rec-baller Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 just wondering if this would be legal or not. i have an open ticket, i have a slot on my ticket for a .243,, my freind who owns a .243 wants to come out shooting with me, BUT he is on a closed ticket without any mentors needed, his land is up in Yorkshire, he wants to come out foxing with me on land i have permission for, both tickets allow .243 to be used on foxes, i currently use a .22-250 for foxing, would this be legal or would he need written permission- would i have to have the land cleared for him to take his rifle on it ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luckyshot Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 Ok you having a 243 slot for a start makes no differenceat all to the answer of this question. Your friend wouldnt need written permission but he would need the land clearing before he went on it with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bedwards1966 Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 Yes, even when shooting under your permission, he needs the land clearing for him to shoot his rifle there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 the only way round it would be to put his rifle on your ticket but not exactly ideal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 Yes, even when shooting under your permission, he needs the land clearing for him to shoot his rifle there. I've been thinking a lot about conditions like this of late. If he went and shot on the land (with permission) with his FAC conditioned as it currently stands what offence does he commit? J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wymberley Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 I've been thinking a lot about conditions like this of late J. I have much more fun contemplating my navel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 I've been thinking a lot about conditions like this of late. If he went and shot on the land (with permission) with his FAC conditioned as it currently stands what offence does he commit? J. it would be breaking the closed condition so not shooting on approved land, obviously the chances of being caught are remote but the maximum that could be done I think is 6 months inside or a fine if you read your ticket Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 it would be breaking the closed condition so not shooting on approved land, obviously the chances of being caught are remote but the maximum that could be done I think is 6 months inside or a fine if you read your ticket Ok, so the offence is that of failing to comply with a condition subject to which a firearm certificate is held - sec.1(2) of the Firearms Act 1968. If a condition reads; The .243 rifle and ammunition shall be used to shoot Fox at Home Farm, Little Piddle, Summershire and for zeroing on ranges. and you are shooting on a different farm (where you were shooting with permission) how have you breached the condition? The condition doesn't say that you can't shoot anywhere else just that you must (because is uses the word 'shall') shoot on Home Farm. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordieh Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 Hi rec-baller Has the land been cleared in the past for 243 or bigger Geordie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 Ok, so the offence is that of failing to comply with a condition subject to which a firearm certificate is held - sec.1(2) of the Firearms Act 1968. If a condition reads; The .243 rifle and ammunition shall be used to shoot Fox at Home Farm, Little Piddle, Summershire and for zeroing on ranges. and you are shooting on a different farm (where you were shooting with permission) how have you breached the condition? The condition doesn't say that you can't shoot anywhere else just that you must (because is uses the word 'shall') shoot on Home Farm. J. thats not the closed cert wording though makes it fairly clear the firearm should only be used over cleared land. The .243 and 7.62/308 rifles with sound moderators and ammunition to which this certificate relates shall be used only for deer and fox control and for zeroing over land deemed suitable by the Chief Officer of police for the area where the land is situated and over which the holder has permission to shoot with that class of firearm from the person by whom the shooting rights are owned or from whom they may be leased or otherwise obtained. The firearm(s) may also be used for zeroing at a range suitable for the safe use of that class of firearm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 Ok, so the offence is that of failing to comply with a condition subject to which a firearm certificate is held - sec.1(2) of the Firearms Act 1968. If a condition reads; The .243 rifle and ammunition shall be used to shoot Fox at Home Farm, Little Piddle, Summershire and for zeroing on ranges. and you are shooting on a different farm (where you were shooting with permission) how have you breached the condition? The condition doesn't say that you can't shoot anywhere else just that you must (because is uses the word 'shall') shoot on Home Farm. J. J Presuming he has the standard, ACPO recommended, condition printed on his FAC, he shall (must) shoot on land deemed suitable by the COP. Therefore, by shooting on land that has not been deemed suitable by the COP he would be breaking the conditions of his FAC. • The *calibre RIFLE/COMBINATION/ SMOOTH-BORE GUN/SOUND MODERATOR and ammunition shall be used for shooting vermin and ground game/fox/deer (delete as appropriate) and for zeroing on ranges, or land deemed suitable by the chief officer of police for the area where the land is situated and over which the holder has lawful authority to shoot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun4860 Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 (edited) My take on that condition is that he is ONLY allowed to shoot at Home Farm, Little Piddle, Summershire, and on ranges He has no permission to use that rifle anywhere else whether the land is cleared or not. But rather than believe what is written on here a simple phone call to his FEO will clear it up Edited September 13, 2012 by shaun4860 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 he knows what he can and can't do and is just looking for a way round it JonathanL is just suggesting someone knowingly breaks their conditions without knowing what it actually says on tickets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 J Presuming he has the standard, ACPO recommended, condition printed on his FAC, he shall (must) shoot on land deemed suitable by the COP. Therefore, by shooting on land that has not been deemed suitable by the COP he would be breaking the conditions of his FAC. • The *calibre RIFLE/COMBINATION/ SMOOTH-BORE GUN/SOUND MODERATOR and ammunition shall be used for shooting vermin and ground game/fox/deer (delete as appropriate) and for zeroing on ranges, or land deemed suitable by the chief officer of police for the area where the land is situated and over which the holder has lawful authority to shoot. He wouldn't breach the condition because it doesn't say 'shall only'. As long as you do actually shoot at Home Farm then you have complied with the condition, surely? The word 'shall' means that you must do it. So, you must shoot on that land. It doesn't say you can't shoot elsewhere. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 rather you than me go to court on that one, so basically what you are saying is all conditions are possible to ignore as that is how the whole lot are worded Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raja Clavata Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 It's clear what the intent of the wording of that condition is, at least it should be, if it isn't to you then you are most likely missing out on some kind of state funded disability benefit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 My take on that condition is that he is ONLY allowed to shoot at Home Farm, Little Piddle, Summershire, and on ranges He has no permission to use that rifle anywhere else whether the land is cleared or not. But rather than believe what is written on here a simple phone call to his FEO will clear it up That's not what it says though. I can't see any way you can use the English language to arrive at that conclusion. You cannot read something which is not there. I think the reason its worded like that goes back to the 'good reason' requirement for having the gun in the first place. You have to actually use it for the purpose you say you want it for. There is more evidence that I think tends to prove that I am right. If we look at the condition for target shooting it reads; 'The firearms and ammunition shall be used for target shooting on ranges suitable.....' A Home Office approved shooting club is entitled to a free certificate. The condition on a club certificate reads; The firearms and ammunition shall (only) be used for target shooting on ranges suitable..... See the difference? The word 'only' is used on the club one. It is put there because the cert is only free for the purposes of club use - ie: in connection with target shooting. If you use the guns for anything else then you can't have a free cert. It must follow then that the firearms on a normal cert can indeed be used for purposes other than target shooting as if they couldn't and the standard condition restricted you to target shooting and nothing else then the word 'only' would not be needed on a club cert. Why would the Home Office invent two different conditions if only one were needed? Hence, if your cert says that your rifle shall be used on Home Farm then you must do so but I cannot see how that restricts you to only shooting on Home Farm. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 I didn't know they did a pedantic ******* benefit these days? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 It's clear what the intent of the wording of that condition is, at least it should be, if it isn't to you then you are most likely missing out on some kind of state funded disability benefit. I know, very clear. It says that you shall use it on Home Farm. Nothing more and nothing less. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raja Clavata Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 Actually it does not say anything it states something and it means something different to what you wish it meant. Whoops, I think the pedanticity is infectious ;-) Applying the same logic on the species would mean anything can be shot with it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 J Piddle in the wind at Home Farm all you like. However, out of interest, when did you last see a "named land" territoriality condition on a fac, I thought the police gave those up years ago. You seem to be arguing a point and using as an example something that no longer exists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raja Clavata Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 Yeah I have never seen named land but I am named on my uncle's FAC exclusively as the person he must be accompanied with, no other references or names (not even experienced shooter which I think is common), we are clear what that means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 Actually it does not say anything it states something and it means something different to what you wish it meant. Whoops, I think the pedanticity is infectious ;-) Applying the same logic on the species would mean anything can be shot with it... though I hate to say anything that might add to the fire the funny thing is where storage etc is concerned they do use the word must yet then go onto shall be used rather than must only which would clarify it once and for all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 J Piddle in the wind at Home Farm all you like. However, out of interest, when did you last see a "named land" territoriality condition on a fac, I thought the police gave those up years ago. You seem to be arguing a point and using as an example something that no longer exists. Well, it doesn't really matter - I was using it it illustrate a point. You can change 'Shall be used on Home Farm' to 'Shall be used on land deemed suitable' and the effect is still the same. You must use it on land deemed suitable but there isn't anything which says you can't use it elsewhere. J. though I hate to say anything that might add to the fire the funny thing is where storage etc is concerned they do use the word must yet then go onto shall be used rather than must only which would clarify it once and for all. Precisely. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raja Clavata Posted September 13, 2012 Report Share Posted September 13, 2012 though I hate to say anything that might add to the fire... And then goes on to do exactly that:-) 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.