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.
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.
