NARGC boycott

berettaman

Badaj0z

Far from throwing ad hominem insults I am simply calling a spade a spade. I used the words ego and arrogance and yet you seem to know who I am talking about!;)

I have defended the NARGC constantly and I believe it can and should play a huge role in Irish shooting sports. Unfortunately I fear it is being poorly led, yes it would make you weep...

Sparks

badaj0z wrote: »

I think the DOJ/Garda/Politicians are rubbing their hands with glee at this moment.

They surely are. The people who spent the last few years badmouthing them in the press have just delivered their own sports to the chopping block without even having to be prompted and now they can wipe out whole sports while saying they are acting in accordance with consensus proposals from the shooting community.

badaj0z

INSIDE

berettaman wrote: »

Badaj0z

Far from throwing ad hominem insults I am simply calling a spade a spade. I used the words ego and arrogance and yet you seem to know who I am talking about!;)

I have defended the NARGC constantly and I believe it can and should play a huge role in Irish shooting sports. Unfortunately I fear it is being poorly led, yes it would make you weep...

OUTSIDE

Sparks wrote: »

They surely are. The people who spent the last few years badmouthing them in the press have just delivered their own sports to the chopping block without even having to be prompted and now they can wipe out whole sports while saying they are acting in accordance with consensus proposals from the shooting community.

Q.E.D.

Sparks

badaj0z wrote: »

Q.E.D.

Eh, no.
Try reading it again. Slowly.

grassroot1

This post was started by someone who was thinking of giving up paying into the NARGC compensation fund, this will only impact the op and his club. It will not in any way effect those involved in the coalition.
The NARGC is everyone who pays into the fund, if you disagree with current policy it is up to you to voice your displeasure to your governing body delegates. If you feel they are not representing your views REPLACE them.

There are many who are trying to change the way the organisation is run and to read that good people have left or are thinking of leaving makes one think it is already too late...

yubabill1

grassroot1 wrote: »

This post was started by someone who was thinking of giving up paying into the NARGC compensation fund, this will only impact the op and his club. It will not in any way effect those involved in the coalition.
The NARGC is everyone who pays into the fund, if you disagree with current policy it is up to you to voice your displeasure to your governing body delegates. If you feel they are not representing your views REPLACE them.

There are many who are trying to change the way the organisation is run and to read that good people have left or are thinking of leaving makes one think it is already too late...

The Sports Coalition letter to the Justice Committee reminds me of the scene in Braveheart when the Bruce betrays Wallace, leading to his capture and death.

The old Irish system of Chiefdoms was so easily manipulated by the British policy of divide and conquer that it led to 800 years of subjugation here.

As long as we continue to be tribally-led, we are easily conquered.

deeksofdoom

Cass wrote: »

What makes you think a club would just leave without first checking what coverage they were getting? You said this (posts 2 & 4) on the first page. Do your due diligence and if it suits change, if not stay where you are.

Well the OP in his first post led me to believe that was the case and he stated that in another post that ' majority rules'.

Cass wrote: »

You make is sound like leaving the NARGC would mean bankruptcy for the club..

Oh come on now don't be silly.:o Thats not what I was saying at all, in the even't of an accident and whats the most a club would have in it s account anyway they would be hardly worth sueing them for. Its the members of the committee who could be held accountable.

Cass wrote: »

It wouldn't. Also it's not insurance through the NARGC, it's a compensation fund. Small difference but one worth pointing out.

Its a compensation fund thats underwritten by an insurance company!!!!!! It is a small difference and there's no real need to go on about it they pretty much do the same thing.

Cass wrote: »

• Firstly, it wouldn't be the court proving anything. If a claim was made it would be from the brief of the claimant/injured party against the brief of the insurance company.
• Secondly, all members of the club would have to sign policies, pay their fees, etc. So the onus is on you to understand the policy before signing. This eliminates the ""i didn't know" excuse..

All I'm saying is you don't just get a whole club to just up sticks and get insurance cover with another insurer, I'm not saying that it couldn't happen its just that more than likely you'll just end up splitting the club.

MrTom1

Am a member of the NARGC and am finding it hard to follow the thread? What has Des Crofton actually done to make ppl want to leave-Not being a smart ass but just interested

Cass

I'm not advocating for any club leaving the NARGC and this thread is not really about insurance, although that is a byproduct of the discussion.

It's about the way the NARGC, aspart of the "coalition" are conductin themselves on behalf of their members without actually consulting with them prior to any action. This is proved in the fact that the majority of NARGC members only became aware of the recent letter of proposals 7 weeks after they were submitted and days after the interim report was released.

What i am saying is if you feel dtrongly enough about this then contact them and do not settle for a "lip service" reply. If you feel your needs are not being met and you can get appropriate cover elsewhere, well that is a decision for each club. So as said above if it suits move, if not then remain where you are.

However all the outrage and anger means nothing if the coalition and their members are not held to account for their actions. However that comes about is up to the members. Remember the NARGC, as with the other groups within the "coalition" are accountable to it's members that give it it's mandate.

Sparks

MrTom1 wrote: »

Am a member of the NARGC and am finding it hard to follow the thread? What has Des Crofton actually done to make ppl want to leave-Not being a smart ass but just interested

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=94977372&postcount=8

MrTom1

Thanks Sparks, So in other words He went off and did his own thing.

Sparks

MrTom1 wrote: »

Thanks Sparks, So in other words He went off and did his own thing.

And in this case his own thing meant proposing a highly restrictive ban on firearms that the Coalition don't have the right to speak for.

berettaman

Here is why I won’t be boycotting the NARGC.:


1. My father, uncle and brothers have helped build up the NARGC at a local level over the last 30 years. The money sitting in the NARGC Compensation fund is the annual contributions of NARGC members past and present.


2. The lads that represent my RGC are genuine people that are working to change things at National level. They deserve as much support as possible.


3. There is a small group at the top of the oorganisation that need to take a look at themselves. Some of these people have not fired a shot in years. It is all about status, money, pints and days out.


4. Des Crofton is an employee. Unelected. It is a case of the tail wagging the dog. We need to elect the right people to help make the changes.

5. It would be a big mistake to walk of the pitch and leave these people sitting with a compensation fund to look after.


6. The NARGC does a lot of work that is not recognised but I believe the association is capable of much more.


7. When our County RGC meet to discuss who we vote for at National Level the question our members ask is “Do they shoot?” as in are they active shooters involved in the sport.


To a certain extent that’s all that matters.