Thread: Any one have there B-cat?

I honestly can't see what harm could come of it. People hunt successfully with handguns in the US, and other places. As Bill said a pistol would be absolute gold as a bail gun. My grandfather used to use one. I guess it comes down to ignorance and fear at the end of the day. It's the control thing the rule makers and enforcers don't want to lose a grip on.

Originally Posted by Savage1

What I hate is that if you are trained by the government to use pistols and are authorised to carry pistols while working in the public then why the fuk do you need to get a civilian at the pistol club to say you are good enough to own a pistol. Really grinds my gears.

I can see why they aren't allowed for hunting, they aren't practical in comparison to a rifle. However shooting them on a farm I see no problem with but now I am beginning to blur the difference between the two in my own mind. Mind you some people would carry one around in their car the whole time and if caught would just say they were going hunting with it.

Making Pistols more accessible to the general public scares the shit out of me. But I do respect the people that use them for sport.

I dissagree.

Hunting pistols are as every bit as practical as a rifle.

I have a S&W model 22a that shoots as good as any .22 rifle I own. It would make an awesome hunting pistol for small game out to 100m.

The HMS shooters would also dissagree ... they accurately shoot out to 100m with the rimfires and 200m with the centerfires.
All these targets are animals for a reason. The sport evolved from Hunting.

I'd love to be able to Hunt with a handgun in NZ but are resigned to having to travell overseas to do so.

I was having a look around the net one day and cam across this
X-Large Frame (X) - Smith & Wesson

Its a .460 S&W Magnum Its got enough knock down to take elk / Wapiti out to 250m and reading on Accurate reloading forums people have taken large brown bears over 250 metres with it.

So i decided that i really wanted to own this gun, I went and talked to the arms officer and the local gun range.
I signed up and after completing in a whole load of sunday morning shooting and doing way over the required ( 12 shoots a year ) and having the Local guy give me the thumbs up for my handling and safety practices.

I was told that i had no chance of getting it because i am classed as a boy racer.
Now tbh I do go out cruising and out to the drags and skids but my only offence / ticket has been failed to give way to a railway vehicle.
I do have a fairly modified car but its 100% road legal and a certification for everything including wheels and ride height ( no its not dragging is ass on the ground )

Now i am not all that worried about it, I only wanted it because i liked that gun but couldn't shoot it up there anyway because it was to big for the range,
I was told that a guy had a desert eagle 50cal and lost his licence a, b and c after getting court shooting it up there.

It was fun and i got to shoot a lot of members different guns maybe one day I will try again, have to take up a police friendly friday night sport like drinking and heading to town

P.S if someone has the above handgun i would LOVE a shot

Originally Posted by Beavis

I honestly can't see what harm could come of it. People hunt successfully with handguns in the US, and other places. As Bill said a pistol would be absolute gold as a bail gun. My grandfather used to use one. I guess it comes down to ignorance and fear at the end of the day. It's the control thing the rule makers and enforcers don't want to lose a grip on.

I can see the harm, wounded animals because they cannot be handled as accurately as a rifle. Sure pistols are accurate but that all turns to shit in the heat of the moment. My rifle can shoot sub MOA but buggered if i can do that on goats. I guess maybe the law sees firearms in hunting as a tool, in which case in virtually every situation the role can be filled more safely and effectively with a rifle.

It doesn't come down to ignorance and fear, it comes down to how easy they are to conceal and how deadly they are.

It's easy to say it is a control thing wanted by the the enforcement officers and law makers when you are not the one who is having to deal with it when things go wrong.

Not trying to have a go, I just think it's important to look at it from the other side to.

But they are still giving pistol's to people to keep at their house and go to the range with B-cats all ready, The only thing that should change is that B class licence holders should be able to hunt with them, If your going to trust them to keep it at their house why cant you trust them to hunt with them?

I dont agree about the killing thing, how many people with rifles still screw up shots? I have never shot a pistol but im sure a regular pistol shooter will kill deer just as easy as me with a rifle.

Originally Posted by Savage1

I can see the harm, wounded animals because they cannot be handled as accurately as a rifle. Sure pistols are accurate but that all turns to shit in the heat of the moment. My rifle can shoot sub MOA but buggered if i can do that on goats. I guess maybe the law sees firearms in hunting as a tool, in which case in virtually every situation the role can be filled more safely and effectively with a rifle.

It doesn't come down to ignorance and fear, it comes down to how easy they are to conceal and how deadly they are.

It's easy to say it is a control thing wanted by the the enforcement officers and law makers when you are not the one who is having to deal with it when things go wrong.

Not trying to have a go, I just think it's important to look at it from the other side to.

Personally I would consider a rifle far more deadly if used for nefarious purposes. But Ï'm talking about a B endorsed shooter using their gun for hunting. Just cuz you may not have sufficent skill to use on for hunting, doesn't mean everbody else is the same.

Originally Posted by Beavis

Personally I would consider a rifle far more deadly if used for nefarious purposes. But Ï'm talking about a B endorsed shooter using their gun for hunting. Just cuz you may not have sufficent skill to use on for hunting, doesn't mean everbody else is the same.

+1

Originally Posted by Beavis

Personally I would consider a rifle far more deadly if used for nefarious purposes. But Ï'm talking about a B endorsed shooter using their gun for hunting. Just cuz you may not have sufficent skill to use on for hunting, doesn't mean everbody else is the same.

A person walking down the street, you can see if they have a rifle, not a pistol. It's the conceal-ability that makes the pistol so dangerous.

In reality a rifle is better for hunting, so it would be hard to get any change to allow pistols to be used in hunting as there is no need for them in that situation.

Although what you saying is right about concealment it isn't making a difference, They still give pistols to people with licence's whats stopping them hiding it? Opening to hunting is just making use of them, some people like hunting not just shooting paper. once again you seem to miss that people hunt with bows when rifles are far more better suited.Pistol hunting will just become another style of hunting. It is the person not the gun doing the damage. Don't blame tools for mans failure.

Originally Posted by Toby

Although what you saying is right about concealment it isn't making a difference, They still give pistols to people with licence's whats stopping them hiding it? Opening to hunting is just making use of them, some people like hunting not just shooting paper. once again you seem to miss that people hunt with bows when rifles are far more better suited.Pistol hunting will just become another style of hunting. It is the person not the gun doing the damage. Don't blame tools for mans failure.

By allowing them to be used for hunting will just attract a lot of undesirable people wanting them to go blazing around after goats in the bush. There is no need for them in hunting when we have rifles, fact. It would also give people an excuse to be carrying a pistol in their vehicle or while deer stalking, "I was just going hunting".

By restricting them to range use it means if you are really passionate about them you can still go shoot with them.

Bows cannot hold 17 arrows and be fired on semi auto one handed, all while being able to be slipped into your waistline where no one can see it.

Just because they are stopping people hunt with them doesn't mean someone isn't going to get one and go on a rampage.

Saying its fact that there is no need for them in hunting is like saying no need to hunt cause you can buy meat at a super market.

If people are found legit from the police to use a pistol then why stop them hunting? Its something they want to do, let em. they have a licence which im not sure but dont think it is easy to get so I dont think many weird people will get one.

Also a pistol will be great for pig hunting when you have dogs, there have been times where we get sick of carrying a rifle through thick bush.

I think savage is assuming that if people have a legit reason to have a pistol outside of a range they will carry them regularly for personal defense. I don't know about anybody else but just because I can, I don't carry a long gun around in my vehicle, or leave one loaded beside my bed. It won't matter if it attracts dodgy people, as they will still get vetted out at the club level. I think the majority of endorsement holders are not stupid enough to CCW. Hunting and CCW are two different things. I mean really if I carted a long gun around for self defense I could just tell the cop I'm going to the range or something.

Semi auto pistols that hold 17 rounds are much more effective when fired with two hands.
The majority of pistols that end up slipped in an offenders waistline where no one can see are cut down 22lr rifles and shotguns.
And I would hope undesirable people would be vetted and unable to get a license in the first place.
Anyway this is all hypothetical. I'm referring to a "what if" situation with licensed and trained sportsmen.

Originally Posted by Nzgunner

Semi auto pistols that hold 17 rounds are much more effective when fired with two hands.
The majority of pistols that end up slipped in an offenders waistline where no one can see are cut down 22lr rifles and shotguns.
And I would hope undesirable people would be vetted and unable to get a license in the first place.
Anyway this is all hypothetical. I'm referring to a "what if" situation with licensed and trained sportsmen.

+1 I don't see it as likely but maybe it could be something pistol shooters could work towards. I used a Browning Buckmark .22lr and a S&W 686 .357 once. Both were wickedly accurate when I had my shit together. Perfectly suitable for close range hunting. Would be less of a burden to carry too. Don't get me wrong I am a dyed in the wool rifle guy though. But they definatley hold merit as hunting arms.