Comments on: My Feelings On Those Who Don’t Support Others Shooting Disciplines.

By: Chris B

Chris B — Sun, 18 Dec 2011 12:23:06 +0000

I still am a modern shooter. Using 19th century style firearms just drives me to buy anything that resembles MODERN firearms.
Pistol grips, adjustable stocks, synthetics, and larger magazines are not military.
Whether you shoot rabbits, quail or elephants i will support your sport !

By: Jack Boswell

Jack Boswell — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 09:02:41 +0000

I have given my last bit of advice and encouragement to this website. Thanks to those who read and appreciated some of it. I hope that this website continues to grow and influence the shooting movement in a positive way. I have learned quite a bit about communication pitfalls. This is my last contribution.

By: Jason Lownds

Jason Lownds — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 01:59:32 +0000

Andy, thanks for pointing out the UK as an example! It’s a classic scenario that we should all be trying to avoid. We should be concerned about saving all forms of shooting whether we have an interest in it or not. Its about educating the public and showing that we stand together which is what the Shooters Party is all about. Simply by being licensed shooters we are giving the anti’s a number of which they have to deal with, If we all then follow up by voting for the Shooters Party then we are doing that little bit extra. Every step we take after that to promote our sport is again, another step forward.
I am very passionate about saving our sport in ALL it’s forms, which is why I will never back down from an argument when someone tries to single out a group of law abiding shooters in order to try and save their own interests.

By: Jack Boswell

Jack Boswell — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 10:02:57 +0000

Keith has answered a blog by an anti-gunner Tory Thompson I think was the name. It was a very positive rebuttal. It showed that shooters are basically good, honest, hardworking people. Shooters have to engage the general voting public with good sound demonstration that we can be trusted and that we are in the best interest of the general public. But what have the rest of us done? Those of you who make all of these motherhood statements about not giving in: Where is your plan of action?
There are two plans of attack. The first is the “softly, softly approach”. Keith’s rebuttal is a good example of this. The SSAA Australian Shooter magazine has shown this in recent times with their promotion of family values. I made a contribution with a “Pop! Why do you hunt deer?” story in the ‘Junior Shooter’ section of that magazine. The SSAA have made many efforts over the years not all of them wise in my opinion. They decided to employ a public relations firm to improve their image. One of the results was the second sentence in this paragraph. Another was the less than useful TV add on “I am a Sporting Shooter” by a famous Trap shooter. It cost us ½ Million dollars and did nothing but annoy a large section of the membership. There is a lot that can be done in this gentle Teary eyed sentiments field.
The second plan of attack is based on just that; “attack is the best form of defence.” I am not thinking on the lines of the “Peta” trilogy on this web site. What I am thinking of is a completely different approach. It is not my original idea it is copied directly from a group of people who were during half my lifetime, regarded as the worst, most despicable pariahs on the planet; the homosexual community. How did they change the world so much?
We could be as successful.
Who are the kingmakers out there? Who moulds opinion? It is not the politicians it is The Media and the Advertising Industry. Who pays for the advertising? Harvey Norman? MacDonalds? Yes and many others like them. By a coordinated approach we could influence the advertisers. We buy their products but we won’t continue if they continue to support the program that it telling lies about our sport. Yes that is what I am talking about; individual letters to the people who worry about their bottom line. One letter from Jack Boswell won’t worry anyone one but hundreds of letters from different people or emails whatever. This will make a difference! How do I know? I know because that is exactly what was done by the community that I mentioned before. No I am not one of them. On many occasions I have tried to get this ball rolling. Most club secretaries are concerned about divulging members’ details because of the privacy laws.
This website could sidestep that problem by using the comments section on any post to offer suggestions and assistance as to who and whom to write to and HOW. The biggest put off most people have is they do not feel competent in writing the letter. Use the resources of this website and do something positive.
I got out of a sick bed to write this. Now you do your bit.

By: Keith Drain

Keith Drain — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 00:34:02 +0000

Great Comments everyone! It is good to see that this line of thinking seems to be gaining more momentum.

If it has a barrel and a trigger and is legal we should fight for it.

By: Andy Myers

Andy Myers — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 12:47:38 +0000

I think the last post says it all, “Divided we fall.” That was certainly the case in the UK following the Hungerford and Dunblane spree killings. Instead of showing a united front, such as the NRA of America provides. Support for Semi Automatic Rifles, Pistols, Pump Shotguns was sacrificed whilst individual support groups bunkered down and gave up support for their fellow shooters, so long as their particular discipline wasn’t affected. Groups such as the British NRA suddenly became very territorial in their support for long range rifle shooting only and whilst token efforts were made by these groups there was never any real cohesive fighting front. Consequently in the 1997 ban the UK lost all cartridge firing pistols. Since then token gestures have been made in the return of some .22lr target pistols but only under very extreme conditions.

I was a target pistol shooter before the ban. I was never interested in shooting rifles, hunting with firearms or black powder but I do strongly support their right to exist. If you are to resist any further changes to legislation you need to stop the fragmentation. Create a unifying umbrella organisation supporting all aspect of shooting and fight back from a position of strength rather than weakness. Good luck!

By: darryl cheal

darryl cheal — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 05:11:26 +0000

It`s really simple, “United we Stand, Divided, we Fall” !!

By: Rodney

Rodney — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 01:20:38 +0000

Disarm, Divide and Conquer. The path of a dictator.

I will not allow my fellow LAFO’s to have their perfectly legitament disciplines taken away from them.

By: Jason Lownds

Jason Lownds — Sun, 20 Nov 2011 23:14:23 +0000

After some recent posts in the comments section of certain articles, I was concerned that a lot of shooters were divided on this topic. It’s refreshing to see on the above comments that the majority are in agreement with Keiths points.
Very well said Keith and I couldn’t have said it better myself.

By: AndrewK

AndrewK — Sun, 20 Nov 2011 09:22:41 +0000

Spot on mate. IPSC really got hung out to dry over the last 15 years by the government. SSAA should have done more for all disciplines and so should have the whole shooting fraternity. Boo to those stinking hypocrites