Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Creeker, SASS #43022

Members
  • Posts

    4,325
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    17

Posts posted by Creeker, SASS #43022

  1. 1 hour ago, Cypress Sun said:

     

    Depends on what you deem a "credible source" doesn't it. Are you a credible source?

     

    I talk to the owners of the local gun shops that I visit, every one of them has been "audited" within the last two years. They have all told me that many other FFLs in the area had been subjected to this also. It's all writing on the wall...guess it all depends on one's way of reading it.;)

    What is this "subjected to" language?

    The ATF can legally audit standard FFL's up to once a year (more often if having failed a prior audir or if they have reason to suspect issues) (some classes of FFL can be audited an infinite number of times).

     

    When I was running the pawns firearm division - our locations were audited yearly like clockwork (I had 30+ location responsibility for BATF compliance).

     

    The inspection agents cannot demand more than is required by law - if the FFL is doing their job there are no licenses getting pulled.

     

    But you have WAY too many FFL's who treat the regulatory end of the business like an optional process and then are SHOCKED when the audit goes poorly and they are actually held accountable, receive warnings, fines and re audits.

     

    There are no "innocents" getting their licenses pulled for no reason.

    • Thanks 1
  2. 11 minutes ago, John Kloehr said:

    It was not you, I was really laughing at Yul's word choice.

     

    And It triggered a memory of renting a Mazda Miata on a camping trip. After the trip was done and I was returning the car at the airport, I then unpacked all the gear, taped boxes back together and had a luggage cart piled high with all the stuff I pulled out of the rental.

     

    A couple walked by and suggested I would never fit all of that stuff into the Miata, I pointed to the "rental return" sign and let them know I just unpacked all of it from the car! They walked on, then turned around to look at the luggage cart and the car again.

     

    I think Yul can make you a cart, but you will need to think about the cart and the contents and leather and such. But my Miata experience shows amazing things are possible.

    It is a Tetris game getting everything in the current Corvette - but it can be done.

    The wife and I visited Yul down at the Escondido Bandidos with the current setup.

     

    Folding cart, 4 pistols, 4 long guns, ammo, clothes, hats and enough regular clothes and stuff for the weekend in San Diego.

     

    And the "peculiar" dimensions and shapes of the mid engined cars storage areas may preclude Yul from building something up to his normal standards.

     

    But I deeply admire Yul personally and his woodwork (which I am honored to currently have a smaller example of already) is extraordinary.

    I would always regret if I didn't attempt to have a guncart made by him.

    • Like 3
  3. 8 minutes ago, John Kloehr said:

     

    rofl-laughing.gif

    I don't know what is so funny - I use my current Corvette to visit shoots.

    Gear, ammo, guns and cart.

     

    The new Corvette has TWO trunk storage areas (front and rear) - that I believe could be used for a custom cart.

     

    But that will be a discussion between Yul and myself.

    • Like 2
  4. Yul, 

    You cannot retire just yet - I have a cart in mind for next year.

    I will have to get you dimensions and have to get your input regarding modularity and range assembly - but I would love to have one of your carts custom built to fit the available space when I finally get my new Corvette.

     

    The looks I get now when pulling all the gear out of the current Vette are hilarious; having your custom work of art coming out of a new Mid Engined one...

    That would be incredible.

    • Thanks 1
  5. I see the problem now...

    It's in the reading.

    It's not a nineteen fifty five sweep.

     

    It's an English - German hybrid.

    It's a One NEIN Five Five sweep.

     

    You have 12 targets 

    2 to the left in a HOSTAGE array (meaning a shoot target slightly obscured by a no shoot target)

    and then to the right two rows of five targets.

    (one row close, one row further back)

     

    10 + 1 rifle

    10 pistol

    1 shotgun

     

    At beep:  With rifle

    Shoot the bad guy holding the schoolmarm hostage 1x

    Don't hit the schoolmarm

    Shoot his gang

    (the CLOSER row of targets 1x each)

    Then shoot the rest of his gang

    (the FURTHER row of targets 1x each.)

    1 - NEIN - Five - Five

    11th Rifle round may be loaded at any time after the beep.

     

    With pistols

    Shoot the bad guy holding the schoolmarm hostage 1x

    Don't hit the schoolmarm

    Shoot the CLOSER row of targets 1x each

    Shoot any four of the FURTHER row of targets 1x each

    Shoot the remaining FURTHER row target with shotgun 1x.

     

     

    Rifle reload could be traded out with more shotgun.

    Shotgun could be traded out for a pistol reload.

     

    Maybe make it more interesting with a required movement between shots 1 and 2.

    Requiring a return to 1st position at beginning of pistol sequence.

     

    See?

     

    1955 (or 1 - Nein - 5 - 5) could be as easy or challenging as you wish.

     

    • Like 3
  6. 5 hours ago, Captain Bill Burt said:

    I respectfully disagree.  Anything that makes a stage more difficult is going to favor the top shooters.  Small and far targets, the gap between the top folks and everyone else will increase, not decrease.  There's a reason top shooters are at the top.  They practice, including reloads.

    Captain, sadly you are tilting at windmills.

     

    CAS has ALWAYS had a contingent that firmly believes that their midpack placements were not because of their personal skillsets (or lack thereof).

     

    They believe "if only" this component (be it reloads, target distance, prop manipulations, dress requirements, plus a 100 other possibilities), "if only" this component was changed - they would be a top tier shooter.

     

    Some will go so far as to (in the name of fun) advocate for luck of the draw items "to level the playing field" - because then others can win.

     

    Or one of my perennial favorites; removing shooters from award contention because they win too often and others should have a chance.

     

    They then hide behind platitudes like "I'm not competitive" and "It's only for fun anyways" to somehow convince the rest of us that their intent is solely noble and not to benefit theirselves in any way.

    • Like 4
    • Thanks 2
  7. IF someone wished to be a "polite" Wire poster - they would create a SINGLE thread with multiple posts within.

    Title:

    Brass for Sale - 38, 40, 5.56, 308, 43 Egyptian

    Post 1 is 38 special brass/ qty/ cost/ shipping.

    Post 2 is 40S&W / qty/ cost/ shipping

    Post 3 5.56

    Post 4 308

    Post 5 43 Egyptian

    So on and so forth.

     

    This would allow prospective purchasers to see all the products for sale within a singular thread - reference the specific post when ofering to purchase and allow the seller to edit/ delete an individual post when a specific item is sold.

     

    Same idea for mutiple clothing items, knives, firearms etc.

     

    This would be cleaner and would allow for more items to remain front page.

     

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 2
  8. In my opinion; Crichtons qoute over emphasizes being contrary.

     

    Great scientists are NOT great because they broke with consensus - they are great because they were correct.

     

    The whole construct of a single noble voice of reason being drowned in an ocean of idiocy is cute - but history has shown that generally the guy screaming at clouds is not a visionary but usually nuts.

     

    As for referencing "Scientific" speech - I am well aware that words have meaning; the addition of words or deletion of same change the meaning and context of others.

     

    When folks (not necessarily you) decide to use shorthand to support or argue against a point - I generally disregard everything they say following.

    If they are too lazy or ill informed to frame their initial debate premise accurately - I am inclined to move on as I assume their "detailed" arguement will be just as lacking.

     

    I fully understand the scientific differences/ political debate points between Climate Change, Naturally Occurring Climate Change and Man Made Climate Change.

    I also recognize that the TRUTH likely lies in "some" combination of each.

     

    Same as I recognize the correlation/ causation/ political expediency between deaths, gun deaths, accidents, murders and suicides.

    When ANYONE from either side speaks in absolutes and insists their side is completely correct and the other is completely wrong - I dismiss them as fools.

  9. 4 hours ago, Subdeacon Joe said:

    "Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus."

     

    - Michael Crichton

    Its a cute qoute but simplistic and argues the wrong point.

     

    Being contrary (breaking with consensus) does not magically make you right.

    Belonging to a majority bloc that is in agreement does not necessarily make you wrong.

     

     

    Being correct is, and should be, the only goal. 

    Every deviation from "consensus" is not a step forward or derived from a deeper understanding than others.

    And just because someone screams out their minority opinion does not mean that opinion is worthy of a listen - usually they are wrong.

     

    The problem arises when "truth" is nuanced and slow to reveal itself in its entirety - too many grab hold of (or dismiss) the initial consensus and then refuse to adjust their opinions as new "truths" are revealed or the initial consensus requires modification.

     

    Example: Climate Change.

    Climate change is real. 

     

    Anyone with a shred of observational ability or education knows this to be true.  Climate change has happened MANY MANY times thru out history; long before mans presence on this planet - ice ages to climate heating to cooling again.

    Indisputable truth.

     

    But we cannot seem to work from that common consensus - one side has to say Climate Change is a hoax and is not occurring at all and the other side claiming all the planets climates changes are man made from the events of the industrial revolution forward.

     

    Because both sides want to tack on their "additional opinions" to this truth and call the other side names and demand they accept their ENTIRE SCENARIO as truth.

     

    And both sides pat themselves on the back claiming nobility and bravery because "they" are the only ones speaking truth.

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 2
  10. Short stock or not - it is still a TWO handed gun to operate.

     

    So...

    My AR holds a lot more rounds...

    My 870 shoulders, handles recoil and aims better...

    My 1911 can be run one handed leaving a hand free for a flashlight or 911 call.

     

    As a "toy" or just something neat to own - sure, why not?  (heaven knows I have a lot of guns "just because")

    But in real life situations, the Shockwave or similar would never be MY top choice for a defensive firearm.

    • Thanks 1
  11. 2 hours ago, Pb Mark said:

    These gun laws vary by state.  Many comments above are generalizations that may or may not be applicable to your state laws.  

     

    And no, you cannot throw a law-abiding shopper out of your public store without a lawful. provable reason.  You can be sued in civil court and will probably lose. This applies to ALL states.  It's called unlawful discrimination.  Use the police to help you and their city or county can be successfully sued too.

    You are incorrect.

    There is no such thing as a privately owned "Public Store" - the private property owning shop operator may refuse service based upon a wide variety of subjective reasons.

     

    Shoppers can be removed for attitude, offensive or provocative language, apparel (designs or language upon it or appropriateness), drunkeness or impairment.

     

    Overt or implied threats of violence are also grounds for removal.  Including overt or implied attempts at intimidation.

     

    There are actually very few situations where a private property owner does not have the right to selectively discriminate; housing, food or medical attention come immediately to mind.

     

    And yes; 

    an individual CAN sue for any frivolous reason - that does not mean they will be successful.

    • Like 2
  12. 51 minutes ago, Duffield, SASS #23454 said:

    They can.

    My estate has instructions to sue any such establishment that I am  injured in for not adequately protecting me.

    Good luck with that.

    Private property that you willingly and freely interact with has no obligation to protect you from occurances outside their direct control.

     

    A rack that falls on you? 

    Yes, that is under their direct control.

     

    A spill that caused a slip and fall?

    Yes, that is under their direct control.

     

    A crazy person that enters an "Open to public invitation" facility and does harm is beyond their scope of control.

    ---------------------------------------------

    And for all the folks stating that signs are just "suggestions" or bypassing a sign is just grounds to be asked to leave - this may be accurate in some very specific jurisdictions; but generally these signs are afforded the same weight as those on "public property".

     

    The definition of a Wal-Mart, a Gas Station, a Burger King or ANY privately owned facility that is not membership driven and opens their doors to the public without restraint is defined as "Private Property open to Public invitation".

     

    Because of the "Public Invitation"; meaning the free and open invite to enter the property - these properties are often afforded the same legal protections as "Public Property" with regard to "Non entry" or "Restricted entry" signage standards.

     

    Meaning, if you would obey a "No firearms" sign at your local courthouse; then it would be wise to do so at your local mall, barbershop or steakhouse as the penalties for ignoring it are likely the same.

    Especially in light of your interaction at that establishment is 100% voluntary and easily avoided by you.

     

    A private property without any signage can of course ask you to leave in the course of your interaction based on private property rights - but they can only ask you to leave and then upon refusal, escalate to trespassing you, as without signage - you are not breaking any firearms laws.

    And yes, private property can selectively discriminate about whom they ask to leave.

     

  13. 1 hour ago, Coffee said:

    Yep there was such a movie, and the main characters were Bad Guys. And aside from the opening scene, where a model 12 was used, they dressed as cowboys of the time and shot single action pistols, 1911s 97s and lever action rifles. Pretty sure that power factor, caliber and stage designs were not an issue.

    Using blanks and following a script has little bearing regarding actual use.

    • Like 1
  14. 3 minutes ago, Chas B. Wolfson, SASS #11104 said:

    Why can't you all just appreciate the pic and not add all the BS.

    Just saying

    Chas B 

    What appreciation is required?

    Some guys rode their horses thru the drive thru at a 2nd rate burger restaurant.

     

    Nothing more - nothing less.

    No incredible social commentary - no amazing artistic composition.

     

    The BS is the entertaining part.

    • Like 2
    • Haha 2
  15. 9 minutes ago, PowderRiverCowboy said:

    Add this to the list of things , I won't be doing :) 

    Good. 

    This is intended as a celebration of a certain form of comedic stylings.

     

    Last thing needed is someone who doesn't want to play along.

     

    Kind of like when a Modern 3 Gunner comes to a CAS match and looks down their nose - thinking we are all dressed stupid and quoting dumb movies.

     

    As I'm sure you are; they might be a wonderful person; but in this environment - they aint needed.

  16. 44 minutes ago, Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984 said:

    I’ve never eaten deep fried styrofoam packing peanuts. What was it that caused you to do that?

    I'm confused.

    You want me to eat them raw?

    I'm not a barbarian.

    • Haha 3
  17. 1 hour ago, Pat Riot said:

    Just the movie. I wasn’t aware of this “interactive”. 
    My wife is going to go with me, even though she rolls her eyes and gives me funny looks when I quote lines from Monty Python. :lol:

    The interactive is "Qoute Along" so you are encouraged to interact with the movie.

    I believe they are also placing the most qoutable parts in sub titles to assist those who don't know the movie quite as well.

     

    My daughter, Desert Scorpion, is always quick with a "Neee" or "I fart in your general direction".

     

    She loves Renaissance Faires and if not going in costume; her favorite shirt is still "Your mother was a hamster"

     

    And, yes, we both get odd looks when I break out the "I'm not dead yet" and she goes right along with it.

    • Haha 5
  18. 5 minutes ago, Pat Riot said:

    Reminder to those of you interested: Tickets are now on sale for Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Showings will only be on 2 dates. Dec. 3rd and Dec. 6th. 
     

    I got my tickets for a theater locally through Fandango.

     

     

    Are you doing the standard showing or the interactive?

    I exposed Desert Scorpion to Monthy Python the last time Holy Grail was in theatres (10 or so years back {maybe more}).

    I wanted to take the grandkids to the interactive.

     

    "Tis but a scratch"

    • Like 1
    • Haha 2
  19. 2 minutes ago, Phantom, SASS #54973 said:

    But hey folks - it's the FUTURE OF COWBOY SHOOTING!!!!! Going back to the...imagined past.

     

    oy...

     

    Phantom

    His "version" is what happens when people do not understand historical context and then bastardize it for their own purposes.

     

    It also happens because too many (even those who are actually active in our game) think "entertainment" and "challenge" are synonymous.

     

    As to his damning use of the word formulaic; most like items use like ingredients - the quality of those ingredients and how you put them together is what differentiates the desirability of those items.

     

    A Yugo and a Ferrari use the same "formula"; four wheels, passenger compartment, suspension, etc.

    No one would confuse the two.

     

    A water color painting done by a pre schooler or a masterpiece by Cezanne use the same pigments, the same brushes, the same "formula" but they are certainly not the same end product.

     

    The YouTuber and his like substitute outlandish components and ridiculous extremes for actual creativity.

     

    Cutting the head and left leg off of Michelangelos David while adding nipple piercings and purple glitter is not an improvement.

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 2
  20. I'm going to be completely blunt - or perhaps BRUTAL.

     

    I'm watching a video from a no name shooter; whose biggest claim to fame is 2nd place finishes?  Who has zero concept of where this game came from or why it has progressed to where it is currently...

     

    I'm watching a shooter who posts 30+ second stages and then disparages the target sizes and arrays as too close...

     

    I'm watching a shooter being insulting toward the equipment modifications and yet cannot complete a stage without hiccups...

     

    This is somehow the FUTURE of Cowboy Action?

    This is yet another example of somebody unable to win under the current system - so instead of trying harder, practicing more or striving to improve their self, attempts to create their own game that they feel will benefit them.

     

    I aint impressed.

    • Like 10
    • Thanks 10
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.