Rules, Rulings, Clarifications & Opinions?

[StealthyBlagga]

I have been a USPSA CRO for many years, and I work several major matches each year. I have enough experience and rules knowledge to decide confidently on the vast majority of questions that arise, but sometime I encounter a competitor assertion that seems contrary to a plain reading of the rules, yet the competitor insists there has been a "decision" from some USPSA official that makes it OK. Usually this pertains to a particular gun part, accessory or modification now being allowed in one of the more restrictive equipment divisions.

 

I realize that I can find the up-to-date rule books, appendices and official rulings at the USPSA Rules webpage, and the information therein clearly has force of law. However, how should I respond to cases were there is no information on the USPSA website, yet the competitor produces "evidence" to support their case... at various times I have been shown emails, Facebook posts and forum threads, some of which, frankly, appear to be completely CONTRARY to a plain reading of the applicable rules. My guess is that these decisions pertained to one particular competitor in one very specific situation at a single match, but without that context I'm not sure I should be applying that decision more generically.

 

Usually I just shrug and run it up the flagpole to the RM... now it is the RM's problem and I can continue to run my stage in blissful ignorance. Oftentimes I hear that the RM accepted that evidence and ruled in favor of the competitor.

 

For those of you who act as RMs, do you accept on face value whatever information the competitor presents, or do you attempt to follow up with the original source for context? In the absence of such corroboration, what sources do you consider trustworthy? A Facebook post purportedly from DNROI? An email purportedly from DNROI? A text purportedly from DNROI? One of these from another USPSA official (e.g. the President) or an RMI? A competitor telling you about a decision at Nationals? Or are only official rulings found on the USPSA website acceptable?

 

Is there a published official ruling on acceptable places to find published official rulings? 

Edited January 20, 2018 by StealthyBlagga

[BritinUSA]

I think all rules, rulings etc. should be in one place and one place only, namely the official rule book. If a ruling is issued I think it should be added to the rule book and published online in a searchable e-book format that can be downloaded to tablets. So any RM, CRO, MD and RO can always have the latest version on hand. 

 

Usig e-mails, Facebook posts or other online media to publish rulings makes a mockery of the ruleset. It is highly likely that there are contradictory statements dating back many years that are being used by competitors, gunsmiths and vendors to create unfair advantages.

 

In summary; If it’s not in the rule book, then it’s not a valid rule.

[RJH]

1 hour ago, BritinUSA said:

I think all rules, rulings etc. should be in one place and one place only, namely the official rule book. If a ruling is issued I think it should be added to the rule book and published online in a searchable e-book format that can be downloaded to tablets. So any RM, CRO, MD and RO can always have the latest version on hand. 

 

Usig e-mails, Facebook posts or other online media to publish rulings makes a mockery of the ruleset. It is highly likely that there are contradictory statements dating back many years that are being used by competitors, gunsmiths and vendors to create unfair advantages.

 

In summary; If it’s not in the rule book, then it’s not a valid rule.

 

Agree 100%

 

Even the rulings in Frontsight can be a pain to find when they are no where else and you don't have a copy laying around.  Really wish that USPSA would do an update list on the website and publish a new paper rule book every 3 years or so with the updates in it.

[Joe4d]

How many logos on their shirt ?
Seems to be directly proportional to the likely hood of contrary to the rulebook interpretations.

 

[pjb45]

As a CRO also, I see the same type of situation from time to time.  If a shooter presents an email from a member of the NORI I will accept it there on the spot. 

 

I have communicated with the NORI to follow up on a questionable situation.  I will use their response in future situations regardless.

 

I agree it would be nice to access to all the "rulings" and in this electronic age it seems like a reasonable expectation.

 

 

[waktasz]

A facebook or forum post from anyone, don't care if it's the pres, sorry, doesn't count.

 

An email directly from DNROI I don't really like, but I've done it myself before, as a CYA.

The reason I don't like it is because people tend to email him and only give him the details they want to share, then quote his reply as if it was a quote from the rulebook. Given the full picture of the situation he may or may not have made the same comments.  I've seen this happen recently. 

 

The rulebook PDF should be amended to have ALL of the prior rulings in it. It would be easily searchable from your phone, and a complete resource. 

Edited January 21, 2018 by waktasz

[wtturn]

The only things that carry any weight are the rules themselves and published DNROI interpretations in Front Sight or the USPSA website.  

 

Emails from DNROI to individuals don't carry the weight of "law" and are insufficient.  Nor do opinions posted on Enos forum or facebook.

 

That practice is a big reason we find ourselves in the current situation.  The rulebook should preempt all else, but it has been supplanted by a myriad of unofficial opinions, interpretations, and folklore compiled over time from a variety of channels whose veracity can't possibly be verified.  In some cases, these opinions are in direct contradiction to the plain language of the rulebook.  It has created this climate in which the rules are seen as flexible and accommodating. 

 

The BoD seems unable or unwilling to perform their oversight duty of DNROI's practices.

 

This is dangerous territory for a sport based on the equitable administration of rules. 

 

 

 

 

[jcc7x7]

5 hours ago, wtturn said:

The only things that carry any weight are the rules themselves and published DNROI interpretations in Front Sight or the USPSA website.  

 

Emails from DNROI to individuals don't carry the weight of "law" and are insufficient.  Nor do opinions posted on Enos forum or facebook.

 

That practice is a big reason we find ourselves in the current situation.  The rulebook should preempt all else, but it has been supplanted by a myriad of unofficial opinions, interpretations, and folklore compiled over time from a variety of channels whose veracity can't possibly be verified.  In some cases, these opinions are in direct contradiction to the plain language of the rulebook.  It has created this climate in which the rules are seen as flexible and accommodating. 

 

The BoD seems unable or unwilling to perform their oversight duty of DNROI's practices.

 

This is dangerous territory for a sport based on the equitable administration of rules. 

 

 

 

 

Well said!

[StuckinMS]

It is definitely time for a new hard copy of the current rules. With the addition of PCC and Carry Optics and all of the " best prsctices" and addendums, let's get it all back into one publication.   Even an electronic all inclusive single publication would be nice. A lot of shooters are not current on all the latest changes and it makes it very difficult for someone to facilitate a stage or match.  Besides it is a major time issue when you have to search through each publication and check dates to prove to a competitor or an RO what rule change I'd currently in place.  USPSA headquarters should make it a high priority prior to majors getting started.

[caspian guy]

Yep agree 100% with all the above... as a CRO i dont want to have to be dealing with 3 or 4 different streams of information about what the rules are right this sec, and what they effectively are based on rulings and opinions.

[bret]

12 hours ago, pjb45 said:

As a CRO also, I see the same type of situation from time to time.  If a shooter presents an email from a member of the NORI I will accept it there on the spot. 

 

I have communicated with the NORI to follow up on a questionable situation.  I will use their response in future situations regardless.

 

I agree it would be nice to access to all the "rulings" and in this electronic age it seems like a reasonable expectation.

 

 

an E-Mail from DNROI is Not a Ruling, it is only his opinion, until ruling has been made and properly posted, it is only an opinion and doesn't mean anything.

If you are a CRO, you need to follow the rules and not make up your own rules.

 

[Sarge]

49 minutes ago, bret said:

an E-Mail from DNROI is Not a Ruling, it is only his opinion, until ruling has been made and properly posted, it is only an opinion and doesn't mean anything.

If you are a CRO, you need to follow the rules and not make up your own rules.

 

It’s never that easy. I used to make the argument that his opinions don’t amount to a hill of beans but always got corrected by everybody from Internet RM’s to folks from USPSA HQ. There are countless shooters in this game who on the advice of DNROI are using gear or doing something that that goes against the book

[wtturn]

It’s never that easy. I used to make the argument that his opinions don’t amount to a hill of beans but always got corrected by everybody from Internet RM’s to folks from USPSA HQ. There are countless shooters in this game who on the advice of DNROI are using gear or doing something that that goes against the book

Doing the right thing is rarely easy.

[CHA-LEE]

When I have served as an RM I stick to the latest poblished rule book and rulings listed on the USPSA website. If the shooter can’t produce rules or rulings from those resources to supporting their cause then too bad for them. If they don’t like my stance on the subject then they can take it up with NROI directly. 

[2MoreChains]

“RM1 this is RM3, Troy, can you come to stage 9, gentleman here says he has an email from you telling him XXXX is OK.”

 

”RM1, on my wayyyyyyy!”

 

Problem solved.  

[Sarge]

7 hours ago, 2MoreChains said:

“RM1 this is RM3, Troy, can you come to stage 9, gentleman here says he has an email from you telling him XXXX is OK.”

 

”RM1, on my wayyyyyyy!”

 

Problem solved.  

But that doesn’t work at 99.99% of the matches

[OPENB]

So how will you hard liners rule on a CZ shooter that shows up on your stage with a Cajun Race Hammer? Rule book clearly says after market hammers are illegal, but we all know what Troy has said. I'm not arguing whether Troy was right or wrong, we all have made up our minds on that, just curious what your call will be, and why?

Edited January 22, 2018 by OPENB

[RIIID]

2 minutes ago, OPENB said:

So how will you hard liners rule on a CZ shooter that shows up on your stage with a Cajun Race Hammer? Rule book clearly says after market hammers are illegal, but we all know what Troy has said. 

No, we all don't know.

Rich

[IHAVEGAS]

They are supposed to be reviewing production division rules this month (was supposed to happen last time the minds got together but they ran out of time) , am hoping 2 or 3 things  clarified on email become clarified on paper. 

 

In general there are rules and their are various ways that some language can be interpreted by honest people. If it is a case of the latter then I am flexible. 

[Chris Keen]

1 hour ago, Sarge said:

But that doesn’t work at 99.99% of the matches

I find that hard to believe when Troy is at a large percentage of USPSA matches. 

 

[Sarge]

5 minutes ago, Chris Keen said:

I find that hard to believe when Troy is at a large percentage of USPSA matches. 

 

There are exponentially more local matches than there are majors.

[Eureka1911]

Golf has done this right. There are only 34 rules of golf and the basic rulebook is very short. However, there is also a much thicker/larger official "Decisions on the Rules of Golf". ANd is all that matters. No internet posts, emails, etc.

[Chris Keen]

1 hour ago, Sarge said:

There are exponentially more local matches than there are majors.

Level 1s don't count.  Everybody knows that.

[Ssanders224]

10 hours ago, CHA-LEE said:

When I have served as an RM I stick to the latest poblished rule book and rulings listed on the USPSA website. If the shooter can’t produce rules or rulings from those resources to supporting their cause then too bad for them. If they don’t like my stance on the subject then they can take it up with NROI directly. 

 

This. 

[teros135]

25 minutes ago, Chris Keen said:

Level 1s don't count.  Everybody knows that.

 

Except for bragging rights,  as in "I beat a bunch of Open shooters with my Single Stack 9mm minor"