Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 46

Thread: Is this legal ?

  1. #1

    Is this legal ?

    Advice please

    i have a piece of land with permission to shoot on.
    problem is, I have not got an open ticket and the land
    Is not passed of by the police.

    I only shoot shot gun on there.
    Now I want to zero my riffle, am I allowed to do this with my mate who has an open ticket?


    with thanks
    craggy

  2. #2
    Only if your rifle is on his ticket and he has permission to shoot on the land (i think)?

  3. #3
    SD Regular
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    East Midlands M1/M69 Junction 21
    Posts
    5,387
    In theory, and I'd check with BASC, (I presume that you are a BASC Member) there is a way that you might be able to do this, via the Estate Rifle legislation.

    You are the occupier of the land as you have the shooting rights. Your friend can, as your guest, use your rifle to shoot on the land under the Estate Rifle legislation.

    Now, where it is a "grey" area is on him having to shoot a test group (with the Estate Rifle) to show that he is competent to shoot a deer and, if necessay at that time to adjust the rifle to shoot to required point of aim.

    I would however seek definitive advise on this and NOT take my advice on it!

  4. #4
    I don't think you are allowed to do that, so check with mr plod/basc
    shooting rights aren't the same thing as shooting permission

  5. #5
    if he has an open ticket and is using your rifle on your land then I can't see any reason stopping HIM zeroing the rifle.

    He is using it lawfully in your company
    he can shoot on the ground as he has an open ticket

    That doesnt help you much though


    a mockery of a stupid system

  6. #6
    I think what you suggest may be illegal. I don't see that an open cert holder being present changes anything. The reality is that you have not got an open certificate and the land is not passed. As it stands you can only either ask for the land to be approved, ask for an open cert or zero elsewhere. I think your mate would only be legal if the rifle were on his ticket as well or is on your ticket as an estate rifle.
    Sorry but I would hate you to get into hot water

  7. #7
    Enfield, using the estate rifle clause means that the person shooting is bound by the same conditions as the FAC holder. If the FAC holder can't shoot over the land then nobody can do so using the estate rifle clause.

    Bewsher, again, the relevant conditions are those on the FAC that the weapon is held under, NOT the FAC of the shooter! It makes no difference if your mate has an open ticket, unless the weapon is actually included on it. The only way around it is if he has an RFD ticket with a right to test weapons, then he can fire anything on it. Otherwise what Bewsher and Enfieldspares suggest is entirely illegal.

    Srvet, almost correct, except there is no such thing as "an estate rifle". The "estate rifle clause" allows someone to use a weapon under the supervision of the holder, but as above it's under the same conditions as the holders FAC. You can share a rifle on several FAC's, but the conditions of use are still those on the FAC of the individual user supervising.

    The only way you can use the rifle on the land is to either get the land cleared, get the restrictive land condition removed from your certificate or get the weapon added to the certificate of someone who has the less restrictive land condition ("open" certificate) and then use it under their supervision.
    Last edited by matt_hooks; 06-01-2013 at 20:36.

  8. #8
    Does everyone have an automatic estate rifle clause? I was under the impression that if I wanted the facility for others to use one of my rifles then I would have to apply for that variation to be on my certificate. I had assumed that the facility would probably be for one of my rifles but not all How does it work and what level of supervision is needed. Could I set someone up in a high seat with the 'estate rifle' whilst I was in another or should I be sitting dutifully under the ladder?

  9. #9
    It has nothing to do with the individual firearm holder or their certificate. The "estate rifle" clause is written in to legislation. Anyone 17 years old or older (if the borrower is 17, the lender must be 18 or older) can borrow, and use, any section 1 weapon held on an FAC, under the supervision of the FAC holder.

    The relevant legislation is here:- Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988

    There is much discussion about who can avail themselves of the clause.

    "Occupier or servant of the occupier" is the first point of contention. The thinking seems to be that someone who holds shooting rights on the land (in writing to be safe) can rightfully claim to be an occupier.

    "Servant of the occupier" is usually taken to mean one who is in "the normal employ" of the occupier, such as a gamekeeper or other employee.

    Note that 1.B states that the firearm is used according to the conditions on the holders FAC.

    The conditions states that the borrowing must take place "in the presence of" the FAC holder for the relevant rifle. "In the presence of" is usually taken to mean "in sight and earshot", although I'm not aware of any legal precedent on this.

    So yes, it CAN apply to any weapon held on a S1 FAC (there is no such allowance for S5 weapons, or S2 either. You can lend someone a 30-06, but not a S2 12 bore. You can however lend a high capacity (S1) 12 bore!)

    There is no such thing as an "estate clause" on a FAC. It is not something that can be "applied for".

    I hope that kind of clarifies it.

    BASC have a useful fact sheet on it.

    https://www.basc.org.uk/download.cfm...7529F5D17C4E2F
    Last edited by matt_hooks; 06-01-2013 at 21:38.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by matt_hooks View Post
    It has nothing to do with the individual firearm holder or their certificate. The "estate rifle" clause is written in to legislation. Anyone 17 years old or older (if the borrower is 17, the lender must be 18 or older) can borrow, and use, any section 1 weapon held on an FAC, under the supervision of the FAC holder.

    The relevant legislation is here:- Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988

    There is much discussion about who can avail themselves of the clause.

    "Occupier or servant of the occupier" is the first point of contention. The thinking seems to be that someone who holds shooting rights on the land (in writing to be safe) can rightfully claim to be an occupier.

    "Servant of the occupier" is usually taken to mean one who is in "the normal employ" of the occupier, such as a gamekeeper or other employee.

    Note that 1.B states that the firearm is used according to the conditions on the holders FAC.

    The conditions states that the borrowing must take place "in the presence of" the FAC holder for the relevant rifle. "In the presence of" is usually taken to mean "in sight and earshot", although I'm not aware of any legal precedent on this.

    So yes, it CAN apply to any weapon held on a S1 FAC (there is no such allowance for S5 weapons, or S2 either. You can lend someone a 30-06, but not a S2 12 bore. You can however lend a high capacity (S1) 12 bore!)

    There is no such thing as an "estate clause" on a FAC. It is not something that can be "applied for".

    I hope that kind of clarifies it.

    BASC have a useful fact sheet on it.

    https://www.basc.org.uk/download.cfm...7529F5D17C4E2F
    The flaw in all the assumptions made about the 'estate rifle' exemption and it's applicability is that there is no definition of the 'occupier' in firearms law. The suggestion in Section 6.14 of the HO Guidance is that this may be interpreted by the Chief Constable as someone who has or holds the shooting rights.

    Usually the shooting rights belong to the Estate or landowner. Someone who has permission to shoot is merely assigned temporary use of those rights, but the legal rights remain in the ownership of the landholder. In firearms matters courts take a much narrower view of rights, and assert a greater duty on those who claim the right to exercise them. We've all seen this in punitive sentences handed out for quite trivial breaches of Conditions on Firearms Certificates.

    For most statutes the court takes the common law definition which is someone who exercises a sufficient degree of control over who is allowed to enter the land or premises.

    This is established as fact in occupiers liability cases where injury to the public or damage occurs. The courts have held here that the 'occupier' in law is the landlord, the tenant, the land manager, a local authority, the Forestry Commission, or even a tenant farmer on LA land. Clearly, these same individuals or organisations actually hold the shooting rights over their land, so could be regarded by the Court as the true 'occupier' in firearms law.

    I'm only making the point that the individuals or organisations which are defined as having the correct legal status & obligations in that area of law at least, are much higher in the pecking order than sportsmen who are just shooting on the land. The case of a genuine sporting estate with clients and employee gamekeepers or stalkers clearly fits that same definition of 'the occupier'.
    If I'm going to be accused of it then it's just as well I did it.

Similar Threads

  1. Any other legal quarry
    By moses in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 07-09-2012, 07:01
  2. is this LEGAL
    By roering in forum Legal Issues
    Replies: 100
    Last Post: 10-05-2012, 22:01
  3. Is a drilling legal?
    By vegard_dino in forum Legal Issues
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 13-10-2010, 16:11
  4. following on from legal in 2012
    By finnbear270 in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 19-07-2010, 13:50
  5. Legal or not
    By Max in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 02-04-2010, 16:46

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •