Rules at a Lv 1 match

[Craig N]

Steven,

with all due respect, you are wrong on two fronts: On the rules -- flashlights on a gun are considered optics, open is the only available division at that point.

And on the concept that the only two options are to throw the rules out of the window or to "go all rule nazi" and drive the officer away from the sport.

When you became a CRO, you agreed to uphold the rules -- as written and interpreted by NROI, not by you -- and I've got to believe, based on your posts here, that you're bright enough to explain it to a competitor, without driving them away....

In my experience LEOs at a match aren't all that different from the rest of the folks who try the sport: They either get hooked, and think this is the greatest thing since sliced bread, or it's not for them, and we hear a myriad number or reasons why they won't come back.....

Nik,

I appreciate you response.

Allow me to take a little more time to explain my position so that I am not understand and also clarrify an important point:

I had not seen the DNROI interpreation posted above before I responded to Chuck's observation on my post from the previous page. Of course I follow the rules. Before the read the DNROI's response I was responding to a bunch of people arguing their interpreation. I shared my interpretation and intention on how to handle an LEO showing with his duty gear which included a weapon mounted light. The rule gave me authority

My position is that we've written an exception to the rules for LEOs to shoot using their duty gear and we've reversed on part of that exception and I think it is wrong and somewhat illogical. I think the reversal on the exception is more harmful than the full application of the exception.

I am arguing for an understanding that Level I matches are different than Level II and up- evidenced that we have rules clearly exempting Level I matches from some of the rules. (I am not arguing for throwing the rulebook out the window) Further we have exemptions for LEOs using duty gear. (Clearly we must want to encourage LEOs to come shoot our sport and practice with their duty set up) So in the context of having both a practice of seeing Level I matches as a little different and having an exemption for LEO to use their duty gear, why are having such an adverse reaction to the duty equipment weapon mounted light?

Just apply the LEO exemption to their duty light at the Level I match. Get 'em out shooting.

I dislike the term "rule Nazi," it's been used against my reading of the rules. I find myself in the rare position of being at odds with the DNROI interpreation. But, OK, we can't all agree on everything all the time. I did, in this case, see it as blind adhearance to "rules" outside of context and intentions.

Finally, to the myriad of reasons they won't come back which is where a lot of my focus is. Applying the interpretation as given forces an LEO to shoot in Open aginst real Optics (not defined optics), compensators, speed rig holsters and mag pouches and monster magazines. (I love 'em all- bring on the equiment race!) Or, it forces him to shoot his equipment different than how he goes to work with it. We know what is going to happen when the officer attempts to compete in Open with his duty equipment- he's gonna get smoked. And, too shooters blame their poor performance on everything but shooting prowess in most cases.

I appreciate your confidence that I could explain the current intrepration without driving people away. I believe I can do that. I am uncertain I can do so and have it survive the ego busting finish in Open. If USPSA gives me and others acting as MDs at local matches the LEO exemption for duty lights and I think I have a better chance of keeping them coming. Give me a little more of blank check than the current interpretation.

///

Of course, one Detective I know carries a Glock 18... boy, oh boy, ain't that a pandora's box or a request for a bit more of a blank check for LEOs and their duty equipment?

My question would be why? That would seem to open a lot of grief and trouble on the officer, the department and the County/State. I know the AG's protection teams uses them (hows that for unfair treatment of the masses LOL) but I don't see how it got worked in for a Detective.

[Jim Norman]

OK, I may have lost track here. We are talking about two separate things I think. One, Shooting with Duty Gear and Two, registering as an LEO for the match. LEO can shoot in short and Techwear shirt, with an open blaster and a ghost holster, still LEO, but not Duty Gear. Or, he can still shoot as an LEO, but wearing his duty belt and gun, but the gun must fit the division. I suppose he could still wear shorts and Techwear.

[sperman]

Or he can shoot in hsi duty gear and NOT register as LEO.

[Skydiver]

Or he can shoot in hsi duty gear and NOT register as LEO.

The way 5.2.8 is written, all the MD has to do is "deem" the competitor to have powers of arrest or be active military. It may help by registering as such, but all that really matters is convincing the MD of the fact.

[Trini]

You think an MD is going be convinced a person is LEO or AD withouIDbeing shown some type of ID.

[motosapiens]

Yeah, local matches are "fun" matches, to most of us too...But we also use them to see how much we have improved from the previous match, against our friends or others...When someone shoots in your division, and the results are skewed because of something like what we are talking about here, then all semblance of progress is also skewed...

I think you make some valid points, but for me, personally, as a shooter and also as a competitor in other sports like bicycle and motorcycle racing, I find that I get a much better impression of my improvement by looking at the overall. When the results are sorted out by division/class etc..., then maybe I just look better this week because the other 2 guys in the senior limited paraplegic womens class couldn't make it, but if last year i was in the 70th percentileout of 40 shooters in the overall, and this year i'm in the 40th percentile, chances are I got better. So I pretty much ignore the division results. If an LEO with a flashlight on his gun finished ahead of me in the division or ahead of me in the overall, I wouldn't care, and I wouldn't blame it on his equipment 'advantage'.

[Skydiver]

Yeah, local matches are "fun" matches, to most of us too...But we also use them to see how much we have improved from the previous match, against our friends or others...When someone shoots in your division, and the results are skewed because of something like what we are talking about here, then all semblance of progress is also skewed...

I think you make some valid points, but for me, personally, as a shooter and also as a competitor in other sports like bicycle and motorcycle racing, I find that I get a much better impression of my improvement by looking at the overall. When the results are sorted out by division/class etc..., then maybe I just look better this week because the other 2 guys in the senior limited paraplegic womens class couldn't make it, but if last year i was in the 70th percentileout of 40 shooters in the overall, and this year i'm in the 40th percentile, chances are I got better. So I pretty much ignore the division results. If an LEO with a flashlight on his gun finished ahead of me in the division or ahead of me in the overall, I wouldn't care, and I wouldn't blame it on his equipment 'advantage'.

Sure, that's if it's one individual LEO shows up, it won't upset your percentile in the overalls that much, but if you had one or two squads show up with flashlights? Given a typical club match of 40 people, having another 8-16 people would have a big effect on percentile. Remember that percentile is essentially the number of people whose scores are lower than yours. The more people there are in the population, the more your percentile can be affected.

Now if all you are looking at is your score as percentage of the high overall score, then yes, it shouldn't matter... unless those LEO's win enough stages and thereby skewing the way stage points are distributed.

[Nik Habicht]

You think an MD is going be convinced a person is LEO or AD withouIDbeing shown some type of ID.

I've never asked a LEO for ID and proof of status.....

Of course we've had a couple of them who showed up to matches in marked cruisers.....

[motosapiens]

Yeah, local matches are "fun" matches, to most of us too...But we also use them to see how much we have improved from the previous match, against our friends or others...When someone shoots in your division, and the results are skewed because of something like what we are talking about here, then all semblance of progress is also skewed...

I think you make some valid points, but for me, personally, as a shooter and also as a competitor in other sports like bicycle and motorcycle racing, I find that I get a much better impression of my improvement by looking at the overall. When the results are sorted out by division/class etc..., then maybe I just look better this week because the other 2 guys in the senior limited paraplegic womens class couldn't make it, but if last year i was in the 70th percentileout of 40 shooters in the overall, and this year i'm in the 40th percentile, chances are I got better. So I pretty much ignore the division results. If an LEO with a flashlight on his gun finished ahead of me in the division or ahead of me in the overall, I wouldn't care, and I wouldn't blame it on his equipment 'advantage'.

Sure, that's if it's one individual LEO shows up, it won't upset your percentile in the overalls that much, but if you had one or two squads show up with flashlights? Given a typical club match of 40 people, having another 8-16 people would have a big effect on percentile. Remember that percentile is essentially the number of people whose scores are lower than yours. The more people there are in the population, the more your percentile can be affected.

Now if all you are looking at is your score as percentage of the high overall score, then yes, it shouldn't matter... unless those LEO's win enough stages and thereby skewing the way stage points are distributed.

I'm not usually looking at how far I am from first, but how much closer I am to first than I was 6 months ago. Perhaps 10 LEO's with flashlights could skew the results if they all show up for only one match, but that assumes that a flashlight is even an advantage. I sure as heck wouldn't want to shoot with one on my gun. Since I seem to be able to shoot major loads just about as quickly and accurately as minor, I'm not convinced that it would be an advantage for a middle-of-the-road shooter. At any rate, I don't really have a dog in this fight, and I'm not really a rules weenie when it comes to what other people use. I worry about what and how I shoot, and let other people do their thing.

Edited February 10, 2012 by motosapiens

[Steven Cline]

Steven,

with all due respect, you are wrong on two fronts: On the rules -- flashlights on a gun are considered optics, open is the only available division at that point.

And on the concept that the only two options are to throw the rules out of the window or to "go all rule nazi" and drive the officer away from the sport.

When you became a CRO, you agreed to uphold the rules -- as written and interpreted by NROI, not by you -- and I've got to believe, based on your posts here, that you're bright enough to explain it to a competitor, without driving them away....

In my experience LEOs at a match aren't all that different from the rest of the folks who try the sport: They either get hooked, and think this is the greatest thing since sliced bread, or it's not for them, and we hear a myriad number or reasons why they won't come back.....

Nik,

I appreciate you response.

Allow me to take a little more time to explain my position so that I am not understand and also clarrify an important point:

I had not seen the DNROI interpreation posted above before I responded to Chuck's observation on my post from the previous page. Of course I follow the rules. Before the read the DNROI's response I was responding to a bunch of people arguing their interpreation. I shared my interpretation and intention on how to handle an LEO showing with his duty gear which included a weapon mounted light. The rule gave me authority

My position is that we've written an exception to the rules for LEOs to shoot using their duty gear and we've reversed on part of that exception and I think it is wrong and somewhat illogical. I think the reversal on the exception is more harmful than the full application of the exception.

I am arguing for an understanding that Level I matches are different than Level II and up- evidenced that we have rules clearly exempting Level I matches from some of the rules. (I am not arguing for throwing the rulebook out the window) Further we have exemptions for LEOs using duty gear. (Clearly we must want to encourage LEOs to come shoot our sport and practice with their duty set up) So in the context of having both a practice of seeing Level I matches as a little different and having an exemption for LEO to use their duty gear, why are having such an adverse reaction to the duty equipment weapon mounted light?

Just apply the LEO exemption to their duty light at the Level I match. Get 'em out shooting.

I dislike the term "rule Nazi," it's been used against my reading of the rules. I find myself in the rare position of being at odds with the DNROI interpreation. But, OK, we can't all agree on everything all the time. I did, in this case, see it as blind adhearance to "rules" outside of context and intentions.

Finally, to the myriad of reasons they won't come back which is where a lot of my focus is. Applying the interpretation as given forces an LEO to shoot in Open aginst real Optics (not defined optics), compensators, speed rig holsters and mag pouches and monster magazines. (I love 'em all- bring on the equiment race!) Or, it forces him to shoot his equipment different than how he goes to work with it. We know what is going to happen when the officer attempts to compete in Open with his duty equipment- he's gonna get smoked. And, too shooters blame their poor performance on everything but shooting prowess in most cases.

I appreciate your confidence that I could explain the current intrepration without driving people away. I believe I can do that. I am uncertain I can do so and have it survive the ego busting finish in Open. If USPSA gives me and others acting as MDs at local matches the LEO exemption for duty lights and I think I have a better chance of keeping them coming. Give me a little more of blank check than the current interpretation.

///

Of course, one Detective I know carries a Glock 18... boy, oh boy, ain't that a pandora's box or a request for a bit more of a blank check for LEOs and their duty equipment?

My question would be why? That would seem to open a lot of grief and trouble on the officer, the department and the County/State. I know the AG's protection teams uses them (hows that for unfair treatment of the masses LOL) but I don't see how it got worked in for a Detective.

He does double duty as a SWAT member. I've got him talked into a letting me shoot with him the next time he practices. He's also interested in shooting at my range someday. Though he's a friend and we've worked some cases together, he doesn't know I'm interested to learn if I can outshoot his G18.