Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 33

Thread: L&B Thoughts

  1. #1

    L&B Thoughts

    Was having a talk with my local FEO this morning and I brought up the subject of granting handguns for humane dispatch. A definite no for two reasons.
    1. If you regularly require a handgun for humane dispatch we would consider that it could be because you are not a fit and competent person to be shooting deer.
    2. If you were requiring the handgun as an more convenient way to carry a firearm to carry out humane dispatch eg in thick cover where a rifle may get snagged up who would be looking after your rifle.

    I pointed out that as a level 2 qualified person I am by that standard a fit and competent person to shoot deer and that on many occasions that I have used my dog to track deer it has been shot by another person or hit by a vehicle and should not reflect on my abilities. I also pointed out that in the main shot deer that have run are dead on locating but we must still be in a position to deal with one that is not.
    On point two they have not or do not wish to consider that I could return my rifle if indeed the wounded beast was shot by myself to a secure location before tracing the wounded animal.
    He is going to raise the matter again and give me a call.

  2. #2
    What a load of cobblers!!!

    Just goes to show yet again the total and utter inconsistancy across the whole of the UK with FA law and how these people apply it.

    Believe it or not I was offered mine by Kent Police, and have used my dispatch pistol on a several occassions when with clients mostly on wounded Sika stags that my dog has bayed, and I do not take my rifle with me if I am with clients as they are paying me to guide them onto deer.

    I hope your FEO see's sense. Follows the recent thread about centralising the FA dept across Scotland by Red Dot................ best of luck I think you will need it if they bring it into force.

  3. #3
    Are they saying there no section 5 firearms granted for use on deer in your area then? If you are taking out clients or tracking on callouts for other people I can't see how their arguments stack up. If you don't do a lot of that kind of work then that often seems to be the reason for not granting,

  4. #4
    I have asked this before and didnt really get an answer but here goes:

    When do you use a pistol for despatch? Is it not easier to just use the rifle?
    I have enough crap to carry and wouldnt want another 2lbs on my belt.
    I cant see myself ever having the need for one (not that should misread that I dont think others should have them)

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by bewsher500 View Post
    I have asked this before and didnt really get an answer but here goes:

    When do you use a pistol for despatch? Is it not easier to just use the rifle?
    I have enough crap to carry and wouldnt want another 2lbs on my belt.
    I cant see myself ever having the need for one (not that should misread that I dont think others should have them)
    I think there are a number of scenarios where a dispatch pistol is of better use than a rifle, and it also depends on the individuals experience and their position, and by that i mean the kind of stalking they undertake, the ground and the species.

    For instance when guiding clients with a dog at foot and you have a wounded Red or Sika stag at last light in deep cover to contend with.

    RTA a pistol is a lot easier to carry than a rifle or shotgun.

    If you are a forestry worker or have a large cull to carry out with a night licence, a wounded stag in the dark with your dog baying it can be a problem with a rifle and scope, and a shotgun is a bit of a lump to carry round with you whilst stalking.

    These are some of the reasons why a dispatch weapon could be authorised and used, but it does depend IMO on the individual applying for it, there must be good reason. If Gazza has good reason, and it appears that he does then his FEO IMO is taking the wrong decision

  6. #6
    Malc,

    You give the answers I expect and can agree with. However in N.Yorks RTAs are dealt with by vets and not stalkers so we cant use that arguement.

    My main question though as I have never heard a view on it is how many deer do you think you have to shoot (if you are not a pro) before you would need a pistol. I maintain you would have to be into the hundreds per year before you can reasonably expect to have to NEED a pistol. If you are indeed competent then I would expect a very low percentage of deer to require a follow up and of those an even lower number to require a pistol specifically. Lets say 1 per 100 or less??

    As in any arguement these days you can apply a "risk analysis" approach and base need on probabilities. I personally accept the arguement that NO deer should have to suffer but the truth is that some will no matter what. I think that the simple situation is that hand guns were made illegal (wrongly IMO) and that the police perceive that the humane despatch arguement is being used in an attempt to flout the law.

    The problem with this perception is that it can result in a negative view of shooters in general from the public and powers that be if they can ever prove the perception to be correct. That is the real danger
    Last edited by shootingduckdog; 09-09-2011 at 15:36.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Gazza View Post
    1. If you regularly require a handgun for humane dispatch we would consider that it could be because you are not a fit and competent person to be shooting deer.
    2. If you were requiring the handgun as an more convenient way to carry a firearm to carry out humane dispatch eg in thick cover where a rifle may get snagged up who would be looking after your rifle.
    To point 1. The FEO obviously doens't do much shoot. there are plenty of occasions were a discret handgun's beter than a rifle, say RTA and he deer has made it into sombodies garden. A stalker walking down the street wih a rifle over his shoulder is more undesirable that having somebody walk down the road to the deer with a pistol in his pocket. Additionally trying to inject a wounded anuimal with a 150grain pill doing 2700fps up close and personal on possible hard ground is considerable more dodgy than a lead pistol bullet doing just over 1000 fps.

    To point2. Why would you assume I would have my rifle with me? I might have secured it in the back of he car and have the bolt in my pocket and returned with the dog. and have given he deer at least an 1 hour or so to stiffen up as per good practice etc......

    I hough you had to apply to the home office for section 5's and it was out of the control of the local force(?)( might be wrong), and that they are contacted just to make sure your no an axe murderer for a home visit if demed necessary?

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by shootingduckdog View Post
    My main question though as I have never heard a view on it is how many deer do you think you have to shoot (if you are not a pro) before you would need a pistol. I maintain you would have to be into the hundreds per year before you can reasonably expect to have to NEED a pistol. If you are indeed competent then I would expect a very low percentage of deer to require a follow up and of those an even lower number to require a pistol specifically. Lets say 1 per 100 or less??

    As in any arguement these days you can apply a "risk analysis" approach and base need on probabilities. I personally accept the arguement that NO deer should have to suffer but the truth is that some will no matter what. I think that the simple situation is that hand guns were made illegal (wrongly IMO) and that the police perceive that the humane despatch arguement is being used in an attempt to flout the law.

    The problem with this perception is that it can result in a negative view of shooters in general from the public and powers that be if they can ever prove the perception to be correct. That is the real danger
    I do not believe that the number of deer that you may require a despatch pistol for should be relevant.To me what is relevant is that you operate under conditions that may require a despatch pistol. In applying the risk analysis I am of the opinion that as well as being a more convenient way of carrying a firearm to be used to despatch a wounded animal the risk of carrying/using a firearm capable of doing the job within a confined area is very much lessened.
    I have never owned a handgun of any type therefore the arguement that I would wish to own such a firearm to flout the law is without basis. IMO the Police should be willing to look at all applications before deciding an outcome.

  9. #9
    Just out of interest SDD do the vets get remuneration,because the stalkers that take it on don't even get petrol money as far as I have been told.

    M

  10. #10
    Afraid I have to agree with the feo, if you want to dispatch a injured deer use a shotgun far better and safer, reading some of the comments some of you obviously have no experience of pistol converted to humane killers or pistols in general or I may suggest injured deer.
    To say you would sooner use a pistol round than a 150 grain rifle round says it all.
    And yes I do shoot pistol and would not like to try and hit a rta injured thrashing deer with one.

Similar Threads

  1. 7x65R - any thoughts please
    By Heym SR20 in forum Rifles & Calibres
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 28-11-2014, 10:06
  2. Seasonings any thoughts
    By Simjim33 in forum Carcass Prep, Butchery & Recipes
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 12-12-2011, 13:13
  3. Your thoughts.
    By High seat in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 11-12-2010, 21:24
  4. Your thoughts on this...........
    By basil in forum Carcass Prep, Butchery & Recipes
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-08-2010, 20:02
  5. Custom thoughts
    By 75 in forum Rifles & Calibres
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 27-01-2010, 09:21

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •