Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 74
  1. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    458

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Enigma View Post
    the one thing i see wrong with this picture is that its everyone for himself, there is no common ground for people to fight the cause together they stare in front of them like racehorses with eye caps covering their eyes...

    people need to learn what it means to stand together once again..
    Now there is some very breathtaking thinking and also a reflection of what Paul stated.

    However we need to realise that this is the rock, the stumbling block to a combined effort and it is just as important to know that the Consultative Committee appointed by the SAPS to negotiate on YOUR behalf will have exactly the same problem. BTW that committee does not have any anti FCA organisation on it. These were never even informed of the formation or invited by the SAPS, only those organisations willing to "negotiate" and bend were, including GFSA and BAC.

    The first point, the rock, the stumbling block has a solution but it requires the effort of members and potential members. If firearm owners - members and potential members are happy they need do nothing then we have to wait for the vague possibility that organisation management will one day see the light. There are to many examples of none ever doing so. Australia, UK, Jamaica, Canada, Brazil and every country that has lost to gun control.

    The problem is caused by self-interest being the only point they are willing to discuss. That is not the first mandate and duty of any firearm related organisation. Growth and protection of members ABILITY to remain members is. That means protect the right to firearm ownership by all and any means is the most important aspect of any firearm organisation.

    How do you get the management to take self interest off the table of discussion. YOU TELL them to do it or walk.

    Members control any organisation. Members have the power to appoint anyone they desire to manage and run the organisation in the direction members want.

    There simply is no discussion of hoping, believing or praying management will do what they are supposed to do by guessing, divining or being guided by the SAPS "needs".

    In reality the solution to this problem lies in telling organisation management to do what members want.

    If anyone thinks firearm ownership has not been dealt a near fatal blow by the FCA then they have not considered how many firearm owners and dealers have been removed or denied ownership.

    700,000 robbed in broad daylight of their firearms and denied compensation.
    750,000 denied ownership by the FCA and SAPS ability to make any decision.
    600 and more dealers put out of business and lost many millions in stock and sales.

    About 50% of firearm owners have been sacrificed to this self-interest stance and the desire to appease the SAPS and FCA. How many more can we afford to sacrifice and who will be next?

    You can't appease a system that was designed to end firearm ownership or restrict it to a few. You can't support it and you can't fix it.

    Better tell your organisation management how you feel and what they must do.

    You don't need organisations to stand together you need members and potential members (any firearm owner or member of the public) to stand together and tell organisation management to get on with the job they are supposed to do, fail and they are out.

    Make sure they do not fail and do what is needed if they do fail.

    You have a solution, what are you willing to do is the most vital problem we now face.

  2. #22
    User
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Centurion
    Age
    47
    Posts
    246

    Default

    I really hope that the Hunters do not yield to the temptation of a settlement.

    The definition of a "good" settlement is that it is one which leaves all parties dissatisfied.

    This case should be fought cleverly, and I believe the following words of Sun Tzu to be apt: "When torrential water tosses boulders, it is because of its momentum. When the strike of a hawk breaks the body of its prey, it is because of timing."

    What better timing is there as now, when the State is not ready- apparently through its own conduct
    Last edited by Snaphaan; 30-03-2010 at 11:16.

  3. #23
    Moderator camouflage762's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Alberton
    Posts
    10,880

    Default

    Snaphaan: I seriously hope somebody who is a somebody from SAHGC is following this thread.
    National Dyslexic Association: D.N.A.

  4. #24
    Moderator camouflage762's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Alberton
    Posts
    10,880

    Default

    Wow.
    WTG abhm.

    BEEG THANKS
    National Dyslexic Association: D.N.A.

  5. #25

    Default SA Hunters Case

    As an Executive member of GOSA I can confirm that SAH has not discussed anything with us. We have tried to stiffen their backs but with no result that we can see because they don't talk to us. Can't say whether they talk to anyone else. I have reliable info that they don't but I can't say that from my own knowledge. It is of course madness to negotiate anything with SAPS, as any deal will be the throwing of a few crumbs to SAH in return for SAH backing off or reducing its effort in court. We all realise that a fight for all or nothing is risky but SAPS relies on the fear of losing. GOSA says fight to the conclusion, at least that ends the right message win or lose.

    John Trevennan Beare asks what can be done to disarm criminals. Nothing. That is the unpallatable truth that most people don't want to hear or accept, and it is an admission that no government can make without damning its own case for gun control. This is the very core of the battle. It is impossible to disarm criminals except for the handful of arms that are confiscated in routine police operations. It cannot be done and has never been done. A government that admits that also admits that control is aimed entirely at civilian disarmament. But we got that very admission from Mluleki George, and we got it more recently from the minister.

    We need to put that at the very forefront of the battle, because it is the key to educating the public as to why gun control is not about crime control.

  6. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dick View Post
    As an Executive member of GOSA I can confirm that SAH has not discussed anything with us. We have tried to stiffen their backs but with no result that we can see because they don't talk to us. Can't say whether they talk to anyone else. I have reliable info that they don't but I can't say that from my own knowledge. It is of course madness to negotiate anything with SAPS, as any deal will be the throwing of a few crumbs to SAH in return for SAH backing off or reducing its effort in court. We all realise that a fight for all or nothing is risky but SAPS relies on the fear of losing. GOSA says fight to the conclusion, at least that ends the right message win or lose.

    John Trevennan Beare asks what can be done to disarm criminals. Nothing. That is the unpallatable truth that most people don't want to hear or accept, and it is an admission that no government can make without damning its own case for gun control. This is the very core of the battle. It is impossible to disarm criminals except for the handful of arms that are confiscated in routine police operations. It cannot be done and has never been done. A government that admits that also admits that control is aimed entirely at civilian disarmament. But we got that very admission from Mluleki George, and we got it more recently from the minister.

    We need to put that at the very forefront of the battle, because it is the key to educating the public as to why gun control is not about crime control.
    What is to be lost by a 'fight to the finish"?

    In my opinion there is nothing to lose since we can now see so clearly what will be the outcome if 'accommodations' are made - instead of fighting tooth and nail to unravel the FCA in it's entirety!

    I say this in light of the fact that in all the history of representations and negotiations by various bodies with SAPS etc on the FCA, very little has been achieved which will ameliorate the ultimate impact - which has been clearly and unequivocally stated many times to be the disarming of civilians.

    Why do people not believe the representatives of the ANC when they tell us these facts? Once one understands the will behind these statements and the truth of them, then there is no choice, other than total capitulation, but to fight to the finish. There can be no middle ground as some foolishly believe.

    I have no idea why anybody who is not in government or the SAPS would bother to try to answer the question about how to disarm criminals - worldwide nobody has come up with an effective answer - why should gun owners bother to give this thought? Does John Trevennan Beare think it is his job to solve this puzzle and that if he does it will somehow impress the ANC sufficiently that they will consider leaving his guns alone? Pulease!

  7. #27
    User
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Centurion
    Age
    47
    Posts
    246

    Default

    Does anyone know what happened on the 29th? I didn't see anything in the press.

    Has the horse bolted?

  8. #28

    Default

    I had a conversation with SAHGCA's New Chief Executive Officer,Mr Danie Venter this afternoon.

    I must say that he was very courteous and friendly. He confirmed that the SAHGCA has entered into negotiations with the SAP. Danie assures me that this will not be to the detriment of any firearm owner in SA, furthermore should they be unhappy with the negotiations, they will just proceed with the court case. The SAHGCA definitely has the upper hand, pray that they use it wisely.

    Although there are many of us who may be a little disappointed that they decided to negotiate, it is always easy to stand on the sidelines and make comment on how someone else should spend their money. Hopefully GunSite South Africa will in the not too distant future, have enough funds to support such initiatives and thus have a more direct input.

    Danie additionally welcomed a closer relationship with GunSite and all firearm organisations. Let this all work to-ward's this and hopefully get to the stage where we speak as one unified voice.

    Frankh
    "Guns are just tools, the way they're used reflects the society they're apart of, if you don't like guns, blame it on society" ~Chris Kyle

  9. #29
    User
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Centurion
    Age
    47
    Posts
    246

    Default

    Thanks Frank.

    Quote Originally Posted by FrankH View Post
    Danie assures me that this will not be to the detriment of any firearm owner in SA
    I must say that these are words that appear to be very carefully chosen.

  10. #30
    User
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    I'm not from here, I was sent.
    Age
    48
    Posts
    5,219

    Default

    I hope they understand that they are negotiating with an organisation that has never once negotiated in good faith.

    Sean.
    Pain is just weakness leaving the body.

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. SAGA court case and SAH court case
    By Chas Lotter in forum Firearms Legal Issues
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-10-2011, 14:57
  2. SAHUNTERS Court Case finalised ?
    By Glocky in forum Firearm Licensing and Re-licensing
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-05-2011, 14:57
  3. Court Case..All Hunters!!!
    By Rudib in forum Firearms Legal Issues
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-08-2009, 10:27

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •