New ISSF Rules

[Richard H]

A question why is it fine for those in the US to embrace this "we have a tradition of sedition and independence and view anything coming from elsewhere with anything from mild suspicion to outright hostility." attitude. When the rest of the world takes the same stance with things from the US some Americans (not all) get their shorts in a knot.


By the way IPSC is shot in European countries. Here's a link to countries that participate is action shooting, might want to scan it before you insult any others http://www.ipsc.org/regions.php

Anyone who thinks the shooting sports is healthy in any country and is not under attack is delusional.

[Dogchaser]

A question why is it fine for those in the US to embrace this "we have a tradition of sedition and independence and view anything coming from elsewhere with anything from mild suspicion to outright hostility." attitude. When the rest of the world takes the same stance with things from the US some Americans (not all) get their shorts in a knot.



Anyone who thinks the shooting sports is healthy in any country and is not under attack is delusional.

Shooting sports are on the chopping block in any country that still allows private gun ownership.

The reason we are always suspicious is because you can't just go to the gun shop and buy a new high capacity pistol and in most countries guns are only used to shoot people with opinions of freedom like we in the US cherish.

China uses slave labor to compete in the world market. Should I respect their motives or suspect them?

BTW Do we have any posters from China on this board or is it censored by their .gov?

[MichaelB]

... in most countries guns are only used to shoot people with opinions of freedom like we in the US cherish.

Are you really sure? Just what exactly do you mean?

In Australia, privately owned guns used to shoot at other people are invariably used in a crime of passion or theft of property. Or gang wars - most recently bikie gangs. Politics doesn't come into it. Are the US, Canada, Europe and most everywhere else so different?

[Dogchaser]

... in most countries guns are only used to shoot people with opinions of freedom like we in the US cherish.

Are you really sure? Just what exactly do you mean?

In Australia, privately owned guns used to shoot at other people are invariably used in a crime of passion or theft of property. Or gang wars - most recently bikie gangs. Politics doesn't come into it. Are the US, Canada, Europe and most everywhere else so different?

If you live in a Communist dictatorship (such as China, North Korea, Iran, old USSR) and speak your mind about the people in power, you just disappear. In Mexico and Columbia and othersyou have the coruption of the polititians paying police to do their dirty work.

In the US we have the 1st Amendment to the Constitution guarranteed by the 2nd.

You really make guns sound like a bad thing in AUS, would you like more gun control laws? Or have you had enough? Do you feel guns make people bad?

ETA Yes gangs do infringe on the freedoms we love, but in my country I can legally carry a concealed firearm to protect myself and family from them. Can you?

[PaulT]

Interesting how a sensible post about the new ISSF rules has migrated to gun control, political freedoms and relative merits of a free –v- centralised economy. Free speach in action.....

This post is a timely reminder to check our kit and check our 2008 team kit. Our friend from Scandinavia took this as such in a professional manor.

As ISSF bulletins go, this was a good one as it included some diagrams to help illustrate the meaning and in all fairness to the ISSF, they provide an efficient bridge for the shooting nations and the IOC.
Hint to ISSF, a flow chart for 25m malfunctions and similar would be good; a picture speaks 1000 words.

The Olympic Games provides a focal point for our sport and irrespective of the merits or otherwise, the Games offers every participating nation the opportunity to showcase its shooting athletes and promote ISSF/Olympic style shooting in a positive light. We surely can not ignore this opportunity.

The introduction of the finals in the 80’s offered a means of making the events more media friendly whilst maintaining the core of each event, they have also delivered a mechanism of breaking ties as the skill of athletes as developed in many of the events that with the exception of 50m pistol, been more frequently necessary.

[Richard H]

The Olympic Games provides a focal point for our sport and irrespective of the merits or otherwise, the Games offers every participating nation the opportunity to showcase its shooting athletes

How so only countries that win the limited number of quotas participate, wheres as the World Cups include athletes from every participating nation.

and promote ISSF/Olympic style shooting in a positive light. We surely can not ignore this opportunity.

That would be true if the shooting sporst got any air time or media mention but as they really don't the shhoting sports are really shown no light let alone a postive light.

[Spencer]

Paul T - look forward to a 'flow chart' for 25m malfunctions in the next Manual for Juries and Range Officers

Spencer

[Jose Rossy]

Unlike in most other countries, organized and sanctioned shooting sports are not a necessity for viable firearm ownership in the USA. One more reason why international style shooting gets such little traction over here.

Don't shoot the messenger.

[fred.mannis]

That would be true if the shooting sports got any air time or media mention but as they really don't the shooting sports are really shown no light let alone a positive light.

I agree. Further, the IOC could, if it wished, ensure that all the sports received a minimum amount of coverage on TV.

[Spencer]

The system at the Olympics is:
- ALL sports are covered by the host broadcaster (it is in each Olympic contract and costs the host broadcaster a lot of money to set up the coverage)
- the host broadcaster makes this covereage available to ALL national channels covering the Olympics
- YOUR national network with the rights to the Olympics decides what they will use within their network - i.e. it is YOUR national network who decides if shooting gets live coverage, delayed coverage, highlights, or zero coverage. National (re)broadcasters are notorious for not admitting this!
- if several million shooters in USA demanded coverage, they would get it (networks are reactive)

Spencer

[Richard H]

The system at the Olympics is:
- ALL sports are covered by the host broadcaster (it is in each Olympic contract and costs the host broadcaster a lot of money to set up the coverage)
- the host broadcaster makes this covereage available to ALL national channels covering the Olympics
- YOUR national network with the rights to the Olympics decides what they will use within their network - i.e. it is YOUR national network who decides if shooting gets live coverage, delayed coverage, highlights, or zero coverage. National (re)broadcasters are notorious for not admitting this!
- if several million shooters in USA demanded coverage, they would get it (networks are reactive)

Spencer

Yes thanks for explaining pooled feeds.

People in the states could request it till there eyes and ears bleed, and NBC their national broadcaster with the Olympic rights would not put it on, NBC will NEVER show anything that puts firearms in good light. Networks are reactive yes but they are way more reactive to their political agenda and those that support it. Now maybe if you managed to get 25-50 million people of their fat ass and actually do something that might make a difference but you can't get that many to actually go out and vote so good luck. NBC and all the networks will cover rampages for days, weeks, months on end though, I guess they count that as filling up their shooting related broadcast quota.

Its the same here in Canada, one of our shooters won the gold in AP at the PAN AM's the coverage was next to nill, less than 10 seconds.

On a more important note which countries national broadcasters are giving coverage to shooting events? Don't all you answer at once, I'm pretty sure the silence will be deafening.

So just because it's captured by someone on tape, unless someone airs it, it might as well not exist.

[Dogchaser]

It really is sad that the shooters don't get the coverage they deserve.

I really feel sports that can be timed, measured or mechanically scored should be Olympic events. The show off sports such as skating, trick skiing and floor gymnastics are all just judges impressions.

At least in our sport if you shoot a 4 there is no doubt you messed up.

[AAlex]

I keep hearing the recurring theme that the lack of coverage is due to political agenda. That is true, of course. However, media can take ANY material and spin it any way they want to promote their agenda, but exactly which material gets air time, in my opinion, is determined in large part by the viewer appeal, and that is the major problem in this sport, in my opinion.

People often compare shooting appeal to darts and golf, but in darts I can see them throwing stuff, and in shooting I can see them swinging and putting. In shooting you can only see them standing there, and then the score appears. This gets old very fast. Even though I'm a shooter, I find curling a lot more interesting to watch than shooting.

I'd like to gripe that I also want to see more of taekwondo, fencing, judo, badminton, table tennis, etc. covered in Beijing instead of goddamn beach volleyball 24/7.

[Richard H]

I keep hearing the recurring theme that the lack of coverage is due to political agenda. That is true, of course. However, media can take ANY material and spin it any way they want to promote their agenda, but exactly which material gets air time, in my opinion, is determined in large part by the viewer appeal, and that is the major problem in this sport, in my opinion.

People often compare shooting appeal to darts and golf, but in darts I can see them throwing stuff, and in shooting I can see them swinging and putting. In shooting you can only see them standing there, and then the score appears. This gets old very fast. Even though I'm a shooter, I find curling a lot more interesting to watch than shooting.

I'd like to gripe that I also want to see more of taekwondo, fencing, judo, badminton, table tennis, etc. covered in Beijing instead of goddamn beach volleyball 24/7.

I agree watching shooting for most people would be akin to watching paint dry that said there are reactive sports ie trap and skeet and even Rapid fire none of those get any coverage, so it has more to do with the politics then tha actual appeal of the sport.

[Fred Mannis]

So just because it's captured by someone on tape, unless someone airs it, it might as well not exist.

So if it does exist on tape/hard drive, why can't the ISSF or country organizations (like USAS, or NRA) negotiate with the host broadcaster or national network to show these events on, say, pay TV, or streaming video? Even the anti gun folks at NBC would have a hard time walking away from incremental sales. Or maybe not. It is certainly very discouraging.

[Richard H]

So just because it's captured by someone on tape, unless someone airs it, it might as well not exist.

So if it does exist on tape/hard drive, why can't the ISSF or country organizations (like USAS, or NRA) negotiate with the host broadcaster or national network to show these events on, say, pay TV, or streaming video? Even the anti gun folks at NBC would have a hard time walking away from incremental sales. Or maybe not. It is certainly very discouraging.

The cost is way too prohibitive for someone like the ISSF to get the footage. They'd rather it not be shown than give it away for free. I do believe there was a little of the olympics on ISSF tv once , for some reason I remember Wifu shooitng FP, but I could very well be mistaken. The other problem is ISSF is not a national broadcaster but would be consider an international broadcaster and there would be contractual problems getting all the national broadcasters to sign off on their exclusive rights to show it in their country.

[Shooter]

This thread has been very interesting, and leads me to wonder if maybe some newer group might be organised. Several years ago, a fellow and some of us, wanted to get the World Shooting Federation going. This was to organize and set up World Championships under an umbrella organization for the non-Olympic shooting events/sports. Maybe it is time to resurect this idea and think about trying to do something like this. I attended a Congress that was held in Hungary, but nothing much happened after that. Maybe it is too big to set up, but it might be worth a try. Don't know if it would help with tv exposure or not, but it would help promote some of the popular shooting sports that are not being contested in the Olympics. Just a thought.
Don in Oregon

[Jose Rossy]

This thread has been very interesting, and leads me to wonder if maybe some newer group might be organised. Several years ago, a fellow and some of us, wanted to get the World Shooting Federation going. This was to organize and set up World Championships under an umbrella organization for the non-Olympic shooting events/sports. Maybe it is time to resurect this idea and think about trying to do something like this. I attended a Congress that was held in Hungary, but nothing much happened after that. Maybe it is too big to set up, but it might be worth a try. Don't know if it would help with tv exposure or not, but it would help promote some of the popular shooting sports that are not being contested in the Olympics. Just a thought.
Don in Oregon

If the fullbore experience with ICFRA is any indication, a one-world organization is not going to go over well in many places.

[David Levene]

This was to organize and set up World Championships under an umbrella organization for the non-Olympic shooting events

I presume you mean the non-ISSF shooting events.

[Guest]

But...
Is Rule 51 'new', or is a result of the actions of Smith and Carlos (USA) at the 1968 Olympics?