Meeting

The place to shoot the breeze on all things IHMSA
United States of America
260 Striker
Class AA
Posts: 1623
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 7:41 pm
IHMSA Member#: 0
Location: DeGraff, OH

Re: Meeting

Post by 260 Striker »

Being on fixed income and with multiple family obligations prevents me from attending the INTS and even attending other clubs than my own local matches. I'm OK with that. However, I don't know who the 30 or so delegates were at the annual meeting, except for Rich, and I wasn't asked my opinion or even given a chance to voice my opinion ahead of time on any rule changes proposed/voted on at the annual meeting. That is my main concern. The dot sight thing is really inconsequential to me but the lack of opportunity to even hear about it and offer an opinion keeps the general membership from participating in rule changes. Years ago proposed rule changes were posted in the newspaper and members were encouraged to comment, then the Executive Committee would review the comments and present proposed changes at the annual meeting. Why did that change? Even the Production sight rule change got several hundred votes instead of the 30 or so who are able to attend the annual meeting. I'm not opposed to the trial period. I just want more visibility of what is happening in our organization. The rules have become guidelines now and the local MDs have the real say on what is allowed at the local matches.
Lynn Shultz
IHMSA #15692 since 1980
Past Match Director Logan Handgun Association
Current VP Logan Handgun Association
NRA Member
United States Air Force Veteran
Retired USAF Civil Servant (47 years)
937-407-4885
User avatar United States of America
high standard 40
Class A
Posts: 657
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 8:08 am
IHMSA Member#: 11568

Re: Meeting

Post by high standard 40 »

Richard, you are of course right that many of us may have jumped to conclusions. I extend my apologies for commenting without knowing of the 60 year old requirement.

I can no longer afford to travel for any silhouette matches beyond my state. I'm on fixed income and I spend all of my time and extra money trying to keep IHMSA alive here in Louisiana. So I could not be at the Internationals or thusly at the delegates meeting. If I had been, and learned of this proposal being offered to let older shooters use a dusty old Production gun, I would have asked the question "why couldn't they just shoot that gun with a reflex sight in Practical Hunter?" I say this not trying to be sarcastic. It is an honest and heartfelt question. I'll soon be 67 years old and I do shoot PH from time to time but I never use any kind of optics to do so. I know I am blessed to have fairly decent vision for my age while many others are not so lucky. But PH allows any shooter to use optics and it gives young and old alike the option to use glass if they so desire. I'm a match director at three different ranges here in Louisiana and I'm all in favor of providing opportunities to anyone to shoot and have fun at my matches. I believe we have enough categories and the rule structure as it already stands provides a place for almost any handgun combination already. I even allow rifle shooters at my matches in an open category. I look for way to increase attendance, not turn people away.

Patience is something you touched on and I can't find a reason not to agree with you in that regard as well. But I can also understand the feeling among many that communication can sometime be slow between IHMSA officers and the general membership. This results in a certain level of frustration which I am sure helped fuel this discussion. I know that this forum is not the official communication media for our association. But the IHMSA News is now distributed online so it would not be that difficult or unreasonable for us to receive important communications in a timely manner online as well. I understand that a new Editor is lined up and publications should resume soon, so maybe all of this hoopla can be just a bump in the road behind us.

Once again, my apologies if I stepped out of line and many thanks to all the volunteers who help keep IHMSA rolling.
IHMSA Member since 1980
Former Match Director Baton Rouge Silhouette Club
Current Match Director Ascension Silhouette
Current Match Director Saline Creek Silhouette
Current Match Director Top Shot Silhouette
NRA Life Member
NRA Range Safety Officer
User avatar United States of America
hardtoseeovergut
Class B
Posts: 340
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2014 7:34 pm
IHMSA Member#: 57702
Location: Central "Ahia"

Re: Meeting

Post by hardtoseeovergut »

high standard 40 wrote:Richard, you are of course right that many of us may have jumped to conclusions. I extend my apologies for commenting without knowing of the 60 year old requirement.

Patience is something you touched on and I can't find a reason not to agree with you in that regard as well. But I can also understand the feeling among many that communication can sometime be slow between IHMSA officers and the general membership. This results in a certain level of frustration which I am sure helped fuel this discussion. I know that this forum is not the official communication media for our association. But the IHMSA News is now distributed online so it would not be that difficult or unreasonable for us to receive important communications in a timely manner online as well. I understand that a new Editor is lined up and publications should resume soon, so maybe all of this hoopla can be just a bump in the road behind us.

Once again, my apologies if I stepped out of line and many thanks to all the volunteers who help keep IHMSA rolling.
Don't be too sorry. You hit the nail on the head. It's not just communication between the officers and members but at least 1/6th of the board had no idea what was going on until our phones started blowing up today. The frustration is palpable on all levels. Communication is key and it is sorely lacking.

I hope this helps the organization turn a page and communicate better with all members. Sometimes things need to come to a head before any meaningful change occurs.
Told wife she's lucky IHMSA is my mid life crisis, it's cheaper than a Corvette or chasing younger women!

Region 3 Sucker, nobody else wanted the job!
United States of America
i26963
Class A
Posts: 654
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 6:22 am
IHMSA Member#: 26963

Re: Meeting

Post by i26963 »

aggshooter wrote:I GUESS WAITING FOR THE OFFICIAL MINUTES IS NOT SOMETHING ANYBODY WANTS TO DO.

My bad, I should never tried to post a recap. Won't make that mistake again. This is why I dislike the politics of a internet forum, too much jumping to conclusions without weighing all the facts.

The proposals were made in a timely manner, but the paper wasn't published and thusly members weren't notified. Not the fault of the member who properly submitted in a timely manner and in good faith. At that point, the choice is to either:

A) recognize the proposals were made in good faith and timely and consider them,
or
B) place a moratorium on everything because they didn't get published.

For those who weren't present, it really doesn't matter if you are for or against, you still would not have been in attendance. Nobody travels hundreds of miles just to attend the delegate meeting.

There were 30 people at the delegates meeting. If you had been there to vote against it, the vote would have been 30-2, 30-4, 27-7, or whatever. But it likely would still have passed. I'm a little offended that the people who don't attend the delegate meeting think that those of us who do attend are incapable of making decisions in the best interest of the organization. The fact that this are trial periods are testament to our collective concern to go slow and not enact something permanent without more member input & info.

I personally don't shoot PH, or flop, or revolvers with $400 Anschutz peep sights. If someone shows up with one, they can shoot it. I'm not going to boycott an event because I don't like that they offer certain disciplines, or that they aren't offering an event that I want to shoot.

Actually, I think the reflex sight applied to only seniors, but that's just my (poor) recollection. Guess we'll have to wait for the OFFICIAL MINUTES to be published.

We've done a lot in past years to attract newbies or keep older members. I was against UAS when it was first proposed in 1995, now I shoot it with everyone else. Rifle scopes and taco hold began with the NRA before it was adopted by IHMSA members. Peep sights started with NRA innovation, nobody actually hunts with a peep sighted TC shooting an underpowered caliber. This past week I saw a Ruger revolver with Anschutz peeps on front & rear. We opened the door to aftermarket sights.

Yes, there was discussion regarding the reflex sight. I'm not about to delve into it online. I hope nobody else does either, just a waste of time since everyone has already made up their mind.
Rich
I consider you,a friend, and respect your opinion, But I have to disagree with you on this one.
I'm sorry you are offended , but it is not that I don't think you can't make good decisions that effect all of us, it is the fact that you DID make decisions that effect all of us. You said so yourself that y'all made the decision to put the wishes of one member that made the proposal over the membership at large, who, by your own admission, were not notified in advance. Should have been tabled, or not allowed on the floor in the first place. Trial rules have a sneaky history of becoming permanent rules, especially if the membership,is not allowed any input, or don't even know about the rule change!
The 60 and over thing is ludicrous itself. I bet that the top 10% in each class was 60 or over. Most of the perfect scores are shot by people over 60!.
I will not apologize to anyone for making my voice heard.
Melvin
There are already classes for an old timer to,shoot their guns.
Co-Match Director LRGC, Lincolnton, GA
United States of America
braud357
Class A
Posts: 652
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 7:56 am
IHMSA Member#: 13794
Location: Gonzales, LA

Re: Meeting

Post by braud357 »

I will also apologize for jumping to conclusions, but in defense of myself and others that may have done so - we have all been deprived of communication and information for quite a long time. We lost the paper, and then we lost the online monthly report. From where we sit - no one is making much of an effort to spread information. As Charlie stated - in the past we were given a comment period for several rule changes. What happened to that program ? At the very least, the regional directors could be given this information, and they could then distribute it to as many as possible. At least then such information could be given a forum and not dropped on us as misinformation. Like it or not, this is the internet age - it would be very easy to set up a mass e-mail drop for such information. As a former member of the board - I can state that communication was much better in the past. A lot of members think that we should totally reinvent IHMSA in order for it to survive; and then another number of members think that we are trying to fix something that is not broken. It is said that we should not live in the past, but - from where I sit, the past was MUCH better than the present is ! I am thankful that the reflex sight rule change is on a trial basis, but given the small bit of information given - it discriminates against younger shooters with poor eyesight. I am a 63 y/o shooter with failing eyesight. Am I going to outfit a Production gun with a reflex sight - not a chance ! I have enough money invested in silhouette equipment ! What good will a reflex sight do if you cannot make adjustments - not much, I am afraid ! Had we not had the scoped categories I would be an ex-IHMSA shooter ! I currently shoot BB-UAS, BB-UASHS, SB-UAS, SB-UASFS, PH-Short course, and PH-22. That is enough categories for me ! What we should seriously consider is a complete revision of our rules, geared towards simplification. Just last month I tried to explain to a shooter the difference between production and unlimited. I do not think that he really understood the difference even then ! As we have all learned today, there are still passionate people involved in this sport. Our "boat" is taking on water - do you want people to bail water, or have them argue about the best way to do it ? We reached a saturation point long ago concerning rules - in my opinion is that we can cater to any shooter who wants to shoot silhouette. This production rule trial is just another Band-Aid on an elephant - it serves no real practical purpose !
IHMSA # 13794 Joined May, 1980
Match Director Ascension Silhouette Gonzales, LA 1991-2009
Louisiana IHMSA Deputy State Director 1983 - 1985
Louisiana IHMSA State Director 1995 - 2007, 2014 -
IHMSA Region 2 Director 2007 - 2009
Life Member - NRA
User avatar United States of America
AtomicDogg
Class B
Posts: 412
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 7:16 am
IHMSA Member#: 49169
Location: Martinez, GA
Contact:

Re: Meeting

Post by AtomicDogg »

Here's my 2 cents and then I'll be quiet........
The issue boils down to (for me) the meeting did not reflect a representative form of governance. The Delegates are suppose to represent the wishes of the club in which they are a delegate from, not represent their wishes. That is why the system was setup to allow a comment/discussion period on all proposed rule changes prior to the "Internationals" and Delegates Meeting. So the delegate could obtain discussion and recommendations from their club. However, since the IHMSA News is having issues and the membership was not informed of proposed rule changes or other business scheduled to come before the delegates; they were not discussed and known about prior to the meeting. In my humble opinion, the IHMSA Forum would have been the next best thing to the IHMSA News for disseminating proposed rule changes and any other business scheduled to come before the Business Meeting. In a nut shell, the votes that were taken were a representation of those in attendance; and I have no big issue with delegates voting based on the information presented to them. However, the system was devised because it was understood that not all members could attend the "World Championships"; even if they did only two representatives from each club would be allowed into the business meeting.

C O M M U N I C A T I O N, with those being governed !!!!
Robert L. Walker
Co Match Director, LRGC - Lincolnton, GA
Past Region 2 Director
Past Georgia State Director
NRA Life Member
IHMSA Life Member
Georgia Website Keeper
United States of America
260 Striker
Class AA
Posts: 1623
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 7:41 pm
IHMSA Member#: 0
Location: DeGraff, OH

Re: Meeting

Post by 260 Striker »

Section I.G of the Official IHMSA Rules state a proposed rule change must be submitted to the Rules Committee 90 days prior to the annual meeting. If we had some way to see what each committee was doing each month this optic rule change would have had plenty of time for membership input and/or discussion. Others have suggested using FB or tweets or other modern methods of communication to keep the membership informed but I thought THIS forum was conceived for that exact purpose. Anyway, I'm OK with a trial period. I'm 71 but don't want to have an advantage over any other shooter regardless of category or class. I have held a R-INT classification for years and have only shot two R-INT scores which got me into the class. I'm lucky to shoot R-AA anymore but that is just me. Pretty soon we are going to have to show a driver's license to prove our age to use certain equipment. Lets jus fix 'communication' and many of these issues will disappear.
Lynn Shultz
IHMSA #15692 since 1980
Past Match Director Logan Handgun Association
Current VP Logan Handgun Association
NRA Member
United States Air Force Veteran
Retired USAF Civil Servant (47 years)
937-407-4885
United States of America
fld40
Target Setter
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 5:31 pm
IHMSA Member#: 16970

Re: Meeting

Post by fld40 »

There has been a lot of "opinion" letting on this. I believe that the failure of our "leadership" to timely address the communication issue went a long way to facilitate this situation. Their failure to do so in the future can only aggraviate this situation. I hope that the purposed corrective action comes about. I believe that braun357, stricker260 and Robert have voiced some very good points on this subject. I thank them for their concern and input.
IHMSA is a sinking ship unless our direction changes drastically.
FLD 40
Past MD Pearland Sportmans Club
Past MD CTSA
Currently Disgruntalted IHMSA member
Post Reply