Taking sides in gun debate

Simon Reinhold makes a case for side-by-sides in a world dominated by the over-and-under

- Simon Reinhold

An invitation to shoot double guns is a rare privilege for me. My loader for the day probably assumed that out of the slips would emerge two over-and-under ejectors. When the first of a composed pair of hammer guns appeared, brief flashes of panic flared in his eyes.

A series of short, urgent questions then followed and I did my best to calm him. I confirmed there was no safety catch, automatic or otherwise, and that all I required of him was to remove the spent cartridges and reload fresh ones. I would cock the hammers when I received the gun back in my hands.

I confirmed my host was aware of my preference for vintage guns and that he was happy for me to bring them. I lowered my loader’s heart rate further: “I’m not here to shoot at every bird in the sky. Four good shots from a pair of hammer guns is better than six rushed shots from over-and-under all day long.”

Slow is smooth, smooth is fast and using an elegant side-by-side is, for me, an important part of a day’s shooting, whether on a peg or working my dog down the leeward side of a hedgerow.

However, if you go to a shooting school as a beginner, unless you ask to be taught side-by-side, almost certainly your instructor will fit you for an over-and-under. There are several reasons why.

First, a good instructor will be looking to provide you with an enjoyable experience and an over and under’s added weight, compared with a side-by-side, absorbs the recoil. With a light, 21g load through a gun weighing 8lb, the recoil is acceptable for most people. Felt recoil is also reduced by good gunfight and most off-the-shelf over-and-underscan more easily be made to fit most people. There are exceptions, of course.

Reducing recoil