Glock Extended Mag Release In CO...

[Ssanders224]

8 minutes ago, Gary Stevens said:

I've been in this sport for almost 40 years and have watched and participated in its evolution. Much of how the rules are applied comes from conversations between DNROI and the RMI corps. The result of these conversations are not incorporated into specific rules in the rule book. Call them Standard Operating Procedures, if you will.

 

i remember being instructed at Nationals to forbid loaded sight pictures. When I asked what rule I should reference, I was told by the MD "because I said so".

 

I also remember, as Sarge does, that if the aftermarket part was the same as OFM it was considered ok. 

 

Everytime  a new rulebook is printed I find things that were in the book that are no longer in the book.

 

 

 

I completely understand, but is that not what official publications are for, as outlined in the rule book? 

 

How are competitors supposed to operated inside the rules if how they are to be applied has not been published? 

 

Surely we can agree that if a rule is not in the rule book (or in an official publication), then it is not a RULE. I say that, because this is the logic that USPSA holds the competitors to. The onus is placed squarely on the competitor by USPSA to be able to produce rules and regulations on command, as seen in my quotation below. 

 

“Please note that, during a match, a shooter may be required to demonstrate that their gun is in compliance with Division rules by identifying a specific

rules clause or published interpretation which authorizes any disputed modification. If the shooter cannot

identify an authorizing rules clause or published interpretation, the RM shall rule that the modification is PROHIBITED for Production use and shall move the shooter to Open Division.”

[Ssanders224]

To add to the topic...

 

I asked Troy the following: 

Me: “Can you modify a mag release to extend the length”

Troy: “The rules only mention exchange of parts, not modification, therefore I'd say no.”

 

So upon the critique of someone else, I asked differently...

 

Me: “Can I install a OEM/OFM mag release that has been extended?” 

Troy: “No, per the external mods rule and the special conditions.”

 

Guys, I don’t know how this gets much more defined.  Per the current rule book, published rulings, and DNROIs current opinion, You cannot use an aftermarket mag release, nor a OFM mag release that has been modified to extend the length in Production. 

[Gary Stevens]

Well I guess that shuts me up, even though I was there when the rule was adopted and sponsored it. 

 

 

[Ssanders224]

11 minutes ago, Gary Stevens said:

Well I guess that shuts me up, even though I was there when the rule was adopted and sponsored it. 

 

 

 

It also means that your welded, extended magazine release is not legal. 

 

If you can point to the official, published ruling (I truly, sincerely wish you could) then it would solve all this. 

 

If you cant, and it is not avalible to membership... then the rule that was “adopted” at some point in the past, doesn’t CURRENTLY exist. If it is not avalible for a shooter to present when asked, then the shooter can not operate under its pretenses. 

[BritinUSA]

I suspect that there are a significant number of people who are affected by this. These extended releases have been sold by several gunsmiths for years. 

[Ssanders224]

2 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

I suspect that there are a significant number of people who are affected by this. These extended releases have been sold by several gunsmiths for years. 

 

There very well may be, and it sucks that they’ve been put into this situation. 

 

It should be a a good indication that USPSA should handle things a bit better going forward. 

[Gary Stevens]

This is what happens when there is a gap in the USPSA knowledge base, I refer to legislative intent.

 

Reading a sentence in the rulebook "x" number of years after the adoption with no prior knowledge of how it came to be is a problem.

 

Since I am a dedicated PCC shooter it doesn't impact me. Others may not be so lucky.

[Ssanders224]

9 minutes ago, Gary Stevens said:

 

Reading a sentence in the rulebook "x" number of years after the adoption with no prior knowledge of how it came to be is a problem.

 

Id say if the rule book requires some type of hand me down knowledge to be understood... then it’s a problem anyway. 

 

A new shooter should abosolutely be able to garner enough knowledge from simply reading the rule book and available published rulings, to know whether or not his gear is legal. 

 

 

Edited January 13, 2018 by Ssanders224

[Sarge]

I suggest contacting your Section Coordinator and/or you Area Director and let them know how important it is for DNROI to follow through on rule changes and to give the same answer to the question every time it’s asked. Should also be required to make official rulings and not informal opinions

[Ssanders224]

9 minutes ago, Sarge said:

I suggest contacting your Section Coordinator and/or you Area Director and let them know how important it is for DNROI to follow through on rule changes and to give the same answer to the question every time it’s asked. Should also be required to make official rulings and not informal opinions

 

I agree wholeheartedly.  However I’ll express my opinion to DNROI directly (and already have). 

If the previous DNROI felt it was a necessary rule change, I don’t know why he didn’t follow through with the process.  He was there for the approval of the 2014 rule book? 

 

Unfortunately, he didn’t follow through, and/or the ruling is not currently avalible. So we are left with the rules that are, which say your aftermarket magazine release is illegal for production. 

 

 

[HoMiE]

41 minutes ago, Gary Stevens said:

This is what happens when there is a gap in the USPSA knowledge base, I refer to legislative intent.

 

Reading a sentence in the rulebook "x" number of years after the adoption with no prior knowledge of how it came to be is a problem.

 

Since I am a dedicated PCC shooter it doesn't impact me. Others may not be so lucky.

Was the intent to allow extended magazine releases if same dimensions  as factory part to allow for competitive advantage to the custom shop options available at that time? 

[Gary Stevens]

The intent was to allow easier manipulation of the mag release. I don't know about competitive advantage, but it is a disadvantage if you can't reach the release button.

 

The only concern expressed by the BOD was that you not be able to enhance the surface area like with a button.

 

The custom shop was also discussed. Features on a custom shop gun were approved if the custom shop gun was an approved gun.

 

That was then, this is now, so who knows.

[Sarge]

11 hours ago, Ssanders224 said:

 

  So we are left with the rules that are, which say your aftermarket magazine release is illegal for production. 

 

 

  Wow, you sure have a bad case of , “i’m Going to beat this horse until it dies a second time”. 

  But it seems you have more of an issue with me than the actual rules. When you make a point of saying “your mag release is illegal” instead of saying lengthened mag releases, you are making it more personal than anything else. What happened, somebody stand up to you on an Internet forum? 

  Since there are at least 3 guys watching this conversation with their finger on the ban button I’ll have to, as usual, bow out and just sit here and take it.

  

[Ssanders224]

48 minutes ago, Sarge said:

  Wow, you sure have a bad case of , “i’m Going to beat this horse until it dies a second time”. 

  But it seems you have more of an issue with me than the actual rules. When you make a point of saying “your mag release is illegal” instead of saying lengthened mag releases, you are making it more personal than anything else. What happened, somebody stand up to you on an Internet forum? 

  Since there are at least 3 guys watching this conversation with their finger on the ban button I’ll have to, as usual, bow out and just sit here and take it.

  

 

I wouldn’t know you from Adam, so no, I have no issue with you at all. It’s extremely rare that I have issues with anyone in this sport, or that they have issues with me. 

 

I have an issue with people using illegal equipment though, as we all should. 

You said you use an aftermarket mag release, that under the current available ruling and DNROI opinion we know is illegal for use in Production.  You also said you wouldn’t be changing your mag release. 

 

What is someone supposed to take from that? It’s not a jab at you...or an underhanded remark.  

Its just a simple observation that the mag release you say you use on your Production gun is illegal under the current rules.   

I would make the same statement to anyone else that says they use an aftermarket mag release in Production. 

 

I apologize that it gets under your skin... as it shouldn’t. It’s simply the facts. 

[Ssanders224]

I’ll say it another way....

 

It is NO different than you, or me, walking up to a new shooter at a match and saying “hey man, your thigh holster isn’t techcially legal”.

 

Its not personal.  It’s an observation, tip, help, etc...regarding the shooters equipment. 

 

But what would you say to that shooter if he replied “well, I’m not taking it off”? 

 

[MVPFc]

17 minutes ago, Ssanders224 said:

 

I wouldn’t know you from Adam, so no, I have no issue with you at all. It’s extremely rare that I have issues with anyone in this sport, or that they have issues with me. 

 

I have an issue with people using illegal equipment though, as we all should. 

You said you use an aftermarket mag release, that under the current available ruling and DNROI opinion we know is illegal for use in Production.  You also said you wouldn’t be changing your mag release. 

 

What is someone supposed to take from that? It’s not a jab at you...or an underhanded remark.  

Its just a simple observation that the mag release you say you use on your Production gun is illegal under the current rules.   

I would make the same statement to anyone else that says they use an aftermarket mag release in Production. 

 

I apologize that it gets under your skin... as it shouldn’t. It’s simply the facts. 

His problem is the same as it always is. He knows you’re one of my guys and has to jump in on every post that concerns us. You could’ve said the sky was blue and he would argue with you. Sad really.

[Steve RA]

I think the point is that Sarge has an extended mag release, the argument is that it is illegal, but he commented that he has never shot it in a match.  I sincerely feel that there are a number of us in the same boat with equally "Illegal" equipment that we have never shot in a match.  I, for instance, have a 1911 with a red dot sight.  It is "Illegal" in Carry Optics, but, I have never shot it in a sanctioned USPSA match.

[Ssanders224]

5 minutes ago, Steve RA said:

I think the point is that Sarge has an extended mag release, the argument is that it is illegal, but he commented that he has never shot it in a match.  I sincerely feel that there are a number of us in the same boat with equally "Illegal" equipment that we have never shot in a match.  I, for instance, have a 1911 with a red dot sight.  It is "Illegal" in Carry Optics, but, I have never shot it in a sanctioned USPSA match.

 

Eh, not really. 

He said “I have had an extended Springer mag release on my PRODUCTION XDM since the week I bought it” , and then continued to discuss its legality. 

Context matters. 

 

I plainly said “your aftermarket mag release is illegal for Production”. 

 

If he has never used the pistol in a USPSA match in Production division, cool. As long as he changes the mag release before he ever does. 

 

And to address your example.... try putting up a post that says “What red dot should I use on my 1911 Carry Optics gun?”  Because this would be a comparable illustration.  You and I both know the type of response you’ll get  

[Sarge]

2 hours ago, MVPFc said:

His problem is the same as it always is. He knows you’re one of my guys and has to jump in on every post that concerns us. You could’ve said the sky was blue and he would argue with you. Sad really.

I didn’t even know who he or you were until I just now looked at some of your past posts. So your comments were unfounded. Neither of you have Phoenix Trinity in your profiles or signature lines.

  

 

 

 

[Steve RA]

You would probably tell me it's illegal !            Irregardless of whether I had ever shot it in a match.

[Sarge]

2 minutes ago, Ssanders224 said:

 

Eh, not really. 

He said “I have had an extended Springer mag release on my PRODUCTION XDM since the week I bought it” , and then continued to discuss its legality. 

Context matters. 

 

I plainly said “your aftermarket mag release is illegal for Production”. 

 

If he has never used the pistol in a USPSA match in Production division, cool. As long as he changes the mag release before he ever does. 

 

And to address your example.... try putting up a post that says “What red dot should I use on my 1911 Carry Optics gun?”  Because this would be a comparable illustration.  You and I both know the type of response you’ll get  

But the rules have not allowed 1911’s since day one. So it’s a totally different animal. It’s not like this topic where one DNROI approved it and another has said yes and no to several different people and nobody has apparently told the maker of said part it’s not legal. 

[Sarge]

2 minutes ago, Steve RA said:

You would probably tell me it's illegal !            Irregardless of whether I had ever shot it in a match.

 And a cheater. Twice!

[Ssanders224]

4 minutes ago, Steve RA said:

You would probably tell me it's illegal !            Irregardless of whether I had ever shot it in a match.

 

I wouldn’t, but plenty of other people would  

[Steve RA]

Ok, I've had my fun, bye now !

[Ssanders224]

3 minutes ago, Sarge said:

But the rules have not allowed 1911’s since day one. So it’s a totally different animal. It’s not like this topic where one DNROI approved it and another has said yes and no to several different people and nobody has apparently told the maker of said part it’s not legal. 

 

Its not a totally different animal.  Both examples are illegal now.  You guys keep reaching back to the past, when it really has little to no bearing on this conversation. 

 

I’ve made many attempts throughout the discussion to emphasize that I am speaking to the “CURRENT” situation. 

 

Correcting someone that their 1911 is currently illegal in CO is no different than correcting someone that their aftermarket mag release is currently illegal in CO.