Anti-gunners attacking firing ranges

[bald1]

I admit to having been relatively unaware of how pervasive the movement to close gun ranges around the country has been. Recently, as an officer of a club, we experienced an insidious legal attack with such trumped up crap as I've ever seen in my life. The kicker was their claim to have been there before us which of course didn't stand in the light of day... they encroached upon us not vicea versa. We won the battle but are loosing the war. Their counsel has moved from administrative hearings to civil suit wrapping us up in the interim and costing us the loss of contracts with various local law enforcement agencies who utilized our facilities in the absence of their own taxpayer funded sites.

Here in South Dakota there is a vigorous movement to enact legislation that would grandfather all pre-existing ranges against this type of ludicrous attack.

But what has caught my eye of late is the double talk from the US Forest Service. They proclaim support of public access ranges in public lands but have in fact embarked on a campaign to close and eliminate all such sites.

Have you witnessed the closure of places to shoot in your area? Please share what you know of the circumstances.

-=[Bob]=-

 

[Rich Lucibella]

Bob-
Welcome. I'd like to hear more of this issue with the USFS. It's been my observation that their attitude toward shooting on the ranges or Forest Service property emanates from the brass in the Regional Office.

Is there a national move afoot to eliminate their ranges?
Rich

 

[DC]

A similar thing occurred here too. There was an "unofficial" range..essentially a large open arroyo on Fed. land that had been used by shooters for 30-40 yrs. A few years ago, suddenly "safety" became a concern: potentially endangering firecrews or other personell that might be about, or the magic bullets that reverse direction 180 degrees and may fly over the freeway. There had been a spotless safety record for all those years.

We all know that the official reason was BS, the truth was that anti-gun factions knew it was being used that way and they didn't like it.
So a group of shooters made a deal with a rancher who leased them a piece of his land for a range. Surviving quite a bit of protest and opposition the range was built and is now the county's only "official" range. Because it can be viewed by passiong motorists it still gets a lot of protests but, as of this moment, the anti's can't do a damn thing about it.

 

[JerryO]

I've seen it happen here in NY. The Blue Mountain Sportsmans Center, which used to be open 365 days a year (except holidays) now is only open on weekends. The reason given protest by the locals about the noise. It's an outdoor range, the nearest to NYC. The range has been there for years. Unfortuneatly as the suburbs moved north, more people moved into the area and they just don't get it.

JerryO

 

[JBP]

Here in central Maryland we have had two clubs recently zoned out of existence due to surburbanization. One club was over 100 years old.

The club I belong to is going to have to spend a lot of money to baffle our 50 yard and 100 yard ranges to keep our neighbors happy.

 

[rod]

Here in Tucson the Tucson Rod & Gun Club has been facing a long and depressing fight to retain our range on forest service land. The FS trotted out their usual "safety" concerns. We have been in operation for more than 40 years and never had any kind of major injury occur. There is literally no outdoor sporting facility in the county who can claim that kind of safety record.

Well our club has some highly politically active members and we drug the FS into an congressional hearing, where they were skewered and made to look like fools. But they were unfazed 'cause they knew that as bad as they were made to look this was all smoke and fury and no real decision making was in the offing.

Currently our range is closed and the FS has indicated that their preferred action is not to provide a new site. Turns out that some big time propery owners and the owner of a major health spa near the range were instrumental in getting us removed (there's money to be made after all).

The whole thing stinks and I'm afraid were going to get left in the lurch, a real eye opener as to the prejudices of governmental agencies.

=rod=

 

[Kodiac]

Here in Virginia, around Richmond, the only place you can shoot is at a specific Range... and they all suck. If you want to go shooting elsewhere - your either out of luck, or on a friends personal property out in the sticks (where I teach most of my classes).

 

[GLV]

Range protection acts are the key, and state rifle and pistol associations are needed in order to work these thru the state legislatures and signed into law. It took us several tries and years to get ours thru. Signed into law by Evan Bayh, who is an A rated demo running for the US senate. GLV

 

[4V50]

GLV is right about Range Protection Acts. Even law enforcement agencies are threatened with range closures...this in the face of Popow v. Margate! In highly urbanized areas, agencies are vying with one another for limited range time.

Consider a major metropolitan area like LA, SF or NY. There all types of law enforcement out there. Local police, transit police, railroad cops, Highway Patrol, Sheriff's, State DoJ, Dist. Atty Investigators, FBI, Secret Service, US Marshal, US Park Police, Mint Police, Postal Inspectors and Postal Police, etc. All competing to meet court imposed standards for realistic training. HA!

These disgusting politicians who are sworn to defend & uphold the constitution are keeping the guys and gals who protect their skins from maintaining the firearm skills they need to perform their jobs.

Concerning Forest Service land, users must establish that it is a range and that it has been in use consistently by the community. That done, closure would require the FS to comply with EPA regs. and remove all that hazardous material called lead. Gee, let those FS officials stew in their own Washington created bureaucratic muck. That EPA stuff can be used and should to our advantage.

Range protection is just as important as protecting firearms ownership. We shouldn't become like the Japanese who must content themselves with airsoft lookalikes.