[BozemanMT]

Putting on a riflery clinic
1 week before the event, we get this "brand new" set of rules FROM A GUN RANGE.

1. When your group arrives be aware that the words Militia or paramilitary may not be used while at our range.

2. While an individual might show up wearing cammos, the entire group may not be so attired as it would indicate a paramilitary type organization.

3. No silhouette targets of ANY style may be used. (We have allowed these in the past and we've taken a lot of flak from both non-members and members using our range.)

4. No military style training, as a group, is allowed.

From a gun range!!!!
It's over, we lost
Unbelievable
Cuz you know, Hunters don't wear camo
Those are bad words that may not be uttered (hell, if a gun range doesn't care about the 2nd, why should they care about the 1st?)
And obviously the 2nd is only for hunting.

This is not in England, this is a range in the United States (and not in one of the states you would think)

[50 Shooter]

You know what you have to do right?;) :cool:

[Declaration Day]

I would not spend one more dime there, if it were my local range.

I'm one of those Militia guys, and while I don't wear camo to the range, it offends me that my organization, or any representation of it, would be frowned upon there.

My local DNR-operated range does not allow silhouette targets.

4. No military style training, as a group, is allowed.

Could somebody please tell me how military-style training could be done at a gun range? You know, 'cuz when THEY come to get us, we'll all have convenient benches to shoot from!:neener:

[High Planes Drifter]

Boycot time.

[Zundfolge]

So what range is this (that I might avoid spending any money there)?

[ZeSpectre]

It's only over if you GIVE UP.

Write a formal letter of complaint
Get others to write a formal letter of complaint
Find another range
Encourage others to find another range
Pool a group and START your own range (hey, it's been done before)
I came up with those options in 30 seconds. Given some time I'm sure I could find more.

[JesseL]

It's awfully silly to let your behavior be controlled by the opinions of people who disagree with your most basic principles. Why would anyone willingly take the first step onto that teflon incline?

[bender]

I would definately never go there again.

[Blackfork]

You weren't going to do any of that stuff anyway. Camo isn't camo, really, it's "Desert Pixelated attire". You can get it at Abercrombie and Fitch. Those e-silhouettes aren't people. At least I haven't seen anyone that looks like that. And riflery is riflery. You aren't going to be doing bayonet charges.

[MrTuffPaws]

Well, I would gladly give up wearing cammo if they would get rid of the other stupid rules at the local ranges.

[50 Shooter]

You guys aren't thinking the right way!

I would get all my friends together and dress up in our cammies, go to the range, shout "wolverines" and say that we belong to a para-military group (Eagle Scouts). Bring targets that are silhouettes of people (those training ones you see) mostly bad guy holding hostage and have everyone do training drills on them.:neener:

If you're going to get kicked out, go out in style!:D

[Thefabulousfink]

JCSA? Who are these guys and why should they care if you shoot at silhouette targets?


I suppose a proper response would go something like this:

"Our organization represents responsible firarms ownership as well as the responsible exercise of the freedoms and liberties that make this country great. I see from you communication that our group would be a hinderance to the opperation of you range, therefore we have decided not to trouble you by holding our event there. You will also be excited to know that our members have decided not to trouble your business at any point in the future.

Thank you,"

That should get the message across.

[dracphelan]

1. Place the name of the range here on other forums.
2. Call them and let them know that you are helping spread the word of their new rules. Also inform them that you will no longer be using their range.
3. Find a new range.

Things are not as bad in Texas as I thought. I don't know of a single range in the Dallas area with these silly rules.

[strat81]

Isn't camouflage relative to your surroundings? Arctic camo for all! Or, if you're tacticool, wear "Urban" camo, especially if it's a wooded area. And what about animal silhouettes? Turkey, deer, squirrel...

And just to be safe, don't wear combat boots. They're for COMBAT! :banghead:

Sorry to hear about your range.

[Lonestar]

Funny thing is Al Qaeda members usually train in regular clothes. All its hurting is a bunch of guys who want to play soldier.

There is no outdoor range within a 50 mile radius from my house that allows human like silhouettes anymore.

[1911JMB]

This is why I go to a sand pit on state land with no rules other than Jeff Coopers 4. Keep in mind that its a private facility. If they don't want certain behavior at their range its fine to complain, but its private property and they do have that right.

[heypete]

*shrugs* Private property, right? They can regulate what is or is not said or done on their property.

If you don't like it, don't go. Vote with your dollars, and make it known what you're doing (by writing a formal complaint).

Personally, I refrain from that behavior anyway -- I find it much more pleasing for myself and my guests when I go to the range to avoid dressing in camouflage, talking about black helicopters, etc. Individuals dressed in camo, talking about "blue helmets" and "black helicopters", conspiracies, and whatnot have been talking near myself and a new shooter, and have really turned off the new shooter from the activity. Indeed, that person left with a very negative impression of shooters as a whole, as the incident reinforced their stereotypes of "crazy militia survivalist gun owners".

I can see that a range might want to make themselves seem a bit more "family friendly", particularly in areas that might be considering legal restrictions on certain activities at ranges, not renewing leases of ranges, etc. It's sad, but it's a reality of many places these days -- a local range near where I used to live in California has restrictions on targets (circular bullseye targets or steel falling-plate animal shaped ones only), which I find to be personally distasteful, but I can understand that it's one of the few things which the range can bring up in its defense every year when the county board of supervisors attempts (as they have for about 20 years now) to close the range down.

Of course, that's a county-owned range and they have to justify their existence to the county. The local privately-owned indoor range allows targets of any shape, and has many human-silhouette targets for sale.

Here in Arizona, you can shoot pretty much whatever targets your heart desires. :)

[wolf_from_wv]

Someone (group?) here in WV drug what looked like 2 4x8 sheets of plywood with a picture of bin laden painted on them down to the 100 yd berm last summer at the DNR range.

[MatthewVanitas]

Wow, took a lot of posts until I found one I agree with. Good on heypete!


I fail to see how "we" have lost because some range wants to have a more mainstream image.

The funniest part of the whole thing: you're crying "treason" against a range for discriminating against you on cosmetic grounds, saying that cosmetics don't matter or are deceptive.

If that's the case, then why not be smart, employ Situational Camoflauge, and show up in jeans, bring bullseye targets, and get on with your training?

How is your training any less effective for shooting at a non-humanoid target (which better represents an obscured person in the dark than some photo-target does), or wearing the street clothing that you would actually wear in an insurgency?

Smart insurgents don't wear uniforms, they employ Situational Camoflauge and blend in with their surroundings. You think the Evil UN Overlords won't find your cammies in your trunk at a roadblock, maybe wonder why you have contraband clothing and send you to an internment camp?

Go undercover! Nod, smile politely, and know that you got one over on these range owners who only _think_ that they're holding you back, as you practice your revolutionary skills.



As a side-note, it's dang silly to try to drive a shooting range out of business over something this small. Not exactly a surplus of shooting ranges even in Texas.

-MV

[Mainsail]

Did the owner of the gun range start his business to make a statement or to make a profit? If it’s a business, he’ll do whatever he has to to protect his business. We can wax idealistic all we want, but ideals aren’t going to put food in his table or pay his mortgage.

[BozemanMT]

It's private property, the range can do what it wants.
And personally (as anyone who's been around me can attest) i always wear blue jeans, a button down and a hat. Always.

that's not the point.

The point is that if a GUN RANGE thinks that by not allowing "so called bizzare behavior" related to guns (not unsafe, just what it thinks isn't mainstream) then pretty soon, it will all not be mainstream. (see England if you don't think this is true)

Personally I'm kinda amazed that they allow firearms.

We stand together, or we soon fall.

I've seen which way this GUN RANGE leans, and I will withhold my business. HOwever, the clinic will have to go on because people have commitments, but if this is the way that the GUN RANGES lean, well, we have no hope, none at all.

[280PLUS]

Gun ranges are doing whatever it takes to look PC these days. Mostly because it only takes a few (OR JUST ONE) to object and start the legal battles. I know of one (Metacon) in CT that has had their very extensive treasury balance reduced to nothing and members assessed mercilessly all to pay the lawyers to fight for it's very existence. I suspect your range is merely doing whatever it can to cover it's a$$. If you boycott etc, what will you have when it's gone?

[Manedwolf]

There is no outdoor range within a 50 mile radius from my house that allows human like silhouettes anymore.

Every one I've seen here does. What, is that supposed to be some psychological thing? If you run into someone wearing all black with numbered rings on their chest, you might shoot at them?

[kfranz]

It's private property, the range can do what it wants.
And personally (as anyone who's been around me can attest) i always wear blue jeans, a button down and a hat. Always.

that's not the point.

The point is that if a GUN RANGE thinks that by not allowing "so called bizzare behavior" related to guns (not unsafe, just what it thinks isn't mainstream) then pretty soon, it will all not be mainstream. (see England if you don't think this is true)

Personally I'm kinda amazed that they allow firearms.

We stand together, or we soon fall.

I've seen which way this GUN RANGE leans, and I will withhold my business. HOwever, the clinic will have to go on because people have commitments, but if this is the way that the GUN RANGES lean, well, we have no hope, none at all.

You're the one saying "so called bizzare behavior", not them. Is this a for profit range, or a private club type range?

[Prince Yamato]

I'm going with HeyPete on this one. Camo and military fatigues... not very inviting to new shooters. You are free to form a milita but a lot of "militias" I've seen are just as described, a bunch of folks in mil-surp camos talking about end of the world scenarios that are inevitable and how "they're going to resist and die fighting". I don't agree with the removal of silhouetted targets, but honestly, a militia doesn't have to wear camo. The founding fathers certainly didn't, they wore their work clothes. If you must be in some form of camo, let it be your work clothes. With a jacket and tie, no one will guess that you are lethal. In effect, you're in "urban camo" when you're at work.

[Waffen]

I only agree with about 3-4 posts in this thread, and thank god the posters I do agree with live around me. I can't believe some of what I'm seeing here.

The people that dress up in all camo and talk black helicopters, UN invasion, and SHTF really only help push the stereotype that all shooters are a bunch of yahoo's (it appears that some are). I look at it as people only playing dress up, like CAS in a way, but more more "real world" and intimidating to new shooters. I will shoot the same in a pair of jeans and a tee shirt as I will in a full military BDU, I doubt it really matters what you are in as well. I don't see many 3 gun/IDPA champs shooting in camo and they seem to do just fine at "tactical reloads" and keeping a lot of rounds on hand. If you want to play like your in the army, put your money where you BDU's and SKS's are and join up. I'm sure you will learn a lot.

As for shooting at Silhouette targets...why does it matter? It's only paper anyway. If you can hit the 10 ring every time you can pretty much call your shot on a deer,hog,human, or raccoon.

As for paramilitary, or militia terms, who cares what you call yourself? You know what you are and that’s it. You could call yourselves "The Care Bear Patrol for Freedom" and it won't make a difference. You would still know what you are and so would others.

My suggestion to you and others is to perhaps try to go more main stream on how you talk, act, and dress at the range. You are scaring away the best asset you have in the future....New Shooters.

I think we can all agree it’s petty what the range is doing, but they must do what they have to, to survive and bring in new shooters. If you don’t like it, go elsewhere, or deal with it.

[StopTheGrays]

LEOs do not practice there then? From the rules they gave you it sounded like they were describing a tactical team...except for the militia part.

I am surprised they did not say no EBRs allowed either. :barf:

[MatthewVanitas]

I am surprised they did not say no EBRs allowed either.


Because that would just be silly.

Public perception:

Unwashed, shave-headed guy in camo with single-shot .22 shooting at UN Soldier Targets ------> militia/racist/nutjob preparing for either UN invasion or the RAHOWA.

Guy in jeans and clean polo shirt with AR-15 shooting at bullseye ----> off-duty cop, Hi-Power competitor, Iraq veteran and local businessman who enjoys plinking, etc.


Smart of them to keep a low profile while letting their clients get in training on proper military-type rifles

-MV

[scout26]

While I agree with MV and HeyPete, some response/feedback to said range is needed.

What's "Military Style" Training ???? A CMP clinc ??? How about an RWVA Appleseed shoot ???

My club closes our rifle range a couple of Saturday's and Sunday's during the year so that several Army ROTC detachments and a couple of Army and Naval Reserve units can get some practice in because they'd have to drive 50+ miles to the nearest range and then go through the trouble of dealing with the Army's own bureaucracy to shoot at the DOD/DA training area in Joliet. Compared to the the $10-$15 dollars per head we charge them for the (CMP) ammo, plus we supply the AR-15's and provide free instruction from our NRA certified Rifle/Pistol instructors. Plus other members volunteer our time to serve as coaches/range safeties/helpers, etc.. If that's not "Military Style" training, then I don't know what is.


I guess my Pink Urban Indoor Tactical Camo lounge pants (that Mrs Scout bought for me a as joke........I think :scrutiny: ) would get me kicked out (and not just for poor taste/fashion sense, and NO, I will NOT post a picture.)

Yes, the range is free to set the rules, and your free to either follow them, go somewhere else, or start your own range.

But I would suggest a sit-down with the range "powers that be", and see if you can work out/clarify the issues.

[thirty-thirty]

Who really "pushes stereotypes"? Who really enforces "political correctness"?
I agree that young/new shooters going to a gun range or gun show the first time might be alienated by non "political correctness" because they have been brainwashed by Hollywood/mass media and publik skoolz.

I agree that a private gun range has the right to surrender to "political correctness" or disallow people who dress like those the media has stereotyped.

But I also have the right not to patronize establishments that spinelessly surrender to these manipulative forces and I will exercise that right.

Like the original post. We have already lost....if we let mass media and Hollywood bully us around.

[MatthewVanitas]

We have already lost....if we let mass media and Hollywood bully us around.

We have already lost ... if we set ourselves in permanent opposition to mainstream American culture, rather than as an integral aspect of it.


-MV

[thirty-thirty]

We have already lost ... if we set ourselves in permanent opposition to mainstream American culture, rather than as an integral aspect of it.
"Mainstream American Culture" today is a product of mass media/Hollywood. If we keep following their lead as they define "Mainstream American culture" where will they lead us?
Surrender is not a good strategy, IMO.

[LoveMyCountry]

When I go to the range it is to stay proficient for personal defense. I like to use silhouette or photo targets to remind myself that if it happens, I will not be shooting a ten ring but a real person. It's not PC, but I want to see the face looking at me and the hands pointing a weapon at me.

I believe that this kind of PC garbage will cause even more Militia type groups to form for the simple reason that they cannot practice, look or talk the way the want to.

Someone who being different, odd or downright strange does not mean they are bad. If everyone had to be just like me, it would be a sad world. If no one could be like me... it would be even worse.

LoveMyCountry

[JohnL2]

Well, I am going to assume that we in the firearms enthusiast community are well aware that there are some who are a little, well, paranoid.
Call them militia types, survivalists, whatever, they are out there. And like it or not, some people think most of us are like them.

I know, it gets tiring and annoying. It is kind of like saying every rotten strain of any particular profession or pursuit is representative of the whole.
The most annoying thing is that the media will always concentrate on the worst, and hardly ever the best.
Is it any wonder we have such an image problem?

Range rules should be about safety. If someone is causing a disturbance then it should be up to the range authority to ask that person to leave. You do get a few guys out there with a really bad attitude, and I don't think anyone wants to be on the range along with them.

[SoCalShooter]

The fight is not over. I can understand why this range does that. They want to make weapons more "friendly" to new shooters and anti's. I believe they should allow all types of sillohuets but they dont have to sell them. Just limit what you sell as a policy of target shooting but allow others to shoot sillohouets.

[ALS]

I'm glad my shooting school doesn't have rules like that.
Most of us wear BDU's (CAMO and Black), use the same weapons that the elite Snipers in the Mideast use, shoot at man size silhouettes.
My instructors back grounds range from US Marine Scout Sniper instructors, Marine and Army Snipers, Rangers, Seals, and Ex Military some who spent 2 - 3 tours in the Jungles of Viet Nam as Snipers. I've shot with Justice Dept, Army and Marine Snipers, FBI, DEA, DIA, LE SRU's (SWAT) units , and average American shooters like the people on this board.
God is this a great country or what? :D

I understand where the local ranges can get nervous with the Media and Anti-Gun crowd just looking to pounce on anything that looks UN-PC.
Many just don't want to put up with the crap that these types want to give them. I also agree that the shooters at these clubs need to stand up at those clubs and make their voices heard. Too many want to just get along.

[1911JMB]

The range I go to rarely has someone show up wearing camo. If it happens usually its just a hunting coat. At the indoor range I used to go to a swat officer showed up with a MP5, a couple handguns and an AR. He was dressed up in the most rediculous crap I have ever seen. Its people like this guy that keep the tacticool business alive and well. As far as I'm concerned he may as well have had thick glasses, dress pants, a shirt and tie and a pocket protector with 8 pens in it. He was a major nerd. It seemed stupid to me and I'm sure it could have intimidated new shooters.

I have no problem with people dressing or acting like idiots if they don't hurt anyone, but it sure won't hurt my feelings if a private establishment prohibits it.

[Outlaws]

I think you could make a scene. Tell them to call the cops when you show up in camo. That is discrimination. They are not allowed to prevent you from doing anything outside of mandating shoes and shirts and pants. The pattern is not up to them. As long as it isn't offensive text, they can't do squat. Just show up, tell them suck it, and let them take further measures.

[gunsmith]

playing "rap" real loud from yer cars and making gang symbols with yer hands.:neener:

Really though, I would stay the heck away from a place like that even though I rarely wear camo.
The man size silhouettes though are important for two in the chest and one in the head.
Heck with the pc excrement, I like to practice headshots


When I lived in SF only one range would play the pc game and everyone went elsewhere.

spend yer money elsewhere...where is this dang range?

[JesseL]

Outlaws

I'm afraid you're mistaken. If the range is a non-government operation, they have the right to refuse service to anyone (with a few exceptions for race, religion, sex, etc). They could kick you out for not having pierced nipples if they were so inclined, and if you don't like it they can have you arrested for trespassing.

[Juna]

Get a petition together with all of the local shooters you know and boycott the place. Present them with the petition signed by as many people as possible. That's a ridiculous infringement of your I & II A rights. What are these nut jobs doing owning and running a gun shop/shooting range?

[Prince Yamato]

I think civilians dressing in camo and playing soldier is ridiculous. It would be like the ultra safety-concious dressing in long coats and firehats playing firefighter everytime there was a grill fire. There's a time for playing and a time to grow up. I'm not a cop or soldier, therefore, I don't tress like one. I'm a civilian, so I dress like one. That being said, it's your constitutional right to be the biggest oddball that you want to be, but just remember that anywhere you go, you become an ambassador for the gun community as a whole and if you act like an a-hole to those outside the community, they'll think the gun community as a collective, are a bunch of camo-wearing, conspiracy-hawking a-holes.

[Taurus 66]

It's them wanting power over you. It doesn't seem to be enough we already have to abide by federal, state, and local laws, but the workplace too. I can understand a good company policy is in order, but all too often silly rules are mixed in. Silly or not we have to abide by them. Why?? Because we are paid a salary to comply .. in part.

A range doesn't pay you to comply. You pay them. Remember this as they have forgotten.

[JesseL]

That being said, it's your constitutional right to be the biggest oddball that you want to be, but just remember that anywhere you go, you become an ambassador for the gun community as a whole and if you act like an a-hole to those outside the community, they'll think the gun community as a collective, are a bunch of camo-wearing, conspiracy-hawking a-holes.

The perception that any individual is representative of (or an ambassador for) any particular group they may resemble, is one of the greatest social challenges to liberty that our nation faces. In an enlightened world, an individual at large would never be judged to represent anyone but himself.

The urge to lump people together this way is destructive, lazy thinking.

[3 gun]

Is this a range open to the public or is it a members only range? If it's members only, is there a BOD you can vote out? We had something like this happen at a range I shoot at over FA fire. The first BOD went along with banning FA because the "new neighbors" didn't like it. :cuss: The new BOD :what: told the guys "get over it" we were here first. They still limit the times of day and which range you can use FA on but FA is back! :D

[cbsbyte]

There range their rules. It is a major liablity issue to have uniformed civilians running around training for combat, especially in some state, like Mass. On top of that I personally would never go to a range which allowed "milita" groups to train for WWIII, or the next civil war. The milita people I have met seemed a bit mentaly unstable, and should not be trusted with firearms.

[Low-Sci]

Actually, the silhouette targets not being allowed is a psychological thing.

During earlier wars like ww2, soldiers trained on bullseye targets. Its also known that it was very, very common for most soldiers to not fire their weapons in combat during those times.

Since WW2, the percentage of troops who actually fire in combat has gone up exponentially, due to several changes in the way soldiers are trained. One of those changes was the replacement of the bullseye target with the silhouette target.

The idea is that you will be training to fire on a human-like figure, hence your reservations on actually firing on a person will be fewer in combat if your training and what you train with more closely resembles what you will face in combat.

Or so the theory goes. The book "On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society" by Dave Grossman details this phenomenon and several others. Its an excellent book; I would recommend it very highly.

[sm]

What is the Act that to the effect of a gathering of certain types of "assembly" denotes paramilitary training? Seems to me there was one and since Homeland Security this/ these are even more defined.

Private Property , more PC, More Family Friendly...well the truth is, times have been changing. One of the reasons many feel instead of bashing and trashing and being uncivil on THR, especially L&P and S&T - more effective use of time would be Activism with Preserving Freedom, RKBA, Attracting and Introducing more shooters and ...

Brian, not picking on you or anyone else. Just I recall start up of a few ranges, and as we discussed before, only about 10% do any work, and only about 4% of the 10% do the REAL work.

I do not own camo, never really used by my Mentors, we never saw a need in it - except for the ones Marketing it to make a buck.
I have no problem if some do...
Point being gun owners tend to divide themselves more than Anti Gun folks simply by alienating each other between personal choice (bird vs deer hunter, benchrest vs Cowboy action...etc) and pushing away fence sitters that might be attracted.
Heck - instead of being a jerk on the Internet , go clean the restroom at your club so a lady and kid are not grossed out.

One club I was involved in kept having every little bitty questioned. Literally "nickel and dime-ing us to death. Burden of Proof if you will - club met, and maintained all these proposed rules and all.

One member dropped $15k of his own money and said to take that money and
get an independent expert in noise to do a test. Club was fine, expert presented the noise from one of the complaint folks shop was more in violation.
We basically went on the offensive instead of having to defend or prove.
Complaints and huffing and puffing quit - they did not have the coins to fight back, and...we found code violations they had.

I have attended some Anti Gun meetings, know thy enemy and all that...they look for anything to use against us and all it takes is one person to complain " my child was scared of all the camo with the war in Iraq and all..." and folks listen that make judgments on codes, insurance...oh insurance.

If someone in the Insurance Company does not like guns, these folks like so many others that toss out information - unsupported, can have a huge effect on rules, regs and all .
Folks do not check into what the Executive said, just the fact he said it can play a role.

Shamelessly borrowing from a song...

A little less uncivil and a lot more action

[Dr.Rob]

No camo? No use of the word paramilitary or militia? No 'group training.'

Guess a CMP match is not in their future. :barf:

And as far as 'group training' does three guys in camo pants sighting in hunting rifles count as 'group training?'

That seems silly to me. I don't normally wear camo but when the weather sucks I'd rather muddy up some GI surplus clothes I bought for hunting than a pair of jeans, or a tie for that matter.

As for the targets, that's getting more and more common, particularly at state run ranges... but it's usually picture-type targets that are banned. IDPA and IPSC are silohuette targets, so I guess those are out too. OOps, they were out before under 'group training'.

I'm not anoyed at the idea of a dress code... I've suggested many a time that dressing better will help get our message across. Like at political events, etc.

But AT the range? Come on people, that's a wee bit over the top. If I shucked out $200 for an "outfitter' wool camo jacket at Cabela's I sure would be pissed to have a range officer tell me it's unwelcome.

Waffen has a GOOD POINT: My suggestion to you and others is to perhaps try to go more main stream on how you talk, act, and dress at the range. You are scaring away the best asset you have in the future....New Shooters.

WE are the ambassadors of our sport, use common sense and courtesy when conducting yourself in public.

[sm]

Game & Fish Range.

There is a Stop sign before one goes on down the road. All guns must be unloaded. This means no speed loaders, no magazines. Even the CCW folks are questioned and if a CCW is loaded, last I heard anyway, they are asked to turn around, go back down the road and unload - or - leave all together, if the RO does not like you.

I do not go there, all sorts of over the top rules. Using the Skeet field is a nightmare...

RO actually has been known to stand there and watch one get gear out of vehicle and watch one open range bag - looking for a loaded gun, speed loader, or magazine.

I got pissed, I mean pissed and I was with some known shooters. One little boy had loaded all by himself the magazine to his new Marlin .22 rifle. He just was real proud of doing it all by himself.
"Look dad, see what I can do , I practiced" and he pulled this out of his little jeans pocket and RO saw it.

RO asked them to leave. Just a kid! 5 rounds of .22 ammo in a mag, and what is a dad to do, frisk his kid?

I was being as nice as could " this is the kids new gun, he wants to shoot it..."
"He broke rules, I do not like you or the dad, and the kid has no business with a rifle that takes a magazine".

We drove the extra distance to private property for that kid to shoot his new gun.

Little fella was upset, and what kind of impression did that have? NEGATIVE about Ranges and Folks that run them. Took some doing to explain to the kid, but he never ever wanted to back to that place.
He did not want to attend a kids event the G&F was having for kids...

Can't blame him. I refuse to go to that range myself, and tell everyone not to, and warn them.

[JohnBT]

"mainstream American culture"

There's a real oxymoron.

Meanwhile, I'm stuck with a Shadowgrass camo parka and waders (they didn't come in just plain old brown.) I guess if I ever get drafted for homeland defense I'm going to be assigned guard duty in some marsh.

John

[Gun Wielding Maniac]

If I'm not mistaken, this clinic is an RWVA shooting clinic. They use Army pattern qualification targets for sight in and qualification. Whats more, an integral part of the philosophy of the group is the idea that armed citizens should be able to fight against oppressive powers.

Its clear that the range restrictions are totally opposed to the character of the RWVA organization and I see no good reason at all for them to try to appease the range. I see a lot of people talking about conspiracies in this thread...

The only conspiracy I see is the one against common sense and gumption perpetuated by the range.

[Zak Smith]

Name the range, Brian.

We have a number of ranges around here that love revenue from clinics, IDPA, USPSA/IPSC, and 3-Gun.

[SFvet]

I wounder if they would have the balls to tell my department to get off the range, since the Sheriffs Department is a paramilitary organization.:evil:

[ArfinGreebly]

They seem to have a problem with "militaristic" or "paramilitary" looking outfits -- in a group setting.

It might be interesting to get into some dress blues or tans (or even whites), polish up the shoes, line up that belt buckle, and march smartly up to the line.

Especially in groups of four or five.

I mean, show a little solidarity for our troops.

And have your oval and/or cicular targets arranged . . . for optimum meaningful shot placement.

[Evil Monkey]

I would run in that range with camo worn and a silhouette in one hand screaming "PARAMILITARY FORCE, AMBUSH THEM!!!!!!!!!!!!!":evil: :D :evil: :D

[gezzer]

Just think it is ILEAGAL in MA to even shoot a human shaped target.

Even on the PD range we had to use a target shaped like a milk bottle. :what:

Glad I voted with my feet to NH.

[gyp_c2]

Doesn't make much sense to raise a ruckus and then not name names...:scrutiny:

[Fu-man Shoe]

The perception that any individual is representative of (or an ambassador for) any particular group they may resemble, is one of the greatest social challenges to liberty that our nation faces. In an enlightened world, an individual at large would never be judged to represent anyone but himself.

The urge to lump people together this way is destructive, lazy thinking.

I could not agree more with the above statement.

However (comma) we live in the real world.

If you're a jackass, and you belong to a high profile group, people at
large *DO* in fact associate your actions with that particular group.

It's just the way it is. Human nature and all that.

Deal with it.

[El Tejon]

If you don't want Militia Boys at your range, just take out the Ding Dongs and Twinkies from the vending machine and put in fruit.:evil: :D

[BozemanMT]

It's not in Colorado, it's in Grant's Pass Oregon.
And we have to go because 30+ people have signed up
But I gaurantee we aren't ever going back.

Unbelievable.
If these are our friends, who needs Barbara Boxer?:scrutiny:

[MatthewVanitas]

In all seriousness, I fail to see how this is a huge problem.

Are they telling you what to do outside of their range?

Are they telling you what kind of guns you can't practice with at the range?

Depending on their definition of "military training", they might not be impacting your training in any notable way whatsoever, except in terms of enforcing what is essentially a dress code.


I'm not quite sure what kind of "military training" you can do on a static range anyway, unless they are actually banning CMP/Highpower events (which I agree would be foolish).

Unless you somehow planned to do fire-team assaults of the berm, I'd guess that most specific "military" type training isn't feasible on a static range anyway.


The whole thing is just a "dress code" to keep the place comfy for the non-apocalyptic shooters, and to keep the range from becoming another expose piece for whatever local news hack just C-'ed his way out of Communications school.

-MV

[lamazza]

The rules seem a little ignorant however...

My range has some similar rules.
Single loads only! That means no more than 1 round in your mag
No silouette targets-only paper bullseye targets
etc,etc

The reason being that we do not want to give the antis any ammo to scream for our closing down.

[280PLUS]

My take is they are trying to avopid a situation like this, Make note of the bold type:

Metacon Wins Preliminary Rounds in Federal and State
Courts
October 20, 2005
In two recent court victories, both the U.S. District Court in Connecticut and the Connecticut Superior Court
declined to impose what would have been burdensome measures upon the Metacon Gun Club in the operation of its
outdoor shooting range. The measures that the range opponents sought to impose on Metacon in the pending litigation
included: forcing the club to manage the site as if it were a hazardous waste generator subject to the regulatory
requirements of the federal hazardous waste regulations; forcing Metacon to fully enclose its outdoor range, thus
turning it into an enormous indoor range, and; forcing Metacon to extensively investigate and remediate any pollutants
even though the range is still operating. All of the measures requested by the range opponents were rejected by the
courts.
First, Judge Arterton of the U.S. District Court in New Haven made clear that operating ranges are not required to
manage spent ammunition as hazardous waste under the federal hazardous waste regulations. The court held that firing
a bullet at a target is not the abandonment of a hazardous material or the generation of a hazardous waste. The court
made clear that spent ammunition at operating outdoor shooting ranges does not need to be managed under the
complex and burdensome federal hazardous waste regulations. This is a significant ruling for sportsmen and ranges
around the country.
Next, Judge Sheedy, of the Connecticut Superior Court’s Complex Litigation Docket in Waterbury, held that it
is inappropriate to order either the enclosure of the Metacon range or remediation of the operating range as requested
by the range opponents. The range opponents have raised an array of alleged issues in their two state lawsuits,
including: safety, noise, zoning, property devaluation, and the environment. In the hearing on their request for
preliminary injunctive relief, however, they presented evidence only of alleged harm to the environment. The court
held that the range opponents failed to establish a substantial probability of environmental harm from Metacon’s
outdoor range.
While these two legal victories are significant, Metacon's legal battle has just begun. These victories relate to
preliminary legal questions raised by the range opponents, only. They do not resolve the ultimate factual or legal
questions that are before the federal and state courts in the three lawsuits now pending.
In the coming months, the range opponents’ lawsuits will raise important questions under Connecticut’s Range
Protection Act, ultimately testing, for the first time, the protections afforded to ranges by that statute. How the court
chooses to interpret the Range Protection Act will affect every outdoor range in Connecticut. The federal court,
on the other hand, will have to determine whether individuals shooting into a berm are point sources requiring federal
discharge permits under the Clean Water Act. The resolution of this issue under the Clean Water Act, as well as
the outstanding hazardous waste issues in the pending litigation, will affect outdoor ranges nationwide.
To date, Metacon has been fighting this battle alone with little outside support. Special assessments on members
have been required to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for Metacon's legal defense. The NRA Civil Rights
Defense Fund has also provided critical financial support. But all of this is not enough for the protracted legal battle
being waged against Metacon.
Your support for Metacon's legal defense will help defend all outdoor shooting ranges in Connecticut and
across the Nation for years to come.
Metacon’s future is your future.
Find out how you can support Metacon by visiting http://www.metacongunclub.com
or contacting: Michael Palmer, Treasurer at (860)658-0061.

[Glockfan.45]

Sad that is comming in Colorado. Hell the range I go to here in Illinois sells the human picture targets, and has no rules other than no loaded guns off the range.

[Larry Ashcraft]

Sad that is coming in Colorado.
It's not in Colorado, it's in Grant's Pass Oregon.

[ezypikns]

Just not there. If you don't like it, vote with your wallet.


I've got lots of camo. Mossy Oak, RealTree, Natural Gear. I wear it when I'm hunting for doves, deer, ducks, or turkey. I put it on when I go hunting. It's functional. Sometimes after I'm finished hunting, I just wear it home from wherever I'm coming from. It doesn't embarass me in any way to be seen in it.
I don't see any need to wear it to the rifle, pistol, or skeet range though. The targets aren't going to run away.

However, I'm not in the military, so I don't have a need to play dress up. I do not see camo as a fashion (or other) statement.

[djpullen]

Hmmm, is this gun range anything like an internet gun forum whose moderators and members constantly worry about what the antis might read and think of us? I know, we can really win the antis over by beating our guns into plow shares and let those leftist elitists rule over us. Do any of you think that there is anything you can do that will change Rosie Odonnel's mind?

[Chuck Dye]

I protest: there is an awful lot of low road noise here that either contributes nothing or contributes negatively.

I get to shoot at the Josephine County Sportsman Park (http://www.jcsa-shootingsports.org), the big deal shooting facility in the Grant's Pass area, several times a year when visiting the best friend. By my experience, there is only a one in three or so chance that there will be any JCSA supervision on the firing line. Silhouette targets and from-the-holster drills have been fairly common on my visits. If things have changed there, I suspect the changes are reactive: some one has caused problems, likely more than a few some ones.

[MatthewVanitas]

worry about what the antis might read and think of us?

Look at is this way, the UT Austin campus gun range gets up to a dozen first-time shooters on a good night (and another dozen regulars. Mix of kids from mainstream non-shooting families in various Texas cities, and a good scattering of foreign-exchange students from every corner of the globe.

Do you think they would end up with a better or worse image of shooting if all our regulars were:
a) white
b) male
c) wearing unwashed camo and "KILL 'EM ALL" t-shirts?
d) shooting at targets depicting UN soldiers


Instead of:
a) Everything (whites in the minority, in fact)
b) 30% female
c) wearing the usual college kid clothes: flip-flop sandals, goofy t-shirts, sagging pants
d) shooting bullseye targets


The "Plan B" there is working pretty well for us. Or should we stop being a disgrace to the Liberty Tree and try out "Plan A"?

-MV

[djpullen]

Think of it this way. If history deems GW Bush's presidency a failure it will be due to his lack of backbone and his "new tone" politics. He has bent over backwards trying to make the left like him. Where has it gotten him? They hate him even more for it. An abusive and bullying person loses even more respect for a person who won't stand up for themselves. While I agree that there is a time and place for everything (camo or whatever), we can't forget that what is right is right and trying to win over antis by pandering to them doesn't work. Keep doing what you are doing and report back to me when Rosie O is on our side. I'm not going to pass on my full second amendment rights because I'm worried about what an anti might think of me.

[MatthewVanitas]

win over antis by pandering to them

I really fail to see how shooting AR-15s, competing in IDPA matches, running cross country (a very, very often overlooked skill among the Black Helicopter set, if my eyes gauge right), and wearing normal clothes while doing so is "pandering".


So not living up to all the antis' propaganda, fear-mongering, and class/race-baiting is somehow pandering?

I wasn't aware that wearing camouflage to the Piggly Wiggly endowed me with some magical uber-patriot-militia abilities.

Well, I've said my piece, I'll just watch this one from here on out.

-MV

[gunsmith]

Flip flops? at the range? when that hot brass hits the noob
she/he will AD into the kid on the left.

saggy droopy pants?:barf: I would rather shoot next to a camo wannabe the a gang banger wannabe any ole day

shooting at targets depicting UN soldiers
oooh,where can I get those!? they sound way cool!

if the politically correct crowd that sometimes shoots at the ranges in SF can get along with the camo wearing binladen target shooting wannabe rednecks
then the rest of the country can.

Name The Range Brian!

[fjolnirsson]

BozemanMT,

check your private maessages.

[silverlance]

I wear camo to the range all the time.
I wear the exact same suit of camo to the range all the time.
This is because my flecktarn's got lots of pockets, fits me to a T, keeps hot brass from going down my shirt, and blocks out the wind nicely (here in california's san fernando valley we have been having winds that rip the targets right off frames and swing all the rifle round spinners).

i don't wash them very often (about once every four or five trips). I wear them ONLY to go shooting, and then put them back up when i come home. rain slides right off the goretex liner, and even the worst CLP+powder sprays don't hurt the fabric any.

to be honest, i'd say that i look more ridiculous than threatening, especially when i'm trying out a new gun with 60 year old ammo - i wear a british riot helmet with full face shield! folks laugh, but after they've had a pierced primer or two they ask me if they can borrow it.

if my range came up with these rules, i'd tell them that i'm a "re-enactor" and point out that i'd hate to have to drive all the way to that OTHER range....

anyway, here's proof... :neener:

[Caimlas]

Is this in rural CO, or near Boulder or Denver?

Now, I don't know what kind of event you had planned, but for me, I'd not have been planning 'militia' training, just general riflery and shooting. Besides the fact that they're mutually exclusive, according to our Constitution.

If it's rural, I'd go anyway. We'd not wear "camo". We'd wear BDUs, maybe the black SWATie type or ODs :rolleyes: - just kidding. We'd all wear common "civvie" clothes of the outdoor quality, just not "cammo". But in general we'd want to be dressed appropriately for the activities at hand while attempting to look as benign as possible). That might include OD, tan, or black cargo pants; and photographer vests - hey, you're guys, you have no fashion sense, right?

We'd use other things for targets, like maniquins (you can do that, right?), or bales of hay or what have you. We'd do "self defensive shooting training" - room clearing or whatever you've got planned.

One thing to keep in mind is that when someone says "militia", they're not meaning 'militia', they're meaning a bunch of fat-arse guys in BDUs who talk about shooting UN, Chinese, Mexican troops, police, black people - whatever - agressors but rarely shoot and have no actual ability. Basically uncivilized paranoids. Don't be them.

Don't just find another place; try and win their "hearts and minds". if you go somewhere else, you'll enforce their paranoid beliefs. Go, act civilly, friendly, and leave the place better than when you arrive (pick up trash, brass - whatever).

In other words, I'd flaunt my "militianess" just as much as possible without crossing the line. If they want to be PC and specific, well... do have a backup plan just in case you <b>do</b> get kicked out, at least. And then you can sue the bastards for contract negation/bait and switch :P (they <b>did</b> give you these rules as a part of the contract? IE, you didn't agree, and then have them change the rules on you? I believe that's illegal.)

[Wedge]

Finally got my wife to accept my open invitation to the range. It was chilly in Austin yesterday (well chilly to those used to Austin) and going to an outdoor range so we were wearing good jeans, sweaters, she had on a black wool pea-coat and I had on a nice black leather jacket. The only non nice thing I was wearing was my baseball cap.

As we were leaving and packing up a guy came in all dressed in camo. My wife was polite enough not to snicker. We figure it was probably the warmest stuff he had to wear, and while we thought it was a little goofy he probably couldn't understand why we were wearing fairly nice clothes out to the range.

I think that the dress code is a bit silly, but if my wife hadn't known me for years she might have had a different opinion seeing that guy on the range since it was her first time there. I guess I am undecided but wanted to post a recent experience.

[ChiefThunderstick]

To get Rosie on our side, offer her a side of beef for lunch. Seriously though we can't let anyone bully us. As someone else here said, you should pow wow with the range officials to make them define and delineate what they actually mean. If it is not to your group's and your liking you are free to take yourselves and your money elsewhere. You should inform them of your decision. Money talks and BS walks and in this case so may your money.

[Caimlas]

Since WW2, the percentage of troops who actually fire in combat has gone up exponentially, due to several changes in the way soldiers are trained. One of those changes was the replacement of the bullseye target with the silhouette target.


I don't suppose the advent of video games has hurt much, either!

[Cosmoline]

Why not go in OD as USGI's from a prior war. Are they going to kick you out for wearing uniforms that celebrate our greatest heroes?

You said this was in Grants Pass? What range is it specifically?

[Caimlas]

The perception that any individual is representative of (or an ambassador for) any particular group they may resemble, is one of the greatest social challenges to liberty that our nation faces. In an enlightened world, an individual at large would never be judged to represent anyone but himself.

The urge to lump people together this way is destructive, lazy thinking.

So are you telling me that it's not a good idea to automatically avoid a group of two guys wearing hooded sweatshirts and baggy pants, late at night? I just thought that was, you know, descriminatory judgement and a wise move, not lazy thinking.

Careful what you say, not all things are universal.

[Monkeybear]

Time to chip in.

My theory:

There is a particular crowd or a specific situation that they have encountered and wish to avoid. My guess would be Militia Yahoos (nothing against militias, just the ones full of yahoos) or 18 year old guys fresh outta highshcool scaring the crap outta people. Face it, people (especially teenagers) in matching outfits with guns taking crazy-**** scare most people. Scared people tend to seek other places to enjoy their hobbies.

If three guys in camo came in and sighted their rifles I doubt they are gonna kick them out. If an ROTC came in to train Im sure there wouldnt be a problem.

[Monkeybear]

So are you telling me that it's not a good idea to automatically avoid a group of two guys wearing hooded sweatshirts and baggy pants, late at night? I just thought that was, you know, descriminatory judgement and a wise move, not lazy thinking.

Careful what you say, not all things are universal.

I avoid everybody late at night. :p

[Travis Lee]

I don't have a "militia", I don't even have a "group", but I would be put off by any new set of arbitrary rules.

I don't have camos, but I like the abundance of pockets in BDUs, roomy in the butt, too! Any body ever try to put a bunch of magazines in tight blue jeans?

I don't ever expect to have to shoot circles, or squares, or diamonds. If I ever need to shoot something, it will likely be human shaped. If I were a hunter I'd practice with critter shaped targets.

I don't believe for one minute that the PC rules will end with those now in place. That range has a growing case of range fascism, they'll be limiting the weapons shooters can use, the number of rounds you can load or fire in a minute. Will they ban mil-surp ammo cans? Will they ban combat boots?

I'll bet a nickel their "reasons" for throwing people out will get progressively more specious as people actually abide by their rules, and their daily "kick" of throwing someone out for infractions thin out.

I am really sick of this "bend over backwards and we'll win over the anti-gun people" mentality.

FEH!

--Travis--

[djpullen]

Good thing our founding fathers aren't still around. They wouldn't be allowed to shoot anywhere by most of THR's standards. Those radical militia bas*****. The only camo I own are the clothes I go hunting in (only wear them when I go hunting) and the stuff Uncle Sam issued to me. I sold most of it and haven't worn any of it since I got my DD214. Let us silence any talk about one of the main reasons that the second amendment was put into the constitution. Defense from foreign invaders. Do any of you guys think that the UN has nothing but the best of intentions for us? I hope none of you guys ever go to Knob Creek machine gun shoot. You'd probably call the fed hotline 10 minutes after you walk in the door.

I wonder how many non gunners R Lee Ermey has coverted with his show mail call. We all know how mamby pamby he is.

[Molon Labe]

At my range, militias are encouraged, and nearly everyone wears BDUs.

I guess I should mention that the range is on my property. :) And I host a militia training session once a month (http://champaigncounty.tripod.com/id4.html). :)

[Molon Labe]

I find it fascinating that so many people here profess to know so much about the militia, yet they have never attended a training session.

You guys remind me of the anti-gunners. They profess to know so much about the "dangers" of firearms, yet most have never shot a gun. :rolleyes:

[Declaration Day]

I'm with you on this one, Molon Labe. I'd say fewer than 1 in 10 "militia guys" fit the descriptions mentioned in this thread. We have none of them in the Southeast Michigan Volunteer Militia.

Of course, the nut-job ones are the ones who attract attention, and people like you and me are left to clean up the militia's image.

It's just like when sheeple see a gun-related crime on the local news, and think that all gun owners must be criminals.

[hso]

What's wrong with talking to the range operators without all the hyperbole? Find out why they've worded things the way they have because it sounds like they're reacting to some specific issue. Work with them to understand that there's another side of the coin they have overlooked.

No Cammo - What do they expect vets who have gotten back from overseas to wear? What do they do when 3 or 4 guys that served together show up in their old BDUs?

No anthropomorphic targets - Under what circumstances? Aren't they needed for IPSC/IDPA/SD training?

No groups self-identified as Militia or Paramilitary - I can't see the other side of the coin on this one.

No group military-style training - This sounds like it's linked to the Militia statement. What do they mean "military-style" training? What are the bounds on this general description.

All this sounds like they're reacting to a group that came in, discussed coming in or was discussed in an industry group. Many ranges don't want a bunch of bubbas in cammo swaggering in claiming to be a self-proclaimed "militia" training in "combat" tactics instead of SD techniques.

Just talk to them without rancor or hysteria so that you understand what they intend.

1. When your group arrives be aware that the words Militia or paramilitary may not be used while at our range.

2. While an individual might show up wearing cammos, the entire group may not be so attired as it would indicate a paramilitary type organization.

3. No silhouette targets of ANY style may be used. (We have allowed these in the past and we've taken a lot of flak from both non-members and members using our range.)

4. No military style training, as a group, is allowed.

[cbsbyte]

Just think it is ILEAGAL in MA to even shoot a human shaped target.

Even on the PD range we had to use a target shaped like a milk bottle

Wrong, that info is inaccurate. It is not illegal for people to use human shaped targets. It is only illegal for some special types of clubs, like PD ranges, to use those types of targets. I know I believe that too but it proved to be unfounded info spread by people who don't know the actual law.

[History Prof]

Get a petition together with all of the local shooters you know and boycott the place. Present them with the petition signed by as many people as possible. That's a ridiculous infringement of your I & II A rights. What are these nut jobs doing owning and running a gun shop/shooting range? No infringement here if this is a private range (which is what the OP seemed to imply). While I think the policies are ridiculous, and I agree with everything else you said, the basic rule is "their land, their rules." Private individulals have the right to restrict your civil liberties on their property. Remember when Tim Robbins got all upset that "the baseball hall of fame has no respect for the first amendment?" Tough Noogies on Tim Robbins! They didn't have to respect his first amendment rights. They're not a branch of government.

[280PLUS]

3. No silhouette targets of ANY style may be used. (We have allowed these in the past and we've taken a lot of flak from both non-members and members using our range.)The reasoning seems quite clear right here to me. Apparently they have been taking "flak" which can EASILY lead to this:
The range opponents have raised an array of alleged issues in their two state lawsuits,
including: safety, noise, zoning, property devaluation, and the environment.All it takes is a few folks. Actually ONE person is leading the charge over at Metacon. He happens to be a lawyer so he's causing THEM to spend all their money as he causes these problems in his spare time for gratis. What I see in this thread is a lot of "What about me and my rights!?" as opposed to "What about the range and the potential for legal battles it may have to fight to stay open?" Just my $0.02 of course...

[19Turkeys]

I am a member of the board of directors of JCSA in Grants Pass, OR.

For the record, I am unaware of these range "policies". I called our president, and she is unaware of any communication to BozemanMT or his group outlining any type of "code of conduct" during his event.

What you may have received is a communication from one officer or employee attempting to implement his/her own personal agenda and not the official policy of JCSA.

There is an Executive Board meeting tomorrow night. Our president has printed out this thread, and she will be discussing it at the meeting to find out the source of this communication.

Yours,

Steve W.

[kungfuhippie]

For once PRk wins:neener:

I got back from the indoor handgun range where out of 20 targets only 3 were not sillouette.

By the way the black sillouette I was shooting at took 50 rounds but finally went down.:evil: He's on the back of my office door.:cool: told all the normal lunchtime network video gamers that instead of a virtual beretta 92 I shot a real one:D and next time they should come too. Mixed responses. It's funner to holepunch paper at 50 feet than "kill" bad guys in my computer. Though where the range isn't an option I'm glad halflife is.

[280PLUS]

Welcome Mr Turkeys, that's a pretty interesting twist to the story. We'll be anxious to hear how it turns out. Thanks!

[Billll]

To paraphrase Arlo:

You can shoot anything you want,
We're not that far from Bozemans Longmont.

I had a co-worker once who was a VMI man, and firmly believed in putting on the camo and taking to the woods to fight off the invading commies. I wasn't convinced that this was a real likely scenario, but told him that if he needed food or ammo, to come back into town and look me up, as I would become a mugger, in those conditions. Got a long, thoughtful silence from him.
Or maybe he was just trying not to laugh.
Camo means fitting into your environment. I go to the range wearing whatever is on top. Exclusively.

[Cosmoline]

19Turkeys, thank you for that clarification!

[19Turkeys]

To further clarify things, three or so years ago a shooter used a very realistic Arab silhouette paper target on the range. He then walked off & left it.

Other shooters saw it and felt it was offensive. Thus, the JCSA board did state that realistic silhouette targets of individuals of any nationality were inappropriate. IDPA style square black silhouette targets are not an issue.

Personally, I think this is a reasonable thing. America is a melting pot and we firearm owners come from many ethnic backgrounds. "Generic" silhouette targets are one thing. Targets representing specific nationalities are in poor taste in my humble opinion.

I'll let the group know more as this unfolds.

Steve W.

[gunsmith]

Sir, thank you for joining our forum.
I would consider it good fun to shoot at a picture of Bin Laden
and after 9/11/01 my local range couldn't keep enough in stock..

is that also unacceptable by your board?

imnsho (not so humble opinion) shooting at a pic of a terrorist like Yasser Arafat and/or Bin Laden is just plain ol fun.
Shooting at a picture of a generic Arab person I would feel that was innapropiate but as long as he/she followed range safety rules I can't see much problem with it.

My old range insisted you clean up after yourself.

Anyway, thank you very much for joining our fine forum:)

[hso]

19Turkeys,

Welcome to THR and thank you for taking the time to get the facts on this issue

[Dr.Rob]

I noticed post 9-11 a lot of ranges that had 'no human targets' were selling Bin Laden and Sadam targets.

19 Turkeys, thanks for clarifying.

[Zoogster]

Is wearing turbans and praying banned too? I doubt it, wouldn't want to offend one of the minority protection groups. Banning people with a similar distrust of excessive or abused power to our founding fathers who wish to openly express that belief is okay though? I am not saying they are well trained or not pretending to be soldiers/patriots, but come on this is America. Are people not allowed to express beliefs by wearing funny clothing?

A bench is a poor place to practice field tactics anyways, only accuracy can be practiced at such a place. Field tactics require training on how to effectively move as a fire team.
Covering and supressive fire while others flank and maneuver. A maneuvering fire team adds multiple variables in thier favor, while two opposing sides stuck behind cover have only accuracy, and the value of thier chosen cover as variables. While fire that forces one side to remain behind cover working as a team to quickly change positions (or flank) adds the variables of multiple angles of fire, the side still behind cover is being forced to spend a few precious seconds reaquiring the new positions of the fire team members before targeting them. Assuming the fire team is accurate, they already know the location of the enemy and need far less time to aim and fire as they do not need to reaquire. So one side needs a second or 2, and the other needs mere miliseconds. Who has the advantage? Grenades are also highly valuable as they are necessary to flush out opposition with highly effective cover. However you can't use those either :neener: Of course these tactics are only effective with a well trained fire team that is used to working together and rotate covering fire so nobody disproportionaly runs low on ammo. Covering fire must be rapid and accurate enough to force the opposition to lose line of sight or die while other team members move to gain the advantage. Suppressive fire must not be sustained very long so a lot must accomplished as it is rotated. It must be accurate or it becomes ineffective against a well trained opposition. This means the team must be highly accurate while stationary and on the move, something you cannot train for at a bench. Speed and precision are key factors as the longer the other side has to become entrenched the better they will resist (position snipers etc), and the more reinforcements they will have.

Basicly the only skill you practice at a range is accuracy while stationary, and that is far from the only necessary skill in organized effective firefights. How you can practice 'military style' training from a bench is beyond me. Unless it is sniper/spotter training.

My point being why would the militia types want to practice at that kind of range anyways? Don't they pride themselves on actual tactics not just hitting a bullseye?

[MatthewVanitas]

Is wearing turbans and praying banned too? I doubt it, wouldn't want to offend one of the minority protection groups.

How about "wouldn't want to violate the 1st Amendment?"


What a bizarre non-sequiter...


Are people not allowed to express beliefs by wearing funny clothing?


You're free to waltz down Main St in a camouflage tutu if you so desire. But if Bob's BBQ mandates a suit and tie, you either wear it or don't eat at Bob's.


Not to mention, this thread basically ended when a member of the range in question dropped in and said that the original post was incorrect.

Don't let facts get in the way of a good rant...

[Chuck Dye]

Please note that the rules posted by BozemanMT in the original post are not the rules of the range involved. The matter has been brought to the attention of the officers and board of The Josephine County Sportsman’s Association (JCSA) and is being dealt with, as evidenced by the posts of 19Turkeys. It is my understanding that the matter will be discussed at an officers' meeting today, 6 December 2006.

Please, can we wait for 19Turkey’s next update and do without further hysterics and histrionics? With the possible exception of the JCSA, no one's ox has been gored.

[brokendreams]

Does anybody know the reasoning behind the militia rule??

Maybe the owner got sick of one particular militia charging targets and yelling "For the militia!" or some such, and just posted a rule.


I never use silhouettes anyhow, so that doesn't effect me.

Providing a fun environment for people is number one priority. If Joe Schmo decides to teach his 10 year old the art of shooting, and they show up to a range with 20 guys dressed in fatigues, discussing RKBA vehemently, talking about their milita, doing cover and assist drills... It might scare the little one, or, give him the worng idea about shooting. Joe Schmo won't come back, and he'll likely become a little more anti.

[BozemanMT]

Not to mention, this thread basically ended when a member of the range in question dropped in and said that the original post was incorrect.

Don't let facts get in the way of a good rant...

No sir
the original post is correct and I have the entire chain of emails to prove it.
What turns out to have changed is that the person who wrote it who claimed to represent the Board of Directors of the range, in fact does not represent the range except in his mind.

However, without this internet board and some timely intervention of some fine people, those rules would have been in place and would have affected the shoot, despite them not actually being real rules.

It was damn fine of 19Turkeys and the rest of the board to in fact clarify the matter and now the person who did tell our group that those rules were in affect is now in big doodoo. They didn't have to do that, and they did.
Gives me hope.

[MatthewVanitas]

@Bozeman: I phrased that poorly. I didn't intend to say that you were wrong, but to say that the situation turned out to be different.

I agree that the original rules were ridiculously unclear, but disagreed with the hostility that many board members had. I think a dress-code (the one semi-logical part of the "new rules") is excessive but understandable. And I stand by my assertion that anyone preparing for "revolution" would be far smarter to practice in street clothes than in camo.

Your bringing up the issue brought it to the attention of the right people, so clearly it was good that you brought up the issue.

-MV

[19Turkeys]

First, I must qualify this post by saying that I was not at the E Board's meeting last night not being an officer but simply a member of the board of directors. Second, I am not in agreement with the decision of the E Board as I believe they whimped out. Third, I plan to bring this matter to the attention of the full board at our meeting on December 13. That said, here's what I understand happened.

The individual who sent the correspondence to Brian defended the correspondence by stating that all of these issues had been discussed at prior board meetings and agreed upon by the full board. HOWEVER none of these items are in the policies & procedures manual.

I understand a discussion followed and the E Board decided to not take any action to either withdraw the correspondence or to validate it.

Personally, I feel this matter is resolved from this standpoint. The matter has been brought to the attention of both myself and the E Board. The range is fully aware that this event will be held and all of the E Board expressed their desire that the group have a good time and enjoy themselves.

I will be at the range all day on the final day of Brian's event. In fact, I will be only one range away. Also, he has my cell phone number and can call me if there are any problems Saturday.

Again, I see this an an unfortunate event and should not be reflective of the attitude of the range toward group events. In fact, JCSA sponsors two machine gun shoots per year at which vendors sell camo. Now, how can the range support the sale of the offending clothing and not support people wearing it?

Again, I do not forsee any difficulties for Brian's group, and I look forward to meeting him this coming Sunday.

Steve W.

[BozemanMT]

Thanks
I'll send Jack over to talk.
he's umm, a character. :rolleyes:

[Grey54956]

BrokenDreams,

I figure that these rules are in place to counter the stereotypical view of the gun owner. Since it is a private range, I can't really see anything wrong with it. If anything, I somewhat approve of these rules.

I know I might catch some flak, but let me explain.

The typical view of the gun enthusiast in this country, usually held by non-gun owners is that we are all either crazed, inbred, jimbo rednecks or crazed anti-gov't militia radicals with tinfoil hats. While we no that these assumptions are typically false, for the greater portion of the firearm-ignorant masses, perception is reality. If the news does a story at the range, and they see tacti-cool camo mall ninja types, the stereotype is reinforced. If someone happens to go to the range because they might be curious about firearms, and the next shooter over is proclaiming the glories of the militia or ranting against the gov't, the stereotype is reinforced and it might turn the person away. This is similar to the effect that survival commandos and WWII memorabilia (with real Nazi daggers and pins...:scrutiny: ) dealers have at gun shows. These folks just go to further a negative stereotype that results in more fear and ignorance from the sheeplish masses.

If we want to be taken seriously as gun owners and responsible neighbors, we should start by projecting a serious and responsible image.

As far as sillhouette targets go, we all know what guns are really for, but there really shouldn't be an absolute need to advertise the fact at the range all the time. A paper plate makes a fine and inexpensive target that doesn't demonstrate that you are practicing putting your shots in a bad guy's center of mass.

If you have a friend out in the country with a private range, or there are other ranges where these rules don't apply, then break out all the fun stuff and sillhouette targets, no problem.

I'm not saying that I hate all that stuff, but simply that if we want to win people over to our side, we need to change their minds about who the gun owner really is. Take a look at the majority of Oleg's posters. They are nicely done, no threatening, and don't typically weird anybody out too much. Then, take a look at 1/2 the adds in a mainstream firearms magazine. Tell me that some of those adds don't leave you feeling a little embarrased.

Same as enjoying Star Trek as a television show, but then seeing TV coverage of a Star Trek convention costume contest.