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

I think my thread has been hijacked.

sign01

Oh and by the way, for those who seek to dwell on historical shortcomings of the NRA, go and read the speeches from the AGM, look at the pictures of Andrew Mercer presenting prizes at The Phoenix, pictures of him actually taking an interest in all forms of shooting. I did and decided that the there was a glimmer of change in the NRA and decided to join. They also were amazing at helping me out of a "tight spot" on the run up to the The GR National Championships.

Instead of bad mouthing them for past actions, get behind for OUR sports future.

That is all!

Don't get me wrong, I can see all the shooting organisations are working hard to provide a framework and facilities for shooting and they're to be commended for that.

I didn't mean shout from the roof tops that we want handguns back, I was talking specifically about retaining existing rights. When the next Hungerford, Dunblane or Cumbria happens and it will, I want to know the primary objective of the organisation I pay a yearly subscription to, is going to protect my interests. Perhaps they're already devoting a large percentage of their time by preempting this, but it isn't clear that would be a major advantage to me as a non member.

If there was a way to have handguns back albeit with strict [bi]annual mental health checks and at a cost to myself, I'd still be very interested.

No-one could ever have pre-empted Dunblane - I don't think anyone would have thought something like that would ever have happened.

With Cumbria the NRA were the first shooting organisation to know anything about it because we had someone involved in the incident when it was happening and went straight into action. A decision was quickly reached between the various organisations about how this would be dealt with and in my opinion the fact that the shooting organisations were prepared before the journalists started calling and before the s*** started hitting the fan meant that law-abiding shooters didn't suffer as they had done in the past. In fact there appeared to be quite a lot of sympathy for shooting in that people appeared to realise that the post-Dunblane laws hadn't stopped gun crime or incidents like this.

Yes I am sure this sort of thing will happen again. I am sure that no amount of law making or gun control will stop it. I am sure that the NRA will deal with it successfully. I am confident that many people see that law-abiding shooters have been badly treated in the past and that there is no need to penalise them any further. I am sure that some of you will disagree with me but you won't stop me in believing that!

Yes that is basically what I'm suggesting, if for no other reason than a single louder voice is easier to listen to. Nevertheless, I appreciate the point you make.

Chapuis wrote:What you are suggesting Halodin is that the NRA becomes something more like The American NRA an all encompassing organisation with different factions within it. It has been suggested numerous times previously and quite frankly while the NRA of America has some good points, the general opinion is that each of our different shooting factions/disciplines and their members generally favour separate organisations. Most of the organisations simply want to enjoy their sport and not get wrapped up in politics.

That's good to know, it would be interesting to find out where this went.

karen wrote:Further to what Iain said, a lot of work was done by Glynn Alger and others talking to the Home Office and Government to get handguns back. It was all heading in the right direction even if it wasn't going to happen overnight. However with the "staff re-organisation" of the last couple of years I now have no idea where that ended up but the NRA were trying VERY hard to achieve this.

Mike357 wrote:Oh and by the way, for those who seek to dwell on historical shortcomings of the NRA, go and read the speeches from the AGM, look at the pictures of Andrew Mercer presenting prizes at The Phoenix, pictures of him actually taking an interest in all forms of shooting. I did and decided that the there was a glimmer of change in the NRA and decided to join. They also were amazing at helping me out of a "tight spot" on the run up to the The GR National Championships.

Instead of bad mouthing them for past actions, get behind for OUR sports future.

That is all!

Very well said . . . although I think there have been plenty of others who have presented prizes at the Phoenix and other GRP Meetings who take an interest in all forms of shooting but maybe the cameras weren't there. In fact I think one of them actually also shot the Speed Steels but might just have been beaten by his wife :shakeshout:

BTW Speed Steels is GREAT!!!!

Good job, now you're selling it to me!

karen wrote:No-one could ever have pre-empted Dunblane - I don't think anyone would have thought something like that would ever have happened.

With Cumbria the NRA were the first shooting organisation to know anything about it because we had someone involved in the incident when it was happening and went straight into action. A decision was quickly reached between the various organisations about how this would be dealt with and in my opinion the fact that the shooting organisations were prepared before the journalists started calling and before the s*** started hitting the fan meant that law-abiding shooters didn't suffer as they had done in the past. In fact there appeared to be quite a lot of sympathy for shooting in that people appeared to realise that the post-Dunblane laws hadn't stopped gun crime or incidents like this.

Yes I am sure this sort of thing will happen again. I am sure that no amount of law making or gun control will stop it. I am sure that the NRA will deal with it successfully. I am confident that many people see that law-abiding shooters have been badly treated in the past and that there is no need to penalise them any further. I am sure that some of you will disagree with me but you won't stop me in believing that!

HALODIN wrote:That's good to know, it would be interesting to find out where this went.

karen wrote:Further to what Iain said, a lot of work was done by Glynn Alger and others talking to the Home Office and Government to get handguns back. It was all heading in the right direction even if it wasn't going to happen overnight. However with the "staff re-organisation" of the last couple of years I now have no idea where that ended up but the NRA were trying VERY hard to achieve this.

Yes I would be interested to know that too but not sure whether it would be possible for me to find out.

However take a look at Glynns Notes in the old Journals up to 2011 - there is quite a bit there which indicates just what was going on behind the scenes with the Home Office and Government regarding pistols and other legislation.

However I have no idea where it all ended up after he was made redundant

Downloadable from NRA website http://www.nra.org.uk/common/asp/genera ... p?site=NRA

HALODIN wrote:Good job, now you're selling it to me!

:shakeshout: :shakeshout: :shakeshout:

Phew! Was beginning to think I had wasted a day lazing around on here sign92