Dusty Devil Dale

It isn't particularly new - been around a while. You have to think in threes. 123--- 234 ---345---3. It isn't what anybody would call GF-friendly, or even two-handed shooter-friendly (pistol split can be a challenge under the clock). Rifle is a lot simpler. I've run into it in matches fairly often.

Agree. A no-shoot hostage target or two can be fun, but otherwise extra targets often turn out to be "P" traps. It helps if they are painted differently, but like you said --WHY have them at all?

Add Hangman or Rattlesnake Sweep: 1232343453

Our central CA club normally has about 70-80 paid members. About 1/3 -1/2 of them participate in monthly matches. Match attendance is heavily weather dependent. Our shooters can choose to shoot on Saturday, Sunday or both days (separate matches held the same weekend) Different shooters prefer different days, so attendance on any individual day is probably less than if we shot only one match. We normally see about 18-25 shooters on Saturday and about 20-30 on Sunday. Our match fees are $15 per match (per day) for members, $20 for non members. I hope that is helpful. Added: Our range is a 8-Bay ghost town setting, so I think ideally we would like to be able to run 3 posses each match day-- say 40-45 shooters.

If it had been me personally, I would have been neck deep in legal action all right -- but probably the "you're allowed one phone call" kind.

Don't give him ideas! You've seen what he can do with them!

Relax. This is the Saloon-- the fun sassnet place. What happens in the Saloon stays in the Saloon.

Honest folks and kids.

My bet is that as long as you did no physical damage to the facility or assault staff people, no reasonable LEO would cite you into court under these circumstances. They would accomplish little and risk a whole lot in the Court of Public Opinion. A court action, in fact, could seriously backfire on the facility management.

Fresno, Ca. But I bet the policies are similar in most other locales.

Which Panama City?

There is very little worse than a self-centric bureaucrat who knows how to insulate themself. Honestly, I can understand a lot of their hesitancy, considering that dog's can be pretty unpredictable with strangers or kids who scare or hurt them. But in this case, Shelly walked into the facility with the dog on a leash, sat in a waiting room with it lying obediently at her feet while she reached down and petted it. They could and should have at least let her help them look for a chip. It is probably good that I wasn't there. If I had been, not unlike your Oregon friend, I likely would have gone into the Shelter's back room, and retrieved myself a Husky pet, and earned myself a criminal record.

A too-true encounter. On her way home one afternoon, a friend's wife, Shelly, found a beautiful adult Husky walking along the roadside, approaching and surveying passing cars like a lost dog. She stopped and climbed out, greeted the dog, opened the rear door of the pickup and the dog jumped in. She took it home, fed it and gave it a bath. It was a neutered male, but wore no collar or tags, although the fur was creased, appearing to have recently worn a collar. Shelly was sure it was somebody's pet. She kept it indoors and found it affectionate, playfull with her daughter, and fairly well-trained. It slept obediently at the foot of their bed. She posted signs around their area, trying to locate the dog's owners, but had no luck after a week. A neighbor suggested if the dog was neutered, it probably had an ID chip inserted behind one ear. At that point Shelly hated to give up her new friend, but she did "the right thing" and took the dog to the local City-funded SPCA shelter to see if they could read a chip and locate the owner. If not (or if the owner no longer wanted the dog), Shelly and her family wanted to adopt it. The staff took the leashed Husky to another room and came back shortly saying the dog was too aggressive. They were unable to check it for a chip. It hadn't tried to attack or bite anyone, but it was not wearing rabies or license tags, and it had growled at the staff when approached. In disbelief, Shelly asked if she could go in to try to calm the dog down. To her shock, they refused to allow her in the room. Further they said their policies require that they not handle, vaccinate or release an aggressive animal back to anyone, or allow anyone to adopt and license the dog, "until and unless" their 'Animal Behavioral Specialist Team' determined that it could be safely allowed to leave the secure facility. If they determined that the dog was too aggressive for adoption, it would be euthanized after 24 hours. Shelly was devastated. She demanded to be allowed to show them that the dog was non-aggressive. The facility Director (a quintessential bureaucrat) was called, and Shelly was directed to leave the facility. Her husband made over a dozen calls to the facility, to several State Legislators, City Council members, the City Mayor, and to a local radio station personality who has an obvious affinity for dogs and cats. He immediately broadcast the situation, trying to bring public pressure to the City and SPCA Director to at least let Shelly demonstrate that the dog was non-aggressive. The facility Director made no statements and did not respond to the radio station or legislator inquiries. All of Shelly's efforts were to no avail. The lovable dog was promptly euthanized after being held 24 hours. At no point before or after its death did anyone check for an ownership chip. Bottom line, if you find a lost animal, do NOT EVER take it to the SPCA or City "Shelter" to get its chip read. Instead, call a veterinarian and/or find someone else who can look for and read an ownership chip-- or just give the dog a good home.

It appears the word 'Canada' was patched in. Hard to tell from the photo angle. but it appears to be a slightly larger font.

At the rate conventional intelligence seems to be failing, an AI takeover seems inevitable.

I had to share this image. I don't know who did the work, but IMO it is VERY NICE.

It is U.N. Agenda 21 still being implemented. The U.N. policy document was signed years ago by GHW Bush. It became the little known Progressive Play Book -- 273 pages of prescription for total governmental control. Some features: > No motorized vehicles-- only bicycles. > All persons eventually living in urban high-rises (to save farmland). >All farmland owned and operated by the various participating governments of the One World Order. >No civilian firearms. It goes on and on and on -- all ostensibly aimed at long-term survival of the Earth and of world humanity, but really aimed at everyone becoming oppressively controlled subjects with no means of escape. Download and take a look at it sometime when your blood pressure is too low and your wife and family are not near enough to hear your comments. It is the root of much of the senselessness we are seeing being turned into public policy. (It is always good to understand your adversaries) I understand 21 is now replaced by Agenda 2040, which is much worse in policies, but more carefully disguised as woke necessities and public safety.

Oh, you were talking about sleep?

Not for SASS shooting, Right? For speed shooting, whatever you gain in shortened stroke will be lost in the loop size. What am I missing here?

Whatever you're doing to stay up all night should definitely be marketed.

How did you post this? 4G? 5G?

Cap'n, I have the same foot problem as you--almost identical! I bear weight only on the heel and balls of my feet. I have to use a piece of trimmed 1/2" carpet as an insert OVER my orthotic, otherwise my feet hurt all night. The carpet (recommended by my Podiatrist) does work pretty well. I cut them the same as my orthotic inserts, except they do not extend under the toes. The Podiatrist thought that would help to relieve and help correct the my hammer-toe condition.

Millennials. No need to say more.

I wear a pair of Whites Logging boots (steel toe, steel shank with spikes) that I've worn in heavy logging and tractor work for 28 years. I've damaged the uppers once (chain saw scuff) and worn out the soles once in that time. They are heavy, stiff-- they give great ankle support, walking on top of logs while limbing, they are reliably snakeproof, and extremely durable. As above, I've sent them back for repairs twice. Both times they quickly contacted me and replaced the boots free of charge and paid shipping both ways. The boots are not lightweight by any stretch, but they give great support and protection. And the lifetime warranty makes them among the lowest cost boots out there, IF you ever need them replaced. I think I paid $550 in 1993 or 94, and I'm on the second free replacement, which makes the cost $550/3 =$183 I tried a pair of $280 Danners for a time, looking for a lighter weight boot. They did not hold up very well in my heavy work. I have not worn the lighter weight Whites, so I can't attest, but their warranty is bomb-proof.

"A little box with a big, warm friend." (Both are over 20#. )