22 Wmr?

[Deker 3,478]

Evening all, took a trip to Surrey guns this afternoon and had a good chat with Peter, the owner. Very helpful and knowledgeable chap. Turns out that with .22rf on my ticket, he would have no qualms about selling me a WMR. However, after further conversation I decided to go with the LR, better to follow my FAO's recommendation and keep him on side I think, especially in these early days.

 

So I am now the owner of a cz 452-2e in LR. Happy days.

 

Really can't recommend Surrey guns highly enough, aimed mainly at target shooters, but plenty of rifles, shotguns and bits & bobs for hunters too. And Peter couldn't have been more helpful. Definitely worth a visit if you're in the area.

 

:thumbs:

 

I believe/guess the RF listing on many peoples FAC against .22 is simply because of the fact many types of ammo can be fired from a .22lr; longs, shorts, caps, shotshells etc., can all run down a .22lr barrel. Many people do use other rounds in certain situations, which adds to the versatility of the .22lr, so a RF listing is potentially very useful for the shooter. So, not necessarily a mistake at all on the part of the regions, potentially a logical move designed to help the shooter and save them a lot of paperwork. Of course you cannot shoot a WMR down a .22lr, the cartridge is too fat to fit, yes, the WMR cartridge diameter is bigger than the lr, but I think we have established a .22RF listing is exactly that, and includes WMR.

 

Who knows for sure, just guessing really!

 

[shropshire dan 467]

Youll love the cz .22lr the .22 caliber is an excellent round sometimes underestimated by some. Rabbits out to 120 yards on a still day and foxes out to 60 yards. Also the quietness is what I love the most to be honest. Try various rounds but mine loves winchester subs and eley subs.

 

Enjoy

Atb

Dan

[charlie caller 3,654]

 

All jolly good chaps, but dont get caught out using your .22 wmr on ground passed for .22 lr, if you dont have an open ticket, I will guarantee somebody will come unstuck with this if something happens

the ticket will be issued on the ground you applied for it with and the calibre it was passed with, so anything named on your ticket will be cleared for the ground you applied with and 22 rimfire will be the round cleared for any approved land as its the minimum calibre in order to require an fac in the first place, 22 rimfire is 22 rimfire, 22cf is 22cf calibre specific is a choice of yours, if 243 is granted than a 243 can be purchased along with ammo of various weights and power,

 

Interesting that you mention .22cf, in my area at least, ground is not passed generically for .22cf, as an example, a pal of mine has two farms very close (not quite adjoining each other) one is passed for .22 hornet, the other .223 both .22 cf but if a man with a .223 and no open ticket used his .223 on ground passed for hornet only, he would be in trouble.

[shropshire dan 467]

That's the same here (west mercia) land to be passed for cf has to be individual calibres

[paulus 26]

That's the same here (west mercia) land to be passed for cf has to be individual calibres

every calibre has potential to do harm in the wrong hands regardless of size and power, if you require a 22cf for fox then i doubt weather mr fox would care if it was a 222 or 22.250 if you put in for a calibre specific variation then that is what you will get, if its a new application they will decide on the maximum calibre the land is permitted for, if that's 223 then why carn`t the applicant buy a 222 instead or any other 22cf for that matter.

[charlie caller 3,654]

 

That's the same here (west mercia) land to be passed for cf has to be individual calibres

every calibre has potential to do harm in the wrong hands regardless of size and power, if you require a 22cf for fox then i doubt weather mr fox would care if it was a 222 or 22.250 if you put in for a calibre specific variation then that is what you will get, if its a new application they will decide on the maximum calibre the land is permitted for, if that's 223 then why carn`t the applicant buy a 222 instead or any other 22cf for that matter.

 

He could buy a .222 but not a .22-250 or .220 swift.

[SportingShooter 0]

 

That's the same here (west mercia) land to be passed for cf has to be individual calibres

every calibre has potential to do harm in the wrong hands regardless of size and power, if you require a 22cf for fox then i doubt weather mr fox would care if it was a 222 or 22.250 if you put in for a calibre specific variation then that is what you will get, if its a new application they will decide on the maximum calibre the land is permitted for, if that's 223 then why carn`t the applicant buy a 222 instead or any other 22cf for that matter.

 

 

I agree with that Paulus,

 

I can't see any logical reason why if a ground is passed up to say .22-250 or .243 why someone can't buy any rifle under that designation.

 

It would reduce bureaucracy with the licensing department for a start and for RFDs without actually changing any risk factors.

[shropshire dan 467]

Completely agree

[Alsone 789]

+1

[Deker 3,478]

All jolly good chaps, but dont get caught out using your .22 wmr on ground passed for .22 lr, if you dont have an open ticket, I will guarantee somebody will come unstuck with this if something happens

 

Covered in #34

 

If the ground is passed for .22 RIMFIRE then it is passed for .22WMR because that is a .22 Rimfire. If the ground is passed for .22LR then it is passed for .22lr, and .22lr is not .22WMR.

 

[Deker 3,478]

 

 

That's the same here (west mercia) land to be passed for cf has to be individual calibres

every calibre has potential to do harm in the wrong hands regardless of size and power, if you require a 22cf for fox then i doubt weather mr fox would care if it was a 222 or 22.250 if you put in for a calibre specific variation then that is what you will get, if its a new application they will decide on the maximum calibre the land is permitted for, if that's 223 then why carn`t the applicant buy a 222 instead or any other 22cf for that matter.

 

I agree with that Paulus,

 

I can't see any logical reason why if a ground is passed up to say .22-250 or .243 why someone can't buy any rifle under that designation.

 

It would reduce bureaucracy with the licensing department for a start and for RFDs without actually changing any risk factors.

 

Ok, excuse me here, I have never had a closed FAC, but I thought they could!

 

If land is passed for say .223, then I thought you could use any calibre below that for it but not above, so, for example, .222 is fine but 22-250 isn't!

 

Is that wrong?

 

Seems a bit daft if you go to your region and say, is XYZ land passed for .222, no says the man, its passed for .308, if you want to use a .222 I'll have to go and check it! :hmm:

[SportingShooter 0]

Perhaps I've confused you Dek,

 

I meant that I can't see any reason why someone can't be issued a slot to acquire any calibre up to and including what the land is cleared for and within their good reason,

 

For instance, a piece of land is passed for up to .243 and the applicant wants to shoot Fox, Vermin and AOLQ, then I don't see why they are issued with a slot for a specific calibre. If it's passed for a .243 then surely they should be allowed to purchase anything .243 and under without any change in the risk factors.

 

To my mind, a less restrictive approach would save FEOs time as calibres would be categorised along side their good reasons. So if you then wanted to have Deer added and the ground on initial application is passed to say .308 or .30-06 then the applicant should be able to purchase anything between a .243 and the maximum calibre.

[paulus 26]

Perhaps I've confused you Dek,

 

I meant that I can't see any reason why someone can't be issued a slot to acquire any calibre up to and including what the land is cleared for and within their good reason,

 

For instance, a piece of land is passed for up to .243 and the applicant wants to shoot Fox, Vermin and AOLQ, then I don't see why they are issued with a slot for a specific calibre. If it's passed for a .243 then surely they should be allowed to purchase anything .243 and under without any change in the risk factors.

 

To my mind, a less restrictive approach would save FEOs time as calibres would be categorised along side their good reasons. So if you then wanted to have Deer added and the ground on initial application is passed to say .308 or .30-06 then the applicant should be able to purchase anything between a .243 and the maximum calibre.

been trying to work out how to say that for the last 30 minutes

[Deker 3,478]

 

Ok Cheers, I see where you are coming from!

 

Seems reasonable, the only possibly slight counter argument (I'm not suggesting it is a good one) is, First grant, No experience...here's a .308 because the land is cleared for it! :hmm:

 

[paulus 26]

 

Ok Cheers, I see where you are coming from!

 

Seems reasonable, the only possibly slight counter argument (I'm not suggesting it is a good one) is, First grant, No experience...here's a .308 because the land is cleared for it! :hmm:

 

my thoughts would be. you either deemed responsible enough to hold an fac or not as saying theres a difference would imply that different levels of responsibility are required for each calibre, would that mean a lad with a rimmy is deemed to be less responsible than a bloke with a 308