Using LEO gear in IDPA question...

[Forrest Halley]

So if they are issued a G22 (like the majority) and he elects to shoot a G27, is he a cheater then?

Local Sheriffs Dept here are issued Sig 1911's but they can carry ANY weapon as long as I qualify with it. Just because they are issued a certain weapon, it might not be the best one for them to defend themselves or someone else with...ability wise.

I don't see any competitive advantage gained there. What exactly is wrong with a 1911? It's just about the most customizable pistol to the end user out there. I do feel however that the intention of the duty rig provision is to carry the duty rig, not to modify it as you see fit and happen to "carry" a pistol that is head and shoulders over a service pistol.

A 34 isn't cheating. I qualified with my 34 this year, and since I do the firearms approvals, I approved myself to carry it.

Well if you can approve yourself to carry anything why not an STI Eagle 9mm? or perhaps a Witness Elite? They'd be perfect for competiti....I mean street duty use. I hear folks are getting 19 or 20 in a 126mm body.

I qualified with my 5" 625 this year. It wasn't a grand feat and it doesn't mean I should be carrying it as a duty weapon in a match or on the street.

I'm not picking on the boys in blue here...I'm picking on rule circumventers.

C 1. Competitors will not attempt to circumvent or

compromise the spirit or rationale of any stage either by the

use of inappropriate devices, equipment or techniques. This is

the Failure To Do Right rule.

C 2. Competitors will refrain from unsportsmanlike conduct,

unfair actions, or the use of illegal equipment, which, in the

opinion of the match director, tends to make a travesty of

IDPA. Repeated offenses reported to the AC or HQ can result

in having membership revoked.

CoF 13. Use concealment for scenario stages when

appropriate. Exception: Police or military officers when using

actual duty gear.<----Actual not self invented, modified or approved. I just wish this were limited to local matches only.

[hankfan79]

What I meant about the 1911 comment was nothing negative. I was trying to say that if a department issued me one but I was allowed to carry ANY weapon I could qualify with, I might go with something else provided I could perform better with it.

Example. PD give me a 1911 but I can shoot more accurately and perform malfunction drills better with a Glock, then that is what I would carry. It would be safer for my fellow officers and the public I am defending.

Edited March 23, 2011 by hankfan79

[Adam P.]

I carry off-duty, but do it in an IWB under a t-shirt, so when I started using a vest, I felt slower than what I usually practice.

Just out of curiosity, why not run the match with your IWB under a t-shirt? I'll bet you've got a lot of practice time in on that setup, and could rock with it.

The only reason I haven't is because of the rules. I believe they state no canted holsters and my IWB is canted forward. Of course I may be wrong on this, but I seem to recall the rule book saying that some where. I know it wouldn't be an issue at my local match, so now that you mention it, I'll give it a try.

[Forrest Halley]

What I meant about the 1911 comment was nothing negative. I was trying to say that if a department issued me one but I was allowed to carry ANY weapon I could qualify with, I might go with something else provided I could perform better with it.

Example. PD give me a 1911 but I can shoot more accurately and perform malfunction drills better with a Glock, then that is what I would carry. It would be safer for my fellow officers and the public I am defending.

I see your point sir, however the line has to be drawn somewhere as far as how much specialization is allowable in the competitive environment of the duty gear and pistol. Civilian competitors just see it as an unfair advantage not as he or she shoots this platform best and that is what they defend the public with. Especially when said officer shoots the same gun in USPSA on an inner/outer belt and not the same duty gear.

[Forrest Halley]

I carry off-duty, but do it in an IWB under a t-shirt, so when I started using a vest, I felt slower than what I usually practice.

Just out of curiosity, why not run the match with your IWB under a t-shirt? I'll bet you've got a lot of practice time in on that setup, and could rock with it.

The only reason I haven't is because of the rules. I believe they state no canted holsters and my IWB is canted forward. Of course I may be wrong on this, but I seem to recall the rule book saying that some where. I know it wouldn't be an issue at my local match, so now that you mention it, I'll give it a try.

IWB is exempt from cant rules. It can be muzzle forward, rearward, whatever. It just has to put the center of the trigger pad behind the centerline of the body. No apendix carry.

[Duane Thomas]

When you say "canted forward" do you mean FBI tilt, top of the slide titled forward of the muzzle? That's perfectly legal. If it's canted the other way, I'd be curious to know where carry it IWB. (?)

[Adam P.]

When you say "canted forward" do you mean FBI tilt, top of the slide titled forward of the muzzle? That's perfectly legal. If it's canted the other way, I'd be curious to know where carry it IWB. (?)

Yes FBI cant. It's a Comp-tac spartan. I probably misread the rule book...wouldn't be the first time.

[jlweems]

I'm not going to spend the money on something like an STI when I can shoot a $400 to the extent of my ability.

Our SRT guys carry Kimbers. I tried to get them to switch over to either G34s or G35s, but they wanted to stick with Kimbers. I qualified with the 34 with full intention of using it on duty.

[Forrest Halley]

I respect your position and I thank you for the discussion. I am highly disturbed by those that I feel manipulate the system to get an advantage on the line. It would be perfectly allowable under the current wording of this LEO gear clause for full-bull 1911's, STI Edges, 5" 625's and the like to slip in under the radar and create an advantage gap. All one would need is a department certification that weapon x is your duty weapon and Voila! I can't see the 34 and 35 as anything more than competition guns, but if it shoots well for you...Rock on! Please continue to serve and protect honorably and best of luck. I'd be picking something along the lines of a Para 16-40Limited in your shoes and I'd be running 22rd magazines.

I guess it'd be hard to convince someone off of a time proven design for something a little less customizable even if it does have higher capacity and power(g35 gen3).

[jlweems]

As I said, there are agencies that issue the G34/35 as a standard issue duty weapons or as tactical team weapons. I know several individuals that carry them on duty. I have the plain clothes gear to carry my G34, but I haven't picked up a duty gear holster for it yet. That's next on the list.

I'm a gun guy. I like to qualify on numerous pistols each year. On a daily basis, I carry a Glock 38, but sometimes I carry other pistols depending upon what I am doing. For formal occasions where Class A is called for, I maintain a set of duty gear and carry a revolver simply because I personally think that a revolver offers more class than any bottom feeder.

[Forrest Halley]

It's hard to beat a 586 or Python in high gloss. Very difficult indeed. It's a shame they haven't made a blued 8 shot 27 without the lock. That'd be a nice barbecue/parade piece yet still have a decent capacity.

[jlweems]

I have a 586 that I plan to qualify with ASAP and carry on duty some, but I will also use this pistol in SSR. For formal occasions, I will carry either a nickel 22-4 in .45 ACP or 66 (no dash). Earlier this week, I traded into a model 28-2, which also seems highly appropriate for such duty.

[Strick]

I respect your position and I thank you for the discussion. I am highly disturbed by those that I feel manipulate the system to get an advantage on the line. It would be perfectly allowable under the current wording of this LEO gear clause for full-bull 1911's, STI Edges, 5" 625's and the like to slip in under the radar and create an advantage gap. All one would need is a department certification that weapon x is your duty weapon and Voila! .

Those guns would not be legal for IDPA, however if they use a gun legal for IDPA and their duty rig (fully equiped per the rules) what is the problem?

[solaritx]

Am I missing something here? LEO can use their duty rigs for IDPA...this means their holsters, belts, mag carriers, etc INSTEAD of the IDPA approved HOLSTER, MAG CARRIER, BELTS and COVER.

When and where did this mean that the gun, magazine, etc would change from IDPA approved?

With the same logic as previously mentioned about getting a gun "in" because someone can get a letter from their mommy, the same could happen with the mag capacity. "My mommy gave me a letter and said that because I have Hi-Caps, I don't have to only load 10, I can use 17....OK?"

The LEO gear has always been that they can use their holster gear and no cover vs the "normal" IDPA gear and cover.

Again, did I miss a new rule change or interpretation?

Thanks

Garry

[Steve Koski]

Garry,

I'm with you. It's an exception for holsters/holster placement/concealment/mag pouch criteria/mag pouch placement. It does not allow non-IDPA legal guns.

Koski

[jlweems]

Am I missing something here? LEO can use their duty rigs for IDPA...this means their holsters, belts, mag carriers, etc INSTEAD of the IDPA approved HOLSTER, MAG CARRIER, BELTS and COVER.

When and where did this mean that the gun, magazine, etc would change from IDPA approved?

With the same logic as previously mentioned about getting a gun "in" because someone can get a letter from their mommy, the same could happen with the mag capacity. "My mommy gave me a letter and said that because I have Hi-Caps, I don't have to only load 10, I can use 17....OK?"

The LEO gear has always been that they can use their holster gear and no cover vs the "normal" IDPA gear and cover.

Again, did I miss a new rule change or interpretation?

Thanks

Garry

I don't think you are missing anything. Nothing in the rules says you can use a firearm that doesn't otherwise meet the rules. It simply states that military folks and peace officers can use duty gear rather than concealment gear. My actual issued duty pistol is not legal for IDPA, but I have other firearms that I carry on duty that are legal.

[Forrest Halley]

I respect your position and I thank you for the discussion. I am highly disturbed by those that I feel manipulate the system to get an advantage on the line. It would be perfectly allowable under the current wording of this LEO gear clause for full-bull 1911's, STI Edges, 5" 625's and the like to slip in under the radar and create an advantage gap. All one would need is a department certification that weapon x is your duty weapon and Voila! .

Those guns would not be legal for IDPA, however if they use a gun legal for IDPA and their duty rig (fully equiped per the rules) what is the problem?

I'd have to say that duty rig includes the gun and mags...and all that is carried on duty. If it's bonafide issue stuff it should be allowed to participate no?

[Steve Koski]

Forrest,

The two references in the rule book to Duty Gear or Duty Rig; they are shown below. They give an exception to using concealment, and give exception to the holster rules. Note that there is no exception for "duty gear" in the pistol rules section.

If you can use the "it's part of my duty rig" argument to mean anything, then you could use potentially use lights, lasers, optics, 18+1 starts, guns that don't fit in the box, whatever. These are clearly not allowed in IDPA. When did you see a cop shoot with a mounted light, or a non-legal pistol at a sanctioned match?

Page 13

CoF 13. Use concealment for scenario stages when

appropriate. Exception: Police or military officers when using

actual duty gear.

Page 35 (in the Criteria of an IDPA Approved Holster section)

Exception – Police or military officers may use their duty rig, but

ALL retention features of the holster MUST be used and all belt

equipment (mace, handcuffs, etc.) must be present.

[Duane Thomas]

I can't see the 34 and 35 as anything more than competition guns,

Why not? You are aware they're just a Glock 17/22 with a slide and barrel a whopping 0.83" longer, right?

[Blueridge]

Forrest,

The two references in the rule book to Duty Gear or Duty Rig; they are shown below. They give an exception to using concealment, and give exception to the holster rules. Note that there is no exception for "duty gear" in the pistol rules section.

Page 13

CoF 13. Use concealment for scenario stages when

appropriate. Exception: Police or military officers when using

actual duty gear.

Page 35 (in the Criteria of an IDPA Approved Holster section)

Exception Police or military officers may use their duty rig, but

ALL retention features of the holster MUST be used and all belt

equipment (mace, handcuffs, etc.) must be present.

I had always had a question about the page 35 rule. Detectives do not carry much of the gear that patrol officers do on a daily basis. Most that I have seen only have the hangun in a paddle or belt holster along with a double magazine or magazine and handcuff combination. Thus would there be a problem with the detective using his "daily" gear as opposed to the duty gear (that they also are issued) they have.

Edited March 25, 2011 by Blueridge

[jlweems]

"Duty gear" in the on the job jargon typically means the actual duty belt worn for uniform duty, and I think that is what the spirit of the rule intends. I don't think that it means that an investigator can show up the latest kydex wonder paddle holster and shoot the match without wearing concealment.

[Blueridge]

Ah, but most of the tactical team (SWAT, etc...) officers I know have tactical gear and standard patrol officers duty gear. By the definition that you suggest, that would mean that by the spirit of the rule they would be limited to using standard duty gear and not the tactical team gear in IDPA.

I am not trying to make waves here, but the "duty gear" for an LEO assignment can vary widely from the standard patrol duty gear. If the detective uses what they have issued as their daily work gear, then why would that be unacceptable under the IDPA rules?

[jlweems]

Nope. I wrote "for uniform duty". SRT/SWAT members wear a uniform. Unless an agency is strictly an investigative agency, even the investigators have uniforms and duty gear to wear with it when their assignment calls for it.

Are you taking the position that because I often wear a Comp-tac paddle when at work that I could show up and shoot a match without wearing concealment because I wear that holster on duty?

[Forrest Halley]

Forrest,

When did you see a cop shoot with a mounted light, or a non-legal pistol at a sanctioned match?

When his DUTY GEAR holster would not stabilize the weapon without the light and four of his fellow officers walked in wearing the same thing. Kind of difficult to call that a custom rig with five identical copies standing there.

I can't see the 34 and 35 as anything more than competition guns,

Why not? You are aware they're just a Glock 17/22 with a slide and barrel a whopping 0.83" longer, right?

Yes you're right about the length. Now about the slide lightening cut and fiberoptic sights....I realize the one item has been clarified as ok , but it does stand as a singular manufacturer's exception to the rule. The gun I am talking about is straight tricked out for production. Seeing as the firearm approval guy can approve whatever they want a clause needs to be put in the rules for department issued duty gear. Perhaps a letterheaded statement by a department official is in order to keep folks a little more true to the spirit. It gets sticky when you have a competitor ask you why officer A is shooting a G34 while officer B is shooting something else and they are both from the same PD.

I had always had a question about the page 35 rule. Detectives do not carry much of the gear that patrol officers do on a daily basis. Most that I have seen only have the hangun in a paddle or belt holster along with a double magazine or magazine and handcuff combination. Thus would there be a problem with the detective using his "daily" gear as opposed to the duty gear (that they also are issued) they have.

"Duty gear" in the on the job jargon typically means the actual duty belt worn for uniform duty, and I think that is what the spirit of the rule intends. I don't think that it means that an investigator can show up the latest kydex wonder paddle holster and shoot the match without wearing concealment.

Ah, but most of the tactical team (SWAT, etc...) officers I know have tactical gear and standard patrol officers duty gear. By the definition that you suggest, that would mean that by the spirit of the rule they would be limited to using standard duty gear and not the tactical team gear in IDPA.

I am not trying to make waves here, but the "duty gear" for an LEO assignment can vary widely from the standard patrol duty gear. If the detective uses what they have issued as their daily work gear, then why would that be unacceptable under the IDPA rules?

Nope. I wrote "for uniform duty". SRT/SWAT members wear a uniform. Unless an agency is strictly an investigative agency, even the investigators have uniforms and duty gear to wear with it when their assignment calls for it.

Are you taking the position that because I often wear a Comp-tac paddle when at work that I could show up and shoot a match without wearing concealment because I wear that holster on duty?

The preceeding exchange illustrates beautifully the differing perceptions of law enforcement duty gear from competitor to competitor. The SO needs a leg to stand on here when it gets out of hand. This either needs serious definition and/or the placement of duty gear users into a separate category/restriction to local matches. It has become clear, to me atleast, that duty gear can be specialized to provide a more positive result in competition than was intended by the spirit of the rules.

[hankfan79]

Hey Koski,

Ever seen a shooter show up to a sanctioned match with a STI Eagle with a magwell and call that a duty weapon? I have.

I wanted to be part of that department because they must have a HUGE budget!!

L.A. Swat get Kimbers (or used to). I think it all comes down to the "spirit" of things. Just shows what they are willing to circumvent to gain an edge.