Sonicdmb73
Well-Known Member
Seems that way, he’s made yet another reply that again states I misrepresented him. Yet totally avoids my comment or the point I was making.He's on some kind of mission to save the human kind from other people's opinions and experiences.
Lives one post at a time, doesn't read (or misinterprets) what others write, contradicts himself. And then gets angry if somebody points this out. Wants "to debate" on matters that others are not concerned in or there's nothing to argue.
I don’t dislike 243, I owned two for over ten years between them. I still have the dies and some bullets, on the off chance I buy another (or my mate might end up with the components) but that’s beside the point.
My point is that I believe the 243 will become obsolete (in that you can’t buy the range of or suitable ammunition) by shops not stocking ammunition. Then people won’t buy the rifles, so there’ll be less demand for ammunition. So less will be stocked and so on.
Unless the Government specifically bans a seizes them there’ll be no compensation either.