cockercas Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 i carnt post the original question because it was sent off basc site. so its not in my sent folder Subject: A-Max Bullets Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2012 11:58:33 +0000 From: Lewis.Thornley@basc.org.uk To: carpingking@hotmail.com Dear Joseph, Please find attached a document written by BASC regarding A-Max ammunition. This attachment and other information can also be viewed by following this link: http://www.basc.org.uk/en/departments/firearms/firearms-department-news.cfm I hope this helps and clears things up for you. Kind regards, Lewis thanks lewis. there is no mention on the legalitys of using a-max on deer. only that BASC supports the use of properly designed expanding missiles to ensure a rapid and humane death of quarry species. so can you help on the legal side of things Is A-max leagal to to use on on deer? Joe, I have had a chat with our Firearms Officer and he has informed of the following: Hornady ‘designed’ the A-Max bullet for “Match” shooting but as there are no restrictions on using high velocity bullets on varmints in the USA the makers also market them for varmint shooting. Please note that the Hornady website expressly advises that A Max should NOT be use for medium or large game. Whilst the UK Firearms Act puts bullets and ammunition containing bullets “designed or adapted to expand on impact” firmly within the prohibited category and whilst bullets caught by that legislation are traditionally and rightly used to humanely dispatch deer and other quarry species; the Deer Act is worded differently. The 1991 Deer Act at Schedule 2 says Deer must be shot using a “soft-nosed or hollow-nosed bullet”. So it could be argued that A-max is no different to its expanding counterpart the V-Max or even a Nosler ballistic tip hunting bullet. They all have hollow points but I would not recommend the shooting of deer with A-Max and recommend people to follow the guidance of Hornady in not using them for larger game. It would be for the courts to decide whether the A-Max would be a hollow nosed bullet that met the Deer Acts wording. Incidentally the plastic tip of a bullet does not count in a bullets classification under the firearms Act i.e. you cannot say a ballistic tip in a hollow nose makes it a solid bullet, likewise you cannot say all hollow point bullets are ‘designed’ to expand even when most bullets will expand as a consequence of velocity and energy impacting on a hard object. It is the maker’s design that counts towards its classification. In terms of animal welfare; the best practice would be to use a suitable bullet for the quarry species involved in any calibre or perhaps in some circumstances the calibre might also be best increased e.g. Whilst a .243 lightweight varmint bullet may be available in the shops to use - would you deploy it on a red deer? Personally I would use the heaviest or best bonded bullet I can find or up the calibre to get better energy and ensure that the majority of the bullet stays together to ensure rapid death by creating a wound channel. A surface injury from a fragmented bullet would not be good. In essence it may take someone to end up in court to find out what the Courts think about the use of certain bullets, but we (BASC) must support the use of suitable combinations of rifles and bullet designs that maintain sustainable hunting ethics which includes responsibility for animal welfare. I hope this answers your query. Best wishes Lewis Lewis Thornley Deer Officer British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC) Marford Mill Rossett Wrexham, LL12 0HL Tel: 01244 573047 Fax: 01244 573013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Logic Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 So exactly as I concluded on the last thread then - legal, but not recommended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beardo Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 case closed (thank god!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cockercas Posted January 3, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 Yes legal until proven otherwise. But I wouldn't want to be the person in the test case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackley Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 So exactly as I concluded on the last thread then - legal, but not recommended. well Mr Logic Iam man enough to give you an appology over the "legal" side of the dabte as I will accept what BASC has said as at the end of the day they are experts. however I will not accept its correct to use an Amax neither will BASC,ethics and animal welfare come into play we can ALL see the grey area which is being exploited,I will be contacting BASC to try and get the wording changed so there is no grey are to expolit just like in Scotland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Logic Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 I've said all along that makes sense to me. In the interim though, there are times when IMHO the Amax works well, but this is down to individual findings and so we must agree to differences of opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 It does make you wonder about people who have to test match ammo on living quarry, personally I find it hard to justify ethically when you have properly designed buLlets available in every gunshop in the country i Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackley Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 It does make you wonder about people who have to test match ammo on living quarry, personally I find it hard to justify ethically when you have properly designed buLlets available in every gunshop in the country i its pretty obvious some dont look on the ethics when choosing a bullet to kill an animal or take on board what experts like BASC and the BDS advice to use anyway its been done to death so to speak,untill the wording is changed to the same as Scotland the practice will still go on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redgum Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 As I don't use Amax I have no idea of the price but what is the big attraction of using them on living quarry. Hunting bullets are designed to kill animals, target rounds are designed to punch holes in paper, would it have anything to do with target heads being legal to be sent in the mail and the convenience of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njc110381 Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 Nice to see that the email from BASC summed up the arguement. It's legal but not advisable. The comment on shooting Reds with a .243 and needing the best bonded bullet available made me giggle - especially the bit that suggested perhaps stepping up to a bigger calibre could be a good idea... Tin hat on - I'm enjoying this!.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 Whilst in no way do I wish to perpetuate this saga but am I the only one who finds it strange that BASC suggest in this email that A Max is, as the law currently stands legal, whereas via the Deer Initiative, of which BASC is a major partner and player (and would therefore have authorised the wording) state that deer legal bullets must be "either hollow nosed or soft nosed. Note: this is generally interpreted to include “ballistic tip” and other bullets designed to deform in a predictable manner". Perhaps it's time BASC did something to sort this "mess" out once and for all, thus enabling them to be consistant with their advice ensuring their members did not fall foul of the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Logic Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 I don't find it the least bit strange; BASC were asked directly if it's legal in England; it is, hence the response. Deer initiative's wording covers England and Scotland. Since deer stalking is big up there, makes sense to word it in such a way as to ensure you are legal wherever you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beretta28g Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 Nice to see that the email from BASC summed up the arguement. It's legal but not advisable. The comment on shooting Reds with a .243 and needing the best bonded bullet available made me giggle - especially the bit that suggested perhaps stepping up to a bigger calibre could be a good idea... Tin hat on - I'm enjoying this!.... Well what caliber would you suggest bearing in mind a .338 is usefull for moles :yp: :yp: :yp: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackley Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 (edited) Well what caliber would you suggest bearing in mind a .338 is usefull for moles :yp: :yp: :yp: well what do you expect from a person who does such a stupid thing like that,there bound to use an unsuitable bullet,makes you wonder if some people are fit to hold and FAC Edited January 4, 2012 by Ackley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njc110381 Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 Well what caliber would you suggest bearing in mind a .338 is usefull for moles :yp: :yp: :yp: Sorry, I was just taking the **** about the .243 really. I know how popular it is and know it can work, personally I just prefer something that was designed to throw a little more weight that's all. 6.5x55, 7x57 or the modern '08 versions like .260 or 7-08. They punch right through more consistantly and leave a better blood trail to track if needed. At the moment I'm using 140gr Hornady SST in my 7-08, they seem ok. well what do you expect from a person who does such a stupid thing like that,there bound to use an unsuitable bullet,makes you wonder if some people are fit to hold and FAC What's wrong with that? I was far enough away from it to be safe from debris myself, there was a big earth bank that the mole was digging in and the land owner had given consent. I have any other lawful quarry on my .338 and as mole is fine for my combi gun (straight from the head of my firearms departments mouth) then I shot it. Big deal! If I had pinned a target in front of the same bank in the same place not a word would have been said, but say the word "mole" and all of a sudden I'm wreckless? I don't think so. If I had intentionally taken that rifle out to do that job then fair comment but I was walking back up the hill after a stalk and saw the mole hill move. The shot was safe and the moles need sorting so I shot it. Big deal! Is a 225gr Federal Fusion unsuitable for moles? Let's deal with your thoughts topic by topic hey, rather than bringing them all together so you can have a really good dig. The mole thing was safe and lawful and we've done that subject to death now. I even have the T-shirt! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 I don't find it the least bit strange; BASC were asked directly if it's legal in England; it is, hence the response. Deer initiative's wording covers England and Scotland. Since deer stalking is big up there, makes sense to word it in such a way as to ensure you are legal wherever you are. No it does not. They have a specific best practise guide for England and that is where I copied the wording from. Charlie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackley Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 Sorry, I was just taking the **** about the .243 really. I know how popular it is and know it can work, personally I just prefer something that was designed to throw a little more weight that's all. 6.5x55, 7x57 or the modern '08 versions like .260 or 7-08. They punch right through more consistantly and leave a better blood trail to track if needed. At the moment I'm using 140gr Hornady SST in my 7-08, they seem ok. What's wrong with that? I was far enough away from it to be safe from debris myself, there was a big earth bank that the mole was digging in and the land owner had given consent. I have any other lawful quarry on my .338 and as mole is fine for my combi gun (straight from the head of my firearms departments mouth) then I shot it. Big deal! If I had pinned a target in front of the same bank in the same place not a word would have been said, but say the word "mole" and all of a sudden I'm wreckless? I don't think so. If I had intentionally taken that rifle out to do that job then fair comment but I was walking back up the hill after a stalk and saw the mole hill move. The shot was safe and the moles need sorting so I shot it. Big deal! Is a 225gr Federal Fusion unsuitable for moles? Let's deal with your thoughts topic by topic hey, rather than bringing them all together so you can have a really good dig. The mole thing was safe and lawful and we've done that subject to death now. I even have the T-shirt! Ive never heard such and excuse in all my life,you crack on mate shooting unsuitable bullets at deer and shooting moles with a 338.god I hope no one from your firearms dept is reading this as to my thoughts on this topic " I havnt got any no more as people like you is going to ruin things for everyone eventually" I would have used stonger words but i wont lower myself to certian people standards I bet your really proud of what you have accomplished,big game hunter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beardo Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 This thread is heading for a close, keep it on track and leave the personal attacks out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddy Galore! Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 (edited) WHAHAY!!! Ackley's at it again Calm down dear it's only 'tinternet... Edited January 4, 2012 by GRAM71 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redgum Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 WHAHAY!!! Ackley's at it again Calm down dear it's only 'tinternet... you may be right sometimes Ackley but you have a way about ya that makes the viens start ta bulge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Logic Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 No it does not. They have a specific best practise guide for England and that is where I copied the wording from. Charlie Charlie, their wording is a generic piece of advice, and although may be aimed at England clearly applies to both. Are you saying that in your opinion BASC have got this wrong; I am unclear on your precise point? Ive never heard such and excuse in all my life,you crack on mate shooting unsuitable bullets at deer and shooting moles with a 338.god I hope no one from your firearms dept is reading this as to my thoughts on this topic " I havnt got any no more as people like you is going to ruin things for everyone eventually" I would have used stonger words but i wont lower myself to certian people standards I bet your really proud of what you have accomplished,big game hunter Seriously, *** is wrong with shooting a mole with a cannon? It's not like it's inhumane; generally when you obliterate something into a thousand tiny pieces, it's pretty dead pretty quick! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddy Galore! Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 (edited) :blink: Edited January 4, 2012 by GRAM71 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Logic Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 In what way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gixer1 Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 Seriously, *** is wrong with shooting a mole with a cannon? brilliantly worded...made me chuckle.... On another point how can anyone comment on shooting a mole with a 338 when they think shooting foxes or deer at silly ranges is ok? Bit hypocritical isn't it? Regards, Gixer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redgum Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 Charlie, their wording is a generic piece of advice, and although may be aimed at England clearly applies to both. Are you saying that in your opinion BASC have got this wrong; I am unclear on your precise point? Seriously, *** is wrong with shooting a mole with a cannon? It's not like it's inhumane; generally when you obliterate something into a thousand tiny pieces, it's pretty dead pretty quick! Surely you would have to have mole on your license as I don't think they are vermin are they, can't find anything in the Home Office stuff. Shotgun would be legal though, I once shot a rat in a ditch at about 4 yds, all that was left was one eyeball, funny how these things stick in your memory. Pretty sure the rat was keeping an eye out for something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts