Meet and Greet to Disarm

[94 at Large]

http://youtu.be/JJ79nNquQ0c

 

[KYGlockster]

Apparently you don't have a clue as to the specifics, but commented anyway.

But, two of the negligent discharges happened as new gun owners were entering the facility as part of a ladies-only familiarization class. None of the people involved were members of the range. They were new shooters who were their for the first time. The range did not have this policy at the time. These two NDs happened within a minute of each other.

The third incident happened at a different time/ day and was not related. It was a person who was showing someone else his gun and he fired it unintentionally. Luckily no one was hurt in either incident.

The policy was implemented due to real events, not some fantasy of disarming people to violate their rights or any other silly ****. It wasn't the members that caused it, but the range is open to the general public during weekends and with that, a wide range of people who's spectrum of knowledge, responsibility and competency varies greatly. The three people that caused the incidents were all first-time visitors to the range.

Personally, and knowing the facts of the events, I can't fault them for making that decision. It's often slam packed with people inside and the counter person simply cannot watch everyone and conduct business accurately. Things happen. Creating that policy was a result of certain things happening and not a matter of "trust" in their membership.

What relevance does this have to people carrying holstered handguns? People fooling around with their guns near the firing line is one thing -- people carrying a handgun in a holster for self-defense is in no way related to the actual act of handling and firing your handgun at the range. They should NOT disarm people who don't even plan on touching their firearm unless their life is in danger. By your logic we should mandate that all people carry their firearms unloaded at all times, because a ND could happen at anytime, EVEN THOUGH THE GUN IS IN A PROPER HOLSTER.

 

[solus]

After first reading your bolded statement above, then the whole other thread, I can see I wandered into a little peeing contest that I want no part of. Where's the "slowly backing away" smiley?

I tried, but I saw nothing in that thread to prove your point that the GRNC worse than the brady bunch.

wow, what an interesting read from beginning to end of the thread and I think coniferous you minimized the comment of pi$$'g contest...whew...but I do see where the president in # 17 downward specifically mentions 'sane and sober' CC (paraphrasing) the president didn't do himself any favors by his comments throughout the thread.

truly unbelievable image for an organization who apparently represents NC gun owners, well at least apparently those who have their permission slips to quote WW.

ipse

 

[papa bear]

GLOCKSTER, i wished this site had a like button. good post. there are several post on here that are note worthy. even ROTORHEAD. a good argument, even when wrong, is worth more then you know.

the biggest question here is, should a "so called" pro-gun group, have an event where the members that attend must disarm, and leave their safety up to someone they don't even know, and pay them for this?

My response is NO, and there is no difference between this and the ANTIS, sheeple, brady bunch that don't want you to carry at all

 

[WalkingWolf]

GLOCKSTER, i wished this site had a like button. good post. there are several post on here that are note worthy. even ROTORHEAD. a good argument, even when wrong, is worth more then you know.

the biggest question here is, should a "so called" pro-gun group, have an event where the members that attend must disarm, and leave their safety up to someone they don't even know, and pay them for this?

My response is NO, and there is no difference between this and the ANTIS, sheeple, brady bunch that don't want you to carry at all

Papa keep in mind that their policy is dangerous, very very dangerous. It changes the long standing rule that all firearms are loaded. The one time I was there I felt extremely uncomfortable with the improper handling of firearms throughout the whole business.

 

[papa bear]

Papa keep in mind that their policy is dangerous, very very dangerous. It changes the long standing rule that all firearms are loaded. The one time I was there I felt extremely uncomfortable with the improper handling of firearms throughout the whole business.

WOLF, this is what i meant by the "dummy light" syndrome. you could use the example, that making a road safer, makes people go faster.

if you take the risk away from people, it makes them lazy and stupid. there should never ever be a ND at a gun show. period. the dealer ought to check every gun, racking it and visibly checking the chamber. then the person it is handed to, should do the same thing.

if people get to thinking that no gun is loaded, they won't check the gun

 

[MAC702]

... You are not asked to disarm, merely to clear the firearms before entering the office...

So, in other words, you are asked to HANDLE your weapons.

What was it you said about this place having had negligent discharges?

 

[JustaShooter]

So, in other words, you are asked to HANDLE your weapons.

What was it you said about this place having had negligent discharges?

Exactly. Far better to require them to remain cased or holstered until on the firing line and prohibit handling the weapon at any other time / place.

 

[marshaul]

So, in other words, you are asked to HANDLE your weapons.

What was it you said about this place having had negligent discharges?

 

[bc.cruiser]

So, in other words, you are asked to HANDLE your weapons.

What was it you said about this place having had negligent discharges?

Well, gee, don't let me quit when someone is being even "remotely" sarcastic.

No one is required to wait until arrival at the door to 'handle their firearm' and abide by the owners requirement of cleared firearms inside the office, even though there is a clearing barrel at that location.

I think, Mr. Instructor Sir, you are trying too hard to be literal. Literally.

 

[MAC702]

Well, gee, don't let me quit when someone is being even "remotely" sarcastic.

No one is required to wait until arrival at the door to 'handle their firearm' and abide by the owners requirement of cleared firearms inside the office, even though there is a clearing barrel at that location.

I think, Mr. Instructor Sir, you are trying too hard to be literal. Literally.

No sarcasm here whatsoever. You cannot clear a weapon without handling it. Loaded weapons should never be handled beyond what is necessary, regardless of chronography or geography relating to approaching whatever dumbass is requesting it.

 

[rotorhead]

What relevance does this have to people carrying holstered handguns? People fooling around with their guns near the firing line is one thing -- people carrying a handgun in a holster for self-defense is in no way related to the actual act of handling and firing your handgun at the range. They should NOT disarm people who don't even plan on touching their firearm unless their life is in danger. By your logic we should mandate that all people carry their firearms unloaded at all times, because a ND could happen at anytime, EVEN THOUGH THE GUN IS IN A PROPER HOLSTER.

Sweet.

If everyone would promise not to take out their weapons and show other people how cool they were, they wouldn't need any kind of policy like this. The problem is, some people don't adhere to that.

Again, of the three incidents I talked about- two of them happened within minutes of each other. They were ladies who were totally new to guns/ shooting and were there to take a handgun familiarization class. While they were in line with a pack of other ladies there for the same class, they had both taken their pistols out and were showing other people how cool they were....and then.....BANG.

The other incident was unrelated and some weeks later. But still, it happened.

Now, how best to eliminate that particular threat- at any range? We're not talking about perceived "maybe" dangers here, we're talking about three distinct incidents that already have happened. As a range owner, what policies would you introduce that would better solve the issue?

Wolf- I'm not sure when you went but you're absolutely right: at one point they were very loose with some of those rules, working under the impression that gun owners and shooters would police themselves. Obviously, and as you've noticed and along with some NDs, that approach needed some adjustment.

Over the past year they've made significant changes, though. The range staff is now clearly identified with either a green, tan or pink shirt marked on the front with the number "37" and the word "STAFF" on the back. They've also made an increased presence in each bay and covered lanes where there is no doubt as to who works there. Several of the old staff was let go and others were hired to help eliminate that problem, too. It's not perfection, but it's a great improvement. They've also been trained to identify newer shooters and actively watch and help them while they are there. Communication among the staff has increased greatly to identify people who need help out there, along with observing and correcting improper gun practices while on property.

For example, when people now come in for the first time, the staff asks them if they are new to shooting. If so, the message is relayed to the range safeties so that they can help them get started and are taught basics of shooting while there- free (not for profit, as some may accuse them). Doing so helps them be safer for all, as well as enhancing their skills right off the bat.

The whole "no loaded firearms in the pro shop" thing is just a part of the overall improvements made in the past year or two. Some don't like that policy, ok fair enough. The idea of "just trust people to keep their guns in their holsters" was tried, and it didn't work so well. Sorry, it's just the way it is. In real life, there are sometimes stupid people and certain adjustments had to be made to accommodate them. They had to make a decision to better mitigate that risk given the wide range of knowledge and education among gun owners out there. Not everyone is as proficient or safety minded just yet as others. But taken as a whole, what better ways could they address the issue of NDs which they've already had there?

Thanks!

 

[MAC702]

 

[Lthrnck]

No loaded firearms,

So let me get this straight in my mind...

This firing range doesn't want people to carry any weapons loaded in their facility until they get to the firing line.

So you must unload at a barrel at the facility.

They incorparated this rule due to 3 different AD/ND incidents?

Were these AD/ND's at the clearing barrel?

 

[WalkingWolf]

+ 1 million.

Rotor how can they expect the people to carry unloaded guns without checking them to see if they are unloaded AND that encourages the very problem of handling firearms. If they had enough staff to begin with, and designated safety officers that is their only responsibility, then they would be safe with ALL loaded firearms holstered.

Remember that all guns are to be treated as loaded, even if they are unloaded. The problem is not with loaded guns but poor management. If they need visitors/members to unload their guns, they are not safe.

 

[rotorhead]

Well, I'm not against that theory. I agree for the most part.

It's just that these circumstances happened when the ladies were waiting for their turn to check in. During that time they took them out of their cases (in one of their instances, she took it out of her purse) and were showing it to the other ladies who were also in line. I don't blame their management for the ladies taking their guns out and showing them to other people, I blame the ladies who took them out and for having them loaded without any kind of training whatsoever prior to walking in. It's not management's fault in that case.

You would have management post RSOs in the pro-shop/ office area and watch for weapons? I suppose that would work, too. But, that would go against the basic argument I'm hearing concerning trust of their customers. If they wouldn't trust them enough to carry loaded, why would it be any different in terms of trust if they had to post RSOs inside the office area to watch them?

I get what you're saying though. I'm not against it, like I said. My only real point is that I'm also not against the steps they took for their business, either.

 

[MAC702]

So when someone walks in with a holstered sidearm he should be treated like someone who hides guns in pockets and purses because anything else would require thoughtful enforcement.

 

[rotorhead]

I really don't think it went all that deep lol.

I think they just made a decision based on a few unfortunate events, that's all. Maybe it's not the most politically popular one, but they did it based on those reasons.

Done, I guess. I don't see it as some drastic violation of rights, really. Just a policy that was made that affects a person for maybe five minutes. yes, terrorists and evil people could come storming in and try to take over the place and that would leave everyone at the mercy of the bad guys. I suppose that's possible. But based on the three incidents that happened, and weighed against possible ones that haven't (and probably never will), a simple decision was made.

It's not the end of the world, guys, it really isn't. But, people must follow their hearts on it, I reckon.

Take care.

 

[WalkingWolf]

IMO they made the range MORE unsafe, by encouraging handling of firearms to unload them. The rule should be no touching weapons except on the firing line, and that rule should be enforced. ND's happen because guns are handled, if they remain in holsters or cases they cannot fire. As far as the RSO, all profession ranges have them.

 

[solus]

didn't this entire thread arise from GRNC setting up a meet and greet at a range that wanted its patrons to disarm?

we have learned, through the gracious contributions of this forum's membership, the range had to institute their disarming policy & controls because of 'several' NDs.

so back to the orginial premise of the thread...why did GRNC wish to assist this range in the first place? to assist the range's revenue generation by holding a meet and greet there?

no where did i seen anybody post how many actually attended this GRNC disarming event?

anybody know for sure?

finally what certificate is the range issuing called CCW and advance CCW?
ipse