[Politics] IRISH NATIONAL CONVENTIONAL PISTOL CHAMPIONSHIP

Bananaman

I just saw this - extremely expensive - prohibitively so - I was debating going to the whole thing to see what it's all about - pity it's now a full/closed event

I'm an NRA member - have been for years - in fact I am an NRA instructor - and this is the first I heard of it

I know loads of NRA members and asked around and none of them heard about this until now either

Seeing as it's a full/closed event the rest of us could run another match the same day and compare scores when they publish the results of this one to see how we would have done had we been able to enter it.

I'd say €5 a man should cover the targets - there are readily available Slow, Timed and Rapid fire targets in many shops

B'Man

Bananaman

I suppose what annoys me about that is the title

Irish National Conventional Pistol Championship

firstly the 'Irish National' part which indicates it a match being run on.a National basis, yet it is a 'fundaiser and party' which was oversubscribed by 'word of mouth' before being advertised

the 'Championship' aspect in conjunction with the 'National' aspect would indicate that it may try to apportion the title of National Champion, yet there has been and cannot now be the opportunity to compete for that except within the 'word of mouth' group

I'm also a bit flabbergasted that there seems to be yet another group trying to form within the shooting sports - seems very wasteful and unnecessary to me

NASRPC run Open matches all over the country - what was wrong with asking them to add this discipline to those matches? The structures are already in place.

B'Man

Sparks

what was wrong with asking them to add this discipline to those matches?

And with that, we cross over the No-Politics rule for Target Shooting (and bluntly, we jump across it and land in GUBU territory given recent disclosures regarding the NASRPC), so I'm splitting out this specific part of the thread and moving it to Shooting.

Bananaman

Since when is a question politics?
- only answers can be political

and if it deemed political - Mods perogative - why split the thread when all the posts are relevant to each other?

:confused

B'Man

Sparks

It became political when you asked why the IBS (who are, don't forget, members of the SSAI) should be the NGB for their sport and why the NASRPC couldn't run it for them (despite the fact that the NASRPC hasn't ever run an NRA Bullseye match nationally, has no Bullseye coordinator and doesn't list it on the list of sports it claims authority over, even after that list was modified at the AGM less than a month ago).

And I split the thread because the OP was a sports question, but yours was a politics question, which is verboten in the Target Shooting forum, as per the charter.

Irish Bullseye Sports

Bananaman wrote: »

I suppose what annoys me

I am sorry I certainly didn't want to annoy anyone. We applied to the NRA Tournaments Division and received approval from them.



We'll try our best to do a good job!

Sparks

Irish Bullseye Sports wrote: »

I am sorry I certainly didn't want to annoy anyone. We applied to the NRA Tournaments Division and received approval from them.

I'm not exactly au fait with NRA procedures, so forgive me if this sounds overly simple, but does that make you guys the NRA-approved governing body for Bullseye shooting in Ireland then?

Irish Bullseye Sports

I don't want this to turn into a political anything, I'm sorry. I wish the very best to all shooting organistations, we'll see you on the range(s) during the year!


Thanks to the target shooters who have registered for the match, the support from all parts of the country and NI is great and indeed confirmed to us the interest and enthusiasm for the new discipline . We will contact all interested shooters and indeed clubs in coming days with details of membership and our match calendar for 2011 , and we look forward to developing and promoting this exciting target shooting sport.

Bananaman

Sparks,

Now who is political?

You are making statements regarding the SSAI - which you are not in a position to do - I also believe you to be incorrect - but that is matter for the SSAI and their members - not for you or I.

You are making claims on behalf of the NRA and their representatives in Ireland - which you are not in a position to do - I do not think any of them would appreciate your trying to use them to further your own agenda.

You are making claims for this group and attributing statuses and positions to them - which you are not in a position to do.

I understand that the previous poster does not want to get drawn into politics, seeing as it is not a VRep account and therefore they are posting personally and do not want to get banned.

I asked them a simple question -

why did they not approach the NASRPC to introduce this discipline when they already hold competitions in clubs throughout the country and already have the proven structures in place to promote them, provide awards and manage National structures such as classification, Championships, Leagues etc.?

You split the thread, put on your Minister for political intrigue wig and decided to make it political.

NASRPC could simply, and I hope they will seeing as this is obviously a closed loop, seek to trial the discipline in a number of clubs and then introduced it on the National Scene by adding the discipline to some or all of the dozen of so national Pistol events they hold each year.

It seems very wasteful to plan to duplicate all of those functions - as is obvious by the need to charge €70 for their first event (that's €2.33 a shot) - in order to raise funds.

B'Man

Sparks

Bananaman wrote: »

Sparks,
Now who is political?

It's allowed in the right forum B'man

You are making statements regarding the SSAI - which you are not in a position to do

That's ridiculous. I can make lots of statements about the SSAI if I wish. I can also make lots of statements about the colour of the sky. So can anyone else.

Now if I was making statements for the SSAI, that would be a different matter - I can't do that. But I didn't. I just reported on a fact about them, and anyone else could email them and ask, same way I did.

I also believe you to be incorrect

The SSAI chairman would disagree with you in regard to this specific point.

You are making claims on behalf of the NRA and their representatives in Ireland

No, I'm not. I'm asking a question.
Which I am in a position to do, as is everyone else.

You are making claims for this group

No, I'm not.
I'm reporting what I was told when I asked a specific question of the SSAI, and I'm asking a specific question of the IBS. I'm not making any statements for anyone.

I understand that the previous poster does not want to get drawn into politics, seeing as it is not a VRep account and therefore they are posting personally and do not want to get banned.

Actually, the IBS has applied for a VRep account and one is in the works for them at the moment. It's just taking a few days because lots of other people have also applied and there's a manpower shortage.

I asked them a simple question

So it's fine when you do it, but if I do it, it's machiavellian politics to further my own agenda by making statements for groups I don't represent?

You split the thread, put on your Minister for political intrigue wig and decided to make it political.

As I said before, when you brought up the NGB issue, you made it political. And that broke the Target Shooting Forum charter rules and that's why the thread was split and this part moved out to here.
I mean, I could have deleted the posts, but what would you have yelled then, but the word "Censorship" and you'd probably have implied I was following some agenda by suppressing these "important questions" or some such rot.

NASRPC could simply, and I hope they will seeing as this is obviously a closed loop, seek to trial the discipline in a number of clubs and then introduced it on the National Scene by adding the discipline to some or all of the dozen of so national Pistol events they hold each year.

Do you honestly think, after the recent disclosures regarding the NASRPC, that anyone trusts them enough to let them take over a centerfire pistol sporting discipline like that?

It seems very wasteful to plan to duplicate all of those functions - as is obvious by the need to charge €70 for their first event - in order to raise funds.

So why does the NASRPC claim to run Classic Rifle in Ireland? Why are they duplicating the VCRAI's structures?
What's good for the goose...

Bananaman

Sparks wrote: »

....... despite the fact that the NASRPC hasn't ever run an NRA Bullseye match nationally, has no Bullseye coordinator and doesn't list it on the list of sports it claims authority over, even after that list was modified at the AGM less than a month ago .....

i have just read that. Firstly I do not see where they claim authority over anything - they administer a range of sports on a National basis.


Secondly it is up there in lights if you care to read it ....

Precision Pistol & Revolver

Pistol involve shooting short firearms from either the strong or weak hand. There are a wide range of disciplines which involve shooting from different positions including prone, kneeling, seated and standing.

Pistol is subdivided into

• Smallbore Pistol which is for Revolvers and Semi Automatic Pistols chambered for 22lr ammunition
• Centrefire Pistol which is for Revolvers and Semi Automatic Pistols chambered for centrefire ammuntion. The most popular are 9mm, .38 and .40
• WA1500 Pistol which is an international centrefire discipline which includes a defined set of classifications and disciplines of its own.

The NASRPC regularly run competitions in Smallbore Pistol, Centrefire Pistol and WA1500 Pistol

What part of that precludes them from running a smallbore or fullbore match where you shoot with one hand?

B'Man

Sparks

Bananaman wrote: »

What part of that precludes them from running a smallbore or fullbore match where you shoot with one hand?

Nothing. Of course, if that was all it took to be the NGB, it'd make them the ISSF pistol NGB too...

Besides which, NRA Bullseye is a specific sport - which isn't listed there.

Not to mention, as I said above:

sparks wrote:

Do you honestly think, after the recent disclosures regarding the NASRPC, that anyone trusts them enough to let them take over a centerfire pistol sporting discipline like that?

Vegeta

Bananaman wrote: »

I asked them a simple question -

why did they not approach the NASRPC to introduce this discipline when they already hold competitions in clubs throughout the country and already have the proven structures in place to promote them, provide awards and manage National structures such as classification, Championships, Leagues etc.?

As someone who is a relative outsider I am just popping in to say. That question is of a political nature and has no place in Target Shooting.

Bananaman

Sparks wrote: »

Now if I was making statements for the SSAI, that would be a different matter - I can't do that. But I didn't. I just reported on a fact about them, and anyone else could email them and ask, same way I did.

The SSAI chairman would disagree with you in regard to this specific point.

I defer, as always, to your more informed view on things and will await further clarification.

Sparks wrote: »

Do you honestly think, after the recent disclosures regarding the NASRPC, that anyone trusts them enough to let them take over a centerfire pistol sporting discipline like that?

NASRPC have no plans to 'take over' anything. You really need to get out more - I know that even paranoid people have people out to get them but you're worrying me.

NRA Bullseye can be shot with either rimfire or centrefire pistols and indeed some matches require both.

As to whether anyone trusts them. I have no doubt whatsoever.

Regardless of the attempts of some to use sleight of hand to keep people watching the shiny bauble while they wheel the elephant onto the stage.

Sparks wrote: »

So why does the NASRPC claim to run Classic Rifle in Ireland? Why are they duplicating the VCRAI's structures?

The NASRPC has always been the SSAI recognised NGB for Classic Rifle.

Indeed they have opened discussions with the VCRAI on a number of occasions (I was there) as to how to work together seeing as they are doing such a good job of running the competitions.

B'Man

Bananaman

Sparks wrote: »

Nothing. Of course, if that was all it took to be the NGB, it'd make them the ISSF pistol NGB too...

Besides which, NRA Bullseye is a specific sport - which isn't listed there.

NASRPC ARE an NGB. They introduced a new pistol discipline last year to great success. No reason why they could not have introduced another.

NTSA an ITS are also NGBs and they could also have introduced a new discipline - not sure if they are allowed as I know they operate under some restrictions so cannot support each other.

I do not believe NASRPC operate under any such restrictions and can of course support everyone.

Just seems unnecessary to create Yet Another Shooting Association as you have often stated yourself.

B'Man

Bananaman

Sparks wrote: »

That's ridiculous. I can make lots of statements about the SSAI if I wish.

and I qoute

Sparks wrote:

The body calling itself the SSAI is not valid; it has held meetings and made decisions and representations under false pretences

B'Man

Sparks

Bananaman wrote: »

and I qoute

Yup.
And why was I saying that? Come on B'man, full story...
And don't forget to tell us all what role within the NASRPC the person who triggered that statement now holds.

As to whether anyone trusts them. I have no doubt whatsoever.

I have no doubt either. I don't think anyone not on the NASRPC committee currently trusts them because of their actions submitting that document.

Sparks

Bananaman wrote: »

The NASRPC has always been the SSAI recognised NGB for Classic Rifle.

Indeed they have opened discussions with the VCRAI on a number of occasions (I was there) as to how to work together seeing as they are doing such a good job of running the competitions.

Indeed?

Sikamick wrote: »

NASRPC list of disciplines from their website:
...
6 Classic Rifle
7 Black Powder Shooting

Classic Rifle And Black Powder is only new on their list, what competitions have they held, these were never on their list of disciplines before.

Is this another grab at control.

Sikamick
VCRAI.

Seems an odd thing to say for the head of the VCRAI if that's the case B'man...

bunny shooter

B'man,

Being a regular visitor to the NASRPC site it is only very recently that Classic rifle was added to your list of disciplines.

Probably as a result of seeing the sucess the VCRAI have made of that particular discipline!

I am a VCRAI member and I for one will be advocating that this organisation have no more to do with the NASRPC in light of recent revelations!

As for the NASRPC claim to be NGB for classic rifle shooting, this is just more of what was revealed in that document..................self appointed egomaniacs empire building on the hard work of others!

Rosahane

I'm an NRA member and have no knowledge of this organisation. That is surprising as I recieve regular emails from the NRA.

I will follow up with the NRA!

Sikamick

Bananaman wrote: »

Indeed they have opened discussions with the VCRAI on a number of occasions (I was there) as to how to work together seeing as they are doing such a good job of running the competitions.

This is not true, You requested a meeting by e-mail months ago, we agreed and you never came back to us.

I was in Rathdrum before Christmas I spoke to a member of the NASRPC, it was a very short conversation and informal.

You have never had Classic or Black Powder on your discipline list, if one looks at your website it's only there in the last couple of months.

Where in the NASRPC's name does it say Vintage, Classic or Service Rifle,
( National Association of Sporting Rifle and Pistol Clubs).



Sikamick

Sparks

Sparks wrote: »

I'm not exactly au fait with NRA procedures, so forgive me if this sounds overly simple, but does that make you guys the NRA-approved governing body for Bullseye shooting in Ireland then?

Rosahane wrote: »

I will follow up with the NRA!

Just on this point, I emailed the NRA today, and they have confirmed that Irish Bullseye Sports is the NRA-recognised governing body for Bullseye pistol shooting in Ireland.

Bananaman

Sparks wrote: »

Just on this point, I emailed the NRA today, and they have confirmed that Irish Bullseye Sports is the NRA-recognised governing body for Bullseye pistol shooting in Ireland.

Why the concern? Are you a member of the NRA?

B'Man

Sparks

Bananaman wrote: »

Why the concern? Are you a member of the NRA?

Curiosity and no.
Why are you getting so defensive about it?

Bananaman

I'm not - I'm just curious aswell.

I had assumed you were not a member and when you said you had been on to them I was surprised.

And you're not - so I am no longer surprised.

B'Man

bunny shooter

Bananaman wrote: »

............The NASRPC has always been the SSAI recognised NGB for Classic Rifle...........

I have contacted SSAI on this claim.

Mr Mole

"The SSAI chairman would disagree with you in regard to this specific point".

Sparks , your above comment reflects exactly what has been going on here for some time. Your personal friendship with the Chairman of the SSAI is visible and apparent through many of your postings.
If the Chairman of the SSAI has something to say or to post, please let him do it himself rather than you being his intermediary. If this isnt politics, then what is?

Sparks

Mr Mole wrote: »

"The SSAI chairman would disagree with you in regard to this specific point".
Sparks , your above comment reflects exactly what has been going on here for some time. Your personal friendship with the Chairman of the SSAI is visible and apparent through many of your postings.
If the Chairman of the SSAI has something to say or to post, please let him do it himself rather than you being his intermediary. If this isnt politics, then what is?

Well, let's make two points clear here, shall we Mole?

Yes, the Chairman of the SSAI is a friend of mine. He was a moderator on this forum for a few years, and we remain friends today. This is also true of a lot of people in the admin side of things because I worked with all of them for the guts of a decade. Of course, you yourself seemed to have no issue with myself the last time we met in Hilltop, and you got on very well with at least one other ex-mod of the shooting forum for years, so obviously friendship in and of itself can't be the problem, right?

Secondly, while the Chairman and I are indeed friends, I was referring to a specific document in that quote, submitted to the Irish Sports Council and which I obtained through a Freedom of Information request to them. I'll be scanning in some pages from that FoI request later today anyway; I'll include the specific pages from that document and post them here so there's no further confusion.

Hopefully at that point, we can discuss the actual actions taken by people and not try to distract folks from those actions or their implications by commenting on who's friends with whom...

Bananaman

Upon reflection I feel I may have done myself a disservice by my responses to this thread.
I allowed myself to be goaded into giving an invalid impression.


Firstly, Politics is the last thing I want to see in shooting.

It is destructive, divisive and distracts from the sports themselves.

I would like nothing better than if people simply got on with actually shooting their disciplines and did not care what part of the country they came from, what club they were in, what affiliations they have, which side of the bed they got out of, who they like or dislike, etc.

Unfortunately - there are far too many who care too much about these sorts of things.

I would hate to give the impression I am one of them - I strive to take the politics out of shooting, not perpetuate it.



Secondly I have no problem with anyone running matches anywhere, in any discipline.

Those of you that know me, know that I support and participate in any and all shooting disciplines,
regardless of who is running them or where they are held and always have.

It is of benefit to everyone to go to as many ranges as possible and take part in as many disciplines as possible.
Even if your personal focus is on a specific discipline, it can be good to try the other shoe for a bit of craic.
Going out and meeting other people, seeing what it is that they do and where it is that they do it,
breaks down all the false barriers people put up.

I have shot in CIPC before and If I could, I would, absolutely, have entered this event.



Thirdly - I have no problem, whatsoever, with people taking part in new disciplines.

Variety is the spice of life and skills developed in one discipline will be of advantage in others.

I find nothing more annoying that people who distance themselves from other disciplines,
those running them or those taking part in them and would hate to give the impression that I would do such a thing.
Personally I find it to be almost a form of racism - distasteful and not to be tolerated.

I have yet to come across a discipline that I have not tried, a range I have not attended, a club I have not visited.
I have enjoyed them all and it has helped me to understand other peoples points of view and
to not develop any assumptions, good or bad, regarding them.

I have shot NRA bullseye before - it is a tough match - but I enjoyed it.



Finally, I wish these guys all the best in running their match, I hope it is a great success and a challenging competition.
I hope they get to focus on their shooting and not allow politics to take away from that.

B'Man

Sparks

Bananaman wrote: »

Firstly, Politics is the last thing I want to see in shooting.

Yet you injected it. Without anyone goading you into it.

It is destructive, divisive and distracts from the sports themselves.

Indeed. That's why we even ban it in the Target Shooting forum.
Mind you, it's political conflicts that do the damage you're talking about - sorting out how things should be run shouldn't be like that and is a necessary task, lest you first learn of changes when someone tells you that your firearm has now been prohibited and you have to give up your sport.

Finally, I wish these guys all the best in running their match, I hope it is a great success and a challenging competition.
I hope they get to focus on their shooting and not allow politics to take away from that.

Well, technically you of course mean to wish them success, as we all do, in running their sport, not just one match; and they have volunteered to be the ones who manage the politics for the benefit of those in the sport, so alas, they won't be able to ignore politics completely while running the sport.

But hopefully it can at least be minimised and kept to the more positive "how do we best run things" instead of the negative "who's pulling strokes against us" conflict we've seen far too much of in recent decades...

Sparks

Sparks wrote: »

I'll include the specific pages from that document and post them here so there's no further confusion.

Here is the relevant page, for the record:

Greenacre

Just wondering how such an email could be sent when three of the five member bodies of the SSAI did not accept the inclusion of another association

Sparks

Greenacre, are you saying that despite the best wishes for the IBS just here expressed, that some people actually opposed their inclusion in the SSAI despite their being the NRA-recognised NGB for their sport? Who'd be so utterly unsportsmanlike?

Greenacre

almost sounds like you are trying to provoke further divisive responses, all i sought was clarity

Sparks

It's the other way round Greenacre, you've just accused sporting bodies of behaving at best stupidly (ignoring what happened the last time they tried to keep an established NGB out of the SSAI/NRPAI); and at worse in an manner designed to suppress a shooting sport. I'm the one asking for clarity by asking who you're accusing of such behaviour. Or are you actually speaking for an NGB officially?

Vegeta

Greenacre wrote: »

Just wondering how such an email could be sent when three of the five member bodies of the SSAI did not accept the inclusion of another association

Which three?

Bananaman

I think these are matters for those elected to the committee of the SSAI and not something to be discussed by psuedo anonymous peop'

B'Man

Greenacre

Sparks wrote: »

Or are you actually speaking for an NGB officially?

No

Sparks

Bananaman wrote: »

I think these are matters for those elected to the committee of the SSAI and not something to be discussed by psuedo anonymous peop'

I disagree. In fact, this entire forum is based on the idea that your assertion is wrong, and we can talk about this kind of thing.

Even if certain committees occasionally end up embarressed because people talk about them when they do something wrong

Sparks

Greenacre wrote: »

No

So who are you accusing then?

Greenacre

Sparks wrote: »

you've just accused sporting bodies of behaving at best stupidly and at worse in an manner designed to suppress a shooting sport. Or are you actually speaking for an NGB officially?

Your words not mine, your interpretation not mine. I think its unhelpful for a moderator to either seek to put words in my mouth or assert that i made any such statement.

Sorry dont know how to do those fancy multi quotes yet!

Vegeta

Greenacre wrote: »

Your words not mine, your interpretation not mine. I think its unhelpful for a moderator to either seek to put words in my mouth or assert that i made any such statement.

Sorry dont know how to do those fancy multi quotes yet!

So speak plainly, what 3 NGBs and what's your interpretation/statement on it all?

xesse

jasus lads the mods are ganging up on us:eek:
who moderates the mods

Vegeta wrote: »

So speak plainly, what 3 NGBs and what's your interpretation/statement on it all?

Sparks

Gosh xesse, you'd think we were asking for the third secret of fatima here. It's simple enough - Greenacre says 3 of SSAI members didn't want the IBS admitted to the SSAI; the question is which three.

Not exactly rocket science.

xesse

99% of the shooters on this forum know you are on some kinda witchhunt here
is there nothing on the TV you could watch and let guys chat amonst themselves here without hearing the gosple acording to sparks:D:D:D:p
probally get fcuked out for that will i?

Sparks

99% of the shooters on this forum (and on a few others at this stage) have also read this.

It's not a witchhunt. It's being annoyed at people causing crap and havoc behind the scenes, then effecting an air of being persecuted when called on it in public, as if they hadn't done anything wrong.

Cass

I find it annoying that after two threads exposing errors, mistakes, secret proposals, and half hearted explanations, that no responses, official or otherwise, have been forthcoming from the NASRPC.

This, the second of the two threads, was started by an NASRPC member and devolved into allegations by what appears to be other NASRPC members against the IBS/Sparks Then when these are resolved/explained using information gained via official channels the name calling, deflection and innuendos start. The same users i might add that also made little of the proposal submitted by the NASRPC.
_____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________
NASRPC Thread

xesse wrote:

It looks to me that you people on here are stirring up a whirlwind in a teacup over this

This Thread

xesse wrote:

jasus lads the mods are ganging up on us
who moderates the mods

99% of the shooters on this forum know you are on some kinda witchhunt here

Seems that 99% of people on this forum and other forums are as shocked by the revelations as the rest of us, as per there responses. Or are they "overreacting" too?
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
NASRPC Thread

Mr Mole wrote:

Only Fianna Fail could match the shooting sports political **** stirring that has been done here through the unnecessary publication of this OLD document

This Thread

Mr Mole wrote:

If the Chairman of the SSAI has something to say or to post, please let him do it himself rather than you being his intermediary.

On that note how about the same. In case you are confused and as i mentioned at the start of this post why have the NASRPC not answered these and every other question on both threads, but instead rely on their members to "hold the fort"?
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Bananaman wrote:

I think these are matters for those elected to the committee of the SSAI and not something to be discussed by psuedo anonymous peop'

This thread is off your making.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I would still ask that the NASRPC answer all questions posed to them, but as they are not capable of doing so then maybe i can ask the members of the NASRPC here.

1. Are any of you among those that would lose their Glocks under the NASRPC proposals?
2. If not how do they feel about their NGB proposing to get rid of Glocks and prevent their owners from taking part?
3. Was their NGB involved in an attempt to block another organisation gaining access to the SSAI? (directed mainly towards Greenacre),
4. Do the NASRPC have official NGB status for Vintage/Classic Rifles and Black powder? I'm lloking for official confirmation on this.
5. If so what ranges are being used, as the NASRPC is an organisation not a range, and what competitions have they organised to further this aspect of shooting sports?
6. What authorisations do they have from the DOJ to allow them to store black powder?
7. Which range is this currently being run at?
8. What is the general reason for disliking another organisation that introduces another aspect of sports shooting?

So without any BS or double talk are any of you willing to answer these questions or authorised to speak on the NASRPC's behalf to answer these questions? I have (some of) them on the other thread, but still have received no answers. Even an Q&A session on the NASRPC homepage to answer my, and others questions.

5rdmag

When I saw the title “open day” I thought it would be a club shoot only with no baggage attached.

It’s a pity that the NASRPC are involved as I personally can not, and will not attend anything involving them after the recent revelations as exposed here on Boards.ie.

This is a very personal opinion and a pledge that I made to myself after reading the proposal they submitted to the PTB without consultation with the clubs and membership that they are meant to represent.

However, I do wish the Harbour House Club the very best and continued success.

Immortal Being

Greenacre wrote: »

Just wondering how such an email could be sent when three of the five member bodies of the SSAI did not accept the inclusion of another association

. Strange goings on indeed. I've so much to say here, that I'm not going to say anything at all (about the subject matter). Discussing such things in public is a disgrace (amongst the shooting community I can understand, but to air our grievances publically to the Doj & Gardai ?????) I don't know, when was the last time they shared their problems with us. Sparks, I'll leave it at that, I'll only get vexed otherwise, suffice to say that 2+2=4, not 48,000. That applies to 90% of your argument here (there seems to be a.. No, not going to do it) , and I speak from a neutral perspective. I can now see how it's so easy to get embroiled in controversy on boards.ie. Disgraceful, I'm going to log off now before I see anything else, for fear that I end up doing the Gardai/DoJ's job for them also. <mod snip>

freddieot

Agreed - "discussing such thing sin public is a disgrace" as is "airing our grievances publicly to the Doj & Gardai " or "doing their job for them".

Far less of a disgrace though than going behind the backs of fellow shooters, to the Doj and Gardai, and trying to sell them out as appears to be the case from the document in question.

My understanding is that the authors of the "subject matter" did not even discuss it with their own general membership before submitting it to the Doj \ Gardai.

For once I am in full agreement with Sparks, and Boards is to be commended for 'outing' this sort of nonsense for all to see. Otherwise, we would never have known about it in the shooting community.

Unlike you, I don't believe that ignorance is bliss. Pity you've gone off already in disgust or you could make a 5th 'neutral' post.

Cass

Immortal Being wrote: »

I can understand, but to air our grievances publically to the Doj & Gardai ?????)

freddieot wrote: »

Agreed - "discussing such thing sin public is a disgrace" as is "airing our grievances publicly to the Doj & Gardai " or "doing their job for them".

These documents were gotten under the FOI, and are available to anyone including the DOJ/Gardai. Not to mention that these and other documents (the proposal by the NASRPC) were submitted to the DOJ directly so they knew about them before any of us did.

I don't know, when was the last time they shared their problems with us.

They have not and will not. They control the legislation, and do not need our input or approval. They also stand united in their actions. So there are more than a few differences.

freddieot wrote:

Unlike you, I don't believe that ignorance is bliss. Pity you've gone off already in disgust or you could make a 5th 'neutral' post.

+1.

No answers from the NASRPC, no responses, no explanations, no apologies, nothing. The "stick our head in the sand" approach seems to be working, and the hope that people will forget about what was done. Twice they have been shown to be looking out for themselves and themselves only, and on both occassions they went behind the backs of other shooting organisations and even their own members, yet still we have people coming on and saying "sure thats in the past".

This practise seems to be common, and while these actions are in the recent past the fact that it is not an isolated incident would lead any person to believe that they will do so again when and if it suits them.