Disturbing development at Cherry Ridge Range

[creeper 16]

Was at the range today for the first time in a few weeks. It seems they have installed video cameras at the handgun and rifle ranges, dont know if the shotgun , 200 and 300 yrd and plinking have them yet. I dont know about anyone else , but I find this to be complete and utter horse-sh!t. The RO said its a move by the board to cover their asses. Call me an alarmist , but the very real threat that these tapes can be subpoenaed by prosecutors or the FBI , ATF or anyone else in the gov is disturbing to me. What with the growing anti-gun sentiment and assault to our 2A rights , I feel they are opening us up to more BS. Just think about the possibilities of what they are doing . Lets say you have to defend yourself to an armed intruder in your own home, A prosecutor finds out you are affiliated withe the club , tapes are subpoenaed and there you are every weekend enjoying your rights shooting various weapons. The prosecutor then decides you are actually practicing to be an armed killer, and dont think thats out of the realm of possibility. How about you and a bunch of friends meet regularly to shoot rifles, with the tapes in hand the Gov comes after you as some sort of militia and a domestic terrorist . Like I said , maybe Im an alarmist , but with the state of things today , I find this unacceptable and will voice my opinion to the ANJRP accordingly.

[JackDaWack 2,895]

I think your over reacting a bit. Camera's serve their purpose in place like this... Guy next to you does something stupid, you have proof, he gets banned for life...

A prosecutor doesn't have the time to sit and watch countless days and hours of video tape just to see you practicing your shooting skills, and even if they did, watching you put lead down range is hardly proof of anything other then the fact you practice shooting. Every in door range has camera's, every FFL has camera's, its nothing new.

[AnthonyG 36]

I belong to central jersey and we have camera's in the indoor range and its simply cause people can be idiots and don't speak up when they break things. We have people shooting the ceiling and marker posts and or they damage the Target holders and dont tell anyone. I really wouldn't be too worried about it there reasons for doing cameras seems just.

[chris327 30]

i agree that it seems to be for your own safety. If someones an idiot you have proof of it. or if people are violating rules it would show it to proove it. I mean im not a strict rule guy. But if you have guests without paying thats annoying or sweeping the line. Thats rules that should be strictly enforced.

 

One thing i dont get is they add stuff like that. But why cant they add a rood over the 22 range? or some cheap post mounted clay throwers in the shorgun range. They would be bolted down and poles cemented in the ground. Just not sure why they dont add this stuff as it wont cost much and would be appreciated by the members.

[creeper 16]

I disagree , Cherry Ridge has always been a range where responsible members help out the RO's with any idiots that are careless , I for one dont like the idea of being watched , like I said alarmist , maybe , but nothing good will come of this.

[djg0770 481]

One thing i dont get is they add stuff like that. But why cant they add a rood over the 22 range? or some cheap post mounted clay throwers in the shorgun range. They would be bolted down and poles cemented in the ground. Just not sure why they dont add this stuff as it wont cost much and would be appreciated by the members.

 

Let me throw some salt in the wound...

 

They already have the clay throwers - they are regularly used for Hunter's Ed and are kept in the shed at the end of the shotgun range.

 

I too would like to see some type of cover on the 22 range. I have also found that the 22 range lately has been crowded while the shotgun range is rarely at half capacity. I have no idea why they ever switched the two...

[djg0770 481]

Also, I'm no fan of the cameras. However, with the rash of suicides at ranges in the last year or two, I understand the need to have cameras...

[chris327 30]

Let me throw some salt in the wound...

 

They already have the clay throwers - they are regularly used for Hunter's Ed and are kept in the shed at the end of the shotgun range.

 

I too would like to see some type of cover on the 22 range. I have also found that the 22 range lately has been crowded while the shotgun range is rarely at half capacity. I have no idea why they ever switched the two...

 

I know they have them and its stupid that we can't use.

Switched? The 22 range was where yhe airgun range was? And vice versa. So you would launch clays possible over into the 200yard range?

[JackDaWack 2,895]

I disagree , Cherry Ridge has always been a range where responsible members help out the RO's with any idiots that are careless , I for one dont like the idea of being watched , like I said alarmist , maybe , but nothing good will come of this.

What exactly are you worried about them seeing? If you follow the rules and act accordingly then i fail to see how anything bad could come of it. Are you really talking about shooting an home invader, and then having the prosecution team sit through endless hours of video tape just to get a couple hours of you shooting at the range? for what purpose do you thing the video will serve them? you fail to consider the sheer amount of time it would take them to find something if anything useful in court, and circumstantial at best.

 

No matter what you say or do with out proof it will always be your word against another in the case of idiots on the line, unless an RO specifically see's someone doing something he cannot take your word for truth and just up and ban someone. With video proof it would be easy to see someone doing something wrong, make a judgement call, and either ban them for a time period or life.... much better then the system of half truths and not much you can do about it.

[creeper 16]

Thats just a " for instance" that I threw out there. If you think prosecutors dont try to railroad legal law abiding gun owners who defend themselves I think you are mistaken , read some of Mas Ayoobs writings on this very subject. Im not worried about anything in particular .Maybe some folks dont care that their privacy ( not sure if thats the proper term here) is invaded , but there is enough of that in this country already. Like I said I dont like big brother looking over my shoulder.

. Are you really talking about shooting an home invader, and then having the prosecution team sit through endless hours of video tape just to get a couple hours of you shooting at the range?

 

 

[JackDaWack 2,895]

Thats just a " for instance" that I threw out there. If you think prosecutors dont try to railroad legal law abiding gun owners who defend themselves I think you are mistaken , read some of Mas Ayoobs writings on this very subject. Im not worried about anything in particular .Maybe some folks dont care that their privacy ( not sure if thats the proper term here) is invaded , but there is enough of that in this country already. Like I said I dont like big brother looking over my shoulder.

It's not the idea of the prosecution trying to railroad a defendant, they will do anything to win. The point is them finding something that is actually going to help them in court and is relevant to the case. In this case or NJ's in general, 99% of problems stemming from a legal shooting will be in the house, unless your the lucky sob with a carry permit. The point im making, unless your depicted in a video doing something incriminating, i don't see how anyone could draw any defensible conclusion other then the fact your practicing and enjoying your hobby. Hell, they would probably fight to keep it out of the court room if it proves your proficiency with a weapon... the last thing they want on the stand is someone who is depicted to know what they are doing.... they usually try and make you look like the a-hole who has no idea how to operate a firearm.

[Guest]

Folks, as a security professional it is the RIGHT move on the ANJRPC's part. First and foremost NOT to nitpick it is NO LONGER video tape....it is Digital Video Recording. Searching would be kinda easy.....HOWEVER, for someone to pick the exact date and time and location that you are on at the range is almost impossible...unless they new the time period....

 

First, my guess is the cameras are there SOLELY for liability reasons, i.e 'slip and fall'...... Not active monitoring.

 

Second, if the system is setup like I think it would be, the system cannot fully realize it's full potential of maximum storage utilizing video motion detection. My guess it is setup for full frame DAYTIME recording and depending on what model/setup they purchased they would be lucky to have two weeks of storage...my guess is they prolly would be happy with the last seven days....24hrs....if there is an 'event' they can take it off the machine right away.

 

The fact is cameras are the way of life today and they are in more places that you know and you are always being 'watched' by big brother....

 

But to think that this is anything other than a liability protective move by the ANJRPC is silly IMHO....

[vladtepes 1,060]

I am far more concerned about someone suffering from extreme paranoia owning firearms than I am a range recording me shooting targets.. but hey.. that's just me..

[tom catman 0]

i dont like it one bit either.if they got out of the clubhouse and circulated they could tell who was making trouble/or not safe like in the past.now i realize technology would make it easier for them to monitor all the ranges from the clubhouse but having video recorded and kept for a time smells like keeping your nics records for 90 days.....no good can come of it.how about purging the video memory every 24 hours?this way they can pull up video if needed for an accident/dispute/safety infraction and still placate my sense of privacy.....how about using the cameras for seeing the targets with monitors at the bench?.....ha..ha...

[JackDaWack 2,895]

i dont like it one bit either.if they got out of the clubhouse and circulated they could tell who was making trouble/or not safe like in the past.now i realize technology would make it easier for them to monitor all the ranges from the clubhouse but having video recorded and kept for a time smells like keeping your nics records for 90 days.....no good can come of it.how about purging the video memory every 24 hours?this way they can pull up video if needed for an accident/dispute/safety infraction and still placate my sense of privacy.....how about using the cameras for seeing the targets with monitors at the bench?.....ha..ha...

Why do you think you have any sense of privacy out side of your property? I hate to be that guy here but c'mon, lets be serious. My friends shop had some merchandise walk away, it took 2 weeks to even realize it was missing, we had watch 2 weeks of video to find out who took it... and we did manage to find the theif, and we were very disappointed to find out it was a friend.

[henrym 19]

Cameras at private ranges are nothing new. Look at old bridge. As a member Im fine with it, and they even tell you at orientation that if you do something stupid you will be caught and punished, the tapes are monitored. Recently they had one of the exterior cameras stolen off the side of the building. Now the replacement camera and some of the others are hooked into into a nice screen so you can see exactly whats going on out in the parking lot, before you walk out to your car holding something that would be EXTREMELY attraction to a criminal. The cameras can work in your favor too.

[Maksim 1,504]

+1 and to add to what Jackdawack posted.

 

You have no obligation to privacy outside of your home. What you do on your own private property, is your own business and perogotive. When you step out into a public or another private place of business, it is their rules. Your only recourse is to not solicit the business.

 

If you do not want to be seen on camera, wear a ski mask. =) But through the bylaws of the club, the BOD and membership which elected them has decided to go ahead and install those cameras. Any issues over privacy should be addressed to the Range officials and BOD, and not on the board.

 

I am not trying to take away from your pitty party, except it solves nothing.

 

If you want a serious explanation of why, only the BOD can explain their intent. If you want a pitty party.... I'm sorry that you feel that way, but you are in the minority.

 

In the past year, there have been at least 2 suicides at NJ's public ranges, and a few more "accidents". The only way to prevent stooooopid frivolious lawsuits by the surviving families, and to stop people from slipping at the range and suing, is to have evidence/proof of what really happened.

 

He said/she said does not weigh the same as a video of what really happened.

 

Think of it this way, part of the reason we need to video tape everything is because we live in a sue-happy society where someone will sue you because you looked at them the wrong way.

[tom catman 0]

out of all i posted you pick up on why do i want privacy?back in the 60's/70's there was a book 1984....now all has come to pass.when i am target shooting or anywhere out of my house it is still noones business what im doin.facebook/twitter all suck.go mind your own business,not mine.if you see a terrorist then get involved.let the professionals do their job.its not yours to do...

[vladtepes 1,060]

out of all i posted you pick up on why do i want privacy?back in the 60's/70's there was a book 1984....now all has come to pass.when i am target shooting or anywhere out of my house it is still noones business what im doin.facebook/twitter all suck.go mind your own business,not mine.if you see a terrorist then get involved.let the professionals do their job.its not yours to do...

 

 

no one forces you to go there...

 

want to shoot on tape? shoot there..

don't want to.. shoot somewhere else..

can't find anywhere? buy your own hunk of acreage in america and do all the shooting you want in private..

 

life is full of simple choices..

 

and a privately owned gun club putting up cameras to keep an eye on the various loons that may creep in, has nothing to do with government control and observation.. unless of course your mind works that way.. ideally nothing bad ever happens at a range.. but if you are shooting while some nutcase decides to off himself.. wouldnt it be nice to have a simple chunk of film clearing you?

 

the ONLY issue I see here is maybe if certain prohibited persons are trying to shoot at the ranges.. OR maybe certain prohibited guns.. if you are on the up and up.. nothing to worry about..

[JackDaWack 2,895]

out of all i posted you pick up on why do i want privacy?back in the 60's/70's there was a book 1984....now all has come to pass.when i am target shooting or anywhere out of my house it is still noones business what im doin.facebook/twitter all suck.go mind your own business,not mine.if you see a terrorist then get involved.let the professionals do their job.its not yours to do...

My post had nothing to do with why you want privacy, we all want privacy, not really a hard concept to understand. I still know people who don't understand how facebook is public...but my settings are set to private... read the fine print.

 

If you are on someone's property...cherry ridge, you do NOT have privacy, and they do have every right to know and see every person on THEIR property, as they are responsible for the property and the people on it...

[CageFighter 236]

note to self......alway wear ski mask when @ Cherry Ridge.

-dont worry, im not paranoid, im just COLD!

[Ray Ray 3,566]

Wow, original poster gets a -5 for NOT wanting to be on camera while he shots? I'm not a fan of Big Brother always watching but that's just me.

[LorenzoS 100]

I'm not normally in the tinfoil hat group but I do have some concerns about having a recording of me at a range. Imagine you are involved in a shooting at home, and the prosecutor digs up a recording from the range that shows you making a mistake during a high stress drill, then uses it as evidence that you are incompetent or irresponsible.

 

In fact Anthony Colandro mentioned on his GFHR podcast that while they record students during class in the Simunition shoothouse, they destroy the recordings immediately after class for this very reason.

[vladtepes 1,060]

I'm not normally in the tinfoil hat group but I do have some concerns about having a recording of me at a range. Imagine you are involved in a shooting at home, and the prosecutor digs up a recording from the range that shows you making a mistake during a high stress drill, then uses it as evidence that you are incompetent or irresponsible.

 

In fact Anthony Colandro mentioned on his GFHR podcast that while they record students during class in the Simunition shoothouse, they destroy the recordings immediately after class for this very reason.

 

 

really having a hard time following this logic..

 

we issue police firearms..

these firearms are needed for protection..

we require the officers to go to the range to "qualify" and be proficient at what they do.. this training.. is considered a positive..

 

but some of you are somehow afraid that putting in practice with a firearm.. and being recorded would be used AGAINST YOU?

 

"your honor we believe the homeowner acted solely in self defense in the shooting of the intruder.."

"your honor the defendant is highly trained with a firearm.. not only has he taken class A B and C teaching him to use a firearm.. but he has logged numerous hours at the firearms range becoming proficient in the use of a gun in the same way a police officer is trained.. his actions were not out of fear or haste.. but instead practiced carefully considered actions.. actions that has no other alternative.."

 

showing a court that you are trained and practiced with a gun would likely work in your favor.. if you were some complete novice the court could argue you acted in haste.. and there were other less deadly alternatives... far less likely with an individual who is trained..

 

but alas as I have already stated.. don't like it? vote with your wallet.. go shoot somewhere else? pretty simple no?

[Mexican_Hippie 3]

You can bet it's not ever going to be to your benefit in any court case. There's too many Monday morning quarterback questions that can be asked about your ability. Also, a clip of you joking around or "blasting some zombie" at the range won't shine a great light when it's out of context. The tape is purely CYA for the range though, IMO.

 

That said, maybe they only retain them for a certain period of time if there's no incident that day. I'd talk to them and ask.

 

I don't like public ranges as it is. I definitely wouldn't go to one with a camera unless they dumped the tapes pretty often.

 

Edit: It would be completely different if it was just a log book of when you came vs actual footage.

[creeper 16]

Pity party! WTF are you talking about , I had a legitimate concern about camera's popping up at a range Ive been a member at for a long time. Im not looking for pity. If you guys are OK with camera's for safety , fine , Im not. If safety is the main concern , just remember its because of "safety" that we can only purchase one handgun a month , "safety" is why my collection of AR's has to be neutered , that I cant be trusted with a high cap mag , collapsible stock , and the dreaded bayonet lug! Its all for safety , but who's? And this thread is at least worth -15.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Pity party! WTF are you talking about , I had a legitimate concern about camera's popping up at a range Ive been a member at for a long time. Im not looking for pity. If you guys are OK with camera's for safety , fine , Im not. If safety is the main concern , just remember its because of "safety" that we can only purchase one handgun a month , "safety" is why my collection of AR's has to be neutered , that I cant be trusted with a high cap mag , collapsible stock , and the dreaded bayonet lug! Its all for safety , but who's? And this thread is at least worth -15.

 

 

no.. they are all choices you make.. by continuing to live in a state that requires those things..

 

no one forces you to go to that range..

no one forces you to live in NJ..

 

GOVERNMENT law (AWB, OGAM, etc..) is NOT the same as PRIVATE rules (cameras at a privately run range..)

 

im by no means trying to "give you ****" you have every right in the world to not want to be taped.. but they (a privately run business) have every right to run cameras.. your rights end where their rights begin.. get what im saying here?

[creeper 16]

really having a hard time following this logic..

 

we issue police firearms..

these firearms are needed for protection..

we require the officers to go to the range to "qualify" and be proficient at what they do.. this training.. is considered a positive..

 

but some of you are somehow afraid that putting in practice with a firearm.. and being recorded would be used AGAINST YOU?

 

"your honor we believe the homeowner acted solely in self defense in the shooting of the intruder.."

"your honor the defendant is highly trained with a firearm.. not only has he taken class A B and C teaching him to use a firearm.. but he has logged numerous hours at the firearms range becoming proficient in the use of a gun in the same way a police officer is trained.. his actions were not out of fear or haste.. but instead practiced carefully considered actions.. actions that has no other alternative.."

 

showing a court that you are trained and practiced with a gun would likely work in your favor.. if you were some complete novice the court could argue you acted in haste.. and there were other less deadly alternatives... far less likely with an individual who is trained..

 

but alas as I have already stated.. don't like it? vote with your wallet.. go shoot somewhere else? pretty simple no?

Again Ive read a lot of Mas Ayoobs writings on the self defense subject, He is often called as an expert witness when law abiding firearm owners use deadly force, Training is exactly the kind of thing unscrupulous prosecutors will use against you , just as they do with having trigger work done or using your own reloads in a self defense situation.

[creeper 16]

no.. they are all choices you make.. by continuing to live in a state that requires those things..

 

no one forces you to go to that range..

no one forces you to live in NJ..

 

GOVERNMENT law (AWB, OGAM, etc..) is NOT the same as PRIVATE rules (cameras at a privately run range..)

 

im by no means trying to "give you ****" you have every right in the world to not want to be taped.. but they (a privately run business) have every right to run cameras.. your rights end where their rights begin.. get what im saying here?

Im not disputing that at all , and I will vote with my wallet , they have every right to tape me and I have every right to go somewhere else, I never contended that issue. I felt the need to **** about it.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Again Ive read a lot of Mas Ayoobs writings on the self defense subject, He is often called as an expert witness when law abiding firearm owners use deadly force, Training is exactly the kind of thing unscrupulous prosecutors will use against you , just as they do with having trigger work done or using your own reloads in a self defense situation.

 

 

NJ case in which training.. or trigger work resulted in a conviction in a self defense shooting? I am not aware of a ton of them.. but maybe if I could read through them I would have a better understanding..