Appeals court rules Baldwin, Wis., gun club must close

Figures, a handful of careless, untalented shooters wrecking the opportunity for serious shooters that can keep their projectiles within bounds....

Which was there first, the range or the residential area? What genius decided it would be a good idea to move in behind the target berm?

First thing nice map. Looks to me you have the Gun club in a trailer court, It is actually three miles south of there.

Amabo, The Farms were there long before the Gun club was.

Virtually all the members of the Citizens Committee are gun owners, hunters, and trap shooters. This was not about gun control, nor are the neighbors anti-gun people. The club was shooting rifles and even machine guns, which can kill up to a mile away, on an eleven acre piece of land which had no effective berms or protections. They insisted on firing at all hours, even after dark, although there were no night lights. They could have compromised, imposed rules, and restricted shooting to shot guns and other short range arms. They chose to take the low road and insist that they had the right to shoot anything at any time. The most basic logic would tell you that is unfair, uncooperative, and unintelligent. They got what they richly deserve.

What an ignorant post by Worrell.

There were lights, "machine" guns an uneducated persons term (full automatic firearms) were not allowed by range rule. and only 2 instances of shooting after dark ever happened and it was law enforcement training.

It is about gun control as the major funder of the citizens group has stated that it is his belief that even law enforcement shouldn’t have guns, after numerous attempts with this individual by the club dating back to 1999 to negotiate with no reciprocation on his part the club was forced to stop negotiating.

It is true that the range was not as safe as it possibly could have been, but the plan submitted to the court would have made it safe. If this was truly about safety there would never have been an appeal started on the grounds that “the range had one attempt at redesign.” If this was truly a safety issue it would have been done when the approved plan was submitted.

“The most basic logic would tell you that is unfair, uncooperative, and unintelligent.”? Wow what a un informed and unjustified comment. The range tried to cooperate and the neighbors no matter what was done would have no part of it.

Shame on you Worrell for stating “They got what they richly deserve.”

Sad Day!