Insurance.

[Bigjohn]

This is a rant and nothing but a rant. I just feel that I have to talk (type) to someone who does not know anything about what's happening, so I can un-burden myself. No names will be mentioned.

For the last thirteen (13) years, I have held, amongst other positions on the committee, the position of Secretary of my local shooting club. With very few members who are prepared to take up any position on these committees, only a few end up doing the work.

My issue is; in the 24 years of existence the club has always maintained its own insurance policy. This has given us the freedom to promote any and all disciplines of shooting for which we could get the range approved. The club has never FORCED its members to join any national shooting body but allowed them to choose the one they felt would support their chosen discipline.

We have had some disciplines start and then fail but we continue to offer the members the options they want. Our club has one strong discipline which most of the members compete in with some overlap, as many compete in other disciplines also.

I enjoy my shooting and attempt to try as many disciplines as I can.

All this may change by the end of next month, and we may be reliant upon the good nature of the Executive of a Singular Discipline Shooting Body. How come, you ask?
Well, A member who holds a position on our clubs Executive and competes in the strongest discipline amongst our membership has placed a 'Notice of Motion', before our upcoming Annual General Meeting.

His proposal says that all of our membership should be signed up to 'this' National Body and be covered by their Insurance Policy. Our club would then drop its Insurance Policy. Members who refuse to join this National body would have no insurance cover and hence would be liable to lose everything if the club was sued.

As their Insurance policy is from the same Insurance Company as our present policy, our club would then become bound by the rules of the Singular Discipline National Shooting Body. For us to hold any of the other Discipline Shoots, as we do now, our club would require annual written approval from this body to hold these shoots. They also need to advise the Insurer that they wish to approve these events.

If someone along the line decides that this does not fit the policy then we are S!^&&2d.

The constitution of our club indicates we are a multi-discipline shooting club and the proposal goes against all principles we have built up over the years. I thought that this proposal would have died a death at the hands of the members at the last meeting but several who have spoken out against this proposal prior to the meeting, supported it and helped it through to the AGM.

I am currently spending many hours attempting to 'counter' the effect acceptance of this proposal would have on our membership. I have tried to sway the member who is moving the motion but he is unmovable from his postion. He feels so confident that it will be accepted that he will be on holidays at the time of the AGM.

If this succeeds, this will seriously dent my shooting activities to the extent that I may have to surrend or sell some handguns. This I do not wish to do.

I would like to thank all of you for letting me have my rant, RANT Mode off!

John.

[dubber123]

Isn't it great when some of the worst threats to your club come from within? Our club is undergoing many of it's own, and I hope yours and ours can come out on top. Heres one of our current threats: Our club has been in continuous use since 1946, they put in the road it's on, called ROD AND GUN CLUB ROAD. Prety self explanatory. Now we have several "new" neighbors who have built on the road sueing, including one moron who says his horses are suffering "emotional distress" from the noise! I dunno, they look pretty relaxed to me. Morons!

[SharpsShooter]

Sounds like the gent that is making all the fuss is a selfish sort. Like you, I enjoy many different types of shooting. Our pistol club supports several types of matches and that is what attracted me to them in the fiirst place. They require that you be an NRA member and Join the state association to support ther shooting sports, but most of ther members would do that anyway.

Your constitution clearly states that your club is a multi-disipline organization and this troublesome member should be reminded that "he" joined you guys, not the other way around.

Hope it works out as I hate to see anyone forced to sell firearms.


SS

[walltube]

Big John,

Your club's constitution is the rule and law of that organisation. Do not allow this one individual to have his way. This will eventually destroy your club.

We here in the U.S.A. are having a similar struggle against a selfish, self-centered group of liars in Congress.

I wish you well, Big John.

Y.T.,

Wt.

[Pilgrim]

Since it is the same insurance outfit, what could the advantage of switching to the "national" organization be? If there isn't a good solid advantage to the club by switching, I would think pointing out that "many" of the members would have to sell their firearms in order to remain in good standing with the State would be more than enough to quash the motion. I hope you are successful. Pilgirm

[Scrounger]

My understanding on their situation is this: They have insurance with a company now which covers all the shooting disciplines they currently use; someone wants to switch to insuring with an organization (Like NRA?) that endorses only one shooting discipline which to nobody's surprise is the one practiced by the individual advocating the switch. It is cheaper because the coverage is more narrow and restricting than their present policy. And that's not a slap at NRA, their insurance program is not restrictive.

[monadnock#5]

I work with two individuals who own shotguns and rifles, but not handguns. And since they don't own them, see no reason why anyone else should have them. It is frustrating in the extreme trying to argue the issue with them, because they have no reasoning or justification for their views. Their minds are made up, end of story.

It sounds to me as if that's the hidden agenda you're up against. It's not about cheaper insurance. It's a backdoor assault on handguns. Your best hope at this point is to rally your fellow handgun owners. Otherwise.....

Ken

[nvbirdman]

Big John, thank you for making me appreciate once again living where I do.

[Bigjohn]

I spent several hours at the range yesterday but did not have an opportunity to re-scope and sight my rifle in. Spent most of the time writting up the proposed changes to the constitution required for 'other' reasons.

This character was also present and he had part of the documentation I had requested, note that the important part was missing. Spent the rest of the morning talking to a prospective new member.

There is a national shooters body simular to the NRA which supports most if not all shooting disciplines and I am a member of this body and have been since 1973. I have also been a member of this other organisation but did not renew last year for financial reasons.

I am hoping to use his own proposal against him at the AGM and offer the members the same deal for the SSAA which I believe offers more benefits for membership. Hopefully, the membership will decide to leave the status quo until a more thorough examination can be made of all organisations.

After all it is the membership that need to decide what they want for the dollars$.

John.