1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

``Dateline Minnesota - May 2, 2010``

Discussion in 'Shooting Related Threads' started by goatskin, May 3, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. goatskin

    goatskin TS Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2009
    Messages:
    1,781
    Ron Baker's (semi-official, MTA-sanctioned and accurate) Minnesota Trap website http://www.mn-trap.org/ has been shut down. WTF?

    What <i>else</i>: new, different, surprising, unintended, consequential and inconvenient for trapshooters happened yesterday?

    So far, we know:

    - the proposal PRESENTED for consideration was NOT the same one that had been circulated as 'Part 1' (and that the mysterious 'Part 2' was never revealed).

    - the proposal (in it's rather obvious anti-BGC animus) virtually forecloses any OTHER small club from having aspirations of throwing a kissed, blessed & sanctified - an ... urr ... umm ... ' * ' shoot.

    What else shooter-unfriendly/divisive/confusing happened yesterday?

    Is dropping only a half-million registered birds (and several hundred shooters) in a couple of years not enough of a wakeup call that all is not well in MN shooting?

    Is it something in the water from all those lakes?


    Bob
     
  2. nubs

    nubs TS Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    14
    What the heck is shutting down Ron's sight got to do with this mess. The site was great for a new ATA SHOOTER to find out not just shoot dates, but clubs I haven't been to and links to MN, gun club web sights. Just want to say thanks for that Ron!

    It would have been nice to have something up and running before this spur of the moment decision was made.
     
  3. Dan S.

    Dan S. TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    117
    Goatskin, thanks for the update. I was unable to go the the meeting or know of anyone who did (so far). I think the state of trapshooting is in trouble in more than just Minnesota. But all of this is certainly interesting. As you say, How does this "help"? Again, thanks for the update.
     
  4. goatskin

    goatskin TS Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2009
    Messages:
    1,781
    As I understand it, the proposal was 14? 19? bullet-points, and most of the 3+hrs of chest-thumping solved a couple of minor issues, kicked more of them down the block and appointed a committee to make further recommendations.

    The big 'accomplishment' was to reduce the minimum number of Team qualifying targets from 2500 to 2000 - which makes plenty of sense considering the short (non-frozen) shooting season and scarcity of clubs in a big area. Also, the 700/700/700 number was reduced to 7/7/5.

    The anti-marathon, anti-BGC bias was still in full & fine fettle & feather, forbidding any club with less than FOUR traps to be considered for 'elite', blessed & kissed (read: *shoot) status.

    A committe of three is going to study, poll (ostensibly) and make further recommendations. How public and transparent their work will be was not addressed, apparently.

    And the MTA is going to have their own website, which they will fund (and control) theirownself; 'tis no wonder Ron Baker did not take kindly to the back of the MTA's hand.

    A lot of folks were there, and some might opine later as to what good (or bad) yesterday did for/to MN shooters: individually and/or as a whole.


    Bob
     
  5. Joe O

    Joe O Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    319
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Try http://www.mnsportingclays.org for a change of pace. If you really want to try something different go to a FITASC shoot. There are many things you can do with your shotguns. I shoot league trap but prefer the variety of Sporting and MN has excellent Sporting! Plenty of great guys there too. It's a very social pastime. Help coach a SCTP or AIM team, they are always short of help! Plenty of energy with the young shooters! I don't know(or want to know) the politics of the whole thing but there are plenty of options. Sometimes the hardest thing to do is to keep a positive outlook.
    I'm just sayin'
    Joe O
     
  6. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    Bob, Part (2) did indeed show up; the copy I have is titled that at the very top, left, in turquoise (color).

    Though I’ve not done any line-by-line analysis, it seems to me to be very similar to part (1) with a couple of additions. There was no mention of any added charges at *asterisk shoots, just as I maintained must be the case in our earlier conversations.

    The first addition I noticed was

    1.) “The Buffalo and Waseca Gun Clubs will “each” be given fifty –two (52) weekends per year to conduct Marathon and Multi Target event tournaments.”

    Bob Wiltse explained that as he went to nine (9) four-trap clubs in preparation for this proposal, he was surprised to hear that gun-club managers, when they had fewer customers than expected at a particular shoot, had thought that “seventy or eighty” competitors were probably shooting marathon targets as some nearby club. His own research had shown him that the real number was, at most, about a third that, say two dozen, tops. He concluded that marathon shoots, in themselves, do not drain competitors from trophy shoots in numbers big enough to worry about.

    In response to uncertainly about how the permitted fifty –two (52) weekends would affect the pocket shoot schedule and wall chart the MTA publishes, a questioner from the floor asked, in paraphrase: “Since the MTA charges a member club $50 for the advertising these two schedules provide, the marathon shoots actually scheduled by these clubs will still be on the schedule, right?” The answer provided was “The shoot schedule will look _exactly_ as it does now.”

    The second paragraph of 1.) above was

    “As stated in the MTA State Team Qualification Requirement proposal, Marathon and Multi-event targets shot nationally or in the State of Minnesota will “not” be used to qualify for the Minnesota State Teams.”

    In a rather long interchange near the mid-day break, it was agreed that “qualify” above meant both in target count and average. The board had already voted that it was at least interested in continuing the discussion, and when the above was refined, shortened, and defined so everyone could be sure what it was about, and put to a vote, the outcome was that a three member committee will be convened with representation of both points of view and with Bob Wiltse as advisor without a vote. That committee will bring its report to the three zone-shoot locations in late June. The general charge to the committee was that it would provide the detail, specifications, and definitions which a rule needs to work, if adopted. It is anticipated that the report will provide the basis for continued discussion at the zone shoot meetings.

    The candidate list for the State Election was introduced; anyone who expressed any interest in any position was on it. Biographies of each candidate have been prepared, have been put in envelopes, are labeled, and are ready to send to about 500 MTA members. It was decided (by general assent, not motion) to do all of the following: 1) put the biographies on the web site, 2) have them for handout at the zone shoots and 3) have them ready for handout on the first day of the State Shoot and thereafter. Having been thus covered, it seemed to me, the plan to mail them was re-affirmed. I did not notice any BOD member expressing any interest, or pressure, in the content of the mailing being sent out in their names other than they be, presumably, biographies. (And not the proposal too, which had once been considered.)

    The meeting was kept moving – however slowly – by a good plan of discussion, which even the most resistant speaker was held to in what seemed to me an even-handed way. Every member on the floor, every member of the board, was free to speak at whatever length desired on the specific topic at hand (either “questions” or “comment”, for example.)

    My own view was that if any board members had seen part 2) they concealed it very, very, well and even part 1) was largely new to many of them. I expect we will all know more specifics when we see the committee report. I do wonder what they are going to do with some of the twenty points part 2) makes but am willing to wait and see.

    I went out to shoot in the wind with MIA so did not attend the last half of the meeting. If I have left anything important out, or imagined something, or "slanted" a subject in one way or the other, I welcome comment or correction by anyone there, particularly board members.

    I think that anyone, on either side, will agree that what I have written above is as accurate a report they themselves could have produced unless they were taking notes, and I have not, I think, “taken sides” or favored any particular faction. So I’ve earned a little space to editorialize, haven’t I?

    I didn’t see anyone explain – or even question - why I, who shoots both trophy and marathon targets, should have some of my targets “thrown out.” I go to and support both kinds of clubs, I pay the same daily fees, both MTA and ATA, and “support trapshooting in Minnesota” equally at both venues. What right does anyone have to discard any of my targets? They are my targets, not theirs. They can do what they want with theirs, but mine are mine, shot as required by the rulebook. I would not support a rule requiring all State Team candidates to shoot Minnesota marathon targets with me in winter, as I do, so why are they messing with me?

    Neil
     
  7. Pride Engineer

    Pride Engineer Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2008
    Messages:
    804
    I think it would be good to know the reasoning behind changing website providers. The board gave this issue careful consideration. Concerns were raised at past meetings about our past provider being the sole judge of website content. There were also concerns about our provider being a one person provider therefore making our website conditional on his availability and desire to continue. As a result of these concerns, our secretary, Sally Stevens, offered to talk to our provider to see if answers could be found to these issues. The result of these discussions were not satisfactory to the board. The past provider insisted on having total control of what went on the website.

    We then turned to the other website proposal which was made by the current provider of the Pennslavania website. This proposal was in hand when we made the decision to see if Sally could work out the problems. We selected this offer, after learning our attempt to solve the issues was unsucessful, as it gives control of the website content to the MTA board, the people elected by the MTA members.

    One of the dangers of having a website provider as we did in the past, was there was no contract. In the event something were to happen to the provider, or if he decided he wanted to stop supporting the site, we would be left holding the bag, as we in fact, have been. We will have a contract with the new provider and if we decide to switch at a later date, a smooth, seamless transition will be possible.

    After careful consideration of the above issues, the board voted 10-2 to change. All board members present wished to thank our past provider for initiating our first ever website and supporting it with his time.

    The new website will be Minnesotatrap.com We expect the first parts will be up later this month.

    Mark Zauhar, MTA President
     
  8. primed

    primed Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,119
    Neil

    What I understood seems to be what you understood. The proposal would take marathon targets out of the calculation for average and target count for purposes of state team selection. But, do you understand what purpose the other 6.888 pages served. It appears to me to be an attempt to "baffle them with B.S." I find it odd that you seem put out about your marathon targets when we were assured that it was a "win/win" for everybody:<)

    When I questioned the need for this rule, an allegation of cheating was made against one individual. I don't think anyone has proof or they should have pursued the issue through official channels. This whole issue seems to be an action to keep somebody off of the state team for an allegation. If the allegation is false, why are we wasting all of this time and effort. If true, why not file an official complaint and get past it. I don't see a demonstrated need for the rule.

    If this proposal goes to the membership at the state shoot (and that is just one possibility) I think it should be refined to one sentence similar to the second sentence of my post. It was clear from the discussion that the author seemed confused on what targets would count and one board member seemed confused about his own position on the issue. How do they think the rest of us feel?

    Bob
     
  9. oldgahchamp

    oldgahchamp Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,263
    Did I understand that clubs with less than 4 traps can not hold ATA events? Larry
     
  10. primed

    primed Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,119
    oldgahchamp

    That was not the way I understood it. The co-author of the proposal only sought input from clubs that had 4 traps or more. I believe he specifically stated that any club could hold marathons and/or *asterisk shoots under his proposal. As a side note, the two clubs that throw the vast majority of the marathon targets in the state have three traps each if memory serves. Their input was not sought by design of the co-author. He set his own standards about who to talk to and who to avoid.

    For clarifcation, it was pointed out that the ATA does not identify marathon targets in their records so it may be difficult to police in general and nearly impossible for targets shot out of state.

    Bob
     
  11. Joe O

    Joe O Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    319
    Location:
    Minnesota
    These Clubs must really dislike Albany GC. After you pay $20 to join and $15 to be in league you can buy a 10 rd punch card for $35. Yes that's $3.50 per rd of Trap, Skeet or 2 punches for 50 on the 5 Stand. The Beer is always cold and they usually have 3 fields up and running. Nice little club and the closest to home for me!
    Joe O
     
  12. pfofml

    pfofml Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    130
    Denny, Your statement is nearly correct. The correct statemnt should read that the second most handsome shooter left the state. The most handsome shooter, without a doubt, still is living and shooting in Minnesota. Truly, I forgive you for this oversite.
    However, if you stated that the best prevaricator has left Minnesota; that would be a true statement.
    Yours
    Peter Falk III
     
  13. JACK

    JACK Well-Known Member Supporting Vendor

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    14,713
    Location:
    NW Wisconsin
    It is pretty easy to find agreement with parts of the issue and pretty easy to fault it in some ways too. but for ATA trapshooting sake, do not let your differences keep you from shooting any/all of these venues. Tahy are all run by decent trapshooters and we have that in common.

    Jack
     
  14. slipping into darkness

    slipping into darkness TS Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2008
    Messages:
    403
    Wow this is interresting, I think it's the water and the cold? we have two north state with problems! one is in a endless search for a home grounds with 1700 members and the other is fighting over 500 members to stay afloat! it would seam one knows how to make money in difficult times and they think buy restricking targets they get whats left of the few?? The goverment may be testing a new drug on these two state? "slid"
     
  15. BugEater

    BugEater TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    Messages:
    26
    Paul in MN,

    The only thing that applies here is the fact you continue to have the same individuals on this thread as in the past thread continuing to misled other individuals with the facts. Take a look at both threads; it’s pretty much the same individuals saying the same things in both.

    These are the facts. Now I'll type these facts real slow so maybe you and others will understand what is trying to take place. The Buffalo Gun Club and the Waseca Gun Club will have 52 weeks a year to throw Marathon shoots. That is 208 dates for Marathon shoots. Plus, now understand this, any other gun club in the state of MN can also throw a Marathon shoot any time they want to. These targets will count for your average and total accumulation of targets in a life time. Not a bad deal for shooting what is basically considered practice targets by most shooters. The only thing the Marathon targets will not count for is making the state team. Everyone also needs to know that the 2,500 singles target requirement to make the state team is going to be lowered to 2,000 or possibly lower. Everyone needs to know that there will be more registered trophy shoots next year then this year which will make it easier for a shooter to get the needed targets. However, the individuals on this thread who attended the meeting on Sunday make no mention of these. Is this on purpose or just a mistake?? I'll let you decide.

    I had a discussion with about 10 shooters on Sunday at the Del-Tone Gun Club concerning the proposal. After about 10 minutes, it's my belief, the shooters understood completely what the concept of what the proposal is trying to accomplish and they understood the concept on how the proposal would work. It's also my belief the majority of the shooter supported the proposal. But, unlike the individuals on this thread and the last thread, these individuals were willing to listen and think for themselves.

    As far as the Chicago Politics go, the only person playing that game is you, doggai! You and some of your friends, who attended the meeting on Sunday, continue to get on this thread and other threads and state how you don't understand what the proposal is trying to accomplish, how it's going to work and how bad it is for trapshooting. Am I to believe, you really don't understand or you just choose not to so you can continue to make your personal attacks on Bob and me?? What I don't understand is why you and your friends, supposedly, don't understand the difference between the stress factors related to a trophy tournament environment versus a multi-target event tournament. You can't tell me you don't get the difference of going to the last post of a 100 target event in a trophy tournament, having not missed a target, knowing if you miss one target you don't get anything but if you run the last post to get a 100 straight, your in a shoot off for the top prize. That's stress. Now, if you’re at a Marathon/multi-target event and the same scenario presents itself, what stress is there?? Either the shooter gets a pat on the back or someone saying “maybe next time". I’ve explained the proposal to several individuals who have nothing to do with trapshooting. Each individual understood what the proposal was about, what it was trying to accomplish and why it was needed. It took about 10 minutes.

    Now, let's turn the table on you Doggai. Why don't you explain to everyone why the club you represent continues to throw their membership shoot the same day a nearby club throws an ATA shoot to just take shooters away? Is that the common good of trapshooting?? If so, here’s your chance to explain. Also, if you daggai, are so worried about me making a public apology, I'd like to ask you why you, daggai, wasn't as worried about a public apology last year when one of your friends made a young lady cry at the MN state shoot. Was it because he's a friend of yours and I'm not or was it that you were part of the antics?? The only things I or anyone else heard were excuses and reasons for the behavior. Here’s your chance to explain.

    There will be no apology coming from me to anyone, any time soon.

    Unlike most individuals on TS, I'll list my name.

    Jeff Hoppes
     
  16. CalamitySJ

    CalamitySJ Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Messages:
    650
    Jeff,

    As MTA Secretary I can shed some light on at least one issue, and that
    is your statement that BGC intentionally set their club membership shoot
    on a date when Monticello Gun Club was throwing registered targets, in
    an attempt to keep shooters away from Monticello.

    During the Steer & Calf Shoot at Del-Tone last September, I held a
    meeting of many gun club managers and representatives. I was very
    pleased with the turnout and it was great to have as many as possible in
    the same room so we could discuss any conflicts or issues between clubs.


    BGC traditionally holds their membership shoot the first weekend of
    August, while Monticello Gun Club traditionally holds their Mini-Grand
    ATA Shoot the first or second weekend of August. Concerns were raised
    about the overlap so BGC stated that they would move their
    non-registered shoot a week earlier, to the last weekend of July. BGC
    also moved off one of their previously held ATA weekends and gave the
    weekend to Monticello as an added shoot for them.

    Once this was settled, Monticello then moved their Mini-Grand to
    accommodate a scheduled trip to the Grand. In all the helpful
    wrangling, both the Monticello Mini-Grand ATA registered shoot and the
    BGC non-registered members shoot STILL ended up on the same date. BGC
    has changed their starting time to later in the day to accommodate all
    the shooters will be participating in both.

    Jeff, as a new manager of Del-Tone, I look forward to including you in
    our upcoming September shoot date meeting. That meeting truly is of
    great benefit for all clubs and trapshooters of Minnesota.

    Sincerely,

    Sally Stevens
    MTA Secretary
    763-486-0853

    PS. I will be attending both Monticello's Mini-Grand and BGC's member event.
     
  17. CalamitySJ

    CalamitySJ Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Messages:
    650
    JF,

    Just to clarify, in December 2009 Bob Wiltse was appointed by the entire MTA BOD to recruit and bring forth all interested parties willing to serve the trapshooters of our great state. He did enlisted the help of all the BOD through emails and certainly had more in-depth assistance from some Zone Directors.

    Sally Stevens
    MTA Secretary
     
  18. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    Jeff, thank you for chiming in, as I invited others to do in my post.

    I did not cite the second half of 3.):

    "All nine MTA gun clubs who have signed the attached signature agreement page have agreed to add one (1) or two (2) *asterisk assigned MTA Tournaments to offer ATA registered tournaments to offer ATA registered shooters a choice and a vehicle to obtain the target requirements needed to qualify that shoot for his or hers Minnesota State Team."

    because I didn't think it was the right thing for me to do. But since you have brought it up, there's the text.

    Why didn't I mention it? Because I, using my own judgement, didn't think it was fair to the clubs.

    As I wrote earlier, the actual text of any rule which may emerge from the committee is not yet set, and we don't know, yet, how it will read. It may or may not turn out to be the rule that these clubs were basing their promises on. It may be that, reading the final proposal, some will say "If _that's_ the rule, I can't promise the same things I did when I understood something different."

    I personally think it's completely unfair to tout these commitments until the exact rules are known to the clubs. In fact, I hope no reader of this will think that a club is "welching" if they find it impossible to do this in the context of whatever happens. So I didn't mention it to give them the freedom to make the best economic decisions they can when all this is passed, or not. It was my decision and I will let the reader decide

    "the individuals on this thread who attended the meeting on Sunday make no mention of these. Is this on purpose or just a mistake?? I'll let you decide."

    and I'll help them in their decision by saying that in at least my case, it was on purpose. And I'll add that I continue to think that bringing it up here was a mistake. But not my mistake.

    Editorialization: I think it would be great to have more trophy shoots in the state and would attend them. But it worries me some too. There's little or no money in throwing registered targets for most clubs and they do it more as a service to the MTA than anything else. I think that many calculate the the number of shoots they throw now is about all the financial risk they are able to take; that the present number is all they can at least kind of count on breaking even on. If I found myself committed to an added shoot on a less favorable weekend and it didn't do well, I (speaking for myself there) am likely to think "Here I took a chance to help the MTA by adding a shoot and just lost money. I make so little on the other one, the combined payoff for throwing registered is hardly worth it. I'm not getting the support from the shooters I think I deserve for the effort I put into it so next year I think I'll just pass." That's the risk of adding shoots. Can the MTA corral enough shooters to make it pay, relatively for sure? If not, it might be better to let clubs make their own economic decisions, which in the end they are going to do anyway.

    I have little doubt that your were able to make ten people understand it in ten minutes. But there is a huge difference between "understanding" it and distilling it into a rule, a point I tried to make to you in that earlier thread. A rule has to be couple of lines, not a couple of pages. I was at the meeting; you weren't. I think I was nearly the only one who really understood what constituted an *asterisk shoot and Bob told us his three-item criterion a dozen times. I _know_ I was the only one who noticed the major difference between the present criteria and what was in Part (1). Or that the part now missing was _exactly_ the one I cited as a potential problem for you in that earlier post.

    As I say, I will wait for the committee report to see what is finally going to be brought before the members at the zone shoots. But I think that the general idea is still fair game for either side, and will have more on that anon.

    Neil
     
  19. brent375hh

    brent375hh TS Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2009
    Messages:
    292
    "Why don't you explain to everyone why the club you represent continues to throw their membership shoot the same day a nearby club throws an ATA shoot to just take shooters away"

    Maybe the club just wants to throw birds that weekend. It is hard to be a very active club without throwing birds on a date that interferes with some other clubs events.

    Does Menards think it is unfair for Home Depot to be open on Saturday too?
     
  20. BugEater

    BugEater TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    Messages:
    26
    Paul in MN,

    The only thing that applies here is the fact you continue to have the same individuals on this thread as in the past thread continuing to misled other individuals with the facts. Take a look at both threads; it’s pretty much the same individuals saying the same things in both.

    These are the facts. Now I'll type these facts real slow so maybe you and others will understand what is trying to take place. The Buffalo Gun Club and the Waseca Gun Club will have 52 weeks a year to throw Marathon shoots. That is 208 dates for Marathon shoots. Plus, now understand this, any other gun club in the state of MN can also throw a Marathon shoot any time they want to. These targets will count for your average and total accumulation of targets in a life time. Not a bad deal for shooting what is basically considered practice targets by most shooters. The only thing the Marathon targets will not count for is making the state team. Everyone also needs to know that the 2,500 singles target requirement to make the state team is going to be lowered to 2,000 or possibly lower. Everyone needs to know that there will be more registered trophy shoots next year then this year which will make it easier for a shooter to get the needed targets. However, the individuals on this thread who attended the meeting on Sunday make no mention of these. Is this on purpose or just a mistake?? I'll let you decide.

    I had a discussion with about 10 shooters on Sunday at the Del-Tone Gun Club concerning the proposal. After about 10 minutes, it's my belief, the shooters understood completely what the concept of what the proposal is trying to accomplish and they understood the concept on how the proposal would work. It's also my belief the majority of the shooter supported the proposal. But, unlike the individuals on this thread and the last thread, these individuals were willing to listen and think for themselves.

    As far as the Chicago Politics go, the only person playing that game is you, doggai! You and some of your friends, who attended the meeting on Sunday, continue to get on this thread and other threads and state how you don't understand what the proposal is trying to accomplish, how it's going to work and how bad it is for trapshooting. Am I to believe, you really don't understand or you just choose not to so you can continue to make your personal attacks on Bob and me?? What I don't understand is why you and your friends, supposedly, don't understand the difference between the stress factors related to a trophy tournament environment versus a multi-target event tournament. You can't tell me you don't get the difference of going to the last post of a 100 target event in a trophy tournament, having not missed a target, knowing if you miss one target you don't get anything but if you run the last post to get a 100 straight, your in a shoot off for the top prize. That's stress. Now, if you’re at a Marathon/multi-target event and the same scenario presents itself, what stress is there?? Either the shooter gets a pat on the back or someone saying “maybe next time". I’ve explained the proposal to several individuals who have nothing to do with trapshooting. Each individual understood what the proposal was about, what it was trying to accomplish and why it was needed. It took about 10 minutes.

    Now, let's turn the table on you Doggai. Why don't you explain to everyone why the club you represent continues to throw their membership shoot the same day a nearby club throws an ATA shoot to just take shooters away? Is that the common good of trapshooting?? If so, here’s your chance to explain. Also, if you daggai, are so worried about me making a public apology, I'd like to ask you why you, daggai, wasn't as worried about a public apology last year when one of your friends made a young lady cry at the MN state shoot. Was it because he's a friend of yours and I'm not or was it that you were part of the antics?? The only things I or anyone else heard were excuses and reasons for the behavior. Here’s your chance to explain.

    There will be no apology coming from me to anyone, any time soon.

    Unlike most individuals on TS, I'll list my name.

    Jeff Hoppes
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.