Big gun poll

[Coolhand]

I am a tad curious after reading these posts as I assume that in the UK you have to have permission to purchase a rifle which is chambered larger than what ? And you have to justify that cartridge?
If I was a bit more canny or dishonest I would have kept the 450/400 3" I had, but the lawyers thought otherwise. I am still looking for a replacement and it has nothing to do with practicality. I just want one !

Mike.

 

[Greener Jim]

Kind of mate.
You apply for a particular cartridge (sometimes just caliber depending on the area you live) and you explain why you want it. If the police feel you have justified 'good reason' you will get a slot on your license and you can then go out and buy something in that chambering.
However, it is very subjective. Some lads on here have .338 Lapua for deer whilst others would have to argue why they wanted bigger than 30-06.

Below is a screen shot from the Home Office Guidance which is there to give the Police an idea of what's what. As I said though it varies greatly from force to force as many people have 'dangerous game' 9.3mm's or .375's for use in the UK.
View attachment 58580

 

[Yorkie]

I seem to remember an 'Express' rifle club being formed about twenty years ago, I'm not sure it ever took off as such. My .375 H&H is enough for me!! Five or six shots rapid starts both my ears ringing and shoulder hurting. But, when an angry pig is coming at you it's very reassuring.

Hi Gunner.
I am glad someone else remembers this. I recall seeing some targets at Minsterly of Lion, Buffalo etc and asking what they were used for and being told it was for shooting the 'African' Rifles.

I have absolutely no NEED for a Big Bore Rifle but what the heck has that got do with anything? I WANT one! I am pretty sure however my FLD would not accept that.

When I did my level 1 a Gent from Ireland used a Blaser in .375 H+H! Needless to see we all wanted a go at the end of the Day. I fired 3 shots Prone and was surprised at how little it recoiled compared to what I was expecting. Winchester factory ammo.

Yorkie.

 

[welshwarrior]

Sounds like one hell of a collection.
You don't happen to have any phots of the 450 No2 double by any chance do you?

I will have a look it'll be analogue not digital, I was on a gap year in Southern Africa doing a bit of shooting and had to have a double it was not very special built on a Spanish SbS shotgun it worked but young a stupid when I returned to the UK the double and 458 where sold to finance a faster car (Morgan 4/4) wished I'd kept both now.

 

[Greener Jim]

Well at least it's a nice car you got. I think the 'working' grade double (and big bolt guns) have the most charm being honest. Maybe I've just read 'The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber' to many times and have just romanticised Wilson's "short, ugly, shockingly big-bored .505"

 

[Whitebeard]

My big regret about the handguns I owned was wsnting but not owning a 44mag. If you transpose this to rifles, yes I would like to own a 375h&h and a 416 rigby

I used to enjoy shooting heavy recoiling big bore handguns, and owned several 44 mags, culminating in a 5 1/2" barreled Ruger Super Blackhawk single action, that was a beast on par i would say with Yorkies Horten special.
However heavy recoiling rifles are not for me, i have fired a few at the range including a 50BMG Accuracy International.
I want to enjoy my shooting and be comfortable not feel like i am being shoulder barged by a prop forward each time i touch one off!

Ian.

 

[scrumbag]

I used to enjoy shooting heavy recoiling big bore handguns, and owned several 44 mags, culminating in a 5 1/2" barreled Ruger Super Blackhawk single action, that was a beast on par i would say with Yorkies Horten special.
However heavy recoiling rifles are not for me, i have fired a few at the range including a 50BMG Accuracy International.
I want to enjoy my shooting and be comfortable not feel like i am being shoulder barged by a prop forward each time i touch one off!

Ian.

I miss my 45 Colt s&w 25 as well

 

[Greener Jim]

I must admit I did not expect the poll to look like it does. I imagined at most there would be a a third voting yes.
Although yes has 'won' it's basically a draw.

Goes to show that half of us on here (extrapolated) would have a dangerous game rifle if they could justify it. I don't think that .458 Win Mag is over doing it that much in the context of wild boar, if only FEO's thought the same

 

[scrumbag]

I must admit I did not expect the poll to look like it does. I imagined at most there would be a a third voting yes.
Although yes has 'won' it's basically a draw.

Goes to show that half of us on here (extrapolated) would have a dangerous game rifle if they could justify it. I don't think that .458 Win Mag is over doing it that much in the context of wild boar, if only FEO's thought the same

I just wish we could scrap the requirement to justify each firearm we want. I think once cleared to own guns you should be allowed to buy what you like and just register it.

 

[Monkey Spanker]

I just wish we could scrap the requirement to justify each firearm we want. I think once cleared to own guns you should be allowed to buy what you like and just register it.

So you think it is ok to let some novice FAC holder go out and get a .50 cal or similar and then go out and shoot small deer with it?
I think you may have just summed up exactly why firearm justification restrictions are required!
MS

 

[Monkey Spanker]

I must admit I did not expect the poll to look like it does. I imagined at most there would be a a third voting yes.
Although yes has 'won' it's basically a draw.

Goes to show that half of us on here (extrapolated) would have a dangerous game rifle if they could justify it. I don't think that .458 Win Mag is over doing it that much in the context of wild boar, if only FEO's thought the same

I'm not so sure that you can apply such statistics to claim that half on here would have a dangerous game rifle?
Many folk would not have even read your post because of the title. Of those that have read it, mainly those with a whim for such a rifle would vote yes.
98% or statistics are either made up or wrong!
MS

 

[Alistair]

So you think it is ok to let some novice FAC holder go out and get a .50 cal or similar and then go out and shoot small deer with it?
I think you may have just summed up exactly why firearm justification restrictions are required!
MS

Um, pretty much yeah. I am certainly no expert, but surely the bloke is either safe with a rifle or he isn't. A backstop that is unquestionably safe for a .270 will also be safe for a 375 or a 458 lott for that matter.

Obviously there are reasons why a DG chambering isn't ideal for a muntjac; recoil, noise, ammo cost, rifle weight, the struggle to find a range to zero it at, not to mention the possibly excessive meat damage, but as far as safety and deer welfare (which should be as far as the polices remit goes) is concerned, then I see no issue. Trying to argue that a certain chambering is more dangerous purely because it is more powerful is silly when you get to deer legal calibres, the bloke behind the rifle is the only factor for that. People mock the system endlessly for promoting the myth that a .243 is magically safer for a first grant than .308 or whatever, so how is this any different?

I present to you the following:
You are sat in a highseat waiting for a Roe deer. One wanders into view at around 60yds.
a.) You check and the shot is good. You line up and fire your .223 (in Scotland obviously). The deer drops and the bullet ploughs into the ground 10yds behind, kicking up some small amount of debris. Excellent, steak for dinner!
b.) You check and the shot is good. You line up and fire your .577 tyrannosaur. The deer drops and the bullet ploughs into the ground 10 yds behind, kicking up 10 kilos of dirt. You massage your shoulder and moan about the cost of powder. Ah well, at least you won't need to get the mincing machine out.
Is a safer than b?
or in this situation
You have arrived at the end of a long hill stalk on reds. You see your quarry at the bottom of a gully around 150yds away.
a.) You check and the backstop looks good. You line up your .270, sort your bullet drop and fire. the deer walks a few steps and collapses. The bullet impacts the safe backstop. The stalker smiles
b.)You check and the backstop looks good. You line up your .500NE, sort your bullet drop and fire. The deer drops like a stone. The bullet impacts the safe backstop, forming an impressive hole. The stalker scowls, wiggling his finger in his ear and muttering about small penis syndrome.
Alternatively;
You are stalking in a forestry block and spot a fallow deer on the skyline. You look hard and decide that the ground behind drops of sharply and your only backstop is a reasonably substantial tree.
a.) You think hard, but ultimately decide it isn't worth the risk. You slip the front lens cover back into place on your .243 and try and get into a better position.
b.) F*ck no, the .375 H&H never even leaves your shoulder. There is always another day...

Can you list any situation in the field where a shot would be safe with a .243 where it wouldn't be with even a .500NE? If anyone can I would be genuinely interested to hear it, because I can't.
The only possible safety justification I can think of is that if the worst were to happen, you would have more chance of surviving being shot with a smaller bore, but I ask you, if the police think this is a genuine risk for an applicant, why are they granting him anything at all?

 

[scrumbag]

So you think it is ok to let some novice FAC holder go out and get a .50 cal or similar and then go out and shoot small deer with it?
I think you may have just summed up exactly why firearm justification restrictions are required!
MS

MS, I don't think so at all. Anyone who is suitable to own firearms will have to be sensible to own and shoot them safely and judged to have enough common sense not to just start hammering away with a .50 Cal at something totally unsuitable. Having lived in a country (Switzerland) where once you have your first license you may buy most things bar fully automatic as long as you register it, I've seen it work remarkably well. Another example is Canada where you show your license and buy a long gun. You don't even have to register it.

So, I resent being called "cuckoo". Please think a little before you type and remove a little of your ignorance. (Latter maybe tougher than the first)

Well done Alistair on a good post.

Scrummy

 

[Greener Jim]

I'm not so sure that you can apply such statistics to claim that half on here would have a dangerous game rifle?
Many folk would not have even read your post because of the title. Of those that have read it, mainly those with a whim for such a rifle would vote yes.
98% or statistics are either made up or wrong!
MS

You are aware that extrapolate means estimate right? It's purely a guess and I see your points.

 

[alberta boy]

So you think it is ok to let some novice FAC holder go out and get a .50 cal or similar and then go out and shoot small deer with it?
I think you may have just summed up exactly why firearm justification restrictions are required!
MS

As Scrumbag pointed out , we can buy any caliber weapon we want here without having to explain to anyone why we want it . To be honest , I can't remember seeing anyone packing 50 BMG chambered firearms for deer . First off , any large caliber rifles are very expensive , as is the ammo .Secondly , they're heavy . I don't want to pack a 15 to 20 pound rifle up the side of a mountain if I don't have to . Finally , since we can buy any caliber we like , it takes away the " I can't have it so I want it " factor .
I have a few friends who own a very few rifles lol . One in particular uses his old Brno in 375 H&H on everything . Those 270 gr bullets do surprisingly little meat damage on deer , work great on Moose and Elk and are very comforting to have when you run into Grizzlies . I guess that's why it's still around after all these years , to each their own .

AB

 

[Sauer90]

Only extrapolation to be had here is the OP "penis envy syndrome"
And MS is rhyming slang.

 

[Monkey Spanker]

Um, pretty much yeah. I am certainly no expert, but surely the bloke is either safe with a rifle or he isn't. A backstop that is unquestionably safe for a .270 will also be safe for a 375 or a 458 lott for that matter.

Obviously there are reasons why a DG chambering isn't ideal for a muntjac; recoil, noise, ammo cost, rifle weight, the struggle to find a range to zero it at, not to mention the possibly excessive meat damage, but as far as safety and deer welfare (which should be as far as the polices remit goes) is concerned, then I see no issue. Trying to argue that a certain chambering is more dangerous purely because it is more powerful is silly when you get to deer legal calibres, the bloke behind the rifle is the only factor for that. People mock the system endlessly for promoting the myth that a .243 is magically safer for a first grant than .308 or whatever, so how is this any different?

I present to you the following:
You are sat in a highseat waiting for a Roe deer. One wanders into view at around 60yds.
a.) You check and the shot is good. You line up and fire your .223 (in Scotland obviously). The deer drops and the bullet ploughs into the ground 10yds behind, kicking up some small amount of debris. Excellent, steak for dinner!
b.) You check and the shot is good. You line up and fire your .577 tyrannosaur. The deer drops and the bullet ploughs into the ground 10 yds behind, kicking up 10 kilos of dirt. You massage your shoulder and moan about the cost of powder. Ah well, at least you won't need to get the mincing machine out.
Is a safer than b?
or in this situation
You have arrived at the end of a long hill stalk on reds. You see your quarry at the bottom of a gully around 150yds away.
a.) You check and the backstop looks good. You line up your .270, sort your bullet drop and fire. the deer walks a few steps and collapses. The bullet impacts the safe backstop. The stalker smiles
b.)You check and the backstop looks good. You line up your .500NE, sort your bullet drop and fire. The deer drops like a stone. The bullet impacts the safe backstop, forming an impressive hole. The stalker scowls, wiggling his finger in his ear and muttering about small penis syndrome.
Alternatively;
You are stalking in a forestry block and spot a fallow deer on the skyline. You look hard and decide that the ground behind drops of sharply and your only backstop is a reasonably substantial tree.
a.) You think hard, but ultimately decide it isn't worth the risk. You slip the front lens cover back into place on your .243 and try and get into a better position.
b.) F*ck no, the .375 H&H never even leaves your shoulder. There is always another day...

Can you list any situation in the field where a shot would be safe with a .243 where it wouldn't be with even a .500NE? If anyone can I would be genuinely interested to hear it, because I can't.
The only possible safety justification I can think of is that if the worst were to happen, you would have more chance of surviving being shot with a smaller bore, but I ask you, if the police think this is a genuine risk for an applicant, why are they granting him anything at all?

It is fairly apparent that many of the less experienced folk on here have yet to experience "when a good backstop goes bad" phenomenon!! No backstop is 'unquestionably safe' as you put it, especially in general stalking scenarios. If you think a 45 degree sand bank on a range is safe, get yourself down to one when they are firing tracer at night and see where they all end up! Transpose that 45 degree bank to a 10 degree ploughed field and think again. I put it to you that in all of the scenarios above where you actually fired, the exiting bullet hits a piece of flint lying at a slight angle or an old plough shear!!! It has happened to me on several occasions and whatever was left of the bullet went away with a blood curdling ricochet noise like something out of a cowboy film! If you shoot enough deer, it WILL happen,and when it does you'll be glad you only fired a small frangible bullet rather than hundreds of grains of high energy tumbling lead believe me!
We live in a society governed by authority which is driven by risk assessment. Your closing statement admits that a large calibre is more dangerous than a small one if it goes wrong, but you limit the error to the applicant? Sadly, this is not always the case though, and the scenario I describe above can (and WILL) happen to the best of us if you do it enough. Sure, there is always a risk with any type of firearm, but the risk assessment process identifies with this and attempts to minimise it to as low aspossible.

As Scrumbag pointed out , we can buy any caliber weapon we want here without having to explain to anyone why we want it . To be honest , I can't remember seeing anyone packing 50 BMG chambered firearms for deer . First off , any large caliber rifles are very expensive , as is the ammo .Secondly , they're heavy . I don't want to pack a 15 to 20 pound rifle up the side of a mountain if I don't have to . Finally , since we can buy any caliber we like , it takes away the " I can't have it so I want it " factor .
I have a few friends who own a very few rifles lol . One in particular uses his old Brno in 375 H&H on everything . Those 270 gr bullets do surprisingly little meat damage on deer , work great on Moose and Elk and are very comforting to have when you run into Grizzlies . I guess that's why it's still around after all these years , to each their own .

AB

We live in different worlds my friend! Yours is vast and open with an accepted gun culture, as well as large and VERY dangerous animals.
Ours is a relatively small island inhabited by far too many people, most of whom are against guns! Our deer are generally quite small and probably the most dangerous animal about at the time (other than wild boar which some folk have). I would want a big gun as well if I thought there was a remote possibility of encountering a Grizzly, but the only grizzling you'll get over here is from folk that aren't allowed guns as big as they'd like!
MS

 

[Greener Jim]

Only extrapolation to be had here is the OP "penis envy syndrome"
And MS is rhyming slang.

Awww well that's just mean

 

[Dorsettaff]

It is fairly apparent that many of the less experienced folk on here have yet to experience "when a good backstop goes bad" phenomenon!! No backstop is 'unquestionably safe' as you put it, especially in general stalking scenarios. If you think a 45 degree sand bank on a range is safe, get yourself down to one when they are firing tracer at night and see where they all end up! Transpose that 45 degree bank to a 10 degree ploughed field and think again. I put it to you that in all of the scenarios above where you actually fired, the exiting bullet hits a piece of flint lying at a slight angle or an old plough shear!!! It has happened to me on several occasions and whatever was left of the bullet went away with a blood curdling ricochet noise like something out of a cowboy film! If you shoot enough deer, it WILL happen,and when it does you'll be glad you only fired a small frangible bullet rather than hundreds of grains of high energy tumbling lead believe me!

MS

+1 on that MS.

I have a 9.3 which is used for driven boar and plains game. I would love a .416 Rigby but it would only ever be brought out when faced with a buff or a hippo or similar.

Whilst I fought long and hard with the authorities on removing the conditions imposed on the use of the 9.3 for AOLQ on this Island, there have only been a handful of times when I would have used it and been happy that it was the most appropriate calibre and foremost it was safe.

When I hear a 150gr copper round ricochet off flint or hear the whining scream of a 85gr hollow point as it deflects off a baked hard track I am just glad that there wasn't 300 grains plus tumbling off on its own through God knows what

 

[Alistair]

It is fairly apparent that many of the less experienced folk on here have yet to experience "when a good backstop goes bad" phenomenon!! No backstop is 'unquestionably safe' as you put it, especially in general stalking scenarios. If you think a 45 degree sand bank on a range is safe, get yourself down to one when they are firing tracer at night and see where they all end up! Transpose that 45 degree bank to a 10 degree ploughed field and think again. I put it to you that in all of the scenarios above where you actually fired, the exiting bullet hits a piece of flint lying at a slight angle or an old plough shear!!! It has happened to me on several occasions and whatever was left of the bullet went away with a blood curdling ricochet noise like something out of a cowboy film! If you shoot enough deer, it WILL happen,and when it does you'll be glad you only fired a small frangible bullet rather than hundreds of grains of high energy tumbling lead believe me!
We live in a society governed by authority which is driven by risk assessment. Your closing statement admits that a large calibre is more dangerous than a small one if it goes wrong, but you limit the error to the applicant? Sadly, this is not always the case though, and the scenario I describe above can (and WILL) happen to the best of us if you do it enough. Sure, there is always a risk with any type of firearm, but the risk assessment process identifies with this and attempts to minimise it to as low aspossible.

MS

It's a good point, and I will freely admit that it wasn't something I had considered. It is also true that I am very far from the most experienced member on here, but I still maintain it isn't within the polices remit to make that decision for you.

As has already been covered, common sense should be applied BY THE APPLICANT as to whether an enormous great DG calibre is suitable for uk deer, and obviously it isn't, but it should still be the applicants choice. Do you base your current choice of kit around its ricochet potential? I doubt many do. If a ricochet does occur, and I have no doubt it does, you have effectively lost control of your projectile. That is a cock up. Not one you could have accounted for and not one you can really be held responsible for (unless it hits someone), but a cock up none the less. Therefore, once you have lost control, the actual projectile itself is secondary to luck in where it decides to go. Maybe a 500gr bullet will do more damage, and maybe it will fly further, but none of that matters as long as it doesn't hit something it shouldn't. If it does, no matter what the projectile is, you will lose your license, property will be damaged and most distressing of all, someone may need a trip to the hospital.

Having said that, this is more a mini rant on my part about what the responsibilities of the police actually are. I must make it clear that I personally don't think it is sensible to be using huge chamberings in the uk just for the hell of it, although I think there may be a case for slightly more 'tame' variants, such as .375, 9.3x74 etc for boar and the larger species. However, if someone wants to do it, is willing to put up with the obvious downsides and is considered safe enough to be trusted with a firearm, then why not.