OGC Members: This is what you're going to get!!

[bstrawse]

I was a long time ago, not anymore.

Just curious, more than anything. If I were still a member, I would hope for a better explanation for an expenditure of this size than just "NRA standards".

We discussed this in a series of extensive and specific presentations over the past few months... It wasn't just me saying "NRA standards"....

[Erud]

So, you are required to spend a half million dollars or so to meet NRA standards?

For these two ranges - and specifically to mitigate risks identified and shared through this process? This is the course of action that has been reviewed, proposed, debated extensively, and approved by the members.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on a more cost effective way to do this that meets the specific requirements under Minnesota Law, the current NRA Range Source Guide (standards - 800ish pages), and effectively mitigates the risks identified in our range risk assessment.

B

Is OGC the only range that has to meet these standards?

[Lights]

Erud, I am a new member to OGC and a certified NRA RSO. This needs to be done to protect are butts period. No disrespect to you Sir, but this is a club voted on project and we decided to do it. In the future you will see this at more and more ranges. Hudson Rod and Gun is already looking into going no blue sky also along with a bunch of other clubs.

[whiteox]

Blue sky is an existential threat to a club like Oakdale. There are a fair number of houses within range of a rifle, where a shooter slips or whatever and launches a round over the berm.

Most folks have a seriously low tolerance for rounds hitting their house and I don't blame them one bit.

If a round ever left OGC and hit a home, or worse yet another human being, the club would be shut down.

I've never met Sam, but I'm very grateful for the work he and Bstrawse have done on this.

[bstrawse]

So, you are required to spend a half million dollars or so to meet NRA standards?

For these two ranges - and specifically to mitigate risks identified and shared through this process? This is the course of action that has been reviewed, proposed, debated extensively, and approved by the members.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on a more cost effective way to do this that meets the specific requirements under Minnesota Law, the current NRA Range Source Guide (standards - 800ish pages), and effectively mitigates the risks identified in our range risk assessment.

B

Is OGC the only range that has to meet these standards?

No.
b

[xd ED]

Blue sky is an existential threat to a club like Oakdale. There are a fair number of houses within range of a rifle, where a shooter slips or whatever and launches a round over the berm.

Most folks have a seriously low tolerance for rounds hitting their house and I don't blame them one bit.

If a round ever left OGC and hit a home, or worse yet another human being, the club would be shut down.

I've never met Sam, but I'm very grateful for the work he and Bstrawse have done on this.

While I'm not going to argue about the need for these improvements, The possibility of a round hitting a house, or even landing on private, or high use public property is pretty slim, giv en the orientation of the ranges, and the proximity of the park reserve. The greatest vulnerability in the ballistic shadow would appear to be the beach in the park reserve, approx 1 mile north

[TH3180]

Will these changes effect the USPSA and GSSF matches in the future?

[bstrawse]

Will these changes effect the USPSA and GSSF matches in the future?

No. The designs were done in a way to ensure we do not impact our competitive matches - and the specific safety elements *already incorporated in the match courses of fire* (such as the course design, the use of range officers, and the specific safety guidelines) are more than enough to mitigate the risk.

Great question though -- there was some good discussion around this very topic at the member meeting.
b

[Seismic Sam]

Blue sky is an existential threat to a club like Oakdale. There are a fair number of houses within range of a rifle, where a shooter slips or whatever and launches a round over the berm.

Most folks have a seriously low tolerance for rounds hitting their house and I don't blame them one bit.

If a round ever left OGC and hit a home, or worse yet another human being, the club would be shut down.

I've never met Sam, but I'm very grateful for the work he and Bstrawse have done on this.

While I'm not going to argue about the need for these improvements, The possibility of a round hitting a house, or even landing on private, or high use public property is pretty slim, giv en the orientation of the ranges, and the proximity of the park reserve. The greatest vulnerability in the ballistic shadow would appear to be the beach in the park reserve, approx 1 mile north

Well, your assessment of the probability of a round getting out and hitting somebody is flat out WRONG, and it's ALREADY happened!! Somebody up in the park caught a spent 7.62 x 39 bullet in the chest that hit him, but didn't penetrate the skin, and fell to the ground. The Washington County Sheriff got involved, did the forensic analysis and found the land and groove pattern was from a Russian AK, did the ballistic analysis, and thankfully concluded that it came from the gravel pit across the road and to the West of OGC, and the gravel pit owner was told to cease and desist in no uncertain terms, and not let any more yahoos shoot on his property. Now, if you just compare the relative volume of fire from a few yahoos in the gravel pit with the volume of fire that goes through the 100 at Oakdale, how much greater do you think our chances are of repeating something that has ALREADY happened next door to us?? Anybody else want to make some gratuitous assumptions about how un-necessary this whole project was??

Oh, and BTW, this happened up at the Elk River Range, and they have a ton more land than we do, and it's a lot more sparsley populated up there too. Look at the Google satellite images if you want to check it out. Two rounds got out of there, one from a member and one from a Minneapolis cop practicing , and both rounds hit existing structures to the North that were noticed immediately. The Sheriff showed up and told them one more round would get the club closed down immediately and permanently, and they had to move hundreds of cubic yards of dirt around to build up their berms, and take a lot of other precautions too, and that sword will be above their heads for as long as that club survives. I had a very long talk with my counterpart up there shortly after I got elected, so this kind of thing can and DOES happen, even in areas that are MUCH more sparsely populated than Lake Elmo.

[xd ED]

As I said, I'm not arguing against the project. What prompted my post was the comment about the possibility of hitting a house. I think we can agree that even if a round went over any berm, specifically hitting house is quite unlikely.
And I'll take your word that the one known incident didn't involve OGC.

I am not against the range safety improvements, as they should enhance the safety of the surrounding areas, and the club's position in the community as well.

There's more to consider than volume of fire, when comparing probabilities of some clowns in a gravel pit to the OGC operation being a safety issue.

Personally Sam, I appreciate your involvement on this project. I believe the club, as well as the surrounding area will be well served by the improvements.

[Erud]

If "no blue sky" is the criteria, how could a club with firing lines beyond short range be able to meet these standards? It seems that there would be a lot of sky to cover if shooting from prone at 600 or 1000 yards. What, if any are the penalties for not meeting these standards?

I am genuinely curious, as I am a member of other clubs and would suspect that if this is a requirement now, it will affect every other club out there. Unfortunately, I suspect that OGC is probably the only club that would be able to undertake a project like this due to the financial aspect of it.

[rugersol]

but didn't penetrate the skin, and fell to the ground.

I shoot SASS ... get hit with a slug, now 'n then ... same thing! ... actually, it's the little shards the cut yer nose 'n ears that are the REAL problem!

I should think this one incident is proof that there's practically zero risk of serious injury?! Sure, he could sue! ... I could see it in court, now! ... "Dr., how life-threatening were his injuries?!" ... "well, we thought about putting on a band-aid ... but we didn't have a Smurf one, and he refused anything else!"

I suspect that OGC is probably the only club that would be able to undertake a project like this due to the financial aspect of it.

You and I are not the only ones who care about that ... but, we are most certainly in the minority! ... as with the '08 and '12 elections, "majority rules"!

I was a member at OGC almost 20yr ago ... seen more than a few board members come 'n go ... a few exceptions aside, it's not unlike yer average politician ... "I was elected ... I must be important ... I should do SOMETHING!"

By God, "something" will be done!

**** everything, and everyone else!

They're right about one thing ... eventually, this will be required ... at all ranges ... presuming, there are any left, who can afford it!

We'll see how long even they get by, without the same setup on the Comp, 50yd, and 200yd! ... let alone, how long "matches" are allowed, without such "standards", in play! ... I guarantee ya two things ... 1. the BOD will have different members, years from now ... 2. whomever that ends up bein', they will have to do "something"!

[Holland&Holland]

I was a long time ago, not anymore.

Just curious, more than anything. If I were still a member, I would hope for a better explanation for an expenditure of this size than just "NRA standards".

As a current memeber I am very impressed with these images, though I can understand your comments about the expendature. I have to say hearing about a mortgage of this size scares the crap out of me. The first thing that went through my mind is a scinerio where a bank is taking over the operation of the range and all that that would entail. That said, I can understand the results of a lawsuite in effect doing the same or worse so I do not claim to have an answer. I have met Sam and Brian and found them to be very stand up guys who have the best of intentions for the club in mind. I think we have to let them do what they were elected to do. Having an extended short range like that will really be nice and some of the folks who we see on the 100 yard line during deer sight in scare the heck out of me so even though I hate spending money of any kind on anything, I have to say I am liking what I am seeing here.

Thanks for sharing these Sam, wanted to get to the meeting but was out of town for work.

[Erud]

but didn't penetrate the skin, and fell to the ground.

I shoot SASS ... get hit with a slug, now 'n then ... same thing! ... actually, it's the little shards the cut yer nose 'n ears that are the REAL problem!

I should think this one incident is proof that there's practically zero risk of serious injury?! Sure, he could sue! ... I could see it in court, now! ... "Dr., how life-threatening were his injuries?!" ... "well, we thought about putting on a band-aid ... but we didn't have a Smurf one, and he refused anything else!"

I suspect that OGC is probably the only club that would be able to undertake a project like this due to the financial aspect of it.

You and I are not the only ones who care about that ... but, we are most certainly in the minority! ... as with the '08 and '12 elections, "majority rules"!

I was a member at OGC almost 20yr ago ... seen more than a few board members come 'n go ... a few exceptions aside, it's not unlike yer average politician ... "I was elected ... I must be important ... I should do SOMETHING!"

By God, "something" will be done!

**** everything, and everyone else!

They're right about one thing ... eventually, this will be required ... at all ranges ... presuming, there are any left, who can afford it!

We'll see how long even they get by, without the same setup on the Comp, 50yd, and 200yd! ... let alone, how long "matches" are allowed, without such "standards", in play! ... I guarantee ya two things ... 1. the BOD will have different members, years from now ... 2. whomever that ends up bein', they will have to do "something"!

This would indeed be a "club killer". Personally, I'd prefer to spend the half million on a lawsuit to block these nonsensical standards from being enforced. It seems completely un-workable beyond 100-200 yards and insanely expensive. It would seem that OGC still has more ranges to cover this way in order to go completely "no blue sky"? It also seems like this plan manages to combine the worst aspects of indoor shooting(noise, poor lighting, shooter separation) while still maintaining the drawbacks of outdoor shooting - heat, cold, snow, mud, etc.

Gun clubs have existed for a long time and have very low rates of accidents or injuries, particularly when compared to other recreational facilities - football fields, swimming pools, etc. If every club agrees to pander to neighbors, politicians, etc, it will not be long before there are no shooting clubs left.

I let my OGC membership lapse in '03 or '04 due to the way it was run and the major PITA it was to shoot there. If I were a member today, I wouldn't be able to turn my membership card in fast enough to get away from this monstrosity.

Just my opinions. If you guys only wanted feedback from club members, you probably should have just put it on the OGC website...

[Holland&Holland]

Just my opinions. If you guys only wanted feedback from club members, you probably should have just put it on the OGC website...

You obviously did let your membership lapse. If you were a current member you would have received the written communications on this.