Talk:Shooting ranges in the United States

message: This is the first draft of this article and is based on moving the formerly US-centric Shooting range article over and editing slightly.  Yaf 21:48, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: First draft

message: I find myself wondering if this article stands on it's own.  When I first saw it, my initial reaction was to ponder if the U.S. is special/different enough on the topic of shooting ranges to merit it's very own article.
I'm not saying merge it with another article.  But I thought I put the question out there.  Maybe the U.S. is that different from the rest of the world on this topic.  We certainly are where gun ownership is concerned.  Thernlund 22:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This came up before, back in February 2006, and resulted in the split that currently exists.  Have added  link.  Yaf 23:01, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah.  I see.  Sounds good to me then. Thernlund 23:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge?

message: The edit war between Yaf and 72.211.140.52/Burk8 made a hash of things.  I reverted back to the last version before the edit war began.  If I've counted correctly, neither editor can make another edit today (some, I'll discretely say, by a wide margin), so everyone go edit something else, and come back tomorrow.
I haven't reported anyone for 3RR yet.  It looks like a bother, so I don't want to.  But I will if it keeps up.
Believe it or not, from an outsider's perpective, you both have something legitimate to say.  Is it really too much to ask that you hash it out in here, rather than revert each other to death?
Silliness. --barneca (talk) 21:09, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit war

message: "mostly a result of legislators responding to gun politics issues"
The main factor is potential toxic ingestion of lead by humans and wildlife and the resulting potential liability, which can result in large lawsuits.
It is not about gun politics.
>> If the title of the section is "environmental issues" it should deal with those directly, and with verifiable links to external sources, and perhaps mention in one sentence, that environmental issues are sometimes used by those who are opposed to the proliferation of firearms or the shooting sports (for whatever reason).
Symmetrically, there should be a separate section entitles "Gun Rights" or "Gun Control Issues" which can discuss, based on verifiable research, opposition to the shooting ranges and the viewpoint of those who feel their gun rights are being jeopardized.
There is mention of "safety issues" and that section/topic can be elaborated a bit.
I am certain there is legitimate concern for environmental, safety, and gun rights issues, and they all can be discussed neutrally with citations to appropriate background material.
While I understand the statement "It is not about gun politics", meaning the section, IMO there IS room for a discussion of gun politics as it affects shooting ranges, and this needs to be given its own presentation. There is no justification, nor a need, to squelch either side.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.33.29.164 (talk) 00:04, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Environmental issues

message: This entire section is very badly written, definitely not up to Wikipedia's quality standards. There's wild statements with no citation (Almost every city with more than 30,000 people has a shooting range? That's COMPLETELY inaccurate) and also plain old bad grammar, including a run-on sentence fragment. Can someone help rewrite it? I don't really know where to start. All I can think to do is delete it entirely, but that would damage the flow of the article. 
99.163.22.236 (talk) 19:07, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "Shooting range locations" section

message: I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
::This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
::#There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
::#It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
::#In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:55, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]] 

message: This article really needs an overhaul, but with virtually no sources there's no foundation for fixing it. Does anyone know of good sources for this topic? If not, maybe it should just be cut down to size and merged back to the main shooting range article. Rezin (talk) 18:24, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup needed 

message: There's naturally going to be some overlap between to articles similar in scope, but this article is a necessary split to keep the other article from being entirely US focused. Just because there's information in both articles doesn't mean we have to pick one for it to be in. Think if this were a paper encyclopedia, with two seperate pages, one on shooting ranges around the world, one on american shooting ranges. We should probably restructure this into a technical description section that links to the main article.
 Outdoor shooting ranges are usually backed by a sandbagged barrier or specially-designed funnel-shaped traps to prevent bullets from ricocheting back at the shooters. Many older outdoor ranges only use an earthen berm, which is often composed of sand, and called the impact berm. Most outdoor ranges restrict the maximum caliber size, or have separate ranges devoted to use with rifles firing heavy caliber cartridges.  Many outdoor ranges do permit the use of automatic weapons on specially adapted Class III weapons ranges.
 Most outdoor ranges restrict the maximum caliber size, or have separate ranges devoted to use with rifles firing heavy caliber cartridges.  Many outdoor ranges do permit the use of automatic weapons on specially adapted Class III weapons ranges. 
 The largest problem currently with outdoor ranges is the lack of sufficient area behind and beside the impact berms. This area, usually called the Surface Danger Zone (SDZ), is a fan-shaped area that extends lengthwise to the ultimate ballistic distance of the round fired. 
 
 Outdoor ranges often use baffles to contain fired rounds within the range, and, with proper design can reduce the surface danger zone area. Guidelines for surface danger zones vary widely. The National Rifle Association of America maintains guidelines for range design, but often the U.S. military range design guidelines are more prescriptive, specific and easier to use. 
DarmaniLink (talk) 13:53, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  reinstating these two sections (3 paragraphs)