Interesting open letter concerning the lead shot/ammunition ban

[Spear Chucker]

They are personal attacks and bullying plain and simple and you might reflect on your role in that.

Dear God Conor, dry up. this is debate. It is spirited, granted, but You just can't cope with that. That is not our problem.
If you force a measure on independently minded people that is just plain wrong, based on lies and misinformation and try to ram it down the throat of these same people, of course they'll resist. Try forcing something down a dog's throat he doesn't want, there's a chance you get nipped. You got nipped. You can't whine.
I am grateful for your judgement as one who sits in authority over us and is the arbiter of all things fair-play. You have shown that when beaten, you just run to teacher. Seriously Conor, poor show. gutless and disappointing. You get back to your mutual appreciation society. High fives all around at Marford Mill. Next stop LACS for you all when shooting is ditched.

 

[Ruger#1]

The issue I am raising is personal attacks on fellow forum members in this thread

Would your time instead not be better spent outlining BASC’s next step in countering any future legislation that would impact on shooting practices with lead ammunition that have negligible detrimental effect on flora ,fauna and human health.

The official BASC policy of opposing further legislation being introduced to restrict the use of lead ammunition seems to be being continually sidelined with the focus instead being acceptance of further lead ammunition restrictions Should BASC members not expect a robust defence of policy by all BASC employees whose wages are funded by their subscriptions and as the “Voice of Shooting” surely the best interests of those you claim to speak on behalf of are best served by a campaign to ensure any proposed future legislation is proportionate to the risks involved.

I too have been subject to personal attacks ,justified and unjustified ,on forums and consider it a non issue , what is of far more relevance is the quality of the argument contained within posts and the sincerity of those posting . On the whole forum members have much in common and voiced differences of opinion are healthy interaction and disagreement shouldn’t be taken to heart if criticism to opinion becomes heated.
When those opinions however are knowingly agenda driven by those posting rather than held in response to evidence presented clearly demonstrating quantifiable risk and reasonably proportionate to that risk then inevitably a degree of frustration colours responses. Rather than cite personal attack as the main problem it would be of more relevance to justify the continual posting of pro lead shot legislation by all our representative shooting organisations when , at least in the case of BASC,the official line is that they are opposed to further legislation.

 

[timbrayford]

They are personal attacks and bullying plain and simple and you might reflect on your role in that.

Do I hear a pot ...?

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Do I hear a pot ...?

I don't recall you resorting to personal attacks in this thread.

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

This is perhaps timely:

BASC launches new social media guide

BASC's new social media guide is designed to help you to promote understanding, respect and highlights the benefits shooting delivers.

basc.org.uk

 

[Chris Richardson]

This is perhaps timely:

BASC launches new social media guide

BASC's new social media guide is designed to help you to promote understanding, respect and highlights the benefits shooting delivers.

basc.org.uk

It’s odd Connor you’ll defend those who agree with you but not those who don’t

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

It’s odd Connor you’ll defend those who agree with you but not those who don’t

Hmmm I’d replace the word intelligent with fanatical then I’d agree

Perhaps reflect on your unwarranted personal comment above.

 

[VSS]

It’s odd Connor you’ll defend those who agree with you but not those who don’t

Isn't that just human nature?
I don't suppose you'd defend me if I were to say I supported the ban on lead, or I thought Chris Packham was a jolly fine fellow, but you'd probably back me up if I said the opposite.

 

[Heym SR20]

This is perhaps timely:

BASC launches new social media guide

BASC's new social media guide is designed to help you to promote understanding, respect and highlights the benefits shooting delivers.

basc.org.uk

I think any body reading this thread would be taking a very dim view on a number of licensed firearms holders and their online behaviour towards others.

 

[hendrix's rifle]

I think any body reading this thread would be taking a very dim view on a number of licensed firearms holders and their online behaviour towards others. @admin

Oh so now we can't disagree with the utter crap you're talking?

Frankly, you're behaviour hasn't been any better than the rest so I suggest you take a look at yourself. You're not holier than thou in all this

 

[Heym SR20]

Oh so now we can't disagree with the utter crap you're talking?

Frankly, you're behaviour hasn't been any better than the rest so I suggest you take a look at yourself. You're not holier than thou in all this

I rest my case

 

[hendrix's rifle]

I rest my case

There's nothing wrong with expressing my opinion? If you've got an issue with that, I suggest you leave the Internet alone and go sit in a cave.

I dare say you certainly wouldn't last on Facebook

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

There's nothing wrong with expressing my opinion? If you've got an issue with that, I suggest you leave the Internet alone and go sit in a cave.

I dare say you certainly wouldn't last on Facebook

Perhaps reflect on the following unwarranted comments:

You're spouting rubbish as per.

They aren't equal and no matter how much crap you spout,

Oh so now we can't disagree with the utter crap you're talking?

 

[hendrix's rifle]

Perhaps reflect on the following unwarranted comments:

Ok, so perhaps he should stop talking crap?

 

[tackb]

I think any body reading this thread would be taking a very dim view on a number of licensed firearms holders and their online behaviour towards others.

I see you’ve edited your request to close the thread

This is not your thread and you are very welcome to not be involved anymore by just stopping posting ?

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Ok, so perhaps he should stop talking crap?

I think you know deep down that is not true. Perhaps best not to comment if you cannot contribute anything constructive of your own to the debate other than to criticise others. Perhaps reflect on that.

 

[hendrix's rifle]

I think you know deep down that is not true. Perhaps best not to comment if you cannot contribute anything constructive of your own to the debate other than to criticise others. Perhaps reflect on that.

It is true though. He see's things through his tinted glasses because he once again fails to see the full picture. This isnt about banning a singular thing, this is a ban that's going to have an effect on every shooter in the UK.

I've already explained that I can understand a possible ban for shotgun cartridges and likewise, maybe some of the larger rifle cartridges however for the run of the mill 6mm's, 6.5s and what not they don't cause enough of an issue. Ultimately, I dont see any reports anywhere that someone in the UK has died from lead poisoning as a direct result of eating meat shot with a lead bullet. It isn't there. People can speculate all they like but that's not fact is it.

Thats what Heym can't seem to understand because he's the minority that shoots maybe a couple of deer a month and clearly doesn't engage with any other form of shooting from pest control, targets or anything else.

 

[timbrayford]

I don't recall you resorting to personal attacks in this thread.

No I rather had someone else in mind, I wonder who?

 

[Smellydog]

Thats what Heym can't seem to understand because he's the minority that shoots maybe a couple of deer a month and clearly doesn't engage with any other form of shooting from pest control, targets or anything else.

The chap in question loaded and shot lead bullets very recently!
For all the advocating alternatives and the dangers of lead he partook to shoot his rook rifle conversion.
He also had photographs of his vice jaws covered in lead.
I don't get it at all.

We are ostracised for openly questioning this farce of a thing but they, the capitulationists, choose to use lead in secret or think their own advise doesn't even apply to them selves.
For all the blah blah blah about health our chap has repeatedly banged on and on about his hands have been in contact with his lead covered vice and his fingers in a box of Hornady v max!

This whole lead ban fiasco smacks of nothing but hypocrisy and treachery.

 

[Spear Chucker]

I think you know deep down that is not true. Perhaps best not to comment if you cannot contribute anything constructive of your own to the debate other than to criticise others. Perhaps reflect on that.

Actually Conor, I would say that on the grounds of the quality of contributions, you have thrown yourself into the bin. This was an interesting thread where a number of forum members were calmly and intelligently discussing various elements that made them feel that the proposed lead ban was based on bad information, poor analysis of that information and both the intellectual laziness of the shooting representative bodies in lifting RSPB sponsored reports without actually doing a scientific analysis themselves, coupled with the seriously bent ideology and agendas of the bodies purporting to represent the shooting community.
Heym then launched himself at one of my posts telling me I was talking "utter bollox (sic)". That then aroused the irritation of a number of the participants who, up to that point, had been involved in a sensible discussion. Heym has only himself and his rather rude and uneducated behaviour to blame.
What I find fascinating though is that you, running out of argument and being shown to be wrong and ineffective in communicating your indefensible position, then sought to divert the reasoned debate away from facts, because you had nothing of value or import with which to counter our points, onto the topic of manners and behaviour. This is because you and Heym were soundly beaten. None of the above is bullying or personal. Heym tried to make it personal with his ill tempered, bad mannered and unintelligent interjections. You just backed him up because you'd lost the argument and were out of your depth. It suited you, and your bent little story to divert the thread into a class sneak's bleat. To hear Heym casting aspersions as to the suitability of the respondents to hold firearms as he does above is both amusing but also deeply shocking. It is a clear demonstration that you and he are completely out of synchronisation with other members and their views. It also is utterly disgraceful behaviour and sad to see that a BASC employee having lost an argument then tries to obfuscate by telling everyone else in the forum they've been nasty. Remember who attacked first cocker. Heym and you in this matter are both an utter disgrace. You should know better. Squeaking about bullying and name calling because you are trying to kill a thread that you cannot counter (because you are not personally good enough and you have no independent science to support your case) is something a child would do. In effect Sir, you and Heym are the bullies. You seek to intimidate and silence us with threats. Shame on you both. You are completely beyond the pale and you have both spoiled a well argued and interesting discussion with your thuggish conduct. If anyone reading this was in doubt as to whether to maintain BASC membership, your last few posts would make it clear that BASC is not a democratic organisation, it just wants mealy mouthed obeisance. Try debating a point in contravention of BASC’s stated position and you will be accused of bullying, harassment and having your integrity and suitability to hold firearms brought into question. In supporting Heym, this is precisely what you have done. Previously I just thought you were sweet but silly. Now I just think you are crooked and unpleasant.