pistol/handgun for dispatch

[Vince Green]

If hand guns are such an essential piece of kit why do the contential trackers not use them instead of lugging there rifles around, some of these teams are tracking wounded game for 10+km's throu tough terrain with the hound on a leash, i'm sure if a hand gun was the tool for the job they would not drag there rifle round with them, would be a lot easier.

 

In Germany every hunter carries a pistol and a knife on his belt. Its regarded as part of the kit. Mind you, so it the hat and everything else.

Edited December 8, 2014 by Vince Green

[bavarianbrit]

In Germany not every hunter carries a pistol and mainly if they do it is the older hunters using Walther ppks in 7.62 because when the police re equipped to 9mm they were sold off cheap.

Generally the hunter will use a combination gun with a shot barrel available for dispatch or if and when they shoot from high seats using only a rifle they do a good job of hitting/killing the prey.

Martin

[ordnance]

 

If hand guns are such an essential piece of kit why do the contential trackers not use.

Who said they were essential. ?

[eddoakley]

Who said they were essential. ?

Didnt realise this topic was still coming up.

The post above is exactly my point.

It is not vital that I have one but I think it is a good idea and will give me the safest option in certain circumstances.

I want one. I have a use for one. I have good reason for one so why should it be difficult to get one?

I should not have to word things cleverly or ask loads of people to give me supporting letters.

To be fair I havnt put the variation in yet and it may be a simple process but the conversations so far have not suggested that it will be.

Edd

Edited December 18, 2014 by eddoakley

[Harnser]

Didnt realise this topic was still coming up.

The post above is exactly my point.

It is not vital that I have one but I think it is a good idea and will give me the safest option in certain circumstances.

I want one. I have a use for one. I have good reason for one so why should it be difficult to get one?

I should not have to word things cleverly or ask loads of people to give me supporting letters.

To be fair I havnt put the variation in yet and it may be a simple process but the conversations so far have not suggested that it will be.

Edd

Edd, if you think you need one there is no reason why you shouldn't apply for it . In the past I have used a .357 magnum pistol for the humane dispatch of live stock on the farms . The .38 /357 is the perfect tool for humane dispatch on just about anything .

Harnser

[ordnance]

 

To be fair I havnt put the variation in yet and it may be a simple process but the conversations so far have not suggested that it will be.

Edd

You would be mad to let some people that basically don't like the thought of someone getting a handgun what ever way they spin it, affect your decision to apply for a handgun. Its not them that will make the decision if you get one or not, you are just lucky that its not up to some on this forum to decide.

[Remimax]

You would be mad to let some people that basically don't like the thought of someone getting a handgun what ever way they spin it, affect your decision to apply for a handgun. Its not them that will make the decision if you get one or not, you are just lucky that its not up to some on this forum to decide.

and that my friend is why we will never have a strong voice when it comes gun use and ownership in this country.

whatever you shoot should have the same support across the board but its the "i'm allright its not affecting me" thats our down fall.

[geordieh]

and that my friend is why we will never have a strong voice when it comes gun use and ownership in this country.

whatever you shoot should have the same support across the board but its the "i'm allright its not affecting me" thats our down fall.

Which was why we lost semi auto centrefire rifles,pistols and Multishot shotguns on to section 1, people saying stuff you it doesn't affect me.

[Traztaz]

Just to clear the Germany situation up, not all hunters carry one, all are however allowed to own one semi and one reveolver, the walther PPk thing is wrong, as it does not produce enough energy at the muzzle, min. muzzle energy here to allow a short weapon for humane dispatch is 400 Joules, the walther cant do it. Yes most own a revolver and a semi, no most do not use them very much at all

[spandit]

I thought the best way to dispatch a deer was to shoot it in the head. How is poppin' a cap in it's *** going to be effective?

[srspower]

To be honest a ELEY fourlong number 6 .410 close up headshot is always going to be considerably more effective than a pistol and safer too.

[al4x]

You're not going to carry a .410 stalking though. Most will just use the rifle or a knife. If you have very poor guests then possibly there is a need. Be interesting how common the wounding shot is though that let's you get close enough to use a pistol.

[ordnance]

 

To be honest a ELEY fourlong number 6 .410 close up headshot is always going to be considerably more effective than a pistol and safer too.

How is a .410 more effective or safer than a close up headshot from a .357 magnum for example. Both would be effective, but a handgun would be a lot easier to carry with you.

 

 

Most will just use the rifle or a knife. If you have very poor guests then possibly there is a need. Be interesting how common the wounding shot is though that let's you get close enough to use a pistol.

If you can get close enough to use a knife then you would be close enough to use a handgun, which would be more humane than a knife.

Edited December 18, 2014 by ordnance

[scotslad]

How is a .410 more effective or safer than a close up headshot from a .357 magnum for example. Both would be effective, but a handgun would be a lot easier to carry with you.

 

Because when fired at point blank range will effectively be like a solid slug and fairly heavy (say 15-20gramms) so far wider and heavier than a 357, so larger wound chanel so more effective, and safer as very unlikely to be much riccohet risk unlike the 357

 

 

If you can get close enough to use a knife then you would be close enough to use a handgun, which would be more humane than a knife.

 

If u can get that close u could probably stop 5,10 or 20 m earlier and shot it with the original rifle ur carrying anyway. Which would actually be more humane too as ur not stressing the deer by getting so close.

Unless u have exceptional smell/tracking ability urself or a very well trained scent hound/deer dog i can see little 'need' for 1

 

How many deer are u actually wounding and how are u following them up? Do u have access to a decent deer dog?

[FarmerShooter]

(I know this is a slightly older thread but I was just 'googling' the 410 shot pistol)

 

Hi there. Yes I have one and probably one of the few people in the UK who actually has one in the .410 calibre.... I find it great and very handy on pests close range around various farm outbuildings. For example, rabbits will often hide around where I keep various building supplies. I can just pull back the iron sheets and aim the pistol at the rabbits down the side and easily take them out. A light shot size 7-1/2 is fine, anything bigger and the recoil (and noise) is pretty strong.

 

 

Also, just out of curiosity, if you wanted a .410 shot pistol like my Bond Arms, how much would you be willing to pay for one, given the rarity of these? I don't see them for sale so I'm just curious... It's got a 6" .410 barrel and extended rubber grip.

Edited January 13, 2015 by FarmerShooter

[Bali]

Also, just out of curiosity, if you wanted a .410 shot pistol like my Bond Arms, how much would you be willing to pay for one, given the rarity of these? I don't see them for sale so I'm just curious... It's got a 6" .410 barrel and extended rubber grip.

 

If I was in the market for one £600 / £800 but I'm not as I have a Bond Arms 2000

[bostonmick]

I have never owned a rifle.it or pistol as I have no interest in them. My own preference that's all.I can see where there is a case for some people to hold a pistol for dispatch purposes but am struggling to see real need if the case may be you use it maybe twice a year.as most have said the wounded or injured beast could be finished with the rifle used in the first instance or a 410.I see no point in having any gun in my cabinet that in reality is not used.having said that if you feel that you need one then apply and if successful all ok if refused then you will have to decide if the very limited amount of use it would get is worth the hassle of a long drawn out appeal and the vast cost this could incur.whatever you decide i wish you well.

Edited January 14, 2015 by bostonmick

[robbiep]

I know someone who is one of the people on the list for police to call in a case of badly injured deer by the roadside. He has a 9mm pistol for that, conditioned for humane dispatch. He has been known to take it when deer stalking too.

 

I've also heard of someone who has a pistol for 'large game' dispatch for bison, here in the UK. However, I've no idea if that is true or not.

[brett1985]

a friend of mine who does alot of stalking and humane dispatch on local farms has both a .357 and a .22 pistol. the .22 is like nothing i have ever seen before. its tiny and folds out from a square shape. no sights, but has an inbuilt laser.

the .357 is a full, unrestricted revolver.

 

he uses them most weeks.

[Richie10]

Not at all what they are saying is how often when stalking do you get up close and personal enough to use a handgun?

Personally I've never had an instance I could use one, you either have a mobile beast or one that is immobile and the easiest option is a second shot. If it is that immobile and really on its last legs and you can get right up to it then a knife is what most use.

The only instances I can think of are potentially car accident victims but then you could use a humane killer or bolt gun but for some reason most who want a handgun don't want a bolt gun..........

 

Then people will argue that you haven't been stalking long enough and haven't been in enough situations to warrant it. You can't base personal experience of casual stalking to someone that is doing it day in, day out.

[eddoakley]

So my original post seems to have created quite a discussion.

My application will not be influenced in any way by the naysayers nor those who feel, as I do, that I should be permitted whatever tool I desire or require (unless there are obvious reasons for a refusal of course)

I am quite surprised though at the number of people who would not permit handguns. I think that we are tightly enough regulated without having to then make sure we can word things more cleverly than the person dealing with a variation.

As far as I am concerned I have a use for the tool that I will apply for. I read at least one comment here of "something you might use once or twice a year" or something of that nature. Well frankly if I used it once in 10 years but at that time it was the safest and most suitable option then for me it is enough justification.

"Just use a .410". Yes, very effective but not helping with not wanting to carry a long gun in the first place.

"If you are close enough for that use a knife". Ever seen anyone kicked by a red, fallow or for that matter roe or muntjac? Not for me thank you. Yes a knife is suitable in some situations but not all.

I am glad that it is being discussed but as I said I am really surprised that people think that a man who has sgc and a cabinet full of shotguns, fac and a cabinet full of various calibre rifles, RFD and several cabinets full of guns then needs to have so much justification to posses another different tool.

I am sure that the older generation who were allowed pistols must take a different view in general to those of us who have never been allowed them? So my question now is if we allow the difficulty of having to justify our need for a pistol stop us applying then how long will it be before the criteria for owning a shotgun or rifle become more strict and then will everyone be of the same opinion?

You shouldnt be allowed a rifle unless you NEED to shoot 10 deer every year, then 100 then....

You dont have 1000 acres of crop to protect so you are not allowed a shotgun.

You only shoot rabbits so a .410 is enough for you, or an airgun.

Where does it stop? Who should have the power to disallow something that someone feels they need (obviously with the exception of potential danger to others etc)

Just my thoughts. Interested to hear other peoples

 

Edd

[Rim Fire]

So my original post seems to have created quite a discussion.

My application will not be influenced in any way by the naysayers nor those who feel, as I do, that I should be permitted whatever tool I desire or require (unless there are obvious reasons for a refusal of course)

I am quite surprised though at the number of people who would not permit handguns. I think that we are tightly enough regulated without having to then make sure we can word things more cleverly than the person dealing with a variation.

As far as I am concerned I have a use for the tool that I will apply for. I read at least one comment here of "something you might use once or twice a year" or something of that nature. Well frankly if I used it once in 10 years but at that time it was the safest and most suitable option then for me it is enough justification.

"Just use a .410". Yes, very effective but not helping with not wanting to carry a long gun in the first place.

"If you are close enough for that use a knife". Ever seen anyone kicked by a red, fallow or for that matter roe or muntjac? Not for me thank you. Yes a knife is suitable in some situations but not all.

I am glad that it is being discussed but as I said I am really surprised that people think that a man who has sgc and a cabinet full of shotguns, fac and a cabinet full of various calibre rifles, RFD and several cabinets full of guns then needs to have so much justification to posses another different tool.

I am sure that the older generation who were allowed pistols must take a different view in general to those of us who have never been allowed them? So my question now is if we allow the difficulty of having to justify our need for a pistol stop us applying then how long will it be before the criteria for owning a shotgun or rifle become more strict and then will everyone be of the same opinion?

You shouldnt be allowed a rifle unless you NEED to shoot 10 deer every year, then 100 then....

You dont have 1000 acres of crop to protect so you are not allowed a shotgun.

You only shoot rabbits so a .410 is enough for you, or an airgun.

Where does it stop? Who should have the power to disallow something that someone feels they need (obviously with the exception of potential danger to others etc)

Just my thoughts. Interested to hear other peoples

 

Edd

Well said hope you get it

Edited January 15, 2015 by Rim Fire

[Scully]

I am glad that it is being discussed but as I said I am really surprised that people think that a man who has sgc and a cabinet full of shotguns, fac and a cabinet full of various calibre rifles, RFD and several cabinets full of guns then needs to have so much justification to posses another different tool.

I am sure that the older generation who were allowed pistols must take a different view in general to those of us who have never been allowed them? So my question now is if we allow the difficulty of having to justify our need for a pistol stop us applying then how long will it be before the criteria for owning a shotgun or rifle become more strict and then will everyone be of the same opinion?

You shouldnt be allowed a rifle unless you NEED to shoot 10 deer every year, then 100 then....

You dont have 1000 acres of crop to protect so you are not allowed a shotgun.

You only shoot rabbits so a .410 is enough for you, or an airgun.

Where does it stop? Who should have the power to disallow something that someone feels they need (obviously with the exception of potential danger to others etc)

 

 

Edd

I'm of the older generation and one of those who owned many handguns over the years, and couldn't agree more. Just because I personally don't feel I need one is no reason why anybody else should feel the same.

I too find it strange that someone who owns firearms capable of killing something 100's of yards away is denied the right to own a handgun, but there again I've always been in favour of licensing the person, and not the firearm. The present licensing system defies all logic; but we all know the handgun ban never was about handguns.

[eddoakley]

I've always been in favour of licensing the person, and not the firearm. The present licensing system defies all logic; but we all know the handgun ban never was about handguns.

 

I often try to illustrate the lisencing procedure with the example of:

If you own a red ford focus 1.6 and you fancy a green one you go to the dealer and do a swap. Send off the paperwork. Simple.

If you have a red gun and fancy a green one you have to sell the red one and send of the paperwork. Wait for new paperwork with permission to buy the green one then go get it and send the paperwork off all over again to inform the authorities. STUPID

Or if you drive a 1.6 ford focus and decide you want a 1.3 the you have to justify to the authorities why you need that different size engine and whether it will suit your needs. STUPID.

You have a driving lisence so are allowed to buy/use cars. Why not similar with guns?

Different subject to my original post, maybe one worthy of another thread.

Edd

Edited January 15, 2015 by eddoakley

[Jaymo]

Plus 1 for Edd

 

I have a workshop full of tools / machines, some of them haven't been used in a few years but there will come a time when I will, and for that I shall be grateful that they are there.

Same analogy for holding a Pistol for dispatch, its legally allowed for aquisition so why not.

Who cares if you use it regularily.

As mentioned, if we are becoming afraid of asking for something that is available then the Home office etc will look at the figures and say " hey, no one is using them so lets withdraw their availability" .

Next will be ????

 

 

So, go on and apply.

 

On a side note, do like the Bond derringer.