M1911

That just ticks me off. It is a waste of time and not part of the standard commands.

Maybe I'm not getting it, but it seems to me that if you have to lean out, then you have to shoot them slicing the pie. You can not combine slicing the pie with near to far. If you want to create a course of fire that requires someone to engage targets near to far, then have them out in the open, with no vision barriers or cover. And don't think you can require them to shoot the targets within an array in any particular order. Equal threat means equal threat -- the shooter can choose his order of engagement.

No, the shooter is in the open at P1 (box) and does not leave P1 but can lean left & right. The barrels are vision barriers for the targets. You have to lean to be able to shoot around them. If they are blocking the appearance of targets, then you can't force the shooter to shoot near to far. Instead, they have to slice the pie. And when slicing the pie, near to far does come into play. The whole "it's a vision barrier not cover" bushwa is weak sauce. As I said previously, the problem here wasn't the shooter. The problem was the illegal course of fire.

My reading of the thread was that yes, the shooter was behind cover, yes, the shooter was using two sides of a barricade, and, I agree, if using cover, near to far doesn't apply. So the entire premise of this thread is faulty, near as I can tell.

Exactly. The problem isn't the shooter or the shooter's conduct. The problem is the illegal course of fire.

I'm curious. Do you have a steel or tungsten guide rod in a Glock? Have you noticed any reduction in recoil or muzzle rise?

Master Tac will make them with the tension fastener on either side if you request so you can have one made so that the tension fastener will be where you need it to get close to your holster. I am pretty sure the tension fastener is less than an inch wide so you will likely be OK either way. I am a weak hand re-loader leaving my strong hand on the grip when I reload so I wear all three of them on my weak side for now. I might move one to the strong side but never more than that. With what I have now the first speed loader could be right against my holster. I also do a support hand reload. I found it faster to put my first two speedloader holders in front of my strong side holster. My third holder goes on my weak side. One of the things that I like about the Ready Tactical holders is that they take up very little room on the belt. So you can position them where you want them.

Did you have a word with the MD?

Yup. For SSP and Production I would go with 9mm. The extra recoil from .40 isn't going to help you.

No, that is way, way too slow. Get some Ready Tactical speedloader holders from cpwsa.

Like this, front 4 targets are 2 yards in front of the next 4, back middle target is 2 yards behind that. Barrels are obstructing view of some targets. Shooter has to lean out left & right to see them and engage in correct priority. I'm really confused. If the shooter is taking cover behind a barrel, the only possible priority is slicing the pie, not near to far. You can't force the shooter to shoot the near targets on the left side of the barrel, then the near targets on the right side of the barrel, then the far targets on the left side of the barrel, then the far targets on the right side of the barrel. It sounds to me that the problem was with the COF being illegal, not the way the shooter shot the COF.

We're going to disagree on that. I absolutely can't stand the HK magazine release. IMO, it is ergonomically horrid.

If they don't pass with hands at sides, they aren't going to pass the scarecrow test either. It would just exaggerate the issue. Indeed.

If I was going to go 1911 in 9mm for ESP, I'd look for a double-stack STI. Even with a magwell, I find reloading single-stack 1911s is slower than reloading a double-stack gun. YMMV.

I shot SSR for about a year. It's a hoot.

Wow.

Why? A holstered gun is a safe gun. The holster protects the trigger from being pulled. So if someone has their hand on the butt of the gun, it can't fire unless and until it is removed from the holster.

if an RO notices, all they will do is take the shooter to the safety table and fix the problem, then continue as normal. It's happened to me before. Same as if you have an empty mag in the gun. Yup. I screwed up that way once at a Steel Challenge match. RO walked me to the safety table, I drew the gun, showed that it was clear, closed the slide, pulled the trigger, holstered and we were all set.

1) We offer a full day Intro to IDPA class once per year. 2) We allow new shooters to show up and shoot. 3) Whether a new shooter has retained something they were told or not doesn't change a darn thing. Either they violated a rule or they didn't. Why they violated a rule is an explanation, but it doesn't justify the violation and it doesn't change the penalty associated with the infractions. This is a fundamental safety rule of IDPA. The rule book is very clear. It is a mandatory DQ. 4) No, the course of action you are suggesting is not exercising discretion, it is blatantly ignoring a rule which you have agreed to uphold. 5) Where did this talk of putting hands on a gun come from? I certainly never said or implied anything of the sort. Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

What division do you want to compete in? If you want to save money, a Glock 19 for CCP or a Glock 34 for SSP would be well under $900. Of course, you would then need to buy holsters, mag carriers, etc.

Video tape it so you have evidence. Then talk the MD.

I do the same.

Agreed. That's how to do it.

If I stop him before he has cleared the holster, I would give a stern warning and no DQ.

Absolutely. I've disqualified two shooters and was polite and respectful to both of them. Both of them took it gracefully. As 45 Raven said, giving someone a break for a major safety violation is not a good idea, and it isn't doing anyone a favor, especially the shooter.