The PH Gun Cabinet - Shooting Matters
Discussion
Prohibiting said:
What do you mean by an extender? Barrel extender? Because no... I'm allowed it as it is, a proper pistol.
If you look in the second picture, I've screwed on the threaded adaptor ready for the silencer
.
Regarding semi-auto pistol for humane dispatch; I was originally authorised a .22 2-shot revolver as the Police will try to do anything within their power not to grant a semi-auto pistol. I proved that I needed a pistol in order to accommodate a sound moderator (obviously you can't screw a sound mod onto a revolver) and after quoting various sections of the Firearms Act and Home Office guidelines they had no choice. This has been virtually a year long battle with a lot of determination to prove the Police wrong and I submitted a lot of proof/evidence of why I needed a silenced pistol as a suitable tool for the job. The noise generated by the revolver was scaring and causing distress to my livestock.
I've noticed Firearms issuing getting tougher every year talking to various people and I reckon they'll try to rule out semi-autos completely for new applications as the years go on. They'll probably bring in a new Firearms Amendment Act within 10 years IMO.
I'm intrigued - what are you shooting, and why do you need a moderator - would subsonics not do the job? And if I may dig a bit deeper, why does it have to be a pistol? If you look in the second picture, I've screwed on the threaded adaptor ready for the silencer
.Regarding semi-auto pistol for humane dispatch; I was originally authorised a .22 2-shot revolver as the Police will try to do anything within their power not to grant a semi-auto pistol. I proved that I needed a pistol in order to accommodate a sound moderator (obviously you can't screw a sound mod onto a revolver) and after quoting various sections of the Firearms Act and Home Office guidelines they had no choice. This has been virtually a year long battle with a lot of determination to prove the Police wrong and I submitted a lot of proof/evidence of why I needed a silenced pistol as a suitable tool for the job. The noise generated by the revolver was scaring and causing distress to my livestock.
I've noticed Firearms issuing getting tougher every year talking to various people and I reckon they'll try to rule out semi-autos completely for new applications as the years go on. They'll probably bring in a new Firearms Amendment Act within 10 years IMO.
Edited by Prohibiting on Sunday 6th November 10:06
minghis said:
Prohibiting said:
What do you mean by an extender? Barrel extender? Because no... I'm allowed it as it is, a proper pistol.
If you look in the second picture, I've screwed on the threaded adaptor ready for the silencer.
Regarding semi-auto pistol for humane dispatch; I was originally authorised a .22 2-shot revolver as the Police will try to do anything within their power not to grant a semi-auto pistol. I proved that I needed a pistol in order to accommodate a sound moderator (obviously you can't screw a sound mod onto a revolver) and after quoting various sections of the Firearms Act and Home Office guidelines they had no choice. This has been virtually a year long battle with a lot of determination to prove the Police wrong and I submitted a lot of proof/evidence of why I needed a silenced pistol as a suitable tool for the job. The noise generated by the revolver was scaring and causing distress to my livestock.
I've noticed Firearms issuing getting tougher every year talking to various people and I reckon they'll try to rule out semi-autos completely for new applications as the years go on. They'll probably bring in a new Firearms Amendment Act within 10 years IMO.
I'm intrigued - what are you shooting, and why do you need a moderator - would subsonics not do the job? And if I may dig a bit deeper, why does it have to be a pistol? If you look in the second picture, I've screwed on the threaded adaptor ready for the silencer
.Regarding semi-auto pistol for humane dispatch; I was originally authorised a .22 2-shot revolver as the Police will try to do anything within their power not to grant a semi-auto pistol. I proved that I needed a pistol in order to accommodate a sound moderator (obviously you can't screw a sound mod onto a revolver) and after quoting various sections of the Firearms Act and Home Office guidelines they had no choice. This has been virtually a year long battle with a lot of determination to prove the Police wrong and I submitted a lot of proof/evidence of why I needed a silenced pistol as a suitable tool for the job. The noise generated by the revolver was scaring and causing distress to my livestock.
I've noticed Firearms issuing getting tougher every year talking to various people and I reckon they'll try to rule out semi-autos completely for new applications as the years go on. They'll probably bring in a new Firearms Amendment Act within 10 years IMO.
Edited by Prohibiting on Sunday 6th November 10:06
Prohibiting said:
What do you mean by an extender? Barrel extender? Because no... I'm allowed it as it is, a proper pistol.
If you look in the second picture, I've screwed on the threaded adaptor ready for the silencer.
Regarding semi-auto pistol for humane dispatch; I was originally authorised a .22 2-shot revolver as the Police will try to do anything within their power not to grant a semi-auto pistol. I proved that I needed a pistol in order to accommodate a sound moderator (obviously you can't screw a sound mod onto a revolver) and after quoting various sections of the Firearms Act and Home Office guidelines they had no choice. This has been virtually a year long battle with a lot of determination to prove the Police wrong and I submitted a lot of proof/evidence of why I needed a silenced pistol as a suitable tool for the job. The noise generated by the revolver was scaring and causing distress to my livestock.
I've noticed Firearms issuing getting tougher every year talking to various people and I reckon they'll try to rule out semi-autos completely for new applications as the years go on. They'll probably bring in a new Firearms Amendment Act within 10 years IMO.
fascinating there is a guy at our club with a glock in .357 sig. according to him he wanted a rifle for the job on the farm but they denied him, so he applied for 9mm and they said to dangerous likely to pass through etc but granted .357 sig If you look in the second picture, I've screwed on the threaded adaptor ready for the silencer
.Regarding semi-auto pistol for humane dispatch; I was originally authorised a .22 2-shot revolver as the Police will try to do anything within their power not to grant a semi-auto pistol. I proved that I needed a pistol in order to accommodate a sound moderator (obviously you can't screw a sound mod onto a revolver) and after quoting various sections of the Firearms Act and Home Office guidelines they had no choice. This has been virtually a year long battle with a lot of determination to prove the Police wrong and I submitted a lot of proof/evidence of why I needed a silenced pistol as a suitable tool for the job. The noise generated by the revolver was scaring and causing distress to my livestock.
I've noticed Firearms issuing getting tougher every year talking to various people and I reckon they'll try to rule out semi-autos completely for new applications as the years go on. They'll probably bring in a new Firearms Amendment Act within 10 years IMO.
Edited by Prohibiting on Sunday 6th November 10:06
aeropilot said:
minghis said:
Prohibiting said:
What do you mean by an extender? Barrel extender? Because no... I'm allowed it as it is, a proper pistol.
If you look in the second picture, I've screwed on the threaded adaptor ready for the silencer.
Regarding semi-auto pistol for humane dispatch; I was originally authorised a .22 2-shot revolver as the Police will try to do anything within their power not to grant a semi-auto pistol. I proved that I needed a pistol in order to accommodate a sound moderator (obviously you can't screw a sound mod onto a revolver) and after quoting various sections of the Firearms Act and Home Office guidelines they had no choice. This has been virtually a year long battle with a lot of determination to prove the Police wrong and I submitted a lot of proof/evidence of why I needed a silenced pistol as a suitable tool for the job. The noise generated by the revolver was scaring and causing distress to my livestock.
I've noticed Firearms issuing getting tougher every year talking to various people and I reckon they'll try to rule out semi-autos completely for new applications as the years go on. They'll probably bring in a new Firearms Amendment Act within 10 years IMO.
I'm intrigued - what are you shooting, and why do you need a moderator - would subsonics not do the job? And if I may dig a bit deeper, why does it have to be a pistol? If you look in the second picture, I've screwed on the threaded adaptor ready for the silencer
.Regarding semi-auto pistol for humane dispatch; I was originally authorised a .22 2-shot revolver as the Police will try to do anything within their power not to grant a semi-auto pistol. I proved that I needed a pistol in order to accommodate a sound moderator (obviously you can't screw a sound mod onto a revolver) and after quoting various sections of the Firearms Act and Home Office guidelines they had no choice. This has been virtually a year long battle with a lot of determination to prove the Police wrong and I submitted a lot of proof/evidence of why I needed a silenced pistol as a suitable tool for the job. The noise generated by the revolver was scaring and causing distress to my livestock.
I've noticed Firearms issuing getting tougher every year talking to various people and I reckon they'll try to rule out semi-autos completely for new applications as the years go on. They'll probably bring in a new Firearms Amendment Act within 10 years IMO.
Edited by Prohibiting on Sunday 6th November 10:06
Have I missed something? I asked what he was shooting (dispatching, I got that bit but what) and why subsonics would not be suitable.. can't see anywhere in his posts the answers to those questions.
I don't mind being open about this...
I'll be using it as a tool for humanely dispatching caged fox in close proximity to free range poultry.
There's no noticeable difference between subsonics and ordinary bullets when fired from an unmoderated firearm. For a subsonic to be effective you need to be using a sound moderator.
That's it in a nutshell but usually they will only issue a silenced pistol to vets working at race courses (2015 Home Office guidelines on Firearms Licensing). Most farmers (and deer stalkers hunting deer) will have a .410 shotgun (or if they're clued up on the subject and want to have the best tool, a revolver) for dispatching sick/injured cattle. If someone was to go a step further and ask for a sound moderatored pistol, cattle don't get particularly distressed by noise so the police and their "experts/contacts" say that there is no need for a sound moderator so the ones that apply settle for a revolver.
Firing a loud firearm close to poultry can cause them major distress and panic hence why I need a firearm to be as quiet as possible. There's nothing more effective and safe at doing the job than poking a handgun through the cage and putting a well placed bullet into the head of a fox.
Any more questions?
I'll be using it as a tool for humanely dispatching caged fox in close proximity to free range poultry.
There's no noticeable difference between subsonics and ordinary bullets when fired from an unmoderated firearm. For a subsonic to be effective you need to be using a sound moderator.
That's it in a nutshell but usually they will only issue a silenced pistol to vets working at race courses (2015 Home Office guidelines on Firearms Licensing). Most farmers (and deer stalkers hunting deer) will have a .410 shotgun (or if they're clued up on the subject and want to have the best tool, a revolver) for dispatching sick/injured cattle. If someone was to go a step further and ask for a sound moderatored pistol, cattle don't get particularly distressed by noise so the police and their "experts/contacts" say that there is no need for a sound moderator so the ones that apply settle for a revolver.
Firing a loud firearm close to poultry can cause them major distress and panic hence why I need a firearm to be as quiet as possible. There's nothing more effective and safe at doing the job than poking a handgun through the cage and putting a well placed bullet into the head of a fox.
Any more questions?
Edited by Prohibiting on Sunday 6th November 22:06
Prohibiting said:
I don't mind being open about this...
I'll be using it as a tool for humanely dispatching caged fox in close proximity to free range poultry.
There's no noticeable difference between subsonics and ordinary bullets when fired from an unmoderated firearm. For a subsonic to be effective you need to be using a sound moderator.
That's it in a nutshell but usually they will only issue a silenced pistol to vets working at race courses (2015 Home Office guidelines on Firearms Licensing). Most farmers (and deer stalkers hunting deer) will have a .410 shotgun (or if they're clued up on the subject and want to have the best tool, a revolver) for dispatching sick/injured cattle. If someone was to go a step further and ask for a sound moderatored pistol, cattle don't get particularly distressed by noise so the police and their "experts/contacts" say that there is no need for a sound moderator so the ones that apply settle for a revolver.
Firing a loud firearm close to poultry can cause them major distress and panic hence why I need a firearm to be as quiet as possible. There's nothing more effective and safe at doing the job than poking a handgun through the cage and putting a well placed bullet into the head of a fox.
Any more questions?
No - my scratch has been itched! Agree about the subsonic point, they are loud without a moderator, I find them to be more of a pop than a crack as you would with HV's. And the little rimfire is the prefect tool for the job you need doing. I'll be using it as a tool for humanely dispatching caged fox in close proximity to free range poultry.
There's no noticeable difference between subsonics and ordinary bullets when fired from an unmoderated firearm. For a subsonic to be effective you need to be using a sound moderator.
That's it in a nutshell but usually they will only issue a silenced pistol to vets working at race courses (2015 Home Office guidelines on Firearms Licensing). Most farmers (and deer stalkers hunting deer) will have a .410 shotgun (or if they're clued up on the subject and want to have the best tool, a revolver) for dispatching sick/injured cattle. If someone was to go a step further and ask for a sound moderatored pistol, cattle don't get particularly distressed by noise so the police and their "experts/contacts" say that there is no need for a sound moderator so the ones that apply settle for a revolver.
Firing a loud firearm close to poultry can cause them major distress and panic hence why I need a firearm to be as quiet as possible. There's nothing more effective and safe at doing the job than poking a handgun through the cage and putting a well placed bullet into the head of a fox.
Any more questions?
Edited by Prohibiting on Sunday 6th November 22:06
Sounds straight forward when I put it like that, but nope, the Police were having none of it. I was prepared to go to Court over this. Anyway, they told me that I'm the only person in the whole South West region of the UK including South Wales, who isn't a vet who has been granted permission for a silenced pistol....
The simple matter is that there's not enough working space. It 'could' be done but it would be very difficult and you're a lot more likely to miss resulting in an unhumane dispatch if you don't hit right in the head. A handgun is simply the easiest and most efficient tool so obviously I would favour that over struggling with a rifle and trying to sight it up!
Also, a frightened fox inside a large cage (0.8m X 1.5m) very rarely sits still for you. The last one I dispatched I had to wait 6 minutes for it to freeze for literally a split second for me to take a shot. There's no wait you could sight it quickly enough with a rifle.
My only concern, and this is a genuine concern, is that a sound moderator weakens the power of a bullet. Subsonics are already lacking power compared to a high velocity bullet. I will be very curious to see how a silenced pistol handling a .22LR subsonic deals with a larger male fox. Hopefully it's enough.
Also, a frightened fox inside a large cage (0.8m X 1.5m) very rarely sits still for you. The last one I dispatched I had to wait 6 minutes for it to freeze for literally a split second for me to take a shot. There's no wait you could sight it quickly enough with a rifle.
My only concern, and this is a genuine concern, is that a sound moderator weakens the power of a bullet. Subsonics are already lacking power compared to a high velocity bullet. I will be very curious to see how a silenced pistol handling a .22LR subsonic deals with a larger male fox. Hopefully it's enough.
Prohibiting said:
My only concern, and this is a genuine concern, is that a sound moderator weakens the power of a bullet. Subsonics are already lacking power compared to a high velocity bullet. I will be very curious to see how a silenced pistol handling a .22LR subsonic deals with a larger male fox. Hopefully it's enough.
I have been looking into this recently. My 308 has a 20" barrel I've been shooting at 600m so I didn't want to reduce velocity. Apparently modern suppressors do not slow the projectile down. The first surpressors had o rings that touched the bullet.
Plenty of YouTube videos where people have tested this out with a chronograph.
Prohibiting said:
The simple matter is that there's not enough working space. It 'could' be done but it would be very difficult and you're a lot more likely to miss resulting in an unhumane dispatch if you don't hit right in the head. A handgun is simply the easiest and most efficient tool so obviously I would favour that over struggling with a rifle and trying to sight it up!
Also, a frightened fox inside a large cage (0.8m X 1.5m) very rarely sits still for you. The last one I dispatched I had to wait 6 minutes for it to freeze for literally a split second for me to take a shot. There's no wait you could sight it quickly enough with a rifle.
My only concern, and this is a genuine concern, is that a sound moderator weakens the power of a bullet. Subsonics are already lacking power compared to a high velocity bullet. I will be very curious to see how a silenced pistol handling a .22LR subsonic deals with a larger male fox. Hopefully it's enough.
Fair enough regarding working space etc.Also, a frightened fox inside a large cage (0.8m X 1.5m) very rarely sits still for you. The last one I dispatched I had to wait 6 minutes for it to freeze for literally a split second for me to take a shot. There's no wait you could sight it quickly enough with a rifle.
My only concern, and this is a genuine concern, is that a sound moderator weakens the power of a bullet. Subsonics are already lacking power compared to a high velocity bullet. I will be very curious to see how a silenced pistol handling a .22LR subsonic deals with a larger male fox. Hopefully it's enough.
As said above suppressors don't slow the bullets down so don't worry about that, in fact they can actually increase velocity slightly in some cases.
Prohibiting said:
I've never posted on this thread before so here is my collection:
.22 Ruger 'new model' Single Six revolver (2-shot restriction for humane dispatch)
.223 Tikka T3
12G semi-auto Browning Maxus (5-shot)
12G O/U Browning B725 black edition
If anyone has a .22 revolver authorisation on their FAC, I'm selling the revolver as a require a sound moderated .22 pistol.
http://www.gunstar.co.uk/ruger-new-model-single-si...
Spot the Brexiteer..22 Ruger 'new model' Single Six revolver (2-shot restriction for humane dispatch)
.223 Tikka T3
12G semi-auto Browning Maxus (5-shot)
12G O/U Browning B725 black edition
If anyone has a .22 revolver authorisation on their FAC, I'm selling the revolver as a require a sound moderated .22 pistol.
http://www.gunstar.co.uk/ruger-new-model-single-si...
Prohibiting said:
My only concern, and this is a genuine concern, is that a sound moderator weakens the power of a bullet. Subsonics are already lacking power compared to a high velocity bullet. I will be very curious to see how a silenced pistol handling a .22LR subsonic deals with a larger male fox. Hopefully it's enough.
Not sure if this helps but I have a moderator for my Savage mk2 and with cci subsonic the point of impact is the same with or without the moderator at 100m.After a couple of years shooting a Caesar Guerini and enjoying the progress with my Ellipse Evo Ascent.
I have treated myself to a new toy
Its a 32 inch Multi choke Parcours.
I have added some weight to the barrels as it was abit whippy on steadier targets.
I have treated myself to a new toy
Its a 32 inch Multi choke Parcours.
I have added some weight to the barrels as it was abit whippy on steadier targets.
Edited by Jem0911 on Tuesday 8th November 13:34
Prohibiting said:
My only concern, and this is a genuine concern, is that a sound moderator weakens the power of a bullet. Subsonics are already lacking power compared to a high velocity bullet. I will be very curious to see how a silenced pistol handling a .22LR subsonic deals with a larger male fox. Hopefully it's enough.
No need to worry. A subsonic will kill a fox without any trouble at close range. I`ve shot a few up to 60, 70 yrds with subs and killed them instantly.Shot placement is the key.
Brads67 said:
No need to worry. A subsonic will kill a fox without any trouble at close range. I`ve shot a few up to 60, 70 yrds with subs and killed them instantly.
Shot placement is the key.
Big different between a rifle vs pistol. Subsonic lead doesn't even expand upon impact as it lacks the volicity when fired from a pistol. But still, I should be good for 2 metres Shot placement is the key.
. Just did a few test shots- boy it's quiet. Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff