This is from the post DragunovSKS linked to at the beginning of this thread.
The question is about whether businesses should run a hot or cold range, and at shooting sport events whether people should be required to surrender arms/unload weapons, etc.
Before I give my opinion I would like to address a couple of the things above.
It's not a mistaken notion. While the courts and government might not respect private property rights, I do. If the owner of Knob Creek wants somone to unload firearms before they enter his property to participate in his event, then he has the right to require they to do that. If someone doesn't like it they can choose not participate.
I think I have already expressed my views about private property. As far lame insurance requirements, the lame thing is the litigious society we live in where something happens and the lawyers circle whoever has the most money. Lets say the range allows everyone to carry guns, and then someone gets shot in a negligent discharge. The dummy that didn't follow the basic safety rules is at fault, but he doesn't have any money, so guess who gets sued. In order to protect themselves from financial ruin, the range gets insurance, but in order to get rates they can afford the insurance company requires them to run a cold range, where you can load your weapon on the firing line only. Blame the lawyers, blame the insurance companies, blames dummies that shoot themselves and other people, but don't blame the range. If they didn't play by the rules they wouldn't be there for you to enjoy at all.
It would seem our author has learned from the opposition, simply throwing bombs at those he doesn't like or agree with, attaching a label that probably he doesn't even understand.
Facism 
: A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
What does this have to do with Knob Creek holding huge machine gun shoots. Because the have safety policies designed to address the lowest common denominator (read as dumbest person there) they are facist? Hardly.
In my humble opinion, without the interference of governments, lawyers, or insurance companies I would like to think that we could run a hot range with a no brandishing requirement. What I mean is that if you are carrying a gun for self-defense continue to carry it, but keep it put away to help avoid safety problems. If you want to get it out, you would be allowed to do so at the firing line, or a designated firearms handling area (I imagine something like a counter attached to a wall with a sign that says "POINT GUN THIS WAY". The wall would be designed to soak up a negligent discharge).
Consider a police station as an example. Everyone there is carrying a loaded gun, but no one is pulling guns out at random and showing them off (at least there shouldn't be). Police stations often have designated areas with bullet traps for loading/unloading and handling firearms. This reduces the opportunity for negligent discharge. Now realize that a business doesn't have the control over customers that a police department has over employees. Basically every Tom, Dick, & Harry can come in the door and you have no awareness of their competency level. The time it takes to admonish someone for a safety violation might be longer than it takes for a negligent discharge.
