Expanding Missiles

[Deerless]

So, have. Missed something or have the rules changed again?
Got my variation back today and noticed several issues that worry me. I currently have 6.5 and 17 HMR, both on open ticket for many years and with any lawful quarry.
I applied for a .222, which has come back with a closed ticket land restriction and only for Muntjac and Chinese Water Deer in England & Wales.
(I asked for Fox/Vermin)

My main concern is that the ammunition section is titled ( Ammunition including expanding ammunition and expanding missiles) authorised to be possessed at any one time. The concearn is that this implies there is a restriction on the amount of expanding missiles/bullets I can possess and that they count towards my overall total, not just ammunition.
As I reload, this is very restrictive, especially as they haven’t authorised me to possess any .222 at all.

I’m not aware of any other amendments since 2017.

 

[andyk]

The expanding bullets thing no longer applies other than to pistol ammo. If it says that it must be some sort of hangover where they’re using old wording.

I’d just ignore.

 

[palmer_mike]

There is no restriction on expanding bullets. Used to be but not now

 

[25 Sharps]

There is no restriction on expanding bullets. Used to be but not now

Not strictly true, there is still restriction on pistol calibres. From memory the wording is along the lines of them being restricted unless they are only commonly loaded for rifles.

 

[rarms]

I think his point is it says missiles, suggesting any non reloaded bullet heads in his possession may count towards the total

 

[25 Sharps]

I think his point is it says missiles, suggesting any non reloaded bullet heads in his possession may count towards the total

Agreed.

He just needs to email his FLD to get clarification, that way when they come back and say there is no restriction he has it writing.

He needs to contact them anyway to clarify the condition on the .222 (probably just suggest they add AOLQ) and get some ammunition added for the .222.

 

[TringSaint]

That used to be the case but changed quite sometime ago iirc.

 

[WalkedUp]

Just email your department with a picture of the relevant conditions and ammunition allowance etc. State what your preferred wording is, refer to the HO guidance on condition wording, and ask for it to be updated.

 

[shakey jake]

I think his point is it says missiles, suggesting any non reloaded bullet heads in his possession may count towards the total

Be alot easier iff people called bullets bullets, head other end of a cartridge, missilles fired by the army and navy, projectile need to be in motion.
Why it becomes so complicated is beyond me

 

[palmer_mike]

Not strictly true, there is still restriction on pistol calibres. From memory the wording is along the lines of them being restricted unless they are only commonly loaded for rifles.

Not sure that’s true. Expanding bullets for .44 are not subject to such controls as they are commonly used in lever guns (but also suitable for pistol)

 

[timbrayford]

Not sure that’s true. Expanding bullets for .44 are not subject to such controls as they are commonly used in lever guns (but also suitable for pistol)

Not allowed for pistols still, but legal if loaded into a rifle.

 

[SimpleSimon]

Not strictly true, there is still restriction on pistol calibres. From memory the wording is along the lines of them being restricted unless they are only commonly loaded for rifles.

Not sure that’s true. Expanding bullets for .44 are not subject to such controls as they are commonly used in lever guns (but also suitable for pistol)

Not allowed for pistols still, but legal if loaded into a rifle.

I sought some guidance on this from BASC a while ago. The short version of the story is that he seemed to think expanding "pistol" bullets were only restricted if they're not suitable for a cartridge commonly found in rifle chambers. Similar to what @25 Sharps said, but a less restrictive variation.

I was able to buy them in the post, the only caveat being that the retailer asked (which BASC said wasn't necessary ) to see a photo of my certificate proving I had a rifle that the bullets would suit.

 

[Nimrod1960]

So they issue a variation to allow you a .222 but no the ammo ! are we employing idiots ?

Clearly we are.

On my last variation I asked for a .308 and discussed with the FEO saying I would either get another barrel for my S&L or another rifle. He agreed to word the ticket as one or the other but not both. The back office staff came back to me saying I couldn’t have two of the same caliber.
I literally could not get her to understand the concept of either but not both.
In the end gave up and told them put a rifle down.

 

[palmer_mike]

Not allowed for pistols still, but legal if loaded into a rifle.

Agree, although the post I was replying to stated only allowed it for rifle only. Therefore not allowed if dual purpose (I don’t think this is the case)

In case anyone is interested, the list of bullets that CANNOT be loaded for use in a rifle is fairly small……

 

[25 Sharps]

Agree, although the post I was replying to stated only allowed it for rifle only. Therefore not allowed if dual purpose (I don’t think this is the case)

In case anyone is interested, the list of bullets that CANNOT be loaded for use in a rifle is fairly small……

Yes, you were right, refreshed my memory and they’re still restricted if they are for loaded pistol only. Which as you say, is fairly limited as anything that can be shot in a pistol can be shot in a suitably chambered rifle!

 

[kenbro]

So they issue a variation to allow you a .222 but no the ammo ! are we employing idiots ?

Clearly we are.

On my last variation I asked for a .308 and discussed with the FEO saying I would either get another barrel for my S&L or another rifle. He agreed to word the ticket as one or the other but not both. The back office staff came back to me saying I couldn’t have two of the same caliber.
I literally could not get her to understand the concept of either but not both.
In the end gave up and told them put a rifle down.

Couple of years back I put in a variation for a .222 Remington.
Duly arrived approved and the ammunition allowance was:
X number rounds of .222.
X number rounds of .222 Remington.
KB.

 

[Nimrod1960]

Couple of years back I put in a variation for a .222 Remington.
Duly arrived approved and the ammunition allowance was:
X number rounds of .222.
X number rounds of .222 Remington.
KB.

 

[T2662075]

So, have. Missed something or have the rules changed again?
Got my variation back today and noticed several issues that worry me. I currently have 6.5 and 17 HMR, both on open ticket for many years and with any lawful quarry.
I applied for a .222, which has come back with a closed ticket land restriction and only for Muntjac and Chinese Water Deer in England & Wales.
(I asked for Fox/Vermin)

My main concern is that the ammunition section is titled ( Ammunition including expanding ammunition and expanding missiles) authorised to be possessed at any one time. The concearn is that this implies there is a restriction on the amount of expanding missiles/bullets I can possess and that they count towards my overall total, not just ammunition.
As I reload, this is very restrictive, especially as they haven’t authorised me to possess any .222 at all.

I’m not aware of any other amendments since 2017.

This tripped me up too last time I renewed. Thankfully the renewal chap said its changed and sorted the paperwork for me.
But it would be nice if changes like this where pushed out to all so we are aware of them, rather than tripping us up or playing catch up.