375H&H - Good reason and UK use?

[Orion]

I stand corrected on the initial application then but the amended, and perfectly reasonable, AOLQ request was made shortly afterwards.

Maybe a reminder that this should be considered firstly “from the standpoint of the applicant rather from that of a possible objector” (Joy v Chief Constables of Dumfries and Galloway 1966) wouldn’t go amiss?

 

[stubear]

It does seem to be a bit of a postcode lottery at times!

Hampshire have always been very reasonable with me and I've currently got .25-06, .300WM and .45-70 all on open ticket and conditioned for deer and AOLQ. I have a few mates who have their .375s conditioned for UK use but equally another good friend of mine has been flatly refused by Northants FLO.

It genuinely concerns me to move outside of Hampshire and run into an FEO who thinks .300 Win and/or .45-70 is "too big" for UK deer use, and end up with a fight on my hands or not being able to use them at all. :-/

 

[njc110381]

It absolutely is a postcode lottery. In the twelve years I've held a FAC I've had some amazing conversations with other shooters, from guys being granted .338 Lapua for deer to others who have looked at my FAC and asked how the hell I've managed to get even simple things like an open FAC for my 6.5x55! One chap in question worked in a gun shop and had several stalking leases - I don't remember the force area but they had flatly refused to open up his .243 even though he'd been shooting for over double the time I had at the time.

I'm in Gloucestershire and have an open FAC and AOLQ on my .416 Rigby. I put in a very comprehensive variation with references from people I've shot with - A DSC accredited witness and another chap who owns a company that trains military and civilian trackers all over the world. I was told however that there are two other shooters in my force area who have a .416 conditioned for boar, and several others with .375.

You should get it for boar. I'm not so sure about deer. It's a good deer calibre though, I used to have one myself and thought it was great. Not excessive at all - big, but not too much. It's a lovely round to shoot. That said, it sounds like there are guys here having serious issues with the same request. To be honest that doesn't surprise me. The best I can do is wish you luck!

 

[zambezi]

It absolutely is a postcode lottery

Amen.

And for no intrinsic value. If only these issues were evidence lead and, after that, the FLOs read and applied the wisdom of the HOG uniformly.

In terms of evidence, Mick's post under another thread shows the vanishingly small number of incidents associated with lawfully held firearms.And I am certain there are zero incidents involving larger calibres. So whither the need for selective proscibing of calibres? And the HOG deals with DG calibre suitability for aolq per Orion's post above. So how it is that some FLOs get that right and some do not is a matter of concern and frustration.

 

[Dickie]

Because they make it up as they go along and there is no way of it being challenged or negotiated to a reasonable outcome.

 

[Vortex2019]

This is rather interesting.
Why is there a restriction on you using your .375 for range use(zeroing/practice) and restriction on ammo type.
What is the reasoning for the restriction, I can’t see what that can be. If you have a range that is suitable for that calibre and you have reason to poses there shouldn’t be an issue.

I have .375 H&H for sporting rifle and running boar comp. They are targets. Yes my “reason “ is target and we use far more powerful but I can have it and no restrictions.

If I can use it for target use, why can’t you use it for practice. Which you need on a safety and ethical shot placement stand point.

 

[scrumbag]

Got a 9.3x62 for ALQ with the MET

 

[zambezi]

Why is there a restriction on you using your .375 for range use(zeroing/practice) and restriction on ammo type.
What is the reasoning for the restriction, I can’t see what that can be. If you have a range that is suitable for that calibre and you have reason to poses there shouldn’t be an issue.

I have .375 H&H for sporting rifle and running boar comp. They are targets. Yes my “reason “ is target and we use far more powerful but I can have it and no restrictions.

If I can use it for target use, why can’t you use it for practice. Which you need on a safety and ethical shot placement stand point.

In my last communication to the FLO, I emphasised the twin points you raise here. It is utterly vital that I am able to test the [expanding] ammunition with which I will face game. My safety is on the line in the case of dangerous game and in respect of all quarry I, as an ethical hunter, want to be certain of ballistic performance of the munitions I use.

The FEO called me today and advised he was reviewing the prescriptive .375 wording on my FAC afresh. I do hope that all restrictions are removed and aolq granted as per the experience of most FAC holders on this forum. HOG 13.9 expressly states that "If an applicant is suitable to hold a firearm certificate and is deemed safe to do so, there is no requirement to restrict the quarry they shoot by the use of conditions imposed on the individual’s firearm certificate".

 

[Vortex2019]

Yes, it seems that he’s putting his own say on what the guidance is. I can’t see why you shouldn’t be allowed it.

It would be like me using mine for target, then take up Boar hunting and all of a sudden I can’t use it at the range or only with certain ammo.

Was expanding not taken off section 5, if so why the stipulation on expanding I mean wether it’s expanding or not it’s still going to kill in the wrong hands. ( humans I mean).

Where as if your going to shoot DG you need the practice with the loads you would be using in the field.

You wouldn’t get an armed police officer pass his qualifying shoot and then never be allowed to practice and sent into a high adrenaline situation.
Practice with firearms is fundamental safety training.

The rifle I bought was actually used by the former owner for hunting and target use.

 

[User00003]

In my last communication to the FLO, I emphasised the twin points you raise here. It is utterly vital that I am able to test the [expanding] ammunition with which I will face game. My safety is on the line in the case of dangerous game and in respect of all quarry I, as an ethical hunter, want to be certain of ballistic performance of the munitions I use.

I tried that approach with a 470NE, still declined me to use it in the UK

 

[Orion]

This is rather interesting.
Why is there a restriction on you using your .375 for range use(zeroing/practice) and restriction on ammo type.
What is the reasoning for the restriction, I can’t see what that can be. If you have a range that is suitable for that calibre and you have reason to poses there shouldn’t be an issue.

I have .375 H&H for sporting rifle and running boar comp. They are targets. Yes my “reason “ is target and we use far more powerful but I can have it and no restrictions.

If I can use it for target use, why can’t you use it for practice. Which you need on a safety and ethical shot placement stand point.

It’s because they are being selective in which parts of the HOG they are choosing to apply (and ignore). The ‘no U.K. expanding use’ is outdated anyway now that expanding is no longer S.5 and should simply be removed. The rest of zambezi’s woes are really inexplicable and indefensible, and can really only be attributed to certain individual(s) in the FLD not wishing to lose face and apply some common sense.

 

[Vortex2019]

I just can’t see some of the reasoning sometimes. I have been lucky so far I would say.
I mean what’s more use or attractive to a criminal my .22 semi or my single shot 375.

I would say the semi auto .22, far more damage could be done with that over all than a slow loading single shot Ruger No1.

It’s time they changed the licensing to the individual and not per firearm. If I can be trusted with a .22 I can be trusted with a .338 Lap etc.
As for what is Useful or correct for game there should be other bodies that decide what is and what isn’t suitable. It should be in HOG and not be interpreted at a whim.

 

[Orion]

I just can’t see some of the reasoning sometimes. I have been lucky so far I would say.
I mean what’s more use or attractive to a criminal my .22 semi or my single shot 375.

I would say the semi auto .22, far more damage could be done with that over all than a slow loading single shot Ruger No1.

It’s time they changed the licensing to the individual and not per firearm. If I can be trusted with a .22 I can be trusted with a .338 Lap etc.
As for what is Useful or correct for game there should be other bodies that decide what is and what isn’t suitable. It should be in HOG and not be interpreted at a whim.

There are already ample references in HOG to support the use of larger calibre rifles for UK AOLQ use. That some FLDs, and even some individuals within FLDs, are choosing to ignore them is inexcusable.

 

[zambezi]

Was expanding not taken off section 5, if so why the stipulation on expanding?

The only reason the FEO supplied for not allowing the use of expanding ammunition domestically was that expanding ammunition is banned at military ranges. I explained that no such prohibition exists at my local [private] club range. The FEO [to his credit] has recently called the secretary of my club and confirmed that fact.

It could be that D&C staffers have been labouring under a misunderstanding about the acceptable use of expanding ammunition at most UK range facilities. So perhaps that explains that part of the inappropriate FAC conditioning thus far. As I said in my last post, D&C are reviewing conditions and will advise me in the week ahead.

 

[Vortex2019]

Hope it goes well and it’s all sorted out. After all we are all vetted. If you can be trusted to own a firearm then you should be trusted to shoot it in this country.

 

[Tomdoun]

I have a .375 on my license and highland region stipulated it could not be used for anything other than zeroing in the UK.

 

[zambezi]

I have a .375 on my license and highland region stipulated it could not be used for anything other than zeroing in the UK.

Very strange since .375 use for "Red deer and boar" is cited specifically in the HOG. And it is hard to understand your situation given Redneck had his .375 granted aolq by French street in 15 minutes! Same FLO?

 

[Sinistral]

Very strange since .375 use for "Red deer and boar" is cited specifically in the HOG. And it is hard to understand your situation given Redneck had his .375 granted aolq by French street in 15 minutes! Same FLO?

I have my doubts on a couple of points.
First, regarding use of “expanding ammunition” is there something different about Bisley Range to MOD Ranges? I don’t know for sure. Expanding is permitted at Bisley, but not mono-metal generally. I thought the same rules applied to both.

https://nra.org.uk/nra-bisley/ranges/latest-range-information/range-regulations/#firearms-ammo

Secondly, the Guidance [p.124] does mention .375 H&H, but only as suitable for dangerous game. Having read your post #40 I can see now where licensing are coming from. According to the HOG table, deer & boar aren’t a valid primary use for a .375 but may of course be granted as AOLQ. Some .375 users obviously have been apart from you, but where exactly does it say this is a right?

 

[LeftHandGuy]

Expanding ammunition is used on MoD ranges. For one thing DDM zero on MoD ranges, and I believe a number are also used by Police forces who use expanding too.

What a stupid excuse....

 

[bogtrotter]

Some years ago now but I did have a client from the south who had a .375 conditioned for Scottish red stags.
However referring to recent posts regarding to the knock down power of large calibers over some of the smaller ones
I should add there was only one stag wounded and lost that year guess what caliber?
Correct the .375 which just goes to prove that its possible to have a runner with any caliber.