Is the image of the British shooter important?

[Moorlander]

I`ve restarted this debate as I think its important , I made comments about the camo wearing shooter being bad for the sports image , some disagreed .

I believe image is very important for the shooting community , the antis, the press and the uneducated still associate gun owners who wear combats with the lunatics such as Michael Ryan , the Mirror once stated "Michael Robert Ryan is that of a surly, brooding and weird loner, who spent his entire adult life dressed in combat fatigues,"

Another Mirror quote " former bouncer Moat, believed to be armed with two shotguns and ammunition and dressed in combat gear."

I`m sure I could dig up other examples but wont , the media love the "Rambo" sh** , wearing combats only fuels their biased reporting .

Scenario, Imagine a mother and kids is fuelling up at a service station , a 4x4 pulls up , gun stickers on the back window , four big guys all get out in combats and Army boots , obviously not Army as rough shaven and sloppily dressed,  the 4x4 back windows is full of green and camo cases that may have guns in! how scary! , their imagination runs wild, they drive home and put it all on faceache , were the shooting club members  dressed like builders, farmers or  hill walkers I doubt anyone would bat an eyelid , modern builders wear and other outdoor clothing is often much better than anything you will get from the QM`s stores , as the saying goes , be the grey man .

I agree it should not matter but with so many lefty liberal snowflakes in positions of power it does matter , if someone made a comment about a bloke being weird for wearing a dress they would see it as a hate crime and no doubt report it to the Police who would have to act , if a target shooter was called a weirdo for wearing combats  and having guns the snowflake crowd would join in!( No Im not saying wear a dress for your next club shoot  )

Happy New Year , I`m off to the pub 

[Nick 53]

I take then we can’t wear fancy dress for the Range then? Not that I would wear fancy dress my wife says I look bland anyway.

each person to there own ! What they wear is there choice if you are comfortable! Then you wear it! If we all turned up in tutu somebody bound to complain. 

All the very best for New year having a gamble in the casino, first time in 6months already on a roll!!

[Grum87]

I spent half an hour or so deliberating over a longer reply, and deleted it.

 

In the end, to me, shooting is an all inclusive sport, encompassing people from every walk of life. Many of us shoot different disciplines, using different firearms from each other, and differing disciplines will have different attire for varying reasons, but we're all shooters within the UK.

 

Does it matter if the man, woman, ladyboy, or youngster next to me is wearing on the firing point?

 

Not one f3cking bit.

 

Now, I'm off to enjoy some cheese, biscuits, a wee dram and a few beers. I hope everyone else is off to do something similar......

 

[bradders]

12 minutes ago, Grum87 said:

I spent half an hour or so deliberating over a longer reply, and deleted it.

 

In the end, to me, shooting is an all inclusive sport, encompassing people from every walk of life. Many of us shoot different disciplines, using different firearms from each other, and differing disciplines will have different attire for varying reasons, but we're all shooters within the UK.

 

Does it matter if the man, woman, ladyboy, or youngster next to me is wearing on the firing point?

 

Not one f3cking bit.

 

Now, I'm off to enjoy some cheese, biscuits, a wee dram and a few beers. I hope everyone else is off to do something similar......

 

I put together my reply ion the other thread, but it got deleted and I can't be arsed to formulate a new one for this

Your response is the correct one, and anyone who has an invalid opinion about what others wear, shoot or say, or which deity they pray to really should GTFO of shooting

Happy New Year from Bradders (getting Bladdered)

[Strangely Brown]

The problem is one of perception; about a year ago on the telly I watched some sort of reality tv show and a young British women on the show said, why does he wear army fatigues?

The bloke in question was an American and wearing what I suspect were 511 trousers and a shirt with epaulettes. Both items of clothing were a stone colour. 

Which does beg the question what is acceptable?

If the weather is peeing down at Bisley you will find a lot of Target Rifle shooters wearing DPM Gortex trousers and nobody gives them a second glance. But put a black rifle in their hands and mention they shoot CSR and you can hear the tuts from the verandah of the NLRC! 

Happy new year!  

 

[bradders]

 

 

Happy New Year

[treetop]

Honestly I can't believe that people worry about what others wear or what there firearms my look like & if it offends someone.

personaly I wear loads of ex military clothing throughout the week, on a general bases, as it's cheap & I don't care if it gets ruined. 

Likewise I can't stand wood furniture on rifles - as that means a tree got hurt making them ..

shooting sports in this country is already fractured, so me wearing an m65 jacket on a firming point or not, won't fix it & if someone wants to be offended , great !! It's there right to be offended & mine to wear what I like 

[Moorlander]

I wasn't really on about what we think of each in the shooting world , more what the non shooting general public thinks of us shooters,that is important in my view . 

[dave thorniley]

its not a fashion parade

[Roy W]

So where does Airsoft and Re-enactment come into this? Neither are shooters as such, but look at Airsoft for instance, they look more tooled up than the SAS.

A few target shooters in DPM smocks aren't an issue, in fact many of them never get seen by non shooters. If they want to drive to a shoot looking like the 3rd Mess Tin Repair Regiment, then they are already too odd to change by suggesting they don't wear it.

 

 

 

[Strangely Brown]

16 hours ago, Moorlander said:

I believe image is very important for the shooting community , the antis, the press and the uneducated still associate gun owners who wear combats with the lunatics such as Michael Ryan , the Mirror once stated "Michael Robert Ryan is that of a surly, brooding and weird loner, who spent his entire adult life dressed in combat fatigues,"

Another Mirror quote " former bouncer Moat, believed to be armed with two shotguns and ammunition and dressed in combat gear."

I`m sure I could dig up other examples but wont , the media love the "Rambo" sh** , wearing combats only fuels their biased reporting .

May I suggest you stop reading the Daily Mirror if their press coverage of the shooting community make for uncomfortable reading? 

Whilst Michael Ryan's crimes are unforgivable, if you ask the people he shot with before the Hungerford incident I think you will find they will tell you the post press image of him is one that most of them do not recognise! 

[chaz]

I'm going to post this without reading any of the posts. Just the header...

'Is the image of the British shooter important'

I don't think anyone could narrow down a 'British Shooter'??

We come in so many shapes, sizes, temperament's, ages, back grounds, and life experiences.

From the single young man with an air rifle to ex and current SF. I really don't think anyone could cram us all in the same box. Which is what makes UK shooters so interesting. Maybe i'm alone on this way of thinking....?? 

We are, and can be what we want to be. I laugh at what i would call 'snobs in tweed plus fours/ breeches' But they probably laugh at 'my kind'. That's what keeps me on the forums. We're such a diverse group. Some very nice giving folks, to those, that, well shall we just say don't give....

Anyway. A happy new year to all of you. I felt all 'Bob Cratchit' then! 

[Big Al]

Of course the image of the British shooter is important, how could it ever even possibly not be?

There are shooters who portray a bad image and those who portray a good one, thats pretty much standard for all things in all walks of life. The key point in my opinion is that we should all try to portray the best image we can at all times.

Obviously Im 100% for responsible shooting and hunting but sadly not all shooters with a shotgun certificate, FAC or even air rifles are so we all collectively get tarred with the brush that fits the lowest common denominator.

Only a week ago I reported a neighbour to the police because he was taking his two sons to shoot air rifles in a public place where I and live and many people walk dogs, myself and my Mrs included. The police confiscated almost a grands worth of guns and scopes yet I had tried previously to reason this one out with him. The family moved in near me 6 months ago, I saw it once so I spoke to the father and made it clear what the law was and his responsibilities. A few months later I saw them at it again so spoke to them at the time and got nothing but abuse so I called the police who warned them. I then find them a week ago out in the same place, again I confronted him and he really didn't give a monkeys, he was so dumb you couldn't rationalise with his so I told him I would again contact the police, that lead to them losing everything and he has now been charged with discharging an air rifle in a public place. While I was trying to communicate with these nuggets who were head to toe in camp and brandishing their rifles I also has dog walkers walking past with their eyes out on stalks thinking the Taliban had arrived, stuff like this does none of us any good, it become sensationalised and blown way out of proportion by those with no understanding of guns but who can really blame them?

The image of the British shooter has to be a good one at all times and my feeling is a bit less camo and fewer guns in peoples faces the better. Im far from assumed about being a shooter but equally we dont need to be ramming it down other people throats what rights we have and walking around in society like an SAS soldier.

Thats my two penneth, as always some will agree while others wont...

[Breacher]

What a load of that which promotes growth and vigour.

The OP talks about how non-shooters view us and form negative opinions based on what they see ?

Yet, as a sport, we are full of narrow minded shooters who view FELLOW shooters negatively based on their attire, their choice of disclipine, their choice of rifle, the colour of their rifle, even whether they choose to shoot off a bipod or "as God intended" .

Thats before we even start with the prejudice proffered by clay shooters toward practical shotgunners. Or TR shooters to Practical Rifle shooters. Airsoft - boy do they get some stick !!

In short, when it comes to what we wear - our fellow sportsmen and women are more prejudiced than the non-shooting public.

[chaz]

What we wear should have no reflection on what we do, or what we 'are'

The clothing is for a purpose for 99% of shooters.

[Moorlander]

15 minutes ago, chaz said:

What we wear should have no reflection on what we do, or what we 'are'

The clothing is for a purpose for 99% of shooters.

But it does  or else fashion would not exist , rightly or wrongly what you wear says something about you and people do judge on appearances , in my opinion dressing up as a PMC or Infantryman with wrap round shades and brandishing a "Black" rifle gives a bad image in my opinion , its fantasy /cos play which without a firearm is usually seen as harmless but with a firearm some will worry about else goes through the  fantasists mind.

Golf clubs and the likes often insist on at least collar and often a tie for the evening , its all about image.

[bradders]

19 minutes ago, Breacher said:

What a load of that which promotes growth and vigour.

The OP talks about how non-shooters view us and form negative opinions based on what they see ?

Yet, as a sport, we are full of narrow minded shooters who view FELLOW shooters negatively based on their attire, their choice of disclipine, their choice of rifle, the colour of their rifle, even whether they choose to shoot off a bipod or "as God intended" .

Thats before we even start with the prejudice proffered by clay shooters toward practical shotgunners. Or TR shooters to Practical Rifle shooters. Airsoft - boy do they get some stick !!

In short, when it comes to what we wear - our fellow sportsmen and women are more prejudiced than the non-shooting public.

Well said.....apart from the bit about bipods!

[bradders]

7 minutes ago, Moorlander said:

But it does  or else fashion would not exist , rightly or wrongly what you wear says something about you and people do judge on appearances , in my opinion dressing up as a PMC or Infantryman with wrap round shades and brandishing a "Black" rifle gives a bad image in my opinion , its fantasy /cos play which without a firearm is usually seen as harmless but with a firearm some will worry about else goes through the  fantasists mind.

Golf clubs and the likes often insist on at least collar and often a tie for the evening , its all about image.

Look here Yardley, I don't know what part of the country you're in, but we have a CSR match at Bisley on Sunday. There'll be over 100 people there, many with "Black Rifles" as you call them, and a few possibly "dressed up as Soldiers" as you and Al refer to them (both unhealthy descriptions I might add), If you come along, I'll give you 5 mins at the safety briefing to address everyone and tell us all how wrong we are in our life choices.

You can even bring some of your "ex" mates to snigger at us

If you live too far North, then you could always pop along to Diggle the week after, I'm sure Eric and the others will be only too happy to give you a platform there

[LONG RANGE CAPT]

What we wear in public especially in this society, has a direct link to who we project ourselves to be.

With the image of the Shooting community continually under the spot light, it is important to display shooting in a positive light.

Shooting should be seen as an inclusive activity which should be promoted and advertised.

As such the image and clothing of those in the Shooting community is important.

I can’t help but agree with Moorlanders comment’s, the wearing of combat fatigues clearly projects the wrong image and many of those who wear combat style clothing are in some way trying to show off some half baked aggressive intimidatory image. 

Which to those of us who are serving members of the armed forces looks sad and pathetic, let alone damaging for the image of legitimate shooting sports.

 

[Moorlander]

26 minutes ago, bradders said:

Look here Yardley, I don't know what part of the country you're in, but we have a CSR match at Bisley on Sunday. There'll be over 100 people there, many with "Black Rifles" as you call them, and a few possibly "dressed up as Soldiers" as you and Al refer to them (both unhealthy descriptions I might add), If you come along, I'll give you 5 mins at the safety briefing to address everyone and tell us all how wrong we are in our life choices.

You can even bring some of your "ex" mates to snigger at us

If you live too far North, then you could always pop along to Diggle the week after, I'm sure Eric and the others will be only too happy to give you a platform there

You are missing the point really , its not about what I or other shooters think , its about what the non shooting public thinks , I`m not a lecturer and live along way from both the ranges you mention so wont be taking you up on your offer , I`m just hoping that this discussion may get one or two shooters to think a bit harder about how they are seen , I value what few shooting rights we have as much as anyone else on this forum and know that  small actions can make a big difference.

[gbal]

38 minutes ago, chaz said:

What we wear should have no reflection on what we do, or what we 'are'

The clothing is for a purpose for 99% of shooters.

Chaz,you were on safer ice saying shooterscan't all be pigeon/grouse holed into one category.Quite right,of course.

But there is a lot of good research showing how others perceive us-and how we perceive ourselves- is quite likely to be influenced- by what we wear. But not specifically  much on shooting attire ( but see House of Bruar-image for sure as well as...).

But the last of your points is key to all this discussion,and begs the key questuon: if 99%  choose attire for a purpose,it's not the same purpose,as you say,but almost every purpose (keep dry eg,cost) can be met in quite a choice of attire-SO,what purpose aka motive does one shooter have in choosing one kind of kit ,rather than another (eg if both are equally waterproof/cost the same )?...that's where public image/imagination starts from....

   And perhaps not all motives are equally acceptable to the observer(s)-ie they have positive or negative  connotations (just like tweed aversion!)

I might wear the kilt at Highland Games,but not wind surfing.

"Disrepute' is the label sports authorities tend to favour for (minor) dress code violations. BUt absolute clone conformity isn't mandatory,or even desireable.I had two tartans,for example....short and.  shorter     :-)

 

 

[Moorlander]

25 minutes ago, gbal said:

Chaz,you were on safer ice saying shooterscan't all be pigeon/grouse holed into one category.Quite right,of course.

But there is a lot of good research showing how others perceive us-and how we perceive ourselves- is quite likely to be influenced- by what we wear. But not specifically  much on shooting attire ( but see House of Bruar-image for sure as well as...).

But the last of your points is key to all this discussion,and begs the key questuon: if 99%  choose attire for a purpose,it's not the same purpose,as you say,but almost every purpose (keep dry eg,cost) can be met in quite a choice of attire-SO,what purpose aka motive does one shooter have in choosing one kind of kit ,rather than another (eg if both are equally waterproof/cost the same )?...that's where public image/imagination starts from....

   And perhaps not all motives are equally acceptable to the observer(s)-ie they have positive or negative  connotations (just like tweed aversion!)

I might wear the kilt at Highland Games,but not wind surfing.

"Disrepute' is the label sports authorities tend to favour for (minor) dress code violations. BUt absolute clone conformity isn't mandatory,or even desireable.I had two tartans,for example....short and.  shorter     :-)

 

 

G , I think you may be fibbing a bit

[Nick 53]

Hi all,

think this is getting out of hand, we shouldn’t be slagging each other off! We all have our opinions and we are in titled to say what we think is correct at the time. Regardless to how we dress or what discipline we take up , someone will think and express a negative comment!

imagine the general public or the antis reading this forum wouldn’t this cause negative comments?

[brown dog]

In this debate, there appear to be those to whom this cartoon would describe a truism, and those to whom it would not.  

Shall we leave this apparently irreconcilable and circular debate there?