ErichF

Heh, the one I've gotten from a couple co-workers, "They start too early." Meaning, "I drank myself to sleep late last night watching the game and can't get my frat-boy butt outta bed." These days, I find more guys would rather spend all day sitting inside watching OTHERS have fun outdoors on TV. Vicarious times, are these...

http://www.shop.canyoncreekcustom.com/category.sc?categoryId=4

Intro to USPSA shooting: http://orpci.org/content/ipsc_intro.htm

Red, you win the prize for most Cliche` post of the year BTW, "keep quiet and observe"? Really? This should be a social as much as a competitive venue. Don't just sit in the corner quietly, get involved, ask questions and participate.

Do it. My 3rd match was the Monster Match and was my 1st major after competing in USPSA for a month. My 10th match was the Factory Gun Classic as my 2nd major. Majors aren't really all that different from a local match, except they are run a bit more strictly when it comes to time management. You will still be in your own little squad rotating through the stages like any other match. There's just a lot more other squads and probably more stages than you see at the local match.

Hard to go wrong with the XDM 525 in any caliber The stock sights are awesome, and there's quite a few aftermarket options for the trigger, if desired.

I kinda mentioned it before, but to clarify my position: The 3 pound minimum rule is not so much a deal breaker for me. As a new member of USPSA, the process for major rule changes/additions in this organization is very troubling, and I'm surprised this organization has been running so long like it has. My only guess is that the past members of the BOD have been fairly "hands off" and reasonable when it came to the rule book. The By-Laws of the USPSA regarding rule making is incredibly lacking and vague. There really doesn't seem to be a process whatsoever, at least not in print. I challenge the current BOD to move for a By-Laws review, specifically the rule making process, and affect changes/additions to the By-Laws that put in place a more specific process for voting in new rules. Add some teeth to the two year rule cycle that is barely mentioned in the By Laws, and put in some form of member comment period. After which, the BOD makes an EDUCATED vote on the proposed rule addition/change/repeal. There also needs to be an emergency rule proposal process that could allow out-of-cycle rule changes for extenuating circumstances. Until the By-Laws are addressed, I would also say that a rule making freeze go into affect for at least one year so that the process can be vetted by the membership. Is any of this even remotely possible in the organization?

I know for a fact that mine do. When someone is talking to me and someone starts shooting the stage, their voice is cut along with the shooting. They are not frequency filtering, just active level reducing. I haven't tried shooting while plugged into MP3 player yet. Maybe that works differently?

This is from the USPSA By-Laws, Section 16.2: That is all I could find regarding rule changing. No procedures, no requirement for a quorum, no requirement for membership comment periods. The BOD does in fact have full authority to make, change, or repeal any rules - so long as there is 3 months notice in the newsletter. EDIT: I should note that the By-Laws doesn't actually give ANYONE specific rulemaking authority - only how often such changes can be made and the notification period...talk about vague... Seems that a change in the by-laws regarding rule making is in order, given the environment seen in this thread...

Nevermind...

This has been an education for me as to the rulemaking process (or lack thereof) of the USPSA. It seems a bit unorganized, on the surface. I need to sit down and read the organization by-laws to fully understand the process, but bear with me... I belong to another national club that has about 150,000 members: the Academy of Model Aeronautics. The AMA main purpose is to promote and manage aeromodelling competition. It covers about 100 various modelling disciplines from RC gliders to helicopters to hand thrown free-flight balsa airplanes. To manage all this well, there are committees for each major discipline, and there is a 2 year rules cycle. There is also a system in place for emergency rules changes. During the two year cycle, all members of the AMA are free to submit rule proposals (new, updated, or repeals), after which the Contest Committee for the respective disciplines votes on the proposals with the full knowledge of the membership. Before the vote, anyone in the membership can read the proposal and make comment. So, what could USPSA benefit from such a rulemakeing system? First, you don't have a BOD making up new rules on the fly. No one can generate and enact a rule outside the standard rulemaking cycle, except emergency proposals. Rules are reviewed by the membership, and there are committees that take note of the comments and vote to adopt or repeal, as the case may be. Generally, nothing like this could happen in a formal rulemaking process, unless it falls under the emergency proposal system. Even if that is the case, there has to be a very good reason to make the change out of cycle (safety related). So my question to those who know is, how does the USPSA rulemaking process compare to the one I just outlined in the AMA? I surely don't expect USPSA to come up with an entirely new system, but it looks like it could use a few tweaks here and there...

Hah....better go READ THIS THREAD and look forward to not shooting Production in 2013 if nothing changes...

Actually, the new rule only applies to the FIRST trigger pull (DA). So, that brings up one of the issues of the discussion...why JUST the first pull? If it's such an issue, why not EVERY pull?

Maybe, but I bet those here on this site were the first and only in the membership to hear about this...and that's not a good thing.

Nice! I'm glad to read that they work well for handgun AND pistol shooters

Ahh, thanks for the link. That is great tech. As a pilot, I have spent more than that on quality, noise-cancelling aviation headsets (Bose units are about $1200). So, $330 isn't crazy expensive.

I didn't know that there were any electronic muffs that could isolate a specific noise frequency while still allowing other sound through. That would be pretty cool, but sounds expensive. Does Bose make shooter's headsets?

I'm glad I came across the thread just before I am about to slap a PRP UMT in my XDm 525 What gets my goat is the wording around the carry-suitability of production guns. "Carry-Suitable" and "Production" are hardly synonymous. To me, and correct me if I'm wrong here, a "production" gun is basically an off-the-shelf gun that is easily acquired and requires minimal training to operate using standard ammunition. Not all "Carry-Suitable" guns some folks are carrying can fall under that description. Many "carry-suitable" guns are indeed user-modified (there's some guys hack saw-ing the grips down on their XDMs), and would fail to meet the current rules of Production Division. So, what's the big push to change "Production" into "Carry" division? My stock 525, IMO, is not really "Carry-Suitable", with trigger job or box stock...it's just a tad longer that what I would carry concealed. Oops, I just gave them a new idea on what to limit next in "Carry" Division

I like the electronic Leight Impact Sport muffs my wife got me for my birthday last month. It seems many folks around here do as well, as every match I see four or five others wearing them. They are also only around $50 from Amazon.com. They are low-pro and pretty comfortable over hat and glasses. I am going to try a pair of aviation gel seals and see if they fit.

Sarge, agreed. So, the consensus is no Squib calls from the squad, but sound off if the RO commands make ready with someone still downrange, etc... This thread has been a great education

I think this has gone from a safety discussion to a what-if cheating discussion... If people are gonna cheat, they're gonna cheat. Every safety brief I have been present for acknowledged the fact that regarding safety, all shooters are ROs. If anyone sees something unsafe , they call it out - especially if the RO/CRO is unaware. The game comes second. What some call a "peanut gallery", I call a squad looking out for each other's safety. Maybe I'm just naive, and you guys are just used to having a bunch of cheaters on your squads?

Well that's what I would do...but some folks are a bit more competitive and just might push their luck. What's the lesser evil here?

I'm new here, but I see penalizing someone for making a call on the side of safety a very bad thing, no matter what the sport and rules are. If there are safety Nazis, and Rules Nazis, I guess I'm on the side of safety. At a local match this past weekend, this guy had TWO squibs, on back to back stages. He withdrew after the second squib, citing potentially bad ammo (duhh). In both cases, the RO stopped the shooter (actually the entire squad yelled STOP.) So, reading this bit about squibs on the two threads here on Benos, it got me thinking. If I hear what I think is a squib shot from my gun, and I stop...then turn around and see the RO 12 feet behind me with a dumb look on his face...is it such a big nightmare to request a re-shoot at a level I match? Whose shooting career will come to an end if I get a re-shoot? I think it's best to leave the rules as they are, but have some discretion to give the shooter benefit of doubt. Don't back a guy against a rule book wall and force him to make a silly decision between game and safety.

So why 15 and not 10? I never said they went up or down. The question was why 15? Why not 12? Or 13? What's the average, full size, off-the-shelf Production Gun capacity? Gamesmanship aside, I just don't see any reasons for not having the Division be reflective of what is actually on the market for Production guns. I'm not trying to change anything, BTW. I'm just looking at this from a different POV. As far as the game itself goes, I don't really care if we have to load 10, 5, 13, 16, or whatever, as long as it's consistent. But if you are going to call it "Production Division", then the capacity rules should reflect what Production guns average for capacity. Notice I said "average". I'm not saying that I get to load 19+1 in my XDm while you get to only load 16 in your XD. That's not consistent and a line does indeed have to be drawn somewhere.

Has anyone thought to ask WHY IPSC went to 15 rounds? Could it be that nearly all full-size Production handguns have a higher capacity than 10 rounds? Maybe they are just keeping inline with current, production technologies? If you want 10 rounds or less, shoot L-10 or SS, I say I do agree that changing the round count can and will water down the achievements of those that came before, and it would probably require everyone to re-classify in the "new" Production division. That would kinda suck. To me, one of the most narrow-minded and dangerous expressions is, "because that's the way we've always done it..." Just food fer thought... I voted for 15 rounds, but that is my opinion based on having done this for a very short period of time thus far...also meant as a "fresh look", and purely from a state of the art point of view. As for the gamesmanship side of it, it really doesn't matter how many rounds we are limited to, as long as we all have the same amount. Some could say we should only have 5 rounds