mactiger Posted July 31, 2004 Share Posted July 31, 2004 Before we go banging the pots around in the rules kitchen, I'd like to see some data on just how many detonations have occurred, either at matches or in practice sessions, segregated into a couple of groups: those that occured during the "flip and catch", and those that happened while ejecting slowly, either with or without hand over the ejection port. I still think the number is statistically insignificant, and is largely a function of unfortunate circumstance--the round gets crossways to the ejector (see Jim Linch's excellent explanations and illustrations), and is detonated. I can't support a rule that says "without caution", because caution is too subjective. Likewise, I don't think we need to be making rules just because a small group of people think something is unsafe, or because they think it's gratuitous showboating. Ejecting a round is something we are required to do to unload and show clear, unless the gun is already empty. Caution is advisable when doing so. A better solution if you are really terrified of a detonation might be to preserve the geometry, so to speak, of the gun and eject your round, lock the slide back, then eject the magazine. That way, the round is supported on it's way out of the pistol. 8.3.6 doesn't specify the order of clearing the gun, only the conditions under which it is to be presented for inspection. Just my 2 cents--I voted for "do nothing". Troy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Beverley Posted July 31, 2004 Share Posted July 31, 2004 How about starting a poll to see how many injuries there have to be before a new rule is added? Based on total accumulated reported incidents we could adopt the following: Zero Injuries = No Change 1 - 10 Injuries = We have a warning procedure 11 = 20 Injuries = Procedural penalty 21 + Injuries = Match DQ This would seem reasonable. Guys, we have already heard of a number of incidents. We have heard of shrapnel embedding in safety glasses. What if the safety glasses didn't stop the shrapnell, or if it slipped underneath? What if a spectator suddenly appeared without glasses and got hit? What is the price of a single loss of sight? How many accidents do we think are OK? Please consider that we are not discussing if there might be an injury. It is clearly evident that it is occurring. Please note that I do not see the "flip n catch" technique as the problem per se. It seems to be related to the speed or force used and then only occurs if the slide is allowed to travel forward again. Would locking the slide back initially work? Troy makes an interesting suggestion about leaving the mag in place but I need to think about that some more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted July 31, 2004 Share Posted July 31, 2004 I have a novel idea here... at the end of the stage. have a special target, record the time, tell them to remove the magazine... SHOOT the targets. (ie remove magazine, fire down range) show clear gun clear hammer down holster... no more live round problems! A better solution if you are really terrified of a detonation might be to preserve the geometry, so to speak, of the gun and eject your round, lock the slide back, then eject the magazine. That way, the round is supported on it's way out of the pistol. 8.3.6 doesn't specify the order of clearing the gun, only the conditions under which it is to be presented for inspection. Hmmmm. Two guys thinking outside of the box. Cool. Both ideas sound like interesting solutions to me. Well done guys! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diehli Posted July 31, 2004 Share Posted July 31, 2004 How about starting a poll to see how many injuries there have to be before a new rule is added?Based on total accumulated reported incidents we could adopt the following: Zero Injuries = No Change 1 - 10 Injuries = We have a warning procedure 11 = 20 Injuries = Procedural penalty 21 + Injuries = Match DQ This would seem reasonable. How many people have been hurt while running in a match? Do we disallow that? What about kneeling? What about going prone? Okay, so you're only talking about gun issues. How many guns in .40 have blown up at a match? 9 variants? .45? Do we only allow .22 because there are no reports of incidents? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted July 31, 2004 Share Posted July 31, 2004 Dear Large Hairy One, Yes, there are always inherent risks with any mechanical device (e.g. guns, angle grinders, cars, aircraft, trains), but the issue at hand is an action which has (and correct me if I'm wrong here), zero shooting or competitive value, but which introduces additional, unnecessary risks. I'd love to be able to do the "spin the gun 3 times before holstering" thing you see in Western or Cowboy movies but, breaking 90 degrees aside, does this have any value other than showmanship? Nobody is trying to rain on anybody's parade here - we're just striving to do everything possible to maximise safety, without affecting the competition proper. If the idea of new restrictions or prohibitions is rejected, fine, but at least I'll know that we tried to do something about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diehli Posted July 31, 2004 Share Posted July 31, 2004 Dear Large Hairy One,Yes, there are always inherent risks with any mechanical device (e.g. guns, angle grinders, cars, aircraft, trains), but the issue at hand is an action which has (and correct me if I'm wrong here), zero shooting or competitive value, but which introduces additional, unnecessary risks. I'd love to be able to do the "spin the gun 3 times before holstering" thing you see in Western or Cowboy movies but, breaking 90 degrees aside, does this have any value other than showmanship? Nobody is trying to rain on anybody's parade here - we're just striving to do everything possible to maximise safety, without affecting the competition proper. As has been said, some people prefer not to/ have issues bending over and picking up rounds. So, yeah, it has value. Additionally, rounds do go off when hitting the ground. So, does it introduce additional risk? Some people have had bad luck with it, others haven't. As far as it being a safety issue, that depends on your bias. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singlestack Posted July 31, 2004 Share Posted July 31, 2004 Ok, I'll be the first to jump on the list of injuries wagon. Area 6 2003. My shooting buddy was DQ'ed while clearing a jam when he had a ejector fire. Brass imbedded in thumb at base. 40 S&W STI. I have it on video. He Arb'ed the call and lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wide45 Posted July 31, 2004 Share Posted July 31, 2004 while clearing a jam No relation to the question at hand. Unless we are expanding the question? OY ! I'm in line with Erik. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omnia1911 Posted July 31, 2004 Share Posted July 31, 2004 I'm confident that cooler heads on the USPSA rules committee will prevail and no action will be taken on this matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TriggerT Posted July 31, 2004 Share Posted July 31, 2004 Hmmmm....11 Pages. Deal Me Out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted July 31, 2004 Share Posted July 31, 2004 Hmmmm....11 Pages. Deal Me Out! Yes, I agree - at 11 pages we're just recycling comments now, so I'll close this thread and the associated poll. Although I didn't initiate the discussion on this subject, I was interested in BE Forum member input, and I sincerely thank everyone who had the courtesy to make constructive comments, both for and against taking any action, without mocking the public consultation process. Thanks again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts