The democratic process

caorach

Well-Known Member
There is considerable and useful discussion on this forum on the "bigger" issues surrounding shooting where it interfaces with politics and those people who don't shoot. These discussions are often tied in with discussions of which shooting organisation is best to represent us, often driven by a small number who are dissatisified with one or other organisation. Many people clearly hold a range of strong views on many topics relating to shooting and the politics involved.

Recently there was a thread here about SNH and enforced training for stalkers in Scotland. There were lots of views expressed, but not a lot of facts. It was a simple matter and the work of 15 minutes to compose a FOI request to SNH and establish the facts and it was interesting that the thread detailing the facts as outlined by SNH attracted a tiny fraction of the posts on the thread of wild speculation and predictions of doom.

It has not escaped my notice, or that of others, that a lot of the people who complain on this forum or who announce that various political events will impact upon our sport never actually engage in the political process by bothering to contact their political representitives or by contacting organisations like SNH and demanding answers.

Why is it that many people who hold strong views and who express them here in useful, constructive and often very well argued threads repeatedly fail to bring these concerns to the attention of their politicians? Why is it that people can type for hours on this forum each week, often predicting doom or detailing what needs to be done and usually fighting with fellow stalkers, and yet it seems very rare for these same people to contact their MPs to make their views known?

Most MPs and similar can be contacted by email or through a simple web interface and it takes only minutes to bring your views to their attention and, therefore, to have your say in a democratic process where a very small number of very loud mouthed people often appear to create the policies and laws of the land.

Are those people who feel strongly about shooting matters, and who frequently fight for long periods of time with other stalkers on this forum, willing to agree that for every hour they spend on SD posting to the faithful they will also spend 15 minutes writing to their MP or other representitive on shooting matters?
 
I agree. I do indeed write to my M.P. about shooting and other related matters and I have always found him very helpful. I know that personally written commmunications as opposed to standardised templates from representative organisations do have some influence on him. atb Tim
 
I have always found him very helpful.

Actually that is a very good point - my experience is also that my MP has been honest and, generally, supportive. The whole thing is a much more positive experience than you might imagine and I think that many MPs are glad to get a communication from people outside of the usual Greenpeace campaigning types who are disgusted and offended by everything that happens around them.
 
I marched in London ref the pistol ban in 1997 . The decision had already been made by the government on that one. That we live in a Democracy is a nice myth.
Martin
 
Superb post.

Direct contact with MPs, if phrased articulately and reasonably, is astonishingly effective.

As to why so many forum based demagogues generally fail to engage with the wider world, I think it's generally because they are not genuinely interested in effecting constructive change. Instead, their main purpose generally appears to be prestige among peers. In real life, prestige among peers usually requires action. Online, prestige can be obtained merely by saying the right things.

I would guess that the people who contribute most to protecting/advancing the interests of field sports will be those you seldom (if ever) see posting on fora such as this. They are likely to be too busy...
 
I marched in London ref the pistol ban in 1997 . The decision had already been made by the government on that one. That we live in a Democracy is a nice myth.
Martin

Tricky one: since a democracy essentially amounts to majority rule, and the majority (rightly or wrongly) is suspicious of hand guns, then in this case democracy worked. It could only be said to have failed if a majority had wanted hand guns, but a ban went ahead any way.

Therein lies THE critical problem with minority interests such field sports. It would probably cost the government remarkably few votes overall to ban private ownership of firearms outright - a substantial majority are either mildly suspicious of them or have no opinion either way. This is why it is so critical to engage with MPs - one of their implicit roles is to protect the interests of minorities where those interests do not harm the interests of the majority.
 
Very quick post - I'm sure I just heard a collective sigh of relief there :confused: - excellent thread and very well put.

Not sure its about democratic process so much as human nature!

I'll come back with a post later - but just a quick well done for raising the thread.
 
Tricky one: since a democracy essentially amounts to majority rule, and the majority (rightly or wrongly) is suspicious of hand guns, then in this case democracy worked. It could only be said to have failed if a majority had wanted hand guns, but a ban went ahead any way.

Therein lies THE critical problem with minority interests such field sports. It would probably cost the government remarkably few votes overall to ban private ownership of firearms outright - a substantial majority are either mildly suspicious of them or have no opinion either way. This is why it is so critical to engage with MPs - one of their implicit roles is to protect the interests of minorities where those interests do not harm the interests of the majority.
I agree wholeheartedly with your sentiments but feel that you are missing and important factor in modern day life.
Trial By Media!
Despite so many denying its existence it is by far the most dangerous force in the UK.
The media hold sway with the politicians to such extent that we end up spending millions upon the likes of the Leveson Inquiry!
It is the media that scream and shout for firearms bans whenever there is an incident. (Usually involving a "High powered Sniper rifle)
In order to deal with the media you need specialised and particular knowledge. I work in the Oil Industry and believe me they take the media VERY seriously!
I write to my MP, sign petitions and also hold membership in a sporting association that takes the media very seriously!
Regards,
Dave
 
Great post. I share your view. Far better articulated than me describing it as 'hot air' and getting shot down for it!!



Superb post.

Direct contact with MPs, if phrased articulately and reasonably, is astonishingly effective.

As to why so many forum based demagogues generally fail to engage with the wider world, I think it's generally because they are not genuinely interested in effecting constructive change. Instead, their main purpose generally appears to be prestige among peers. In real life, prestige among peers usually requires action. Online, prestige can be obtained merely by saying the right things.

I would guess that the people who contribute most to protecting/advancing the interests of field sports will be those you seldom (if ever) see posting on fora such as this. They are likely to be too busy...


I also agree with everything you say here mungo, except I do think there is a 'real life' forum - its called the Pub!
 
......since a democracy essentially amounts to majority rule ....

See http://www.notocosta.co.uk/camerons-no-help-against-the-costa-coffee-colonists/

(The important bit is " Well aware of this, 5,749 people of Totnes, three-quarters of the town’s population of 7,500 signed a petition against Costa’s application and are demonstrating and planning boycotts. All in vain.")

What happened to "Localisation" and why is it that even minor civil disorder gets more attention than 100,000 pensioners peacefully marching for pension reform?

The mushroom principle?
 
Last edited:
I think the problem is that this forum is no more a source of information than the gossip column in the local rag. It's all just heresay and rumours perpetuated by scaremongers. How can you contact your local MP regarding the compulsory training for deer stalkers (just an example) when no such thing exists? It would be very easy to make a fool of yourself by complaining about something that isn't happening!
It's a sad fact that most of the opinions on this forum are driven by media (SD can be classed as media) and very little is based on fact. I'm not saying that it's a bad thing, it promotes discussion and debate but it has no bearing on real world issues. I take it all with a pinch of salt and find out for myself what is fact and what is not and I'd reccomend everybody else to do the same.
 
5,749 people of Totnes, three-quarters of the town’s population of 7,500 signed a petition against Costa’s application and are demonstrating and planning boycotts. All in vain

I suspect that the direction you are taking might be the opposite of what I'm suggesting in the sense that I'm suggesting a polite, constructive and personal approach to your local MP (MP for example, other options are equally as important and useful) and so the total opposite of petitions, protests, demonstrations and trail by media. I'm not suggesting you change the world but rather that make a positive and personal approach to people who, over time, can influence the direction the world might take. This is not a quick fix in the way that environmental activism keeps offering quick fixes, often to non-existent problems, in media stunts.

I have a letter I received this week from my MP which is so un-PC, frank, accurate, honest and to the point that you wouldn't believe an MP can speak so freely. I will not make the text available, there will be no trial by media even the SD media, but I know his honest opinions and that he is working behind the scenes to achieve these and he knows that no matter how un-PC his views he has support from some of his constituents and this is, I believe, a key point. Greenpeace or other loud mouthed "trial by media," "trial by stunt," whinging and hand wringing type organisations can try all they like but they will not change his honest views and while people like myself keep writing he will know that he has a mandate from his constituents to take the direction he is taking. I suspect that to him this mandate is more important than 1,000 media stunts. This direct and personal approach circumvents the whole media/PR and even PC world that a small but very vocal minority of "activists" would like to force upon us but which, in truth, very few people inhabit or wish to inhabit.

Some time back I took a fairly high profile local journalist shooting, just at targets. He enjoyed his day and by the end of it was talking about maybe taking it up and buying a rifle. I don't think he ever actually bought a rifle but that isn't the point, the point is it was something he could see himself doing and he saw less danger, risk, dodgy characters, intemperate behaviour and the like than he might have seen at a local Sunday school outing. He certainly saw less bad behaviour and dodgy characters than he will see at an anti-shooting demo and I'm sure he will note the difference in self discipline and behaviour. The day cost me a few quid in ammo and a little bit of effort. Again this is the opposite of protest and demonstrations but represents a personal and genuine opportunity not only to allow others to enjoy shooting but, just maybe, to help improve our position in the public eye. So, while you are quietly writing to your MP in a polite and constructive manner why not offer to take him out for a day? What about contacting a local journalist and offering to take them out for a day? No cameras or reports or recordings but just "I noticed you recently broadcast/wrote about the countryside and thought you might like to privately experience some wildlife and conservation activities..."
 
Tricky one: since a democracy essentially amounts to majority rule, and the majority (rightly or wrongly) is suspicious of hand guns, then in this case democracy worked. It could only be said to have failed if a majority had wanted hand guns, but a ban went ahead any way.

Therein lies THE critical problem with minority interests such field sports. It would probably cost the government remarkably few votes overall to ban private ownership of firearms outright - a substantial majority are either mildly suspicious of them or have no opinion either way. This is why it is so critical to engage with MPs - one of their implicit roles is to protect the interests of minorities where those interests do not harm the interests of the majority.

Very true, however given the current economic downturn, the significant revenues the shooting industry brings to the UK economy (by a minority) may attribute to a positive stance with many politicians. I certainly think the shooting lobby should leverage of this economic argument.
 
Caorach, I would tend to disagree that my direction is opposite to yours and I totally agree with your calm, polite and correct ways of doing things. It is just that after 15 years of being a Councillor and many more years as Director of a large International group (strongly into people focus) it is the squeaking wheel that gets the oil which occasionally frustrates me.

I am very wary of the way that the many forms of media can be manipulated (a la "spin") and we, in a minority sport, need the strongest possible representation.

I with you, not agin you!

My MP is, and always has been, excellent in supporting shooting & rural activities and will definitely get my vote again.
 
I have it on good authority that DSC 2 will be the Scottish benchmark. Don't put off your levels 1 or 2.
 
Lmfao @ deerpath. Every one has an opinion some feel strongly enough to contact there MSP,s My self i have went to tea a few times with mine and discussed the deer sector in as much detail as i possible could. Most MSP,s were not aware of how the deer sector in Scotland worked and got very confused with the RED DEER COMMISION / DEER COMMISION SCOTLAND /SNH DEER SECTOR / DEER PANNEL / DI ENGLAND/ funded partly by SNH Scotland /ADMG /LDNS / BASCS (INVOLVMENT ) /BDS (INVOLVMENT) DMQ ( BASC BDS LED ) I could go on but would get lost in all the muddle. Is it any wounder why an MSP might just hope the deer sector will be good boys.

Caorach how do you simplify this set up to your MSP who is willing to listen but only to a point.
 
Caorach how do you simplify this set up to your MSP who is willing to listen but only to a point.

I don't know, nor do I know the exact details of your situation or your MSP so I really feel it is impossible for me to say. In the end you are in the best position to know what your message is, mine might be different, and if it is too complex for presentation then you have to simplify it until you can present it in the time or attention span available. There is nothing to stop you following up with written material "for reference" with an explanation that this is beyond what a sane man needs to know but that he might find it useful to refer to on some detailed points.
 
I suspect that the direction you are taking might be the opposite of what I'm suggesting in the sense that I'm suggesting a polite, constructive and personal approach to your local MP (MP for example, other options are equally as important and useful) and so the total opposite of petitions, protests, demonstrations and trail by media. I'm not suggesting you change the world but rather that make a positive and personal approach to people who, over time, can influence the direction the world might take. This is not a quick fix in the way that environmental activism keeps offering quick fixes, often to non-existent problems, in media stunts.

I have a letter I received this week from my MP which is so un-PC, frank, accurate, honest and to the point that you wouldn't believe an MP can speak so freely. I will not make the text available, there will be no trial by media even the SD media, but I know his honest opinions and that he is working behind the scenes to achieve these and he knows that no matter how un-PC his views he has support from some of his constituents and this is, I believe, a key point. Greenpeace or other loud mouthed "trial by media," "trial by stunt," whinging and hand wringing type organisations can try all they like but they will not change his honest views and while people like myself keep writing he will know that he has a mandate from his constituents to take the direction he is taking. I suspect that to him this mandate is more important than 1,000 media stunts. This direct and personal approach circumvents the whole media/PR and even PC world that a small but very vocal minority of "activists" would like to force upon us but which, in truth, very few people inhabit or wish to inhabit.

Some time back I took a fairly high profile local journalist shooting, just at targets. He enjoyed his day and by the end of it was talking about maybe taking it up and buying a rifle. I don't think he ever actually bought a rifle but that isn't the point, the point is it was something he could see himself doing and he saw less danger, risk, dodgy characters, intemperate behaviour and the like than he might have seen at a local Sunday school outing. He certainly saw less bad behaviour and dodgy characters than he will see at an anti-shooting demo and I'm sure he will note the difference in self discipline and behaviour. The day cost me a few quid in ammo and a little bit of effort. Again this is the opposite of protest and demonstrations but represents a personal and genuine opportunity not only to allow others to enjoy shooting but, just maybe, to help improve our position in the public eye. So, while you are quietly writing to your MP in a polite and constructive manner why not offer to take him out for a day? What about contacting a local journalist and offering to take them out for a day? No cameras or reports or recordings but just "I noticed you recently broadcast/wrote about the countryside and thought you might like to privately experience some wildlife and conservation activities..."

I agree with you but you have to admit that dispite his personal views or those of other MP's the PARTY WHIP usually has the last say ( free votes are very rare these days) so where's the democracy the last 20+ years have seemed more like a dictatorship of one or another.
 
Back
Top