wgnoyes Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 Bill, please take no offense to this, but are you not responsible enou<SNIP> The fact that I AM RESPONSIBLE enough to own firearms means I'll gladly spend the extra five seconds out of my life to check ONE MORE TIME to see if it's unloaded, even if I just put it down 10 paltry seconds before to reach for a tool to help me disassemble it. I would hope everyone does that. (Just as an aside, it's amazing to me in general the trend I see time and time again that the topics that one would think would just simply be answered with a simple common sense reply end up generating the most traffic. I guess that's just the nature of forums.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ima45dv8 Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 It seems some folks have forgotten or never learned the #1 rule when shooting with a RO watching. NEVER SCARE THE RO! If you scare the RO, anything he says after that is perfectly reasonable. It may or may not be in a language anybody can understand but it is still reasonable. A most excellent point! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twodownzero Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 It seems some folks have forgotten or never learned the #1 rule when shooting with a RO watching. NEVER SCARE THE RO! If you scare the RO, anything he says after that is perfectly reasonable. It may or may not be in a language anybody can understand but it is still reasonable. If you think that's true, go ahead and stop me. I'll see you at arbitration--and I'll win. There is no rule against scaring the RO, and certainly no presumption of reasonability. His or her actions are controlled intentionally by 8.3, and any deviation from that is interference. Somehow I suspect that the same ROs who would stop a shooter and require him to reshoot a stage for no reason are the same ones who are happy to brag about the number of shooters they've DQed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aztecdriver Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 It seems some folks have forgotten or never learned the #1 rule when shooting with a RO watching. NEVER SCARE THE RO! If you scare the RO, anything he says after that is perfectly reasonable. It may or may not be in a language anybody can understand but it is still reasonable. If you think that's true, go ahead and stop me. I'll see you at arbitration--and I'll win. There is no rule against scaring the RO, and certainly no presumption of reasonability. His or her actions are controlled intentionally by 8.3, and any deviation from that is interference. Somehow I suspect that the same ROs who would stop a shooter and require him to reshoot a stage for no reason are the same ones who are happy to brag about the number of shooters they've DQed. I agree with singlestack and ima45dv8. As RO, I'm responsible for ensuring the safety of the course of fire. If an incident occurs or begins to occur that I believe is becoming unsafe, I am going to stop the shooter, clear the range and evaluate what has happened. I have the authority and responsibility to do so. There are times when this happens and in actuality, no safety infraction has occurred. At which time, a reshoot will be granted. I've had experiences at all level of matches, once where the shooter looked like they AD'd, but was an early shot that surprised both the shooter and myself and even one time at a local indoor match where the shooters feet flew out from underneath him on a run down range. He landed safely, and even continued to engage the course from his backside. Both times I issued the "stop" command, both times we all just let things settle, made a ruling that no rules were violated and reshoots were ordered. Each time this happens, there hasn't been an issue and all parties and the squads were appreciative of the good calls. The stop command is not simply reserved for DQable events. Just because it's issued does not necessarily mean a DQ is forthcoming. I've stopped a few shooters for false starts. In addition, the range officers creed states: Safety shall always be my primary goal, with efficiency and speed of the competition as secondary factors. Examples of this happening are rare, but experience can lead you to see these situations happening. A very poor example would be a with a newer or less "confident" shooter misses a target in a COF, you know they are not confident because they are basically hunting their way through with no plan. At the end of the array you notice that they see a target they missed, clearly behind the 180. You see they are going to turn toward the target and you have about 1/10th of a second to react - do you stop them or do you let them index on the target before you stop them - or do you let them break those shots. I've seen that one play out - and instead of stopping them before they broke the shots it was after and two rounds landed about 2 yards away from a squadmate walking up that side of the bay. I haven't had to do it a lot - but I have done it, and everyone has been happy with the outcomes. For the record, I have one DQ and that was for a new shooter that I'm embarrassed to say I gave way too much latitude in handling a misfeed when I noticed he had his finger wrapped around the trigger. I hate DQ'ing people. I'll hate it even more if I don't stop someone before they shoot themselves or someone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aztecdriver Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 (edited) Bill, please take no offense to this, but are you not responsible enou<SNIP> The fact that I AM RESPONSIBLE enough to own firearms means I'll gladly spend the extra five seconds out of my life to check ONE MORE TIME to see if it's unloaded, even if I just put it down 10 paltry seconds before to reach for a tool to help me disassemble it. I would hope everyone does that. (Just as an aside, it's amazing to me in general the trend I see time and time again that the topics that one would think would just simply be answered with a simple common sense reply end up generating the most traffic. I guess that's just the nature of forums.) There's also a difference between knowing and verifying what you know. I'm confident in my knowledge of the status of my weapon, but I'm still going to verify it. Has nothing to do with level of experience or being comfortable with it. It's a practice I've adopted - similar to the practices I've adopted in flying airplanes. I know at the point I turn final in my plane my gear is down as I use it in a power management scheme and checklist. I still check 3 green on short final to make sure it's down and locked before I put the wheels on the pavement. Go out to the NTSB website and search on the number of gear up landings in privately owned and operated airplanes. Note the level of the pilots and their experience - many of them have 1000s more hours than I do and still didn't perform that last check before they set the plane down. I've got 700+ hrs in my plane - I'll still check each and every time. Edited May 25, 2010 by aztecdriver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singlestack Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 It seems some folks have forgotten or never learned the #1 rule when shooting with a RO watching. NEVER SCARE THE RO! If you scare the RO, anything he says after that is perfectly reasonable. It may or may not be in a language anybody can understand but it is still reasonable. If you think that's true, go ahead and stop me. I'll see you at arbitration--and I'll win. There is no rule against scaring the RO, and certainly no presumption of reasonability. His or her actions are controlled intentionally by 8.3, and any deviation from that is interference. Somehow I suspect that the same ROs who would stop a shooter and require him to reshoot a stage for no reason are the same ones who are happy to brag about the number of shooters they've DQed. Excuse me, but where did you read there would be no reshoot? And if I don't issue a reshoot, I could care less what happens at an arb. If you scare me, thats a REASON, not interference. You don't know me at all so suggesting that I like DQ'ing shooters is way over the line. Kinda makes me wish I wasn't a Moderator right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgunz11 Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 It seems some folks have forgotten or never learned the #1 rule when shooting with a RO watching. NEVER SCARE THE RO! If you scare the RO, anything he says after that is perfectly reasonable. It may or may not be in a language anybody can understand but it is still reasonable. If you think that's true, go ahead and stop me. I'll see you at arbitration--and I'll win. There is no rule against scaring the RO, and certainly no presumption of reasonability. His or her actions are controlled intentionally by 8.3, and any deviation from that is interference. Somehow I suspect that the same ROs who would stop a shooter and require him to reshoot a stage for no reason are the same ones who are happy to brag about the number of shooters they've DQed. Excuse me, but where did you read there would be no reshoot? And if I don't issue a reshoot, I could care less what happens at an arb. If you scare me, thats a REASON, not interference. You don't know me at all so suggesting that I like DQ'ing shooters is way over the line. Kinda makes me wish I wasn't a Moderator right now. What constitutes scaring an RO? Does the RO get scared someone is going to break the 180 every time they swing close to it rapidly? If the RO does and stops the shooter, does he offer a re-shoot because he was scared or does he say you broke it? Does the RO get scared when the shooter has a malfunction? Does the RO get scared when a shooter trips and falls with a loaded gun? Does the RO get scared when a shooter has an "uprange" start? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aztecdriver Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 (edited) Bobby, read my post. I gave you examples. Scared isn't the right word. Surprised is more like it. Every situation is dependent upon judgment and the rest of the context. I've seen people fall perfectly fine that hasn't even made me jump. I've seen people fall that worried me greatly. At the same time I've started people uprange that I had no doubt wouldn't do anything - i've also started people uprange that I'd previously purposely moved people away from their turn and draw path. It's my call - if I feel it's becoming unsafe - it'll be stopped. ETA - If as RO I don't understand what is going on - I'm required to stop the COF. It might be my fault - at which time you are free to have someone else hold the timer on your reshoot. Edited May 25, 2010 by aztecdriver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgunz11 Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 You should not stop someone because you "feel it's becoming unsafe". There is nothing safe about running around with a loaded pistol, but it can be done safely. Do you see the difference there? I know an RO that has telepathy and can see the future and he stops shooters BEFORE they break the 180 and DQ's them from the match, he even says he saw it happen. 8.3.5 “Stop” – Any Range Officer assigned to a stage may issue this command at any time during the course of fire. The competitor must immediately cease firing, stop moving and wait for further instructions from the Range Officer. 8.3.5 leaves the window open for an RO to stop a CoF at any time for any reason. A guy that falls on his butt and continues to shoot should not have been stopped. Someone thumb cocking their pistol in the holster is not at this time a DQ'able offense. No re-shoot can be issued, and the shooter should not be stopped. Stopping them and asking to see their empty chamber before they dry fire at a down range target is not a reasonable command. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aztecdriver Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 Um, yes, I should, and I will. 180s are bad examples and I don't think I would ever stop someone before breaking it, but I gave one example above where I might. As I've already stated. Thumb cocking might make me just a tad nervous if it's first stage but as it's not unsafe by the rules, have at it. I won't ask someone to show me clear there. Don't make blanket statements about ro auhority, they have it. It can be abused, but most times it's not. The scaring the ro comments are mostly extreme circumstances, and rare, but a stop is required for safety because most times the ro is too busy checking their shorts vs watching the shooter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ima45dv8 Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 This one has been answered, and has drifted far afield from the original question. Closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts