Sarge Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 That last little line down there about mag capacity is incorrect as well. A club rule can not override a uspsa rule without approval. A club can not tell an open shooter he can only put 10 rounds in his mag if it is legal where the range is located. USPSA should never allow that to happen. As for the state fed laws on mags, I thought there was a new rule about that. USPSA rules prohibit using hi cap mags where outlawed to ensure equity right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 This whole thread reminds me of the club that commented they only allow C class shooters and above to shoot their matches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkeeler Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 That last little line down there about mag capacity is incorrect as well. A club rule can not override a uspsa rule without approval. A club can not tell an open shooter he can only put 10 rounds in his mag if it is legal where the range is located. USPSA should never allow that to happen. As for the state fed laws on mags, I thought there was a new rule about that. USPSA rules prohibit using hi cap mags where outlawed to ensure equity right? Ok I may have that wrong. Bad analogy? But, It is up to the USPSA club to operate with in the rules of the host range! ???? So is it wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 This whole thread reminds me of the club that commented they only allow C class shooters and above to shoot their matches. No, no, they have to be able to shoot---but apparently it would be okay to charge U, D, and C-class shooters an extra $250 to shoot the match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkeeler Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 (edited) Well as a member of USPSA I should be able to walk in to any USPSA sanctioned match and pay $5.00 to shoot it! Edited October 29, 2014 by bkeeler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frag316 Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Oh, please. Everyone needs to unclench their colons here. The USPSA organization at our range doesn't prohibit anyone from shooting a match. The range that hosts it does after three matches as a nonmember of the range. /Lawyer'd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ac4wordplay Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Affiliated Clubs are autonomous in nature and are specifically allowed to conduct club business according to their own local, State and Federal laws, club bylaws, and/or business practices. Affiliated club (USPSA) and host range. It is up to the USPSA club to operate with in the rules of the host range! ... This has been an interesting discussion. Would you use this argument to defend a club that... had club bylaws prohibiting muzzles from being oriented over a berm (think "USPSA reload"), violation resulting in DQ/ejection from the property and held USPSA matches and DQd competitors for every "muzzle over the berm orientation" orientation Hey, it's in the club's bylaws, right? And you've quoted a sentence from USPSA bylaws 4.8 that seems to support the practice, right? So it must be fine, right? Are the two arguments similar? Why (or why not)? Respectfully, ac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Attila Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 I have never heard one of the USPSA members that shoots there has ever support the rule. Bruce, Jeff don't seem to support having it, but are arguing it within the rules/by laws. Bruce has implied the Troy has communicated to him that it is within the rules/by laws. The rule is put there by the host club. The club hosts many other disciplines other than USPSA. The rule applies for all of them. The BOD at the host club is not made up of USPSA shooters. From what I have heard, they don't put a lot of importance on USPSA. The BOD is not on here defending why they have it. Does the rule suck? YES. But why keep arguing about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Attila Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Affiliated Clubs are autonomous in nature and are specifically allowed to conduct club business according to their own local, State and Federal laws, club bylaws, and/or business practices. Affiliated club (USPSA) and host range. It is up to the USPSA club to operate with in the rules of the host range! ... This has been an interesting discussion. Would you use this argument to defend a club that... had club bylaws prohibiting muzzles from being oriented over a berm (think "USPSA reload"), violation resulting in DQ/ejection from the property and held USPSA matches and DQd competitors for every "muzzle over the berm orientation" orientation Hey, it's in the club's bylaws, right? And you've quoted a sentence from USPSA bylaws 4.8 that seems to support the practice, right? So it must be fine, right? Are the two arguments similar? Why (or why not)? Respectfully, ac because the club must adhere to USPSA rules. There are clear rules in what is a DQ. There is no rule about what a club can charge. It is accepted practice for some clubs to charge more for non-members. The only thing in question here is the amount being charged for non-members. if the host club ever caps membership and does not allow USPSA members to join, and thus shoot in their matches, then it would be in violation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkCO Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Affiliated Clubs are autonomous in nature and are specifically allowed to conduct club business according to their own local, State and Federal laws, club bylaws, and/or business practices. Affiliated club (USPSA) and host range. It is up to the USPSA club to operate with in the rules of the host range! ... This has been an interesting discussion. Would you use this argument to defend a club that... had club bylaws prohibiting muzzles from being oriented over a berm (think "USPSA reload"), violation resulting in DQ/ejection from the property and held USPSA matches and DQd competitors for every "muzzle over the berm orientation" orientation Hey, it's in the club's bylaws, right? And you've quoted a sentence from USPSA bylaws 4.8 that seems to support the practice, right? So it must be fine, right? Are the two arguments similar? Why (or why not)? Respectfully, ac One of our clubs had to request (and were granted) an exception for just this issue. They can not muzzle over the berm and can not shoot into side berms. I don't know which USPSA President granted the exemption, but they have one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkeeler Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Affiliated Clubs are autonomous in nature and are specifically allowed to conduct club business according to their own local, State and Federal laws, club bylaws, and/or business practices. Affiliated club (USPSA) and host range. It is up to the USPSA club to operate with in the rules of the host range! ... This has been an interesting discussion. Would you use this argument to defend a club that... had club bylaws prohibiting muzzles from being oriented over a berm (think "USPSA reload"), violation resulting in DQ/ejection from the property and held USPSA matches and DQd competitors for every "muzzle over the berm orientation" orientation Hey, it's in the club's bylaws, right? And you've quoted a sentence from USPSA bylaws 4.8 that seems to support the practice, right? So it must be fine, right? Are the two arguments similar? Why (or why not)? Respectfully, ac I believe the example you are giving is in fact a rule at some ranges. Would you have to get an exemption? I don't know. I could contact USPSA and find out if you like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkeeler Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Would I like that rule? No. I don't like the bylaw my club has either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkeeler Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Affiliated Clubs are autonomous in nature and are specifically allowed to conduct club business according to their own local, State and Federal laws, club bylaws, and/or business practices. Affiliated club (USPSA) and host range. It is up to the USPSA club to operate with in the rules of the host range! ... This has been an interesting discussion. Would you use this argument to defend a club that... had club bylaws prohibiting muzzles from being oriented over a berm (think "USPSA reload"), violation resulting in DQ/ejection from the property and held USPSA matches and DQd competitors for every "muzzle over the berm orientation" orientation Hey, it's in the club's bylaws, right? And you've quoted a sentence from USPSA bylaws 4.8 that seems to support the practice, right? So it must be fine, right? Are the two arguments similar? Why (or why not)? Respectfully, ac I believe the example you are giving is in fact a rule at some ranges. Would you have to get an exemption? I don't know. I could contact USPSA and find out if you like? I don't know about it being fine. But it would be a DQ. According to the host clubs bylaw. Never said our bylaw was fine either but it is there. I think the competitors would need to be aware of the bylaw and that it would be a DQ before a match was started. Still don't know if you would need an exemption for it?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ac4wordplay Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Affiliated Clubs are autonomous in nature and are specifically allowed to conduct club business according to their own local, State and Federal laws, club bylaws, and/or business practices. Affiliated club (USPSA) and host range. It is up to the USPSA club to operate with in the rules of the host range! ... This has been an interesting discussion. Would you use this argument to defend a club that... had club bylaws prohibiting muzzles from being oriented over a berm (think "USPSA reload"), violation resulting in DQ/ejection from the property and held USPSA matches and DQd competitors for every "muzzle over the berm orientation" orientation Hey, it's in the club's bylaws, right? And you've quoted a sentence from USPSA bylaws 4.8 that seems to support the practice, right? So it must be fine, right? Are the two arguments similar? Why (or why not)? Respectfully, ac One of our clubs had to request (and were granted) an exception for just this issue. They can not muzzle over the berm and can not shoot into side berms. I don't know which USPSA President granted the exemption, but they have one. Mark, Are you able to put me in touch with that club's USPSA discipline director? Is that person on BE? We can go PM as appropriate. Thanks, ac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkCO Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 AC, I can give you the name of the person who runs the USPSA matches now. The person who got the exemption no longer shoots. Send me a PM with your email and I will reply back with the last 3 MDs for the club covering at least 15 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExtremeShot Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 So if I understand this correctly, All the out of town do-gooders would like us to dissolve our USPSA affiliation and tell 50+ USPSA shooters every month to go take a hike or play IDPA or some other lame shooting sport, just because the people that run our gun range won't allow non-members to shoot more than 3 times? I'm sorry..but I don't give a flying eff about the out of towners. I care about the 50+ local shooters that, despite the stupid gun range rules, decided to ban together and form a USPSA club. I care about the dedicated people like Jeff, Bruce, Gene, Joel, and many others that have kept our USPSA match going for so many years despite it being a thankless job. What matters is that we HAVE a match. The cowboy shooters don't like us and would like us gone. The rifle guys don't like us and would like us gone. The old farts that use the range as a place to hang out would like us gone. And on a bigger front, the neighbors that live adjacent to the club are constantly trying to shut us down. The anti-gunners trying to shut us down. And idiots that show up and vandalize things that get blammed on us are threatening to shut us down. And now our OWN USPSA brothers are saying we need to be shut down. If we get shut down...if we lose our USPSA affiliation, I'm blaming it directly on people like Sarge and MarkCo. And I hope you sleep better at night knowing that you screwed fellow USPSA shooters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlad Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Darren, your point will fall on deaf ears, mostly. I've gone down this path arguing with people about keeping USPSA matches alive despite local club rules, and all I got back was "No, zee rules must be followed, it is better to not shoot at all then have to bend the rules". All I can recommend is hum "Shake it off" to yourself and don't let it get to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExtremeShot Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkeeler Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Darren, your point will fall on deaf ears, mostly. I've gone down this path arguing with people about keeping USPSA matches alive despite local club rules, and all I got back was "No, zee rules must be followed, it is better to not shoot at all then have to bend the rules". All I can recommend is hum "Shake it off" to yourself and don't let it get to you. Vlad yeah I see your point.See I think people are missing the whole deal here. USPSA has NO SAY over the bylaws of the host range, it is up to the USPSA club to OPERATE with in the RULES of the host range and meet their activity requirements to USPSA. If all of you want to get all of that changed go ahead,but until then we will be having Level I USPSA matches at our host range! Until I can afford to by a range this range will be our host range and we must follow their rules! I am spent on this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Well as a member of USPSA I should be able to walk in to any USPSA sanctioned match and pay $5.00 to shoot it! Absolutely. If you are GM. Anything less than that, we have a graduated scale of match fees, with U and D shooters on the end of the scale having to pay $250, since they'll obviously shoot props and damage things more often. That would be okay, right? Because the USPSA affiliation agreement doesn't mention anything about how much money people can charge, nor does it say anything about having to make all people pay the same amount. bkeeler also misses the point with: USPSA has NO SAY over the bylaws of the host range, it is up to the USPSA club to OPERATE with in the RULES of the host range and meet their activity requirements to USPSA. Absolutely. Which is separate from signing an agreement that says "The club agrees that all USPSA matches shall be open to any person eligible for USPSA membership or are members of other IPSC regions." which apparently someone signed but he is ignoring. Or do you normally sign agreements then ignore them? Do you consider that a normal way of doing business? Winning the over-reaction award, we have: So if I understand this correctly, All the out of town do-gooders would like us to dissolve our USPSA affiliation and tell 50+ USPSA shooters every month to go take a hike or play IDPA or some other lame shooting sport, just because the people that run our gun range won't allow non-members to shoot more than 3 times? I'm sorry..but I don't give a flying eff about the out of towners. Interesting. I personally care that shooters can shoot a match. Which, I'll note, they can't necessarily do at your range. It interests me that someone signed the affiliation agreement knowing that their range's policies did not allow what the agreement requires. I'm sorry to hear that your BoD is comprised of people who hate action shooting sports---I know how that feels. We are lucky enough at our range to have (in the last 10 years) managed to slowly get more and more people on the board that care about ALL shooting sports, and thus our action sports have flourished. Hope you can get that to happen over time, too. According to bkeeler, Troy has said that your range's situation is not against the rules. I'm not sure how not, but then again I don't know all the facts of your situation. It certainly seems to me that "allows non-members to shoot three organized matches of any discipline (USPSA, SSC-ish, IDPA, SASS) before needing to be a member to continue shooting there" means pretty clearly that matches are not open to all people who are potential legal members of USPSA. Someone lives in your area and wants to continue to shoot matches, but can't unless they belong to your range. But hey, I don't make the rules. I'm glad you have local shooters who support the sport. And having a dedicated crowd of folks to help out and hold matches it great. Sorry to see, however, that you don't apparently care about the sport, though---just your local shooters. I see your situation---BoD actively against action shooting, your bylaws apparently allow proxy voting (ours doesn't---must be at the annual meeting for bylaw changes), but the good part is that apparently your yearly fee is low, and the 3-times-first is at least a good start. I personally am not saying you guys should be shut down. I am simply saying that what you are doing (which indeed may be the best that you can actually do at this time) is not what the affiliation agreement seems to require. Hope that in the future, you get more power on the BoD at your club. Oh, and that ExtremeShot isn't one of those people, because in general, you want people in charge who care about all parts of the sport, and not just the locals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlad Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Sorry to see, however, that you don't apparently care about the sport, though---just your local shooters. So you are saying he is doing this on purpose to screw with you and others and it is out of the blackness of his heart that he is not canceling the match to spite his local club, and the 50 or so shooters who would then not have a USPSA match at all? That makes about as much sense as cutting off ones nose to spite ... oh wait. Never mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExtremeShot Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Don't put words in my mouth. I said I don't care about the out of towners. I NEVER said I didn't care about the sport. I am a Life member and Master in two divisions. I definitely care about the sport......but think about this, what does it matter if I don't have a match to shoot at? If I don't have a match to shoot, who cares what the rules are. If there isn't a match to shoot, isn't the whole issue a moot point? Damn right it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkCO Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Granted this discussion has not always been about the rules, however Darren, I have been involved with several clubs that had issues with the USPSA rules. In each case, it was a simple matter to get an exemption from the USPSA President so that the local rules could be followed and the USPSA rules could still maintain integrity. To be between a rock and a hard place and wantonly break a rule to serve a "greater" purpose may be admirable, but it is still breaking the rules. I am almost positive that a simple email exchange with Phil Strader, the USPSA President (Troy is not the President) would result in an exemption and, at least for your club, this would no longer be an issue. The breadth of dialog to create 147 posts on a topic that could likely be solved with a paragraph back and forth with Strader, is discouraging. Both sides can hold their proverbial noses in the air, but the solution is pretty simple. BTW, Troy is the DNROI, not the president, and by rule, he has no authority to allow a locally adopted rule, only the President. 3.3 Applicability of Rules: USPSA matches are governed by the rules applicable to the discipline. Host organizations may not enforce local rules except to comply with legislation or legal precedent in the applicable jurisdiction. Any voluntarily adopted rules that are not in compliance with these rules must not be applied to USPSA matches without the express written consent of the President of USPSA. All local rules allowed under these provisions will be documented at USPSA HQ. PresidentPhil Straderpresident@uspsa.orgVoice: +1 (703) 786-3791 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkeeler Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 The I can't read award goes to Thomas H: "Absolutely. Which is separate from signing an agreement that says "The club agrees that all USPSA matches shall be open to any person eligible for USPSA membership or are members of other IPSC regions." which apparently someone signed but he is ignoring." They are OPEN to ANY person eligible for USPSA membership or are members of other IPSC regions! And which part don't you understand????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkeeler Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Granted this discussion has not always been about the rules, however Darren, I have been involved with several clubs that had issues with the USPSA rules. In each case, it was a simple matter to get an exemption from the USPSA President so that the local rules could be followed and the USPSA rules could still maintain integrity. To be between a rock and a hard place and wantonly break a rule to serve a "greater" purpose may be admirable, but it is still breaking the rules. I am almost positive that a simple email exchange with Phil Strader, the USPSA President (Troy is not the President) would result in an exemption and, at least for your club, this would no longer be an issue. The breadth of dialog to create 147 posts on a topic that could likely be solved with a paragraph back and forth with Strader, is discouraging. Both sides can hold their proverbial noses in the air, but the solution is pretty simple. BTW, Troy is the DNROI, not the president, and by rule, he has no authority to allow a locally adopted rule, only the President. 3.3 Applicability of Rules: USPSA matches are governed by the rules applicable to the discipline. Host organizations may not enforce local rules except to comply with legislation or legal precedent in the applicable jurisdiction. Any voluntarily adopted rules that are not in compliance with these rules must not be applied to USPSA matches without the express written consent of the President of USPSA. All local rules allowed under these provisions will be documented at USPSA HQ. President[/size]Phil Strader[/size]president@uspsa.org[/size]Voice: +1 (703) 786-3791[/size] Thanks for putting that up. But what rule are we breaking now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now