Practical Use

I Carry a Glock (a 23 or a 26), and shoot a 5" 1911 in IDPA matches. I Carry a 1911 (Colt CCO - Officer frame, Commander top end), and shoot a Glock (34, the 23, and the 26) in IDPA Matches. I shoot both the Glock 34 and the full size 1911 in IPSC, as well as a wide body 1911 some of the time. What dilemma? Have fun with all of them. That said, there is a little voice that once in a while says, "carry and shoot the same gun all the time." So, I tried it. Not as much fun. I like fun. What dilemma?

I will attempt once again to deal with the often quoted, "IDPA is a game," and "IDPA is not training." With all due respect, it is whatever the shooter makes of it! Personally, I like it as a game. However, I really respect the few shooters who choose to shoot in a really tactical manner (at least to the extent possible within the course design), whatever that means. We tend to get a bit self-centered as to what the sport (yes, sport) is. How about we let each individual decide. That said, rasing the power factor does not make sense. One of the issues is that the "tactical people" just cannot seem to not compete (double negative), and sometimes want the existing rules changed to make them more competitive. Nope - the sport is what it is. Unless the governing rules are changed, shoot it according to the rules. Do I think that loading a .40 down to 125 is within the sprit of the sport?? I don't know what was in the mind of the organizers. I think we have a mixed message in the rules: shoot "real life" loads, and at the same time, load to 125. The rules do seem to be at odds. There again, what else is more fun than endless debates when we are not at the range!!!

Why does it matter how someone else chooses to shoot???? Are you bothered by the fact that they do not see the game your way?

And all this time I thought that the perfect double was a date with twins.

This is not intended as a criticism of Indshrk's decision to continue when the SO said to. It is only a personal comment. Last month I started a stage, and forgot to put my ear plugs in. About three or four shots into it I realized I had no ear protection. I stopped myself - no way I am going to continue without my ear protection. I turned to the SO and told him. He cleared me. Yes, I was allowed to reshoot. If the SO had told me to continue, I would not have done so. If fact, had he or she told me to continue, I would likley have told them to P--- off. I have been shooting IPSC and IDPA for about 13 years, I am not going to damage my hearing if I can avoid it. I think that the SO and scorekeeper in Indshrk's situation did not have a clue what their role is. SO stands for safety officer. Shall I try that again, SO = safety officer. Shooting without ear protection is not safe - it can result in lasting damage. Ed

This is a game. It is a safety issue. Sac Law Man hit it right on the head - for goodness sakes, lets be safe, have fun, and play. Stop the person - no game is worth hearing damage. If you peruse the issue of noise and hearing damage, it does not take much for a lasting hearing loss. Now that safety is "reinstated" let's go on the the have fun and play - let the person reshoot. Ed

Here is the link to the 5.11 toilet paper: www.511tactical.com/Products/Tactical/Buttwipe.asp It is available in regular, non-skid, cameo, and covert. I tried the cameo, but my butt disappeared, so it did not work well. Ed

If I break the crystal would that be a FTDR????? Ed

Here it is: http://www.511tactical.com/Products/Tactical/HRTWatch.asp Does anyone have any idea how well this will work on a 7 yard target????

Sac Law Man is correct in my opinion - as long as I see - really see - the target at that range I seem to get the hits. I don't need to focus on the front sight at that range. Ed

Good software - we have been using in Sacramento for a while. It has been great to dump the old Excel spreadsheet! Ed

I would prefer simple stages - by simple I mean no trick stuff (e.g. draw a card, only shoot targets that match the card - or even worse, the color you draw are the hostage targets). I second the idea of as many "real" props as possible. There are a ton of things a club can obtain if they put there members to work. For example, at my "home" range we have several old mail boxes - great props. Movers, yes, but deployed in a realistic manner. If possible, targets that charge you. Or targets that move on a track of some kind across the range. It is hard to design stages that are really defensive in nature. It is much easier to have the standard, "there are 9 bad guys in your back yard, open the back door and proceed to the brick wall and engage all nine." I also question stages that have one dashing from Cover at A, to Cover at B, and then cover at Position C. I don't know about must of you, but I am not leaving cover for anything if I don't have to. Now, all that being said, I commend those that make the effort to be a match director, and try to put on a match that is fair, diffiuclt without being intimidating, and meets everyone's idea of what is "tactical," or "realistic." Ed

If it was anything but a state match my advice would be to find a good beer bar and hope that the match will be televised. Not on TV?? Oh well, play some pool instead. Given that it is a big match, get some of the disposable hand warmers to keep in your pockets. Ed

The solution is obvious - combine IDPA and IPSC.

We alarady have Grand Masters.......woops, wrong sport. Ed

Bob, If HQ is responding that they already have an AC, they are not telling the truth. Ron was the AC and he resigned months ago. Ed

I still shoot USPSA a couple of times a year. I think the production catagory was an attempt to mitigate the effect of IDPA. The problem was that the USPSA BoD missed the "tactical point." If USPSA decided to add a tactical division, the problem would be to design matches that could accomodate all the existing divisions and the tactical folks.

It seems like any board, discussion group, or guys talking at the range, all seem to eventually get around to how unresponsive HQ is. The the conversation moves to "the founders ....., and therefore, play by the rules or don't play." Personally, I have enjoyed the sport. I have written to IDPA HQ on several occasions, and never even had the courtesy of any response. (If I did not respond to my clients and customers, I would not be in business for long.) (Rant mode: What about an area coordinator for California? Don't bother to answer anyone's letters, emails, or telephone calls! Rant mode: in suspension, not off yet.) Is it time to form a member organization??? Sure, it would be a pain in the ass, a bunch of work, and considerable expense. However, in the long run, would a tactical sport be better off as a member organized and operated sport? The "United States Defensive Pistol Association?" I do not fault the IDPA founders. They went to a lot of time, effort, and expense, and therefore have a right to impose their will. I get really sick of Wilson bashing. I do not even remotely believe that he acted as the corner stone just to sell pistols. I would bet money that his time and effort have cost more than the revenue generated. HOWEVER (shout), how long can the organization go on as a "controlled" corporation, without any member input. If the sport is to survive, something needs to change. Ed Vernon A00041

They never answered any of my letters, but I am not bailing on the sport. Ed

Jake - How can the sport mature if people like you don't shoot, and don't help the sport to mature. Why shoot at all? Not intended to be a flame - I really get concerned. Ed

I cannot believe that I overlooked that!!!!!!!!!!! Keith - you are in the Northern Hemisphere (Central part of the state qualifies????) Thus, my figures should hold up, other than during a leap year. Ed

In "real life" when you "angle" the targets (which I agree is a good idea) would you assume that a shoot through would count - I don't think so........ Take them in order and shoot each one!!

Your strong side foot should be at a 7.7% angle off the axis of the azmith of your body when standing naturally. You have 154 cm leeway. You week side foot should be at the same angle with a slight right cant (assuming you are right handed), plus or minus 2 degrees when viewed from 25 yards (plus or minus 1.5 feet). Everybody knows that!!!! (Sorry Keith - just could not resist ) Ed V in Sacramento

Gaming - sure. Within the spirit of IDPA - no. Poor course design - yes. Had I been the S.O. it would have been a FTDR. - yup!!!Ed

Why have such a sensible solution when you can complicate the dickins out of the issue and debate it until the sun comes up. For the sake of arguement, "It is not sensible." It is potentially omni-sensible. So there! Ed