Marksmanship Standards

So I was at a range today that shall remain nameless as it's not about the range but the shooters. It is primarily used by stalkers and vermin shooters. I have a pretty miserable view of stalkers shooting abilities generally but after today I have to question the availability of a FAC without a firearms competency test.

The target area is surrounded by a 5'+ square of timber which was peppered with bullet holes. Some very large bullet holes. Not ones that are being shot at bunnies. Fortunately for them, the shooters are nameless but such was the number of negligent discharges (3' 4' and maybe even more, cannot be considered anything else) that these people represent a danger to the rest of us, either physically or that they do something like that out stalking and somebody catches a bullet with the inevitable firearms law review.

Clearly these people don't know (or perhaps care) about bore sighting a rifle and don't know what to do if a shot does not appear on the target.

I hear all the stuff about maintaining our freedoms so no compulsory training, tests etc however after that today I am afraid I have changed my mind. Freedoms only survive if people are responsible enough to make sure they are competent and operate safely. Clearly not everybody is, or cares, and that is the environment where more legislation will appear eventually.

I now am coming to the view that the DSC1 shooting test is inadequate. It should include mounting and zeroing a scope with bore sighting. That is a basic skill. I am also coming the view that if DSC2 is supposed to demonstrate competence then it should include shooting test to a much higher level ie out to 300 yards prone and equivalent off sticks etc. At the moment you can whack a deer at 50 yards and are deemed be fully competent. Eh naw.

Most of you will disagree with me, but you did not see what I did. If someone was shooting like that on a range with me I would be off home quick.

 

[Island]

I got fed up after page three.

I persevered and had an epiphany. The best option is to have mandatory training carried out by a select cadre of SD stalkers.

Et voila! Everyone will be shooting the ace out of the ace-of-spades at 500yds in jig time....

 

[potshotpat]

Was never in the armed forces, but used to think shoot it ( clay or deer) before it shoots back

 

[Skinny78]

I got fed up after page three.

Fair enough mate. I havent read it all either but have enough splashes to see the arguements.

 

[Pete6.5]

Try to look at it a different way at least these people are making the effort to go to the range to improve their shooting ability.

 

[User00040]

Try to look at it a different way at least these people are making the effort to go to the range to improve their shooting ability.

+1

Now, if only some people would spend as much money on firing and replacing their ammunition as they did on rifles/scopes/reloading equipment... we would not have a problem!

 

[Kevgun]

If I see someone doing something wrong at the Range, I go and politely point it out to them, most of the time there is no hard feeling, I think if you see someone doing something dodgy, then your the numpty for not pointing it out to them.

Last year we had a guy in our club who turned up at the 1000 yard Range and he couldn't even hit the Target, so as per the rules 3 shots and your off, instead of ridiculing him, with his beautiful AI rifle and a fancy Night force scope, I spoke to him only to find out he had never shot the rifle at that distance, only out to 300 yards, so I took him to the zeroing range, sorted through his 5 different types of ammo and found 3 boxes of 140 match ammo, I chronographed his rifle with those cartridges, then adjusted to rifle to a good solid zero, entered the correct data into his ballistic app, then took him back to the 1000 yard range, got him to dial his own elevation and windage, went through all the setting on his Scope and explained the difference between Mil and Moa, He took his first shot a Vbull, he was over the moon, then I said if in doubt ask because most of us are approachable, but you do get the odd Billy big bollocks who thinks he's Chris Kyle and no one else should be allowed on the Range, advice and manners cost bugger all.

 

[Swedish]

Billy big bollocks

That made me spit my salad out!

 

[Lancaster]

That made me spit my salad out!

Serves you right for eating rabbit food

 

[Overlay]

If I see someone doing something wrong at the Range, I go and politely point it out to them, most of the time there is no hard feeling, I think if you see someone doing something dodgy, then your the numpty for not pointing it out to them.

Last year we had a guy in our club who turned up at the 1000 yard Range and he couldn't even hit the Target, so as per the rules 3 shots and your off, instead of ridiculing him, with his beautiful AI rifle and a fancy Night force scope, I spoke to him only to find out he had never shot the rifle at that distance, only out to 300 yards, so I took him to the zeroing range, sorted through his 5 different types of ammo and found 3 boxes of 140 match ammo, I chronographed his rifle with those cartridges, then adjusted to rifle to a good solid zero, entered the correct data into his ballistic app, then took him back to the 1000 yard range, got him to dial his own elevation and windage, went through all the setting on his Scope and explained the difference between Mil and Moa, He took his first shot a Vbull, he was over the moon, then I said if in doubt ask because most of us are approachable, but you do get the odd Billy big bollocks who thinks he's Chris Kyle and no one else should be allowed on the Range, advice and manners cost bugger all.

That’s a nice thing to do KG.

I can plop a few rounds in at 300 myself all day long, thats the distance I practice out to and shoot my normal distance is sub 200 after that distance 0f 300 I wouldn't have a clue to be honest, I wouldn’t have thought my scopes I use would be any good either at any further than 300

That guy apart from the ammo bit would be me to be honest, I’ve never trained over 300 don’t understand how to gauge the long range MOA - my 308 is 1” high at a 100 and 12’‘ low at 300 yds I work it out and practice that, and 95% of my shooting is off sticks, my 243 has a zeiss dial up which I done the hard way by shot by shot until I got it spot on from 100 through to 200 - 300

if I was a swimmer in shooting long range I would have drowned long ago
I even preferably zero off a clamp style tripod and not off a bench or prone, but thats my way and used to that way

I would love to master the long range shooting but time and wrong equipment get in the way regularly

good on you matey for lending a hand

 

[Buchan]

Some of the boards we use for the @BDS - Charity Account North-West training days have holes all over a 2mx3m area. But a closer look will show the big holes are pretty tight, showing good groups. The wide spread of holes is either someone zeroing or targets pinned to the whole board. So there maybe a valid explanation for the variance in the OP.

But the central point of the OP that skills testing should be mandatory I agree with, especially before shooting live animals.

 

[bogtrotter]

That’s a nice thing to do KG.

I can plop a few rounds in at 300 myself all day long, thats the distance I practice out to and shoot my normal distance is sub 200 after that distance 0f 300 I wouldn't have a clue to be honest, I wouldn’t have thought my scopes I use would be any good either at any further than 300

That guy apart from the ammo bit would be me to be honest, I’ve never trained over 300 don’t understand how to gauge the long range MOA - my 308 is 1” high at a 100 and 12’‘ low at 300 yds I work it out and practice that, and 95% of my shooting is off sticks, my 243 has a zeiss dial up which I done the hard way by shot by shot until I got it spot on from 100 through to 200 - 300

if I was a swimmer in shooting long range I would have drowned long ago
I even preferably zero off a clamp style tripod and not off a bench or prone, but thats my way and used to that way

I would love to master the long range shooting but time and wrong equipment get in the way regularly

good on you matey for lending a hand

 

[bogtrotter]

A man after my ownheart most of my shots are sub 200 yards can
stretch to 300 if absolutely necessary and
If I'm absolutely honest I have no real wish
to shoot further not in the least interested in shooting targets not shot targets other than
to zero since I was in the ACF and that was sixty years a go.

 

[NullMac]

Well done Nullmac! Bravo you for sticking your head above the parapet, not that they would hit it!

Plenty of evidence that day that they would. Wouldn't mean to though.

There are quite a few over the years I have witnessed shooting, and they have failed miserably only to become keyboard experts..

I don't agree with you on your definition of an ND I just think it was poor shooting.

It doesn't strictly conform to the ND definition. However hoicking many many rounds down range that are off target is negligent and if some are potentially missing the catcher that is an ND.

 

[NullMac]

If an ndividual fires a round without knowing where the point of impact will be, I'd agreed that's a type of ND. But maybe not in the classic sense.

Agreed, it is more about the negligent than the discharge. Sadly it wasn't just the one.

 

[Rewulf]

I don't agree with you on your definition of an ND I just think it was poor shooting.

Negligent discharge is the unintentional firing of weapon. Missing a target by 3’ or 5’ is not a negligent discharge as it was an intentional, conscious firing in a safe direction.

Sir, a negligent discharge is one where the gun fires when you did not intend to do so, caused by failure to observe safety rules .

I RO on 2 ranges , one 25m and one 100m.
I have to say, Ive witnessed various people do what I would call an ND , having chambered a round , put it into their shoulder/settled their aim ect , unintentionally fire the rifle.
I have also seen people with lever action rifles chamber the round with their finger on the trigger (one hit a concrete floor 10m in front of him on a 25m range)

There are also those that fit a scope, and as Nullmac mentioned , dont even do a basic bore sight of the rifle , before trying to hit 1 ft targets at 100m, wasting ammo , and damaging wooden surrounds, many clubs stop you shooting if your first round doesnt hit the paper.

If to be a 'proper' ND, the gun is not pointing in the general direction of the target when fired, then that person has no business being on a range, and should not really be in possession of an FAC.
I am in favour of a practical safety shooting assessment prior to FAC being granted, to those that are not members of an HO club, where this should be carried out anyway.

 

[lowlandjock27]

So I was at a range today that shall remain nameless as it's not about the range but the shooters. It is primarily used by stalkers and vermin shooters. I have a pretty miserable view of stalkers shooting abilities generally but after today I have to question the availability of a FAC without a firearms competency test.

The target area is surrounded by a 5'+ square of timber which was peppered with bullet holes. Some very large bullet holes. Not ones that are being shot at bunnies. Fortunately for them, the shooters are nameless but such was the number of negligent discharges (3' 4' and maybe even more, cannot be considered anything else) that these people represent a danger to the rest of us, either physically or that they do something like that out stalking and somebody catches a bullet with the inevitable firearms law review.

Clearly these people don't know (or perhaps care) about bore sighting a rifle and don't know what to do if a shot does not appear on the target.

I hear all the stuff about maintaining our freedoms so no compulsory training, tests etc however after that today I am afraid I have changed my mind. Freedoms only survive if people are responsible enough to make sure they are competent and operate safely. Clearly not everybody is, or cares, and that is the environment where more legislation will appear eventually.

I now am coming to the view that the DSC1 shooting test is inadequate. It should include mounting and zeroing a scope with bore sighting. That is a basic skill. I am also coming the view that if DSC2 is supposed to demonstrate competence then it should include shooting test to a much higher level ie out to 300 yards prone and equivalent off sticks etc. At the moment you can whack a deer at 50 yards and are deemed be fully competent. Eh naw.

Most of you will disagree with me, but you did not see what I did. If someone was shooting like that on a range with me I would be off home quick.

As with processes and procedures at work I alway view change through the lease of 'need'. I just had a brief look at the ONS on accidents/deaths caused by fire arms (no differentiation between legal and none legal owned.) and I would consider the numbers such that there is no requirement to add further mandator requirements to a process which is detailed and slow. That said there is no excuse for bad practice which I think should be called out 'possibly politely?' where seen.

 

[dogone]

What is truly frightening is the incompetence of police. Our club has an indoor and 400 yd outdoor range. RCMP used to qualify annually with pistol and assault rifle.
I cleaned up used targets. Most had holes all over man sized targets at 20 yards. Pathetic would describe the marksmanship.

 

[Rutland lad]

What is truly frightening is the incompetence of police. Our club has an indoor and 400 yd outdoor range. RCMP used to qualify annually with pistol and assault rifle.
I cleaned up used targets. Most had holes all over man sized targets at 20 yards. Pathetic would describe the marksmanship.

I work in the Police driving arena. That involves teaching Police officers to drive cars and ride motorcycles in response situations.
What people tend to forget is that these officers are not ace drivers/riders, they’re normal members of the public who put on a uniform and are then trained to do these things to a minimum acceptable standard. Some actively dislike driving. Take it from me that trying to teach some of them to drive properly is like trying to nail jelly to the ceiling.
The same applies in the firearms world - they’re not marksman/gunslingers, they just have to reach a minimum standard decided by the HO.
And some of those holes would be made by using that weapon in away that was totally alien - shooting from the hip, single handed, wrong handed, whilst wearing a respirator for example. All these things are done to increase the range of use of the weapon in circumstances most people cannot imagine.

 

[Border]

I think most people would agree that no one is a natural born shot. In order to shoot well a certain level of repitition/practice is required.
Where I live (Norway) it is mandatory to pass a hunting exam in order to go hunting. If you wish to shoot all species of deer and lynx, bear, wolverine and wolf you need to pass the annual "big game" rifle test.
This is nothing more dramatic than a two part test at the range.
First off you need to shoot 30 shots with a chambering legal for intended quarry, ie 222Rem and up for roe and 6.5x55/260 Rem/6.5 Creedmoor and up for everything else.
These must be taken over the course of two sessions. There is no target/ score requirement for these 30 rounds so in theory one could miss the target with all rounds and still document the required round count.
Most however use them to verify that the rifle is "on" and to zero with the mandatory expanding rounds for part two of the test.
Part two can be taken the same session as the remaining 30 shots.
The actual test involves shooting 5 rounds of expanding ammunition into a reindeer target at 100m. The kill zone is 30cm and all 5 shots must be inside the lines, which are not visible from the shooting position. You are not allowed to see the result until all 5 shots have been fired. Positions allowed are prone, sitting, kneeling or standing. The only aid allowed is a sling.
Rifles require 5 shots in the target. Disabled shooters can apply for dispensation and use other aids.
Double rifles, combination guns and drillings only 3 rounds because of the shots climbing with a warm soldered barrel.
This is the test in simplicity, to shoot bear you need to take an additional bear test.
I help out at the range with my shooting Club. Here we see the wide range of differing shooting abilities, from the beginner to the elderly hunter whose rifle may not have been used since the autumn the previous year (most game is in season from aug-dec).
Many have issues and chase the shots around the target, twiddling like mad on the scope turrets hoping that the two will coincide. These are often the people that even with help each year repeat the same process. Others ask for help or have perhaps been keeping their eye in by shooting "Jaktfelt" comps in winter/spring.
The test isn’t difficult by Any standard but even still many take several tries before passing.
There has been suggestions of reducing the kill zone and increasing the documented training rounds but so far this has not been implemented.
On the whole the test works ok. It ensures a minimum standard, provides a little income for shooting Clubs and a social get together for hunters. Interestingly the busiest time at the range test wise is after the summer holidays but before the reindeer and roebuck season starts in august.

 

[macfarlane]

It’s sometimes easier shooting at the corners of the paper the targets on rather than the target in the centre, that’s my excuse anyway.