All people seeking membership must contact admin after registering to be validated.
https://mail.full-bore.co.uk/
As you had feet on the ground so to speak, do you know what BASC and not BSSC, the supposed umbrella organisation for all shooting weren't the ones making the statements? Would BASC not share their toys or was it felt that a game/pest control focused (rather than target shooting) organisation would be best?karen wrote:We've been through this at least twice before - the NRA knew about the Cumbrian shooting first, informed the other bodies and they all decided to speak with one voice. That voice was decided by all the organisations to be BASC. They did not "stick their neck out" - they were acting WITH all the other shooting bodies so that ONE voice spoke for all.Blackstuff wrote:While the shooting lobbys response to the Cumbrian shootings was a joint affair behind closed doors, it was BASC sticking its neck out on tv/radio etc defending ALL of us.
I know as I was in the NRA offices and Iain was on duty in Cumbria (so that should be easy to work out how the NRA got to know first!)
Forgive me for feeling passionately about my #1 form of shooting but when something comes completely out of the blue it can surprise and shock you. Particularly as i can't really see the difference between UKPSA ISPC shooting and NRA IPSC shooting, they're both going to be ran to the IPSC rulebook, so as a shooter (not someone vying for control of the organisation), i simply don't see how any benefits could come about to the shooters. For one i'd presume that if the NRA bid is successful (and i doubt this has move has come from IPSC themselves), i'd have to become a member of the NRA, which is a 40% increase in membership costs for a kick off. Added to that the alleged lack of representation in the North, it doesn't exactly bode well for anyone further up the country than Rossendale does it?The Cupcake Kid wrote: I haven't been told anything either, but you are making assumptions.
Maybe the IPSC invited other organisations to apply to become the GB representative because they want to look at alternatives? Who knows? All we know at the moment is that the NRA have put in an application and certain members of the UKPSA seem to feel very threatened by that piece of information.
if the UKPSA were in really great shape and doing a marvelous job of representing the IPSC, there is no reason why anyone would feel threatened or view the application as "hostile". Instead, they would just shrug it off and get on with the job in hand.
I forgive you. But as we don't know what the NRA is proposing, we can't speculate or guess on what the difference might be if they were to become the IPSC rep. We need to wait and see.Blackstuff wrote:Forgive me for feeling passionately about my #1 form of shooting but when something comes completely out of the blue it can surprise and shock you. Particularly as i can't really see the difference between UKPSA ISPC shooting and NRA IPSC shooting, they're both going to be ran to the IPSC rulebook, so as a shooter (not someone vying for control of the organisation), i simply don't see how any benefits could come about to the shooters. For one i'd presume that if the NRA bid is successful (and i doubt this has move has come from IPSC themselves), i'd have to become a member of the NRA, which is a 40% increase in membership costs for a kick off. Added to that the alleged lack of representation in the North, it doesn't exactly bode well for anyone further up the country than Rossendale does it?The Cupcake Kid wrote: I haven't been told anything either, but you are making assumptions.
Maybe the IPSC invited other organisations to apply to become the GB representative because they want to look at alternatives? Who knows? All we know at the moment is that the NRA have put in an application and certain members of the UKPSA seem to feel very threatened by that piece of information.
if the UKPSA were in really great shape and doing a marvelous job of representing the IPSC, there is no reason why anyone would feel threatened or view the application as "hostile". Instead, they would just shrug it off and get on with the job in hand.
Have you shot CSR at Bisley in recent times, i.e. within in the last year??lapua338 wrote:I'm a member of 3 other affiliated clubs and fail to see the benefits of individual NRA membership. I also encouraged all my shooting colleagues not to renew too.
I have been a member since 2006 and in that time I've witnessed the continued failure and incompetence of the organisation. The facilities are archaic and a national embarrassment. The range has been mismanaged/misgoverned for decades.
How on earth do they expect to see civilian shooting flourish throughout the country?
In my opinion, the NRA is another self-appointed, arrogant and self-promoting organisation with a rather glossy propaganda magazine that does little to promote and secure the future of shooting sports. Reading the latest edition of the Journal reinforces my belief that the NRA is simply an "elite" TR club which allows other forms of shooting albeit within the constraints of the "Bisley system". For example, a 16.30 finish Tues-Fri during the summer season! What's that all about? There's at least another 4 hours of daylight.
The NRA is not the be-all and end-all in the world of shooting. I do not recognize the NRA's authority in controlling any discipline I care to shoot. The NRA does not represent me or many others like me. The NRA only really understands the needs of the TR-type shooter.
What happened to the original aim of the NRA, which was the promotion and encouragement of marksmanship?
The NRA should be promoting the art of riflecraft... the "art of the rifle". The NRA does not understand the rifle nor its use. The late, great Jeff Cooper summed it up perfectly... "the specialization and formalization of target shooting has led the majority of practitioners astray, in much the same way that the sport of fencing has obscured the art of swordsmanship" (or words to that effect).
TR is not a measure of marksmanship nor is it fun. It's the dullest and least imaginative form of shooting on the planet. From my understanding, it's also a dying discipline (and all the better for it) therefore, the NRA should be promoting gun handling/skill-at-arms and more practical forms of shooting, e.g., CSR, etc. But the NRA are incapable of providing this level of service as they don't have the knowledge, the experience nor the imagination to conduct exotic (and remain safe) courses of fire.
That's one of the many reasons why you won't see civilian shooting flourish throughout the country because formalized TR/Match Rifle, etc, is so damn dull.
I would encourage anyone wishing to take up shooting not to join a TR club with their prejudice and narrow-mindedness. Find a club that embraces more practical forms of shooting. I've been lucky enough to find a club where we have the freedom to do what we like with lever-actions as long as its safe.