Exclusive use of classic target

[juan]

I dont want to change due to pc reasons either.

but I would shoot this sport if we were shooting soda cans off the fence.

[h2osport]

Is this seriously a major stumbling block to getting more shooters into our sport? I believe not.

Football is a sport, but I do not think changing the shape of the ball is going to get you more football players.

Basketball is a sport, but changing the shape of the backboard is not going to get you any more basketball players.

What is the difference between Football, Basketball, Soccer, etc and Practical Shooting? I am never going to use a soccerball, football, basketball etc to defend myself should the need arise!

I have heard many times how USPSA is a sport and should not be considered to represent real world at all. I guess I should assume that I am not really better prepared to use a weapon in self defense, should the need arise, as a result of shooting USPSA. There is a difference between not wanting to appear as commandos, and bending over backwords to show that the sport is PC.

I think this discussion is a waste of time. Changing the target to be more mainstream seems to be way less productive, than say getting out into the community and hosting youth/women only/family fun days to introduce the sport to new shooters.

Just my .02

Randy

[Rob Boudrie]

In the most recent issue of Front Sight, I read with interest that Phil Strader is advocating using targets without "heads" in order to make USPSA appear to be more sport than defensive or militia type shooting, especially to outsiders or newcomers to the sport.

I am absolutely opposed to this.

The World Body has embarked on a path towards political correctness, and dismissed my claims that the so-called "Classic" target was a step towards elimination of the standard target back when it was first introduced. Over the following years, we saw the rulebook re-organized to put the Metric target second (to make it easier to remove from some regional rulebooks); backroom dealings to make sure the first world shoot authorized to use both targets utilize the Classic exclusively; removed from the rulebook but left a legit target; and finally removed as an allowed target. I'm not saying they planned this - chances are very good the persons telling me I was "wrong" in my prediction honestly believed it but, like gun control, one step leads to another which leads to yet another. There will always be some aspect to our sport that is the least "politically correct". This year, it may be the target. In another year, it could be stage descriptions or the layout of stages. Further down the road, we could actually see pressure to replace realistic stages with abstract skills testing exercises, or a move away from drawing from the holster or running with a loaded firearm. At some point, you need to draw a line and not cross it. I respectfully submit that we are now at that point.

The gun banners aren't suddenly going to like us because we shoot at targets without heads, and they aren't stupid enough to not notice that drawing a gun from a holster has its roots in the defensive use of a sidearm. Also, unlike some other nations, our ability to practice our sport is based on legislation, not the whim of what one particular public official may feel like permitting.

If this particular issue is important to you, please be sure to ask those running for Area Director or USPSA President to clearly state their position on this matter before sending in your ballot. This isn't like some other shooting orgs where the current board members are the only ones allowed to vote for the organization's leadership - it's in the hands of you, the members. Pay attention to the issues, listen to what everyone stands for, and don't just give the incumbant or more familiar name on the ballot your vote unless she/he has earned it.

[kgunz11]

I think Phil needs to know how we feel about this so I am going to fwd this thread link to him. He's explained his thoughts pretty well in FS. He wants to make it more friendly to more shooters. I say piss on them if they can't shoot at a target with a head on it. How far must we get from our heritage?

[gmshtr]

These are all excellent points, and I'm sorry if I worked a few of you up. Clearly, some of you posted before your morning coffee! :-D

First of all, anyone who knows me knows that I am about as far from "PC" as anyone can get. My opinion here is strictly based on the growth of the sport and the future of USPSA, not political correctness. The tradition and roots of Practical Shooting should never be lost...in fact they should be cherished and celebrated. We will always have defensive shooting roots, and I will ALWAYS promote USPSA as the best way to learn proper gun handling skills that can then be correctly applied to a tatical situation...just like I did during my 14 years as a law enforcement officer and trainer. For those of you who carry a pistol for defensive purposes, I will not insult your intelligence by talking about the difference between lethal engagments and running through a 32 round field course with an Open gun. Clearly, the difference is night and day, but the gun handling, the foundational knowledge, and the mechanics can be traced back to USPSA. We should be proud of that, and protect our heritage.

To address Mr. Boudrie's post. My opinion is just that...an opinion. Your votes for Area Directors and USPSA President (which I will be running for next term), should definitely be based on careful and intelligent research. THE USPSA MEMBERSHIP (you) will dictate what will be the best direction for USPSA, not my opinions. Trust me, I MUCH prefer the Metric Target, but I feel the Classic Target will help the SPORT become easier to promote. But, if the membership as a majority didn't agree, then the debate would be over. USPSA belongs to US, not the Board, the President, the Exec Director, etc, and WE should never forget this! Do I think we will ever see the Verizon Nationals? Probably not, but that doesn't mean we can't try to get there.

I welcome all opinions, suggestions, and comments...good and bad. Please send them to me freely at www.straightersolutions.com

Looking forward to serve you,

Phil Strader

[Vlad]

Phil, with all due respect, I think this is an issue that can be tainted by ones level of involvement in the game.  I think professional and semi-pro shooters have a much higher interest in seeing the Verizon Nationals then the average shooter and their perspective may be skewed towards making the sport as accessible to as many non-shooters as possible, bringing televised events, and lets face it, more sponsorship and money.  I understand it and I don't hold it against anyone. To the great majority of shooters it is a non-issue, and I think if I ask the shooters of my local matches what they would prefer the answer would be overwhelmingly against it. Most of us like being un-PC.   

[BritinUSA]

USPSA does not translate well to televised events, the viewer can't see the hits on the target. A better way to promote any 'action shooting' sport is to use targets that react. The Steel Challenge is a better introduction as the viewer can see the splatter on the target and hear the ding. The time could be shown on a tv screen in real-time. It's easier to track the winners/losers as the scoring is simpler.

Leave the targets in USPSA as they are and let the MD's decide which target to use at which time.

[gmshtr]

Vlad,

I certainly respect your opinion. Please understand that my post was made as a USPSA member, not as a "pro" shooter...although I think you have to get paid to be considered a pro, which I'm sad to report isn't the case! Now you've got me thinking though! Phil Strader...sponsored by Verizon...can you hear me now??? Good. :-D. Just kidding, of course.

Phil

Edited May 25, 2010 by gmshtr

[kgunz11]

But Phil, you'd have to give up your Iphone and get a Droid if you want to be sponsored by Verizon!

I don't think Phil's stance is motivated by money or profit out of an understanding of how he conducts other business. He is one of the most affordable trainer/coaches out there. He doesn't price his classes according to what others charge, but more what he considers fair. That speaks volumes about the man himself, so it's really not fair to suggest he wants to use the "classic" target so that pro shooters can make more money. I think he genuinely wants to see the sport grow. Of course I'm not Phil, but what I know of the man leads me to believe greed is not at all part of the equation.

[gmshtr]

USPSA does not translate well to televised events, the viewer can't see the hits on the target. A better way to promote any 'action shooting' sport is to use targets that react. The Steel Challenge is a better introduction as the viewer can see the splatter on the target and hear the ding. The time could be shown on a tv screen in real-time. It's easier to track the winners/losers as the scoring is simpler.

Leave the targets in USPSA as they are and let the MD's decide which target to use at which time.

I think I know of a match that would be PERFECT for TV!

www.proamshooting.com

[BritinUSA]

I think I know of a match that would be PERFECT for TV!

www.proamshooting.com

Excellent ! That's even better than Steel Challenge as we have all the movement of a regular USPSA match. So what channel is it on ?

If you don't have a tv deal then contact your local University, they probably have an Audio/Visual course that teaches camera/presentation skills etc. Get the students to put together a professional looking tv program of the event (they can use the finished result as part of their course evaluation), then offer it free of charge to the sports networks. One of them may bite, get the thing on the air and next year negotiate a price for it.

[gmshtr]

USPSA does not translate well to televised events, the viewer can't see the hits on the target. A better way to promote any 'action shooting' sport is to use targets that react. The Steel Challenge is a better introduction as the viewer can see the splatter on the target and hear the ding. The time could be shown on a tv screen in real-time. It's easier to track the winners/losers as the scoring is simpler.

Leave the targets in USPSA as they are and let the MD's decide which target to use at which time.

I

Edited May 25, 2010 by gmshtr

[kgunz11]

I think I know of a match that would be PERFECT for TV!

www.proamshooting.com

Excellent ! That's even better than Steel Challenge as we have all the movement of a regular USPSA match. So what channel is it on ?

If you don't have a tv deal then contact your local University, they probably have an Audio/Visual course that teaches camera/presentation skills etc. Get the students to put together a professional looking tv program of the event (they can use the finished result as part of their course evaluation), then offer it free of charge to the sports networks. One of them may bite, get the thing on the air and next year negotiate a price for it.

It will be featured on Shooting USA again I hope. Wish I could be there as I really REALLY want to shoot the Pro Am some day. I even built a 6" 9mm gun that would be perfect!

[BritinUSA]

It needs to be on ESPN, FOX Sports or some network with some serious viewing figures. Shooting USA is preaching to the choir, shooters watch it but probably precious few others. We need to mainstream it, not lamestream it.

[Sarge]

Phil, with all due respect, I think this is an issue that can be tainted by ones level of involvement in the game.  I think professional and semi-pro shooters have a much higher interest in seeing the Verizon Nationals then the average shooter and their perspective may be skewed towards making the sport as accessible to as many non-shooters as possible, bringing televised events, and lets face it, more sponsorship and money.  I understand it and I don't hold it against anyone. To the great majority of shooters it is a non-issue, and I think if I ask the shooters of my local matches what they would prefer the answer would be overwhelmingly against it. Most of us like being un-PC.   

I'm with you 100% on this. I'll take it a step further, and of course with the obligatory"no disrespect intended", and bet there are more than a few local club match shooters who have never heard of Phil Strader. Or any of the other elite shooters in the game. They don't care about GM cards, Televised shoots, Who is the president of USPSA, who makes the best open gun, etc.. They want to come out once a month and run and gun. I have had more than a few shooters say they started shooting matches because they got a CCW permit and it beats shooting at milk jugs on a farm.

I understand wanting to grow the sport, but do we really want to attract new shooters who might be too sensitive to shoot a target because it appears humanoid? What are they going to do shoot all Deltas because they don't want to hurt it too bad?

This whole thought process is flawed. Even in paintball you are trying to kill the other team. Changing from gun to marker does not change that.

Ughh...

[Pezco]

I am for a change in target type if it helps our exposure to the world. More exposure equals more commercial opportunities for us.

[kgunz11]

Sarge, thank you for your service to our country.

I like the way you think!

[Vlad]

Vlad,

I certainly respect your opinion. Please understand that my post was made as a USPSA member, not as a "pro" shooter...although I think you have to get paid to be considered a pro, which I'm sad to report isn't the case!  Now you've got me thinking though!  Phil Strader...sponsored by Verizon...can you hear me now???  Good. :-D. Just kidding, of course.

Phil

Phil, I want to make sure I was clear, I wouldn't have a problem even IF Verizon was throwing sacks of cash through your window, and I would be perfectly ok for the sack recipients to try to expand the sport in a way that increased the quantity or size of sacks.  I just don't think it would work without dumbing down the game until we used rubber band guns and made pew-pew sounds with a small trumpet.  I think people opposed to shooting sports would remain opposed to handgun sports because we use handguns, no matter if we shaped our targets like socially insensitive multiculturalism opposed sexist Martians where those with ballistic inclinations generally don't care.  

I have met shooters from other disciplines who are opposed to USPSA shooting but their arguments don't start with the targets, their first beef is with the "inherent lack of safety" of moving at all while shooting, and I don't think anyone would suggest we should remove that aspect of the game to attract bullseye shooters. 

[atbarr]

Sarge, thank you for your service to our country.

I like the way you think!

+1

a.t.

[Flexmoney]

Growth... at the expense of our roots...our practicality...

No thank you. (Growth need not be the overall goal.)

The real courage is to "stick to our guns"...and our practical roots.

I say we get 3-headed targets...with forked tails.

[kgunz11]

Growth... at the expense of our roots...our practicality...

No thank you. (Growth need not be the overall goal.)

The real courage is to "stick to our guns"...and our practical roots.

I say we get 3-headed targets...with forked tails.

:roflol:

[Rob Boudrie]

First of all, anyone who knows me knows that I am about as far from "PC" as anyone can get. My opinion here is strictly based on the growth of the sport and the future of USPSA, not political correctness.

There is no avoiding it - what we are a taking about is a "PC" move, though I accept that your motives are not "PC" related. Just as calling a dog's tail a leg does not mean that the dog has five legs, asserting that the motivations behind an action are not PC does not change the PC nature of the action.

What happens when someone decides that "scenarios" are interfering with the growth of the sport? Would we then take steps to make sure the stage layouts in our high profile matches did not include doors, windows, starting positions that resemble self defense scenarios (sitting reading a newspaper, etc.)?

Steel Challenge meets all the PC requirements - skills testing exercises, no scenarios, etc. and can be offered where there is the need to be politically correct.

It needs to be on ESPN, FOX Sports or some network with some serious viewing figures

Ever since the buyout by Disney, ESPN has had a strict policy that no sporting events involving the use of handguns may be covered.

[diehli]

I like the size of the Metric targets (the amoebas are the Metric ones, the humanoid are the Classics, irrespective of how IPSC chose to name them) and the irregularly-shaped A-zone. Toss an appropriately-sized head/upper scoring zone on 'em with a bigger (compared to the dimensions of the current head), irregularly-shaped upper A-zone and let's rock 'n' roll.

Or, let us choose what we use, but, perhaps, at (some) majors use Metrics so it's more "OMG-it-looka-likea-man" friendly.

[Sean Gaines]

I dont want to get political but I agree with Jake, I would love to see my shooting buddies at a national event on tv, and see our sport mainstream. this is just a game. the way its setup now is whe shoot the humanoid, brown targets, and we don't shoot the white humanoid targets. I can see were some people could get upset about and take offense of it. for me just put a turtle target up there and shoot it and have fun. Nobody ever complains about the turtle targets at world shoot. But when someone wants to change something, you get all this resistance, that we must defend our rights, yada, yada. As a shooter I could care less at what target I shoot at. Lets just shoot and have fun. I don't think anyone wants to have to shoot at a human unless they are forced to. I don't understand why we have to brodcast to the world that we shoot at humanoid targets. can you imagine if we shot at turtle targets and it was politically correct, and the tv stations broadcasted it. can you imagine the tv exposure we could possible recieve. How many new shooters would want to get involved. Can you imagine the type of sponsorships, and lucrative prize tables that could result from this, not only that but it would help the businesses that are in this niche sport. Just a thought. I understand both sides, but the rules are always evolving with trends and innovation. But I can see Phil's point. We have enough people against us, why do we need to give them more ammuntion to be used against us. JMHO

[sperman]

...the amoebas are the Metric ones, the humanoid are the Classics...

You've got that backwards. I know it doesn't make any sense, but the targets used in the US are metric, the turtle targets are classic. See appendix B.