rabid bunny

Hey Wiggy, Would you be happier if we all snuck up on the bunnies and hit them with a stick then?

You miss the point, if you are capable of acurately shooting 400 + yards you do not need stalking skills and the bunny count increases significantly. I suggest if you are not happy shooting over 150 yards then don't. However criticizing others who are experienced and proficient at this technique is out of order, I do not agree with your opinion and am I'm glad you do not want to debate it further.

Lucky for us Chris is not some "nutter" then. If we are that worried about what the "anti's" might think, perhaps we should not have a forum such as this. I have a great deal of respect for Chris's ability and professionalism at shooting, especially at long range. Good work Chris. You do not need every one's approval, there will always be some "spoil sport" do gooder out there that will criticize even the best of us.

very professional, good to see how it should be done. :unsure: thanks for posting. Don't let fear of what the anti's might think stop you from sharing with others. more please.

SteveieP, There is no law that says you can not shoot a firearm in a public place. Infact in the highways act it allows a firearm to be shot within fifety feet of the centre of a highway, provided no one is injured, threatened or made to detour. Secondly, it is not "armed trespass" if the private land has public access.

ZB, did this chap plead not guilty and fight it in court and have a Judge rule against him? or did he just plead guilty and give in to the police state ?

Even the above quote contradicts itself. loaded shotgun or loaded air weapon then (whether loaded or not) Like you first stated, lawful authority or reasonable excuse, I am saying I have reasonable excuse ( or good reason). Your main point to note is your interpretation. My reasonable excuse is my interpretation. So untill I get caught and test this in court, we may not know for sure what a judge will think "reasonable excuse" is. In the meantime, I intend to continue with my shooting. If others disagree, then it's their choice to not shoot. I just hate it when "codes of practice" restrict my shooting.

"Whenever you are in a public place you should carry the rifle in a gun cover and always ensure that it is unloaded and not cocked." I think that only applies to under 17 year olds. Or it could be 18 year olds now. And notice you said "should". In any case, I presume you lifted this from the BASC "codes of practice". That is not law. And for those synical enough, I am not suggesting you ignore the BASC codes of practice.

obviously

Access means just that, you can use it to access a route to somewhere, not to use at your disposal. "public access" makes it a public place. Check your law.

Firstly, I shoot rabits with a sub 12 ft/lb air rifle on MOD land which has public access, (which makes it a public place) with out permission. In my opinion, the law regarding carrying firearms in public places do not apply if I can show good reason for being there. The onous is on me to show good reason and I think shooting rabits is good reason. Secondly, I do not encourage people to shoot where they have no permission, even though there is no law that states "you can only shoot where you have permission". Thirdly, I make these "statements" when someone else says things like "MOD land is private property", or other incorrect things like "you can only buy firearms "face to face" etc. Finally, I am no fool and I have been shooting for over twenty years and fit to handle an air rifle safely. I like to know my rights within the law and take advantage of the "grey areas" to suit me. My decision.

I agree with what you say, unless the MOD land in question has "public access". A lot of MOD land is left open to the public, in these cases, I think armed trespass will not apply. It would be more likely to be treated as a "public place" instead and in that case you only need to show "good reason".

I think that law only applies to RFD's. In other words, RFD 's can only sell now in person. That does not mean however, that every one must go to an RFD. Laf, it is not a legal requirement to have to BUY "face to face"

legal definition of private property: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary....rivate+property Quote "private property n. land not owned by the government or dedicated to public use." and again here http://www.thefreedictionary.com/private quote 4. a. Belonging to a particular person or persons, as opposed to the public or the government: private property. another definition here: http://www.legal-explanations.com/definiti...te-property.htm quote Private Property n.It is a system to allocate the ownership of pieces of land to particular people,who exercise full control on it without the society or the government having any ownership or legal right unlike common property. If I'm right, then MOD land is not private and therefore Armed trespass laws do not apply. Just so everyone understands me, I'm not saying it's ok to break into MOD property. But if the gate is open ...

As far as I know, the MOD is not a privately owned entity. So how can someone from the MOD own the land? The MOD is paid for by the tax payer. That makes it something else.

That was a guess about the Red BMW, the rest I got from your profile. Seriously though for a moment, I do not think that MOD land is "private".

what do you know about security companies then? I know someone who has a security company and he drives a red BMW... :blink: would you trust him, they are all drug dealers.

Now here's a question... Is MOD property considered "private property". As far as I'm aware, you will only get charged with "Armed Tresspass" if caught with a firearm on "private Property" with out the owner's permission. One way to find out who the owner is though.. :blink:

Where does it say that in law then?

As far as I understand it, the FAC is a police permission slip with police restrictions and limitations. There is no LEGAL requirement to use a certain bore against certain animals, other than for shooting Deer. So if you "contravene" a police restriction on the FAC then presumably the police will deal with it by receeding the FAC. I think you would not end up in court over it.

Thanks for putting me right on the quote from the FAC in condition 6. However, I still maintain there is nothing in law preventing shooting a fox with a legal rimfire.

Dave-G Do you consider your FAC to be a legal Document? It should state in your "additional conditions" section that you can shoot vermin and other wildlife in connection with shooting on ANY Estate. Also it may state you can shoot animals to protect other animals or humans, so presumably if you want to shoot a fox, that's ok because you are protecting rabbits that you want to shoot And you can humanely shoot animals, I could interpret that as putting a fox out of it's misery after not killing it with the first shot.

Yeh, let's close the thread now that you have had your say. However I agree with you that it is not illegal to shoot an air rifle in your own garden (whether it is section one or not), but should add, so long as you do not injure or frighten anyone on a public highway within 50 feet.

One word ******** Tiercel It explains it all here : http://www.bbc.co.uk/crime/law/powersofarrest.shtml it says this: Where the offence is relatively minor, police officers are expected to use other means, such as a summons, before resorting to arrest. In other words, arrest should only be used if the police cannot find your name, or suspect that you have given them a false name or address.

Shooting an air gun is not an arrestable offence. The police are very unlikely to arrest anybody unless the offence carries a five year prison sentence or if the police think the offender may not respond to a summons.