"Phil" the London fox sniper

[Gazoo]

I am not sure an open certificate really is meant for urban back gardens though.

[DL.]

I am not sure an open certificate really is meant for urban back gardens though.

Well you're wrong, Because the FAC that I've had for the past ten years states "for the lawful shooting of fox over suitable land over which the certificate holder has authority to shoot."

Now shooting a fox from an upstairs window makes that land suitable, and for you to say that it's not makes you come across as a person who wishes for there to be more restrictions on people doing pest control.

[Gazoo]

I am not sure an open certificate really is meant for urban back gardens though.

Well you're wrong, Because the FAC that I've had for the past ten years states "for the lawful shooting of fox over suitable land over which the certificate holder has authority to shoot."

Now shooting a fox from an upstairs window makes that land suitable, and for you to say that it's not makes you come across as a person who wishes for there to be more restrictions on people doing pest control.

I always know I am in the presence of greatness when the rebuttle starts with "well you're wrong" , if you had ended with, "so there", I wouldn't have had a leg to stand on!
But, since you didn't put the killer "so there " in, I still have a chance.
The whole point of this conversation, is the interpretation of "suitable land". Just because it says that, doesn't mean you can call anywhere suitable just because you feel like it. You are supposed to use good judgement and err on the side of caution.
I've had FAC and SGC for 35 yrs, including open, I have protected shooters rights by making it my business to take on the police when they abuse the powers that are given to them, more times than you have polished your gun , probably.
It makes me come across to you like, " wishing more restrictions on people doing pest control", but to me it's like ,"dont want buggers shooting firearms in back gardens in case they kill some ones kid".
I'm no shrinking violet when it comes to shooters(my) rights, but the quickest way to get open licences knocked on the head is by being silly with wording on tickets and safety of others. The British legal system operates largely on common law which comes down to judges decisions . What it always comes down to in a court (where there is a difference of interpretation) is, what is reasonable. I just do not think that is reasonable behaviour, and I am damn sure the police will not think that is reasonable behaviour.
But hey, dont want to fall out with anyone , peace brother.

[Mr_Logic]

Shooting urban foxes with a .22 happens a lot, and with an open ticket it is legal and perfectly sensible if the shooter knows what they're doing. A friend of mine has shot many foxes like it - pest control is a vital task and this is a legit way of doing it. He'll also trap when shooting is not possible.

[Scotsgun]

No prob with shooting foxes with a 22. I've shot many with my moderated Mauser 7. You just have to be careful of your backstop as I've found subsonic bullets prone to ricochet if missed.

[knewmans]

I heard Tom Keightley the fox shooter on Radio 2 last year. He seemed pretty balanced and competent. The episode isn't available but there is this article http://tinyurl.com/qhlutxb

[zeroveez]

It all comes down to judgement, and not merely the application of "The rules". Those of us with open tickets have been given then based on experience, or so we hope.

[Outsider]

I personally think that if the chaps shooting didn't think it was safe to shoot, they'd er on the side of caution. For these lads to be operating with the Metropolitan Police aware of their activities, I can only imagine they'd be as careful as humanly possible.