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

The catch here is you can only vote if your 'Primary Shooting Discipline' is Gallery Rifle and you have to be a Individual Member of the NRA, therefore the actual numbers eligible to vote is small and those that even bother to return voting slips is even smaller, figure is about 560 who list GR as Primary discipline.

Karen, thank you for the clarification. The only difference between the US and UK NRA (and without suggesting anything) would be that we don't use the same people every year therefore guaranteeing (as best we can) complete impartiality.

Love

Blu

John MH wrote:The catch here is you can only vote if your 'Primary Shooting Discipline' is Gallery Rifle and you have to be a Individual Member of the NRA, therefore the actual numbers eligible to vote is small and those that even bother to return voting slips is even smaller, figure is about 560 who list GR as Primary discipline.

So let me get this straight, in order to vote for someone to represent Gallery Rifle on the GC you have to be a Gallery Rifle shooter/competitor, do I have that right?

Blu

Blu wrote:

John MH wrote:The catch here is you can only vote if your 'Primary Shooting Discipline' is Gallery Rifle and you have to be a Individual Member of the NRA, therefore the actual numbers eligible to vote is small and those that even bother to return voting slips is even smaller, figure is about 560 who list GR as Primary discipline.

So let me get this straight, in order to vote for someone to represent Gallery Rifle on the GC you have to be a Gallery Rifle shooter/competitor, do I have that right?

Blu

Nearly.

The technical condition is that you have nominated Gallery Rifle as your Primary Discipline to the NRA. Now, why would you do that unless you were a GR shooter? But you could so nominate, regardless of your actual major participation.

IainWR wrote: Nearly.

The technical condition is that you have nominated Gallery Rifle as your Primary Discipline to the NRA. Now, why would you do that unless you were a GR shooter? But you could so nominate, regardless of your actual major participation.

This technical quirk is IMHO a flaw in the system as it essentially allows for what I'd call vote rigging with people switching primary disciplines just to allow them to influence an election for a discipline that they don't actually shoot, therefore open to abuse.

Didn't say I turned a blind eye did I?

Why would I think otherwise Karen, Sorry for doubting you .

Wait till they've done something wrong: I am sure carrying a gun down your pants was NOT a condition on the FAC. Certainly not a sign of "fit and proper" either.

Maybe Sim has an angle on that but Breach of the Peace comes to mind? Sim??

Sim G wrote:

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...?

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.

dromia wrote:
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...

Sorry but I think you and Adam are being childish about this - I didn't like the inference of Neil's last post either, but that's his personal opinion on an unofficial forum...I would certainly object if Neil (or the NRA) were making such comments officially, but as they're not, then my main concern is that they put on the best Phoenix event they can...

...but to start knocking an event that's enjoyed by so many shooters (most of who are unaware of the politics and talk on forums) is being as negative to shooting as some of the things you complain about...

karen wrote:It's odd that we all seem to read Neil's comments differently.

Maybe some have become so used to complaining about the NRA historically, that they will always be biased against anything or anyone connected to it...

Just for the record John I didn't say I would boycott the Phoenix.

I said that I would no longer be pursuing Gallery Rifle as a discipline in my club, if any of our members wants to do so then I'm sure I and the committee will support them, but I personally will not put my energies into a discipline that has someone with nfrances view as one of their leaders.

Childish if you think so, but I disagree. Me I'll put my energies into disciplines that support people with less narrow, divisive and unhealthy views, that is me exercising my choice at the end of the day I am supporting gun ownership.

Unpalatable as it may seem to you the NRA/Bisley and the rest divide is real and both sides take each other as they find them. You ask people to stop criticising the NRA and others want the NRA to be national and representative so that they don't feel the need to criticise. The NRA has a lot of historical baggage but they do nothing practical to challenge those views and show by example rather than rhetoric that they are a different animal now, if they did then putting the historical criticism to bed in a current context of different action would be easy and the naysayers would not have any traction. I ache to be able to say something good about the NRA to the shooters and gun owners who don't use Bisley.

Me I want to put my support behind something inclusive around the one thing that binds all people who shoot, gun ownership. The NRA is not that organisation. Where is the middle ground? where is the leadership and example? who should that come from?

Maybe it is a strong competitive spirit that makes shooters so keen to be at odds over anything they can find differences on I don't know but it is unhealthy and damaging to us all and malignant views like nfrances's have no place in my vision of the shooting world and I make no apologies about challenging them when they arise.

karen wrote:It's odd that we all seem to read Neil's comments differently.

As much as I regret saying this (and I think I said it earlier in this thread), the petition is likely to do no good at all and I agree with Neil's similar comments. We have been here so many times before and nothing happens. I have signed every similar petition going (and will always continue to do so) even though I do not shoot the discipline involved. I've seen it advertised on Facebook, on websites and by email yet still only 13,702 signatures after over a month and most people sign at the start.

I wish it would work and so does everyone here but I don't think it will. Since this thread started it has gone up by just over 500 (hopefully from the NRA putting it on their website) but that is not enough (SendIt - you need to hassle the NRA to send an email out).

I wish I had a magic wand that would make every shooter in the country sign it but I don't and I don't think anyone else does either.

Ho hum!

Love

karen

Karen. Firstly, thank you for signing the petition and for the general support, indeed thank you everyone in that regard.

I posted earlier in this thread about my conversations with NRA and their reasons for the actions they feel appropriate. There is a link on their website and we have tried to make sure that goes out as widely as possible via our social network outlets. I have asked NRA to e-mail membership via the e-newsletters that go out but they have not done so to date as far as I am aware, as a member I certainly have not received one, we live in hope.

The petition is the opening gambit of the campaign we call 'Unity'. It is a year long venture that will have other initiatives introduced as they become available. We now have a Poster printed and we are sending them to Clubs, Retailers, anyone who will display them, if anyone wants one or two and can persuade an outlet to display one just ask us at contact.firearmsuk.org.

We are gradually attracting wider media interest, we have already had enquiries about the petition and responded accordingly, word is gradually spreading and whilst main stream media coverage can be a double edged sword awareness grows.

I appreciate your point about signature count and early hit rate, and yes it would have been nice to have had a quicker response, but, that being said it is still growing, gradually so we take the positive from that. We are working hard in the background to drive this forward and will not give up!

Two observations I would make are:

Circa 1.4m shooters in UK yet we struggle at present for 1% of that total?
The Daily Telegraph poll following Nigel Farage's LBC97 interview stands earlier today at 62,450 for the 'Yes' count, perhaps we need to find a way to reach them without attracting the adverse attention an approach to the DT would surely attract?

We continue to approach and speak to whoever we can to gain support and there are other things we could do if funding were available, but hey ho such is life.

We are not going to give up, long haul!

Thank you and best wishes,

Charles.