The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

toffe wrapper wrote:I remember posting on another thread ( violent crime reduction bill) that this exception was not a good idea.
Various people defended it saying my opinion of a back door for criminals etc was wrong.
Showman's guild blah blah, insurance Blah Blah.

We its a F***** stupid thing, as proved by this case.

walesdave wrote:

toffe wrapper wrote:I remember posting on another thread ( violent crime reduction bill) that this exception was not a good idea.
Various people defended it saying my opinion of a back door for criminals etc was wrong.
Showman's guild blah blah, insurance Blah Blah.

We its a F***** stupid thing, as proved by this case.

That's right - just like owning semi-auto rifles was a F***** stupid thing, as proved by Hungerford, and owning handguns was a F***** stupid thing, as proved by Dunblane....

I'm sure though that your chosen discipline (whatever it is) is a NOT F***** stupid thing as it's something you think is ok.

While the numpties in this case should have been prosecuted under different laws - I'm sure the H&S bods could have found something relevant, the miniature rifle club exemption is used many many small bore clubs to operate and in correctly run ranges is used to introduce non-shooters to the shooting sports without the need for clubs to arrange guest days etc.

bradaz11 wrote:

Pippin89 wrote: But the fact these people put it at risk with their stupidity, and were completely above the law, does call for some sort of change.

no it doesn't they went to court and were dealt with. if they were above the law, that wouldn't have happened.

DO NOT WISH MORE LAWS ON US

if you are found to be unsafe, there are more than enough laws in existence to deal with it.

Sim G wrote:The point is the “range”, the acquisition of firearms and ammunition was legal. The use in those circumstances was legal, but still people are calling for a repeal of that section!! FFS!

There are people up and down the country that use this exemption to shoot. Tiny little clubs, on the sides of village halls that go all the way back to the turn of the 20th century, remain because of this. Likewise, Stag Parties are a great idea!! They might not be the gateway to the stifled, rule driven utopia that some desire, but they certainly break down the barriers for ordinary people that shooting can be safe and fun! That can only help when there’s the next vilification of the Sport.

Don’t like it, ban it! Honestly, I am pig sick of the attitude of some within the sport. They truly have no idea how utterly destructive that is.

Pippin89 wrote:

I'm not sure if you read the article but they were NOT dealt with. They were let off of all charges relating to the range....
The only charge they were found guilty of was pointing a gun at their neighbour in public. The running of the range was legal and, as such, they were found innocent on all charges relating to this.

Sorry if it doesn't conform to what you think a firearms owner should believe but in my humble opinion they should not have been allowed access to firearms considering how they used them. If that calls for a change in law then so be it. I made a couple of very not-very-intrusive suggestions on how it could be dealt with that would allow it to be continued to use in the manner in which it is intended while also stopping "wannabe gangsters", as they have been described, from running p*** poor and dangerous ranges.

This range being in the public eye, and bringing knowledge of Section 11(4) to the media is not a good thing for its future use. Surely it is better to remove the improper use of it up front and stop any further incidents like this one so it is not used against the genuine users???