Pelham Fish & Game Club Land Sale

[daekken]

any waiver or hold harmless agreement is easily defeated by a good lawyer in a lawsuit.

I went to Pelham with a lawyer friend once; he signed the waiver and then joked it was about as worthless as the paper it was printed on.

They take it very seriously at Pelham, too. As soon as you enter the property it must be done. I know someone that parked at a range first and then walked over to do the waiver and they were thrown out for the day by the then-president, both the member and his guests.

The waiver also has the insidious ability to police how many times people are coming as guests. A year or two ago they added the limit to how often a guest could come each year. This is like gun registration in a way, it lets them easily track who brings guests and which guests so they can come after you if your cousin Joe comes for the magical third time this year or whatever.

Ironically, my MA club has never had a waiver of any kind.

 

[FisherTech]

I went to Pelham with a lawyer friend once; he signed the waiver and then joked it was about as worthless as the paper it was printed on.
day by the then-president, both the member and his guests.

Gurrie Fandozzi?

 

[PatMcD]

I agree with you on the way he was treated was shitty.

But also, zeroing a rifle at a match? ... isn't that an a**hole move?

I believe I said "Nail down a zero". The shooter in question is rated a High Master in Across the Course, Mid-Range, and Long Range. 495 Club, 792 Club, 990 Club, as well as a former Hard Gun on the Army Reserve Team. I can pretty much guarantee his first round would be no worse than a 8 on target because he'd already done the math.

 

[M1911]

They were the first club we ran into requiring any waiver.
It clearly was an issue for the league.
No big deal at the end of the day because we had a lot of laughs without Pelham. No hard personal issues myself but I shot at a few clubs on teams and nobody else had us signing shit for anything so I’m respectfully calling BS on your ‘most clubs’ statement.

In any event I hope the smarter side wins this. Selling land AS A GUN CLUB IS JUST PLAIN STUPID!!!

Most clubs where I’ve shot USPSA or IDPA required signing a waiver.

 

[M1911]

I went to Pelham with a lawyer friend once; he signed the waiver and then joked it was about as worthless as the paper it was printed on.

They take it very seriously at Pelham, too. As soon as you enter the property it must be done. I know someone that parked at a range first and then walked over to do the waiver and they were thrown out for the day by the then-president, both the member and his guests.

What a Richard.

 

[Asaltweapon]

Most clubs where I’ve shot USPSA or IDPA required signing a waiver.

Whatever. I only know what I know as it happened to me. I don’t spout internet crapola.

 

[SgtHal75]

Whatever. I only know what I know as it happened to me. I don’t spout internet crapola.

Internet Crapola…

 

[Rob Boudrie]

They were the first club we ran into requiring any waiver.
It clearly was an issue for the league.

It's should only be an issue is sprung on you at the last minute. And, if it spring on you at the last minute after you invested time, energy and $$ to attend, that gives your attorney even more ammunition to invalidate the waiver if necessary.

I took a course once from someone who moonlighted as an attorney (or perhaps he moonlighted as a shooting instructor). He spend 15 minutes going over the waiver and made a point that he was not pressuring or coercing anyone to sign, and even offered a full on the spot refund if someone did not feel comfortable signing it. He explained all of this was to increase the chances the waiver would he upheld if he needed it.

It's like the pre-nup that was invalidated because one party sprung on the other the day of the wedding - sign or the wedding if off. The court considered it coercive.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Shorthand version of a MUCH longer story involving an affidavit rather than a waiver competitors would have been required to sign if USPSA nationals were not moved out of Colorado:

• USPSA leadership insisted it was not encouraging competitors at a scheduled match in CO to break the law by violating the magazine ban. In fact, they offered about any legal reasoning why "not to worry" other than consultation with and publication of an opinion from a licensed attorney (perhaps because the board new what the answer would be)
• The match said "sure, we'll just require competitors to sign an affidavit they are not violating the magazine law"
• USPSA leadership - no way will we ever agree to that.

Shorthand version of a MUCH longer story

 

[M1911]

Shorthand version of a MUCH longer story involving an affidavit rather than a waiver competitors would have been required to sign if USPSA nationals were not moved out of Colorado:

• USPSA leadership insisted it was not encouraging competitors at a scheduled match in CO to break the law by violating the magazine ban. In fact, they offered about any legal reasoning why "not to worry" other than consultation with and publication of an opinion from a licensed attorney (perhaps because the board new what the answer would be)
• The match said "sure, we'll just require competitors to sign an affidavit they are not violating the magazine law"
• USPSA leadership - no way will we ever agree to that.

Shorthand version of a MUCH longer story

That whole situation wasn't so much USPSA leadership stepping on their dingus, as more like, running it over, stopping to back over it again, then going forward to run it over again, and again, and again.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

That whole situation wasn't so much USPSA leadership stepping on their dingus while wearing a track shoe , as more like, running it over, stopping to back over it again, then going forward to run it over again, and again, and again.

FIFY

 

[DarthRevan]

I agree with you on the way he was treated was shitty.

But also, zeroing a rifle at a match? ... isn't that an a**hole move?

Yeah... I'd lean more rookie than a**h***.

 

[Broc]

What is wrong with a club requiring a waiver?

Maybe you guys should beat up the people that get hurt doing something and try to go after the club instead of blaming the club.

 

[murf4321]

If the glue eating idiots at Pelham would stop shooting the wooden target holders or blasting holes in steel target frames with rifles on the clearly labeled “handgun only” action ranges from 50 feet away; maybe we’d have nicer things.

 

[jasons]

It wasn't Bob who ran this match I'm talking about. It was some other clown.
Bob would have let him (Brian M) shoot if he was running it.

I figured. Bob is a good dude.

 

[jasons]

I believe I said "Nail down a zero". The shooter in question is rated a High Master in Across the Course, Mid-Range, and Long Range. 495 Club, 792 Club, 990 Club, as well as a former Hard Gun on the Army Reserve Team. I can pretty much guarantee his first round would be no worse than a 8 on target because he'd already done the math.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen him shoot anything worse than a wide 9. Nice guy too.

 

[kingfisher]

Funny Pelham story: they advertised on their website a 600yd prone match. It said "Pelham members are encouraged to attend".
My buddy up here wanted to nail down a zero on a rifle he had just put a new front sight on. He drove down, 2-1/2 hours, and the gate is closed. He waits a few minutes and someone shows up, unlocks the gate, and my buddy follows him in. The guy stops and asks him "Uh, you need to be a member to shoot here". My buddy says "Yeh, there's a prone match today on the 600yd range". The guy says "Huh, well I guess that's ok".
So my buddy drives up to where the shooters are gathering. They ask him "Can we help you?" He says "Yes, I'm here to sign up for the match".
"Are you a member?"
"No, but the match bulletin didn't say you needed to be"
"I'm sorry, but this match is for members only; you're gonna have to leave"
"Seriously? Nowhere does it say that on your website"
"Don't know what to tell you, guy"
So, he gets back in his vehicle and drives 2-1/2 hrs home. On the way to his van, he hears one of them say "Go back to Maine".

What a bunch of a**h***s.

Here's the funny part: one of the guys there asked him what he wanted to shoot for a rifle. He replies "I've got my Palma rifle with me"
"Huh. Never heard of that brand".

I'm very glad I was not there that day to witness this (especially the bolded part).

I've had some fun on that 600-yard range, but that likely would have ruined my day. We're all in this together, and we should help each other... not be a**h***s.

 

[appraiser]

I've heard so many sh*tty things about Pelham I have never even thought about joining or asking to be brought in as a guest

I went to a gun show / swap meet there in 2006 iirc, my only time there

 

[kingfisher]

Does anybody know what the "Proxy vote will be held on Dec 13th at the BOD meeting" is for?
Could this mean that the land sale issue has not been decided (voted down by the members), and instead the BOD could change the outcome?

Update:

View attachment 680952

 

[Nick Fury]

Watch this closely going forward. This is not just a “Hey guys I got a great idea!” there is actual cash at stake and now you get to see who stands to benefit…

 

[murf4321]

Does anybody know what the "Proxy vote will be held on Dec 13th at the BOD meeting" is for?
Could this mean that the land sale issue has not been decided (voted down by the members), and instead the BOD could change the outcome?

Thought the same, not really sure, but I think it’s for something else.

The ballot had nothing on it anywhere mentioning anything about a proxy vote whatsoever. And the fact they they said the results were already “verified”, to me, means it’s finalized. Why verify once only to then verify it again?

 

[Mesatchornug]

Thought the same, not really sure, but I think it’s for something else.

The ballot had nothing on it anywhere mentioning anything about a proxy vote whatsoever. And the fact they they said the results were already “verified”, to me, means it’s finalized. Why verify once only to then verify it again?

Look at the club bylaws. There's probably a description of exactly how the vote has to be completed. It might say the final step is to read the tally into the record, in person, at the next meeting, or something.

 

[Rockrivr1]

If the glue eating idiots at Pelham would stop shooting the wooden target holders or blasting holes in steel target frames with rifles on the clearly labeled “handgun only” action ranges from 50 feet away; maybe we’d have nicer things.

This is a universal idiot move at all ranges. There's a discussion about the same thing on the Harvard thread.

 

[Amputee Marksman]

We require any non members shooting at our club to sign a waiver......even the trap league. Not really sure why that would be considered an issue it's standard practice at most clubs.

They were the first club we ran into requiring any waiver.
It clearly was an issue for the league.
No big deal at the end of the day because we had a lot of laughs without Pelham. No hard personal issues myself but I shot at a few clubs on teams and nobody else had us signing shit for anything so I’m respectfully calling BS on your ‘most clubs’ statement.

In any event I hope the smarter side wins this. Selling land AS A GUN CLUB IS JUST PLAIN STUPID!!!

I don't know how to define "most clubs" but I can say this. At WSA when you participate in an IDPA match you do agree to a waiver when you register for the match. I've had to sign waivers for just about every sanctioned IDPA match I've shot all over NE. I remember signing waivers for some other shooting events also. Maybe not to the level of "most clubs" but certainly it is not at all uncommon to sign a waiver.

 

[Asaltweapon]

I don't know how to define "most clubs" but I can say this. At WSA when you participate in an IDPA match you do agree to a waiver when you register for the match. I've had to sign waivers for just about every sanctioned IDPA match I've shot all over NE. I remember signing waivers for some other shooting events also. Maybe not to the level of "most clubs" but certainly it is not at all uncommon to sign a waiver.

Not my experience but if you are happy about it then be my guest. Enjoy!!

I only shared my true life story about the place when they started it.

 

[Amputee Marksman]

Not my experience but if you are happy about it then be my guest. Enjoy!!

I pretty much have no thoughts on it at all. It is what it is. Sign the release/waiver and shoot or go home. I'd rather shoot.

 

[Asaltweapon]

I pretty much have no thoughts on it at all. It is what it is. Sign the release/waiver and shoot or go home. I'd rather shoot.

Well the league said FU so there’s that. Not driving to Pelham didn’t hurt my feelings nor did any single person or team say “gee, so sad we don’t shoot with them anymore”.

 

[Amputee Marksman]

Well the league said FU so there’s that. Not driving to Pelham didn’t hurt my feelings nor did any single person or team say “gee, so sad we don’t shoot with them anymore”.

Just so we're clear, I have no problem with your decision. I respect the fact that you took a stand regardless of whether I agree with it or not.

 

[Asaltweapon]

Just so we're clear, I have no problem with your decision. I respect the fact that you took a stand regardless of whether I agree with it or not.

As do I in return. We’re good.

 

[wiryone1]

If the glue eating idiots at Pelham would stop shooting the wooden target holders or blasting holes in steel target frames with rifles on the clearly labeled “handgun only” action ranges from 50 feet away; maybe we’d have nicer things.

This is a universal idiot move at all ranges. There's a discussion about the same thing on the Harvard thread.

I have been a member at Pelham for 6yrs I think. For the record, voted no on land sale before I saw this thread. I just don't have time in this stage of my life to spend much time on NES. I think they could use that land for archery. Possibly move archery to that area instead of selling it.

Your not wrong on the idiot thing. Unfortunately, that is just something that most shooting orgs have to deal with. My issue is that when someone does something dangerous or destructive, all the members get a finger wagging email and sometimes a range is shut down until further notice. Why do the rest of the members have to pay a price when it is like one or two who should be held accountable? Recently they shut down the steel end bay for handguns because someone shoot across at and angle. Also the archery 3-D range was recently shut because someone was shooting a handgun there. The "caretakers house" is just beyond the archery range as well as the utility range drive. No berm with only a small patch of trees seporating the areas.

I realize they probably do not know who did those things, but why punish everyone else. Let us know, but don't close stuff down. Don't treat everyone as irresponsible by closing ranges.