Michael Brown

I tried the search function but was not successful. If this has been discussed ad nauseum, if someone could direct me to the proper thread? I have not noticed too many vertical foregrips in 3-Gun competition, while they appear to be all the rage in the tactical community. I have not gone to one but then again, I haven't given them a fair shot either. What I am curious about is what the opinions in a performance oriented sport like IPSC multi-gun or other 3 gun type matches, are on vertical foregrips. Michael Brown

I think that is a much more sensible set of rules than the first version. I think it's quite good. Michael Brown

Did a search but couldn't find anything. Does anyone have a copy of the old SOF 3 gun rules? If you have one and can't post it here, please email at mtbrown1801@mac.com Thanks in advance. Michael Brown

Is anyone mounting their Simmons Pro Diamond on a flat-top AR? If so, what mount and rings are you using? Michael Brown

I saw someone mention an Aimpoint Magnifier (?) on another thread. Does anyone know anything about these? Who sells them and what do they cost? Michael Brown

Does anyone see any reason why this (TA31F) would be better or worse than a TA11 for 3 gun? It seems a little more compact and I think its got a better field of view while still using the BAC of the TA11. Any ideas, experiences or opinions? Michael Brown

Been a long time Catfish! See you there! Mike

Phil, While I admire you for stepping up to the plate, there is no reason to put yourself to expense because an organization makes a bad decision. Michael Brown

Ted, My problem exactly! Michael Brown

I think eliminating this catagory blows, although I will admit that my motives are a little self-serving. Let me say first that I am a field officer not an admin officer or full time training officer. I never shot a pistol or a match until I became an LEO. Ways this catagory has benefitted me: 1) Because of the politics involved in police work, I was not selected to be firearms instructor for my department (at that point this was a primary goal) until they realized how bad it looked that the three time state law enforcement champion wasn't an instructor. 2) When I won, I got recognition from the department which meant an occasional day to train and some input in how our officers are trained (this would be important to you too if your department still thought the weaver stance was cutting edge). 3) It felt good when somebody in church said they saw me in the paper for winning this match and they were glad officers took their own time to be better at things like this. If you are a professional and care about what you do (aka a real cop) you know how sensational that occasional sincere compliment feels. Ways this catagory benefitted our local clubs: 1) Positive exposure for a fringe sport. Lets face it, a lot of people watch the 5:00 or 6:00 news which featured our regional championship and state championships and wanted to talk about police officers' involvement and the positive aspects of it. More people locally will be influenced by this than a bunch of re-runs of American Shooter, Shooting USA, and Shooting Gallary. Local news is usually not interested in high GM's or Super Squads. They are interested in what cops are doing. 2) After public recognition of the sport, several people came out to try the sport. We should be all about attracting new members. If each state attracts one new cop to be a USPSA member, every oh-so expensive extra trophy is paid for. Considering that my participation (I was among the first in my area and worked very hard to get officers involved) got over a dozen new cops involved in my area, I'd say this one trophy at a match was more than worth it. Also it wasn't just cops that came out when they saw this feature, it was non-competitive gun owners a well. Our local clubs used to run matches with 8-15 members. We are usually above 30 in the cold months now and over 50 in the spring. This kind of publicity works and should be encouraged. I also have a personal belief (excuse my paranoid rant) that IPSC eliminated this catagory because in many other countries, officers are often discouraged from being armed or participating in what their liberals call "paramilitary training." Europeans in particular are conspicuously guilty of this. IPSC likely caved to a certian degree of political pressure just like the Olympics did in terms of firearms sports. If this is so, I hope USPSA seeks to differentiate itself rather that ingratiate itself to IPSC. Rant off. It seems sad that we eliminated this catagory for no good reason. Michael Brown

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but has anyone talked to HQ or the owners themselves about exactly what this will mean? For example, I have a Blade-Tech belt (not tel-lok) holster, a Sidearmor Belt holster and a Comp-tac belt holster. All three are sized for a 1.75" belt that I wear. However all of them have a tiny pinhole of light at the bottom of the loops if you look at it from on your knees. Not the inside of the body or belt or side piece, but from where the height (not thickness) of the belt ends. The holsters are right up against my side and not only could you not fit a .75 inch item, you could not fit a .01 inch item through. It would seem to be legal but the rule says no daylight. I looked at a Safariland 5183 (which I believe is also out of production now) and is named as a holster that typifies legal IDPA pouch holsters and saw the same problem. Is this illegal? Anyone? I spoke to the MD for this year's second major match and he indicated that he felt this would be legal after the new rules go into effect in April. I've sent HQ several emails but it looks like they have no intention of returning them (going on 4 weeks). I want to simply move forward on this, but its getting real frustrating and I am refusing to buy one more holster. Anyone with some answers is certainly appreciated. Michael Brown

Anyone know why USPSA is no longer recognizing Law Enforcement as a sub-catagory anymore? Michael Brown

I love the Locking Paddle but I have no idea how anyone is getting theirs to pass the "no light" rule. I still intend to use it for USPSA Production Division. I've got a belt holster on order as I'm pretty confident it will pass muster. Michael Brown

Back to the original topic of IDSA: My bet is that this never gets off the ground. I don't think a loosely organized group such as this can create a major shooting sport off disgruntled members of a fairly new organization. IDPA took off because its time was long coming (a sport directly marketed toward non-competitive shooters in a competitive format) and the people involved were credible and had the background for a venture like this. Plus IDPA was a full-time venture for Wilson and Company until they got it off the ground. The same cannot be said for the folks trying IDSA. I hope it works (really) but I doubt it. Michael Brown

"Yes, we have different divisions, and yes we still have areas to improve in and evolve. But like Shannon said, it is about the shooting. To imply that it's only about gear only shows us your info comes from circa 1993 gun rag articles and you don't know what you're talking about." Let me just say I never got personal in any of this discussion and I never made assumptions about anyone's background or knowledge. Now to post this with no knowledge of me is ridiculous. I could be be 70 years old or 12 years old. ( I am 32) I could have never shot a USPSA match or I could be quite good. (I'm fairly new to USPSA but I should hopefully be classified Master in Production by the time scores are entered in February) I could know nothing about defensive shooting or I could be very experienced. (I'm no expert but I'm a very serious student) The point is you don't know and your assumptions smack of not listening to others. Nowhere did I mention gear. I spoke of irrelevencies in the courses of fire not appealing to new shooters and my distaste for what I perceive as an over-indulgence toward the good shooters. If you are so inclined, re-read my post and then determine if you should be so impolite to someone who IS interested in USPSA but merely answered what he thought the problem was with USPSA's perception by new shooters. Michael Brown