freeidaho
-
Posts
369 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Profiles
Events
Store
Posts posted by freeidaho
-
-
Hey Ken Reed, I'm with you on that. It might have been you a while back in response to one of my postings on the idpaforum.com that somebody did a poll in here on this sub-forum on who is actually an IDPA member. Interesting results
So let me propose this to the mods, in this here IDPA sub-forum, if you want to post, then you must include your IDPA membership number.
Or have a separate IDPA rules/policy subforum where posters must include their membership #'s.
How's that Ken?
That would be a wee bit safer and more anonymous than closing your posts with your real name like over on idpaforum.com
Chills,
Thanks for the idea ! ! !
But I'm not proposing an exclusive area for IDPA members. I believe well thougt out input from anyone and everyone is a great thing. Cross pollination is a good thing.
What I am asking is if IDPA, IDPA HQ and its founders shouldn't get the modicum of respect that we allow any poster here on the forum. I can't call one of you posters stupid, or call your ideas dumb, but it is fair game to do the same to Bill Wilson, Joyce, HQ staff, etc. Just seems inconsistent to me, and I can't see any downside to a change.
Just a thought,
Ken Reed
-
I just spent about two hours pulling out all the bickering in this thread. Let me make this clear: BrianEnos.com is a forums board that prides itself on the civility of its discourse. Referring to other posters' comments as "tired", "BS", "dumb", "tripe", "crap" or calling those who disagree with you "whiners", etc. is not going to fly. Anyone who is unclear on this concept should re-read the Forum Guidelines.
Since I thougt there were some valid points made in this thread, I did the surgery rather than shutting it down or deleting it entirely. Now, let us continue.
Duane,
Good rules indeed. One of those was one of my posts, and I should have been more mellow. Sorry.
I find it interesting, that one can use any and all of those words, and worse, when describing IDPA, IDPA HQ, Bill or Joyce. Sounds like a double standard to me. This double standard maybe what starts alot of these wild threads in the first place.
Shouldn't the same respect shown to an anonymous poster that may do nothing for our sport be afforded to the group that founded the sport?
Just a thought for you moderators to kick around...
Ken Reed
-
What we are missing is an official training syllabus for the SOI's. That will eliminate most of the variances out there on how rules are interpreted. The biggest issue I see currently are SO's that are certified but still not really solid on the rules. Something that USPSA definitely has over IDPA IMO.
Mark,
I can't recall where I read it but I read it recently, the new SOI materials are out.
Ken Reed
-
Ken,
I hear what you are saying, but when it gets down to a public debate on what a rule MEANS versus what it SAYS, it is a good example of the faults a lot of people find in IDPA.
My threshhold is relatively high and the only two things that really get up my nose (as Mrs Slocombe of 'Are You Being Served' says) are "dumping" and the 2005 requirement to take cover before dropping an empty magazine instead of as soon as I realize the gun is empty.
Doesn't keep me from shooting, though.
Jim,
Indeed, if it were my sport, I would not have the go to cover to reload rule. I agree with they guy that said he believed that it is an administrative rule, like one knee down. I've been shot at, and sometimes you run like hell, and sometimes you shoot back. In the case of IDPA we always shoot back, until we run the gun dry.
However, I didn't mortgage my business and house to start a shooting sport. I haven't poured 10 years of my life into making it a success. So I will happily shoot the sport of someone who has, and make the best of it.
That brings up another point. It seems that there are two camps in IDPA, those that make the best of it, and those that try their best to make the worst of it. I'm glad you are in the former bucket.
Take care.
Ken Reed
-
Oh no, he hit my "dumping" button.
That is contradictory bogus bs.
First you tell me that a stage is Vickers Count, defined by "as many shots as desired may be fired." and then that "Intentional round dumping to gain a competitive advantage will result in a twenty second FTDR penalty." You cannot have it both ways, the dumping penalty means the SO can keep me from firing as many shots as I desire.
Dumping in a gunfight? If that is what you call shooting until the threat is absent, I'll dump. Jeff Cooper once demonstrated as expert witness for a court case that it is possible to shoot a man eight times before he can fall down.
Jim, everyone;
With all due respect, and I really mean that, you are being a bit deceptive here. Vickers means shoot as much as you want to get good hits. It does not mean shoot as much as you want to get a perfectly timed reload. Everyone I know in IDPA is smart enough to know the difference, it is a simple concept. The rest is about personal integrity. It is a clearly written rule, and that is sufficient for most people. That it is tough to call, seems to make some folks think it isn't a rule. Go figure.
By comparison, I guess that means cheating on ones wife, beating their kids, or stealing from the neighbors is okay, just because it is hard to detect.
If you follow any dumper around for a whole match, you know like being squadded with them, you will indeed clearly see a pattern of convenient reloads preceeded by firing extra shots. Not extra shots on more difficult targets, or more shots on distant targets, but more shots when a reload would be really nice. It ain't rocket surgery. Those dumping and trying to explain it away, ain't fooling anyone. Shooters notice these things, and make mental notes. Hmm, guess I can't trust that guy as far as I can throw him, is what I think when I see it. We have two guys in our club that do it, the rest seem to get the rule just fine.
Just $.02 cents from deep in the boonies in Idaho, maybe we see thing different here. Dunno.
Ken Reed
-
Ken, most of my ill feelings toward Bill Wilson would go away if he just added a Q&A section to either the TJ or the website. If he does not want to answer questions directly then appoint someone to. I don't care for his lack of contact with members.
TSA looks to be interesting. I just have a problem with the founder's habit of quoting himself on the website.
The only real issues I have with the IDPA rules boils down to a few rules. 1. Having to retain an empty mag unless I am at slide lock. 2. Not being able to do a reload if I happen to be caught in the open. 3. This is the granddaddy of all dumb rules. Trying to determine if someone dumped rounds to get to slide lock.
Joe D, everyone;
I'm not sure those things are worth all the anxst, but it is your stress to handle not mine. Bill is, who he is, just as you are, or I am. I have no idea what he thinks, or why he does what he does. My ESP has been broken since birth. Wish I could read minds like y'all.
He has however appointed Robert Ray as a liason for all things IDPA. He posts and sometimes answers posts on other less hateful discussion groups. Like it or not, no HQ person is coming within a Texas mile of this discussion group. It is indeed that bad. So in a way people here continually demanding their pound of flesh, year after year are perpetuating the problem.
The funny thing is that the empty mag thing has been explained about a billion times, by people that have actually been shot at and know that the last thing on your mind is counting rounds. Why that is not sufficient is beyond me. I don't mean to open up that war again, sorry.
Not reloading in the open is a red herring. You saw the COF description, you correographed your little shooting dance, you should have left cover with enough rounds in the gun. If after all that, you misjudged, you should be within a step or two of cover anyway. Very few COFs that I have seen require more than the capacity of the gun when in the open, with the exception of revolvers. Revolvers shooters may have a real issue.
The truth is IDPA is not going to be like the other shooting sports, and some people want to have a tantrum over it. Not directed at you specifically JoeD.
Funny thing is you see many of the same issues on the USPSA part of BE.com. The difference is that people that don't shoot USPSA don't log in there and continually post "nanner nanner nanner, I told you your sport has issues." Again, not directed at you.
Ken Reed
-
Yes, I still feel IDPA would be better off without Bill Wilson.
Looking forward to JoeD's shooting sport.
After you have poured your money and your time into it, and made it successful for 10 years, just turn it over to someone else. Sounds like an unusual business plan to me.
Seriously though, have you thought about IDSA or TSA? They were setup specifically to be better at the IDPA game. Of course you will note they are both privately owned corporations, just like IDPA. You will also note, they use mostly IDPA's rules with a few tweaks. Some more lenient, some way more restrictive. They have been so grandly successful you should be able to find a match on any given weekend, anywhere in the world.
Ken Reed
-
Nice rant, Mark, except the small part where you infer that anyone who doesn't actively participate in an activity should not be allowed an opinion. A great many men to have an opinion on abortion, though it's a certainty they will never have to endure one.
I believe there is a difference between having an opinion and what goes on here at Brian's little byte of the net under IDPA. It seems that many that don't shoot IDPA are bent on ruining it for anyone else, and/or just stirring as much trouble as possible. That is not "having an opinion", that is "picking a fight."
There seems to be way more "picking a fight" here, than "having an opinion." There seems to be way more condemnation and slander than discussing, learning and sharing.
It is my belief that cutting out the picking a fight, condemnation and slander is what people mean when they aren't interested in the input from those that don't participate in the sport.
Just a guess,
Ken Reed
-
Hey Bones, Idon't seem to quite get your comment about suffrage in IDPA.
Having talked with a major internationally known competitor he says that the membership in IDPA is going down. He also says it drops by about 2,000 every time there is a rule book revision.
Okay, I gotta ask. What makes membership numbers of a privately held company available to a secret major internationally known competitor?
Second, what happens to membership in the 4 or 5 years between rulebook revisions?
Thanks,
Ken Reed
-
Actually Ken, it sounds alot like the real world... which I thought IDPA was supposed to emulate. Nobody has ever told me my real world, everyday carry gear was too "gamey"
for the street.
And by the way, USPSA with a vest is better, IMHO, than close-range bullseye with three targets, which is what over-choreographed IDPA seems to be becoming.
But hell, they're all just games, and they all fling lead, so I'm in. Shoot well and stay safe.
DanO
Dan, and everyone;
I'm truely sorry you guys have such issues with IDPA or your local club, or whatever your problems tend to be. I know lots of clubs that don't really have any issues, including my club here in Idaho. Here in Podunk, about half the shooters cross over between games, and we truely don't have any of the problems y'all do.
Since some clubs do seem to have lots of reported issues, and shooters that either love to be miserable, or love to complain, or something, and some clubs don't, yet they are using the same rulebook, I wonder what the problems actually are.
I don't have the answers, that is for sure..... and typing on the internet has rarely made things better.
Have a good night!
Ken Reed
-
I've never shot IDPA but I did watch a match once.
I have a good friend that is trying to get me to shoot it but I'm having a hard time bringing myself around to it and here's why;
My carry gun is a H&K USP compact but I can't shoot it in IDPA because I've given it a custom "Scotts Grip" permanent sand grip and the rules say that only grip tape is allowed. My other carry gun is an SA 1911 but it has a tungsten guide rod and weighs 46 oz.'s so it's not legal. These are the guns that I carry every second that I'm away from home. IDPA is great because it gets people out shooting and it's all about making guns go "BANG" but don't try pulling any BS about it being "Real World" carry friendly because I'm presently building a 9mm 1911 ESP gun just to get started shooting the sport.
Dan,
Isn't the H&K allowed in ESP?
Would a 2 minute change of guide rod, fix your 1911?
Ken Reed
-
In the time I have been reading here, these are the changes that the "experts" have suggested:
no tac reload
no reload with retention
allow speed reloads
no cover calls, use fault lines
no weight limit
no limit on holsters
no behind the center line for holsters or mags
no two mags on the belt limit
no prohibition on lightening slides
no limit on modifications
no 10 round limit on loading mags
no scenario descriptions
no limit on rounds in a COF string
no limits on steel in a COF
no tactical sequence
allow air gunning
allow pinned grip safeties
no limit on barrel length, especially for revolvers
allow porting
no boxing of guns, i.e. no size limit
if it is concealable, it is okay
and last but not least, no FTDR
There are probably a lot more, but these are the ones I could come up with in a few minutes of snooping around.
Sounds like USPSA with vests to me.
Ken Reed
-
Gman, there is no BoD at IDPA.
Last I knew, the BoD was Bill, Joyce and John Sale. In the distant past it also included Ken Hackathorn, and Tom Givens. Spelling may be poor on these names.
Ken Reed
-
What I don't understand is why are we affraid of heavy guns? In USPSA Limited or L-10, There is no weight limit, but must shooters choose to shoot the lighter framed S_I guns instead of heavier steel framed guns, heck Dave S. won Limited nationals with a Glock. The heaviest gun does not win... My point is why make a rule to stop an "arms race" that will never happen.
Good question.
Do any of y'all follow discussion groups where concealed carry is discussed, and shooting games are not discussed. If not, reading them is instructional.
People on these carry specific groups are not trying to conceal an STI, they are all the time talking about how J frames, or Glock 19s are too heavy, or too bulky, or too hard to conceal, and they are considering a .380 or .22 for carry, or all manner of off-body carry. Very few on these carry specific discussion groups are carrying full sized guns, let alone full sized guns with weighty accessories added. Weight and size, too big and too heavy are very real concerns for people that actually carry every day, day in, and day out, winter and summer.
Infact I see some disengenuous posts here that go something like, "I conceal a 6" barrel N-frame revolver, why can't I shoot it in IDPA, stupid rules." The truth usually goes something like, "I concealed a 6" revolver for a couple hours, once, back in the winter of 1999, but I never had to sit down, I have never carried it all day, or in the summer.
Before you get all excited and say, but but but I carry a full size, let me say that I carry a 42 oz when loaded, double stack .45ACP all day, every day, winter and summer, so it can be done, but it is one heavy, bulky son-of-a-gun, and you have to be extremely bull headed to modify your wardrobe enough to do it. It is about 31 oz unloaded, with a mag, btw.
All that said, I can see why a sport, all about concealed carry, would have a size and weight limits.
Just a thought,
Ken Reed
-
I would shoot my carry gear in IDPA but my police duty gear does not meet the rules.
Seems like the rulebook sufficiently covers this situation:
CoF 13. Use concealment for scenario stages when appropriate. Exception: Police or military officers when using actual duty gear.
L. Any type of filler to hide an offset.
Exception – Police or military officers may use their duty rig, but ALL retention features of the holster MUST be used and all belt equipment (mace, handcuffs, etc.) must be present.
What is your specific issue?
Ken Reed
-
Dennis, I had two "misses" that barely missed the down three (one casued a FTN) and....
Mr Neck,
For the record, a three doesn't help out with a FTN penalty. You have to have at least one hit in the -0 or -1 scoring area to not get a FTN.
That said, I get your point in general, it can be a game of millimeters.
Ken Reed
-
I just had this conversation with Carlson's (KS) - as long as the OD of the barrel is >0.825", they can install their standard tubes. Less than 0.825" and they'll install a Tru-Choke thin wall system, but you can't shoot slugs out of that.
They quoted $150 to thread the barrel, and 3 extended choke tubes of my choice with return shipping and a 2 day turn around.
Is Briley that much better? I realize that they're good, but that good?
Mornin';
Just talked with a very knowledgable fellow at Briley on the phone. They need 0.850" outside diameter of barrel to put in Benelli chokes. They can put their thin chokes into my 18.5" barrel which is 0.827" outside diameter, and I can shoot slugs through it. They advised the current price is $179 with three chokes, and there is a two week turn around time.
Thanks for pointing me to Briley.
Ken Reed
-
Don't see anything in the rules. Any problem with putting a single round in an open chamber and dropping the slide? With a Glock, does not seem to be a safety issue. Would this earn a DQ or Procedural?
Perfectly acceptable IDPA wise.
Unadvisable because of the extra stress it puts on the extractor.
Ken Reed
-
ya wanna get rid of your 24"?
trapr
Trapr,
Possibly, make me an offer, freeidaho at yahoo dot com. The barrel is almost new, but has some shiny spots in the bluing. It is threaded, and has a single choke installed, marked Steel Shot Ok CL. I had to modify the forestock to make it work, since I had the forestock for the 18.5" barrel. Not a difficult modification.
Ken Reed
-
if you want one i have one that is factory benelli, w/ sights. its a spare that i'll part with relatively, cheap.
trapr
Trapr,
Thanks for the kind offer! I already have a 18.5" and 24" barrel, so another 18.5 might be overkill.
Thanks again ! ! !
Ken Reed
-
Yes, send it to Briley.------------Larry
Larry,
Hotdang ! ! !
Thank you Sir ! ! ! !
Ken Reed
-
Greetings encyclopedia of all things 3-Gun;
Is there enough metal in the stock 18.5" Benelli M1S90 straight tube barrel to cut it for a choke?
I tried a search on this topic but either found nothing or found everything.
Thanks for your answers ! ! !
Ken Reed
-
I thought all of those parts were specifically allowed on CDP pistols (as long as they fit into the box)? It seems that adding a weight restriction to CDP is sort of like double jeopardy for shooters.
Jack,
There has been the same weight restriction on CDP for at least a half a decade. There is a free rulebood at IDPA Website
Ken Reed
-
I got mine from Cabella's:
http://www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/template...&hasJS=true
I see that they offer a large variety of plugs now.
This part of the Cabella's page is troubling:
Item notes
This is not a hearing protection device and should not be used for noise reduction applications.
Your thoughts ? ? ?
Ken Reed
Do Fourm Rules For Civility Apply To Idpa Hq And Its Founders?
in IDPA Shooting
Posted · Edited by freeidaho