IPSC rules

[Vlad]

belt keepers?

[Resjudicata]

So what is a granny to do.

Use belt keepers, get your belt through at least three loops on your pants or maybe cowboy action shooting instead? I don't think cowboy has that requirement in their sport.

Chris

[JFlowers]

If you are wearing a standard two-piece belt system, only the inner belt has to pass through the belt loops.

[Resjudicata]

If you are wearing a standard two-piece belt system, only the inner belt has to pass through the belt loops.

If it is a two piece belt where the outside attaches to the inside with velcro or something then yes. However, if the outside doesn't have a way to attach to the inside belt then I don't think it satisfies the rules.

Chris

[Skydiver]

So if my inner belt were sewn directly to my pants (shorts, kilt, coveralls, jumpsuit, etc.), but there were no belt loops, then it still would not comply with 5.2.3? I'd still need to sew on 3 belt loops even if they don't do anything?

[Nik Habicht]

If you are wearing a standard two-piece belt system, only the inner belt has to pass through the belt loops.

If it is a two piece belt where the outside attaches to the inside with velcro or something then yes. However, if the outside doesn't have a way to attach to the inside belt then I don't think it satisfies the rules.

Chris

Any uniform shop catering to law enforcement will have keepers in stock. Or, you could make your own out of stiff material and Velcro; heck I've seen some folks just take a length of velcro to make a keeper....

Put a few keepers in place, and you've got a working system. I used keepers for the first five or six years of shooting USPSA, and just attached my Safariland outerbelt to my regular pants belt....

[bgary]

So what is a granny to do.

Hmmmm... follow the rules?

They aren't that complicated. Nor particularly onerous.

The belt-loop thing and the towel fiasco, together, illustrate one of the philosophical differences between the international rules and the US rules. Internationally, if you violate a rule off-the-clock, you get a penalty that affects your score. In the US... you get to fix the problem, no harm no foul.

Note that, if I recall correctly, ladies are allowed to have a separate set of belt-loops somewhat lower on their hips... but the belt still has to go through belt loops. Most ladies either wear their belt at the waist, or sew three belt loops on their shooting pants.

[West Texas Granny]

So what is a granny to do.

Hmmmm... follow the rules?

They aren't that complicated. Nor particularly onerous.

The belt-loop thing and the towel fiasco, together, illustrate one of the philosophical differences between the international rules and the US rules. Internationally, if you violate a rule off-the-clock, you get a penalty that affects your score. In the US... you get to fix the problem, no harm no foul.

Note that, if I recall correctly, ladies are allowed to have a separate set of belt-loops somewhat lower on their hips... but the belt still has to go through belt loops. Most ladies either wear their belt at the waist, or sew three belt loops on their shooting pants.

This belt loop issue is silly.

[Resjudicata]

So what is a granny to do.

Hmmmm... follow the rules?

They aren't that complicated. Nor particularly onerous.

The belt-loop thing and the towel fiasco, together, illustrate one of the philosophical differences between the international rules and the US rules. Internationally, if you violate a rule off-the-clock, you get a penalty that affects your score. In the US... you get to fix the problem, no harm no foul.

Note that, if I recall correctly, ladies are allowed to have a separate set of belt-loops somewhat lower on their hips... but the belt still has to go through belt loops. Most ladies either wear their belt at the waist, or sew three belt loops on their shooting pants.

This belt loop issue is silly.

Rather than just saying that the rule is "silly" maybe you could post info about where you are running into a problem complying with the rule and maybe someone can give some suggestions on how you can solve your problem and comply with the rule.

The belt keepers are very cheap and easy to find. You could be in compliance with the rule for a couple of dollars.

Chris

[JFlowers]

What's silly about it? Three options exist.

You wear the holster and mag pouches on your pants belt. Simple and straightforward.

You wear the holster and pouches on a gun belt which is attached to your pant's belt by keepers (at least 3). This is from the old days when this was the way police gear was done. And the keepers keep your gunbelt from ending up at your armpits when you draw.

You wear the holster and pouches on the outer belt of a two-belt (velcro) system. This is basically just a modern update of the previous option. Instead of three keepers, the velcro acts as a keeper at all touching points.

A single variation exists. Woman are allowed to add belt loops below the waist. This is a simple requirement of anatomy. I have seen several woman do the "hand across the chest and pull things to left in order to clear the way" draw. Lowering the gun a few inches helps make this less problematic.

Aside from a couple of holster options that are not suitable for competition and a couple that are just not allowed, that pretty much covers the basic ways to carry a handgun.

[Skydiver]

West Texas Granny can probably explain her specific issue in detail.

Without knowing her specific issue, I can imagine the following: Women are allowed to have their belts down to hip level (See 5.2.3.1). So if a lady has her gun belt at hip level, but her pants belt is at waist level, then belt keepers aren't going to fix the problem. As described earlier, the way around this is to sew on belt loops down at the lower level.

Personally I feel that the comma and the "or" in 5.2.3 should allow an RO or RM to consider a belt to be secure, but as I noted about a month ago, John Amidon made a clarification that a belt needs to be secured by at least 3 belt loops.

5.2.3 Unless otherwise specified in the written stage briefing, the belt carrying the holster and all allied equipment must be worn at waist level. The belt or the inner belt or both must be either securely fixed at the waist, or secured with a minimum of three belt loops.

5.2.3.1 Female competitors may be permitted (if so authorized in Appendix D) to wear a belt, holster and allied equipment at hip level, however, the top of the belt must not be positioned below the furthest lateral point of the top of the femur (tuberosity major).

Here is the other thread about the belt loops:

JA's clarification: http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=103964&view=findpost&p=1372997

Start of thread: http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=103964&view=findpost&p=1182885

Moderators: feel free to merge threads or split threads as you think appropriate.

[bgary]

This belt loop issue is silly.

perhaps. Bear in mind that the first-and-foremost priority of the rules is to ensure safety while we run around with guns. I suspect that the belt-loop rules origins lie in the belief that if you're going to have gun and ammo hanging on your belt, it makes sense to ensure that the belt is secured in place.

That aside... the broader observation I'd make is that there will probably be lots of rules that you or I feel are "silly" in any given game. But there aren't generally a lot of games which allow a competitor to simply ignore the rules they don't like. So, at some level the choice we have is to play the game according to the rules... or not play it at all. I'd rather play.

Most of us choose to accept that there *are* "rules of the game", play within them as long as they are in the rulebook, and/or work with the USPSA board to change them if they're truly problematic.

$.02

Edited March 8, 2011 by jakers

[mda]

So what is a granny to do.

Follow the rules!

[adively]

So what is a granny to do.

Hmmmm... follow the rules?

They aren't that complicated. Nor particularly onerous.

The belt-loop thing and the towel fiasco, together, illustrate one of the philosophical differences between the international rules and the US rules. Internationally, if you violate a rule off-the-clock, you get a penalty that affects your score. In the US... you get to fix the problem, no harm no foul.

Note that, if I recall correctly, ladies are allowed to have a separate set of belt-loops somewhat lower on their hips... but the belt still has to go through belt loops. Most ladies either wear their belt at the waist, or sew three belt loops on their shooting pants.

5.2.3.1 Female competitors may be permitted (if so authorized in

Appendix D) to wear a belt, holster and allied equipment at hip

level, however, the top of the belt must not be positioned below

the furthest lateral point of the top of the femur (tuberosity

major).

It will depend upon what division she is shooting in.

5.2.3.1 Applies to Revolver, Limited 10, Limited and Open, but does not apply to Single Stack or Production.

[mhs]

For those wanting to understand WTG a little better:

from last year

[Resjudicata]

WTG,

I suggest looking at NRA Action pistol competition. You can shoot the whole match standing and with no movement. It is also based on accuracy within some moderately quick time limits. From what I've seen in this thread and the one referred to from last year it would appear that the NRA AP sport is perfect for you. I shoot that sport with several people of limited mobility who are VERY competitive without any special consideration for their disabilities. Sometimes we just have to make a choice about which sport we can compete in and then just get out there and practice.

Chris

[Flexmoney]

Really? A towel? Really? Without malice can someone explain to a noob how this is possible? I do not understand.

A few years back, shooters started showing up at (major) matches with specific non-gun devices that they would use as a sighting aide during their stage walk throughs. These started to evolve into gun like devices (perhaps airsoft replicas in some cases, IIRC). So, imagine you are a range officer and you are down range, working on a swinger...and you look uprange and see a shooter with a Glock (replica) in his hand...pointed at your swinger. Makes for an uptight moment for all.

Back then, the IPSC and the USPSA rule book shared even more than they do today. When the rule came out to address this, the pendulum swung pretty far.

Thankfully (In My Opinion) our good folks at USPSA decided to ride the pendulum back toward the middle on some of the rules that IPSC had/has adopted in recent years.

Are you allowed to point, or is anything in yer hand not allowed? Thank you for the expected education.

Here is how the IPSC version of the rule reads. And, the part in bold is how it is really being called.

8.7.4. Competitors are prohibited from using any sighting aid (e.g. the whole or

part of an imitation or replica firearm, any part of a real firearm including

any accessories thereof etc.),

except for their own hands,

while conducting

their inspection ("walkthrough") of a course of fire. Violations will incur

one procedural penalty per occurrence (also see Rule 10.5.1)

And, here is the (current) USPSA version:

8.7.2 Competitors are prohibited from using any guns or gun replicas as

sighting aids while conducting their inspection ("walkthrough") of a

course of fire. Violations will incur one procedural penalty per occurrence (also see Rule 10.5.1).

The folks at IPSC might make a decent argument that their version is more clear...nothing in the hands. I don't know if that is the case. If that is the true meaning, then they have a lot of extra words in the rule. I'd tend to focus on the "sighting aid" part. Blake is pretty creative, but I don't think he has figured out how to make a towel work as a sight.

Unless there is more to the story, I think Blake had a decent arbitration that could have been made. Now, winning the arbitration...not likely. Even with a bit of logic on his side...

Edit to add... I just re-read Rick's post (see #8) ...and now realize that this wasn't during the walk through...it was after the Make Ready.

[Flexmoney]

I remember when I was taking my RO class back in 2007 our USPSA/IPSC rulebook still had that same "sighting aid" rule in, our instructor had said that a video camera would also have counted as a sighting aid. I was a bit incredulous at that statement, but reading now that a towel also a sighting aid is just outrageous.

So, If I've got this right, having a miniature video camera mounted on your ear gear is a sighting device? OK, that makes a lot of sense.

There is plenty of talk like that in IPSC (I'm not sure if anybody has acted on it though and called a penalty?). The "argument" being that you could take a video of your walk-through...or your actual run...and the share that with a team mate. Then, for instance, they would know the timing on the swingers.

There is a push to flat out ban (videos) cameras at IPSC.

[aussieSVlover]

On page 36 of the March issue. I was shooting in the same squad with Blake. Long story short. Long field course with a loaded gun on table start and all magazines on table. Start position was seated facing uprange. Blake was given the make ready command. After making ready, he returned to the start position where he had left a white hand towel. He picked the white towel up and sat down and wiped his face and hands off. The RO on the right side of the stage yelled "That is a procedural." After completing the stage, Blake was informed he had broken rule 8.7.4. He appealed to the CRO, then the Range Master, who both refused to overturn the call. Discretion being the better part of valor, Blake declined to go to arbitration. Who knew that a small white towel was an aiming device.

I cannot see how this penalty could be applied as the rule regarding sighting aids applies during the walk thru. The make ready command had been given which is the start of the course of fire during which time you are permitted too take a sight picture with an unloaded firearm. Unless he had a loaded towel the penalty given is wrong.

[George Jones]

Good. Someone picked up on the pertinent point. If, as described, this "illegal" use of a towel happened after Make Ready, then that penalty should not have been applied.

If I can be handling a loaded gun after that command, a sighting aid penalty seems rather unnecessary, and in this case, incorrect.

[DSAF61]

Good. Someone picked up on the pertinent point. If, as described, this "illegal" use of a towel happened after Make Ready, then that penalty should not have been applied.

If I can be handling a loaded gun after that command, a sighting aid penalty seems rather unnecessary, and in this case, incorrect.

EXACTLY!

[BritinUSA]

The make ready command had been given which is the start of the course of fire during which time you are permitted too take a sight picture with an unloaded firearm. Unless he had a loaded towel the penalty given is wrong.

I believe that you are only permitted to take a sight picture on a single target, not multiple targets but it does specify with an unloaded firearm...

8.7.2 If match organizers also prohibit taking a sight picture with an unloaded firearm prior to the start signal, competitors must be advised in the written stage briefing. Violation will result in a warning for the first occurrence and one procedural penalty for each subsequent occurrence in the same match.

8.7.3 When permitted, competitors taking a sight picture with an unloaded firearm prior to the start signal must only do so on a single target, to verify that their sights are prepared as required. Competitors who test a targeting sequence or a shooting position while taking a sight picture will incur one procedural penalty per occurrence.

8.7.4 Competitors are prohibited from using any sighting aid (e.g. the whole or part of an imitation or replica firearm, any part of a real firearm including any accessories thereof etc.), except for their own hands, while conducting their inspection ("walkthrough") of a course of fire. Violations will incur one procedural penalty per occurrence (also see Rule 10.5.1).

They make no mention of a towel..., perhaps the "Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy" has some more pertinent information on this subject.

Edited March 13, 2011 by BritinUSA