Shooting without insurance

[Cosmicblue]

The reason I asked the question was this : recently a  few of us have  taken a “non shooting friend “  to a couple of clay grounds to introduce him to the sport .  We have supervised him and given him enough rudimentary instruction to break a few targets .  I’d mentioned that he was shooting uninsured , but he said surely the grounds had insurance to covered him . Given the consensus above I’m going with the fact he isn’t specifically insured . 

I suspect that actually takes you into a whole new can of worms - I read a notice at Orston SG last Sunday that referenced  Section 11(6) of the Firearms Act that indicated that they were only allowed to have non certificate holders shooting in the company of Orston's instructors - I have seen that notice at other grounds too.

 

[timps]

I suspect that actually takes you into a whole new can of worms - I read a notice at Orston SG last Sunday that referenced  Section 11(6) of the Firearms Act that indicated that they were only allowed to have non certificate holders shooting in the company of Orston's instructors - I have seen that notice at other grounds too.

This has always been the case with section 11 (6) exemptions most people think that just because a ground has one they can use it and take a non-licence holder mate on to that ground and shoot.

In reality it is the shoot organisers that have the exemption not the physical piece of land and the chief of police has to satisfy themselves that such exemptions are properly conducted and supervised before issuing.

At the bare minimum you have to sign a form stating you are not prohibited person under the act, and be supervised by an authorised person throughout the shoot. If the ground authorises you then great but if not you are not automatically covered by their section 11 (6) exemption.

You should always check the grounds requirements before taking a non-licence holder shooting.