The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

Thanks for all your post's regarding this but I yet to see how this differs from a "trader" who has the right to come on here to defend themselves against a "bad deal" post.

I further appreciate that folks on here have been shooters for a long time and there may be bad blood between them and the NRA, but does that justify a witch hunt? If your not happy with what they do/stand for, dont join them and take your £'s elsewhere.

Like everyone here, I am just expressing my opinion and from the old Full-bore you may remember what my saying is about them

CK

My opinion used to be to join and change from within but I am now of the opinion that they (the NRA) will decline to the point where they will have to listen and change or they will simply fade away from lack of support.
I do not wish for this to take too long and I do hope that the change that comes will be for the better.
The shooters of this country deserve better than the NRA currently offer.
NRA - change or die! It's as simple as that.

dodgyrog wrote:My opinion used to be to join and change from within but I am now of the opinion that they (the NRA) will decline to the point where they will have to listen and change or they will simply fade away from lack of support.
I do not wish for this to take too long and I do hope that the change that comes will be for the better.
The shooters of this country deserve better than the NRA currently offer.
NRA - change or die! It's as simple as that.

Which is fair enough, that is your opinion, I'm all for free speach. but why doesnt this apply to Gun shops then?

I'm not saying its wrong to say whats on your mind, just why are some subjects "off topic"

I'm going to leave it now, but thought it was an interesting point to bring up

CK

I think Dromia clarifies things..."For me the fundamental difference is that these organisations have chosen to occupy these boards and have a presence here, on an open forum that invites peoples views and opinions.

:)

dromia wrote: My NRA membership used to confer distant shooters some benefits that helped offset the cost of attending Bisley but for reasons that has stopped, if the only thing that NRA helps you with is shooting at Bisley then it cannot be a National organisation.

OK, I'm going to bite.
:mrgreen:
If the NRA is a national organisation independent of Bisley, why should it provide concessions to those who can't use Bisley? But you criticise it for not being a national organisation, then complain there's no discount for living miles away.

You can't have it both ways.

And, Dodgyrog, how would you like it to change? I'm open to input on the bit I'm responsible for! But there are things that simply cannot be done - the law does not permit them - and there are others for which there is no money.

yours

Iain Robertson

Robin128 wrote:I think Dromia clarifies things..."For me the fundamental difference is that these organisations have chosen to occupy these boards and have a presence here, on an open forum that invites peoples views and opinions.

:)

Um I was invited - I didn't choose to come here.

Love

karen

You are very welcome here and I hope that you are able to enjoy the forum and the wider spectrum of topics and conversations.

It is difficult not to get into conversation when it appears someone is criticising your organisation or occupation and sometimes a few lines can help the other person view both sides of an issue.
I do feel though that sometimes no matter what is said some people will not change their views and at that point it may be better to draw a line under that subject.

As with other topics, it is worth remembering that the membership of this forum is reasonably large and that only one or two people may not see life from your prospective.
At the end of the day it would make a boring old world if we all saw everything the same way,

Don't give up,

DM

Don't worry I'm unlikely to give up but please note there will be things I and other staff just can't comment on even if I agree with you!

Karen, it is always nice to see you on the forum, as it is Iain and Heather and John and any other NRA person and we appreciate the time and comment from all of you. There are always going to be times when you have to sit on the fence (I know I have to sometimes)

It is the nature of a forum :)

IainWR wrote:

dromia wrote: My NRA membership used to confer distant shooters some benefits that helped offset the cost of attending Bisley but for reasons that has stopped, if the only thing that NRA helps you with is shooting at Bisley then it cannot be a National organisation.

OK, I'm going to bite.
:mrgreen:
If the NRA is a national organisation independent of Bisley, why should it provide concessions to those who can't use Bisley? But you criticise it for not being a national organisation, then complain there's no discount for living miles away.

You can't have it both ways.

And, Dodgyrog, how would you like it to change? I'm open to input on the bit I'm responsible for! But there are things that simply cannot be done - the law does not permit them - and there are others for which there is no money.

yours

Iain Robertson

Ian you are conflating the issues, understandable as I have written a bit on this in different forums and I don't expect a busy man like yourself to have read and digested all the posts.

In relation to the fees and withdrawal of benefits for those distant from Bisley, this is to illustrate the current irrelevance of the NRA to those who are not on Bisleys doorstep and to show that the NRA currently is Bisley as these "Bisley" benefits was all that the NRA had to offer us.

It is the NRA that I criticise for not being a national organisation not Bisley shooting ground. If it was a true national organisation then it would be doing things for all its members equally and not be subsumed by the Bisley facility.

The hard fact of the matter Ian is that currently the only reason to join the NRA is if you shoot at Bisley as an individual member, if you do not then being a member confers you no benefits other than insurance which can be got elsewhere as can good legal advice both at less cost.

The NRA has to swallow this reality because until it does it will be hard pushed to have meaningful recruitment outside the Bisley catchment. Also old supporters like me now have nothing tangible to help persuade non members to join, we have had the rug pulled from under us by the very organisation we are trying to support.

Read the Journal it is all about Bisley or national team tours that eminate from Bisley, the reporting of NRA regional activity is negligable. That in itself speaks volumes.

The NRA has put itself in a catch 22 situation. If it really wants to change and develop from within being a member led organisation then for that to happen you will need stronger regional presence on council, committees etc. However with the regional membership being proportionatley lower then the chances of regional recruitment is lower. For regional membership to increase then the NRA's regional presence and activity must increase but that won't happen until you get more regional voices/membership.

Not only are you not seen to be relevant by non members but your are loosing your old champions like me.

We are not getting it anyways never mind both ways out here in the regions just now.