Rob Boudrie

I've added the following notice to the home page on the server we recently moved from: USPSA has recently move hosting to a faster web server located at IP 209.62.63.82. The copy of the web site you are visiting resides on the old server at IP 67.15.14.83. It takes a while for updates to the DNS (Domain Name System) to propagate across the internet. Once your ISP's DNS server properly resolves USPSA.ORG, you will start reaching the site on the new server (and will no longer see this message).

I've received a couple of reports of this, but haven't figured out the cause yet. If you are getting this "forbidden" message, please open a command window and run "ping www.uspsa.org" and let me know what numeric IP address it tells you it is pinging. Thanks, Rob

Did you check to see if yourDNS resolves USPSA to the old or new server?

I disabled classifier upload on the old server before the move so that we would not have data being dropped in two places. Before uploading a classifier, check to see if you system is resolving to the new server: "ping uspsa.org" from a command window If you see "67.15.14.83" in the output you are going to the old server, and need to wait for the DNS update to propagate to your system (more precisely, to your ISP's DNS servers) If you see "209.62.63.82" your DNS is resolving to the new server. If you are curious about the details of the new vs. old system, visit www.uspsa.org/hosting

HQ creates the list of eligible voters, including their addresses, on the first business day of July [bylaw 6.5], and turns the list over to the CPA firm with the unaddressed ballots instructions to let the USPSA Executive Director know the results. Once that list is turned over to the CPA firm, USPSA is out of the loop and no modifications or changes of addresses are made to it. The re-sending of the ballot used the exact same list as the first one. So, if the change of address was relatively recent, this could account for the ballot going to the previous address. I would be surprised. The election is run by an independent CPA firm, not USPSA. In fact, USPSA doesn't even have access to the correlation between the numbers printed on the ballot and the member name. The mailing house does, which is how they were able to send a second ballot with the same number with no compromise in the confidentiality of your vote.

The motive was simple - to protect every member's right to vote, while concurrently not going back on the representation we have made to the members who got their original ballot that it would count. A vendor to a vendor to USPSA screwed up (the mailing service hired by the CPA firm that is hired by USPSA to run the election) and sendtthe ballot by "standard mail" (ie, "junk mail") rather than "first class mail". Given the hand we were dealt, can you offer any insight as to how we could have better handled the situation?

Try again - I think I have it fixed. I moved the web server to a new host today, and had to do a few steps manually to avoid losing any classifiers. The good news is that we went from a Celeron w/IDE drives and 1G ram to a dual Xeon 3.2Ghz w/2GB ram and 10K SCSI drives in a 3 disk RAID5 configuration.

It might help their recruitment if the US government would not prosecute and jail border patrol agents when requested to do so by the Mexican government.

You know incorrectly. See the lastest issue of American Rifleman for a knowledge update.

It is also one of, if not the, most vertatile words in the English language as the video demonstrates:

http://www.usps.com/communications/news/pr...06/pr06_069.htm So, you have an official USPS press release stating you can tape the box with adhesive.

Three words: Postal Inspection Service Thre more words: Domestic Mail Manual

Dillon has become much tighter about enforcing this over the years - when I got my 1050 I was told they never enforced this except in cases of obvious and repeated customer abuse (such as repeatedly breaking the shell plate). But, stuff on my 1050 so rarely breaks that this limitation is for all practical purposes irrelevant and, even though the 1050 doesn't get free parts, I know I can have any part shipped immediately when I need it. The 1050 is a press without peer, so it's easy to understand why Dillon does not feel the need to offer the full warrantee on this machine - it's not like someone else has a press in this price range that's even close.

A S&G combination change key is a wonderful thing

Are you saying that swearing at people, even when they are acting like idiots, while carrying a gun is the kind of behavior that does give armed civilians a good name?

You didn't lose your cool but use the "f'in" term in conversation with another driver on the road? Even though I expect she was in the wrong, this would hardly qualify as the kind of social interaction that gives armed civilians a good name.

Try that in MA and get a felony conviction for recording voice without permission - happened when the subject of a traffic stop recorded it, filed a complaint against the officer, and was prosecuted and convicted.

One interesting thing about Brownells - if customers return product, Brownells returns it to the supplier and gets credit, or a refund, for the price. A supplier does not generally get to argue fault with Brownells - just decide if they wish to continue to deal with Brownells, returns and all, or not. In effect, Brownell's acts as a rather powerful negotiating agent for the retail consumer and gives you a LOT of leverage you don't have when dealing directly with the supplier.

Stating your opinion as if it we an established fact does not make it so. Despite your "proof by assertion", I can state that I strongly support freestyle competition and I would be surprised if any board member feels otherwise. There is a HUGE difference between the USPSA "forbidden actions" rule and the IDPA "FTDR" rule. The current rule does not allow the RO or RM to assess any penalty upon a shooter whose actions is subsequently declared prohibited by the RM. The ability to impose such a penalty upon a shooter is the cornerstone of the FTDR IDPA rule, and is not included in or implied by the new rulebook.

This is just my personal opinion but I believe that, whenever possible, the RM should rule on a situation without being told the individual to whom it applies. For example, where there is a scoring call there is no reason the RM needs to know whose target they are scoring. Ditto for a forbidden action call.

This big difference is the the Forbidden Action makes it very clear that the RM has the authority to issue such an order, and mandate a reshoot, after a shooter has driven a truck through a hole. I also hope that this rule is very seldom used.

True, however, reality happens. Situations such as Bruce describes will happen, as course designers are not perfect. The question at hand was "do we want to give the Rangemaster the authority to do something about it?" The board voted to grant RM's that authority, however, we are not forcing them to use it. I expect that NROI will be watching how RM implement this, and issue some guidance if the unreasonable starts to happen.

This is only a problem for police departments if their purchasing procedures do not give them the freedom to buy from one of the many suppliers with ammo in stock. As to the cost hitting them hard - it pales in comparison to the increase in gas costs. But, it gives writers a story on a slow day.

This is not accurate. The notice on the members page is the official explanation, and I will not attempt to duplicate it here. That document describes how the ballots will be tabulated. A decision has been made, and USPSA HQ is now in the process of implementing that decision. Comments are welcome, however, changing the procedure for the 2007 election again is not something we currently have on the table, nor do we expect it to be.

Please visit the USPSA Members Page for an important update on this issue.