ANIMAL rights activists are calling for shooting magazines to be listed as top-shelf magazines claiming they are “gun porn”.
Animal Aid is campaigning for newsagents to stop selling popular titles such as Shooting Times to readers under 18-years-old.
The charity claimed the publications that show images of triumphant children “parading” the carcasses of deer and pheasant are “sick”.
Campaigners carried out their own survey where 84% of those involved were in favour of banning the magazines outright – with 74% moving them to the top shelf.
But publication bosses and sportsmen claim the magazines show “no gratuitous violence” and there are worse magazines out there for youngsters to get their hands on.
Andrew Tyler, director of Animal Aid, said: “We’ve looked at these magazines for some time and the ones we highlight features photographs not just of animals being shot, but the people who have killed them – and they’re quite often young kids – looking absolutely triumphant and delighted.
“To communicate that message to adults or children is a very warped and unhealthy message.
“We are at the point where most people recognise that what remains of our indigenous wildlife has to be cherished and protected, so to render animals as targets and to take visible and explicit pleasure in killing them and then parading their dead bodies is sick.
“They are porn – they’re gun porn.”
Mr Tyler claimed the ‘worst’ of the titles were Shooting Times, Sporting Gun, Shooting Sports and Sporting Rifle and also blamed the glory of death of the young age that people take up shooting.
He added: “Government statistics show that over the past 20 years the number of shotgun licenses has being going down so there is something of a crisis.
“Their constituency is ageing. Unless young people get introduced and start taking up gun use by the age of 14 or 15 they’re not going to – and the reason for them of their peers being put off is public opinion.”
“Safety and respect”
But one shooting enthusiast, who wished to remain anonymous, said the magazines are useful guides for the environment and should not be regarded as offensive.
The 18-year-old said: ““I have been an avid reader of Sporting Rifle for 5 years and have been shooting for much longer.
“This is ridiculous to consider these magazines as anything other than educational.
“These magazines are not about showing off what is killed, it includes tips on conservation issues and it’s a way for people with similar interests to share memories and advice.”
The Scottish Countryside Alliance (SCA), where 10% of its members are under the age of 25, echoed the principle that the titles are “educational”.
Jamie Stewart, SCA director, said: “There are many, many magazines on shelves accessible to young children that are certainly more inappropriate than hunting and shooting magazines.
“By and large the magazines are aimed at a market that participate and they are full of informational and educational material – there is no gratuitous violence.
“The biggest percentage of our work in terms of out youth members is to instill safety and respect for those animals – education is top of our agenda.”
Mr Stewart also claimed the field and country sports generate £240million for Scotland’s economy and provided 11,000 jobs.
The Professional Publishers Association (PPA) said there is no reason for the magazines to be prohibited as there are currently no “legal restrictions”.
A PPA spokesman said: “Country and field sports magazines are specialist interest titles that are published responsibly for a target audience.
“As such, there is no requirement for these magazines to be subject to legal restrictions regarding how they are displayed at retail.”
WH Smith, the country’s largest magazine retailer, said it is important to find a balance when advertising certain titles.
A spokesman said: “We aim to display these magazines where they are accessible to those who want to buy them but do no offend those who do not – consistent with other magazine retailers and industry practice.”
