Safety on the Shooting Line

[Rik]

Originally Posted by whisky

the rules go on about solo shooting and say it can take place where the public dont have access, but go on and say something about access has to be considered available even if through tresspass. Doesn't that rule out nearly everywhere??

Not really. I think the actual wording is intended to cover the situation where the public don't have access (i.e. are not allowed onto the ground) but can get in without (for example) using wire cutters...
Our ground is private - no public rights of way - and as grounds of a palace can definitely be taken as 'no public access'. But the fence between us and Kensington palace gardens is just iron railings, a little over waist high. With this set up, we can't have solo shooting even though the ground is 'private'. Difficult to prevent mindless idiots jumping the fence to play football behind the targets...
In liability terms, I think you're probably fairly safe if someone climbs a security fence and stops an arrow. You could reasonably expect that the fence would prevent someone being there. Not so with railings.

[tel]

".....fenced all round and where the public has no legal right of access." it says - trespass is not a legal right

[Dave]

Originally Posted by tel

".....fenced all round and where the public has no legal right of access." it says - trespass is not a legal right

Unfortunately you do have a 'duty of care' to people who trespass on your land - although if they're injured (and sue) any compensation would be reduced by the courts if they didn't have a very good reason for their trespass.

[karamajo]

Similar threads have cropped up in various shooting forums. The question of a trespasser being injured is common and the subject is full of urban mythology.

When you look at the insurance aspect of things, it's hard to understand how anyone can be insured against commiting an act of negligence. If an archer 'accidentally' shoots someone, then the MUST be a large degree of negligence! The bow must be pointed at a person and the arrow released for it to happen. It is the responsibility of the archer to ensure that this is done safely and if it isn't, then it is quite simply negligent.

I don't know what the wording is on the GNAS insurance policy, but I bet it doesn't cover negligence!

Ian

[tel]

Originally Posted by Dave

Unfortunately you do have a 'duty of care' to people who trespass on your land - although if they're injured (and sue) any compensation would be reduced by the courts if they didn't have a very good reason for their trespass.

I appreciate that - I was looking at it purely from the 'shooting alone' angle, not trying to justify the culling of idiots

[Zanda]

Originally Posted by karamajo

Similar threads have cropped up in various shooting forums. The question of a trespasser being injured is common and the subject is full of urban mythology.

When you look at the insurance aspect of things, it's hard to understand how anyone can be insured against commiting an act of negligence. If an archer 'accidentally' shoots someone, then the MUST be a large degree of negligence! The bow must be pointed at a person and the arrow released for it to happen. It is the responsibility of the archer to ensure that this is done safely and if it isn't, then it is quite simply negligent.

I don't know what the wording is on the GNAS insurance policy, but I bet it doesn't cover negligence!

Ian

hows this for madness guys n gals, there is no such thing as an accident, all accidents are now classified as "an avoidable incident" good old health and safety

[Cimbian]

Just out of interest and not advocating wanderers... Has anyone ever been shot during target archery whilst wandering behind targets etc.?

[Jumile]

Originally Posted by Zanda

hows this for madness guys n gals, there is no such thing as an accident, all accidents are now classified as "an avoidable incident" good old health and safety

It goes hand-in-hand with our ever-increasingly litigious society. The removal of accidents ensures that there is always someone to blame whenever something occurs. Unless you're an insurance company, where Force Majeure is a a valid catch-all.

Disgusting, but we seem to be allowing it to happen.

[elastoplastscavenger]

Originally Posted by Random_guy

since if someone managed to get over the 8 foot fence etc and an accident occured, i'm pretty certain GNAS would argue you couldn't possibly have had full control of the field, as if you had, the accident wouldn't have happened! And if they won that arguement you wouldn't be covered under GNAS insurance for the incident. Probably wouldn't happen, but i personally wouldn't risk it!

iv heard of a similar incident where a drunk tramp broke onto a building site, climbed up the scafolding and fell off. sued the builders because the fence was less than 8 feet at one point.

[Rik]

Originally Posted by Cimbian

Just out of interest and not advocating wanderers... Has anyone ever been shot during target archery whilst wandering behind targets etc.?

Not to my knowledge in target, but I believe an archer was shot in the leg on a field course a few years back...