mechanical

I'm looking forward to the match It's not in the rule book, but you're also not allowed to ghost a ninth round on the lifter during empty shotgun starts. Just in case you were thinking of it.

Thanks Andy & RO's, it was a great match and I'm looking forward to the next one! One bit of feedback: I know that myself and a few other shooters had some confusion on how many rounds you could have in the shotgun during an empty chamber start, but I think I've figured it out: http://www.brm3g.com/index_files/Page571.htm There are two parts to this rule as written, never have more than 9 rounds in the shotgun, and never hold more than 8 in the mag tube. As written, having a full tube (8 rounds), and 1 round on the lifter, closed & empty chamber, satisfies both halves of 6.3.2.6. (There are 8 in the magazine tube, which is allowed, and there are 9 rounds in the shotgun, also allowed) While I can't speak for everyone, I imagine that none of us would appreciate getting bumped to open for violating an unwritten rule, so I'd suggest adding something like this for next year: "6.3.2.6.1 No shotgun in Tactical class may have more than 8 rounds in the shotgun during an empty chamber start" It would save everyone the hassle of asking (and answering) the question in the future.

I haven't heard anything, but I've been thinking about getting a SCAR, so I'm hoping they follow through.

I like the idea of a magazine size restriction (outside of open). However, I oppose blanket dimensional restrictions (ie, a 7.5"x3"x1" box or similar). I'm primarily a Sig rifle shooter and generally prefer them to my AR. (If any of you remember, I was the joker who shot the SG552 at the 2011 FNH match.) 550 type mags are a little wider than the proposed FNH magazine box, yet are still only 30rds. I'm not a top level competitor, but I'll argue that my magazine being 1/8" wider than an AR mag does not give me any competitive advantage. I might be a nobody, but I strongly encourage any magazine size limit rule be written with non-AR shooters in mind. (throw us a bone, it's not like we're always winning these matches) Either write an exception for "factory double stack 30rd mags for non-AR15 rifles exceeding the dimensions by not more than 0.5" in any direction", or have a whitelist of approved non-AR 30rd mags (550, HK93, G36, AK, "match director will review others on request", etc). You could even just say "31 rds max capacity". You'd enforce it the same way the 140mm/170mm limit on pistol mags is enforced. (Check capacity if someone notices it seems to big, or complains, or a random capacity check if you're so inclined) If you want to attack the "monopodding off a giant floorplate" aspect, you could limit it to "31rd double stack mags, floorplates no thicker than 0.375" and no more than 0.25" wider/longer than magazine body". Heck, throw a max overall magazine length in there if you want, but just be generous enough to include non-AR 30rd magazines.

I'm thinking of shooting my Sig 551. I just did a quick check and a standard 30rd mag is a little over 1" wide (the ribs that set insertion depth into the receiver and the nubs for coupling the mags). It looks like it meets the 7.5"x3", but I was just using a tape measure, so I could be a little off there. If you're going to implement a magazine size restriction, could we get some kind of blanket waiver for factory 30rd mags that don't fit in the box? (ie, a standard mag with a standard floorplate, not some humongous thing) I don't know how you'd word such a rule, but it would be nice for those of us who don't always shoot AR's.

Two rule questions for the match: 1) Are there any (rifle) ammo restrictions other than "no AP/steel core/steel jacket"? I'm asking because the local 3 gun matches at the Peacemaker range prohibit certain lots of 55gn Winchester and I think some other standard lead core ammo. I did not see anything like that in the rule book, but I want to make sure I don't show up with prohibited ammo. 2) In Tactical Optics, can a sling be used as a shooting aid, or is it considered a prohibited supporting device (like a bipod/foregrip)? Thanks

Stlhead, Abandoning empty so that the RO's can rack the firearms makes a lot of sense. I'd say that in this case, it's not so much a "safety" rule as an administrative one to keep everything moving along and I don't really see anything wrong with it, as long as it's understood to be an admin thing with clearly defined penalties. Andy, I didn't realize that there were matches that were ok with the 1911 grip safety in lieu of the thumb safety. It seems biased against 1911's if nothing else gets the trigger/grip/etc safety checked for function when the thumb safety isn't engaged, but I suppose that a higher rate of disabled 1911 grip safeties than Glock trigger safeties could have led to that. (Do these rules allow cocked Sig's? Like I've been saying, they're no different than the M&P or Glock except you can't see the lever that disengages the firing pin safety) I suppose that the matches I've been to may have been heavily influenced by USPSA, and/or my fellow shooters may have fed me erroneous USPSA inspired rules and advice. I was under the impression that the pistol "safe" conditions were pretty much universal from comments my squadmates have made. StealthyBlagga, It is illogical, but I can see how that train of thought (all safeties must be engaged) got started. StealthyBlagga/Andy: I'm not here to bitch about your USPSA rules. I just wanted to figure out what, if any, reasoning was behind them and have no intention to lobby the USPSA rule committee for a change. I don't care for some of the things I've seen (probably not a reflection on the organization as a whole, just local) and don't have the skill to compete in any meaningful manner, so I'm happy just doing this for fun at the local level without investing myself into the concerns of the organization as whole. I've heard enough comments from friends and other shooters about "always unload to avoid a potential DQ" or "shooting a Glock/M&P so they don't have to worry about anything when abandoning" that I wanted to ask about this. It struck me as being an overly harsh penalty to DQ a shooter who is just as safe as the Glock guy (or potentially more safe), solely because his safety bumped off after he dropped it in the box.

MLM, I was typing when you posted and missed your reply. I understand what you're trying to say, and perhaps it makes sense when we look at the classic 1911, but it doesn't strike me as a relevant comparison with any of the other pistols of interest. The Sigs and whatever else all have a firing pin safety. You can do whatever you want to the sear and hammer, but it will not fire even if it strikes the firing pin. You can take a hammer and punch and whack the firing pin itself, but it won't fire unless the trigger is pulled enough to disable the firing pin safety. In an external, manual of arms "functional" sense, is that any different from the Glock or M&P?

Lets ignore the (optional) reholstering for now. I understand a lot of you aren't comfortable with it, but it's not the focus of my question. Rules on this match were some kind of outlaw ruleset (unpublished, to my knowledge). I suppose the relevance in my mind was that the "safe holster condition" in USPSA (and 3 Gun, etc) struck me as similar to the abandoning/boxing conditions. I don't want to tie this into the 1911 grip safety too much, I know they are commonly disabled. (I usually shoot a Sig (SAO and DA/SA), but also have a Glock. I don't do much with the 1911 at this time) Ronnie J, if you can give a bump to any trigger surface get a discharges, it's broke. It should only fire with a rearward motion. This could be applied to the trigger face, or through friction on the side of the trigger. I'd say that if you can't toss your cocked/unlocked 1911's or Sig's into a box and feel safe, you need better triggers. The firing pin safety (Sigs and other pistols so equipped) will prevent firing unless the trigger is pulled. On 1911's, I think the firing pin springs and half-cock notch should prevent firing (lets not talk about the 1911 too much, I started using them as an example because they're common). (Is there any info available on dropped firearms discharging? Has anyone run a test or experiment on this?) I suppose the Glock trigger safety reduces the chances of a side/friction force causing moving the trigger rearwards and firing, but aside from a horribly floppy holster, I can't think of any situation where this would really occur. It seems to me that whenever a discharge comes up in this situation, it's because something worked into the trigger guard and pulled the trigger, totally negating the trigger safety. What about the M&P? Correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I've seen of them, the bottom of the trigger hinges backwards to deactivate the firing pin safety. There doesn't appear to be anything preventing a side/friction load from firing one of these. I don't have an M&P to look at, but it seems to me that the trigger pull weight and travel are comparable between M&P's, Glocks and the Sig. I'll get my Glock and Sig out to compare, but I want to say the pull weight and travel (slack/takeup is part of the travel, right?) is comparable. In any case, the race Glock/M&P with a 2lb short travel trigger of whatever variation doesn't strike me as being too far off from a Sig (SA) or 1911. Is a "trigger safety" considered adequate just because it's external to the frame? I'm having trouble seeing how an external "safety" that is disabled by pulling the trigger really makes the firearm any "safer" than one without. It doesn't seem any different from the internal firing pin safety that's disabled by the rearward travel of the trigger, except that you can see it without disassembling the pistol.

I'll apologize if this is on the long-winded side. I want to give some background for my question, some info on my experiences, and why I'm bringing this up. First, some quick background on myself: I've been shooting USPSA and 3 Gun/MultiGun matches locally for about a year now. I've been doing this for fun and am not really serious about "competing". I've been reading this forum for a while, but don't post much. I mainly read to find tips/techniques/etc to improve my shooting. (In short, I'm a nobody) I searched a bit and didn't see any discussion on this topic, but feel free to point me towards it if I missed it. My question here was prompted by some happenings at a recent local 3 gun match. In short, a stage allowed you to reholster your pistol during the course of fire to pick up a rifle/shotgun. I'm totally comfortable with that and it isn't a problem for me. (I'm fine with slinging a loaded rifle too, FWIW) Our resident rules-nazi started hassling the RO with questions about holstering a loaded pistol, what rules allowed it, how it had to be done, the condtion, etc etc etc. He also hassled the RO about leaving rifles/shotguns in the dump barrels elsewhere during the match. During the stage that allowed reholstering, one of the shooters holstered a pistol in a manner that got a warning from the RO. Here's my question: What is the rationale behind the various "safe conditions" to holster or box pistols? (I suppose this applies to USPSA, Outlaw and whatever other multigun rules exist. probably some more than others, it's kind of a general thing I think) All pistols can be boxed or holstered (when allowed) totally empty, slide locked open. (makes sense to me). I know the Glocks/M&P's are ok to just drop in the box or holster, loaded chamber. 1911's and SAO pistols must be on safe. DA pistols must be decocked (and on safe if there is one?). I don't understand this: How is the Glock any different from a 1911 with the safety off? Don't start with the "safe-action" thing. According to Glock's Brochure, the "safe-action" system is a combination of their triger safety, firing pin safety and an auxiliary drop safety. <I linked to the official Glock Brochure here, but don't have enough posts to do that> The way I see it, both the Glock and 1911 (off safe) are pretty much the same. Both will fire if the trigger is pulled. Neither will fire any other way (my understanding is that the 1911 is relatively safe from inertial discharge, but if you disagree, imagine a series 80 with the additional firing pin safety). The 1911 has a trigger safety too (usually called a grip safety), and it's probably "safer" from accidental discharge than the Glock's because it doesn't automagically turn off if anything touches the trigger. It might be harder to force or overpower too, but I haven't looked into that. When abandoning the pistol, if you catch the trigger on either the Glock or a 1911 (off safe), they will fire. (This happens to be the only reason I can think of for either pistol to fire during boxing/holstering, barring some freak mechanical defect.) Lets throw in the DA/SA Sig pistols for the sake of expanding this scenario (226, 228, whatever). How is the loaded and cocked Sig functionally any different from our Glocks? Both have firing pin safeties that are disengaged when the trigger is pulled. Both are drop safe. Both will fire if the trigger is pulled. Is there any condition in which the loaded and cocked Sig will fire that the Glock won't? Or put the other way, how is a Glock safer than the Sig under this situation? I see the Glock and Sig as being functionally identical at this point (fire if trigger pulled, won't fire if it isn't). The two pistols have similar trigger pulls too (heck, some Glock triggers are lighter than the SA trigger on a stock Sig). I guess I'm hung up on the pistols all being functionally the same as a Glock when cocked (Sig) or off safe (1911). All of them will fire if the trigger gets yanked, none will fire if it isn't. Since they're all the same at this point, why is one acceptable to drop in a box while the other gets you a DQ? Rephrased: why should a 1911 shooter get a DQ if his safety gets bumped off during/after abandoning when it only reverts the pistol to the Glock's "safe" condition?