[Politics] IRISH NATIONAL CONVENTIONAL PISTOL CHAMPIONSHIP

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.

derek_g34

Mad, I clicked on this thread expecting to see something about the IRISH NATIONAL CONVENTIONAL PISTOL CHAMPIONSHIP.

Thought you mods pulled lads up for going completely off topic. Oh, you are the lads completely off topic...sorry

Sparks

That'd be the [Feb 11th-12th] IRISH NATIONAL CONVENTIONAL PISTOL CHAMPIONSHIP thread in Target Shooting that was started by the IBS about the match derek. This is the thread where we moved the political bits to rather than delete them and be accused of censorship; it's not in the Target Shooting forum because of that forum's no-politics rule in its charter.

Sorry for the confusion, though I thought this was all explained in post number three at the top of the thread.

derek_g34

Sorry,silly me went straight to the end of the witchhunt. I should have read from the start.

Sparks

Well, if you did, you'd have seen where it started.

5rdmag

Ezridax wrote: »

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.

+1.

This is why I will not support any event, shoot or otherwise involving the NASRPC.

It seems that there are still a lot of supporters of the NASRPC out there even though they tried to shaft us and take our money forcing us to do their courses, and by us I mean the general shooting public.

Agh, sure that's in the past now, let it lie............Our problems are only about to start if you ask me, just wait for the next round of renewal applications for your firearm.

LB6

Nice to see that you can be lead by the voice of one who has had issues with the NASRPC in the past. I know that if I was in the same association as him, I'd be embarassed by his notions of grandeur and low tactics on other matters.

BTW - when was the last NASRPC AGM you attended?

who_cares1971

I read Boards from time to time to get some info on whats happening in the shooting world as I am a shooter. I never signed up because its like any message board mods have their favorites, people have different agendas etc etc the list goes on so I just stay out of it but this is not a boards or mod bashing post so I'm not going there. I have however signed up today just to say a few things and it will probably be my only post

This whole trend reminds me of a line from a very funny film "We are The Judean People's Front" not "The People's Front of Judea" hate those *******.

SSAI, NRAI, ITS, NSAI, IPC, NASRPC, IBS.....did I leave someone out because I cant keep up anymore!! AKA too many chief not enough indians! We are all shooters and should have the very same interests, Shooting! But no people have to go out on their own to set up something new because they don't like this guy or we want to get rid of them and a million and one other reasons. We should all be united, yes there is always differences of opinion but thats normal. One thing I really hate to see people doing is bad mouthing any organization especially when they are not the ones who give up allot of their time (shooting, family and other stuff) to be part of it and to run it, being involved in things over the years I know whats involved. I never really hear people saying thank you to these people just criticizing them!

Yes the letter that was put on Boards from the NASRPC has allot of bad points in it but in 2009 (is there not a new committee now?) when it was believed that everyone would lose their license I'm sure it seemed like a good idea and to be honest I am one of those people who does not have the license and am in the legal system. I would conform to most of them (not all, because unlike allot of people I just want to enjoy my sport) if it means me getting it back!! Also I know the people who could not afford financially to appeal the decision would too because they will never get their license back.

So in a nut shell we need less organizations with different agendas (and I'm not talking about shooting agendas). More unity among the community, less back stabbing, less two faced practicing, some gratitude for the people working hard in the genuine organizations. And most of all the fun, enjoyment and safe participation of our sport!!

PS. Just before people jump on board (no pun intended) I am not part of any organizations committee etc etc obviously I am associate to some being a shooter.

Thats my bit said, Amen.

Sparks

who_cares1971 wrote: »

Yes the letter that was put on Boards from the NASRPC has allot of bad points in it but in 2009 when it was believed that everyone would lose their license I'm sure it seemed like a good idea

The thing is, in 2009 when it was thought that people would lose their licence, the people who wrote that document were sitting at a table with the people whose job it was to talk to the FCP about it. Those who wrote that document were the ones who wrote the rules for how these things were meant to be done. They set up the entire system - above a lot of objections at the time.

So when they wrote that document, they were going behind the backs of everyone who was working within the system that they had set up. A whole team of people from several different shooting bodies had been working together on the problem - exactly what should be happening and what you and everyone else has been saying for a long time that we all need - and then this was sent in behind them, undercutting everyone.

We may not have the kind of veto power over Ministers that some people would want; but when people do that kind of thing, go behind the structures that are in place for dealing with things, how much damage do you think it does to what little we can do?

That's why it's not a small thing that's back there in the past.

And yes, most people are sick of it. Those of us who've seen it for the last ten years most of all. But what can you do when a small group of people continually and repeatedly crap all over good work just because they're not in charge of it?

Mr.Flibble

who_cares1971 wrote: »

SSAI, NRAI, ITS, NSAI, IPC, NASRPC, IBS.....did I leave someone out because I cant keep up anymore!!

Yes, at least three - NTSA, NARGC, LRRAI. It is hard to keep up, isn't it?

who_cares1971 wrote: »

So in a nut shell we need less organizations with different agendas (and I'm not talking about shooting agendas). More unity among the community, less back stabbing, less two faced practicing, some gratitude for the people working hard in the genuine organizations. And most of all the fun, enjoyment and safe participation of our sport!!

You're right, but, sadly, you've two chances of getting it.

Sparks

Mr.Flibble wrote: »

Yes, at least three - NTSA, NARGC, LRRAI. It is hard to keep up, isn't it?

A lot more than just three...

You're right, but, sadly, you've two chances of getting it.

In fact the whole row was because we weren't getting it despite a lot of effort