Originally Posted by paul4be
Chirs, whilst I don't particularly agree with a decision such as that for the reasons that I have previously mentioned, where should "levelling the playing field" stop??
The issue has been raised and despite rules already in place to address it, it would appear that changes are still likely. When the next issue and the next are raised, how many rule changes come about? How many people does an issue need to affect to bring about whole scale ruling changes that affect the sport as a whole?
Anyone choosing to take part in any sport is fully aware of the rules before taking part. If due to particular circumstances they need to use an adapted part of those rules, they are aware of that from the outset as well.
I am not having a pop, but genuinely would like to know your thougths on the above.
Hi Paul, my thoughts about levelling the field go for what the majority of the shooters want. I don't think rules should be changed to support a tiny minority (we do enough of that in this country as it is). BUT if something can be done to help the minority then, obviously i'm up for that as long as it's not to the detriment of the majority.
I think one of the reasons why so many got annoyed with the whole situation is because concerns were mentioned over and over again but ignored by those in the decision making process..allegedly....
There's many that are able to see a logical solution but are ignored and when using sound logic, are shouted down as being un PC??? then people wonder why some get frustrated and angry with it. I think it's blindingly obvious now (because of the length of other threads about the same subject) that this is really starting to bug a lot of shooters. despite the feelings aired on here and in person 'some' still think it's personal????