Jump to content

timps

Members
  • Content Count

    1,697
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About timps

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • From
    Bury

Recent Profile Visitors

1,120 profile views
  1. On my certificate not online it says who should fill In the tables. . it genuinely isn’t ambiguous so when you sell a gun you have to follow the conditions on the buyers cert. if you sell me a gun then you have to fill out my cert not the RFD. it legally isn’t up for debate. yep it’s stupid but who says the law is sensible.
  2. Never said it was logical but it is part of the conditions on your cert. It is up to you if you follow it but it is a legal requirement regardless. Chances of getting caught who knows but ignorance of the law isn’t a defence in court. just pointing it out that’s all.
  3. There may not even be an NDA in place. If the NSCA keep quiet about any sanctions it will provide a degree of protection from legal action. If they ban someone for let’s say, I don’t know, maybe 3 years with a 2 year probation period just as a for instance and plucked out of the sky. Then they can only be sued for libel and damaging anyone’s business reputation if they publicly tell anyone about it. If they keep stum then all anyone can do is sue to let them compete again. There hasn’t been any damage to anyone’s good name so no financial damages to be made. Obviously any ensuing court case to let them compete again may or may not have adverse publicity but that won’t be the fault of the NSCA. I doubt anyone would agree to an NDA for a decision that exonerated them. The world FITASC is in the USA this year the entry list will be interesting.
  4. Just look on your own certificate there is a clause which says:- "If you are selling a firearm [or shotgun] which will be sent or posted to another dealer for the buyer to collect in person you should complete this table and notify the police. The dealer who actually hands over the firearm should not complete the table or notify the police (except in circumstances which may require police investigation as above)." So unless you fill in the buyers certificate you are failing to comply with the conditions listed on it, if you can not post it to be filled in I'm not too sure why the above clause is on my certificate.
  5. Why isn’t there a like button on PW 😂 Back to the thread, I really don’t get why there would be a non disclosure agreement over an innocent or a no further sanctions decision. It will be interesting to see the entry list for the World sporting over the next 3 years it will certainly prove or disprove the rumour that’s going around. So much spin on both sides of the argument with fake or misleading accounts on forums and Facebook groups it’s highly entertaining reading, but it is very sad for the sport (if I can call it that now) as a whole.
  6. If there is a guy going around at the world championships falsely accusing people of cheating then surely people wouldn’t care about embarrassing the gentleman or getting him banned for life. Getting a shooter disqualified from a world championship on lie is worse than the alleged cheating unless there was some truth to the accusation. Not that it matters as nothing official will be said. Like I said before none of those involved come out of this well.
  7. The other more cynical view is the NSCA have been silenced by legal action and a cheat has got off further punishment , neither view has any proof. The facts are: A shooter was disqualified from the world championship however they were never named. A certain individual’s name was subsequently removed from the results. The NSCA sate the disqualification is final but further disciplinary action is being appealed. The NSCA state the disciplinary action is now resolved. This was a shoot run by the host country not the CPSA under NSCA rules and regulations which differ from the CPSA. Therefore any sanctions would not automatically apply to the CPSA as they are not involved in the process only an observer from afar. The aftermath of all this is a complete mess. Officially a shooter was disqualified for what? no one knows, any further sanctions? no one knows. Unofficially well loads know the allegations and rumours. I would have thought NSCA would, if the disqualification was unsound state it to exonerate the shooter in question. And there is the fact that he has disappeared from the NSCA member list which has lead to other rumours about him being able to shoot in the USA in future. No one comes out of this mess in a good light
  8. Well the NSCA have made a decision, quote from their Facebook page ..... “NSCA Disciplinary case 19-05 that occurred at the 2019 World English has been resolved.” Thats your lot 🙄🤐😂. As to an official statement of what happened or if further sanctions were imposed are obviously not forthcoming. I doubt we will ever hear an official version of what went on so it will probably be rumours and hearsay from now on. It will be interesting to see the competitors entry list next time the world championship is in the USA.
  9. Teague Beretta Optima flush fitting chokes for sale, used in my DT10, AL391 and 682 Gold E. 2 X Teague flush - 3/8 UK (light modified US) - £20 each inc P&P (not Optima plus or HP Optima) 1 sold 1 still available
  10. From my memory the 85 to 88 were very similar producing 60 + hp with a ridiculous low end power designed by beelzebub to send you straight to hell. Then from 89 to its end they redesigned the head and exhaust to lower compression which was supposed to aid starting and make it more user friendly. I think that produced about the 55 ish hp. I know plenty that raced the 86 put two base gaskets on to help starting and tame it. The jetting was off from standard as Honda jetted it rich on the 86 to aid starting as well. I don’t miss trying to kick the thing up that’s for sure but I did miss racing it. The later models behaved like an 86 with to gaskets on so I always wondered if Honda had listened to the complaints.
  11. I Raced an 86 CR 500 for 2 years, the kickstarter ate through a pair of Axo boots in 2 months. I look forward to the next instalment
  12. He will have had the chance but the disqualification itself is handled by shoot management of the ground or the jury appointed by them not the NSCA. According to the rules :- “Shoot management may disqualify or expel a member when a complaint has been filed in writing and after giving both parties (the party filing the complaint and the party complained of) an opportunity to be heard prior to disqualification or expulsion.” Obviously by the fact he has now been disqualified he has had the chance to appeal so either his appeal against disqualification failed or he never lodged an appeal against the disqualification with shoot management. As to which it is we wont find that out until after the NSCA appeal is heard.
  13. According to the NSCA "Northbrook has rerun the shoot results, and the current posted results are the final official results." Therefore based on the above statement he cannot appeal the disqualification and that stands. The NSCA have then looked at the evidence and the NSCA Executive Director, have reached a decision if any additional disciplinary action should be taken, this additional disciplinary action is what is being appealed not the disqualification from the shoot. It would be an interesting turn of events if at the meeting of the NSSA Officers they come to a different decision to Northbrook and the NSCA Executive Director seeing as they have stated the results with him removed are final, but at this moment in time he is not innocent he is disqualified from the shoot and the current NSCA disciplinary action is in effect until the appeal is heard. Regarding his sponsors I see he is absent from the list of shooters on their respective web pages when before the incident he was listed.
  14. Just an update for those who are following this. From the NSCA Facebook page: ”EDITED: The disciplinary case from the World English Sporting Championship is under appeal. It is NSCA policy not to discuss the details of any disciplinary matter, but we can explain the process being followed, which is dictated by the NSCA Rule Book, Section IV “Rules of Conduct,” starting on page 11. This prescribes how rule violations are to be addressed and how disciplinary actions are undertaken. http://nsca.nssa-nsca.org/rule-book/ Following notification of an appeal, according to rule IV-E-1, “… the NSSA Officers shall hold a hearing on the matter, which will take place at the next regularly scheduled quarterly meeting of the NSSA Officers.” This meeting will take place on January 16, so the case will remain on appeal until that time. The decisions of the NSCA Executive Council will remain in effect during the appeal process. Following the meeting, NSCA will make a final statement on this case. Thank you for your patience and understanding as we follow our established process.”
×
×
  • Create New...