NRA General Council Elections - Vote for me please

[Lancs Lad]

As has been said. As a none Bisley regional shooter and as a Club Secretary you are going to have to do much better than that to represent my interests and get my vote.

Just about sums up my feelings on the matter.
For the amount of time I get to spend on an MOD range annually, which can be seriously reduced by weather, Landmarc and Army last minute changes, I actually think that the £10 SCC card fee is more than generous enough as a required donation to the NRA from non-members. I most certainly do NOT feel the need to open my wallet to help keep Bisley afloat when the benefits of any such investment are highly unlikely to be felt anytime soon within my operating area.

LL

[Airbrush]

Phil, what are your views regarding CSR & other ‘practical’ shooting disciplines?

[Mattnall]

Phil, what are your views regarding CSR & other ‘practical’ shooting disciplines?

And Muzzle brakes?

[hitchphil]

Maybe the NRA could give us a refund on the Affiliation fees???????????????

Oh, look, a pig has just flown past my window!

= Sure - if you want to bankrupt & bring the organisation down?

This is not an NRA Emergency Aid Fund! - its Sport England / GB etc. NRA are just bringing it to the attention of membership & clubs. Personally I think shooting will be a long way down the queue & then there are the standard prejudices anyway to get any benefit, but in theory if you have a range with some costs you might get some help.

NB About 300 Bisley caravan & hut licence fee holders are in effect subbing the NRA the equivalent of £150k because we will get no rebate on that for no use or access, from March to when? end June 3m ~£75k worth, or end Aug ~£150k ish.

Thats about the same as asking every individual Member to increase their subs by £10 to £15 each. If NRA asked for +£10 to £15 from every member to survive & be there in 2020 - will you pay in?

There are a lot of non members in affiliated clubs, the only contribution they make is a share of the £80 affiliation fee & £10 for their safe cert card which doesn't make a contribution over its costs. So far from clubs asking NRA for a rebate? maybe NRA should be asking for a sub for every non NRA member in all its affiliated clubs? as NSRA are looking to do? as many other sporting organisations (Scuba Tennis etc) already do..... but shooting doesn't? - a lot of people get their shooting for very little if any real contribution to the club based side of the sport?

Maybe now is the time to redress that balance?

I've included the full post so context still exists. However I strongly disagree with this. My concern is that a vote for you is a vote for increased fees for members of affiliated clubs, when all it will do is keep Bisley afloat during this time of lost range revenue.[/quote]

Nowhere does that post say in this context thats what I will do, (so you have actually quoted it quite out of its context) - & I think you have missed the point of it too. In the extra ordinary circumstances of today, if we needed to raise emergency funds (& that is an if) to survive then there are untapped 'memberships' vs tapping the existing ones again & again & if there are calls for rebates then clubs that contribute c£200k vs caravan owners that contribute ~£366k pa might not have such a good case? & as for keeping Bisley afloat I think you mean a £3-4m turnover charity & membership org that maintains many on MoD ranges too. BASC/NSRA/CPSA etc cant do that. I only hope the regional range fund is intact after this, so NRA an go back to trying to expand its coverage in the country.

btw NSRA - suggested £35 / head for all club members but reduced club fees (I shouted that down to them then) - actually charging the person vs the clubs might just put an end to the cycle of duplicate insurances & costs incurred when joining multiple clubs. If NSRA do that? then watch others follow suit.

I also doubt that a fee charging structure will be the sole decision of Gen Council & my view as one voice of 20+ wont make a huge difference. I am not going to reply to look after the interests of non members over members, if thats what you are asking me to do? nor your own situation over & above the wider membership either - what i will say is - in that case will be - make it fair, make overall increases marginal - if any, recognise other shooting insurance where possible, make it compatible with HO rules, dont undermine the role or strength in the clubs & have exceptions for probationary, guests, U25 & disabilities etc.....

. I take it your are not interested in Jnr shooting then?

[hitchphil]

Phil, what are your views regarding CSR & other ‘practical’ shooting disciplines?

NRA have created a real discipline with structure, some rules, training, leagues, events & competition - I do some of the Historic & fun ones like plates thanks.

Our club has 2xNo4 a Mosin carbine & a P14 in 303 & we want to complement that with an SMLE. AR15 types etc are a bit out of the clubs budget as is F class, but we have 2 scopes & bipods that allow members to shoot something approaching recreational scoped rifle & FTR class with a TR Paramount. We have funds for a decent 223 bolt action if it an be multi use. The club could raise a platoon of about 18 members + 4 club all armed with Historic rifles & we now buy 303 by the 2k at a time - so watch out if you live in neighbouring Beds, Cambs, Bucks or Middlesex.

[RDC]

Nowhere does that post say in this context thats what I will do, (so you have actually quoted it quite out of its context) - & I think you have missed the point of it too.

I get that you was responding to someone who suggested a rebate for clubs. However your 'time to adress the balance?' Is what worries me.

In the extra ordinary circumstances of today, if we needed to raise emergency funds (& that is an if) to survive then there are untapped 'memberships' vs tapping the existing ones again & again & if there are calls for rebates then clubs that contribute c£200k vs caravan owners that contribute ~£366k pa might not have such a good case? & as for keeping Bisley afloat I think you mean a £3-4m turnover charity & membership org that maintains many on MoD ranges too.

Emergency funds at the expense of those who have no choice but be affiliated with the NRA in order to use MoD ranges. There is no way existing membership and affiliation revenue couldn't cover such admin. Therefore I stand by my point of view that it's for the benefit of Bisley, not the NRA membership or shooting as a whole.

If I recall correctly, you have a caravan at Bisley, don't you? I can see why keeping accommodation affordable is of interest to you, especially now the NRA seem intent on making things more expensive with supposed improvements.

I don't blame you, that's something that impacts you so you are right to be passionate are about it. Same reason I'm passionate are about wanting to vote for someone who seems interested I helping ALL NRA members, not just those who shoot at Bisley.


BASC/NSRA/CPSA etc cant do that.

I'm not a member of those, not are you (to my knowledge) standing in an election for them.

I only hope the regional range fund is intact after this, so NRA an go back to trying to expand its coverage in the country.

Very few individual members outside of Bisley that I have spoken to are of the opinion that the NRA cares, despite the promises of more regional involvement and support. You really think the regions will matter at the expense of Bisley?

btw NSRA - suggested £35 / head for all club members but reduced club fees (I shouted that down to them then) - actually charging the person vs the clubs might just put an end to the cycle of duplicate insurances & costs incurred when joining multiple clubs. If NSRA do that? then watch others follow suit.

It wouldn't though if you are in multiple clubs. What's to stop you claiming you've already paid it at another club? How much time and effort and cost would go into proving who is gen?

If NSRA or the NRA insist club members must also be members of the respective organisation, what happens to those who don't wish to be? You'd demand the clubs boot them? The NRA would have a monopoly because of the competency cards, and I reckon it would cause a lot of damage to clubs. Hardly a good position if it's meant to be for the good of the clubs and shooting...

I also doubt that a fee charging structure will be the sole decision of Gen Council & my view as one voice of 20+ wont make a huge difference. I am not going to reply to look after the interests of non members over members, if thats what you are asking me to do?

It was either here or in the CV I am sure I read that you want to improve the relationships with clubs, or some such. It's what prompted me to make my original comment showing how worried I am about the quote.

nor your own situation over & above the wider membership either

As a regional shooter that gets to Bisley once a year (if that), I'm used to the NRA not caring about us, and everything being Bisley-centric. It's why there aren't more regional individual members, people don't feel represented. Even those who are members.

- what i will say is - in that case will be - make it fair, make overall increases marginal - if any, recognise other shooting insurance where possible, make it compatible with HO rules, dont undermine the role or strength in the clubs & have exceptions for probationary, guests, U25 & disabilities etc.....

I'd love for it to be fair, but I think I've highlighted my belief enough.

. I take it your are not interested in Jnr shooting then?

I'm interested in everyone getting into shooting if it interests them. It's one of the reasons I am adamant against increased fees being forced on club members of affiliated clubs. Any increases in cost for no gain other than to keep a distant range open is not beneficial to young shooters unless they shoot at Bisley.

[hitchphil]

Phil, what are your views regarding CSR & other ‘practical’ shooting disciplines?

And Muzzle brakes?

Facts ............. they are unnecessary to compete or practice, they have become fashionable, there is no competition that requires them, & the noise they deflect has serious consequences for a number of ranges. Bisley now gets complaints about noise & their use on the 600yds FP near Queens road is too close to houses so exacerbates that, similarly Siberia. Results of tests suggest price has no relation to noise, so allowing some & not others will be fraught with issues, but they work just as well in a silencer.

leaving a FP clear separation does little for those behind, who now have to wear hearing protection when arriving in their cars when they previously didn't. With nearly 10000 members there isn't range space at Bisley to leave lanes clear anymore & many club secretaries dont know what rifles their members will bring on the day so book std spacing & when a member drags one out, they dont notice or dont enforce the rules so they become a problem for adjacent range users. There are shooters who now wont bring their kids or dogs to the back of the FP on a mixed butt because of them. I have measured the sound levels behind them & they generate damaging levels for significant distances behind the FP & beyond the ditch that are not present with standard muzzle. There are medically qualified shooters worried about the noise they deflect & serving forces shooters who dont see a need for their use & dont support their use either. Those that use them are a minority & those around the see them as selfish & a nuisance.

In some circumstances they seem ok - own club range with no neighbours or a CSR competition with few spectators or other shooters in the proximity & 400yds or less away from Queens Rd at Bisley. But on mixed shooting butts / FPs they are a problem.

Dont vote for me if you think muzzle brakes are your gun/shooter/human rights to inflict on other range users - they are not - there are bigger issues to deal with.

[hitchphil]

Nowhere does that post say in this context thats what I will do, (so you have actually quoted it quite out of its context) - & I think you have missed the point of it too.

I get that you was responding to someone who suggested a rebate for clubs. However your 'time to address the balance?' Is what worries me.

In the extra ordinary circumstances of today, if we needed to raise emergency funds (& that is an if) to survive then there are untapped 'memberships' vs tapping the existing ones again & again & if there are calls for rebates then clubs that contribute c£200k vs caravan owners that contribute ~£366k pa might not have such a good case? & as for keeping Bisley afloat I think you mean a £3-4m turnover charity & membership org that maintains many on MoD ranges too.

Emergency funds at the expense of those who have no choice but be affiliated with the NRA in order to use MoD ranges. There is no way existing membership and affiliation revenue couldn't cover such admin. Therefore I stand by my point of view that it's for the benefit of Bisley, not the NRA membership or shooting as a whole.

If I recall correctly, you have a caravan at Bisley, don't you? I can see why keeping accommodation affordable is of interest to you, especially now the NRA seem intent on making things more expensive with supposed improvements.

I don't blame you, that's something that impacts you so you are right to be passionate are about it. Same reason I'm passionate are about wanting to vote for someone who seems interested I helping ALL NRA members, not just those who shoot at Bisley.


BASC/NSRA/CPSA etc cant do that.

I'm not a member of those, not are you (to my knowledge) standing in an election for them.

I only hope the regional range fund is intact after this, so NRA an go back to trying to expand its coverage in the country.

Very few individual members outside of Bisley that I have spoken to are of the opinion that the NRA cares, despite the promises of more regional involvement and support. You really think the regions will matter at the expense of Bisley?

btw NSRA - suggested £35 / head for all club members but reduced club fees (I shouted that down to them then) - actually charging the person vs the clubs might just put an end to the cycle of duplicate insurances & costs incurred when joining multiple clubs. If NSRA do that? then watch others follow suit.

It wouldn't though if you are in multiple clubs. What's to stop you claiming you've already paid it at another club? How much time and effort and cost would go into proving who is gen?

If NSRA or the NRA insist club members must also be members of the respective organisation, what happens to those who don't wish to be? You'd demand the clubs boot them? The NRA would have a monopoly because of the competency cards, and I reckon it would cause a lot of damage to clubs. Hardly a good position if it's meant to be for the good of the clubs and shooting...

I also doubt that a fee charging structure will be the sole decision of Gen Council & my view as one voice of 20+ wont make a huge difference. I am not going to reply to look after the interests of non members over members, if thats what you are asking me to do?

It was either here or in the CV I am sure I read that you want to improve the relationships with clubs, or some such. It's what prompted me to make my original comment showing how worried I am about the quote.

nor your own situation over & above the wider membership either

As a regional shooter that gets to Bisley once a year (if that), I'm used to the NRA not caring about us, and everything being Bisley-centric. It's why there aren't more regional individual members, people don't feel represented. Even those who are members.

- what i will say is - in that case will be - make it fair, make overall increases marginal - if any, recognise other shooting insurance where possible, make it compatible with HO rules, dont undermine the role or strength in the clubs & have exceptions for probationary, guests, U25 & disabilities etc.....

I'd love for it to be fair, but I think I've highlighted my belief enough.

. I take it your are not interested in Jnr shooting then?

I'm interested in everyone getting into shooting if it interests them. It's one of the reasons I am adamant against increased fees being forced on club members of affiliated clubs. Any increases in cost for no gain other than to keep a distant range open is not beneficial to young shooters unless they shoot at Bisley.

Again you have quoted some points out of context to suit your own view 'address balance' applies to the original thread not this.

I am the ONLY candidate who even bothered to ask you in this forum for votes & who even took the time to read replies & respond - so who else is going to help your plight? or is continuing in isolation, unsupported a better option? I get that there are many, especially in the regions who think NRA is not for them, does little & they have no choice but be members & in fact that bit is true - if you want to use MoD ranges you need to have RCOs & SCC's & again out of context - NSRA/BASC/CPSA etc cant do that = cant issue SCC's or train RCO's & certify them or negotiate with MoD for their use. So whats better work with or in-spite of NRA because actually you dont have a choice & there isn't going to be another one coming along any time soon?

Yes i have a caravan. 2 unis, BYSA, kids & club use it way more than I do & for nominal £ if not just a beer. So am not a selfish or self interested as you try to portray me to be! & affordable accommodation options for regional shooters can include them as members rent them for less than the cost of a room - if we are not developed off camp! we do that now for any shooters who come to Bisley once a year.

This forum in particular has a bad rep for negativity........ & some advised me not to even bother canvasing here & maybe they were right? Do you just want to attack & undermine the only person asking you for support? so for info & ideas too on how to do that? or see what might be possible?

[dromia]

I am sorry but it is the NRA that has the bad reputation, masquerading as a national organisation when it is only interested in Bisley. Probably due in no small part to the chief exec having some sort of performance related remuneration based purely on meeting Bisley income targets.

Once again the NRA fails to address its complete failings beyond Bisley and that is what it and you as an aspiring council member will be judged on.

Run away from here if you will because the truth hurts as have all the previous NRA acolytes that have refused to admit never mind address the organisations continued Bisley centric policy whilst regional 100 yard+ shooting in most areas withers on the vine.

Damning this forum won't change the very visible and real fact that the NRA has zero relevance to non Bisley using gun owners/shooters and is having no positive impact on improving on or even maintaining the shooting and gun ownership status quo.

This has been an ongoing debate here since the forum started, look back to the early days and see all the promises made then by the NRA proselytisers about waiting 'till Bisley was on its feet and it could then focus on strong regional development. Well we are ten years on now, things have got much worse in relation to range access and gun ownership and we are still waiting for the "Bisley benefit" to make any palpable difference and see the "prioritisation of the regions". All the NRA rhetoric is meaningless and unfounded unless shooters nationally notice a difference brought about by this self proclaimed "national" shooting club.

Perhaps if the council and chief exec left their Bisley bubble and spent some meaning full time visiting and listening to the nations shooters and gun owners they might have a better understanding of the national issues shooting and gun ownership are facing and understand all the people they purport to represent. However their continued absence from the regions just adds to the contempt already felt for them outside Bisley.

You obviously have no idea how insulting it is for non Bisley shooters to be told how wonderful Bisley is now and how finances are improving whilst they struggle with increasing range cancellations, less range availability, poor or non existent targetry and Coms, unsafe facilities, mixed quality service and continually increasing costs for less.

[ovenpaa]

This forum in particular has a bad rep for negativity........ & some advised me not to even bother canvasing here & maybe they were right? Do you just want to attack & undermine the only person asking you for support? so for info & ideas too on how to do that? or see what might be possible?

Now this is the bit that infuriates me. This is a national forum so it is going to see comments from all quarters of our United Kingdom and certainly not all of them will be pro UK NRA. Forums members have questions and concerns so how about representing them, asking them how you can help?