Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Federal Gun Ranges Hit With Requests for Access

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by swampsniper, Jul 13, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. swampsniper

    swampsniper Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2003
    Messages:
    280
    Location:
    St. Augustine, Fla
    Federal Gun Ranges Hit With Requests for Access
    Alan Korwin, Gun Laws of America

    Activists around the country are beginning to probe federal shooting ranges, seeking public access, if my inbound emails are any measure. This follows release of news from Bloomfield Press that federal law specifically allows such use (linked at end). So far, authorities have reportedly been resisting the public's interest in following the law, and that's putting it nicely.


    http://www.sierratimes.com/05/07/11/gunranges.htm
     
  2. Cesiumsponge

    Cesiumsponge Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,266
    Location:
    Washington
    I think there is at least one other thread on this topic somewhere.

    I'm curious on how many holes in the ceilings/walls there are at indoor federal shooting ranges...and how it compares with public ranges.
     
  3. taliv

    taliv Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2004
    Messages:
    22,290
    hey, i'm the only one here professional enough to put a hole in this ceiling
     
  4. blue86buick

    blue86buick Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2003
    Messages:
    394
    Location:
    Cedar Rapids, IA
    Now the question is, how do you know if a range was built with fedaral funds? Obviously, one in the basement of a courthouse would have been, but what about the local "LEO only" range used by the police? How would I find out if Uncle Sam helped pay for it, and therefore I have a right to use it?

    (yes, I do mean the one local to me....but I'm sure other cities have similar ones, and a generic answer helps all)
     
  5. crawfish

    crawfish Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    123
    Location:
    NC
    Request that information under the Freedom of Information Act from your local city/county manager. You may have to keep at it or you will be put off over and over. May get lucky and get the info first time but don't count on it.
     
  6. nyresq

    nyresq Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    Messages:
    543
    Location:
    Long Island, NY
    the law says the govt may charge "range fees". suppose the controling agency (like the USMS at the AZ court house) were to say the range was open to the public, but the fee was $500 per hour per person. The law doesn't specify what the range fee would be or impose any limits. whats to stop them from doing that?
     
  7. DMF

    DMF Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,247
    Location:
    Nomad
    May not will, and subject to the Secretary's approval. Good luck getting any government owned range opened to use by the general public. It will probably happen the day after Satan hosts a snowboarding competition in hell.
     
  8. shermacman

    shermacman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    1,754
    The space shuttle, NORAD and the Pentagon were built with Federal funds. I would like: 1) a ride 2) a tour 3) to use some of those fancy computers...
    When do I get to go?
     
  9. Pappy John

    Pappy John Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    619
    Location:
    Susquehanna Valley
    Shermacman,....... :D
     
  10. Farnham

    Farnham Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    Messages:
    641
    Location:
    Texas
    I've done #2 and #3, and trust me, they ain't lyin about "lowest bidder," you couldn't pay me to do #1! ;)

    S/F

    Farnham
     
  11. c_yeager

    c_yeager Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2003
    Messages:
    5,479
    Location:
    Seattle
    Ive been to a really nice new police-only range, and my observation was that it was only slightly less riddled with those scary holes all over the place than the public counterparts.
     
  12. trickyasafox

    trickyasafox Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Messages:
    2,523
    Location:
    upstate NY go to school in WNY
    i've been to an leo only range, as it was on land that was acquired by a private person, who continued to grant the police permission to use it. so pretty much it was the cops and about 5 other people with access.

    40 s*w brass by the barrel, nickle plated and once fired
    223 ammo by the barrel once fired.

    holes in everything but the air and water.

    i kinda wish i had a 40, the brass is just there for the taking but even a cheap skate like me cant justify taking brass i cant use. i thought about grabbing a few thousand and just trying to offer rediculous trades, like 5000 pieces of 40 for 500 pieces of 45.
     
  13. bogie

    bogie Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    Messages:
    9,569
    Location:
    St. Louis, in the Don't Show Me state
    Hey, definitely trade that stuff here. I don't shoot one either, but trade bait is trade bait.

    And if you don't have a .223 now, you will...

    My boss shoots at Quantico.
     
  14. 308win

    308win Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Messages:
    2,918
    Location:
    Ohio - The Heart of it All
    I spent 16 months at #3; you aren't missing anything. Go see the Wall, WWII memorial, Smithsonian, etc. and spend your time on some quality visits.
     
  15. Hawkmoon

    Hawkmoon Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2004
    Messages:
    3,454
    Location:
    Terra
    DMF,

    The first "may" you emphasized is a granting of permission, not a conditional approval.

    The second is also a granting of permission -- it allows (but does not require) the Secretary to establish fees. It does not allow the Secretary to prohibit access.

    The last clause you emphasized only states that regulations shall be approved by the Secretary. The preceding clause states that regulations shall be established. "Shall" is mandatory language, not discretionary language.

    In other words, it doesn't say the Secretary "may" grant access to the public, it says the Secretary "shall" grant access to the public.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page