New Petition - Part 2 (Number of signatures: 13,188)

[Blu]

WOW! Seriously now, nfrancis holds a position in the UK NRA? Which position does he hold exactly?

Blu

[SevenSixTwo]

Disgraceful opinion....

[Sim G]

Don't you think it's a bit daft to boycott a whole event and discipline because you don't like what one person has said...?

No, I don't. Have a look at GR's website, Neil Francis is the face and voice of GR, with a few notable additions. Francis does not support my firearms ownership or shooting, in fact Francis believes that I should be a worry....

Christel would definitely censor me should I write what I actually think of Francis.

It is not just one person it is one person who has power and influence within the discipline and also within the NRA.

That is what is most worrying about his looney tune views, the discipline thinks that someone with this approach to guns is fit to represent them so it reflects on the whole discipline and to a lesser extent on the NRA.

In a nutshell...

[dromia]

He is NRA Gallery Rifle Discipline Representative serving a three year term on NRA General Council.

[Sim G]

WOW! Seriously now, nfrancis holds a position in the UK NRA? Which position does he hold exactly?

Blu

He's the NRA Gallery Rifle representative. If memory serves, he is previous Captains of the England and Great Britain teams as well.....

[Christel]

Censor you Sim G tongueout

:lol:

[Chuck]

Reality is somewhere in the middle although I do have serious reservations about why people want guns for target shooting and then don't go target shooting. People who are more interested in guns than shooting worry me - they should probably worry everyone.

WHY? Would love to hear a reasoned explanation for that comment, not that there IS one that has any sense.

That nonsense is just straight from the "anti" book of inane hysterical and groundless quotes. How can anyone even remotely jump to that conclusion, that's "projection" and used by the deluded and those scared of inanimate objects to vilify something they cannot or will not understand - or just do not like in the first place. No wonder UK shooting is in the state it's in with daft comments like that from those supposedly in a position to further the sport - sounds more like a member of GCN to me.!

No offence but really, you are no friend of the shooting community.

It's like saying people who are not interested in playing football should not support it or collect memorabilia? Or that people who don't go Formula One racing should have nothing to do with cars zzzzom

If UK shooting had say 500,00 more PLINKERS and occasional target shooters (competing or not) each with FAC's / SGC's would that be a bad thing? For the sport NO, for some others who really just don't get it, most definitely.

[top]

Already done it.

[karen]

OK how many of us here can honestly say that they have never known someone who had an unhealthy interest in guns? People who think that guns make themselves something special or give them a stiffy?

I have known a few . . .

When I first started shooting I was at college with two guys who were members of the rifle club - one of whom claimed he was in the SAS and walked around with three pistols secreted about his person at all times. He was a mature student but still only late 20s. He wasn't a plinker, a competitive shooter, a collector, a historian - he was just a saddo. He and his friend ended up in prison for being caught with a sawn off shotgun in the back of their car and a lot of illegally held ammo.

Another person I knew quite well had a massive amount of firearms because he "needed them". He was competitive, a plinker, a collector, a historian etc BUT he spoke often about killing members of his family and of "needing his firearms one day". He boasted to me about having stocks of illegal firearms and going out in a blaze of glory. What do you do then?

Sometimes there are people who should worry us and if they do we should do something about it and hope that someone takes notice. If someone had taken notice of those who were concerned about Hamilton we might not be having this discussion.

Love

Karen

[phaedra1106]

Having just read through all of this I really can't believe that an elected NRA official could have such a narrow view of the sport.

Both my son and myself are what's labelled as "disabled", for me this means I will never be able to travel as far as Bisley and take part in any of the events held there, similarly my physical problems mean I'm unable to shoot prone for any length of time or have a consistent hold so S, F or any class of competition shooting is very difficult if not impossible at times.

So where does that leave me?, when I do manage to get out of the house and shoot at my local club I shoot at 25yds with a variety of rifles that I enjoy shooting, if I'm lucky I may get to my nearest outdoor range 6 times a year. This (at least according to your views) means that because I "plink" with my guns I should be a worry to everyone else?.

Luckily my local club (St Giles Yarners) is an extremely welcoming and supportive club, the fact that I may not be able to get there more than once every couple of months or shoot postal competitions etc. isn't a problem for them. It's local clubs like this that are the life blood of shooting in the UK and who keep our sport alive by bringing new shooters into the sport and being supportive of all shooting disciplines whether they be competition target or not.

Shame on you N.Francis your views are a disgrace to your fellow shooters.