The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

I was once informed by an RFD that if I came into the shop with a variation for .45 rifle I could have anything from .45 Colt to .45/120

Redcat

Just had a thought, every reloading die manufacturer produces .308 Winchester reloading dies but no one makes 7.62x51 NATO dies.........

Fedaykin wrote:

TRG-22 wrote: Indeed not - that's been Fedaykin. For the avoidance of any doubt, accusing someone of cheating is accusing them of being dishonest. (And as an aside, so is accusing them of being a troll.)

You can knock that off right now TRG-22! I DID NOT ACCUSE YOU OF CHEATING OR BEING A TROLL! I said that using a broad calibre definition to buy rifles in multiple calibres is a cheat, that is not even remotely an accusation against you. I take an extremely dim view of being accused of such things when I have been taking time to respond to your questions. Considering you don't even have a FAC I don't quite see how you take it as a personal accusation against you and if you look back more than once I clearly stated that we or I are not accusing you of being dishonest. I think you owe me an apology.

Nowhere have I said that you were accusing me of being a cheat, but you have used that term more than once to describe those who contravene what you call the spirit of the law. Those who are committing that contravention are actual people, shooters, FEOs etc, so you are accusing them of dishonesty, and if you look back at my previous posts it's quite clear that it is that practice I've been critical of, and have never suggested you're calling me dishonest.

Nor was my comment about being called a troll directed at you, I was replying to Sim G. But it was a general observation, showing a reason why I take such exception to that accusation.

TRG-22

1) Wind your neck it
2) Join a club
3) Get a FAC

I am not accusing anybody of dishonesty just pointing out that as it stands it is a cheat. You are clearly here to wind people up and I have nothing more to say to you.

redcat wrote:I was once informed by an RFD that if I came into the shop with a variation for .45 rifle I could have anything from .45 Colt to .45/120

Redcat

Variety is the spice of life!

J4mes wrote:

redcat wrote:I was once informed by an RFD that if I came into the shop with a variation for .45 rifle I could have anything from .45 Colt to .45/120

Redcat

Variety is the spice of life!

I really didn't want to comment on this topic again but at the risk of going around in circles again I would say that was because it just said ".45 rifle", a variation that just says "7.62 rifle" would, in the same way, also give a multitude of possibilities.

Fedaykin wrote:1) Wind your neck it

I hope that by that you don't mean I should not disagree with you.

2) Join a club
3) Get a FAC

Neither of those would change my attitude that if the letter of the law permits something, and those officially tasked with enforcing the law are officially OK with something which conforms to the letter of the law but not what you think is the "spirit" of it that you should not call those people dishonest.

I am not accusing anybody of dishonesty just pointing out that as it stands it is a cheat.

So you call the action a cheat:

Fedaykin wrote:The spirit of the law absolutely is contravened using that form of cheat

Fedaykin wrote:... it is using a cheat to buy whatever you want.

but want to claim that you are not thereby classing anybody who carries out the act as someone who is cheating?

I can't see how it is possible to perform an act which is a cheat and yet not be cheating. And despite your protestations to the contrary cheating is an act of dishonesty. If you accuse someone of cheating, then you are accusing them of being dishonest.

You are clearly here to wind people up

I've repeatedly said that I'm not. The fact that you, personally, may be getting wound up because you don't like me disagreeing with you, or because you don't like it said that an accusation of cheating is an accusation of dishonesty does not mean that that is my intention, or the reason I am here.

Given my repeated denials of that charge in various forms, for you to repeat it means that you don't believe what I have said, i.e. you think I am lying.

and I have nothing more to say to you.

Good.

No more totally evidence-free imputations from you that I am lying.

And here we go again!........

TRG-22 wrote:

Fedaykin wrote:1) Wind your neck it

I hope that by that you don't mean I should not disagree with you.

2) Join a club
3) Get a FAC

Neither of those would change my attitude that if the letter of the law permits something, and those officially tasked with enforcing the law are officially OK with something which conforms to the letter of the law but not what you think is the "spirit" of it that you should not call those people dishonest.

Well, in that case, *IF* you ever do get to join a club........and get to apply for a FAC, given where you live, you'll be applying to the Met......so you better get used to accepting the 'spirit' of the law, as that's what the Met FET will expect on the form, from my experience as an ex-Met licence holder.

Oh absolutely - I'm not saying, or expecting, that all forces will use the same "interpretation" as each other. But my attitude to someone who is allowed by his force to buy, say, an AR15-type semi-auto rifle in .22WMR is "good luck to him", not "that's cheating".