Why Are Range Officers Armed?

[BetaShooter]

I was at the range today with my son today and we witnessed the following exchange which made me wonder why ranger officers are armed. This takes place at the 50 yard rifle range.

Range Officer: "SIR" 1 second pause "SIR" shouted VERY loudly
Shooter: Was shooting a 10/22 roughly one shot every 2 seconds, stops shooting and turns around
Range Officer: "We have a 4 second rule between shots"
Shooter: "Okay, I'll slow it down" turns around and resumes shooting - with a notably slower pace
Range Officer: "SIR, SIR I SAID 4 SECONDS BETWEEN SHOTS"
Shooter: "Look, I'm concentrating on hitting the target, not counting between shots, I'm not shooting rapidly by any means"
Ranger Officer: steps toward the shooter, who was still seated "You are shooting faster than once every 4 seconds we have rules here and they need to be followed"
Shooter: now stands up "Are you timing me? For chrissakes, it's a .22 and I'm not being unsafe, I'm taking controlled shots"
Ranger Officer: "If I witness you rapid firing again, I will remove you from the range" tenses up and steps back a little and un-snaps the thumb strap on his holstered pistol, then rests his hand on it.
Shooter: "Give me a break, are you serious?"
Range Officer: "I said 4..."
Shooter: interrupting "I know what you said, and I heard you the first. Good day" turns around and sits down and begins reloading his magazine.
Ranger Officer: still standing with his hand on his gun, waits for a little while and walks about 10 yards away.

For what it's worth, the shooter was a very safe guy. I was next to him for about a half an hour and he practiced excellent gun safety and seemed to be a personable fellow. He was a roughly 50 year old man, not a punk kid by any means. The whole situation worried me a little. I had my 10 year old son with me. I have been to several ranges and most range officers seem a little "odd". So why are they armed? I could see if they wore kevlar vests or something similar, but why do they need to openly carry?

 

[brufener]

I have no problem with range officers being armed, what if they want to take a break and shoot?

What is scary is the implied threat when the range officer put his hand on his gun. Give me a break. On the other hand, the shooter can always leave if he doesn't like the rules.

 

[XavierBreath]

I'm surprised the shooter did not leave.

Why are Range Officers armed? Because they can be, and there is a small chance they may need to be, just like any other citizen who carries a gun. At the range, the difference is open carry.

The Range Officer went to far when he unsnapped his holster, and placed his hand on his weapon. Doing so definitely held the implication that lethal force would be used if the shooter did not back down in a verbal confrontation. This is by definition brandishing. I would have had a chat with his superior. The question is.......was the RO a reserve sheriff's deputy or what? Who is his superior? Either way, he was wrong in his actions, and should receive corrective action.

 

[.38 Special]

Four second rule? Good lord. I'd feel like a complete moron standing around with a gun in my hand and muttering "one one thousand, two one thousand..."

As for the guy unsnapping his thumb strap and taking a grip on his sidearm? Scarcely believeable. I'd have left that range instantly and considering pressing charges. Even the implied threat of deadly force in enforcing a "four second" rule is utterly out of bounds.

 

[10-Ring]

I have no problem w/ armed R/O's, but I do have a problem w/ RO's that don't understand their place in the universe & what the spirit of the law/rules means Honestly, I'd look for another place to shoot.

 

[Azrael256]

Did this RO happen to own the place? I might be inclined to talk to the owner. Unsnapping the thumb strap and resting his hand on the gun is a really dumb idea. One might call it "terminal stupidity."

 

[BetaShooter]

The guy did leave very soon afterwards. We did too. The whole thing gave me a bad feeling and I can't stop thinking about it. It happened at my favorite range too, I go there 3 or 4 times a month.

 

[.38 Special]

I believe I would have been incredibly upset had I been present. Making out as though you are willing to draw against a man for not obeying the letter of a (inexplicable) range rule is simply inexcusable.

 

[Ala Dan]

I shoot on my local PD range, so damn right all range officers are armed; but
its mostly LEO's, retired LEO's (myself), security officers, or military types that
are using this range anyway. Oh yes! the public is welcome on the first Sat
of each month from 0800 hrs to 1600 hrs. No fee, no harassment, and each
shooter's targets are furnished FREE of charge. Proper instruction is available,
if needed~!

 

[BetaShooter]

No the RO wasn't the owner. I thought the holster thing was out of line too. Did the RO actually break any laws? He was openly carrying, and he didn't remove the pistol from the holster, so he didn't brandish it. I wondered about this also. I am debating about telling the management about the incident, but I'm not the party directly involved.

 

[Zen21Tao]

Sounds like an RO with an little bit of an authority complex. My God, forcing someone to shoot every 4 seconds with a .22. Preventing rapid/bump firing is one thing but that is just rediculous. The RO's main purpose is to maintain safety. Some controlled 1 sec to 2 sec shots are not inherently unsafe unless the shooter is acting unsafe and in this case it doesn't appear he was. And as for releasing hios thumb break as if preparing to draw down of the gun for shoot every 4 sec instead of four, that is uncalled for. That RO needs a big boot in the a** and a new non-gun related job.

 

[beerslurpy]

This is by definition brandishing.

My thoughts exactly. That is the point at which you get witnesses and summon the nearest police officer.

The exciteable types who have a tendency to brandish over petty BS tend to get into more serious trouble later on. Better to have a nice long paper trail to ensure that justice eventually gets done. Then there is also the possibility that potential legal trouble could discourage such uncivil behavior in the future.

 

[R.W.Dale]

You most certianlly should inform the managment, As ownere I'm certian they would like to know about employes costing them buisness

 

[XavierBreath]

Did the RO actually break any laws? He was openly carrying, and he didn't remove the pistol from the holster, so he didn't brandish it.

There is no need to concern yourself with legalities. Do not bother going after him legally. Go after his job instead. He should not be allowed to intimidate patrons of the range in this manner.

Brandishing does not require that the weapon be removed from a holster. Brandishing only requires that a threat to use the weapon is implied.

By unsnapping the holster and laying his hand on the gun, it was brandished.

This is no different than a hoodlum purposefully opening his shirt to reveal a pistol stuck in his pants to intimidate a person into compliance.

In my opinion, this Range Officer was a hoodlum. He was a hoodlum sanctioned by the owner of that range to carry a gun there. It's up to the owner to decide how he wants to handle it.

I am not a lawyer, but I'll give free opinions worth what you pay for 'em on the internet.

 

[beerslurpy]

edit: nevermind, we agree

 

[Werewolf]

Time to find a new range and time to round up the guy who was assaulted by the range NAZI and press charges.

I imagine what he did could at the least be considered brandishing which is a big no-no in many if not most states.

It is quite possible that what he did could be considered assault. In many jurisdictions making a threat to use violence is assault and unsnapping the thumb strap and placing one's hand on the firearm contained there in is definitely a threat to use violence.

That RO is a ticking time bomb - he needs to be defused. Complain to management at least but I'd go to the local magistrate and swear out a complaint of assault if that is an option in your jurisdiction.

 

[Firethorn]

Betashooter, it can depend upon the state laws and the prosecuter/judge situation, but there's a world of difference between having a gun in an open carry holster and having your hand on it after unsnapping it while having an arguement. The guy might not be chargable under brandishment, but I'm sure that a creative prosecuter will be able to find something.

Personally, I'd have been leaving halfway into that arguement, or if I'd been the RO, asked the man to stop shooting and leave.

 

[David904]

The question shouldn't be "Why are range officers armed?" I've been to enough ranges to know that I always keep a loaded magazine ready or another carry gun on me at all times. You get the occasional gang banger at the outdoor/relatively unsupervised ranges.

The question should be why wasn't this guy arrested or at the very least reported to management and fired immediately. My considered opinion would be (from my armchair) that if he drew down on this kid for what is ostensibly a ridiculous reason, I would have drawn on him. He's obviously unbalanced and a serious threat.

Had I been that kid, upon seeing this guy unsnap his holster, I would have said' "no problem sir... I'm leaving now. Sorry to have broken your rules." I would then have called management and the police.

 

[BetaShooter]

XavierBreath,
Thanks for clearing that up for me. I missed what you said about brandishing in you first post. And I wasn't sure if you could brandish an openly carried gun. They didn't cover any open carry topics in the CHL class...

I wonder if it isn't easier to just take my business somewhere else. I have been going to that particular range for years, and only recently have they added range officers. I just need to decide if it's worth the hassle or not.

The whole incident could have turned out badly had the shooter reacted differently. I thought the guy handled the situation pretty well - probably better than I would have. I normally don't give it a second thought when I see RO armed, but this incident made me question the practice.

 

[Hemicuda]

the implied threat of unsnapping the holster... WOW... I'd have been VERY tempted to either put my hand on my OWN piece and warn him of his unwise and potentially fatal mistake.

OR more likely, I'd call the cops sand report him for brandishing and criminal menacing...

 

[JohnKSa]

Even TX's somewhat relaxed laws about the use of force and deadly force do not allow a person to threaten deadly force unless they are already justified in using force (not deadly force).

I don't know of any situation that allows a person to threaten another person with a gun unless a crime is taking place. I don't know of any place where there is a "4 second rule" law nor of any place where disobeying a Range Officer is automatically grounds for use of force.

The shooter was an idiot for arguing with the Range Officer and the Range Officer was within his rights to enforce his rule or even to eject the shooter had he continued to object/argue. But I can't see any way that reaching for his gun was justifed or even legal.

 

[.38 Special]

The problem, as others have pointed out, is not that the man was armed. I personally am gratified to see "my fellow Americans" go armed.

The problem is the goofball who thinks the gun on his hip is a solution to the problems of daily life. This man needs to be "corrected" and the sooner the better.

 

[cloudedice]

All the more reason

I am debating about telling the management about the incident, but I'm not the party directly involved.

All the more reason to tell the management. Being an independant third party, you had the opportunity to see the exchange from the outside. You don't have to cover up a mistake you made (story from RO's POV), and you're not angry over the way you were treated. (Shooter)

In my experience, management, and well pretty much everyone, tends to lend more credance to a calm third party than to either of the parties involved in a confrontation.

 

[jhco50]

Betashooter, I would recommend talking to the owner and manager of the range. What this guy did was threaten the other shooter. If this is not reported he will get more brazen until either he shoots someone or gets shot himself. He escalated the situation with his stupidity. In a way, you were directly involved. If he had drawn his weapon, you and your son would have been in danger of fire as well. Unbelievable.



Quote:No the RO wasn't the owner. I thought the holster thing was out of line too. Did the RO actually break any laws? He was openly carrying, and he didn't remove the pistol from the holster, so he didn't brandish it. I wondered about this also. I am debating about telling the management about the incident, but I'm not the party directly involved.

 

[Huddog]

I agree the management should be informed. This RO is a liability to them and could well cost them serious money if he is stupid enough to follow through with his threats. (Placing your hand on a weapon can be inferred to be a threat. If it puts a person in fear of an unwanted touch it is assault.) Not to mention what pain he could cause a customer or the customers family who files the suit. Employee behavior is the responsibility of the Employer and I am sure they would appreciate a heads up about this RO.

I have no problem with ROs being armed, or store employees or the general public for that matter but everyone must know that their actions have consequenses and in this case his should be loss of employment at the least.

Four seconds is ridiculous.