Issf Wankers
- Thread starter HKfan
- Start date
well, who is growing and who is shrinking?
That's all you need to know about ISSF sour grapes.
They know, deep down inside, that they are insufficiantly manly, so they try and neuter everyone else, rather than growing some balls. Bah.
That's all you need to know about ISSF sour grapes.
They know, deep down inside, that they are insufficiantly manly, so they try and neuter everyone else, rather than growing some balls. Bah.
"Targets should not symbolize the killing or the destruction of human beings or animals"
And trap/skeet shooting doesn't...?
Perhaps if "the IPSC" switched to archery targets, tweed jackets and pocket stop-watches it would be more acceptable to this hypocrit...?
And trap/skeet shooting doesn't...?
Perhaps if "the IPSC" switched to archery targets, tweed jackets and pocket stop-watches it would be more acceptable to this hypocrit...?
Donny Fenn1
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- East Kootenays
have they changed the olympic rapid fire pistol targets? when i shot that discipline the were all human silhouettes, and isn't running boar a picture of a pig?
i thought ipsc targets were cardboard diamonds?
i thought ipsc targets were cardboard diamonds?
holy #### maybe someone should point out that the entire purpose of the Olympics, originally, was games of war. What's archery, javelin, biathlon, judo, boxing, etc etc etc all about? KILLING PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and we don't use human shaped targets anymore. If that moron from the ISSF thought the "classic" target was human shaped, I'd hate to meet his wife.
This is no different than "farmers" acting like their long guns are great, peaceful, politically correct, while being totally in favor of whatever restrictions/etc on those evil, "designed to kill" pistols.
You don't need to look very far to see this very attitude.
ISSF feels that it is the only sports thinggie which can claim to be "ok" and reasonable (you know, the whole "Olympic sport") thing, and they feel that being associated with ipsc would greatly harm their image. To be perfectly honest, they have nothing to gain and lots to lose, and whereas I'm sad at the decision, it makes perfect sense, from their point of view.
How different is this, really, from us pistol shooters being hung out to dry in favor of losing the long gun registry, for example? #### the restricted owners, just so long as the farmers don't have to register their long guns. "good" guns and "evil" guns.
>Well, any time we see an ISSF person trying to shoot IPSC, we can tellt hem
>to f**k off, now.
Hmmm... Virtually all of the people whom I bring into ipsc start out with the hart house revolver club, which is a purely bullseye (issf/isu) club. Not to mention I'm one of the metro toronto pistol league bullseye champs, and I shot bullseye for years before really getting into ipsc. ... So, let's not confuse individual members with the organization itself.
You don't need to look very far to see this very attitude.
ISSF feels that it is the only sports thinggie which can claim to be "ok" and reasonable (you know, the whole "Olympic sport") thing, and they feel that being associated with ipsc would greatly harm their image. To be perfectly honest, they have nothing to gain and lots to lose, and whereas I'm sad at the decision, it makes perfect sense, from their point of view.
How different is this, really, from us pistol shooters being hung out to dry in favor of losing the long gun registry, for example? #### the restricted owners, just so long as the farmers don't have to register their long guns. "good" guns and "evil" guns.
>Well, any time we see an ISSF person trying to shoot IPSC, we can tellt hem
>to f**k off, now.
Hmmm... Virtually all of the people whom I bring into ipsc start out with the hart house revolver club, which is a purely bullseye (issf/isu) club. Not to mention I'm one of the metro toronto pistol league bullseye champs, and I shot bullseye for years before really getting into ipsc. ... So, let's not confuse individual members with the organization itself.
omen said:
No difference at all. You are quite right. It is completely, deeply wrong, and we excoriate these Quislings at every opportunity.
Shooting bullseye is one thing. Have at 'er! Anything which involves trigger finger wiggling, from Cowboy Action to Sporting Clays, is bound to be good! That said, being a member of the ISSF is another thing altogether, as it apparently means you aren't allowed to "...cooperate with the IPSC", or "...participate in any practical shooting activities", according to a resolution made at the 2000 ISSF general assembly. Fair enough. Elect a new board
Oh, wait... that was the general assembly, not simply the board. The membership chose this excerable position.This is like saying that in order to be Canadian, you have to be anti-gun.
Has any other shooting sport assosciation adopted such a reprehensible stance as to seek to instruct their members as to what they can and cannot do?
Bah.
ISSF vs. IPSC is like comparing going to the driving range and actually playing a round of golf.
However, if IPSC/USPSA were to ever change the 'classic' targets to a more round shape, I think the sport would gather more participates and would be accepted more by the general populace.
Of course, some people would be more inclined to shoot IDPA as a result.
However, if IPSC/USPSA were to ever change the 'classic' targets to a more round shape, I think the sport would gather more participates and would be accepted more by the general populace.
Of course, some people would be more inclined to shoot IDPA as a result.
It seems that only round targets are acceptable. Trap/skeet, bullseye. Maybe we need to get away from the classic target and use a round target that looks like this "8". A small circle on top of a big one or will that look too much like a snowman?
The ISSF is the governing body for all recognized international and olympic shooting sports and is hanging on by it's fingertips . Many countries have very restrictive firearms control so thier citizens are unable to own or practise for the shooting venues . With the global gun ban mentality running rampant and olympic comittees from many countries wanting to drop all of the shooting sports , it's only a matter of time and there will be no powder shooting sports . Airguns only and then that will disappear . Canada has been very instrumental and vocal in trying to kill off the shooting sports . The International Olympic Comittee is liberal to the extreme as are most comittees of member nations so the member nations are in the process of cutting all funding and training allowances to the shooting sports . This is not the fault of the ISSF who are fighting a losing battle . You can go to the Canadian Olympic Comittee website and look at the sports funding . Plenty of money for syncronized swimmers and shot putters , but none for shooters . If a Canadian shooter qualifies for an international competition , like the PanAm games or the Olympics , they pretty much pay thier own way .
ISSF, at least in pistols, has made itself irrelevant, by taking the pleasure out of shooting. Their courses of fire are designed to challenge olympic class shooters. They don't provide relevance to most people who have an interest in handguns. A free pistol is just plain weird to many shooters, let alone the general public.
I look at the competitions that get a good turn out. ICORE, Action Match. Silhouette,SASS,IPSC, IDPA, even PPC, these all offer something in the way of diversity of course of fire, type of firearms available, even real world relevance, in the form of self defence or hunting applications. They are interesting to a broader spectrum of people than ISSF matches.
Having purified their sport into a corner, they now have to defend their hold on govt funding for ranges, sports development and travel junkets. The ISSF range built for the 2000 Olympics here in Sydney is a complete white elephant. $17,000,000 dollars was wasted on a facility that is rarely used, 12 months ago the dept of sport asked me to try and figure out how to convert it to dual IPSC usage so it could pay it's way. No such luck.
The first step in a black public relations campaign is to label your opposition evil. This has worked for politics and religion in the past, this is what we are seeing here.Notice the humanoid (non IPSC) target used to illustrate the article?
I look at the competitions that get a good turn out. ICORE, Action Match. Silhouette,SASS,IPSC, IDPA, even PPC, these all offer something in the way of diversity of course of fire, type of firearms available, even real world relevance, in the form of self defence or hunting applications. They are interesting to a broader spectrum of people than ISSF matches.
Having purified their sport into a corner, they now have to defend their hold on govt funding for ranges, sports development and travel junkets. The ISSF range built for the 2000 Olympics here in Sydney is a complete white elephant. $17,000,000 dollars was wasted on a facility that is rarely used, 12 months ago the dept of sport asked me to try and figure out how to convert it to dual IPSC usage so it could pay it's way. No such luck.
The first step in a black public relations campaign is to label your opposition evil. This has worked for politics and religion in the past, this is what we are seeing here.Notice the humanoid (non IPSC) target used to illustrate the article?
Of course the real joke here is that the Olympic movement may well dump all the ISSF shooting events from the agenda anyways.
THe current head of the Olympic comitte is having a sport by sport 'review'. He's capping off the number of sports in the olympics and if they add one they drop one is the new rule. They actually dropped 2 or three events for the London games coming up. I believe the organisers said that this would save them $50M in costs.
I can't remember all the sports but baseball was one of them, (dropped because the US kept winning and on-one outside of the US or Japan cared anyway).
So being an 'Olympic' sport is not that great a justification as to a sports existence as the olympics will be increasingly run by the media and sponsors - and who wants to sponsor a sport that has a limited TV audience?? Lets face it ISSF events hardly make exiting TV. Now IPSC, on the other hand, with some editing is great. 20 second bursts of activity, exciting head to head shootoffs, edit it together and you have a great TV roundup slot!
I remember after the Bisley World Shoot in the 1990's the Daily Telegraph had a write up that said precisely that - IPSC would make a great Olympic sport. Of course the anti's have a tizzy over that thought.
Yes, welcome to the Olympics the greatest made for TV sports spectacular ever!
THe current head of the Olympic comitte is having a sport by sport 'review'. He's capping off the number of sports in the olympics and if they add one they drop one is the new rule. They actually dropped 2 or three events for the London games coming up. I believe the organisers said that this would save them $50M in costs.
I can't remember all the sports but baseball was one of them, (dropped because the US kept winning and on-one outside of the US or Japan cared anyway).
So being an 'Olympic' sport is not that great a justification as to a sports existence as the olympics will be increasingly run by the media and sponsors - and who wants to sponsor a sport that has a limited TV audience?? Lets face it ISSF events hardly make exiting TV. Now IPSC, on the other hand, with some editing is great. 20 second bursts of activity, exciting head to head shootoffs, edit it together and you have a great TV roundup slot!
I remember after the Bisley World Shoot in the 1990's the Daily Telegraph had a write up that said precisely that - IPSC would make a great Olympic sport. Of course the anti's have a tizzy over that thought.
Yes, welcome to the Olympics the greatest made for TV sports spectacular ever!
