Mercer & NRA Against Reloading

[kennyc]

Kenny I totally get what you're saying; but if reloading does become an issue (and I'm getting the feeling it could), then we can't afford to either bury our heads in the sand, or over-complicate the issue...

The example I gave was just off the top of my head...any real materials would need to be reviewed and scrutinised, to ensure they were fit for purpose...

...and when I say 'fit for purpose', I'm not talking about the 'ideal' but about the reality.

just for clarity, I am not having "a go" at your suggestion per se, I just feel very strongly about multiple guess exams being used as a measure of competence.

[pnuk]

Any sort of course could be passed by anyone but the most vacant. It's easy enough to answer questions or do an exam on the day about things you've just learned. Look how many complete numpties pass their driving tests (I know a girl who passed on her eighth time and definitely can't drive safely)

I would think it would be far more indicative to ask people pertinent questions randomly and pull some of their ammo and check whether it falls within spec. Testing people randomly and really just asking them to talk though how they reload and what they understand about it would show both true comprehension and practical application.
Most in my club reload and I trust almost all of them to be knowledgable enough to be safe. One of them I don't and therefore avoid being on the bench to the right of him ( on the left of him is probably the safest place in Bisley, he has a great deal of mass that I'm guessing would absorb a small nuke let alone one rifles worth of shrapnel :-)) I've heard him discuss his 'load development' and he seems to have a bit of knowledge which in this example is definitely a dangerous thing.

Having said that, long may reloading be allowed. The most dangerous point of a Bisley shoot is the drive there.

[Dougan]

Kenny I totally get what you're saying; but if reloading does become an issue (and I'm getting the feeling it could), then we can't afford to either bury our heads in the sand, or over-complicate the issue...

The example I gave was just off the top of my head...any real materials would need to be reviewed and scrutinised, to ensure they were fit for purpose...

...and when I say 'fit for purpose', I'm not talking about the 'ideal' but about the reality.

just for clarity, I am not having "a go" at your suggestion per se, I just feel very strongly about multiple guess exams being used as a measure of competence.

No problem Kenny, and your (and other peoples) feelings about multiple choice exams are quite valid...

...My concern is that if some sort of certification does happen then the cost will be born by the shooters - I've done a quick costing, and if you base it on 5000+ loaders, you're talking about a lot of money...probably the biggest cost would be the staff who give the presentations and administer the test...if you require experts who can evaluate/mark a test/exam subjectively, and take the responsibility for who they pass, then you can double or treble what they would need paying.

[Dougan]

Any sort of course could be passed by anyone but the most vacant. It's easy enough to answer questions or do an exam on the day about things you've just learned. Look how many complete numpties pass their driving tests (I know a girl who passed on her eighth time and definitely can't drive safely)

I would think it would be far more indicative to ask people pertinent questions randomly and pull some of their ammo and check whether it falls within spec. Testing people randomly and really just asking them to talk though how they reload and what they understand about it would show both true comprehension and practical application.
Most in my club reload and I trust almost all of them to be knowledgable enough to be safe. One of them I don't and therefore avoid being on the bench to the right of him ( on the left of him is probably the safest place in Bisley, he has a great deal of mass that I'm guessing would absorb a small nuke let alone one rifles worth of shrapnel :-)) I've heard him discuss his 'load development' and he seems to have a bit of knowledge which in this example is definitely a dangerous thing.

Having said that, long may reloading be allowed. The most dangerous point of a Bisley shoot is the drive there.

Random sampling and testing isn't really viable as it isn't consistent and leads to accusations of unfairness.

I agree with you though about the drive to Bisley - Shooting is incredibly safe in comparison to things like driving and diving...I've known people who've died doing both, but have never heard of a loading fatality in the UK...

...and I don't think we should allow the hazards of reloading to be over-blown or exaggerated (that would be counterproductive for us all) - If it actually comes to it, then personally I'd find out what the minimum requirement of the MOD would be, and work towards that.

[lapua338]

I'm sick to death of reading this thread now.

The answer is a simple one... those of us that reload safely continue to do so.

There is no problem to solve. In my opinion, if you can't reload safely following what is essentially simple principles then you shouldn't be doing it.

It is impossible to legislate for unsafe practices.

I for one, do not wish to be involved in excessively complicated administrative procedures in an attempt by the NRA to increase the size and scope of their influence to the detriment of the shooting community. It may be a cynical viewpoint but that's where I see us heading and I do hope I'm proved wrong.

[kennyc]

Any sort of course could be passed by anyone but the most vacant. It's easy enough to answer questions or do an exam on the day about things you've just learned. Look how many complete numpties pass their driving tests (I know a girl who passed on her eighth time and definitely can't drive safely)

I would think it would be far more indicative to ask people pertinent questions randomly and pull some of their ammo and check whether it falls within spec. Testing people randomly and really just asking them to talk though how they reload and what they understand about it would show both true comprehension and practical application.
Most in my club reload and I trust almost all of them to be knowledgable enough to be safe. One of them I don't and therefore avoid being on the bench to the right of him ( on the left of him is probably the safest place in Bisley, he has a great deal of mass that I'm guessing would absorb a small nuke let alone one rifles worth of shrapnel :-)) I've heard him discuss his 'load development' and he seems to have a bit of knowledge which in this example is definitely a dangerous thing.

Having said that, long may reloading be allowed. The most dangerous point of a Bisley shoot is the drive there.

Random sampling and testing isn't really viable as it isn't consistent and leads to accusations of unfairness.

I agree with you though about the drive to Bisley - Shooting is incredibly safe in comparison to things like driving and diving...I've known people who've died doing both, but have never heard of a loading fatality in the UK...

...and I don't think we should allow the hazards of reloading to be over-blown or exaggerated (that would be counterproductive for us all) - If it actually comes to it, then personally I'd find out what the minimum requirement of the MOD would be, and work towards that.

I'm pretty certain the minimum was Maggot loading bags into a light gun with his boot and sock off so he could keep count with his hands full tongueout tongueout

[Mr_Logic]

There does come a time when the right answer is f*** off. I think we're there.

[karen]

Er sounds like a whole load of you haven't read the AGM minutes just jumped to conclusions!

Try reading them and understanding the main issue - the NRA is on your side! :cool2:

[Mr_Logic]

The point is the comment in the journal, hardly positive to reloading. Said earlier in the thread that I hoped it was Andrew Mercer getting a comment wrong and it sounds like this is the case. Equally, if reloading is identified as a safety risk there will be those who want it regulated / banned etc. this must not be allowed.

[karen]

The point is the comment in the journal, hardly positive to reloading. Said earlier in the thread that I hoped it was Andrew Mercer getting a comment wrong and it sounds like this is the case. Equally, if reloading is identified as a safety risk there will be those who want it regulated / banned etc. this must not be allowed.

Read the AGM minutes!

http://www.nra.org.uk/common/asp/genera ... ategory=13

And if the MoD decide that reloading is "a safety risk" it will be the NRA fighting your corner (as they did with certification a few years back) so you can continue shooting.

Saying "this must not be allowed" and other anti-NRA comments (by others) isn't going to change the MoD's mind if they decide to ban reloaded ammo on their ranges.

This is one of those times when all of you need to SUPPORT the NRA (whatever you think of them).