From: "Matthew Wright", [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well as I've said before the Govt will adjust its tone slightly as it suits them and the mood they think they face, but the trend is relentless and aimed at turning the screw step by step on shooting. This time they have started to move on shotguns while also beginning to lay some groundwork for airguns by moving towards RFD restrictions. Next time (or opportunity) they will move in on airguns more specifically. In the meantime they will expect to see a further reduction in shotgun ownership and if you factor in the decline of farmers and with this further red tape we could see some sharper drops in firearms ownership altogether. Add to this the very clear attitude they are still displaying about shooting with references to "gun culture" (what is this?) and their comments about administering more tightly and police powers. The important point is this - we only just have critical mass in shooting (ie enough people to strongly campaign with) but it will slip away with this trend. Equally without critical mass it will be very difficult to attract new entrants to our sports given any controversy. This is the real issue we need to focus on now rather than, as in the past, the comfort zone of discussing the nuances of detail in each clause. I remember being absolutely amazed when attending post-Dunblane meetings to hear shooters debating the finer points of laws and compensation instead of building a serious organised campaign plan. We have started to get our act together but we are far from there yet. Worst of all is this- if you consider that the Govt has been in trouble, that there have been major protests, that shooting was looking good in the Olympics and there has been no incident with a legal gun , then you know what the Govt would do when they are feeling more confident!!! Nope, this continued tightening on shooting sports is not good at all and they are still trying to sell this nonsense as something to do with illegal guns. Returning to the question of their term "gun culture", they have never said what this means but they tend to imply it has something to do with a situation in the US. One might think they meant gun misuse but more so they mean the way in which US shooting sports are prepared to stick up for themselves. This is what really riles them and it is reflected in a range of issues where if anyone holds a contrary view they are labelled "extremists", in fact several of this Labour lot referred to farmers protesting about fuel tax as I quote "scum" and "terrorists". Most parroted their support with only slightly less stupid remarks (it really is serious stuff - they really instinctively think this way and say it!). This attitude that involves refusing to admit to faults and attacking people who have different views is displayed amongst children as bullying. When Govts act in this irresponsible way it becomes serious - there is very little difference in calling people extremists and the old Russian methods of declaring anyone who opposes them as insane. Matthew Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___________________________________________________________ T O P I C A The Email You Want. http://www.topica.com/t/16 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
