Lovely post. Logical, common sense and experienced based.

Grolschevik wrote: »

As I said above , I'm a supportive outsider. I also work as and with journalists and PR people. In terms of PR and media, there have been a few very important points made here that relate to public support.

Many of you won't like my argumaent, but here it is.

First, some selected quotes, with the what I reckon are the most relevant bits bolded:





I don't think it is seen as a bloodsport by most people in the same way as The Hunt. See below.











Ok, heere's my argument. Again, as an interested ousider who works with the media:

The "domino effect"/"death by a thousand cuts" thing is a 'slippery slope' argument. It doesn't wash for something like hunting fox with horses and dogs. Most of the public see that as being in a completely different league.

It's a bit like this: for example, when you think about it philosophically and ethically, eating sausages is on the same 'moral' scale as, say, fur farming, but the average punter doesn't see it like that.

Because they prefer NOT to think about it like that, to its logical conclusion. That's why I think that fishing isn't held in the same low regard among ordinary urban punters as fox-hunting is.

The last thing you want is to be associated in the public mind with support for hunting fox with horses and dogs. You're only going to lose in any association with that in the public mind.



You want the ordinary punter to see gun use as on the level of fishing and sausage eating and mouse traps and rat poison, things they don't see or don't want to see as in even being near to the same ethical territory as something like fur farming, to continue that analogy/example. Even the leather industry has managed to successfully keep its distance from fur, except with hardcore vegans.




This ^^^.

Also bonus points for playing up the sports angle: biathlon, skiing, Olympic target shooting etc. There are thousands of airsofters, too. Connect; don't slag them off as children or Mittys.

Connect with the university gun clubs. Trinity has its own small range.

Cut out any political talk that comes across as overly American gun rightsy.
Cut out slagging off politicians and guards and journalists.
Cut out anything that could be interpreted as alt-right.
Cut out sovereign citizen/freeman/resisting tyranny stuff. There was at least one on this thread already.
Cut out talking of Eurofascism and cultural marxism etc. These are known right-wing tropes that media will pick up on.

Be seen to be the respectful, professional, sportmen and women, some of whom who perform a valuable service culling what farmers see as pests, and others who engage in internationally recognised sports.

Don't be associated with red-coated, red-faced, twice-a-year law firm partners frothing at the mouth and blooding each other in the woods when not riding roughshod through some smallholders land and scaring his sheep -- because THAT (unfair or not) is the public and media perception of The Hunt.

THis is just my take. I don't want to start or get into an argument.

Oh, and the media isn't interested in truth, balance and accuracy any more. It's about sales, clicks, lowest common denominator. Goes for Prime Time as much as any tabloid rag. They can't be trusted. Even a supportive journos words will come across differently after editors get their hands on it and pictures and headlines added in.

QUOTE=Grolschevik;115987108]Then you need to ask yourselves why that is, and address the reasons. And ask ‘why?’ about the reasons behind the reasons, and behind those reasons again. Also, you wouldn't give up if you didn't hit the mark with your first shot, would you?

Incompatibility and differing opinions and association of what people concieve as "firearms" in these 3 groups. You could also ask it this way too.Do we need to associate ourselves with people who are playing and practising military tactics with state of the art , albeit replica firearms, or with another bunch who dress up and pretend they are the Allgemeine SS? Also, an international shooting discipline IPSC is actually banned here in Ireland with both live and airsoft firearms because it was considered "combat training" so it can have a double-edged cutting effect if some media whore was looking for a "scoop"

In short;we have been there,they didnt want to know, and in the case of the reenactors knew it better than us that the EU laws wouldn't apply to full auto blank firing weapons that "they used"...When in fact it was aimed exactly at those post-Bataclan and Paris shootings...Last I heard they were looking for legal representation on this here...

Has that influence helped the cause of the ordinary shooter?

Believe it or not ...Yes... We are all "ordinary GUN OWNERS here, shooters second. A lot gets discussed on a horse ride as much as big deals are done on the golf course.

Would they extend the same concern in your direction?

Yes they have...You'll have to read my memoirs for the story on that one.:)

Ordinary punters may drift in, and I’m sure journalist have it bookmarked for the occasions they need it.

You are actually ASFIK the 1st person who has admitted they are media openly on this site.In the 20 years I've been posting here I cant recall any media ever approaching us on anything relating to shooting, gun laws or other relevant to Ireland on this site, defeats or victories...Soo, it would suggest we aren't that important or interesting to Irish MSM. Even when IPSC was banned here RTE preferred to use a hit-piece from the US than ask Irish shooters about it.

Thread titles and rhetoric are important because of this.
There’s always another way of wording stuff.

Instead of a thread title like “getting a pistol through the North”, call it “What are the rules on imports now?” Instead of “I got hundreds of bastard rats lasy night it was like a scene from ‘Nam”, write “I’ve found that setting up this way is very effective at rat control”.

I saw a thread recently about the virtues of particular night sight. It could have been worded like “it enabled me to track the wounded animal into the undergrowth so I could humanely dispatch it”. But it was actually worded like “it ran off after I hit it but the sight picked up the heat of the fox’s intestines that were hanging out after my first shot, so I was able to find it and finish it off”.

Just put yourself in the position of a randomer wandering in and reading that.

Not getting at anyone, but language use and appearances are especially important to a sport that finds itself under threat.[

Some merit to that alright. But even the Antis have claimed us calling it "field sports" is disguising bloodsports as a politer term. A case of doublespeak?

Remember, we are arguing a lot against emotivism and "muh feelings" logic here that trumps any sort of logical debate these days.

Cass wrote: »

That is true and if so, well, so be it. We aren't pleasing everyone anyway so we have to move on with what we can change.

One area is language. We try to stop the use of the word weapon, rightly so, we can apply this to other areas. Its a sport we have and i reject the use of the above term because it signifies a negative. So if we all reject it and use the word sport or fieldsport its a small step but in the right direction.

We will have to change but not to the detriment of our sport or the values contained within.

That’s back to the PR chestnut Cass. It’s not what’s in the package, it’s the packaging.

Tea drinker wrote: »

It's cultural, the media traditionally associate guns with crime - either the IRA and subversive element or the drug gang type. That's the message people are used to receiving about guns. We don't have a broadcast medium of our own to counter the the broadcaster we pay for! I think RTE need to understand they have to present us fairly, or else they'll get more complaints than they did for the "God arrested" skit at Christmas ;-)
Having said that WE need to be careful of our PR that the rabble don't become motivated to attack us and RTE for screening an OMG pro gun agenda!
IMHO We're not going to reach anyone thru youtube.
But there's nothing to stop us investing in a quality 30 minute video showing competitions, showing like Cass said the conservation areas and environmental impact, and the hunting aspect too, how it gets from a cleanly dispatched animal (almost no difference to dispatch of a factory animal) to a healthy meal for a family. There's any amount of presentable stuff that WE find interesting, and the above could be a nice presentation to a politician.

Exactly, I mentioned something about how collectors should be allowed a wider choice of firearms, when I was talking so someone on another thead on boards and he said that the IRA would get them and use them. And this is the exact attitude that got pistols banned for 30 odd years, the perception of crime breeds fear. Perhaps a point could be made about how the government and the Gardaí are more likely to break the firearms laws, like the temporary custody order and the attempted gun ban about 10 years ago, than the actual shooting community.

Cass wrote: »

H
Our only focus should be on correcting disinformation where and when we can and working to highlight/call out (perhaps even stop) the continuous, subtle, links between criminals and legal firearm owners whenever its implied.

I think also we should be somewhat proactive too on some points of ownership. Constant dripping wears away a stone. We mightn't see it but maybe the next-gen will. It's a tactic that has been used by the Left/Greens in opposition for years. Might never look like its going anywhere, but its always there, until it wears a hole into the rock. Question is what will be acceptable to all point or what would give us another easy win?

GooseB wrote: »

A very positive aspect of shooting in my opinion that really should be spoken of more, particularly if trying to educate the "general public" on shooting sports is the inclusiveness and equality of it. From a target shooting viewpoint, a 19 year old girl can potentially shoot beside a 90 year old man and both shoot against each other more or less equally.

At the top level the sexes may have separate events but less formally there's really no need to separate them. Similarly, a person with a particular disability may be able to compete pretty much equally against an able bodied person. The shooter can be any age, orientation, race or creed - of all sports, shooting has to be up at the top as one of the best levelers out there. "It's all about the nut behind the bolt" as I was told.

Like it or not, "inclusiveness" is the way of the world now, particularly among the typical demographic that forms the anti gun brigade and mindset. The target aspect of the sport lends itself well in that regard and could potentially be capitalised more.

Apologies for the target-centric post but that's where I fit into the shooting jigsaw. I'm definitely not anti hunting, but I do think the target side of the wider shooting community is the easier side to get outsiders/the media/politicians - all the groups mentioned over the multiple pages of this thread so far - to see that guns are "weapons" about as much as golf clubs are "weapons". Hunting as an introduction has 2 major shocks, 1. The "oh my god it's a gun" and 2. The killing. Target shooting only has point No.1 so is an easier introduction to get started off with at least.

I agree, retired clay & rough shooter myself, Benchrest is my go to now.

Don't know how many females shoot game, not many I would suggest, but lots shoot Benchrest and archery has huge numbers.

You never hear anyone saying "o my god, its a bow and arrow".

Peoples perceptions and fears also need to be address.

I started a new job years ago, getting to know the people who worked there, i kept my interest in shooting under my hat for about a year. I told a lad who worked there eventually and he was really enthuased, as he'd never fired a gun, so i took him to the range and he loved it, but he could not take up the hobby as his missus put her foot down and said no guns in the house.

He was a convert, even if he couldn't shoot himself, but the people in the office were appalled at the notion of me owning a gun. I got the usual jibes about the kinahans and the IRA, and despite the use of facts and figures, which i found were ignored, emotion seemed to rule over logic.

That's a really good plan. The Dept of Education did this a decade or so ago with Generic Repeat Design schools - everything built since then was basically a variation of the same design, with a lot of money & time saved on design phase.

Cass wrote: »

How is that relevant to Ireland? I ask because thinking like that is once again applying an American solution to an Irish problem.

There has never been a mass shooting in Ireland and we have access to only semi auto (forget the misnomer used) firearms. If politicians want to use such events in other countries then our job is to discredit their implication that such an event can happen here as "only a matter of time". If they [politicians] want to ban something for fear of an event then we must point out the flaw in their thinking and how holding one group of people responsible for the actions of an entirely separate group is unjust, and possibly unlawful.

As for the media. News cycles don't last long enough for the media to worry about being precise with their terminology. They apply the same vocabulary to firearms as the general public and any attempt (as we seen with the letter writing campaign to RTE) will be largely ignored or explained away.

Make no mistake, regardless of the level of co-operation we do or don't get this won't be easy, won't be a victory of any sort and still will not be accepted by a portion of the public. Our only focus should be on correcting disinformation where and when we can and working to highlight/call out (perhaps even stop) the continuous, subtle, links between criminals and legal firearm owners whenever its implied.

Cass, I would ask the question how isn't that relevant to Ireland? If we're to convince the public that we know our stuff and the media and politicians are clueless, then why not call them out. You, yourself, admit that "we should be correcting disinformation where and where we can", so why not correct it here? Pointing out the flaws of politicians' thoughts and plans isn't enough, we need to completely discredit them for their incompetence on the subject matter, if the public sees some clueless fella trying to tell them why certain firearms should be banned, they're not going to listen to him. I certainly agree that we have to discredit any links between crime and sports shooters, but why limit ourselves to that? Why not attack their foundational knowledge and make their entire argument come crashing down around them?

On another note, I've heard that the 50 cal society in the UK were successful in recent attempts to ban 50 cals, so perhaps we could take a page out of their book. I'm not sure what they did in the form of lobbying, so maybe someone can get in contact with them.

Limerick Sovereigns wrote: »

I have considered the idea of building and licencing a 25m or 50 m range when the kids are reared and semi-retirement becomes an option. I have been passively scouting for a location as I travel the region while working.

I think that the Castlebridge range in Wexford might be a model that could be replicated and improved. Basically, its a disused industrial building (maybe an abattoir) that is well away from any neighbours. This makes noise a non-issue so the only other problems are ventilation and baffles/buttstops. Its not Midlands, but if there was one in every county that currently has nothing it might make a difference. I'm open to correction from those involved, but it can't have cost a king's ransom to get off the ground.

My suggestion for action: Invite interest in starting a project off-line so that a small group of motivated people could design a template for:

1) A small affordable indoor range.
2) A small affordable outdoor range.

which would meet DoJ standards.

I think that this would be a valuable resource to anyone who wanted to give such a project a go. However, anyone doing so who thinks that they will get rich from it is dreaming. These types of ranges/clubs would just about break even in most locations in my opinion so it would most likely be a labour of love that would benefit the sport rather than an individual. If someone makes a few quid then all the better but you wouldn't want to be trying to pay your mortgage from the subscriptions.

Obviously, the templates would have to be altered to suit any individual site, but the specification would also describe the features to look for in a site or building in the first place.

Is this suggestion worth developing? I would certainly chip in for what little my knowledge is worth.

An indoor 50m range in Ireland, super idea , we would all be spoilt.

Seriously though, easy option would be 40 foot shipping containers welded together, your only downfall would be the restriction in numbers who could shoot. Probably not viable for an ongoing enterprise.

As you said, build costs crazy here and you will not get rich on it, best options would be a block built old warehouse that could be converted.

Probably too expensive for just one person, never mind to run it, this is where a group of like minded people could make a go of it, subject to planning and licensing which is a mountain to climb in itself.

I'll take these both together as there is a lot of crossovers.
As some of ye might know I have been looking at getting something started in a range closer to to the Limerick /Ennis region for the last ten years.As there is literally a desert between Limerick, Galway and up as far as Lough Bo.In short there is a market in this area.

I too have looked at some very suitable buildings, inc my own backyard, where we have an overroofed triple former silage clamp and machinery shed that would have been ideal, and was actually Ok by Mr G from the DOJ.
As well as a quarry up the road from me,and the former factory we owned and built-in Limerick in the 1960s, now developed into a fine massive warehouse facility and machine park. All of the owners were sold on the idea at first,but then within thinking of it were off it and didn't want to know within 48 hours.

What killed me on my own property was the entranceway traffic turning right is turning blind on the main road where we have enough boy racers and heavy trucks coming down from a quarry. And of course, we cant modify the entrance,as it is a listed feature, with a listed gate lodge in the way. Ah, the joys of living in a listed country house.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

One of the many troubles with these plans is money, planning permission and the hassles with it, then getting all 3 parties of CC , AGS, and DOJ to sing in the same hymn sheet So this idea of getting real estate first,is going to be a major problem.
Hence I think the idea of the "portable shooting range" is going to be the solution to this on a county level. I
t's a lot easier to rent off someone, or even buy a bit of land for a container park than a range, usually in some industrial part of a city or town, so there will be traffic and parking and noise anyway in some shape or form.

It's not a permanent structure as it is on a trailer, nor is it wired to power as it has it's own genny, Soundproof, Modular so you can add or subtract units which come in nice easy to work with figures,10,20,40 feet. Got an idea too for making these four-bay shooting. two standing, two kneeling, sitting /prone, making it also disabled/wheelchair friendly.
Pretty easy to construct bullet traps for it as well, and clean them too. A lot easier to move about with a truck and a lifter than try moving an installed range or the like once the landowner gets cold feet and your lease is up.

What sort of money are you looking at. Depending on your skillsets and how much you do and splash out on materials,[steel mostly]. I'd estimate the price of a good 2nd hand jeep 15/20k for a 40 footer.

I'm a firm believer in this case", if you build it they will come" in the area I've mentioned. You are not out a huge amount if they don't for some reason, and if it does take off and you are at a "please take a number" crowd every day you are open, buy /build another container, and put it besides,on top of the other.:)

Once we get an approved design by the DOJ. IE specs, steel required etc. There is then an approved standard design for all of these portable ranges to be built on. They won't be pretty, but if they get people shooting or having a place to drop in and pop off a few rounds after work, or wanting to check their zeros rather than spend a couple of hours driving to ranges on their days off...Wouldnt that be a good thing?

If you are wondering why I'm giving away a potential business idea here.
I Don't care!! I want people out shooting with the least hassle to them logistically and legally. There will be plenty of a market for everyone, and it is still a sufficient investment and hassle and paperwork involved to get this going. You still have to found a club as it stands, and that's a job in itself.

So please have at it someone if you want to.:)

yubabill wrote: »

I'm as guilty as anyone of posting political stuff on here, so I'll give my hot take on your question.

For me, it started with hunters getting attacked in online forums by antis, where we found that if we stuck together, we could achieve something.

Then we got the semi-auto thing from Martin Callinan and co., which led to a public hearing (linked in the previous posts) which again achieved something of a stalemate, at least and not an outright crackdown.

The latest was the EU firearms directive, which involved many of us contacting politicians directly. And again, we saw a compromise of sorts.

And so we arrive here, with the lead ban proposal. Another political thing.

Really, I don't want politics and shooting intertwined.

It would be lovely if we could just go about our business as many of us have done for decades, without incident.

Personally, I think that we should mellow on the politics side apart from the lead ban.

When I was 10 and my ol man bought me my 410.
I wish he had included a note or talk in it stating:
"If you take up this gun as your fathers and grandfathers did.I want you to know that in 40 years time you will spend many hours arguing, discussing, planning and spending a lot of your time on a thing called "the internet" on a "laptop" about the politics and dealing with politicians and people who have a problem with you owning this gun, and a few different types you will own in 30 years time and hunting. You will be involved in court cases, gambling your money on unsure outcomes to be congratulated and censored in equal measures. You will meet politicians, judges and lawmakers in equal measures in person to discuss and plan this topic both here and abroad. You will become one tough opinionated, no compromise, no backdown SOB with few friends, an acid tongue and a cynical attitude to all things and men, and spend as much time doing this as going hunting. Do you really want to have this gun?"::pac:

The simple fact is, whether you like it or not anymore if you want to own guns or shoot them you have to get political and discuss the politics these days.
If you want a quiet non-political hobby. Take up stamp collecting,or Bonzai gardening I guess.
Politics and shooting, hunting and gun-owning have been to me just as much a part of this as shooting and gutting a deer. Just part of the messy bit that's unavoidable.:)

But now my own dad, in his 60's, having always been a sports fanatic, especially Olympics and athletics, had said he always liked biathlon, but had never held a rifle. Once restrictions ease, I'm hoping to bring him up and show him the ropes!

I was just looking at some biathlon shooting. What they do is amazing considering their HR is about 185 BPM and they shoot standing and from off their elbows. I suggest you might do this for your father as this is something I had planned to do once the ranges open back up - it's just for fun. The prone biathlon targets are 45mm in diameter, the standing are 115mm. I was going to draw them out on paper with a compas and have a go myself at hitting them, all be it with about one third of the heart rate and relaxed.

Regarding shooting at steel as mentioned above - silhouettes are shot on steel targets and it's allowed. It's .22LR only and the sil's themselves are housed in their own little enclosure that catches the bullets - it's great craic and highly recommended. It may not be exactly what you're after but it's at least getting closer so give it a go if you ever get the chance at a range that has them.

GooseB wrote: »

I was just looking at some biathlon shooting. What they do is amazing considering their HR is about 185 BPM and they shoot standing and from off their elbows. I suggest you might do this for your father as this is something I had planned to do once the ranges open back up - it's just for fun. The prone biathlon targets are 45mm in diameter, the standing are 115mm. I was going to draw them out on paper with a compas and have a go myself at hitting them, all be it with about one third of the heart rate and relaxed.

That's a great idea, I might just do that!! I've only focussed on groups myself, other than getting a close zero, I've never really gone for bullseye's.

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

2 Generations n my fam.From different sides of the Western world.
One in prewar1914 Imperial Germany, thru Weimar and WW2 and postwar Germany up to today.
The other side , Depression-era NYC and NJ although leaning more towards the fishing as it was cheaper to do , thru WW2 and post-war America.
Done because it was necessary to feed yourself and the fam in any way possible. rather than a "sport"

Irrespective of how we got into it,it is still a lifestyle choice. Anything that involves you surrendering your privacy and scrutiny by Govt and LE who decide if you are worthy of possessing such and whether you can participate in it cant be classified as a hobby.Does anyone know of any other sport that you would be scrutinised as much because of your equipment? I can't.

My grandfather (mother's dad) was stationed in Israel, I think, somewhere in the middle East anyway, for ww2, with some artillery group. One of the really big units fell on him, broke his legs, so he was sent home. He never talked about it, only heard after he passed, which at that time I was not even a teenager yet. It's one of my big regrets never getting to ask him about it.

GooseB wrote: »

Regarding shooting at steel as mentioned above - silhouettes are shot on steel targets and it's allowed. It's .22LR only and the sil's themselves are housed in their own little enclosure that catches the bullets - it's great craic and highly recommended. It may not be exactly what you're after but it's at least getting closer so give it a go if you ever get the chance at a range that has them.

Wasn't Nicholas Flood shooting centerfire silhouette? Where were they at that?