evilstoat Posted March 31, 2009 Report Share Posted March 31, 2009 (edited) This is just a senario, this did happen but persons involved don't want names, or places mentioned Clay shoot was organised but (no liability insurance was taken out), for friends and family, organiser is thought not to have clay ground ticket, lots of people attend this, and there were about 10 guns that people were using on the stands, 3 stands i think. organiser leaves his gun by the stand, and goes to operate one of the clay traps, everybody having a turn on the stands, people were loading the semi auto's ( 3 shot) then passing to the person on the stand, they were then shooting then passing the gun back, what happened was, that the organisers's gun was used, two shots were fired, then passed back but during this the gun went off, and the third cart went into a by standers leg, making a bit of a mess. Apparently there are civil cases being served on each other, blaming each other who is to blame, and who has committed offences, as i'm sure some have committed some firearms offence this incidently has nothing to do with me directly, so don't go digging into me...lol, just interested as i was told about this a while back, but was interested who was to blame and who if any was responsible for committing offences if any. Cheers in advance for the advice Edited March 31, 2009 by evilstoat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilstoat Posted March 31, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 31, 2009 Nobody? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baldrick Posted March 31, 2009 Report Share Posted March 31, 2009 In civil law, I would anticipate that the organiser and the person handling the loaded gun at the time of the shot, are both liable in negligence. Both apparently breached their respective duties of care. Criminal law - I have no idea, but I would imagine that assault may be a charge levelled against the bloke who had the ND. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilstoat Posted March 31, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 31, 2009 Thanks for the reply Baldrick, not sure if anybody thought they might be contributing to any legal argument, but this has nothing to do with me, and i'm just interested who would be at fault, not so much morally but legally, but any other comments would be welcome. Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harnser Posted March 31, 2009 Report Share Posted March 31, 2009 As it was a gun shot wound then the police would have to be involved . They may concider it to be a stupid accident or a malacious wounding . The out come of the police investigation may give you some idea as were the blame lay . Harnser . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexm Posted March 31, 2009 Report Share Posted March 31, 2009 (edited) The police would likely pursue the organiser/owner(s) of the guns used if no Section 11 exemption was in place for the shoot too! A terrible situation for everyone concerned, and for our sport too. Edited March 31, 2009 by alexm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vmobiler1 Posted March 31, 2009 Report Share Posted March 31, 2009 I would have thought the buck stops at the organiser, He has a duty of care to other`s as he organied the event. The person who was shot has a case against the persn handling the gun, the person handling the gun (may)have a case against either the person handing them the loaded gun (ie. was this person a so called "safety officer" qualified or not) and then back to the organiser as he should make sure all H&S was n place ie Insurances and competant people. No doubt somene will JUMP on my back about this, be it m spelling, gramma or my oppinion! Any HSE`s n here??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruno22rf Posted March 31, 2009 Report Share Posted March 31, 2009 (edited) The organiser is totally responsible under Health and Safety regs.He failed to ensure the safety of participants in this instance and was negligent in not making sure that a NOP (normal operating procedure) was in place at each shooting stand and that those on the stand were aware of it.The onus is on the organiser now to prove that all "reasonable" safety precautions were taken and explained to those on site.As a slight deviation from this-it is EXTREMELY rare for a gun made in the last 20-30 years to fire unless someones finger is on the trigger because of the use of intercepting sears-this could be proved quite easily by having the gun examined by a reputablr RFD-it might be used to counter-claim against the person holding the gun at the time but its a long shot.As soon as members of the public are allowed onto any site that site becomes public-even if not invited!+failing to ensure the safety of the public is an imprisonable offence. Edited March 31, 2009 by bruno22rf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clayman Posted March 31, 2009 Report Share Posted March 31, 2009 This sounds as though its run as a commercial enterprise. As such the organiser is required by law to have: A safety policy statement Have done a risk assessment. In that process the potential hazards are identified and controls put in place to prevent accidents. This may be signage, training, safety equipment, supervision etc Its sounds pretty clear that the described shoot if it took place the way its suggested was fairly Maverick and basic H&S was not applied. If thats the case, the organiser is going to take the wrap. An accident occurred at a well known shoot about five years back, and the H&SE prosecuted. The business was fined £4k and the shoot organiser £5. With costs on top it probably cost them in the region of £20k. All for the sake of some simple safety evaluations put down on paper and applied. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boomstick Posted March 31, 2009 Report Share Posted March 31, 2009 This sounds as though its run as a commercial enterprise. An accident occurred at a well known shoot about five years back, and the H&SE prosecuted. The business was fined £4k and the shoot organiser £5. With costs on top it probably cost them in the region of £20k. He got off pretty lightly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CZ550Kevlar Posted April 1, 2009 Report Share Posted April 1, 2009 Why was he loading 3 cartridges into his gun in the first place? I have never known targets at a stand to be presented in 3`s always in pairs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilstoat Posted April 1, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2009 Why was he loading 3 cartridges into his gun in the first place? I have never known targets at a stand to be presented in 3`s always in pairs. Don't ask...lol, i said the same thing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted April 1, 2009 Report Share Posted April 1, 2009 Clayman is spot on with his analysis as far as the HES (or more likely in this case the Environmental Health) are concerned. The police will only look at issues of criminal law , Civil law is outside of their remit and it will not be up to the police to decide who is liable or the quantum of damages, that will be down to the respective legal teams and (unlikely) a judge in a Country Court. Both the organiser and the person holding the gun, and the person who had the gun last owed a duty of care, and arguably all failed to adequately discharge their liability. From what has been said the organiser did not properly risks assess the activity and put in place even basic supervision. Someone left the gun loaded Someone else pointed the gun in the direction of another person and pulled the trigger The injured party’s solicitor will have some fun with this one, but the biggest problem facing the injured party is that without any insurance cover in play, how is he going to get any compensation? Lesson to be leaned – 1. Follow the basic requirements of the HSE and risk assess your activity 2. Act on the findings of your risk assessment 3. make sure you have adequate insurance cover in place 4. check on the legal requirements of your activity 5. Make sure your activity complies with the firearms law Alternatively do as this guy did and say ‘sod it – it will never happen to me…’ David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highlander Posted April 1, 2009 Report Share Posted April 1, 2009 Shame that a fun, friendly, family w/e gets spoilt BUT guns are NOT playthings AND the organiser should have at the very least have covered himself (with insurance not armour!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted April 1, 2009 Report Share Posted April 1, 2009 he may have done through his house insurance etc, however we have next to no information and the incident doesn't show up on google so didn't make the news which is pretty rare if it happened. Lots of suppositions and what iffs on the interweb where the correct story usually doesn't appear Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilstoat Posted April 1, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2009 (edited) Apparently this did happen, i have spoken to some involved who are naturally worried about civil law rather than criminal, as the police were involved i think they just put it down as far as i am aware as an unfortunate accident, obviously several were to blame regarding saftey, i will keep you updated anyway, as this progresses but everybody seems to be blaming each other, as for googling the story i don't think it made the papers not sure, parties involved did mention an estate where this took place but, i don't want to name anybody, or places as it doesn't involve me directly, if you like....friend of a friend if you know what i mean. the injured party has had from what i am told skin grafts ect. Thanks for the replies, i'm sure this has happened before at some time or another, i was just interested to see what the outcome was, and what will be for the parties involved Edited April 1, 2009 by evilstoat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted April 1, 2009 Report Share Posted April 1, 2009 Al4x has a point about home insurance, and up until recently I would have said that this is a good 'safety net' BUT - a large % of people do not have home insurance - AND i am seeing more home underwriters refusing to cover shooting / guns. SO if anyone is thinking of falling back on their home insurance - best to check first1 D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilstoat Posted April 1, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2009 (edited) So far i am told the injured guy is trying to make a claim against the organiser, and the organiser is making a claim against the guy who discharged the gun, claiming he didn't realise the gun was being used, as he was manning a clay trap Edited April 1, 2009 by evilstoat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted April 1, 2009 Report Share Posted April 1, 2009 generally the police seem quite good at accepting accidents happen with firearms. After all they have enough themselves, as for the legal side one things for sure the only real winners sound like they will be the lawyers who will make a mint out of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruno22rf Posted April 2, 2009 Report Share Posted April 2, 2009 i dont think that saying that he didnt realise the gun was being used would help the organiser -in fact i think it would go against him as it was his gun that was not secured as to prohibit its use by a third party-an offence in itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted April 2, 2009 Report Share Posted April 2, 2009 Not an offence if the person taking charge of the gun is a certificate holder, but as has been said if there were non certificate holders shooting Sec 11.6 would be needed - unless the organiser was thinking he was OK under the 'occupiers gun, occupiers premises, occupiers presence ' exemption! Yes the lawyers will get their cut! Depending on the size of the claim the legal fees will make a pretty significant contribution to the overall costs of the claim. Again this would normally be covered by the insurance company, BUT it seems unclear who if anyone was insured! David 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.