I would like to address some concerns that have been raised about a possible gun firing range. For the sake of full disclosure I am for the firing range as long as it is not a noise issue. I think we should look at the claims by those opposed to the firing range. It was suggested that we take a .45 caliber gun out to the proposed firing range and fire off about 50 rounds at various days and times of the week. While I fully support this idea, I would suggest that this test be conducted with the caliber that is being proposed by Mike Gustafson, "range suitable for low-power handguns and rifles". I.E. .22 caliber.

First issue: sound. I believe that some people have the impression that the area will sound like, "Lethal Weapon" or "Dirty Harry". That's Hollywood; the bigger the bang the more drama for the movie.

Second issue: cost. I believe that Mike suggested that he would look to the NRA for a financial grant. I'm sure that those property owners that are in favor of a gun range would have no problem having an annual use fee like the one charged by the Jamestown firing range.

Third issue: environment/need. As to the remark that we are not Oakland, thankfully this is true, but we still have had home invasions in our area so don't suggest that it doesn't happen. (however, protection of the home is usually not the primary reason for improving shooting skill.) I know at least four ladies that have had to go to Jamestown to take weapons training. I think they would have preferred to have something in our area for training instead of having to make the trip down the hill.

 

Al Rodriguez