NASRPC's exit of the Sport Coalition.

Tackleberry. · 24-10-2015 7:37pm #1

NASRPC Communication
From
Will Danaher

Dear NASRPC Members
We are writing to inform you that at a meeting of our National Executive on Saturday the 24th of October, we made a decision to withdraw from the Sports Coalition.
We have reluctantly come to this decision for a number of reasons, including the following:
* Our right to effectively represent you, our members through the coalition has been denied.
* The lack of objectivity and transparency of the selection process for representation on the FCP.
* The ratification of the Sports Coalition representatives for the FCP without the approval of all coalition members.
* The failure to notify the NASRPC of the agenda item for the meeting on Monday the 5th of October; that was the selection of the Sports coalition representatives for the FCP.
* Our disappointment at the lack of our direct representation on the Firearms Consultative Panel through the Sports coalition.
* Lack of direct communication and consultation on the selection process for the FCP sports coalition representatives.
* Communication from the Sports coalition legal representative threatening to summons a member of the NASRPC committee and the Minister for Justice to court.
* Our final effort to resolve the situation prior to the first meeting of the FCP, scheduled for the 29th of October did not yield a positive result.
We recognise the invaluable contributions the Sports Coalition has played in bringing Shooting Sports to where we are today, but as we move to the next phase of this process, we believe that our decision is in the best interests of you, our affiliated members and clubs.
In our continuing efforts to achieve the best possible representation for you, we are actively exploring all option to continue to have your voice heard, including directly on the Firearms Consultative Panel and elsewhere.
Accountability is important and to this end, We are now and always available to discuss with any group, club or individual any aspect of our decisions and how we got here.
To this end we are organising an information forum, which will be open to all affiliated clubs, on Sunday 1st of November at 11.00 - venue to be confirmed.
Regards,
Will Danaher
Secretary
National Association of Sporting Rifle & Pistol Clubs

bpb101 · 25-10-2015 12:49am

Tackleberry. wrote: »

NASRPC Communication
From
Will Danaher

Dear NASRPC Members
....
* Communication from the Sports coalition legal representative threatening to summons a member of the NASRPC committee and the Minister for Justice to court.

....
Regards,
Will Danaher
Secretary
National Association of Sporting Rifle & Pistol Clubs

Probable for the best. A lot of people here starting to get pissed off with them.

The bullet point left in the quote. What are they on about, does anybody know?

Big Bangstick · 25-10-2015 1:15am

There's been enough dirty laundry washed here over the years which has given the powers that be information they shouldn't have had access to. There is a meeting on Nov 1st. If you're a member of an NASRPC club why not go and ask your questions there or email the person who sent the email? If you're not a member of an NASRPC does it actually affect you?

Seems the fcp is once again being done behind closed doors with no input from those it actually affects.

Sparks · 25-10-2015 1:59am

Mod Note: Big bangstick, don't back-seat mod. People can ask whatever questions and discuss whatever topics they want here within the forum charter.

And speaking as me: if we'd washed our laundry a bit earlier or even just done it properly, we'd all be better off today.

Cass · 25-10-2015 11:25am

Big Bangstick wrote: »

Seems the fcp is once again being done behind closed doors with no input from those it actually affects.

What a load of bollix. According to the notification above, one group does not want to share information/representation with the other groups within the "coalition" so this, in your mind, means the FCP is at fault and not the groups within this "coalition".

The FCP consists of representatives from the various shooting bodies, An Gardaí and the DoJ. The NRAI, NTSA, Pony Club, etc will all send representatives (duly elected and known to the members of those groups). It would appear the NASRPC want to do the same but because of the "hierarchy" at the "coalition" they feel they are not getting this opportunity. So they are announcing their intention to leave the farce that was the "coalition" and send their own representatives. The fact they have sent out this notification informing their members would fly in the face of your "behind closed doors" theory.

Perhaps the one you should be focusing on is the remaining group(s) within the "coalition". You know, the one that is actually to blame.

It does raise an interesting point though. If these remaining groups are doing things behind the backs of their fellow "coalition" members then what are they doing to the other shooting groups not in the "coalition", and what have they been at all this time that we don't know about (not counting the messes they created that we do know about).

bpb101 · 25-10-2015 11:46am

Big Bangstick wrote: »

There's been enough dirty laundry washed here over the years which has given the powers that be information they shouldn't have had access to. There is a meeting on Nov 1st. If you're a member of an NASRPC club why not go and ask your questions there or email the person who sent the email? If you're not a member of an NASRPC does it actually affect you?

Seems the fcp is once again being done behind closed doors with no input from those it actually affects.

No , I am not an affiliated members. But going down this line of "it dosent concern me", is exactly what fûcks us.

Just because I'm not an affiliated member dosent mean I am un effected.
If I don't shoot semi auto centre fires, should't i still care that they are trying to take them off people who have spent thousands of euros on their sport?

grassroot1 · 25-10-2015 11:57am

Can anyone tell me the coalitions legal representative is that William Egan?

cw67irl · 25-10-2015 12:41pm

Yes he is

Deaf git · 25-10-2015 2:04pm

Time for this incarnation of a Sports Coalition to close it's doors and quietly go away.

clawback07 · 25-10-2015 9:29pm

Deaf git wrote: »

Time for this incarnation of a Sports Coalition to close it's doors and quietly go away.

At Birr game fair I was approached by a member of a main group in the S.C to sign their petition . I told this person that regrettably I had signed the petition on line , and asking me what I meant I told them that their apparent u turn on .22 barrel length and semi auto centre fire flew in the face of their duty as a Sports Coalition . The reply I was given was that there were a lot of mischief makers out there trying to undo the the good work of the Sports Coalition and not to believe everything I read ! By jayzuz some leopards can change their spots !

Cass · 25-10-2015 11:07pm

I read your reply about an hour ago and this point in particular:

clawback07 wrote: »

The reply I was given was that there were a lot of mischief makers out there trying to undo the the good work of the Sports Coalition and not to believe everything I read ! !

,made me think of some posts on this thread so i went back to read a few and it still scares me.

That there are those that still believe everything they are told. That they, without question or hesitation, believe that what is being done or was being done was not only the right way but the best way.

Some of the posts were so steadfastly blinkered that when i quoted the SC's statement, gave a link to THEIR website and then posted a screenshot of their comments the poster still said it was not them that said that.

In the face of such blind dedication it's best to walk away.

clawback07 · 26-10-2015 12:16am

Cass wrote: »

I read your reply about an hour ago and this point in particular:

,made me think of some posts on this thread so i went back to read a few and it still scares me.

That there are those that still believe everything they are told. That they, without question or hesitation, believe that what is being done or was being done was not only the right way but the best way.

Some of the posts were so steadfastly blinkered that when i quoted the SC's statement, gave a link to THEIR website and then posted a screenshot of their comments the poster still said it was not them that said that.

In the face of such blind dedication it's best to walk away.

Which is exactly what some of these people want those who might question their aims want you/us to do ,I.e give up and go away ! I would replace " steadfastly blinkered " in your post with 'orchestrated " ! I'm a little tired at this stage of any query to some of these groups being then portrayed as having an axe to grind with them and close ranks and ice the " complainant " out of the big picture ! So thank f##k for this forum !

Tackleberry. · 29-10-2015 7:14am

From :Mark Maguire
NASRPC Communication - FCP Representation

Dear Shooters,

We have been very busy recently, working hard to safeguard the future development of our sport. These efforts have been somewhat successful and we are pleased to inform you that Martin Hayes (NASRPC Vice Chair) will represent the NASRPC on the Firearms Consultative Panel with Declan Byrne as his Alternate. Furthermore, Martin will be supported in matters of mutual interest by Mark Maguire (NASRPC PRO) who will be representing Countryside Alliance Ireland. We have also received offers of support by other shooting groups attending – but more on that later.

We are now satisfied that our views will be directly represented – a situation only made possible by the decisions taken by the committee last weekend. Finally we would like to thank all of those who offered messages of support at this critical time.

Thank You

The NASRPC Committee

badaj0z · 30-10-2015 2:30pm

The NASRPC committee may be proud of their achievement in resigning from the Sports Coalition and getting their "own" seats on the FCP but they have done the shooters of Ireland a great disservice. They have caused the first major split in the united front which the shooting sports have presented when faced with changes in legislation which would have been bad for our sport. They have even gone against the expressed will of the vast majority of their members present at a meeting in Hilltop 2 weeks ago, that they should reach an agreement with the Sports Coalition in the interests of all the shooting sports. This refusal to act as agreed with their members has resulted in many of the clubs, affiliated to the NASRPC, meeting this week and agreeing to formally request an EGM of the NASRPC. The motion for this EGM calls for the removal of the committee and their replacement by a new committee which will act in the best interests of the membership as a whole.
The history of the reasons for the breakdown of the relationship between the NASRPC and the Sports Coalition makes for very interesting reading but that is another story.

Witcher · 30-10-2015 2:43pm

badaj0z wrote: »

The history of the reasons for the breakdown of the relationship between the NASRPC and the Sports Coalition makes for very interesting reading but that is another story.

Same as always.

'I know x and y but I can't share it.'

Load of bollocks.

BillBen · 30-10-2015 3:24pm

In a nut shell. The Nasrpc who represent a vast majority of target shooters where not given a seat on the fcp which is absolutely crazy. To me it looks like friends of friends got a seat. Personally I'm glad that target shooters will be represented by fellow target shooters

Sparks · 30-10-2015 3:54pm

The NASRPC signed up with the SC. The SC got the seat.
This is the NRPAI/SSAI thing all over again.
This time, the NASRPC got their own seat. Grand so.
Only now the NASRPC clubs want to fire their board for getting their own seat?

Well. At least it's not like the FCP actually has work to be getting on with, so there's that at least...

(btw BillBen, the NASRPC don't represent a majority of target shooters. They represent a *lot*. The majority, depending on how you look at it, either aren't in any NGB, or are in the ICPSA. In both cases, by a healthy margin. The NASRPC might have represented a majority of the target shooters in the SC, but that's about the only context in which that statement would be correct).

Big Bangstick · 30-10-2015 5:43pm

Has anyone a breakdown of who is on the FCP and from what organisations they represent on the shooting side of things? From what I hear that will make interesting reading!

Tackleberry. · 30-10-2015 6:01pm

Sparks wrote: »

The NASRPC signed up with the SC. The SC got the seat.
This is the NRPAI/SSAI thing all over again.
This time, the NASRPC got their own seat. Grand so.
Only now the NASRPC clubs want to fire their board for getting their own seat?

Well. At least it's not like the FCP actually has work to be getting on with, so there's that at least...

(btw BillBen, the NASRPC don't represent a majority of target shooters. They represent a *lot*. The majority, depending on how you look at it, either aren't in any NGB, or are in the ICPSA. In both cases, by a healthy margin. The NASRPC might have represented a majority of the target shooters in the SC, but that's about the only context in which that statement would be correct).

But the NASRPC ain't seeing eye to eye with the SC now, and have gone lone wolf looking for there own seat at the ministers table. Fair enough now there on the FCP but that's now only a platform to heckle from, the NASRPC members that happened to be at there shoot in Hilltop encouraged,asked and told M Tope to get back talking to the SC and there would be a seat there for them, Gerry McCarthy from WA1500 and Declan Keogh all encouraged M Tope to not turn away from the SC, apparently that ended up as an email sent by the NASRPC a week later which the SC did not get the time needed to be answered ...Followed very shortly by another only to say that that NASRPC would not be part of the SC, hence the meeting last week and a call for a EGM from its members.

Big Bangstick · 30-10-2015 6:10pm

How many seats did the SC get allocated and was nasrpc allocated one of them?

Witcher · 30-10-2015 6:27pm

Thank fcuk I didn't bother going in to that meeting when it was in Hilltop, load of fcuking waffle and ****eing on as usual. Staying out on the range added half an hour to my life anyway.

I have a lot of time for most of the NASRPC lads but I can't listen to it all anymore.

badaj0z · 30-10-2015 6:47pm

The substantive issue between the SC and the NASRPC committee was not about seats at the FCP. It was about trust. The NASRPC failed to comply with the undertakings that all of the members of the SC agreed to on setting it up. They then did not go to SC meetings to explain themselves and tried to negotiate through third parties. Hence when the SC was offered 4 seats and as there were issues of trust and lack of communication with the NASRPC, they were not offered a seat. They then threw their toys out of the pram and resigned and continued their solo runs at the DOJ,which had caused much of the original problem. The affiliated clubs, who make up the NASRPC, believed this behaviour to be less than acceptable, especially as the committee had agreed to reenter discussions with the SC and then did the opposite, hence the call for a change of leadership.

Sparks · 30-10-2015 7:06pm

Mod Note: I'm not going to repeat myself about back-seat modding. Next person gets a holiday to cool off.

Wadi14 · 31-10-2015 12:41am

badaj0z wrote: »

............................ The affiliated clubs, who make up the NASRPC, believed this behaviour to be less than acceptable, especially as the committee had agreed to reenter discussions with the SC and then did the opposite, hence the call for a change of leadership.

Is it all the affiliated clubs ?
Did the committee agree to go back into talks when at Hilltop ?
Was the call for change of leadership, or committee members to step down not made prior to Hilltop ?

Can you clarify these, as like a lot of people its hard to know what is going on

badaj0z · 31-10-2015 10:54am

Wadi14 wrote: »

Is it all the affiliated clubs ?
Did the committee agree to go back into talks when at Hilltop ?
Was the call for change of leadership, or committee members to step down not made prior to Hilltop ?

Can you clarify these, as like a lot of people its hard to know what is going on

So far a majority of the affiliated clubs have decided to support the call for an EGM. The others are discussing the issue with their committees and members and will decide soon.
Taking points 2 and 3 together, the meeting at Hilltop was organised by the eleven clubs that were most unhappy with the relationship between the NASRPC committee and the SC with the expressed intention of bringing about a change at committee level. The meeting was mediated by 2 prominent members of the shooting community and the committee agreed to reopen discussions with the SC. What they did is in the public domain. They sent the SC a letter demanding an FCP seat or they would resign. No direct attempt was made to set up a meeting or to talk . The letter gave the SC 7 days to reply but the committee issued their public resignation letter after only 5 days, before the SC had replied.. The SC reply refuted in detail, all of the points made and referred to the "trust" issue at the heart of the problem.
A meeting of the NASRPC affiliated clubs was held on Wednesday last, the 28th Oct, which concluded with the clubs present agreeing to individually formally request an EGM in writing as specified in the NASRPC constitution. This is ongoing and it is expected that the NASRPC secretary will have to set up a date and venue within 30 days after receiving the requests.

Tea drinker · 04-11-2015 10:48pm

Based on knowing Martin Hayes and Declan Byrne, on that experience alone I would support them. They aren't irrational guys and I believe would only follow this course of action if it was necessary - my 0.02c

garrettod · 05-11-2015 4:08am

Tea drinker wrote: »

Based on knowing Martin Hayes and Declan Byrne, on that experience alone I would support them. They aren't irrational guys and I believe would only follow this course of action if it was necessary - my 0.02c

While I only know the two lads a little, any direct experience I have had has been very good. As such, I'd be of a very similar view to you Tea Drinker.

That said, it frustrates me to see even more "cracks" appearing within the shooting community, we will always be far stronger if we stand together, but that requires proper organisation, everyone honouring agreements and good leadership. When it comes to Ireland (be it in terms of our sport, in politics etc.), sadly we can't seem to stick to our agreements on anything for long and instead end up fighting amongst ourselves and not fully focusing on the core issue(s).

badaj0z · 07-11-2015 9:37pm

Strider wrote: »

Same as always.

'I know x and y but I can't share it.'

Well looks like you are wrong. If you follow this link you will get the full story of what happened between the NASRPC and the Sports Coalition.
All target shooters who are members of clubs who are(or were, considering how fast the NASRPC is expelling clubs at the moment), should read this and weep. Ask yourself this question, do I want to be represented at national level by a committee who behaves in this manner?

http://www.sportscoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Des-Crofton-Response-to-NASRPC-resignation-261016.pdf

You will find the full correspondence exchange here:

http://www.sportscoalition.org/nasrpc-resignation-from-the-sports-coalition/

Witcher · 07-11-2015 10:48pm

badaj0z wrote: »

Well looks like you are wrong. If you follow this link you will get the full story of what happened between the NASRPC and the Sports Coalition.
All target shooters who are members of clubs who are(or were, considering how fast the NASRPC is expelling clubs at the moment), should read this and weep. Ask yourself this question, do I want to be represented at national level by a committee who behaves in this manner?

http://www.sportscoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Des-Crofton-Response-to-NASRPC-resignation-261016.pdf

You will find the full correspondence exchange here:

http://www.sportscoalition.org/nasrpc-resignation-from-the-sports-coalition/

Wrong about what? I never made any claims or statements to be wrong about.

I directly quoted your 'oh I know x and y but I can't talk about it' act. Either say what you know at the time or stay quiet.

homerhop · 07-11-2015 10:55pm

Ah the Sepp Blatter of the shooting community. I would rather take my guns cut them in two and join ICABS then be part of any organisation that he is involved in.

badaj0z · 07-11-2015 11:52pm

As the main unofficial apologist for NASRPC Homer, you can do better than that.

Shooting Forum - Firearms licencing information

NASRPC's exit of the Sport Coalition.

Comments

Forum Charter - Useful Information - Photo thread: Hardware - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads - Upcoming Events - RFDs by County

Forum Charter - Useful Information - Photo thread: Hardware - Ranges by County - Hunting Laws/Important threads - Upcoming Events - RFDs by County