How many Pro stalking guide Clear all their land

Not sure if you're aware, but the long standing FEO for this area retired in July. It may be that the new one is just playing it very safely for the time being. I'm yet to meet her as I've had no reason to yet. I'll be a shame if she has a very different outlook, as the outgoing lady was very realistic about things.


No Liz (realistic outlook depends who you talk to ) has gone mine is the other Long term FEO and she was quoting County Policy which she cant do anything about individually

the new FEO isnt my area


in all other ways she was very reasonable understanding and helpful
 
Didn't realise this was all concerning dorset (my iPhone app doesn't show all the details!).
My personal (first hand) experience is that some individuals with years of experience in the field can also be guilty of misjudgement or safety errors that could have horrendous consequences.

What does this mean for those with zero experience?

My view is that firearms safety courses should be gradually introduced taking the same tact as the police speed awareness course.
 
Firstly I would ask the question are the Land clearance people qualified and which quals they need and have obtained.If they approve the land, point out to them in a reasonable manner ,that they and the Chief officer of police now become jointly liable for any "accidents" under common law.
This condition used to be "Land approved by the chief officer of police" for the county. Most sensible counties removed it when realising the do do the Chief could end up in.
 
What Be condescending holier than thou Rude unhelpful and offensive to people who have broken a minor law

I've spoken to quite a few people who have been on it and they said it was informative a gave them a different perspective on the danger of speeding.

I have no doubt there are some that they think they know it all but that would not be the purpose of a firearms safety course.

I'm not aiming this at you by the way.
 
I've spoken to quite a few people who have been on it and they said it was informative a gave them a different perspective on the danger of speeding.

I have no doubt there are some that they think they know it all but that would not be the purpose of a firearms safety course.

I'm not aiming this at you by the way.


i understand ive also spoken to several (including my wife ) and that's how they where treated Yes they learned stuff but the general attitude of the staff was Strict headmaster / bully dealing with a naughty 5yr old from booking on the phone to attending etc several aid they would have rather taken the points than be treated like that again (this isnt young boy racers or about what they are trying to teach just how )

I do think every body who wants an FAC should attend firearms safety training obviously a target guy would get this at a club and has to attend over 6mths before he can even put in for a grant .
Hunting is a bit more difficult
 
What Be condescending holier than thou Rude unhelpful and offensive to people who have broken a minor law

I'm going to be brutally honest and say that you are coming across as quite anti-police. Do you think that you may have come across that way in your interview?
 
I do not believe that anybody on here is anti-police.
What we are against is the Police making up arbitrary laws that are NOT law.
The Polices job is to enforce the law not make up laws.
In some ways I pity them as there is only home office guidance, guidance being the word that causes the controversy. What we all hate is that they do not all sing from the same hymn sheet.
Interpretation can vary not only from force to force but FEO to FEO in the same district. Many FEOs are not shooters and therefore do not understand what is being asked of them.

Interestingly you could get a DSC2 without having ever shot a deer. Think about it. You could stalk and say you would shoot that one and there is the safe shot. Then you could go away to a park and gralloch animals that were being culled, thereby passing all the criteria.

What we do not like is the Police saying this is the way it is when it is not law. If you give in then you set a precedent and soon it becomes the minimum standard.
It is not law. You should not stand for it and you should write to your MP about it and give him a flea in his/her ear to get it sorted out.
 
Interestingly you could get a DSC2 without having ever shot a deer. Think about it. You could stalk and say you would shoot that one and there is the safe shot. Then you could go away to a park and gralloch animals that were being culled, thereby passing all the criteria.

Are you suggesting that people can get someone else to shoot the deer for them? Do you have evidence of this taking place?
 
Back
Top