Rob Boudrie

Well said.

In today's liability climate, it's very hard to tell when something is in the manual because it needs to be and when something is in there as a legal precaution. My first revolver was a Colt Python bought about 25 years ago. Even with all the modern safeties rendering such advise obsolete, the manual still stated that the gun should be carried with an empty chamber in the cylinder under the hammer.

If you follow the link on the ezwinscore page - www.uspsa.org/ezwinscore/barcode you will file answers to most of these questions. 1). I show two barcode readers that have been tested to work and yes, they are USB. These are available from HK (the former British colony, not the German gun company) for about $35, or domestically for about $65. HK mail orders take about 3 weeks. I've ordered 5 so far - 3 arrived working, one was DOA (but the vendor responded promptly and will send a replacement) and I am still waiting for one to arrive. 2). No current plans to sell these via the USPSA store, but that could change. That's a call for Dave Thomas to make. 3). There are two forms of barcode label "Stage specific" that encode the stage number and gun type, and "Generic" - no stage number of gun type. The selected stage and guntype remain unchanged when scanning generic labels so, if you have a pile from one stage, you won't have to re-select the stage number after each scan. Since scoresheets are generally picked up in piles from stages, it will be a call for the MD and stats director to make - is "Stage encoding" worth the extra effort to get stage specific labels on the correct scoresheet? The stage number and gun type selection boxes in EzWinScore remain active after scanning a barcode to make it very easy to recover from wrong labelitis. 4). All existing data input methods will still be available in EzWinScore. You could even outfit your RO's with a pen and just write the name and competitor number on a scoresheet in the event of a reshoot . This is absolutely no reason why anyone would need to "wait for a replacement label." If you like this feature you can thank Lee Neal - he goaded me into it by telling me he was using this technique to score IDPA matches, and then sent me a scanner so I didn't have to wait for a slow boat from China.

Subject line says it all - see www.uspsa.org/ezwinscore for details.

Does anyone else have this requirement? I've never heard of it before. The only thing missing is "bullet weight" and the calculate/report function. If we do this, it will have to wait until the next database layout update since we don't have a field for bullet weight in the competitor table. Rob

I can with my Blackberry 8800 . It's not in the same speed as an aircard (115k vs about 700k), but I get unlimited data on my Blackberry as a $20/month adder to my cell plan, whereas an aircard would run about $70/month, and not give me phone or handheld email. It's probably more necessary with a Blackberry since web browsing is not in the same league as the Iphone (the Blackberry is primarily an email appliance), but it's nice to be able to park myself in an airport waiting area and use a full sized PC to catch up on email and the forums. Also, I can upload EzWinScore results to the web using my laptop and a Blackberry.

Can the Iphone be connected to a PC to give it internet access?

I still run into the occasional stage where having 20+1 in the gun allows me to skip a reload or have insurance shots on a stage with steel. Reloads on the run are not "free" - if they were, you'd probably see some champion shooters using single stack guns from their sponsors in the Limited Nationals.

The general strategy in many states, including mine, is a set of taxes and fees each of which target less than 50% of the population, and thus each gets popular support.

What's interesting is that you buy the phone on a non-subsidized price; must accept a 2 year contract; and get hardware that is locked to prevent usage with another vendor (except in nations where such a practice is illegal). What I like about T-Mobile is that they will give you the unlock code for any equipment you get from them after your bill remains current for 90 days. If I could have bought an I-phone with provider flexibility, 1 year contract I got from T-Mobile, and generous "unlock" policy I would have seriously considered getting one.

By maximizing the chances that a new club looking to affiliate with an organization chooses USPSA over IDPA, the TSA or whatever other startup is formed by someone who wants to set their own rules without the inconvenience of elected leadership. By maximizing the new shooters go looking for USPSA matches rather than generic action shooting matches. By making USPSA the entity that industry playerswant to sponsor, make deals with, and be associated with. This includes not only sponsors but business deals like the USPSA/Para deal that has already netted USPSA $31K. By making USPSA the most commonly covered action shooting sport on TV, and the de-facto standard when magazine and news articles reference action shooting sports. By providing a mechanism to expose USPSA to more potential members and, hopefully, recruit some of them By getting USPSA into clubs that do not now support a USPSA program. I have already heard from one club local to me that does not have the resources for USPSA Matches but is considering running some steel events. Not everyone will be happy with this purchase, and that is the price of doing something rather than mere perpetuation of the status quo. This business decision is a calculated risk with both upside and downside. The upside won't have us annexing the NRA as a fully owned subsidiary, and the downside won't run us out of business.

The exact nature of membership needs to be worked out by HQ and will almost certainly be subject to board approval (either by formal motion or by HQ telling the board 'This is what we are about to do, do you object?" I am not aware of any automatic conversion of Single Stack Society members to USPSA members, thought they were and are most welcome to join USPSA. USPSA did not acquire the Single Stack Society so it's not the same situation. All details to be worked out Not at present and no specific current plans for one. I expect there will be a database of results where members will be able to look up their historical results, statistics about stages and matches, etc. I expect to be working closely with USPSA staff on the technical aspects of this. The same question could be asked regarding USPSA's support of National Championships, membership in IPSC, or fielding a world shoot team. Each of these services has specific benefit to the members who participate, and indirect benefit to the rest of the members through an increased footprint of USPSA in the competitive shooting marketplace. Currently USPSA is the biggest competitive action shooting organization but not the "dominant force". I want USPSA to be *THE* brand name in practical shooting the same way Microsoft is the brand name in desktop computing, and I feel that this benefits our membership.

Different organizational structures - "Membership based 501©(3) not profit" for USPSA and "Corporation with no membership authority over selection of corporate officers" would make such an acquisition rather difficult.

I've been using the game Green Mountain bag for over 12 years. The shoulder strap clip broke once, but they gave me a prompt, free, and vastly improved replacement. I never examined the Ishot or Shooters Connection bags since they were both introduced after I got the Green Mountain bag.

There were 9 people voting, and each had their own reasons. There was never a formal "finding" as to "why", so all any of those people, myself included, can do is comment on their personal reasons for voting the way they did. I started out on the fence and fell over to the "buy" side for several reasons: - An exceptional amount of detailed research by Dave Thomas and Bruce Gary - Strong committment to make it work from Dave Thomas. - A desire to see USPSA as #1. I believe the "exposure" is not just the occasional TV show, gun magazine article, or mention in an article about a product or shooter but our general reputation and exposure that is more than the sum of the parts, and that requires being second to none in all or nearly all venues of exposure. - It's also a way to expose USPSA to people who aren't currently members - many of the SC shotoers come from other sports, shoot SC only, or for other reasons never got around to joining USPSA.

It was obvious to me that some members would love it, some would hate it and some would not care. If "everyone will love it" becomes a requirement for doing anything, then nothing will get done. USPSA has come a long way towards openness in recent years. I remember reading an article by John Sayle many years ago about "why bod meetings are closed to the members". Today, all one has to do is contact HQ 30 days before a meeting to request an observer seat (offered on a "space available" basis, but no one has ever been turned down). While I cannot take exclusive credit for that, I am proud to say that I was part of the initial subset of board members proposing open meetings. There will always be people not satisfied with the level of openness. I actually spoke to one member who felt that any member should have access to data like "the maximum we are prepared to offer" or "the minimum we are willing to accept" when making an offer to buy or sell an asset. Like any corporate acquisition, the deal is a calculated risk. The upside is that we increase the prominence of USPSA in the competetive marketplace of action shooting organizations, and increase our presence as "the name brand" when the media (TV, gun press, etc.) discuss action shooting sports. Sorry, but I am not interested in being the "equal" of the other action sport shooting organization when we get coverage in the press, industry recognition, etc. I want USPSA to be #1.

I would be opposed to making a SC stage part of a traditional USPSA match. If a match wanted to do a SC stage as a side match, fine - but not as part of the match itself. And, as a competitor, I'd be annoyed if the stage count was trimmed by 1 to make room for such a side match. It's about expanding what we do, not shrinking anything we already offer.

This is not "just the normal stuff" where I come from (except for the federal stuff and administrative prohibitions at courthouses and a ccw not valid at schools law). I am under no such restrictions regarding bars, banks, police stations, etc. in Massachusetts, Maine (except for posted bars), Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut or Rhode Island. The laundry list of restricted venues is the one problem with recently enacted CCW statutes.

I think it was on the cover of their catalog a few years ago.

Yeah, but you've got a whole bunch of restrictions don't you? Are you allowed to carry in a restaurant that has beer on the menu?

I do think an explanation is owed, and I gave it to the best of my ability. The timing and nature of the negotiations was such that it would not have been practical to put it all on hold to conduct a survey - but we could have done the safe thing and taken a "pass". As members, you have a right to complain, disagree, ask where the money went, etc. and probably have *more* recourse than a stockholder in a publicly traded company. If you think the board blew it, put together your campaign and run for AD - you'll have a much better chance at unseating an incumbent that a non-institutional shareholder has of voting out a board member from a publicly traded firm in which you hold voting shares. As to the posting by "rhen" - Great work, and well said.

If everything were a matter of polling the membership, we could disband the board, and set up a secure online voting system for use any time there was a decision to be made. In a case like this, it was not practical as polling the membership would have [a] introduced delay into the process - it's not like there are SC style events one can go our and buy on demand and told the entire world what we were considering doing - which would quite likely impact the dynamics of the sale process. Could we build our own national steel championship? Sure, but we wouldn't have "market leadership" in the sector from Day one; wouldn't have the intertia of industry and press recognition; and would in a best case scenatio take years to build up to the point where the SC now is. This is very similar to situations where major companies like Microsoft buy companies that are already selling products they are fully capable of building in-house. Also, the existing nature of the SC as separate and distinct entity will make it much easier for USPSA to treat it as a separate, and major, undertaking from our existing programs. USPSA is a corporation in a competetive market sector, with numerous action sport shooting organizations going after the same market share in terms of competitor participation; organizational membership; host clubs; sponsor recognition and industry/press recognition. This is an opportunity for USPSA to increase the size of our "footprint in the marketplace" and increase the gap between us and other organizations that attempt to offer a similar product. As to the finances - I expect all details will be released, but I will not take it upon myself to do so outside of the normal process (ie, release via the minutes; formal financial report or info from USPSA HQ). Some basic realities: Is there risk? Yes Will buying it result in any reduction of services to current USPSA members? No Will buying it reduce USPSA's current cash reserves? Yes Will the SC challenge run at a profit and generate a return on investment? Hopefully Are we "betting the organization" (ie, would failure put USPSA out of business) ? No Are Dave Thomas and the USPSA staff who will be working on this project absolutely committed to its success? Yes

I wonder if it's something about the nature of the work - 80% of the MD's I have met shooting are in that specialty.

What do you think the chances are you could get a ruthless attorney (who is probably more used to the near sure thing of car accidents, slit and fall, and malpractice to take such a case on a contingency fee basis?

Corporate drone.