Decision on ISSF clothing rule

[G.A.]

How long would the process take for it to be in effective?
I am waiting to buy some shooting clothes and the possible new rule change is holding me back.
If they are in their initial process and this rule won't be effective until 2005, how do they expect shooting clothes seller to stay in business with merchandize that people wouldn't be buying for a year? And when the new clothes do become available, their price would be rather high to accomodate for the loss the companies suffered in sales.
Please place your input, if you know what happened in the 80s with the rule change at that time.
.50116.0

[Len]

If the rule ended up being effective in a year, NOW would be the time for the clothes as it's going to take some ramp up time to get used to the new clothes.
.50124.50116

[David Levene]

: How long would the process take for it to be in effective?
: I am waiting to buy some shooting clothes and the possible new rule change is holding me back.
: If they are in their initial process and this rule won't be effective until 2005, how do they expect shooting clothes seller to stay in business with merchandize that people wouldn't be buying for a year? And when the new clothes do become available, their price would be rather high to accomodate for the loss the companies suffered in sales.
: Please place your input, if you know what happened in the 80s with the rule change at that time.
I understand that the decision will be made/confirmed in April.
dalevene-at-blueyonder.co.uk.50130.50116

[Spencer C]

Given that most of the 'objections' appear to be coming from a comparatively small number of shooters and coaches, rather than the european ISSF clothing manufacturers;
Could it possibly be that the clothing manufacturers are not too worried?

.50132.50116

[pilkguns]

the clothing manufacturers are the ones leading this fight.
Personally, I would rather see them go the way of pistol shooting, nothing allowed. that would mean lighter guns would come back in vogue, lighter guns would be required without the clothing support and thus lower scores which could mean a bigger target that was more "reactive" to give the Television audiences something to see

Or lets really get in the orginal Olympic spirit and shoot naked, that would get media attention.

: Given that most of the 'objections' appear to be coming from a comparatively small number of shooters and coaches, rather than the european ISSF clothing manufacturers;
: Could it possibly be that the clothing manufacturers are not too worried?

.50138.50132

[Len_R]

I've said it before and I'll say it again, Shoot naked!
.50141.50138

[Richard H.]

I really don't know what conspiracy you guys are talking about. The proposal is to remove half the equipment that the clothing manufactures make, so I really can't see what's in it for them. I beleive Kurt Thune as been very vocal about opposing this change.

: Given that most of the 'objections' appear to be coming from a comparatively small number of shooters and coaches, rather than the european ISSF clothing manufacturers;
: Could it possibly be that the clothing manufacturers are not too worried?

.50145.50132

[Scared]

: I've said it before and I'll say it again, Shoot naked!
You obviously haven't seen Wig shoot in a while.

.50148.50141

[Len]

in equipment, so new jackets for everyone! and cheaper pants.
.50150.50145

[David Levene]

: Given that most of the 'objections' appear to be coming from a comparatively small number of shooters and coaches.............
I have said it before, but that is the root of the problem. Shooters moan like mad about the proposed changes but how many have actually made their feelings known to the ISSF.
Just sending an email or letter to the ISSF is a waste of time. It is too private and can be written off as a "mere handful of complaints".
The complaints need to be in public in a place that the ISSF cannot ignore, and I am afraid that Target Talk is not good enough. The ISSF themselves have provided such a place, the response section to the Anderson letter on the ISSF News site. It is easy to see how many people feel strongly enough about the topic to have posted there. So far less than 20 people have complained. On that showing you might as well throw your trousers away now.
dalevene-at-blueyonder.co.uk.50153.50132

[Len_R]

: : I've said it before and I'll say it again, Shoot naked!
: You obviously haven't seen Wig shoot in a while.

.50156.50148

[Len_R]

If there is a place to complain and only 20 people have complianed in public, then maybe besides some of the clothing mf's maybe that's all that care?
You can't have it both ways...saying there is a place to complain, then when on 20 or so people do, saying not enough people are complaining, if that's the number, that's the number.
Myself I think written letters are more important and effective as not all shooters have access to the Internet but many have access to post.

.50164.50153

[David Levene]

: You can't have it both ways...saying there is a place to complain, then when on 20 or so people do, saying not enough people are complaining, if that's the number, that's the number.
Fine, I personally don't really mind which way the ISSF go on the trousers issue. It would be a shame though if shooters with strong views were ignored simply because they didn't post in the most appropriate place.
If all of the people who complained on TT were to post to the ISSF News site then the arguements would be much more compelling.
dalevene-at-blueyonder.co.uk.50169.50164

[Len_R]

In looking it'snot a lot of people so maybe they have?

.50198.50169

[Richard H.]

Why new jackets? The only thing they are planning to change is the pocket and straps on the shoulder which can easily be removed from existing jackets.
: in equipment, so new jackets for everyone! and cheaper pants.

.50238.50150