As you are aware we and many others including the B.A.S.C., C.A., N.R.A., and N.S.R.A. have been working hard lobbying members of Parliament to get the London Organising Committee of the Games and the Olympic Delivery Authority to reconsider Bisley as a possible venue for the 2012 shooting.
It would appear that during the original assessment of Bisley that a potentially less than honest appraisal of the National Shooting Centre had been carried out with intention of making it difficult for the Olympic Board to choose Bisley as shootings preferred venue.
As a result of your letter writing to those organisations given above, politicians, and in particular Lord Corbett, we have arrived at a point where we have wide ranging support for this cause from the Lords.
The result of this pressure and despite efforts by the Olympic authorities to derail the process, Lord Corbett has asked the ODA to attend a presentation of 'The Bisley Bid' in front of members of the Lords and Commons and then to explain the justification for their rejection of Bisley as a venue.
The support of the Lords and MPs shows what can be achieved if we at the grass roots level give up a little of our time and work together. As the saying goes “you’re either pulling the cart or getting a free ride”. I would like to thank you all for “pulling” this far. We can have a rest for a while whilst we await the outcome of the presentation but be prepared, there is away to go yet.
Friday, 10 July 2009
Tuesday, 5 May 2009
A constitution does not guarantee your rights!
There is a country that has a freely elected government which is at present trying to consolidate its position for years to come by removing the right of free speech and encouraging its citizenry to report other citizens to the government if they believe that those concerned are not thinking the “correct” way.
The tactic of neighbourhood spying has worked very well for those that have used it in the past; you know those countries that many of our parents and grand-parents fought against. In more recent years the policy has been made use of on the African continent and some South American countries. In all cases the information was used to remove those who disagreed with the government and their use or misuse of power. This latest attempt to remove dissent from the populous is being perpetrated by the greatest advocate of free speech.
So what would cause you or me to fall foul of the correct thinking police? Well, do you disagree with any of the governments political positions or did you possibly not vote for them. Are you a former member of the armed services or part of service persons family? These guardians and former guardians of freedom are considered very dangerous as they have received specialist training in arms and warfare. Do you have religious beliefs that guide you through your life? Do you believe in personal freedom and your right to protect and defend your family? All of these things and others could mean that your neighbour may get you arrested.
So where is this new dictatorship, none other than the U.S.A.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano gave all the above reasons in her now-infamous DHS (Department of Homeland Security) report. Despite many requests from both parties but mainly the Republican Party to apologise and withdraw the report, she has so far refused.
Sens. David Vitter (R-La.) and Mike Johanns (R-Neb.) have introduced a resolution requesting that Janet Napolitano issue a formal apology to the nation’s military personnel and veterans whom the report deems extremist because they are pro-life and/or hold other conservative views. It’s an outrage that those who served this country honourably in Iraq and Afghanistan would be scrutinized by federal officials. All of society should be wary of a federal government that may be monitoring political groups who differ with the president on policy grounds.
It would appear that the supporters of free speech, religious freedom and all the other constitutional, amendment and bill of rights, that many Americans hold dear only apply if you agree with the President and his administration.
The tactic of neighbourhood spying has worked very well for those that have used it in the past; you know those countries that many of our parents and grand-parents fought against. In more recent years the policy has been made use of on the African continent and some South American countries. In all cases the information was used to remove those who disagreed with the government and their use or misuse of power. This latest attempt to remove dissent from the populous is being perpetrated by the greatest advocate of free speech.
So what would cause you or me to fall foul of the correct thinking police? Well, do you disagree with any of the governments political positions or did you possibly not vote for them. Are you a former member of the armed services or part of service persons family? These guardians and former guardians of freedom are considered very dangerous as they have received specialist training in arms and warfare. Do you have religious beliefs that guide you through your life? Do you believe in personal freedom and your right to protect and defend your family? All of these things and others could mean that your neighbour may get you arrested.
So where is this new dictatorship, none other than the U.S.A.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano gave all the above reasons in her now-infamous DHS (Department of Homeland Security) report. Despite many requests from both parties but mainly the Republican Party to apologise and withdraw the report, she has so far refused.
Sens. David Vitter (R-La.) and Mike Johanns (R-Neb.) have introduced a resolution requesting that Janet Napolitano issue a formal apology to the nation’s military personnel and veterans whom the report deems extremist because they are pro-life and/or hold other conservative views. It’s an outrage that those who served this country honourably in Iraq and Afghanistan would be scrutinized by federal officials. All of society should be wary of a federal government that may be monitoring political groups who differ with the president on policy grounds.
It would appear that the supporters of free speech, religious freedom and all the other constitutional, amendment and bill of rights, that many Americans hold dear only apply if you agree with the President and his administration.
Monday, 6 April 2009
Time to get Ready
Within the next 15 months there will be a general election that will be critical to the future of a rural way of life, the countryside and the sports that are undertaken there.
There are many organisations that represent us at all levels and for all different reasons. They can only work on our behalf if we support them. In these most difficult of days not everyone can afford to give money and whilst money is appreciated, why not volunteer to help with a leaflet drop in your area or help out on a stall at a local farmers market.
Whether you are a fisherman, deerstalker, clay shooter, paper target shooter, hunter or small business owner, we are dependant upon being represented in parliament in a fair and equal manner. The up-coming elections are our chances to let those running know that they work for us and we can change our representatives if they do not work in our best interests.
Sunday, 15 March 2009
The first step in Gun control has started.
In just over two months the most anti gun president of the U.S. has started to implement his program to restrict firearms usage. The department of defence has passed an edict that any government fired brass must be destroyed and therefore removing the brass from the market place.
One of the fifth largest companies in the U.S., Georgia Arms, to re-manufacture this spent brass said that at present it produces in excess of 1,250,000 rounds of .223 a month. It pays the U.S. government .80 cents per case and the government receives over $1,000,000 a month. The U.S. government is prepared to accept a loss of 90% to facilitate this. The remanufacturing companies will still be allowed to purchase the brass but they must have it destroyed and sign a declaration that they will not remanufacture the empty cases. Georgia Arms has calculated that the company will lose approximately half of its income and will therefore have to lose half of its staff.
The U.S. department of defence has already started this process by making sure that the spent brass that it produces from now is chipped before the brass is sold. The chipped brass is then sold and will invariably be shipped out of the U.S. to China for processing.
This will effect the cost of all brass used in ammunition. In the U.S., police, National Guard, private citizens and competition shooters will no longer have a ready supply of affordable ammunition. This will not only effect cost of current military loads such as .223, 9mm, .45 etc but also the brass in all other ammunition.
Tuesday, 11 November 2008
New Chief. Same anti gun attitudes.
Obama's Plan for Your Guns
After being given an airing on a nationally broadcast radio show, Gun Talk, the official web site of the new administration in the U.S. swiftly removed their manifesto of intent after the site was inundated with hits from aggrieved second amendment supporters. However, in a lesson that should be learnt by all who post on the web, once there, it is there forever, archived. After much searching the page that was removed has been found...Click Here to view (scroll down to the "Crime and Law Enforcement" section). Go take a look at what they don't want 80 million plus people to know.
As usual the law abiding members of society are being penalised for the anti-social and illegal activities of a minority. So what does the mew administration intend to do.
1. As president, Barack Obama would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade.
This amendment passed to stop the bogus law suits against firearms makers and importers across the U.S. Sold to the masses as a tool to solve crime, legitimate crime fighting agencies already have access to this information. If repealed, the information would be available to attorneys enabling them to file law suits. This means a gun maker would be liable for the acts of a criminal. Put another way, a car maker could be sued by someone that a drunk driver ran over.
2. Obama and Biden also favours commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals who shouldn't have them.
Gun owners also support the ideal of keeping guns out of the hands of children and criminals. But rather than demonise guns to children gun owners work through a system of education and correct usage and handling. Keeping guns and for that matter any lethal items away from criminals is an unobtainable goal, as they are criminals and therefore do not obey the law. With over 20,000 gun laws in the U.S when a criminal gets a gun they break quite a lot of laws.
3. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof.
There is no gun show loophole. At a gun show if you are a dealer the laws have to be observed by all Federal Firearms Dealers. There is no law that prevents an individual from selling a gun to a friend or family member. There are many apocryphal tales of police witnessing the sale of firearms in parking lots outside of an event. This raises the question that, if this is true, why don’t the police arrest the people concerned. Could this be that no crime has been committed or are the police just failing in their work?
4. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent; as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets.
The 1994 Clinton gun ban was and has been shown to be bogus. Given an inordinate amount of hype and publicity by the media it addressed a problem that according to the F.B.I records did not exist. With the sunset of the ban in 2004 records show no increase in incidents in the use of the weapons banned than before it was introduced. Once again the bill will be put forward as a bill to stop machine guns but it was never about machine guns. The guns banned had aesthetic additions such as a folding stock or a bayonet lug to name but two. Rest assured when the new bill is put forward there will be many more restrictions than in the old bill.
Why should I worry, I live in the U.K? Well in this ever shrinking world ideas put forward by the president in the states can have far reaching effects. His intent to support restrictions on constitutional rights will be difficult to implement through normal democratic procedures. The President elect will either force through his will by passing an executive order or more worryingly put the weight of the U.S. behind groups such as IANSA and push through U.N resolutions and sign treaties which will have the same effect. These treaties over-ride any constitution that a country may have and become part of international law which this current U.K government would embrace whole heartedly.
After being given an airing on a nationally broadcast radio show, Gun Talk, the official web site of the new administration in the U.S. swiftly removed their manifesto of intent after the site was inundated with hits from aggrieved second amendment supporters. However, in a lesson that should be learnt by all who post on the web, once there, it is there forever, archived. After much searching the page that was removed has been found...Click Here to view (scroll down to the "Crime and Law Enforcement" section). Go take a look at what they don't want 80 million plus people to know.
As usual the law abiding members of society are being penalised for the anti-social and illegal activities of a minority. So what does the mew administration intend to do.
1. As president, Barack Obama would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade.
This amendment passed to stop the bogus law suits against firearms makers and importers across the U.S. Sold to the masses as a tool to solve crime, legitimate crime fighting agencies already have access to this information. If repealed, the information would be available to attorneys enabling them to file law suits. This means a gun maker would be liable for the acts of a criminal. Put another way, a car maker could be sued by someone that a drunk driver ran over.
2. Obama and Biden also favours commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals who shouldn't have them.
Gun owners also support the ideal of keeping guns out of the hands of children and criminals. But rather than demonise guns to children gun owners work through a system of education and correct usage and handling. Keeping guns and for that matter any lethal items away from criminals is an unobtainable goal, as they are criminals and therefore do not obey the law. With over 20,000 gun laws in the U.S when a criminal gets a gun they break quite a lot of laws.
3. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof.
There is no gun show loophole. At a gun show if you are a dealer the laws have to be observed by all Federal Firearms Dealers. There is no law that prevents an individual from selling a gun to a friend or family member. There are many apocryphal tales of police witnessing the sale of firearms in parking lots outside of an event. This raises the question that, if this is true, why don’t the police arrest the people concerned. Could this be that no crime has been committed or are the police just failing in their work?
4. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent; as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets.
The 1994 Clinton gun ban was and has been shown to be bogus. Given an inordinate amount of hype and publicity by the media it addressed a problem that according to the F.B.I records did not exist. With the sunset of the ban in 2004 records show no increase in incidents in the use of the weapons banned than before it was introduced. Once again the bill will be put forward as a bill to stop machine guns but it was never about machine guns. The guns banned had aesthetic additions such as a folding stock or a bayonet lug to name but two. Rest assured when the new bill is put forward there will be many more restrictions than in the old bill.
Why should I worry, I live in the U.K? Well in this ever shrinking world ideas put forward by the president in the states can have far reaching effects. His intent to support restrictions on constitutional rights will be difficult to implement through normal democratic procedures. The President elect will either force through his will by passing an executive order or more worryingly put the weight of the U.S. behind groups such as IANSA and push through U.N resolutions and sign treaties which will have the same effect. These treaties over-ride any constitution that a country may have and become part of international law which this current U.K government would embrace whole heartedly.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)