USPSA BOD Meeting

[lcs]

Hello everyone,

I would like to express my thought process as it related to my vote (as A4 Director).

At the time of the meeting, I was rallying behind the philosophy that Production division should be that of a true “stock” class pistol, with a minimal amount of specialized gunwork and accessories needing to be performed or purchased to be competitive. The trigger limit discussion (and eventually motion) was spawned from Production mag pouch discussions, replacement triggers, etc. As some of you may know, I shot an M&P9 Pro for nearly 3 years that was totally stock (besides grip tape and sights). I think my vote was motivated by my rationale that if I could remain competitive with a 6-7lb trigger, most could. Plus new shooters would not be intimidated by the extra amount of trigger work needed to be “competitive.” In short, I voted based on my personal experience and viewpoints.

I can honestly say that I began to question my decision only days after the meeting. I came to grips with the fact that although some sort of restriction on excessive trigger work may comfort some new shooters, many of our current Production shooters would need to spend more money to even the playing field regarding their equipment. This was what I was trying to avoid in the first place.

Do I still PERSONALLY believe that Production Division should be shot with stock internals and triggers? YES

Do I think that adjusting one’s trigger pull to pick up an NRA 3lb weight (which most will do) would negatively, substantially, or permanently affect anyone’s shooting? NO

Do I think this was a worthwhile motion? YES

Do I think we presented the motion and voted pre-maturely? PROBABLY

(Here’s the important question) Do I think that raising the trigger pull would grow the division? I’M NOT SURE.

Here’s what I am sure of:

- Production division has been around for over 10 years, and has truly changed our sport for the better.

- It will be VERY difficult to re-structure a 10 year-old division without alienating a large group of shooters.

- It will be very difficult to ensure that triggers are weighed consistently regardless of what method could be used.

- It is in our nature to “improve” our gear, whether it is our guns, holsters, cars, golf carts...hell, everything.

- Members should contact their Area Directors to voice their opinions. I would ask that you please keep things polite and professional without personal feelings being interjected.

- The BOD will meet twice more in person with several special meetings during the year before this possible rule change would take effect in 2013.

Thanks to everyone for your comments.

Thanks for posting, Great to see our future President responding.

You say above You are sure "it will be VERY difficult to re-structure a 10 year-old division without alienating a large group or shooters. Why would you want to re-structure something that appears to be so successful.

[Bergie]

I'll add another twist to this.

Let's say I'm shooting Production with my CZ and I forget to chamber a round at make ready.

The beep goes off and I have to rack the slide to chamber a round. Now my first shot is below 3#. Am I now in Open?

The same goes for unloaded starts.

[lugnut]

Also if you think you need a lighter trigger to shoot better you better get your ass to the range and get more trigger time.

Sorry, I call BS on this. I said it before, I'll say it again. A lighter, smoother trigger will help all competitors. How much it helps depends on how good the shooter is in the first place. At the top tier maybe it's not so much. But all I can say is the best shooters in this area have damn light triggers.... and I've yet to try a Limited or Open gun with anything less that 2.5 lbs!

We have some great shooters on this thread alone and I don't think the ONLY reason they are squawking is because of the money they spent on their triggers and the way the decision went down!

[Loves2Shoot]

I'll add another twist to this.

Let's say I'm shooting Production with my CZ and I forget to chamber a round at make ready.

The beep goes off and I have to rack the slide to chamber a round. Now my first shot is below 3#. Am I now in Open?

The same goes for unloaded starts.

If you don't decock it and the rule says the first shot must be 3#'s, I would think so.

I think Phil made an excellent case against letting it stand and Chuck is dead on IMO.

[old506]

I think the argument could be made that newer shooters will have a hard time making sure that they are following this rule (if implemented). I remember being a new shooter (maybe the BOD should think back?) and one of the things that worried me was if I was going to show up with the right ammo/gun and not be disqualified or laughed at? Yes, most stock pistols will have a trigger pull over 3 lbs but many new shooters won't have a clue. The more "stuff" (rules) we pile on, the harder it gets for a new shooter to wade through it and increases the chance that they just don't show up. Or worse, think they have to buy specialized equipment (trigger pull guage) prior to joining us.

The Worst thing about this whole mess (now seeing leadership back track on tdecisionion/thinking) is that there didn't seem to be a whole lot of wisdom in the room as far as thinking it through, implementation, and being patient and possibly taking a step back. Why ram something through? I can't believe that no one thought that this wasn't going to stir up the membership? What about the future, how are (more) important rules decisions going to be made going forward? Hopefully, this will be a learning example for the BOD in the future.

[JKSNIPER]

Sorry for the thread drift but if you want to discuss it Lugnut PM me.

[spanky]

I want to know what guns the Ads who voted for this use in production....

Also, why the vote against magnets in production?

[LPatterson]

Well I finally got through the thread so far and would like to add my thought/comment. It would appear that our Board of Directors has taken on a Congressional approach. We think we know what is best for you without bothering to ask first. So perhaps we should do what is often done, we should flood the approving Area Directors with phone calls and emails. It is not so much the rule, I don't think my Glock is below is below 3# but why should you care. After all a Glock is not DA/SA anyway so is the wording going to be that the first trigger pull be something arbitrary.

Mr President the fact that you used a stock gun that did not inhibit your shooting doesn't mean much unless it was while you were a new shooter. Since your screen name is GMshooter that implies that you are in fact a Grand Master in some Division. I struggled to get to C and will probably never advance beyond that but I read web sites of GM shooters who state their trigger pulls are a pound, pound and a half, two pounds but you voted to restrict my right to use a trigger pull of my choice. This is the United States of America and as such the Constitution guarantees my freedom of choice. I voted once for change and it was one of my bigger mistakes don't make this be my second.

[Nik Habicht]

I CAN say with certainty that there are people out there who stay away from USPSA competitions and their reasoning is that they think (whether its right or not its their perception) they can't do well because they have a "out of the box" pistol and can't be competitive with the USPSA crowd.

I can say with certainty that this is one of the reasons I hear cited. I can also say with certainty, because I've quizzed some of those folks, that the real reasons often have to do with time or family pressures, financial obligations, and occasionally an inability to reconcile their assessment of their shooting abilities with the reality of classification.....

Blaming the equipment is a crutch used by some folks who try the game and don't like it. I've long realized that we will never appeal to everyone, and I'm o.k. with that.....

I'm not much interested in recreational team sports, yet people I know play softball and other sports competitively....

[Nik Habicht]

I'll add another twist to this.

Let's say I'm shooting Production with my CZ and I forget to chamber a round at make ready.

The beep goes off and I have to rack the slide to chamber a round. Now my first shot is below 3#. Am I now in Open?

The same goes for unloaded starts.

That will probably depend on how the final rule is written. I'd hope it would be written with an exemption, that allows for at minimum unloaded starts and malfunction clearance without penalty, and one that ideally preserves the ability of a competitor to cock upon the draw, if they desire to take the time.....

[kevin c]

I shoot Glocks in Production. If I have to pull three instead of two pounds for each shot, so be it. I'll still want to have a smooth trigger with less travel than stock, and will work the gun myself or have somebody sell me a trigger of the "proper" weight (though I've had a Production GM comment to me that my trigger is still "kinda gritty" - is that what's keeping me from beating him, or getting my M card, or is it the lack of range time?).

Of the new folks I see in my club's intro to action shooting class, >90% have box stock guns with the triggers that come from the factory. None of them worry about trigger weight or equipment at the beginning. It's only when their hooked that they start asking about stuff that makes them "competitive" (even though actually being so is usually months and thousands of rounds down range away), and their first questions are about the gun they have, not the one they might want to buy. As I see it, the trigger weight rule makes for one less thing for them to worry about. If they want to spend money on it, then they can, to make it smoother, not necessarily lighter.

The things that give me pause are how quickly this came to pass, and how difficult it might be to implement. Both need working on. But I really do not see it as a game changer or game breaker, more a minor annoyance to me as an established Production shooter, and a non issue for new shooters.

Edited December 23, 2011 by kevin c

[MarkCO]

Totally agree Kevin. The new shooters don't read the rulebook, have no idea what division they are in, have no idea what they have gotten into until after their first match, most not even then. If the new shooters in other areas are so well read, great, but not even close here.

Furthermore, most tenured members don't know the rules, who their AD is nor even that the ADs make up the board with a vote equal to the president. Those here on Enos do not represent the majority if the USPSA membership either. Not a good or bad thing, just is.

What keeps the new shooter is kind words, encouragement and inclusion. The first match is kind if scary for many new shooters, which we either forget or it was no big deal due to prior hobbies. We have a great shooter in CO who was almost driven away due to a lack of these things, not the rulebook. I still read his email before going to work a match as a reminder.

[Supermoto]

Totally agree Kevin. The new shooters don't read the rulebook, have no idea what division they are in, have no idea what they have gotten into until after their first match, most not even then. If the new shooters in other areas are so well read, great, but not even close here.

Furthermore, most tenured members don't know the rules, who their AD is nor even that the ADs make up the board with a vote equal to the president. Those here on Enos do not represent the majority if the USPSA membership either. Not a good or bad thing, just is.

What keeps the new shooter is kind words, encouragement and inclusion. The first match is kind if scary for many new shooters, which we either forget or it was no big deal due to prior hobbies. We have a great shooter in CO who was almost driven away due to a lack of these things, not the rulebook. I still read his email before going to work a match as a reminder.

The first match can be intimidating. I know mine was especially after watching the Open guys shoot. Thankfully my AD, Rob Boudrie was there to help me and make me feel welcome. And while I don't agree with his decision on this vote, I do know that he cares about the sport, making it better and helping new and experienced shooters.

[mike cyrwus]

Trigger pull gauges (Lyman digital) are NOT expensive....I think I purchased mine for about 40-50 bucks a couple years ago.

Easy to operate and gives a digital readout of the pull so theres no arguing over the weight being used is actually over 3 pounds etc...

Also if you think you need a lighter trigger to shoot better you better get your ass to the range and get more trigger time.

Respectfully, its not that easy, I can take a glock, m&p, XD, or just about any pivoting trigger and get a different trigger reading on a lyman, anywhere up to 1.5# from the true reading.

Also, I know of at least one trigger maker (not gonna say who) who's claimed trigger weight is lighter than claimed. How? They start the pull with the pre-travel slacked out.. So I guess thats good if the rule stands in 2013. lol.

[mike cyrwus]

Any elected official is supposed to represent the wishes of the people who voted them in. Sounds to me like a lot of members aren't too happy with this new rule. Rob, you are my area director and I don't like this rule.

Maybe he is. Do all members agree with you in regards to this?

[Brandt9913]

Well I finally got through the thread so far and would like to add my thought/comment. It would appear that our Board of Directors has taken on a Congressional approach. We think we know what is best for you without bothering to ask first. So perhaps we should do what is often done, we should flood the approving Area Directors with phone calls and emails. It is not so much the rule, I don't think my Glock is below is below 3# but why should you care. After all a Glock is not DA/SA anyway so is the wording going to be that the first trigger pull be something arbitrary.

Mr President the fact that you used a stock gun that did not inhibit your shooting doesn't mean much unless it was while you were a new shooter. Since your screen name is GMshooter that implies that you are in fact a Grand Master in some Division. I struggled to get to C and will probably never advance beyond that but I read web sites of GM shooters who state their trigger pulls are a pound, pound and a half, two pounds but you voted to restrict my right to use a trigger pull of my choice. This is the United States of America and as such the Constitution guarantees my freedom of choice. I voted once for change and it was one of my bigger mistakes don't make this be my second.

I agree with you not about not liking the rule, but my main objections are the SA/DA guns that only have to comply for the first shot and my second issue is how to enforce/test the 3# trigger rule. My trigger is above 3#'s, but I wouldn't be happy if the springs fatigue and/or normal wear causes it to go below 3#'s without a reliable way to test it.

Also, of the AD's that voted for the new rule, the incoming president is the only production shooter. Yes, another has coffee classifiers on his record, but Phil Strader has been a long time Production shooter. He is also a GM production shooter. While I don't agree for the reasons listed above, I have much more respect for a person that made GM and competes in production using a completely stock gun.

[Singlestack]

Hello everyone,

I would like to express my thought process as it related to my vote (as A4 Director).

At the time of the meeting, I was rallying behind the philosophy that Production division should be that of a true stock class pistol, with a minimal amount of specialized gunwork and accessories needing to be performed or purchased to be competitive. The trigger limit discussion (and eventually motion) was spawned from Production mag pouch discussions, replacement triggers, etc. As some of you may know, I shot an M&P9 Pro for nearly 3 years that was totally stock (besides grip tape and sights). I think my vote was motivated by my rationale that if I could remain competitive with a 6-7lb trigger, most could. Plus new shooters would not be intimidated by the extra amount of trigger work needed to be competitive. In short, I voted based on my personal experience and viewpoints.

I can honestly say that I began to question my decision only days after the meeting. I came to grips with the fact that although some sort of restriction on excessive trigger work may comfort some new shooters, many of our current Production shooters would need to spend more money to even the playing field regarding their equipment. This was what I was trying to avoid in the first place.

Do I still PERSONALLY believe that Production Division should be shot with stock internals and triggers? YES

Do I think that adjusting ones trigger pull to pick up an NRA 3lb weight (which most will do) would negatively, substantially, or permanently affect anyones shooting? NO

Do I think this was a worthwhile motion? YES

Do I think we presented the motion and voted pre-maturely? PROBABLY

(Heres the important question) Do I think that raising the trigger pull would grow the division? IM NOT SURE.

Heres what I am sure of:

- Production division has been around for over 10 years, and has truly changed our sport for the better.

- It will be VERY difficult to re-structure a 10 year-old division without alienating a large group of shooters.

- It will be very difficult to ensure that triggers are weighed consistently regardless of what method could be used.

- It is in our nature to improve our gear, whether it is our guns, holsters, cars, golf carts...hell, everything.

- Members should contact their Area Directors to voice their opinions. I would ask that you please keep things polite and professional without personal feelings being interjected.

- The BOD will meet twice more in person with several special meetings during the year before this possible rule change would take effect in 2013.

Thanks to everyone for your comments.

So you believe that it is a good thing to piss off every Production shooter that has had a job done to lure some fictitious "new" shooter to the sport?

Lets do a little math. Lets say there are 3,500 active Production shooters. Lets say 3,000 of them have spent $200 on a trigger job. $600,000. Then we tell them they have to get another trigger job so they can be rules compliant. I think 1.2 million dollars is a bit more important than to have made this decision without consulting the people spending it.

[Glshooter]

Any elected official is supposed to represent the wishes of the people who voted them in. Sounds to me like a lot of members aren't too happy with this new rule. Rob, you are my area director and I don't like this rule.

Maybe he is. Do all members agree with you in regards to this?

Have you read this post? and how would he know? Was the membership ever polled to find out of this is what they wanted?

Edited December 24, 2011 by Glshooter

[Nemo]

I had some activity on this issue on my Facebook wall today, including Phil's. The following are copy paste of my comments there so please excuse incoherent portions.

To the USPSA BOD,

A short note to let you know that I don't agree with the trigger pull limit on USPSA production division pistols that the you recently adopted. I believe that if you ask the membership the majority's sentiment will be same.

What is the rationale behind this change? To align us more with IPSC? We don't want to be more aligned with IPSC. This change would bring nothing positive to the sport.

Please think about it. There is still time to reconsider and rescind this determination.

Enforcement of this one will be an inconsistency nightmare. Does NROI have a vote on this? I'd like to hear John Amidon's thoughts on implementation of this proposal.

As presented the issue doesn't seem to be a safety concern. Production division already addresses the possibility of unsafe triggers by disallowing disconnection of safety devices.

So what is the non-existing problem that we need a rule to solve? This one will cause more problems (implementation) that what it will solve.

One more thing is that this rule will only impact the majority of production shooters that use striker-fired pistols. The traditional double action will still have >3lb first trigger pulls but sub-1lb subsequent.

I still fail to see the logic behind this...

Thank you Phil Strader for taking the time and letting us know your reasoning behind the proposed rule change. As there is one full year before this could take effect, during that time I ask you to please consider the following:

1. Practicality and logistics of the implementation

2. The enforcement difficulties of the proposed rules

3. The impact upon the majority of current production shooters that use striker fired pistols

4. The LACK OF NEED for the change, as there is no safety reasoning behind it and I don't believe productions trigger jobs have spooked anybody from joining or taking up practical shooting (hell, if open division doesn't spook a prospective new shooter, NO PRODUCTION GUN WILL).

I am a practical shooter. I determine what trigger weight is practical for my shooting ability or lack thereof. The same way I have PRACTICAL production pistols with buried Bo-mars, I can have a practical sub-3lb trigger.

This is USPSA. Mentions of "real world", carry, personal defense, guns and gear in our rules, by-laws or policies is IMO completely out of order. Therefore, if the BOD based their decision of voting for this rule change based on the sentence Rob quoted ("the desire to have the Division remain viable for typical carry-suitable guns"), it would be easier just to get rid of that sentence than to change the way we have been playing for the last 10 years.

THIS ONE AIN'T BROKE, FOLKS. NO NEED TO FIX.

[leadslinger275]

Leveling the playing field in the introductory Division, perhaps?

Gee, I guess I will have to go back to more stock springing and make my gun more reliable. I'm heartbroken.

Thanks for the heads up, Chuck.

1. Production is one of the most competitive divisions in the sport at all levels. Some of the best professional shooters in the sport compete in production division. It is one of the hardest divisions to compete in, I would not call it an "introductory division".

2. Limiting trigger weights sounds very IDPAish to me... and that is not a good thing. If it ain't broke don't fix it.

[mike cyrwus]

Any elected official is supposed to represent the wishes of the people who voted them in. Sounds to me like a lot of members aren't too happy with this new rule. Rob, you are my area director and I don't like this rule.

Maybe he is. Do all members agree with you in regards to this?

Have you read this post? and how would he know? Was the membership ever polled to find out of this is what they wanted?

BE members are a small percentage of the total overall uspsa membership.

The percentage of the membership that voted was, what, like 17%? Do we expect that a poll of the membership will be any less participated in? Why even have elections? We cant just have a pure democracy and vote on everything.

Elections are what give the elected officials power to make these decisions. If we poll about trigger jobs and only 20% respond to the questionnaire? Should those 20% be the only ones who the area director votes in accordance with?

its just like the general election; Phil Strader and the area directors will be representing all the members; not just their local shooting buddies, not just the ones that voted, not just the ones who, responded to a poll.

They were elected; and not one of them are dummies; they are around shooters ALL across their area as well as Country. They voted on this, they took a vote, and it passed.

They very well may ruminate on their decision, and decide to put it back up for a re-vote. Whatever they do is cool by me, I know it will suck for some, but it might be fun for others. Heck, it might shift some money away from gunsmiths to firearms trainers; and I think thats a VERY good thing. I have not formed my own opinion about this, and to be honest, I dont have the time to mull it over; which is fine. And why I voted for someone that will do all that stuff for me.

[Chills1994]

They don't even check trigger weights in IDPA.

[Chills1994]

I loathe the idea of paying somebody to "train" me.

One, I'm cheap.

Two, in my PM's to Ben he has said ghat not even once did he ever take any professional instruction.

[BlackBuzzard]

"viable for typical carry-suitable guns"

We cant just carry guns around anywhere, they have to be concealed and a CH license to boot.

How about a cover garment requirement to supplement the new trigger standards. :roflol:

Then of course there are issues of cover while shooting, reloads with retention, etc that really should be looked into........................ :sick: :blush:

BB

[ErichF]

I'm glad I came across the thread just before I am about to slap a PRP UMT in my XDm 525

What gets my goat is the wording around the carry-suitability of production guns. "Carry-Suitable" and "Production" are hardly synonymous. To me, and correct me if I'm wrong here, a "production" gun is basically an off-the-shelf gun that is easily acquired and requires minimal training to operate using standard ammunition. Not all "Carry-Suitable" guns some folks are carrying can fall under that description. Many "carry-suitable" guns are indeed user-modified (there's some guys hack saw-ing the grips down on their XDMs), and would fail to meet the current rules of Production Division. So, what's the big push to change "Production" into "Carry" division? My stock 525, IMO, is not really "Carry-Suitable", with trigger job or box stock...it's just a tad longer that what I would carry concealed. Oops, I just gave them a new idea on what to limit next in "Carry" Division