While we are on the subject of what is rational vs. irrational lets consider the following.

1) I find it irrational that anyone would have a preference for which direction the animals are facing.

2) I find it rational that it would be preferrable to face the animal in a direction that it was intended to face and that the aiming side would be free from distracting letters, casting marks and other imperfections.

3) I find it disturbingly irrational that I would be "refunded my entry fees and invited off the range" if I simply requested that the NRA rules be followed as they relate to the question of animal placement (as pointed out above).Jim T.
B Poster

Jim, thanks for the response. I think you are all over it. In a day where the media is trying to destroy us daily, I think we should love and enjoy the sport, not look for reasons to destroy it. Maybe someone is making alot of money by shooting at the back of targets, just not me! (if I get some of that action, maybe I'll want to shoot at the back of targets too.)

Hawk-1 wrote: In a day where the media is trying to destroy us daily,

You might be on to something. I'm pretty sure the weather girl on channel 4 is trying to break up my marriage.

Just like Claymore mines - "this side toward enemy".

hambone49 wrote:You might be on to something. I'm pretty sure the weather girl on channel 4 is trying to break up my marriage.

Now that's funny.....

Bob259 wrote:While it's not the same as the smallbore targets, it's common practice in HP to face 'all' the animals the same way one day then the opposite the next because of the target cupping. Surprised someone hasn't complained about that yet...

PLEEEEAAAAAASE don't give them any more ideas...

JASON WROTE:

by Jason on Wed Mar 03, 2010 1:52 pm

Yes, Mary, there are usually spots to aim at on targets even with very good paint jobs. Having a guaranteed spot to aim at on every target would save at least a second or two of looking through the scope to find one on each target, which could make a difference.

Here's my little secret, folks: I use the "leg" of the chickens, the ear ofthe javelina, the head of the turkeys and the "horns" of the rams as aiming spots, and that is not fair to everyone else. Therefore, any feature that might be used by ANYONE as an aiming point should be eliminated. Having said so, I propose that all animal-shaped silhouettes be replaced by circular silhouettes. That way all targets would be devoid of any salient features which someone may use as an aiming point, blah, blah blah...

Like Ricky Ricardo used to say..."Loosee, thees ees sooooo ridiculous!!!!"

Y'all have a nice day.

Disclaimer:
The comments above are not intended to insult, degrade, criticize or attack anyone in any way. The intent is to point out how a fun sport can be ruined...

Go! Jaoquin Go!




I have the new prototipes designed


Jerry

Joaquin B wrote:JASON WROTE:

by Jason on Wed Mar 03, 2010 1:52 pm

Yes, Mary, there are usually spots to aim at on targets even with very good paint jobs. Having a guaranteed spot to aim at on every target would save at least a second or two of looking through the scope to find one on each target, which could make a difference.

Here's my little secret, folks: I use the "leg" of the chickens, the ear ofthe javelina, the head of the turkeys and the "horns" of the rams as aiming spots, and that is not fair to everyone else. Therefore, any feature that might be used by ANYONE as an aiming point should be eliminated. Having said so, I propose that all animal-shaped silhouettes be replaced by circular silhouettes. That way all targets would be devoid of any salient features which someone may use as an aiming point, blah, blah blah...

Like Ricky Ricardo used to say..."Loosee, thees ees sooooo ridiculous!!!!"

Y'all have a nice day.

Disclaimer:
The comments above are not intended to insult, degrade, criticize or attack anyone in any way. The intent is to point out how a fun sport can be ruined...

I was going to say this EXACT SAME thing yesterday but decided that I since I am still new around here that I would just sit back and continue watching this unfold.

I was waiting for someone from up here in WA to pipe up and point out that, as I have discussed with several others, I shoot at the legs on chickens and turkeys and the front legs on pigs and rams. While I'd love to have something to shoot at in the middle of the targets, the legs work just fine, too. The idea of having a different point of impact and point of aim was first introduced to me a couple years ago as "shoot the line" by Dennis Martinen as he uses the line of the back as his spot. It works.

Joaquin...sit up straight and behave yourself.

LOL
Innocent

I really don't understand why we are wasting so much time on this subject. The applicable section in my rule book pertaining to this subject reads as follows:

"On the one-fifth scale targets used in Smallbore Rifle all feet should be 1 inch wide by 2 inches long. For cast
Smallbore Rifle targets that have casting marks or dimples on one side, the smooth side must face toward the
shooters for consistent appearance."

Now I know there are people out there that wear their underwear so the tags show and even wear their thong backwards, but they can seek medical attention for this malady and will lose their predilection for placing animals in postions they were not intended to be in i.e. facing the wrong way.

As for me, I think we could more constructively spend our time discussing the following:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... st_Popular

JIm T, I believe my comment is BTB.
Innocent

Jim T. wrote:I really don't understand why we are wasting so much time on this subject. The applicable section in my rule book pertaining to this subject reads as follows:

"On the one-fifth scale targets used in Smallbore Rifle all feet should be 1 inch wide by 2 inches long. For cast
Smallbore Rifle targets that have casting marks or dimples on one side, the smooth side must face toward the
shooters for consistent appearance."

Now I know there are people out there that wear their underwear so the tags show and even wear their thong backwards, but they can seek medical attention for this malady and will lose their predilection for placing animals in postions they were not intended to be in i.e. facing the wrong way.

As for me, I think we could more constructively spend our time discussing the following:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... st_Popular

Personally, when it comes to shooting at the targets, I could take it or leave it. Realistically, it adds another dimension to the sport when the animals are facing a diferent direction (mostly on the Turkeys but to a minor extent on all of them). What has most people upset is that a small amount of people have had the rules changed. Now, on the pincipals of that alone I can agree with the people that are really upset about it. Now because of a select few, everyone is obligated to look at one side of the animals or, not hold an officially recognized NRA Match. If it were a strong majority that felt that the textured targets were unfair, there would not be that many people here speaking as they are. To summarize it, maybe better.... It was traditioinal in many clubs around the countrry to face them any which way and, nobody at those particiular clubs cared. Now they are forced into a one-way format by someone that is not even shooting there, and most-likely never will. I'm done! HaHa!