Yeah, it happens here and there. I was told by a major Canadian airgun vendor a couple of years ago that exemptions can be granted by municipalities for pest management contractors such as those which send shooters to major public markets at night to reduce rat and pigeon populations. Without these guys' work, our food would be half-eaten and/or covered in rodent and bird excrement. Of course the general public doesn't want to hear about that! Powerful airguns with silencers often being used in urban areas are essential for national food safety, but that runs counter to the political narrative. As with just about everything else in this modern age, the contradictions are only too obvious to anyone with a grain of sense and actually paying attention.
Scope height so high above barrel on some air guns .
- Thread starter Rokon1976
- Start date
Yeah, it happens here and there. I was told by a major Canadian airgun vendor a couple of years ago that exemptions can be granted by municipalities for pest management contractors such as those which send shooters to major public markets at night to reduce rat and pigeon populations. Without these guys' work, our food would be half-eaten and/or covered in rodent and bird excrement. Of course the general public doesn't want to hear about that! Powerful airguns with silencers often being used in urban areas are essential for national food safety, but that runs counter to the political narrative. As with just about everything else in this modern age, the contradictions are only too obvious to anyone with a grain of sense and actually paying attention.
Corporations can gain exemptions so that they do not need to comply with federal firearms laws? Is there any evidence for that other than what appears to be in videos?
This suggests that municipalities have the authority to override federal law with regard to firearms regulations. That doesn't make sense.
I realise that it must be more complicated than that. Probably some communication going on between federal and municipal authorities around how essential rodent and pigeon control really is in urban areas and exemptions are granted. Perhaps reluctantly, who knows? I mean, look at the situation over the past year with various police chiefs and others popping up on both sides of the pistol ban proposal. Tory is all about that, and our local idiot mayor Kennedy Stewart (who the heck gives their baby the first name 'Kennedy' and why didn't he go with 'Ken' from early years?), besides completely abandoning his solemn election promise of over 40,000 new below market housing units to be made available during his term in office, wasted little time jumping on board. Municipal governments and city hall departments are a mixed bag, with some decent folk who can actually think for themselves and others (politicians) who just can't.
One personal example; more than 20 years ago I was asked by a landlord to get full liability coverage for my upstairs suite, as I was seeing musicians in my workshop regularly and they were concerned about potential for lawsuits should someone fall down stairs or suchlike. Before I could get insurance I needed a business license, so I contacted city hall. Or I should say, I tried to contact city hall. A week of frustration on the phone, wasting hours leaving messages in various departments, getting the run-around any time anyone actually answered a phone and none of my voicemails replied to. Finally one woman picked up the phone in the licensing department and was very brief but polite about it. She'd heard a couple of my messages and said "You didn't call us. I never talked to you. Please do not call again." I tried to interject, to ask for some explanation, as I really wanted to have a legit business license for working at home. She repeated those words exactly, then said "Thank you, and good day." I sat down and thought about it a little and realised that she was going out of her way to help me, to offer a kindness. Essentially, between the lines, she was saying 'there is no way you are going to get licensed to work at home and if you persist an officer will have to come to your home and issue a cease and desist order' or something along those lines. She knew perfectly well that thousands upon thousands of self-employed people work at home, but that doing so at least in some lines of work was in violation of bylaws regarding use of property. So she told me to shut up and get on with my life. I did some fancy talking with the insurer, the same company my landlord was using for their fire and other insurance, and they relented and 'allowed' me to pay $600/year for the first year with $2,000,000 liability coverage against 3rd party injuries. The next year they doubled to $1,200, and I paid that. The third year they doubled it again... and I cancelled, without telling the landlord, as I simply didn't/don't earn enough to pay that kind of money for insurance. Some months later I had to move out anyway, as the landlord lost one parent and needed to have the other move in so he could take care of her. Haven't had insurance since, as musicians are mostly poor and I don't have the inclination to charge anything close to the going store rates for my work.
Long-winded, sorry. And I know only slightly relevant to the topic in terms of bureaucracies. But it goes, I think, towards explaining why public markets and the like are able to hire airgun-using pest controllers with their silencer and night vision equipped modern airguns to patrol the properties at night and eliminate pests. I was told that this happens in all major population centres in the Lower Mainland. Surely the feds are aware of it, as it must be happening in all our cities... unless consumers are happy about finding partially nibbled foods and rodent/bird droppings for added flavour, which seems unlikely. The population health outcomes of a disease outbreak originating with such animals should be abundantly clear, especially now that we're in the midst of a pandemic from that very same sort of source, and also considering that bubonic plague is slowly migrating North as climate change makes it possible, last cited as being in Colorado I think, after being in New Mexico a decade earlier.
One personal example; more than 20 years ago I was asked by a landlord to get full liability coverage for my upstairs suite, as I was seeing musicians in my workshop regularly and they were concerned about potential for lawsuits should someone fall down stairs or suchlike. Before I could get insurance I needed a business license, so I contacted city hall. Or I should say, I tried to contact city hall. A week of frustration on the phone, wasting hours leaving messages in various departments, getting the run-around any time anyone actually answered a phone and none of my voicemails replied to. Finally one woman picked up the phone in the licensing department and was very brief but polite about it. She'd heard a couple of my messages and said "You didn't call us. I never talked to you. Please do not call again." I tried to interject, to ask for some explanation, as I really wanted to have a legit business license for working at home. She repeated those words exactly, then said "Thank you, and good day." I sat down and thought about it a little and realised that she was going out of her way to help me, to offer a kindness. Essentially, between the lines, she was saying 'there is no way you are going to get licensed to work at home and if you persist an officer will have to come to your home and issue a cease and desist order' or something along those lines. She knew perfectly well that thousands upon thousands of self-employed people work at home, but that doing so at least in some lines of work was in violation of bylaws regarding use of property. So she told me to shut up and get on with my life. I did some fancy talking with the insurer, the same company my landlord was using for their fire and other insurance, and they relented and 'allowed' me to pay $600/year for the first year with $2,000,000 liability coverage against 3rd party injuries. The next year they doubled to $1,200, and I paid that. The third year they doubled it again... and I cancelled, without telling the landlord, as I simply didn't/don't earn enough to pay that kind of money for insurance. Some months later I had to move out anyway, as the landlord lost one parent and needed to have the other move in so he could take care of her. Haven't had insurance since, as musicians are mostly poor and I don't have the inclination to charge anything close to the going store rates for my work.
Long-winded, sorry. And I know only slightly relevant to the topic in terms of bureaucracies. But it goes, I think, towards explaining why public markets and the like are able to hire airgun-using pest controllers with their silencer and night vision equipped modern airguns to patrol the properties at night and eliminate pests. I was told that this happens in all major population centres in the Lower Mainland. Surely the feds are aware of it, as it must be happening in all our cities... unless consumers are happy about finding partially nibbled foods and rodent/bird droppings for added flavour, which seems unlikely. The population health outcomes of a disease outbreak originating with such animals should be abundantly clear, especially now that we're in the midst of a pandemic from that very same sort of source, and also considering that bubonic plague is slowly migrating North as climate change makes it possible, last cited as being in Colorado I think, after being in New Mexico a decade earlier.
No, an assumption based on knowledge of the availability of exemptions, rather than ignorance. Anyone posting videos should follow the law to save themselves and the firearm community in general unwanted grief. Upon a re-watch of the channel there appears to be other questionable actions portrayed.
Suggested reading;
https://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/F-11.6/
There has always been provision for exemptions (in the past municipalities specifically named) for businesses to own and use prohibited items. See subsection 12(for exempted items), and 97 (for authority). ****Not legal advice****
On topic: High mounted scopes on airguns give the same effect as canted rails ( beneficial to low BC, high arching projectiles), although to a lessor degree. Most air rifles have stock combs to accommodate for the scope position.
A pellet gun trajectory is a ballistic curve. In such a curve there's a flat-ish part near the top of the ark where the height of the projectile varies the least with distance. A higher-mounted scope has the effect of pushing this flat-ish part of the trajectory out to a further distance.
This is particularly useful for things like "field target" competitions, where the parallax adjustment of the scope is used for rangefinding. Due to how it works this is more accurate at shorter distances and less accurate at longer distances. By pushing the flat-ish part of the trajectory out to a distance where the rangefinding is less accurate, it gives a better chance of hitting the target. At shorter distances the rangefinding is more accurate, so you just dial in whatever adjustment you need (even though the adjustment is larger than with a lower-mounted scope).
If you know the distance to your target (i.e. it's fixed or you're using a laser rangefinder) then a high-mounted scope doesn't help.
This is particularly useful for things like "field target" competitions, where the parallax adjustment of the scope is used for rangefinding. Due to how it works this is more accurate at shorter distances and less accurate at longer distances. By pushing the flat-ish part of the trajectory out to a distance where the rangefinding is less accurate, it gives a better chance of hitting the target. At shorter distances the rangefinding is more accurate, so you just dial in whatever adjustment you need (even though the adjustment is larger than with a lower-mounted scope).
If you know the distance to your target (i.e. it's fixed or you're using a laser rangefinder) then a high-mounted scope doesn't help.
Unless there's a misunderstanding, the text in blue completes the sentence.
Sounds like this means the height of the scope above the bore determines the trajectory or path the pellet follows on its way to the point of aim. To put it another way, when shooting a target with a higher mounted scope the pellet follows a path that is different than it would be if the scope was mounted lower.
If that is what is meant, the assertion is that two different pellets fired by the same air rifle from the same place follow different paths to exactly the same target.
Yes, the text in blue completes the sentence. And yes, the pellet *does* follow a different path than if the scope is mounted lower.
The scope is aimed at your point of aim. The bore of the gun is some distance below the scope, and the muzzle is angled upwards. The pellet trajectory starts out below the barrel, arcs upwards, crossed the point of aim at the first zero, goes above the point of aim, arcs back down, crosses the point of aim again at the second zero, then drops below the point of aim.
If the pellet starts further below the scope (due to the scope being mounted higher), and we hold constant the amount the pellet rises above the point of aim between the two zeros, the effect is to push the zeros out to a longer distance.
Feel free to punch it into a pellet gun ballistic calculator. It's a real thing.
No doubt most airgun shooters are aware that pellet gun ballistic calculators are a real thing. But perhaps that's not what is meant.
It's correct that scope height will determine the path a pellet follows to a target. Of course the rifle itself is not in the same position in both cases. The greater the difference in scope height the greater the difference in the path the pellets will follow. But there are limits on how much of a difference in scope height comfortable shooting will tolerate. If it's too high or too low, shooting will become uncomfortable and that's never good for results in any discipline of shooting.
Are the differing paths followed to the target very dissimilar from one another? Readers can see for themselves. What is relevant and not mentioned previously is the distance at which the air rifle is zeroed. The closer the zero, the more scope height affects the path to the target -- the trajectory.
Below are the results of a rifle zeroed at 25 yards, within the typical ranges shot in Field Target. The first has a scope mounted 1" above the bore, the second 1.5".
Below are the results of a rifle zeroed at 50 yards, again within the typical ranges shot in Field Target. The first has a scope 1" above the bore, the second 1.5".
