RobinC wrote:Our Firearms laws were imposed on us shooters (less than 100 thousand of us) by non shooters and politicians (60 million), other than open armed insurrection what do you suggest we do?
I suggest apt and able shooting organisations, instead of infighting, three-wise-apes-behaviour, and obsequiousness. The desastrous legislation was primarily due to the inactivity and ineptness of the shooters' representatives at that time.
These events are a thing of the past, true. The slavish, succumbing attitude of shooters' representatives towards the Home Office however still persists. Just look at GB Shooting ("how NOT to style a sports website") and how gratefully and humbly (Uriah Heep...) they welcome that their Harsh Overlords ever so graciously _deigned_ to allow a handful of Olympic hopefuls to practice their sport in England again, for a very limited number of exceptional training sessions under strict military supervision. Wow.
Fine, let's get back to the topic. I fully agree that the so-called "rule interpretation" concerning clothing styles at ISSF events goes far overboard, beyond what might still be considered tenable and maybe reasonable (dignified appearance at medal and closing ceremonies). It would not survive legal scrutiny.
And while I feel myself (being only a pistol shooter however) critical of the rifle trend toward full body armour, I agree that the proposed future rules would mean a very significant financial load on many seriously competitive shooters.
I may be wrong and if I am I appologise but I though they were saying you could not wear jeans on the podium to collect your medal, not that you cant shoot in jeans.
I know one top shooter who "Only" shoots in jeans and has done so for the last upteen years and I think they may even be the same pair of jeans for all those years.
Barney wrote:I may be wrong and if I am I appologise but I though they were saying you could not wear jeans on the podium to collect your medal, not that you cant shoot in jeans.
I'm afraid you are wrong Barney. The relevant wording is:-
Prohibited clothing items for competitions and award ceremonies include blue jeans, jeans or similar trousers in non-sporting colors, camouflage clothing, sleeveless T-shirts, shorts that are too short, ragged cut-off shorts, all types of sandals, trousers with patches or holes as well as shirts or trousers with non-sporting or inappropriate messages (See Rule 6.10.1).
Again may be wrong but I'll have a bet that most of the ex top level shooters on the executive committee who voted for this stupidity used to shoot in jeans as well!
Best regards
Robin
Barney wrote:Would your run of the mill nike or addidas tracksuite pants be ok or would they have to be in team colours etc?
Remember that anything said on this forum is really just personal opinion. If you are indeed WP then, although we are honoured, this is much too important for you to just take advice here.
RobinC wrote:Richard H
No, you are wrong, having travelled extensively around the world including spending much time in the States I can asure you that we as a race don't give in to any thing and are probably more anarchic than most, have you ever driven in England? what speed limit?
Our Firearms laws were imposed on us shooters (less than 100 thousand of us) by non shooters and politicians (60 million), other than open armed insurection what do you suggest we do? We are actually still fighting 13 years after through the political system, a massive petition went in only a short while ago.
As for the ISSF rules, including this stupid jeans thing we are up there fighting, did you contact the ISSF to complain? I did. We have more to lose than you, The US is so big you can be independant and to a greater extent is, if we turn inwards our sport will suffer, my home is closer to Holland and Europe than most of England, we had a group from our club shoot on the continent at the week end, easier than you going to most events in the US or Canada.
Don't lets fight amongs our selves, we need to concentrate our efforts on stopping this, if you want to do something constructive contact the ISSF athletes committee chairman juha.hirvi@hirvishooting.fi
good shooting and long may we shoot in jeans
Best regards
Robin
Robin You might not have meant that part for me but I clearly stated that I don't hold or think British shooters responsible for the handgun laws imposed on them, It's hard to have much clout when as a group we are so small.
Not sure what you mean about easier than going to events in Canada or the US? I'm in Canada and I drop my gear in the car and go, or if it's far I put it in my hard case and fly. No issues not hard at all. For me to go to the US from Canada there is some more paper work but it's very easy and takes a few weeks. Flying with firearms to US no problem, the biggest issue is with air cylinders and the TSA.
Yes I did send an email to the ISSF, with regards to both the proposed rifle clothing and the silly blue jean rules (similar trousers what the hell is that all trousers are similar). Maybe we should wear skirts in sporty colours.
Never drove in England, but they are becoming a society that doesn't seem to mind losing freedom for perceived security, which is a problem all over the world including all over North America, it just seems a little advanced in the UK. Maybe it's just because I'm not there that the picture I get is that people don't have a problem with it.
Richard H wrote:
Never drove in England, but they are becoming a society that doesn't seem to mind losing freedom for perceived security, which is a problem all over the world including all over North America, it just seems a little advanced in the UK. Maybe it's just because I'm not there that the picture I get is that people don't have a problem with it.
I don't think I'd say 'we' don't mind losing freedom for security, in fact I'd suggest we do mind. The problem is we don't make the rules, we just vote in the politicians. We also know it really doesn't matter too much who's in power, the policies are not really going to be any different.
Anyway, back on topic. I still want to know what the proposed rulings are for officials - both those running the events and those non shooting team officials.
Barney wrote:......lives the other side of Aus to me.
Just a 2 hour drive then ;-)
Back to your original question, my personal feeling is that any tracksuit trousers would appear to be acceptable (subject of course to the manufacturers' marking and sponsorship rules). If however you are shooting in a sub-international match I would be sorely tempted to ask the match organisers to declare that the interpretations will not be applied at their meeting.
Whilst there might be some justification for the interpretations at World Cups and above, as their application will only have an aesthetic effect it is ridiculous to apply them at a lower level.
RobStubbs wrote:
I don't think I'd say 'we' don't mind losing freedom for security, in fact I'd suggest we do mind. The problem is we don't make the rules, we just vote in the politicians. We also know it really doesn't matter too much who's in power, the policies are not really going to be any different.
Anyway, back on topic. I still want to know what the proposed rulings are for officials - both those running the events and those non shooting team officials.
Rob.
Well that measure of apathy is a sure sign of a beaten people "it doesn't matter what we do nothing will be different", I sure hope the majority of people don't share your sentiment, but I fear they probably do.
Richard H wrote:
Well that measure of apathy is a sure sign of a beaten people "it doesn't matter what we do nothing will be different", I sure hope the majority of people don't share your sentiment, but I fear they probably do.
Well apart from the small fact that that isn't what I said - is that 'apathy' ? I wouldn't say so. I have on many ocassions written to my MP and to the home office directly. I will still do that, but I've seen nothing change from my actions. The majority of people will of course do nothing other than vote (and I suspect the majority actually don't even bother to do that).
I prefer to continue being optimistic whilst not ignoring realism. I will be very pleasantly suprised if my letter writing brings about positive change, but it doesn't stop me trying.
Clearly moving thickness from 2.5mm to 2mm isn't going to do jack diddly for the "TV viewers". How thick is Lycra?
It is indeed like the so called US "health care reforms", lots of conversations, and in the end it's the insurance companies themselves which are the winner (same as equipment manufacturers).
Indeed it looks like the very reason the clothing manufacturers are getting potentially "rewarded" is because they have been trying to get around the spirit of the rules.
Let us hope that "additional discussions" can take place that aren't solely relegated to "committees" and that involve the people that actually matter. The shooters.
Someone said there was a limited amount of testing devices for this purpose. Does it really make more sense to have every ISSF rifle shooter throw out his garments and buy new, approved gear? What's to stop this same crap happening in 4 years time, when 2mm is decided to be too tough and supportive, and we have to go down to 1.5mm?
Richard H wrote:Well that measure of apathy is a sure sign of a beaten people "it doesn't matter what we do nothing will be different", I sure hope the majority of people don't share your sentiment, but I fear they probably do.
Point correctly taken. That is the problem there. Not necessarily of the problem of individual shooters, but definitely the continuing problem of the British shooting organisations. Apathy and acquiescence.
