CliveWard Posted November 21, 2015 Report Share Posted November 21, 2015 Hi All, Reading the other thread on here where we have one person with a certain profile within the shooting industry saying they are not in favour of civillian ownership of certain firearms based on what they 'look like', because of an imagined negative perception it might bring to shooting sports... Perhaps the perception needs to be changed, not the sport. Cheers Clive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrCetrizine Posted November 21, 2015 Report Share Posted November 21, 2015 Exactly. Just because it doesn't have any walnut doesn't make it more dangerous or even military style. TVs used to come in wooden cabinets, now they are all plastic and metal doesn't mean they should only be installed in the Radar room of a destroyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbal Posted November 21, 2015 Report Share Posted November 21, 2015 I don't wish to prejudge the issue. Are you so sure the person is saying that it is his perception that matters,or is he saying it is substantial civilian-better yet "public'- perception of an association of certain weapons with eg terrorism that is the issue? The association is not unfounded. Have you any positive ideas on how any such perceptions might be changed? Use psychological research if you wish,-don't expect easy answers there-but 'presentation' has been studied,popularly seen as 'image makeover'-not easy,and especially with complex behaviours already with some negativity,or at best lukewarm tolerance. The extent to which some aspects of shooting might have contributed to any perception,or indeed misperception,is discussable,but the ways in which shooting sports might help change such perceptions are really what is needed-the probability is that some shooting is on the defensive. Bear in mind the considerable research established effects of the media-on all this. There is an important distinction to be made between what is true,and what is thought to be true...shooters may think that it is the second that is their problem. Maybe so,but the first can't be entirely dismissed,and the issue of changing perceptions/beliefs remains for many kinds of shooting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradders Posted November 21, 2015 Report Share Posted November 21, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbal Posted November 21, 2015 Report Share Posted November 21, 2015 Mark,some easy ones to try: Don't come from Barcelona Be nice,help old ladies across the street Be kind to animals Don't use sexist language,especially to assert your self need for 'alpha male ' status,even jokingly. Don't involve guns especially. Don't involve guns at all. Get the basic idea..... ? :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John MH Posted November 21, 2015 Report Share Posted November 21, 2015 Nope Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveT Posted November 21, 2015 Report Share Posted November 21, 2015 I wish they would just leave us alone to play 'darts with a bang'....sick of being afraid to say I shoot , sick of criticisms......screw them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbal Posted November 21, 2015 Report Share Posted November 21, 2015 Dave,your frustrations etc are understandable-but a negative response to those who do not actively participate in shooting,or support it,is more likely to accelarate the demise of most forms of shooting ,much more than continued acceptance of it- and a little criticism may be justified-there are no 100% truths in this area. Many minorities have gained acceptance with a positive campaign.The suffragettes were not even a minority. (no screw them jokes please). Shooting can be positively depicted,and a balanced fair image promoted. Not everyone has the skills/interest etc to do so.But don't make it more uphill for others. US programs/research are by no means discouraging. Be fed up,if you must, but don't make a 'screw you' attitude public,please.Accentuate the positive,if possible,in an informed good natured way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbal Posted November 21, 2015 Report Share Posted November 21, 2015 John,sorry it can't be done in one word.Not much of value can. We are rather poorly prepared in UK to defend shooting,and that included shooting ourselves in the foot with internal squabbles. US is very different.Not just the NRA,or indeed a more accepting culture.ut we know it's a more accepting culture in some detail,because of extensive "market research". I'm not suggesting you.anyone reads all/any of it,but it shows how well informed proponents of hunting and shooting can be. I've just perused the 260 pages of one such set of attitude studies: "The Future of Hunting and Shooting Sports" funded by the USFish and Wildlife Srvice. A mine of information about likely recriuitng and reasons for/not participating. Some are surprising.But it's a valuable resource -for US agencies-who wish to promote the activities. OK ,UK is not the same-two points...it may well be in some ways,but crucially for the issues raised by any agency here commenting on such issues,there is nothing remotely like it available as a data base...we just don't know much beyond stereotypes (tweed suits ans wannabees-I sometimes feel like leaving!)..as is obvious on almost any 'discussion'-even on here-it makes little progress,despite some positive generalities...and soon degenerates into factional quibbling,losing sight of what to do.) Just a few examples-well it's obvious that the best intro to shooting is by your dad -confirmed...but who would have thought children from single parents (women) are just as likely to try shootng as two parent kids? Langage matters-emphasis on 'legal and controlled hunting' is more acceptable the just 'hunting" (honest,John the extra words really matter) "Animal welfare' is a major concern...'Animal rights' are not.....UK may differ-point remains-be relevant. Dozens of these pointers.Thus,"cost,lack of game" are way down the bottom of the lists for not participating "Safety',"good instruction','wider skill development' way up at the top of the lists for attractive features. OK,I don't want to do even one page,but just suggest we can learn-I hope BASC etc do a little of this,but I don't see it-some successful schemes,maybe- but detailed analysis? Nothing wrong with 'a great day was had by all', of course but it's ...err ..'amateur' in a nicely British way (but some Brits aren't nice to Shooting.) We might do better to add some profesional informed 'market research',and at least stop sniping at each other,separated by an alleged common interest. gbal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveT Posted November 21, 2015 Report Share Posted November 21, 2015 Yes I am irritated. Gbal says in his above post 'We are rather poorly prepared in UK to defend shooting' ...and that appears to be the eternal obstacle that seemingly cannot be overcome.....plus it betrays the mind-set that we ourselves seem to have accepted that we have to 'defend' our sport as if it is a social aberration instead of promoting it as a highly-disciplined and healthy outdoor pursuit. As a result we are beset by apologists , appeasers and those that tell us to just ''keep your head down' .....hoping that the next wave of 'righteous' gun law proposals won't do us too much harm! This has been going on FOREVER and we are continually on the defensive when we are actually amongst the most respectable and law-abiding citizens out there...of necessity. We should turn the conversation and our thinking to getting out of that terminally downward spiral and,in an ideal world, identify a charismatic representative (individual and governing body) that puts an end to 'defensiveness'.......we have nothing to defend...its just a sport carried on by responsible individuals ....just like fencing, motor-racing etc etc. However , I am just wishing for Shangri-la? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbal Posted November 21, 2015 Report Share Posted November 21, 2015 Dave,agreed-I just meant 'true 'em',rather than 'screw 'em" I've experienced all this for over six decades. But also how receptive MP(s) can be to reasoned information (that does not mean shooting is always squeaky clean). As I went on to post,having spent a while on the US report,we clerarly have nothing like this research data base here-our NRA may be improving,but it's got the handicap of British culture (Bisly etc) both to support it,and limit it. US NRA is by no means an entirely 'squeaky clean' outfit,but wouldnt it be nice to have 'one voice' and something like the Wildlife and Fish Federal agency back up-when the data support. Even on here-generally sensible,we still often get 'one word fits all'-and it's a negative word. BASC seem above this,and increasingly professional-so it's not all doom and gloom. E might even get a sustained,honourable draw from the Police. NOw ,I'm not on the barracades either (we hopefully never have ab=ny),but sort of 'educate' away that what we say matters. Hence,when appropriate,engage pleasantly with critics-you won't win them all-some still think the world is flat-but generally,with honesty and mutual respect,there is s reduction in antagonism.That's about all shooting needs. Nor are we always 100% right,but seldom 100% wrong. Meet our side of halfway,but it has to be reasoned/reasonable. Hell,we don't all agree with each other all the time-who does-but sort ot what we can put across positively..most critics have not had any chace to consider all aspects. OK,you know what I'm saying-softly, softly works best-if we are right,we should be able to say so respetfully,and with positive points, and with a reasonable chance of meeting at least half way.That will do. Just to lighten it,the greatest game shooter of the Edwardian generation was not really hitting it off with the otherwise charming lady beside him at dinner,and when she finally demanded what he did in life ,he had to admit "I shoot"... "Well',she exclaimed "some poor little bird flies past and you go 'Bang,bang'''. "Not exactly,I just go bang"... Is that as assertive as we should be...when pushed hard? :-) gbal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbal Posted November 21, 2015 Report Share Posted November 21, 2015 SORRY_DOUBLE POST Dave,agreed-I just meant 'true 'em',rather than 'screw 'em" I've experienced all this for over six decades. But also how receptive MP(s) can be to reasoned information (that does not mean shooting is always squeaky clean). As I went on to post,having spent a while on the US report,we have nothing like this research data base here-our NRA may be improving,but it's got the handicap of British culture (Bisley etc) both to support it,and limit it. US NRA is by no means an entirely 'squeaky clean' outfit,but wouldn't it be nice to have 'one voice' and something like the Wildlife and Fish Federal agency back up-when the data support. Even on here-generally sensible,we still often get 'one dismissive word fits all'-and it's a negative word. BASC seem above this,and increasingly professional-so it's not all doom and gloom. We even get a sustained,honourable draw from the Police. Now ,I'm not on the barracades either (we hopefully never have any) but sort of 'educate' away that what we say matters,and we have to act more consistently. Hence,when appropriate,engage pleasantly with critics-you won't win them all-some still think the world is flat-but generally,with honesty and mutual respect,there is reduction in antagonism.That's about all shooting needs. Nor are we always 100% right,but seldom 100% wrong. Most willmeet us halfway,but it has to be reasoned/reasonable. Hell,we don't all agree with each other all the time-who does-but sort out what you can put across positively..most critics have not had any chance to consider all aspects- be up to speed on some factors-that means facts etc,and you should help the cause. OK,you know what I'm saying-softly, softly works best-if we are right,we should be able to say so respetfully,and with positive points, and with a reasonable chance of meeting at least half way.That will do. Just to lighten it,the greatest game shooter of the Edwardian generation was not really hitting it off with the otherwise charming lady beside him at dinner,and when she finally demanded what he did in life ,he had to admit "I shoot"... "Well',she exclaimed "some poor little bird flies past and you go 'Bang,bang'''. "Not exactly,I just go bang"... Is that as assertive as we should be...when pushed hard? :-) gbal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CliveWard Posted November 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 21, 2015 Yes I am irritated. Gbal says in his above post 'We are rather poorly prepared in UK to defend shooting' ...and that appears to be the eternal obstacle that seemingly cannot be overcome.....plus it betrays the mind-set that we ourselves seem to have accepted that we have to 'defend' our sport as if it is a social aberration instead of promoting it as a highly-disciplined and healthy outdoor pursuit. As a result we are beset by apologists , appeasers and those that tell us to just ''keep your head down' .....hoping that the next wave of 'righteous' gun law proposals won't do us too much harm! This has been going on FOREVER and we are continually on the defensive when we are actually amongst the most respectable and law-abiding citizens out there...of necessity. We should turn the conversation and our thinking to getting out of that terminally downward spiral and,in an ideal world, identify a charismatic representative (individual and governing body) that puts an end to 'defensiveness'.......we have nothing to defend...its just a sport carried on by responsible individuals ....just like fencing, motor-racing etc etc. However , I am just wishing for Shangri-la? With you all the way there Dave. Post Dunblane there was quite a stigma attached to this hobby, with the help of the press and an election looming and this seems to have carried on to some extent with shooters and representing organisations just trying to stay off the radar and 'hope they dont come for us next'. One thing that our club secretary said at the time was "Every one of us is an ambassador for this sport. It's something you should be proud of and share with as many people as you can." On an individual level, just engaging about it in a positive way with people is always a start. I do, and if there is even the slightest hint of interest then an invite to come shooting with me soon follows. Anything that new shooters would find engaging and enjoyable should be encouraged. Cheers Clive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(200x135).jpg.0fd0a94f065c6cb243fdff1b40e0819a.jpg)
.jpg.0972b4e2bdf0b5a4109eb96f2b1b62ad.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.