Sarge Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 So we were sitting around talking about rules in general at the match tonight. I mentioned that every match I shoot questions always come up that would be great discussion in the rules forum. Right after the conversation I was ROing an Open shooter who double plugs(molded plugs and muffs) On one stage I noticed he did not have his muffs on over his plugs so I let him know prior to commencing the COF. The next stage I do NOT notice it and he shoots with only his plugs while the muffs were up on top of his head. When he finishes the COF he said," man that was loud and I thought about stopping", or words to that effect. Here is the question. If he would have stopped would you give him a reshoot? He did afterall, have hearing protection in place. The rules I'm reading only state "hearing protection". The answers we came up with ranged from Yes I would reshoot him, No I would not reshoot him and everything in between. Keep in mind the solution needs a rule to go by. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Santiago Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Interesting situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twodownzero Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 No reshoot for stopping himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Santiago Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Here is my thought with rules attached. It seems to me to boil down to what is "adequate hearing protection". It may differ among shooters. 5.4.1 All persons near an area potentially exposed to ricochet debris or bullet fragments are required to wear eye protection. All persons near an area where the sound of firearms being fired may potentially cause hearing damage are required to wear adequate hearing protection 5.4.4 A competitor who inadvertently loses eye or ear protection during a course of fire, or commences a course of fire without them, is entitled to stop, point their handgun in a safe direction and indicate the problem to the Range Official, in which case the provisions of the previous rule will apply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aztecdriver Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Here is my thought with rules attached. It seems to me to boil down to what is "adequate hearing protection". It may differ among shooters. 5.4.1 All persons near an area potentially exposed to ricochet debris or bullet fragments are required to wear eye protection. All persons near an area where the sound of firearms being fired may potentially cause hearing damage are required to wear adequate hearing protection 5.4.4 A competitor who inadvertently loses eye or ear protection during a course of fire, or commences a course of fire without them, is entitled to stop, point their handgun in a safe direction and indicate the problem to the Range Official, in which case the provisions of the previous rule will apply. Right on. Stopped an open shooter at nationals because he muffs fell off and he was double plugged. In fact he didn't hear the first stop call because he was still shooting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfchorn Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 5.4.1 All persons near an area potentially exposed to ricochet debris or bullet fragments are required to wear eye protection. All persons near an area where the sound of firearms being fired may potentially cause hearing damage are required to wear adequate hearing protection. 5.4.2 If a Range Officer deems that a competitor about to make an attempt at a course of fire is wearing inadequate eye or ear protection, the Range Officer may order the competitor to rectify the situation before allowing the competitor to continue. The Range Master is the final authority on this matter. 5.4.3 If a Range Official notices that a competitor has lost or displaced their eye or ear protection during a course of fire, or has commenced a course of fire without them, the Range Official must immediately stop the competitor who will be required to reshoot the course of fire after the protective devices have been restored. 5.4.4 A competitor who inadvertently loses eye or ear protection during a course of fire, or commences a course of fire without them, is entitled to stop, point their handgun in a safe direction and indicate the problem to the Range Official, in which case the provisions of the previous rule will apply. I'm sure I there will be opposing views, but when I take all the rules above in context (words above bolded by me), the clear intent is to prevent hearing damage by the use of adequate hearing protection. I recognize the word adequate is not present in either 5.4.3. or 5.4.4, but I would still allow the reshoot. We stress safety in every aspect of our sport, and I see this as a safety issue. Hearing loss is cumulative and irreversible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted October 18, 2011 Author Share Posted October 18, 2011 5.4.1 All persons near an area potentially exposed to ricochet debris or bullet fragments are required to wear eye protection. All persons near an area where the sound of firearms being fired may potentially cause hearing damage are required to wear adequate hearing protection. 5.4.2 If a Range Officer deems that a competitor about to make an attempt at a course of fire is wearing inadequate eye or ear protection, the Range Officer may order the competitor to rectify the situation before allowing the competitor to continue. The Range Master is the final authority on this matter. 5.4.3 If a Range Official notices that a competitor has lost or displaced their eye or ear protection during a course of fire, or has commenced a course of fire without them, the Range Official must immediately stop the competitor who will be required to reshoot the course of fire after the protective devices have been restored. 5.4.4 A competitor who inadvertently loses eye or ear protection during a course of fire, or commences a course of fire without them, is entitled to stop, point their handgun in a safe direction and indicate the problem to the Range Official, in which case the provisions of the previous rule will apply. I'm sure I there will be opposing views, but when I take all the rules above in context (words above bolded by me), the clear intent is to prevent hearing damage by the use of adequate hearing protection. I recognize the word adequate is not present in either 5.4.3. or 5.4.4, but I would still allow the reshoot. We stress safety in every aspect of our sport, and I see this as a safety issue. Hearing loss is cumulative and irreversible. While your views certainly make sense I don't know what is "adequate" to every shooter in every instance. That would be purely subjective and not equally applied. How do we know earplugs alone are not adequate by definition? I see people use only foam plugs sometimes even shooting louder guns. Do good quality plugs adequately reduce noise level? Are we talking by medical standards? Or do plugs just not make it as quiet as a shooter might like so he wears muffs as well. In this case is he not wearing adequate protection? I don't think we can let the shooter determine adequate because then it is subject to scrutiny by the officials. A shooter having a bad run could just say, "Dude I forgot my muffs I need to stop" then on a smoking run get pissed because an RO stops him and orders a reshoot. I don't double up, I just wear really good muffs but I could see myself stopping if I forgot part two of my hearing protection. Question is would I be smart to do so from a rules standpoint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 No reshoot for stopping himself. I disagree. It's up to the shooter to decide on the level of hearing protection. If an open shooter chooses to avail himself of both plugs and muffs, he's as entitled to stop himself as a shooter who only wears one or the other, if the hearing protection is inadvertently lost.... Hearing matters. I won't differentiate based on layer of protection..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 5.4.1 All persons near an area potentially exposed to ricochet debris or bullet fragments are required to wear eye protection. All persons near an area where the sound of firearms being fired may potentially cause hearing damage are required to wear adequate hearing protection. 5.4.2 If a Range Officer deems that a competitor about to make an attempt at a course of fire is wearing inadequate eye or ear protection, the Range Officer may order the competitor to rectify the situation before allowing the competitor to continue. The Range Master is the final authority on this matter. 5.4.3 If a Range Official notices that a competitor has lost or displaced their eye or ear protection during a course of fire, or has commenced a course of fire without them, the Range Official must immediately stop the competitor who will be required to reshoot the course of fire after the protective devices have been restored. 5.4.4 A competitor who inadvertently loses eye or ear protection during a course of fire, or commences a course of fire without them, is entitled to stop, point their handgun in a safe direction and indicate the problem to the Range Official, in which case the provisions of the previous rule will apply. I'm sure I there will be opposing views, but when I take all the rules above in context (words above bolded by me), the clear intent is to prevent hearing damage by the use of adequate hearing protection. I recognize the word adequate is not present in either 5.4.3. or 5.4.4, but I would still allow the reshoot. We stress safety in every aspect of our sport, and I see this as a safety issue. Hearing loss is cumulative and irreversible. While your views certainly make sense I don't know what is "adequate" to every shooter in every instance. That would be purely subjective and not equally applied. How do we know earplugs alone are not adequate by definition? I see people use only foam plugs sometimes even shooting louder guns. Do good quality plugs adequately reduce noise level? Are we talking by medical standards? Or do plugs just not make it as quiet as a shooter might like so he wears muffs as well. In this case is he not wearing adequate protection? I don't think we can let the shooter determine adequate because then it is subject to scrutiny by the officials. A shooter having a bad run could just say, "Dude I forgot my muffs I need to stop" then on a smoking run get pissed because an RO stops him and orders a reshoot. I don't double up, I just wear really good muffs but I could see myself stopping if I forgot part two of my hearing protection. Question is would I be smart to do so from a rules standpoint. I think it's up to the shooter to determine how much protection is enough..... If someone's really gaming it that way -- bad run, I want a reshoot because I forgot my muffs -- we'll catch on to that pretty quickly. 10.6.1...... Shooter gets a few rounds in, and stops himself, because it's just too loud -- reshoot.... Shooter finishes the stage -- he owns the score... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aztecdriver Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 5.4.1 All persons near an area potentially exposed to ricochet debris or bullet fragments are required to wear eye protection. All persons near an area where the sound of firearms being fired may potentially cause hearing damage are required to wear adequate hearing protection. 5.4.2 If a Range Officer deems that a competitor about to make an attempt at a course of fire is wearing inadequate eye or ear protection, the Range Officer may order the competitor to rectify the situation before allowing the competitor to continue. The Range Master is the final authority on this matter. 5.4.3 If a Range Official notices that a competitor has lost or displaced their eye or ear protection during a course of fire, or has commenced a course of fire without them, the Range Official must immediately stop the competitor who will be required to reshoot the course of fire after the protective devices have been restored. 5.4.4 A competitor who inadvertently loses eye or ear protection during a course of fire, or commences a course of fire without them, is entitled to stop, point their handgun in a safe direction and indicate the problem to the Range Official, in which case the provisions of the previous rule will apply. I'm sure I there will be opposing views, but when I take all the rules above in context (words above bolded by me), the clear intent is to prevent hearing damage by the use of adequate hearing protection. I recognize the word adequate is not present in either 5.4.3. or 5.4.4, but I would still allow the reshoot. We stress safety in every aspect of our sport, and I see this as a safety issue. Hearing loss is cumulative and irreversible. While your views certainly make sense I don't know what is "adequate" to every shooter in every instance. That would be purely subjective and not equally applied. How do we know earplugs alone are not adequate by definition? I see people use only foam plugs sometimes even shooting louder guns. Do good quality plugs adequately reduce noise level? Are we talking by medical standards? Or do plugs just not make it as quiet as a shooter might like so he wears muffs as well. In this case is he not wearing adequate protection? I don't think we can let the shooter determine adequate because then it is subject to scrutiny by the officials. A shooter having a bad run could just say, "Dude I forgot my muffs I need to stop" then on a smoking run get pissed because an RO stops him and orders a reshoot. I don't double up, I just wear really good muffs but I could see myself stopping if I forgot part two of my hearing protection. Question is would I be smart to do so from a rules standpoint. Unfortunately, the only way one can tell what is adequate is the shooter themselves. There is no way to tell whether reports are hurting them or not - and we have to take their word for it. If they start different stages with different hearing protection and play that game - a nice stern warning against 10.6.1 would be a way to fix it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ima45dv8 Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Here is the question. If he would have stopped would you give him a reshoot? No. I've seen too many competitors shoot a stage with only plugs to consider them inadequate, Hell, I've done it myself. I meant to double up. I meant to put cups over the plugs as added insurance....but, but, but, but, I screwed up, Who's fault is that? There's a point where the competitor is responsible for their own actions, and lack of action. I think we're there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperman Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Right after the conversation I was ROing an Open shooter who double plugs(molded plugs and muffs) On one stage I noticed he did not have his muffs on over his plugs so I let him know prior to commencing the COF. The next stage I do NOT notice it and he shoots with only his plugs while the muffs were up on top of his head. When he finishes the COF he said," man that was loud and I thought about stopping", or words to that effect. If the muffs were on top of his head, it would be clear to me that he intended to use them as protection and i would offer him a reshoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Right after the conversation I was ROing an Open shooter who double plugs(molded plugs and muffs) On one stage I noticed he did not have his muffs on over his plugs so I let him know prior to commencing the COF. The next stage I do NOT notice it and he shoots with only his plugs while the muffs were up on top of his head. When he finishes the COF he said," man that was loud and I thought about stopping", or words to that effect. If the muffs were on top of his head, it would be clear to me that he intended to use them as protection and i would offer him a reshoot. If the guy had plugs in but the muffs on his head, I'd mention it to him before he started the stage. If a guy was double-plugged and lost the muffs during the course, I'd stop them and give a reshoot. If somehow I missed it, and the guy shot the entire stage with muffs on his head but not over his ears and afterward wanted a reshoot, I'd say no---but if they took a couple of shots and then stopped, shaking their head, I'd give a reshoot. We don't give reshoots because the noise makes it difficult to concentrate. We give reshoots because people don't have sufficient hearing protection for their ears. If they shot the entire stage wearing plugs-but-not-muffs, then they apparently thought they had adequate hearing protection---if it was loud and they couldn't concentrate it is not our problem. Basically, what they have with them when they make ready determines what I'll do. If they've been double-plugging all day, but when they come up for one stage are just wearing plugs---I'll run them that way, and no re-shoot. I can't tell if they don't think they need to double-plug anymore, and they are wearing hearing protection which is sufficient for most shooters. If, on make ready, they suddenly go "Dang, I need my muffs!" I'll let them go grab them, though, even if they already have plugs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Here is the question. If he would have stopped would you give him a reshoot? No. I've seen too many competitors shoot a stage with only plugs to consider them inadequate, Hell, I've done it myself. I meant to double up. I meant to put cups over the plugs as added insurance....but, but, but, but, I screwed up, Who's fault is that? There's a point where the competitor is responsible for their own actions, and lack of action. I think we're there. Mark, if a competitor appealed your decision to me under 5.4.4., he'd get the reshoot. He's entitled to reach a different decision on what he considers adequate hearing protection, than you do. She might have hearing loss already -- and doubling up is essential. The rules are clear -- we don't care who screwed up; we don't want shooters trying to prioritize between their hearing (or vision) and their score..... I rarely see this come up. If they're trying to game the system, we'll catch them.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poppa Bear Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 If the shooter takes the first couple of targets and stops because they forgot to double plug then tape them and give him a reshoot. If they shoot the COF and then say I forgot to double plug, that is to late you own the score and time. It is up to the shooter to determine adequate protection if they are double plugged. If it is just plugs or muffs then it is a no brainer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
want2race Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 I think it's obvious if someone is trying to game the rules. Shoots entire stage, stops short of finish and wants reshoot for inadequate hearing protection. Vs. Shoots 2 or 3 targets then stops for the same reason. I shoot matches at an indoor range. I use molded plugs only for the larger bays, but double up on the smaller steel bay. It's a smaller room and the noise is twice as loud so I double up with muffs. It's uncomfortable at best with single plugs (mine have baffles in them). If I shot one target without them I would stop and either take the score as is or request reshoot. No match is worth my hearing. I've also stopped after load and make ready, before the buzzer, and indicated that I was not doubled up. This was on a rifle stage and my rifle is freakin LOUD. The RO had no problem waiting for me to double up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lcs Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 In the situation last night--Paul would not get a reshoot because he finished the COF and then made the comment about being loud (His muffs were clearly on the side of his head not over his ears, but he was plugged). Note: I have seen many open shooters shoot with just ear plugs. Many open shooters use plugs and muffs. If Paul had taken two or three shots and stopped--I would have given him a reshoot. I have seen the same thing happen at Area matches and reshoots were given. If the shooter finished the COF, then no reshoot. You know pretty damn quick your missing your hearing protection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aztecdriver Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Pretty much the stop themselves reshoot needs to go something like this: "beep" *BANG* Damn! Ow, that was loud (as they shrug up their shoulders and reach for their strong hand ear with their weak hand)... I gotta stop... ULASC.... You don't shoot 20 rounds and then --- oops my ears are ringing a little, I might could have double plugged, can I have a reshoot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Santiago Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 In the situation last night--Paul would not get a reshoot because he finished the COF and then made the comment about being loud (His muffs were clearly on the side of his head not over his ears, but he was plugged). Note: I have seen many open shooters shoot with just ear plugs. Many open shooters use plugs and muffs. If Paul had taken two or three shots and stopped--I would have given him a reshoot. I have seen the same thing happen at Area matches and reshoots were given. If the shooter finished the COF, then no reshoot. You know pretty damn quick your missing your hearing protection. Just for clarity, I realized after the first 2 shots I had not doubled up. I thought about stopping then, but since I was unsure of the rule I finished the string and then made the comment that Kevin noted. I did NOT ask for a reshoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted October 18, 2011 Author Share Posted October 18, 2011 In the situation last night--Paul would not get a reshoot because he finished the COF and then made the comment about being loud (His muffs were clearly on the side of his head not over his ears, but he was plugged). Note: I have seen many open shooters shoot with just ear plugs. Many open shooters use plugs and muffs. If Paul had taken two or three shots and stopped--I would have given him a reshoot. I have seen the same thing happen at Area matches and reshoots were given. If the shooter finished the COF, then no reshoot. You know pretty damn quick your missing your hearing protection. Just for clarity, I realized after the first 2 shots I had not doubled up. I thought about stopping then, but since I was unsure of the rule I finished the string and then made the comment that Kevin noted. I did NOT ask for a reshoot. Same here. Hence the question. The problem I am seeing with the various comments is that judgement calls are never going to be fair across the board. That's why I wanted in depth discussion and any supporting rules that may apply. I really did not want to get into the "gaming" aspect of it too much. Even though I think it could be used as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skydiver Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Gaming... yeah specially for a Bill Drill. Shoot of 5 very quickly, and then instead of unloading and show clear, point to your ear with your weak hand and say you had inadequate hearing protection. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twodownzero Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 No reshoot for stopping himself. I disagree. It's up to the shooter to decide on the level of hearing protection. If an open shooter chooses to avail himself of both plugs and muffs, he's as entitled to stop himself as a shooter who only wears one or the other, if the hearing protection is inadvertently lost.... Hearing matters. I won't differentiate based on layer of protection..... Sure, he can stop himself. The stage will be scored "as shot." The fact is that I will be wearing only plugs or muffs, not both, while I'm running him. One or the other is perfectly adequate. Reshoots are for range equipment failures or for situations beyond the shooter's control, not negligence. If a shooter's shoe comes untied, does he get a reshoot? What about if he drops a magazine that he needs to finish the course of fire? Where do we stop? I of course mean these questions rhetorically, of course. The rules cannot depend on such things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juan Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 I had some questions on this but different. does a def person need ear pro? and whose to say what a person needs. Ive seen some people get quite disturbed if someone in the peanut gallery wont put his on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Merricks Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Man you guys are hard. As being one of those people that shot a course without HP, with an open gun and in a shoot house I would always allow a reshoot when it is obvious that the shooter did not have what he felt was adequate HP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Santiago Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 No reshoot for stopping himself. I disagree. It's up to the shooter to decide on the level of hearing protection. If an open shooter chooses to avail himself of both plugs and muffs, he's as entitled to stop himself as a shooter who only wears one or the other, if the hearing protection is inadvertently lost.... Hearing matters. I won't differentiate based on layer of protection..... The fact is that I will be wearing only plugs or muffs, not both, while I'm running him. One or the other is perfectly adequate. In your opinion... one or the other is adequate. For me it's double. Who is right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now