dwarven1
Lonely Mountain Arms
You mean you have to load one round at a time? WTF is the reasoning behind that?
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Goodbye, Mass Rifle Association
- Thread starter Martlet
- Start date
Fooped
Resident HK Guru
I don't belong to MRA largely due to it being a fair distance away from me, but boy is this one a deal breaker!
![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
For the members of MRA.....If you have questions about the rules show up at a board meeting....you most certainly will get a very detailed answer.
For non members.......the rules are in place for reasons that are not appropriate to discuss on a public forum. However, as one person has said already, everyone has a choice.
For non members.......the rules are in place for reasons that are not appropriate to discuss on a public forum. However, as one person has said already, everyone has a choice.
And what really pisses many members off is a BoD who shrug aside criticism and complaints and puts it back on the membership. You berate members in the same post that you shrug off mistakes made. Rather than acknowledging what an idiotic policy it is to have unposted matches on a Sunday afternoon, you nod towards it briefly then offer alternatives that myself and others have already listed as still further problems, then go one to berate members further.
If having membership that doesn't volunteer at the club bothers you so much, then work to close the club to any that can't/won't volunteer. I pay extra every year because I'm unable to help out. That means I'm less of a member? It's that very attitude that you've heard people say they're sick of. If you're supposed to be representing the membership and taking care of OUR club, as you VOLUNTEERED to do, beating those who criticize some of your policies isn't a great start.
Attitude? I think you mean "without servitude". That's certainly the attitude your displaying. As I stated before, I shoot when I can, clean the ranges after use (and before if needed), leave supplies on the line (I've donated an untold number of staplers, cardboard, and targets), I'm safety conscious, refer members, and generally keep to myself unless I'm shooting with other members of this forum. Because I complain about shortcomings and poor policies in the club I'm now an unwanted member with an attitude?
I'm glad you ranted. It's an excellent example of why we have problems within the club.
I think some of the rules sound odd to people because they aren't used to shooting at an outside range located in an urban area. I think most of us understand the reasoning behind, and agree with, the rules in place.
So are you saying that every club should allow anyone to shoot on an outdoor range just because they paid their dues? In my opinion that is just asking for trouble. The qualification process at MRA is a simple process, it ensures that a shooter knows the range rules and that a shooter can safely shoot on a target at that range.
Your comment about "Things must be different inside of 495" is so untrue.
I am a also a member at Harvard - their 200/300 yard line is even more restrictive than MRA. At Havard you as a member need to qualify on the 200/300 yard line and only you are allowed to shoot ont hat range - not guests.
Actually, MRA has had matches on Sunday afternoons for going on 15 years. In fact, at one point the matches were held EVERY Sunday afternoon. We have matches for the members, and non members alike to promote the shooting sports, and our club.
And by the way, I am also glad you have had the opportunity to trash the MRA in a public forum. And on that note, I will not continue to feed this thread.
I invite all members of the MRA to come to the club for at least one board meeting a year to voice concerns, more if you have the time.
Martlet,
Just to clarify - I am not on the MRA Board, I am not a Director. I am just a member.
You state that I "shrug off mistakes made" ..Actually I said "Was it a mistake that the event at the Loeb Range was not posted - Yes." I don't see this as shrugging - I agreed it was a mistake.
As far as my comments - they were not directed at you - they were directed at the members who do nothing and only complain.
I think it's great that you've donated supplies.
Just to clarify - I am not on the MRA Board, I am not a Director. I am just a member.
You state that I "shrug off mistakes made" ..Actually I said "Was it a mistake that the event at the Loeb Range was not posted - Yes." I don't see this as shrugging - I agreed it was a mistake.
As far as my comments - they were not directed at you - they were directed at the members who do nothing and only complain.
I think it's great that you've donated supplies.
My apologies. I misinterpreted your response, and took it as directed at me since I was the person initially voicing complaints. My "shrug off" comment was directed at the paragraphs you dedicated to berating members, and one line that addressing a mistake.
I donate what I can. Time is something that I just don't have. If someone were to look at my door activity for the club, they'd see I hardly have time to even shoot. I just try to be a good member and leave the ranges better than I found them.
I have been a member of MRA for several years and am pretty happy with the club in general. The target carriers on the Loeb range are often broken, but the system is rather fragile and in need of the planned replacement. I have also found the club and ranges to be clean during my visits. The comment made about accidentally putting a round on 128 must have been made by someone who has not used the 100/200 yard range; as long as you use the firing ports, you will hit the berm.
Unfortunately the complaints about firearms safety are well founded. The Loeb range is one of the UN safest places I have ever shot at. The members seem to have no conception of firearm safety and point their guns in any direction that strikes their fancy and will be quick to assure you not to worry "its not loaded". I have corrected menbers until I was blue in tha face and have been met by either indifference or blatant hostility. The problems are so bad that I believe a range officer is needed during the busier times. The basis problem is there is no control over where the guns are handled. On the range no guns should be handled unless the shooter is forward of the line. This means that the gun should not be taken out of its case until the shooter is on the line. In the room behind the range guns should only be pointed in a safe, designated direction a wall, perhaps, but definitely not down range at the members.
Denying a member the use of the Loeb range due to an unscheduled match is inexcusible. If proper notice isn't given the match should not be held. This is a pet peeve with me as I have been denied the use of ranges at HSC for this reason.
I think MRA is a great club, well worth joining. It has its flaws just like any organization; the only serious problem I see at the moment is safety and it should be addressed immediately. An RO is needed to control some of the more delinquent members.
Unfortunately the complaints about firearms safety are well founded. The Loeb range is one of the UN safest places I have ever shot at. The members seem to have no conception of firearm safety and point their guns in any direction that strikes their fancy and will be quick to assure you not to worry "its not loaded". I have corrected menbers until I was blue in tha face and have been met by either indifference or blatant hostility. The problems are so bad that I believe a range officer is needed during the busier times. The basis problem is there is no control over where the guns are handled. On the range no guns should be handled unless the shooter is forward of the line. This means that the gun should not be taken out of its case until the shooter is on the line. In the room behind the range guns should only be pointed in a safe, designated direction a wall, perhaps, but definitely not down range at the members.
Denying a member the use of the Loeb range due to an unscheduled match is inexcusible. If proper notice isn't given the match should not be held. This is a pet peeve with me as I have been denied the use of ranges at HSC for this reason.
I think MRA is a great club, well worth joining. It has its flaws just like any organization; the only serious problem I see at the moment is safety and it should be addressed immediately. An RO is needed to control some of the more delinquent members.
It just reminds me of the Boston PD requiring a range test for an LTC, just b/c someone can put holes in paper when they have to does not mean they will be as responsible when nobody is looking.
I just hope the BOD offers to help people who do fail and not just kick them out.
I guess being in a more urban area with a 1000+ members things are different.
A valid point. Well, now they know about it. I don't really put much, if any, of the blame regarding range safety on the BoD. As I've stated, I correct members when I see unsafe acts. Perhaps I'll just start reporting every unsafe act I see. I'm sure this will put me in bad favor with the BoD, but a safety lesson will do many of these people some good.
The safety concerns aren't really listed as an indication the board isn't doing it's job, but as an example of the types of thing that make my shooting time less than enjoyable. Maybe it's just the type of person MRA is attracting. Obviously, due to many of the comments here, it's a wide-spread problem that likely needs more attention than a reporting system, in my humble opinion. I'm not sure what the solution would be, though.
kevin9
NES Member
Why?
If a club wants to make that one of their rules that's fine. If another club does not; if they want to treat their members as adults and post their rules and punishments for members to see and heed then that's fine too. People will choose what fits them best. I find the idea that everyone has to be tested or qualified to use any range to be right up there with the idea that everyone must be tested to get a firearms license, or that they must get a license to own a firearm at all.
+1
I'm not a member at MRA. I am an officer at a different club. Like MRA, our club is a non-profit and we do not have any paid employees. Everything is done by volunteers and the same 5-10 people (mainly the officers and board members) do all the work.
The officers and board members are people, like any other. We have the same faults and foibles as anyone. So how you present your criticism and suggestions can greatly effect how it is received.
Furthermore, when people who never volunteer at the club come up with suggestions that will greatly increase our time commitment and/or use our very limited club funds, you should expect that their suggestions may not be greeted with open arms.
If you want to change the system, then put your shoulder to the wheel and help out. We commit many ours of our precious free time (and yes, our schedules are just as crowded as yours) to working at the club. We struggle with figuring out how to police members who are not behaving properly. So just how receptive do you think we are when someone who doesn't do diddly for the club comes in with an attitude?
If you won't do any work at the club and expect that the hard-working BoD will jump to your every whim, well, don't be surprised when that doesn't happen.
Finally, if a member of our club decided to make posts such as this in a public forum before addressing the issues with the board, quite frankly I'd be telling them good riddance.
At Harvard Sportsman's you must qualify to use the 200/300 yard range. As for things being different inside 495, drive here and look outside your car window. All the ranges are in very close proximity to suburbia. A round that leaves the range has a very large possibility of hitting a house. A single round that leaves the range can 1) cause a tragedy and 2) close down the club for good. So why is it surprising that some clubs require specific orientation to a particular range, so as to reinforce safety rules?
That does present a bit of a problem, doesn't it?...
I'm a bit surprised that in all this time there hasn't been an incident where a stray round hasn't landed in someones living room or windshield (perhaps it has happened years ago and I just never heard of it). Is the MRAs safety record due to the range rules, pure luck, or a combination of both? The message I'm getting is that more and more shooters are ignoring the range rules and/or members are looking the other way.
Personally, I haven't seen any blatant or obvious violations first-hand (although I have seen plenty of evidence... shot up target stands, ceiling baffles, etc).
I've been an MRA member for about 7 years now and am somewhat satisfied with it. I chose it primarily because of the proximity to my home (I'm only about 10 minutes away), and because it's open 24/365.
Some of the range rules are a pain, single round loading on the 100/200 range being the most irksome. The Loeb range is long overdue for a rehab... the lighting is horrendous and the target retrieval system is maddening (at least that is being addressed), and even that might not be such a problem if idiots weren't shooting the tracks.
I'll admit that MRA sounds less and less appealing when I hear about ranges like Harvard and Holbrook, but I guess that's the price to pay with having a firing range located in such a densely populated area.
Despite the problems and inconveniences, I'll continue to be a member there. I'd really hate to see it fold or get shut down because of a few careless a**h***s.
Sorry, but that's not enough information for the board to act. They have an incident reporting system set up. You need to use it. You need to tell them, to the best of your knowledge 1) what happened, 2) when it happened, and 3) who did it. And you need to sign your name. Anonymous posts on the internet are not something they can use to take disciplinary action against the transgressor.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,602
- Likes
- 33,714
Hopkinton Sportsmens requires a written test to be cleared to use any range, and a shooting test to get a card key for the indoor range. There are a several people at the club who can do qualification, and will cooperate in setting up mutually convenient qualification appointments.
Agreed, as the VP of my Home owners association I know this to be true.
Orientation is fine, as for testing read my last post.
I don't have a problem with any private club making a range test mandatory. I may not agree with it but I have the choice to join or not to join.
This thread has turned in to a MRA bashing thread and I would like it to stop. I have been to MRA once so I can't speak from experience as my range time was limited. The bottom line here is if you don't like the way a club does things fine one you like. Which is exactly what Martlet is doing.![[wink]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/002.gif "Wink [wink]")
This thread has turned in to a MRA bashing thread and I would like it to stop. I have been to MRA once so I can't speak from experience as my range time was limited. The bottom line here is if you don't like the way a club does things fine one you like. Which is exactly what Martlet is doing.
Mikey:
I've had to qualify at two clubs. In neither club was it a big deal. It wasn't hard at all. They were not, in any way, trying to make people fail or require them to be expert marksman. What they were trying to do is make sure that people follow proper safe procedures. The qualification process lets them see the new member in action on the line and correct them if required. You can't do that if all you do is talk at the new members.
Others:
At my club, a number of years ago we were short on instructors and it took a long time before we were able to do a range orientation for a new member. He came to a club meeting and complained about it long and hard. We discussed at the meeting that we needed more instructors, and the club membership voted to pay for several members to become NRA certified instructors. The new member who complained was the first to volunteer. He's helped out doing range orientation for years, even though he had a full time job, and spent 2 weekends a month in the National Guard, and is now an officer.
If you see a problem, come to the board with a solution and offer to help implement it.
I've had to qualify at two clubs. In neither club was it a big deal. It wasn't hard at all. They were not, in any way, trying to make people fail or require them to be expert marksman. What they were trying to do is make sure that people follow proper safe procedures. The qualification process lets them see the new member in action on the line and correct them if required. You can't do that if all you do is talk at the new members.
Others:
At my club, a number of years ago we were short on instructors and it took a long time before we were able to do a range orientation for a new member. He came to a club meeting and complained about it long and hard. We discussed at the meeting that we needed more instructors, and the club membership voted to pay for several members to become NRA certified instructors. The new member who complained was the first to volunteer. He's helped out doing range orientation for years, even though he had a full time job, and spent 2 weekends a month in the National Guard, and is now an officer.
If you see a problem, come to the board with a solution and offer to help implement it.
Last edited:
I understand but disagree with the intended outcome of qualifying, that’s all.
+1 Absolutely!
I don't have a problem with any private club making a range test mandatory. I may not agree with it but I have the choice to join or not to join.
This thread has turned in to a MRA bashing thread and I would like it to stop. I have been to MRA once so I can't speak from experience as my range time was limited. The bottom line here is if you don't like the way a club does things fine one you like. Which is exactly what Martlet is doing.
Overall, MRA isn't a bad club at all. I merely listed some of the reasons I'M leaving. That's what a public forum is for, to share information. I could equally list a ton of things I love about MRA, however, that isn't what this thread is about. In the list of things that are important to me, the negatives have come to outweigh the positives, hence, my search for a new club. The same may not be true for someone else. That's great. They'll enjoy their time at MRA.
It's saddening to see some members/officers treat the club like a good ol' boys club. Being berated by officers/members for voicing my opinion on a public forum and being told that doing so would make me an unwelcome member of their club reeks of elitism. It's that very attitude that drives many away.
I just want a club where I can pay my dues, use the ranges I want in a safe, professional, and respectful manner as close to the times it's convenient for me as possible, without the added stigma that if I don't have time, or desire, to do work around the range I'm suddenly a horrible member, even though I pay extra as a result.
Why qualification is important
I agree with you that if all members of clubs acted as truly responsible adults there would be no need for qualification or even a license. However, in the wrong hands a firearm becomes a deadly weapon.
As a member of several clubs, I have seen people do things that simply shock me. If you think about it, people do things in the normal course of the day that are truly stupid. Think about what you see while driving on the highway. Many times people just don't think.
Most clubs in Mass are indeed located within striking distance of populated areas. It is every club's number one responsibility to make sure that the surrounding community is protected from rounds leaving their range. As shooters, if we want to continue to have these ranges to shoot at we must understand that the rules have usually been put in place for a reason and to go along with the qualification procedures that any club's Board puts in place.
If you think the procedure is wrong or unnecessary then attend a board meeting and voice your opinion. You may indeed be correct, but change only happens when one person takes the time to start the ball rolling.
Remember, if you do damage at a club you will be punished according to the rules and bylaws of that organization. Typically the most they can do is throw you out. However, if a round escapes and causes property damage or worse, and can be tracked to the person who fired it, that person's life will be turned upside down by the chief of police, the district attorney and lawyers.
I agree with you that if all members of clubs acted as truly responsible adults there would be no need for qualification or even a license. However, in the wrong hands a firearm becomes a deadly weapon.
As a member of several clubs, I have seen people do things that simply shock me. If you think about it, people do things in the normal course of the day that are truly stupid. Think about what you see while driving on the highway. Many times people just don't think.
Most clubs in Mass are indeed located within striking distance of populated areas. It is every club's number one responsibility to make sure that the surrounding community is protected from rounds leaving their range. As shooters, if we want to continue to have these ranges to shoot at we must understand that the rules have usually been put in place for a reason and to go along with the qualification procedures that any club's Board puts in place.
If you think the procedure is wrong or unnecessary then attend a board meeting and voice your opinion. You may indeed be correct, but change only happens when one person takes the time to start the ball rolling.
Remember, if you do damage at a club you will be punished according to the rules and bylaws of that organization. Typically the most they can do is throw you out. However, if a round escapes and causes property damage or worse, and can be tracked to the person who fired it, that person's life will be turned upside down by the chief of police, the district attorney and lawyers.
dwarven1
Lonely Mountain Arms
Not all clubs inside 495 - Riverside doesn't have anything but an orientation (unless it's changed) to be able to shoot at all the ranges it has.
And with that kind of an answer, most folks will exercise that choice... and go elsewhere. Why can't you tell us why there's a one round at a time rule? I've literally never heard of such a thing at any other club. No rapid fire, no drawing from holsters... stuff like that I've heard of. But not only firing single shot rifles. I can't think of a worse way to practice riflery than to have to manually load each time and get out of position.
Uh... yes.
Shame, really... you have a bully pulpit here to defend your club's reputation. You should take advantage of it.
I agree Martlet and the whole range test thing wasn't directed at you that was more of a general statement. Like I said a private club is a private club.
Martlet: no one here has said you are a horrible member because you don't volunteer your time at the club.
What I've said is that if you don't help out, then your complaints are less likely to get the full encouragement of the board. The board members are simply people, with all the foibles of anyone else. Put yourself in the place of a board member. Think about what it would be like if you spent hours of your own time working at the club, trying to police safety, improve the facilities, keep it clean because people won't pick up after themselves, and then hours more wrestling with disciplinary procedures against knuckleheads. How would you feel when members criticize your work but make no effort to help out? You think you can do better? Great, come on in and help out. I'm sure they've got plenty of projects for you to help with if you can't convince the board to support your own proposals.
You've identified issues that will take the board's time to work out. You are telling them that they need to work harder and spend more of their limited free time to do X, Y, and Z, but you're not willing to help out. Why you are surprised and angry that they don't just jump to it?
Yes, you pay your dues. Great, I'm sure MRA needs the money. The reality is that if no one gave their time, these clubs would fold. The dues money is not nearly enough to pay for employees. If you are not helping out at the club, then (like most members) you are leeching off the backs of those who do, those who give their time to support the club and preserve shooting in eastern MA.
As for your statement about elitism, I'm sorry, but that's really wrong. You are criticizing the club and board in public without having given them the opportunity to respond to your concerns and/or tell you their plans for addressing them. You are really damaging them as an organization, potentially driving away new members, without letting them address the issues first. And then you claim that they are being "elitist" for not wanting to engage in a flame war with you on an open forum. I'm sorry, but I think you are being very, very unfair to the MRA board.
And to repeat, I am not a member of MRA. I've been perhaps the most vocal person on this thread who is disagreeing with you. So your criticism here:
is misguided. I'm neither an officer nor member of MRA. In fact, I don't think I know any of the board at MRA. And furthermore, you are criticizing the board here in public, but when you get criticized back, then that is "berating", "elitism", etc. Pot, kettle, comm check.
Riverside had a range qualification test when I joined last year.
Last edited:
I joined four years ago and had to take one, but it was pretty lame and not objectionable. I think it was five out of ten shots from a P22 on the paper at 25 yards
Huh? You disagree with trying to ensure safety? Or you think the clubs are trying to drive away members? Sorry, but I'm not following you.
