What would a UK national shooting body look like.

[dromia]

Grant.

It would need to be recognised and supported by the existing bodies. :G

It would also need to have the support of shooters so what would it offer and for what? Playing devil's advocate here.

[Sandgroper]

There in lies the rub. While not a threat to the status quo, it could be seen as one. :cool2:

[BestDrugDoc]

What about a slightly different approach:

How about setting up a "Firearms Certificate Holders Association" and a "Shotgun Certificate Holders Association" or similarly named organisations.

These associations would be able to draw on a wide variety of shooters who have an identifiable common ground - ie the certificates, and consequently the associations can lobby for and help shooters of all types with common problems and present a united front nationally. They would be able to claim a wide and easily identifiable and understandable membership base.

It seems a simple idea that could "do what it says on the tin". Individual disciplines will still have their own organisations and publications etc, but these new associations would be uniting bodies, dealing with the big picture.

In fact it could be one body "Firearms and Shotgun Certificate Holders Association"

Perhaps something new without a "track record" with shooters or the authorities and politicians could take things in a better direction for the benefit of all of us?

[dromia]

Aye that gets us closer to the nub.

As I've postulated, its about the people and that which binds us all regardless of discipline, gun ownership, that is the key.

The ability to legally own guns is a far greater similarity and strength than disciplines, some of which come and go, many of us dabble in multiple disciplines or over our career or change disciplines as our interest and abilities change.

Disciplines are by their nature factional and partisan as they focus down on specific ways of shooting rather looking holistically at gun owners as their constituency, this approach carries built in divisions and factionalism.

A truly national representative organisation should be about representing people, gun owners and aspiring gun owners, rather than a collection of shooting sports.

We need to work with what we all have in common rather than that which separates us.

The whole needs to be greater than the sum of its parts.

[honsu]

Hi

As the NRA is no longer represented here, this is just me.

I have never heard a TR shooter call the historics "the funnies". I have never heard a TR shooter resent the shotgunners (have you seen the cars they drive - they are mostly loaded in a way TR shooters aren't, and the money is wonderful). I can't comment on the negative views of other disciplines - I'm TR through and through. I agree we are fractured, but ramming different types of shooting together is a bit like getting lawn tennis, real tennis, table tennis, badminton, squash, lacrosse, hockey, hurling, shinty, ice hockey, baseball and cricket under one organisation. All of those have as their basic characteristic that they use an implement to hit a moving object. Shooting uses an implement to hit an object (which may or may not be moving). I submit that we are more diverse than the pastimes I listed. We have a common political and media problem that the chattering classes and their media friends see us as an easy target and most politicians don't have the balls to tell that group they are talking rubbish. But that is a different issue from coherent organisation in sporting terms.

Iain

Hi Iain does this mean you guys have chossen to stop posting about the NRA or has the NRA asked you not to as there was not a post about this in the NRA section?

Sorrey for going of topic.



:flag5:

[dromia]

Interestingly I have noticed from a trade perspective that there are distinct types of shooting customers.

Firstly is the sport shooter who is into the activity be, clay pigeons, stalking, rough shooting small bore leagues, centre fire TR, MR F class or what ever, to them a gun is a tool that allows them to do their chosen activity and their primary interest is the sport and/or competing.

Secondly there are those of us who are interested in guns and shooting them for their own sake, disciplines and competition are secondary or just a way of shooting our guns.

However all the representation is about specific disciplines which then only responds to a specific activity ignoring the majority who are into guns. Ignoring the obvious is what has given us the mess we have.

[dromia]

Hi Iain does this mean you guys have chossen to stop posting about the NRA or has the NRA asked you not to as there was not a post about this in the NRA section?

Sorrey for going of topic.



:flag5:

Look in the NRA section and read the yellow header as to why we have locked the NRA forum.

[Sandgroper]

Hi Iain does this mean you guys have chossen to stop posting about the NRA or has the NRA asked you not to as there was not a post about this in the NRA section?

Sorrey for going of topic.



:flag5:

Look in the NRA section and read the yellow header as to why we have locked the NRA forum.

WTF!

[Sandgroper]

What about a slightly different approach:

How about setting up a "Firearms Certificate Holders Association" and a "Shotgun Certificate Holders Association" or similarly named organisations.

These associations would be able to draw on a wide variety of shooters who have an identifiable common ground - ie the certificates, and consequently the associations can lobby for and help shooters of all types with common problems and present a united front nationally. They would be able to claim a wide and easily identifiable and understandable membership base.

It seems a simple idea that could "do what it says on the tin". Individual disciplines will still have their own organisations and publications etc, but these new associations would be uniting bodies, dealing with the big picture.

In fact it could be one body "Firearms and Shotgun Certificate Holders Association"

Perhaps something new without a "track record" with shooters or the authorities and politicians could take things in a better direction for the benefit of all of us?

Very good idea.

One question I have relates to structure, voting and engagement with all shooters.

How do we form such an organisation from individual FAC/SGC holders? If we base it around clubs, we could miss the individual shooter.

[M99]

What about a slightly different approach:

How about setting up a "Firearms Certificate Holders Association" and a "Shotgun Certificate Holders Association" or similarly named organisations.

These associations would be able to draw on a wide variety of shooters who have an identifiable common ground - ie the certificates, and consequently the associations can lobby for and help shooters of all types with common problems and present a united front nationally. They would be able to claim a wide and easily identifiable and understandable membership base.

It seems a simple idea that could "do what it says on the tin". Individual disciplines will still have their own organisations and publications etc, but these new associations would be uniting bodies, dealing with the big picture.

In fact it could be one body "Firearms and Shotgun Certificate Holders Association"

Perhaps something new without a "track record" with shooters or the authorities and politicians could take things in a better direction for the benefit of all of us?

Very good idea.

One question I have relates to structure, voting and engagement with all shooters.

How do we form such an organisation from individual FAC/SGC holders? If we base it around clubs, we could miss the individual shooter.

It would need a huge amount of co-operation from the "trade" and the shooting press to spread the word. Now as much as people are moaning about Blaze - I would suggest that James Marchington would be a good point of contact were this to become more than just an internet thread - he has a wealth of contacts, is very enthusiastic and is a nice guy on top of that too!

Mike