Official IAA & IAGB Press Release

extremetaz

right guys, here she is.

Shiva

Lads, thats excellent....kudos to you all.

One small suggestion, if I can be so bold....

It might be worth adding a section in the common misconceptions area that an airsoft device cannot be converted or adjusted to fire live ammunition. I know you mention that airsoft equipment cannot be loaded with metal shot, but would it also be worthwhile treating the live ammunition issue as a seperate point ?

ED E

Good stuff. Just skimmed over it but very nice. Keep it up:D

Hivemind187

Shiva wrote:

Lads, thats excellent....kudos to you all.

One small suggestion, if I can be so bold....

It might be worth adding a section in the common misconceptions area that an airsoft device cannot be converted or adjusted to fire live ammunition. I know you mention that airsoft equipment cannot be loaded with metal shot, but would it also be worthwhile treating the live ammunition issue as a seperate point ?

The implication is there, however, I know what you are saying.

The list of misconceptions was chosen because they are the most common ones we had heard at the time. few people are daft enough to believe that these devices can be used to discharge "live" ammunition, however, there is a post up dealing with potential objections to Airsoft and anything that appears in that will be tackled by a later white paper regarding the various urban legends, myths etc*

*Assuming I can find the time to write the bloody thing.

tonyj_mc

well donr lads had a quick squint over it. nothing obvious jumping out

Fiach Dubh

Very well done. There's nothing in that document I don't agree with.

Fallschirmjager

looks good, i would slight redo the bit about stinging. it is mentioned twice in close succession, which can give the impression it is something that even we are concerned about. i would downplay this simply because you can wear gear that vastly reduces the impact...you hear the sound, not feel the pain.

i would also take out the bit on military helmets and say plastic replicas or something like that...

but i do like all the references...it shows we know what we are talking about..which is the truth...

Hivemind187

Fallschirmjager wrote:

looks good, i would slight redo the bit about stinging. it is mentioned twice in close succession, which can give the impression it is something that even we are concerned about. i would downplay this simply because you can wear gear that vastly reduces the impact...you hear the sound, not feel the pain.

i would also take out the bit on military helmets and say plastic replicas or something like that...

but i do like all the references...it shows we know what we are talking about..which is the truth...

Using an implication of exclusive use of relica equipment or plastic imitations was considered at an early point in the process however it was felt that being bluntly honest about everything and hiding absolutely nothing (since it is all legal, legit and defensible) was the way to go. In most cases references to military grade equipment etc is merely example rather than rule.

But I get what you are saying about the stinging, I must have missed that one. I'll keep it in mind for the next paper. Thanks Falls.

Fallschirmjager

Hivemind187 wrote:

Using an implication of exclusive use of relica equipment or plastic imitations was considered at an early point in the process however it was felt that being bluntly honest about everything and hiding absolutely nothing (since it is all legal, legit and defensible) was the way to go. In most cases references to military grade equipment etc is merely example rather than rule.

But I get what you are saying about the stinging, I must have missed that one. I'll keep it in mind for the next paper. Thanks Falls.

cool with me dude...i think it is the right document at the right time. well done all around. bravo!


edit..one other thing..its cheaper then paintball (on going cost etc)...cant recall if thats in...and i know a lot of paintballers might disagree...

ambro25

Good show. This out yet? (I mean, "communicated" out).
Oh... when do we sign up / when do we vote? Innocuous enough questions (which have been asked before, to cover the following point - also made before), but it would lend quite a bit more credence to the PR if the IAA was actually representative of something/someone

The Master

ambro25 wrote:

Good show. This out yet? (I mean, "communicated" out).
Oh... when do we sign up / when do we vote? Innocuous enough questions (which have been asked before, to cover the following point - also made before), but it would lend quite a bit more credence to the PR if the IAA was actually representative of something/someone

Great work lads , very well worded and seems very well thought out.
But just to continue what ambro25 was saying.
I hope this is not sent out to anybody while the IAA still has no official members?

Hivemind187

Fallschirmjager wrote:

cool with me dude...i think it is the right document at the right time. well done all around. bravo!


edit..one other thing..its cheaper then paintball (on going cost etc)...cant recall if thats in...and i know a lot of paintballers might disagree...

Cost was left out because it is too arbitrary and none of the committee (as far as I am aware) are economists qualified to make that call.

kdouglas

looks good lads, well done

everything there looks really well, one *very* minor thing i would change though, your email address, you have irishairsoftassocation.com, so you should set up info@irishairsoftassociation.com and even just have that redirect to the gmail one, looks a lot more professional

extremetaz

crap - i must have forgotten to amend the email addy... well spotted KD. you are of course correct.

wrt circulation - nope, this hasn't been sent out any farther than here yet, just up for your own perusal at the moment.

like Ambro says, there's no point in the IAA drawing fire until we have a full official members list - but that's all in the pipeline too and we would hope to be getting around to that over the coming weeks.

kdouglas

oh... and you spelled hurley wrong, it's not hurly

Hivemind187

kdouglas wrote:

oh... and you spelled hurley wrong, it's not hurly

Tell that to Microsoft Word and that fecking paper clip :mad:

... everyones a critic. :rolleyes:

extremetaz

Hivemind187 wrote:

...and that fecking paper clip :mad:

that little b*st*rd just never listens does he!!

[--SC(+)PE--]

Good stuff and very well written

kdouglas

extremetaz wrote:

that little b*st*rd just never listens does he!!

got rid of that little fecker a *long* time ago!

IronWolf

Most impressive, good job

Lemming

Hivemind187 wrote:

Using an implication of exclusive use of relica equipment or plastic imitations was considered at an early point in the process however it was felt that being bluntly honest about everything and hiding absolutely nothing (since it is all legal, legit and defensible) was the way to go. In most cases references to military grade equipment etc is merely example rather than rule.

TBH, I'd rather that joe-soap-the-omfg-politician wasn't given anything that could be used for grand-standing soap-box theatrics. Using terms like "military grade" is akin to very much stirring the pot in a negative way.

Joe-soap's reaction to reading that is probably going to be "f00kin' ell!!!!!" and that's not what we should be aiming for. We want to present as non-threatening a sporting activity as possible. Phrases like that don't help our cause.

bar that, read well - especially the science stuff.

Hivemind187

Lemming wrote:

TBH, I'd rather that joe-soap-the-omfg-politician wasn't given anything that could be used for grand-standing soap-box theatrics. Using terms like "military grade" is akin to very much stirring the pot in a negative way.

Joe-soap's reaction to reading that is probably going to be "f00kin' ell!!!!!" and that's not what we should be aiming for. We want to present as non-threatening a sporting activity as possible. Phrases like that don't help our cause.

bar that, read well - especially the science stuff.

The decision was made not to mince our words or to seem evasive about any aspect of the sport.

Using military grade uniforms, helmets, gloves etc just makes sense because they are being employed for their designed purposes.

Remember Slinkies, Silly Putty, Cyber-skin and a range of other materials and products were all originally military designs.

Lemming

Hivemind187 wrote:

The decision was made not to mince our words or to seem evasive about any aspect of the sport.

Using military grade uniforms, helmets, gloves etc just makes sense because they are being employed for their designed purposes.

Remember Slinkies, Silly Putty, Cyber-skin and a range of other materials and products were all originally military designs.

Hivemind, slinkies are non-threatening. silly putty is non-threatening. cyber-skin is non-threatening.

The term "military-grade" is not perceived as non-threatening.

This is all about the public's perception. Sometimes being "brutally" honest is a bad thing to do and discretion is the better tactic to use. It's not being dishonest, but at the same time we have to recognise that wearing our hearts on our sleeves is not going to see us through all fine-and-well, because someone somewhere will manipulate what we say for whatever angle they want to take in portraying their side of the discussion.

Honesty in itself doesn't win hearts & minds. Presenting yourself well does.

Fallschirmjager

if its okay i might get someone i know who knows very little about airsoft to read it and we can maybe get a laypersons view...might not be a bad idea for a few of us to do that. what do you think?

Hivemind187

Fallschirmjager wrote:

if its okay i might get someone i know who knows very little about airsoft to read it and we can maybe get a laypersons view...might not be a bad idea for a few of us to do that. what do you think?

Go ahead. Its not like we are hiding anything. Just dont hand it to any official types just yet ok?

Fallschirmjager

Hivemind187 wrote:

Go ahead. Its not like we are hiding anything. Just dont hand it to any official types just yet ok?

no problem. and dont worry its not a circular i am doing here, i will hand it , let them read it, take it back...

MaxForce

Just got a chance to check this out now guys and am well impressed. Well done to you all.

Evolute

Actually Read the full thing lads Excellence is what id call that.

Heckler

Well done to all involved. Well written and conveys its message matter of factly.

Voodoomelon

Under "Safety & Urban Myths", it says "We will attempt to dispel a number of this", where "this" should in fact be "these".

Good work all round.

extremetaz

nicely spotted - how the hell did we miss that.... :rolleyes:

Hivemind187

extremetaz wrote:

nicely spotted - how the hell did we miss that.... :rolleyes:

the "cut & paste" curse strikes again me thinks.

Well spotted Voodoo.

CrazyRabbit

Voodoomelon wrote:

Under "Safety & Urban Myths", it says "We will attempt to dispel a number of this", where "this" should in fact be "these".

Good work all round.

Thanks you for volunteering to become the official proof-reader for the IAA.