Category: All About Guns
The below is an excerpt from the 1978 book, Olympic Shooting, written by Col. Jim Crossman and published by the NRA.
International Shooting Reorganizes After World War II
By Colonel Jim Crossman
International shooting competition ceased after the 1937 UIT World Championships in Helsinki, Finland. When peace came in late 1945, the soldiers of many nations were quickly returned to civilian life and peacetime pursuits.
A meeting of the International Shooting Union was held early in 1946 to plan the resumption of international shooting competitions. The United States was represented at that meeting by Brig. Gen. Merritt A. Edson, USMC. Gen. Edson sought to get an American rifle match fired at 200, 300, 400 and 600 yards, and an American-style pistol match included in the postwar shooting program.
The first postwar World Championships of the International Shooting Union were held on the Stora Skugen rifle and pistol range outside Stockholm in August 1947. Eighteen European nations and Argentina and Egypt sent squads varying in size from 6 to 40 men (the English) to compete.
The United States was represented by one man, Lt. Col. Noah J. Rodeheffer, USMC, who was sent by the NRA as the delegate to the UIT meetings.
It is interesting to note that Greece, whose financial plight following World War II made it necessary for the United States to contribute direct aid in money and materials, sent its representatives to Stockholm in a Greek Army plane furnished by the United States. The U.S. was unable to circumvent the red tape involved in securing transportation for a team and was represented only by Col. Rodeheffer, who flew commercial airlines to Stockholm.
The following results of that meeting were reported in American Rifleman, October 1947, page 42:
In the Shooting Union meeting August first and second, several things were accomplished which will be of interest to American shooters. For one, the amateur rule of the Union was clarified, particularly as it impinged upon Olympic competition. The United States has long been reluctant to participate in Olympic shooting activities because of a vague rule defining amateur status. It was felt that some of the national shooting societies on the Continent read a rather different meaning into the “amateur” rule than could be read into English translations.
The new amateur rule, which has not yet been passed upon by the Olympic Rules Committee, is reasonably specific. It says that amateurs will not include: (a) Those who give paid exhibitions in marksmanship; (b) those who professionally test guns (this is the only ambiguous phrase in the rule and will need clarification); (c) those who professionally instruct in marksmanship (this does not include members of the armed services who instruct recruits). A man’s shooting activities for the two years prior to Olympic participation will determine his amateur standing. Money not in excess of eight dollars a day or forty dollars a week may be accepted without an accounting and without affecting a person’s amateur standing. Prizes in excess of these sums must be reported to his club and, if the winner is to retain an amateur standing, he may retain only such amount as will cover his actual expenses, including entrance fees, ammunition, and living and traveling costs as defined by the International Olympic Committee.
It was also determined that the shooting portion of the 1948 Olympic program was to be limited to a 300-meter free rifle, three-position match; a 50-meter, 60-shot prone, .22 caliber rifle match; a 50-meter, 60-shot free pistol match and a five-bobber pistol match similar to that fired at Stockholm. This program is unsatisfactory to many nations other than the United States, and the Finns announced that at the Olympics of 1952, to be held in Finland, a much broader program including service rifle events would be fired.
Thus were the ground rules laid down for the postwar resumption of international target shooting.
Lead photo: Arthur E. Cook won a gold medal during the London Olympic of 1948 at the tender age of 18. We will see more from Cook, who sadly passed away in February 2021, in future installments of our retrospective on U.S. Olympic shooting history. Photo from the NRA archives.
Categories
Some Red Hot Gospel there!
Categories
Very Impressive! (You choose)
.png)
July 8, 2022- Last Friday Governor Newsom signed AB 2571 into law under an emergency order to have the law go into effect immediately. The law is will cripple youth shooting in California as it prevents the promotion of firearms and firearm-related products and events to youth.
This new law impacts Associations, Camps, Clubs, FFLs, Hunter Education, Instructors, Firearms Trainers, Youth Organizations, ranges, and those who work in association with any youth shooting program — including firearm safety training. Any promotion of firearms to those under 18 years of age may lead to hefty fines of $25,000 per incident.
Today CRPA, Second Amendment Foundation, Gun Owners of California, and others are standing up to Newsom and his propaganda. These groups filed a lawsuit to stop the further implementation of this unconstitutional law and are seeking an immediate injunction to block the law from taking effect.
“This law is a clear First Amendment violation of speech and assembly. It’s really an attempt to wipe out the next generation of hunters and shooters,” said CRPA President and General Counsel Chuck Michel. “Politicians in Sacramento are not even trying to hide their disdain for the “gun culture,” which they neither understand nor support. They want to wipe it out.”
Newsom not only does not support Second Amendment rights; he has been working to make it practically impossible to acquire, own or use a gun for sport or self-defense. With this bill, designed to keep youth out of the shooting sports, Newsom hopes that the current generation of freedom-loving gun owners will be the last.
“We must fight for the the next generation of gun owners so they can learn about firearms and their safe use, train, experience the joy of sport shooting and hunting, have fun, learn discipline, and understand their Second Amendment rights,” said Michel.
To receive updates on this and other 2A cases, SIGN UP to receive CRPA communications and follow up on social media. Knowledge is the first step to political power.
With the Supreme Court affirming that the Second Amendment has teeth and prohibits government infringement, now is the time for a long overdue SECOND AMENDMENT RECKONING. Gun owners must support litigation efforts and groups like CRPA, GOC, and SAF that fight for your rights, and have been for decades. There are LOTS of lawsuits to be filed as we fight back against the BLUE RESISTANCE to the Second Amendment.
Categories
A Winchester Model 64 in 30-30
Wife Suzi and I were chatting the other day about someone in the industry who got a new job. She said, “Nah, he won’t make it, he’s not a Gunist.” I paused, thinking, “I don’t think I’ve ever heard that word, but it’s a good one.”
“So,” I said, “what’s a Gunist?” Suzi has been around our industry for quite some time. I was curious to know what insight she had on the matter.
“Oh, you know, someone like you. Somebody who’s lived it, breathed it, grew up with it, reads those boring books you read about old English guns, proof marks, all that reloading stuff, works on guns in the garage for hours at a time, you know — gun stuff. If I need to know something about guns, I ask you and you just about always know at least something about it. He’s not like that and doesn’t understand who we are, or how we think. Just because he can sell refrigerators, doesn’t mean he can work in our industry selling gun stuff.”
And it dawned on me, she was right.
In the “old” days, say, 20 or 30 years ago, the vast majority of executive level types in the biz were gun guys, or as Suzi says, “Gunists.” They had grown up shooting, hunting, collecting and more than likely, working in our industry. They understood their customers — because they were their customers. Fast-forward 20 or 30 years and in today’s “corporatized” companies, there is a tendency to think, “Well, if they can sell widgets, or tractors or used cars, they can sell guns.” But almost always it ends up not to be the case at all. There are exceptions, but not many.
The really bad thing is some of those who get brought into our industry have tended to bounce from company to company, wrecking havoc, getting fired, getting golden handshakes, only to turn up again in some executive position. It’s like, once you get a union card, you can get a job no matter what. “Hey, he was the VP of marketing there, so he could be the VP of marketing here,” sort of thinking. Not.
If you’re a “Gunist” and reading this now, you are probably aware of some pretty silly new products that have been introduced over the past 10 years or so. After a jaunt to SHOT Show, I have often come away thinking, “Did anyone who was an actual shooter even look at that product before they introduced it?” And the scary thing, is sometimes I find out that actually, no … nobody who was an actual shooter had looked at it before the VP of Sales (formerly a VP of sales at Enron or something and a definite non-shooter) simply ordered it launched and their Madison Ave. marketing firm did it. Then we usually witness what we call “the big silence” as people don’t buy whatever “it” is.
Of course, then that VP ends up at some other unsuspecting company and does the same thing. Repeat ad-nauseam. All of which is fine if all I’m going to do is complain about it. So let’s not just complain and wring our hands and repeat woe-is-me chants. What can we do about it?
Actually, it’s easy. Make yourself known. If (fill in the blank here) company announces, introduces or tries to sell you on a product that’s stupid — tell them. Pick up the phone, drop them an e-mail, fill out the survey, whatever it takes. Just say, “Hey, I don’t mean to be ugly, but that new digital/hi-tech/battery-powered/operator-based/polymer/CR123/lavender-laser/Kydex-wrapped widget, is … um … stupid. Don’t waste your money on it, because I won’t waste my money on it either. And besides, you shoulda’ asked a Gunist before you did it in the first place.”
Of course, some of those marketing disasters have served to make our industry interesting at times. I’ve still never actually seen a magazine for a Bren Ten 10mm auto. Can you say “Rogak P-18” auto pistol? Even the term “Short Magnum” may go the way of the Do-Do bird. And just because you can make it out of polymer, doesn’t mean you actually should. Well, at least then it could be recycled into those little booze bottles you get on airplanes.
So let’s cross our Gunist fingers and hope the industry looks harder for executives who know the difference between a .22 Hornet and a .22 LR, have some 1950s Gun Digests laying around that are well-thumbed, and are really sorry they can’t make the meeting on Wednesday because it’s dove season opener. Please?