Dougy Posted July 30, 2019 Report Share Posted July 30, 2019 Packam at a game fair would have been like having Gary Glitter locked in the stocks outside a Dr Banardos home. There's no way it would have been a debate of any kind. Wrong I agree, but the anger from country folk towards the mentally challenged self opinionated jelly fish penis would be extremely hard to control. I wouldn't want to pay £20 to see the plonker anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted July 30, 2019 Report Share Posted July 30, 2019 29 minutes ago, oowee said: Scully you make some good points. We have to be open in what we do and base our actions on facts. Hiding in the shadows and hoping it all goes away is not the way to win an argument or even maintain what we do. I do however think that we need to look closer at what we do, when and how we do it and to some extent the GL fiasco has required that. I think we should look at our sport in it's entirety and see where we can improve what we do and how we do it. Totally agree. If we have nothing to hide then we have nothing to fear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted July 30, 2019 Report Share Posted July 30, 2019 9 minutes ago, Dougy said: Packam at a game fair would have been like having Gary Glitter locked in the stocks outside a Dr Banardos home. There's no way it would have been a debate of any kind. Wrong I agree, but the anger from country folk towards the mentally challenged self opinionated jelly fish penis would be extremely hard to control. I wouldn't want to pay £20 to see the plonker anyway. We’ve had the KKK at a rappers do, or whatever, and now Gary Glitter at a Barnardos home! Really? He isnt the anti christ, he’s a normal bloke, but for some reason appears to have most of the shooting community afraid of him! Is it me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Good shot? Posted July 30, 2019 Report Share Posted July 30, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, Scully said: Thanks for that link Scully. I can understand the organisers frustration but still believe that the game fair was the wrong location for such a debate unfortunately. Edited July 30, 2019 by Good shot? Spelling edit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KB1 Posted July 30, 2019 Report Share Posted July 30, 2019 3 minutes ago, Scully said: We’ve had the KKK at a rappers do, or whatever, and now Gary Glitter at a Barnardos home! Really? He isnt the anti christ, he’s a normal bloke, but for some reason appears to have most of the shooting community afraid of him! Is it me? He should be allowed to pay his entrance fee, just like the next person…… and everyone is also free to ignore him, or engage in debate if they want to. My wife and my daughter think its wrong that I have shot animals, yet it doesn't stop us from having civil debates…… and I'm certainly not going to ban my Mrs from the bedroom, just because she holds different views on the subject🥴 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NatureBoy Posted July 30, 2019 Report Share Posted July 30, 2019 Packham done a clip about it Friday gloating and using there email content to have a go. In it he has invited CJ to do it at Birdfair in August! thought i saw something up CJ had accepted but it been taken down. Still can't imagine him actually doing debate. Cos he never has and has no answers. Avery either! When asked they say it for gov bodies to sort out. Unless he's getting paid maybe by/if there actually is a panorama being made/going out?? Remember the fuss, if's and but's and talk about the other supposed panorama prog about pheasants/game shooting that never was/ or aired! They got meeting with gov bodies next month tho! After what they have been saying, the misinformation they have spread and as a lobbying group of extremist eco/ politico activists they should have no part in any discussions or policy making! I notice they have announced they will not be challenging any of the current GL;s. NB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
islandgun Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 6 hours ago, Scully said: We’ve had the KKK at a rappers do, or whatever, and now Gary Glitter at a Barnardos home! Really? He isnt the anti christ, he’s a normal bloke, but for some reason appears to have most of the shooting community afraid of him! Is it me? Its you..No ones afraid of of him. simply dont give him the publicity he craves..By all means have a debate but in a neutral place. if he wants to go to the gamefair let him pay..He wants to provoke to get a negative reaction and more donations for the cause Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 1 hour ago, islandgun said: Its you..No ones afraid of of him. simply dont give him the publicity he craves..By all means have a debate but in a neutral place. if he wants to go to the gamefair let him pay..He wants to provoke to get a negative reaction and more donations for the cause No ones afraid of him? Our shooting org’s banned him from the game fair out of fear of what he may do, or someone else may do, and some on here are hysterically comparing him to white supremacists and a peodophile! And you reckon it’s me? 🙂Yeah, right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
islandgun Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 22 minutes ago, Scully said: No ones afraid of him? Our shooting org’s banned him from the game fair out of fear of what he may do, or someone else may do, and some on here are hysterically comparing him to white supremacists and a peodophile! And you reckon it’s me? 🙂Yeah, right. It is you. Your the only hysterical one here.. I didnt say he was a a member of the kkk just that he would be as welcome as one. as usual your argument relies on twisting other peoples words to suit yourself. read mine and others post,s.. . if your unhappy do something about it for instance go on the avery blog and argue with them, because arguing amongst ourselves is exactly what packam etc want.. im done for that reason Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougy Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 Packam relies hugely on attention for his drive, remove that and his just a nobody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibble Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 Packham is the irritating kid in the playground just wanting attention . When he was stopped going to Dogfest that was portrayed as a controversial figure not going for public safety reasons . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucky Shot 1958 Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 15 hours 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 agree with Scully,if Packham & Co had of been allowed attended they could of been questioned about all the lies that they have told and been exposed as the liars they are,I think a good opportunity was missed. It could all of been recorded and made good viewing. just my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 7 minutes ago, Dougy said: Packam relies hugely on attention for his drive, remove that and his just a nobody. Yes, he does, but he’s having a hugely negative impact on shooting for a nobody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 18 minutes ago, islandgun said: It is you. Your the only hysterical one here.. I didnt say he was a a member of the kkk just that he would be as welcome as one. as usual your argument relies on twisting other peoples words to suit yourself. read mine and others post,s.. . if your unhappy do something about it for instance go on the avery blog and argue with them, because arguing amongst ourselves is exactly what packam etc want.. im done for that reason I haven’t twisted anything. All I’ve done is quote other people’s posts; if you can’t cope with that then it’s your problem. I’m not happy at all, but equally with the apathetic attitudes of our shooting orgs and other shooters as I am with those who oppose us. I regularly contact many and various opposition organisations, from the HO to LACS and many in between. Just because I don’t post it on here doesn’t mean I’m doing nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 11 hours ago, Scully said: No, my argument is based on what CJ claims 'could have happened' if we'd had the chance to talk with him as he suggests in the film....'we could have asked him...etc etc etc'. CJ had done all the assessing, and gone to greta lengths to organise the debate, including security, which WJ had ( to the extent they were willing to come ) expressed their satisfaction with as far as I'm aware. Yes, I think you did suggest it. Its a poor film. So it was your opinion based on someone else's opinion? OK! It appears The Gamefair organisers were not convinced CJ had assessed the situation adequately or to their satisfaction. As I recall, I wrote something to the effect that, if it went wrong we would have scored a massive own goal by inviting him......is that not correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobbyathome Posted July 31, 2019 Author Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 14 hours ago, Scully said: Both sides can have their own film crews present, therefore ensuring no claims of biased editing. The pending Panorama programme wasn't filmed in front of a live audience, do you believe that will ensure its impartiality? Was he offered payment to turn up? If someone thumps him then that is assault, and they would ave more to lose than he does. To assault people like this is playing right into their hands, as we all know. Yet another massive own goal. Are we really that pathetic? But he was going to, it was our shooting organisations which denied him the chance. That is what this entire thread is about! scully i am not that pathetic but there are a lot of people that are i would not hang dead crows on his gate but someone did !!! most of us can have a discussion and agree to disagree on various issues but some people take it to the next level of course thumping someone is assault but because it is illegal it does not stop people doing it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old farrier Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 The organisers that banned him from attending did the right thing the same as banning hooligans from a football match hes a troublemaker and far easier to ban him than having to sort out the mess he creates on the day why would he want to go to the event other than for his ego and to cause a reaction Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 1 hour ago, Old farrier said: The organisers that banned him from attending did the right thing the same as banning hooligans from a football match hes a troublemaker and far easier to ban him than having to sort out the mess he creates on the day why would he want to go to the event other than for his ego and to cause a reaction Ok, I'll try again. He, along with Avery and Tiernan were INVITED to go, to take part in a debate. The organisers didn't ban any of them initially. The organisers were put under pressure by a number of our shooting organisations to ban them, so for reasons best known to them, they did. WJ are now making much of the fact that the shooting organisations are running scared, and who is to say they are wrong? We are a laughing stock, again. We're going round in circles here! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greylag Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 All history now,let it be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
islandgun Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 3 minutes ago, greylag said: All history now,let it be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rst1990 Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 8 hours ago, Scully said: Ok, I'll try again. He, along with Avery and Tiernan were INVITED to go, to take part in a debate. The organisers didn't ban any of them initially. The organisers were put under pressure by a number of our shooting organisations to ban them, so for reasons best known to them, they did. WJ are now making much of the fact that the shooting organisations are running scared, and who is to say they are wrong? We are a laughing stock, again. We're going round in circles here! I believe the shooting organisations decided to ban him as they did not want any conflict to happen as that would have made things a lot worse. i don’t believe the shooting organisations are running scared, how are they? I wonder if CJ will take packham up on his offer of invitation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 3 minutes ago, Rst1990 said: I believe the shooting organisations decided to ban him as they did not want any conflict to happen as that would have made things a lot worse. i don’t believe the shooting organisations are running scared, how are they? I wonder if CJ will take packham up on his offer of invitation? I really can’t be bothered to go through all this again, just read the thread. I am interested in your last paragraph however; what invitation has Packham offered to CJ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 14 minutes ago, Scully said: I really can’t be bothered to go through all this again, just read the thread. I am interested in your last paragraph however; what invitation has Packham offered to CJ? Some birdfest fair, or other, I believe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 8 minutes ago, panoma1 said: Some birdfest fair, or other, I believe? Interesting indeed. Hardly the neutral ground some have clamoured for, but it's better than nowhere. 👍 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old farrier Posted July 31, 2019 Report Share Posted July 31, 2019 9 hours ago, Scully said: Ok, I'll try again. He, along with Avery and Tiernan were INVITED to go, to take part in a debate. The organisers didn't ban any of them initially. The organisers were put under pressure by a number of our shooting organisations to ban them, so for reasons best known to them, they did. WJ are now making much of the fact that the shooting organisations are running scared, and who is to say they are wrong? We are a laughing stock, again. We're going round in circles here! Ok back to the original post they were banned from the game fair in this post they weren't invited to go the tv debate was a different post 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.