The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

froggy wrote:I did, I also wrote to the Press Complaint Commission, got nowhere

Christel !!

Excuse my ignorance but who is the body supposed to "defend" the interest of UK shooters ?? shouldn't it be their task to track all this incidious propaganda ?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

We have a few who talk the talk however after many decades I am still waiting for them to effectively walk the walk in supporting the principle of gun ownership as opposed to shooting disciplines.

froggy wrote:I did, I also wrote to the Press Complaint Commission, got nowhere

Christel !!

Excuse my ignorance but who is the body supposed to "defend" the interest of UK shooters ?? shouldn't it be their task to track all this incidious propaganda ?

Ah, I also emailed the NRA about it, got nowhere.

See, basically because it was a "blog" published in the Guardian noone could object. So it seems that as long as you are classifying it as a "blog" then you can write whatever you like.

pe4king wrote:

christel wrote:Like the one about Pistorius where the SA "journalist" wrote that all gun owners were either weirdos with sexual deviations or madmen.
I did, I also wrote to the Press Complaint Commission, got nowhere.

I wonder if they would get away with it by describing other members of society as ALL drug dealers or pimps, short answer NO it would cause a $hitstorm

If it is written as a "blog"...then yes :roll:

However there may be a stronger response...

HMM so we can all "blog" about the parasitic sh1t that's ruining our country, demand they all be rounded up and burned at the stake and no one can do anything - I think not. it's just no one WANTS to do anything methinks.

I can only repeat here what I was told when I contacted the Guardian, NRA and the PCC.

Because it was a "blog" there is nothing they can do. It is the author's personal opinion which apparently one is free to write in public with no repercussion.

Chuck wrote:HMM so we can all "blog" about the parasitic sh1t that's ruining our country, demand they all be rounded up and burned at the stake and no one can do anything - I think not. it's just no one WANTS to do anything methinks.

Yep. Just don't libel any identifiable individual or small(ish) group of individuals, or prejudice court proceedings, or incite terror, or (insert 28 flavours of) hate against anything, and you're free to write what you want. (this is not an exhaustive list - I have an inch thick book on my desk in front of me listing all the things it is banned to write in Britain today)

The regulator for the BBC is the BBC Trust, and its Editorial Complaints unit. Like professional standards departments in police forces, these bodies exist to defend the organisation and allow its leaders to pay lip service to the idea of public accountability while carrying on as they damn well please. The people who staff these departments are trained to find reasons to reject your complaint, not look at it with an open mind.

Forty-seven years ago, when we moved in to our first house, I followed the example of my parents and ordered a daily newspaper. After a few months, it occurred to me that there were only a very few newsworthy subjects that I actually new a lot about---cars, commercial vehicles, guns, target shooting etc--- and that everything that I read about these subjects in the paper was wrong, usually with very biased reporting. I cancelled the newspaper and I have not bought one since.
Fred

FredB wrote:Forty-seven years ago, when we moved in to our first house, I followed the example of my parents and ordered a daily newspaper. After a few months, it occurred to me that there were only a very few newsworthy subjects that I actually new a lot about---cars, commercial vehicles, guns, target shooting etc--- and that everything that I read about these subjects in the paper was wrong, usually with very biased reporting. I cancelled the newspaper and I have not bought one since.
Fred

Same here, but i never paid for them! (And by that i mean i read someone elses, not that i stole them! :lol: )

Gaz wrote:I read that at the time. Sadly it's a "feature" so the BBC can get away with being as nakedly biased as it likes because, technically, it isn't "news".

It's the sort of gormless trash I'd expect to see confined to the comment pages of the Guardian, along with the antisemites and authoritarian bullies that newspaper loves to glorify.

''Gaz''


Well I have just read the article and can't for the life of me understand what leads you to comment as you do. I thought it fair and reasonable. I certainly didn't find it as you say: 'Nakedly Biased' nor did I find it as you suggest 'gormless trash'. Please explain specifically what leads you to say that.


Jenks

The woeful inaccuracies regarding what you are legally allowed to do in Switzerland is a start