NRA competency certs Not a Rant

Discussion in 'Shooting, Hunting and Fishing' started by ugly, Aug 19, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. ugly

    ugly LE Moderator

    No ranting involved just info.
    Last night my club (HBSA) announced that all certs will be processed from November. This involves a £3 fee for non NRA members and is annually renewable. If you are an RCO it is implied that you are exempt. Again the issue of non liability for club secretaries signing off individuals was riased but still the NRA is sticking to its hardly credeible line of no liability for the club, the sec or itself!
    For those sporting rifle shooters who attend MoD or Bisley ranges rarely the cert is required and will be available through the organisation running that particular range day ie BASC, NGO or BDS.
  2. It will be an administrative nightmare for most clubs unless they turn a blind eye and just nod everyone through.
  3. ugly

    ugly LE Moderator

    Which is all it is worth as the NRA has stated that it can be done from the clubs shooting records!
    The club sec last night stated its not onerous to do! I'm expecting that the club will chase me when I appear at the christmas shoot but I will resist!
    You can still shoot without the cert, you need to be supervised! :roll:
  4. Have the NRA made it clear exactly how foreigners who are visiting for shooting competitions are going to achieve this certification?
  5. ugly

    ugly LE Moderator

    If you are Belgian or Dutch or even French they already have such a system and your license and club membership covers this. However you can still shoot unlicensed as long as you are supervised. Not sure as to what level of supervision is required so thats £3 I wont be sending them!
  6. I count as Dutch, so that is no problem then!
  7. ugly

    ugly LE Moderator

    I'd write to them at the NRA and check and also your own national orgs just to clarify! Nothing like making the buggers work for their membership fees is there?
    My answer was taken from a Belgian shooter that I know, yes I know choco and KP but most of them are OK!
  8. ancienturion

    ancienturion LE Book Reviewer

    You are also exempt if a practising NRA qualified Club Instructor or Club Coach.

    Is this the same competency test that you mean?

    Surely, as an FAC holder of some standing and ex-soldier you should be exempt?

    Or have I got the wrong end of the stick?
  10. ugly

    ugly LE Moderator

    No its a cert which the club sec signs to say that you are a competent shot, the NRA has for years been attempting to hijack FAC issues from the plod by promoting training courses and mandatory testing!
    The problem is that most shooters either ignore the NRA like an annoying pished up uncle at a wedding or hate it like a battered ginger welsh stepson would to a scouse stepdad.
    Now tolerating the NRA and its oddball and idiotic rantings to ensure that you can shoot is one thing but to actively support them in pushing for mandatory pre FAC training for all disciplines is plainly wrong. We have already played into the hands of the H&S Nazis by letting Lantra in so why restrict the flow of recruits to a sport?
    The whole problem is that the NRA are pushing this certification on the grounds of insured liability yet telling club secs that they will not be held liable should a certificated individual do something stupidly dangerous.
    Now plainly the NRA is lying to get the clubs to sign up to this.
    If I was still a club sec I would personally refuse to do this and withold any monies from the NRA until it became clear what the truth is. Now I am not in the business of taking a risk which absolves the NRA of liability yet allegedly puts no liability on me. Work that one out!
    I prefer to shoot in woods and fields and yes although I take money from clients to teach them to stalk that is because I have liability issues with novices wandering around with my loaded rifles and no zeroing nor deer identification or season teaching having been done. You wouldnt jump in a plane and try to fly without training would you?
    The NRA first bandied £15 as a suggested fee which was effectively a tax on shooting. I for one made loud noises regarding this opportunity for the NRA to make money at the clubs risk without back up. Now it is £3 people will say "oh thats not bad!" Wait until it goes pear shaped and the club sec is dragged through court!

    Edited to add: That is a rant! :x
  11. Long and unhappy story but for general info this is where it has got to:

    Can be done but wholly correct that in general just another burden on shooters to no good effect.

    Some might not know how all this kicked off in November 2007 with the moronic proposal to impose a 3800J limit. So here you go:

    Muzzle Energy and the MoD

    "Along with clubs and individuals the NRA found itself on the back foot when we were quietly told, in a phone call from one of our Regional Members of the General Council, in the last week in October 2007 that the MoD had agreed to change the muzzle energy rates for use of their ranges by civilians from 7000 joules to 3800 joules. This news caused great consternation as effectively it meant that Target Rifle, Match Rifle, F Class and other forms of long range shooting were effectively banned on all MoD ranges and Bisley (which uses the MoD Range Danger Area of Pirbright).
    Urgent discussions between the NRA and the MoD revealed that a final decision had not yet been reached, but that this was a proposal. However, to induce a bit more concern, Altcar decided to be ahead of the game and to introduce the new proposed provisions with immediate effect. This ensured that the knowledge of the proposed change was out in the general shooting community at the same time as the Association became aware, and panic ensued. At the same time as the NRA was trying to discover how serious the issue was, and what the MoD's intentions were, we were simultaneously under assault from shooters concerned at losing their sport.

    In early discussions we learnt that the reason for this proposed change of policy was that when looking at the introduction of the .338 sniper rifle the Army had discovered that if fire was not precise, rounds could escape from ranges. The muzzle energy of a .338 is 6000+ joules. The MoD then carried out a general examination to find a muzzle energy figure that would guarantee rounds would not escape from ranges. On this basis they proposed to introduce the 3800 joules limit that meant, in terms of Target Rifle, 144 grain bullets were OK but competition ammunition of 155 grain was probably out.

    Effectively if no accommodation could be reached most national and international long range competitions could not be shot in the UK on most ranges, including Bisley.

    A series of urgent meetings took place between the Association and the MoD, to either get the limits changed upwards or find other ways of satisfying the Defence Estates concerns. We were informed that the general limit of 3800 joules would remain however, if we could propose a package of measures designed to ensure that all rounds fired would be contained by the range stop-butt, then the MoD would consider allowing civilians to shoot ammunition that exceeded the 3800 joules figure.

    To give an example of the scope of this decision to reduce the muzzle energy limit one has only has to look at 'historics', the Brown Bess musket which, when fired using black powder, generates some of the highest muzzle energy figures, accepting that the ball at most travels a few hundred yards.

    Even though this form of measurement (muzzle energy) is an inexact science the MoD insist that this is the way in which they will judge what firearms and ammunition can be fired on their ranges. Discussions around a different method of measuring or arguments about whether the current 155 grain bullet is 'over or under the bar' will not be worth the effort, because we have tried.

    We have to realise that to the military there is no 'Defence Imperative' to allowing us to shoot on their ranges.

    In our discussions however they are willing to consider letting civilians shoot in excess of 3800 joules if we can put in place procedures that will ensure that all shots will hit the stop-butt.

    The NRA is determined to do everything it can to ensure all legitimate shooters can continue to take part in and enjoy their sport.

    To this end the Association has negotiated a months grace to allow us to put together proposals designed to meet the needs of the MoD and allow all of you who shoot fullbore to continue shooting.

    The military have indicted that we need to offer 'comfort' relating to the following, Safe Person, Safe Training, Safe Practice and Safe Place, in that we have the correct procedures in place to guarantee bullets will be captured by the stop-butt.

    Safe Person/Training
    The military want to be assured that everyone who shoots on a MoD range is competent and safe to fire the classes of firearm they are using.

    Initially this will probably require each Club Secretary or Chairman to sign off each individual as being competent and safe, identifying the types of firearms they are able to fire. If agreed the NRA will supply by e-mail and the website an agreed form of certificate for clubs to use.

    Going forward it has already been indicated that training of individuals will be an issue. As previously notified the Association intends to send to all its clubs the new Probationary Training pack, originally for them to choose to use or not. As with RCO courses, it will probably become a requirement for individuals, new to the sport, to have undertaken an approved course to shoot on MoD ranges. The NRA intends to supply appropriate course material for clubs to meet this need.

    In the future the NRA also believes that to make things easier for clubs and individuals that we may need to introduce a 'Shooting Logbook' so that a person's qualifications, experience and classes of firearms they are able to fire are recorded in the same document for easy production.

    Safe Practice
    It has been suggested that in future on a MoD range it will be necessary for civilians to demonstrate that their fire is accurate from the outset of a range day. It is proposed that if there is no 'zero range' the shoot should start at 200 yards to ensure all rifles are zeroed before moving back. This will be inconvenient and will require that everyone turns up to shoot at an agreed time to get zeroed, with the whole procedure being monitored closely by RCOs. The details of what this means in practice are still to be agreed.

    In addition a strict understanding of range orders and compliance will be essential for clubs to ensure their continued use of MoD ranges.

    Safe Place
    MoD Ranges, as we are all aware, are strictly inspected, maintained and controlled environments. The ranges at Bisley are, incidentally, leased from the Army. As such they are inspected and certificated by them regularly and are thus controlled by the same conditions as those ranges run by the MoD. Effectively, the muzzle energy restrictions will affect Bisley in the same way as any other MoD range. Fortunately we do have zeroing facilities that other ranges may not have. "
  12. ugly

    ugly LE Moderator

    Smoke and mirrors really nothing new about liability, as soon as the NRA and its TR only dinosaurs eventually die off then Bisley may be worth a visit again!
    I havent attended Trafalgar since some spotty oik of an NRA official demanded to know why I was using the rifles magazine as designed and not solely as a loading platform!
  13. You may get your wish but life in that dinosaur yet.

    Flicking through the online version of that poxy and utterly boring "....and a good time was had by all....." journal they send out which is just an expensive way to recycle paper, of about 80 odd pages (say 65 if you cut out the full page ads and piccies) there are all the usual club notices, info, long winded vanity match & team reports, accounts etc etc which you might expect plus a few bits of useful stuff but

    8 pages devoted to Obituaries

    9 to a deadly dull article on the Trams that used to ply arounds Bisley and the long gone railway link

    5 to an equally dreadful history of one of the clubhouses

    6 for an arcane p1ssing match between the NRA and the "International Confederation of Fullbore Rifle Associations" on target Rifle Standards

    The "Members Letters" page has, in total, some random p1ssing about there not being printed books of prize lists any more, bloke wanting to know if anybody was up for a spot of golf and some pointless shite about childhood memories of the trams.

    Anybody notice what is not being written about? I know that such rags are hard to fill at the best of times but by the sainted sandals of Saint Hubert of Liege, surely somebody there must know what the problem is?
  14. I am confident that there will be certain changes with this system. I have been poking with a sharp stick. Quite hard.

    NRA is still a disgrace though.
  15. ugly

    ugly LE Moderator

    New thread needed about how national organisations are neither national nor organised!
    Ex_Stab you are supremely qualified to start this one.
    Please make it a new thread so we can keep this one clear for info. Yes I know I'm as guilty!