2aHawaii
General Topics => General Discussion => Topic started by: Darmok and Jalad @Tanagra on September 14, 2013, 06:47:22 PM
-
This seems like a long post, but I added lots of spacing! ;)
This is a question that I COULD have asked the RO at the time, but decided it was the wrong time to question him. Read on, and you'll see why I say this....
My daughter and I were shooting rifles at the bulls eye range. My daughter decides to try shooting while standing, and after a couple rounds she's ready to stop .... the rifle (AK-47) is just a bit more weight than she can easily hold, aim, and fire.
She hands me the rifle and walks around the bench to the spotting scope while I finish the 3 rounds left in the mag. I cleared the rifle and set it on the bench. Then I walk around and check my hits in the scope.
That's when the RO walks over. His first sentence was, "You know you're responsible for her, huh?"
I said, "I guess so. Why? Did she do something wrong?"
The RO said, "I was watching and she pointed that rifle right at you with a live round in it. I can ban both of you for that since you're responsible for anything she does."
I told him I was watching her and never saw her point the rifle my direction at any time. If I had, she would have heard from me on the spot.
The RO said I get one, and only one, warning, and then he will tell us both to leave. I apologized for her mistake at least twice. I also told him if I see her doing anything else like that, I'll be sure to correct her.
He didn't seem to want to drop it. He hesitated a couple of steps, then went back to his position on the line. I'm not sure what he wanted me to say or do, but he obviously wasn't happy. Maybe he expected me to get angry and yell at her, but I never saw her point the rifle at me or anywhere else other than in a safe direction.
Now, I don't intend to argue that he may have been mistaken, that my daughter KNOWS the rules, that she has practiced with me many times, that the RO approached me and not her, and that the ROs in general will YELL AT YOU AS YOU ARE DOING SOMETHING WRONG without delay (seen this a couple of times). They have microphones and have no problem using it if they see a problem. He thought he saw what he saw, and I have no reason to doubt him.
What I'm interested in is his comment that I'm responsible for anything my daughter does at the range. As far as I know, even if the rifle is registered to me, she is an adult. She is responsible for her own actions.
Nothing about her would prevent her from passing a firearm background check. Therefore, allowing her to borrow my rifle to shoot at the range, with or without me being present, is perfectly legal.
So, unless (1) there is a "blame the guy who owns the guns" rule at KHSC, or (2) he mistook my daughter to be a minor, I am having a tough time figuring out why he would say I'm responsible for her??
By the way, my daughter is 27. :D
Any insight? Mahalo!! :shaka:
-
It's your fault
-
It's your fault
Thanks for that insightful and well articulated response, KK! I can always count on you! :thumbsup:
-
Thanks for that insightful and well articulated response, KK! I can always count on you! :thumbsup:
I don't know what those big words mean but you're welcome. :thumbsup:
-
Mike is the rangemaster there.
-
Mike is the rangemaster there.
That's good to know, but doesn't answer my question ...
-
got yelled at a couple times but I think because of the hearing protection they have to yell in the mic. I don't take it personal when they tell me to move forward when shooting standing. it's their job and people do make mistakes. better safe than sorry!!! when I see them the next visit they are friendly... it's probably because they are under pressure not to even have 1 accident as that could shut down the range....
-
got yelled at a couple times but I think because of the hearing protection they have to yell in the mic. I don't take it personal when they tell me to move forward when shooting standing. it's their job and people do make mistakes. better safe than sorry!!! when I see them the next visit they are friendly... it's probably because they are under pressure not to even have 1 accident as that could shut down the range....
That's what I told my daughter. Tough job, lots of young shooters probably don't take the ROs seriously, etc, etc. I understand if they have to be strict and act like drill sergeants sometimes, BUT .... the question remains ....
Why would he tell me I'm responsible for anything my daughter does at the range??
-
the owner of the rifle is ultimately responsible for the rifle and any shooters using the rifle. same for handgun or silhouette side...
-
That's what I told my daughter. Tough job, lots of young shooters probably don't take the ROs seriously, etc, etc. I understand if they have to be strict and act like drill sergeants sometimes, BUT .... the question remains ....
Why would he tell me I'm responsible for anything my daughter does at the range??
Instead of 100 fuss guessing, I'd recommend you ask him next time you see him.
He won't remember you by that time and you can ask him in the third person.
-
(http://i944.photobucket.com/albums/ad287/Doug_Moose/blank_space_zps638d7add.jpg) (http://s944.photobucket.com/user/Doug_Moose/media/blank_space_zps638d7add.jpg.html)
-
I remember once when a good friend and I were shooting one of my AK's.......
My friend shot a few rounds then looked back and smiled while still pointing
the rifle down range....
Then the range officer yelled out "POINT THAT RIFLE DOWN RANGE!!!!!!"
We both looked at him then went to look who he was yelling at.......
He had yelled at my friend...... My friend told him he was pointing it down range....
Then my friend toldem "I wasn't gonna point the rifle at anybody..."
RO says "YOU WERE ABOUT TO!!!!!"
That was pretty cool... that's Minority Report action!! Very qualified!
Sorry about my story, doesn't really answer your question.....I feel your pain though
-
I was hoping somebody knew somebody who was banned because their family member or friend broke a range rule. Or they knew of a range rule that makes you responsible for anything your shooting partner does.
If you don't like my question, please feel free to ignore it .... although it's kinda late for that, huh? >:D
It's not about liking it, I'm trying to help you to get the correct answer.
-
It's not about liking it, I'm trying to help you to get the correct answer.
KK, thanks for the assistance. Really, I know you are trying to point me in the right direction.
I have a feeling I already know the correct answer. The RO was acting on a false assumption, because he thought my daughter was under age for shooting unsupervised. I could ask him about that later, but I'm wondering about this now... tonight.
What I was trying to find out from the 2A community is whether they know of a rule that would make me responsible for my adult daughter's mistakes, to the point where I can be banned.
If you don't know the answer, then I'll have to find out from the ROs (other ROs :) ) and get back to you. Hopefully this information helps others who might find themselves in similar circumstances. Knowledge is a good thing. :geekdanc: :thumbsup:
-
I remember once when a good friend and I were shooting one of my AK's.......
My friend shot a few rounds then looked back and smiled while still pointing
the rifle down range....
Then the range officer yelled out "POINT THAT RIFLE DOWN RANGE!!!!!!"
We both looked at him then went to look who he was yelling at.......
He had yelled at my friend...... My friend told him he was pointing it down range....
Then my friend toldem "I wasn't gonna point the rifle at anybody..."
RO says "YOU WERE ABOUT TO!!!!!"
That was pretty cool... that's Minority Report action!! Very qualified!
Sorry about my story, doesn't really answer your question.....I feel your pain though
Thanks, BC. Not a bad story, and very relevant! It shows the ROs are not perfect beings, and they sometimes overreact. The "He was about to.." line sounds like a cover-up for a mistake to me.
I'd personally prefer they err on the side of caution to keep us safe than not. This might be what happened to us. Maybe he THOUGHT he knew what he saw, but decided to approach me instead of her because of his doubt.
Hell, for all I know, he could have heard someone SAY she pointed the rifle at me and never saw it himself. It's just odd that the "you're responsible for anything she does" admonishment was emphasized.
:shaka:
-
That's good to know, but doesn't answer my question ...
Ren answered the question in your thread title. ;D
It was all based on perspective. He may have saw it from a different angle and it may have looked a certain way. He is the RSO and in a way they have authority. He may have gone about it in a wrong manner, but sometimes you just have to agree with them and apologize. Keep shooting and have fun or argue it and possibly get kicked off the range.
IDK, man, I don't have children, but I do invite my brother and/or friends every now and then. I sometimes get a scolding or told about their actions. I just apologize, correct my guest, keep on shooting and enjoy my day. Simple enough.
-
Ren answered the question in your thread title. ;D
It was all based on perspective. He may have saw it from a different angle and it may have looked a certain way. He is the RSO and in a way they have authority. He may have gone about it in a wrong manner, but sometimes you just have to agree with them and apologize. Keep shooting and have fun or argue it and possibly get kicked off the range.
IDK, man, I don't have children, but I do invite my brother and/or friends every now and then. I sometimes get a scolding or told about their actions. I just apologize, correct my guest, keep on shooting and enjoy my day. Simple enough.
:thumbsup:
-
.
-
Because your weapon is registered in your name, you are fully responsible for anything that happens with that rifle. It's just like when you lend someone your vehicle and they get pulled over or in an accident; because its your vehicle, you will be held responsible. Unless you legally lend the rifle to your daughter in accordance with HRS, you are still responsible, even if she is an adult.
Isn't gun registration fun, kids? :D
The problem here is, the RO assumed I owned both rifles. He didn't ask, so there's no way for him to know who the rifle owner is.
Assumption is the mother of all F***-ups!
-
With the exception of one person in particular,I believe all of the RO's are cool and some even friendly. One RO has a chip on his shoulder and that sometimes leads to uncalled for and IMO, unacceptable behavior under certain circumstances. I'm all for yelling at people fussing with their stuff at the table during a ceasefire or mishandling a firearm since life and limb are at stake and yelling is arguably the most effective way to convey a sense of importance, alarm and urgency . But yelling at people for violating range rules like placing two bulleye targets in a vertical (as opposed to side by side) configuration or for shooting at the berm instead of the back stop is over the top. The ROs do a lot to keep us all safe. The fact that the range remains open to the public and the absence of any reported major incidents leads me to believe they have and continue to do their job. They are not always perfect and we shouldn't expect them to be. If you want an alibi in case you are wrongfully threatened with being ejected from the range, use the video on your smart phone. It's free, can be erased and can be used over and over again and again. Just a thought.
-
With the exception of one person in particular,I believe all of the RO's are cool and some even friendly. One RO has a chip on his shoulder and that sometimes leads to uncalled for and IMO, unacceptable behavior under certain circumstances. I'm all for yelling at people fussing with their stuff at the table during a ceasefire or mishandling a firearm since life and limb are at stake and yelling is arguably the most effective way to convey a sense of importance, alarm and urgency . But yelling at people for violating range rules like placing two bulleye targets in a vertical (as opposed to side by side) configuration or for shooting at the berm instead of the back stop is over the top. The ROs do a lot to keep us all safe. The fact that the range remains open to the public and the absence of any reported major incidents leads me to believe they have and continue to do their job. They are not always perfect and we shouldn't expect them to be. If you want an alibi in case you are wrongfully threatened with being ejected from the range, use the video on your smart phone. It's free, can be erased and can be used over and over again and again. Just a thought.
You can't put 2 bullseye targets in a vertical configuration? Is this for the pistol side, rifle side or both? I use the 50 yard bullseye targets all the time. Only other targets I use are the square sight in targets. I've always put them vertical on my rifle frame. Even the side by side 50 yard NRA small bore bullseye targets I turn vertical. No one ever told me anything about it on the rifle side.
-
.
-
Sounds like the pistol side. Rifle side is no problem.
Pistol side. The rules are listed on the wall and some are posted randomly in multiple areas.
-
Not enough evidence presented. Will need to see pictures of said daughter. :shaka: :shaka:
But as already mentioned, the registered owner is responsible just like with cars. The ROs just try to do the best they can and sometimes make mistakes too
-
Not enough evidence presented. Will need to see pictures of said daughter. :shaka: :shaka:
But as already mentioned, the registered owner is responsible just like with cars. The ROs just try to do the best they can and sometimes make mistakes too
So, what you just said is, if my daughter does something that can get her banned from the range, the ban also applies to me??
In addition, how does the RO know who the registered owner of a rifle is? For all they know, since they never ask, I could have borrowed the rifles, and neither of us is the owner.
-
You need to remember that they can ban anyone they want to.
Even if they just perceive a danger, or violation of the rules.
The only thing you can do is to make yourself aware of the rules and follow them.
-
just accept the mistake irregardless of fault, always practice safety first and enjoy shooting...
-
one time I was on the pistol side and after shooting all my mags the RO comes up and says that if I was shooting in competition I would be disqualified. I'm like "what are you talking about?" He tells me that I had put my hand in front of the muzzle. "what?! can you show me what I did and how I should properly grip the gun so I do not do that again?"
"just don't do it" and he walks away
"ughh ok"
I have had my pistols for some time and I have NEVER put any body part in front of the muzzle while at the range. I had no idea what he was talking about, and he did nothing to correct this "problem" I had
-
You need to remember that they can ban anyone they want to.
Even if they just perceive a danger, or violation of the rules.
The only thing you can do is to make yourself aware of the rules and follow them.
I'd like to really see how a ban on someone from a public park works out. I'm not sure if there are instances where this has been done before in the context of a shooting range.
There seems to be some stuff that would app,y from sex offenders, which thy ban not for punishment but for protection of the public. For this to happen though you would need a hearing, an appeal process etc.
Add to it second amendment issues and all kinds of stuff on 1A it would be interesting.
My experience with some range masters has been listen to their safety rules, and dismiss their veiled threats and comments. I love the guys in the pistol side the always help me and are decent guys once we got to know each other.
-
I'd like to really see how a ban on someone from a public park works out. I'm not sure if there are instances where this has been done before in the context of a shooting range.
There seems to be some stuff that would app,y from sex offenders, which thy ban not for punishment but for protection of the public. For this to happen though you would need a hearing, an appeal process etc.
Add to it second amendment issues and all kinds of stuff on 1A it would be interesting.
My experience with some range masters has been listen to their safety rules, and dismiss their veiled threats and comments. I love the guys in the pistol side the always help me and are decent guys once we got to know each other.
There are posted rules.
If you don't follow the rules, you get kicked out. It's not that hard a concept to understand.
-
.
-
Dar,
I wasn't there when the situation went down, and I can't read minds, so I can only speculate.
Perhaps the R.O. mistakenly assumed that your daughter was an unemancipated minor.
If this was the case, the R.O. probably relied on Haw. Rev. Stat. 577-3, which reads, in pertinent part, "[t]he father and mother of unmarried minor children shall jointly and severally be liable in damages for tortious acts committed by their children," when he made his statement.
You stated that your daughter is not a minor; she is in fact, 27.
So does this mean you are no longer "responsible for everything she does at the range"?
It depends... while you may not be responsible for "everything" your daughter does at the range (she is not an unemancipated minor), you may still be found, "absolutely liable," for damages (personal injury and/or property damage) that arise as a result of her discharging a firearm that you own.
Haw. Rev. Stat. 663-9.5 reads, in pertinent part, "If a firearm discharges and the discharge of the firearm proximately causes either personal injury or property damage to any person, the owner of the firearm shall be absolutely liable for the damage."
Of course, there are affirmative defenses to this absolute liability, but it is good FOR ALL OF US to be aware of the existence of such statutes.
Oh yeah, this isn't legal advice! :thumbsup:
That's good info, NewGuy. The statute on liability is a TORT statute, which means the owner is held liable for damages or injuries. It's not a criminal statute.
I read that as : if my daughter causes damages or injury with my gun, I have to pay for them financially. Breaking a range rule does not rise to the level of causing damages or injury especially if nothing bad happened as a result.
-
You need to remember that they can ban anyone they want to.
Even if they just perceive a danger, or violation of the rules.
The only thing you can do is to make yourself aware of the rules and follow them.
This is all bullshit. Like I said, you can't ban someone from a public park without due process, which means a hearing.
they can't do it just because they want to either. They will have to present evidence of the violations.
I know how mike likes to run his fiefdom; he threatend to "ban" me before, that was quickly squashed by corporate counsel and the Dir. Of Parks and Rec.
Can you get in trouble? Yes. Can you be removed from shooting? Yes.
Can you be banned because you did one thing? Likely no. And, again it would be a Judge banning you not mike.
Here is the bet: find me someone who is "banned" and if we can't get them to retract the so called ban I will buy you a box of ammo up to $50.00
-
What your also saying KK is that a life guard can ban you from the beach if you don't listen to him, with no proof or hearing. That just doesn't happen lol.
-
If you want an alibi in case you are wrongfully threatened with being ejected from the range, use the video on your smart phone. It's free, can be erased and can be used over and over again and again. Just a thought.
This makes for interesting 5pm dinner meeting discussions with the Director on 24hr notice lol.
"My guy wouldn't say that!"
"Oh yeah? #pushplay"
-
What your also saying KK is that a life guard can ban you from the beach if you don't listen to him, with no proof or hearing. That just doesn't happen lol.
It happens all the time.
I saw two guys drinking on a public beach.
The lifeguard told them to stop.
They didn't listen.
The police came and they were taken away.
It happens.
P.s. this is EXACTLY what I said:
There are posted rules.
If you don't follow the rules, you get kicked out. It's not that hard a concept to understand.
-
.
-
It happens all the time.
I saw two guys drinking on a public beach.
The lifeguard told them to stop.
They didn't listen.
The police came and they were taken away.
It happens.
They were violating a written law, which is what the police arrest for. That doesn't mean they can't come back to the beach the next day. That would be just like me showing up during park closed hours without a permit. If were shooting then, they could indeed arrest me for trespassing. That doesn't mean when the park opened I couldn't come back.
If it worked that way, don't you think they would have "Banned" the OWS protestors from Thomas square (a public park)? Think about what you are saying man, you make no sense lol.
1.) a violation of a rule could get you temporarily ejected for the health and safety of the public.
2.) temporarily removing an individual for a safety reason is not the same as the "bans" that I have personally heard threatened at Kokohead.
3.) to ban someone it would require due process
4.) the judge would order the person banned - not the range officer.
-
They were violating a written law, which is what the police arrest for. That doesn't mean they can't come back to the beach the next day.
You are wrong bro., just deal with it lol.
You're wrong Einstein.
This is exactly what I said.
There are posted rules.
If you don't follow the rules, you get kicked out. It's not that hard a concept to understand.
It's a fact.
Why don't you walk around the line at Kokohead pointing your loaded gun at everyone and see what happens.
If you don't get kicked out, I'll buy you a box of ammo.
-
If it worked that way, don't you think they would have "Banned" the OWS protestors from Thomas square (a public park)? Think about what you are saying man, you make no sense lol.
Educate yourself.
They did ban them from the park.
They tried to camp on the park and were banned from doing so.
They set up their tents on the sidewalk outside of the park property.
-
Rules are not laws. You seriously don't understand the legal aspect of this stuff.
-
Educate yourself.
They did ban them from the park.
They tried to camp on the park and were banned from doing so.
They set up their tents on the sidewalk outside of the park property.
I've forgotten more about the De-Occupy vs. Honolulu case than you will probably ever know. It's not like I haven't worked on this case. Oh, wait - I was the one who brought the case to the attorneys. I've also done investigations and testified in federal court on this case.
They are not banned from the park. They cannot sleep in the park, because it would violate park regulations. They are more than free to go into the park anytime that does not violate the parks hours of operation.
-
Rules are not laws. You seriously don't understand the legal aspect of this stuff.
You have no concept about my level of understanding.
The simple fact is that if you're being unsafe with firearms at Kokohead, you'll get kicked out.
You do it again, I guarantee they ban you.
If you believe differently, prove it.
Be unsafe on the public side of Kokohead everytime you go and see what happens.
-
The rules at Kokohead are obviously different from other parks such as Kapiolani as the rules are in place to prevent sudden DEATH or serious injury. You can argue the legal aspects of rules and laws but in this case there are obvious sudden consequences that are farther reaching than any argument - getting killed by another person's stupid mistake is a high risk at Kokohead if you don't follow the rules. That risk is mitigated by the implementation of rules. Despite rules there are dumb arse clowns that don't understand them i.e. pointing a rifle at their neighbors or everyone down the line. Next time someone disobeys rules, I can elevate the situation, call HPD and say the shooter threatened me with a gun. Want that? Or how about the countless ass clowns who play with their firearms during a ceasefire when there are people down range. I see people mock the ROs and disobey the rules on purpose. I have no problem with unsafe, disobeying people getting kicked out and banned. I don't want to get shot.
We make mistakes once in awhile. We also can't control what another person's perception, actions or opinions of you are. Our egos get bruised once in awhile. Detach. Move on. Focus on the next time you go shooting, don't ponder on this situation, it's not worth the thought or effort. Enjoy shooting. Carpe diem. iChing.
-
The rules at Kokohead are obviously different from other parks such as Kapiolani as the rules are in place to prevent sudden DEATH or serious injury.
Sure, and so are the rules that are in place at a beach, national parks, museums, a basketball court or even a public pool they are all different, and many of them are there to prevent death or serious injury; you could just as quickly break your neck or hurt yourself running around a pool! There are administrative regulations, procedures, and guidelines that govern the implementation and creation of those 'rules'.
You can argue the legal aspects of rules and laws but in this case there are obvious sudden consequences that are farther reaching than any argument - getting killed by another person's stupid mistake is a high risk at Kokohead if you don't follow the rules.
So because something is unsafe and dangerous, the rules that govern due process should be discarded? Hrmmm. That sound distinctly similar to the arguments that people make against CCW and why some people shouldn't have guns at all. No joke, you do understand that this is the same line of thinking that is used against pro-gun entities and individuals in court right now? I understand the end result for safety, and I don't disagree with it at all - but there are processes to get something to happen. Kokohead does not have that process in place, and they should; they like to do things how they want to do them, and not necessarily how the rules, regulation, and precedent says it should be done. However, it's Hawaii, so what can we really expect?
I've seen, and been on the receiving end of some threats from Mike of being banned from the park for so called 'violations' that are wholly unrelated to anything affecting public safety. We had discussions with corporate counsel and the Director, and those issues were resolved favorably for me. What KK is missing is that there is a huge difference from being removed temporarily and being banned. If I go into a public place yelling and screaming, say the legislature, they will likely kick me out,and that would probably be legit. However, I could come back the next day and probably repeat the process. To "ban" someone takes far more effort, and if it's a public place that you are being 'banned' from, then they have specific guidelines that should be met under the constitution.
Some things that happen to ban someone:
1.) They have to be informed of what they did (generally in writing);
2.) They get a hearing, where evidence is presented against them;
3.) they get an appeal process.
Sex offenders are banned from many public parks in the interest of public safety. It's not punitive to them, but safety for others. Likely the same effect could be had with a shooter who continues to violate the rules. One issue is that even sex-offenders aren't supposed to be banned from their places of education, college, church etc. With the minimal places that one can exercise their 2nd Amendment rights, and in light of Ezell, I don't know how that would affect a judges reasoning if it removed the only place a shooter could train (since that element was found to be corollary to the right of self-defense).
This whole issue would very likely be a case of first impression since most places do not have public shooting ranges, but there are some basic legal tenets that would be very instructive for the issue.
-
This discussion is what I tried to avoid ... a general back and forth about whether the ROs are allowed to enforce the range rules, and the shooter has no recourse for appeal.
All I was hoping to find out is how far the "gun owner is responsible for everything a shooting partner does with his gun" goes in terms of having the owner ejected/banned.
I didn't point a gun at anyone, nor did I cause my daughter to (assuming the RO saw what he said he did).
If it was just a case of intimidation, or a misplaced assumption of her age, then both situations answer my question .... it would not be appropriate to ban/eject ME as punishment for HER rule infraction.
:shaka:
-
What if they call the police can you be trespassed like they do on private property?
-
This discussion is what I tried to avoid ... a general back and forth about whether the ROs are allowed to enforce the range rules, and the shooter has no recourse for appeal.
All I was hoping to find out is how far the "gun owner is responsible for everything a shooting partner does with his gun" goes in terms of having the owner ejected/banned.
I didn't point a gun at anyone, nor did I cause my daughter to (assuming the RO saw what he said he did).
If it was just a case of intimidation, or a misplaced assumption of her age, then both situations answer my question .... it would not be appropriate to ban/eject ME as punishment for HER rule infraction.
:shaka:
You would probably be better off discussing this with the RO's. I would think they would be better able to explain.
-
What if they call the police can you be trespassed like they do on private property?
You really have to look at the differences between §708-814 and §708-814.5, which is what would govern Kokohead.. ACLU in Center v. Lingle (2005?) sued for similar actions to what is being suggested at Kokohead right now; their case was regarding Act 50, which allowed people to be trespassed for 1 year w/o due process and the bad stuff was repealed by the legislature.
So to answer your question: yes. But it doesn't look like it comes with the 1 year prohibition that 708-814 would have.
One important thing I saw is that even §708-814 is stated to be subject to constitutional scrutiny when applied in light of religious or political activities.
-- 2006 ACLU Legal report:
• Act 50 (Squatter’s Law)
The ACLU of Hawaii challenged Act 50, the “Squatter’s Law”, which gives public officials overly
broad powers to ban individuals from using public spaces such as beaches, streets, and sidewalks. The
legislature, in response, repealed most of the egregious provisions. The ACLU lobbied the legislature
to pass Senate Bill 2687, which would have repealed the rest of the act. Unfortunately, this bill died at
the end of the 2006 Legislative session.
I have got to get back to homework :P this is really bad hahaha. 2A hawaii worse than Facebook!
-
I have got to get back to homework :P this is really bad hahaha. 2A hawaii worse than Facebook!
Worse?
Or better?? >:D :thumbsup:
-
Sure, and so are the rules that are in place at a beach, national parks, museums, a basketball court or even a public pool they are all different, and many of them are there to prevent death or serious injury; you could just as quickly break your neck or hurt yourself running around a pool! There are administrative regulations, procedures, and guidelines that govern the implementation and creation of those 'rules'.
So because something is unsafe and dangerous, the rules that govern due process should be discarded? Hrmmm. That sound distinctly similar to the arguments that people make against CCW and why some people shouldn't have guns at all. No joke, you do understand that this is the same line of thinking that is used against pro-gun entities and individuals in court right now? I understand the end result for safety, and I don't disagree with it at all - but there are processes to get something to happen. Kokohead does not have that process in place, and they should; they like to do things how they want to do them, and not necessarily how the rules, regulation, and precedent says it should be done. However, it's Hawaii, so what can we really expect?
I've seen, and been on the receiving end of some threats from Mike of being banned from the park for so called 'violations' that are wholly unrelated to anything affecting public safety. We had discussions with corporate counsel and the Director, and those issues were resolved favorably for me. What KK is missing is that there is a huge difference from being removed temporarily and being banned. If I go into a public place yelling and screaming, say the legislature, they will likely kick me out,and that would probably be legit. However, I could come back the next day and probably repeat the process. To "ban" someone takes far more effort, and if it's a public place that you are being 'banned' from, then they have specific guidelines that should be met under the constitution.
Some things that happen to ban someone:
1.) They have to be informed of what they did (generally in writing);
2.) They get a hearing, where evidence is presented against them;
3.) they get an appeal process.
Sex offenders are banned from many public parks in the interest of public safety. It's not punitive to them, but safety for others. Likely the same effect could be had with a shooter who continues to violate the rules. One issue is that even sex-offenders aren't supposed to be banned from their places of education, college, church etc. With the minimal places that one can exercise their 2nd Amendment rights, and in light of Ezell, I don't know how that would affect a judges reasoning if it removed the only place a shooter could train (since that element was found to be corollary to the right of self-defense).
This whole issue would very likely be a case of first impression since most places do not have public shooting ranges, but there are some basic legal tenets that would be very instructive for the issue.
Don't take this out of context as the argument being presented is about Kokohead not about pro guns or anything broader. Don't let this argument creep out as you did by cutting and pasting my response, which I can also argue that anti gun folks do as well.
Like I said, take responsibility for the actions of your daughter whether in the eyes of the RO or more importantly as a father. Reading the post again it seemed that the OP was the more experienced shooter. A lot of extra movement to shoot and spot could have been minimized by establishing your shooting position then positioning your spotting scope.
example: (http://accurateshooter.net/Blog/tubbvidx350.jpg)
The event has passed without any physical harm to anyone. No one got shot or hurt with the exception of an ego - and that's easily repaired. Kokohead's corrective actions are tame compared to a military range, where as a recruit had an already shotgunned, shouldered M16 smacked into my face because the selector was not on safe. Perhaps this thread should've been titled "Who's responsible for my daughter?"
-
The event has passed without any physical harm to anyone. No one got shot or hurt with the exception of an ego - and that's easily repaired. Kokohead's corrective actions are tame compared to a military range, where as a recruit had an already shotgunned, shouldered M16 smacked into my face because the selector was not on safe. Perhaps this thread should've been titled "Who's responsible for my daughter?"
Once again, you missed the entire point of my question. I stated this is not about me being right or wrong, or whether my daughter did anything wrong, or whether or not I am a responsible parent or shooter.
It is ONLY about the RO's threat to ban me for the actions of my daughter. Does he have that authority, or doesn't he? If she were a minor, I would agree he does, because the range rules clearly state that. However, she is well over 18 (able to own a rifle) and over 21 (able to own a pistol).
I don't think he can hold me responsible based on the rules, laws, and information I have at the moment. I wanted to ask if anyone here knows of some rule I don't that makes me responsible for her breaking a range rule (not breaking a gun law, and not shooting someone, and not intentionally refusing to follow range rules).
I think I have already gotten the answer. No such rule, law, or guidance exists. He was either acting on an assumption (she was a minor), or was just blowing smoke to intimidate me.
If the title of this thread is confusing, perhaps it's the situation being complicated by:
(1) the statements of the RO making me responsible for her when that's not the case,
(2) the manor of the RO's approach (warning me afterward instead of notifying her directly the moment he saw her being unsafe), and
(3) the tense environment created by a state legislature which tries to make gun ownership and use so strictly controlled while enacting such poorly written laws.
I do appreciate everyone's input. The discussion demonstrates how true the old saying is:
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
I was sure I knew what the rules were at the range, that EACH INDIVIDUAL is responsible for his or her own conduct. The exception is when the shooter is a minor accompanied by an adult.
This weekend had me questioning whether what I knew just ain't so.
-
I've brought newbie adult friends to the range before and when they did not act safely, I got scolded by the RO "stay with and watch your friends"!
I take it in the spirit that everyone has the same responsibility of being an RO when in the range. Actions of my friends reflect badly on me and eventually reflects badly on the RO.
Safety is everyone's responsibility and as a shooter in the KHSC, if we see someone not acting safely, we are all also obliged to say something.
When the RO scolds you for the actions of your friends (or in this case, your daughter), it is an indication that the RO sees you as the most senior of the group and expects you to give an "educational beatdown" to the younger folks in your group that puts anyone at risk.
In some ways, the RO scolding you is an honor that he sees you as the more experienced guy and thereby expects more from you. Take it in the spirit that the RO sees you as a delegated RO for the group and puts you in higher regard than others.
-
I've brought newbie adult friends to the range before and when they did not act safely, I got scolded by the RO "stay with and watch your friends"!
I take it in the spirit that everyone has the same responsibility of being an RO when in the range. Actions of my friends reflect badly on me and eventually reflects badly on the RO.
Safety is everyone's responsibility and as a shooter in the KHSC, if we see someone not acting safely, we are all also obliged to say something.
When the RO scolds you for the actions of your friends (or in this case, your daughter), it is an indication that the RO sees you as the most senior of the group and expects you to give an "educational beatdown" to the younger folks in your group that puts anyone at risk.
In some ways, the RO scolding you is an honor that he sees you as the more experienced guy and thereby expects more from you. Take it in the spirit that the RO sees you as a delegated RO for the group and puts you in higher regard than others.
Well said. :thumbsup:
-
I've brought newbie adult friends to the range before and when they did not act safely, I got scolded by the RO "stay with and watch your friends"!
I take it in the spirit that everyone has the same responsibility of being an RO when in the range. Actions of my friends reflect badly on me and eventually reflects badly on the RO.
Safety is everyone's responsibility and as a shooter in the KHSC, if we see someone not acting safely, we are all also obliged to say something.
When the RO scolds you for the actions of your friends (or in this case, your daughter), it is an indication that the RO sees you as the most senior of the group and expects you to give an "educational beatdown" to the younger folks in your group that puts anyone at risk.
In some ways, the RO scolding you is an honor that he sees you as the more experienced guy and thereby expects more from you. Take it in the spirit that the RO sees you as a delegated RO for the group and puts you in higher regard than others.
What you said is nothing I don't already practice. My daughter took the handgun safety class in December with me. I've made sure she learns, remembers, and practices all safety basics. I always tell her when she's not being as careful as she could be (I'm her parent as well as a responsible gun owner, so that's my job!). I didn't give her access to the gun safes until she practiced with me and demonstrated proper gun safety and operation.
I really don't see the RO talking to me in a threatening manner the same as bestowing an honor on me, so maybe it's a double-edged sword: you get the be honored as the person in charge, but you also get a$$ chewings on your friends' behalf in a much-less-than-honorable fashion.
-
I get scolded for my friends two benches down doing something stupid.
Instead of going online and whining about it, I ask the RO exactly what my friend did wrong then I instruct my friend not to do what they're doing. (To my friend who just happens to be a member of this forum, You know who you are)
-
I get scolded for my friends two benches down doing something stupid.
Instead of going online and whining about it, I ask the RO exactly what my friend did wrong then I instruct my friend not to do what they're doing. (To my friwnd who jist happens to be a member of this forum, You know who you are)
If you see anything in my posts that look like "whining," please let me know.
I didn't need to ask what she did wrong, because he already told me what he believes she did wrong.
Hopefully your statement wasn't directed at my thread specifically.
-
They check my ID everywhere and every time I buy cigarette/alcohol even though I'm 30+. Physically appearances can be deceiving especially for a female. I get yelled at almost every time I go to range.. lol .. But I just say sorry and move on because I'd got kicked out for once trying to clarify with the RO about a procedure in a military range and I was being very polite too. Please just try not doubt a RO, luckily you are not a in a military facility.
-
Just be grateful that there are ROs. There was a job posting a few mos. ago and from what I heard they have a hard time filling them. No ROs = no range time. Understand that these people have to deal with people with various experiences, backgrounds and languages - all the while trying to keep armed people safe from each other and themselves. I've seen people bring uncased firearms, people loading firearms behind the line, open carry and explaining to the ROs that they did on another range on the mainland or whatever.
Being scolded is not an "lol" moment. Learn, understand why it was unsafe and move on. Shoot safely. Kokohead is our only public range.
-
Just be grateful that there are ROs. There was a job posting a few mos. ago and from what I heard they have a hard time filling them. No ROs = no range time. Understand that these people have to deal with people with various experiences, backgrounds and languages - all the while trying to keep armed people safe from each other and themselves. I've seen people bring uncased firearms, people loading firearms behind the line, open carry and explaining to the ROs that they did on another range on the mainland or whatever.
Being scolded is not an "lol" moment. Learn, understand why it was unsafe and move on. Shoot safely. Kokohead is our only public range.
ren, I understand. I already said I respect the tough job ROs face, and I also said I understand they are not perfect. I agree with everything you said. It just doesn't have much to do with my question.
So far, subject to new information being offered, I haven't seen anything that tells me I can be punished at the range for my daughter's mistake as long as it was just that ... a mistake. If there had been an "actual emergency" in which injury or damage occurred, I'm sure the other laws would apply. But to my knowledge, the threat was just that ... a threat. There's nothing in the range rules that would subject me to punishment if my daughter were to do something serious enough to be banned herself.
Hopefully this helps others. This is a difficult topic, because too many interpret it as another "I'm mad because an RO yelled at me" thread. That was never the subject.
It was always about whether someone can be punished (ejected/banned) for someone else breaking the range rules.
(http://i944.photobucket.com/albums/ad287/Doug_Moose/deadhorse_zpsa5b0a3e2.gif) (http://s944.photobucket.com/user/Doug_Moose/media/deadhorse_zpsa5b0a3e2.gif.html)
-
To your question, can you be punished / kicked out due to actions by someone else, I think it depends on the situation, but ultimately yes.
If one person does something bad at the range and the range is closed, we are ALL punished for it. Because of this consequence, we are all ultimately responsible for monitoring each others actions while at the range because one bad apple can ruin it for everyone.
Now, I'll bring some examples and don't necessarily refer to your daughter but hear me out for a bit....
Hypothetically, if a person invites a known troublemaker or an irresponsible person to the range, does the person who did the inviting not bear some responsibility for the bad actions that the troublemaker might do? If you invite someone to the range with you, you bear responsibility for that person's actions regardless of who is the registered owner of the firearms used. If you invite a person who is a novice at the range, you are responsible for their safety, brief them of the safety rules and not expect them to know what they're doing if no one has taught them what is expected of them. Until you are confident that that person is safe with firearms 100% of the time, you don't relinquish the responsibility to oversee what they do, if you are the person that brought them to the range. If you see that person doing something unsafe, it is your job to scold them and teach them the ropes before an RO does your job for you.
Take this one step further... if you know a person is unsafe or emotionally unstable, and yet you take the time to get a person interested in shooting sports and teach them about firearms, are you not taking A BIG RESPONSIBILITY for what that person might do for the thing that you enabled that person to do? When a Kung fu master takes on a student, teaches that student deadly arts without regard for a student's immaturity or lack of self control as to what they'd do with that martial arts, isn't that Kung fu master being unwise for teaching that student in the first place?
Now, I will take this one more level.... When a father decides to bring a life into this world, isn't that father ultimately responsible and should do what they can to take care of that child and to bring up the child as a productive and socially responsible member of this society? You are still their father and still have that role to play in their lives no matter how old they are.
Aren't we as fathers responsible to correct our children when they do something wrong, especially if they are just standing next to us? Lastly, would you really want someone else to correct your own daughter when you are right there to do the job?
So for the reasons stated above, in my opinion, yes it is reasonable to expect that you are responsible to do your part in making sure you, your daughter and your group is acting in a safe manner while using the public shooting range.
-
To your question, can you be punished / kicked out due to actions by someone else, I think it depends on the situation, but ultimately yes.
If one person does something bad at the range and the range is closed, we are ALL punished for it. Because of this consequence, we are all ultimately responsible for monitoring each others actions while at the range because one bad apple can ruin it for everyone.
Now, I'll bring some examples and don't necessarily refer to your daughter but hear me out for a bit....
Hypothetically, if a person invites a known troublemaker or an irresponsible person to the range, does the person who did the inviting not bear some responsibility for the bad actions that the troublemaker might do? If you invite someone to the range with you, you bear responsibility for that person's actions regardless of who is the registered owner of the firearms used. If you invite a person who is a novice at the range, you are responsible for their safety, brief them of the safety rules and not expect them to know what they're doing if no one has taught them what is expected of them. Until you are confident that that person is safe with firearms 100% of the time, you don't relinquish the responsibility to oversee what they do, if you are the person that brought them to the range. If you see that person doing something unsafe, it is your job to scold them and teach them the ropes before an RO does your job for you.
Take this one step further... if you know a person is unsafe or emotionally unstable, and yet you take the time to get a person interested in shooting sports and teach them about firearms, are you not taking A BIG RESPONSIBILITY for what that person might do for the thing that you enabled that person to do? When a Kung fu master takes on a student, teaches that student deadly arts without regard for a student's immaturity or lack of self control as to what they'd do with that martial arts, isn't that Kung fu master being unwise for teaching that student in the first place?
Now, I will take this one more level.... When a father decides to bring a life into this world, isn't that father ultimately responsible and should do what they can to take care of that child and to bring up the child as a productive and socially responsible member of this society? You are still their father and still have that role to play in their lives no matter how old they are.
Aren't we as fathers responsible to correct our children when they do something wrong, especially if they are just standing next to us? Lastly, would you really want someone else to correct your own daughter when you are right there to do the job?
So for the reasons stated above, in my opinion, yes it is reasonable to expect that you are responsible to do your part in making sure you, your daughter and your group is acting in a safe manner while using the public shooting range.
Thanks for your opinion. I started to answer with examples of my own, but I'll stay with the cliff notes, and a follow-up to one of your examples...
I think you use the term "responsible" too broadly. Moral, legal, obligatory, social, and accepted responsibilities all have different connotations and ramifications.
Example: If I take a jerk to the range, it's only because I'm a nice guy, and gongho was unable to take his AR-15 on the bus.
Then, if I saw gongho point a loaded gun at someone, I'd be more apt to take him out before he had a chance to fire. But, that's just me being a responsible gun supporter! >:D
-
^^^ LMAO! Thanks!
-
Because your weapon is registered in your name, you are fully responsible for anything that happens with that rifle. It's just like when you lend someone your vehicle and they get pulled over or in an accident; because its your vehicle, you will be held responsible. Unless you legally lend the rifle to your daughter in accordance with HRS, you are still responsible, even if she is an adult.
Isn't gun registration fun, kids? :D
This.
The problem here is, the RO assumed I owned both rifles. He didn't ask, so there's no way for him to know who the rifle owner is.
Assumption is the mother of all F***-ups!
A police officer pulls over a vehicle that has two occupants, a driver and a passenger. The passenger is an older parental figure giving verbal instructions to the driver on how to park the vehicle. The younger and filial driver, is listening to the instructions of the older passenger and obeying. Now without having to check registrations, or run VIN numbers, or produce receipts of purchase for the vehicle or anything absurd like that who is likely the owner of the vehicle? Same thing with your firearms. The RO made a judgement call based on the information at hand, and wouldn't you know it-,he was correct-- you are the owner of both firearms. So why the big fuss? Did you want him to give you a verbal disclaimer as well?
"...you're responsible for anything she does But what I mean by that is more of a general implied responsibility for her actions since you are the one teaching her at the range and I would assume, but have no factual nor physical proof, that these are your firearms, as in they are legally registered to your name. In truth if your daughter accidentally shoots someone here, since she is a legal adult, the criminal and legal ramifications would rest squarely on her shoulders. Although if it were to result in a civil case, it is likely you could be partially responsible as the owner of the firearms as well."'
Also, maybe this is just me, but bringing any person, safe or unsafe, IS the responsibility of the person hosting them there. Your daughter would not be at the range shooting firearms without the influence of you as the host and the use of your firearms, so yes I believe she is your responsibility.
Edit: Whoa four pages. Making sure I didn't miss anything.
-
This.
A police officer pulls over a vehicle that has two occupants, a driver and a passenger. The passenger is an older parental figure giving verbal instructions to the driver on how to park the vehicle. The younger and filial driver, is listening to the instructions of the older passenger and obeying. Now without having to check registrations, or run VIN numbers, or produce receipts of purchase for the vehicle or anything absurd like that who is likely the owner of the vehicle? Same thing with your firearms. The RO made a judgement call based on the information at hand, and wouldn't you know it-,he was correct-- you are the owner of both firearms. So why the big fuss? Did you want him to give you a verbal disclaimer as well?
"...you're responsible for anything she does But what I mean by that is more of a general implied responsibility for her actions since you are the one teaching her at the range and I would assume, but have no factual nor physical proof, that these are your firearms, as in they are legally registered to your name. In truth if your daughter accidentally shoots someone here, since she is a legal adult, the criminal and legal ramifications would rest squarely on her shoulders. Although if it were to result in a civil case, it is likely you could be partially responsible as the owner of the firearms as well."'
Also, maybe this is just me, but bringing an unsafe person (not to say your daughter specifically is either safe or unsafe) IS the responsibility of the person hosting them there. Your daughter would not be at the range shooting firearms without the influence of you as the host and the use of your firearms, so yes I believe she is your responsibility.
Edit: Whoa four pages. Making sure I didn't miss anything.
That's a straw argument, and it's not realistic.
The first thing the cops always ask when they stop you is "license, registration, and insurance card". The registration has the owner(s) name. There's no need for the cops to assume anything.
As for being responsible for bringing an unsafe person to shoot, do you really know for a fact that I would be punished (banned/ejected from KHSC) for her actions, or is this more of a moral responsibility? I agree (again) that I have a responsibility as the firearm owner, the parent, her shooting partner, and a human being to ensure she demonstrates proper safety when shooting. None of that, however, implies I am responsible for everything she does related to following KHSC range rules. If she gets herself ejected or banned for doing something wrong, do you (1) think I should be ejected/banned as well because of my association with her, and (2) think the KHSC RO has the authority to eject or ban me for something I did not do myself?
All laws are about discharging a gun. I'm talking about breaking range rules with no ND, no injury, and no property damage. A simple failure to properly obey the rules due to a lack of attention or another unintentional reason.
(http://i944.photobucket.com/albums/ad287/Doug_Moose/deadhorse_zpsa5b0a3e2.gif) (http://s944.photobucket.com/user/Doug_Moose/media/deadhorse_zpsa5b0a3e2.gif.html) (http://i944.photobucket.com/albums/ad287/Doug_Moose/deadhorse_zpsa5b0a3e2.gif) (http://s944.photobucket.com/user/Doug_Moose/media/deadhorse_zpsa5b0a3e2.gif.html)
-
The Koko Head Rules
Know and obey all range commands
Unload, open the action, remove the magazine and bench all firearms during a cease fire
Do NOT handle any firearms or stand at the firing line where firearms are present while others are down range during a cease fire
Load no more than 5 rounds in the magazine
No rapid or indiscriminate firing
Shoot only at authorized targets. No plinking of objects on backstop berm or on the ground. Human silhouette targets are not allowed
Wear eye and ear protection
Children age 17 and below must be accompanied by an adult
Children 9-12 years may fire .22 long rifle caliber only, with an adult standing next to and assisting the child
Eye and ear protection mandatory
Children 8 years and younger are prohibited from using firearms
No alcohol or illegal drugs allowed
No gambling
Tracer, incendiary, exploder or armor piercing type ammunition is prohibited
Violation of any of the above rules will result in dismissal from this range
Hawaii State Law requires firearms to be transported unloaded in a rigidly constructed receptacle, or a commercially manufactured gun case, or the equivalent thereof that completely encloses the firearm. HRS 134-6 (c)
--------------
Ok, so if the RSO tells you to leave and you don't, doesn't that violate the first rule and therefore again results in dismissal from the range?
-
That's a straw argument, and it's not realistic.
The first thing the cops always ask when they stop you is "license, registration, and insurance card". The registration has the owner(s) name. There's no need for the cops to assume anything.
As for being responsible for bringing an unsafe person to shoot, do you really know for a fact that I would be punished (banned/ejected from KHSC) for her actions, or is this more of a moral responsibility? I agree (again) that I have a responsibility as the firearm owner, the parent, her shooting partner, and a human being to ensure she demonstrates proper safety when shooting. None of that, however, implies I am responsible for everything she does related to following KHSC range rules. If she gets herself ejected or banned for doing something wrong, do you (1) think I should be ejected/banned as well because of my association with her, and (2) think the KHSC RO has the authority to eject or ban me for something I did not do myself?
All laws are about discharging a gun. I'm talking about breaking range rules with no ND, no injury, and no property damage. A simple failure to properly obey the rules due to a lack of attention or another unintentional reason.
I think this whole thread exists because somebody did get hurt at the range that day. Now that person is searching for some sort of validation for their injured feelings/ego/pride.
In case you missed all of these responses:
It's your fault
the owner of the rifle is ultimately responsible for the rifle and any shooters using the rifle. same for handgun or silhouette side...
Because your weapon is registered in your name, you are fully responsible for anything that happens with that rifle. It's just like when you lend someone your vehicle and they get pulled over or in an accident; because its your vehicle, you will be held responsible. Unless you legally lend the rifle to your daughter in accordance with HRS, you are still responsible, even if she is an adult.
...But as already mentioned, the registered owner is responsible just like with cars. The ROs just try to do the best they can and sometimes make mistakes too
It depends... while you may not be responsible for "everything" your daughter does at the range (she is not an unemancipated minor), you may still be found, "absolutely liable," for damages (personal injury and/or property damage) that arise as a result of her discharging a firearm that you own.
Haw. Rev. Stat. 663-9.5 reads, in pertinent part, "If a firearm discharges and the discharge of the firearm proximately causes either personal injury or property damage to any person, the owner of the firearm shall be absolutely liable for the damage."
Of course, there are affirmative defenses to this absolute liability, but it is good FOR ALL OF US to be aware of the existence of such statutes.
I've brought newbie adult friends to the range before and when they did not act safely, I got scolded by the RO "stay with and watch your friends"!
I take it in the spirit that everyone has the same responsibility of being an RO when in the range. Actions of my friends reflect badly on me and eventually reflects badly on the RO.
Safety is everyone's responsibility and as a shooter in the KHSC, if we see someone not acting safely, we are all also obliged to say something.
When the RO scolds you for the actions of your friends (or in this case, your daughter), it is an indication that the RO sees you as the most senior of the group and expects you to give an "educational beatdown" to the younger folks in your group that puts anyone at risk.
In some ways, the RO scolding you is an honor that he sees you as the more experienced guy and thereby expects more from you. Take it in the spirit that the RO sees you as a delegated RO for the group and puts you in higher regard than others.
To your question, can you be punished / kicked out due to actions by someone else, I think it depends on the situation, but ultimately yes.
If one person does something bad at the range and the range is closed, we are ALL punished for it. Because of this consequence, we are all ultimately responsible for monitoring each others actions while at the range because one bad apple can ruin it for everyone...
...So for the reasons stated above, in my opinion, yes it is reasonable to expect that you are responsible to do your part in making sure you, your daughter and your group is acting in a safe manner while using the public shooting range.
...Also, maybe this is just me, but bringing any person, safe or unsafe, IS the responsibility of the person hosting them there. Your daughter would not be at the range shooting firearms without the influence of you as the host and the use of your firearms, so yes I believe she is your responsibility.
-
The Koko Head Rules
Know and obey all range commands
Unload, open the action, remove the magazine and bench all firearms during a cease fire
Do NOT handle any firearms or stand at the firing line where firearms are present while others are down range during a cease fire
Load no more than 5 rounds in the magazine
No rapid or indiscriminate firing
Shoot only at authorized targets. No plinking of objects on backstop berm or on the ground. Human silhouette targets are not allowed
Wear eye and ear protection
Children age 17 and below must be accompanied by an adult
Children 9-12 years may fire .22 long rifle caliber only, with an adult standing next to and assisting the child
Eye and ear protection mandatory
Children 8 years and younger are prohibited from using firearms
No alcohol or illegal drugs allowed
No gambling
Tracer, incendiary, exploder or armor piercing type ammunition is prohibited
Violation of any of the above rules will result in dismissal from this range
Hawaii State Law requires firearms to be transported unloaded in a rigidly constructed receptacle, or a commercially manufactured gun case, or the equivalent thereof that completely encloses the firearm. HRS 134-6 (c)
--------------
Ok, so if the RSO tells you to leave and you don't, doesn't that violate the first rule and therefore again results in dismissal from the range?
Vague and over-broad - you can't get banned for that lol.
That was ultimately his question, could he banned for his daughters actions. I believe, at this point, we have established no. I don't see the authority in the trespass statue that would allow them to do that; there are constitutional issues; significant substantive and procedural due process issues; vagueness issues.
These people are not king of the park - not on our tax dollar they are not. Don't freaking forget that. Just because they are paid to keep us safe, doesn't mean that they get to dictate all the marching orders without justification or answering back to us.
-
I think this whole thread exists because somebody did get hurt at the range that day. Now that person is searching for some sort of validation for their injured feelings/ego/pride.
In case you missed all of these responses:
That is so not what he even asked or started out with. No one got hurt; he was threatened by government actor with an action that they can't legally justify, especially for another individual of age.
Nothing here suggested that the OP didn't care what his daughter did, or wasn't concerned or worried that the RO was yelling or would yell at him or her for said action, but that he threatened a by-standing individual who may or may not had any legal responsibility at all for the actions performed by another adult.
-
Vague and over-broad - you can't get banned for that lol.
That was ultimately his question, could he banned for his daughters actions. I believe, at this point, we have established no. I don't see the authority in the trespass statue that would allow them to do that; there are constitutional issues; significant substantive and procedural due process issues; vagueness issues.
These people are not king of the park - not on our tax dollar they are not. Don't freaking forget that. Just because they are paid to keep us safe, doesn't mean that they get to dictate all the marching orders without justification or answering back to us.
That's the answer to my specific question, just in a more concise and direct nutshell than my version!
:thumbsup:
-
So - an RSO can dismiss you from the range for violating any of the rules posted but they can not "ban" you from the public range without legal due process, is this right?
Also on side note, been shooting regularly at the Clark County public range in Las Vegas where full auto, full mags, rapid fire, human silhouette targets, SBR's, drawing from holsters, silencers and unregistered rifles are all allowed and have never once heard the RSO in charge ever have to raise his voice or ever have to threaten or belittle a shooter for a rules violation. Don't get me wrong, rules do get broken but they are handled by the assistant RSO's who are near the offender and not by the RSO in charge over the PA system. Does that make the public range in Nevada more dangerous or less safe than the public range in Hawaii?
I guess in Hawaii we just have to shut up and appreciate what we got because if you speak up or question the establishment you are called a cry baby by your peers ???
-
OP, the answer is with the range personnel ask them next time. Theres no valid answer or remedial action that can be taken here. I
know there are a few individuals and organizations that dispute the rangemasters decisions and challenge them - but from what I hear from fellow shooters, that only created rifts within the local shooting community. Kokohead is the central and sole public shooting facility, its not perfect but thats what we got.
-
Little late into this p$$ing fest but I think th e RO was just checking out your daughter and thats why he did not ridicule her. :love:
You happened to catch him so he had to say something. :crazy:
Slap him :thumbsup:
-
Range Nazis just get off on ordering people around because it makes them feel a rush of power that they lack elsewhere in life. Their motivation stems from a deep rooted feeling of inadequacy, not actually ensuring range safety which is their job. :shaka:
-
Range Nazis just get off on ordering people around because it makes them feel a rush of power that they lack elsewhere in life. Their motivation stems from a deep rooted feeling of inadequacy, not actually ensuring range safety which is their job. :shaka:
No they don't. Did you get this statement from an RO? Otherwise, that's a broad speculation that is applied unfairly to the ROs. That is strictly your interpretation. Try dealing with the multitude of personalities and experiences from shooters that frequent the range. Did you see how much they make? No medical benefits and only 19 hours a week. I have known and spoke to several to them about their work - they do it because of their shared passion for shooting. One of them has built the only rimfire M1A/M14 and M1 Garand I have ever seen.
Negative experiences from the ROs have gained more attention than shooters who give them an attitude.
I've witnessed both sides so some common arguments that shooters have given after clearly violating KHSC rules are:
"I have a gun and you don't"
"I've been (am) in the military"
"The gun is not loaded"
"Why can't I uncase behind the line when my gun is unloaded?"
"I've been shooting for __years"
"I was just grabbing my phone"
Some shooters don't speak English well.
When dealing with tools that can cause death in a fraction of a second, I'd rather have a "Range Nazi" than a passive hallway monitor. I don't want to get shot as a result of some other person's mistake, arrogance or ignorance.
-
Good question, on the who's responsible,. But the question should be why did they do it!?!
My theory is that someone might of did it on purpose to take a start the gears moving to start shutting things down and suppress the 2a movement. Notice how everything got all hectic after it went mainstream in the local news, they literally had a neighborhood board meeting within days just to talk about it, and for them to act that aggressive and fast is fishy! It's kind of funny how the same story plays all over again to take a piece of what we have left just, like when someone so called shot a .50cal over kokohead.
It's just a theory ,
-
I've only had one turd there and I haven't seen him in a while. I brought one of my AK's there and obviously it doesn't lock back, so the guy comes to me and tells me to lock it back and I say I can't. The mags out, pointed down range, it's cleared, I show him it's cleared, but still says I need to lock it back. I told him I've never done it since I've been shooting there and he freaks out calling me a liar. So, he hands me a shotgun shell to keep it open. Since then never have locked it back and no ones said anything.
-
I've only had one turd there and I haven't seen him in a while. I brought one of my AK's there and obviously it doesn't lock back, so the guy comes to me and tells me to lock it back and I say I can't. The mags out, pointed down range, it's cleared, I show him it's cleared, but still says I need to lock it back. I told him I've never done it since I've been shooting there and he freaks out calling me a liar. So, he hands me a shotgun shell to keep it open. Since then never have locked it back and no ones said anything.
They will, I have been going there 45 years and still get yelled at!
-
Buy a few of those CMP safety flags for your non locking guns... Makes everybody happy.
I
-
With the exception of one person in particular,I believe all of the RO's are cool and some even friendly. One RO has a chip on his shoulder and that sometimes leads to uncalled for and IMO, unacceptable behavior under certain circumstances. I'm all for yelling at people fussing with their stuff at the table during a ceasefire or mishandling a firearm since life and limb are at stake and yelling is arguably the most effective way to convey a sense of importance, alarm and urgency . But yelling at people for violating range rules like placing two bulleye targets in a vertical (as opposed to side by side) configuration or for shooting at the berm instead of the back stop is over the top. The ROs do a lot to keep us all safe. The fact that the range remains open to the public and the absence of any reported major incidents leads me to believe they have and continue to do their job. They are not always perfect and we shouldn't expect them to be. If you want an alibi in case you are wrongfully threatened with being ejected from the range, use the video on your smart phone. It's free, can be erased and can be used over and over again and again. Just a thought.
Wonder if you "person" and mine are the same. lol
-
Being an NRA Certified Range Safety Officer (RSO) I want to add a little to this conversation. I am NOT a Range Officer (RO) which has a totally different function at a range. My guess is that Mike is the RO when he is there and the others are RSO's. I don't work at the range. I volunteer to keep the range safe at HRA events such as the Shooting Sports Fair and Fun Shoots. There is a book at the KHSC called the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) Guide that has to be maintained at the range at all times that contains all the rules and regulations that the RO's and RSO's have to operate by. Just because there are rules posted does not mean that the RO's and RSO's don't have the ability kick you off and/or ban you for doing something that is justified by the SOP and enforced by the RO and/or RSO. Posted or not. They can kick you off the range for a day for just about any infraction or brain fart. It is up to the RO and/or RSO to make that decision. But to ban you permanently is covered under the SOP and requires them to take certain steps including calling the police. Much of what they decide to do and say is based on their judgement, instinct and YOUR attitude when you are being yelled at. They yell at you for a good reason. Don't take it personally. But do take it seriously. Range safety is serious business and they yell for a good reason.
-
I was hoping somebody knew somebody who was banned because their family member or friend broke a range rule. Or they knew of a range rule that makes you responsible for anything your shooting partner does.
If you don't like my question, please feel free to ignore it .... although it's kinda late for that, huh? >:D
I do know of an incident that happened about 2 years ago. A guy and his brother set a target frame out at the 200yd area before shooting started for the day. After a while he wanted to leave and told the RSO that he was going to go out to the 200yd area to retrieve his target frame. The RSO told him that he couldn't go out there until they were able to coordinate the line safe with the pistol range. And that it could take as long as another hour before they could do it. The guy decided he didn't want to wait that long and at the next rifle side line safe (while the pistol range line was still hot with shooters firing) he went out to the 200 yd area and retrieved his target frame. The police were called and the guy was banned from the range for a year. The guy's brother was kicked off the range for the day. Bottom line is the brother got kicked off the range for the day due to this guy's actions and/or his attitude about his brother being banned. My memory is not always good so any details I may have missed or got wrong were done so purposely.
-
I do know of an incident that happened about 2 years ago. A guy and his brother set a target frame out at the 200yd area before shooting started for the day. After a while he wanted to leave and told the RSO that he was going to go out to the 200yd area to retrieve his target frame. The RSO told him that he couldn't go out there until they were able to coordinate the line safe with the pistol range. And that it could take as long as another hour before they could do it. The guy decided he didn't want to wait that long and at the next rifle side line safe (while the pistol range line was still hot with shooters firing) he went out to the 200 yd area and retrieved his target frame. The police were called and the guy was banned from the range for a year. The guy's brother was kicked off the range for the day. Bottom line is the brother got kicked off the range for the day due to this guy's actions and/or his attitude about his brother being banned. My memory is not always good so any details I may have missed or got wrong were done so purposely.
In my case, the only "attitude" was on the side of the RO. I was respectful and not making excuses. He, however, was adamant about trying to scare me with the "you're responsible for her" line. I think maybe I wasn't afraid enough for him. He seemed to be waiting for some attitude from me and didn't get it. At that point, I think he was disarmed and therefore walked away mad. Just seemed to want me to react and was not expecting me to diffuse the situation so easily.
If the act he saw was so dangerous, I fully expect he (if it was actually he that saw it) would have jumped on the mic immediately. Approaching me to tell me seemed odd.
I'm really not worried about being banned, even for a day. I do what I'm supposed to. If that's not good enough, then they can just ban me now! I can't do any better, and I'm too old to back down in fear just because someone threatens to kick me out for a mistake I never even witnessed.
So, this thread can probably rest in peace. It's gone much further than I expected already!
(http://i944.photobucket.com/albums/ad287/Doug_Moose/deadhorse_zpsa5b0a3e2.gif) (http://s944.photobucket.com/user/Doug_Moose/media/deadhorse_zpsa5b0a3e2.gif.html) (http://i944.photobucket.com/albums/ad287/Doug_Moose/deadhorse_zpsa5b0a3e2.gif) (http://s944.photobucket.com/user/Doug_Moose/media/deadhorse_zpsa5b0a3e2.gif.html) (http://i944.photobucket.com/albums/ad287/Doug_Moose/deadhorse_zpsa5b0a3e2.gif) (http://s944.photobucket.com/user/Doug_Moose/media/deadhorse_zpsa5b0a3e2.gif.html) (http://i944.photobucket.com/albums/ad287/Doug_Moose/deadhorse_zpsa5b0a3e2.gif) (http://s944.photobucket.com/user/Doug_Moose/media/deadhorse_zpsa5b0a3e2.gif.html)
-
(http://i944.photobucket.com/albums/ad287/Doug_Moose/deadhorse_zpsa5b0a3e2.gif) (http://s944.photobucket.com/user/Doug_Moose/media/deadhorse_zpsa5b0a3e2.gif.html) (http://i944.photobucket.com/albums/ad287/Doug_Moose/deadhorse_zpsa5b0a3e2.gif) (http://s944.photobucket.com/user/Doug_Moose/media/deadhorse_zpsa5b0a3e2.gif.html) (http://i944.photobucket.com/albums/ad287/Doug_Moose/deadhorse_zpsa5b0a3e2.gif) (http://s944.photobucket.com/user/Doug_Moose/media/deadhorse_zpsa5b0a3e2.gif.html) (http://i944.photobucket.com/albums/ad287/Doug_Moose/deadhorse_zpsa5b0a3e2.gif) (http://s944.photobucket.com/user/Doug_Moose/media/deadhorse_zpsa5b0a3e2.gif.html)
SPANK THAT PONY ! :rofl: