So I went to the range this morning and met some friends at the silhouette range.

I've got a buddy that just bought a 9mm Hi Point carbine. (tactical)

He's having fun going through rounds when on the cease fire one of the RO's comes up and tells him that the 9mm rounds are too powerful for the metal targets when shot out of the (16") barrel of the Hi Point.

He then proceeds to tell him that he (my friend) is not allowed to shoot the 9mm carbine on the silhouette range and he has to shoot it on the rifle side if he wants to shoot it.

So my friend leaves and I walk over to the rifle side with some other friends and lo and behold I see three jackoffs sitting in the members only section of the silhouette range shooting TC "pistols".

One was chambered in .308 one in .223 and I think the other one was .243 or some similar size rifle round.

WTF?

So a 9mm round fired out of a carbine is too powerful but rifle rounds that have 10 times the energy and three times the velocity with pointed tips that are sure to damage the silhouettes are ok?

GTFO of here.

It wasn't me that was told to take my gun and leave but I was pissed off anyway.

I seriously wanted to pimp slap all the rifle caliber toting culprits... But they had guns in their hands and I thought to my self, *self, that probably wouldn't be a good idea*

They told me the same when I had my UMP, could only shoot it on the rifle side. 

I tried to quickly find some ballistics data but it was taking too long

I'll just sum it up by saying I agree.

Disgusting.

I just don't get how much power this club has at a publicly owned rifle range.

I too asked about shooting pistol caliber carbines there, and was told no.  Don't tell me that a 9mm carbine(or .357 or .44 or .30carbine) has more muzzle energy than a 500s&w magnum!  (I seen guys shooting 500's  there...)
I pay taxes, and pay their fee.


9mm, 16" bbl. Hornady XTP (147gr., 1400 fps MV (wild ass guess and much faster than probable), 640 ft lbs ME)

 .30 Carbine, factory load (110 gr, 1990 fps MV, 975 ft lbs ME)

.357 Mag, 1894CP 16.25" bbl, Hornady XTP-FP (158gr, 1800 fps MV, 1137 ft lbs ME)

.44 Mag, 1894 20"bbl, Hornady XTP-HP (240gr, 1750 fps MV, 1632 ft lbs ME)



out of a pistol...
.500 S&Wmag, Hornady XTP (350grain HP, 1900 fps MV, 2805 ft lbs ME)

(All are estimates so YMMV)

I have heard this crap before. Those guys suck and descriminate.....nuff said.

Why don't they charge the sheriffs and other orgs that use the silhouette range too? I see the LEOs with all kinds of stuff.

Guys, there are a couple of things to bear in mind here.

1.  The range is operated by, and funded by, the HMSSA.  Their sport is a handgun-only sport.  Their range, their rules.
2.  The prohibition against rifles, even pistol caliber carbines, isn't about damage to the targets.  It's about usage.  The range is there for handgun shooters.  They don't want to start picking up overflow from the rifle side.

Yes, they allow .22 rifles, because .22 rifles are part of their sanctioned events.  But they are a minor part. 

Why do they have the power to make these rules?  Because they are the ones operating the venue, paying for the insurance, manufacturing the targets, and upkeeping the facilities.  You don't like it?  Join the club, become an officer or otherwise find your way onto their board of directors, and do something about it!

Sorry Tom, I'm gonna have to disagree on some of the thing you said.
On number 1, Yes I agree that, their range, their rules; can't argue with that, but is it right? In my opinion no.

On number 2, Not picking up overflow from the rifle side is inappropriate.  This is a public range and if not for public funds, ie taxes, there would be no range.  The club is 'borrowing' this space and this land from 'us' the taxpayer.  With the ever increasing numbers of new shooters, they should be thinking about changing some of the rules to accomodate the extra volume.  This overcrowding problem is getting worse and worse, and disgruntled shooters will only cause strife in our firearm community.
 
Maybe we aught to start up another letter writing campaign to the city and state reps about the overcrowding and decreased range hours.
 
There isn't enough bodies on this site to be effectual though, we need more people to do this.

I don't agree. That is not their park. It belongs to the tax payers of the City and County of Honolulu. 
We don't need to go to their board or vote. They have a privilige as stated here: http://www1.honolulu.gov/parks/rules/commercial_acts.pdf
If we don't like it we can go to a hearing to get their permit reviewed again. 

Isn't this outrage kind of misplaced? This isn't exactly a civil rights issue. It's starting to sound more like a temper tantrum.

How about instead of posting an angry rant about it and asking a bunch of us to rally around a cause that's not as unanimous as you may believe, you write the organization directly and request that they review their policies to include 9mm carbines in their list of allowed firearms, and politely list reasons why you think they should?

I don't think it's a good idea to turn every disagreement into a petition or lawsuit. It kind of dilutes the credibility of gun-related issues that really matter.

Isn't this outrage kind of misplaced? This isn't exactly a civil rights issue. It's starting to sound more like a temper tantrum.

How about instead of posting an angry rant about it and asking a bunch of us to rally around a cause that's not as unanimous as you may believe, you write the organization directly and request that they review their policies to include 9mm carbines in their list of allowed firearms, and politely list reasons why you think they should?

I don't think it's a good idea to turn every disagreement into a petition or lawsuit. It kind of dilutes the credibility of gun-related issues that really matter.

I disagree. Discrimination is descrimination.   I recommend getting some time out on the pond before you jump in with your advice headfirst. This isn't the first time it has happened like this with these guys on this and other topics.

We (the not in the cool kid club) have had issues with these folks ranging from the above, picking up brass, and overcrowding.

I don't think kingkeoni wanted any action, it's just a rant. And plenty people agree that it is annoying.

Quote from: antoinebugleboy on September 19, 2011, 12:30:08 PM

Isn't this outrage kind of misplaced? This isn't exactly a civil rights issue. It's starting to sound more like a temper tantrum.

How about instead of posting an angry rant about it and asking a bunch of us to rally around a cause that's not as unanimous as you may believe, you write the organization directly and request that they review their policies to include 9mm carbines in their list of allowed firearms, and politely list reasons why you think they should?

I don't think it's a good idea to turn every disagreement into a petition or lawsuit. It kind of dilutes the credibility of gun-related issues that really matter.

I disagree. Discrimination is descrimination.   I recommend Getting some time out on the pond before you jump in with your advice headfirst. This isn't the first time it has happened like this with these guys on this and other topics.

All I'm saying is, if you're going to make a court case or subject the group to government review because you've got a complaint, they're going to ask if you took every measure before doing so. At the very least, writing a formal request letter gives you more credibility if it does become a case. Give them a chance to turn you down.

Also, just throwing around the word "discrimination" indiscriminately doesn't win any points. What kind of discrimination are you talking about? Preference for dues-paying members? Racial discrimination? What?

I don't think kingkeoni wanted any action, it's just a rant. And plenty people agree that it is annoying.

I was responding more to heavies' post, in that regard.

King - I hear you man.  It's my biggest beef with them, but it's a club.........so you just have to abide by their rules. 

What I did is bought a SW 460V to try and put more energy into the metal plates.  A SW500 would be a good choice as well.

Isn't this outrage kind of misplaced? This isn't exactly a civil rights issue. It's starting to sound more like a temper tantrum.

How about instead of posting an angry rant about it and asking a bunch of us to rally around a cause that's not as unanimous as you may believe, you write the organization directly and request that they review their policies to include 9mm carbines in their list of allowed firearms, and politely list reasons why you think they should?

I don't think it's a good idea to turn every disagreement into a petition or lawsuit. It kind of dilutes the credibility of gun-related issues that really matter.

Temper tantrum?
I don't think so. I wasn't even the one shooting a carbine. It's an observation. This is a firearms forum. On a forum people share their observations.
That's how it works.

As far as asking you to rally around me... Nobody asked you to do Jack shit.
If you don't like what I type then don't respond.

As far as litigating.
Again you're adding fuel to a non existent fire.
You never heard me say anything about litigation at all.

People that blow things out of proportion by adding imaginary topics of arguments are doing themselves and this forum a disservice.

Quote from: 2aHawaii on September 19, 2011, 12:36:29 PM

I don't think kingkeoni wanted any action, it's just a rant. And plenty people agree that it is annoying.

I was responding more to heavies' post, in that regard.

Not angry or ranting.
I am just suggesting that the current rules are not fair to the public. A pistol caliber carbine has less impact energy than some large caliber handguns, per the excuse that it would damage the targets. If the RO is going to make an excuse like that, it is not valid.


I'm not sure where you heard anything about court case?

My suggestion is to write our elected officials and ask what is being done about the overcrowding and ridiculous hours that the public is 'allowed' to practice safe firearm handling skills.

I'm not trying to suggest that the club should be disbanded, permits pulled, or anything like that, just that they need to rethink some of the policies that omit some shooters from utilizing the plinking range.  Especially when the reason for the ban (pistol caliber carbines) is not valid.

Quote from: antoinebugleboy on September 19, 2011, 12:30:08 PM

Isn't this outrage kind of misplaced? This isn't exactly a civil rights issue. It's starting to sound more like a temper tantrum.

How about instead of posting an angry rant about it and asking a bunch of us to rally around a cause that's not as unanimous as you may believe, you write the organization directly and request that they review their policies to include 9mm carbines in their list of allowed firearms, and politely list reasons why you think they should?

I don't think it's a good idea to turn every disagreement into a petition or lawsuit. It kind of dilutes the credibility of gun-related issues that really matter.

Temper tantrum?
I don't think so. I wasn't even the one shooting a carbine. It's an observation. This is a firearms forum. On a forum people share their observations.
That's how it works.

As far as asking you to rally around me... Nobody asked you to do Jack shit.
If you don't like what I type then don't respond.

As far as litigating.
Again you're adding fuel to a non existent fire.
You never heard me say anything about litigation at all.

People that blow things out of proportion by adding imaginary topics of arguments are doing themselves and this forum a disservice.

Read my reply to 2A above.

My suggestion is to write our elected officials and ask what is being done about the overcrowding and ridiculous hours that the public is 'allowed' to practice safe firearm handling skills.

I'm not trying to suggest that the club should be disbanded, permits pulled, or anything like that, just that they need to rethink some of the policies that omit some shooters from utilizing the plinking range.  Especially when the reason for the ban (pistol caliber carbines) is not valid.

I misunderstood you, then. My apologies.