BH209 max charge
03-29-2009 | 04:31 PM
#31
Thread Starter
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,408
Likes: 0
From:
RE: BH209 max charge
ORIGINAL: rafsob
Ask a stupid question and you may get a stupid answer. I am sorry , but just I couldn't resist that one.
Really why would you come to this forum and ask such a question? Wouldn't going to the horse's mouth, so to speak, be more reliable? Please don't think me a pot stirrer, I am just one on the side of safety also. This is one of the reasons I will never post my reloads or ML loads on line without qualifiers! I always tell folks to go to the manufacturer and get their loads recommendations. Sure they may seem a little on the conservative side, but wouldn't you if you were in their shoes? Tort is alive and well in this day and age!
You must admit as you do that as a professed scientist that you are really putting yourself out there when you start listing experimental loads on this forum with or without qualifiers. I would worry that someone out there would take your word as gospel and hurt themselves or damage their equipment. This could happen I suppose.
I think I should quit before some of you guys try to tar and feather me (which I am sure will happen.) But talking plain sense should be more the rule and not the exception around here.
Shoot safe!
ORIGINAL: spaniel
That was the point of this thread -- what IS the recommended max load in an Omega? What you posted instead was that certain velocity and range limits should not be done with a ML.
Two different things.
That was the point of this thread -- what IS the recommended max load in an Omega? What you posted instead was that certain velocity and range limits should not be done with a ML.
Two different things.
Ask a stupid question and you may get a stupid answer. I am sorry , but just I couldn't resist that one.
Really why would you come to this forum and ask such a question? Wouldn't going to the horse's mouth, so to speak, be more reliable? Please don't think me a pot stirrer, I am just one on the side of safety also. This is one of the reasons I will never post my reloads or ML loads on line without qualifiers! I always tell folks to go to the manufacturer and get their loads recommendations. Sure they may seem a little on the conservative side, but wouldn't you if you were in their shoes? Tort is alive and well in this day and age!
You must admit as you do that as a professed scientist that you are really putting yourself out there when you start listing experimental loads on this forum with or without qualifiers. I would worry that someone out there would take your word as gospel and hurt themselves or damage their equipment. This could happen I suppose.
I think I should quit before some of you guys try to tar and feather me (which I am sure will happen.) But talking plain sense should be more the rule and not the exception around here.
Shoot safe!
I think that was a fair question. Perhaps if you had enough plain sense to read the original question, you wouldn't need to attack people.
As for the rest of the discussion, the manufacturers (and apparently you) only care about living in fear of lawyers. I take responsibility for my own actions (which may be an unusual concept these days). After all, if the manufacturers are living in fear of lawyers they only care about THEMSELVES, not about ME. If I try something and there is a negative outcome, I have sense enough not to sue anyone.
Go ahead and hide in your basement from the lawyers. But how dare you attack me for not living a similar life of fear. That is MY business. I came here to ask a question. Not to be lectured.
