Stoeger suspended from USPSA

[JRV]

They threw Joe from Infinity under the bus for that as well, and all he did was ask them for whatever legal advice the Board was relying on (other than a letter from a Sheriff) when they were telling folks to fly to Colorado with standard cap mags...

[DMF13]

. . . responsible for the Colorado USPSA Nationals fiasco . . .Regardless of who communicated with the CO AG, or the media, the responsibility for that fiasco starts, and ends, with the USPSA leadership. They had two legitimate/responsible choices: 1) start with a location without a magazine restriction, or 2) hold the match in CO, but follow the USPSA rule book, specifically 3.3.1, which reads, "In states where competitors are restricted by law to maximum magazine capacity, that maximum capacity will be the maximum allowed for all competitors in the contest. Any such limitations must be made known to all competitors by the Match Director/Range Master before the start of the match."

They were aware the CO law only allows for possession of magazines with a capacity greater than 15 rounds, if continually possessed since before the law went into effect in 2013. They were also aware that many people would be in the violation of the law if they brought their competition gear to CO. For example, one of the most popular divisions is Carry Optics, and one of the very popular Carry Optics guns is the SIG P320. No one could have possessed P320 mags prior to the Colorado magazine limit, because they weren't available for sale until 2014. So without much effort, it is easy to prove anyone with a P320 mag, capable of holding more than 15 rounds, is in violation of the law, because it could not have been possessed since before the law went into effect.

The claims that it was a non-issue because the local Sheriff wouldn't enforce the ban are ridiculous. Anyone driving to the match will pass through several other cities, and counties. While most CO cops I know don't like the mag ban, that's not a universal sentiment, and it's not true for the various prosecutors either. Further, even if you made it to Mesa county without being contacted by LE, the local Sheriff isn't the only one who can make arrests in that county, and it would be the local District Attorney's office who would decide whether to prosecute based on an arrest made by another other agency.

While the chances of being arrested for it are somewhat low, and an actual prosecution, lower, the number is not zero, as shown by actual arrests, and convictions, since the law was passed.

Further, once the problem started receiving attention, to tell the members 'bring any mags you want, it's not a problem, but oh, by the way, sign this document saying you understand the law, and will comply with the law,' was extremely unprofessional, dishonest, and irresponsible.

Anyone that denies that, is either ignorant of the realities of the legal issues, or being dishonest about the realities of the legal issues.

All the rest is a sideshow, intended to lay blame anywhere other than the failure of the USPSA leadership to choose one of the two available, and responsible, options, for planning the national match.

[JCS]

Wait, what? Can you support that about doxxing? I’m skeptical.

While Ben has posted some harsh memes, I haven’t seen anything like that.

The BoD and USPSA personnel have done far worse, including stalking a member and threatening many others with a frightening abuse of power.


I'm responding to the insinuation that Derek doxxed anyone.

He has posted board minutes, court records, and state business filings, all of which were public.

I was referring to the stuff insights posted. He posted lots of personal information about BOD members relating to their past history and financials. Including stuff about their marriages and divorces. Some of which was decades old and doesn’t relate at all to uspsa. It doesn’t matter that it’s “public”. I can easily find out lots of very personal information about you that’s “public” on the internet. Just because you are good at internet detective work doesn’t mean you should share publicly what you’ve found. I personally think it’s inappropriate to post about a BOD personal life, marriages and divorces.

[Clusterfrack]

I was referring to the stuff insights posted. He posted lots of personal information about BOD members relating to their past history and financials. Including stuff about their marriages and divorces. Some of which was decades old and doesn’t relate at all to uspsa. It doesn’t matter that it’s “public”. I can easily find out lots of very personal information about you that’s “public” on the internet. Just because you are good at internet detective work doesn’t mean you should share publicly what you’ve found. I personally think it’s inappropriate to post about a BOD personal life, marriages and divorces.

I agree. I would have redacted anything not related to financial concerns.

[jetfire]

No one could have possessed P320 mags prior to the Colorado magazine limit, because they weren't available for sale until 2014.

Sure they could have, the P320 takes the same mags that the P250 which was definitely in production before the cut off.

But, your point is broadly correct and USPSA leadership dicked the dog on the Cameo thing

[modrecoil]

Posting public records isn’t doxxing.

I have no knowledge of the specific incident discussed but posting public records can be doxing. Especially when targeting an individual and intentionally collecting, aggregating and distributing personally identifiable information - public or private - without their consent. It can also apply to organizations but the ethical case there is less clear.

[bofe954]

I think if everyone would have kept their mouth shut the match could have been held in Colorado and it would have been fine.

I still think they should not have done it. Foley is gone and some more should go.

To me that should be about the end of it and the rest just reminds me of internet cancel culture BS.

A bankruptcy could be "just business" or could be someone who is completely irresponsible. Divorce issues could mean someone is a shitbag or that their spouse had a crafty lawyer. I can't tell which, and it may or may not have anything to do with whether that person should be on a BOD. So posting it to me is just trying to start controversy.

Jake selling stuff, and not paying his taxes...I know a lot of people who sold primers, ammo etc for profit during the recent shortage and I'm pretty sure none of them paid taxes on any of it. I know a lot of people who have sold firearms for more than they paid and I'm sure never paid taxes, and I don't care. I certainly don't think anyone should lose a job over it.

I also don't know what he got for free and what he didn't. There was a Colt Delta Elite and other non-competition items pictured in the group of stuff he sold and I doubt that was reviewed in Front Site (although I admit I don't pay that much attention to it). If CZ actually gave him that Shadow and they are offended that he sold it, that's between them and him. Investigating him and posting everything he sold, for what? Trying to get the IRS or ATF after him or something? '

I guess if he ends up in jail they will be heroes and the world and USPSA will better, right?

People cheating on classifiers? Don't care either. Want to have a GM card and get smoked at majors by A's and B's, have at it. If you are cheating, that is on you.

Burning down USPSA doesn't help anything.

Want to start a better organization, run better, with better people, better rules, better matches? Please do it, I have a life membership at USPSA and I'd be happy to buy one at your org, too.

[Mike Pipes]

I think if everyone would have kept their mouth shut the match could have been held in Colorado and it would have been fine.

I still think they should not have done it. Foley is gone and some more should go.

To me that should be about the end of it and the rest just reminds me of internet cancel culture BS.

A bankruptcy could be "just business" or could be someone who is completely irresponsible. Divorce issues could mean someone is a shitbag or that their spouse had a crafty lawyer. I can't tell which, and it may or may not have anything to do with whether that person should be on a BOD. So posting it to me is just trying to start controversy.

Jake selling stuff, and not paying his taxes...I know a lot of people who sold primers, ammo etc for profit during the recent shortage and I'm pretty sure none of them paid taxes on any of it. I know a lot of people who have sold firearms for more than they paid and I'm sure never paid taxes, and I don't care. I certainly don't think anyone should lose a job over it.

I also don't know what he got for free and what he didn't. There was a Colt Delta Elite and other non-competition items pictured in the group of stuff he sold and I doubt that was reviewed in Front Site (although I admit I don't pay that much attention to it). If CZ actually gave him that Shadow and they are offended that he sold it, that's between them and him. Investigating him and posting everything he sold, for what? Trying to get the IRS or ATF after him or something? '

I guess if he ends up in jail they will be heroes and the world and USPSA will better, right?

People cheating on classifiers? Don't care either. Want to have a GM card and get smoked at majors by A's and B's, have at it. If you are cheating, that is on you.

Burning down USPSA doesn't help anything.

Want to start a better organization, run better, with better people, better rules, better matches? Please do it, I have a life membership at USPSA and I'd be happy to buy one at your org, too.

SAY IT LOUDER BROTHER

[Clusterfrack]

I’m a member, and I don’t want to “burn it down”. I want a BoD and President who don’t act like petty tyrants, ban people because someone else posted on social media, knowingly ask members to break laws and assume responsibility, and I sure as fuck don’t want cheaters to get a pass. What is the point of a sport if there’s no competitive equity?

Loud enough?

[JCN]

I’m a member, and I don’t want to “burn it down”. I want a BoD and President who don’t act like petty tyrants, ban people because someone else posted on social media, knowingly ask members to break laws and assume responsibility, and I sure as fuck don’t want cheaters to get a pass. What is the point of a sport if there’s no competitive equity?

Loud enough?

We can’t even get that in our government, so I’m not expecting it in our sport.

Would be nice, but so would the ammo fairy putting cartridges under my pillow at night.

[bofe954]

I’m a member, and I don’t want to “burn it down”. I want a BoD and President who don’t act like petty tyrants, ban people because someone else posted on social media, knowingly ask members to break laws and assume responsibility, and I sure as fuck don’t want cheaters to get a pass. What is the point of a sport if there’s no competitive equity?

Loud enough?

Well, you have a new president. Not sure how many of the BOD are new as I'm not that familiar with the old ones. I was looking at the website and I thought most of the names were new, but I don't know who was on during any of this.

I don't really see cheating on a classifier at a club match as a competitive equity issue (if that is what you are referring to). Holding a higher card than your ability just ensures you never win, right?

I do think they have banned people for that in the past, I think it was someone else that got outed on Stoeger's podcast, in fact.

Is it a reasonable response is to dig in to the personal lives of the USPSA BOD and employees, and post it all over the place?

Have you talked to your area director about this?

[DMF13]

Double post, and edit because I misread the hit factor info from USPSA.

[DMF13]

I don't really see cheating on a classifier at a club match as a competitive equity issue (if that is what you are referring to).
I'm not sure, but I believe even scores from classifiers at level 1 matches could affect the "high hit factor," but I'll be damned if I can find an explanation of how.it's actually calculated.

If they are driving up the average for the "top shooters," that does impact other members who are honestly shooting the classifiers.

Further, anyone who will cheat, and help others cheat, is the type of person who would hurt other shooters to cheat. Its happened before:
https://www.gunnuts.net/2014/06/18/range-officer-cheating-scandal-in-united-states-practical-shooting-association/

Finally, the classification system becomes meaningless, if we don't enforce the integrity of the system. Hell, why even have the sport if we don't care about cheating? Might as well just go to the range, without a timer, and shoot at a target without scoring it, and call it good. If we don't care about preventing cheating, what's the point of running a timer, scoring/pasting, and recording the data?

[Clusterfrack]

Have you talked to your area director about this?

Yep. No joy.

[bofe954]

Yep. No joy.

I don't know what to tell you. I watched some of Stoeger's recent stuff, like the Matt vs USPSA establishment video.

To me trying to change out the board seems like an answer, and a reasonable thing to do. If they really had people lined up to run for all of the board positions they should have just focused on that.

I wouldn't want to do it, and knowing that a bunch of internet sleuths are going to be digging in to my personal life and past and posting it all over the web doesn't make it any more attractive.

Getting rid of Foley has to be a step in the right direction, although since Stoeger essentially put Foley there in the first place, it doesn't make me that enthusiastic about whoever he wants on the board either. I don't know if Stoeger misjudged Foley, or if it was just a troll to see if he could get someone into the position. Maybe he knew what a timebomb Foley would be and just thought it would be funny. Sort of seems like it from Matt vs the establishment video.

I think USPSA can be improved, I don't think quitting helps. I'm not finding any sympathy for the players in this controversy on either side.

[Clusterfrack]

I agree. The USPSA organization is seriously messed up, and quitting won't help.

A few responses to your other comments:
A Ben S conspiracy to plant Foley as a presidential time bomb is a QAnon-level fantasy. Foley seemed like a good choice for president at the time, and like many sociopaths is good at hiding his true nature. The fault lies with Foley, but the $1M question is why the BoD didn't fire him much sooner? Why? Because they liked what he was doing.

Good qualified people are willing to serve on the BoD, despite the drama. Matt Hopkins for example. Hopefully, there will be a steady turnover of the old BoD and the organization can return to focusing on competitive practical shooting and upholding its nonprofit charter.


I don't know what to tell you. I watched some of Stoeger's recent stuff, like the Matt vs USPSA establishment video.

To me trying to change out the board seems like an answer, and a reasonable thing to do. If they really had people lined up to run for all of the board positions they should have just focused on that.

I wouldn't want to do it, and knowing that a bunch of internet sleuths are going to be digging in to my personal life and past and posting it all over the web doesn't make it any more attractive.

Getting rid of Foley has to be a step in the right direction, although since Stoeger essentially put Foley there in the first place, it doesn't make me that enthusiastic about whoever he wants on the board either. I don't know if Stoeger misjudged Foley, or if it was just a troll to see if he could get someone into the position. Maybe he knew what a timebomb Foley would be and just thought it would be funny. Sort of seems like it from Matt vs the establishment video.

I think USPSA can be improved, I don't think quitting helps. I'm not finding any sympathy for the players in this controversy on either side.

[Zincwarrior]

I’m a member, and I don’t want to “burn it down”. I want a BoD and President who don’t act like petty tyrants, ban people because someone else posted on social media, knowingly ask members to break laws and assume responsibility, and I sure as fuck don’t want cheaters to get a pass. What is the point of a sport if there’s no competitive equity?

Loud enough?

I am just a no name hack but have to agree. I want a concise rulebook that doesn't change the division specifications every three months, and "knowingly ask members to break laws and assume responsibility, and I sure as fuck don’t want cheaters to get a pass." These appear to be minimum level non negotiable items that should be...no brainers.

[jetfire]

Do you guys that are defending him actually believe that Ben cares about the wellbeing of USPSA as an org?

[Jared]

Do you guys that are defending him actually believe that Ben cares about the wellbeing of USPSA as an org?

If not changing the way the sport is run, what is his motivation?

[JCN]

If not changing the way the sport is run, what is his motivation?

You can want something to change while not caring about it’s health and viability.

Think of every self centered ex-girlfriend that thought YOU were the entire problem…

Calling everyone a stupid, incompetent asshole is kind of a Karen move.

[Cory]

Do you guys that are defending him actually believe that Ben cares about the wellbeing of USPSA as an org?

Im a former USPSA member and big time nobody.

Yeah, I think he cares about the well being of the organization. He's been in USPSA for a long time, has multiple national titles, more than one USPSA centric business. He writes books about the topic, teaches classes on the topic, and has a podcast about the topic. He may be an ass sometimes but I think he definitely cares. And I dont think it's just a financial investment type of care either. The sport is an enourmous part of the guys life.

I think the BOD actions lately are driving all the other stuff. Mistakes in judgement on both sides but in my mind the BOD holds far more blame than anyone.

[45dotACP]

I guess the more pertinent question is if the BOD cares about the wellbeing of USPSA as an org.

Likely Ben will continue doing Ben. Teaching shooting, writing books, trolling dudes.

But USPSA ought to be asked why they were willing to take such a gamble with the whole Cameo thing and risk getting their members either cited or arrested.

Sent from my SM-A326U using Tapatalk

[RevolverRob]

We can’t even get that in our government, so I’m not expecting it in our sport.

Would be nice, but so would the ammo fairy putting cartridges under my pillow at night.

Arguably, it should be easier to affect change in a smaller organization and get something we want. I sort of feel we set up a fallacy here by comparing it to the Govt.

The USPSA isn't a governmental entity, but is the property of the members (share holders) not the board of directors. And it's quite possible overall to change it for the better.

The question is whether some folks will go along with what is needed to make those changes.


I guess the more pertinent question is if the BOD cares about the wellbeing of USPSA as an org.

B-I-N-G-O - This is the pertinent question.

___

FWIW, I have thoughts, but they're fairly unkind towards the current leadership of USPSA. My personal opinion - and tactic - would be to report the various BOD members who have clearly violated federal laws for those violations. Up to and including turning over the various documents for JM's alleged illegal selling of firearms for profit to the ATF.

I would petition the IRS to investigate the 503(c) status of the org.

Personally, if I were Derek, this is what I would do*. I would drop the nuke on them and fuck 'em. In doing so, it the org were dissolved, so be it.

Here's the shit kicker folks can't seem to get to - if USPSA ceased to exist only matches at certain levels cease to exist. Beyond that, Club Level (where most of the participation is occurring) will still occur. Eventually, someone will come along with something new and positive. But in the meantime you leave a lasting impression on people about what happens when you throw stones from your glass house.

*I've said as much to Derek in passing as well.

[JCN]

Arguably, it should be easier to affect change in a smaller organization and get something we want. I sort of feel we set up a fallacy here by comparing it to the Govt.

The USPSA isn't a governmental entity, but is the property of the members (share holders) not the board of directors. And it's quite possible overall to change it for the better.

The question is whether some folks will go along with what is needed to make those changes.

B-I-N-G-O - This is the pertinent question.
___

FWIW, I have thoughts, but they're fairly unkind towards the current leadership of USPSA. My personal opinion - and tactic - would be to report the various BOD members who have clearly violated federal laws for those violations. Up to and including turning over the various documents for JM's alleged illegal selling of firearms for profit to the ATF.

I would petition the IRS to investigate the 503(c) status of the org.

Personally, if I were Derek, this is what I would do*. I would drop the nuke on them and fuck 'em. In doing so, it the org were dissolved, so be it.

Here's the shit kicker folks can't seem to get to - if USPSA ceased to exist only matches at certain levels cease to exist. Beyond that, Club Level (where most of the participation is occurring) will still occur. Eventually, someone will come along with something new and positive. But in the meantime you leave a lasting impression on people about what happens when you throw stones from your glass house.

*I've said as much to Derek in passing as well.

I do disagree and we don’t know what the reality is because it’s hypothetical musing.

I think it’s HARDER to make the changes in a volunteer activity because there’s no glory or financial incentive to attract excellent candidates.

The government of the USA is also like the property of the people in theory.

For a sport, I don’t know that it really belongs to the members either.

Does MLB belong to the fans? That’s a terrible analogy though.

I just don’t know that there’s a real model we can compare it to.

SCCA is probably the closest thing.

Completely disagree with what happens if USPSA dissolves. The attraction to the sport for me is national standard and rules language. It’s the reason why I have zero interest in all the random 3 gun clubs and random outlaw steel matches.

There’s a local club that decided to run outlaw instead of USPSA and I am not motivated to go there either.

If USPSA disbands, then local matches will start drifting to random rulesets and that’s not attractive to me.

I recently started Steel Challenge and the only draw of that to me is the national database.

[JCS]

Arguably, it should be easier to affect change in a smaller organization and get something we want. I sort of feel we set up a fallacy here by comparing it to the Govt.

The USPSA isn't a governmental entity, but is the property of the members (share holders) not the board of directors. And it's quite possible overall to change it for the better.

The question is whether some folks will go along with what is needed to make those changes.



B-I-N-G-O - This is the pertinent question.

___

FWIW, I have thoughts, but they're fairly unkind towards the current leadership of USPSA. My personal opinion - and tactic - would be to report the various BOD members who have clearly violated federal laws for those violations. Up to and including turning over the various documents for JM's alleged illegal selling of firearms for profit to the ATF.

I would petition the IRS to investigate the 503(c) status of the org.

Personally, if I were Derek, this is what I would do*. I would drop the nuke on them and fuck 'em. In doing so, it the org were dissolved, so be it.

Here's the shit kicker folks can't seem to get to - if USPSA ceased to exist only matches at certain levels cease to exist. Beyond that, Club Level (where most of the participation is occurring) will still occur. Eventually, someone will come along with something new and positive. But in the meantime you leave a lasting impression on people about what happens when you throw stones from your glass house.

*I've said as much to Derek in passing as well.

I disagree about participation at locals if uspsa dissolved. I wouldn’t shoot matches anymore. The appeal for me is knowing not just how I stack up locally but nationally. Uspsa classification system isn't perfect but it gives someone in small town Oklahoma a chance to compare to the best in the sport.

[Clusterfrack]

Do you guys that are defending him actually believe that Ben cares about the wellbeing of USPSA as an org?

I think he cares about the wellbeing of USPSA as a sport.

[RevolverRob]

If you care about your national ranking - how do you square the fact that PSI has found consistent issues of cheating in Classifiers?

In other words - whatever your standing is - it cannot be reliable or consistent as long as cheating is occurring.

Fact of the matter is if you want level rules and national standards, professional accountability has to be issue #1. If you don't have that and don't think you can get that - then your national standing and comparisons mean zilch.

USPSA has demonstrated that they are corrupt and have ethical issues. To be honest, I'd take your classifier standings against anyone who you didn't see shoot their classifiers with an absolutely grain of salt.

[JCN]

I think he cares about the wellbeing of USPSA as a sport.

But only as a vehicle that he can ride in / on (is my assumption).

That’s a parasitic kind of relationship. Like wanting a host to live so you can suck the blood.

I would be super interested in him pivoting to IDPA as a sport.

I think he could make the transition.

He’d have to be a little less antagonist though. I don’t see Joyce putting up with much shit.

[JCN]

If you care about your national ranking - how do you square the fact that PSI has found consistent issues of cheating in Classifiers?

In other words - whatever your standing is - it cannot be reliable or consistent as long as cheating is occurring.

Fact of the matter is if you want level rules and national standards, professional accountability has to be issue #1. If you don't have that and don't think you can get that - then your national standing and comparisons mean zilch.

USPSA has demonstrated that they are corrupt and have ethical issues. To be honest, I'd take your classifier standings against anyone who you didn't see shoot their classifiers with an absolutely grain of salt.

That’s hyperbole, my friend.

Again, Steel Challenge is under the USPSA umbrella but they run their classifier standard a little differently.

There are alternatives.

Check this out: for steel challenge, instead of adjusting the peak / Hundo time for THE BEST in the world, they adjust it for the average GM at the world shoot.

That’s actually kind of an awesome way of doing it that filters out the extreme Hail Mary runs.

Even a change like that to the adjustment of Hundo time for standard USPSA can negate the impact of cheaters.

[JCS]

If you care about your national ranking - how do you square the fact that PSI has found consistent issues of cheating in Classifiers?

In other words - whatever your standing is - it cannot be reliable or consistent as long as cheating is occurring.

Fact of the matter is if you want level rules and national standards, professional accountability has to be issue #1. If you don't have that and don't think you can get that - then your national standing and comparisons mean zilch.

USPSA has demonstrated that they are corrupt and have ethical issues. To be honest, I'd take your classifier standings against anyone who you didn't see shoot their classifiers with an absolutely grain of salt.

Uspsa board is corrupt or the members are corrupt?

I’m sure there are cheaters. But it’s isolated to individuals or a single club. I don’t believe it’s rampant enough that it’s ruined the classifier scores.

[RevolverRob]

Uspsa board is corrupt or the members are corrupt?

Both are. That's actually pretty obvious from the overwhelming evidence and actions of parties in question.


I’m sure there are cheaters. But it’s isolated to individuals or a single club. I don’t believe it’s rampant enough that it’s ruined the classifier scores.

We have different stances on this. I'm pretty much firmly in the camp that the whole thing is tainted by association at this stage.

BUT if you think it isn't tainted, then I implore you to push for change. Because otherwise things won't get better, they're only getting worse.

___

Anyways, I think I'm about played out on this situation.

In my opinion, USPSA BOD have acted incongruously to their responsibilities as Board members of the USPSA. Their recent actions of choosing to ban Ben Stoeger, Derek, and a host of other folks is an effort to deflect from their guilt. Guilt with respect to violations of Federal laws and guilt related to their abdication of fiduciary responsibility to the org.

The current membership of the board is culpable in these issues, up to and including YML. Continued employment of Martens, continued lack of transparency with regards to A8 financials, at this stage the USPSA appears to be only slightly less corrupt than the NRA.

My personal view is that the evidence is overwhelming and damning. I, personally, support nuking the entire org from orbit. But I'll admit to being prone to a more extreme view than others. It has just been my experience that if you see two cockroaches, you need to act decisively and vehemently to kill a colony. At this point, my view is that basically the entire USPSA BOD and USPSA Employees are cockroaches in need of decisive, vehement, action to eliminate them.

My stance going forward is: That as of last week, I actively encourage folks to not continue to financially support USPSA through membership, without simultaneously acting to improve your Association by calling for the complete resignation of the board. I recommend you do this loudly and OFTEN. And if you really care as much as you claim to care, nut up and run for board positions.

[jetfire]

I think he cares about the wellbeing of USPSA as a sport.

I would pretty strongly disagree with that assessment

[EVP]

I would pretty strongly disagree with that assessment

Do you have anything to base this of?


I don't personally know Ben or anything but I have heard him talk on a few occasions about his wishes for the betterment of the sport and how to better help the new comers to the sport.

I get he has angst with the Bod and such but he obviously seem to care about the sport and peoples participation in it.

[jetfire]

Do you have anything to base this of?


I don't personally know Ben or anything but I have heard him talk on a few occasions about his wishes for the betterment of the sport and how to better help the new comers to the sport.

I get he has angst with the Bod and such but he obviously seem to care about the sport and peoples participation in it.

I do know Ben personally. For quite some time, actually. I don’t think he cares about the sport in any way beyond it as a mechanism to keep him relevant and employed. If he woke up tomorrow morning and thought that winning IDPA matches was a better way to stay relevant and get people to sign up for classes he’d go do that.

[Clusterfrack]

I do know Ben personally. For quite some time, actually. I don’t think he cares about the sport in any way beyond it as a mechanism to keep him relevant and employed. If he woke up tomorrow morning and thought that winning IDPA matches was a better way to stay relevant and get people to sign up for classes he’d go do that.

I hear what you're saying. Based on my limited interactions with Ben, I don't agree.

[JCN]

I hear what you're saying. Based on my limited interactions with Ben, I don't agree.

I wonder if some of the dichotomy comes from his dislike of USPSA versus love of IPSC worldwide.

But you can’t shit on the mother-in-law and not expect it to affect your relationship with the wife.

Even if you don’t like the mother-in-law, you’re not going to get anywhere by scorched earth campaigns.

There seemed to be a fundamental disconnect regarding the perception of who needed whom more.

I’d personally love Stoeger to tackle IDPA and make it a better sport, hopefully with a little more professionalism and tact, because I don’t see Joyce putting up with many shenanigans.

[YVK]

I do know Ben personally. For quite some time, actually. I don’t think he cares about the sport in any way beyond it as a mechanism to keep him relevant and employed.

His ability to stay relevant and employed under the status quo didn't seem any different than that of, say, JJ, Max M, and other dudes of his level and generation. Yet I haven't heard either of them or, frankly, near majority of the pros say anything about legitimately bullshit things that have happened. I don't disagree with you on the relevance and cash flow aspects. At the same time, I think he is a bit different person from those who are content to keep collecting and saying nothing about anything, right or wrong, as long as they get paid.
This is just my observation based on spending about a week, in total, in his classes.

[jetfire]

I hear what you're saying. Based on my limited interactions with Ben, I don't agree.

I appreciate your disagreement.

I’m a late participant in this thread, and I’ll leave after this. But I think this entire thread can be summed with a quote from Band of Brothers: “Fighting over Sobel? That’s smart”

[LittleLebowski]

I wonder if some of the dichotomy comes from his dislike of USPSA versus love of IPSC worldwide.

But you can’t shit on the mother-in-law and not expect it to affect your relationship with the wife.

Even if you don’t like the mother-in-law, you’re not going to get anywhere by scorched earth campaigns.

There seemed to be a fundamental disconnect regarding the perception of who needed whom more.

I’d personally love Stoeger to tackle IDPA and make it a better sport, hopefully with a little more professionalism and tact, because I don’t see Joyce putting up with many shenanigans.

JCN preaching tact, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria! End of times!

😁

[JCN]

JCN preaching tact, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria! End of times!

😁

Hey, I have been married for 21 years and I learned a thing or two about tolerating mother in laws! :D

After not tolerating mother in laws, hahaha.

[LittleLebowski]

Hey, I have been married for 21 years and I learned a thing or two about tolerating mother in laws! :D

After not tolerating mother in laws, hahaha.

I’ve a retired Marine Colonel father in law you should meet 😁

[RevolverRob]

I said I was done with this and I lied...

Latest review of financials statements suggest that ~25% of A3 match finances are unaccounted for. Quick dip into the reports shows multiple instances of same check number being claimed multiple times. $15,000 in cash withdraws.

https://www.instagram.com/p/ClErZmEvTPA/?igshid=MWI4MTIyMDE=

My list for USPSA is starting to read like a former IL Governor:

1) Cheating
2) Embezzlement
3) Tax Fraud
4) Sexual Harassment lawsuits
5) Bad Legal Advice
6) Silencing Critics with bans

[gtmtnbiker98]

I’ve a retired Marine Colonel father in law you should meet 😁

Field Day still on Thursday?

[Mike Pipes]

I said I was done with this and I lied...

Latest review of financials statements suggest that ~25% of A3 match finances are unaccounted for. Quick dip into the reports shows multiple instances of same check number being claimed multiple times. $15,000 in cash withdraws.

https://www.instagram.com/p/ClErZmEvTPA/?igshid=MWI4MTIyMDE=

My list for USPSA is starting to read like a former IL Governor:

1) Cheating
2) Embezzlement
3) Tax Fraud
4) Sexual Harassment lawsuits
5) Bad Legal Advice
6) Silencing Critics with bans


Area 3 is an Area 3 problem isn't it? Didn't USPSA fire the Area 3 Director that was a Stoeger guy?

[DMF13]

Area 3 is an Area 3 problem isn't it? Didn't USPSA fire the Area 3 Director that was a Stoeger guy?Probably a distinction, without a real difference, but Hopkins resigned before the board could "fire" him. He had taken a job, and moved, outside of Area 3, and was therefore ineligible to be the Area 3 Director, but didn't tell the board, and only resigned after they discovered he had moved away.

[JCN]

https://youtu.be/jf3eqiPwD7k

Some encouraging stuff happening.

Yee-min seems to be trying to do the right thing.

Clusterfrack

[Clusterfrack]

Probably a distinction, without a real difference, but Hopkins resigned before the board could "fire" him. He had taken a job, and moved, outside of Area 3, and was therefore ineligible to be the Area 3 Director, but didn't tell the board, and only resigned after they discovered he had moved away.

I think Matt Hopkins would have been a great AD.

[DMF13]

I think Matt Hopkins would have been a great AD.
You're probably right, but my comment wasn't a judgment. I was just trying to clear up the misconception about Hopkins being "fired."

[THeHumbleMarksman]

He’s been doing interviews with BOD members and (back when elections were running) presidential candidates, which of course, all involved were also promoting on their socials.

Recently, he’s started affirmatively covering for them.

He deleted or hid comments on his most recent videos discussing the BOD issues, stating—in his position—that no organization is perfect and the recent bans were “deserved.”

I know for a fact he (Humble/David) hid my comment and others. David was asked what Derek (practical shooting insights) did to deserve his ban, and I responded with the list of things Derek brought to light with documentation (the same list in the comment to which you replied).

Derek and the other folks were watching that comment thread (and all know me on non-YouTube social media), and they said my comment lasted a whopping minute before being banished to the shadow realm. Sent me screenshots and everything. David was hiding or deleting any comment referencing specific issues with the BOD, because I watched other comments disappear when refreshing the video.

Baseless speculation:

My schizo-lifter-brain conspiracy theory is he wants to be first in line for a certain media job if the incumbent gets fired (or charged criminally) for selling $20K worth of T&E guns on an internet forum… but I have absolutely nothing to back that theory up besides (1) it makes sense and (2) the little birdies I see when I’m blacking out deadlifting whisper it in my ears.
Haven't logged in in a while - lots of time between when you said this and where we are but I feel compelled to address it.

Yes - I zapped a comment that was bogging down - I don't remember the exact nature of it - but I seldom do zap comments. Look it's no secret there's a contingent in the USPSA community that's not fans of me- most of them don't know me personally- and I don't have to give them platform for grand standing - so I don't.

Mouthpiece for the board? Yeah no. I started my podcast last year in a direction of giving the board productive ideas on how they could forward the line of making USPSA more than it is. Since then, they've shown themselves incapable of the most basic stuff to run an org. At this point providing constructive information to grow USPSA is completely wasted. The org can't manage the fundamentals.

Regarding your speculation on me getting a media job at USPSA - nah. My day job is too lucrative to step away for a media career - if my YT take 10xs it will be a conversation with my family but it's still mega high risk - given the direction of the winds in online media - it's unlikely to happen. in a far distant future - I wouldn't mind being president of USPSA as I have the CV to do a good job with it and I'm passionate about it. But kids are too little and everything is too expensive for that to be a reality in the near or even medium term.

[JRV]

Haven't logged in in a while - lots of time between when you said this and where we are but I feel compelled to address it.

Yes - I zapped a comment that was bogging down - I don't remember the exact nature of it - but I seldom do zap comments. Look it's no secret there's a contingent in the USPSA community that's not fans of me- most of them don't know me personally- and I don't have to give them platform for grand standing - so I don't.

Mouthpiece for the board? Yeah no. I started my podcast last year in a direction of giving the board productive ideas on how they could forward the line of making USPSA more than it is. Since then, they've shown themselves incapable of the most basic stuff to run an org. At this point providing constructive information to grow USPSA is completely wasted. The org can't manage the fundamentals.

Regarding your speculation on me getting a media job at USPSA - nah. My day job is too lucrative to step away for a media career - if my YT take 10xs it will be a conversation with my family but it's still mega high risk - given the direction of the winds in online media - it's unlikely to happen. in a far distant future - I wouldn't mind being president of USPSA as I have the CV to do a good job with it and I'm passionate about it. But kids are too little and everything is too expensive for that to be a reality in the near or even medium term.

I appreciate you checking in and addressing the board stuff head-on.

The org—any org that runs a shooting sport—would benefit from an engaged and active president. It’s baffling to me that the presidents and managing directors tend to be folks that are disconnected from the higher levels of competition (or even shooting sports entirely).

[THeHumbleMarksman]

I was discussing that recently about the caliber of individual putting their hand up - USPSA is to a size where it needs competent management and folks experienced with running organizations stepping into the fray. The finances don't support paying anybody to do so. The dudes stepping in care a lot but don't have skillset to be good at what they're trying to do - in some instances.

As it is - it's a glorified popularity/beauty contest. Caring a lot about the sport but not having the soft skills to influence or leadership experience to leverage is basically trading an old board member for a new one.

The online storm of constant criticism is going to further deter quality people from stepping in - in conversations I've had with people who didn't put their name in the hat but could have. The exposure is good - in many/most respects - but the resulting dogpile isn't. Weird spot.

If the board can wrangle job descriptions for the employees and have annual/semi annual performance reviews that'd be a big / strong step.

[SecondsCount]

I was discussing that recently about the caliber of individual putting their hand up - USPSA is to a size where it needs competent management and folks experienced with running organizations stepping into the fray. The finances don't support paying anybody to do so. The dudes stepping in care a lot but don't have skillset to be good at what they're trying to do - in some instances.

As it is - it's a glorified popularity/beauty contest. Caring a lot about the sport but not having the soft skills to influence or leadership experience to leverage is basically trading an old board member for a new one.

The online storm of constant criticism is going to further deter quality people from stepping in - in conversations I've had with people who didn't put their name in the hat but could have. The exposure is good - in many/most respects - but the resulting dogpile isn't. Weird spot.

If the board can wrangle job descriptions for the employees and have annual/semi annual performance reviews that'd be a big / strong step.

Is it that hard to get some decent people on the board of directors? They need to get some people from all walks of life, including finance, law, and education.

[THeHumbleMarksman]

Is it that hard to get some decent people on the board of directors? They need to get some people from all walks of life, including finance, law, and education.

There's a lot of time devoted to a job that doesn't pay anything and is still stressful. It's tough to squeeze in an extra XX hours a week with a family/job.

I imagine it's like being a match director on steroids.

[SecondsCount]

There's a lot of time devoted to a job that doesn't pay anything and is still stressful. It's tough to squeeze in an extra XX hours a week with a family/job.

I imagine it's like being a match director on steroids.


I ran a shooting range with 100+ volunteers for 10 years. It takes effort but once you get people trained and some decent organization, it goes pretty smoothly. The first thing you do is get rid of the troublemakers, or put them in their place.

[Zincwarrior]

I ran a shooting range with 100+ volunteers for 10 years. It takes effort but once you get people trained and some decent organization, it goes pretty smoothly. The first thing you do is get rid of the troublemakers, or put them in their place.
You should run. Not being snarky here.

[SecondsCount]

You should run. Not being snarky here.

I'm retired from running gun orgs 😁

I also have very little interest in USPSA. Lots of fun for many but the game does very little for me. The problem is that a majority of gun owners are super cheap, want to show up and play, then go home.

We had two occasions where clubs came to our range board and asked us to waive the $3 fee per person, per event because people were complaining. Three dollars!! The club was getting 15 or 20 dollars per person.

If the shooting sports had golf money, or even hunting money, it would be a lot better off.

[Zincwarrior]

I'm retired from running gun orgs 😁

I also have very little interest in USPSA. Lots of fun for many but the game does very little for me. The problem is that a majority of gun owners are super cheap, want to show up and play, then go home.

We had two occasions where clubs came to our range board and asked us to waive the $3 fee per person, per event because people were complaining. Three dollars!! The club was getting 15 or 20 dollars per person.

If the shooting sports had golf money, or even hunting money, it would be a lot better off.

Its the insurance and org dues. Local clubs are volunteer, and not making money off of it.

EDIT: Personally I am not familiar with the needs of the board of a sport like USPSA.
-They need an accounting service.
-Some limited marketing.
-A rulebook.
-a system for tracking members and classifications.

What else?

[SecondsCount]

Its the insurance and org dues. Local clubs are volunteer, and not making money off of it.

EDIT: Personally I am not familiar with the needs of the board of a sport like USPSA.
-They need an accounting service.
-Some limited marketing.
-A rulebook.
-a system for tracking members and classifications.

What else?

These clubs are making money. I'm sure a good portion went to dues, targets, etc but we took care of the insurance.

[BWT]

There's a lot of time devoted to a job that doesn't pay anything and is still stressful. It's tough to squeeze in an extra XX hours a week with a family/job.

I imagine it's like being a match director on steroids.

Agreed and I appreciate your content and shout out in the PX4 video!

I wasn’t aware of any opinions on de-cocking any particular way but it made me laugh pretty hard regardless.

[THeHumbleMarksman]

Agreed and I appreciate your content and shout out in the PX4 video!

I wasn’t aware of any opinions on de-cocking any particular way but it made me laugh pretty hard regardless.

In my first 92 LTT video for first shots a few years ago I was decocking it with my support hand while shooting a string of DA shots to test me/the gun and caught a bit of flack for doing it - just having a bit of fun

[RevolverRob]

Another Day and More Fuckery from the USPSA Board:

110728

From PSI: https://www.instagram.com/p/Cy6K3Fzrfy_/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==

[Clusterfrack]

Another Day and More Fuckery from the USPSA Board:

110728

From PSI: https://www.instagram.com/p/Cy6K3Fzrfy_/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==

What the actual fuck?

[YVK]

That's a next level dysfunction. What's the punishment for failing a polygraph, prison time? Can't wait till next AD election and I hope that someone runs against the incumbent.

[Lon]

What a dumpster fire.

[feudist]

Another Day and More Fuckery from the USPSA Board:

110728

From PSI: https://www.instagram.com/p/Cy6K3Fzrfy_/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==

LOL.
Polygraphs are literally voodoo.
Psychological suggestion and intimidation.
"Confess or it'll tell us."
Inadmissible outside of Kangaroo court.
I'd trust torture results before I'd believe a polygrapher's.

[fatdog]

a bunch of 10 year olds....intellectually and emotionally

[Coyotesfan97]

I’d quit before I took a polygraph. The one I took getting hired on ruined them for me. Double bird walking out the door.

[mmc45414]

What a dumpster fire.

And this is even more nutty, nobody would even second it:
110743

[Lon]

And this is even more nutty, nobody would even second it:
110743

Yep.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Dearest God - can these folks use Google Scholar to see that polygraphs have little if any validity? It's been known for years.

[TheRoland]

What a meltdown. Throw them all out.

[bofe954]

What a meltdown. Throw them all out.

Area 3 voted no.

[YVK]

And this is even more nutty, nobody would even second it:
110743

Rizzi voted against the polygraph. I wonder if he wanted to make it so more people are pissed with this decision but Arnburg either didn't understand the intent or didn't want to have anything to do with that.



Can the membership propose an improvement in the process and suggest to use serum of truth instead?

[bofe954]

Rizzi voted against the polygraph. I wonder if he wanted to make it so more people are pissed with this decision but Arnburg either didn't understand the intent or didn't want to have anything to do with that.



Can the membership propose an improvement in the process and suggest to use serum of truth instead?

If I floated the idea of a polygraph at work I think I'd have to have a psych eval done before my return. I do feel like there is some amount of "you get what you vote for" in all of this. Regardless of motivation Stoeger may force USPSA membership to give a shit about leadership. It's hard to imagine how these guys got elected.

[JCN]

Rizzi voted against the polygraph. I wonder if he wanted to make it so more people are pissed with this decision but Arnburg either didn't understand the intent or didn't want to have anything to do with that.



Can the membership propose an improvement in the process and suggest to use serum of truth instead?

Or perhaps he knew there were enough votes to approve it even if he dissented so he didn’t have to become more of a sacrificial lamb. You know they’re just going to assume that people who voted “no” are the leak regardless of the test results….

[Spartan1980]

Dearest God - can these folks use Google Scholar to see that polygraphs have little if any validity? It's been known for years.

They know that. They are just looking for legitimacy for running the next person(s) out of their dick measuring club. They've exhausted all their other options.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I thought dick measuring and weighing dicks was the way they determined the new classes of guns. Single dick, carrying your dick with optics, limited dicks, etc. Should I put brass weights in my scrotum?

[jeep45238]

Dearest God - can these folks use Google Scholar to see that polygraphs have little if any validity? It's been known for years.

NSA don't care. Can have a TS/SCI, but no poly = no NSA clearance.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I have a better proposal, from the days of Salem. Have everyone wear their gaming gear with game guns with tungsten rods, heavy fake lights mounted, an extended mag with a brass plate plus 6 extended mags with weighted plates. Then throw them in a lake. Those that float are traitors (like the witches) and will be hung up as a target as shootable in a match, if you sink you are righteous (as the non witches) and will go to gun heaven with 5 millisecond splits.

[YVK]

Stoeger posted a vid where he opines that A3 and A7 aren't leaking the info. Of course, that's what I expect him to say but it'd be funny if Arnburg and Rizzi did take the polygraph and passed it.

[Archer1440]

Perhaps this is preparation for the next President of the organization. Not the one we wanted and voted in three times, but the one they seem to want.

[konkapot]

They could "pass" it but still be lying. Polys are a sad joke...which makes it fitting that USPSA is going to spend money on a test like that.

The whole thing reminds of an HOA that's lost it's mind and is has now turned on each other.

[CleverNickname]

They could "pass" it but still be lying.
I'm not familiar with polygraphs, but I'm guessing that the reverse could be true and someone could also fail a poly and not be lying, right?

[jeep45238]

I'm not familiar with polygraphs, but I'm guessing that the reverse could be true and someone could also fail a poly and not be lying, right?

It simply measures biological readings that someone interprets (ie - breathing speed/depth) while asking questions of a known outcome to compare to ones with unknowns.

If you can hold your calm throughout, you'll pass no matter the validity of anything said.

[CleverNickname]

It simply measures biological readings that someone interprets (ie - breathing speed/depth) while asking questions of a known outcome to compare to ones with unknowns.

If you can hold your calm throughout, you'll pass no matter the validity of anything said.
So if someone is truthful, but still nervous about taking a polygraph (or is just nervous for some unrelated reason), then would it be possible to fail despite telling the truth, or not?

[DDTSGM]

So if someone is truthful, but still nervous about taking a polygraph (or is just nervous for some unrelated reason), then would it be possible to fail despite telling the truth, or not?

Yes.

A lot of whether you 'pass' or 'fail' depends on the operator and their ability to establish a baseline and interpret the graphs.

The smartest legal mind I know - 'the Legal Beagle' - once told me (paraphrase) 'if I was with you all last night and someone asked you to take a polygraph regarding your whereabouts during that time period, I'd tell you not to agree.'

Two friends who were both polygraphists told me 'mine are accurate, not so sure about...' (again, paraphrase).

[jeep45238]

So if someone is truthful, but still nervous about taking a polygraph (or is just nervous for some unrelated reason), then would it be possible to fail despite telling the truth, or not?

Yes. See below:


Yes.

A lot of whether you 'pass' or 'fail' depends on the operator and their ability to establish a baseline and interpret the graphs.

The smartest legal mind I know - 'the Legal Beagle' - once told me (paraphrase) 'if I was with you all last night and someone asked you to take a polygraph regarding your whereabouts during that time period, I'd tell you not to agree.'

Two friends who were both polygraphists told me 'mine are accurate, not so sure about...' (again, paraphrase).

[feudist]

So if someone is truthful, but still nervous about taking a polygraph (or is just nervous for some unrelated reason), then would it be possible to fail despite telling the truth, or not?

When I took my hiring polygraph for the police department, the polygrapher told me I was being deceptive on the question about belonging to an organization that was against the USA.
At the time, the only thing I'd ever joined(besides the Army), was the United States Fencing Association...
We went round and round a few times(he didn't know what fencing was, the ignorant wretch) before he dropped it.
Apparently my mild amusement at the question changed my breathing.
Whatever.

[Coyotesfan97]

After I was hired and starting talking to people who had polygraphs with the guy who did mine all expressed their opinion he was an asshole. One guy he failed took a polygraph with the state police and passed. He was about to be hired by DPS when our hiring sergeant called him and she convinced him to take another polygraph with our other polygrapher. He passed that one too and got hired by my agency. I worked with him for thirty years.

[konkapot]

Similar poly experiences.

I had switched from one agency to another, and the questions they asked lateral applicants were a little more.....directed....towards common issues with police officers. The polygrapher was training someone, there were two of them behind the machine.

One question I may have had an emotional reaction to he said to his trainee "See....Konkapot reacted that way because he knows if he's lying we won't hire him."

A previous poly (again a lateral hire) the certified polygrapher and alchemist really focused in on drug use. An odd topic to focus on, as I had never touched/used narcotics before. I would have thought that there would have been other, more profitable topics to focus on. I almost guided his questioning out of pity.

[Archer1440]

At the time, the only thing I'd ever joined(besides the Army), was the United States Fencing Association...
We went round and round a few times(he didn't know what fencing was, the ignorant wretch) before he dropped it.
Apparently my mild amusement at the question changed my breathing.
Whatever.

Vinyl division, or barbed wire? 😆

[Zincwarrior]

What the actual fuck?

Yes thats an interesting level of 'wait, what?'

I did corporate finance for 20+ years. Never heard of any board that would think its members would submit to such.

[RevolverRob]

All folks who are dues paying members of USPSA should write to the board and their AD about your disproval of their efforts to engage in this type of behavior.

[Zincwarrior]

All folks who are dues paying members of USPSA should write to the board and their AD about your disproval of their efforts to engage in this type of behavior.

How does it impact the average dues paying member? It just seems like inside the dugout stupid that every org has. Its fun to watch the train wreck but, how does it affect Bob the Class C shooter?

[RevolverRob]

How does it impact the average dues paying member? It just seems like inside the dugout stupid that every org has. Its fun to watch the train wreck but, how does it affect Bob the Class C shooter?

Well, let's see:

Under this BOD - the average member has had their organizational money spent down to nearly nothing.

The BOD has banned members for saying anything negative about them.

They have sponsored and attempted to get members to violate state laws at Cameo.

The DRNOI has publicly berated volunteers at matches.

The director of marketing has taken guns and ammo given to him to review in his capacity and sold them illegally, pocketing the cash. Thereby making the org intrinsically less lawful.

They are currently being sued by a banned member and spending membership dollars on their legal defense.

They have nearly doubled dues without justification.

They have nearly doubled spending without justification.

They have cut Team USA spending. Meanwhile, they created a "Senior Team" which just so happens to have two, mediocre, board members on it. So they can use your money to travel to matches.

They have canceled Level 2 matches with local clubs, because a member or two of those clubs said something mean about them on the internet.

But hey if you want your membership dues to go to paying legal defenses and allowing a few individuals to have unfettered access to the money and use it as their personal travel/slush fund, that's up to you.

[jetfire]

They have sponsored and attempted to get members to violate state laws at Cameo.


The director of marketing has taken guns and ammo given to him to review in his capacity and sold them illegally, pocketing the cash. Thereby making the org intrinsically less lawful.


Two notes on these two items specifically: of all the things that have happened the Cameo one is by far the worst. That was an actual crimes-crime, and could have potentially landed members in jail, regardless of what the sheriff of the local area said.

The second thing - there's nothing inherently illegal about selling review guns, provided everything is handled above board. If it's intentionally done for personal gain or profit, then sure the ATF could have something to call you about. However, lots professional gun writers will pay writer's price for a gun, keep it for like 18 months, then be all "wait I need to pay for a car payment or something, lets liquidate this Canik or whatever"

[Zincwarrior]

Well, let's see:

Under this BOD - the average member has had their organizational money spent down to nearly nothing.
-having money or not impacts the average shooter?

The BOD has banned members for saying anything negative about them.
-As I said, inside the dugout stupid. I've seen a lot of stupid like that even in church groups.

They have sponsored and attempted to get members to violate state laws at Cameo.
-That is a real issue. IDPA tried the same thing.

The DRNOI has publicly berated volunteers at matches.
-Thats a personal issue and getting punched in the mouth will solve it.

The director of marketing has taken guns and ammo given to him to review in his capacity and sold them illegally, pocketing the cash. Thereby making the org intrinsically less lawful.
-Here you go. Agree completely.

They are currently being sued by a banned member and spending membership dollars on their legal defense.
-Yes, its stupid. Meh.

They have nearly doubled dues without justification.
-Yes, like every other thing.

They have nearly doubled spending without justification.
-See above.

They have cut Team USA spending.
-That means less than nothing to your average shooter.

Meanwhile, they created a "Senior Team" which just so happens to have two, mediocre, board members on it. So they can use your money to travel to matches.
-Spending my money anyway.

They have canceled Level 2 matches with local clubs, because a member or two of those clubs said something mean about them on the internet.
-Yes that is indeed stupid.

But hey if you want your membership dues to go to paying legal defenses and allowing a few individuals to have unfettered access to the money and use it as their personal travel/slush fund, that's up to you.
-My membership fee will be spent on something stupid regardless.

Once you move past the rules and the cost for the website maintenance everything else is a waste of member money.


Personally for my money, keep the board updated for matches and match results, check the rules every five years for tech changes, and bin everything else.

[CleverNickname]

The second thing - there's nothing inherently illegal about selling review guns, provided everything is handled above board. If it's intentionally done for personal gain or profit, then sure the ATF could have something to call you about. However, lots professional gun writers will pay writer's price for a gun, keep it for like 18 months, then be all "wait I need to pay for a car payment or something, lets liquidate this Canik or whatever"
The issue is that the guns in question were provided to USPSA (and therefore USPSA property), but they were sold by an employee personally and the proceeds were not returned to the organization. If it was just a USPSA employee selling guns for USPSA but not personally taking the proceeds, then I don't think anyone would have a problem with it.

[jetfire]

The issue is that the guns in question were provided to USPSA (and therefore USPSA property), but they were sold by an employee personally and the proceeds were not returned to the organization. If it was just a USPSA employee selling guns for USPSA but not personally taking the proceeds, then I don't think anyone would have a problem with it.

I would be very interested to see the terms of the T&E agreement that the manufacturer sent those to Jake/USPSA under, because that would determine whose property the gun actually is.

[mmc45414]

I would be very interested to see the terms of the T&E agreement that the manufacturer sent those to Jake/USPSA under, because that would determine whose property the gun actually is.
Or what name is on the #4473, unless the organization has an FFL?

[CleverNickname]

Or what name is on the #4473, unless the organization has an FFL?
Page 4 on the 4473 says:

"When the transferee/buyer of a firearm is a corporation, company, association, partnership, or other such business entity, an officer authorized to act on behalf of the business must complete Section B of the form with his/her personal information, sign Section B, and attach a written statement, executed under penalties of perjury, stating: (A) the firearm is being acquired for the use of and will be the property of that business entity; and (B) the name and address of that business entity."

[jetfire]

Or what name is on the #4473, unless the organization has an FFL?

Yeah, that's another important factor. I don't believe USPSA has an FFL, because when I've sent in guns for NROI review to get added to the production list they go to some rando FFL

[CleverNickname]

Yeah, that's another important factor. I don't believe USPSA has an FFL, because when I've sent in guns for NROI review to get added to the production list they go to some rando FFL
Looking at the list of FFLs (https://www.atf.gov/firearms/listing-federal-firearms-licensees) I don't see one for USPSA.

[Stephanie B]

I'd call USPSA a four-alarm dumpster fire, but if dumpster fires ever became sentient, they might sue for defamation.

[jetfire]

Looking at the list of FFLs (https://www.atf.gov/firearms/listing-federal-firearms-licensees) I don't see one for USPSA.

Alright, so on this topic let's look at an example from another organization and how T&E guns are normally handled in the industry. Let's say I want to get the new GX4 Carry reviewed in Ballistic Magazine. I contact one of the editors of Ballistic at their official corporate email address, and send them a gun to write up. That editor as an employee of the magazine writes the review, and then at the conclusion of the review emails me asking me what writer's price for the gun is. Because we're homies, I give him the hookup, he pays for the gun and gets to keep it.

Despite the fact that he's an employee of the magazine and the gun was sent to him in his official capacity at the magazine, at no point did anyone think the gun belonged to the magazine. I sent it to a specific writer for specific work, and at the end he pays for it with his own money. This is standard industry practice whether I'm sending guns to employees or freelancers.

So that means in the case of Jake, if he was sent a gun to review for the USPSA magazine, then paid writer's price for it and eventually resold it, he didn't do anything that violates industry norms. Now, that doesn't mean we don't pay attention to see if writers are intentionally flipping guns for profit, because that's not cool (and is also a crime) because that will get people blacklisted.

To be clear, I'm not defending Jake here, just pointing out that furor over the gun thing is actually more of a tempest in a teapot than a real issue. With the caveat that if he bought the guns at a discount and sold them with the intention to make a profit, he probably committed a crime.

[RevolverRob]

With the caveat that if he bought the guns at a discount and sold them with the intention to make a profit, he probably committed a crime.

It's pretty clear that he was using Indiana Gun Owners Forum (INGO) as a venue to sell firearms for about 2-years and almost certainly made a profit during that time.

Martens sold over 30 firearms during that time, most of them competition related firearms, and at least 1/3 of them were featured in Front Sight Magazine. He deleted a number of posts and not all of them were able to be recovered, such that we don't know what all guns were sold just some of the amounts they were sold for. In addition, he sold a number of accessories and ammo, coincidentally also featured in various capacities in Front Sight Magazine. Over the course of 2-years he sold these things for at least $23k.

During this time Martens was reported to have handed out business cards to people at matches and letting them know, "I'm moving some inventory." - Which is an example, literally called out in the BATF Pamphlet "Do I need an FFL?", as something that you probably need an FFL for.

[fatdog]

Over the course of 2-years he sold these things for at least $23k..

If you did not pay for the item, the IRS calls it income, if you sold it for more than you paid I am pretty sure they consider it a capital gain....but I am not an accountant. Not sums that anyone is likely to get criminally charged for but an audit, back taxes, fines if they found you out of compliance. I don't know what sort of public accusations get someone an IRS audit.

[jetfire]

It's pretty clear that he was using Indiana Gun Owners Forum (INGO) as a venue to sell firearms for about 2-years and almost certainly made a profit during that time.

Martens sold over 30 firearms during that time, most of them competition related firearms, and at least 1/3 of them were featured in Front Sight Magazine. He deleted a number of posts and not all of them were able to be recovered, such that we don't know what all guns were sold just some of the amounts they were sold for. In addition, he sold a number of accessories and ammo, coincidentally also featured in various capacities in Front Sight Magazine. Over the course of 2-years he sold these things for at least $23k.

During this time Martens was reported to have handed out business cards to people at matches and letting them know, "I'm moving some inventory." - Which is an example, literally called out in the BATF Pamphlet "Do I need an FFL?", as something that you probably need an FFL for.

Yeah, I'm not an ATF auditor, but I would consider that to fall under the list of things that you probably need an FFL for. That skirts awfully close to the line of "engaged in the business" and then when you say shit like "I'm moving inventory" vs "I need to clean out this fucking gun safe that's full of shit"

[TCinVA]

Well, let's see:

Under this BOD - the average member has had their organizational money spent down to nearly nothing.

The BOD has banned members for saying anything negative about them.

They have sponsored and attempted to get members to violate state laws at Cameo.

The DRNOI has publicly berated volunteers at matches.

The director of marketing has taken guns and ammo given to him to review in his capacity and sold them illegally, pocketing the cash. Thereby making the org intrinsically less lawful.

They are currently being sued by a banned member and spending membership dollars on their legal defense.

They have nearly doubled dues without justification.

They have nearly doubled spending without justification.

They have cut Team USA spending. Meanwhile, they created a "Senior Team" which just so happens to have two, mediocre, board members on it. So they can use your money to travel to matches.

They have canceled Level 2 matches with local clubs, because a member or two of those clubs said something mean about them on the internet.

But hey if you want your membership dues to go to paying legal defenses and allowing a few individuals to have unfettered access to the money and use it as their personal travel/slush fund, that's up to you.

Change a couple of details and it sounds like you're talking about federal government officials.

[DMF13]

Ah, polygraphs. What a mess.

Polygraphs do have their place as an investigative tool, and are misunderstood by many who love them, and hate them.

However, the number of properly trained polygraphers, is very small. There is a huge difference between someone who went to the DoD polygraph school, that is a couple months long, then has all their tests peer reviewed, and has continuing education requirements, versus someone who went to a week long class, doesn't have their tests peer reviewed, and is unlikely to get, let alone be required to attend, any continuing education, and doesn't have their testing peer reviewed.

Do you really think USPSA is going pay for someone who fits in the former category, and understands how to properly conduct a pre-test interview, conduct the testing, do a proper post test interview, is educated in the most recent developments (including countermeasures), has the most up to date equipment, and works on a team with other polygraphers so their work can be peer reviewed? I have my doubts, as those guys in the private sector command extremely high prices.

Some guy who has been to a class that's a few day long, has equipment that's questionable, isn't getting continuing education, and doesn't have well trained peers reviewing their tests, will look like a huge bargain. My guess is that's who will be hired by an organization that is looking to have many people tested, and is experience some financial difficulties.

All speculation on my part, but I've been to Vegas, and know how to play the odds. ;)

[CleverNickname]

Some guy who has been to a class that's a few day long, has equipment that's questionable, isn't getting continuing education, and doesn't have well trained peers reviewing their tests, will look like a huge bargain. My guess is that's who will be hired by an organization that is looking to have many people tested, and is experience some financial difficulties.

I wouldn't put it past the board to spend a little more money to get someone whose interpretation of the results is predetermined.

[JCS]

What are they going to do if one of the people who are starting this witch hunt fails the test.

This is such a waste of members money. I’d be shocked if they can legally do it. They aren’t employees. I’m seeing lawsuits as inevitable if this happens. Which will cost the members even more money.

People shouldn’t leak confidential stuff. I’m not for that. But this is silly.

[YVK]

Ben posted that he has been unbanned. This is mildly entertaining. I almost tempted to make a poll if he is going to attempt a return. Obviously he has very little to gain from that unless he can win in an optic division. Unless he just wants to shoot for fun of shooting because I think he does enjoy shooting.

[Archer1440]

Ben posted that he has been unbanned. This is mildly entertaining. I almost tempted to make a poll if he is going to attempt a return. Obviously he has very little to gain from that unless he can win in an optic division. Unless he just wants to shoot for fun of shooting because I think he does enjoy shooting.

My poll would be to see how long he remains unbanned. Boy can't seem to help himself.

[RJ]

Ben posted that he has been unbanned. This is mildly entertaining. I almost tempted to make a poll if he is going to attempt a return. Obviously he has very little to gain from that unless he can win in an optic division. Unless he just wants to shoot for fun of shooting because I think he does enjoy shooting.

I would guess he will return to shoot USPSA, yes. Imagine the clicks he could generate from that.

I also wonder how many of the "ImmA QUit uNtiL Ben's rEinStATed!" crowd would rejoin. I left USPSA, not because of Ben's situation, but because I was disappointed in the ongoing shenanigans of the board. Haven't thought about this for a while. Maybe I should.

[MGW]

I seem to remember him saying at one point the the IPSC worlds was his favorite match. Correct me if I’m wrong but I think USPSA is the only path for a US shooter to Worlds. I could see Ben shooting USPSA to get back to that match but who knows.

[Cory]

He had said previously that his 2025 calendar was full. But, in his instagram story today he also said that he had built in time for some matches, and bought a gun for matches. So he's definitely going to be shooting matches. What division, gun, and matches remains to be seen. It also seems like he might have had a heads up prior that his unban was coming.

I'm glad he's been unbanned. I think him being banned in the first place was crazy. I'm not certain that his being unbanned means that the higher level org has really sorted much out though. The budget stuff is still absolutely insane.

[Trooper224]

Jeez guys. I thought the WNBA had drama.

[steve]

Interesting.

[45dotACP]

Jeez guys. I thought the WNBA had drama.I've never seen the sport that didn't have its share of egos and drama queens. You should (probably not) see the Brazilian Jiu Jitsu drama. Yikes.

As for Stoeger's unbanning....eh, what does he really have to contribute or to prove? The answer to both questions is "probably not much."

He's at his best as a teacher, but his problem is his love of trolling.

Sent from my SM-A326U using Tapatalk

[DMF13]

He's at his best as a teacher, but his problem is his love of trolling.

Yeah, I was leery of taking his class, but I'm glad I did. On breaks some of his attitude showed, but when actually teaching he did a great job. He is one that I'd actually take his class again. There are some classes I've been to, where I definitely learned a lot, but don't see much point in repeating. With Ben I could see how going back would be a benefit. That said, I generally recommend that people ignore the negative aspects of his reputation, but there are a few people I know that I told to look elsewhere, because I knew they would be bothered by his persona.

[OldRunner/CSAT Neighbor]

Yeah, I was leery of taking his class, but I'm glad I did. On breaks some of his attitude showed, but when actually teaching he did a great job. He is one that I'd actually take his class again. There are some classes I've been to, where I definitely learned a lot, but don't see much point in repeating. With Ben I could see how going back would be a benefit. That said, I generally recommend that people ignore the negative aspects of his reputation, but there are a few people I know that I told to look elsewhere, because I knew they would be bothered by his persona.

Agreed DMF & after hosting Ben/Joel the last 2 yrs was going to sit ‘25 out but caved sev. months ago so they’re back in Longview next March.

[GJM]

Speaking of USPSA suspensions, the 23 and 24 classifiers have been suspended:

https://uspsa.org/announcement/930

[DMF13]

Speaking of USPSA suspensions, the 23 and 24 classifiers have been suspended:

https://uspsa.org/announcement/930Well this actually affects me. I'm signed up to shoot a match in a few days, and they actually published a match book like a major (even though it a level 1), and 24-01 was the classifier they chose.

[CleverNickname]

Speaking of USPSA suspensions, the 23 and 24 classifiers have been suspended:

https://uspsa.org/announcement/930
Thanks, I'm MD at my club match next month and I was about to use a 24-series in the match.

[Noah]

Thanks, I'm MD at my club match next month and I was about to use a 24-series in the match.

“ Reason for Suspension:
Awaiting the establishment of a defined process for HHF calculation.

Classifier Uploads During Suspension:
Once the classifiers are reinstated, any 23 and 24 series classifiers uploaded during this suspension period will count toward member classifications.”

[GJM]

What was unclear is whether these classifiers on record will count or be withdrawn?

[Le Français]

What was unclear is whether these classifiers on record will count or be withdrawn?

Yes, and if the HHF is changed, will the resulting change in percentage be applied to these classifiers already on record prior to today? One wonders…

[CleverNickname]

“ Reason for Suspension:
Awaiting the establishment of a defined process for HHF calculation.

Classifier Uploads During Suspension:
Once the classifiers are reinstated, any 23 and 24 series classifiers uploaded during this suspension period will count toward member classifications.”
Yeah but everyone would be pissed at me if they don't get their classifier score right away instead of a couple months from now.

[1911Nut]

It never ceases to amaze me how folks can take an interesting and enjoyable activity or sport, and under the guise of "improving" said sport or activity assign a group of "experts" to work collectively and tirelessly to f--k it up.

[DaBigBR]

What was unclear is whether these classifiers on record will count or be withdrawn?

I believe this has been answered - they will still count. Assuming that they are reinstated with lower HHFs, however, the percentage based on the prior HHF will stand (just as it would if the HHF went up over time). I cannot find a source on this now but I am nearly certain of it. My 24 series classifiers still show up for me and are counting.