want a .17 but been told will not get granted

[Redgum]

Not true; just not possibly with an Essex ticket - if someone from outside with a different ticket conditioned for fox shoots there, all perfectly legal. How stupid?

 

Also - fox IS vermin - the police HO guidelines are not part of the FAC document, nor are they referenced, nor is anything else referenced by an FAC. Therefore, the FAC conditions stating vermin means the common definition of that word, under which the fox qualifies.

 

Oh dear, my worse fears are true logic, you are Dekers wife. Tell me, in my Oxford dictionary, which your probably going to tell me has absolutely nought to do with the English language, it also states under section 2 of the definition of the word vermin 'very unpleasant and destructive people. Does that mean I can shoot xxxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxx.

[welshwarrior]

Oh I'm now looking at a 17 now I'm in Surrey

[GP1]

Think you'd do bloody well to get a half decent 22.250 set up for £300......

You can get a .22-250 if you shop around, might not be the best but these are all under £300 on Gun trader

 

CZ 550 American ------------- .22-250-------R/H--£250-S/H-Ayrshire

 

Ruger M77-------------------- .22-250---21" R/H--£250-S/H-Surrey

 

CZ 550 Standard-------------- .22-250-- 23" R/H--£275-S/H-East Yorkshire

 

Ruger M77 Mk I Standard Hunter.22-250-- 21" R/H--£285-S/H-Shropshire

 

Mauser FN-------------------- .22-250-- 20" R/H--£289-S/H-Derbyshire

 

Fabrique Nationale Mauser---- .22-250-- 24" R/H--£289-S/H-Derbyshire

[kyska]

Not true; just not possibly with an Essex ticket - if someone from outside with a different ticket conditioned for fox shoots there, all perfectly legal. How stupid?

 

Also - fox IS vermin - the police HO guidelines are not part of the FAC document, nor are they referenced, nor is anything else referenced by an FAC. Therefore, the FAC conditions stating vermin means the common definition of that word, under which the fox qualifies.

 

My fac has conditions stating that centrefire is to be used for fox, the rimfires for vermin and ground game, I brought this up in conversation with the FEO and he simply stated that my force won't allow rimfire for fox, if I want to dispute this, write to the CC and expect a long, convoluted experience, if I also decided to breach the conditions set on my FAC, they'll have it back.

 

Even if a test case hasn't confirmed that fox is vermin, I still don't fancy getting caught breaching the condition on my fac.

[ordnance]

Your post reads like you aren't in the UK. last I looked, and policed in the 1970's, N. Ireland is also part of the UK.

 

HMR for fox varies from county to county. Some do, some don't. My personal view is that, although it kills foxes well under the right conditions, it's not consistent enough. When I had one I had several runners when even a .22lr would have put them down As has been said, .22wmr would be a better option for a rimfire.

 

Now lets hear from the "I've killed 7000 foxes at 500 yards headshot with one shot one kill brigade".

 

I could of put England Scotland wales and n Ireland i put UK to cover it all. I know N Ireland is in the UK and am happy for it to remain that way.

[Redgum]

My fac has conditions stating that centrefire is to be used for fox, the rimfires for vermin and ground game, I brought this up in conversation with the FEO and he simply stated that my force won't allow rimfire for fox, if I want to dispute this, write to the CC and expect a long, convoluted experience, if I also decided to breach the conditions set on my FAC, they'll have it back.

 

Even if a test case hasn't confirmed that fox is vermin, I still don't fancy getting caught breaching the condition on my fac.

This is the reality of it kyska much to what some on here think, the reason I managed to get hmr on my license for fox in my county was to shoot trapped animals which occasionally I have to do,it would make much better sense using the .22lr with subs for this but they wouldnt wear it. Shooting a fox in a cage with a 243 is a tad dangerous for me.Now the Home Office guidance to police on firearm law does state a rimfire can be used in certain circumstances, I could push it, write along letter to the firearms licensing manager etc but really is it worth the bother, I havent trapped a fox in ages.From talking to my local FA dept it seems that the police in many counties don't want people thinking the calibre is a main foxing tool and taking 150/250 yd shots at fox's,if you have good reason then you will get a much better calibre for the job, if you don't have good reason then you won't. PW members that insist its within your rights to have fox down for HMR just show their lack of real knowledge on firearms and ballistics.

[Dekers]

Nowt wrong with me Dekers, I probably havent been shooting half as long as you but I live in the real world and try to share my real experiences with others on this forum.You obvioulsy dont live in the county of Gloucestershire. You live in an ideal world, first license opened on arrival,get everything you ask for regarding conditions, the plod do as you tell em and all the animals you shoot drop dead on the spot. Go and do the lottery mate, you aint gonna loose, you could probably part the sea on the way. Sorry mate, I just dont believe you.

 

So I suppose my FAC was granted by the fairies, the fact it is Open, and every tool is conditioned for Target, zero and all Lawful quarry is something I imagined hey!

 

I don't care if you believe the world is flat and man has never been to the moon.

 

You really are on something at the moment Redrum, remember its a lot stronger now than when you were a lad!

 

I'm not in the business of lying and I'm a little more accurate with my comments than you, so if you insist on making personal snipes kindly get you facts straight.

 

Did you ever ask your FEO what this new legislation is that makes HMR ILLEGAL on Fox, I'm still waiting to hear?

[Redgum]

Three words Dekers, 'Point','missing' and 'the'. :blink: :blink: :blink:

[kyska]

So I suppose my FAC was granted by the fairies, the fact it is Open, and every tool is conditioned for Target, zero and all Lawful quarry is something I imagined hey!

 

I don't care if you believe the world is flat and man has never been to the moon.

 

You really are on something at the moment Redrum, remember its a lot stronger now than when you were a lad!

 

I'm not in the business of lying and I'm a little more accurate with my comments than you, so if you insist on making personal snipes kindly get you facts straight.

 

Did you ever ask your FEO what this new legislation is that makes HMR ILLEGAL on Fox, I'm still waiting to hear?

 

Dekers,

 

I've read this topic, and I can't see where redgum has stated its illegal, I may very well be mistaken, so forgive me if I am.

 

My concern, actually, its not a concern per se, is that if conditions on your fac are broken, you have by proxy broken the law to the effect, not statute law, but there are plenty others that can get you in hot water IE losing a fac.

 

We all know, without pedantics that a hmr will kill a fox, its a given, there are people who shoot them dead with sub fac air rifles, but the conditions bestowed on me remain.

 

I don't risk it, out of worry, I suppose as I haven't in the grand scheme on this site held my fac for long, self regulation on my behalf.

 

I think the main argument here is that new and newish fac holders have these conditions attached, and stick to them, but the 'older school' (no offence intended, as I have no idea how old some people are on here) with very open licences, with many a firearm built up over the years, with the ebb and tide of enforcement have a definate more blase attitude toward licensing.

[geordieh]

Hi All

Iknow somebody in somerset who has applied for a 22-250 and he has been told he has a 17hmr and that is plenty good enough for foxes 22-250 refused

Geordie

[ordnance]

There seams to be a bit of confusion here. My FAC says my .22 can be used for sporting and vermin control can i not shoot foxes with it. ? My point being if its legal what bases would my FEO to refuse me using a .22 on foxes.

[kyska]

Hi All

Iknow somebody in somerset who has applied for a 22-250 and he has been told he has a 17hmr and that is plenty good enough for foxes 22-250 refused

Geordie

 

He wasn't refused on the choice of calibre for fox, its the calibre for the land, thats not in debate.

[kyska]

There seams to be a bit of confusion here. My FAC says my .22 can be used for sporting and vermin control can i not shoot foxes with it. ? My point being if its legal what bases would my FEO to refuse me using a .22 on foxes.

 

Have you only read your replies on this topic?

 

Shoot fox all you like without a fox condition as its not had a test case, ethically its debatable for most calibres other than centerfires.

 

Seems its ok if you're a **** shot but have a CF you're ok, crack shot with a rimmie at 80 yards you're not, police need to get their act together.

[ordnance]

Have you only read your replies on this topic?

 

Shoot fox all you like without a fox condition as its not had a test case, ethically its debatable for most calibres other than centerfires.

 

Seems its ok if you're a **** shot but have a CF you're ok, crack shot with a rimmie at 80 yards you're not, police need to get their act together.

 

You are making assumptions i dont shoot foxes with my .22 i use it for target and I was asking is it legal. Whether it is right to shoot foxes with rimfires is another debate.

 

My fault for not be clearer.

Edited November 23, 2011 by ordnance

[Redgum]

Dekers,

 

I've read this topic, and I can't see where redgum has stated its illegal, I may very well be mistaken, so forgive me if I am.

 

My concern, actually, its not a concern per se, is that if conditions on your fac are broken, you have by proxy broken the law to the effect, not statute law, but there are plenty others that can get you in hot water IE losing a fac.

 

We all know, without pedantics that a hmr will kill a fox, its a given, there are people who shoot them dead with sub fac air rifles, but the conditions bestowed on me remain.

 

I don't risk it, out of worry, I suppose as I haven't in the grand scheme on this site held my fac for long, self regulation on my behalf.

 

I think the main argument here is that new and newish fac holders have these conditions attached, and stick to them, but the 'older school' (no offence intended, as I have no idea how old some people are on here) with very open licences, with many a firearm built up over the years, with the ebb and tide of enforcement have a definate more blase attitude toward licensing.

 

This is a very valid point, a bit like the trailer test, if you had a license back whenever you don't need to take it, does this mean a certain generation were'just good at reversin trailers'. Many thousands of fox's have been shot legally with .22lrs and nobody ever questioned it, when things changed I do not know but it was before I gained my fAC. I have been shooting for 40ys, shotguns that is and am also a quite new to this game and it really is a steep learning curve.Those that have held fac's for a number of years have quite an archaic attitude to modern day problems with conditions and variations, and my apologies to Dekers if he's reading this for the grief I give him, but the, 'well look what i've got, they wont give me grief' attitude makes me mad ,some forces DO have differant interpretations of the law. The government make the laws, the police enforce them, they may read the law differantly to how you see it but they still are the enforcers of it, who decides on whether you get a license or not, its not the makers of the law is it. The best way I can explain the way I see the police and variations/conditions is to imagine the fA dept of your regional police force as a bouncer on the door of a club. The boss says to the bouncer smart dress only, he wont let you in as you don't agree with his ideas of smart dress, yes you can stand and argue for an hour but the outcome will be no entry and a good kicking round the back.

[kyska]

You are making assumptions i dont shoot foxes with my .22 i use it for target and I was asking is it legal. Whether it is right to shoot foxes with rimfires is another debate.

 

My fault for not be clearer.

 

Eh? :unsure:

 

How am I making assumptions fella?

 

I said, if you don't have a fox condition then it should be presumed that fox is vermin, I didn't know, so I asked and they stuck a condition on my fac that fox are not vermin and require CF. So, legally, it seems if you don't ask for clarity, with the lack of a test case, and you kill the animal humanely (negating prosecution within the statute of the cruelty to animals act) you're fine bud. Thats my take on it.

 

My point earlier is that I have a fox condition, if I got caught, which is highly unlikely if i did shoot a fox with a rimfire, I've breached my conditions of the fac, I've not broken the law, but I'd still lose my fac.

Edited November 23, 2011 by kyska

[al4x]

My fac has conditions stating that centrefire is to be used for fox, the rimfires for vermin and ground game, I brought this up in conversation with the FEO and he simply stated that my force won't allow rimfire for fox, if I want to dispute this, write to the CC and expect a long, convoluted experience, if I also decided to breach the conditions set on my FAC, they'll have it back.

 

Even if a test case hasn't confirmed that fox is vermin, I still don't fancy getting caught breaching the condition on my fac.

 

 

how are you breaching the conditions if you shoot a fox with yours? its not a pure foxing tool so thats why it doesn't have fox against it, foxes are vermin and it doesn't say vermin not including foxes. In certain situations its the best tool for the job mine still comes out for certain foxes in places I don't want to use anything bigger. I've had all sorts of FAC wordings, some with fox listed some without I've had vermin and more recently they seem to like writing pests instead. Now to me a fox taking chickens is a pest so fits the bill, BASC stuck their neck out in an unusual way saying to just shoot them if the situation is right and you have a vermin condition on your rimfires that implies some people that deal at the sharp end of firearms problems think it isn't a problem

[ordnance]

Perhaps we can clear this up. Some are talking about police forces working to government guidelines. What are the government guidelines on calibers for shooting foxes. ?

Edited November 23, 2011 by ordnance

[kyska]

how are you breaching the conditions if you shoot a fox with yours? its not a pure foxing tool so thats why it doesn't have fox against it, foxes are vermin and it doesn't say vermin not including foxes. In certain situations its the best tool for the job mine still comes out for certain foxes in places I don't want to use anything bigger. I've had all sorts of FAC wordings, some with fox listed some without I've had vermin and more recently they seem to like writing pests instead. Now to me a fox taking chickens is a pest so fits the bill, BASC stuck their neck out in an unusual way saying to just shoot them if the situation is right and you have a vermin condition on your rimfires that implies some people that deal at the sharp end of firearms problems think it isn't a problem

 

My fac makes it clear that vermin and ground game for the RF, capital FOX, vermin and ground game for the .204, and as I've said earlier, made clear by the feo.

 

Unless I'm mistaken, which I might well be, as I've said, its pretty clear to me.

 

The ommission of FOX on the RF denotes clarity?

Edited November 23, 2011 by kyska

[Redgum]

Perhaps we can clear this up. Some are talking about police forces working to government guidelines. What are the government guidelines on calibers for shooting foxes. ?

 

confirmed (see paragraph 13.13 for guidance).

Fox

13.23 Common rifle cartridges considered

suitable for the shooting of foxes range from

.17 Remington, and .22 Hornet to .22 -250

and .220 Swift, though there is a wide range

of suitable similar calibres commercially

available. In windy areas, where heavier bullets

aid accurate shooting, or if applicants wish to

use one rifle for shooting both deer and foxes

they may choose a rifle in 6mm (.243/.244) or

6.5mm (.264) calibre. .22 Rimfire is generally

too low-powered to be used against fox

except at short range, but may reasonably be

permitted for use against such quarry in

certain circumstances. However, sole use

against fox would not normally be sufficient

“good reason” to acquire such a rifle (see

paragraph 13.15). Combination shot gun/rifles

should have the rifled barrel in a similar

calibre. Expanding ammunition should be

authorised for shooting foxes.

 

These are the Home Office guidelines to police, the interesting bit is the little piece on Rimfires, it doesnt say that the .22lrs cannot be used for fox but leave it totally in the hands of the police to decide and with some countys .17hmr rimfire isnt happenening, you would have more chance with a .22lr.

[Cannon]

Perhaps we can clear this up. Some are talking about police forces working to government guidelines. What are the government guidelines on calibers for shooting foxes. ?

 

What are the guidelines on shooting trolls? Someone please tell me.

[Mr_Logic]

My fac makes it clear that vermin and ground game for the RF, capital FOX, vermin and ground game for the .204, and as I've said earlier, made clear by the feo.

 

Unless I'm mistaken, which I might well be, as I've said, its pretty clear to me.

 

The ommission of FOX on the RF denotes clarity?

Arguably.

 

The WHOLE point here is that the word 'vermin' is vague.

 

The ONLY offence you can commit here is to breach the terms of your FAC. In order to convict you of this offence, the prosecution needs to prove that (a) you shot the fox with the rifle in question and that (B) this rifle was not conditioned for such a shot. If the rifle is conditioned for 'vermin' then in order to successfully convict it must be PROVEN that a fox is NOT vermin.

 

The conditions are done in such a way that while you can argue as Kyska does, you can also argue that the 'good reason' for a 22CF is specifically fox; and that fox is a subset of the word vermin. I.e. that the 22CF has the good reason of fox shooting; where the 22 RF / HMR has the good reason of vermin shooting. The two are not mutually exclusive; they simply determine how the rifle is licensed.

 

Of course, anyone with 'vermin and any other lawful quarry' may shoot fox - there is no way the fox is not included in this term.

 

The FAC conditions must be taken literally; no other documents are referenced by the FAC so no other documents except commonly-used items such as a dictionary may be referenced to decide the term.

 

The simple FACT here is that the condition is too vague as to be enforceable.

 

Now then. Redgum, please stop talking such utter rubbish, vague pointless posts which make no sense.

 

How is firearms licensing like taking a trailer towing test?! It's not, nothing like.

 

People who have been shooting longer tend to get their own way because of experience and being able to justify what they want. However, part of that experience is knowing how to ask for things, when to back off, and when to push hard. That knowledge comes in part from knowing the law, knowing firearms, and not being prepared to take it up the ****.

 

If you want to accept removal of conditions from your ticket because of 'policy' then fine - that is YOUR decision. Plenty of other people don't. Let me give you an example.

 

I moved to Northants last year. Part of that move obviously entails notifying the police of my change of address. In Law, see BASC website, that is ALL I have to do. Northants wanted to issue a new ticket; while I didn't have to do this I don't see arguing for no tangible benefit. However, Northants Police do not use the wording 'any other legal quarry'. That is their policy, it's not one i agree with, but that's their policy.

 

Thames Valley DO use that wording so my FAC was so worded. My new FEO wanted to remove that, I did argue it with him politely and the question mark remained when he left here. Checking with the manager, my ticket still has that wording for all historic Thames Valley firearms. I could have accepted the first offer; I chose not to.

 

I don't say everyone should choose the same as me - you may want to do differently. It is not acceptable though to say that I know nothing; that my viewpoint does not reflect reality. The reality is that while forces DO have policies, even though by Guidelines and Law they should not, proving your requirements and a correctly argued, delicately put case DO work. Ultimately, the Police have a job to do, but that job is not to stop you shooting. If you can prove a genuine need, you can have those items. Every now and again some FEOs and departments can step out of line, but that's why a call from BASC or SACS can help - not to come the heavy, but to remind of the legislation and ask nicely.

[Vermincinerator]

Arguably.

 

The WHOLE point here is that the word 'vermin' is vague.

 

The ONLY offence you can commit here is to breach the terms of your FAC. In order to convict you of this offence, the prosecution needs to prove that (a) you shot the fox with the rifle in question and that (B) this rifle was not conditioned for such a shot. If the rifle is conditioned for 'vermin' then in order to successfully convict it must be PROVEN that a fox is NOT vermin.

 

The conditions are done in such a way that while you can argue as Kyska does, you can also argue that the 'good reason' for a 22CF is specifically fox; and that fox is a subset of the word vermin. I.e. that the 22CF has the good reason of fox shooting; where the 22 RF / HMR has the good reason of vermin shooting. The two are not mutually exclusive; they simply determine how the rifle is licensed.

 

Of course, anyone with 'vermin and any other lawful quarry' may shoot fox - there is no way the fox is not included in this term.

 

The FAC conditions must be taken literally; no other documents are referenced by the FAC so no other documents except commonly-used items such as a dictionary may be referenced to decide the term.

 

The simple FACT here is that the condition is too vague as to be enforceable.

 

Now then. Redgum, please stop talking such utter rubbish, vague pointless posts which make no sense.

 

How is firearms licensing like taking a trailer towing test?! It's not, nothing like.

 

People who have been shooting longer tend to get their own way because of experience and being able to justify what they want. However, part of that experience is knowing how to ask for things, when to back off, and when to push hard. That knowledge comes in part from knowing the law, knowing firearms, and not being prepared to take it up the ****.

 

If you want to accept removal of conditions from your ticket because of 'policy' then fine - that is YOUR decision. Plenty of other people don't. Let me give you an example.

 

I moved to Northants last year. Part of that move obviously entails notifying the police of my change of address. In Law, see BASC website, that is ALL I have to do. Northants wanted to issue a new ticket; while I didn't have to do this I don't see arguing for no tangible benefit. However, Northants Police do not use the wording 'any other legal quarry'. That is their policy, it's not one i agree with, but that's their policy.

 

Thames Valley DO use that wording so my FAC was so worded. My new FEO wanted to remove that, I did argue it with him politely and the question mark remained when he left here. Checking with the manager, my ticket still has that wording for all historic Thames Valley firearms. I could have accepted the first offer; I chose not to.

 

I don't say everyone should choose the same as me - you may want to do differently. It is not acceptable though to say that I know nothing; that my viewpoint does not reflect reality. The reality is that while forces DO have policies, even though by Guidelines and Law they should not, proving your requirements and a correctly argued, delicately put case DO work. Ultimately, the Police have a job to do, but that job is not to stop you shooting. If you can prove a genuine need, you can have those items. Every now and again some FEOs and departments can step out of line, but that's why a call from BASC or SACS can help - not to come the heavy, but to remind of the legislation and ask nicely.

 

Tom, i suspect that when your FAC is renewed and you are still here in Northants it will be worded with Northants conditions and you will loose the "any other lawful quarry" condition (unless Northants has a change of policy within the life of your FAC)however they allow the shooting of fox with both .22LR and .17HMR although i asked for the condition to be removed for my .22LR as i think it is wholey inadequate.

I now have a 22WMR and shall be asking for the condition to be re-instated.

My take on the issuing if FAC's calibres and conditions etc..... is that if you satify all the criteria for your chosen calibre then your firearms licensing office must have good reason to refuse you that calibre and you have the right to challenge any decision.

You dont have any right of appeal against your FAC conditions unless they are unreasonable, what would classed as unreasonable i dont know and that would be for a court to decide but if your Cheif of Police added a condition saying that you may only shoot these guns if your completely naked, i would say that unreasonable.

There is only legislation governing suitable calibres for deer in this country, calibres for every other quarry are recommendations and just that, for example it is recommended that a minimum calibre of 270 is used for boar and you have a dedicated condition.

There is nothing unlawful about giving a boar a headache with a 17HMR if you have the any other lawful quarry on your ticket, highly unadvisable but not unlawful

If there is a situation where a issuing force does not use the any other lawful quarry condition and i shoot an animal that is not regarded as vermin or ground game or is not worded on my FAC i will be braking the conditions of my licence, the wild boar being a godd example again, even if i shoot him with a 270 but dont have the relevant wording on my FAC i am in breach of the conditions, simple as that.

 

Ian.

[al4x]

Ian you're mad havin a fox condition removed from a rimfire. Now you can't deal with garden foxes or ones that you encounter at close range while rabbiting.

[Dekers]

As I stated in a previous post the fox condition was removed from hmr condition when the license was in for an increase in centrefire ammunition holding, I called the department the second I recieved my license back and asked why and the response was that the department had some new legislation,I commented that this seemed a little odd as I had not heard of any law change but the FEO was sticking to his version of events. Maybe Gloucester Police dept had made a mistake in the first place in puttin fox on for hmr, after all it was also on the 243.

 

Whatever is said about ones rights and knowing the law, what happens when there isnt any law eg hmr and fox's, fox's not being vermin etc. There is NO law that says hmr is legal or not legal to be used for fox, nor 22lr and what about shotgun pellet size, but if its not down on your license then surely it then becomes a matter of law ( does that make sense ). One thing is for sure and if your department don't like HMR's being used for fox then they will not put it on your license, whether you go out and use it for fox under the cloak of vermin is up to you, and if you do I'm sure you won't be the first along with many thousands of .22lr owners.( as stated in a previous post, there has been no conviction as yet.)

 

 

Dekers,

 

I've read this topic, and I can't see where redgum has stated its illegal, I may very well be mistaken, so forgive me if I am.

 

My concern, actually, its not a concern per se, is that if conditions on your fac are broken, you have by proxy broken the law to the effect, not statute law, but there are plenty others that can get you in hot water IE losing a fac.

 

We all know, without pedantics that a hmr will kill a fox, its a given, there are people who shoot them dead with sub fac air rifles, but the conditions bestowed on me remain.

 

I don't risk it, out of worry, I suppose as I haven't in the grand scheme on this site held my fac for long, self regulation on my behalf.

 

I think the main argument here is that new and newish fac holders have these conditions attached, and stick to them, but the 'older school' (no offence intended, as I have no idea how old some people are on here) with very open licences, with many a firearm built up over the years, with the ebb and tide of enforcement have a definate more blase attitude toward licensing.

 

 

We all have to to deal with the police however long we have been shooting, my FAC had the condition ALL LAWFUL QUARRY added some 3-4 years ago when it went in for a variation, the conditions were good before but that was better. I have also just been through a renewal when, presumably because of my current firearms holdings and new request, I had a home visit from a Senior Firearms Enquiry and Explosive Liaison Officer who also had to travel some 55 miles to me! It went well and he advised me he would recommend accepting my additional requests.

 

This debate is not necessarily about the suitability of ANY calibre for ANY task, it is more about how to deal with the police/FAC. I have never said life is easy and without doubt some FEO are not only Muppet's but little Hitlers as well, my last guy was, and I had to straighten him out considerably, so did EVERYONE else I knew who had him. This guy left the position some months ago, leaving behind, as his temporary replacement said...a bit of a backlog!

 

It isn't easy questioning a FEO, I said that in my very first post here, but some simply have it wrong or invent things, it seems Redrum has been told there is new legislation causing him to lose his fox condition, the way I see it that is a downright lie and the police should be taken to task. I have never had warfare personally with the police, I have just explained things to them on several occasions, and when faced with reality/reason/situation/circumstance and sometimes even the law which they have wrong, you will usually get what you want.

 

There is NO law banning HMR on Fox, to the best of my knowledge there is no law banning any calibre/type of firearm on fox. Many regions accept rimfires for fox and they are perfectly capable/IDEAL for the job when used appropriately, but can that not be said for any calibre/quarry!

 

This whole thread has migrated into something else, as so often happens, but as I have always held, if someone has the genuine need for a rimfire for fox and their region refuses then they should grow some balls and take them to task.

 

Any number of regions do accept fox with rimfire, and any number of shooters will confirm that rimfire is a perfectly humane and effective fox tool. Lets not get into any silly debates about it not being as good as a .22cf or 243 etc etc, these to have their limitations.

 

A defence of its our Policy doesn't have a chance when faced with many responses from other shooters saying the reality is it works, also consider the situation where a shooter from one region with the fox condition can join another in a region that doesn't allow it and perfectly legally shoot fox standing next to him. OR the region offers a CF............. BUT, I need to shoot foxes in the Hay Barn at night which is next to the Farmhouse and stables, wouldn't that be a bit dangerous and noisy, the fox are only 25 yards away, a .22lr with subs would be perfect! Any half decent brief would make the region look stupid when faced with these, and I'm sure many other examples. Lets not get heavy into these reasons either, they are quick possible examples, any decent firearms brief would/should be able to do much better than me!

 

ATB!

Edited November 24, 2011 by Dekers