bring back pistols ?

[Scully]

Not repealing the handgun ban would no more prve you right than the opposite would prove you wrong.The issue will not be decide nor influenced by the opinions of anyone on this forum.

You suggest the real way to protect the cornerstones of shooting,as being 'sporting' shooting is via BASC.I think you are delusional about the power that BASC has.BASC were there following Hungerford,but could do nothing to prevent high mag' capacity shotguns becoming sect'1,even though those guns played no part in the murders at Hungerford.Nor could they prevent handguns(as we knew them)from being banned,and in fact I seem to recall BASC advising everyone to keep a low profile.

Amongst a minority participant sport(shooting)semi-auto centrefire rifle owners and handgunners were even more of a minority,and therefore not really a priority.All those people who mattered;collectors,Lords and lesser politicians kept theirs anyway,so that's ok.

The fact that the vast majority of shooting carried out now is of the 'sporting' type may be our saving grace,but not because of the power of BASC,( in the face of a determined government agenda BASC has no real power)but because there are so many people in positions of influence and power,like the Lords,Politicians and indeed the Royal family who participate in this type of shooting,and also because of the revenue 'sporting' shooting provides.The fact that BASC has the 'ear' of such people is to be applauded,but don't believe being a member of BASC or any other organisation is our saviour.That is being complacent,and that way lies our undoing.

By all means join the organisation of your choice(I am a member of both BASC and the NGO)but the 'real power' may lay with us,but we can't even be bothered to write a few words in defence of our sport,but can be bothered to write a few words to belittle someone elses!We deserve all we get.

[Mungler]

I wrote to the select committee and I copied in BASC as requested on their website.

 

It is your inability to recognise that when a "lawful" FAC holder goes Tonto there will be unavoidable consequences not to the liking of the shooting community.

 

A shooter's vote is the same as a non shooters vote. It's a miracle that following Cumbria there haven't been more restrictions; again it's got nothing to do with logic but keeping the public (in majority) happy. I thought .RF semi autos would have been banned or something else to nibble at the edges. As above it doesn't matter if Bird did or did not use a 10/22, the non shooting public wouldn't know CZ bolt action from a Ruger 10/22.

 

The fact shooters didn't get worse was down to a Tory sporting shooter PM and BASC. No doubt you will disagree but there you go.

 

Besides, pistols still ain't coming back....

[Scully]

You've totally missed the point;I personally have no interest in pistol shooting at all.If I did I could attend my old club which is still ongoing less than45 minutes away.

I am only too aware of the consequences of someone going 'Tonto',regardless of the choice of weapon.

You say it's a miracle there aren't more restrictions following Cumbria;we don't know what restrictions are to come yet,and yes,I do happen to agree with you;if Cameron wasn't a keen shooter we could really be in the deep stuff.But nothing has been decided yet,though many options have been mooted no-one knows for sure what the outcome will be,not even BASC.

I'll also agree BASC do a good job,otherwise I wouldn't be a member,but if you think they are our saviour then my first point still stands...you're deluded.

[Mungler]

Well it stands to reason that BASC will back sporting shooters to the hilt; to do otherwise would be like Turkeys voting for Xmas.

 

As for the other shooting organisations, good luck to them, but those that are spending time or money trying to get semi auto centre fire rifles and pistols back, well they are deluded in the extreme; this goes back to my point about shooters not being able to see a situation from the otherside of the fence.

[Kes]

I have read all the posts and the last issue in Munglers post is wrong, IMHO.

Shooters can put themselves in the place of the victims families.

If it werent for the low levels of gun ownership more shooters families would be victims. We know at least one forum user (cumbria shooting thread) has a relative/close friend who was shot by Bird.

Having been involved in shooting, a persons reaction is, I suggest, slightly different than one who is a victim (directly or indirectly), without that involvement.

I further suggest that a shooters second, third or fourth reaction is not to want to ban guns but to want to know why the particular murderer had a gun and how he became so paraniod/delusional without this being noticed, that he used it against his fellowman.

 

It is not possible to imagine a more heinous crime than Dunblane, we are mostly parents and know no parent should have to bury their child. I personally do however have more fear and concern over illegal firearms than legally held ones. The same I would say about pistols. The vast majority of SGC/FAC holders are law abiding (obviously) and in a minority, therefore, we will always be the target unless someone eventually takes a case to a court based upon bans being an infringement of their personal and human rights, as is the US defence, enshrined in their Constitution.

[Vipa]

I am surprised by the suggestion that supporting all forms of shooting, including the return of pistol shooting, should imply to anyone, support for the most heinous murderers.

The need to support each other and not to be selfish about other shooting sports, stems from the knowledge we all share that there is nothing dangerous about guns. Its a very, very, very small number of the people who use them, those who should have been prevented from their ownership and use.

The effects of that madness are catastrophic and nobody, with half a brain, would support anyone who kills in any situation such as this.

 

There are very many more 'murderous' drivers than shooters, by a long way, but we dont ban cars - they dont set out to kill but we try to balance the control and management of cars and their use to allow us the freedom to use them. Drink/drug driving kills large numbers of people annually.

Driving a car or supporting someone who drives a car is NOT, and never will be, support for the worst excesses that a motorist can perpetrate.

 

I believe we should all support all well controlled and regulated shooting sports, not just hope the one we prefer will be the last to be banned.

That means excluding rambo type idiots from all our sports.

l'd hope for the support of others, were my shooting sport to come under threat, hence I offer mine.

 

I found myself nodding all the way through reading your post and was already prepping my praise at a post well written...... then I read your second from last sentence....

 

What exactly do you mean by 'rambo type idiots?' I remember lots of guys (like me) who used to wear combat gear to shoot police pistol comps, I wwas shooting next to quite a few guys in combat BDUs at bisley last weekend... are these the people you are refering to as in all my time as a shooter I have not met anyone that fits into any other bracket that fits your description

 

If I am correct then, with one sentence, you have proved yourself just as hypocritical as the rest by condoning all forms of the sport apart from those where the preferred dress code you find distasteful.

[poontang]

 

 

What exactly do you mean by 'rambo type idiots?'

 

 

 

 

[Breastman]

So just going by that picture wearing DPM makes you a 'rambo type'?? I don't have any myself as I find it soaks up water and gets really heavy and I can afford to buy mossy oak/realtree stuff. But I'll be sure to tell people that I shoot pigeons with and several at both rifle and clay clubs that they think they're Rambo because they bought cheap camo gear :blink:

 

Mark

[The Ellwood]

I never got the chance to shoot pistols or semi auto centre fire rifles.

The bans achieved their aims, so will stay for the time being.

I woud like to see the bans repealed, even if it was only a little at a time.

As has been said, a successful court case based on "human rights" (as much as i normally dispise that term) would be the (seemingly) only way to get the ball rolling.

Edited June 4, 2011 by The Ellwood

[poontang]

So just going by that picture wearing DPM makes you a 'rambo type'?? I don't have any myself as I find it soaks up water and gets really heavy and I can afford to buy mossy oak/realtree stuff. But I'll be sure to tell people that I shoot pigeons with and several at both rifle and clay clubs that they think they're Rambo because they bought cheap camo gear :blink:

 

Mark

 

You don't recognise the fridge bashing 'Rambo' type in the picture then?

[Breastman]

Certainly not! One doesn't do Section 2 shotguns dear boy!

 

Mark

[chrispti]

 

 

 

Huh....... rubbish

 

This is ''walty rambo wanna be type''

[poontang]

Certainly not! One doesn't do Section 2 shotguns dear boy!

 

Mark

 

Moving targets can be a bit tricky I suppose.

[poontang]

Huh....... rubbish

 

This is ''walty rambo wanna be type''

 

That looks like one of those 'pistol type' sawn off thingamajigs. :o

 

Respect

[Scully]

Well it stands to reason that BASC will back sporting shooters to the hilt; to do otherwise would be like Turkeys voting for Xmas.

 

As for the other shooting organisations, good luck to them, but those that are spending time or money trying to get semi auto centre fire rifles and pistols back, well they are deluded in the extreme; this goes back to my point about shooters not being able to see a situation from the otherside of the fence.

Yep,I agree with you,BASC will back sporting shooters to the hilt,we're all that's left,and not to do so would be the end of BASC.

While I can't agree that those fighting for the return of semi-auto centrefire rifles and pistols are deluded,I do believe they face a never-ending struggle and the only thing they have going for them at the moment is they're out of the spotlight(the vast majority of the British public don't even realise there are people still shooting pistols in this country,and in some numbers)so until that changes the status quo will remain.But it's their time,and their money,and I for one wish them success,even though I have no desire to take part.

[Imperfection]

You don't recognise the fridge bashing 'Rambo' type in the picture then?

 

Thats Ozzyfudd.I remember him posting the photo.

 

Not sure that wearing ex-army camo makes you a wannabe Rambo though.

[Kes]

Vipa, I was not referring to the clothes people wear - how does that make an idiot?

I was referring to those types for whom their 'sport' is an excuse to use a firearm loudly noisily and as publicly as possible.

Its a mentality not a set of camo gear.

I'm pleased you find most of the post ok.

I do not care what people wear - I do care about the way they behave.

[Vipa]

Vipa, I was not referring to the clothes people wear - how does that make an idiot?

I was referring to those types for whom their 'sport' is an excuse to use a firearm loudly noisily and as publicly as possible.

Its a mentality not a set of camo gear.

I'm pleased you find most of the post ok.

I do not care what people wear - I do care about the way they behave.

 

And as I have said... I would love to know where these types lurk as I have never come accross any... Shooters all tend to be the same whether they shoot clays, game, pigeons... you always have the loud ones and the quiet ones... doesn't make them wanabee Rambos... I think you need to have your PC chip checked out, sounds like it may be faulty!

 

Why oh why should we hide from the public and whisper in dark corners. Don't you think that is just fuelling Joe Publics poor image of our sport. Personally I am proud to be a shooter and have no problem being 'public' with the fact. If you have a problem with it then I suggest you obviously feel there is something wrong with being involved in the sport

 

And how the chuff does one use (the vast majority of) firearms quietly

 

Please.... get back to the GCN forum from whence you obviously came

Edited June 4, 2011 by Vipa

[poontang]

 

 

Not sure that wearing ex-army camo makes you a wannabe Rambo though.

 

It doesn't.

 

Shooting fridges from the hip with a pump action and SG's is hardly normal though

 

(cue all the fridge hunters coming on to defend their sport)

[Mungler]

Vipa it's all been quite sensible and then when theres something you don't like you suggest the poster is an anti or from the gun control network, that's "naughty" as we say in Essex.

 

The point Kes makes is particularly poignant when you bear in mind the equality of votes between shooters and non shooters and that non shooters couldn't give a stuff about our sport, which is fair enough and their right.

 

Following on, if certain behaviour and dress was likely to inflame a negative public reaction and perception then why choose that path? Why not dress like normal people and help the positive publicity that shooters are like everyone else and that it can be a non military based sport / pass time.

 

It's just about looking over the fence and adding realism. Dressing like Rambo or a Ninja is a negative reflection on shooting. It's not fair but I think what Kes is getting at makes sense.

[Mr_Logic]

Our biggest problem is that we never, ever get on our high horse and tell the government and the country to stuff off and leave us alone. Did we march on Westminster In support of hsndguns? Did we get on the news and make a fuss? Have we this time? As long as the government believes the public hate us we will be targeted.

 

We aren't hated, not for shooting. Tell someone you shoot and they ask what you shoot. If you say targets you get questions about what they are like etc etc, but say you shoot fluffy bunnikins and then they might go quiet. Also, generally a male conversation = shooting good. Women hate it as a rule, we must not let ourselves be damaged by this unfair, inaccurate perception that we are hated. Just to be clear, I am not saying women hate shooting but that when you do get fervent opposition and comments, it is generally a woman making them.

 

The press hates shooting so we must make sure that publicity happens; to that end BASC's new media push is a very good thing.

 

But no, I can't see handguns back any time soon...

[Kes]

Mungler, Your support is welcomed, thank you, and I agree with your other comments.

I do not use any other fora, one is enough.

Vipa is prone to overreaction sadly. Suggesting I am in any way involved with the GCN is typically wayward. I didnt even know what it meant until I read your post.

 

Vipa you need to moderate your oversensitive and somewhat unpredictable reaction.

For the record, camo doesnt turn me on personally, however, its a very effective tool for me out in the field.

[fruitloop]

the bigest problem is sensational jouralism that fluffs up the antis to make them look as a larger majority and whip up a tabloyd story to try and sell the news hears a idea lets all stop buying news papers that have a anti gun headline and see if it will get them to print the truth insted of opionised bs all the time

Edited June 5, 2011 by fruitloop

[Dr_Scholl]

It doesn't.

 

Shooting fridges from the hip with a pump action and SG's is hardly normal though

 

(cue all the fridge hunters coming on to defend their sport)

 

It may not be normal, but it sure is fun.

[Vipa]

Vipa it's all been quite sensible and then when theres something you don't like you suggest the poster is an anti or from the gun control network, that's "naughty" as we say in Essex.

 

The point Kes makes is particularly poignant when you bear in mind the equality of votes between shooters and non shooters and that non shooters couldn't give a stuff about our sport, which is fair enough and their right.

 

Following on, if certain behaviour and dress was likely to inflame a negative public reaction and perception then why choose that path? Why not dress like normal people and help the positive publicity that shooters are like everyone else and that it can be a non military based sport / pass time.

 

It's just about looking over the fence and adding realism. Dressing like Rambo or a Ninja is a negative reflection on shooting. It's not fair but I think what Kes is getting at makes sense.

 

 

The vast majority of the general public wouldn't be able to tell the difference between DPM, MARPAT, Multicam, Realtrees Hardwood, Mossy Oak Breakup.. et al.... All they see is a bloke in cammo toting a gun of some description. So, until the entire shooting community stops wearing any kind of cammo, we are apparently all going to give the sport a bad name.

 

I see nothing wrong in competitions that simulate military realism, most highly regarded 'non static' shooting matches are military based. Just look at the events at the upcoming Imperial Match at Bisley, Advancing man, practical rifle (which includes move and shoot snap shooting, urban engagement elements etc.) The McQueen, which is basically a competition based on military sniper training... the list goes on.

 

There seem to be an awful lot of people on here who seem to know exactly what does and doesn't give our sport a bad name. I can't remember the last time the media showed us as gun toting rambos or showed images of fridge shooting from the hip or pictures of cammo clad weekend warriors prentending to play soldiers in some sinister way Go and have a look at the GCN website, I don't think you will find one image or comment portraying shooters as wanabee rambos and knowing how the GCN think, if they thought that was a way of further ailienating the shooting community, they would use it.

 

A good analogy is the Golf Club one... the old duffers all complain about how the way youngsters dress on the course shows the game in a poor light, jeans.. banned! ankle socks.. Banned... 'NON TAILORED' shorts.. banned... but at the end of the day, any non golf playing member of the public wouldn't look at any one wearing these items and think any less of them or the game... quite frankly, they wouldn't give a toss... it's the same with the shooting community, it is those within it who bitch and moan about how people look etc... Try turning up at a driven shoot in Real Tree Hardwoods gear snd see what happens... If you aren't ejected immediately you will certainly be viewed as the scum of the earth because you aren't wearing tweed, it's all about snobbery and being smug in the knowledge that those who dress or participate in things you personally find distasteful are in someway beneath you and are to blame for all the issues the shooting community faces! The general public couldn't give a damn... all they see is a shooter and it is the gun they are focussed on, not how he is dressed or what he is shooting.

 

I do however remember the media reporting us in a poor light when people have been killed. I also remember the media reporting crimes being comitted with illegally held firearms and then the GCN and others somehow trying to lump us in with them..

 

To those who suggest it as a truism, I feel that this attitude of cammo and certain types of shooting giving our sport a bad image is a reflection on your own insecurities and paranoia. There is no evidence to suggest this is the case. The British mentality and attitude towards firearms in general is quite probably unique in the world (with the possible exception of Japan.) This is mainly due to the conflicting imagery we are fed from Hollywood and the UK media & Gov't. Brits just can't get thier heads round the fact that a firearm of any description is no different than a golf club or hammer, they are tools to be used for work or pleasure that can also kill (albeit at a distance with a firearm.) The people in most other western countries can understand that and as such have no significantly worse firearms crimes statistics than us. They also tend not to find private ownership of firearms a threat.

Edited June 5, 2011 by Vipa