National Bodies

[Pippin89]

Interesting conversation I had some time ago, and the recent consultation has sparked it in my thoughts again...

Why do we have so many national bodies for shooting? BASC, NRA, NSRA, British Shooting, CPSA etc...
I understand the need for separate departments with difference expertise, but surely it would make sense if all of these organisations came under one roof??? If they all answered to the same head then the efforts of all could be far better aligned. Such as contacting members regarding the current consultation.

And then the resources are pooled for one collective force with more weight behind it rather than multiple smaller bodies doing what they can (I say this optimistically of course...)

In addition many of us are members of multiples of these and would find it far easier to have one subscription to one body (potentially with different "tiers" so costs don't escalate for someone who just does one form of shooting.

[Triffid]

Sounds a great idea.

But I think the evidence is that the term 'herding cats' comes to mind. Each of the bodies you mention has at one time or other pursued it's own self-interest to the detriment of the greater shooting community.

Triffid

[Christel]

Yeah but, that would be far too easy...

Then there is the money aspect...

[GeeRam]

Each of the bodies you mention has at one time or other pursued it's own self-interest to the detriment of the greater shooting community.

^^This.

Simply put, UK shooting is too fractured with too much self interest around, with too many only interested in their small niche part of it to the detriment of shooting as a whole.
You only have to see the apathy shown by many of sections of the disciplines after Hungerford, Dunblane and the more recent proposed changes to legislation during the past decade or so.

[dromia]

Selfish vested interest on behalf of the organisations.

Mergers would invariably lead to job losses and the snouts in the trough CEOs aren't going to hurry to become turkeys voting for christmas.

The modus operandii of our "non national" organisations is that gun owners and shooters are here for them rather than them being here for gun owners.

Just look at the state of UK shooting and the national organisations abject failures in doing anything positive for shooters to prove their total lack of efficacy.

A search of this site will reveal much past discussion on this topic which is damning in and of itself to the "national" organisations as it is obviously the way to go which they blithely ignore at gunowner's peril.

[The Gun Pimp]

Interesting conversation I had some time ago, and the recent consultation has sparked it in my thoughts again...

Why do we have so many national bodies for shooting? BASC, NRA, NSRA, British Shooting, CPSA etc...
I understand the need for separate departments with difference expertise, but surely it would make sense if all of these organisations came under one roof??? If they all answered to the same head then the efforts of all could be far better aligned. Such as contacting members regarding the current consultation.

And then the resources are pooled for one collective force with more weight behind it rather than multiple smaller bodies doing what they can (I say this optimistically of course...)

In addition many of us are members of multiples of these and would find it far easier to have one subscription to one body (potentially with different "tiers" so costs don't escalate for someone who just does one form of shooting.

There was a 'study' commissioned many years ago regarding amalgamation of the NRA, NSRA & CPSA - if I remember correctly. I attended one of many regional forums and everyone was all for it. I think the CPSA were the stumbling block in the end. How ridiculous that the NRA & NSRA don't just amalgamate - it's all cartridge rifle shooting.....

[mag41uk]

I can remember this being talked about back as far as après Hungerford!
Wont ever happen due to ego`s.
There could at least be a "super committee" with a couple of reps from each body meeting a couple of times a year.

[dromia]

They would say they have that with the BSSC, (British Shooting Sports Council).

Another useless talking shop that has done nothing of any significance for us.

[bobcat]

Selfish vested interest on behalf of the organisations.

Mergers would invariably lead to job losses and the snouts in the trough CEOs aren't going to hurry to become turkeys voting for christmas.

The modus operandii of our "non national" organisations is that gun owners and shooters are here for them rather than them being here for gun owners.

Just look at the state of UK shooting and the national organisations abject failures in doing anything positive for shooters to prove their total lack of efficacy.

A search of this site will reveal much past discussion on this topic which is damning in and of itself to the "national" organisations as it is obviously the way to go which they blithely ignore at gunowner's peril.

Couldn't have said it better myself. It is real shame we don't have one body that speaks for all of us whether Clay Pigeon, Classic Rifles, Game and many many other great disciplines while I am not into a lot of them I would happily pay to support one powerful voice that helped and protected everything shooting. Maybe with recent licensing of Scottish game the Lords, aristocracy and Millionaires may decide it time to form something new but I doubt it.

[Blackstuff]

To many egos, to many executives and some fundamental differences at grassroots. The idea of killing living creatures as 'sport' is repugnant to some, particularly when it comes to trophy hunting, just as is campaigning for being able to use guns for self defence is to others. It would be impossible to get it all under one roof for everything, but to be fair, even the biggest US groups don't have that either.

One organisation covering most areas would be helpful (to shooters/gun owners that is....)