Rules at a Lv 1 match

[Chills1994]

JKSNIPER wrote:

Speaking as a now retired LEO did you ever go up to the guy in question and inform him that he was technically in violation of the rules for shooting in production?

AMEN! Preach on Brother JK!

[aztecdriver]

Actually, I have mentioned to at least one of the LEO'S, just in passing, and again the reply was, we (I) am just doing this for practice, which is quite clear, as they use cover, look from side to side before showing clear and holstering. Like I said, I have no problem with them practicing, but competing in production is just not the place they should be, in my opinion. I on the other hand, am not practicing per se at the match, and I wish to compete with others in my division on equal footing.

Here's what I think my next question in the series would be:

"Hey, Mr. LEO, I think it's great your coming here to practice and I definitely welcome it. Let me ask you though, did you download your magazines to 10 rounds to shoot in production?"

If they said "yes", then the next response is obvious - "If you changed your duty equipment to meet the requirements of the division in one aspect, don't you think it appropriate to either take the light off to meet the rest of the requirements of the division, or move to a division that your equipment does meet and you can still get the practice you're here for?"

If they said "no", then you have more than a light to worry about...

[GrumpyOne]

Actually, I have mentioned to at least one of the LEO'S, just in passing, and again the reply was, we (I) am just doing this for practice, which is quite clear, as they use cover, look from side to side before showing clear and holstering. Like I said, I have no problem with them practicing, but competing in production is just not the place they should be, in my opinion. I on the other hand, am not practicing per se at the match, and I wish to compete with others in my division on equal footing.

Here's what I think my next question in the series would be:

"Hey, Mr. LEO, I think it's great your coming here to practice and I definitely welcome it. Let me ask you though, did you download your magazines to 10 rounds to shoot in production?"

If they said "yes", then the next response is obvious - "If you changed your duty equipment to meet the requirements of the division in one aspect, don't you think it appropriate to either take the light off to meet the rest of the requirements of the division, or move to a division that your equipment does meet and you can still get the practice you're here for?"

If they said "no", then you have more than a light to worry about...

That would be a good question to ask.... But is it my place, as just a competitor, to ask it?

[MarkCO]

As a paying member of USPSA...YES!

[warpspeed]

Approach is everything, right ? As long as you are not being a DH, it will be fine.

It is really up to the person doing the check-in. When you pay your money, they usually ask me what my classification is and division I'm shooting. Major or minor & verify USPSA #. Perhaps you could volunteer to do that next match and then you could make sure he is put in the correct division and remind him of the specific rules he may or may not be aware of.

[spanky]

Approach is everything, right ? As long as you are not being a DH, it will be fine.

It is really up to the person doing the check-in. When you pay your money, they usually ask me what my classification is and division I'm shooting. Major or minor & verify USPSA #. Perhaps you could volunteer to do that next match and then you could make sure he is put in the correct division and remind him of the specific rules he may or may not be aware of.

I don't think it should be the responsibility of the registration person to verify that every single person who registers is competent on their own divisional requirements.

[aztecdriver]

That would be a good question to ask.... But is it my place, as just a competitor, to ask it?

Well - every group of people has a different dynamic. Maybe they won't accept it as such, but I'd offer it more as coaching than as a rules compliance czar that way it's not coming off so much your worried about the competitive environment but helping them understand the game.

I might start it off with like: "Hey, I'm really glad you're here... If you don't mind, let me help you understand the division requirements and why they exist... This club might let you shoot in production, but if you go to another venue, or even want to try your hand at a major match like a state championship, you're going to have issues, and to be honest, I'd rather you stick around and get the most out of these matches."

It's been my experience, one of two things will happen. 1. They'll want to learn and therefore will understand the issue. 2. They won't and the competitive environment will get to them and after a bit they'll stop coming. Whether they SAY they want to or not, they'll look at the scores and want to eventually start moving up the list - and not understand why they are 30% of a junior or some rather large guy that doesn't shoot for their job requirement, like me.

If they keep coming back and it's not dealt with - then I'd be pulling the other cards the others have mentioned.

[Chills1994]

I would have peeked at his scoresheet to see if:

A. if he had a USPSA member number

B. if he was classified

C. both A and B

and adjusted my approach to him correspondingly.

[Joe4d]

If i was a RO i would tell them, or any new shooter that walked to the line there gun wasnt legal. Once, I wouldnt argue, or go back and forth. Excuse me you cant shoot with a light on your gun in production. If they had been told before or offered any argument. I would just shrug and let em shoot. Then right down OPEN on the score sheet.

A MD or RM that ignores the rules should be reported to the SC immediately. If you use the word "USPSA" you have a duty to follow the rules. Now granted most likely nothing will be done but that is all you can do other than vote with your feet and not shoot there.

[JimmyZip]

If they are just paying the match fees, and not shooting for score, I see no issue. If they are shooting for score, then I see where you have a point. If it is as you say, and you have the grounds you have, and have talked to the MD, etc. Well, then go over their heads. Like Mark said though, it won't be pleasant. Stuff like that rarely is.

[Skydiver]

If i was a RO i would tell them, or any new shooter that walked to the line there gun wasnt legal. Once, I wouldnt argue, or go back and forth. Excuse me you cant shoot with a light on your gun in production. If they had been told before or offered any argument. I would just shrug and let em shoot. Then right down OPEN on the score sheet.

A MD or RM that ignores the rules should be reported to the SC immediately. If you use the word "USPSA" you have a duty to follow the rules. Now granted most likely nothing will be done but that is all you can do other than vote with your feet and not shoot there.

I agree with the sentiment, but unfortunately, you can't just write down OPEN on the score sheet and let it quietly go by. The shooter still must be informed. (Granted who is to say "as soon as possible" maybe at the time scores are posted for the review. Such behavior though could be even viewed as even more inequitable and be a reason for disciplinary investigation be done on the match officials.)

See 6.2.5 and it's subsections:

6.2.5 Where a Division is unavailable or deleted, or where a competitor fails to declare a specific Division prior to the commencement of a match, the competitor will be placed in the Division which, in the opinion of the Range Master, most closely identifies with the competitor's equipment. If, in the opinion of the Range Master, no suitable Division is available, the competitor will shoot the match for no score.

6.2.5.1 However, if a competitor fails to satisfy the equipment or other requirements of a declared Division during a course of fire, the competitor will be placed in Open Division, if available, otherwise the competitor will shoot the match for no score.

6.2.5.2 A competitor who is classified or reclassified as above must be notified as soon as possible. The Range Master's decision on these matters is final.

The interesting issue that will come up though, is that most (?) level I matches, the MD is also the RM. If the MD made a decision that it was okay for the LEO competitor to use the equipment, then isn't it implied the RM has also made a decision and it's final?

Personally, I think that the rules for 5.2.8 accepting duty gear only applies to holsters and other equipment. It does not cover the gun itself. The gun must still comply with Division requirements.

Edited February 6, 2012 by Skydiver

[JKSNIPER]

As we all well know theres a way to tell someone that they're wrong where they then thank you for your help and a way to do it that makes them want to strangle you.

I agree 100% that its how you approach the person, regardless of their profession, that will then dictate the outcome of the conversation.

You approach a guy at a match and say "Hey buddy ....I don't know if you're aware of this or not but that light you have on your pistol? It can't be there when you shoot in production. If its there when you shoot then technically you're supposed to be shooting in open division. Not trying to be a rules nazi but if you shoot in open you're going to be competing against all those guy with those souped up race guns and gear."

Chances are he'll respond with something how he was unaware and its his first or second match and no one ever told him the rules before or he didn't understand them.

If you go up to the same guy with a chip on your shoulder and an attitude that he's somehow a cheater and needs to be taught a lesson then the response won't be the same as before.

I would venture to say that (in my experience) over 90% of the people that go to their first match have little to no knowledge of the rules.

Usually a friend has brought them to the match and HE probably has only a vague understanding of the rules and, the few he knows, are those that pertain to his division he shoots in.

The poor new guy is almost always totally lost or worse fed wrong information.

It also doesn't help that for most guys we're never going to ask for help with something we don't know about.

We'd rather risk carving our arm off with a power tool than admit we have less that perfect knowledge of something "manly".

Its like driving and stopping to ask directions. Most guys will find a way to drive across the Bering Strait than admit they're lost and need help finding someplace.

[sperman]

To me, those are 2 seperate issues. Registering as Female, Miltary, LE may make you eligible for special awards. At a level 1 match, I doubt there is any reason to register for any of the special categories.

If the MD determines that you have powers of arrest, feel free to mount a flashlight on yoru gun. How you register has nothing to do with it. If you feel like having a flashlight on the end of your gun is that big of a deal, and you are OK with lying to the MD and your fellow competitors, have at it. You might as well load up some 105 PF loads at the same time. Once you've crossed that line, you might as well cheat in every way possible.

Have you read 5.2.8? Do you still feel like the shooter and the MD are breaking the rules by allowing him to compete with the duty rig?

Uh, no. That particular rule was created to allow LE guys to shoot their duty gear, meaning holster and magazine pouch positions could be adjusted. Most LE's wear their magazines in the front, not behind the hipbone. Some LE's have holsters that go below the belt, either thigh rigs or just really low belt drops. It doesn't give license to waive other divisional requirements. It doesn't give LE license to use magwells, grip tape on the slide (which by the way is not uncommon in LE), magazines loaded all the way up, slide mounted red dots or for that matter 1911's in Production. Divisional requirements are still the same, it just allows for different holster/mag locations.

Chuck,

Thanks for helping me understand the intent of 5.2.8. I guess I was being too generous with my interpretation of "related equipment."

[ErichF]

Yeah I'm also a member of said club.

I think it's just a matter of casual dialog with the guys. I sat in the after-match debrief where we discussed a few rules-related issues and such. The flashlight thing wasn't brought up, but they both admitted to still learning the ropes of USPSA. I think they would be reasonable about it if brought up from a purely rules perspective, as the owner seems to be motivated to make the match legit.

I will have a talk with the MD next chance I get.

Edited February 6, 2012 by ErichF

[Steven Cline]

5.2.8 Competitors deemed by the Match Director to be full-time law enforcement officers with arrest powers or military personnel on current active duty orders, may be entitled to use their duty holsters or similar holster and related equipment when such equipment does not strictly satisfy the equipment or other requirements of the declared Division. The Range Master will remain the final authority in respect of the safety and suitability of using such equipment at USPSA matches. The use of such equipment, except as otherwise permitted in the rules, is restricted to Level I matches only.

1. As MD, I would refer them to the RM, since they are the one with authority in this matter.

2. Doesn't "and related equipment" mean if their duty rig has a light, they can shoot with a light? Maybe I'm reading too much into this rule, but it seems to me this is exactly why the level 1 exemption for LE was written.

Exactly what I was thinking and how I read it. The rule specifically allows for equipment which does not strictly satisfy the division requirements. It gives decision making authority to RM and also says it's for the Level I matches.

I would allow the flashlight, I would require adhearance to the capacity restrictions. No 17 rnd mags in production.

I personally think the triple retention holster and closed and locked mag pouches would offset any advatage the flashlight would offer. I would require he use the snaps and full retention when drawing from the holster.

That approach seems to be be the best of both of worlds- we get LEOs practicing with their duty equipment, but as it should be practiced. That equipment would offset any help the weight gives.

[Steven Cline]

I just re-read 5.2.8....... The way interpret it, by holsters and all related equipment, I take it to mean holsters, mag pouches, etc...... Not the actual pistol. But, that is only my opinion.

The flashlight is not the pistol, it's related equipment. And different than a weight in that it has a function for the LEO to use far more important than reducing muzzle movement.

Edited February 6, 2012 by Steven Cline

[Steven Cline]

Nothing in 5.2.8 requires them to register as LE.

True, but at that point, if they don't register as LEO, then what's to stop me from putting a light on the end of my muzzle and shooting in Production? Either they register as LEO, and can shoot the match in their duty gear, or they register as a civilian, and shoot in open with their duty gear...

I think that should be corrected. If the LEO is going to shoot the match using the LEO exemption to division requires, I think the shooter should be identified as LEO. This allows everyone to know he was really shooting a different match.

Though the LEO isn't a Division he is shooting a different match like the way the Single Stack shooter shoots a different match. He should be able to see how he did the overall, but his comparision in the Division will be skewed because of his duty rig.

He's carrying more weight, using a slower holster (Todd J doing a stupid fast draw from a level 3 aside- the rest of the frickin' universe is significantly delayed by the Lvl 3 over the open top kydex holster), and the closed top holsters. If he has a flashlight it's a minor offset to the rest of his handicaps.

If he beats you with those handicaps- waaaaaa. It's like getting beat by a Single Stacker when yer shooting Limited; you got beat.

[Chuck Anderson]

Nothing in 5.2.8 requires them to register as LE.

True, but at that point, if they don't register as LEO, then what's to stop me from putting a light on the end of my muzzle and shooting in Production? Either they register as LEO, and can shoot the match in their duty gear, or they register as a civilian, and shoot in open with their duty gear...

I think that should be corrected. If the LEO is going to shoot the match using the LEO exemption to division requires, I think the shooter should be identified as LEO. This allows everyone to know he was really shooting a different match.

Though the LEO isn't a Division he is shooting a different match like the way the Single Stack shooter shoots a different match. He should be able to see how he did the overall, but his comparision in the Division will be skewed because of his duty rig.

He's carrying more weight, using a slower holster (Todd J doing a stupid fast draw from a level 3 aside- the rest of the frickin' universe is significantly delayed by the Lvl 3 over the open top kydex holster), and the closed top holsters. If he has a flashlight it's a minor offset to the rest of his handicaps.

If he beats you with those handicaps- waaaaaa. It's like getting beat by a Single Stacker when yer shooting Limited; you got beat.

You're making an assumption they are using a level 3 duty rig, or flap holsters for that matter. My duty rig was a Safariland 6280 with Bianchi Accu-Mold open top mag pouches. Although I can't we do have a guy in the office who can routinely do .7 and the occasional .6 draw from that particular holster. I'll check with John, but I'd wager his answer is going to be no flashlights.

I would also add that my current "duty" rig is a Safariland 6378 ALS holster with a Crimson Trace Lightguard on a Glock 19, and a Blade Tech mag pouch holding a Glock 17 mag with an Arredondo Base pad on it. I run the same holster for competition in 3 Gun but I wouldn't try to get away with a light attached.

Edited February 6, 2012 by Chuck Anderson

[aztecdriver]

I just re-read 5.2.8....... The way interpret it, by holsters and all related equipment, I take it to mean holsters, mag pouches, etc...... Not the actual pistol. But, that is only my opinion.

The flashlight is not the pistol, it's related equipment. And different than a weight in that it has a function for the LEO to use far more important than reducing muzzle movement.

I disagree. When it's attached to the pistol, it's part of the pistol.

[Jim Norman]

Not taking sides on this. I'll wait for JA to speak. But I do have thoughts on this.

IF the competitor is shooting in his duty rig as in what ever he carries on his belt/person, dressed as if for duty, that is to say, vest, Cuffs, Radio, Baton, patrol shoes, etc., then the fact that he has or does not have a light on his gun and the fact that the weight of a small pistol light MAY control recoil, he should b able to shoot in what ever division his gun, likely a Glock or an M&P would put him in if he were just shooting. He would be most likely in Production and if he so chooses, then he downloads to 10 rounds and goes at it, If he is wants to not download, then he is in Limited. If with all that extra gear on and with covered mag pouches and all the rest he beats me, then I need to get my rearend out there and practice!

[Skydiver]

I'm having a hard time wrapping my brain around why it's okay to put a gun with a flashlight in Production. So if the gun has a laser, the gun still goes into Production? Is the same true for Ghost Ring sights? A red dot optic? What about a suppressor?

MD's and RM's must get paid the big bucks to make these high level decisions.

[Chuck Anderson]

On my phone but short answer from John is no they are not legal. I'll post his response when I get back to a computer.

[Chuck Anderson]

Email to John:

Question came up re: cops using flashlights on Production pistols. There are more people out there than I expected that seem to think the "related equipment" clause allows gun lights. I thought it applied to holster, magazine pouches and their respective positions. Is this more broad than I thought?

Chuck

Email from John

Not to my knowledge, what you think it is, to me is how I would rule on it.

John

Other than being about the most poorly written sentence I've ever seen out of John, seems pretty clear no lights.

[sperman]

There might be an opportunity to clear things up with the next rules update. Maybe something like: "related equipment is limited to holster and magazine pouches. The firearm must always meet division requirements."

[ErichF]

So, are we SURE that gun lights are not authorized in LIMITED Division, also? Just want to clarify that before assuming they have to shoot Open.