Thread: The anti gun lobby

Basically what I think he is saying is we need to find some common ground and all be singing off the same page, coherently. The cynical side of me thinks we will get fucked over at every turn, even when reasoning behind restrictions is totally ridiculous. Our biggest problem is that those who make the rules on our behalf, have no idea, and they see the police as the only credible source of information regarding firearms, they will eat what the police feed them. We need to change this somehow.

If there is 250-270k FA's licences in the country then we do indeed have the ability to have a strong voice. Thats 6-7% of the country, politcally speaking that is a pretty large percentage.
If need be, we certainly have the weight to offer up some politcal clout and positively influence firearms legislation in the future. Its just a matter of getting that voice heard.

But we are splintered into our little groups, how do you combine? Not easy, need one encompassing all

Originally Posted by Maca49

But we are splintered into our little groups, how do you combine? Not easy, need one encompassing all

It is known as COLFO, they lobby ministers etc. on our behalf.

regards

Originally Posted by steven

It is known as COLFO, they lobby ministers etc. on our behalf.

regards

Nope - colfo represent less than 2% of firearms licence holders and only have very few individual members.
Voting membership is entirely restricted to member organisations and entities - a maximum of less than twenty.

There is simply no broad-based democratic representation of licence holders.

I know - to get a 'policy' document at all it had to go through a local branch to a national branch to colfo ... and back down the chain of obstrustion at every level.

Other efforts such as NSA are simply not supported or obstructed by vested interests - or ignored at out peril.

Time is running out and much more restrictive laws likely in the not to distant future for even in the US this is apparent.

The problem is that trying to get broad based democratic representation is probably not achievable. All of our efforts in the past have been along this line. Trying to keep everybody happy is self destructive.

The model I proposed isn't very democratic, nor is it representative to start with. If a good job gets done it will become representative. Initial communication with police MPs etc would be by a small group of affected persons wishing to meet. This group reports back to all user groups.

While not necessarily selected from each user group outside parties will have no choice but to consider that group representative, if the information flow is organised and professional.

The key factors are the professionalism of the members of the group. To be seen as disaffected emotional minorities, losing their ability to play with their dangerous toys is not productive. We have no appeal to the police/govt or the public if that is our response.

It is not about being nice, its about building relationships and requiring accountability. Its a lot harder to screw people you know and respect, who have a good public image....

Personally I think its too tall an expectation.... we would need around 4-6 suitable people in each electorate who could contribute a lot of their time for beneficiaries that would probably not appreciate the effort and time required....

We don't want another beauracratic national heirachical structure, we want local level autonomy but with co-ordinated approaches to issues... and good organised information flows...

COLFO potentially could reorganise in that way maybe... huge asks... money time and people

Originally Posted by Southern Man

Nope - colfo represent less than 2% of firearms licence holders and only have very few individual members.
Voting membership is entirely restricted to member organisations and entities - a maximum of less than twenty.

There is simply no broad-based democratic representation of licence holders.

I know - to get a 'policy' document at all it had to go through a local branch to a national branch to colfo ... and back down the chain of obstrustion at every level.

Other efforts such as NSA are simply not supported or obstructed by vested interests - or ignored at out peril.

Time is running out and much more restrictive laws likely in the not to distant future for even in the US this is apparent.

You are wrong here.

a ) COFLO represents ppl who are in gun clubs and the gun industry. So clubs, and blanket organisations for instance send them a cheque and get to vote. As a rep of one such I had/have a vote at the AGM on issues so there is some democracy going on. Unlike say some organisations such as NSA which can use the funds you give them for anything "related" they think is reasonable. I also wonder on the legal comeback on you if you donate to NSA and it goes pear shaped so I wouldnt donate to them myself, apart from I think they are nutters.

b) COLFO also approaches such organisations as say small bore (which tell them to "p*ss off") to get them on board but apathy rules.

c) COLFO seems to have some success lobbying but they are one "for" v quite a few "against".

Originally Posted by steven

You are wrong here.

a ) COFLO represents ppl who are in gun clubs and the gun industry. So clubs, and blanket organisations for instance send them a cheque and get to vote. As a rep of one such I had/have a vote at the AGM on issues so there is some democracy going on. Unlike say some organisations such as NSA which can use the funds you give them for anything "related" they think is reasonable. I also wonder on the legal comeback on you if you donate to NSA and it goes pear shaped so I wouldnt donate to them myself, apart from I think they are nutters.

b) COLFO also approaches such organisations as say small bore (which tell them to "p*ss off") to get them on board but apathy rules.

c) COLFO seems to have some success lobbying but they are one "for" v quite a few "against".

I'm not sure that you have established that he is wrong... you seem to have confirmed and repeated what he said...

The point is engage the clubs you are in, they in turn go to colfo.

regards

Originally Posted by Beavis

Basically what I think he is saying is we need to find some common ground and all be singing off the same page, coherently. The cynical side of me thinks we will get fucked over at every turn, even when reasoning behind restrictions is totally ridiculous. Our biggest problem is that those who make the rules on our behalf, have no idea, and they see the police as the only credible source of information regarding firearms, they will eat what the police feed them. We need to change this somehow.

Yep... but we have to develop our skills before we can expect to be listened to..... we probably also have to learn to support and not withdraw it on every variation to our own beliefs.... the police love division... they must be sweating with the Black Power and Mongrel Mob starting to talk?