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!          

^^^ 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? 

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.

         

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!

 

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.   

You happened to catch him so he had to say something. 

Slap him   

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. 

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. 

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