New IPSC BC Doubletap
- Thread starter Slavex
- Start date
The anti camo comments remind me so much of the good guns/bad guns arguments of years ago that were so divisive to the firearms community ... now we have good clothes/ bad clothes arguments with similar results.
To those that believe we need to show a 'better face' for our sport, I say, lead by example, not by imposing your views on others through restrictive rules.
Remember that the 'bad guns' that were considered so bad for the image of shooting sports in years past were handguns ....
To those that believe we need to show a 'better face' for our sport, I say, lead by example, not by imposing your views on others through restrictive rules.
Remember that the 'bad guns' that were considered so bad for the image of shooting sports in years past were handguns ....
Sorry, this one is going to be a little verbose.
I work in an animation studio. You will not ever find a more left wing, politically correct and typically anti-gun environment than that, yet everyone there knows what I do for fun. Sure, I take some ribbing about it from time to time, but most of them actually seem to have an interest in how I fare in my competitions, and some of them have even indicated an interest in coming out to try shooting a handgun at some point. This is a real surprise to me given the political slant of most people in the film industry.
It wasn’t always this way. In the first few years of my career I know that many of my peers had no idea how to take me and many were quite frankly afraid of me. This was very disturbing and isolating for me, and quite frankly, I didn’t “get” them anymore than they “got” me. But I believe this sense of fear is at long last a thing of the past. Understanding has to flow in both directions, and that took some time for me to realize.
I have always tried to be open about my sport and enthusiastic/energetic and all those things that one would expect from someone who has a passion for something. I do not believe I should have to hide under a rock because I happen to like guns and shooting them competitively. I also realize that this is the modern age and most people I run into in this modern urban society likely won't have an immediate understanding of the way someone like me thinks, so I try to not be too "in your face" about it. I'm careful about what I wear to work, and I try to think twice about the sorts of comments, humorous or otherwise, that I make in mixed company. The last thing I want is for people to arrive at the erroneous conclusion that this great sport that I am so passionate about is really just a training ground for a bunch of red-neck, paranoid, kill crazy commando wannabes. As a result of this awareness, I feel that I have made some headway over the years, and most of these people now see what I do as a sport that is completely disconnected from the violence we see sensationalized in the press. This is how I want them to see me, and how I want them so see us collectively because it is the truth.
I despise censorship and I don't think anyone should ever HAVE to be told what to wear or how to speak or how to think. But prudence would seem to dictate that we be cognizant of the fact that humans tend to fear what they do not understand and govern ourselves with common sense. Firearms ownership by private citizens in this modern age is a tough sell and always will be. It sucks that this is so but it is a fact so why make it any worse than it has to be? And let’s face it; some of the t-shirts we’ve all seen out there are really pretty offensive and have no place at an IPSC match. For example; a picture of a B-52 flying over a map of Iraq with a mushroom cloud rising up out of it and the words “NOW its Miller time” emblazoned beneath isn’t going to seem very funny to someone who had to leave their whole extended family behind in order to make a better life for themselves here in Canada.
For most people perception is reality, and I would prefer to be perceived as someone who is professional, respectful, honest, responsible, and courteous, rather than as someone who is belligerent, aggressive, confrontational and/or quite possibly dangerous. I suppose one could think of it as a tactical maneuver in that; being right doesn't necessarily mean you will win an argument. First you have to win them over, THEN you can table your point.
Having said all of this; I have always said that the people I have had the pleasure to associate with in this sport over the many years I have been playing this game are the best people in the world. FWIW Rob, I never got the impression you were exactly an “in your face” sort of person. Yes, the tats, the piercings and the fangs get noticed, but lots of people in this world like body art and piercings. It’s just your thing….Big deal. You are being who you are and if you are genuine and respectful of others, the only people you will ever have a problem with are those who already have agendas and who automatically fit and edit any and all input to support an already established viewpoint. There’s nothing you can do about them anyway so why worry about what they think?
I work in an animation studio. You will not ever find a more left wing, politically correct and typically anti-gun environment than that, yet everyone there knows what I do for fun. Sure, I take some ribbing about it from time to time, but most of them actually seem to have an interest in how I fare in my competitions, and some of them have even indicated an interest in coming out to try shooting a handgun at some point. This is a real surprise to me given the political slant of most people in the film industry.
It wasn’t always this way. In the first few years of my career I know that many of my peers had no idea how to take me and many were quite frankly afraid of me. This was very disturbing and isolating for me, and quite frankly, I didn’t “get” them anymore than they “got” me. But I believe this sense of fear is at long last a thing of the past. Understanding has to flow in both directions, and that took some time for me to realize.
I have always tried to be open about my sport and enthusiastic/energetic and all those things that one would expect from someone who has a passion for something. I do not believe I should have to hide under a rock because I happen to like guns and shooting them competitively. I also realize that this is the modern age and most people I run into in this modern urban society likely won't have an immediate understanding of the way someone like me thinks, so I try to not be too "in your face" about it. I'm careful about what I wear to work, and I try to think twice about the sorts of comments, humorous or otherwise, that I make in mixed company. The last thing I want is for people to arrive at the erroneous conclusion that this great sport that I am so passionate about is really just a training ground for a bunch of red-neck, paranoid, kill crazy commando wannabes. As a result of this awareness, I feel that I have made some headway over the years, and most of these people now see what I do as a sport that is completely disconnected from the violence we see sensationalized in the press. This is how I want them to see me, and how I want them so see us collectively because it is the truth.
I despise censorship and I don't think anyone should ever HAVE to be told what to wear or how to speak or how to think. But prudence would seem to dictate that we be cognizant of the fact that humans tend to fear what they do not understand and govern ourselves with common sense. Firearms ownership by private citizens in this modern age is a tough sell and always will be. It sucks that this is so but it is a fact so why make it any worse than it has to be? And let’s face it; some of the t-shirts we’ve all seen out there are really pretty offensive and have no place at an IPSC match. For example; a picture of a B-52 flying over a map of Iraq with a mushroom cloud rising up out of it and the words “NOW its Miller time” emblazoned beneath isn’t going to seem very funny to someone who had to leave their whole extended family behind in order to make a better life for themselves here in Canada.
For most people perception is reality, and I would prefer to be perceived as someone who is professional, respectful, honest, responsible, and courteous, rather than as someone who is belligerent, aggressive, confrontational and/or quite possibly dangerous. I suppose one could think of it as a tactical maneuver in that; being right doesn't necessarily mean you will win an argument. First you have to win them over, THEN you can table your point.
Having said all of this; I have always said that the people I have had the pleasure to associate with in this sport over the many years I have been playing this game are the best people in the world. FWIW Rob, I never got the impression you were exactly an “in your face” sort of person. Yes, the tats, the piercings and the fangs get noticed, but lots of people in this world like body art and piercings. It’s just your thing….Big deal. You are being who you are and if you are genuine and respectful of others, the only people you will ever have a problem with are those who already have agendas and who automatically fit and edit any and all input to support an already established viewpoint. There’s nothing you can do about them anyway so why worry about what they think?
Yeah,
the 1st time I saw Rob was at a restaurant in NB for the nationals. I looked at him and really didn't know what to think of the teeth. I thought to myself,.... "self,...is this man going to bite me?"
Thank god he didn't, 'cause I don't like getting bit!
Some people would look at him and may think he is little crazy, but I learned over the years with my "clients", that you should never judge a book by its cover.
He may be a little, "crazy", but not a, "bad crazy", more of a, "I'm not going to hurt you,...but we are going to jump that bridge with your Dodge Neon"- sort of crazy.
sorry to stray off target,....I'll get back to my booze.
the 1st time I saw Rob was at a restaurant in NB for the nationals. I looked at him and really didn't know what to think of the teeth. I thought to myself,.... "self,...is this man going to bite me?"
Thank god he didn't, 'cause I don't like getting bit!
Some people would look at him and may think he is little crazy, but I learned over the years with my "clients", that you should never judge a book by its cover.
He may be a little, "crazy", but not a, "bad crazy", more of a, "I'm not going to hurt you,...but we are going to jump that bridge with your Dodge Neon"- sort of crazy.
sorry to stray off target,....I'll get back to my booze.
Last edited:
I'll admit that I am not super "in your face" but I am also not one to shy away from attention (no seriously, I don't). I used myself as an example simply because the tone of the article from the double tap definitely pointed toward those who are on the edge of "normal" as possibly needing to conform more, in order to help IPSC. And I disagree with that. Quite honestly I would rather we take the lumps from allowing people to wear shirts that some of us find offensive (ok it would be hard to find one that would bother me), just to stay true to what our group is. If we, who want to help the sport grow, do our part, and work with new shooters, spectators, concerned neighbors, whatever, and tell them that sure, there might be some guys you won't like in the sport, but that overall we are a great bunch. I even admit it might cost us a bit here and there, but I'd rather that than to have to start limiting people. If someone is wearing something that is legal to wear, than really who are we to say they can't wear it? It's this kind of stuff that makes me want to put all my piercings back in, do another mohawk and wear my rubber fetish suit to matches. Be glad it doesn't fit anymore and the top is all cracked and ripped.......
what we need are people skilled in delivering good PR. Plain and simple. IPSC needs to hire people that know how to show us in our glory of diversity, and the companionship that we all share. Trying to divide to us is only going to cost us. If a guy has bunch of tats, interview him, find out what he does for a living, people might be surprised to find out he's a cop, or a doctor. The guy with the piercings? maybe he's a lawyer, or teacher or surgeon. Promote how open we are to all people of all types, and you'll see the sport grow.
Sig- it was great shooting with you guys at the Nats, I hope to see you in 2007 as well.
what we need are people skilled in delivering good PR. Plain and simple. IPSC needs to hire people that know how to show us in our glory of diversity, and the companionship that we all share. Trying to divide to us is only going to cost us. If a guy has bunch of tats, interview him, find out what he does for a living, people might be surprised to find out he's a cop, or a doctor. The guy with the piercings? maybe he's a lawyer, or teacher or surgeon. Promote how open we are to all people of all types, and you'll see the sport grow.
Sig- it was great shooting with you guys at the Nats, I hope to see you in 2007 as well.
Personally...I could care less about tattoo's. hair, piercings...it just means IPSC attracts all kinds...
Cammo ...interetsing how something that is deisgned to make you blend in...actually makes you stand out. I don't like it...and the reason is simple...there is a difference between tactical and pratical...and cammo blurs those lines.
Regarding someones appearance...there is a legal precidence to consider. There is such a thing in industry as "appropriate attire"...but that is limited to clothing. That means...you can't say anything about hair, tattoo's, etc. Anything else would be discrimination (you can change a shirt...tattoo's are forever)
I don't see IPSC as being any different. That's why rule 5.3.1 specifically refers to "dress" not appearance. Now that I think of it...no one wants to see Slavex in a dress ...we really should clarify that rule
Conclusion...show up with pink hair and a bone in your nose...you're good to go...if you have on cammo pants...you're going to get talked to...
Cammo
...interetsing how something that is deisgned to make you blend in...actually makes you stand out. I don't like it...and the reason is simple...there is a difference between tactical and pratical...and cammo blurs those lines. Regarding someones appearance...there is a legal precidence to consider. There is such a thing in industry as "appropriate attire"...but that is limited to clothing. That means...you can't say anything about hair, tattoo's, etc. Anything else would be discrimination (you can change a shirt...tattoo's are forever)
I don't see IPSC as being any different. That's why rule 5.3.1 specifically refers to "dress" not appearance. Now that I think of it...no one wants to see Slavex in a dress
...we really should clarify that rule Conclusion...show up with pink hair and a bone in your nose...you're good to go...if you have on cammo pants...you're going to get talked to...
Quigley, the 'appropriate attire' laws are far more restricted in application than you imagine. Employers do not have the right to arbitrarily determine an employees dress ... its either casual (whatever you like), formal, (shirt and tie) or a specific uniform.
In any event, it is pointless to discuss labour law when participants in a match are not employees of IPSC.
The only valid point you make is when you refer to rules of the game. If the rules specify no camo, then so be it. But I will challenge the intelligence of such a rule in terms of its desired result ... I don't think it acheives its intent.
In any event, it is pointless to discuss labour law when participants in a match are not employees of IPSC.
The only valid point you make is when you refer to rules of the game. If the rules specify no camo, then so be it. But I will challenge the intelligence of such a rule in terms of its desired result ... I don't think it acheives its intent.
Last edited:
Gothmog said:
Well...maybe you don't understand or accept the intent...
Don't try and make IPSC into someting it's not...you'll enjoy it more.
If cammo's that important a part of anyones week-end wardrobe...there's always Air Soft
Last edited:
Quigley said:Well...maybe you don't understand or accept the intent...
Don't try and make IPSC into someting it's not...you'll enjoy it more.
If cammo's that important a part of anyones week-end wardrobe...there's always Air Soft
Why don't you explain the intent, then ... all I see as a result of this policy is more divisiveness in the shooting sports for a totally unnecessary policy. If there is a safety issue, fine and well. If there is an image problem, lead by example as I said before.
And the antis would say "if shooting is an important part of anyone's weekend activities, there's always Air Soft"
And its camo, not cammo ... from camoflage.
Hello Everyone,
RElliot – You wrote an excellent post for this thread.
Slavex – Why don’t you write a rebuttal article that can be published in our newsletters?
A couple of points for you all to consider:
A concerned member that participates in our sport wrote the article.
This is not a policy that IPSC has adopted. The IPSC rulebook does give the Match Director the ability to deal with this situation and it is completely up to their discretion and judgment. Note: There perceptions could be vastly different from yours, so be prepared to live with there decision.
I believe personal freedom should be respected. If someone wants to wear these shirts on there own time, go for it. What happens when this impacts other people or organizations? A really good point was made earlier in this thread of discussion:
“The fact of the matter is that 99.9% of people are prejudiced by your appearance; in milliseconds, they make an assumption (be it positive or negative) about you before you even get to open your mouth.”
It is possible that in our lifetime firearms may end up being banned because uninformed people are basing their decisions on bad information and poor public perception of the firearm owner. That is a very sobering fact that we all have to be aware of.
I am glad that this article was published. It will promote discussion and hopefully will make the point that we all have to take responsibility for our actions. The problem that we will run into is where do we draw the line? What is acceptable to some is not to other…. So how do we deal with this?
DVC
RElliot – You wrote an excellent post for this thread.
Slavex – Why don’t you write a rebuttal article that can be published in our newsletters?
A couple of points for you all to consider:
A concerned member that participates in our sport wrote the article.
This is not a policy that IPSC has adopted. The IPSC rulebook does give the Match Director the ability to deal with this situation and it is completely up to their discretion and judgment. Note: There perceptions could be vastly different from yours, so be prepared to live with there decision.
I believe personal freedom should be respected. If someone wants to wear these shirts on there own time, go for it. What happens when this impacts other people or organizations? A really good point was made earlier in this thread of discussion:
“The fact of the matter is that 99.9% of people are prejudiced by your appearance; in milliseconds, they make an assumption (be it positive or negative) about you before you even get to open your mouth.”
It is possible that in our lifetime firearms may end up being banned because uninformed people are basing their decisions on bad information and poor public perception of the firearm owner. That is a very sobering fact that we all have to be aware of.
I am glad that this article was published. It will promote discussion and hopefully will make the point that we all have to take responsibility for our actions. The problem that we will run into is where do we draw the line? What is acceptable to some is not to other…. So how do we deal with this?
DVC
Quigley said:
No, as I believe it is labour law in BC. I once consulted the BC Employment Standards office and what I posted earlier was what I was told.
Again, though, what does it matter? We are not discussing employees here. IPSC can make whatever rules it likes and I am free to think them foolish as you think them wise.
I would like you to make your case though ... perhaps you'll convince me.
While camo isn't part of my normal wardrobe I find it offensive that someone will tell me what I can and can't wear in public. It's this mentality that will stop new members from joining IPSC.
For what its worth I find plaid gives the wrong message (insinuates you may listen to country music or be a hick) but I'll be damned if I'll tell anyone not to wear it.
I see a mohawk in my future at the next PG qualifiers.
For what its worth I find plaid gives the wrong message (insinuates you may listen to country music or be a hick) but I'll be damned if I'll tell anyone not to wear it.
I see a mohawk in my future at the next PG qualifiers.
Quigley said:
Well, with all due respect
, that isn't the question here. Assuming one respects the rules but disagrees with them and thinks they ought to be changed ... persuade me that they ought not be changed.
BTW, I took a look at the rules and camo is not prohibited, but its use 'discouraged' ... seems a little waffly to me. I will point out that 'similar types of military or police garments' also fit into this category. It seems to me I've seen a great many competitors wearing single colour BDU (cargo) pants at club matches. Why pick on camo when the rule appears to apply to both?
Gothmog said:Well, with all due respect
Assuming one respects the rules but disagrees with them and thinks they ought to be changed ... persuade me that they ought not be changed.
BTW, I took a look at the rules and camo is not prohibited, but its use 'discouraged' ... seems a little waffly to me. I will point out that 'similar types of military or police garments' also fit into this category. It seems to me I've seen a great many competitors wearing single colour BDU (cargo) pants at club matches. Why pick on camo when the rule appears to apply to both?
If there are rules, then shouldn't we do our best to follow them (!?) I could care less if a guy wears camo pants, or hats or clothing of that nature. You and I know that is means nothing, but the "public" can be remedial when it comes to forming opinions.
ie: at a sanctioned IPSC match, spectators observe a participant dressed head to toe in Camouflage. This person is not in the military, so why would he want to wear camouflage....?
Those people (spectators) may observe this and come to the conclusion that IPSC is a training ground for militant civilians. (we both know how easily people can form the wrong opinion)
Put yourself in their shoes. You show up to observe an IPSC match, and the majority of people are camo'd up...., even though they are not in the military.
Dressed in T-shirts/ golf shirts and shorts we have a hard enough time getting public approval. Public approval (wether you agree or not), is important.
If I observed a person I know who is active military or ERT, and they were wearing camo or "tactical" type clothing, I would think, "cool", they are working their firearms skills in their duty gear. Most public would agree I think....
I have a hard enough time trying to convince people at work that my sport is a legitimate shooting sport. Some (officers included), think guns are bad, and if people show up to see what IPSC is about and see Joe shooter all decked out in Camo gear he got at the Walmart, ...well....it just doesn't help any. I have no problem with it at all, but why dress for hunting at an IPSC shooting match.
I would encourage LE and Military to utilize their gear, and would see it as a positive thing, especially considering most LE only qualify once a year.
Last edited:
maurice said:If there are rules, then shouldn't we do our best to follow them (!?) I could care less if a guy wears camo pants, or hats or clothing of that nature. You and I know that is means nothing, but the "public" can be remedial when it comes to forming opinions.
ie: at a sanctioned IPSC match, spectators observe a participant dressed head to toe in Camouflage. This person is not in the military, so why would he want to wear camouflage....?
Those people (spectators) may observe this and come to the conclusion that IPSC is a training ground for militant civilians. (we both know how easily people can form the wrong opinion)
Put yourself in their shoes. You show up to observe an IPSC match, and the majority of people are camo'd up...., even though they are not in the military.
Dressed in T-shirts/ golf shirts and shorts we have a hard enough time getting public approval. Public approval (wether you agree or not), is important.
If I observed a person I know who is active military or ERT, and they were wearing camo or "tactical" type clothing, I would think, "cool", they are working their firearms skills in their duty gear. Most public would agree I think....
I have a hard enough time trying to convince people at work that my sport is a legitimate shooting sport. Some (officers included), think guns are bad, and if people show up to see what IPSC is about and see Joe shooter all decked out in Camo gear he got at the Walmart, ...well....it just doesn't help any. I have no problem with it at all, but why dress for hunting at an IPSC shooting match.
Maurice I don't think you addressed the main issues I had, but I'll give you credit for making an attempt.
1. Following the rules has nothing to do with agreeing that they are good rules. If I am not persuaded the rules are good, I may in time leave the sport or never take it up.
2. Why would someone wear camo at a match? Camo is so mainstream now, nearly everyone wears it. The real question might be "why not?". In any event I've never felt inclined to wear it at a club match, but I really don't see the harm in it.
3. The 'military training ground' argument. IPSC shouldn't be construed as military training except when it really is military training and then those guys can wear their stuff. Uh huh ... I think you place way too much emphasis on a totally unfounded idea here and you contradict yourself. No one will believe this is some kind of paramilitary training any more than people will think Judo makes you a Ninja.
More to follow ... gotta run.
Last edited:
oddly enough everybody is missing the point about camo...
it isnt tactical super midnight assassin gear anymore..
ITs mainstream fashionable stuff, worn by kids, women and all sorts. ITs available in Hawaiian tropic colours, blues, pinks you name. Camo which once symbolized perhaps some sort of non sheep like mentality, is now mainstream and probably doesnt invoke much of a response...
Or is it that people only have an issue with camo if your holding a gun?
it isnt tactical super midnight assassin gear anymore..
ITs mainstream fashionable stuff, worn by kids, women and all sorts. ITs available in Hawaiian tropic colours, blues, pinks you name. Camo which once symbolized perhaps some sort of non sheep like mentality, is now mainstream and probably doesnt invoke much of a response...
Or is it that people only have an issue with camo if your holding a gun?
