Page 20 of 35
Re: New Petition - Part 2 (Number of signatures: 13,188)
Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2014 8:07 pm
by Dougan
Blu wrote:Dougan.
You're spot on that I'm not married with kids; but that doesn't mean I'm not still subject to the law of 'best laid plans...' - It's one of the big bank-holiday weekends, and I'd of loved to go shooting...however It's my nephew's wedding today, and I've ended up host to some of the visiting family from abroad for the weekend...no wonder I'm a little grumpy
Dougan, now take what you're having to do and add a spouse and a couple of kids. Oh Dougan, what you're having to put up with for the weekend, that's not no where near in the same league as someone with a spouse and kids mate. I'd guess that your plans get upset occasionally, for us married with kids it's common occurrence but hey it comes with the territory and you try and work around it best you can.
Still by the time you read this your weekend will be all done and dusted, I hope it wasn't to much of a pain for you mate.
Blu
I was exaggerating my 'grumpiness' (just joking), and had a really good weekend...though have eaten and drunk enough for a month!
Probably the most 'pain' was when I got a spare hour yesterday, and checked in on this sorry thread...
Re: New Petition - Part 2 (Number of signatures: 13,188)
Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2014 8:11 pm
by Dougan
nfrancis wrote:dromia wrote:Nfrancis.
What is your view on shooters who do not compete but still shoot regularly?
Depends what they are shooting.
Use of firearms for practical reasons such as vermin control or animal management aside - if your primary reason for owning firearms is listed as target shooting you probably need to be target shooting to justify its ownership. If anyone says thay want a firearm for target shooting - why wouldn't they go target shooting?
At the moment most police areas seem to accept this as turning up to a club a couple of times a year and 'signing in'. Fine - this was always the case - even before the laws changed in the 1990s.
However one day something will happen again in this country and firearms ownership will, as usual, be called into question. Worst case scenario is if you are not really target shooting you may well have difficulty in justifying ownership of that firearm. I don't really count aimless pinking as target shooting.
So - my views - well - I could argue that they are the sport's worst nightmares because when something does happen again we'll have 2 million Daily Mail readers crying for blood on the basis we had thousands of gun nuts who had no real justification or reason to hold 'an arsenal of lethal weapons' when they never actually went target shooting. That's my sport down the pan. I could probably take up clay shooting however!
Alternatively I could argue they are missing out on 90% of what shooting is all about. Essentially the same as any other sport or pastime - football, cricket, basketball, darts, chess - whatever... Competition is what shooting sports are - its not about guns (contrary to popular belief) its about shooting.
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.
Neil - I stuck my neck out for you earlier in this thread as I agreed that getting people shooting, and competing more could be more effective than yet another petition...
...then you come out with this stuff...so please excuse me if I don't back you up on the forum again.
Re: New Petition - Part 2 (Number of signatures: 13,188)
Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2014 8:16 pm
by Dougan
Sim G wrote:The reason I won't attend Phoenix is again is because of your view and your standing in Gallery Rifle. When asked, I'll tell them, the negative bigoted view of Neil Francis stopped me going. I want no association with what he represents. And when your gallery rifle is on it's ar$e, I'll still be shooting round paper targets
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...?
Re: New Petition - Part 2 (Number of signatures: 13,188)
Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2014 8:18 pm
by Blu
Dougan, shame that you find this thread "sorry". I found the wide range of views on the matter quite interesting.
Blu
Re: New Petition - Part 2 (Number of signatures: 13,188)
Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2014 8:22 pm
by Dougan
Your right, it's been an important and interesting topic...but some of the more recent contributions haven't exactly been constructive...
Re: New Petition - Part 2 (Number of signatures: 13,188)
Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2014 8:26 pm
by Blu
Dougan wrote:Your right, it's been an important and interesting topic...but some of the more recent contributions haven't exactly been constructive...
Ah well such is the way of forums.
Blu
Re: New Petition - Part 2 (Number of signatures: 13,188)
Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2014 9:23 pm
by John MH
dromia wrote:Were you competing?
Some plinking and some competing, the plinking holds less attraction for me.
Re: New Petition - Part 2 (Number of signatures: 13,188)
Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2014 11:20 pm
by ordnance
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.
I am sure that lots of people collect firearms for different reasons the engineering the historical aspect. That would not concern me why would it concern you.
Re: New Petition - Part 2 (Number of signatures: 13,188)
Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2014 7:03 am
by dromia
Dougan wrote:
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...?
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.
Re: New Petition - Part 2 (Number of signatures: 13,188)
Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2014 7:26 am
by dave_303
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.
Wow Neil, that's your view? How did you ever get voted into a position of influence in the NRA? This is a serious question, the logistics behind the reality are simply mind boggling!
I sat a Military History Degree at University, is it surprising that when it comes to shooting that the list of firearms below are what I own? I don't compete with them, as stated earlier, in an argument you neatly avoided, I can't actually afford it, I may buy the odd gun if I get some cash in, as I did recently with some inheritance, or if I sell some stuff. In that way my collection are an investment, I don't intend to but it s*** hits the fan I can sell some, however, saving for competition fees would see money go down the pan that I wouldn't see again.
I have come across this attitude before, but NEVER from a fellow shooter, and frankly, the fact that you hold this view disappoints me as it just makes you seem incredibly ignorant and self-centred.
