Rifle clubs, MPs and politics

[Gaz]

Following on from Labour's* nebulous but dangerous announcement that they want to make gun owners "prove their suitability to own a firearm", I think it is time to nip this sort of politics in the bud by threatening MPs who support it with the direct loss of votes from constituents.

Here's how I think "we", ordinary shooters, can do this.

Each Parliamentary constituency has one or more rifle clubs, or sporting syndicates, or something of a similar nature. These by definition consist of a number of shooters. Could the memberships of clubs based in these constituencies be persuaded to write to their MPs or otherwise petition them to say something along the lines of "unless you actively speak out on our behalf and oppose these proposals, you will lose the vote of X constituents and we will be vocal about how and why you lost these votes, signed, members of Anytown Rifle Club/Syndicate"?

I realise most MPs have majorities in the thousands, and shooters within constituencies number perhaps a few hundred at the absolute most, but I'm thinking unless we stand up and take direct action now, we'll lose even more of what precious little we have left.

What do you think? (dons tin hat, scuttles away to bomb shelter)



* These media articles we're seeing are part of the ACPO response to being told by the Conservative-led Home Office that they won't get FAC/SGC fees increased by having a cosy stitch-up behind closed doors. ACPO's paid professional lobbyists and public relations executives are now going into action to secure more money for the police by getting the public and disinterested politicians to support the idea of raising FAC/SGC fees, and have found themselves an ally in those old enemies of shooting, the Labour Party. Honourable exception made for Kate Hoey, of course!

[Mezzer]

Gaz
In a functioning democracy it's the only way to do it BUT ..... that would require our people's representatives (MP's?) to be honest and upstanding guys / girls and there's a fat lot of chance of that happening. After all, a single vote can make all the difference. During the political campaigning exercises that bring these numpties to our doors before any elections, they'll promise you anything you want, all of which will then be conveniently 'forgotten' once they get their feet under the proverbial table.

None of the main parties will be picking up my vote (for what it's worth) because none of them deserve it and I'll be telling them exactly that when they come knocking on my door. If the post firing chit-chat of an evening at our club is anything to go by then I'm not the only one who thinks this way.

Mezzer

[IainWR]

getting the public and disinterested politicians to support the idea of raising FAC/SGC fees

"Disinterested": Having no personal stake in the outcome. Hence, able to take an objective view.

So, the thinking is that we don't like politicians applying objective judgement?

Has anyone examined the electoral dynamics of the appointment of Police Commissioners? There's at least one where the total votes cast for the winner was within 1000 of the number of FACs and SGCs on issue in that police area.

[Chapuis]

"Has anyone examined the electoral dynamics of the appointment of Police Commissioners? There's at least one where the total votes cast for the winner was within 1000 of the number of FACs and SGCs on issue in that police area."

Now that is an interesting fact. Thanks for pointing that out Iain.

[IainWR]

From the Environment Agency website, on the subject of rod licenses:

What’s in it for you?

• It’s quick and easy and you’re licensed immediately – renewing next year will be even easier
• Renewing online costs us less – so more of your money goes directly toward protecting and improving your fishing
• Look out for a new range of online and mobile services that will help you choose when, where and how to go fishing


Apples and pears, anyone?

[Meaty]

Talking of fishermen...
How about BASC /SA/NRA etc trying to enlist the support of the various angling bodies under the umbrella of 'the existence of all rural/shooting sports being in danger'? There are millions of fishermen/women in this country and if they were made aware of the restrictions that are potentially being imposed on various factions of our sport they may help out where it counts. Initially even 1% of them on our side could help greatly. (wishful thinking I know :cool2:)

[whoowhoop]

The difficulty is that there is no single organisation that represents the many and varied branches of shooting in this country, and no requirement to belong to any of those that exist. Given the numbers of license holders there are, the proportion of these prepared to stand up and do something or put their hand in their pocket is pretty poor.
Shooting, as a whole, has not yet faced a real battle, instead it has been picked off bit by bit.
To try to persuade those who do not participate in, let alone consider , our chosen interest, to put themselves out to defend it is a very steep hill to climb.
It's not as though we should have been concerned about our future, now is it?

Funding will always be an obstacle to any campaign, it is something we should all be able to support without a second thought. A simple levy on a range fee, an extra fiver for a club membership, the odd raffle - all are little things that every club should be doing with a view to supporting an active campaign.
The same goes for the manufacturers and suppliers - no shooting = no business. It must be in all our interests to be prepared for funding a fight. Just in case.

[dromia]

As you pointed out first of, we have no creditable national body to act as a focus for such a campaign, to mobilise the resources and give individuals a reason and purpose to fund raise for. It is the lack of any co-ordinated leadership for shooters that is our biggest weakness.

For a fund to be raised there would need to be a responsible body for the money which would clearly set out what it would be spent on and what this would seek to achieve, this body would need to have clear purpose and goals and have the respect of the shooting community with none of the baggage, facility responsibility and the confusing multiplicity of roles the current mob have.

This thread alone has pointed out things that should and could be done now especially with an election looming in 18 months with a goodly chance of another hung parliament. However the lack of leadership, authority and skill to mobilise shooters means that we will miss another opportunity and continue to be hostages to circumstances.

[Meaty]

Whoowhoop, precisely.
I struggle to get my head around the apathetic nature of the general populous in this once Great Britain :cool2:
We just seem happy to bend over and take it utb and then moan like for years afterwards.

[Gaz]

getting the public and disinterested politicians to support the idea of raising FAC/SGC fees

"Disinterested": Having no personal stake in the outcome. Hence, able to take an objective view.

So, the thinking is that we don't like politicians applying objective judgement?

Not so much an objective view in my opinion, but rather that they have no significant knowledge of the topic. Hence they are empty vessels, ready to be filled by one-sided stats and assertions dreamed up by the police and Labour et al.

None of the main parties will be picking up my vote (for what it's worth) because none of them deserve it and I'll be telling them exactly that when they come knocking on my door. If the post firing chit-chat of an evening at our club is anything to go by then I'm not the only one who thinks this way.

So something like this idea of actively telling MPs they're losing our vote already sort of covers your intention not to vote for them anyway?