Blastmaster Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 It sure is easy to thank someone for their service nowdays. Everywhere you turn people are thanking the Military and LEO's. And that's a good thing. It's a far cry from our boys returning in the 70's. Don't stop thanking our military or LEO's for their service, they deserve it. But when the opportunity to give a member of our armed forces a little slack because he needs to perform his duty and you don't, your "Thank you" is just lip service. Waimea Yep!! Yes Sir, Plus 1, +1, agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gold Canyon Kid #43974 Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Were there other shooters before the match or at the match that asked for similar "shoot through" scenarios/preferences? Were they approved or denied? If others were earlier denied shoot throughs it does make it hard for the match director to approve one and not the other, if that happened. I do not know the facts, just asking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blastmaster Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Were there other shooters before the match or at the match that asked for similar "shoot through" scenarios/preferences? Were they approved or denied? If others were earlier denied shoot throughs it does make it hard for the match director to approve one and not the other, if that happened. I do not know the facts, just asking. Why does it matter what someone else requested? "Similar scenerios" would indicate someone else with military obligations had asked. Evaluate this situation on its merits and let us know your opinion. That's all. Don't make it any more complicated that that for the purposes of this post. Yep, the MD job isn't easy, but for the purposes of this thread, you are in the hot seat so give us your opinion GCK. Blastmaster Edit: If I was MD and I had no choice other than to pissing off a Military person called to duty or an Ol Fart asking to watch his dog have kittens.... I would piss off the Ol Fart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anvil Al #59168 Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Shooters choice of which ever he wants to do. It's not like a day of a regular job. It's not like missing a day of school. It's the armed forces. Let him pick which ever. Of course. This is just my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gold Canyon Kid #43974 Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Why does it matter what someone else requested? "Similar scenerios" would indicate someone else with military obligations had asked. Evaluate this situation on its merits and let us know your opinion. That's all. Don't make it any more complicated that that for the purposes of this post. Yep, the MD job isn't easy, but for the purposes of this thread, you are in the hot seat so give us your opinion GCK. Blastmaster Edit: If I was MD and I had no choice other than to pissing off a Military person called to duty or an Ol Fart asking to watch his dog have kittens.... I would piss off the Ol Fart. It does matter what had already happened concerning shoot throughs for other shooters for this match and possibly even what happened in past years. Unless you have the full story you can not make an informed decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blastmaster Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 It does matter what had already happened concerning shoot throughs for other shooters for this match and possibly even what happened in past years. Unless you have the full story you can not make an informed decision. Rarely does a supervisor have all the facts to make a 100% informed decision or by the time you gather all the facts it is to late or the situation isn't significant enough (compaired to other crisis that are occuring) to make a 100% informed decision. At least that has how it as been for me in 35years of mining and supervision. Back to topic GCK, what is your gut feeling on the miliary guy being called to duty? Shoot from the hip and make a call, so to speak... for this thread at least. Blastmaster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flying W Ramrod Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 At our monthly and annual matches, Active Duty shooters are free. He should have been given opion 3 or 4. In the words of the immortal Mountain Charlie "right wrongs nobody". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bear Saint Paw Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 His choice of Option #3 or #4 and this, It can be published in advance that the only exception to the no shoot through rule will be for active duty military, or for activated reservists or national guardsmen. Activated members of the guard or reserves will have to show a copy of their orders. Active duty personnel must present their ID to the MD. If I remember correctly active military have a green/white ID while guardsmen & reservists are issued red/white IDs. All active duty military personnel and their spouses and minor children should shoot free. Heaven knows the loss of those fees won't hurt those clubs and it just might get them a lot of positive PR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gold Canyon Kid #43974 Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Rarely does a supervisor have all the facts to make a 100% informed decision or by the time you gather all the facts it is to late or the situation isn't significant enough (compaired to other crisis that are occuring) to make a 100% informed decision. At least that has how it as been for me in 35years of mining and supervision. Back to topic GCK, what is your gut feeling on the miliary guy being called to duty? Shoot from the hip and make a call, so to speak... for this thread at least. Blastmaster I would expect the match director to know about what had happened to date at his match related to shoot throughs, I do not know the facts on what other shoot throughs might have been requested in this situation and won't comment until I do. Way to many times on the Wire are we asked to make a call based on only part of the information and sometimes are only given all the information later and it could clearly have changed the some of the decisions. If in fact other requests for shoot throughs were turned down at this shoot, depending on their circumstances it could effect the decision. Won't play your game! When more information is provided then I will offer a call! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Scatterbrain Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 It can be published in advance that the only exception to the no shoot through rule will be for active duty military, or for activated reservists or national guardsmen. Activated members of the guard or reserves will have to show a copy of their orders. Active duty personnel must present their ID to the MD. If I remember correctly active military have a green/white ID while guardsmen & reservists are issued red/white IDs. All active duty military personnel and their spouses and minor children should shoot free. Heaven knows the loss of those fees won't hurt those clubs and it just might get them a lot of positive PR. They did away with those almost ten years ago. My ID looks exactly like a RA ID. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Rick, SASS #49739L Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Around here he would have been invited to shoot through. Probably get a standing ovation at the awards ceremony. Our freedom to do what we do is guaranteed by these guys. Anybody who might complain about unfair or unequal treatment gets invited to fulfill the young man's obligation in his place. CR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col. Nathan C. Riddles, SASS # 7462 Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 They did away with those almost ten years ago. My ID looks exactly like a RA ID. Thanks OS. I wasn't aware of the ID change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Three Foot Johnson Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 3 or 4, and anybody that complains can have a blanket party at 2:00am and go serve in his stead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garrison Joe, SASS #60708 Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Were it my match, Option 4 would have been kicked into motion. I would have found that, if necessary because shooter could not be put into a "makeup posse", that I could have personally spared the extra 30 minutes needed to RO a "posse of 1 shooter", rounded up three willing spotters (might all just happen to be Vets, too), and let that deserving pard shoot the 6 stages he missed on the first day. Public servants called out for law or fire duty would be granted the same privilege. Rules are good. Great application of good rules is even better, Good luck, GJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allie Mo, SASS No. 25217 Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Hi again, I apologize for not reading all your posts. This is a case where I have thoughts about our game and will not be swayed by good arguments to the contrary. I think there are many good reasons for allowing shoot throughs. However, if a club wishes to discourage them, they should not deny them entirely. Instead they can post "shoot throughs may only be allowed at the Match Director's discretion." Or/and, maybe say that shoot throughs must be approved two weeks (or some set time) before the match. That might eliminate the possibility of someone picking the nice day to shoot through. I read that WR is a match denying shoot throughs, even a child who cannot get out of school will be denied a shoot through. IMHO, we should encourage the young people with the same ardor we encourage the military. Regards, Allie Mo PS I see a trend towards assuming the worst in our participants and I don't like the direction it is taking us. Stand up to the individual who abuses our rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frederick Jackson Turner Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 You know, this nation was founded on the Lockean concept that the law is the servant of mankind, man is not the servant of the law. Seems to me that common sense and legitimate exceptions might be made to the "no shoot through" rule at cowboy shoots. Cheers, FJT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jabez Cowboy,SASS # 50129 Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 I would handle it this way,,,,,, Give his choice of option 3 or 4 ..... Then I would anounce the situation at the saftey meeting and his choice of how to handle the shoot through .... The I would ask for a show of hands from Anyone opjecting to the plan ,,,,,, ( I would expect none) ,,, and ask all the folks to help him all they could .... And at the awards event I would present him with a voucher for a free shoot next time he was up my way .... GOD BLESS those who serve .... Jabez Cowboy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WymoreWrangler SASS 46187L Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 What part of Thank you for your service was forgotten here... Shoot through.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace_of_Hearts Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Were it my match, Option 4 would have been kicked into motion. I would have found that I could have personally spared the extra 30 minutes needed to RO a "posse of 1 shooter", rounded up three willing spotters (might all just happen to be Vets, too), and let that deserving pard shoot the 6 stages he missed on the first day. Public servants called out for law or fire duty would be granted the same privilege. Rules are good. Great application of good rules is even better, Good luck, GJ Extra time was not needed. All that was required is that the shooter be assigned to an afternoon posse to shoot the stages that he did not shoot on the first day. No inconvenience, no "shoot through", no muss, no fuss, and the young GENTLEMAN (And he truly was a gentleman) could have shot a complete match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shooting Bull Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Extra time was not needed. All that was required is that the shooter be assigned to an afternoon posse to shoot the stages that he did not shoot on the first day. No inconvenience, no "shoot through", no muss, no fuss, and the young GENTLEMAN (And he truly was a gentleman) could have shot a complete match. EXACTLY what I was thinking. How many times in this thread have we seen the term "shoot through"? No shoot through was required or, from what I can tell, requested. He could/SHOULD have simply shot half the match in the morning on one posse and the second half of the match in the afternoon on a different posse. Just another posse memeber. A person I'd love to have on my posse because he'd probably bust his butt doing posse duties. It couldn't be any more simple and and LESS inconvenient for the match officials. I realize we're only dealing with half the story here but, from what I've read so far, they got this one terribly wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkey Creek Red, SASS # 22854 Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 As a former range master for a state match, I have had to make decisions like the one being talked about here. Like Allie Mo (no e), I too feel that we are getting to the point that we are worried about too many what if's. In this case, let the person shoot, and if option 4 is their choice, so be it, have a great day, and THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace_of_Hearts Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 In defense of the Match Director..... I believe he was being barraged by the term "shoot through" and had that stuck in his mind. When you are presented with a problem on the range you don't have the luxury of sitting in a quiet place without anyone around and thinking through the situation, and many times options are overlooked. Don't hang the gentleman...... YET Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lefty pete Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 for those that are not ready to get behind our men and women of the armed forces------ feel free to get in front of them.God bless our service men and women past and present. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blastmaster Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 In defense of the Match Director..... I believe he was being barraged by the term "shoot through" and had that stuck in his mind. When you are presented with a problem on the range you don't have the luxury of sitting in a quiet place without anyone around and thinking through the situation, and many times options are overlooked. Don't hang the gentleman...... YET In a way, the shooter did shoot through, kinda.... but I don't care what you call it,.... it doesn't really matter,,,, I am happy that it worked out. Yer right, supervisors (MD) don't always have the luxury of...... The MD doesn't need any defense,,,, he and whomever else, did good and gets my support. Blastmaster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shooting Bull Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 In a way, the shooter did shoot through, kinda.... but I don't care what you call it,.... it doesn't really matter,,,, I am happy that it worked out. Yer right, supervisors (MD) don't always have the luxury of...... The MD doesn't need any defense,,,,he and whomever else, did good and gets my support. Blastmaster Really? You think they did good for only allowing the shooter to shoot half the match? You're certainly welcome to your opinion but, I sure can't say that I agree with it in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheyenne Culpepper 32827 Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 In my humble opinion, I don't see an option at all............let him shoot, period!!! That shoot has allowed it before, and quite possible to the same serviceman/cowboy. It was accomplished before....why not again? I guess the phrase,,,,"DUH?" comes to mind.... I could never understand the no shoot through rule in any instance. Mule Camp let me finish 5 stages after I recieved an important call of illness in the family....I guess I just don't see it at all.......... Cheyenne, who is thankful to all vets and their families, Culpepper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chickahominy Charlie Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 "Any fool can follow a rule. I want officers smart enough to know when to break them!" LTG Willard W. Scott Superintendent, United States Military Academy, 1982-1986 I knew General Scott pretty well, and I am quite confident he would have said to break the published rule in this case. +1 Let him shoot the whole match....in whatever scenario makes the MD feel comfortable....but let him shoot. ....and who could second-guess a 60 year old three star general who'd mount up on a mule, in his greens, in a rainstorm, and ride up and down the sidelines at an Army football game? I miss Scotty.... Chick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blastmaster Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Really? You think they did good for only allowing the shooter to shoot half the match? You're certainly welcome to your opinion but, I sure can't say that I agree with it in this case. Uphhhhs!!! Me bad...I retract my last post.. I reread your post #55 very carefully and see that I misunderstood that the shooter could have or should have been allowed to shoot in the morning on one posse and then in the afternoon on another posse.. That didn't happen. Sorry!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shooting Bull Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Uphhhhs!!! Me bad...I retract my last post.. I reread your post #55 very carefully and see that I misunderstood that the shooter could have or should have been allowed to shoot in the morning on one posse and then in the afternoon on another posse.. That didn't happen. Sorry!! I had a feeling that was the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blastmaster Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 I had a feeling that was the case. Thank you for being gentle in getting me back on the correct path. Blastmaster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seldom Seen #16162 Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 The young man joined his assigned posse on the morning of the second day, competed, never said a discouraging word, and fun was had by all. But alas, no chance for fame or glory for our honorable young man on that field of battle on that day. If the soldier isn't complaining why are you? If only to stir things up maybe. This special treatment of active duty soldiers is overplayed. I have two children in the Army (one is medically retired due to injuries incured while on active duty) along with Nephew. My son is going to Korea for a second time and then a deployment probably to the Sandbox. I am very proud of the committment they made to serve in the U.S. Army. But they do not and I do not believe they should get special treatment just because their boss calls them in unexpectedly to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shooting Bull Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 This special treatment of active duty soldiers is overplayed. In a lot of situations I agree with your statement. This is NOT one of those situations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacknife Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 If the soldier isn't complaining why are you? If only to stir things up maybe. This special treatment of active duty soldiers is overplayed. I have two children in the Army (one is medically retired due to injuries incured while on active duty) along with Nephew. My son is going to Korea for a second time and then a deployment probably to the Sandbox. I am very proud of the committment they made to serve in the U.S. Army. But they do not and I do not believe they should get special treatment just because their boss calls them in unexpectedly to work. My thoughts exactly, like my question before. Who asked for this special treatment? Bet it wasn't the military man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shooting Bull Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 My thoughts exactly, like my question before. Who asked for this special treatment? Bet it wasn't the military man. Don't know and, quite frankly, I don't care. It says in the OP that it WAS requested. He should have been allowed to shoot the match.....the WHOLE match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacknife Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Don't know and, quite frankly, I don't care. It says in the OP that it WAS requested. He should have been allowed to shoot the match.....the WHOLE match. And it also was stated that shoot thrus weren't allowed, didn't have any exceptions listed. Rules are rules, and are top be applied evenly. Something that some here aren't used to. Making exceptions for one is penalizing all others. If ya aren't gonna play by the rules, don't even have em. Simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.