Stlhead

I don’t come around here much anymore. The atmosphere of the forum, much like the sport (3 gun) has just gone in a different direction. I do peek at the topics every few months and noticed this one that struck me as the first one I have noticed worth commenting on in a while. Back in the day I started with USPSA, then got into 3 gun and abandoned USPSA for anything other than pistol practice for 3 gun, I have shot a few matches over the years, I have Set stages, I have served as an RO, I have done set up, tear down, shot tactical rifle matches (pre-PRS), shot PRS, watched the rise of 3 gun nation, DQed at a major match, and DQed others. The zenith of 3 gun was right after 3 gun nation got started, from there it started a slow but steady decline that bottomed out last season. I feel there are many reasons for the decline, but here are what I see as the big 3. The stages at many matches where just not as much fun to shoot, 3 gun is expensive, not just in money, but more importantly time, lastly the bulk of the participants are getting old and broke Dick. Fortunatley there are still a few guys left willing to put on a good match for me to limp around at. USPSA guys will always find fault with 3 gun, as far as they are concerned all shooting sports worship at the feet of the USPSA, and some will blame the shotgun, but shotgun is only a barrier to those that are not in the sport already, the decline has to come from those that where already in the sport, not just a lack of new shooters.

I like the 110 V Max

If a properly holstered pistol is insufficient to protect you from the potential danger of a pistol when the user is going prone in front of you then it is insufficient to protect the wearer of that holster. If mitigating danger is the highest concern then we should strongly consider finger gunning the stages and walk (don't run) around yelling "pew, pew, pew". After all that would be the best way to assure no one got hurt.

If you are planning on shooting the High Dessert Classic at Parma then you can shoot whatever you want. You can change uppers, or even shoot multiple guns on a single stage. Just shoot trooper division. Trooper is usually a very competitive class, and your open stuff will fit right in. Hopefully there will be a few other riflemen to show up to the matches you get to this year to test yourself against.

Never question the advice you get on the internet. It is worth every penny you pay for it.

Any decent trigger that you practice with and learn to love will beat the latest fad trigger that you just got. So it really does not much matter which trigger you think is best, because they are are all about the same.

Garmil So if I understand your point, the fact that many (not all) rules call detachable magazines on shotguns an open only feature it is right and just and not subject to debate? Rules are fluid, they change all the time, especially in 3 gun. Lots of matches, lots of different rules sets. I think that detachable magazine fed shotguns should be allowed in all divisions. Fixed magazine shotguns don't make sense when the application requires more shells than can be held in a fixed magazine. We do not regularly see stages where we load rifle and pistol magazines on the clock, what fun is that? Instead we have stages where we see how fast we can shove shot shells into our shotguns. Saying that a detachable magazine on any gun is a feature that should only be allowed in open says that it is some sort of major advantage that should be reserved for those that can handle the power of shooting open. Detachable magazines are just common sense, the fact that there are not more shotguns that have them relates more to hunting regulations than common sense. Bryan I often ask myself that. Many of us shoot because we enjoy it. I hold no illusions of the practical or social application of our game, we use bird shot on targets that are not birds! One of my favorite matches every year has no shotgun in it at all. I like shooting shotgun, I enjoy shooting a round of sporting clays now and again, many matches that I enjoy require them, but shotguns are not required to have a great match. Perhaps the best use of shotguns in our sport would be shotgun only matches, I can't say for sure, but I know that as we are doing it now the shotgun portion of our game is broken, and needs a change. Is allowing detachable magazines the change that is needed? I don't know, but I do know that shotguns that look like pikes, and competitors with shot shells hanging all over them on plastic clips are not the direction I want to keep going.

Too bad.

So I get that you disagree, are you going to support your argument? Or are you going to try and poke holes in mine? Or are you done?

It would also seem to allow the use of more than one gun of a given type on a single stage with that language and interpretation. If so cool. More guns = more fun.

No, revolvers do not have detachable magazines, nor do many rifles. The poor bastards in California don't have detachable mags on many of their rifles. Why pick on shotguns with detachable magazines? I could give two shits if people use magazine fed shotguns in limited and scope tac, but to say that they should be excluded because the current rules say so is short sighted and illogical. Detachable magazines are not a new invention, they are not even controversial. A detachable magazine for a shotgun is no more "Open" than a detachable magazine for a rifle or a pistol. "Open" is everything, the other divisions are defined by what features they allow, and they allow detachable magazines on two of the three guns. Why not allow it for all three. The main reason people don't want detachable magazines in the other divisions is that they don't want to buy a new shotgun after dumping too much money into what they already use, especially when the detachable mag shotguns have been so lackluster in the past. Those arguments should not hold any water. If the feature (detachable magazine) is too much of an advantage for any but open, then we should make all detachable magazines open.

No dot, no comp, not open. Pistols can have detachable mags, as can rifles and not be in open, why should shotguns be different.

And why would you need to be on a diet?

Not offended, just not entertained. I have not seen a match saver detonation, nor ever spoken to anyone who has, or even read of anyone who has, did I miss it in this thread from 4 + years ago? I am not a match saver fan, I think they are stupid, but the chances of one going postal and killing the shooting buddy that I have that uses one is slim enough to risk. I bet that a loading port and a ham fisted quad is far more likely to cause a minor skin wound that becomes infected poses more risk than a match saver. Or someone could eat at Popeye's Chicken before a match and literally die in the blue plastic fortress of solitude.

What about pie? Will pie be addressed in the update? And a rule that allows any competitor who has reset three stages in a row to punch any competitor who has not done any resetting in the previous stage in the balls (or other place of the punchers choosing in case there are no balls to be punched). Oh and shotgun tubes should be limited to holding 8 rounds in everything but open. And open should be able to use whatever gun they like and as many as they like as long as it is safe. If those rules are not given grave consideration I will not be able to endorse the new boss, because it will be the same as the old boss. WE WILL NOT GET FOOLED AGAIN!

If you are going to necro a thread at least pull a better one back from the dark ages.

I like pie. If someone puts out a rule book that gives me pie, I will endorse it. Otherwise I will go to the matches that are put on by the guys that do a good job at putting on matches, without regard to what rulebook they choose to follow. There is after all only one really important rule, DON'T SHOOT PEOPLE. After that rule they are all secondary.

Last year the Seekins High Dessert Classic was held in the usual IronMan time slot in Parma, and it looks to be scheduled there again.

I am sorry for derailing this thread. It is about if we need to add another division, not classification cards.

Who was talking about three gun nation? 3 gun was here long before 3 gun nation came around to try and make a buck off of it and it will be around long after 3 gun nation has moved on. USPSA will on the other hand be around for as long as suckers are willing to send them money every month for the privilege of shooting stupid stages in order to get a little card in the mail with a different letter on it. This thread is if real matches that people actually want to go to should add a carry optics division.

All of those divisions are USPSA pistol, we are talking about 3 gun. Why bring our sport down to the level of USPSA?

A carry optics pistol has a dot. Adding a dot to a pistol makes it an open pistol under nearly every ruleset currently used in our sport. Just because a pistol lacks ALL of the features of an open pistol, or that one person does not shoot it any better than a limited pistol does not matter. As the rules are now if it has a dot it is an open pistol. If you want to shoot a pistol with a dot there is a place for that, it is open. If you do not want to compete with the other shooters who choose to shot a pistol with a dot then don't shoot a pistol with a dot. If you are certain this new division will be more popular than the Beatles then what better way to drum up support is there than by using your chosen equipment to compete in an existing division? If it is so swell soon enough everyone else will be doing it and there will be a grass roots uprising to add CO to all three gun matches. I personally am pushing for a division with a PCC (and open pistol back up), tube fed shotguns only (but you can use as many as you like), and open rifle (with steel targets that STRONGLY favor 308). I will call this new division Talley Trooper, and I will let you shoot your CO pistol in it if you like!

X-rail = disappointment.

There should be two divisions. Open, and limited. Open should be open, use whatever you want and as many as you want, as long as it is not a hazard or damage the targets. Limited would be scope tac. why bother with anything else?

Normally I feel it my duty to take a contrarian position to anything posted by Chuck. In this case I will instead just make the comment that if Mr. Anderson would have just taken the blue pill this whole ordeal would have been avoided.