Jump to content

Petition NOT to ban Grouse Shooting


JJsDad
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

Why You Shouldn't Sign a Shooting Petition

Liam Stokes - Countryside Alliance · 14 Dec 2017

 

As another petition 'not to ban driven grouse shooting' gets circulated, we're taking the opportunity to highlight to you why you shouldn't sign and share it. Our friends at The Countryside Alliance have neatly summarised this for your consideration. Please do share your personal thoughts by commenting at the bottom.

 

At the Countryside Alliance we are often asked to support petitions in favour of shooting, but we almost never agree to do so.

This can be the cause of some agitation among those who create these petitions. When all your friends support shooting it can be easy to assume that a pro-shooting petition would be a good way of capturing that positivity. In reality, supporting petitions would harm the credibility of those of us working for shooting in parliament and the media.

Today the petition is the favourite tool of the animal rights movement, whose arguments are long on emotion and short on facts. They like to use petitions because they can fill the statistical holes in their arguments with numbers of signatures, and their heartstring-tugging pictures and slogans are an effective method of harvesting clicks on social media.

The arguments for shooting are the reverse. They are complex and grounded in science and real-world experience. At the Alliance’s Campaign for Shooting, we work to put these arguments in the hands of policymakers and politicians. There is a sound and growing evidence base that both demonstrates the value of shooting and is helping shape and form our shoot management practices, and that evidence should be the bedrock of our arguments, not the number of clicks we can achieve on a petition.

If we start to argue from a position of how many people support our petitions, we immediately validate everyone else trying to do the same. Our position has always been, and must continue to be, that policy should be based on evidence and principle.

There is another reason we do not support petitions. The Alliance’s role in the defence of shooting is politics and PR, and supporting petitions is bad politics.

Consider the recent row over animal sentience. It was a classic of modern animal rights campaigning, a strategy we have been highlighting for the past two years. A “fact” of dubious provenance is selected, it is distorted to maximise outrage and broadcast on social media, it is shared by celebrities with enormous followings. The underpinning campaign is invariably a petition. Using this precise strategy over 360,000 signatures were gathered in 24 days on one petition, over 230,000 on another, calling on the government to recognise animals are sentient when literally no one had argued that they weren’t.

We need to be combatting this anti-scientific, post-factual method of campaigning, not engaging in it. At the Alliance we are working with politicians to spread the message that these petitions are so often based in mistruths and distortions that they mustn’t be allowed to drive the policy-making process. We are also helping them understand that even the most vigorously-signed petition carries no electoral threat. Those 360,000 signatures represent 0.7% of the electorate.

We cannot make these arguments if we are supporting petitions from our own supporters. We appreciate the passion that drives those who start them, and we understand our refusal to back them can be frustrating, but we must do what is right to mount the most effective defence of shooting. That means arguing that petitions play no role in the legislative process.


Liam Stokes is Head of Shooting Campaigns at The Countryside Alliance and famously defended driven grouse shooting infront of the parliament select committee when a petition to ban the sport reached 100,000 signatures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As said, widely suspected it's a scam petition set up by the antis, hoping it would get a far worse showing than the current one asking for DGS to be banned. Mildly amusing that it's catching up with the ban DGS petition at a rate of knots. It's poorly worded and a deliberate attempt to show the shooting community as being anti-raptor. Do not doubt for one minute the lengths these people will go to in an effort to ban shooting (the ultimate objective). Liam Stokes sums it up rather well in his piece.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...