Clark rifles - what's the scoop?

[Hill]

There are two basic questions I still have, and I'm not sure how or if they will ever be answered:

- Is there a medical expert on gunshot injuries that will come forward and say, conclusively, unambiguously, that they believe this to be a bullet wound? Is that injury even possible from a single projectile strike? I mean, as badly as these people want to blame CCR for this, where are the expert opinions? The Dr said, they said, someone said....it's all just BS until someone believes in it enough to come forward and say so. I've looked at the photo, and I don't believe what she has is a bullet wound. But, I'm not an expert. Where are the experts that will testify to this?

- Is it even possible to get a round from CCR to the spot on their property where she was injured? I've looked at the satellite pictures, the elevation differences, the photos from the news media. I've looked at the layout of the berms, the backstops, the baffles. I'm not seeing it. I suppose you could walk out from under the covered shooting area, and if you shot almost straight up you may be able to lob a round onto their property. But, short of that, is it even possible? Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. If someone wanted to prove their case, I'd think it'd be pretty easy and relatively inexpensive to model the area in 3D on a computer. Then it would be relatively simple to figure this out, quite conclusively.

The long and short of it seems obvious to me; if these people want CCR gone as badly as they seem to, I'd think they'd be all over all the hard evidence they could muster. Just doesn't appear to be any....and I'm not surprised.

I agree that there hasn't been any hard evidence that this incident occured, and I don't think that it's productive to wait for any that might be disclosed - they've taken their best shot. I don't think that it did happen as described. More plainly, after long consideration I just don't believe any part of their claims.

Obviously she hurt her head. In all honesty my money would go to the owl attack considering the nature of the abrasions to her head that were so well photographed. Though I can't claim expertize either, to me there is no possibility that her wounds were caused by a bullet in flight no matter whether it was richochet, fragmented, or otherwise driven from a normal bullet course from any firing point or position at the Clark Rifle's range.

I think that when her injury occurred they realized a 'now or never' opportunity to raise a public ruckus that they hope will be sufficient to cause the county officers to decide that the range should be relocated or closed, knowing full well that she was not hit by any bullet.

I'd love to see them prosecuted for this false claim.

 

[thirtycal]

+1

 

[cmassey]

I agree that there hasn't been any hard evidence that this incident occured, and I don't think that it's productive to wait for any that might be disclosed - they've taken their best shot. I don't think that it did happen as described. More plainly, after long consideration I just don't believe any part of their claims.

Obviously she hurt her head. In all honesty my money would go to the owl attack considering the nature of the abrasions to her head that were so well photographed. Though I can't claim expertize either, to me there is no possibility that her wounds were caused by a bullet in flight no matter whether it was richochet, fragmented, or otherwise driven from a normal bullet course from any firing point or position at the Clark Rifle's range.

I think that when her injury occurred they realized a 'now or never' opportunity to raise a public ruckus that they hope will be sufficient to cause the county officers to decide that the range should be relocated or closed, knowing full well that she was not hit by any bullet.

I'd love to see them prosecuted for this false claim.

I couldn't agree anymore! So much speculation; where are the experts with their research and facts? I just want to go shooting at my favorite and very safe range again!

 

[BlindedByScience]

I'm done speculating and I'm not waiting for any more proof....or the lack thereof. The point I was trying to make is that given the animosity the neighbor has towards CCR, and given the lack of real proof on several key points.....it's all just noise and we should all get back to shooting.

 

[NoFlinch]

While hounding the press may feel good it will do little to change the established positions. ..... the best that can happen is for this story to die. The complainant will do her best to keep it alive. .

Yes!

In that way, NO ONE will have to be accountable for anything.

Not TV
Not Newspapers
Not the Complainant
Not the tax payers

It's a win-win for no one!

 

[U201491]

Yes!

In that way, NO ONE will have to be accountable for anything.

Not TV
Not Newspapers
Not the Complainant
Not the tax payers

It's a win-win for no one!

Unless you can get the DA to press charges for filing a false report, there is little that will come of this, other than grief for the Range owners and members. Best bet is to get an Attorney and go after her for the damage she is doing to the membership and the people that own the range.
Nothing else will get anything done. The press is the left the left is the press.

 

[whiskeybill]

I live near CCR and there's a lot of shooting to the east of the range several times a week

Yep. I'm fairly new to the area, but I did participate in the clean-up just up the road a bit from Clark Rifles, at what appeared to be an old quarry. Evidence indicates that not only is shooting going on up there, but it is likely done in concert with drinking alcoholic beverages. When our clean-up commenced, the State Patrol was up there having a freshly burned out pickup hauled out too. If I lived in that area, I'd be much more concerned with shooters out in the general area than I would be with an established gun club.

 

[edslhead]

The ladies concern with the club is the NOISE. She's just using the safety angle as a means to try and close the place.

 

[thirtycal]

The ladies concern with the club is the NOISE. She's just using the safety angle as a means to try and close the place.

Abso-friggin-lutely.

The root issue here, without any doubt, is the noise.

At first, I thought it was the monetary effect on their property value. But now that I know a little more about that lady & her husband, I don't think they are itching to sell the place. I think they're itching to have relief from their decision to have built a house literally next door to place where .300 WinMag's are going off all day long.

Too bad for them, but 'noise' is what they signed up for when they built their house where they did. Undoubtedly they know that there's a 5 year backlog of folks who want to continue the noise.

Thirtycal

 

[whiskeybill]

When I was stationed at Naval Air Station Whidbey Island, it was the same song and dance. People paying a boat load of money for real estate in a very scenic environment, but they then found out (too late) they had to put up with the jet noise. Sorry folks, this base has been here since the 1940's. If you don't like the noise, don't buy in the neighborhood. Obviously, they didn't research the surroundings very well before making the purchase.

 

[AMT]

Same difference with the people in an out-skirt of Portland, near a waste management dump station. The road going in is clearly marked, and has been for years. Turn right to go into the dump. Turn left to go into the 1/2-million dollar homes.

The homeowners don't like the smell so they are making all sorts problems - wanting to pass legislation for emissions, wants the waste management people to "do something" about the smell, etc, etc, etc.

YOU PASSED THE DUMP ON YOUR WAY TO LOOK AT THE HOME PRIOR TO BUYING IT !!! DUH !!!!

I remember seeing the report on the news a few years back. I am trying to find the news article but am having no luck.

Same scenario with these people. You know what you are getting into when you go look at the property (or a home) - unless you buy it sight unseen. Either way, it is YOUR fault for moving there so stop trying forcing others to bend to your will.

...the right of entitlement never ceases to amaze me.....

 

[NoFlinch]

Unless you can get the DA to press charges for filing a false report, there is little that will come of this, other than grief for the Range owners and members. Best bet is to get an Attorney and go after her for the damage she is doing to the membership and the people that own the range.
Nothing else will get anything done. The press is the left the left is the press.

So, when did you call the DA and encourage him to press charges?
(I know you didn't)
No one did............ or will.......

"The press is the left the left is the press"..........................and the press has left..............the scene

 

[NoFlinch]

......not only is shooting going on up there, but it is likely done in concert with drinking alcoholic beverages......... .

NO!

Say it isn't so.

You're joking, of course.

I've never heard of such a thing.

Hearsay and Blasphemy!

I think someone should encourage the DA to file against YOU...............

 

[U201491]

So, when did you call the DA and encourage him to press charges?
(I know you didn't)
No one did............ or will.......

"The press is the left the left is the press"..........................and the press has left..............the scene

I beg to differ, and it is not rocket science to reach a DA.
They want a complaint by a LE officer to proceed .
And it is not even long distance on a cell phone..................
Motivate enough calls and they might do something, but don't hold your breath.

• Office Name : Clark County Prosecuting Attorney
• Name : Anthony F. Golik
• Address : PO Box 5000, Vancouver, Washington 98666
• Phone : 360-397-2261
• Email : [email protected]

Criminal Prosecution
<broken link removed>
Abbie Bartlett, Deputy Prosecutor
Email: [email protected]
Anne Cruser, Deputy Prosecutor
Email: [email protected]
1013 Franklin Street, PO Box 5000
Vancouver WA 98666-5000
(360) 397-2261 (Phone)
(360) 397-2230 (FAX)

<broken link removed>
Dustin Richardson, Senior Deputy Prosecutor
Arthur D. Curtis Children's Justice Center
Email:[email protected]
PO Box 5000
Vancouver WA 98666-5000
(360) 397-6002 (Phone)
(360) 695-1760 (FAX)

<broken link removed>
Jennifer Nugent, Unit Coordinator
Domestic Violence Prosecution Center
Email: [email protected]
210 East 13th Street, PO Box 1995
Vancouver WA 98660
(360) 487-8530 (Phone)
(360) 487-8531 (FAX)

<broken link removed>
Tonya Rulli, Senior Deputy Prosecutor
Email: [email protected]
1013 Franklin Street, PO Box 5000
Vancouver WA 98666-5000
(360) 397-2261 (Phone)
(360) 397-2230 (FAX)

<broken link removed>
Tonya Rulli, Senior Deputy Prosecutor
Email: [email protected]
1013 Franklin Street, PO Box 5000
Vancouver WA 98666-5000
(360) 397-2261 (Phone)
(360) 397-2230 (FAX)

<broken link removed>
Jeff McCarty, Deputy Prosecutor
Email: [email protected]
1013 Franklin Street, PO Box 5000
Vancouver WA 98666-5000
(360) 397-2201 (Phone)
(360) 397-2053 (FAX)

<broken link removed>
Scott Jackson, Chief Criminal Deputy
Email: [email protected]1013 Franklin Street, PO Box 5000
Vancouver WA 98666-5000
(360) 397-2261 (Phone)
(360) 397-2230 (FAX)

<broken link removed>
Jeff McCarty, Deputy Prosecutor
Email: [email protected]
1013 Franklin Street, PO Box 5000
Vancouver WA 98666-5000
(360) 397-2261 (Phone)
(360) 397-2496 (FAX)

 

[Hill]

I said that I'd like to see them prosecuted for filing a false report but I know that such a charge requires proof just as their claim requires proof. The only way they would be charged would be if the sheriff were able to prove that their complaint was a false one.

These people know all of this; their claim was made purely for the media negativity toward the range.

 

[NoFlinch]

The only way they would be charged would be if the sheriff were able to prove that their complaint was a false one.

And I bet if the sheriff received 100 letters/phone calls/emails, he might consider some sort of action.

And in actually taking some sort of action, it would discourage others from making false accusations.

But, I live in a fantasy world ...........................

.......and it's lonely here....

 

[Flopsweat]

And I bet if the sheriff received 100 letters/phone calls/emails, he might consider some sort of action.

And in actually taking some sort of action, it would discourage others from making false accusations.

But, I live in a fantasy world ...........................

.......and it's lonely here....

It certainly is very colorful there.

 

[fry]

Issue with people turning around and muzzle swing the RO's.

Got to a point that no RO would agree to supervise the pistol range on non member days.

Usual case of a couple of freaking idiots ruining it for everyone else.

more like a couple people every time the range was open to the public (on any sunday).
then there is the denial and back talk after the sweep. rare exception to actually get an apology.

 

[Hill]

For those who have googled the site in attempts to determine the possibility of this claim having merit:
Clark Rifles and the sheriff's department have determined that NO-ONE, as in nobody was firing on Range #4 on the day or time of the claimed wounding of Mrs. Sperling.

Range #4 is the longer distance range which lies in line with the claimant's house, comes closest to that house and is most often thought to be the likely source of a bullet which might have escaped the range.

Nevertheless, Clark Rifles is constructing additional safety barriers, tightening it's rules slightly, and beginning to create a log of the many shots heard in the area which do not come from shooting at their range.

Did I say that at at the time and date of the alleged incident nobody was firing on range number 4?

Hoot, hoot!

 

[edslhead]

That just goes to show how tightly that range is run. Good for them. Now if they would just let me join