Ranges Ridiculous Rules Effort to Pander to the Left?

[Sousuke]

Actually, the real question in this thread is if a business is free to set rules for the use of their facilities ?

Easy as that, is a business free to set their own rule? Period.

Are you referring to legality or community pressure?

In the Bay area I would say gun related businesses are not free due to mob pressure on city councils.

[Eureka1911]

Are you referring to legality or community pressure?

In the Bay area I would say gun related businesses are not free due to mob pressure on city councils.

This entire thread is based on the assumption of the OP. There is not one shred of solid evidence regarding why this range made the decision they allegedly made. But people are outraged despite this fact. It seems to me that the real question is does a business have a right to decide their rules, even if one group or another does not like them?

[IVC]

Actually, the real question in this thread is if a business is free to set rules for the use of their facilities ?

Easy as that, is a business free to set their own rule? Period.

Their home, their rules.

Of course they are and of course it's their rules, but that is NOT what the OP is about. Read it again.

The OP is about "pandering to the left." Blocking some types of targets is just one way of pandering to the left. Working closely with Armatix was pandering to the left too. The business (we all know who they are) was free to do it, and we were free not to patronize them. Smith & Wesson were free to work with Clinton on gun control and we were free to call them on it. Bill Ruger was free to limit magazine capacity, and so were Dick's. We were free to spend money elsewhere.

[Packy14]

OK, I never have ever shot human shaped tgts in civilian life.

Honest question, does the shooting at a human shaped target really add anything?

I mean if you are on some combat course or something, sure. But most public ranges generally have a "slow, aimed fire, no holsters" type of philosophy. So if that's the type of range you go to, then what are you REALLY missing out on if you can't shoot a silhouette target?

I am not sure I'd buy an argument that "it conditions you to shooting at a human shape for home defense purposes". In general I think the ability to use your gun in an actual HD situation is more about scenario driven planning and serious contemplation about what it would be like and less about the shape of the paper. In other words, as Gunny Hartman said, "It is a HARD HEART that kills".

I guess I am a bit unreasonably snooty but whenever I see silhouette targets go up at my range at the 50 yd line with folks blasting away and barely keeping their rounds in the shape, I kinda just think "oh brother, fricken dorks".

But like I said, I am uneducated on the topic. Help me stop being snooty (or tell me why I am correctly snooty).

well every IDPA and most USPSA targets are human silhouette, so there is that... can't practice for those at a range like that.

[Dskibum]

I tend to want to enjoy shooting some different targets with my wife. Sharing a straight bullseye target gets boring. The golf course target with 6 ‘holes’ we can each take 3 and have fun together. Then of course we go to blm land and shoot reactive steel too, for fun.
I tend to stay away from ranges that don’t want you to enjoy shooting. I also stay away from guns fishing and other ****, the range masters there are CA dog officers in disguise looking for violations. I don’t need to be searched just to take a case of 3handguns onto a range

[Eureka1911]

The OP is about "pandering to the left."

Which he admitted was only his guess, he had no confirmation.

[IVC]

Which he admitted was only his guess, he had no confirmation.

And that's a good point.

I mentioned in one post above that I don't have problem with rules that are based on their customer base and that are not imposed externally. Comparable to "vegan restaurant that doesn't serve meat" vs. "a regular restaurant that doesn't serve meat because local vegans will protest even if they never set foot in the restaurant."

Can anyone confirm why such policy in place and provide some proof?

[Eureka1911]

So without a shred of proof of protests, pressure, etc. this thread took off based on the unproven speculation of a single individual. The Internet at its best.

[IVC]

The "unproven speculation" is actually a good "educated guess." Let's not get carried away with expecting the full legal standard of proof here.

Ranges in So Cal where I shoot don't have such policies and a lot of families and kids shoot there (including my own). I also live in non-D area. Coincidence?

[divert_fuse]

Usmc, only because you asked...

http://solutions.synearth.net/page/159/

I doubt they currently accept SLA Marshall's conclusions. I'm not certain they ever did, regardless of what this article says. Nobody with any sense does, or should have then. His conclusions were asinine and his research was in some kind of superposition between unbelievably sloppy and actually fradulent. Look into it.

[oddball]

Chabot Gun Club had that rule for years. Not sure the real reason, but I was told a long time ago that non-bullseye targets like silhouettes were not allowed because they were too tall for the target holders, basically 1X4 wooded horizontal rails (top and bottom). Curt used to replace shot-up rails all of the time.

[200Apples]

Forgive me for overlooking most of the replies in this thread (I'm on my way to my local range, where zombie, hostage and other human profile paper targets are sold), but I would think that someone with a username such as tacticalcitydotcom would have their own target range.

[Jimi Jah]

Welden, the black guy imprisoned for a failed hit job that worked at the Oceanside Iron Sites range used to sell me Obama Zombie targets.

Yes, you can still shoot clowns there. My wife printed out a pic of the boss that fired her. She filled his face full of holes. I often shoot out cancelled credit cards for therapy.