sslav

Can RO "un-issue" a comnad? And does that mean that it reverts the status of the firing line? Say the shooter is at the starting position. The RO issue the "Make Ready" command and the shooter draws his gun. The shooter then says "Wait, that target over there is not taped." The RO looks and agrees. He then instructs the shooter to re-holster the gun. In the process the shooter ends up dropping the gun. Is this a DQ because "Make Ready" command was issued and the COF started. Or was this command retracted when the RO told the shooter to re-holster? I think the two situations are similar - RO issues a range command. Shooter then brings something of significance to the attention of the RO that requires that command to be rescinded.

Like putting with a wedgie? All the top pro's are doing it.

I did not realize that a competitor may "re-open" the COF. So if I notice that I left steel standing after the "Range Is Clear" command, can I draw my gun, slap in a mag and resume blasting? I think not.

Agreed. The RO should not have issued the "Range Is Clear" command until the gun was properly holstered, but he did. "Range Is Clear" command was given so the COF is over. So there should not be a DQ in this situation.

So by that egocentric bit of logic, you're not and will likely never be a good shooter? :roflol: Yes there is a downside. I have to console my self with trying to reduce the overall number of good shooters out there. Right now it is a slow going.

You are working with a tainted sample here. A cop who is not only going to shoot USPSA but will stick around long enough to actually get classified clearly has more than just a professional interest in shooting. Of LEOs who show up at our matches, very few show up more than once. As to what makes someone a good shooter, it is an interesting question. This may be a bit egocentric but here is how I see it - anyone who shoots better than me is a good shooter. It is a shifting scale.

You must have better law enforcement shooters where you shoot. Because of the ones around here only very few would make a C.

As long as it does not push the gun more then 2oz over stock they should be good in any production gun.

Last year's Area 8 was my first major match. By that point I was shooting USPSA for about 2 years. One thing that I was completely unprepared for was the length of the match. I shot local matches between 6 and 7 stages and I usually help to build the matches and still had energy for tear down. So 11 stages did not seem like that big a deal especially since I was not building stages before the match. I was completely out of energy by the end of the match. I pretty much sleepwalked through the last couple of stages. So plan accordingly. Make sure you have energy bars or some kind of low volume/high energy snacks and keep munching on them throughout the match. Depending on how it affects you an energy drink may not be a bad idea. And of course plenty of water. I followed did that at summer blast and had a much better match overall.

It takes about 5 minutes per shooter including scoring, pasting, resetting. You get your five minutes, everyone else on the squad gets theirs. The larger the squad, the smaller is the ratio of you shooting to other guys shooting. No matter where you go, there you are. ROing, scoring, taping/resetting and lets not forget BSing make the time go faster.

I have installed two sets of Dawson adjustable and never had a problem. Maybe its a particular brand of sights?

Welcome to the forum. I think focusing on one division (and one gun) at a time is probably a better way to go. Most of the good shooters I see tend to do that. Your mileage may vary.

I prefer adjustable.

I did not include Steel matches in my answer. In any case I am in the one of the two most popular brackets.

Respectfully, ADs can happen whenever there is any kind of gun handling is involved. Once again the two issues involved are: 1. The likelihood of an AD. and 2. The impact (pun intended) of an AD. If there is no finger in the trigger guard, then running uprange will never result in an AD. On the other hand even with the finger not in the trigger guard, you can still end up with AD when reholstering. For example you can have a drawstring on the bottom of the jacket catch the trigger for instance - and that is not a hypothetical. If you do have a finger in the trigger guard and you are running uprange you may or may not have an AD - and the odds are still in your favor of not having one. If you have a finger in the trigger guard when reholstering you are near certain to have an AD. So with proper finger placement - running uprange is less likely to result in an AD than reholstering. And with improper finger placement - running uprange is still less likely to result in an AD than reholstering. Moving on to the consequences of an AD If you are running uprange while pointing the gun downrange and your gun goes off the round will either strike the berm or it will go over the berm. Sending a round over the berm is certainly a bad thing - there is a chance that it will hit something. But that chance is fairly low. On the other hand if you have an AD while reholstering it is even money or better odds that that round is going into your body. So consequences of an AD when running uprange are most likely less severe than of an AD while reholstering. I am sorry but there is an intellectually dishonest device utilized in the statement above. There is no equating holstering and re-holstering. These are two extremely dissimilar actions within the context of a competition. In the first case you are not on the clock. Your focus is entirely on the action you are performing - saely holstering your gun. The RO has no worries other than supervising that single action. How can you possibly equate that to re-holstering in the middle of a stage? Do you actually shoot in USPSA competitions? Yes listening to someone screaming as you are trying to apply pressure to a gunshot wound in their thigh as it is gushing arterial blood is so much more appealing. Given that many shooters - some of whom are very experienced feel differently, is it even remotely possible that your opinion is wrong?

Lets see. There have been ADs resulting in gunshot wounds while re-holstering both on and off the clock. There have been no ADs resulting in gunshot wounds while moving uprange with the gun pointed down range. You are advocating a technique that has resulted in gunshot wounds over one that may cause a round to go over the berm? The safest way to move uprange is to unload, hammer down, holster while facing downrange. Then move uprange, face downrange, draw, load and continue the course of fire. As far as I know there is nothing in the rules that prevent you from doing this. This would be safer than running uprange holding the gun facing downrange. Reholstering a loaded gun is not safer as evidenced by the facts (not opinions) presented so far.

The test is whether they are easily, objectively and reliably enforceable. Specific problems with each are detailed below Top five shooters may not be known for at least hours after the last shot was fired. In a multi-day match any or all of the top five could well be several states away. Even if you can have the top five shooters present their guns for inspection - how do you know that the gun is unaltered from the shape it was in during the competition or if it is even the same gun? This fails reliability test. Will you pull shooters off the line (randomly or in case of being suspected of cheating) and inspect their guns? Well what if you detail stripped the gun and it passes with flying colors. The shooter then goes on to have a malfunction(s) following the inspection. Does the shooter now have cause for re-shoots or a complete refund of his match fee (and hotel fee and travel expenses) because some stranger had his gun in pieces and may not have put it back together to the shooter's standards? And what would be the selection criteria for these inspectors? Are they required to have high degree of familiarity with the internal of say five or eight various gun models? Would they have hold certifications or "Yah! I know Glocks! (or CZs, M&Ps, XDs, Beretas, EAA etc..)" good enough? Will they be supplied with micrometers and detailed specs for each gun? And can you with 100% certainty determine if a given part was intentionally altered from the factory configuration or if it is a result of wear in? Sorry this fails both the ease of enforcement and the objectivity criteria. Hardly. Or perhaps all of these problems can be avoided by creating rules that can actually be enforced without tearing down people's guns.

Of course there is a way to stop it. You can create a set of clear and enforceable rules. If you make a modification illegal it should be quickly and unambiguously detectable with minimal training of the match staff. If you can not reliably detect a violation, it should not be a violation. Yeah, I know it is the Indian and not the arrow. Yet somehow an awful lot of Indians seem to put a bit of effort to get better arrows. Which is why we are having this conversation in the first place. So maybe, just maybe the arrow does play into it a little bit? And if so then we should make sure that all the good little Indians that obey all the rules are not placed at a disadvantage by those few big bad Indians who are going to assume that if a modification can not be detected then it is automatically legal. As mentioned before we do have chronos and mag gauges. Why bother? Why don't we just assume that you are shooting whatever power factor you are claiming you are shooting and that your mags are up to spec? After all we are all honorable sportsmen, aren't we?

Yes that is a very obvious truth. Here is another - PEOPLE WILL CHEAT. Maybe few maybe not so few - depending on your faith in humanity. If rules that they are breaking are not enforceable then cheaters get off free. Maybe some can be satisfied with the "they only cheat themselves" philosophy. I on the other hand feel that if someone cheats when they are competing against me then they are cheating me. And I want them caught. Sorry I am just not a "turn the other cheek" kinda guy.

I think it is naive to believe that everyone is going to play nice-nice. If the rules are not easily enforceable, then those who choose to cheat, get a free pass. I think we have had enough scandals in sporting news over the last few years that clearly demonstrate that people will cheat.

We should not make rules that can not be effectively enforced. It is all fine and well to rely upon the good will of our fellow man and the forbearance of reptiles. But in the real world it means handing an unfair advantage to those that are less than scrupulous.

You try re-holstering a gun in 1/2 a second and you are a lot more likely to put a round into your lower extremities than you are to put a round over the berm while running uprange with the gun pointed downrange.

+1 For lefties there is no need to replace the slide lock, but you may need to replace the extended mag release.

That is the great thing about free market. Everyone gets to vote.

Cost of mags naturally has to be included. Without mags saiga is a rather poor club, not a shotgun. In our local tactical shotgun match I came in 8th out about 50 shooters. I was running a mossberg pump. I came in first in the pump class, got beaten by 3 limited shooters and four open shooters. One of the four open shooters was my friend running a Saiga. However, I practice shotgun regularly, He barely does. He still came in 5th overall and 4th in the open class and the only limited shooter above him was the limited winner. That right there tells me that Saiga offers a decisive advantage and would dominate the tactical class in 3-gun. I do not see how our sport would benefit from that.