Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Match Directors: how do you handle this?


Nimitz

Recommended Posts

This one should be enough to convince you. I know there are more if I wanted to dig for them. This was a quote from Troy. I'm not sure why it didn't quote properly.

There wasn't a rule book to follow? I'm wondering, maybe local rules were the norm in those days, I wasn't involved then and don't know.

There was a rule book to follow. The "no local rules" rule didn't come about until recent years, well after Mr. Hollar was out of office. I don't remember the exact date, but I do know he was either no longer President or he was in his last year.

It doesn't matter what Andy did or allowed. The answer to the original question is "no, you can't be warned or DQ'd under USPSA rules for pointing your muzzle over the backstop, unless the gun goes off." If the club chooses to not follow the USPSA rule, or to not apply for a variance to the "no local rules" rule, then they are not, by definition, shooting a USPSA sanctioned match. I understand the reasons for it as stated, but the facts remain the same.

mbree: "I appreciate the input from everyone. Not something to fester on, I just want consistent rules applied across all shooters, from unclassified newbies to GMs. "

This is precisely the reason that USPSA rules exist, why we publish a rulebook, and why we teach RO seminars all over the country. If I read right, the OP is not talking about the range in Colorado that the rest of you have mentioned.

Another thing: the forbidden action rule is NOT there for making up rules and then DQ'ing people when they break them.

:angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 102
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Ken, that's the same here ... this is a safety rule issue, not a match competition rule issue (leaving the politics of why this rule has come about at our club aside ...)

From an academic standpoint this is an interesting discussion since 'muzzle over the berm' seems like a safety issue to me but if true, it sounds like some are saying that USPSA does not want to abide by local range safety rules it doesn't agree with ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A club in western Oregon lost their USPSA affiliation for the same thing.

As well they should have. I think if a club is using this policy there should be two things. No using the letters (USPSA in that order) and making it very well known in case somebody may be passing through on business or vacation and want to shoot. We get a few guys a month from out of state who are in town with P&G or some other business. I can only imagine them violating a club rule and being told "you are done, have a safe trip home".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get what the BoD is trying to do with the rule. I believe the intent of the rule is to ensure that no rounds leave the range for safety reasons. Our club as a similar rule but it's worded differently. Our rule is that all targets must be placed in such a manner that when the bullet passes through it the bullet must impact the berm. Perhaps the BoD would entertain the idea of rewording their rule?

10.4.1 already covers that. No need for club rules about berms

10.4.1 governs the competitor, not the stage designer. Having dealt with a club that enacted a similar rule (targets shall be placed in such a manner that all hits thereon will go on to strike a berm, not the range floor, I can assure you that 10.4.1 isn't good enough.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What happens when a clubs BoD makes a "safety" rule that steel cant be shot, or no running with guns, or no rapid fire?

The first is a stage design constraint. Having shot plenty of all paper stages, I wouldn't like it, but would prefer it to no USPSA. There's nothing in the rule book requiring you to use steel, or classic or metric targets.....

The other two are a different story.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no separate USPSA club at the range in question. The "club" and the range are the same entity.

The BOD is proposing eliminating the by law that recognizes precedence of sanctioned match rules over club rules.

If the by law is changed and the BOD does not grant a waiver for the club "muzzle over berm rule" to the USPSA matches, then USPSA matches can no longer be held by that club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What happens when a clubs BoD makes a "safety" rule that steel cant be shot, or no running with guns, or no rapid fire?

The first is a stage design constraint. Having shot plenty of all paper stages, I wouldn't like it, but would prefer it to no USPSA. There's nothing in the rule book requiring you to use steel, or classic or metric targets.....

The other two are a different story.....

I understand that. My point was more about not letting a clubs BoD manipulate USPSA rules in the name of safety. From my experience with the BoD from 2 clubs the safety concerns are more about stopping action shooting than making anybody safer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no separate USPSA club at the range in question. The "club" and the range are the same entity.

The BOD is proposing eliminating the by law that recognizes precedence of sanctioned match rules over club rules.

If the by law is changed and the BOD does not grant a waiver for the club "muzzle over berm rule" to the USPSA matches, then USPSA matches can no longer be held by that club.

Will this "muzzle over berm rule" only apply to handguns? Have you ever seen a trap shooter accidentally put a slug in his gun and then say pull? I have. If this bylaw is changed I think in the name of "safety" this should apply to the trap shooters also in case of a slug getting mixed into someones shot shells.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shot leaving the range are controlled by a shot size rule and range configuration.

Rifles have a waiver with certain required protocols.

Any club member who violates a club rule will get thrown out. Any visitor, will be banned.

If the new by laws pass, USPSA matches will need a waiver. I doubt it will be granted and certainly not if folks persist in the belief that USPSA match rules can be subordinated to club rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nimitz,

If you want to continue to hold USPSA sanctioned matches, sounds like you need a variance from USPSA. At this point, your best next step is to email USPSA and ask what the proper path to that variance is. I would assume they require a form and various explanations, etc.

I think this is one of the differences in USPSA and IPSC rules in that they have a Designated Safe Angles kind of rule which allows this to happen when you have restrictions that force you to narrow the normal 180 rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sincere questions:

Do you (or anyone) know for sure that a waiver won't be granted to continue with matches under USPSA (or SASS or IDPA or ??) rules?

Has the club's BOD been polled on this yet?

At this point we also don't know what the SOPs will contain either, so there are a lot of unknowns associated with the new club By-laws that are being proposed. Go to the club forum to find out the answer to the SOP status question.

Back to the original question: If the new by-law pass I would be pushing hard and making a strong case for a waiver, which is a viable option per the new by-laws.

Edited by Bamboo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everytime I reload a semi auto pistol, the muzzle is pointed above the berm, unless you got some mighty tall berms.

Agreed. If I recall when I was on my club's board nearly all rounds that left the range were not during any type of match. It was the general membership launching bullets in unsafe directions. I'm sure people even do it on purpose on occasion.

It's just easy to single out the "devil" sport of USPSA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

very true ...my understanding is that for the last several months the question of a waiver for USPSA matches has come up a the monthly Board mtg but the Board has used various 'tactics' to do nothing about it ...

So, let's try to get back to the original question since according to our AD we are ok to continue to hold sanctioned matches ... not looking to throw anyone under the bus but some have suggested that he is wrong and we can't hold matches. Who is the decision authority as to whether a variance is even required? And then who and what form would this variance take?

Not saying we will embark on this path but I'm curious about the process ....

we'll certainly know more in about 5 hrs ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One club in my area has to fire all rifle and pistol rounds from underneath wooden baffles. They were forced to agree to that when the neighbors took them to court after supposedly finding projectiles in their backyard.

The judge ruled in favor of the club when they produced video footage of the neighbors trespassing onto marked club property and taking projectiles out of the impact berms. But he also ruled that they had to build the overhead baffles to continue to operate. Puts a big damper on stage design.

Neighbors don't like the noise and their fear (or lack of understanding) of firearms, even if the gun club was there before they build their million dollar mansion. They have and will continue to do the most unscrupulous things to get their way..."to protect the children" and close down the gun club.

If I had to shoot a USPSA match at this club with the "no muzzle over the berm" local rule and there was a classifier with a reload, exactly how am I supposed to suddenly change how I reload to keep the muzzle below the berm?

BC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

obviously there will have to be compromises ... some good, some not so good ,.... but I'm with our AD, shooting the match is better than not shooting the match, after all, it's a level 1 match ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

my understanding is that for the last several months the question of a waiver for USPSA matches has come up a the monthly Board mtg but the Board has used various 'tactics' to do nothing about it ...

Not true. This has not come up at all. I wish I had documented the meeting where the current safety officer/chief instructor stated USPSA already had the waiver. FYI, the MD already queried the BoD pres and asked. No, there is no waiver at this time. There can not be a waiver for something that is not in effect yet.

IMO, much of the BoD's politics is personality based.

Edited by remoandiris
Link to comment
Share on other sites

obviously there will have to be compromises ... some good, some not so good ,.... but I'm with our AD, shooting the match is better than not shooting the match, after all, it's a level 1 match ....

If USPSA would make a rule that says all muzzles must not clear the berm during a CoF I would agree with you. That way many competitors would have to learn a new way to reload.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, let's try to get back to the original question since according to our AD we are ok to continue to hold sanctioned matches ... not looking to throw anyone under the bus but some have suggested that he is wrong and we can't hold matches. Who is the decision authority as to whether a variance is even required? And then who and what form would this variance take?

Since there is confusion on this issue, I would ask Jay to contact NROI and get their input.

Edit: Jay is an RO. I looked up the wrong person on USPSA. My apologies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree 100% that the BoD politics is personality based. Although probably not optimal, even if the By-laws pass, a "new" set of Board members can institute a waiver or even work to modify the by-laws ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...