Do you trust BASC

[Rewulf]

Just now, Fellside said:

Some good points. I don’t wish for it in any way, shape or form by the way. I’m just ever curious, as to what the downstream consequences might be. 

Trust me , sec 2 is gone , maybe by the end of the year.
Theyre just working out how to do it, given some people will have up to 5 years left of a sec 2 ticket.

The fact is , if its common knowledge among FEOs , why doesnt BASC know about it , and inform its members ?

[Genghis]

4 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Trust me , sec 2 is gone , maybe by the end of the year.
Theyre just working out how to do it, given some people will have up to 5 years left of a sec 2 ticket.

The fact is , if its common knowledge among FEOs , why doesnt BASC know about it , and inform its members ?

Would be interesting timing given the election next year - which Labour are considered strong favourites to win.
 

The Tories might hold off on making any changes pre-election, so I think it’ll be 2024 at the earliest.

[holloway]

8 hours ago, Rewulf said:

I shall remove myself forthwith for my ignorance,  never to BASC bash again, or take a timeout out of 5 minutes, whichever comes first .

You’ve got some stamina I’ll give you that (9 pages and counting) .most lost interest on page 2.

[Rewulf]

9 minutes ago, Genghis said:

Would be interesting timing given the election next year - which Labour are considered strong favourites to win.
 

The Tories might hold off on making any changes pre-election, so I think it’ll be 2024 at the earliest.

Why would holding off help the tories ?
Youre looking at it from a shooters POV.

Its good propaganda for the tories to 'shake up' the firearms laws , make us all safe ect.

If they dont do it , they leave themselves wide open to criticism from labour , for 'not doing enough'
You could also guarantee it would be a coup for labour to do it as soon as they get in power, probably with even more restrictions.

5 minutes ago, holloway said:

You’ve got some stamina I’ll give you that (9 pages and counting) .most lost interest on page 2.

They dont know what theyre missing do they ? 

[Genghis]

7 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Why would holding off help the tories ?
Youre looking at it from a shooters POV.

Its good propaganda for the tories to 'shake up' the firearms laws , make us all safe ect.

If they dont do it , they leave themselves wide open to criticism from labour , for 'not doing enough'
You could also guarantee it would be a coup for labour to do it as soon as they get in power, probably with even more restrictions.

At this particular moment, I don’t think there is the same kind of anti-shooting sentiment coming out of the Keyham incident as there was post-Dunblane. Gun control isn’t dominating the headlines and public attention seems more focused on the cost of living crisis, strikes and the usual Brexit/EU discussions. Outside of Plymouth, I don’t think it’s considered a big issue by most.

 

I’m not saying that most of the public aren’t anti-shooting, but I don’t think most of them have stricter gun control high up their priority list. I’m not sure the Tories could get much in the way it brownie points by announcing this pre-election. I agree though, that if instituted by Labour post-election then the changes would likely be even more severe, especially given what Pollard is asking for.

 

 

[merseamal]

1 hour ago, Fellside said:

Well done Scully - you can at least hold your head up as one who did make the effort. As an aside, if the S1 manoeuvre goes through, I do wonder if it could potentially encourage more rifle ownership….?

😂 no, I can’t see how there would be any more rifles, it would just make owning a section 2 harder.

[clangerman]

26 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

They dont know what theyre missing do they ? 

been quietly watching the basc crowd dodge your questions and troll with claims of bashing as usual and shame on them for it! 

[merseamal]

A change in firearms is something that Conservatives are likely to do as a knee jerk to try and win favour!

BASC are fighting hard to try and stop this.

no matter the outcome, it’ll be the honest shooter that comes out worse off and it won’t stop any gun crime.

[Fellside]

17 minutes ago, merseamal said:

😂 no, I can’t see how there would be any more rifles, it would just make owning a section 2 harder.

I don’t think it’s been suggested that rifle grants would be an immediate function of a new S1 system - moreover that people may be tempted to own a rifle and be prepared to go through the grant process. Glad I’ve given you a chuckle. My crystal ball however is a little less clear than your perfect future teller…?! Got any tips for Cheltenham?

[merseamal]

26 minutes ago, Fellside said:

I don’t think it’s been suggested that rifle grants would be an immediate function of a new S1 system - moreover that people may be tempted to own a rifle and be prepared to go through the grant process. Glad I’ve given you a chuckle. My crystal ball however is a little less clear than your perfect future teller…?! Got any tips for Cheltenham?

Tips for Cheltenham and all other betting, sure, don’t bet, it’s a waste of money.

getting a S1 grant isn’t particularly hard, getting the ground permission, knowing what you’re doing etc. isn’t so easy.

I cannot see any correlation in moving 3 or less shot shotguns to S1 and people being tempted to get a rifle. 
 

why do you want a shotgun? Clays, game, wildfowl and I belong to a club… why do you want the rifle erm, because the forms the same and I’m tempted…

like I say, I don’t see the correlation 

[8 shot]

Land permissions for "Pest control" will become even easier, if shotguns are put on S1, farmers will grant permission to anybody that asks and thus the authorities will not be able to refuse. ie possible loss of earning through crop damage again quote the "General Licence" as my S1 shotgun does. Once permission is granted apply for 22rl etc. Can of worms if you ask me may take years to sort out with law changes. 

[Fellside]

16 minutes ago, merseamal said:

Tips for Cheltenham and all other betting, sure, don’t bet, it’s a waste of money.

getting a S1 grant isn’t particularly hard, getting the ground permission, knowing what you’re doing etc. isn’t so easy.

I cannot see any correlation in moving 3 or less shot shotguns to S1 and people being tempted to get a rifle. 
 

why do you want a shotgun? Clays, game, wildfowl and I belong to a club… why do you want the rifle erm, because the forms the same and I’m tempted…

like I say, I don’t see the correlation 

Interesting. There is some chatter about more people being tempted to go through the process if (and if?!) this S1 thing comes to fruition. From a personal perspective, I do a lot of shotgun shooting. I’m also very lucky to have access to various farms and estates. I often get asked to sort out a fox, and on one land area I’ve been offered the roe deer. As rifles just aren’t my thing, I politely decline, usually asking a friend to take the rifle work. If a person like me was remotely tempted and the S1 was imminent, I’m sure it could tip the balance. There must be more in my situation. As for my betting joke, I wouldn’t bet on a horse either…… or any certainty re the S1 for that matter. It’s swirling around the dark waters of politics now. Anything could happen. 

[Rewulf]

2 hours ago, Genghis said:

At this particular moment, I don’t think there is the same kind of anti-shooting sentiment coming out of the Keyham incident as there was post-Dunblane. Gun control isn’t dominating the headlines and public attention seems more focused on the cost of living crisis, strikes and the usual Brexit/EU discussions. Outside of Plymouth, I don’t think it’s considered a big issue by most

Agreed, but it will be used in a game of one up man ship when the time is right. 

 

1 hour ago, clangerman said:

been quietly watching the basc crowd dodge your questions and troll with claims of bashing as usual and shame on them for it! 

👍

 

1 hour ago, merseamal said:

no matter the outcome, it’ll be the honest shooter that comes out worse off and it won’t stop any gun crime.

Definitely. 

[wymberley]

On 14/03/2023 at 18:38, Genghis said:

At this particular moment, I don’t think there is the same kind of anti-shooting sentiment coming out of the Keyham incident as there was post-Dunblane. Gun control isn’t dominating the headlines and public attention seems more focused on the cost of living crisis, strikes and the usual Brexit/EU discussions. Outside of Plymouth, I don’t think it’s considered a big issue by most.

 

I’m not saying that most of the public aren’t anti-shooting, but I don’t think most of them have stricter gun control high up their priority list. I’m not sure the Tories could get much in the way it brownie points by announcing this pre-election. I agree though, that if instituted by Labour post-election then the changes would likely be even more severe, especially given what Pollard is asking for.

 

 

Whereas the first point is valid, one could argue that it is so simply because there is no doubt as to which organisation has to bear the responsibility for this one. However, don't be lead into a false sense of security. Once the current crises are resolved, Luke Pollard and, no doubt, the now (at that time) retired Ian Arrow with time on his hands will step out of the shadows.

Edited March 16, 2023 by wymberley

[Gas seal]

The (post office ) gun license was to carry and use a gun not to own one. The first police license was to own a gun . I was told at the time that l just had to ask the police for a license. It’s changed a lot since then. Now guns are called weapons more than shot guns or firearms. The question will be why do you want a gun and what will you be doing with it. It will be harder to get a license for shotguns and firearms. When children are killed with firearms, legally held or illegally held, something will have to be changed. 

[enfieldspares]

BASC when I queried the moembers' money spent on hosy=ting driven days for MPs at Catton Hall seemed to suggest that this tens of thousands of pounds represented a way to promote the interests of shooting sports.

So I hope some might read below and see how this may affect those of us that reload our own sporting rifle ammunition.

The Firearms Bill 2023 is presently going through Parliament. This has the support of the Home Office and passed its Committee Stage today unamended. 

This has passed both first and second readings and has now gone to the committee that scrutinises the bill line by line. That means that this bill is likely to become law in some form or another.
 

https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3216

 

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2023-03-03/debates/44446BB0-1E7B-456D-99D4-1E8E3F46E816/FirearmsBill

PW Members will then need to cut and paste this, below, into a search engine to see the completed committee stage report.

Public Bill Committee. FIREARMS BILL. Wednesday 15 March 2023

You can then see a dowloadble PDF of the committee report.

And how many were on that committee of the many that BASC hosted at its driven days at Catton Hall?
 

[Rewulf]

1 hour ago, enfieldspares said:

The Firearms Bill 2023 is presently going through Parliament. This has the support of the Home Office and passed its Committee Stage today unamended. 

This has passed both first and second readings and has now gone to the committee that scrutinises the bill line by line. That means that this bill is likely to become law in some form or another

Thanks for posting this 👍

The miniature rifle clause will likely affect few people, I suspect that maybe one or two pay and play places could be forced to do things differently, but its effect on the vast majority of us is negligible. 

The manufacture of ammunition clause is more serious for those of us who reload, and could cause wider reaching issues. 

What can be seen from the debate is the willingness of MP s to increase licencing fees, to around £500, which will most definitely cause some to simply give up shooting come renewal time. 

In the not too distant future, these new laws, loss of sec2, the lead ban, and the resultant  dwindling numbers of licence holders, will have a devastating impact on UK shooting. 

I would very much like to hear BASCs comments on this. 

[neutron619]

8 hours ago, Rewulf said:

I would very much like to hear BASCs comments on this. 

As would I, but I suspect after 9 pages of unconstructive mud slinging, you're not going to get an answer.

If, on the other hand you'd argued constructively, approached the debate with an open mind, willing to be changed, and not assumed that everything you personally disagree with is a sign of malicious intent on the part of the organisation....

[Rewulf]

38 minutes ago, neutron619 said:

As would I, but I suspect after 9 pages of unconstructive mud slinging, you're not going to get an answer.

If, on the other hand you'd argued constructively, approached the debate with an open mind, willing to be changed, and not assumed that everything you personally disagree with is a sign of malicious intent on the part of the organisation....

Oh I see , so because myself and some others have criticised BASC  on a thread , they aren't going to comment on this here, or anywhere else ?

I mean , I understand of course, a multi million pound organisation ,representing 150000 members , styles itself the voice of shooting , is perfectly entitled to , silently scowl, stamp its foot ,and throw its toys around isn't it ?

[Gordon R]

Quote

 

As would I, but I suspect after 9 pages of unconstructive mud slinging, you're not going to get an answer.

If, on the other hand you'd argued constructively, approached the debate with an open mind, willing to be changed, and not assumed that everything you personally disagree with is a sign of malicious intent on the part of the organisation....

 

Has Burnley Dave returned? Does BASC's policy or public utterances depend on the posts of one person? Ludicrous doesn't do it justice.

As for approaching the debate with an open mind, those who have had a pop at Rewulf should examine their conscience.

[Rewulf]

7 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

Has Burnley Dave returned?

[neutron619]

2 hours ago, Rewulf said:

Oh I see , so because myself and some others have criticised BASC  on a thread , they aren't going to comment on this here, or anywhere else ?

I mean , I understand of course, a multi million pound organisation ,representing 150000 members , styles itself the voice of shooting , is perfectly entitled to , silently scowl, stamp its foot ,and throw its toys around isn't it ?

Oh come off it. Criticism is one thing and goodness knows I've exchanged some lengthy emails with Conor recently too, but this is the sort of thing I have to explain to my 9-year old:

If you want people to engage with you, you have to make them feel that it's worth their while. I mean, Conor could sit here listening to and responding to your complaints in some kind of itemized fashion (and as far as I can see, he did attempt that - if not here then on the previous "bashing" thread) but as you say, he's got 150,000 other members he could be dealing with who won't aggressively pursue and berate him and for whom he could actually achieve something positive.

You've already demonstrated that no amount of engagement is going to satisfy you (or shut you up) so he's probably (and speaking as a BASC member, correctly) decided that the money BASC members are paying for his time is being wasted, ergo you aren't going to get a response.

Added to all that, you're rude, frankly, and displaying all the tactics of someone trying to win an argument rather than hold a representative to account - yet you justify all this in the name of the latter.

Apart from attacking the man and not the ball, so to speak, we've all watched you use the "squirrel!" (n.b. see "Up") approach of bringing up other arguments and points as soon as a previous point is addressed as a means of avoiding having to acknowledge that it has indeed been addressed. We've just seen you - again - attack another poster who doesn't agree with you point of view, simply for saying so. You have consistently assumed the worst motivations on the part of BASC and anyone daring to speak up for them, but defended any of those who agree with you to the hilt.

And finally, all of this has occurred within the bounds of a thread asking whether people trust BASC. If you were genuinely looking for engagement and answers you wouldn't do it inside a thread that is akin to asking Conor / BASC representatives "so when did you stop beating your wife?"

As I said, it's the kind of thing I have to explain to my 9 year old. If you want people to take what you're saying seriously then say it in a grown-up, calm and measured fashion. Address your points one at a time and acknowledge the answers. Disagree politely. Whether you're right or wrong doesn't really matter until you've managed to persuade people you're worth listening to! As clever or right as you and your supporters may be (and note that I haven't said you are/aren't), your argumentative approach doesn't currently justify the attention. As for throwing toys out of the pram.... Well.

As an aside, after Rewulf has had the opportunity to respond / call me names again, I'd like to see this thread closed down. It's run it's course. I think PW could do with an embargo on "bashing" threads for a while (or at least stipulate that we have to go after a different organization for a while). Does anyone trust the Welsh Guild of Table Leg Covermakers, for example?

[holloway]

6 minutes ago, neutron619 said:

Oh come off it. Criticism is one thing and goodness knows I've exchanged some lengthy emails with Conor recently too, but this is the sort of thing I have to explain to my 9-year old:

If you want people to engage with you, you have to make them feel that it's worth their while. I mean, Conor could sit here listening to and responding to your complaints in some kind of itemized fashion (and as far as I can see, he did attempt that - if not here then on the previous "bashing" thread) but as you say, he's got 150,000 other members he could be dealing with who won't aggressively pursue and berate him and for whom he could actually achieve something positive.

You've already demonstrated that no amount of engagement is going to satisfy you (or shut you up) so he's probably (and speaking as a BASC member, correctly) decided that the money BASC members are paying for his time is being wasted, ergo you aren't going to get a response.

Added to all that, you're rude, frankly, and displaying all the tactics of someone trying to win an argument rather than hold a representative to account - yet you justify all this in the name of the latter.

Apart from attacking the man and not the ball, so to speak, we've all watched you use the "squirrel!" (n.b. see "Up") approach of bringing up other arguments and points as soon as a previous point is addressed as a means of avoiding having to acknowledge that it has indeed been addressed. We've just seen you - again - attack another poster who doesn't agree with you point of view, simply for saying so. You have consistently assumed the worst motivations on the part of BASC and anyone daring to speak up for them, but defended any of those who agree with you to the hilt.

And finally, all of this has occurred within the bounds of a thread asking whether people trust BASC. If you were genuinely looking for engagement and answers you wouldn't do it inside a thread that is akin to asking Conor / BASC representatives "so when did you stop beating your wife?"

As I said, it's the kind of thing I have to explain to my 9 year old. If you want people to take what you're saying seriously then say it in a grown-up, calm and measured fashion. Address your points one at a time and acknowledge the answers. Disagree politely. Whether you're right or wrong doesn't really matter until you've managed to persuade people you're worth listening to! As clever or right as you and your supporters may be (and note that I haven't said you are/aren't), your argumentative approach doesn't currently justify the attention. As for throwing toys out of the pram.... Well.

As an aside, after Rewulf has had the opportunity to respond / call me names again, I'd like to see this thread closed down. It's run it's course. I think PW could do with an embargo on "bashing" threads for a while (or at least stipulate that we have to go after a different organization for a while). Does anyone trust the Welsh Guild of Table Leg Covermakers, for example?

The trouble is …much as I agree with your eloquently written post you have just given him another 5 pages at least to grind on about ! 

[Rewulf]

12 minutes ago, neutron619 said:

 

If you want people to engage with you, you have to make them feel that it's worth their while. Actually , I dont NEED to make it worth their while, Ive asked, I thought quite politely, some questions. Not just for me , but for the benefit of both sides of the camp, members and non members alike.
He doesnt NEED to answer them, `but by NOT answering them, creates a suspicion that he/BASC finds the question difficult to answer, this leads to lack of TRUST.
Which I might point out , is what the thread is about.
I mean, Conor could sit here listening to and responding to your complaints in some kind of itemized fashion (and as far as I can see, he did attempt that He did not , he spent most of his responses bemoaning how much BASC gets 'bashed - if not here then on the previous "bashing" thread) but as you say, he's got 150,000 other members he could be dealing with who won't aggressively pursue and berate him and for whom he could actually achieve something positive.

You've already demonstrated that no amount of engagement is going to satisfy you (or shut you up) so he's probably (and speaking as a BASC member, correctly) decided that the money BASC members are paying for his time is being wasted, ergo you aren't going to get a response.
Then why does he constantly ask me to call him, if hes not bothered, he could just put me on ignore , and not have to suffer my 'aggressive beratement ' ?

Added to all that, you're rude, frankly, and displaying all the tactics of someone trying to win an argument rather than hold a representative to account - yet you justify all this in the name of the latter.
Where have I been rude ?

Apart from attacking the man and not the ball, so to speak, we've all watched you use the "squirrel!" (n.b. see "Up") approach of bringing up other arguments and points as soon as a previous point is addressed No point has been addressed -as a means of avoiding having to acknowledge that it has indeed been addressed. We've just seen you - again - attack another poster who doesn't agree with you point of view, simply for saying so. Who WAS rude , and resorted to personal insults. You have consistently assumed the worst motivations on the part of BASC and anyone daring to speak up for them, but defended any of those who agree with you to the hilt.
YOU have assumed this , where have I insinuated they are up to no good ?
I have used factual arguments , and BASCs own information, to ask questions I think are important to everyone.

And finally, all of this has occurred within the bounds of a thread asking whether people trust BASC. If you were genuinely looking for engagement and answers you wouldn't do it inside a thread that is akin to asking Conor / BASC representatives "so when did you stop beating your wife?"
Im pretty sure Ive asked no questions like that.

As I said, it's the kind of thing I have to explain to my 9 year old. So you say , Im going to assume thats another insult to add to the list ? If you want people to take what you're saying seriously then say it in a grown-up, calm and measured fashion. Address your points one at a time and acknowledge the answers. Again , there are no answers .Disagree politely. Quote my 'impolite responses' Whether you're right or wrong doesn't really matter until you've managed to persuade people you're worth listening to! As clever or right as you and your supporters may be (and note that I haven't said you are/aren't), your argumentative approach doesn't currently justify the attention. As for throwing toys out of the pram.... Well.

As an aside, after Rewulf has had the opportunity to respond / call me names again, I'd like to see this thread closed down. It's run it's course. I think PW could do with an embargo on "bashing" threads for a while (or at least stipulate that we have to go after a different organization for a while). Does anyone trust the Welsh Guild of Table Leg Covermakers, for example?
Ive never called you names.
 

Another attempt to shut a discussion down , using argumentative language and insults.

Ill ask again , to Conor or anyone at BASC , how much money is in  the (7 figure , ring fenced ) fighting fund, and what has it been spent on since 2017 ?

[wymberley]

Well, it's either close it or in view of a somewhat more recent post move it to the Craft an DIY Section.