Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

nasty618

Classified
  • Content Count

    115
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About nasty618

  • Rank
    Finally read the FAQs

Profile Information

  • Real Name
    Mike S

Recent Profile Visitors

228 profile views
  1. It's worth noting that what others have said about the two guns being reasonably close is not just for the sake of being familiar with them, but also for complying with the rules. Canik is striker fired, correct? I dont know if any RM would have an issues with hammer vs striker substitution since both are on the Production approved list... but worth knowing in advance. Check out rules 5.1.7 and 5.1.8 just in case.
  2. I think you misunderstood what i was saying. I was asking: "at what point do you bump to open for manually dropping the hammer to a half cocked position on a decocker equipped gun?" The rule does not specify when. So I suggested that it (decision to bump shooter to Open) may be done in the same manner as when deciding on the DQ for 10.5.11 - which is upon gun being holstered (no functional access to the trigger)
  3. The rule says "Manually decocking to the half-cocked position is not allowed and will result in the competitor being moved to Open division". But it doesn't say at what point... So do we use the "SA cocked/safety not applied" logic (DQ if holstered in that condition) and say bump to Open when shooter holsters and loses functional access to trigger?
  4. I can certainly agree with that. Especially since it's not that big of a deal, IMO So let's use my hypothetical example: Shooter lowers a decocker hammer manually and accidentally stops at half cocked... What should be RO's actions? Welcome the shooter to Open/Minor? immediately or upon holstering? Or stop shooter and allow to recock/decock before holstering?
  5. Probably. I didnt shoot USPSA two years ago and what i was able to find using Search did not answer my question... Would you mind linking to that discussion in this thread? So specifically to this: I was not convinced that the "or" operator indicates that there is an option of choosing the method of getting into the "hammer down" condition... i read it as "decocking lever must be used if present or lower manually if not present (not a decocker model". More than likely i am splitting hairs here and i dont mean to do that ... Personally i feel that it has no competitive advantage and minimal safety concerns with either method on a decocker gun. The only negative for the shooter i can see is lowering manually and accidentally stopping at half cocked... now what? Welcome to Open minor immediately? Upon holstering? Or recock/decock before holstering would solve this? if someone can point me to the consensus of this discussion from the past - i would be thankful.
  6. For SA/DA guns equipped with a decocker, what is the correct way of getting into the gun ready condition? Rules: When in the ready conditions as specified under 8.1, a gun with an external hammer must be hammer down. A hammer is considered to be in the "hammer down" position when the hammer is placed there by pulling the trigger while manually lowering the hammer (manually decocking) or by activating the decocking lever if present. Manually decocking to the half-cocked position is not allowed and will result in the competitor being moved to Open division Handguns with external hammers must be fully decocked at the start signal. If a decocking lever is installed and used, the term fully decocked is the position where the hammer rests once the decocking lever has been used. Altering a factory installed decocker to bring the hammer to rest at less than a half-cocked position is not allowed. Reference: Appendix D4 and D7 (Production and Carry Optics) My understanding of the rules: if a gun is equipped with a decocker, the decocking lever MUST be used to get to "hammer down" position. Manually (fully) lowering the hammer on such a gun is not an option. Am i correct? Thanks in advance!
  7. That is so true... much too often, grown ass men act like kids... Completely agree with you there.
  8. That's probably the best way to get to know someone... but not everybody has the opportunity to meet their elected officials in person at a match, unfortunately... I think it would be great if one of the well known podcast/content creators could organize a live feed. Collect questions from membership in advance, ask those, then open the floor to live Q&A. Doesnt get much easier or better than that in this day and age.
  9. I am not sure voicing an opinion on a candidate's policy in a constructive and respectful manner should be seen as "politics". For example, if you tell me i should vote for Candidate X because you feel he will revamp the classifier system that you feel is broken or that he will introduce member benefits that you feel are needed... and i then disagree with you by saying i dont think the system is broken and here is why .... and perhaps ask a few constructive questions about what specific member benefits we're talking about and how they will affect the price of membership and my general experience... Is that politics? Or is that a constructive discussion of candidate's policy that will lead to transparency and better understanding for the general membership?
  10. Agreed. The more i shoot, the more i realize how well it works overall for the vast majority of USPSA participants. I've read some of the candidates' agendas and thought they were ... somewhat irrelevant. ------------- A few questions to the open thread 1. Where could i find list of all candidates, for Area 8 and El Prez specifically? 2. Similar to what Foley did on Stoeger's and i think was it Levy's podcast? - are there any live chats and Q&A sessions planned by anyone? 3. In your opinion, without getting too political, who is YOUR preferred candidate and maybe why? I am going to send an email to Heather @ USPSA on ##1 and 2, but maybe someone here can answer? The third one... I dont mean to start any flame wars or get poltical. I would like to know WHY i should consider voting for one vs another and want to hear substantiated opinions. Thanks in advance
  11. My slot email included my code and a link to main page of Practiscore: I dont see the registration page link anywhere in the email... it's not here either: https://uspsa.org/nationals - all i see is a "More Info Coming Soon" CTA... Does anyone have the actual match registration link they could share with me?
  12. That makes total sense. Let me ask this: do you think having an importer who imports them was a direct result of an entrepreneur (future importer) and the maker (Tanfoglio) seeing an increased interest in Tanfo products in the US? And if the answer is yes, which I think is a reasonable logical chain here, then would it be appropriate to say that the interest may have been spiked by the number of podiums that gun was on? Have we not seen that pattern before - win today, sell later today?
  13. Apparently there are some built in features in the current software version that may accomplish this: https://invisioncommunity.com/features/engagement/
  14. Sorry, but it's not though... it's actually exactly what i would aim to avoid with this feature request. What i am asking for a like/dislike button underneath a post that allows participants to show their preference on the topic without having to post a one word or one emoji reply that only adds to clutter.
×
×
  • Create New...