shooting rifle without fac .

neillfrbs

Well-Known Member
hi is it legal for someone over the age of 18 to shoot a rifle on private land with out holding a fac ,but being supervised buy some one that does and using there rifle.
only I have been told that you cant .and can only do so if it is an estate rifle.
which makes me think how do you get experience with rifles, if you cant legally shoot them.
an example would be my shooting pal has the shooting rights on lots of land ,holds fac for 22lr 17hmr 223 243 308 can I legally shoot his rifle with him supervising me .
thanks neill.
 
I believe the answer is yes if you are within earshot of one another... I'm not suggesting you ever have been a naughty boy but if one was to have a criminal record (for a serious violent crime for example) would you be able to enjoy the same privilege be it an estate rifle or not?! Be interested to see what everyone thinks
 
The answer is yes, see http://basc.org.uk/wp-content/plugins/download-monitor/download.php?id=38 for full details.

Out of interest, who was it who told you that you can't?

The term "estate rifle" has no legal definition, but is used to describe exactly the conditions you have specified - i.e. someone who doesn't hold a FAC borrowing a rifle, or someone borrowing a rifle that is not on their FAC, from the occupier or servant of the occupier (who has that rifle on their FAC) to use on private premises under their supervision.

willie_gunn

P.S. If you do a search for "estate rifle" on the site you will find numerous threads on the subject, not all of which necessarily come to the same conclusion!
 
Last edited:
only reason I ask is have put in for my fac ,and if I had shot my mates rifles ,and I told the feo that when he visits would not want to get in trouble.
I would think the more experience the better.
 
What an 'estate rifle' encompasses is a bit of a grey area when you take the rifle in question out of the context of 'landowners' or 'servant of landowner' (employee/leaseholder of sporting rights). I certainly would not allow any non-certificate holder to leave my side with one of my firearms. They would always be within arms reach!
 
It's a crazy thing with our firearm laws - you can borrow a rifle under supervision, but not a shotgun and not a FAC shotgun. A shotgun can only be lent by the owner of the land.
 
It's a crazy thing with our firearm laws - you can borrow a rifle under supervision, but not a shotgun and not a FAC shotgun. A shotgun can only be lent by the owner of the land.

Are you quite sure about that?

http://basc.org.uk/wp-content/plugins/download-monitor/download.php?id=39


Is it an Offence If I Loan a Shotgun to Someone? | Future Law

willie_gunn

P.S. Also found this on the Met Police's website: FAQs - Metropolitan Police Service

Another way to shoot shotguns and even rifles without a certificate is when you are accompanied by the landowner or his agent, (e.g. game warden), shooting on his land, using his weapons within the limitations of the authorities on the certificate.


However, as a non-certificate holder, you cannot borrow another person's gun, if he is not the occupier of the land you intend to shoot on.

Of course that then leads into the definition of "occupier":

The term “occupier” is not defined in the Firearms Acts, nor has a Court clarified its meaning. However, the Firearms Consultative Committee in their 5th Annual report recommended that the provisions of section 27 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 be adopted. This states that ‘“occupier” in relation to any land, other than the foreshore, includes any person having any right of hunting, shooting, fishing or taking game or fish’.
 
Last edited:
I believe the answer is yes if you are within earshot of one another... I'm not suggesting you ever have been a naughty boy but if one was to have a criminal record (for a serious violent crime for example) would you be able to enjoy the same privilege be it an estate rifle or not?! Be interested to see what everyone thinks

NO.
Being within earshot is NOT being under supervision, you could be in earshot whilst on the other side of a busy road.

HWH.
 
Misconception. There is no such thing as an "Estate rifle" in the firearms law.

There is what is known as the "estate rifle condition" (search for The Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988 Section 16) which allows someone to borrow a rifle for use on land where the owner of the rifle has lawful authority to shoot (grey point the first, the law says "the occupier" which is not further defined. Occupier might in some cases be taken to mean the owner, or someone who lives there, or possibly someone who has shooting rights over the land. It's almost universally agreed that this does not include someone doing volunteer pest control, unless there is some kind of written agreement ensuring the right to shoot. Of course, if you take the definition given in the act mentioned above (Wildlife and Countryside Act) "occupier" can be taken to mean "ANY person having shooting rights over the land". What are "shooting rights"? Is verbal permission from the owner good enough? Yet another grey point!)), as long as the rifle is used only under supervision (ok, the law says "in the presence of" grey point the second, as discussed above, do you need to be close enough to intervene, or is it ok to be far away but close enough to shout at them and see them?) of "either the occupier or a servant of the occupier" (grey point the third, who is classed as a servant. Also note that although you can be "in the presence of" a servant, the legislation would seem to suggest that the owner of the rifle must be the occupier) as long as the person supervising has an FAC relating to the weapon, conditioned to allow the type of shooting to be carried out. Also note that the conditions relevant are those on the FAC under which the rifle fired is held. It matters not a jot if you hold an open FAC, you still cannot shoot someone elses rifle on land that it's not approved for if their ticket is closed. Nor can you shoot something that their certificate is not conditioned for. For example if you have deer on your FAC but they do not, but you are shooting their rifle that is not held on your FAC then you can't shoot deer with it.

As to the post above, the legislation says "in the presence is" not "under the supervision of". A big distinction!

The take away point here is, the legislation is not clear when it comes to firearms, on anything!
 
Last edited:
i always thought that yes you could but recently ive had to mentor a friend who lives in essex and when i told essex police that he had been using my rifle under my supervision i was told quite sturnly that i was not allowed to let anyone use my rifle apart from me even if they were under my supervision not wanting to inflame the situation i didnt push it any futher but then phoned my own force (wiltshire) who said yes essex are right but they were a lot more easy going about it and from what i could get from it, it was just tollerated
 
Have a read of the relevant section of the Firearms Act (The Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988 Section 16) (Google will provide).

If you have a written agreement to shoot on land then you are classed as the occupier, and therefore it is allowed. (Well, that's the way it appears to my lay eye) otherwise how would people take paying guests out to shoot without having their own rifle?

 
You'll be fine if his permission to shoot extends to his guests and you are under his close supervision.
 
Have a read of the relevant section of the Firearms Act (The Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988 Section 16) (Google will provide).

If you have a written agreement to shoot on land then you are classed as the occupier, and therefore it is allowed. (Well, that's the way it appears to my lay eye) otherwise how would people take paying guests out to shoot without having their own rifle?


Have a read of the relevant section of the Firearms Act (The Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988 Section 16) (Google will provide).

If you have a written agreement to shoot on land then you are classed as the occupier, and therefore it is allowed. (Well, that's the way it appears to my lay eye) otherwise how would people take paying guests out to shoot without having their own rifle?


The act uses the word "occupier" and although the word occupier is not defined in the act, however the FCC stated that the definition in the Wildlife and Countryside Act be used,

This states that ‘“occupier” in relation to any land, other than the
foreshore, includes any person having any right of hunting, shooting, fishing or taking
game or fish’.

To me, in this context, a right is something that, in law, cannot be taken away and as such gives the holder/owner of that right legal control over it to do with it as he so wishes.

Certainly when giving someone permission to shoot on the farm I am giving them exactly that, permission to shoot. I most certainly am not conferring on them any right to do so.

Interestingly the ACPO FELWG discussed this very subject, reported in their latest published minutes:

17. SECTION 11(5) EXEMPTION
17.1 Helen Rees asked for some concensus on the definition of “Occupier” for the purposes
of S11(5) of the Firearms Act. BASC, NGO and Gamekeepers Association interpret it to
mean the individual has a right to shoot which means they effecitvely have permission
from the landowner. Helen’s view on 11(5) is that a person can benefit from non
exemption if they have a shooting right (a binding contract with the landowner).

17.2 Graham Wididcome to address this in the Guidance in the near future. Ministers are
looking as changing the terminology of “occupier”.

17.3 Barry Collacott concluded by reading a quote with regards to the definition of “occupier”
from the BASC website “Issues arising from S11(5). No definition of occupier in the
Firearms Act but generally means someone with an interest in the land that is
enforceable at law”.

17.4 All agreed this was a good definition
 
We've been here before regarding "rights".

When you assign someone the shooting rights you are also giving them the right to take game (and yes, I know that deer is not defined as game).

willie_gunn
 
hi is it legal for someone over the age of 18 to shoot a rifle on private land with out holding a fac ,but being supervised buy some one that does and using there rifle.
only I have been told that you cant .and can only do so if it is an estate rifle.
which makes me think how do you get experience with rifles, if you cant legally shoot them.
an example would be my shooting pal has the shooting rights on lots of land ,holds fac for 22lr 17hmr 223 243 308 can I legally shoot his rifle with him supervising me .
thanks neill.

Yes
 
thanks guys for your replies ,will take that on-board. might ring basc on Monday see what they say.
 
i always thought that yes you could but recently ive had to mentor a friend who lives in essex and when i told essex police that he had been using my rifle under my supervision i was told quite sturnly that i was not allowed to let anyone use my rifle apart from me even if they were under my supervision not wanting to inflame the situation i didnt push it any futher but then phoned my own force (wiltshire) who said yes essex are right but they were a lot more easy going about it and from what i could get from it, it was just tollerated
They are not RIGHT!
they are most defititely WRONG.

i have had to educate a few people in two forces who decided they would stretch their interpretation of the law

Read something the other day:
"don't question authority, they don't know either"!

if in doubt ask which aspect of the firearms act they are referring to
 
my shooting pal has the shooting rights on lots of land ,holds fac for 22lr 17hmr 223 243 308 can I legally shoot his rifle with him supervising me .

It depends whether your pal really has the "shooting rights on lots of land". Unless he is rather wealthy I'd be surprised if he does.

More likely he has various permissions to shoot, which may or may not allow him to bring one or more guests, or even paying clients, along as well.

"Shooting rights" is a legal term, and sometimes even the land owner does not own the shooting rights. Shooting rights are a subset of sporting rights, which also includes fishing rights, etc.

See Need to Know: Sporting rights and the law | Blog | Houses for sale, properties for sale - Country Life for an overview.

A tenant farmer probably doesn't.

If what your pal means is that he personally has permission to shoot on the land, unless he also has permission to bring along another friend etc. then no.

And if he is e.g. shooting vermin for a tenant farmer, be wary. A farmer who does not have the shooting rights is still allowed to control vermin, but only to allow one other person to do so on their behalf. Presumably your pal. But not you.

All that said, if your pal does actually own or lease the shooting rights, or has permission from the actual owner or leaseholder including permission to bring along a guest, then its OK to use his rifle under his supervision (generally meaning within sight and earshot), provided you are not prohibited from using firearms (e.g. due to custodial prison sentence etc.)
 
Back
Top