AMU is no longer having a Bullseye Team??

This question was asked over on TargetTalk with no responses yet, I thought someone here could answer it.

"Anyone know if this is true. I was told that the AMU is no longer having a Bullseye Team, but training for pistol Combat Matches instead."


http://targettalk.org/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=46886

- Dave

If it is true, there are going to be alot more Marines and Navy shooters winning big matches. 

Civilians too. 

I hope it's not true for the sake of marksmanship.

I am former AMU shooter and got ahold of one of my sources there. The AMU is switching their focus/mission to Bianchi Cup. They will shoot BE for Interservice and Perry.
Jon

Bianchi is NRA's big money/big sponsorship discipline.  I wonder if NRA worked behind the scenes to bring the AMU over to Bianchi to add more draw for their moneymaker....

We are on our own here folks.  We don't have any resources to promote our sport besides word of mouth and the internet.

It might be time for us to have a competitor meeting that people actually know about at Perry next year to see if Bullseye and the NRA still have a future together.

Bianchi Cup participation was way down too until they started the production division.

This is interesting to me.  Here we are trying to figure out if we should go it alone, then what? We are also resisting any change being introduced, myself included, ie. (eTargets at Perry).  Maybe holding on to some traditions is a slow road to death.  CMP is putting eTargets at Talladega.  Why do they think it's a good idea?

Rather than bite the hand we should be looking how we can get new blood AND make the NRA take notice, and they will, if they see an engaged shooting community.

I don't have any big ideas other than committing to get a least 2 new shooters to a match, I will provide ammo and guns for them to compete if needed.

- Dave

Oh by the way I just bought a SUIS eTagrget for AP practice.

Jim Henderson told me last year that government cutbacks has limited their ability to compete except at perry and matches between service groups and ended the clinics they once offered to civilians.  Im sure they will still be factor at perry.

DavidR wrote:Jim Henderson told me last year that government cutbacks has limited their ability to compete except at perry and matches between service groups and ended the clinics they once offered to civilians.  Im sure they will still be factor at perry.

This is what I suspected also.    I believe the last year that the AMU had a presence at Desert Midwinter was 2009 or 2010.


The sequester has hit everyone hard.

"This is interesting to me.  Here we are trying to figure out if we should go it alone, then what? We are also resisting any change being introduced, myself included, ie. (eTargets at Perry).  Maybe holding on to some traditions is a slow road to death.  CMP is putting eTargets at Talladega.  Why do they think it's a good idea?"

I wouldn't assume that any rational cost benefit analysis was behind this decision.  In my experience working acquisition for the government, they get steamrolled into a lot of things by manufacturers representatives, and the only limitation is, if someone will commit the millions of dollars of funding to their grand schemes. No thinking required.

As long as it isn't NRA trying to kill off Bullseye.  That's what I'm worried about.

The market and money (or lack there of) might do it.  Not the NRA, directly.

Schaumannk wrote:

I wouldn't assume that any rational cost benefit analysis was behind this decision.  In my experience working acquisition for the government, they get steamrolled into a lot of things by manufacturers representatives, and the only limitation is, if someone will commit the millions of dollars of funding to their grand schemes. No thinking required.

CMP doesn't get any money from the Govt. they are a federally chartered 501(c)(3) corporation.  The board spends their money thoughtfully. 

When building a new range eTargets makes considerable sense.  eTargets would require from 1/2 to 1/3 the land to support the same # of shooters for a match.  CMP has extensive experience with eTargets in their air rifle & pistol programs.  Also not having anyone downrange is a huge safety advantage even with all our safety precautions - I'm sure this plays into the insurance premiums.

With the technology that comes with eTargets you can actually watch an event.  Live scoreboards allow you to dial in and watch a specific competitor's target, live etc.  You might even have a major event recorded and broadcast on YouTube or maybe even TV at some point.

Maybe these are the type things we need to get more excitement around our sport?  While I totally enjoy the walk to the target and scoring, I don't see it being an attraction for new shooters.

Sorry for getting so far off topic.

- Dave

The federal law enacted in 1996 (Title 36 U. S. Code, 40701-40733) that created the Corporation for the Promotion of Rifle Practice and Firearms Safety, Inc. (CPRPFS, the formal legal name of the CMP) mandates these key “functions for the corporation:
(1) To instruct citizens of the United States in marksmanship; 
(2) To promote practice and safety in the use of firearms; 
(3) To conduct competitions in the use of firearms and to award trophies, prizes, badges, and other insignia to competitors.
The law specifically states: In carrying out the Civilian Marksmanship Program, the corporation shall give priority to activities that benefit firearms safety, training, and competition for youth and that reach as many youth participants as possible.

The new CMP mega complex is due to open spring of 2015.

dronning wrote:

Schaumannk wrote:

I wouldn't assume that any rational cost benefit analysis was behind this decision.  In my experience working acquisition for the government, they get steamrolled into a lot of things by manufacturers representatives, and the only limitation is, if someone will commit the millions of dollars of funding to their grand schemes. No thinking required.

CMP doesn't get any money from the Govt. they are a federally chartered 501(c)(3) corporation.  The board spends their money thoughtfully. 

When building a new range eTargets makes considerable sense.  eTargets would require from 1/2 to 1/3 the land to support the same # of shooters for a match.  CMP has extensive experience with eTargets in their air rifle & pistol programs.  Also not having anyone downrange is a huge safety advantage even with all our safety precautions - I'm sure this plays into the insurance premiums.

With the technology that comes with eTargets you can actually watch an event.  Live scoreboards allow you to dial in and watch a specific competitor's target, live etc.  You might even have a major event recorded and broadcast on YouTube or maybe even TV at some point.

Maybe these are the type things we need to get more excitement around our sport?  While I totally enjoy the walk to the target and scoring, I don't see it being an attraction for new shooters.

Sorry for getting so far off topic.

- Dave

The federal law enacted in 1996 (Title 36 U. S. Code, 40701-40733) that created the Corporation for the Promotion of Rifle Practice and Firearms Safety, Inc. (CPRPFS, the formal legal name of the CMP) mandates these key “functions for the corporation:
(1) To instruct citizens of the United States in marksmanship; 
(2) To promote practice and safety in the use of firearms; 
(3) To conduct competitions in the use of firearms and to award trophies, prizes, badges, and other insignia to competitors.
The law specifically states: In carrying out the Civilian Marksmanship Program, the corporation shall give priority to activities that benefit firearms safety, training, and competition for youth and that reach as many youth participants as possible.

You are right, and you are wrong.  It is federally chartered.  The CMP makes lots of money selling things they get for free from the government, and a lot of other government money pours in through Federal grants and support.  
I don't see a big difference between them, and Fannie May and Freddy Mack.  They are not even close to a self financing operation.

CMP spends tons of money for a fantastic shoot centre, but in the grass roots area it is still up to the individuals.

Schaumannk wrote:

dronning wrote:

Schaumannk wrote:

I wouldn't assume that any rational cost benefit analysis was behind this decision.  In my experience working acquisition for the government, they get steamrolled into a lot of things by manufacturers representatives, and the only limitation is, if someone will commit the millions of dollars of funding to their grand schemes. No thinking required.

CMP doesn't get any money from the Govt. they are a federally chartered 501(c)(3) corporation.  The board spends their money thoughtfully. 

When building a new range eTargets makes considerable sense.  eTargets would require from 1/2 to 1/3 the land to support the same # of shooters for a match.  CMP has extensive experience with eTargets in their air rifle & pistol programs.  Also not having anyone downrange is a huge safety advantage even with all our safety precautions - I'm sure this plays into the insurance premiums.

With the technology that comes with eTargets you can actually watch an event.  Live scoreboards allow you to dial in and watch a specific competitor's target, live etc.  You might even have a major event recorded and broadcast on YouTube or maybe even TV at some point.

Maybe these are the type things we need to get more excitement around our sport?  While I totally enjoy the walk to the target and scoring, I don't see it being an attraction for new shooters.

Sorry for getting so far off topic.

- Dave

The federal law enacted in 1996 (Title 36 U. S. Code, 40701-40733) that created the Corporation for the Promotion of Rifle Practice and Firearms Safety, Inc. (CPRPFS, the formal legal name of the CMP) mandates these key “functions for the corporation:
(1) To instruct citizens of the United States in marksmanship; 
(2) To promote practice and safety in the use of firearms; 
(3) To conduct competitions in the use of firearms and to award trophies, prizes, badges, and other insignia to competitors.
The law specifically states: In carrying out the Civilian Marksmanship Program, the corporation shall give priority to activities that benefit firearms safety, training, and competition for youth and that reach as many youth participants as possible.

You are right, and you are wrong.  It is federally chartered.  The CMP makes lots of money selling things they get for free from the government, and a lot of other government money pours in through Federal grants and support.  
I don't see a big difference between them, and Fannie May and Freddy Mack.  They are not even close to a self financing operation.

You are both right and wrong, as we both stated they are federally chartered.  It is well known that they sell surplus Garands , etc.. for operating revenue.  Since they are a non-profit the sales of surplus M1's won't last forever they set up a permanent endowment which is funded by the excess sales and donations for future operations.

They receive NO other government money in the form of grants or anything else.  The endowment does receive some pretty sizeable donations from estates of major supporters.

Dave

"They receive NO other government money in the form of grants or anything else.  The endowment does receive some pretty sizeable donations from estates of major supporters."




Prove it.    Post a link to their financial documents.    Should be a public record.
Also how much of their endowment, and earnings off of it, were the result of assets transferred from the government to the CMP when the Army turned it over?

Dug a little deeper, and found this. 

http://www.faqs.org/tax-exempt/AL/Corporation-For-The-Promotion-Of-Rifle-Practice-And-Firearms-Safety-Civilian-Marksmanship-Program.html

According to these figures, 84.5 percent of all CMP income comes from grants.    Maybe I am way off base here, and someone can point me to an organization other than the US federal government in the business of making grants.

Grants aren't always money.  The gov't contribution (grant) they received is the value of the surplus guns & ammo they receive and sell.  I am not sure if it's accounted for when received or when sold.  I will find out but I believe it goes into inventory at $1 then is accounted for when sold because a percentage of the guns are scrapped.

Grants can come from any organization the NRA gives our State association a grant.  Colleges give grants to students.  Estates can grant money too.

Dave

http://forums.thecmp.org/showthread.php?t=148141

dronning wrote:Grants aren't always money.  The gov't contribution (grant) they received is the value of the surplus guns & ammo they receive and sell.  I am not sure if it's accounted for when received or when sold.  I will find out but I believe it goes into inventory at $1 then is accounted for when sold because a percentage of the guns are scrapped.

Grants can come from any organization the NRA gives our State association a grant.  Colleges give grants to students.  Estates can grant money too.

Dave

http://forums.thecmp.org/showthread.php?t=148141

It doesn't really matter.  Based on the documents I read, the CMP's income was in the ballpark of thirty million a year.   In 2007 twenty five million of that amount was government grants. 

Sales of government guns, and commercial ammo which I am sure they had to buy,  netted less than a million a year.  This revenue covered less than a tenth of their operating expenses.

"The CPRPFS is a tax-exempt non-profit 501(c)(3) corporation chartered by the U.S. Congress, but is not an agency of the U.S. government (Title 36, United States Code, Section 40701 et seq.). Apart from a donation of surplus .22 and .30 caliber rifles in the Army's inventory to the CMP, the CMP receives no federal funding."




This is a lie of omission.    They aren't receiving any appropriated funds.    


Government grants don't fall under appropriated funds.

This might be off topic, but talking about the etargets.... I shot air rifle matches at the new Camp Perry complex. I didn't know what to think at first either, but I ended up liking it.

You have a video monitor at your side, you can zoom in to see exactly where your shot hit. It scores on the side, even tells you how close to the center you are by decimal points. Like an X can be a 10.5 or 10.9 etc. The whole thing is also live on the internet so the whole world can see (or laugh) at how your doing.

When finished, I went up to the control central, told them I was done. He hit a key and a print-out of my scores by shot, and a target plot showing where they all were. If I can find one, I will scan it and post it.

KenO wrote:This might be off topic, but talking about the etargets.... I shot air rifle matches at the new Camp Perry complex. I didn't know what to think at first either, but I ended up liking it.

You have a video monitor at your side, you can zoom in to see exactly where your shot hit. It scores on the side, even tells you how close to the center you are by decimal points. Like an X can be a 10.5 or 10.9 etc. The whole thing is also live on the internet so the whole world can see (or laugh) at how your doing.

When finished, I went up to the control central, told them I was done. He hit a key and a print-out of my scores by shot, and a target plot showing where they all were. If I can find one, I will scan it and post it.

No one, absolutely no one, has explained how timed and rapid fire is going to be conducted on non turning e targets. A huge part of this game is mastering the "Turn"..
Jerry

Jerry,
they will probably do the same thing as the Olympics, green light for go and red light for stop. Since it's electronic it knows if there is an early or late shot. If it works for Olympic rapid fire it will work just fine for conventional rapid fire. 
What i'm curious about is what will happen when the frame gets hit with a 230gr. hardball round.

When shooting with lights, those shooters aren't focused on their sights so they can see the lights.  Unless they change our sport so the shooters are at "low ready" until the lights change, I don't see how it's going to work.

New electronic ultradots with red-green sight rings that wirelessly . At extra cost of course...