A return of Handguns, a discussion.

[HALODIN]

Thanks for the reply, but all it needs to say in big letters is "the primary benefit of joining the NRA is to safeguard your right to shoot."

Nothing from the above excerpts sells it to me. What can the NRA do for me as someone who's enjoys recreational shooting, but doesn't visit Bisley? OK you have "* Liaison with police on Firearms queries." but I'm not likely to pay for that service.

[karen]

I think that's implied by what I posted.

And the "Liaison with police on Firearms queries" is free to members - hopefully you will never need it. However if you are not a member and you do need it then it could be difficult and expensive! Bit like insurance really.

[HALODIN]

It should be explicit, not implicit. It's the biggest selling feature of the whole organisation, shout it from the roof tops!

The problem is I'm not convinced and at this point at least, I'm not going to join. This view is probably shared by the other 95% of FAC holders who also aren't members.

[karen]

OK let's assume the wording is out of date and could be changed - I can take your suggestion to the Membership Committee and get that sorted so it is more explicit.

However give me a scenario where your wording would be needed and I can use it as an example to illustrate the point and also tell you whether it is already covered by what the NRA do.

I don't think anyone would have a problem with changing wording in the privileges of membership but give me more to work with.

[Chapuis]

It should be explicit, not implicit. It's the biggest selling feature of the whole organisation, shout it from the roof tops!

The problem is I'm not convinced and at this point at least, I'm not going to join. This view is probably shared by the other 95% of FAC holders who also aren't members.

60% 0f FAC holders probably belong to either BASC, NGO, BDS, SGCA or some other shooting related organisation and the other 38% don't belong to any organisation. Generally few target shooters have individual membership of any national organisation and rely upon the affiliation of their shooting clubs.

I was actually quite surprised to hear how few individual members the NRA has. From the figures quoted to me it would appear that both the National Gamekeepers Association and the British Deer Society both have 3 times the number of individual members of the NRA, as for BASC do the maths yourself.

[HALODIN]

It needs more than just words on a website, it needs to be the NRA's mission statement. In the context of this thread, if the NRA offered to protect existing shooting rights and campaign for the return of handgun ownership, they would have many more members... If you're not drawing in the numbers with existing strategies, try something new.

What does the NRA do to further the view of responsible shooting within the government and advance shooting rights?

OK let's assume the wording is out of date and could be changed - I can take your suggestion to the Membership Committee and get that sorted so it is more explicit.

However give me a scenario where your wording would be needed and I can use it as an example to illustrate the point and also tell you whether it is already covered by what the NRA do.

I don't think anyone would have a problem with changing wording in the privileges of membership but give me more to work with.

[HALODIN]

That looks very fragmented, a single organisation that represents all of our views would be in the interest of all FAC holders...

60% 0f FAC holders probably belong to either BASC, NGO, BDS, SGCA or some other shooting related organisation and the other 38% don't belong to any organisation. Generally few target shooters have individual membership of any national organisation and rely upon the affiliation of their shooting clubs.

I was actually quite surprised to hear how few individual members the NRA has. From the figures quoted to me it would appear that both the National Gamekeepers Association and the British Deer Society both have 3 times the number of individual members of the NRA, as for BASC do the maths yourself.

[IainWR]

The NRAs Charter Objective is the Encouragement of Marksmanship. Getting a Royal Charter changed is really really difficult. The Sportsmans Association set out in 1997 to do what you suggest. I was at its inagaural meeting, I joined on the first night it met, and I did my best to sign up members. How many members does it have now?

In the UK, there is no point in shouting from the rooftops that we want handguns back. All it will get us is a load of crap from the likes of the Daily Mail and the Sun. And the NRA doesn't have the resources to do anything significant about it anyway. Political campaigning is expensive. We have to work it very carefully over the long term, getting more and more people to realise the irrationality of the position, and be ready with the proposals if an opportunity arises to make an input into amendment of the Firearms Acts. All that is very much what BSSC does on behalf of all the Associations who make up its membership.

[Chapuis]

What you are suggesting Halodin is that the NRA becomes something more like The American NRA an all encompassing organisation with different factions within it. It has been suggested numerous times previously and quite frankly while the NRA of America has some good points, the general opinion is that each of our different shooting factions/disciplines and their members generally favour separate organisations. Most of the organisations simply want to enjoy their sport and not get wrapped up in politics.

[karen]

Further to what Iain said, a lot of work was done by Glynn Alger and others talking to the Home Office and Government to get handguns back. It was all heading in the right direction even if it wasn't going to happen overnight. However with the "staff re-organisation" of the last couple of years I now have no idea where that ended up but the NRA were trying VERY hard to achieve this.