in a small quarry with a rock face wall and boulders kicking around, so I can only assume ricochet is the reason as per above poster!

I hadn't thought of shooting in a quarry, I admit. That would obviously complicate things.

But again, there is still a risk of ricochet with lead. I haven't shot at a ground that uses an old quarry (that I remember), so I am unaware of how it would be set up.

[Diary of my SGC grant]

5 hours ago, jan8p said:

Local ground is plastic friendly, but not steel friendly. 

What's the reason behind not allowing steel shot?

Denmark has been lead free since 1996, and have had zero issues with steel shot. More benefits if anything.

[Diary of my SGC grant]

I bet that's a weight lifted from your shoulders!

Make sure you get your renewal in within the next couple of weeks so it is ready for processing in 5 years time. 😉

[Guntrader Hacked]

North Yorkshire police have just issued a statement via social media to make people aware of this issue.

They are asking people to change passwords and be extra vigilante with home security.

[That was a great success then........]

15 hours ago, Mungler said:

Facts tell us that this year our death rate is running below the 5 year average. 

But last year's rates were well up, which shows the potential danger of COVID and a need to be cautious.

 

15 hours ago, Mungler said:

With the stats to hand, a vaccine and the summer months it is only right to open up now - if don’t, then when?

The stats are showing an increase in hospitalisation rates again, even with more people getting vaccinated. Isn't that a worrying sign?

With those rates increasing, experts tipping it to get worse, and everyone suddenly deciding that all precautions are now unnecessary, what is in store for the immediate future?

I would rather spend the summer months in sensible restrictions than another miserable winter in lockdown. Of course I'd much rather do neither, but I cannot see that happening.

15 hours ago, Mungler said:

We have what, 4 or 5 million able bodied working people currently on furlough. We are killing the education, lives and prospects of the young. We are consigning future generations to poverty and the repayment of the massive debt currently being amassed. We are facing financial ruin, and it is economic activity that pays for ‘stuff’, stuff like the NHS.

This is all true. I personally don't know what the answer is though.

Let everyone catch it and let nature take it's course? That will overwhelm the NHS and have other implications.

It's impossible decisions like this that make me glad I'm not in a position to have to make them.

[That was a great success then........]

18 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

It's the ONS  stats, and it's not a broad term. 

21 % higher than normal people have drank themselves to death via liver failure, many more will die later. 

I wasn't saying your chosen stats were a broad term, more suggesting that stats CAN be spread across a broad term.

I can see how liver failure is up. Depending on what stats you go from, including the earlier ones I reviewed, it was a broader spectrum.

18 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Without any back up of stats you seem to doubt lockdowns have caused any deaths or mental health issues? 

Where have I stated that? If you knew me you wouldn't even insinuate that.

18 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Read this very carefully. 

Death certificates have been deliberately falsified to show excessive covid deaths, people dying from totally unconnected illness and accident have been put down as dying with covid... Even when negatively tested, I personally know of 4 examples, and multiple NHS workers I know have confirmed it. 

So how does that future proof the death certificate? 

Dying "WITH COVID", not "OF COVID". There is a difference.

You seem to have fallen into the common trap of thinking that they are somehow linking COVID to their deaths, as do the NHS workers you know by the sounds of things. They are not saying there is a link at all. Muppets on Facebook are suggesting that.

What they are doing is safeguarding the information incase they suspect any links in the future.

As an example (remember, an example. Not me saying this is a fact, just an example.), in several years time scientists see a link between COVID and fatal brain tumours. They can then cross reference death certificates with that information (which would read something along the lines of 'Cause of death - Brain tumour (with COVID).') and see if there is any abnormal data or trends. Without the information about COVID on the certificate it makes it harder to find. It is potentially useful to scientists and researchers, that is all. 

There is nothing nefarious going on, and I highly doubt any death certificates have been falsified. What would be the point? You're stepping close to tinfoil hat territory with that one.

[That was a great success then........]

39 minutes ago, Jim Neal said:

Sadly, the gullible were duped by the phrase and used it to justify an insane level of paranoia whilst continually screaming at everyone else to hide behind the sofa and never come out again.

I think that is why it is important for people to do their own research and form their own opinion.

But as has been shown here, people interpret the data differently, and there is always a bias from where you get the data from. 

For those who get their research from Facebook posts, there is as many people who believe it is a conspiracy and completely fabricated as those that believe the end is nigh and we are all doomed.

[That was a great success then........]

6 hours ago, Rewulf said:

You're making a huge assumption on that though aren't you? How much lower are the deaths in other categories? 

Figures out today state alcohol related deaths are up 20 %, suicides up, I wonder what caused that? 

I cannot find the source that I have previously seen, but I wasn't going off assumption.

I understand that suicides were sadly higher than usual, and liver failure is a common problem due to over drinking. Other alcohol related deaths I have seen as reported to be down, but it is a broad term that can include anything from drunken students falling off statues to someone drowning in a breweries fermentation vessel depending on who's statistics you go off.

To stop us going around in circles, I'll assume that we are looking at conflicting statistics and think of the old adage "Lies, damned lies, and statistics".

It is worth noting that since records began in 1838, there has only been four years with a higher death toll for UK citizens - 1915, 1918, 1929 and 1940. I think that tells it's own truth. 

6 hours ago, Rewulf said:

If we take the word of the stats, and say 150,000 people died 'with' {whatever that means} covid over the past 18 months, something like 5 % of the total of deaths in that time? 

I'm led to believe that the phrasing 'died with COVID' is a label for future reference. It doesn't necessarily mean that COVID was the cause of death, or even related, but future studies may want to know who died with/shortly after COVID. It's a way of future-proofing the death certificate, in a way. Sadly, the media latched onto the phrase and used it in whatever way sells papers.

[That was a great success then........]

1 hour ago, Rewulf said:

Im sorry but thats just plain rubbish, average road deaths per year are less than 2000, so even if there were NO road deaths , which is clearly not the case, or NO workplace  or sport deaths, again , clearly not the case, they would be a drop in the ocean anyway.
So to say covid deaths swallowed up the deaths that didnt happen is total fallacy.

You are taking three examples I've posted, and not seeing there are many more similar categories of deaths that are also lower than usual. They were examples - not a definitive list.

It is worth noting that the information I replied to was wrong anyway. Deaths were up by about 90,000 (695,000 vs 604,000) over the previous year. It is also the highest by a country mile compared to the other recent years I compared it too.

Does that mean that 90,000 died of COVID? No, it is likely higher as deaths were down in other categories.

1 hour ago, Rewulf said:

This again means what ?

Deaths arent a problem?  Are deaths from untreated ailments (because of covid) a problem ?
What about the quality of life of people who cannot get seen by their GPs , because most GPs have had a year off ?
The real death toll will be next year , when all those who SHOULD have been treated over the last 18 months, die from the diseases they have been living with, while the  obsession with covid has been satisfied.

Thats the point I'm trying to get at. Treating COVID is putting a strain on the NHS, which means that other people are going untreated.

I can't grasp how you are failing to understand that.

1 hour ago, Rewulf said:

Heres a test, how many people do YOU PERSONALLY know, that have definitely died of covid, and please dont include anyone over the age of 90, or with a terminal illness.
Ill go first.... 1.

I know of 1 for definite, two probable, and several who have been very ill and are still suffering months later.

I don't want it to be more.

I have a relative who is an A&E nurse. She has seen more than her fair share of deaths recently. She recently told me of a 19 year old with COVID who is unlikely to come out of hospital alive. She had no underlying health problems.

But you sit in your ivory tower claiming it is a hoax and there is nothing to worry about. Get your head out of the sand.

[That was a great success then........]

36 minutes ago, Mungler said:

We are currently running below the 5 year average mortality rate - quite a feat in a pandemic, no? 

As I said earlier, deaths are not the problem - ill people needing hospital care are.

Last year's deaths were not a true representation due to less 'normal deaths including road fatalities (less people driving around), workplace accidents (work closures), sport and leasure related deaths (people couldn't do things), and so on. I assume this year may be similar to a lesser extent.

[That was a great success then........]

14 minutes ago, Mungler said:

No, you’re absolutely right. We’re all doomed. This must be the end. I had my car booked in for an MoT next month - at least I don’t need to worry about that now. 

I can remember people having the same attitude 15 months ago. 🙄

We are not all doomed, but neither is everything swell and the government (or Lizard People, or whatever conspiracy you subscribe to) are just making it all up for some unknown nefarious reason. 

It is a serious issue, and one that is proving to be getting worse again. It demands some respect and caution, that is all. If we carry on acting irresponsibility and rushing into full social interaction without precautions then we will end up in a full lockdown again. No one wants that.

[That was a great success then........]

54 minutes ago, Mungler said:

Whenever I hear ‘doubling’ I hear the BS alarm going off.

You double 2 and you get to 4, that’s an increase of only 2 but a 100% increase or a ‘doubling’ sounds a lot more frightening...

...Latest daily Covid patient admission is 717 (that’s well under less than 1 admission per hospital) and total Covid bed occupancy is 3,964 and so that’s 3 Covid patients per hospital.

 

Why use 2 and 4 as an example instead of 717 and 1434? Or 1434 and 2868?

As you have pointed out, 717 is only the current daily admission, not how many we have in a hospital bed. It doesn't take long to fill those 3,964 beds at that rate does it?

59 minutes ago, Mungler said:

Now then, how many hospitals are there in the UK I hear you ask? Well, the answer is 1,250.

How many of those are NHS hospitals with facilities to admit COVID patients, and how many are private eye hospitals and such?

The actual number of NHS hospitals is far lower.

[That was a great success then........]

8 hours ago, Rewulf said:

Where has this come from ?
Hospital case are up marginally, 'staggering' sounds like a newspaper headline....

...To describe the NHS as understaffed and under funded ? I dont know where to start there, sounds like a party political broadcast from the labour party...

...Besides success with the vaccine roll out, we still cant control it, again...any more than we can control the flu or common cold.

I may have worded it a little strongly, but my sentiment stands. Hospital admissions are up. There are numerous reports of hospitals opening more 'COVID wards', I've heard it first hand from friends and family in the NHS about an increase in patients, and Chris Whitty keeps hammering the point home (to deaf ears) that trends are looking 'scary with numbers doubling every three weeks.

Certain hospitals have already started postponing non-urgent appointments, and NHS staff have been asked to postpone holidays with some areas putting a stop on people booking leave. Ask yourself why.

In reference to the NHS been under-staffed and underfunded; this has been the case for years. Ask anyone who works in the NHS.

Even though we cannot control the common cold or flu, these do not carry the same risk as COVID, nor put such a strain on the NHS. That is the issue.

Sorry to hear about your friend by the way.

8 hours ago, Scully said:

I keep hearing about all these op’s and procedures ( especially regarding cancers ) which have been put on hold due to Covid, but as I’ve said before, I personally know of four people whom have been treated for their cancer ( and continue to be so ) including various op’s for the same, none of whom have had to wait let alone postponed. 

I've had a pre-operation appointment postponed, and have never had the call up about it. Luckily I haven't had a issue.

My mother-in-law has had her knee operations put back twice, and I know of someone else who has had a shoulder operation postponed.

Not so much recently, but there was cases of cancer patients not getting treatment due to risks of catching COVID from hospitals. This was last year. 

8 hours ago, udderlyoffroad said:

There isn't.

People in hospital are testing positive.  That is because the UK hospitals are filthy, disgusting places pushing DNRs onto otherwise healthy people.

The rhetoric is being ramped up because there's an awful lot of vested interests in remaining in the state we're in.

As you state, the point of the lockdown was to 'protect the NHS' front and centre, not to save lives. 

We need to learn to live with this airborne virus - But don't worry, we won't, lockdown will be declared within a couple of weeks or so, and it'll be another 'few weeks to flatten the curve'.  The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over again and expecting different results.  We must be truly mad in this country.

Oh and we'll just have to agree to differ that the NHS is underfunded and under-staffed.  It is demonstrably neither, but so appallingly managed that we are effectively euthanising people. 

 

I'm sorry, but that all sounds like a load of waffle to me. What vested interests are there in keeping the country locked down?

7 hours ago, Mungler said:

I wish they would give us more info beyond age in relation to deaths - yes we know Covid is primarily a disease of age, but I’d bet a chunk that 95% of people getting ironed out are what I would clinically term as being ‘on a wobbly wicket’ or unvaccinated.

 

It's not the deaths that are the problem. It is the people taking up hospital beds. Someone in a bed for weeks/months puts the strain on the NHS, someone in a bodybag doesn't.

It is now a case with young people and people who are vaccinated who are getting ill and been kept in hospital. It is not a 'disease of age at all.

[That was a great success then........]

I wish I was as confident as you lot.

There is currently a staggering increase in hospitalisation, with many new wards having to be opened up for COVID patients. Some are now axing operations again. Many of these patients in hospital are young and/or vaccinated and have no underlying health problems.

It is worth remembering that the lockdowns and restrictions are to help reduce hospital care and overwhelming the NHS, thus leaving staff and resources to concentrate on other patients and treatments. 

I appreciate that people are losing livelihoods and missing out on important life experiences, but the NHS simply cannot cope with life as normal. It's no secret that the NHS was under-funded and under-staffed before COVID hit, it is now far worse.

If anyone was told they had to sacrifice their business or lose their wife to cancer, almost all would choose to lose their business. This is what could be on the cards if we don't find a way to stop people being hospitalised by COVID and having to push back other vital treatments.

I'd love to have life back to normal, and I'd love to be able to stop hemorrhaging money and custom because of this damn virus. But we are stuck between a rock and a hard place until we find a way of controlling it. And vaccines don't seem to be the savour we were promised.