Boundary Positions

[mangy1983 51]

If a crofts boundary fence ends 4-5 meters away from a main road, does anyone know if l would be legal shooting on the road side of the fence? Although it is a main road it is still very quiet and l know about the shooting 50 yard/foot rule from a highway but doesn't that only matter if you prove a distraction to other drivers? I am unsure of where the roads verge would begin and my permission ends...

 

The reason l am asking is that this croft has a hill on it which starts about 100 yards from the road and my quarry (geese) are always in the area between the foot of the hill and the road and l am finding it really hard getting a safe shot as well as working my way over the hill and round them to get into a position to take a safe shot. I think if l could shoot by the boundary fence and have the hill as a backstop it would prove to be a much better solution.

 

What do you guys think?

 

cheers Callum

[paulus 26]

in england there is no law that says you carnt shoot within x yards of a road its a myth, it comes under the highways act, your not allowed to obstruct the flow of traffic so it you shot a pheasent say and it landed infront of an oncomming car causing that car to stop or take action you are obstructing the flow of traffic and as such it is an offence, however if someone hears you shooting and slows down or stops, then they are doing so of their own free will so you are not obstructing the traffic and so no offence is committed

[CharlieT 32]

I'm afraid you are wrong. The OP is correct.

 

I suggest you re read the law.

[matt_hooks 188]

A quote from the BASC code of practice on Lamping which gives the source and the wording that is relevant. Of course that doesn't apply in Scotland. You could possibly be prosecuted for endangerment, but there is no actual statute in Scotland that relates to the section quoted below in English law.

 

The Highways Act 1980 Section 161 in England and Wales makes it an offence to discharge without lawful authority or excuse any firearm within 50 feet of the centre of the highway and in consequence of which the user of the highway is injured, interrupted or endangered.

 

But that doesn't mean you have the right to shoot from land that is not part of your permission. The boundary fence of the croft is the boundary of your permission. To enter on to to the highway with a firearm, loaded, and with the intention of firing it, is armed trespass and could get you in serious trouble.

[paulus 26]

keep looking the truth is out there the x yard is a myth

[Lab 10,979]

I'm afraid you are wrong. The OP is correct.

 

I suggest you re read the law.

I'm afraid you are wrong..... Better get the legalities sorted out before you continue to argue!!

[matt_hooks 188]

Paulus, I suggest you google the piece of legislation I mentioned in the quote above. It is NOT a myth, but it is also not exactly what people normally think it is.

[Lab 10,979]

Here you go Paul...............found it...

In England & Wales it is an offence without lawful authority or reasonable excuse to

discharge any firearm within fifty feet of the centre of a highway which consists of

or comprises a carriageway, and in consequence a user of the carriageway is

injured, interrupted or endangered. [section 161(2) of the Highways Act 1980 as

amended].It is important to remember that the discharge of a firearm is not

prohibited in itself. It must also be proved that there was an injury, or that

someone’s passage was interrupted or interfered with e.g. they have been forced to

make a detour.

[matt_hooks 188]

Paulus, below is an actual quote, from the actual legislation (Highways Act 1980)

 

Now tell me that the 50 foot rule is a myth.

 

 

The Highways Act 1980, Section 161: Penalties for causing certain kinds of danger or annoyance.

 

(1)

If a person, without lawful authority or excuse, deposits any thing whatsoever on a highway in consequence of which a user of the highway is injured or endangered, that person is guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding [level 3 on the standard scale].

 

(2) If a person without lawful authority or excuse—

 

(A)

lights any fire on or over a highway which consists of or comprises a carriageway; or

 

(

discharges any firearm or firework within 50 feet of the centre of such a highway,

and in consequence a user of the highway is injured, interrupted or endangered, that person is guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.]

Edited December 29, 2011 by matt_hooks

[matt_hooks 188]

Lab, that's a quote from somewhere, where is it from?

 

Yes, there is no absolute offence of discharging a firearm within 50 feet of the centre of a highway. The offence requires that a user of the highway is "injured, interrupted or endangered" to be complete.

 

It's poorly worded, define what interruption or endangerment is!

 

Also remember that it needs to be "without lawful authority or excuse". Now you could argue that being a servant of the landowner and requiring to control a pest species qualifies as "lawful authority" but I can't find any precedent in law for it, so you'd be taking a chance.

[Lab 10,979]

Lab, that's a quote from somewhere, where is it from?

 

Yes, there is no absolute offence of discharging a firearm within 50 feet of the centre of a highway. The offence requires that a user of the highway is "injured, interrupted or endangered" to be complete.

 

It's poorly worded, define what interruption or endangerment is!

 

Also remember that it needs to be "without lawful authority or excuse". Now you could argue that being a servant of the landowner and requiring to control a pest species qualifies as "lawful authority" but I can't find any precedent in law for it, so you'd be taking a chance.

it was on here before mate. The arguement has been done before and because it wasn't a certain ruling if you found yourself in court I think that could be used as a loophole.

[paulus 26]

Paulus, below is an actual quote, from the actual legislation (Highways Act 1980)

 

Now tell me that the 50 foot rule is a myth.

 

 

The Highways Act 1980, Section 161: Penalties for causing certain kinds of danger or annoyance.

 

 

(1)

If a person, without lawful authority or excuse, deposits any thing whatsoever on a highway in consequence of which a user of the highway is injured or endangered, that person is guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding [level 3 on the standard scale].

 

(2) If a person without lawful authority or excuse—

 

 

(A)

lights any fire on or over a highway which consists of or comprises a carriageway; or

 

 

(

discharges any firearm or firework within 50 feet of the centre of such a highway,

and in consequence a user of the highway is injured, interrupted or endangered, that person is guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.]

 

looks the same as what i said to me still a myth lol

[matt_hooks 188]

Depends Paulus. If you mean the general opinion that firing a firearm near a footpath or road is completely illegal, then yes, it's a myth. If you mean that there are certain circumstances when you can be prosecuted for firing a gun within 50 feet of a road then definitely NOT a myth!

[paulus 26]

most incidents where people fall fowl of this myth are delt with by way of a caution, either or both parties are wrong if youve youve not caused injury or an obstruction stand your ground you are not breaking any law and by accepting a caution you are admitting guilt.

[matt_hooks 188]

This argument has been done to death, and is totally irrelevant to the OP's post as it only applies to England and Wales, and he's about as far as you can get from England and Wales within the UK.

 

I still say if he fires from outside the boundaries of his permission then he is committing an offence. If he stays within the boundary fence then he isn't.