Report of FCP Meeting Minutes

Sparks

jb88 wrote: »

Does anyone care what words were used, "Report", "Minutes", "Information", etc.

Well, yes. Because words matter. Especially around the topic of law, which is the FCP's reason for existing. This is a rather long-standing communal bugbear even if it's an under-recognised one; because either it is a bad thing when a Garda uses the wrong meaning of words and rejects an application that he should have granted because of his mis-reading of a law; or it's not a bad thing and those rejections should stand and Gardai should be allowed to read a law any way they want. Collectively, we have a historical preference for the former state of affairs; but that comes at a price, because it's either one reading for everyone or it's not; and if it's one reading for everyone, then the words matter.

Now, if you're having a natter over a pint in the pub, that's a different story and you'd have to be an ill-mannered eejit to haul someone over the coals for the misuse of one word when the context made the meaning obvious; but this is not the pub and legally you are publishing when you post here, not nattering.

It's mostly neither here nor there. But this is one of the areas where it actually matters.

English is a confusing language, this I know having taught it at one stage during my career, typo's aside I think mine is fairly good.

Don't.
Seriously, just don't.
Genital-measuring stuff between grammar nazis is nobody's idea of a good time.

Anyone attending the meetings is entitled to keep minutes, notes ,official or otherwise and or publish their remarks, as long as they don't conflict with the rules of Boards.
Unless bound by any confidentiality clause which this is information isn't governed by.

Yup, correct in all cases. Especially the last - the minutes of the FCP are not confidential.

I thank you for your input as a moderator and your correction of this former English teacher is noted.

Wonderful. Then said teacher is free to reread the correction for what it was. You'll note I wasn't saying it couldn't be published (see "Nothing wrong with that"); I was saying that they weren't minutes, they were a report.
That's it; that's all. The mountain:molehill ratio ought to remain high.

PS The document sent to me was and I quote "fcp minutes". That was its title, just to clarify.

Is it possible that you are interchanging the title of the email or the filename of the actual attached file with the title of the report which was - according to what you posted:

Report on the FCP Meeting on the 28th January 2016

Sparks

clivej wrote: »

So I'll now wait for the 'official' sh¡te version from crofton

That has already been published on the SC website. A small note - it's no more official than the above report. The official minutes are prepared by the DoJ, nobody else, because it's their meeting. It's run by them on behalf of their Minister. All the rest of us are attendees.
Don't misunderstand me - the FCP's one of the single best things to ever happen to shooters on the legal side of things and I think I might have mentioned that in passing at some point in the last few years -- but it has a very defined nature and it's a very bad error to lose sight of that definition, both because you'll think you have things that you very much do not; and because you'll forget that you very much have things that others would love for you to forget about.

Rimfire Shooter

Does anyone know what way the reloading issue is being approached? It seems there are 2 more schemes to be approved. I've heard is one doing ISSF 300m fullbore stuff on a range in Dublin area & the other is one of the deer groups.

Can I assume that individuals doing it at home is not even on the agenda?

clivej

Rimfire Shooter wrote: »

I assume that individuals doing it at home is not even on the agenda?

Correct.
Sure we can be trusted with firearms that have the capability to kill at over 1 mile but not with the components that make up the bullets

downrange

jb88 wrote: »

It now seems that the SC is firmly in control of the NASRPC in light of the recent replacing of Martin Hayes.


It seems a cleverly crafted piece of new committee work has put an SC supporter firmly into a role he is not qualified to view impartially the views of the members of the NASRPC.

The majority supported the NASRPC in their decision to leave the Sports Coalition, as they did not represent our views.

Now one of the SC 'S main supporters has manipulated himself onto the FCP. via a seat representing the NASRPC.

No good will come of this NASRPC members. No good what so ever.

I agree with you on all of the above. And to extend what you say - the NASRPC is definately firmly under the control of the Sports Coalition, without a doubt.

Did you know that three of the NASRPC Committee are also on the Sports Coalition Committee and in fact the Chairman of the NASRPC was appointed to the FCP by the Sports Coalition. Also, the day to day affairs of the NASRPC and the SC are effectively being run by the same one individual, just check the name on most of the news posts on both websites.

We can all be rest assured that the NASRPC will officially rejoin the SC in the near future and we will be told "it is in the interests of our members" and then the NASRPC will simply blend in to the overall NARGC/SC organisation with one lord and leader.

And suddenly one day in the future, you will all ask, what happened? How did that happen? When did that happen?

It happened the day busloads of extras were brought to Naas to raise their hands in the air in a hypnotic trance.

It's the latest cult and the brainwashing and propaganda is well under way.

BattleCorp

Are many others unhappy that the NASRPC committee ignored the wishes of the people at the AGM? I know I am.

It was made clear at the AGM, Martin Hayes was to remain on the FCP and the committee removed him barely 3 weeks after the AGM.

Who made this decision to ignore the wishes of those at the AGM?

downrange

BattleCorp wrote: »

Are many others unhappy that the NASRPC committee ignored the wishes of the people at the AGM? I know I am.

It was made clear at the AGM, Martin Hayes was to remain on the FCP and the committee removed him barely 3 weeks after the AGM.

Who made this decision to ignore the wishes of those at the AGM?

Nobody on the ground is happy with the decision.

Martin spoke out at the FCP against the leader of the SC and was very quickly dismissed soon after. He spoke the truth but some people can't handle the truth. He defended our colleagues who the SC brands as "Criminals".

BillBen

Hopefully this committee will be turfed out next year. I fear that they are going to undo all of the excellent work the last guys did they have already sold their souls to the devil and they are only in the position a few weeks.

badaj0z

downrange wrote: »

I agree with you on all of the above. And to extend what you say - the NASRPC is definately firmly under the control of the Sports Coalition, without a doubt.

Did you know that three of the NASRPC Committee are also on the Sports Coalition Committee and in fact the Chairman of the NASRPC was appointed to the FCP by the Sports Coalition. Also, the day to day affairs of the NASRPC and the SC are effectively being run by the same one individual, just check the name on most of the news posts on both websites.

We can all be rest assured that the NASRPC will officially rejoin the SC in the near future and we will be told "it is in the interests of our members" and then the NASRPC will simply blend in to the overall NARGC/SC organisation with one lord and leader.

And suddenly one day in the future, you will all ask, what happened? How did that happen? When did that happen?

It happened the day busloads of extras were brought to Naas to raise their hands in the air in a hypnotic trance.

It's the latest cult and the brainwashing and propaganda is well under way.

You guys are a hoot, you really are.Did you know that the SC is really controlled by aliens? Did you know that these aliens are also secretly controlled by meta aliens? It is all a plot and it is so unfair that you lost the vote. It would be so lovely to go back to how things were before the democratic plague infected shooters.

BattleCorp

badaj0z wrote: »

You guys are a hoot, you really are.Did you know that the SC is really controlled by aliens? Did you know that these aliens are also secretly controlled by meta aliens? It is all a plot and it is so unfair that you lost the vote. It would be so lovely to go back to how things were before the democratic plague infected shooters.

Were the committee instructed to leave Martin Hayes as the FCP rep by the floor of the AGM? It's a simple yes or no.

gunny123

downrange wrote: »

It happened the day busloads of extras were brought to Naas to raise their hands in the air in a hypnotic trance.

Care to back that up with a little hard evidence ?

gunny123

BattleCorp wrote: »

Are many others unhappy that the NASRPC committee ignored the wishes of the people at the AGM? I know I am.

It was made clear at the AGM, Martin Hayes was to remain on the FCP and the committee removed him barely 3 weeks after the AGM.

Who made this decision to ignore the wishes of those at the AGM?

Would that be sort of the same as the previous committee being told to rejoin the SC at the Hilltop meeting and not doing so ?

BattleCorp

gunny123 wrote: »

Would that be sort of the same as the previous committee being told to rejoin the SC at the Hilltop meeting and not doing so ?

Bit of a difference between the AGM and a meeting in Hilltop.

And to follow your logic, if it was wrong then, it's just as wrong now.

homerhop

gunny123 wrote: »

Care to back that up with a little hard evidence ?

You mean like the husband and wife who said they were not members of any club but told to go to it and half an hour later were members of Munster target

gunny123

BattleCorp wrote: »

Bit of a difference between the AGM and a meeting in Hilltop.

Not in the final outcome there's not.

gunny123

homerhop wrote: »

You mean like the husband and wife who said they were not members of any club but told to go to it and half an hour later were members of Munster target

If they became members of a club, so what ? They are members of a nasrpc affiliated club, and so entitled to vote.

homerhop

The meeting in hilltop was an information meeting, the same as the one held in Harbour House.
The agm is an official meeting where minutes are taken and elections/voting takes place....a slight difference I would say

homerhop

The meeting in hilltop was an information meeting, the same as the one held in Harbour House.
The agm is an official meeting where minutes are taken and elections/voting takes place....a slight difference I would say

homerhop

gunny123 wrote: »

If they became members of a club, so what ? They are members of a nasrpc affiliated club, and so entitled to vote.

Comedy gold

gunny123

homerhop wrote: »

The meeting in hilltop was an information meeting, the same as the one held in Harbour House.
The agm is an official meeting where minutes are taken and elections/voting takes place....a slight difference I would say

The committee were told to do something and didn't do it, Its exactly the same thing being whined about on this thread.

gunny123

homerhop wrote: »

Comedy gold

If they weren't entitled to vote, why didn't the committee point that out and refuse them entrance to the agm ?

homerhop

gunny123 wrote: »

The committee were told to do something and didn't do it, Its exactly the same thing being whined about on this thread.

Far from whinging, The agm was an official meeting the one in hilltop was not, the committee had no mandate to agree to anything at it.

BattleCorp

gunny123 wrote: »

The committee were told to do something and didn't do it, Its exactly the same thing being whined about on this thread.

And if you think the committee were wrong after Hilltop, do you think they were wrong after the AGM?

downrange

badaj0z wrote: »

You guys are a hoot, you really are.Did you know that the SC is really controlled by aliens? Did you know that these aliens are also secretly controlled by meta aliens? It is all a plot and it is so unfair that you lost the vote. It would be so lovely to go back to how things were before the democratic plague infected shooters.

What's a meta alien ? :eek:

gunny123

BattleCorp wrote: »

And if you think the committee were wrong after Hilltop, do you think they were wrong after the AGM?

If thats what actually happened, then of course.

BattleCorp

gunny123 wrote: »

If thats what actually happened, then of course.

So what do you think happened at the AGM? Were the committee told that the floor wanted Martin Hayes to remain as the FCP rep?

gunny123

BattleCorp wrote: »

So what do you think happened at the AGM? Were the committee told that the floor wanted Martin Hayes to remain as the FCP rep?

Has anyone asked Martin Hayes what happened ? All i have seen is the statement on the nasrpc website. Maybe Martin left of his own volition.

homerhop

gunny123 wrote: »

If thats what actually happened, then of course.

Gunny you were at the agm, when an individual ( I know the man but not sure what way this thread is about naming names is atm) came back into the room and said he had called Martin who said he would be happy to stay on as the NASRPC rep on the fcp. The new chairman put it to the floor and it was agreed on by the members.
Now there are a few people posting here who all say the same, all from clubs around the country. We all can't be wrong

gunny123

homerhop wrote: »

Gunny you were at the agm, when an individual ( I know the man but not sure what way this thread is about naming names is atm) came back into the room and said he had called Martin who said he would be happy to stay on as the NASRPC rep on the fcp. The new chairman put it to the floor and it was agreed on by the members.
Now there are a few people posting here who all say the same, all from clubs around the country. We all can't be wrong

Yes, but he is entitled to have second thoughts also, or have all sorts of other reasons for feeling he couldn't continue in that role. It would be nice to hear it straight from the horses mouth, what actually happened.

homerhop

badaj0z wrote: »

You guys are a hoot, you really are.Did you know that the SC is really controlled by aliens? Did you know that these aliens are also secretly controlled by meta aliens? It is all a plot and it is so unfair that you lost the vote. It would be so lovely to go back to how things were before the democratic plague infected shooters.

It's ok we can always bus in a load next year

SVI40

What I saw at the AGM, was the majority of the persons present were not happy with the outgoing committee. Yes, they did fantastic work over the years, but on the day they were voted out.

Even on the day, they were unsure how many clubs were affiliated, and who those clubs were.

My takings from the AGM was a new committee, who will accept membership from all clubs, even if they are late paying, and will be transparent to all. The Chairman committed to giving the conference call number, where meetings may take place, via conference, to anyone who wishes to listen in / attend.

downrange

FACT #1
Martin Hayes was removed from the FCP by the NASRPC committee last week, just a few days after the FCP meeting on 28th January.

FACT #2
At the AGM the new committee agreed to retain Martin on the FCP and this was overwhelmingly supported by the floor (note that by that time the blow-ins with ink still wet membership letters from MTSC had all left, their job being done).

FACT #3
This decision now puts the new committee in the same box that they placed the old committee in, i.e. they made a major decision without consulting with the members.

FACT #4
Yes a majority vote (99-88) elected the new Chairman and the new prearranged committee followed. However, the majority was made up of people with MTSC membership letters who we never saw before and who don't know one end of a gallery rifle from the other. Now that they are all gone back under their stones, the majority of competitive target shooters (gallery, benchrest or pistol) do not support the new committee and are disgusted at the removal of Martin from the FCP.

Roundpack

SVI40 wrote: »

What I saw at the AGM, was the majority of the persons present were not happy with the outgoing committee. Yes, they did fantastic work over the years, but on the day they were voted out.

Even on the day, they were unsure how many clubs were affiliated, and who those clubs were.

My takings from the AGM was a new committee, who will accept membership from all clubs, even if they are late paying, and will be transparent to all. The Chairman committed to giving the conference call number, where meetings may take place, via conference, to anyone who wishes to listen in / attend.

Factually incorrect, the old committee members were not voted out, they did not stand for election.

After all the shouting about how important the constitution was, its really dissapointing to see the new regime ignore it

clivej

gunny123 wrote: »

Has anyone asked Martin Hayes what happened ? All i have seen is the statement on the nasrpc website. Maybe Martin left of his own volition.

No Martin did not leave of his own accord. Martin and Declan got a phone call to say they had been removed from the FCP panel.

I got that from the horses mouth so to speak

BillBen

gunny123 wrote: »

Has anyone asked Martin Hayes what happened ? All i have seen is the statement on the nasrpc website. Maybe Martin left of his own volition.

Believe me Martin did not leave of his own accord. The Nasrpc were told by Des to get rid of him and no I don't have evidence but it's obvious to all but a few that he was thrown off of the panel because Crofton couldn't control him. Now getting back to the bus loads of hired help that went to the AGM. I was sitting directly behind the new assistant secretary and the 10 or 12 people and can tell you that they were no more shooters than the sh!t on my shoe every time a vote was passed they were looking at him waiting to be told which way to vote. Democracy is a great thing if it's fair and it's not rigged all because some people had personal grudge against some on the committee. Now as far as I can see they have succeeded in destroying the Nasrpc.

jb88

gunny123 wrote: »

Care to back that up with a little hard evidence ?

Evidence, were you not there yourself, I have been a competitive shooter for almost 10 years and I go to comps and I didn't recognize over 50% of the people there.

jb88

homerhop wrote: »

Gunny you were at the agm, when an individual ( I know the man but not sure what way this thread is about naming names is atm) came back into the room and said he had called Martin who said he would be happy to stay on as the NASRPC rep on the fcp. The new chairman put it to the floor and it was agreed on by the members.
Now there are a few people posting here who all say the same, all from clubs around the country. We all can't be wrong

That's the truth

jb88

homerhop wrote: »

Gunny you were at the agm, when an individual ( I know the man but not sure what way this thread is about naming names is atm) came back into the room and said he had called Martin who said he would be happy to stay on as the NASRPC rep on the fcp. The new chairman put it to the floor and it was agreed on by the members.
Now there are a few people posting here who all say the same, all from clubs around the country. We all can't be wrong

That's the truth, I brought up this issue and another well known Gallery shooter confirmed this after a phone call to Martin.

badaj0z

homerhop wrote: »

It's ok we can always bus in a load next year

What makes you think that? I think you will find that you will be wrong but you can work that out for yourself as part of your conspiracy theory.

Downrange, in answer to your question, a meta alien is a sort of superior alien who sits above the lower aliens in the alien ascendancy. You can get meta squared aliens too but this depends on how paranoid you are.

homerhop

badaj0z wrote: »

What makes you think that? I think you will find that you will be wrong but you can work that out for yourself as part of your conspiracy theory.

Downrange, in answer to your question, a meta alien is a sort of superior alien who sits above the lower aliens in the alien ascendancy. You can get meta squared aliens too but this depends on how paranoid you are.

Conspiracy theories!!! You were very vocal here about the conspiracy theories of solo runs by a former member of the committee. You were not as mouthy at the meeting when the new chairman stood up and said he knew of all the meetings that this person had,

badaj0z

homerhop wrote: »

Conspiracy theories!!! You were very vocal here about the conspiracy theories of solo runs by a former member of the committee. You were not as mouthy at the meeting when the new chairman stood up and said he knew of all the meetings that this person had,

Why should I have been? I knew the background so I knew what the chairman was going to say. May I suggest that one of you asks Martin why he was replaced as the NASRPC rep on the FCP? If he is open about it, this will end this fatuous debate.
May I also say that all of the bilious sour grape comments will not change anything that has happened one iota. I have been glad to see that the new committee and it's supporters have not been on here crowing about their victory. It is a great shame and a disservice to the shooting community that the supporters of the old committee can not stomach the loss.
The new committee is quietly getting on with the everyday running of the organisation. They will be holding a progress meeting with reps from the clubs in March to show what they have done and get feedback about future actions. I for one will be recommending that the constitution is repaired and put back to it's original state before the previous committee's manipulations

LB6

badaj0z wrote: »

The new committee is quietly getting on with the everyday running of the organisation. They will be holding a progress meeting with reps from the clubs in March to show what they have done and get feedback about future actions. I for one will be recommending that the constitution is repaired and put back to it's original state before the previous committee's manipulations

1. Way too "QUIETLY". They were the ones spouting about all information should be in the public forum, yet they go and do things without consultation with the members who paid their fees. They have our emails, send out the information directly to the members, not the clubs. it doesn't cost anything to email ppl.

2. Are you on the committee? How do you know they'll be holding a progress meeting with clubs in march?

3.You can recommend all you like, what do YOU want to MANIPULATE the constitution back to?

BattleCorp

badaj0z wrote: »

I for one will be recommending that the constitution is repaired and put back to it's original state before the previous committee's manipulations

I'd just like to point out something to you. The Constitution can't be manipulated by the Committee. The Constitution can only be changed at an AGM where 2/3 of people agree with the change. Likewise, the current Committee can't change the Constitution without holding a vote and getting the agreement of 2/3 of people there.

If any changes were made in the past, they were made with the consent of the members at the AGM through a democratic vote.

Unless of course you are suggesting that it was done outside of the rules previously?

badaj0z

BillBen wrote: »

Democracy is a great thing if it's fair and it's not rigged all because some people had personal grudge against some on the committee. Now as far as I can see they have succeeded in destroying the Nasrpc.

This really is hilarious. Did you not notice how the constitution was ignored by rigging the rules for club membership so that an EGM could be avoided?Why do you think that was? It was to avoid the EGM rules on voting, which allow each club one vote. The old committee knew that they would lose this vote as the vast majority of the clubs wanted them out so they brought forward the AGM knowing that the floor would vote and the rent a crowd from the two largest commercial clubs would turn up and support them, with the help of a free lunch.They also reckoned that not many people would turn up from the clubs down the country because of the distances involved. Well they did turn up, because the level of dissatisfaction with the status quo was so high. What is also very sad is the attitude displayed in previous posts which implied that only regular gallery rifle and pistol competition competitors should be voting. This is rubbish but also shows one of the reasons a change was required. There are many more club members than there are regular competitors and all club members can expect something from their National Association.
There were no personal grudges involved. The committee simply lost it's way and was focusing on too narrow a spectrum of the shooting sports.

badaj0z

LB6 wrote: »

1. Way too "QUIETLY". They were the ones spouting about all information should be in the public forum, yet they go and do things without consultation with the members who paid their fees. They have our emails, send out the information directly to the members, not the clubs. it doesn't cost anything to email ppl.

2. Are you on the committee? How do you know they'll be holding a progress meeting with clubs in march?

3.You can recommend all you like, what do YOU want to MANIPULATE the constitution back to?

They have been keeping the clubs up to date with progress. If you have not heard then look to your club committee. It is the clubs who are the members according to the constitution.
No, I am not on the committee, but my club does keep the members up to date.
Recent events showed that there were at least 3 versions of the constitution in circulation. The new committee needs to ascertain the most current version, ensure that any recent changes were made properly and then post the right version on the website. Is this manipulation?

BattleCorp

badaj0z wrote: »

This really is hilarious. Did you not notice how the constitution was ignored by rigging the rules for club membership so that an EGM could be avoided?Why do you think that was? It was to avoid the EGM rules on voting, which allow each club one vote. The old committee knew that they would lose this vote as the vast majority of the clubs wanted them out so they brought forward the AGM knowing that the floor would vote and the rent a crowd from the two largest commercial clubs would turn up and support them, with the help of a free lunch.They also reckoned that not many people would turn up from the clubs down the country because of the distances involved. Well they did turn up, because the level of dissatisfaction with the status quo was so high. What is also very sad is the attitude displayed in previous posts which implied that only regular gallery rifle and pistol competition competitors should be voting. This is rubbish but also shows one of the reasons a change was required. There are many more club members than there are regular competitors and all club members can expect something from their National Association.
There were no personal grudges involved. The committee simply lost it's way and was focusing on too narrow a spectrum of the shooting sports.

You say it's not personal yet you are calling the members of the "two largest commercial clubs" (your words, not mine) a 'rent a crowd'. Not the kind of language used by people who don't hold a grudge.

I do agree with you in one aspect. Non-competing club members do deserve every bit as much of a vote as competition shooters, no disagreement there. The NASRPC is mandated to do their best for all members.

BattleCorp

Does anybody actually know what the correct version of the Constitution is?

Is it posted online anywhere?

LB6

badaj0z wrote: »

They have been keeping the clubs up to date with progress. If you have not heard then look to your club committee. It is the clubs who are the members according to the constitution.

First email I received this morning from my club, with the attachment from the development officer speaking on behalf of the nasrpc for some reason. Surely that's not the PRO's job, or even the Secretaries?

That's a friggin dousie to say the least! I'm too p'd off to reply to it now. I'll give it my full attention in due course.

I paid my €10 last year to be affiliated directly to the nasrpc. I want to be spoken to directly and not by a third party.



[/QUOTE]No, I am not on the committee, but my club does keep the members up to date.[/QUOTE]

Would you mind sharing what your club has sent it's members to see if we're all getting the same information?

[/QUOTE]Recent events showed that there were at least 3 versions of the constitution in circulation. The new committee needs to ascertain the most current version, ensure that any recent changes were made properly and then post the right version on the website. Is this manipulation?[/QUOTE]

As far as the constitution goes, it's the last one posted on the old nasrpc website before the page was amended. It's to this one that any amendments from the AGM in january should be applied and to no other.

badaj0z

BattleCorp wrote: »

You say it's not personal yet you are calling the members of the "two largest commercial clubs" (your words, not mine) a 'rent a crowd'. Not the kind of language used by people who don't hold a grudge.

I do agree with you in one aspect. Non-competing club members do deserve every bit as much of a vote as competition shooters, no disagreement there. The NASRPC is mandated to do their best for all members.

I was only reflecting back the comment made by Homerhop as follows

homerhop wrote: »

It's ok we can always bus in a load next year

You forgot to mention the free lunch.

badaj0z

LB6 wrote: »

As far as the constitution goes, it's the last one posted on the old nasrpc website before the page was amended. It's to this one that any amendments from the AGM in january should be applied and to no other.

Are you sure LB6? Is that the version which is currently shown on the web site here:
http://nasrpc.ie/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/0.1NASRPCConstitution.pdf