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

Reshoot?


3djedi

Recommended Posts

I can't speak to IPSC rules as I don't shoot IPSC.

As far as the rules are concerned in either USPSA or IPSC, we can assume things all we want. I feel like I keep repeating this over and over but until you get clarification directly from the the source that rules on such matters, you are just assuming.

My stance on the matter was formed from information I received in a recent RO class from an NROI instructor. Whether or not you or I feel plugs alone are "adequate" is irrelevant. The only person that can dictate whether plugs alone are adequate (for USPSA) is Troy McManus as he is Director of NROI. NROI defines, interprets, and rules on matters such as these.

I can say that personally I don't feel that plugs alone are adequate enough for ME which is why I double plug. Are they adequate to satisfy the requirements for ear protection as specified in the rule book? Yes.

My guess is NROI's rationale is that since plugs alone satisfy the basic requirements for ear protection, they are deemed adequate.

Any of you can email him at dnroi@uspsa.org. I can't tell you who to contact at IPSC for clarification as I do not know.

This thread really belongs in the Rules section on here, BTW.

Edited by d_striker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Do you double plug? That is, ear plugs with muffs? If you do and you lose your muffs, you have not lost your ear protection.

If you only use muffs and lose it, reshoot.

Sometimes I double plug. But at this particular match I only had on the muffs. I spun so fast the muff twisted and ended up between my ear and eye. Lol

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

short-term problem ... in a couple of years when you're old and decrepit you'll never be able to spin fast enough to dislodge your earmuffs ... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't speak to IPSC rules as I don't shoot IPSC.

As far as the rules are concerned in either USPSA or IPSC, we can assume things all we want. I feel like I keep repeating this over and over but until you get clarification directly from the the source that rules on such matters, you are just assuming.

My stance on the matter was formed from information I received in a recent RO class from an NROI instructor. Whether or not you or I feel plugs alone are "adequate" is irrelevant. The only person that can dictate whether plugs alone are adequate (for USPSA) is Troy McManus as he is Director of NROI. NROI defines, interprets, and rules on matters such as these.

I can say that personally I don't feel that plugs alone are adequate enough for ME which is why I double plug. Are they adequate to satisfy the requirements for ear protection as specified in the rule book? Yes.

My guess is NROI's rationale is that since plugs alone satisfy the basic requirements for ear protection, they are deemed adequate.

Any of you can email him at dnroi@uspsa.org. I can't tell you who to contact at IPSC for clarification as I do not know.

This thread really belongs in the Rules section on here, BTW.

I have to disagree with this. If a shooter has a previous hearing loss and needs double plugging, that is up to the shooter. If the shooter feels that they need double plugging because of sensitivity, than that is up to the shooter. If a shooter starts gaming the system with bogus re-shoot requests, it will catch up to them. The director can not dictate what level of hearing protection is adequate for each person. The only hearing issue that can be dictated, is that you have some form of hearing protection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're certainly entitled to disagree with it. My original point was that if you're at a major and this happens, don't think you're automatically going to get a reshoot. I am guessing that many other RO's have received this same information.

I think you're confusing what the individual feels is adequate for their personal needs vs what satisfies the rule book definition of "adequate." So, to say that the individual is the only person that can determine what is adequate is not quite true when we are all playing a sport that has a rulebook. I think your statement is absolutely correct if you're talking about going to the range and shooting on your own time.

To be certain, perhaps you should email Troy. He's really good about responding promptly. I'm satisfied with the information I received and will make that call accordingly should it arise. My stance could change, if provided with the proper information from said source.

Edited by d_striker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me it is very situational and something discussed several times through the years. IF I start the stage and lose my muffs at the start I WILL stop and fix them and REQUIRE a reshoot. If I am the RO and the same thing happens I will stop the shooter and have them reshoot.

The sticky area is when it gets close to the end of the stage and the hearing protection/ eye protection is dislodged on a bad run. I would hope that the loss was not intentional to get a reshoot, so I have to make an educated and subjective decision as to whether I will offer the reshoot or not. If it happens on a great run then it is also up to the shooter if they want to reshoot the stage. I myself might decide to keep the run if I was the shooter.

In the end it comes down to the integrity of the shooter. I WOULD NEVER pull a stunt like this just to get a reshoot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is embarrassing: I am an RO and I can not find the definition of adequate anywhere in the rule book! Could someone please point me in the right direction?

Thanks,

Chuck

Always the jokester, aren't you Chuck?

Sent from the range

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is embarrassing: I am an RO and I can not find the definition of adequate anywhere in the rule book! Could someone please point me in the right direction?

Thanks,

Chuck

Always the jokester, aren't you Chuck?

Sent from the range

Hey George, just asking a simple question! Inquiring minds want to know ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went ahead and emailed Troy as it didn't seem like anyone else was going to do it. Although he seemed a little reluctant to give a definite answer, this is what I received:

--------------------------

Hello Troy,

Sorry to bother you again.
When discussing Rule 5.4.4 in a recent RO class, our instructor mentioned that if a shooter loses their muffs but still has ear plugs in, they have not lost their ear protection.
Can you elaborate on what "adequate" hearing protection entails as listed in Rule 5.4.1?
-----------------------
Any sort of commercially produced hearing protection is adequate, although some may be a little better than others. The question usually is, is it adequate for the competitor's needs. For spectators, fingers in the ear are adequate, if done properly. The RO should not attempt to make people double cover, nor should he allow someone using cotton balls stuck in their ears to compete.

We do not have a definition, per se, of what adequate hearing protection is, nor do we have one for eye protection, but the judicious application of common sense should be sufficient in 99.9% of all cases where eye and hearing protection is called into question.

Regards,

Troy
---------------------------
Based off of that response, I'm changing my stance if I'm RO'ing a shooter that loses their muffs but still has plugs. I will stop them and have them reshoot. My rationale is that if the shooter has double plugged, they must feel that they need that level of protection.
This seems to be such a subjective matter and there are obviously differences of opinion on what "adequate" entails. If I'm at a major match and this happens to me, I'm not going to stop myself. Sure, you could stop and then if the RO gives you the ULSC command, you could arbitrate. All I'm saying is be prepared for that possibility. Also be prepared for the possibility that the RM and/or arb committee may have the same sentiment as the RO that felt your plugs were adequate.
Personally, I wouldn't want to burden myself with arguing this matter when I'm just trying to shoot. I'll shoot on until I hear stop and be prepared to not get a reshoot.
Edited by d_striker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beauty is always in the eye of the beholder. We had this discussion a few weeks ago and my position has not changed. Absent direction from NROI I look for minimums. Some form of eye protection and at least a set of foam or other type of insert in the ear plugs.

Once those minimums are met, I am out of the equation.

I fully understand not wanting to damage one's hearing. However if you are double plugged and your actions cause the additional ear protection to become unseated, that is your problem IMO. If you feel your hearing requires double plugging, then stop fix your additional ear protection and continue. Option two is stop shooting that stage altogether.

Probably not a popular position, but absent different direction from DNROI that is where I am. Apparently at least one instructor agrees with me. We'll see what happens down the road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thoughts are if they come to the line double plugged the muffs are what will be noticeable. If they come off or get dislodged I will not take the time to see if they have plugs underneath. STOP and reshoot.

If they come to the line with just muffs and they are dislodged then we also have a stop and reshoot.

If they come to the line with just plugs and they are dislodged we stop and reshoot.

If they come to the line with just plugs and after the first couple of shots they stop and claim that they forgot their muffs, we will stop and reshoot. After the first couple of shots then they have made their choice and I will not allow a reshoot because they claim they were distracted by the loud shots.

I double plug and have stopped myself twice because I forgot to put my muffs back on. In both cases I was the first shooter and in both cases I stopped after the first shot. In my opinion the person deciding if the hearing protection is adequate is the shooter, but that decision must be made at the start of the stage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at the 2 rules I quoted above:

5.4.3 If a Range Official notices that a competitor has lost or displaced their eye or hearing protection during a course of fire, or has commenced a course of fire without either one, the Range Official must immediately stop the competitor who will be required to reshoot the course of fire after the protective devices have been restored.

5.4.4 A competitor who inadvertently loses eye or hearing protection during a course of fire, or commences a course of fire without either one, is entitled to stop, point their handgun in a safe direction and indicate the problem to the Range Official, in which case the provisions of the previous rule will apply.

The rules just say eye or hearing protection with no mention of minimums or any such metric. The first one says the RO must stop the shooter. The second rule says the shooter is entitled stop themselves. Can this be gamed, of course it can. But, I find it very hard to believe that folks think it is OK to decide to overrule an individual's decision that they have become unsafe due to equipment issues.

Remember this?

Range Officer's Creed

As a USPSA Range Officer, I shall conduct all competitions with the safety of the competitors, spectators and fellow Range Officials first and foremost in my thoughts and actions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think 99.9999% of people are ever going to game something like this. Could someone do it? Yeah, sure, they'd probably do it once or twice and call it a day. No one is going to plan offing their muffs constantly and intentionally. Personally, I double plug. I am hearing sensitive and want to preserve as much as I can for as long as I can. The people putting in one pair of ear plugs from the dollar store and having them not even be all the way in and then shooting Open guns, that's their choice to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

No the RO didn't. I just fixed my earmuffs and finished the classifier. But thanks to you guys I was able to show him the rule and reshoot it.

He's pretty new and was very happy to learn the rule and allow my reshoot......

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Had you stopped yourself from shooting the stage, you would get a reshoot.

Since you fixed your hearing protection and kept going, you should not have been given a reshoot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No the RO didn't. I just fixed my earmuffs and finished the classifier. But thanks to you guys I was able to show him the rule and reshoot it.

He's pretty new and was very happy to learn the rule and allow my reshoot......

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Had you stopped yourself from shooting the stage, you would get a reshoot.

Since you fixed your hearing protection and kept going, you should not have been given a reshoot.

I don't know. The rule says reshoot for inadvertently losing them. It doesn't say only if they don't put them back on. Losing them screwed up the stage so I would have a shooter reshoot even if they put them back on immediately.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No the RO didn't. I just fixed my earmuffs and finished the classifier. But thanks to you guys I was able to show him the rule and reshoot it.

He's pretty new and was very happy to learn the rule and allow my reshoot......

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Had you stopped yourself from shooting the stage, you would get a reshoot.

Since you fixed your hearing protection and kept going, you should not have been given a reshoot.

I don't know. The rule says reshoot for inadvertently losing them. It doesn't say only if they don't put them back on. Losing them screwed up the stage so I would have a shooter reshoot even if they put them back on immediately.

Once they put them back on and finished the stage, they get scored.

The shooter didn't stop themselves neither did the R.O. the shooter chose to finish the stage, after putting their hearing protection back on.

Had he stopped, then a reshoot is needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with bret, the shooter "is entitled" to stop themselves during the course of fire, if they do they can get a reshoot.

However if they choose not to stop (and the RO did not stop them) and instead finish the stage I would not then give a reshoot.

Eric

Edited by eric4069
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with bret, the shooter "is entitled" to stop themselves during the course of fire, if they do they can get a reshoot.

However if they choose not to stop (and the RO did not stop them) and instead finish the stage I would not then give a reshoot.

Eric

Did the RO notice the ear muffs were off? If so the RO MUST STOP THE SHOOTER. If the RO sees a shooter bump a door or wall etc and the muffs come loose he should be stopped even if he takes the time to refit them.

5.4.3 If a Range Official notices that a competitor has lost or displaced their eye or hearing protection during a course of fire, or has commenced a course of fire without either one, the Range Official must immediately stop the competitor who will be required to reshoot the course of fire after the protective devices have been restored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sarge,

The shooter wasn't stopped, he fixed it and finished the stage.

R.O. didn't stop him and the shooter chose to finish the stage after he fixed his hearing protection.

I see no reason in the rules for a reshoot since he wasn't stopped either by himself or the R.O.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess in that case the RO and the shooter messed up then. But there also isn't a rule in the book that says he can't be ordered to reshoot after range is clear. The shooter still had a bad run. Even if he remuffed and kept going and then pointed out the rule, AND the RO saw it come off but didn't know what to do. The RO could then be taught the rules and be like ,"damn I screwed that up, reshoot."

But If everybody left happy then I guess that's that.

I would have needed duct tape on my mouth not to intervene

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
On 7/22/2016 at 1:51 PM, Sarge said:

I guess in that case the RO and the shooter messed up then. But there also isn't a rule in the book that says he can't be ordered to reshoot after range is clear. The shooter still had a bad run. Even if he remuffed and kept going and then pointed out the rule, AND the RO saw it come off but didn't know what to do. The RO could then be taught the rules and be like ,"damn I screwed that up, reshoot."

But If everybody left happy then I guess that's that.

I would have needed duct tape on my mouth not to intervene

R.O.'s can't catch everything, since the shooter wasn't stopped, he should not get a reshoot.

Just because he had a bad run is not reason for a reshoot, he chose to finish the stage.

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...