This was, indeed, news to me.
http://www.denverpost.com/outdoors/ci_4735397
Printable View
This was, indeed, news to me.
http://www.denverpost.com/outdoors/ci_4735397
about frigging time.
18,000 waste of space golf courses and it takes them 18 months to maybe find a spot?
ridiculous.
Faster please
Maybe we should take over some golf courses, would make a awesome sporting clays facility.
News to me too.
Wonder what is wrong with the old Rocky Flats site.
It's not like they are going to build houses there......ever.
Towards the end of the article, this blurb states:
I wonder if this 200K that is being considered is part of the North Shoot area?Quote:
The U.S. Forest Service is conducting a study to determine whether it will close about 200,000 acres of the Arapaho- Roosevelt National Forest west of Boulder to shooting, again because of conflict with creeping urbanization.
Typical that the Forest Service would consider this. It was only a matter of time.
yes it does include the north shoot area.
Rocky Flats will be primarily a National Wildlife Refuge and as such, NO firearms will be allowed on those portions of the property. The Army Corps of Engineers is already beginning to finish up the Superfund cleanups and withdraw their offices and personnel. The NWR is already establish and will be expanding as the ACoE certifies SFc completion.
BUT, The Forrest Service and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) also have control of portions of Rocky Flats. I'm not sure of what their status of reclamation is. I'm not sure what that would mean for a shooting location at Rocky Flats, but my guess is that we won't see one. BLM has some fairly scary rules about shooting on their land and in fact, BLM has the most land under management of any government agenct, state or federal.
Still, it'll be cool to have someone closer into the city for long range rifle!!!
OK, so here's the deal:
The Government (both sides) do not want the public to be armed or to train with arms they have. I California and a few other states, they get the public to outlaw firearms. In States where that will not work, they take away you ability to shoot/train with firearms. Remember, it is against the law to be a part of a militia. So, on these club shoots, if folks are wearing splotchy clothes that would assist in hiding in the woods, that could be construed as militia training and we could all be doing FedTime. The Gummit is not your friend and will take away what they can by any sneaky means needed. If we were a liberal state, guns would be outlawed, but you can shoot at any number of public ranges as they would be everywhere like Kalifornia. Since we are a conservative state, you can own any gun you want, just don't shoot it.
careful man, the dude's in the dark suites and shades might be coming to get you..
That's been my take on this concept.Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnTRourke
You can't throw a golf ball without hitting a golf course in the metro area. You can't enter a strip mall parkinglot without seeing a shop that sells golfing equipment.
With all that going for one sport why are ranges that existed for decades (Like Aurora Gun Club) being forced out of place?
A shooting range is usually used by people with a high degree of interest in keeping safe while every moron and his brother can start whacking balls anyway they want.
Violence? Would some honest journalist want to get the police records of calls to violent confrontations on shooting ranges vs golf courses? Anyone want to bet that the cops are called to shooting ranges to settle violence amongst users more often than golf courses?
Golf courses also tend to have someplace to purchase alcohol. Someone could be driving home over the legal limit and kill someone DUI. No shooting ranges ever serve alcohol.
Noise? There isn't a shooting range around that makes as much noise as I-25 and that operates 24 hours a day. If sound baffles work so well to deaden the roar of traffic why couldn't they do the same for the sounds of shooting? Paid for by the developer putting in houses, of course.