Hornady Amax

[Robin128]

Good arguments each way...I think I can see what RFD was trying to achieve.

I hope he has involved BASC.

I'll have a word with Mike on Monday.

:G

[Robin128]

Oh and if anyone can PM me his number, I'll let him know exactly how much money he's cost me....!! Masturbater!

http://www.devon-cornwall.police.uk/Onl ... fault.aspx

Give a piece of your mind Sim G but not too much...

:G

[kennyc]

sorry this may be just me, but I fail to see what this Mike Squires did that was wrong? he is on the committee to represent shooters and brought up a subject that has caused many acrimonious debates on various forums ie: whether certain bullets sold as target bullets can or even should be used on animals, the law is unclear and as agreed by the Firearms licensing operations officer the law is unenforceable, as I see it he was doing his job and trying to demonstrate to the committee yet another piece of poor legislation. A thing we are all constantly moaning about! so all of a sudden he is the villain of the piece? because there has been a balls up and target shooters have been using bullets that are to all intents and purposes identical in construction to expanding bullets for game use? and now its possible that the Home Office is going to re designate some bullets as expanding ? sorry but that is a risk you take when trying to get change with bureaucrats, sometimes they jump in the wrong direction! does this mean we should stop trying to change the status quo?
I would suggest people read the minutes of the meeting it looks to me like this Mike Squires is doing a pretty good job, of course I always did like a good tar and feathering

I am a bit late replying here so I echo SimG's comments. The bullets are different the Amax plastic tip is shorter, the manufacturers do not say they are expanding bullets and one person 'sectioning' two bullets is hardly a scientific study. Pull the ends out with a pair of pliers and it is instantly obvious they are different, so one man's observations have effectively put many hundreds if not thousands of UK shooters in jeopardy of breaking the law. What about hollow point target ammunition. US JAG stopped them being used in Iraq for a period as they decided they were expanding. So what happens if Mr Squires questions that next? OK he just raised the subject and the D&C chose to pursue but the deed is done now.

I still think the venom expressed against Mike Squires is uncalled for and childish, he raised in a meeting what a lot of people have been questioning for years, OK D&C decided to use that as an excuse to run to the HO for a reclassification of the A-max, big deal! was that his fault? if so what is the point of having representatives on these committees ? if you are going to lynch them every time things go south?

[Sandgroper]

At my zeroing session last Sunday I was testing subsonic loads with 168gn AMAX's

These two bullets were recovered after going through a plywood target, then carpet and then into the sand.

No expansion.

This was the result after hitting a 3mm steel plate which it did not penetrate.

As you can see the core completely separated - something you don't want in a expanding bullet. This was the only one fired at the plate that day, but I have at least one other example the same results.

The V-Max and AMAX may look similar when sectioned, but they might be constructed differently as regarding the bonding of the core to the jacket.

Now, this is no way meant to swing the arguement one way or the other. These are just my observations from a day at the range.

[kennyc]

contrary to some peoples statements, this is lifted from Hornadys site

A-MAX® NOW featuring AMP™ bullet jackets!

Designed by match shooters for match shooters. With an ultra-low drag tip, our A-Max match bullets feature an aerodynamic secant ogive that delivers flat trajectories with excellent uniformity and concentricity. Find out more...

Rapid, explosive expansion with limited penetration.
[b]Recommended muzzle velocity range: 2000+ fps.[/b]
These bullets are not recommended for hunting medium and large game.
(presumably because they are liable to explode and not penetrate if the target is too close)

chose which bit of the advert supports your view!

personally I see no problem with using expanding ammo for target use (if allowed by the competition rules) I also think that the expanding ammunition rule was like so many other laws brought in without due thought and logic, however the only way you will change the law is if you keep the stupidity of it in the spotlight, trying to stick your head in the sand and argue black is white is not going to cut it!

[ovenpaa]

I still think the venom expressed against Mike Squires is uncalled for and childish, he raised in a meeting what a lot of people have been questioning for years, OK D&C decided to use that as an excuse to run to the HO for a reclassification of the A-max, big deal! was that his fault? if so what is the point of having representatives on these committees ? if you are going to lynch them every time things go south?

I would like to think my views on this are more moderated. My concern is one man made an observation with very little data to back it up and as a consequence the Home Office legal types have apparently declared the Amax section 5.

Now if this is the case I am technically breaking the law by holding these projectiles through no fault of my own. I very much doubt I am going to have an armed response team smashing the front door in over this and the financial loss to me is minimal as we only had Amax's in the house to experiment with however I do wonder how many legitimate shooters are using these things and have several hundred in the cupboard. Taking it a stage further this also means they will be illegal to shoot at many ranges as they are now deemed to be expanding.

No venom here, more sadness that a member of our shooting community has caused such a knee jerk reaction.

[Christel]

I googled Mike Squires and a link to another FB thread came up so he'sbeen named and shamed before.

Google Mike Spires RFD and you'll get the minutes from the original meeting. This weeks minutes aren't available yet.

Post a link please? I can't find any mention of him elsewhere on this forum apart from on this Amax thread?

I googled his name and found his name on another forum...

[kennyc]

I still think the venom expressed against Mike Squires is uncalled for and childish, he raised in a meeting what a lot of people have been questioning for years, OK D&C decided to use that as an excuse to run to the HO for a reclassification of the A-max, big deal! was that his fault? if so what is the point of having representatives on these committees ? if you are going to lynch them every time things go south?

I would like to think my views on this are more moderated. My concern is one man made an observation with very little data to back it up and as a consequence the Home Office legal types have apparently declared the Amax section 5.

Now if this is the case I am technically breaking the law by holding these projectiles through no fault of my own. I very much doubt I am going to have an armed response team smashing the front door in over this and the financial loss to me is minimal as we only had Amax's in the house to experiment with however I do wonder how many legitimate shooters are using these things and have several hundred in the cupboard. Taking it a stage further this also means they will be illegal to shoot at many ranges as they are now deemed to be expanding.

No venom here, more sadness that a member of our shooting community has caused such a knee jerk reaction.

sorry Dave but from where I am sitting, the only knee jerk responses have been from the shooting community against Mr Squires, the law is an ass we all know that, yet this guy has been insulted and vilified in print for something that at this point we don't even know he caused! for all we know this was something brought about by all the threads on various forums extolling/decrying the virtues of the Amax bullet for hunting! it says he raised the question of the difficulty of identifying an expanding bullet when alongside a match bullet such as the Amax, did that conversation come out of the blue or was the meeting already headed in that direction? we don't know the minutes are not specific enough to tell! sorry got to go out now will log back on later Ken

[Mr_Logic]

But, the golden rule for dealing with the police is never to give them anything which they can use against you.

They seem to have missed the point - the legislation says about bullets DESIGNED to expand. The amax is not so designed; it just does so. The HPBT match work rather nicely on rabbit/fox also. Should we ban them? Clearly, the whole law is not fit for purpose. But better to be quiet than risk the police being morons, yet again.

[Robin128]

How would this be handled by The Police...in terms of enforcement...are we all to get a letter telling us to turn them in at a RFD?

And are those like myself with expanding already on ticket legally using them on ranges???

:-P