Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Why not limit rifle rounds?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 174
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I like things just the way they are. Don't make changes just to make changes.

Agreed - I don't really hear any complaining about multigun.

The only question I ask when I show up to a match is do I shoot for accuracy (Time-plus) or speed (IMGA)...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like things just the way they are. Don't make changes just to make changes.

Agreed - I don't really hear any complaining about multigun.

The only question I ask when I show up to a match is do I shoot for accuracy (Time-plus) or speed (IMGA)...

I agree to leavng things the way they are. Changing rifle mags quickly is a skill. I practice it a little, but you seldom hear of anybody burning down a stage because they were a lightning-fast rifle mag changer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More rules????

....... :yawn:

Yep and the video that just played in my head was. Some guy in Trench Coat standing in the shadows at a corner near a darkened phone booth say " Spittz ....Buddy!..heaya tTell me what you think of the..... 3 gun rules. .... Whata Make-A some Changes?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Picture the McCarthy trials videos ......

And Sir your telling this Tribunal,.... That!... We can mess up 3 gun the most with more rules!

The cartoon plays

Super man could mess up Three gun better than Mighty Mouse because he was a real person

All the time Minny mouse is entering scores wrong with a sideways smile

Bruce Willis is dirty faced and perched at the ledge of a very tall building saying "NOott More-gg

rule Limits"

May West say " Come on up and change the rules some time"

And Finally the Duke says "Pilgrim if think your gonA change the rules and get away with it"

And Rodney King has to say : "Cant we all just shoot" And Get Along?

Edited by AlamoShooter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If i hear any more comparisons of tactical to our military i'm gonna puke. Our marines are already using open rifles (2 optics). The term "tactical" should be reserved for the LEO folks and the gear they use.

Hahahahaha......... awesome.:cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I rarely have to do a mag change with my rifle during a stage. One thirty-round mag will get me through pretty much any stage I've run into at the five different ranges where I shoot local matches. Why is there no limit to how many rifle rounds we start with? We limit shotgun capacity. I think it would be nice to have more rifle mag changes required.

It seems odd that I can only put nine shells in my shotgun, but I can put a Beta mag on my rifle. Do any matches ever limit rifles to 20 round mags? Why not? I think I'd kinda dig it. What say you?

If you dig making magazine changes, more power to you...but don't start another thread to monkey with 3-gun rules...enough of 'no beta', no 'mono-podding'...let's leave it alone. How would you like to go back in time during the stupid ban when all we can have were 10 rounders??? We are our own worse enemy! Let the stage designer creates the scenario that mag change would be necessary, like having a low port that you can't really shoot through it unless a shorter 20-rd mag or roll over prone position is used, wouldn't that be better than an arbitrary broad base round limit?

Edited by PacMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, those of you that oppose any restrictions on rifle magazine capacity, do you also oppose the magazine length restrictions on pistol mags? Do you also oppose the common practice of limiting shotguns to nine rounds at the start? I would assume that if you oppose limiting the rifle's capacity, you also oppose limiting the handgun and shotgun.

Of course, I'm talking about only tactical divisions.

I can understand why we limit the magazine length of pistols and the capacity of shotguns

in tactical, and I think that is a good policy. Why doesn't that philosophy extend to the rifle? It makes no sense to me that I can't use a 33-round Glock mag in my pistol but I can put a 100-round Beta mag in my rifle. An AR with a Beta mag is a lot more unwieldy, and less practical, than a Glock with an extended mag or ghost-loading a tenth round into my shotgun.

None of this applies to open divisions, to me open is where anything goes and the equipment race and R&D should occur.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? The standard AR mag was 20 rounds. Most are 30, but all my Pmags hold 31. I also have a whole slew of very inexpensive, and expensive higher capacity magazines. What about the shooter with the Galil? Does he get to have 35 rounds in his magazine? Does the HK 91/M14 shooter only get 20? Just because you shoot an AR doesn't mean everyone does.

Please Chuck, 20 isn't really standard anymore, today it's short, almost everyone has 30s in an AR platform. 30 is a good number and most here seem to be in agreement that if there is a limit 30 is good. Never saw a guy with a Galil in 3 gun, they must be hanging out with all those guys who shoot .45 in Production, I guess he'd have to load light, and M14 guys generally don't shoot Tactical.

I would have to disagree that most here seem to be in agreement. I think most here just want people to leave our game the F alone!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, those of you that oppose any restrictions on rifle magazine capacity, do you also oppose the magazine length restrictions on pistol mags? Do you also oppose the common practice of limiting shotguns to nine rounds at the start? I would assume that if you oppose limiting the rifle's capacity, you also oppose limiting the handgun and shotgun.

Of course, I'm talking about only tactical divisions.

I can understand why we limit the magazine length of pistols and the capacity of shotguns

in tactical, and I think that is a good policy. Why doesn't that philosophy extend to the rifle? It makes no sense to me that I can't use a 33-round Glock mag in my pistol but I can put a 100-round Beta mag in my rifle. An AR with a Beta mag is a lot more unwieldy, and less practical, than a Glock with an extended mag or ghost-loading a tenth round into my shotgun.

None of this applies to open divisions, to me open is where anything goes and the equipment race and R&D should occur.

Please stop beating the horse - it's dead.

If you really want to do rifle mag changes during a COF, I'm sure none of your competitors will complain. But please don't try to force it on the rest of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have to disagree that most here seem to be in agreement. I think most here just want people to leave our game the F alone!!!

I'm not saying most would agree to limit mag capacity, I haven't seen a count. I'm saying most who would want to limit mag capacity in the Tactical divisions would make that limit at 30 rounds, and not an true arbitrary number like 26.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, those of you that oppose any restrictions on rifle magazine capacity, do you also oppose the magazine length restrictions on pistol mags? Do you also oppose the common practice of limiting shotguns to nine rounds at the start? I would assume that if you oppose limiting the rifle's capacity, you also oppose limiting the handgun and shotgun.

Of course, I'm talking about only tactical divisions.

I can understand why we limit the magazine length of pistols and the capacity of shotguns

in tactical, and I think that is a good policy. Why doesn't that philosophy extend to the rifle? It makes no sense to me that I can't use a 33-round Glock mag in my pistol but I can put a 100-round Beta mag in my rifle. An AR with a Beta mag is a lot more unwieldy, and less practical, than a Glock with an extended mag or ghost-loading a tenth round into my shotgun.

None of this applies to open divisions, to me open is where anything goes and the equipment race and R&D should occur.

Well your question is flawed isn't it? We don't restrict capacity, we restrict length, those are two different things, mostly because of the whole "practical" thing in the name of the game and I would argue foot long mags are not all that practical in a pistol, more so in a rifle. We restrict shotgun capacity because reloading is so much a part of shotgun shooting that capacity is probably more important then shooting itself and it makes a huge difference unlike pistol or rifle.

The other things is that outside competitive circles there isn't really a race for shoving more rounds in a mag because after a point it gets stupid and uncomfortable. In the rifle world, the industry and users want a lot more rounds and things like Beta's or surefires, or whatever were NOT designed for our game, they are just evolutionary things, unlike 170mm 38super mags.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, those of you that oppose any restrictions on rifle magazine capacity, do you also oppose the magazine length restrictions on pistol mags? Do you also oppose the common practice of limiting shotguns to nine rounds at the start? I would assume that if you oppose limiting the rifle's capacity, you also oppose limiting the handgun and shotgun.

Of course, I'm talking about only tactical divisions.

I don't like limits on the shotgun or the handgun mag, My thought is so long as the shooter is willing to leave the equipment as is for the duration of the event its good.

The 140 mag restriction "Limit" seams silly to me , What ? Why? 1-3/16" in the mag is too much but a 6" barrel is ok.

The shogun Limit seams silly too So a 24" barrel with an 8 round tub is ok but a 24 barrel with a 10 round tube is not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The entire game is dictated by arbitrary rules that are for for the most part the sole decision of the match directors (in the case of non-USPSA matches). Capacity, mag length, required dress codes, cinched mags, bipods can or can't be removed, all of these and a nearly infinite number of others are left up to the match director to decide on. Every match director wants to run the best match they can, so they can be expected to modify the rules to improve the game as they see fit. I would even imagine that some of them may even follow threads like this to gauge the interest in proposed rule changes. If you want mag restrictions on rifles then make a case, if you are against any restrictions on rifle mags state your argument. So far the more compelling argument has been for limits as far as I can tell, and as I said before, I am the Honey Badger on this issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The entire game is dictated by arbitrary rules that are for for the most part the sole decision of the match directors (in the case of non-USPSA matches). Capacity, mag length, required dress codes, cinched mags, bipods can or can't be removed, all of these and a nearly infinite number of others are left up to the match director to decide on. Every match director wants to run the best match they can, so they can be expected to modify the rules to improve the game as they see fit. I would even imagine that some of them may even follow threads like this to gauge the interest in proposed rule changes. If you want mag restrictions on rifles then make a case, if you are against any restrictions on rifle mags state your argument. So far the more compelling argument has been for limits as far as I can tell, and as I said before, I am the Honey Badger on this issue.

I havent heard one argument on why limiting rounds would be a good idea....maybe I missed it. No one needs to convince anyone to let you use a long mag, we can already do that.:cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm heavily in favor of removing pistol mag limits. Had a fellow competitor load up a 33 round Glock mag for a pistol stage last month. I counted 4 malfs before he dumped the mag for a "normal" capacity one...

Probaby a Korean copy. The original GLock 33 round mags work great. I keep one in door pocket of my cruiser at work. I have tested it numerious times with no issues.

Pat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I game the whole only 9rds in the shotgun at the buzzer. I have a 12rd tube, so at the buzzer I put 4 more in the tube and away I go. I can use a 140mm mag for pistol(9mm) and get 22rds in the gun. I think I've had to reload my handgun maybe 3 times in the last year for multigun.....

Only place I want the stupid limit on mags to go away is Production. Who shoots Production with anything other than 9 or 40(most 9mm have 17rd mags and 40's have 15)? Sure you get the noobie that shows up with his XD45 to shoot Production, but even he can get more than 10rds in his gun....

Edited by Jon Fuhrman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want to force mag changes have a standards stage. (Gasp!!!)

Given that 30 plus round magazines are easily and readily available, I'm mildly against any sort of cap on mag limit in Tac or Tac Limited/1X/Iron Sight/Limited division. Stage design will easily nullify any advantage that high cap mags have anyway.

Making 20 rounds the limit to prevent monopodding will simply make me build up the bottom of the 20 rd magazines.

I'm with Kelly. I generally feel that the practical shooting sports are better off with the fewest possible rules. I am very much against adding piecemeal equipment bans just because you frown on a certain piece of equipment - are we turning into the BATFE? Greater-than-30-round magazines are widely and cheaply available nowadays, and are standard equipment on a lot of weapon systems, so I don't see a compelling reason to prohibit them.

There is also the matter of enforcement - ROs can barely keep track of 9 round limits for shotguns and 10 round limits for Production... who is going to determine if the shooter just fired 31 rounds before a reload instead of 30?

Ok, those of you that oppose any restrictions on rifle magazine capacity, do you also oppose the magazine length restrictions on pistol mags? Do you also oppose the common practice of limiting shotguns to nine rounds at the start? I would assume that if you oppose limiting the rifle's capacity, you also oppose limiting the handgun and shotgun.

The logic is simple: in the "Real World" use of weapons (upon which we base many of our rules), handguns are carried as compact personal defense weapons, so size really does matter. I CCW a Glock 27 with 10+1 capacity because a 30-round magazine is simply too impractical for my lifestyle, and I'm sure would be for most cops and soldiers too. The same is true for tube shotguns, where anything with a barrel over about 22 inches starts to get unwieldy. Rifles are much less impacted by magazine size because greater-than-30-round magazines have little, if any, impact on portability or effectiveness. Does this answer your question?

Edited by StealthyBlagga
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...