We need a CHAMPION

Big Bang Theory

Well-Known Member
It’s clear to me that there are some organisations that take our money and in return promise to represent us. It is also clear to me that, in my opinion, they are falling way short of the mark. There has been an enormous amount of chat on here (and elsewhere) about how disappointed people are, about what should be done, about how we as shooters are being disadvantaged/picked on etc.
But that’s all it is. Chat. We blame the organisations, then once we’ve vented our spleens - nothing?

So. Let’s find a big hitter. Someone with clout who understands. I’m no expert but if you get someone who is respected on your side who is willing to be badged as an advocate?

What for instance is Sir David Attenborough’s stance on this?

I’m only throwing this out as we clearly need a ‘big gun’ rather than a toothless tiger, and, obviously, purely just my thoughts and observations....
 

Pedro

Well-Known Member
The main problem with finding someone high profile is how shooting is portrayed in the media at present and what that would do to someone's public profile. I imagine a quick think could come up with all sorts of people who advocate field sports. Off the top of my head: David Cameron, Eric Clapton, Guy Ritchie, Ian Botham, quite a few rugby stars including Gareth Edwards. There's the Royal family of course as well. But it would be a brave person who would put their name to a campaign for shooting.

It would result in the BBC shunning them, or at least presenting them in a bad light and any of the tabloid papers jumping all over them. Look how stories about the royal family shooting are portrayed often as an example.
 

reloader54

Well-Known Member
I've often thought similar, but realistically thinking, not many who we first perceive to be a prospective "champion" fall short as they wish to remain popular within their peers and fans alike, I like Vinnie Jones, as a person, as a shooting man, but most of all for the unashamed hurt and despair when losing his lovely wife, that tough guy image is all well and good, however it's not a busted nose that will stop the likes of packham and his ilk, if it was I would smack the prick me sen,[to be honest, it worked fine for the first thirty years of my life] but someone who fights clever and with great ability to lead others into the fight. you will never convert all to our way of thinking as many have ulterior motives in mind, personally I cant see an answer, the world is changing, from our point of view not for the better. I'm getting to the point of realising there is no answer, only more increasing restrictions, on shooting, and much more besides, gotta watch what you say, what you think, tolerance, liberalism has got a hold on society, just look how difficult it is to say anything without some prick claiming it's offensive. often those who they claim are offended have risen above it and think them somewhat patronising. this government elite needs to be sent a message, 'cos if you can feck over 17.4 million good people without suitable retribution you get just about get away with anything. but I don't think 17.4 million good people have got what it takes. well not before eastenders, or come fecking dancing comes on.
me I'm gonna gut a few birds tomorrow, continue with the load development for my new acquisition [thank you Highlandsjohn] and continue my life as I see fit within my own chosen path. and to coin an ancient tattoo from my earlier days.

FTW
 

countrryboy

Well-Known Member
Must admit being a jock so hate cricket, but big Ian Botham has done more good than all the orgs combined over the last few years and to my knowledge was 1 of the 1st to donate birds to food banks as well as paying for birds to be made into ready meals and then donated.

His forgot about the birds campaign has been brilliant.
Althou from wot I have seen Fields ports channel also don't good work.
Just hard to get message across and into mainstream media
 

Rusty Gate

Well-Known Member
The main problem with finding someone high profile is how shooting is portrayed in the media at present and what that would do to someone's public profile. I imagine a quick think could come up with all sorts of people who advocate field sports. Off the top of my head: David Cameron, Eric Clapton, Guy Ritchie, Ian Botham, quite a few rugby stars including Gareth Edwards. There's the Royal family of course as well. But it would be a brave person who would put their name to a campaign for shooting.

It would result in the BBC shunning them, or at least presenting them in a bad light and any of the tabloid papers jumping all over them. Look how stories about the royal family shooting are portrayed often as an example.
But its because of HOW shooting has been portrayed that we need a high profile figure to get attention in getting it over clearly, effectively & ACCURATELY.
 

VSS

Well-Known Member
I think Charlie Jacoby is someone who has really stuck his head above the parapet, Taking on the three stooges from WJ on their own ground at least showed there is an anti-anti voice. Has anyone from the pro shooting organisations taken them on head to head in public debate so far?
Agreed his doing more than most, but he's hardly a well known public figure with the mainstream media behind him.
We need someone else with Packham's level of following / recognition, but on our side of the fence. And media savvy too.
 

dunwater

Well-Known Member
The main problem with finding someone high profile is how shooting is portrayed in the media at present and what that would do to someone's public profile. I imagine a quick think could come up with all sorts of people who advocate field sports. Off the top of my head: David Cameron, Eric Clapton, Guy Ritchie, Ian Botham, quite a few rugby stars including Gareth Edwards. There's the Royal family of course as well. But it would be a brave person who would put their name to a campaign for shooting.

It would result in the BBC shunning them, or at least presenting them in a bad light and any of the tabloid papers jumping all over them. Look how stories about the royal family shooting are portrayed often as an example.
The whole point of a campaign featuring high profile individuals would be to generate a level of interest and debate that cannot be easily ignored, not by the BBC or anyone else.
There are a lot of people out there that have never heard the case for shooting and hunting as a conservation tool.
 

tikka_madras

Well-Known Member
You ideally need a media team. An older charming guru, a lovable rogue and a young non-white woman would fit the bill. Employ them in a shooting org, make decent top-gear esque country sports shows for the internet and get them on every media show that discusses shooting and hunting. Someone like basc should get to it.
 

ArunT

Well-Known Member
I could be wrong here, but it may have to be turned the other way by introducing shooting at a much younger level, say with air pistol/ rifle to remove the stigma around firearms. This could potentially get them insterested in the next level which could be rim fire competitions which ideally would be nice if discussed in the news. Maybe more news at national/ international levels would get more people interested in the sport. In parallel, if the news about scientific methods of conservation, issues with over population etc could be discussed in the mainstream media, ideally by vets or clinicians who are experts in the field, the amboguity around firearms would could slowly disappear. Maybe a new documentary series by Nat Geo or similar on conservation effect, maybe told from a hunters perspective could achieve something. Its a slow progress but in my opinion, possibly a more permanent one. Sorry if this is off topic, but felt something bigger might be required to sustain safe shooting and stalking which many of us enjoy and take pride in.
 

VSS

Well-Known Member
I could be wrong here, but it may have to be turned the other way by introducing shooting at a much younger level, say with air pistol/ rifle to remove the stigma around firearms. This could potentially get them insterested in the next level which could be rim fire competitions which ideally would be nice if discussed in the news. Maybe more news at national/ international levels would get more people interested in the sport. In parallel, if the news about scientific methods of conservation, issues with over population etc could be discussed in the mainstream media, ideally by vets or clinicians who are experts in the field, the amboguity around firearms would could slowly disappear. Maybe a new documentary series by Nat Geo or similar on conservation effect, maybe told from a hunters perspective could achieve something. Its a slow progress but in my opinion, possibly a more permanent one. Sorry if this is off topic, but felt something bigger might be required to sustain safe shooting and stalking which many of us enjoy and take pride in.
Agreed.
Small arms training / target shooting should be a compulsory part of the national curriculum for sports lessons in schools. That would de-stigmatise firearms instantly.
 

reloader54

Well-Known Member
I agree, it would take some big balls. But what have we got right now? No balls. No balls at all. I tell you who has - Jeremy Clarkson
. He is also a staunch remainer who believes the referendum vote was won by Northern thickos who are stuck in the middle ages
 

VSS

Well-Known Member
. He is also a staunch remainer who believes the referendum vote was won by Northern thickos who are stuck in the middle ages
Does that matter? We're talking shooting sports here, not Brexit!

(Although having said that, one of my reasons for voting remain was because I reckon fieldsports will get a bad deal in the event that we leave the EU. The rest of Europe seems to have a far more enlightened stance on hunting in general, and without their steadying influence I reckon hunting in the UK is f****d).
 

The fourth Horseman

Well-Known Member
Does that matter? We're talking shooting sports here, not Brexit!

(Although having said that, one of my reasons for voting remain was because I reckon fieldsports will get a bad deal in the event that we leave the EU. The rest of Europe seems to have a far more enlightened stance on hunting in general, and without their steadying influence I reckon hunting in the UK is f****d).
It's dead anyway, it's just a matter of time. I feel sorry my great grandkids will never hold a gun or rifle and enjoy what I, my kids and half my grandkids have loved. I remember being shown a Tory printed plan for firearms to be taken out of public ownership and that was 30+ years ago.
 

Freeforester

Well-Known Member
There lies the answer, education, and evidence-based results, like most of the Europeans understand, but the general public here are denied the chance of getting to grips with the reality by the agenda-setting main stream broadcasting interests, who deny the oxygen of balanced coverage to our side, but whose day of reckoning will assuredly come.

Getting kids involved in basic conservation projects is a good start, and can kindle a lifelong interest in the matter, but objective coverage is required, alas sadly lacking even on the so-called countryside programmes. Repeat Out of Town with Jack Hargreaves, don't try to dazzle with apps, graphics and tech, get them to make duck tubes, nest boxes, and to monitor their use as the progress of the inhabitants, tell the good story, even Clarkson did his bit in his own style in the Sunday Times today, Remainer or no.
 

Top