Sweeping

[pvhendrix]

Using the same logic...any shooter that shoots a race holster worn in an appendix carry is DQ'able, as when they walk the muzzle sweeps the inside of their opposite thigh.

Should NOT be a DQ as is currently written, in my opinion and interpetation.

This was also my thought (I'm not an RO). But if i bent my right leg to scratch my ankle, my muzzle would be pointed at my lower leg

Read the rule (or the opening post).

Lower extremities are specifically excluded. (and lower, only)

The rule covers while holstering and drawing if I recall correctly (don't have my book with me).

[G-ManBart]

I can't think of a more dangerous thing a competitor can do with his "safe or inert" holstered gun. We certainly can't let shooters sweep themselves just because the gun is in the holster, can we?

I agree. The rule should be clarified and this should be a DQ.

So it's okay for a hot, holstered gun to be pointed at your femoral artery, but not your hand? Sure, putting your hand under the muzzle is an intentional act, but so is positioning your holster such that it points at a pretty important part of your anatomy!

I'm not going to put my hand under the holster/muzzle, but I can see why they might not want to make this a DQ offense. R,

[twodownzero]

Handling and pointing are not the same thing.

[G-ManBart]

Handling and pointing are not the same thing.

We allow competitors to "handle" the gun during the draw and have it sweep those same important parts....that's FAR more dangerous than putting you hand under the holster with the gun in it.

You can handle your holster all you want, regardless of whether it has a loaded or unloaded gun in it.

To enforce the kind of rule that you would need to prevent this action would be pretty complicated, i.e. "competitors may not handle their holster, if it contains a loaded handgun, in such a way that would cause a body part, other than a lower extremity, to be swept with the muzzle"....or some such thing. Then you add in the factor of whether they touched the bottom of the holster, but didn't actually have anything in front of the muzzle etc....way too complicated. I'd not something I'd do, so I don't really care, but I'll take a bet that we won't see a change on this. R,

[George Jones]

Grasping the bottom of a holster with a loaded gun in it is mentioned in RO classes. It is a discouraged practice (meaning avoid it yourself and teach your new shooters to avoid the habit). But there is no rule aginst it since a properly holstered gun is considered inert for the purposes of the rules.

[Skydiver]

You can handle your holster all you want, regardless of whether it has a loaded or unloaded gun in it.

... as long as the holster stays on the belt, and the belt stays securely attached to your waist. Remember that thread about removing the belt to go potty. :-)

[briansea2]

"Handling (as in “handling a firearm”) The act of manipulating, holding or gripping a

firearm while the trigger is functionally accessible."

If the gun was legally holstered, it wasn't handled.

I still have trouble reconciling this with the DQ for taking your belt and holster (with gun) off when not in a safe area.

I agree ...but then there is this "The handgun while in the holster attached to a belt and on the competitor is considered inert, meaning completely inactive."

that attached to the belt part really puts a different light on it.

B

[G-ManBart]

You can handle your holster all you want, regardless of whether it has a loaded or unloaded gun in it.

... as long as the holster stays on the belt, and the belt stays securely attached to your waist. Remember that thread about removing the belt to go potty. :-)

Absolutely. At a recent major match I was waiting for one of the port-a-johns to empty...waiting, waiting, waiting. Finally, I hear some banging and clanking and out comes a famous GM with his gun belt on, and his gun on it. Oh yeah, he walked by a safety area to get to it. Guess he doesn't read much here

[Woody Allen]

I can't think of a more dangerous thing a competitor can do with his "safe or inert" holstered gun. We certainly can't let shooters sweep themselves just because the gun is in the holster, can we?

I agree. The rule should be clarified and this should be a DQ.

NROI we are here not to parse the rules to DQ shooters. It isn't a game. As a new RO and a new shooter (you are both), were your actions pushing the DQ at the Indiana Sectional warranted? You didn't push-you shoved and shoved and shoved to DQ the shooter. You were wrong. Dead wrong. Law student or not-you impacted others in an adverse way. NROI is not a license to look for creative ways to DQ shooters. Shame on you!!!

[alpha-charlie]

Using the same logic...any shooter that shoots a race holster worn in an appendix carry is DQ'able, as when they walk the muzzle sweeps the inside of their opposite thigh.

Should NOT be a DQ as is currently written, in my opinion and interpetation.

This was also my thought (I'm not an RO). But if i bent my right leg to scratch my ankle, my muzzle would be pointed at my lower leg

Read the rule (or the opening post).

Lower extremities are specifically excluded. (and lower, only)

I understand how the rule reads and it's open for interpretation. But, by the rule (which is written on paper and not real life) it makes it sound like the lower extremities are o.k. to sweep. Are they not as important as the upper extremities. Think about it, why is it o.k. (per the rule) to "sweep" the lower extremities but when the hand comes under the muzzle when holstered with trigger completely covered by the holster, now it's a safety issue? And how close can the hand come to holstered muzzle before it's considered sweeping the muzzle. If my hands are relaxed at sides and my fingers are 3 inches below the muzzle is that considered sweeping the muzzle? The rule is written too vague and is wrong.

[alpha-charlie]

I can't think of a more dangerous thing a competitor can do with his "safe or inert" holstered gun. We certainly can't let shooters sweep themselves just because the gun is in the holster, can we?

I agree. The rule should be clarified and this should be a DQ.

NROI we are here not to parse the rules to DQ shooters. It isn't a game. As a new RO and a new shooter (you are both), were your actions pushing the DQ at the Indiana Sectional warranted? You didn't push-you shoved and shoved and shoved to DQ the shooter. You were wrong. Dead wrong. Law student or not-you impacted others in an adverse way. NROI is not a license to look for creative ways to DQ shooters. Shame on you!!!

I agree. It was a pimpy call and was made to assert new found authority. To DQ someone and then recommend they take it to arbitration because it will "probably be reversed" is a slap in the face to a new shooter, to any shooter. Simply pulling the shooter to the side to make them aware of such a questionable violation would have been the fair sportsman approach to the call. By telling them it will be reversed in arbitration then you know it was a bogus call and a big waste of time for everyone involved.

[staudacher]

I can't think of a more dangerous thing a competitor can do with his "safe or inert" holstered gun. We certainly can't let shooters sweep themselves just because the gun is in the holster, can we?

I agree. The rule should be clarified and this should be a DQ.

NROI we are here not to parse the rules to DQ shooters. It isn't a game. As a new RO and a new shooter (you are both), were your actions pushing the DQ at the Indiana Sectional warranted? You didn't push-you shoved and shoved and shoved to DQ the shooter. You were wrong. Dead wrong. Law student or not-you impacted others in an adverse way. NROI is not a license to look for creative ways to DQ shooters. Shame on you!!!

I agree Woody, as a witness to the event it was clear (hey they didn't try to hide it) that there was a personal agenda in play. The sad part is the kid they decided to play their game with was shooting only his fourth match and they seriously screwed him up for the rest of match. Quite frankly I think you two owe him his match fee.

[staudacher]

I can't think of a more dangerous thing a competitor can do with his "safe or inert" holstered gun. We certainly can't let shooters sweep themselves just because the gun is in the holster, can we?

I agree. The rule should be clarified and this should be a DQ.

NROI we are here not to parse the rules to DQ shooters. It isn't a game. As a new RO and a new shooter (you are both), were your actions pushing the DQ at the Indiana Sectional warranted? You didn't push-you shoved and shoved and shoved to DQ the shooter. You were wrong. Dead wrong. Law student or not-you impacted others in an adverse way. NROI is not a license to look for creative ways to DQ shooters. Shame on you!!!

I agree. It was a pimpy call and was made to assert new found authority. To DQ someone and then recommend they take it to arbitration because it will "probably be reversed" is a slap in the face to a new shooter, to any shooter. Simply pulling the shooter to the side to make them aware of such a questionable violation would have been the fair sportsman approach to the call. By telling them it will be reversed in arbitration then you know it was a bogus call and a big waste of time for everyone involved.

IMO, the CRO and RO should be suspended. Yea, it was a slap in the face of every competitor there when the CRO and RO decided to take it upon themselves to make up rules as they saw fit. Activist CRO/ROs have no place here. This is a game 99% of us play for fun. If this is allowed to go without any punishment it sets a bad precedent for our sport.

Edited July 27, 2010 by staudacher

[Singlestack]

Time Out!

We do not allow that here.

[Singlestack]

NROI has issued a ruling on this topic.

http://www.uspsa.org/rules/nroi_rulings.php?action=edit&indx=46

I am going to reopen this thread with a warning not to drift back to attacking anybody.

[SLM]

NROI has issued a ruling on this topic.

http://www.uspsa.org/rules/nroi_rulings.php?action=edit&indx=46

I am going to reopen this thread with a warning not to drift back to attacking anybody.

Why not just close it back up? I can't see this staying pretty very long.

[ima45dv8]

Why not just close it back up? I can't see this staying pretty very long.

Have a little faith!

[sperman]

I find the inclusion of 5.2.7 confusing. Since you aren't even allowed on the course of fire with a holster that doesn't meet 5.2.7, why do you need to include that in the rule on sweeping?

10.5.5.1 Exception – A match disqualification is not applicable for sweeping of the lower extremities (below the belt) while drawing or re-holstering of the handgun, provided that the competitor’s fingers are clearly outside of the trigger guard. This exception is only for holstered handguns. Sweeping does not apply to a handgun holstered in compliance with Rules 5.2.1 and 5.2.7

5.2.7 Competitors must not be permitted to commence a course of fire wearing:

5.2.7.1 A shoulder holster or “tie-down” rig (visible or otherwise), except as specified in Rule 5.2.8,

5.2.7.2 A holster with the heel of the butt of the handgun below the top of the belt, except as specified in Appendix D, or otherwise indicated in Rule 5.2.8.

5.2.7.3 A holster with the muzzle of the handgun pointing further than 3 feet from the competitor’s feet while standing relaxed,

5.2.7.4 A holster which does not completely prevent access to, or activation of, the trigger of the handgun while holstered.

[George Jones]

I find the inclusion of 5.2.7 confusing. Since you aren't even allowed on the course of fire with a holster that doesn't meet 5.2.7, why do you need to include that in the rule on sweeping?

DRLs, of course.

[racerba]

I understand how the rule reads...it makes it sound like the lower extremities are o.k. to sweep.

The rule DOES NOT allow general sweeping of the lower extremities. Only while holstering and unholstering is it allowed.