Nik Habicht

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Nik Habicht

  • Rank
    Chopped Liver
  • Birthday 05/04/1966

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Levittown, PA
  • Interests
    Shooting, Photography, Reading, Old Police Cars, changing cases in post titles
  • Real Name

Recent Profile Visitors

2,474 profile views
  1. Two thoughts come to mind: Who, me? and: You ought to know -- you've encountered me enough in person!
  2. If I lived closer, I'd come shoot your matches -- even if you make me start inside the fault lines on every stage.... :-) I was playing Devil's advocate for the rest of audience.....
  3. And DNROI then briefs the Board, who have a certain time period to object/vote -- right? So, not only are the RMIs consulted, but the process is then vetted by the BOD.....
  4. Starting "outside" is a distraction from the shooting, right? I think that's as valid a challenge, as creating a start position "inside" that requires movement before being able to see targets..... Then again -- if I care about specificity, I tend to be very specific about where I want hands and feet to be at the start. The rest of the time, I'm as likely to specify a starting position anywhere inside or outside the FFZ, facing in the direction of shooters choice, with hands in any legal position, i.e. not touching gun/ancillary equipment.
  5. Or have the ROs call out the times for a score keeper...... You do have one RO per shooter, right?
  6. Which might have been fine, if he dumped a nine round mag on the ground somewhere between the start and where he fired the first shot.... Hey -- if there's enough time and distance, load the gun, and immediately reload -- especially if firing ten very early on without a reload is the best move....
  7. I'm with Mike -- but if a club decided to base a decision to ban that holster on 5.2.6, I don't know how to argue against that.....
  8. Mike -- I'm fine with most of the above argument. I'm not certain that you get to reverse a DQ under 10.5.11 only to immediately reinstate under 10.6 -- and I'm not sure that a DQ holds up under 10.6 if you cite both rules at the moment of disqualifying a competitor (hypothetically me :-) ). I'd argue that it's tough to call a "wrong call" a reasonable call -- especially if the competitor is also an experienced CRO. [Translation -- the hypothetical competitor has put his time into studying the rules, and is certain that his start position is legal because his gun falls under ] Two things are certain: I would never put us into that position on the range by disregarding your ruling, and while I'd semi-confidently argue the 10.5.11 DQ, I like my chances a lot less under 10.6. Thanks for the education, Mike -- I got something out of this thread and more specifically out of your arguments. :-)
  9. Mike -- I agree with you, if the RM is "within the scope of final authority" in the rulebook. I wouldn't appeal the ruling that the safety has to be applied -- where the RM is the final authority, if the gun is single or selective action. does not apply to -- hence the opening to slip ann arb through, not to mention that it's legal to appeal a DQ, as long as one isn't appealing the facts of the safety violation. I'd appeal the match DQ on the grounds of the gun being double action -- in which case the RM isn't the final authority, and the thumb safety doesn't need to be applied. All that said, it's been an interesting exercise, and I've learned a bit by thinking it through.....
  10. only gives you final authority if the gun is a single action pistol or a selective action pistol. So -- this is how I see it playing out. You require the safety be applied. The shooter doesn't comply. You then DQ the competitor -- who promptly files an arbitration, conceding that he declined to activate the safety because he was shooting a double action firearm, ergo not subject to the safety requirement. is pretty generous about defining what constitutes DA; you're not going to convince me that pulling the trigger on a Glock or M&P won't let the striker rise or retract before allowing it to fall. I'm not sure you find an arb committee to uphold the DQ. I'm not likely to vote to uphold for this scenario.....
  11. For the OP -- When you pick up the timer, remind yourself that the word you might need is "Stop!" That'll keep you from all kinds of excited utterances, while your brain searches for the correct command......
  12. For those of you who are on board with asking a competitor which way they're going -- what are you going to do when the shooter has brainfade on the start and goes somewhere else? I usually just observe and hang back, and adjust to what the competitor does....
  13. I'll play Mike. refers back to Single Action Firearms and Selective Action Firearms. Specifically: and So, yes will apply, as soon as the M&P has a hammer. Until then I'd argue that its primary safety is the one built into the trigger face. Are you advocating that the primary safety is one thing for one type of M&P and another for a different version? See also Section 8.1.5, specifically: I think the intent is pretty clear, when I read the entire chapter.....
  14. I'd rather have and not need, than the reverse. Then again, when I was doing this regularly, I drove to matches, including three trips to PASA and one to Tulsa. And I may have carried ammo cans for friends who were flying in....
  15. Double seems right. Back in 2003, I shot a sectional on my way to Production Nats. The sectional ~250 rounds from what I remember, the Nats required 311. Add 16 chrono rounds and I was roughly at 575. I packed 1200, and brought about half home -- but I'd rather have too many rounds, than to have to go scrounging or buying ammo....