In their response published in "Shooting Times" of 13 November to letters criticising their position on shot guns to cull deer the British Deer Society have again omitted or evaded mention of the use of slug ammunition. Why? Is it because they don't know about modern shot gun slug ammunition or that they didn't have it to test?

And why do they not mention that whilst lettered shot is classed as s2 and normal slug as s1 under the Firearms Act that soft point rifle ammunition is classed as s5? Normal carriers cannot carry soft point rifle ammunition only s5 carriers. For the remote smallholder the cost of s5 carriage would be horrendous!

Have BDS considered that? Not everybody lives in Hampshire. For some people their "local" gun shop is then two hours journey by car or even ferry added on top of the s5 cost of delivery to that gun shop!

Why should a smallholder be forced to this? He or she can hold lettered shot under a normal s2 Shot Gun Certificate and can apply for a cheaper "Co-Terminous" s1 Firearm Certificate to allow possession and use of s1 slug? No need to buy a rifle that will seldom be used. And as a matter of law their shot gun, regardless of whether shot or slug is used, remains as s2 and on the holder's Shot Gun Certificate.

The response by the BDS like its "tests" remains inadequate.

Richard

As ever, appreciate your forthright views.

I don't like seeing your personal contact details in open forum - too many malicious and opportunistic individuals around.

Can I suggest editing to remove these, maybe replace with a suggestion that respondants PM you if a direct response is required.

rgds Ian

quote:

The response by the BDS like its "tests" remains inadequate.

Richard

With you 100%.

I endorse Ian's recommendations regarding removal of your contact details.

H5

Done. I'd "cut and pasted" without scrolling down. Thank you.

Easily done. Good job you didn't post it up on somewhere like Guntrader where theres no edit provision.

Rifle slug 2800 ftlbs
LG individual ball 600 ftlbs (6)

223 approved by BDS @ 200yds 600 ftlbs

Easy to see how they may of got a little confused.

quote:

Originally posted by griff:
223 approved by BDS @ 200yds 600 ftlbs

No fair Griff!

BDS did NOT recommend the reduction in calibre requirement in the recent consultation!

Having said that, I am definately NOT in the camp that suggests shotguns should be banned for deer control.

Time and place - there is always a tool that is most appropriate to the time and place!

rgds Ian

Ian,
consider myself reprimanded!

griff

quote:

Originally posted by IanF:

Having said that, I am definately NOT in the camp that suggests shotguns should be banned for deer control.

Nor I unless it's a drilling or combination!

quote:

Originally posted by griff:
Rifle slug 2800 ftlbs
LG individual ball 600 ftlbs (6)

223 approved by BDS @ 200yds 600 ftlbs

Easy to see how they may of got a little confused.

Rifle slug 2800 ftlbs
LG individual ball 600 ftlbs (6)

Out of interest. At what distance from the muzzle?

I am an advocate of shotgun usage given the right circumstances.

Nor I unless it's a drilling or combination! [/QUOTE]


Now then - that is fighting talk!

Just because I'm known for my liking of european hardware!

Rgds Ian