TargetTalk

I am in disbelief in regard to the animosity that I’m reading that’s being directed towards the NRA. It seems totally myopic for some competitive shooters to not see their chosen area of firearms usage in context of the larger picture of firearms ownership in general, not to mention our Constitutional rights.
If you don’t like the direction or focus of the NRA, perhaps the blame needs to be cast on those who unrelentingly attack all firearms owners.

Since this topic has been broadened by comparative remarks concerning Canada, I’d like to take up the matter further, not to denigrate Canada, but to illustrate a point.
I have been a citizen, firearms owner and competitive shooter in both the USA and Canada. Furthermore, I have previously been employed by the Canadian branch of a major US corporation in the specific capacity that involved the sales and importation of goods produced by one of their subsidiaries, a major US based firearms manufacturer. So, I feel I’m in a position to fairly comment without being accused of unfair bias.

Right up front, there is almost no comparison between the two countries in regard to firearms ownership. In Canada, it is not a right, it’s a privilege; one that must be re-applied for on an annual basis. And, it’s a privilege that is actively and consciously being chipped away. American firearms owners complain about being harassed, and while this is certainly true in many regions, they have no idea until they’ve lived in Canada! The rules change regularly, always towards greater stringency, always involving higher costs and more red tape.
Without boring you with the step by step specifics involving the array of permits, let it just be said that each hoop you jump through is followed by a higher and more expensive loop.
Consider a few things:
-Most competitive APs as designed by their manufacturers, would be considered restricted weapons, just like a standard pistol, due to the “over 500 fps” law. That means four tiers of permits (FAC, certified club membership, restricted weapons permit, and a permit to convey). The “solution” is to modify APs so that their velocity cannot be adjusted above 500 fps. Not everyone agrees that this doesn’t come at some expense to performance.
In the broader picture of handguns and what's allowed and disallowed, comments such as "None of those issues concern me in any fashion" are not just silly but extremely self serving! How'd you like to be sold out by the air gun competitors?
-Importation of the consumables (ammo, primers, powder, etc) are subject to annual government imposed quotas. (I know from first hand experience all too well!) When the supply runs out, tough luck! Your favorite powder didn’t get chosen by your provincial distributor/importer? Tough luck again! Oh yeah, don’t think this doesn’t affect prices, either. How’d you like to pay $50 for a pound of powder?
-Need to get your firearm serviced? If it’s a pistol, you’ll need a permit to convey for that. So, you have to go the your local firearms control officer, (who may in fact not be all that local... one of mine was a 30 mile round trip), and wait around until they can spare some time to see you. (Think DMV!) These are extremely short term permits. If the repair takes too long, you have to get an extension or new permit. Depending on how your local Firearms Control Officer interprets the law (that’s a whole other can of worms!), you may need to make another trip to get a new permit, just so your firearm can be returned.
-All permits are discretionary. All permits also have conditions and pre-requisites that are also discretionary. Depending on the animosity of your local law enforcement, you may find it impossible to own use what you might like. And like I said, there is tremendous room for interpretation.... and confusion! Often, it can be personal. They don’t like you? No permit and no guns!
-Once a year every club has to go through the hassle of verifying everyone’s membership status and issue the appropriate document so that each individual member can then renew their permits. Don’t think for a minute that unannounced rule changes, delays and errors don’t happen!! And, of course, the logistical impact imposed on the club translates into higher and higher membership dues.

Over the years I have known many Canadian Firearms Control Officers. A couple I have known on a fairly close personal & professional basis. I can tell you from first hand knowledge that the goal is not to simply carry out a regulated bureaucracy, but to incrementally dissuade people from owning firearms. Harassment might be overstating it, but unrelenting negative pressure would not be a mischaracterization.
I don’t mean to put down Canada or Canadians. There is a lot to love about the country and it’s people. But, as a firearms owner, I’d never want to live there again!

If you are lucky enough to enjoy your rights as a gun owner and citizen of the United States, ask yourself how you’d like to deal with an alternative such as this.
So, before slamming the NRA, think about what they’ve done and continue to do that very directly affects your ability to enjoy your sport.

Respectfully,
Jim

Fair viewpoint. I'd like to remind you, however, that others do have experiences with the NRA that are less positive. We also have different perspectives, not necessarily inferior in terms of knowledge or experience. We are aware of the state attacks. We still come to these conclusions.

And speaking of myopic, be careful not to read the Second Amendment outside of the complete framework of the Constitution. Second Amendment does not trump First Amendment. I am becoming increasingly concerned that about the fact that, on this forum, anyone who criticizes the NRA is considered to be something wrong by some forum members. To be blunt, that's bullshit. The NRA is not sacrosanct. It's a human organization run by humans, not a benevolent dictator of the Second Amendment

Criticism is healthy, and should be encouraged in this country. Why? Because we get to see differing viewpoints, which allows people to think and come to their own conclusions based on not only their own viewpoints, but others. Removing other viewpoints results in extremism and destructive ideas that benefit a few at the cost of many. This, incidentally, is my principal objection to the NRA as a lobbying organization. There is little room for more moderate organizations or discussion due to the vitriol on both sides. This extremism isn't some construct I made up. It's a fact. Both sides come up with stupid laws. The lack of ability to communicate between the two "sides" (never got that one honestly) hinders reasonable governance rather than helps it.

This is why criticism is a necessary and healthy part of democracy.

Criticizing the NRA is not myopic. Neither is supporting it. The reasons for doing so may make an individual viewpoint myopic if they do not consider other viewpoints.

What else...oh, yes. Don't confuse criticism of the NRA as a sports governing body with criticism of the NRA as a lobbying body. The two are definitely different subjects with different issues.

And, one other point. I'm not saying "pipe down and don't support the NRA" at all. There are plenty of good reasons to support it. I'm just asking that in doing so, you consider the other sides as well and accept that there are other viewpoints that can be valid.

In the last two years ive competeted in

7 competitions sanctioned by CMP

6 competitions sanctioned by USAS

4 competitions sanctioned by The National Association of State Games

1 competition sanctioned by NRA

NRA is almost a completely political organization, and its too liberal for my tastes. CMP is forging ahead, and I for one hope they are wildly successful.

this year's schedule so far includes

6 CMP
4 USAS

NRA? maybe 1.

A fact and an opinion. And a request.

Fact: USAS is only interested in Olympic events. That means they won't support 50m pistol, CF, SP or Bullseye. It's not their mission. But they AND the CMP would cover a lot of stuff.

Opinion: The reason states and cities come up with insane gun regulations (like the forward magazine thing) is that they are written by people who don't know the first thing about shooting. And remember, we are wired to fear what we don't know. Part of the reason for this state of affairs is that, as others have noted, a position that is not 100% pro or against is not acceptable to most people -or the loudest people. If hunters and target shooters were involved in discussions about regulations, perhaps California wouldn't be so weird (haha, joking). But most shooters AND most gun-fearing people would cringe at the thought. They would consider it back-stabbing.

Request: Please, no personal attacks. I know. Whatever you're thinking, I know.

Christopher Miceli wrote:Cmp is rolling out its own class system for rifle since the NRA CMP camp perry thing. The do a lot for air rifle. Maybe they could take over pistol, and air events as well as international events

The CMP will be offering smallbore rifle in 2018 at camp perry. Hopefully they will expand their pistol offering as well.

Ricardo wrote:A fact and an opinion. And a request.

Fact: USAS is only interested in Olympic events. That means they won't support 50m pistol, CF, SP or Bullseye. It's not their mission.

USAS has jurisdiction for all ISSF events. I'll grant that they put all resources into the Olympic events.

A USAS/CMP alliance might be vey worthwhile. CMP has revenue from the sales of Garands, etc. Maybe we can get them authorization to serve as disposal agent for the Berettas, justifying it as funding for the Olympic disciplines.

Anschutz wrote:

Christopher Miceli wrote:Cmp is rolling out its own class system for rifle since the NRA CMP camp perry thing. The do a lot for air rifle. Maybe they could take over pistol, and air events as well as international events

CMP Talladega Marksmanship Park - Civilian Marksmanship Program: Just curious, could National Matches be held here for many disciplines?

Not for highpower, smallbore, or pistol and maybe not for airgun with the present facilities. There simply aren't enough targets even with the faster matches. Even in Anniston there are only 80 lanes for 10m. But they do work well for regionals. My belief is that they would need to at least double the 100 yard smallbore and pistol points to make things work. They would also need far more rifle points for highpower.


That said the facility is top rate and the target systems work pretty well.

On the other hand, Camp Perry is large enough to do all of the above, though there is a sacrifice for pistol due to the lack of a covered firing line and the fact that in bad weather you can be standing in Ankle deep mud.

Camp Perry has 150- 1000 yard rifle points, 250- 600 yard rifle points (with firing lines at 200, 300, 400, and 500 as well), a portable 400 point pistol range setup with turning targets, a 100 point covered smallbore range, and an 80 point airgun range.

For the large CMP High Power matches they run 6 relays on those 250 points. For big pistol matches there are 3 or 4 relays run on 300 of the 400 points.

Mike

jmdavis wrote:

Anschutz wrote:

Christopher Miceli wrote:Cmp is rolling out its own class system for rifle since the NRA CMP camp perry thing. The do a lot for air rifle. Maybe they could take over pistol, and air events as well as international events

CMP Talladega Marksmanship Park - Civilian Marksmanship Program: Just curious, could National Matches be held here for many disciplines?

Not for highpower, smallbore, or pistol and maybe not for airgun with the present facilities. There simply aren't enough targets even with the faster matches. Even in Anniston there are only 80 lanes for 10m. But they do work well for regionals. My belief is that they would need to at least double the 100 yard smallbore and pistol points to make things work. They would also need far more rifle points for highpower.


That said the facility is top rate and the target systems work pretty well.

On the other hand, Camp Perry is large enough to do all of the above, though there is a sacrifice for pistol due to the lack of a covered firing line and the fact that in bad weather you can be standing in Ankle deep mud.

Camp Perry has 150- 1000 yard rifle points, 250- 600 yard rifle points (with firing lines at 200, 300, 400, and 500 as well), a portable 400 point pistol range setup with turning targets, a 100 point covered smallbore range, and an 80 point airgun range.

For the large CMP High Power matches they run 6 relays on those 250 points. For big pistol matches there are 3 or 4 relays run on 300 of the 400 points.

Mike

Thanks for the info.

About Talladega for rifle championships, the weather in Al in July averages about 5-8 degrees hotter than Ohio. That doesn't sound like much until you put on a couple of sweatshirts and a leather coat for hours.

sparky wrote:

Mike M. wrote:

SlartyBartFast wrote: Just pointing out that if we're talking competition shooting, where for the most part you can't use any old gun you want anyways, you don't need libertarian post 1980 takeover interpretations of the American constitution and rabid opposition to any and all laws to protect the sports.

Tell that to the pistol shooters in the UK.

Exactly!

I don't disagree. There's a step (or giant leap) too far.

But being rabidly anti-legislation wouldn't have helped UK shooters.

6string wrote:I am in disbelief in regard to the animosity that I’m reading that’s being directed towards the NRA.

I'm in disbelief at your misrepresentation of the Canadian situation.

Import quotas for ammunition are 5,000 cartridges for personal use. And the local stores aren't about to run out.

A rifle can be brought in simply by having your PAL. A handgun only needs to be on the register before import. All that I need to import a firearm into Canada is match the same requirements required to purchase the firearm from a Canadian source.

Black or smokeless powder is allowed up to 8kg (18lb).

However, I don't think you can legally import all these things from the USA thanks to US export law.

The firearms act has been pretty stable since 1995, and the Conservatives mad the transportation permit contingent on the licence greatly facilitating moving your handguns from home to ranges and gunsmiths.

The AP definition I'll agree sucks. And I've discussed on this forum ways I'd like to see it changed.

But it's not in lobbying for AR-15 to be non-restricted that the AP community would gain supporters in the general public to get the rules changes for competition pistols.

I always think it's funny when folks who live in countries with more restrictive gun laws than the U.S. argue that being more accepting of anti-firearms legislation wouldn't be a bad thing and would make firearms and firearms sports more acceptable to the public.

The Neville Chamberlain approach is wrong. Appeasement won't result in "peace for our time" with those who are anti-2nd Amendment (or whatever the equivalent might be in your country...if you have one). The slippery slope has been proven time and time again.

sparky wrote:The slippery slope has been proven time and time again.

The slippery slope argument is a logical fallacy. Why have any laws then? Every law and regulation is a step down the slope towards totalitarian rule and surveillance.

Fact is I, and many others, who would go to bat for competitive shooting and limiting the number of laws and restrictions, will line up on the other side of the debate on many other issues that the NFA might want to emulate the USA and NRA on.

AR might have a much bigger following here if getting a license for a rifle didn't involve courses that were heavy on hunting information.

If you feel that your battle line can be drawn on a hill and you can defend it, good for you. In many places that extreme line was breached long ago and more solidly defensible lines need to be drawn.

I only suggest that in places like New York State, it is far more likely that a cooperative effort to legalise competition weapons starts moving the other way than wagging a battle for a complete repeal. Hearts and minds won over, then a complete repeal or at least a softening of regulations might become possible.

While all these issues may have varying levels of contentedness, they are not necessarily inter-dependent. There is neither the need to make one dependent on the other, nor abandon one or the other. Take your advances where you can.

Battles, wars, slippery slopes, it's all language IMO that needs to be avoided to have reasoned discussion with others and consider all view points and how best to address them.

SlartyBartFast wrote:

sparky wrote:The slippery slope has been proven time and time again.

I only suggest that in places like New York State, it is far more likely that a cooperative effort to legalise competition weapons starts moving the other way than wagging a battle for a complete repeal. Hearts and minds won over, then a complete repeal or at least a softening of regulations might become possible.

Having lived most of my life in western NYS. I have testified, demonstrated, diagrammed, power pointed etc to city councils, county supervisors, etc a dozen times about the differences or lack of differences between hunting semi autos operations, AR style operations, pistol grips on hunting wood stocked rifles vs AR models, raised sight on hunting guns vs AR models, cyclic rates of semi auto hunting rifles vs AR models and that old terror magazine capacity. Specifically the requirement that in organized local, state, regional and national competition, ie service and match rifle that 8 rounds are/were required after the initial 2 shots. So important is the fact that many shooters have to mark magazines with a 2 or an 8 just so they do not get them confused. And that criminals care not a peep about magazine capacity but law abiding folks do!

Did the governing authorities listen, yeah, understand ..not a lick even with 8x10 glossies with arrows and description on the back as a handout. There was no convincing them. Presenter after presenter in city halls, county offices or state capital far out numbering the "antis" even made a dent in the votes or bill modification to allow the competitor any variances in rifle style, hand grips, flash hider,, or magazine capacity. The only concession was a "grandfather clause" and even that had kevlar strings to it in the long run and was subject to at a whim change in the dark of night.

Now NYS have the "Safe Gun Act" no internet sales of ammo..any ammo. Reports of state police lurking near shooting ranges to stop for any minor/made up infraction to search for "properly" stored guns and ammo. Clubs feeling compelled to record handgun serial numbers and permits # used in competition at the clubs for their protection. Urban legends....not in the least.

So seeking a more cooperative effort between gun owners and governments is a pipe dream. Just ask the poor gun owners of California, England, Australia, New York, Mass., Conn, RI, NJ.

Your state is next. despite what goes on in Washington DC. Local Laws will be tied up in the courts for many election cycles, federal appeals courts will quiver and not rule anything. SCJ will dither and haw and do little about the 2A.

Now is the best time to drive a stake into the hearts of the antis. It will not happen again. Its the pioneers that take the arrows! Occupy wall street would look like a minor event..occupy city hall, county offices and state capitals. Lose permit maybe, go to jail perhaps.

Be like the founding fathers, risking all “… we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes. our permits and our sacred honor.”

Uhm. That was...I can't really agree with your SCOTUS analysis...Read D.C v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), please. Stare decises will prevent repeats. They didn't overturn Miranda or other controversial pluralities, they won't overturn this majority. That's excluding the McDonald (McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010)) case, which matters even more, and was a 5-4. These things don't get decided again just because someone else came on a court...

I'm...pretty sure that South Carolina will not see restrictions on firearm ownership anytime soon either...considering we had the Charleston Shooting, you'd think we were a likely candidate. There ain't much on the legislative horizon, and what little is there is currently in the legislative equivalent of a trash bin. Our Senate is supreme in the state, and it's controlled by staunch conservative factions. I can't see any firearms control being passed here, honestly.

Where exactly is your argument aimed? I thank you for sharing your experiences with NY, but I'm not sure if your post is connected with the reality on the ground at various other states.

Edit: A kind forum member pointed out to me that I needed to explain a bit more about stare decises. It is Latin and has a specialzied meaning. Here's a link to what it means. I recommend just sticking to the introduction before the table of contents unless you want to be very confused very quickly. This is in no way meant to say that anyone on this forum is incapable of understanding this material! But there are entire classes in law school on the concepts of federalism and separation of powers and the effects of stare decisis thereon. Stare Decisis details get really complicated, and it's a major part of why lawyers are expensive.

Xman, sounds like you've made a gallant effort. But failed to win those hearts and minds.

Such, unfortunately, is democracy. No matter how reasoned or well argued we think our position is, we can find ourselves on the minority side.

But also, was your effort more than just yourself? What other people and organisations were involved?

And politically, you need to know when a situation is lost and protect what you can. To then come back and work towards repeals and changes in other areas after.

Chia wrote:May I suggest forming a new group? I think we can all read the writing on the wall with the NRA (as has been discussed often here). We all agree that there's an issue, but without capital or publicity nothing can be done.

It's not too difficult a process, big-picture wise. Small picture is much more complicated.

Big picture:
1. Remove NRA as a requirement to competitive clubs. This is done by offering an alternative that does NOT require NRA certification, and while utilizing their rules as a basis, modifying the rulebooks for various events. That can only be done by two groups of people: experts at the sport and people with trade/business contacts. Creating a separate certification and membership system would be critical, as would utilizing technology to reach a broad base of shooters, both for casual and serious competition. This means the rules would have to have two basic systems: a casual type of comeptition for informal events, and a moer structured and serious one for national events.

2. Publicize and indirectly compete with the NRA, drawing competition people away. Emphasize inclusiveness of all disciplines, and actually, I don't know, make a magazine that talks about competition guns and their history? There's plenty of lore to make a constant publication on, and not a lot of it is as well documented as it should be. Also, this is a great place to emphasize the training and safety aspects of the sports in a pretty divided country. It won't get everyone over, but staying out of the political arena (except for issues directly affecting the sports) will make for a lot more goodwill and less antagonism.

3. Once sufficient competition has been drawn away and the new organization has sufficient resources and goodwill, directly interfere with the NRA's running of events by scheduling things on top of theirs.

4. All of this leads up to one thing: take accreditation from the relevant organizations as the U.S. official sponsor of shooting sports, both nationally and internationally. Voila: functional competitive sports league for shooting.

Yeah, it's a hell of a thing to try and do, but them's the breaks. Either we complain or we do something. Currently we're just complaining. I'm not seeing it change anytime soon either unless an organization can be put together that does this.

Edit: When I first read this thread's title, I thought you were talking about them writing us off as a charitable expense...too much time in the tax code.

There is one in the works. Wait a few weeks.

Ya know, I agree that the NRA can muddy the water in a lot of disciplines.

However, one of their programs, collegiate shooting support, I cannot fault.
They support the All American program which does a neat thing for the top tier collegiate shooters ... something that is strived for and all those know and are honored by the kudos from the program.

In terms of non-NCAA shooting, in both rifle & pistol, they go out of their way to keep the sport from dying out in schools that do not have the NCAA programs.

I've had shooters in both NCAA and NRA Intercollegiate Club National Championships and while they are different, they honor and keep some of the shooters in the sport.

One of the saddest things I see is very good and even excellent high school shooters drop off the face of the earth after they get their high school diploma .... NRA does indeed keep them going in that "sport for life" mindset.

(Do they do some dumb stuff --Yes! , and am I happy seeing them do mostly political activism these days --No, but there is a place for that too, especially in the last 20 or so years.

SlartyBartFast wrote:... being rabidly anti-legislation wouldn't have helped UK shooters.

It probably would have if they had started 30 (or 50 or 80) years sooner.

Attend, for example, the annual Gun Rights Policy Council meetings and hear just how hard some shooters are working to win back some basic human rights in places like Italy. Their struggles seem oddly to be both pathetic and noble at the same time.

What I'm saying is simply that what we lose we rarely, if ever, get back via the same processes that took it away. I'm willing to fight on every front at the same time. We're not talking about allocating resources in a shooting war here; I can support a dozen different organizations simultaneously as long as I feel each is doing something positive.

About some things, I can say the NRA well and truly sucks. I still send them money because I said "some things", not "all things".

PS - I long ago stopped trying to tell people the difference between the NRA and the ILA. Most people don't separate them in their minds any more. Is it the case the that the tail wags the dog completely? Is there no longer any utility in pointing out that the NRA and the NRA-ILA are two different things? Or is my info so out of date that I'm wrong about that, too?

jhmartin wrote:Ya know, I agree that the NRA can muddy the water in a lot of disciplines.

However, one of their programs, collegiate shooting support, I cannot fault.
They support the All American program which does a neat thing for the top tier collegiate shooters ... something that is strived for and all those know and are honored by the kudos from the program.

In terms of non-NCAA shooting, in both rifle & pistol, they go out of their way to keep the sport from dying out in schools that do not have the NCAA programs.

I've had shooters in both NCAA and NRA Intercollegiate Club National Championships and while they are different, they honor and keep some of the shooters in the sport.

One of the saddest things I see is very good and even excellent high school shooters drop off the face of the earth after they get their high school diploma .... NRA does indeed keep them going in that "sport for life" mindset.

(Do they do some dumb stuff --Yes! , and am I happy seeing them do mostly political activism these days --No, but there is a place for that too, especially in the last 20 or so years.

Thanks for sharing this. I'm really glad they're doing that! As people have probably noticed, I'm not rabidly anti- or pro- anything. It's perfectly possible for an organization to do a lot of good while still having human issues.