stevie1967 Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 I enjoy a good days pigeon shooting as much as the next man,but i would always put the safety and convenience of the general public before a days shooting.I recently came accross a couple of blokes shooting over rape stubble under a very busy flight line,the thing i found disturbing was the fact that the hide was set up backing on to a very sparse hawthorne hedge about 3 feet thick,but on the other side of the hedge was a very busy pavement running alongside an equally busy main road with a bus stop not 30 feet away,fair enough most of the shots where taken out in front but in the couple of minutes i was watching as i drove by i saw 3 incomers shot above the hide 2 of which landed on the road and got splattered by cars and the other landed stone dead right by the queue of old dears waiting for the bingo bus.People walking along the pavement must have come close to a coronary at the sound of gunshot not 3 feet away.Is it me or what? Cos i think this level of disrespect gives us all a bad name. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fenboy Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 I would personally say they must be complete richard heads, and idiots like that can only do our chosen sport harm ,why could they not put a hide up in the middle of the field. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unapalomablanca Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 They were within the law by the sound of it and were probably experienced. I bet you havent always lived up to your ideals. I find there are a lot of people on this forum who just want to let us know how perfect they are and how reckless others are. Just enjoy your sport and stop busybodying about others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpk Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 You need to be 50 yds away from any public highway whilst discharging a firearm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boristhedog Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 You need to be 50 yds away from any public highway whilst discharging a firearm. No you don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpk Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 No you don't. I'm sure you do, I may be wrong though. I shall have a look and stand corrected if I'm wrong.......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpk Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 Highways Act 1980 22.17 Under section 161 of the Highways Act 1980, it is an offence for any person, without lawful authority or excuse, to discharge any firearm within fifty feet of the centre of any highway which comprises a carriageway, if in consequence, any user of the highway is injured, interrupted or endangered. For these purposes a carriageway means a highway (other than a cycle track) over which the public have a right of way for the passage of vehicles. The Highways Act does not apply in Scotland but Procurators Fiscal may use common law offences of “culpable and reckless conduct” and “reckless endangerment” in situations in which the 1980 Act would be contravened in England and Wales. (I stand corrected it's 50 ft) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpk Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 The first paragraph is a little loose in it's explanation, but I wouldn't want to risk the local police tapping me on the shoulder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pegasus bridge Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 i think its 50ft from the center of the highway, and then its not clear cut in terms of how its perceived. still - they are asking for hassle, and being a little daft shooting there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pegasus bridge Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 aah - you found it whilst i posted ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boristhedog Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 Highways Act 1980 22.17 Under section 161 of the Highways Act 1980, it is an offence for any person, without lawful authority or excuse, to discharge any firearm within fifty feet of the centre of any highway which comprises a carriageway, if in consequence, any user of the highway is injured, interrupted or endangered. For these purposes a carriageway means a highway (other than a cycle track) over which the public have a right of way for the passage of vehicles. The Highways Act does not apply in Scotland but Procurators Fiscal may use common law offences of “culpable and reckless conduct” and “reckless endangerment” in situations in which the 1980 Act would be contravened in England and Wales. (I stand corrected it's 50 ft) mpk, the point is that you can shoot whilst standing on a road. It's the bit you quoted above that makes all the difference, ie 'if in consequence, any user of the highway is injured, interrupted or endangered'. Provided no-one is injured, interrupted or endangered you can shoot legally. ATB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpk Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 Ref to the op pigeons landing on people's heads would probably constitute endangering and potentially injuring, I have no intention of picking the law apart but mearly commenting on the op statement. No offence intended. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatcatsplat Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 mpk, the point is that you can shoot whilst standing on a road. It's the bit you quoted above that makes all the difference, ie 'if in consequence, any user of the highway is injured, interrupted or endangered'. Provided no-one is injured, interrupted or endangered you can shoot legally. ATB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fenboy Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 They were within the law by the sound of it and were probably experienced. I bet you havent always lived up to your ideals. I find there are a lot of people on this forum who just want to let us know how perfect they are and how reckless others are. Just enjoy your sport and stop busybodying about others. Unfortunatly reckless people reflect badly on all us gun owners so sorry to dissapoint but yes I always live up to my ideals when out with a gun and they dont incude shooting where I am anywhere near pedestrians or dropping birds on a main road. Like it or not the actions of others effect us all at times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retromlc Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 actually it's not 50 yrds at all and their lawful excuse is decoying/crop protection, another thread to run on forever i expect, what was wrong is that the birds fell into the road and hit people at the bus stop,they could be considered to be breaking the law,as it would cause "in consequence, any user of the highway is injured, interrupted or endangered." if you shot next to a path and the people choose to cross the road that's not the same as it's their choice to move direction.their actions were stupid and very bad PR and to shot a bird that lands in the road is dangerous. I've met a couple of shooters who are like those *****,you can stop the idiots Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpk Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 Unfortunatly reckless people reflect badly on all us gun owners so sorry to dissapoint but yes I always live up to my ideals when out with a gun and they dont incude shooting where I am anywhere near pedestrians or dropping birds on a main road. Like it or not the actions of others effect us all at times. :stupid: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boristhedog Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 Ref to the op pigeons landing on people's heads would probably constitute endangering and potentially injuring, I have no intention of picking the law apart but mearly commenting on the op statement. No offence intended. None taken by me. I agree that shooting that close to people on a road would be both unwise and probable dodgy in law. I just wanted to say that, in general, we can shoot from a road or very near a road if the shot is safe, for backstop and other people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpk Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 None taken by me. I agree that shooting that close to people on a road would be both unwise and probable dodgy in law. I just wanted to say that, in general, we can shoot from a road or very near a road if the shot is safe, for backstop and other people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bakerboy Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 I would personally say they must be complete richard heads, and idiots like that can only do our chosen sport harm ,why could they not put a hide up in the middle of the field. I am with you, the law is one thing common sense is another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Potter Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 For what it's worth I don't think what the law says about the exact distance from the centre of the highway is of any great relevance to this issue. Anyone setting up to shoot within 30ft of a bus shelter and the other side of a 3ft wide hedge from a payment is not only as thick as **** but risks a visit from, in no particular order, an armed response team, the environmental health department and/or the HSE regarding exposure to noise, a flurry of lawyers as sooner or later one of those shot birds will cause a road traffic accident and as the shooter has a duty of care not to drop shot birds where they may cause harm or distress he/she/they will find they are deeply in debt. I doubt that even if they were insured that the insurer would pay up citing "Gross Stupidity" as the reason for rejecting the claim If this account is true I really can't believe that anyone would be so inconsiderately stupid. To be honest if I walked past that set-up and someone fired a shot I would phone the Police, what they were doing may or may not be strictly legal but it's about time gross stupidity became a crime. As for the poster who said They were within the law by the sound of it and were probably experienced. I bet you haven't always lived up to your ideals. I find there are a lot of people on this forum who just want to let us know how perfect they are and how reckless others are. Just enjoy your sport and stop busybodying about others. That act of stupidity could cost you your permission, the negative publicity that this would create will lead to Farmers thinking that why have the hassle of allowing pigeon shooting on their land, I'll buy a couple of gas guns instead. Unbelievable Mr Potter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 It does give shooting a bad name. There are always those with the " i can so i will" type attitude, there are so many laws and liabilities in our land that a bit of common scence goes a long way. How common is common scence though Interuption? dead pigeons falling on and around you can do that! Not to mention someone firing a shotgun behind you when your waiting of a bus. A good point on insurance constbutory negligence could leave the shooter in hot water, akin to leaving your keys in the car or front door Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
proTOM1 Posted August 26, 2011 Report Share Posted August 26, 2011 Ive setup once or twice near ish to a road and nearish to a footpath but if there is any other way i will take it ,never had much trouble . Had more trouble when ive been well away from footpaths and had joe public thinking they can walk where they like . But the case the op has posted is just mad footpath,road and people at a bus stop :o Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yickdaz Posted August 26, 2011 Report Share Posted August 26, 2011 They were within the law by the sound of it and were probably experienced. I bet you havent always lived up to your ideals. I find there are a lot of people on this forum who just want to let us know how perfect they are and how reckless others are. Just enjoy your sport and stop busybodying about others. are you serious ??? if the police would happen to pass by they would have nicked them in no time, lost licence guns everything, they were causing a disturbance and shocking members of the public not to mention shooting a matter of a few feet from a public footpath and road, i,d say they are complete and utter idiots, not experianced and knew what they were doing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catweazle Posted August 26, 2011 Report Share Posted August 26, 2011 I wouldn't be upset to see plod take the guns and make them apologise to the old dears in the bus queue before presenting themselves at the station to explain why they should get them back. Fools like this do us a disservice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cranfield Posted August 26, 2011 Report Share Posted August 26, 2011 For what it's worth I don't think what the law says about the exact distance from the centre of the highway is of any great relevance to this issue. Anyone setting up to shoot within 30ft of a bus shelter and the other side of a 3ft wide hedge from a payment is not only as thick as **** but risks a visit from, in no particular order, an armed response team, the environmental health department and/or the HSE regarding exposure to noise, a flurry of lawyers as sooner or later one of those shot birds will cause a road traffic accident and as the shooter has a duty of care not to drop shot birds where they may cause harm or distress he/she/they will find they are deeply in debt. I doubt that even if they were insured that the insurer would pay up citing "Gross Stupidity" as the reason for rejecting the claim If this account is true I really can't believe that anyone would be so inconsiderately stupid. To be honest if I walked past that set-up and someone fired a shot I would phone the Police, what they were doing may or may not be strictly legal but it's about time gross stupidity became a crime. As for the poster who said They were within the law by the sound of it and were probably experienced. I bet you haven't always lived up to your ideals. I find there are a lot of people on this forum who just want to let us know how perfect they are and how reckless others are. Just enjoy your sport and stop busybodying about others. That act of stupidity could cost you your permission, the negative publicity that this would create will lead to Farmers thinking that why have the hassle of allowing pigeon shooting on their land, I'll buy a couple of gas guns instead. Unbelievable Mr Potter 'Nuff said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.