USPSA 3 Gun Nationals

[kimel]

The need for 'speed unloading' will mostly dictate "effective round management". Clearing a rifle is quick and easy (okay...I am assuming box magazine fed rifles...haven't seen much mention of tubular mag rifles in 3-gun).

Unloading shotguns quickly is a whole other story (unless using a Saiga or its ilk) so people will quickly learn to manage rounds loaded more effectively. It just might be that dropping one more in after running dry to pick up that last target will be faster than continually topping off and then having to unload a bunch of rounds. All of a sudden those speed loaders in Open class could become a time liability! And, there is always the berm for "powered speed unloading".

And if this becomes too much of a problem look for some enterprising soul to come up with the speed unloader. Maybe a quicky pop-top on a mag tube extension. Whip out the spring, dump the shells, rack the bolt and move on. Okay...ick. Maybe a quick disconnect magazine tube assembly. Hello Open class?

This sport is a game. In a game we figure out how to overcome obstacles. The need to clear a firearm quickly and safely is just another obstacle to be overcome.

There was a thread not that long ago talking about how evolution in pistols had just about ceased. It could very well be that next major field of development will be in rifle and shotgun.

Will the rules be able to keep up or useful designs be able to stay within the rules? I hope so.

[kurtm]

Kimel:

The speed unloading into the berm is THE problem! I have seen the good old drop the mag and roach one off in the "general direction of the berm technique, and have seen WAY to many leave the range. Yea D.Q., but where did it go??? What is "unloaded"? I have seen D.Q.s for an empty chamber, slide locked back, but in rapidly setting the gun down the EMPTY mag didn't fall quite all the way out, you know held in by the last 1/2 inch of the grip, is that a D.Q.?? Round management? how many times have you had to shoot a makeup shot? Now we have a speed load to an empty chamber, drop the bolt, make up the shot, and then once again all the contortions to do a speed "Unload". I have seen this "system" ( manditory unloading on the clock) for the last 4 years at SMM3-G and it is just plain DANGEROUS! Have you had much experience with this? If you have I would like to hear your views on why it is safe ( I do mean this in an information only way and AM NOT slinging mud!)

As for me replacing the S.D. I would have to move to another state, and whikle that wouldn't be bad, I don't think the pay would be worth the move KURTM

[ccur]

AMEN!! I especially hate the speed unload stuff..I have gone downrange of guns that were not REALLY empty and then the competitor gets DQ'ed but we were ALL DOWNRANGE of a hot gun!! Whose fault is it? I think the match has to share responsibility for it as it could be avoided by creative use of barrels, shelves, etc facing INTO a berm for a weapon left on SAFETY!!! THen no one is in danger...

Cheryl

[uscbigdawg]

I'm VERY guilty of doing the mag drop & fire technique every once in a while and will admit that it is not very safe, especially when the idiot button is pushed 'cause I'm on the clock.

I had a similar discussion about carrying of long guns yesterday. Basically, we both agreed that muzzle down is WAAAAAY safer than muzzle up. For this discussion, it is because if there is a round in the gun and it goes off, if the muzzle is up, you have no clue where that bullet went. Muzzle down, you see dirt, DQ, and crisis addressed (I'm purposely omitting human contact with lead discussions).

As Cheryl pointed out, the speed unload can be more safely delt with by simply intelligently pointing tables, barrels (are great), etc. in non-parallel directions to the path of the course rendering the firearm 'safer'. IF the safety is on great, but I'm actually not even a stickler on this as many shotgun safeties are quite easily disengaged, and would hate to DQ someone for a mechanical issue when the gun is in a 'safer' position.

That's my two Lincolns.

Rich

[kellyn]

Horse is dead, drawn and quartered.

[kellyn]

By popular demand, horse has a few spasms left.

[jkmccoy]

Hopefully the rules regarding "abandoned" firearms are part of the Provisional rules that can be changed to result in a successful set of USPSA 3-Gun rules. Remember that these rules have been presented as "Provisional" and that they are to be used as a means of hosting matches within the USPSA rules but that they are subject to change. It is great to see the exchanges here regarding these rules. There is obviously a wealth of 3-gun knowledge among the members of this board. I encourage all of you to view these provisional rules as a "working draft" and to submit suggested changes to your Area Director. We can collectively beat this horse into the ground, but we will also need to work through the USPSA channels to get the set of rules we really need.

Personally, I agree that there are safer ways to deal with "abandoned" firearms. I would much rather see firearms grounded in a "safe" condition in a position so that the muzzle points in a safe direction. At the Texas State 3-Gun we have been pretty successful using tables where a gun could be left pointed into the ground. This year for long guns we used the 12" cardboard tubes firmly affixed to props with padding in the bottom where long guns could be grounded. That way, even if the gun is still loaded it is pointed into the ground and is relatively safe.

Cheers,

Kelly McCoy

[mactiger]

That solution works for me. Barrels, tubes, whatever, point the gun in a safe direction (so that it can't be turned), and put the safety on. No different from loading a gun and putting it on a shelf, in a briefcase, etc., in fact, probably better.

Troy

[Neil Beverley]

I agree with the the others who prefer simply to apply the safety and then deposit the gun in a safe direction and preferably in a pit or bunker of some kind. The downwards sloping tubes or tables (or shelves/boxes?) is an excellent idea providing they're not too "fussy" (too small) about receiving the gun.

I also agree that the "speed unload" has great potential for a problem and it's simply not "practical" to have to run the gun (probably the shotgun) at less than normal capacity.

Providing the competitor has properly complied with the depositing requirements then he should cease to be responsible for the gun (for penalties and DQ etc.) until he returns to clear it when he immediately (from the first touch) becomes responsible again. Nobody else should be touching the gun at all and if they do any penalty should be directed to them at that time not the competitor.

My comments above are completely my own personal thoughts on the matter and in no way can be considered as an IPSC view point.

And just in case someone asks, "have I ever done it?" Yes, but a long time ago.

[bgary]

The thinking about requiring an abandoned firearm to be unloaded revolved around two things:

1) it is the more conservative approach, and for the provisional review period, we would like to have the ability to "loosen up" the rules based on what we learn, rather than have to try to "tighten up" the rules based on what we learn. If, at some point, USPSA decides it will be OK to leave a loaded gun behind, that will be a Good Thing, rather than having to post a change which makes things more rigorous and makes people mad.

2) We gave a lot of thought to saying that you could leave an unloaded gun behind if it was left in a cradle, a barrel, or some other physical device that it would stay in and not move. Where we landed, though, for the provisional period, is that it was probably premature to require clubs to spend the time and money to build those things. We want to get some feedback about the rules first. And then, if/when it becomes clear that that is a viable approach, then we'll probably give clubs the option: if you want to leave loaded guns behind on a stage, you *have* to provide props that meet [whatever specification ends up making sense]

Keep in mind that when we are writing rules, we have to try to write rules that work equally well for the 10-shooter club match in the woods, and the 200+ shooter national championships. So... at least in this case, we took the "safe" path, and will be consciously trying to learn over the next year to see if there is a better path that works well for the whole spectrum of USPSA match types.

So, I guess what I'd say is we will probably get there. We just aren't there yet, in this first provisional attempt.

Bruce

[Neil Beverley]

Bruce

The comments in my previous post most certainly are not a criticism of the excellent work done on these rules. Please accept my comments as merely a contribution to the debate.

I can't argue against starting out "better safe than sorry" and you clearly debated the subject. At the end of it all I'm sure you will achieve a decent set of workable and popular rules.

I like the concept of the conditional depositing of a "still loaded" gun, i.e. can be left loaded but only if X, Y and Z have been put in place. This would deal with the smaller clubs and smaller matches but provide for those matches than want to and can make it work.

[bgary]

Neil

Thanks for the comments, and no, I definitely don't take the comments here as criticism. Unlike the IPSC list (!), the contributions here actually add value to the process, and I am grateful for the comments people submit.

In point of fact, although I "wrote" the USPSA multi-gun rules, most of the process I performed was just culling comments from these forums, and packaging them up into a framework for submission to the rest of the USPSA board. All I did was steal other people's excellent thoughts. So... the comments here really became the initial set of rules, and I would expect that they will be used to refine them going forward.

As a side comment, I am hopeful that that is the beginning of a trend: that constructive comments and new ideas get a "fast track" into the rules discussions and result in new and interesting directions for our sport.

Bruce

[kimel]

As a side comment, I am hopeful that that is the beginning of a trend: that constructive comments and new ideas get a "fast track" into the rules discussions and result in new and interesting directions for our sport.

Oh yeah! That's what I like to hear! Thanks Bruce and everyone else involved for forging ahead down this path.