What do you think

A shooting participant stands backed up to the boundary fence.

Under existing legislation, the leisure activity of shooting can happen in close proximity to a domestic dwelling that is neither owned nor occupied by a shooting participant.

The logistics of such an activity necessitate:
Large numbers of birds, tall trees, frequent vehicular access, which in close proximity to a home, destroys peace, privacy, warmth and light.

The practice of such an activity results in:
Marauding people, gunfire, injured and dying birds, which in close proximity to a home, causes profound distress.

The culture of such an activity fosters:
Menacing imposition and collective insensitivity, which in close proximity to a home, verges on tyranny, as there is no escape other than subjugation, complicity or flight.

From what I have read, I conclude the law that permits a shooter’s liberty to abrogate a home dweller’s liberty is the 1831 Game Act, which defines when shooting cannot take place, but not where shooting cannot take place.

Does this omission in the 21st century amount to an infringement of Article 8 of the Human Rights Act with regard to respect for privacy, family life and the peaceable enjoyment of a home?

I am not a lawyer, just a homeowner placing the facts of the pheasant shoot round my home in the public domain.

People and families are not objects or property. Using their places for living as places for killing defies common decency.

The law should protect the liberty of everybody who lives in the countryside, not this culture of impunity, not this arbitrary imposition of gratuitous slaughter on other peoples' lives.