-
the Daily hi thread
Umarex HDR50
- Thread starter Mmab9
- Start date
Talyllyn
Super member
Yes they are still available.
Using one for home defence would get you into a lot of trouble!
Using one for home defence would get you into a lot of trouble!
Tommy Atkins
Active member
I looked into this and when you look at the effects (FB) they hurt but not enough for a desparate crackhead to come back and take it off you. Also the “reasonable force.” question.
Genuine interest on people’s thoughts.
Genuine interest on people’s thoughts.
Popgun Rob
Super member
Probably not a good idea to talk about the use of these for anything but plinking tin cans on the forum. It's been discussed previously indepth anyway when they first came out a few years ago.
I had the Glock version for a while and used it in the garden blasting beer cans. Great fun but not much more than a usual replica so I sold it as the ammo is too expensive by comparison.
zakdingel
Super member
I suspect that if you were to use one as they are described for in this country it will you that gets into trouble --the country they were made in have diffrent laws to us --and in some parts using none lethal force is permitted also some parts lethal force is permitted --but here in the Uk we are governed by the use reasonable force within reason --IF we had diffrent laws i think there could be less crimes committed against peoples homes ---but until then all we can do is shout and call the police
GreenGrowler
Super member
They have been renamed now, for the UK at least, to TR50, training revolver 50 calibre.
Popgun Rob
Super member
Sensible move, the HDR was always a dodgy name for a low power version here. 
Mark Palmer
Member Extraordinaire
A friend had one, great fun for short range can bashing but that's about all, the 50 cal rubber bbs made for entertaining targets down the range! I took great delight picking them off and chasing them around the range with diopters, the acipe guys struggled to keep up with the movement and range changes!!
Said friend stupidly shot his own hand at point blank when the gun was hand es d back to him after some one else had had a go!
, queue a numb and bruised hand for a week or so!!
Said friend stupidly shot his own hand at point blank when the gun was hand es d back to him after some one else had had a go!
, queue a numb and bruised hand for a week or so!!
GreenGrowler
Super member
Yeah, I don't think I'd want to personally find out how much they hurt, lol !
Seen a few videos of people who's IQ is significantly smaller than the calibre of the marker they are on the wrong end of lol.
Great fun for back yard bashing indeed, can be a slippery slope though, before you know it you have half a dozen markers in two different calibres.
Markers are more accurate than you would think, specially when you have a rifle size/type with a longer, riffled barrel and first strike rounds.
Seen a few videos of people who's IQ is significantly smaller than the calibre of the marker they are on the wrong end of lol.
Great fun for back yard bashing indeed, can be a slippery slope though, before you know it you have half a dozen markers in two different calibres.
Markers are more accurate than you would think, specially when you have a rifle size/type with a longer, riffled barrel and first strike rounds.
you will get prosecuted worse than the crackhead who was trying to steal or whatever
Alan B
Busy member
Reasonable force is to some extent in the eye of the beholder in that whilst there is a definition for it, it is open to some interpretation, by you, and indeed by the law after the fact when trying to establish if what a defender did was indeed reasonable, and you may well find a jury will see it you way, as they in fact did with me on one occasion, which I'll get to.
Essentially the law has three things to say on the matter: 1. The force you use must be necessary to prevent the crime/harm you are trying to stop. 2. The force you use must be proportional to the threat and not excessive in the context of when it is used, i.e. if someone is armed with a stick and threatening you with it, you can't then go at them with a chainsaw, and if they drop the stick, they are then unarmed, so the chainsaw, or even their stick would be considered completely out of proportion to the threat. 3. (and this is the somewhat nebulous one in terms of how to prove it) Given that if you find yourself in a sudden unwelcome situation where you are probably acting on instinct in the moment to at least some degree, you have to show that at the time, you genuinely believed what you did in terms of the force you used, was necessary 'in the moment' even if it later turns out you were wrong.
One of the few times I've ever been in a legal situation where this sort of thing might have been considered, the notion of me having used excessive force actually wasn't even mentioned in the court case which ensued, even though I absolutely did use excessive force if you follow what the letter of the law says about it. Specifically, I was out with friends on the way home from a club in Manchester, simply walking to the bus station at Piccadilly, when some thug and his pals decided they didn't like the way we all looked (used to dress a bit 'gothy') and so the main guy decided to attack us. To do this, he grabbed a large thick wooden branch from the edge of a bit of waste ground serving as a car park in the Chinatown area, to serve as weapon, then proceded to come at us with it accompanied by his pals, taking a few poorly aimed swipes at me, as I got in front of my friends to protect them.
Unlike me however, he was clearly not familiar with martial arts basic prinicples, because when I grabbed the end of his weapon, he made the mistake of trying to pull it away from me - as I figured he would - which only served to add to the force I'd imparted on it by pushing it hard at him instead of pulling it as he probably thought was going to occur. This resulted in him getting a fairly painful jab in the stomach from the end he was holding, which then caused him to let go of it, allowing me to throw it up to spin it around so I then had the thicker and of it, whereupon I proceded to beat the living crap out of him with it, despite his instant transformation into trying to appease things by initially holding out both his hands, palm downwards, whilst saying 'Nah, you're alright mate...' and trying to back away out of range, in the forlorn hope that I woud consider this an apology and the matter finished. Not bloody likely.
Now according to the reasonable force laws, technically this now meant I was attacking him when he was unarmed, making it very obviously excessive force that I was using since I now had his weapon and he was trying to back away having realised that I wasn't the easy target he thought I was. I however, took the view that since he was the one who brought the weapon in the first place, and he was the one who attacked me and my friends, he had no right to complain when I took the weapon off him and gave him a free lesson on how you actually do use something like that, by twatting the living crap out of him with it whilst his mates ran off, until the police showed up and arrested him, thanks to some witesses who all said I was attacked and merely defended myself with the weapon he had used on me when I took it off him, which was at least true, if you omit the part where he was trying to give up after I'd disarmed him, because he was a cowardly thug. Fortunately, the police and CPS saw it the same way as I had, as did the Jury at Manchester Crown Court, where he was found guilty and, at a later date, sentenced to eighteen months in prison, largely because he already had a list of previous longer than war and peace, including having attacked a female bartender with a stool and put her in hospital. So you can see he was a real tough guy.
Interestingly, when I and my friends were at court, we actualy had to sit in the same seating area as the several shell suit clad members of his scrotey family, who occasionally commented to us with pearls of wisdom such as 'You're f*cking dead mate...'. As far as I'm aware, the courts now have seperate areas for seating various parties, but at the time it really was like that and really not a pleasant experience at all.
So I'm not in the least bit sorry that I used excessive force on their family member. I'd do it again in a heartbeat and not feel remotely remorseful about it. If you attack me or my friends, or break into my house or whatever, then I don't give a crap what the law says is proprtional for a scumbag; they'll get what they bloody well asked for.
Last edited: