Do you trust BASC

[Keith 66]

Im still a Basc member, i have said before that there were things i didnt agree with but on the whole its the biggest organisation with the most clout. United we stand divided we fall & all that! I remember back in the days of Wagbi a high proportion of wildfowlers on Council, this changed as clubs memberships aged & people stopped voting.

When i started as canvey sec too many years ago we would exhort members to vote for wildfowling candidates & sometimes it worked. But apathy set in & these days if you suggest at a club meeting that members vote for council you are met with blank indifference.

There are two wildfowlers up for election to council, I have just voted for them & suggest others do too.

 

[Newbie to this]

22 minutes ago, albifrons said:

The decisions that affect shooting are done by the Government

Don't remember the voluntary (ban) phase out of lead being a government decision. Maybe I missed that one.

 

24 minutes ago, albifrons said:

Name another org that has the same clout that BASC has?

All of them, as it seems BASC have none, same as the rest.

[enfieldspares]

3 hours ago, merseamal said:

Why did you sell the gun?

If lead is banned the risk even if remote that the barrels would be damaged is of having to have the maker provide a new set of barrels. And I consider plastic wads far more damaging to the environment than lead shot. So I use only fibre wads. Cost is not far short of £30,000. Yes I could have someone else make new barrels but then then gun becomes worth a third, a quarter of what it was.

Edited March 9, 2023 by enfieldspares

[London Best]

12 hours ago, Keith 66 said:

Im still a Basc member, i have said before that there were things i didnt agree with but on the whole its the biggest organisation with the most clout. United we stand divided we fall & all that! I remember back in the days of Wagbi a high proportion of wildfowlers on Council, this changed as clubs memberships aged & people stopped voting.

When i started as canvey sec too many years ago we would exhort members to vote for wildfowling candidates & sometimes it worked. But apathy set in & these days if you suggest at a club meeting that members vote for council you are met with blank indifference.

There are two wildfowlers up for election to council, I have just voted for them & suggest others do too.

 

Although I gave up coastal wildfowling nearly thirty years ago, I too still vote for wildfowlers for council. 
I avoid voting for those who proudly state how many committees they sit on from other interests, councils, football clubs, charities, etc.

[flycoy]

When I joined PW 8 years ago I would enjoy reading the posts about pigeon shooting days and tips. Maybe i didnt see the negativity then or perhaps it wasnt there. The lack of knowledge from the bashers of what Basc does for shooting, young shots, ladies shooting, stalking, wildfowling etc, astounds me! The same few names knock whatever appears on here and its not the Forum I joined.   i appreciate the support from others for an organisation i am very proud to be part of  but this forum is no longer enjoyable and time is better spent chasing pigeon or getting a newbie into shooting 

for that reason I am bowing out of the forum, wish you all the best, stay safe and well 

 

Flycoy 

[Gordon R]

After 196 posts over 8 years, you will be sorely missed.

[stockybasher]

32 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

After 196 posts over 8 years, you will be sorely missed.

But he read 3846 😐

[Gordon R]

If members are leaving - just leave. Too much drama queen about announcing a departure. 

[Rewulf]

37 minutes ago, stockybasher said:

But he read 3846 😐

He could have just not read the threads that upset him maybe? 😏

[Penelope]

On 06/03/2023 at 22:48, Fellside said:

Yes it’s the old fine line isn’t it -at what stage does free speech become a belligerent attack…..?

It would still be free speech.

[Scully]

18 hours ago, Gordon R said:

After 196 posts over 8 years, you will be sorely missed.

😂

[Weihrauch17]

On 09/03/2023 at 20:24, albifrons said:

The decisions that affect shooting are done by the Government through legislation, of which we all have to follow.

BASC challenges these “decisions” in the interest of all who shoot, and yes, not all are popular.

Name another org that has the same clout that BASC has?

Please don’t mention SACS or CPSA, as they simply offer cheaper insurance, which seems to be the draw for the bashers.

They didn't challenge them, they suggested them!!

[Fellside]

3 hours ago, Penelope said:

It would still be free speech.

That depends on many variables and aspects. Nothing is ever quite that straight forward. 

 

[Rewulf]

2 hours ago, Fellside said:

That depends on many variables and aspects. Nothing is ever quite that straight forward. 

 

Strange statement, it's the sort of thing one would say when you don't agree with the 'free' speech you don't like, and want it shutting down. 

What you're trying to do is turn it into hate speech, so you can get the thread locked. 

[Fellside]

1 hour ago, Rewulf said:

Strange statement, it's the sort of thing one would say when you don't agree with the 'free' speech you don't like, and want it shutting down. 

What you're trying to do is turn it into hate speech, so you can get the thread locked. 

No actually - I was merely trying to avoid having to explain free speech transgressions because it’s quite involved - the regularly accepted limitations such as copyright violations, libel, obscenities, abusive and threatening language, hate speech, non disclosures, classified information, rights to privacy etc. etc. There are lots more. In other words free speech is fine until it can be proven to harm. Despite the fact that we all like to embrace ‘free speech’ it isn’t a catch all term to hide behind in the absence of decent behaviour.

About your theories: if you wish to denigrate a legal entity such as BASC (or any other), in writing, on an open forum, that’s your risk, your choice. If you’re bringing in to question the honesty of their financial practices, when accounts are published for all to see, you may well be legally exposed. I don’t think crying ‘free speech’ will help you much if challenged. 

Re getting the thread locked, this is not a reasonable solution. The only reason I would like some regulation on here, is not because I wish to compromise free speech, or because I think you’re getting close to unearthing a BASC financial irregularity - I’m pretty sure there isn’t one. No, it’s simply because I’m finding the vicious BASC blame culture tedious and potentially damaging to shooting’s public profile. I think if this ugly debacle continues it will half empty PW - along with it’s add revenue budget. 

[Rewulf]

16 minutes ago, Fellside said:

About your theories: if you wish to denigrate a legal entity such as BASC (or any other), in writing, on an open forum, that’s your risk, your choice. If you’re bringing in to question the honesty of their financial practices, when accounts are published for all to see, you may well be legally exposed. I don’t think crying ‘free speech’ will help you much if challenged

Threats of litigation. 

18 minutes ago, Fellside said:

not because I wish to compromise free speech

But..... 

18 minutes ago, Fellside said:

I think if this ugly debacle continues it will half empty PW - along with it’s add revenue budget. 

But you definitely don't want the thread locked? 😂

Lets be honest, this isn't the first 'BASC bashing' thread, but I'll ask you the same question I asked Conor, why do they exist, if criticism of BASC  is so unpopular, why so many doing it? 

Or aren't we allowed to ask that question? 

[merseamal]

6 hours ago, Rewulf said:

Threats of litigation. 

But..... 

But you definitely don't want the thread locked? 😂

Lets be honest, this isn't the first 'BASC bashing' thread, but I'll ask you the same question I asked Conor, why do they exist, if criticism of BASC  is so unpopular, why so many doing it? 

Or aren't we allowed to ask that question? 

Simple, as the previous poster stated. Like it or not, BASC are by far the largest, most influential organisation that has by far the best chance to protect the future of shooting. As they have been doing for the past 115 years.

they have done so much work, behind closed doors (for very good reason) that most members will never know.

im not one for censorship or locking threads and am all for freedom of speech and criticism. You have asked lots of questions about BASC and all have been answered well, but you still pursue?

by promoting hate with no founding towards the best hope of a future for all shooting you are not offending BASC, you are not helping or improving anything, you are creating infighting and helping the antis.

if you’ve an axe to grind with BASC, phone your regional office or head office or email them, I think you’d be pleasantly surprised with the response.

[Rewulf]

29 minutes ago, merseamal said:

Simple, as the previous poster stated. Like it or not, BASC are by far the largest, most influential organisation that has by far the best chance to protect the future of shooting. As they have been doing for the past 115 years

I'll give you the bit about largest and most influential, at least financially, but best chance of protecting us, not feeling that one, and I'm not sure where you get 115 years from? 

 

32 minutes ago, merseamal said:

they have done so much work, behind closed doors (for very good reason) that most members will never know

Go on then, tell us, because you obviously know, is it a secret? 

 

33 minutes ago, merseamal said:

im not one for censorship or locking threads and am all for freedom of speech and criticism. You have asked lots of questions about BASC and all have been answered well, but you still pursue

I must have missed that bit 🤔

35 minutes ago, merseamal said:

by promoting hate with no founding towards the best hope of a future for all shooting you are not offending BASC, you are not helping or improving anything, you are creating infighting and helping the antis

Really? 

Is this the response we get when we ask the 'wrong' questions? A load of sycophants coming out the woodwork to insult, misdirect, and attempt to end the thread, using any means necessary? 

How much money is in the fighting fund? How much has been spent since it was set up, and what on? 

What has the £1 million a year 'saved' from the legal cover been used for? If its gone into the fighting fund, why does the 21/22 accounts only show £500k in it? 

[Pushandpull]

WAGBI was founded in 1908. At the AGM in 1981 the name was changed to BASC. 

1908 to 2023 is 115 years. Once again, a simple fact available to anyone on line.

[Rewulf]

27 minutes ago, Pushandpull said:

WAGBI was founded in 1908. At the AGM in 1981 the name was changed to BASC. 

1908 to 2023 is 115 years. Once again, a simple fact available to anyone on line.

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

[Fellside]

8 hours ago, Rewulf said:

Threats of litigation. 

But..... 

But you definitely don't want the thread locked? 😂

Lets be honest, this isn't the first 'BASC bashing' thread, but I'll ask you the same question I asked Conor, why do they exist, if criticism of BASC  is so unpopular, why so many doing it? 

Or aren't we allowed to ask that question? 

I don’t work for BASC - legal action won’t come from my direction. Neither am I able to allow or disallow PW content.

If you enjoy whacky conspiracy theories - try Twitter. You’ll find plenty of friends there. 

[Rewulf]

4 minutes ago, Fellside said:

I don’t work for BASC - legal action won’t come from my direction. Neither am I able to allow or disallow PW content.

If you enjoy whacky conspiracy theories - try Twitter. You’ll find plenty of friends there. 

Here's a conspiracy theory for you.

In July 2020 basc dropped legal cover insurance, it was going to cost members 'nearly' a million a year to keep it, and 'no one used it'

Basc statement

Q: Will this decrease the cost of membership?

A: No. The cost of legal expenses insurance increased from an estimated £2.60 to £5.80 per member in the last year. However, the membership subscription was not increased to cover this cost

Why not increase membership by £3.20 ?

A. Basc can save £1 million a year.

The SAME month ,basc set up a 'new' fighting fund ,which would have a 7 FIGURE ring fenced fund for legal fights. Despite there being evidence that a fighting fund was in existence in 2017 that was having upwards of £1 million a year diverted into it from subscriptions? 

In the 21/22 accounts it showed the figure of £586,000, down from £700,000 the year previous .

So I'll ask again , how much is in the '7 figure fighting fund' and what exactly has it been spent on ?

[Gordon R]

Without taking the side of BASC or the critical of BASC side, I have to say that the anti-Rewulf posters seem far less factual than Rewulf and a lot more personal.

[Rewulf]

1 minute ago, Gordon R said:

Without taking the side of BASC or the critical of BASC side, I have to say that the anti-Rewulf posters seem far less factual than Rewulf and a lot more personal.

They're doing it to get the thread locked Gordon, they want the criticism of basc shut down.

I believe the criticism is justified and in the interests of PW members.

If basc are going to be our 'voice' they need to be accountable.

[Fellside]

4 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Here's a conspiracy theory for you.

In July 2020 basc dropped legal cover insurance, it was going to cost members 'nearly' a million a year to keep it, and 'no one used it'

Basc statement

Q: Will this decrease the cost of membership?

A: No. The cost of legal expenses insurance increased from an estimated £2.60 to £5.80 per member in the last year. However, the membership subscription was not increased to cover this cost

Why not increase membership by £3.20 ?

A. Basc can save £1 million a year.

The SAME month ,basc set up a 'new' fighting fund ,which would have a 7 FIGURE ring fenced fund for legal fights. Despite there being evidence that a fighting fund was in existence in 2017 that was having upwards of £1 million a year diverted into it from subscriptions? 

In the 21/22 accounts it showed the figure of £586,000, down from £700,000 the year previous .

So I'll ask again , how much is in the '7 figure fighting fund' and what exactly has it been spent on ?

I’ve no idea - look at their accounts or ring them up. I would certainly make certain of the facts before publicly recording wild accusations. Well……I would. You do what you like.