Jump to content

best news this week


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

9 minutes ago, Dave at kelton said:

It would be even better news if those large estates that host country file roadshows took a similar line and stood up for our community!

hello, i agree, the 2019 Country File show is on at  Blenheim Palace Estate,  2000 acres of game shooting yet there are no shooting interests at this show

Edited by oldypigeonpopper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Scully said:

BIG BIG mistake in my opinion. Like I said in another thread, him and his mates will milk this for all it's worth. Why are we so afraid of him? 

Why Scully? What is the shooting community supposed to do? Welcome the idiot with open arms? Buy him teacakes? Listen to his stupid opinions?

He's a mad man as far as i'm concerned. 

   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Whitebridges said:

Why Scully? What is the shooting community supposed to do? Welcome the idiot with open arms? Buy him teacakes? Listen to his stupid opinions?

He's a mad man as far as i'm concerned. 

   

Why?

Because now him and Avery and their cronies have told all their supporters and the general public, that the shooting community has banned them because the shooting community has lots to hide, and in the face of a ban of him and Avery, who can now deny it? 

Yes, (  unless we DO have something to hide ) we should welcome him. What are the alternatives? Do YOU think we have something to hide? 

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, stupid or otherwise, but how do we refute his allegations ( stupid or otherwise ) with facts unless we debate with him in front of an audience?  

According to CJ it was all set up. We blew a golden opportunity to take the initiative. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's an act of masochism to invite someone to give you more pain! Why give the ******* another platform to push his agenda? Especially a provocative adversary in an uncontrolled environment, where someone might take the opportunity to show him the error of his ways!

What benefits to our sport would his presence provide?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Scully said:

Why?

Because now him and Avery and their cronies have told all their supporters and the general public, that the shooting community has banned them because the shooting community has lots to hide, and in the face of a ban of him and Avery, who can now deny it? 

Yes, (  unless we DO have something to hide ) we should welcome him. What are the alternatives? Do YOU think we have something to hide? 

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, stupid or otherwise, but how do we refute his allegations ( stupid or otherwise ) with facts unless we debate with him in front of an audience?  

According to CJ it was all set up. We blew a golden opportunity to take the initiative. 

I disagree! If they are crowing about us having something to hide, why do our representative organisations not challenge them to a debate, on neutral ground and at a time convenient to both parties, such as a studio where the whole debate could be recorded, and subsequently released on YouTube, unedited? That could counter their claim that shooting has something to hide!....or prove it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, panoma1 said:

It's an act of masochism to invite someone to give you more pain! Why give the ******* another platform to push his agenda? Especially a provocative adversary in an uncontrolled environment, where someone might take the opportunity to show him the error of his ways!

What benefits to our sport would his presence provide?

It wasn’t an ‘uncontrolled environment’; CJ had it all planned. 

What ‘pain’ could he and Avery give us.....unless we have something to hide of course? 

He wasn’t given a platform, CJ had organised it do both sides had a platform to debate. Again, what are you afraid of? 

The benefits would be to show him up in front of an audience, for what he was. CJ has both the knowledge and the intelligence to do this, but now the opportunity has been missed. A massive own goal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, panoma1 said:

I disagree! If they are crowing about us having something to hide, why do our representative organisations not challenge them to a debate, on neutral ground and at a time convenient to both parties, such as a studio where the whole debate could be recorded, and subsequently released on YouTube, unedited? That could counter their claim that shooting has something to hide!....or prove it!

That opportunity for neutral ground was missed when Packhams management refused to be interviewed if BASC were present following the GL farce. The general public aren’t aware that this is what happened, but CJ could have asked him in person and with an audience why he did this. He can’t now. The entire game fair debate was to be filmed. Like I said, opportunity missed and now Avery etal are milking it with big smiles and once again we’re on the backfoot.

It may have played some part in countering the allegations ( true or otherwise ) in the up and coming Panorama documentary regarding grouse shooting, after which we will all be in the backfoot once again. 

One step forward and three back. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Scully said:

It wasn’t an ‘uncontrolled environment’; CJ had it all planned. 

What ‘pain’ could he and Avery give us.....unless we have something to hide of course? 

He wasn’t given a platform, CJ had organised it do both sides had a platform to debate. Again, what are you afraid of? 

The benefits would be to show him up in front of an audience, for what he was. CJ has both the knowledge and the intelligence to do this, but now the opportunity has been missed. A massive own goal. 

The uncontrolled environment was him being abroad in an enclosed area (a Gamefair) where tens of thousands of people despise him!

The pain would be listening to his anti shooting rhetoric.

Any time he is give the chance to speak is giving him a platform, I'm not afraid, just don't think shooting should give him that platform!

What benefit would it bring, even if it did show him up.....it would have no effect outside of shooting, because the audience would likely be all pro shooting anyway!

Edited by panoma1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, panoma1 said:

The uncontrolled environment was him being abroad in an enclosed area (a Gamefair) where tens of thousands of people despise him!

I think perhaps you should view the CJ film again. Anyone who is stupid enough to assault Packham, Avery or Tiernan would not only be playing right into the hands of their campaign, but also guilty of assault, and all the consequences that follow. 

The pain would be listening to his anti shooting rhetoric.

But that's all it is...rhetoric and hysterics, most of which doesn't stand up to scrutiny, which would have become apparent given the opportunity. An opportunity now missed. 

Any time he is give the chance to speak is giving him a platform, I'm not afraid, just don't think shooting should give him that platform!

Exactly, he is more than capable of creating his own platform because he is a celebrity with a huge following. We seldom have the chance to share that platform, but we had the chance to offer him and WJ one where we would not only be present, but more than willing and capable of holding our own with CJ at the helm. Not now; all gone. 

What benefit would it bring, even if it did show him up.....it would have no effect outside of shooting, because the audience would likely be all pro shooting anyway!

What happened to your idea of youtube? After all, the game fair debate was due to be filmed. To make it fair, both sides could have their own film crew there so any accusations of favourable editing could be denied. Like I said, a massive massive own goal. We may never get a better chance. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if Packham had been allowed to attend and made to look silly, he would have an answer for the waiting press with cries of intimidation off camera and fearing for his and Avery’s safety, you would only need this to-be backed up with some selected footage of a few lads who had got a little over lubricated at the beer tent and a bit vocal in front of the cameras.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Scully said:

 

Whatever, it's all conjecture anyway, you have voiced your opinion on what could have happened, and I have voiced mine!......the decision, right or wrong has been made...........I support the decision, and have offered a possible alternative/better way shooting could address the allegations/claims of WJ ......what have you offered? Apart from criticism that is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, old'un said:

Even if Packham had been allowed to attend and made to look silly, he would have an answer for the waiting press with cries of intimidation off camera and fearing for his and Avery’s safety, you would only need this to-be backed up with some selected footage of a few lads who had got a little over lubricated at the beer tent and a bit vocal in front of the cameras.    

It’s not a case of Packham being ‘made to look silly’, it’s a case of two sides in a debate regarding facts and figures. If neither side has their act together it will be they themselves who make themselves appear silly. This works for both sides, and like has been stated, if both sides have their own film crews, each balances out the chances of cries of ‘foul’ by the other. How could it be any easier? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having packam at the gamefair would be like having a KKK member at rapping gig.. surely it would be better to ignore the little ------  [he doesn't like ignore] then put provable  counter claims out on social media........put simply dont do anything he wants at any time, ever

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, panoma1 said:

Whatever, it's all conjecture anyway, you have voiced your opinion on what could have happened, and I have voiced mine!......the decision, right or wrong has been made...........I support the decision, and have offered a possible alternative/better way shooting could address the allegations/claims of WJ ......what have you offered? Apart from criticism that is.

The criticism is well warranted, and totally justifiable given the case put forward by CJ. He ‘offered’ the opportunity, and was shot down in flames by three of our biggest organisations applying pressure on the game fair organisers. 

He is justifiably critical and angry. A massive massive own goal. Incredible. 

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...