Flexmoney

Whatever I carry, I have to run it in a match. It is a true test of whether I can actually hit with the gun or not, since it is almost always a smaller gun than I compete with (which are most always Glocks). Steel Challenge works great for that (locally, we can choose "no holster", so one can focus on just shootability). My daily for the last number of years is almost always a J-frame (642). It is just super convenient. Uncle Mikes #3 and Hip Grip @ 2 o'clock I have a Ruger LCR in 327mag that I like.... Better ballistics and 20% more ammo on board than the 642. I like it in a pocket holster, as I don't have it setup as nicely for carry as my 642. A G26 is often in the mix. Glock Sport Holster at 3:30, works pretty well. After shooting a G43 in a Steel match, I'm not quite comfortable with it yet. I'd need more work on it to feel good about being able to shoot it well for carry. Small guns carry well.

<Ctrl f> "arrow" 0/0 LOL

Hi George. There was another test question under course modification that was fairly vague. I don't recall that the question specified if the modification was before/after competitors had shot the cof. In those cases, I defer to the more generic answer/rule. I believe I used 2.3.1, and was dinged for it. (I think it is applicable to the question, due to "should") Just an FYI.

J-frame in Steel challenge is the truely "Undiscovered Country". Good stuff.

A what? Revolver? LOL... Revo is covered in the rule too.

I have a question on this rule. It is on the RO test and I don't know how to answer it due to the last bit of the last sentace of the rule. "...unless otherwise specified in the stage briefing. " My read is that the WSB may stipulate a slide or hammer back. If not specific, then the default for an unloaded Ready Condition is slide down hammer down. Thoughts?

Sig did. lolz

Glock good.

Tense is slow. Relax the strong hand.

How to deal... Once you have identified a hazard, how do you deal with it. You apply a control. In this case, it is really easy. Keep people out of the freakin BOOM zone! The BOD and DNROI have a bit of work to do here, immediately. 9.6.2 should never ever circumvent 8.3.8. There cannot be ambiguity. There cannot be exceptions. There cannot be any question. Safety, in this case, was designed to fail. (I can expand on that if there is a desire to hear it)

If you get into risk mitigation or hazard analysis, often you look at two aspects... 1. The likelihood of the even occurring. 2. The impact of the event occurring. Even if the likelihood of an event is low, if the impact is high...you have an issue that needs addressed. The impact here is death. And, while we can say the situation that leads to this has a low likelihood...we know it certainly isn't low enough (we have empirically evidence...actual things that have happened...that prove this out)

How many of these were broken or fudged? All, I'd argue. Jeff Cooper's Four Rules:[6]

The reality is that we don't know how (literally) thousands of shooters will respond to such a stress event. I can say, with some degree of certainty, that there is such a thing as sympathetic muscle contraction. (<-- not sure if that is the proper term...perhaps "visceral", maybe somebody can correct me) The idea boils down to muscles tensing under a stress. I don't even believe that you have to get into fight or flight response (where some will have a heightened sense of reality while others will crap their pants and suck their body into T-rex arms).

9.6.2 does not mention "moving forward". Not sure this is something we want to range lawyer anyway? We quickly lose our belt and suspenders approach to safety doctrine...as is evident by recent events.

8.3.8 “Range Is Clear” – This declaration signifies the end of the Course of fire. Once the declaration is made, officials and competitors may move forward to score, patch, reset targets etc.