Is firing a CO2 rifle in a forest for target practice, in the uk legal?

Question

A friend of mine took a ratcatcher rifle to his local woods, then got hit by CS spray from local cops. My sniper rifle is arriving tommorow and I want to do some target practice. Its just a C02 rifle not real ammunition. If I go to the woods do I have a right to let of a few rounds on targets?

I think its legal, but the last thing I need is some old bat stuck in a traffic jam calling the police saying she has seen a rifleman at the side of a motorway pointing his gun, and then my day being ruined. No animals or people involved and I can legally own this rifle, just want to do some long range target practice. Thanks in advance for any advice.

Answer 1

Depends who owns the woods. If you have permission to shoot there then that's fine and nobody will bother you, but if you are shooting without permission then that's called "trespass with a firearm" and you can go to prison for that. If you shoot a rabbit or even a sparrow you may be had for poaching and for that they can confiscate anything that they deem you used for poaching, including the car you drove there in, as well as sending you to prison.

They used to send people to Australia for poaching but these days you have to ask the Aussies first and buy your own ticket.

Answer 2

What you Englishmen call a ratcatcher is what us Americans
call a Crosman, either 13xx or 22xx, these are basically the
same guns, 13xx are .177 and 22xx are .22. Just the tubes
Co2 tubes are longer.
You can shoot, just as long as your gun is below 12 ftb. If not
you need a FAC.
Maybe you should ask your fellow countrymen this question.
http://www.airgunbbs.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?s=454891ce4e06e4bf3ca761385c5a8d06&f=4
This forum is in England.

Answer 3

<> purely because of fact something it legal does no longer mean that's precise. <> there's a reason you may no longer spell 'assume' with out '***'. people who assume too plenty finally end up making asses of themselves. <> would not make sense, does it - and yet, there you're advocating human beings basically assume the government is sweet! <> incorrect! <> advert hominem assaults injury your credibility. in line with possibility Marc, like me, would not see too plenty interior the way of credibility while analyzing your question. <> The term "fetus" actually ability "the extra youthful interior the womb". The fetus IS a residing person. life starts at theory, no longer delivery nor some arbitrary element in between. for this reason, each abortion constitutes the homicide of an unborn person. <> however the fetus IS human. for this reason, abortion IS homicide. <> what's so slender minded approximately acknowledging the unborn for the residing human beings they're? for the reason which you at the instant can't try this, does no longer that propose your innovations is extremely extra slender than mine? <> That purely is going to coach how schizophrenic human establishments could be - and you % to assume such a company (the government) is sweet.

Answer 4

as long as its not at a national forrest its ok