The state of shooting clubs and ranges in New Jersey and the USA...

[DevsAdvocate 112]

It all started with this:

 

Ban on concealed carry at shooting range

 

And has opened up with a huge discussion about the past, present, and future of shooting sports in the United States, and by extension: New Jersey.

 

Here are a couple of takes on the matter:

Gun Culture 1.0 vs 2.0

http://www.pagunblog.com/2011/10/19/gun-culture-1-0-v-gun-culture-2-0/

http://www.pagunblog.com/2011/10/20/more-on-gun-culture-1-0-and-2-0-in-clubs/

 

In short... there is a divide in shooting sports in our country... Gun Culture 1.0 is the OFWGs of our shooting sports. The old timers who hunt bolt-action, like wood on their shotguns, and balk at any pistol that isn't a revolver or a 1911. These guys believe the best shooting practice is slow-firing on a static paper target 20 feet away. These are also the guys that have been around long enough to have guns mail-ordered to their homes (pre-GCA 68) and had to dial a 1-800 number to get updates on Gun legislation in Washington DC. These guys are the "old school", and these guys happen to also sit on the boards of most shooting ranges.

 

Gun Culture 2.0 is the new generation. Kids who grew up playing Counter-Strike, Call of Duty, etc. who got into guns for all things fun and tacticool. They love rapid firing, suppressors, Evil Black Rifles, black tubberware pistols, and combat shotguns with mag extensions to the double digits. They love IDPA, 3-guns, and zombie shoots. They enjoy tactical vests, tac lights, and aggressive stylings of firearms. Unfortunately, they lack places to shoot and practice, and they are looked down upon with scorn by the OFWGs who run most clubs...

 

Unfortunately, GC 1.0 ain't gonna be around much longer, and as OFWGs shuffle off their mortal coils, they (sometimes) take their ranges with them to the grave.

 

What really irks me though is this: what's with all the waiting lists around here? In the RTSP thread, Riverdale was discussed, and it was mentioned that it is under-utilized. Why? Same with Shongum. And a whole host of other ranges. Is this to keep young folks out? New shooters?

 

If we're gonna win here in NJ and across the USA, we're gonna need places to shoot for the new Generation. And these places need to be accepting of new members and their new 'ways'.

[Ray Ray 3,566]

Good post, 2.0 checking in here (although I don't play Nintendo games).

[Joelk 61]

I think those two groups leave out a large number of people, of various ages, who view firearms a weapons or tools for self defense, who are neither Fudds (1.0), nor competition shooters(2.0) or Tactical Teds(2.0).

[DevsAdvocate 112]

I think those two groups leave out a large number of people, of various ages, who view firearms a weapons or tools for self defense, who are neither Fudds, nor Tactical Teds.

 

I would even put those people in the 2.0 crowd. Especially those who want Concealed Carry. That is very much a modern Gun thing.

[Joelk 61]

I would even put those people in the 2.0 crowd. Especially those who want Concealed Carry. That is very much a modern Gun thing.

I disagree as I don't know anyone who is a serious student of self defense who would describe them self like the 2.0 description below.

Gun Culture 2.0 is the new generation. Kids who grew up playing Counter-Strike, Call of Duty, etc. who got into guns for all things fun and tacticool. They love rapid firing, suppressors, Evil Black Rifles, black tubberware pistols, and combat shotguns with mag extensions to the double digits. They love IDPA, 3-guns, and zombie shoots. They enjoy tactical vests, tac lights, and aggressive stylings of firearms.

This sounds like a description of a kid who likes guns because of video games. It also sounds like the airsoft kid who finally got old enough to buy real guns. It is all based on image and style, without any though as to real world function and substance.

 

The concealed carry guy does not love guns because they are "fun and tacticool" but because they can save his or his family's lives.

 

I own ARs and Glocks, not because they are cool, are black, or are "tubberware", but because of their functionality. I don't care about aggressive firearm styling, just function. I don't "enjoy" tac vests, nor do I "enjoy" tac lights, I just need a light (or NV) to see in the dark. Etc...

 

I do see and agree with your point, I just think that your description ignores and alienates a lot of people.

[Jon 264]

I disagree as I don't know anyone who is a serious student of self defense who would describe them self like the 2.0 description below.

 

This sounds like a description of a kid who likes guns because of video games. It also sounds like the airsoft kid who finally got old enough to buy real guns. It is all based on image and style, without any though as to real world function and substance.

 

The concealed carry guy does not love guns because they are "fun and tacticool" but because they can save his or his family's lives.

 

I own ARs and Glocks, not because they are cool, are black, or are "tubberware", but because of their functionality. I don't care about aggressive firearm styling, just function. I don't "enjoy" tac vests, nor do I "enjoy" tac lights, I just need a light (NV) to see in the dark. Etc...

 

Agreed. +1

[Wastegate 9]

I think the reason most ranges have problem with 2.0 is exactly like you stated. They like the "cool" guns from video games and movies. If the go to the range and try any of the stuff they have seen or played, people are going to get seriously hurt or killed without proper training on how to safely do it.

 

I for one don't want people next to me doing movement drills or transition unless I've shot/attended classes with them before.

[PK90 3,570]

As my business motto states, I believe that firearm owners can be broken down into 4 classes:

 

HUNTERS - SHOOTERS - COLLECTERS - DEFENDERS

 

One can fall into various categories, but will generally fit into one specifically.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

Agreed. +2

 

Harry

[Krdshrk 3,877]

This sounds like a description of a kid who likes guns because of video games. It also sounds like the airsoft kid who finally got old enough to buy real guns. It is all based on image and style, without any though as to real world function and substance.

 

I liked guns before I even started playing video games like that... but it definitely increased my awareness. I'm also an airsofter who was already old enough for real guns but didn't pick up on it 'till later on. However, my gun choices are not all based on image and style. I don't want a .50AE Desert Eagle because of Counter Strike. I will say I picked up my PSL-54C because it looks like a SVD Dragunov but it's still a fun shooter

 

I'm definitely not a 1.0 fudd though!

[ronhonda 86]

I Only got into shooting less than 10 years ago and I can classify myself as part of the 2.0 culture. But I don't believe in zombies .As far as clubs having waiting lists, I don't think it is to keep young people out. They have their members who pay their dues and keep the club alive.When old members go, there are and will be new members to take their place.When I first started out, I joined the range in tenafly. it was an old timer range. Every time i went there to shoot i was looked at like an outcast, a foreigner. I feel partly responsible in bringing in new blood and events that some of the members took interest in. Now, several years later, there is a lot of new blood at the club with activities Going on weekly that cater to the 2.0 crowd.I did not renew my membership because the hours of operation and my schedule did not match.I joined Riverdale because like someone said elsewhere, I can go when I want to, and most of the times I am there by myself. I open up, shoot, clean up and leave.I don't go as much as I would like to. But when I want to go, I go and I have no problems.I would like to join a club like CJ or OB but I am far away from the clubs and with certain life changes happening right now (in delivery room with wife) I don't have the time to spend the whole day at the range. Membership has its privileges and I will continue to enjoy them, when I can.

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

I think that taking that viewpoint makes you part of the problem, not the solution. By trying to categorize shooters you are a devisive force within the gun community. We are ignored by the politicians in this state, because we are not a force of which to be afraid. The reason for that is that we squabble so much among ourselves that we can't speak with one voice, which would make us a force to be reckoned with.

 

Reading some of Farnk & Bob's posts (NJ2AS) it seems they are trying to move in the right direction. Bob & I have discussed this before. When you start using derrogatory terms like Fuds and OFWG's it just shows the anti-factions that we are divided within our own house.

 

I'm not singling you out, just saying that the mindset that sees factions within our community weakens our efforts. Those OFWG and Fuds have a lot of knowledge that they can pass on and likewise, you might find them receptive to new ideas if you met them in something other than an adversarial posture.

 

Just sayin': Can't we all get along?

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob<---no spring chicken

[Krdshrk 3,877]

in delivery room with wife

 

Ronny Jr's gonna be a Gun Kid 3.0

[ronhonda 86]

I am just a shooter.The guns I have were all purchased for what like to do.

 

 

[Shane45 807]

What I care about is having a range that I can train at doing the style of shooting I want to do. The type of training and shooting Joel, myself and many others do in the "1.5" crowd is persona non grata at many ranges. I had my eyes opened to the old school contempt you talk about when I was a guest at a range that shall remain un named but WOW, given a hard time and discourteous treatment at just about every turn by the majority. Lots of snide comments and my rifles are TAN lol. Won a few "1.0's" over when we helped them with their rigs they were having trouble with. But just by the layout of the range you could tell they were stuck in 1972 and not changing anytime soon!!!! The one range I have come across that seems to be foward thinking about these delineations is SJSC. After 12 or 13 years at CJRPC I have let my membership lapse. If SJSC follows through with all of its plans, this will be the club I join. USANA seemd rather progressive as well but the legal issues need to settle first.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

So Ron, we have a new shooter yet???

 

Harry

[ronhonda 86]

I agree with Bob in the there are too many factions in the shooting community.We all should be one loud, strong, unified group. Until we get there we will be ignored by "our" politicians.

[ronhonda 86]

1319217511[/url]' post='369679']

So Ron, we have a new shooter yet???

 

Harry

 

Not yet. Probably not till late in the evening or early Saturday morning.Kid inherited my giant head.

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

Kid inherited my giant head.

 

 

ROTFLMAO. Poor mom!

[Joelk 61]

I agree with Bob in the there are too many factions in the shooting community.We all should be one loud, strong, unified group. Until we get there we will be ignored by "our" politicians.

I agree we should be as inclusive as possible, but how can gun owners "speak with one voice" as Bob said, when some gun owners say that the firearms that other gun owners own/use should be banned, and who vote that way?

 

I have also had gun owners tell me that they don't think anyone but police officers should be allowed to carry a gun. How can I be unified with that person when my biggest concern is concealed carry?

[Krdshrk 3,877]

ROTFLMAO. Poor mom!

 

Poor Ronny (afterward)

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

They have to be shown that we sink or swim together. That fellow who lloks askance at your "reach out and touch someone" black rifle has to be made to understand that, to a politician, there is no difference between you bolt gun with the big glass, bipod, adjustable stock and muzzle brake and his woodstocked deer or groundhog gun - they will both become long range "sniper rifles" in a non-shooters view. It's a shame that we have to win over those in our own community, but the fact that we do only serves to point out that we have not been inclusive enough, that we have minimized and sloughed them off when they don't hod views similar to ours. We need to put our own house in order.

 

JMHO

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

[DevsAdvocate 112]

I disagree as I don't know anyone who is a serious student of self defense who would describe them self like the 2.0 description below.

 

You contradict yourself sir... lookie here:

 

I own ARs and Glocks, not because they are cool, are black, or are "tubberware", but because of their functionality. I don't care about aggressive firearm styling, just function. I don't "enjoy" tac vests, nor do I "enjoy" tac lights, I just need a light (or NV) to see in the dark. Etc...

 

You obviously fall into the 2.0 generation. Serious self-defense students go for the best tools for the job, which are coincidentally the same tools used my police/military, and are also exemplified in video games.

 

This sounds like a description of a kid who likes guns because of video games. It also sounds like the airsoft kid who finally got old enough to buy real guns. It is all based on image and style, without any though as to real world function and substance.

 

So what? Where else are they gonna get exposed to shooting sports? And so what if it's based on image and style? We want these kids in our tent, we want them to spend money on AR-15s, ACRs, SCARs, etc. We also want them to go shoot, and learn the differences between real life and video gaming.

 

You make mainstreaming sound like a bad thing.

 

The concealed carry guy does not love guns because they are "fun and tacticool" but because they can save his or his family's lives.

 

BS! You don't go through all the effort to carry concealed if you didn't love guns. And one can be serious about self-defense and still enjoy the "tacticool" aspects of shooting. The two are hardly exclusive from one another, and I very much doubt that it is actually the case. I'd bet that the average CCWer in the 'free states' owns a few black rifles with tacticool accessories on them.

 

Not to mention, CCW is a recent invention within our national fabric going back about 20 years (when it really became widespread), and has grown quite considerably along with the Black Rifle Boom.

 

I do see and agree with your point, I just think that your description ignores and alienates a lot of people.

 

I don't think it does. I think it encompasses what is essentially the next generation of shooting. We need to accept these gamers with arms open into the sport and learn from them as much as they'd like to learn from us.

 

With sports like hunting at an all time low, we need to get our support where we can get it.

[NicePants 58]

After reading that I kinda consider myself 1.5, or maybe 1.7. I grew up hanging out with my grandpa a lot, and he was into a lot of older guns and wild west type stuff, which would explain the obscene amounts of love I have towards revolvers. But I also believe in concealed carry and I love modern guns too. And Counter-strike sucks!

[DevsAdvocate 112]

They have to be shown that we sink or swim together. That fellow who lloks askance at your "reach out and touch someone" black rifle has to be made to understand that, to a politician, there is no difference between you bolt gun with the big glass, bipod, adjustable stock and muzzle brake and his woodstocked deer or groundhog gun - they will both become long range "sniper rifles" in a non-shooters view. It's a shame that we have to win over those in our own community, but the fact that we do only serves to point out that we have not been inclusive enough, that we have minimized and sloughed them off when they don't hod views similar to ours. We need to put our own house in order.

 

JMHO

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

 

That's kinda the point I'm getting at. Older generations, in general, have a hard time grasping the new trends, and can also be quite resistant to new developments. The older generation of shooting is boring to us younger folks. I can't even begin to understand why some older shooters shoot from a rest at a rate of once per hour while cleaning the bore after every shot... it's boring, and somewhat impractical. Then these guys get all mad when brass from my AK hits their rifle and question why I'm shooting so fast, and what I intend to do with that weapon.

[DevsAdvocate 112]

What I care about is having a range that I can train at doing the style of shooting I want to do. The type of training and shooting Joel, myself and many others do in the "1.5" crowd is persona non grata at many ranges. I had my eyes opened to the old school contempt you talk about when I was a guest at a range that shall remain un named but WOW, given a hard time and discourteous treatment at just about every turn by the majority. Lots of snide comments and my rifles are TAN lol. Won a few "1.0's" over when we helped them with their rigs they were having trouble with. But just by the layout of the range you could tell they were stuck in 1972 and not changing anytime soon!!!! The one range I have come across that seems to be foward thinking about these delineations is SJSC. After 12 or 13 years at CJRPC I have let my membership lapse. If SJSC follows through with all of its plans, this will be the club I join. USANA seemd rather progressive as well but the legal issues need to settle first.

 

I don't get why things like rapid fire are frowned-upon. Outside of being a sniper, how is slow-firing on a target a practical form of training? I can see doing it as a warm-up exercise, but transitioning to other forms of practice is very important.

[Joelk 61]

You contradict yourself sir... lookie here:

 

You obviously fall into the 2.0 generation. Serious self-defense students go for the best tools for the job, which are coincidentally the same tools used my police/military, and are also exemplified in video games.

 

So what? Where else are they gonna get exposed to shooting sports? And so what if it's based on image and style? We want these kids in our tent, we want them to spend money on AR-15s, ACRs, SCARs, etc. We also want them to go shoot, and learn the differences between real life and video gaming.

 

You make mainstreaming sound like a bad thing.

 

BS! You don't go through all the effort to carry concealed if you didn't love guns. And one can be serious about self-defense and still enjoy the "tacticool" aspects of shooting. The two are hardly exclusive from one another, and I very much doubt that it is actually the case. I'd bet that the average CCWer in the 'free states' owns a few black rifles with tacticool accessories on them.

 

I know CCWer's who, who like many in the police and military, have no love for firearms, but only view them as a tool.

 

Not to mention, CCW is a recent invention within our national fabric going back about 20 years (when it really became widespread), and has grown quite considerably along with the Black Rifle Boom.

 

CCW is also not a recent development. While there have been more laws passed regarding CCW in the last 20 years people have been carrying concealed firearms for self defense since guns small enough to conceal were made.

 

I don't think it does. I think it encompasses what is essentially the next generation of shooting. We need to accept these gamers with arms open into the sport and learn from them as much as they'd like to learn from us.

 

With sports like hunting at an all time low, we need to get our support where we can get it.

I think you are missing my point. My point is that your description of 2.0 contains motives such as coolness, styling, and video game pedigree that you feel cover self defense shooters and ccwers. I, and several other people in this thread, disagree. I am not saying we should not include anyone (regardless of their motivation for owning guns), I am just saying that your description, which is based significantly on motive for ownership, alienates people like myself who would otherwise identify with you.

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

I can't even begin to understand why some older shooters shoot from a rest at a rate of once per hour while cleaning the bore after every shot... it's boring, and somewhat impractical. Then these guys get all mad when brass from my AK hits their rifle and question why I'm shooting so fast, and what I intend to do with that weapon.

 

 

Your intolerance for someone trying to wring every bit of accuracy out of gun, is no different than their intolerance for someone that burns through a full mag of ammo. Shooting isn't always about training for something or practical uses. Sometimes shooting is an end in itself. I like trying to put all my shots into one hole - and if that means allowing the barrel to cool between shots and maybe cleaning between strings, so be it. I also like running (well, in my case maybe not actually running ) a practical course with my AR. We need to understand and embrace the differences within our own community.

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

[Joelk 61]

I don't get why things like rapid fire are frowned-upon. Outside of being a sniper, how is slow-firing on a target a practical form of training? I can see doing it as a warm-up exercise, but transitioning to other forms of practice is very important.

What kind of training are you talking about? No mater what type of shooting you do you need a firm grasp on the fundamentals.

 

Anyone who knows me knows I have no aversion to rapid fire. Shoot as rapidly as you want as long as you can hit your target.

On the other hand, I have nothing but contempt for those who go to the range and dump lead into the berm as fast as they can because they think it looks cool, without any ability to actually hit the target.

[DevsAdvocate 112]

I think you are missing my point. My point is that your description of 2.0 contains motives such as coolness, styling, and video game pedigree that you feel cover self defense shooters and ccwers. I, and several other people in this thread, disagree. I am not saying we should not include anyone (regardless of their motivation for owning guns), I am just saying that your description, which is based significantly on motive for ownership, alienates people like myself who would otherwise identify with you.

 

My description takes into account the motives as well as the move to embrace advances in shooting technology. Gun Culture 1.0s see all that stuff and consider it "tacticool". Whether that's a derogatory term or not is up to you. I don't think it is as it represents a culture shift towards a positive development of our sport.

 

You're operating under the assumption that 2.0 folks only like tacticool things and nothing else. I never made that assertion and I don't quite understand the hesitation that I included folks like you into that category. You're literally creating divisions where none exist.

 

As for CCW...

1. Cops don't count. They're there own type of class with a wholly different set of rules.

2. Those who view guns as "tools"? What does that mean? Is there a difference viewing a gun as a "tool" or as a "weapon"? Is it wrong to appreciate them for their "style"? What makes this group so special that they are somehow in a different group?