Bullets crossing boundaries

R. Macleod & Son - The Best Hunting Companion
Must admit I thinks its 1 of these things that will depend on the exact circumstances.

I do probably believe it will be illegal to fire a round onto someone else's ground BUT how would anyone ever know? assuming a deer is standing inside ur boundry the chances are there is no one else nearby (esp if ur downwind).
The chances of anyone seeing u are pretty slim anyway and then they'd have to find the bullet and match it to ur gun, I just can't see it happen

In theory it shouldn't matter wether ur bullet goes over by inch or 1000m, but I'm not entirely sure taking a shot where the back stop is 1000m away would be classed as safe anyway no matter who's ground it is (can u really see everything in that 1000m?)

While I believe u shouldn't, in practice it will happen all the time, otherwise u couldn't shoot a deer anywhere near ur boundry even if shot direction is at 90 degrees to boundry it could still richocet of at 90 degrees every now and again. Any deer shot near the boundry fence will have the chance of the bullet crossing it perfectly safely
Really as long as the shot is safe is all that really matters but it will depend on the exact circumstances each time
 
nun_hunter said:
The relevance is "no offences took place and no further police action was required". You can never guarantee what a bullet will do once it hits any object so regardless of what you think it may do or where it may end up you never know. Plenty of threads on here of bullets entering a deer perfect broadside and exiting 90° or more and striding other deer or even another part of the initial deer.
Click to expand...

Which does raise an interesting point. What if someone shot a deer that was on their land, had masses of backstop on their land which they were making full use of (deer halfway up a sandy bank 50m away, stalker up a high seat shooting downwards towards it etc..) and the bullet clips a shoulder, comes out skywards and lands in someone elses land 300m away? Maybe this is exactly what happened in this instance with the bullet going through the window?

There was no deliberate reckless act, no negligence on the part of the stalker - He was being as safe as safe could be. So did he break the law? I would suggest not, and if an injury resulted from the bullet coming down thats why we have insurance! I cant see how the stalker has done anything other than exactly what he was meant to be doing.

Lets not forget that ricochets and unusual bullet trajectories happen on civvy target ranges too..

Its rather like car accidents and insurance - if your car is in good nick, you're not speeding, not drunk or high or being a wally and someone randomly steps out in front of you and gets killed then yes, that person is dead because of you (IE; it was you that hit them) but its not your fault - You were doing everything you should have been doing.

This surely cant be an absolute "if you pulled the trigger and something goes wrong, you WILL be liable for civil/criminal charges regardless of any other circumstance"? Sure, I can see someone being liable if they were being unsafe or deliberately broke the law, but a random act of god?
 
No harm in just asking. I often dream of doing strange things with Kylie Minogue. But I never would.


...Part of the above statement may not be true.
 
I'm more of an Angela Merkel man myself...
Click to expand...

I saw Angela Merkel once.

Standing right in front of me at French Passport Control for the Eurostar.

The French PAF (Frontier Police) asked for her passport.

I remember it well!

"Name?"

"Merkel, Angela"

"Nationality?"

"German"

"Occupation?"

"No, not this time, just passing through"
 
enfieldspares said:
I saw Angela Merkel once.

Standing right in front of me at French Passport Control for the Eurostar.

The French PAF (Frontier Police) asked for her passport.

I remember it well!

"Name?"

"Merkel, Angela"

"Nationality?"

"German"

"Occupation?"

"No, not this time, just passing through"
Click to expand...

Love it!
 
It gets worse CarlW!

Another time, again, I was stood behind her, also again at the Eurostar, I use it quite a lot. That distinctive short dumpy figure, no discernible waist, no discernible hips, no discernible bust, like a sack of potatoes. Sensible flat shoes. And that distinctive, probably now tinted, sandy ginger coloured hair with its pudding basin style hanging over the back of the collar of its purple trouser suit.

I've always been an admirer...like you I guess CarlW...I had to say something...I couldn't stop myself...so I touched her gently on the back of the shoulder.

"Kanzellor Merkel! Guten Tag! Wie geht es Ihnen?"

And at that point she turned around and...and...it wasn't her at all.

IT WAS ELTON JOHN!

What a fool I looked. And with him not understanding a word of German too.
 
Last edited:
Lots of opinion. Simple fact is this: Any bullet (or fall of shotgun pellets) on land where you don't have permission is legally classed as Constructive Tresspass. Whilst not strictly a criminal offence, your FEO will look at it as, at best, irresponsible, and would likely take this into account, if brought to their attention, at renewal time. Shooting over one permission onto another, crossing land you have no permission for isn't the same BUT you could be landed in trouble if, in doing so, the owners/occupiers made a complaint along the lines of such shooting affecting their legal enjoyment of their land by dint of feeling threatened or other similar nuisance. This from a solicitor's advice and backed up by an FEO when I called to enquire about exactly this scenario last year.
 
Try reading Deer:Law and Liabilities by Parkes and Thornley.......the definitive reference .Swan Hill Press ISBN1-84037-096-3:stag:
 
This opens up another question about shooting close to boundarys then we all accept that the bullet will pass and through said beast and end up in neighbours hillside , what distance between shot beast and hillside is considered to be a safe back stop ? And potentially what distance can remains of bullets travel after passing through deer obviously species calibre bullet type etc can all make a major difference. Personally I shoot in lots of areas close to neighbouring woodland mainly reds and I now use either hollow point 6 mm bullets which never exit but cause an explosion inturnally or 6.5 mm plastic tipped bullets that do the same , this is to reduce the risk of bullets passing though onto neighbouring areas
 
For those wittering on about shotgun shot falling on land belonging to someone else, it too is an offence.

I ran a shotgun shoot to raise funds for a local rugby club and had to get the police out to gain permission to hold the shoot. Much thought was given to the likely prevailing winds and where the shot would reach to, the FEO who came had a booklet which told him how far shot would travel given various wind speeds. We worked out safe areas to shoot and how to keep the non-shooters safe too.

I was impressed with how helpful he was and with how much care was taken, but I was left in no doubt falling shot, however harmless, if it falls on someone else's land would be an offence for which I would be held liable.

Regards, Simon
 
6) Unless on private property with permission of the land owner. It is an offence for someone under this exception
to fire any missile beyond the boundary of the premises unless with permission of the adjacent land owner

I was looking through some old downloaded info I receive as an assessor. This is a police notice as such.....Should answer the original question...J
 
Moray,
thanks, that's as definitive as I need. Curiosity would lead me to ask what offence is commited, but in the future some time.
Cervus - I've looked through the relevant bits of johns book, which deals with shot and run on to neighbours land, really well but doesn't cover bullets crossing boundaries. If I've missed it, point it out, I'm happy to re-read the relevant bits if I've missed something.
 
Dalua said:
Popular opinion suggests that it is civil offence of trespass.
Click to expand...

I've found 'popular opinion' to vacillate from 'not fit to hold an fac' via 'don't ask, you should just know' to 'it doesn't matter as long as you don't hurt anyone/anything'. You'll excuse me if I don't base my decision making on 'popular opinion', as it's not a solid starting point if answering questions from the prosecution.
 
Oracle said:
It would amount to a "Constructive Trespass" and, given the scenario described, would most likely call into question any certificate holders "fitness to be entrusted with a firearm"
Click to expand...

Treedave,
We've gone in a ferkin big circle but if you refer to post #9 above, there's your answer, pure and simple.
Oracle, quoted you now twice, that's got to be worth at least a beer!
 
Simple question, or is it. I am standing on the riverbank. I own the riverbank so I have the right to be there. I pick up a flat stone and skim it. It goes well and lands on the far bank. What offence have I committed. I have sent an object with velocity onto a neighbours property. It is inert. It cannot move without some external force doing so. The chances of the neighbour finding a nd recognising it as a foreign object are slim.
How many of us have tucked up in a hedge waiting for that buck to come out the neighbours wood into our field. Oh deer, I cannot shoot you as my bullet will land safely in the wood.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Article Article
My first Red
Replies
19
Views
1K
VSS
VSS
  • Article Article
Post-Rut Roe Buck
Replies
6
Views
2K
tjm160
tjm160
  • Article Article
Danes in Scotland
2
Replies
21
Views
5K
Scipio
Scipio
  • Article Article
Danes in England
2
Replies
29
Views
7K
EssexBigMac
EssexBigMac
Poaching.
Replies
4
Views
4K
Fez
Fez
https://Immersive-optics.com/
Back
Top