Is this ethical action for a range owner?

T

tjhands

New member
Hi.

First off, my yearly range dues are only $40, so it's not a huge deal either way, but I'd like to run the scenario by y'all and see what the consensus is.

My indoor shooting range is located under a highway overpass . Last year the city did work on the highway above it and due to safety concerns, the range below was closed for 6 months or so. No refunds, pro-rated or otherwise were issued from the range. I was upset that I wouldn't be able to shoot there, but wasn't too concerned about not being offered a refund. I thought, "well, it's not his fault that the city is doing work up there."

The range re-opened in late October when they (apparently) finished repairing the road. A notice was sent stating that the range was finally reopening. No mention of any further closures were hinted at in the least. I paid for another year at that time. I just got a letter in the mail yesterday stating that as of April 1st, the range will be closed again as the city is resuming work on the road above the range. It was stated that they do not have any idea how long the range will be shut down, but I would guess that it'll be similar to last year, re-opening in October. No mention of any kind of a refund.

Should I be ticked off this time? Surely the owner of the range had SOME information from the city ahead of time that they'd be continuing their work this year. If he DID know this, then I have a problem with him not informing us customers that we'd only be getting half a year's access to the range, while charging us the full price.

What do you think? :confused:
 
I'd be upset if

I was expected to pay dues for a range I could not use. The owner should reimburse you by extending you membership by a month for each month he was closed, as a bare minimum.
 
I dont see it as a big deal. If you were charged dues monthly, then maybe, but you pay them annually. IMO, annually means once a year, not necessarily a years range time. Id just go more when they re-open to make my money back up.

Its 40 bucks....who cares?
 
liliysdad,

I know. Like I said, it's not the $$. But if it were $400 a year, would THAT make it unethical? If so, then it's unethical for $40, too.

I suppose I can show my displeasure by not joining next year, but it's the only indoor range in my area! :( He's got me by the short hairs.
 
Look at it this way. Those months he is closed, he has no revenue. You are paying the little bit extra to ensure you have a place to shoot when the time comes he can reopen. Otherwise, he would more then likely be going out of business.
 
Look at it this way. Those months he is closed, he has no revenue. You are paying the little bit extra to ensure you have a place to shoot when the time comes he can reopen. Otherwise, he would more then likely be going out of business.
Click to expand...

That's too Zen for me. :D

But seriously, that's probably the best way to look at it. If the price were $80 a year, I'm sure I'd be paying it, so I'll just think of it as paying $40 for half the year. But if he raises the price next year, I'm gonna cram that Zen right up his keister! :p
 
I guess only the range owner knows if he committed fraud, but it is fishy. If it were me, I'd call him and ask to have my membership extended for the months he was closed. Just because others have accepted the current situation doesn't mean you have to. The amount of the membership doesn't matter -- $40 or $4000 -- the issue is the same. If you don't call him on it, at least in your own regard, it sounds like next year he may close up again just after collecting dues. How long could he keep this up?
 
It's a matter of your personal relationship and feelings towards the owner of this gun range.
Do you like these people and are they really goiod personal friends where you don't care if you don't get your $40 worth of gun range use during the year? $40 isn't that big of a deal to help a local gun range out if you like the people who run it.

If you don't have any real relationship with these people then you may have to think, yes, unless there was an agreement in some contract that your anual range dues may be effected by unepected closings and so forth, that it would onlt be reasonable for the range owners to give some type of partial refund back or extend the current membership covering the time the range was closed. It would only be considerate of them.
If they don't think nothing of their paying customers, like you, then why should customers like you feel sorry for them if they are forced to close their business?

Is this a place that is just a gun range or is it a gun shop and range where they also sell guns and stuff to stay in business?

Look at it this way also. Are you holding back just because this is a gun range? If this was another type of business or club that didn't give you what you paid for, would you demand your money back?
 
You might check with the city and see how long they have know they were going to be working on that road. It might have been a total surprise to the range owner both times. And maybe it wasn't.
 
If this is a real business

and the city keeps closing it down, don't you think somebody would be paying the business for lost revenue? I agree it's just $40 and it would be worth that to just keep my name on the list for when it reopens. But it seems the guy would extend your membership out of good faith or pro-rate your next dues payment. But like I said, I wonder what the city is paying him for lost revenue? He might be making more having the range closed than open.
 
Its 40 bucks....who cares?
Click to expand...
I would!!!!
I work all week long for $40.00 to call my own.
By coincidence, $40.00 is exactly what the money Nazi (aka: My wife) gives me as an allowance.

I suppose I can show my displeasure by not joining next year, but it's the only indoor range in my area! He's got me by the short hairs.
Click to expand...
-- says it all.
The guy sounds like a slime ball,,,but you're stuck with him and his way of doing business.
 
I dont see him as being a slime ball. I dont know hi, he very well may be. However, if the range is his only source of revenue, then I see no problem with his practices. He has to pay the mortgage, utilities, insurance, etc, just to keep the range open...

Like I said, its an annual due. If you pay the dues, then get too busy to shoot for 3 months, would you go in and demand that he prorate you those three months you did not shoot?
 
tjhands said:
My indoor shooting range is located under a highway overpass . Last year the city did work on the highway above it and due to safety concerns, the range below was closed
Click to expand...

Out of this entire thread, I find the most concern with the bolded portion above (bolding mine).

Does this range have a poor backstop?

If I were you, I'd be pressing the city to explain it's "safety concerns" in complete detail. It sounds like a load of you-know-what to me.

During construction, is the roadway closed that leads to the range (i.e., no access to the range parking area)? This might make sense of the range closure.

Or is it only the fact that nearby, bullets would be sent down range, and that's just (gasp!) too dangerous for our city employees!

If the city is being skiddish only because its a "range".... I'd be ticked and I'd let everyone know about it.

Now... lets talk about that $40!....................... ;)
 
If you pay the dues, then get too busy to shoot for 3 months, would you go in and demand that he prorate you those three months you did not shoot?
Click to expand...

Ahhh, but that's totally different. When someone pays for a year's membership to, say, a healthclub, they use the club when THEY want to use it. Same with a gun range. :)
 
During construction, is the roadway closed that leads to the range (i.e., no access to the range parking area)? This might make sense of the range closure.

Or is it only the fact that nearby, bullets would be sent down range, and that's just (gasp!) too dangerous for our city employees!
Click to expand...

No, I think it was for the shooter's (supposed) safety - not the city worker's. I believe they were concerned that with jackhammers and other cement-smashing equipment above us, some debris may be knocked loose and fall on people below.
 
Or is it only the fact that nearby, bullets would be sent down range, and that's just (gasp!) too dangerous for our city employees!
Click to expand...

Perhaps Im mistaken, but I assumed the "safety issue" was for the patrons due to ongoing constructon, not the other way around.
 
So we're talking about an overpass where large heavy chunks of concrete or equipment might crush people.

OK - enough of a safety concern for me. Now I understand.
 
Yes, the highway is literally directly above us. It is the ceiling to the range. I have no qualms with shutting the range down while they are ripping up concrete above me - it's just the nagging notion that surely the range owner was informed that the construction (DEstruction?) would continue this year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top