This morning during the broadcast Agora, broadcast on Rai 3, a confrontation took place which, wanting to use benevolent terms, saw times assigned to the participants very unbalanced in favor of abolitionist positions and against sporting weapons. A handful of seconds went to President Maffei to represent the positions of Arch Hunting and of its congressional position, convincing, as the quantity and quality of the consents received testify. The few weeks that divide us from the pronouncement of the Supreme Court on the only referendum in the field; the other referendums seem to have abandoned the game. Did they want to sprint for interests far from questions?
From December 15th, every hour will be good to get feedback on quantity of signatures and the validity of the methods of collection. If, and we emphasize, only if, the collection should be legitimized by the Supreme Court, we believe that from February 20 we will have to know the sentence of these questions that question the European directives. It can be done? Apart from the referendum against the wildlife management, the transmission was the plastic, plural, representation of the sensitivities at play in society, to the advantage of a part that is internal to a significant urban culture; to be contrasted with arguments and not with walls e suicide barricades.
Public communication takes into account surveys and power relations, it is up to us to resolve them in our favor. Leave the defense of qualifying values 157/92 to pursue procurement and privatization produces these results. In 1990 and 1997, the Italians did not go to vote for those referendums. Numbers not chatter. Of that pro-abstention majority of yesterday, today the best interpreters are the environmentalists who contested the referendums. We have a duty to denounce the responsibilities of those who, in the hunting world above all, but not only, have evaded the positive purposes on the protection and management of wildlife (Source: Arch Hunting).