-Mongrel- Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Gunsmoke - do you have another agenda? Your original query has been answered. Whenever he posts he has another agenda. ANYBODY who has spent any amount of time on PW should realise that. It is for this reason alone that Gunsmoke is less well tolerated than many others by some of the more established members. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartynGT4 Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Gordon - I could say the same about your attitude to fellow shooters. If I use strong language from time to time it is out of sheer frustration at the way this community seems hell bent on destroying itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 David, If John Swift isnt acting on behalf of BASC then why isnt there another BASC member on the group ? I find this illogical since John Swift is being paid and must be acting on BASC's behalf (your previous posts confirm this). If he's worth paying to do the job then BASC's logo should be there - unless? Or are BASC admitting its no longer associated with the conclusions of the report. Anyway you look at this its odd. JohnSwift either has a status as BASC rep or what the hell is he doing there and why hasnt he been replaced ? I am not knocking BASC but why remove the logo ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Martyn - I find your behaviour towards me offensive. I don't have an "attitude" towards genuine shooters with no axe to grind. I have never felt the need to use strong language on a public forum. That is what damages the image of genuine shooters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartynGT4 Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Martyn - I find your behaviour towards me offensive. I don't have an "attitude" towards genuine shooters with no axe to grind. I have never felt the need to use strong language on a public forum. That is what damages the image of genuine shooters. Were you not the one to cast the first stone by suggesting I had a limited vocabulary? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sitsinhedges Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 To be honest David, the endless rambling on about compliance to an audience who probably mostly shoot no wildfowl at all seems like a great big red herring to be used as an excuse when the bad news comes out. I will probably shoot 5000 shells in a year, maybe two of them will be at duck and they will be tungsten matrix. BASC, of which I am a member seem to be implying that if a ban comes about it will be all our own fault thereby absolving itself of any duty to defend lead or take any responsibility for its demise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 He was answering someone's question, is there something wrong with that? Honestly, the speed at which some of you lot jump on people is a ******* disgrace. Martyn - can we call a halt? I think your post above started it, if we need to get pedantic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 May I just make the point that PW exists and has expanded by welcoming all members and treating them with a degree of respect and responsiveness. Perhaps its best for us all to check that we are respectful and do not criticise unnecessarily but yet have the odd blazing row. I have been guilty in the past but strive for self improvement constantly ! Defending a fellow PW'er should not bring condemnation. Tried to get a few big words in to that since they seem to have cachet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poontang Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 The LAG is not a BASC group, and is not run by BASC, it never was and never has been. It is a DEFRA group. Yes we have a member of staff to take minutes but they have no other roles and are not involved in the reports or research. The Chairman is no longer employed by BASC since he retired, consequently BASC do not have any active role in the group and consequently it would be wrong for our logo to be on the LAG web site. As I understand it the research has been done its now a matter of the group putting together its formal report. David How can you say that David? John Harradine is directly involved in reports and research, or has he left BASC too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartynGT4 Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Kes - I agree I'm off to do something a little more constructive, like removing a host of virii from my sons laptop (again) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunsmoke Posted December 15, 2013 Author Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Gunsmoke - do you have another agenda? Your original query has been answered. I only have one agenda 'defend shooting the best I can' as others are working against my interests. I am not anti BASC, I have worked with WAGBI/BASC for over 40 years, as a gunsmith I believed that BASC was working for my interest on lead shot to defend shooting. Then I find out that this is not the case. I am only having a go at BASC on the lead shot issue. To promote steel shot BASC have made false and misleading statements and all I have tried to do is tell the truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Gunsmoke - it would have been better if you had made your agenda plain at the outset. It was evident to me that your initial post was never going to be your last, whatever was said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Gordon, May I politely suggest that you have allowed some gunsmoke to get in your eyes with a slight loss of your usual vision ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 :lol: Nice one Kes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Can someone please explain why, if the LEG is DEFRA run and made up of key stakeholders, the BASC are no longer one of these key stakeholder organisations. Surely if John Swift has retired from BASC he should have resigned from the group and BASC should have appointed someone else in his stead and DEFRA would have then appointed another chairman thus still ensuring BASC was represented instead of being left out in the cold. Or have I got it all wrong ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 I do not know who is paying JAS for his LAG work, please ask the LAG if you want to know. DEFRA asked JAS to be the chairman, and as far as I know it was their decision, backed by the other members of the LAG that he should carry on as chairman after he retired from BASC as few months ago, but if you want to check that please ask the LAG Yes poontang, over the last few years many people had a hand in the research and reports, including John Harradine, but the logos on the web site are those of the organisations who currently sit on and make up the LAG now the research has finished. As it is now BASC no longer has any direct representation on the group, its now a matter of the group writing their final reports, so there is not much left to do. What we and I would hope other organisations are now doing is planning for the possible scenarios that come out of the LAG report. And despite what some may think or say, its very much at the top of the BASC agenda to keep lead shot safe, our policy is clear and its not changed. I am sorry if my reiteration of the need to comply is annoying, but its important and its a simple matter of fact and has no other agenda, I am personally keen to see practical changes to the legislation in England and Wales, but I know we will only have a chance of doing this if compliance is high, there is no other agenda as some have intimated. Its sad that gunsmoke has resorted to type as it were claiming, falsely, that BASC have promoted steel shot by making false and misleading statements about lead - total rubbish - we have been round this subject time and time again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sitsinhedges Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 So BASC are not representing shooters in this group that wants to ban lead? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wymberley Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Or have I got it all wrong ? BASC is the self proclaimed 'voice of shooting' and biggest shooting organisation in the UK - to save me typing, for more info' just have a look on Wikipedia. I have just been looking at Gunsmoke's photo/video and staring at that great big hole (reminds me about a song of Liza and a bucket). Ex now, but as a member for some 35 years, one of the first Hon REDOs, Sporting Shotgun Shooting Coaches and a Hon FO, metaphorically speaking, I could weep. The fact that the hole is there at all can only mean that there has been a mistake on the part of the organisation. Now, as this would have to have been of such a Gargantuan level, it is unthinkable that that should have occurred. Consequently, there is only one alternative: It is deliberate. Therefore, Charlie, on this occasion, I'm afraid that you really have got it all wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 I am with Sits on this. You say David the LAG is writing its report, we know who the other members of the group are but why isnt BASC there at this critical moment ? Most of the others have an agenda - we covered this some time ago but to now find BASC will play no active part in shaping the final report, is both a let down and a 'let-in' for the groups with a very positive anti- shooting agenda - ban lead shot, screw-up shooting - we have said this before. Why oh why, at this super critical moment is BASC not kicking some ****. It defies explanation or am I missing something ? Remember we talked about the availability of lead in silt, how quickly it became unavailable to wildlife (ducks), how, with all the inland shooting that has been done with lead, there are any waterfowl left with the level of lead poisoning that implies? The phrase, thrown to the wolves is not exactly out of place here, if, there is no shooting representation. Wasn't BASC representing all shooting orgs. like the CLA, CA etc? I simply cannot believe we are no longer represented whilst analysis is being done and the final reports written. Come on David you have to admit, if the suppositions are correct, it looks a little lacking in foresight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poontang Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 John Swift's expenses are being met by BASC. I'm staggered that BASC have no representation on the LAG anymore, simply because 'there is not much left to do'. Are we to see the WWT and RSPB distance themselves from the group too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Of course, the LAG were not set up to ban lead shot, nor do they have the power or authority to do so. Their objectives are stated on the LAG web site. The research has been done, I assume the findings agreed, all that left if for the LAG is for the report to be authored. There is nothing more anyone can do to influence the LAG report. The big effort will now be the planning for the scenarios that may roll out from DEFRA’s report to government and consequently the lobbying of the government as they decide what, if anything to do. Turning our resources towards this can hardly be seen as a mistake surely? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartynGT4 Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 Martyn - can we call a halt? I think your post above started it, if we need to get pedantic. Gordon - As you say, this is a public forum and in the interests of promoting it in as good a light as possible I have retracted part of my original post. Also, I apologise if my comments caused you personal offence, that was not my intention and on reflection I accept that my comments inadvertently fueled the very behaviour I feel detracts from what is otherwise a very valuable forum. Having said that, I do feel this forum has gone downhill somewhat and I agree with Kes's comments in that we should all take time to exercise a little restraint, myself included. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 John Swift's expenses are being met by BASC. I'm staggered that BASC have no representation on the LAG anymore, simply because 'there is not much left to do'. Are we to see the WWT and RSPB distance themselves from the group too? The answer must be sadly - No they wont - there isnt much to do but conclude the reporting which really is perhaps all they needed ??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 "its now a matter of the group writing their final reports", - from your post 41 above David - am I wrong and the writing of the final reports will in no way be influenced by the current group members nor signed off by them and published? Perhaps Defra will face down all the opposition and say it doesnt accept the report. I know you aren't directly involved David but to the least conspiracy theorists amongst us, the 'evidence' seems compelling. I just hope I am completely wrong or the 'voice of shooting' will have swallowed its tongue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartynGT4 Posted December 15, 2013 Report Share Posted December 15, 2013 I just hope I am completely wrong or the 'voice of shooting' will have swallowed its tongue. I nearly chocked on my coffee when I read that :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.