Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)
The following was posted on uk.legal. I've copied it, with my
reply, in the hope that it might save a life:
pete <peterturtill@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:ntq9k0tc6a28bi6jhlotrluho6vqtc5nip@4ax.com:
> On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 18:20:06 +0100, Palindr?me
> <sb382638@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>>bigbrian wrote:
>>>
>>> Assuming that he turns out not to have been a police
>>> officer, is the person who fired the fatal shot likely to
>>> be charged with any crime? There's clearly an intention
>>> to shoot something, and presumably a clear mistake in
>>> identifiying what was being shot.. There's presumably
>>> some sort of civil liability - any criminal charges that
>>> could be brought? Ot is it enough that it can be put down
>>> to a "tragic accident" And would it make a difference if
>>> the boy was entitled to be on the land, or was there
>>> without permission? (its not clear from the article what
>>> the actual situation was, or even whether he was on the
>>> land being used by the hunt at all when he was hit)
>>>
>><snip brief description of shooting incident>
>>
>>The article does describe the boy as being a member of the
>>shooting party.
>>
>>A 13 year old engaged in such pursuits should be being
>>supervised by an adult. No-one should not have been ahead
>>of the gun(s). So the blame may not fall entirely on the
>>shooter.
I have not seen a detailed report of how the accident occurred
but here is an explanation of a possible scenario most fox
controllers are aware of as it is a highly dangerous situation:
"A" picks up the reflection of the light from a fox's eyes using
a spotlight from a vehicle. (The eyes of a fox or cat are
designed to reflect excess light so it is better able to see in
low light conditions. This reflection is very bright indeed and
usually unmistakeable to an experienced shooter).
"B", in the same vehicle, gets out of the vehicle and rests on
the front bonnet to get a steady shot at the fox which is
clearly identified in the lamp held by "A".
The fox, at a range of 100 plus yards, moves around the face of
the vehicle to get down wind to check the scent. This may be
initiated by curiosity or because one of the shooters will be
immitating the squeal of a terrified rabbit (i.e. indicating an
easy meal to the fox). But the fox is suspicious and wants to
check out the scent, so it moves to get down wind of the party.
"B" moves his position to follow the fox hoping for a shot. He
now rests his rifle on the top of the vehicle. "A" is still able
to follow the fox by pointing the lamp out of the car window.
Fox moves further round the vehicle. "A" now has to get out of
the vehicle to use the lamp. "B" gets a clear view of the fox
through his telescopic sight and fires.
"A" has the top of his head blown off because "B" has not
allowed for the parallax between the line of sight through the
telescopic sight and the line of fire through the rifle barrel.
The 'scope is positioned about 3 inches about the rifle barrel
which gives him a clear view without seeing "A's" head directly
opposite the rifle muzzle.
In my view, that is the most likely (and dangerous) scenario but
we will all know in due course.
Derry
The following was posted on uk.legal. I've copied it, with my
reply, in the hope that it might save a life:
pete <peterturtill@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:ntq9k0tc6a28bi6jhlotrluho6vqtc5nip@4ax.com:
> On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 18:20:06 +0100, Palindr?me
> <sb382638@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>>bigbrian wrote:
>>>
>>> Assuming that he turns out not to have been a police
>>> officer, is the person who fired the fatal shot likely to
>>> be charged with any crime? There's clearly an intention
>>> to shoot something, and presumably a clear mistake in
>>> identifiying what was being shot.. There's presumably
>>> some sort of civil liability - any criminal charges that
>>> could be brought? Ot is it enough that it can be put down
>>> to a "tragic accident" And would it make a difference if
>>> the boy was entitled to be on the land, or was there
>>> without permission? (its not clear from the article what
>>> the actual situation was, or even whether he was on the
>>> land being used by the hunt at all when he was hit)
>>>
>><snip brief description of shooting incident>
>>
>>The article does describe the boy as being a member of the
>>shooting party.
>>
>>A 13 year old engaged in such pursuits should be being
>>supervised by an adult. No-one should not have been ahead
>>of the gun(s). So the blame may not fall entirely on the
>>shooter.
I have not seen a detailed report of how the accident occurred
but here is an explanation of a possible scenario most fox
controllers are aware of as it is a highly dangerous situation:
"A" picks up the reflection of the light from a fox's eyes using
a spotlight from a vehicle. (The eyes of a fox or cat are
designed to reflect excess light so it is better able to see in
low light conditions. This reflection is very bright indeed and
usually unmistakeable to an experienced shooter).
"B", in the same vehicle, gets out of the vehicle and rests on
the front bonnet to get a steady shot at the fox which is
clearly identified in the lamp held by "A".
The fox, at a range of 100 plus yards, moves around the face of
the vehicle to get down wind to check the scent. This may be
initiated by curiosity or because one of the shooters will be
immitating the squeal of a terrified rabbit (i.e. indicating an
easy meal to the fox). But the fox is suspicious and wants to
check out the scent, so it moves to get down wind of the party.
"B" moves his position to follow the fox hoping for a shot. He
now rests his rifle on the top of the vehicle. "A" is still able
to follow the fox by pointing the lamp out of the car window.
Fox moves further round the vehicle. "A" now has to get out of
the vehicle to use the lamp. "B" gets a clear view of the fox
through his telescopic sight and fires.
"A" has the top of his head blown off because "B" has not
allowed for the parallax between the line of sight through the
telescopic sight and the line of fire through the rifle barrel.
The 'scope is positioned about 3 inches about the rifle barrel
which gives him a clear view without seeing "A's" head directly
opposite the rifle muzzle.
In my view, that is the most likely (and dangerous) scenario but
we will all know in due course.
Derry
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram