Jump to content

Lead ban & BASC


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

5 minutes ago, Tollerman said:

BASC members latest offer received today discounted Maserati only £55,500 .Don't think anyone in my little syndicate will be buying one any time soon as we will be saving up for a box of non toxic cartridges to share between us

Why? Just continue using lead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, as I've said, it doesn't end here does it? Every rifle calibre under 243 is now pretty worthless. You're 22lr's and 17's pointless, because pound to a penny, this fumbduck announcement is going to be seized on by every anti-shooting lobby you can think of. Five years? No chance, they'll want it now if the acknowledgement, wrongly, is that lead is so toxic as to go.

If you think that isn't going to happen you're as thick as the mince employed at Marford Mill.

So, what do we use in small calibers? Copper monolith for rabbit shooting, not likely. The cost will be through the roof and the ballistics are going to be ****. Your flat shooting 223 is now artillery and utterly pointless, not to mention no longer deer legal for small species. For anyone that owns an old lever action or vintage rifle you may as well have that deactivated now, as it's going to be totally pointless and impossible to shoot.

Call me a cynic but this smells like wholesale annexing of access for the ordinary shooter that doesn't pull down upwards of 50k plus a year and the transformation of shooting into a pastime for the elite.

Of course, you might say we can rely on our organisations to argue robustly that calibers under 6mm should be exempted. You could, but going by recent performance I would suggest you don't bet your house on it.

 

Edited by mick miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, mick miller said:

Well, as I've said, it doesn't end here does it? Every rifle calibre under 243 is now pretty worthless. You're 22lr's and 17's pointless, because pound to a penny, this fumbduck announcement is going to be seized on by every anti-shooting lobby you can think of. Five years? No chance, they'll want it now if the acknowledgement, wrongly, is that lead is so toxic as to go.

If you think that isn't going to happen you're as thick as the mince employed at Marford Mill.

So, what do we use in small calibers? Copper monolith for rabbit shooting, not likely. The cost will be through the roof and the ballistics are going to be ****. Your flat shooting 223 is now artillery and utterly pointless, not to mention no longer deer legal for small species. For anyone that owns an old lever action or vintage rifle you may as well have that deactivated now, as it's going to be totally pointless and impossible to shoot.

Call me a cynic but this smells like wholesale annexing of access for the ordinary shooter that doesn't pull down upwards of 50k plus a year and the transformation of shooting into a pastime for the elite.

Of course, you might say we can rely on our organisations to argue robustly that calibers under 6mm should be exempted. You could, but going by recent performance I would suggest you don't bet your house on it.

 

I don't think lead in rifle ammunition should be phased out however -  surely much less likely to be ingested than shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, clangerman said:

that’s ok your just annoyed what’s your thoughts on picking lead over plastic to ban first 

I have changed my mind a few times on this - it's a choice of two evils. My permission and syndicate (rough shoot) floods and we are lucky enough to have grey partridge which we are attempting to increase in number from a small base - we don't shoot them. I don't much like plastic but I already see it in the ground where it's been blown in or maybe even in some recycled topsoil/fertiliser. This season I have been shooting lead with fibre wad, steel with fibre wad (eley 32g 5's) in my early 80's o/u and Gamebore Mammoths (which I love) in the SXP. 

My current thinking is that I'd like to use the eley steel 5's for the drives that don't often see high birds on and mammoths on the geese/one drive they really get up on. I did get a complaint for taking my Winchester SXP on a day though - from a guest no less. On this land I feel plastic would be the lesser evil - if used for geese / higher birds - we have no livestock just grey partridge and a lot of fowl which lead can be a detriment to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, mossy835 said:

we have 5 years yet.so i will use lead till then,

:good:

For those who use steel and are happy using it, fine, I guess I could use steel but I tried to get away from anything above 1oz for my go-to cartridge on pigeons and 28g of 7.5 is my preferred choice on pigeons or blacks.

The thought of using 32g or 34g of 4s or 5s in steel does not appeal to me, partly due to me getting older and preferring a lighter load and secondly I realised some time back that I did not need such big loads to kill pigeons or blacks, so until I am forced to use steel I will continue using lead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Papercase said:

I have changed my mind a few times on this - it's a choice of two evils. My permission and syndicate (rough shoot) floods and we are lucky enough to have grey partridge which we are attempting to increase in number from a small base - we don't shoot them. I don't much like plastic but I already see it in the ground where it's been blown in or maybe even in some recycled topsoil/fertiliser. This season I have been shooting lead with fibre wad, steel with fibre wad (eley 32g 5's) in my early 80's o/u and Gamebore Mammoths (which I love) in the SXP. 

My current thinking is that I'd like to use the eley steel 5's for the drives that don't often see high birds on and mammoths on the geese/one drive they really get up on. I did get a complaint for taking my Winchester SXP on a day though - from a guest no less. On this land I feel plastic would be the lesser evil - if used for geese / higher birds - we have no livestock just grey partridge and a lot of fowl which lead can be a detriment to.

it’s definitely the plastic it was going ok last night until i fetched a few empties from the car to prove we pick them up BIG mistake they tore me to pieces lead or steel they didn’t care what we use it’s coming out of the plastic joe public does not like lucky it was fibre wad cases or i might have been lynched 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Papercase said:

I don't think lead in rifle ammunition should be phased out however -  surely much less likely to be ingested than shot.

Doesn't matter though does it. They will argue that fragments of lead move away from the point of entry and wound channel into the flesh. In fact, advocates of the copper monolithic are already doing this work for them. So, ergo, lead in any amount is toxic. Nothing can be left for carrion or raptors to eat, just as with shot.

I hear these same idiots argue that the cost too is acceptable, what does it matter if you only shoot 30 beasts a year? Yes, fine for you on your annual trip up to Scotland to ponce around a hillside dressed like a tweedy numpty, but what about the humble rabbit shooter with his 22lr, or anyone shooting upwards of 200 a year as part of a cull program? Or 3,000 a year at paper.

There is  a word going round in my head to best describe the idiots that suggested this without the groundwork in place first, it begins with 'T' and rhymes with 'flats'.

Edited by mick miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, clangerman said:

it’s definitely the plastic it was going ok last night until i fetched a few empties from the car to prove we pick them up BIG mistake they tore me to pieces lead or steel they didn’t care what we use it’s coming out of the plastic joe public does not like lucky it was fibre wad cases or i might have been lynched 

Can I ask one kind of a social gathering this was?  Seems....harsh.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've just been pointed toward this response to the statement from the cartridge manufacturers.

https://basc.org.uk/countryside-organisations-welcome-cartridge-manufacturers-commitment-to-the-future-of-game-shooting-in-the-uk/

The interpretation of the cartridge firms message is so selective I actually laughed loud enough to frighten my dog.  

I fear that we could be on the verge of an extremely destructive debacle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basc just don’t get it do they, did they not understand what the leading cartridge manufactures said.

The are struggling to find words that do not make them look more stupid than they already do.

Basc are no longer fit for purpose and have not been for some time but they are digging a very big hole for themselves this time.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For what it was worth, I called BASC today and let the poor woman at the end of the phone know in no uncertain terms what I thought of this mess. I was polite, and didnt direct anything towards her personally, but ensured that she knew how utterly let down I feel by the organisation that I pay to protect our sport, and further, how entirely inept they have been.

 

In my stupidity I thought that it was a given that this would have been discussed with cartridge manufacturer's - who, afterall, does not bother to seek counsel with the pepole upon who your assertions rest before they make a statement bound to be picked up by, and indeed pushed upon the national press and those who actively wish to do us harm?

 

If I had done something of this magnitude at work, I would not be asked to leave, I would have been escorted from the building. 

Edited by PeterHenry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, PeterHenry said:

For what it was worth, I called BASC today and let the poor woman at the end of the phone know in no uncertain terms what I thought of this mess. I was polite, and didnt direct anything towards her personally, but ensured that she knew how utterly let down I feel by the organisation that I pay to protect our sport, and further, how entirely inept they have been.

 

In my stupidity I thought that it was a given that this would have been discussed with cartridge manufacturer's - who, afterall, does not bother to seek counsel with the pepole upon who your assertions rest before they make a statement bound to be picked up by, and indeed pushed up the national press and those who actively wish to do us harm?

 

If I had done something of this magnitude at work, I would not be asked to leave, I would escorted from the building. 

 Well said 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mick miller said:

Well, as I've said, it doesn't end here does it? Every rifle calibre under 243 is now pretty worthless. You're 22lr's and 17's pointless, because pound to a penny, this fumbduck announcement is going to be seized on by every anti-shooting lobby you can think of. Five years? No chance, they'll want it now if the acknowledgement, wrongly, is that lead is so toxic as to go.

If you think that isn't going to happen you're as thick as the mince employed at Marford Mill.

So, what do we use in small calibers? Copper monolith for rabbit shooting, not likely. The cost will be through the roof and the ballistics are going to be ****. Your flat shooting 223 is now artillery and utterly pointless, not to mention no longer deer legal for small species. For anyone that owns an old lever action or vintage rifle you may as well have that deactivated now, as it's going to be totally pointless and impossible to shoot.

Call me a cynic but this smells like wholesale annexing of access for the ordinary shooter that doesn't pull down upwards of 50k plus a year and the transformation of shooting into a pastime for the elite.

Of course, you might say we can rely on our organisations to argue robustly that calibers under 6mm should be exempted. You could, but going by recent performance I would suggest you don't bet your house on it.

 

You really don't have a clue. 

There are already non lead alternatives for .22lr and viable alternatives for .223 and .243 that have been in use for a couple of years. 

As for the ballistics of monoliths being like "artillery." that's bull**** too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, mick miller said:

Doesn't matter though does it. They will argue that fragments of lead move away from the point of entry and wound channel into the flesh. In fact, advocates of the copper monolithic are already doing this work for them. So, ergo, lead in any amount is toxic. Nothing can be left for carrion or raptors to eat, just as with shot.

I hear these same idiots argue that the cost too is acceptable, what does it matter if you only shoot 30 beasts a year? Yes, fine for you on your annual trip up to Scotland to ponce around a hillside dressed like a tweedy numpty, but what about the humble rabbit shooter with his 22lr, or anyone shooting upwards of 200 a year as part of a cull program? Or 3,000 a year at paper.

There is  a word going round in my head to best describe the idiots that suggested this without the groundwork in place first, it begins with 'T' and rhymes with 'flats'.

More total ****. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...