Reload without allowing muzzle over the berm

[remoandiris]

So no I don't have a USPSA # or do I. You will never know as I value my privacy and it's simply none of your business anyway.

Funny...I don't remember ever asking you for one.

[two shoes]

Get involved.

And, pray tell, how are you involved? There are numerous forum members who have been USPSA members for decades. Forum members who have built stages month after month for years. Forum members who have been Level I MDs for significantly longer than you have been shooting USPSA.

So, how are YOU involved?

Simple. I supported a zoning change that will bring an indoor range to my area and spent time with my local rep to ensure their support since it was in their district. It's opening this summer. I have a standing invitation with every one of my local elected officials and members of the media for a day at the range at my expense. I keep tabs on where development is going in an effort to prevent encroachment upon our local ranges. I talk with the guys on the local SWAT teams and members of our local police and sheriffs departments to encourage their participation. It's slow going but some are showing up and the future looks promising in this endeavor. I'm trying to get those in local government involved by fielding and sponsoring shooters. I spend time with new shooters and try to get them started by encouraging them to come out and shoot our 101 course which is the perfect way to introduce them to completive shooting without worrying about match day stresses or what divisions one shoots. I donate equipment.

So while I may not be involved in the manner you approve of I am involved and I do get results.

So no I don't have a USPSA # or do I. You will never know as I value my privacy and it's simply none of your business anyway.

WOW!!! That should silence the detractors...

I'd say she is more involved than most of us, at least more than I am currently. West Texas Granny is now my role model!

[aztecdriver]

So no I don't have a USPSA # or do I. You will never know as I value my privacy and it's simply none of your business anyway.

You've already given enough info to find out name and USPSA# - but that is all irrelevant. Regardless of what you do personally for your ranges, and if all you say is true, very big thank you and I'm impressed with the effort, this discussion isn't about one persons involvement. Let's bring it back to the discussion at hand?

Edited January 2, 2012 by aztecdriver

[JKSNIPER]

Sorry guys but I got to agree with Jthompson and (gulp) WTG on this one.

A LOT of stamping of feet and threatening to hold the breath until blue will NOT help things.

You want some cheese with that whine? lol

I understand the stance that USPSA has rules that a match must follow for that range to "advertise" their upcoming match as a USPSA one.....and I agree with not having to learn a bunch of range specific rules so when you travel to compete you don't have to unlearn and relearn on the spot a bunch of new rules for each and every match.

BUT...the reality is we live in a society that seems to solve most of its problems with litigation.

The club that owns the range has to deal with that reality along with the development that has occurred since the range has been put in place.

Here we also have to deal with an anti-shooting sports mentality among the general population in addition to everything else.

Having a round leave the range and strike someone's car or house could possibly shut down that range permanently.

We had a recent newspaper article here calling for the local range to shut down because it is located on the back side of an air nat guard base despite a stellar safety record.....if there is ONE incident there IMHO the range will be shut down the same day possibly to never reopen which would truly be a tragedy as we don't have a lot of places to shoot at around here.

and for all the talk of LEOs being the culprits etc...? The club here installed cameras and security system stuff to tell who was committing the offenses and I'm happy to say that it was NOT LEOs doing it.

And I'm not putting out there that LEOs are paragons of safety and gun handling skills...I spent enough time as a firearms instructor for my agency to know just how many guys are gun guys......not a whole lot.

Guys have to understand that their USPSA label does not really bring in a tremendous amount of revenue to clubs (here at least) so saying "I'm going to take my ball and go someplace else unless you play by MY rules" is not really much of a threat.

You have to realize that the people surrounding the range and community in general are afraid of the possibility of a round leaving the range and striking little Johnny as he's on his way to school. ...so they already want the range shut down to keep little Johnny safe and thats WITHOUT any rounds leaving the range.

SO the local club...trying to stay ahead of the lawyers and community activists makes a rule about pointing the muzzle over the berm to lessen the possibility of such an event occurring and showing the community that they are taking steps to keep everything safe.

In the event such a thing does happen the club can point to their rule and use it to show how they took steps to keep their range safe and MAYBE avoid having their range shut down permanently.

The clubs are increasingly made up of the "fudds" as one put it here....some are good guys and some are PITAs but take an attitude with them and that is the WRONG way to go.

I'll go shoot somewhere else is fine to say in the west or midwest where theres a lot of places to shoot but here in NY theres not a whole lot of options especially here on Long Island.

If their range is shut down due to an incident the USPSA people will say "Sorry.' and move to a different venue.

In the meantime you have people who maybe have been shooting at that range for many years now faced with either having to travel a great distance to now shoot or having to give up a hobby they love because of carelessness.

When such a thing occurs the entire shooting community suffers because its one less place to shoot, hold matches, introduce people to the shooting sports and the sport dies a little each time a range is shut down.

I understand why a range makes such a rule and why they want it enforced regardless of who is shooting there or under what banner they fly.

Suppose...the BOD recognizing the trend of clubs to require such a rule decided to make it a USPSA rule?

Will you now stop shooting and sell all your stuff or will you adapt to reloading in the low ready position or some other way to accommodate the rule change?

IMHO this is a lot of wind about nothing.

WHen you go to someone else's range you have to abide by their rules.... or you can stay the fudge home.

JK

[remoandiris]

Suppose...the BOD recognizing the trend of clubs to require such a rule decided to make it a USPSA rule?

Will you now stop shooting and sell all your stuff or will you adapt to reloading in the low ready position or some other way to accommodate the rule change?

IMHO this is a lot of wind about nothing.

WHen you go to someone else's range you have to abide by their rules.... or you can stay the fudge home.

If the USPSA BOD makes it a rule, I am happy to oblige...JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER USPSA SHOOTER! But until that happens, anyone with a little skill knows the current reload method of keeping the mag well in line with the eyes and target is faster than any other method. If one range forces shooters to reload differently, those USPSA shooters are at a disadvantage when they compete against others without the reload method restriction.

So keep thinking this is all about nothing. When you get smoked by a lower classified shooter at THEIR range, and it comes down to reloads, next time you may decide to stay the fudge home.

[Sarge]

Some of you act like you should be able to do whatever you want and I'm just an ass for suggested you may not. We should be able to do whatever we want within USPSA rules. The club who lets USPSA in the door should know what they are getting and they should know they can not impose local rules.

Some of you are coming off like petulant children that are pissed because they can't have it their way. See above.

Edited January 2, 2012 by Sarge

[Sarge]

What gets me is we are all here on a predominantly USPSA geared forum and all of a sudden we are getting club members or board members whatever, who want to argue that they should be able to impose their will upon us as shooters. Almost like they are trolling for suckers like me who will defend the organization. I'm certain it is made clear to clubs what they are and what they are not allowed to do in regards to hosting sanctioned matches.

I am just glad that every club I shoot at or belong to is shooter friendly.

[remoandiris]

What gets me is we are all here on a predominantly USPSA geared forum and all of a sudden we are getting club members or board members whatever, who want to argue that they should be able to impose their will upon us as shooters.

I was thinking along the same lines.

I'm certain it is made clear to clubs what they are and what they are not allowed to do in regards to hosting sanctioned matches.

You would hope. But the other thing is club boards change over time. Some board members have higher levels of tolerance than others. Too bad they don't think about those things before they decide to run for club office.

[Sarge]

Glad it's not just my imagination.

[aztecdriver]

Suppose...the BOD recognizing the trend of clubs to require such a rule decided to make it a USPSA rule?

Will you now stop shooting and sell all your stuff or will you adapt to reloading in the low ready position or some other way to accommodate the rule change?

IMHO this is a lot of wind about nothing.

I will stop shooting USPSA, and probably, yes sell all my stuff. It's an impossible standard to judge as an official, and I won't be risking major match entry fees for a trip home because an official "thinks" my muzzle may have strayed above the berm angle.

I will have lost complete faith in the BOD for the desire to address possibly 15% of the ranges in the nation, rather than just let them go and continue with those we do have.

Asking for a nationwide rule will dramatically affect USPSA, to the point where the 85% of the constituents who didn't want that rule will reform through outlaw matches.

If you think it's a lot of wind about nothing - then why did you bother responding. Look - I said that ranges can do what they want... just don't expect to host a USPSA match when you can not legitimately accommodate it. It really is that simple.

[remoandiris]

I won't be risking major match entry fees for a trip home because an official "thinks" my muzzle may have strayed above the berm angle.

You and I disagree on this point. Just like every other DQable offense, an RO has to KNOW they saw the offense, not THINK they did.

[titandriver]

Good points aztec! How about the pix on the cover on the latest issue of Front Sight, anybody get apoplectic over that one? Might be a tall berm that muzzle is pointing at but I'm guessin' he'd be DQ'd at WTG's club!

[aztecdriver]

I won't be risking major match entry fees for a trip home because an official "thinks" my muzzle may have strayed above the berm angle.

You and I disagree on this point. Just like every other DQable offense, an RO has to KNOW they saw the offense, not THINK they did.

We can disagree here, but the problem I have is that the 180 can be defined in relation to the shooter - and the median. Perception comes into play, yes, but the berm rule is variable, depending upon where the shooter is in relation to it (closer in the higher the angle before breaking) and size wise - monster mountain berms in the back with 12 foot side walls...

So what your saying is that if it's as difficult to enforce, because the RO has to KNOW that it happened all of those variables must be witnessed in a fraction of a second... two things are going to happen - you are going to have the gotcha ROs with more gotcha space -- and your going to have the rule being near unenforceable because good ROs are going to be not positive because it's too fast. (except blatant violations). Then were back to the same problem... still risking a round going over the berm.

I see your point... but I don't think it's so cut and dry.

Edited January 2, 2012 by aztecdriver

[JThompson]

Some of you act like you should be able to do whatever you want and I'm just an ass for suggested you may not. We should be able to do whatever we want within USPSA rules. The club who lets USPSA in the door should know what they are getting and they should know they can not impose local rules.

Some of you are coming off like petulant children that are pissed because they can't have it their way. See above.

They are not imposing local rules. They asked if they could, I told them no you may not do that you choices are to fix the range, run it outlaw or don't have USPSA matches. Are you saying a club can not change it's mind once they have let the USPSA in? Something akin inviting a vampire into your house. The bottom line is they have decided they don't think it's right for their club under the current USPS rules. They are well within their rights as a BOD to decide what events they want to hold and which ones they don't. They are not trying to run a match using the USPSA name and enforcing their own rules.

I don't like losing a club anymore than the next man,,, I put many hours into this sport and will continue to do so, but I realize all the verbiage in the world will not change a mans opinion when he thinks he is doing right to maintain his club viability. That's not to say there aren't cases where people just have an attitude about how we do our sport, but I submit that some of the stuff here gives them more ammo rather than less.

If you think I enjoy taking this position you are mistaken, I find it distasteful, but I find a lot of things distasteful and still speak what I know to be true.

Not long ago we had a board that had USPSA all but gone. They were limiting our matches and looking for all sorts of ways to get us out of there. So rather than take it to the forum, we got a bunch of us together and ran for the BOD, replacing all of them with USPSA friendly members. While railing against the night makes us feel a little better it rarely changes things. You want to change something you have to work from within. And that Sir's and Madam is all I have to say about that.

JT

Edited January 2, 2012 by JThompson

[remoandiris]

They are not imposing local rules. They asked if they could, I told them no you may not do that you choices are to fix the range, run it outlaw or don't have USPSA matches. Are you saying a club can not change it's mind once they have let the USPSA in?

What you told the club is the same thing I and a few others have already posted, but your previous post didn't include that info.

If a club board doesn't want USPSA to hold matches by USPSA rules, that club board is free to tell USPSA to leave. I don't recall anyone in this thread say anything about boards not being able to tell USPSA to leave. However, if boards allow USPSA to stay, it has to be with USPSA rules, not USPSA rules plus local rules.

[JThompson]

They are not imposing local rules. They asked if they could, I told them no you may not do that you choices are to fix the range, run it outlaw or don't have USPSA matches. Are you saying a club can not change it's mind once they have let the USPSA in?

What you told the club is the same thing I and a few others have already posted, but your previous post didn't include that info.

If a club board doesn't want USPSA to hold matches by USPSA rules, that club board is free to tell USPSA to leave. I don't recall anyone in this thread say anything about boards not being able to tell USPSA to leave. However, if boards allow USPSA to stay, it has to be with USPSA rules, not USPSA rules plus local rules.

If you look back early in the thread I did say that before, but it's easy to get lost if 300 posts. See this one: http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=140993&view=findpost&p=1600310

We are agreed on USPSA non USPSA we discussed the rule he thought might let them regulate per the rules.... ergo safe direction, but I told him it did not apply in this case. Basically one of those fobar deals all the way around.

JT

Edited January 2, 2012 by JThompson

[Skydiver]

What gets me is we are all here on a predominantly USPSA geared forum and all of a sudden we are getting club members or board members whatever, who want to argue that they should be able to impose their will upon us as shooters. Almost like they are trolling for suckers like me who will defend the organization. I'm certain it is made clear to clubs what they are and what they are not allowed to do in regards to hosting sanctioned matches.

I am just glad that every club I shoot at or belong to is shooter friendly.

Actually, I'm guessing for new clubs that sign up, it is not clear to them what they have signed up for. Some of them do not realize that:

- using masking tape on the floor is not acceptable as a fault line;

- having CoF's that make a shooter move within the fault lines is illegal;

- they cannot impose procedurals for shooting a target before it is activated unless it is written in the WSB that target must be activated before engaged;

- a course designer's "intent" doesn't matter on match day -- only what is on the WSB does;

- giving a shooter with a confirmed squib a reshoot is against the rules;

- just using Joe Random Shooter's 9mm to challenge calibration is not okay.

ETA: Added 'move' above.

Edited January 3, 2012 by Skydiver

[Skydiver]

For those who are supporting "muzzle over the berm" rules, is it no muzzle over the berm ALL the time, or only on reloads?

Additionally, are you willing to accept a DQ without protest for having a muzzle over the berm when you go from your home range that has 20 foot high berms to another range that only has 8 foot high berms?

[remoandiris]

I won't be risking major match entry fees for a trip home because an official "thinks" my muzzle may have strayed above the berm angle.

You and I disagree on this point. Just like every other DQable offense, an RO has to KNOW they saw the offense, not THINK they did.

We can disagree here, but the problem I have is that the 180 can be defined in relation to the shooter - and the median. Perception comes into play, yes, but the berm rule is variable, depending upon where the shooter is in relation to it (closer in the higher the angle before breaking) and size wise - monster mountain berms in the back with 12 foot side walls...

So what your saying is that if it's as difficult to enforce, because the RO has to KNOW that it happened all of those variables must be witnessed in a fraction of a second... two things are going to happen - you are going to have the gotcha ROs with more gotcha space -- and your going to have the rule being near unenforceable because good ROs are going to be not positive because it's too fast. (except blatant violations). Then were back to the same problem... still risking a round going over the berm.

I see your point... but I don't think it's so cut and dry.

After cogitation, I can see a USPSA-wide rule could have issues, including one you mentioned above...berm height. USPSA would have to require a certain minimum berm height, say 12 ft. Higher is o.k., but not lower. ROs would have to be trained to look at gun angle during reloads to determine if the muzzle points over the berm from any single point in the bay. Probably not something that can easily be taught. Maybe USPSA BOD members have considered the cost vs. benefit and decided this isn't something that can be mandated.

[Skydiver]

I won't be risking major match entry fees for a trip home because an official "thinks" my muzzle may have strayed above the berm angle.

You and I disagree on this point. Just like every other DQable offense, an RO has to KNOW they saw the offense, not THINK they did.

We can disagree here, but the problem I have is that the 180 can be defined in relation to the shooter - and the median. Perception comes into play, yes, but the berm rule is variable, depending upon where the shooter is in relation to it (closer in the higher the angle before breaking) and size wise - monster mountain berms in the back with 12 foot side walls...

So what your saying is that if it's as difficult to enforce, because the RO has to KNOW that it happened all of those variables must be witnessed in a fraction of a second... two things are going to happen - you are going to have the gotcha ROs with more gotcha space -- and your going to have the rule being near unenforceable because good ROs are going to be not positive because it's too fast. (except blatant violations). Then were back to the same problem... still risking a round going over the berm.

I see your point... but I don't think it's so cut and dry.

After cogitation, I can see a USPSA-wide rule could have issues, including one you mentioned above...berm height. USPSA would have to require a certain minimum berm height, say 12 ft. Higher is o.k., but not lower. ROs would have to be trained to look at gun angle during reloads to determine if the muzzle points over the berm from any single point in the bay. Probably not something that can easily be taught. Maybe USPSA BOD members have considered the cost vs. benefit and decided this isn't something that can be mandated.

Gun angle isn't sufficient even if there were a minimum 12' berm requirement. The allowable gun angle for a 6'6" shooter reloading with the gun at face level standing 100 yds away from the back berm would be different from a 4'6" shooter doing the same reload standing 3 yds from the back berm.

Edited January 3, 2012 by Skydiver

[remoandiris]

Gun angle isn't sufficient even if there were a minimum 12' berm requirement. The allowable gun angle for a 6'6" shooter reloading with the gun at face level standing 100 yds away from the back berm would be different from a 4'6" shooter doing the same reload standing 3 yds from the back berm.

Yep, just another reason this is not something we need to have as a rule...unless a reliable, repeatable method is developed to ensure fair application.

[ima45dv8]

So maybe we could adopt a rule that says the barrel of the firearm can't be pointed above a plane parallel to the range floor. That would work for universal enforcement, wouldn't it?

Oh wait. . .what if the range floor isn't level...

You know, some of those folks who build bays like to tilt the range surface for drainage.

Maybe self-leveling, free-floating, hi-speed protractor-lensed glasses for the RO's could be mandated! That would fix the problem.

Oh wait. . .of course we'll have to wait for them to be developed, and for USPSA to agree to pick up the cost (business opportunity!).

Hopefully that will mean only a nominal increase in membership dues. Thank God I'm a Lifer -- they can't increase mine...so why should I care!

Oh wait. . .the RO would have to be 90 degrees to one side of the competitor for them to work. We'd have to make a new rule not allowing targets anywhere near the 180 so the RO wouldn't be swept.

That would work!

Oh wait. . .

[JKSNIPER]

Skydiver...I would accept it.

I would not like it...but just as you get called for any penalty you may or may not have committed in any sport you can whine about it and still get the penalty or accept it with as much sportsmanship as you can muster at the moment.

Its up to a shooter to know his and the ranges limitations. If you're suddenly at a range with low berms AND a no muzzle over the berm rule IMHO it would behoove that shooter to adjust his/her plan to adapt for the conditions present.

Just like we can't call foul if it starts raining....theres no such thing as bad weather....just poor clothing choices.

Adapt and overcome.

I predict a lot of ranges adopting this rule in the coming years. DO I like it and think its necessary?

Not really....but in todays climate of "Oh my back, my neck, my LAWYER!" I can understand the feeling people have to try and cover their 6 as much as possible.

JK

[JKSNIPER]

remoandiris....the only person anyone gets "smoked " by is....... themselves.

I don't compete against other people...I try to better my last performance without concern for how others perform and , I believe, thats how most of the people here operate.

You can't control what someone else does or does not do..you can only control yourself and your actions so why waste time worrying about what you can't control?

And if a lower classification shooter shows up and shoots like a house on fire I will be first in line to congratulate him on his stellar performance.

JK

[twodownzero]

I won't be risking major match entry fees for a trip home because an official "thinks" my muzzle may have strayed above the berm angle.

You and I disagree on this point. Just like every other DQable offense, an RO has to KNOW they saw the offense, not THINK they did.

Except it's not a DQable offense and never will be, because our membership isn't asleep at the switch enough to ever allow that to be a rule.