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

Damn the insurance! They all offer insurance!

In the insurance post, legitimate or not, who did you recommend?

Do you feel this organisation, it's scale and its location offers anything beyond cheap insurance? Mean anything in Westminster?

Objectively?

So do you think more money would improve the service we get from our NGBs? Seems a bit chicken-egg to me

Countryman wrote:Damn the insurance! They all offer insurance!

In the insurance post, legitimate or not, who did you recommend?

Do you feel this organisation, it's scale and its location offers anything beyond cheap insurance? Mean anything in Westminster?

Objectively?

That is my point exactly all they all offer is insurance and the question of representation wasn't relevant so why hijack it what does it prove in relation to this thread.

If you want a discussion on the relative merits of our national bodies then start a fresh thread that is focussed on that issue, although I suspect that it has been done to death many times on here before, rather than misusing quotes form elsewhere out of context and thus causing confusion

Can you now answer my other questions please, who is the one man band you are referring to?

Also the purpose of citing my post as previously asked.

Dromia. Can I suggest you reread the last page?

1. Without writing a manifesto we are in agreement about where representation of our sport needs to be.
2. Having said that you recommend an organisation for insurance that offers nothing much more than insurance really ( nice fella that he is and all that) One man band may be inaccurate but it's how UKIP were seen with Farage and they are not as big as UKIP , BASC, CA or even the NRA.

I don't want to start a thread about the relative bodies. I think I have said ad nauseam that they are all lacking, how so broadly and that things need shaking up in that respect whilst all gun owners do more to promote and grow our sport.

Meanwhile though, don't we need not to be recommending cheap insurance but recommending those organisations who have a voice?

I don't see where the confusion springs up.

I'm still confused trying to follow your posts, obviously my intellectual abilities are nowhere near yours.

Why shouldn't insurance be recommended when that is what is specifically asked for? Are you suggesting that we just ignore that members question?

Also in the context of representation there is no existing body that I could recommend people give money to, so really in the context of national organisations the one who gives the best value insurance, other than if you want to join Bisley shooting club AKA the NRA, is the only reason for giving any of them money.

Plenty of people to put you down Dromia no need to help them out! I'm not pushing my perceived intellectual superiority I'm just voicing an opinion.

I do disagree that none of the bodies do ANY good but I would agree that few of them do much for our sport and even the best are limited in their success. We need a pro shooting campaign that counters the assertion of the press that we are all Sociopaths.

I feel it is appropriate to point out that it's not just insurance that you need to protect your shooting.

Still at a loss but I've plaited enough jam for this day so I give up on you.

I would assume he's referring to SACS, yes he's a "one man band" but he's very professional and certainly knows his stuff and provides members with excellent advice and support if/when needed.

As opposed to SGA. Nice people all 5 of them I'm sure.

Both niche market insurance providers. Not great advocates of gun ownership.

I expect all the Scottish organisations are absolutely bricking it. Shooting is not popular with the SNP. Shooting is clearly the preserve of the rich and powerful which sits at odds with their Socialist roots.

Hey hey, Socialists vs sociopaths!

Countryman wrote:As opposed to SGA. Nice people all 5 of them I'm sure.

Both niche market insurance providers. Not great advocates of gun ownership.

I expect all the Scottish organisations are absolutely bricking it. Shooting is not popular with the SNP. Shooting is clearly the preserve of the rich and powerful which sits at odds with their Socialist roots.

Hey hey, Socialists vs sociopaths!

Dont worry, the SNP are fair-weather socialists. If the Communist Party won the General Election in England, the SNP would become very right wing all of a sudden...
Seriously, and sadly, it is worse than Toff-Hating: They see landowners, and by extension all shooters, as being English/Torys/'Westminster insert-insult-here': That is the worst crime in their eyes. They have combined Wealth, land ownership, political views, (all of our) shared hobby and (perceived) ethnicity all into one, and that is very dangerous indeed.