Creeker, SASS #43022

I have always wanted to open a breakfast place and call it "The Awful Waffle". But since the last restaurant I invested in was a GIANT pain - I doubt it will ever happen.

Was thinking the same thing - cockpits are relatively compact; 1, 2 or 3 rifle rounds passing thru would definitely get the pilots attention.

It's a freaking newbie... This is not likely a shooter in the running for an overall or category win. Stage the pistols at position - restage them after shooting. Lender may retrieve firearms and move them to the unloading table in a muzzle up "malfunction" carry AFTER the stage is completed. And since I am the TO in this hypothetical situation - this IS the way it is going to go. Unless we are talking about a shooter new to SHOOTING/ firearms handling - or a child requiring extreme parental oversight; the only persons ON or crowding the firing line are me and the shooter.

No - not really. But... And there is always a but. Just because they don't "need"aftermarket parts does NOT mean they are good to go out of the box. They need complete polishing and internals cleanup and they are vastly over sprung from the factory (to overcome the lack of polished and smoothed internals). The lever/ lifter springs are very much improved by trimming and polishing. The main spring as well. The only true downside is the shortage of replacement parts (stock or aftermarket) in the event of overzealous polishing, hour glassing or metal removal. The action is very similar in stroke to a 3rd generation short stroke kit - I have 3rd gen setups in my Ubertis and am able to transition back and forth to the Miroku without muscle memory issues. If the price were right - I would have no issue purchasing another Miroku; but if all things are equal - a tuned Uberti is the better choice.

There are others - I got both of these as gifts from wife and daughter. Ebay can sometimes be your friend. Etsy sellers as well. I found this one from Cinch. https://images.app.goo.gl/m5EfJcU4b25UjVhw8

It is a Redhead shirt - online called a "Billy the Kid" shirt. I have both the Henley shown and the button up (not snaps) version (matter of fact - that is the shirt I wore yesterday at the Dixie Desperados in St George UT). There are at least a couple for sale online right now. https://poshmark.com/listing/Redhead-Cowboy-Billy-the-Kid-Pistol-Button-Down-Long-Sleeve-Shirt-Mens-L-65deb3728e40fd6df36d8ee9?utm_source=gdm_men&utm_campaign=19895611666&campaign_id=19895611666&ad_partner=google&gskid=pla-2265693241841&gcid=652501234044&ggid=147477093557&gdid=m&g_network=g&enable_guest_buy_flow=true&gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAjwnv-vBhBdEiwABCYQA-OMyuLKQBie19OYX9C_YqRXQw0Tdn6eb6KrVywxtMxUwk4S2pnVlhoCxLcQAvD_BwE Short of that - I would hunt on Etsy for something similar.

Just because this is an automotive pet peeve of mine. Car "Bras" or Leading edge masks are STUPID. I am referring to the cloth, mesh and strapped protectors as shown in the pictures not to Expel or PPF or any clear film based products. They are applied ostensibly to "protect" the paint. But there are TWO major issues with this; first the cloth and straps will ALWAYS vibrate and move - this vibration will wear thru paint and grill surfaces causing more damage than if the car had been left unmasked. And IF you don't remove them regularly to wash away the dust, dirt and grit that find their way under the mask - the nose will look like it was sandblasted. Second is the asinine idea that you should take a pretty thing; cover it up with an ugly thing and then just imagine to yourself how pretty it is under the covering. I feel the exact way about Dash covers to protect the dash from sun fading or cracking. How about I leave the dash uncovered and attractive and THEN when/ if it fades or cracks - then Ill cover it up with a fuzzy dashmat?

Stripe is a pretty good format for a forward facing processing interface. A number of my clients use Stripe. I also believe Square offers an interface that allows for end user data input. This style interface allows for consumer (end user) input and provides for data security and encryption. These systems protects both the consumer AND the seller from bad actors retrieving or reusing data.

Im confused; why shouldn't they be together? Those are EXACTLY the same gun just separated by a few generations. An American Sporting Rifle that has competion, hunting and self defense capability. I see a direct family lineage - sort of like a boy out with his Great Grandpa. There may not be a lot of family resemblance - but they share the same genes and heritage.

I own a card processing company. IMO, I believe your research results are being misapplied. There are direct costs to ALL transactions. And THEN there are either SELLER supported OR PURCHASER subsidized costs (sometimes both) to ALL transactions. The direct cost is for the ACTUAL item or service being exchanged, i.e. You pay xx dollars for a pound of powder. This is payment for product. The retailer sells you a pound of powder for xx dollars. This is product for payment. Simple enough? The RETAILER supported cost is ALL the others costs it takes to make that transaction occur (a store, an employee, business licenses, utilities, etc. and so on) Including card processing (convenience) fees. The PURCHASER subsidized cost is ALL the other costs incurred to make that transfer occur (time, fuel, taxes, etc. and so on). For the sake of this discussion; lets limit ourselves to the topic of club match registration. If card processing is offered - these debit/ credit card processing fees would be a supported cost and applied against the seller. Making the transactional cost of the product (in this case, a match) to the end purchaser ONLY the xx dollars of match price. If the club does NOT offer this option - then the PURCHASER must subsidize the seller by paying additional fees. A USPS MO is a couple dollars ($2.10) for a typical annual entry. A USPS stamp is a dollar. An envelope is a few cents. Paper and ink for application printing and completion a few more cents. Yes, insignificant numbers - I admit. But still additional costs. Conversely - if online registration and payment is offered. I (purchaser) am not charged any transactional fee on my Debit card. I (purchaser) am not charged any fee for the email. And I can do this transaction from the comfort of my home at 3am in my underwear. So my transaction is more convenient - completed in a fraction of the time - I can receive instant confirmation - all for free. Now the transaction and supported fees are back on the seller as they should be. And YES; there are costs (and YES, these costs could be more the purchasers subsidized costs) - but the convenience and efficiency on the club (sellers) side of faster processing, easier data entry, ease of deposit, accurate information transfer and lessening risk of losing physical checks, money orders or applications generally offset these supported fees. The SELLER can choose to support certain fees or the PURCHASER can choose to subsidize certain fees. But the claim that use of electronic payment increases cost to the consumer is informational cherry picking at best.

Did I order something PHYSICAL? Pretty sure we were discussing differing forms of written communication. Touting pen and paper applications, filling out a physical check (one easily lost, mutilated, altered or forged), or paying a fee for a money order, stuffing it into an envelope (which has yet another cost), paying still another fee (stamp) for transport and then waiting days for the package to arrive at its destination. Or use electronic email and payment methods - instant, verifiable and secure. Yes, we should definitely be insulting and dismissive of folks desiring to use the method of communication that is superior in every measurable metric.

When you arrive by horseback without your eyeglasses, granola bars and heart meds - we can all acknowledge your dedication to the era. But since you used the paved road to get there, GPS navigation to find the range and the internet to debate the topic - I don't see any moral conflict to using modern technology regarding registration or payment. We are just PRETENDING to be old west cowboys - the Pony Express is long since deceased.

What does "lazy" have to do with using archaic and outdated methods? Is a auto mechanic "lazy" because they no longer work on the boiler tank of your 1904 Stanley Steamer ? Is the Dr. "lazy" because he no longer subscribes to the ritual sacrifice of a goat for your head cold? Is your local movie theatre "lazy" because they don't have a piano player to entertain during the title cards of your black and white silent film? Writing a paper check, stuffing it in an envelope, paying somebody to physically transport it across the country (hoping that it is not lost, mutilated or stolen) is an antiquated and ridiculous operation and will soon seem as out of date as blood letting.

First - Facebook sucks. Second - your club needs an actual navigable WEBSITE. Your site ABSOLUTELY HAS to have: Location; including address, GPS, range name - any specifics as to location on the range, is there a range office sign in - in addition to the match sign in? (directions {and DISTANCES} from various landmarks are appreciated as well). This is very important in large metro areas where the shooters choice of lodging with the same city name can be next door or an hour+ away. Any range specific rules: prohibited shooting styles, plant and poke, parking, RV's, dogs, spectators, etc. Calendar: Date (and TIME, for setup, registration, safety meeting, first rounds downrange) of your next shoot. Cost of said shoot. Any match extras: Side matches, lunch, discounts at local eateries, retailers or attractions. Date of your next annual (if applicable) Sign up form, schedule of events. Local lodging and accomodations info. Past Scores List of Officers and their contacts At LEAST ONE phone number to a club official for questions or visiting shooter inquiries (this has to be someone willing to actually answer a call or at minimum RETURN a call in a timely manner) Nice things to have: A place to print/ electronically sign waivers. A place to join the clubs mailing list. Photo album/ videos - link to your youtube page. Stages for the upcoming match. Club/ Match philosophy as to match design, target arrays and sizes. I spent nearly 20 years running a VERY successful club - The above items were mandatory for my club to ensure anyone/ everyone that had any interest in joining us was provided with the most opportunity possible. Now that I am traveling more and visiting more distant clubs and annuals; it amazes me the lack of effort put forward to entice attendance at various clubs. Painted Lady and I enjoy traveling and road trips - so "when" I find a club in proximity to our destination on the same weekend; I am excited to explore their website to ascertain if I want to attend. If I cannot easily/ conveniently find the above information - and cannot make contact with a club official; then I simply pass on by. I'm sure I have missed out on some good, fun shoots - but CAS is not a driving force in my life any longer and my time is too dear to spend it at an event that chooses to not communicate basic information. Or does so thru a format that is not conducive to ease of finding specific information (Facebook).

Im sorry - one of the most iconic rock songs of all time neutered into grocery store background noise.

Different shooters have differing desires. I go to shoots to compete - and to do under as equal of conditions as possible. I personally don't go to shoots to bs, socialize or visit. I have a very simple policy; if I don't enjoy the shoot - I don't return. If the match is poorly written, the expectations poorly communicated and the match lacks consistent (shooter to shooter, posse to possee) standards because of poorly communicated instructions - then we are not competing in a like manner. And I'm insulted that my time was wasted by folks that expect me to pay for, suffer thru and then be positive about their lack of effort. I am very open about only attending shoots that I believe I will enjoy - stylistically and operationally. I would rather stay home than shoot a match that is disagreeable - and since I am not there for the people; I can appraise the event based solely on the event. I firmly believe that repeatedly patronizing shoots that don't satisfy your desires only leads to being served more of the same.

With all due respect - this is not aimed at you specifically; but this mindset is the ROOT cause of almost all the issues. Laziness in stage writing led to the creation of "Stage Conventions". Lazy stage writing has led to the trend toward trying to overly shorten directions and omitting pertinent information. The stage writers "job" is to convey the information, "ALL THE INFORMATION", necessary to allow multiple shooters to perform the same actions in a safe and consistent manner. There is no prize for brevity. Ink is cheap and electrons are free. There is no cost penalty for a few extra letters (or even forbid; extra sentences). And I fully contend - those extra letters or sentences MORE than pay for themselves by the elimination of questions at stage read and shooters errors/ frustration on the firing line. Less is more... No, no it is not. If you want people to do things in a consistent manner - to do those things thoroughly and completely. You have to provide clear, thorough instructions that define your expectations. The rules of clear communication have not changed - who, what, where, when and how (and to what extent). What has changed is lazy stage writers have decided that "the shooter should already know this" so I don't have to write it. (kinda glad heart surgeon teachers and jet pilot instructors don't subscribe to this theory) I loved writing stages - and I wrote good stages. I took great pride in my stages/ matches because I took great effort in making those stages/ matches the very best I could. I analyzed EVERY single stage I have ever written from the viewpoint of a lefty AND from a righty. From the viewpoint of a BP shooter AND from smokeless. From the viewpoint of a Duelist, a Gunfighter AND a supported shooter. And after the steel was set; looked at everything AGAIN from the viewpoint of a tall shooter AND a short one to ensure every variable was considered and addressed - and changes noted, made and communicated as needed. I do not understand the mindset of someone that wants to write stages and then whines that "It's too many letters" and too much work, so they cannot be bothered to write them completely.

Started my daughter at 5. Top 10 at EoT a few years later.

With all due respect - until the convention is rewritten. The RULEBOOK that every shooter receives reflects something different. Yet another example of short sighted situational rules - people create bad rules and then double down by creating caveats to bad rules. Then triple down by pretending that by creating caveats and conditions; they are doing anything beyond perpetuating the problem they themselves created. And these minutes are from 2016 - it's now 2024 and the rulebook still reads as I read it.

The stage convention says "If NO starting position then blah blah blah" I contend that NO direction or instruction means exactly that; no - none - nada - zip - zilch. And so by contrast if ANY direction or instruction is provided (no matter how vague or lacking) it is no longer NONE - and by the very WORDS in the convention makes the convention moot. The stage convention says if NO starting position; it does not say IF the starting position is somewhat incomplete or IF the details are vague - then use the convention to fill out the details. As Tyrel said so eloquently; Standby... BEEP.

Perfect.

Shhhh - they didn't know I considered them friends.

Bull, I have found you're almost always in agreement. With the wrong side of the argument. And before anyone takes offense - I am friends with Bull and Tennesee Williams. And as such - I reserve the rights in perpetuity to mercilessly argue with them the most minuscule and unimportant points.

And there are a fair contingent - even among the RO committee that agree with you. I just happen to be one that doesn't. The conventions were written to "fill in the blanks" when stage writers failed to do so. They were NOT written to create additional /supplemental required instruction that must be absorbed into the existing written instruction. Ill provide yet another analogy. Stage convention: Your breakfast will consist of cereal served in a bowl with milk, a glass of orange juice and a sliced banana. Written instruction: Your breakfast will consist of eggs and bacon, coffee and an apple. My interpretation: I'm getting eggs, bacon on a plate, coffee in a steaming mug and (hopefully) a green Granny Smith apple to bite into per written instruction. The stage convention is no longer applicable because of written deviation from convention. IF we insist anything not SPECIFICALLY exempted by written instruction is still required per convention: Your eggs and bacon MUST be served in a BOWL - as a plate (even tho thats expected for eggs and bacon) was not over ridden and MUST have milk poured upon it. Your coffee MUST be served in a GLASS - a mug was not over ridden. And no biting into the skin and tearing it part with your teeth because your apple MUST be sliced - because sliced was not over ridden. Anyone besides me see the silliness here? At some point - someone in SASS decided they were better stage writers than us and that (like a lot of the rules) "that just doesn't look right" - so they over stepped. And many lazy stage writers - who seem to think that each letter on the stage instruction costs them money; grabbed hold of the concept to make defaults their standard default. And then others conflate and intermingle the instructions so every staging, body placement and hand positioning must be lawyered to determine what was said - what may have been left out and what terms from the conventions they feel needed to be added. The game is supposed to be easy. And the conventions to create consistency when the stage writer failed. Attempting to intermingle, parse and insert every word of the stage conventions into over riding writen stage instructions is not making it easier and is not making it more consistent.

IMO - Stage conventions only exist in the ABSENCE of an instruction. That is 100% why stage conventions were created - that in the absence of a specific instruction or allowance; stage writers / shooters would be subjected to a default. Stage conventions were not created to intermingle with the written stage instruction. It is not required to parse and implement every word of the stage convention that the stage writer does not specifically exempt. Written instruction OR stage convention; it is an either/ or situation. This intermingling of written instruction AND stage convention is exactly why you see inconsistent application/ outcomes. Attempting to combine written instruction AND stage conventions to extrapolate what exactly they are allowed to do. Even to address your example; shotgun/ rifle safely staged vertically at window. IF that is what the stage writer provides - how do you reconcile that with the assertion that stage convention defines "safe" as lying flat and requires such to be safe? You cannot. As soon as ANY specific instruction is given; the written instruction over rides the stage convention that is applicable to that situation.