Popsbengo

I feel for you; have you considered a powered golf cart modified to take your stuff? There's a couple of chaps around I know using that solution to good effect. Plenty of battery capacity for to and fro on a range. AIM products are high quality design and manufacture. Re AIM mats - I have one and it's very good, bigger than the common rolled up type and quite stable for my back bag. I also have a couple of AIM drag-bags, a very comfortable way to lug gear up a range on your back if you must.

Not a cynic, I think we all agree that the various police jurisdictions should apply the law interpreted to one standard, correctly. It's very frustrating. I believe the College Of Policing consultation is their in-house attempt to do that but as always the devils' in the details

Seems reasonable advice to me, after all persons normally doing invoiced work wouldn't necessarily be a 'servant' ie painter & decorator etc. Just because the invoiced work may involve firearms doesn't change that does it? Also invoiced work implies only a contract by contract relationship between parties. Someone on the payroll is clearly a 'servant' with continuous employment responsibilities and duties and under direct control of the employer.

cheers and lets hope the planning sails through this time

for understanding - what range is that ?

Thought it might have been a fudge for the Landed Gentry, good info Roy

I always read/watch/hear everything with a bucket of salt to hand as a pinch is never enough. I don't care about celeb tittle-tattle and the press can get stuck up 'em for all it matters and I'm not about to accept any 'news' analysis from a tabloid. I recommend Private Eye for investigative journalism, again with a skeptical view of course

I just don't buy this "corporate media" narrative, makes no sense to me

Very interesting. I agree with your point "why should applying for a shotgun be different to applying for any other firearm?" I think the day may come where shotgun ownership will be dependant on 'good reason to possess' and all that entails such as land to shoot over permissions and/or membership of clay shooting clubs etc. Clearly the Police need to resource their firearms departments properly and I'd be content to pay more for my license to help facilitate that as it's a small cost when seen spread over five years. Maybe the ten year license with periodic checks would be better in terms of admin efficiency and occasional eyes-on oversight? With regard to 'not knowing one end from the other' that too seems a real problem, certainly for new staff, and I made that point in my feedback to the recent College of Policing consultation.

Maybe a quick read through of this: https://oalexanderdk.substack.com/p/blowing-holes-in-seymour-hershs-pipe?fbclid=IwAR1vkEURrBRBbN0Neie-ZyBlocVwSC8oiiOsebdLPqDmwzBcxSQgBprv8z0 The original source of the Nordstream story reviewed and pulled to bits. Of course, this could all be a media coverup - couldn't it ?? Or it may just be the original story is just that... a story.

oh well, we'll see 😉

False equivalence. Not at all the same thing. Equating the Holocaust to some calibres being banned by a regional government in democratic Australia is frankly outrageous.

Having a Labour Government ? So what's your point ?

Reads like a conspiracy theory; no actual evidence just hyperventilated, non-objective rant against 'the man'

I am very surprised you are operating as you state. Where's the safety design template? How do you control the safety area? You have risk assessments ? The advice you say you have received is contrary to the written HO advisory you cited. I'm very surprised you have NRA approval in principle, setting up a shoot "on a field" given their published position. The NRA have recently published their Range Design Handbook, within the first pages they state: "The NRA is a charity whose objectives include promoting the efficiency of the armed forces through combined military and civilian marksmanship activities. The NRA has no legislative power to regulate range design or operation. It has published this Handbook in order to assist civilian range operators in applying best practice to the operation of civilian rifle ranges, as part of pursuing its charitable objectives. Commercial advice on the design of specific ranges, as well as range inspection services, are available from National Shooting Centre Limited, the wholly-owned commercial subsidiary of the NRA." While agreeing that the NRA don't have legislative power they do represent best practice and any deviation from that will be very difficult to explain should the men & women in wigs get involved following an incident.

What is the misinformation you refer to? Your own I would suggest. I quote from the HO circular: "The responsibility will now be placed more firmly on range owners/operators to ensure that their range is constructed and maintained safely. Failure to do so will leave them liable to sanctions under a range of legislation, such as the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957, the Occupiers’ Liability (Scotland) Act 1960 and the Health & Safety at Work Act 1974. See Annex A for further details. The criteria for club approval and affected certificate conditions have been revised to remove references to Ministry of Defence safety certificates (see Annex B)." To say "It is up to the landowner/operator to determine if safe to use.." is correct but there's an assumption the operator has set up the range to meet standards and cite the NRA/NSRA standards. It's yet to be tested in law but I think any operator that doesn't have a properly certified range (ie built to a recognised standard) is asking for trouble should issues arise and most importantly their insurance company will certainly kick off should a serious claim be brought. An individual's personal insurance is not adequate - the range must be insured. If in doubt try asking your insurance provider. Planning is not an issue for the shooters - it's likely any ad-hoc range will incur noise abatement pressure from Planning irrespective of the 28 day rule.

Sensible to ask and not assume. I occasionally shoot at Esk. T4 with Marc & Helen and I've actually met the chap that assessed their range.

You can shoot on a range that has adequate insurance. Your personal insurance is not relevant to that aspect, it covers you but not the range. Shooting over land that is not a proper range is not covered by your FAC conditions. Home Office approved is relevant to permission for clubs to train others and is not limiting in the sense you ask your question. If you attend an event "over land" it must be a field firing range properly set up and insured not just a field with "shooting over" permissions. For example, Eskdalemuir is a field firing range with a certificate and insurance organised by Gardners Guns. But do ask your FEO with specific examples.

absolutely incredible skill but I wouldn't want to ever listen to that again. No heart or soul just technical brilliance.

While I appreciate the musical skill in jazz, it does nothing for me. I'll leave "extreme metal" thanks, not really music just sonic torture. At the moment I'm listening to Peter Green's early Fleetwood Mac (pre Christine Perfect/McVie) and there's only one British blues band that comes close - John Mayall's Blues Breakers with Eric Clapton and occasionally Peter Green on lead ('The Super-Natural'; one of the greatest guitar tracks ever). BB King, Duane Allman, Steve Ray-Vaughn, early Santana - I guess I'm a sucker for electric blues. Oh, and of course the greatest of all time - Jimi

Sold Thanks to all for enquiring

I have a Magnetospeed Sporter chronograph surplus to needs now I have a Labradar. It's 100% complete, fully functioning and hardly used. In perfect condition. These are £225 on line. £155 with post included to mainland UK SOLD

Yes, seems a bit of a waste as RCO must incorporate RSO. I also completed both yesterday and passed both

I guess my experience meant I could pretty much fly through the RSO as it's meat and drink to any Range Officer however for the RCO I had to mine answers from the handbook as some questions were subtly different and on the face of it had two or more seemingly reasonable choices - just not necessarily the precise book answers required.

I've just finished doing both on-line assessments, the questions were quite different (and RCO was hard!)