Well now, I've observed the whole who-raw whine-fest about sissyfication with equal amounts of amusement and irritation. Once up on a time, you took an issue rifle to the line and fired issue ammunition. Then came the M1903 in National Match version. At first, it was very similar to the "regular" M1903 rifle, but then came better barrels and "C" stocks, which did not get put on "regular" rifles for many years. On my desk is a picture of the 1931 Kansas high power rifle team, with all their equipment. Their equipment consisted of NM rifles, 10-pocket cartridge belts, little straight thru telescopes on really short tripods and most of their shooting jackets had home-made elbow patches rudely stitched into place. The road from "real" service rifle had already become somewhat forked, but you could still see it from there.
Then post-Korea, came the NM Garand and M-14 with their heavy barrels, heavy stocks, glass bedding and trick sights, further blurring the view. Then came the A2 version of the AR, which quickly became a VERY heavy barreled VERY trick sighted float tubed fast-twist poodle shooter firing bullets way heavier than issue with two-stage triggers which were NEVER issue either. These gizmos are now commonly leaded up past 15 pounds and you need a garden cart to haul all your crap (store-bought cordura jacket, big spotting scope, scope stand, stool, cooler, etc) from the parking lot down to the 200-yard line for roll call, cursing your luck every step of the way that you got squadded on Viale instead of Rodriquez.
Anyway it appears to me that, we haven't really had a "real" service rifle at any of the "big" matches since about 1920, give or take a year or so. And for some time now, we are allowed a hooded rear sight with a lense, and the new adjustable what's-it thingy has been approved for NRA/CMP competition.
So anyway I had to tell all of y'all all of that so I could tell you this. What I was wondering was, all you so called "serious" shooters, those of you bashing the rules committees and especially the new guy who was hired to make things a bit more relevant, who by the way has more than just a little experience on the two-way range, I just really have to wonder how may of y'all are using a lense in YOUR rear sight at the same time you're whining about the new rapid fire start from position rules. Because I really don't see much difference between the two. Like any other sport, high power has its own rules. We may not like the rules, but there they are, and we all have to live with them. If you don't like the rules, perhaps you should campaign for a place on the rules committee and set things right, or move on to something else like bowling, or maybe match rifle.
Once upon a time, experience and practical improvements gained at the "big" matches trickled down to the troops and interested civilian shooters. We haven't had much of that, other than the DMR program, for quite a long time, and the DMR program is more more tactical than most of us are used to nowadays. Maybe it's time we changed some of that, and got back to shooting something like a "real" service rifle and shoot it like the troops actually shoot these days, than what we're doing now. Personally, I hope the new match, which by the way is a test match by invitation only, catches on and shakes things up and brings a whole bunch of new folks into the game. How that could be a bad thing, is beyond my feeble imagination but I guess some of you will be along promptly to tell me how to get my mind right.
Then post-Korea, came the NM Garand and M-14 with their heavy barrels, heavy stocks, glass bedding and trick sights, further blurring the view. Then came the A2 version of the AR, which quickly became a VERY heavy barreled VERY trick sighted float tubed fast-twist poodle shooter firing bullets way heavier than issue with two-stage triggers which were NEVER issue either. These gizmos are now commonly leaded up past 15 pounds and you need a garden cart to haul all your crap (store-bought cordura jacket, big spotting scope, scope stand, stool, cooler, etc) from the parking lot down to the 200-yard line for roll call, cursing your luck every step of the way that you got squadded on Viale instead of Rodriquez.
Anyway it appears to me that, we haven't really had a "real" service rifle at any of the "big" matches since about 1920, give or take a year or so. And for some time now, we are allowed a hooded rear sight with a lense, and the new adjustable what's-it thingy has been approved for NRA/CMP competition.
So anyway I had to tell all of y'all all of that so I could tell you this. What I was wondering was, all you so called "serious" shooters, those of you bashing the rules committees and especially the new guy who was hired to make things a bit more relevant, who by the way has more than just a little experience on the two-way range, I just really have to wonder how may of y'all are using a lense in YOUR rear sight at the same time you're whining about the new rapid fire start from position rules. Because I really don't see much difference between the two. Like any other sport, high power has its own rules. We may not like the rules, but there they are, and we all have to live with them. If you don't like the rules, perhaps you should campaign for a place on the rules committee and set things right, or move on to something else like bowling, or maybe match rifle.
Once upon a time, experience and practical improvements gained at the "big" matches trickled down to the troops and interested civilian shooters. We haven't had much of that, other than the DMR program, for quite a long time, and the DMR program is more more tactical than most of us are used to nowadays. Maybe it's time we changed some of that, and got back to shooting something like a "real" service rifle and shoot it like the troops actually shoot these days, than what we're doing now. Personally, I hope the new match, which by the way is a test match by invitation only, catches on and shakes things up and brings a whole bunch of new folks into the game. How that could be a bad thing, is beyond my feeble imagination but I guess some of you will be along promptly to tell me how to get my mind right.


Comment