Proposed Multigun rules Posted for comment on uspsa.org

[KentG]

Never mind.

Edited June 26, 2012 by Kent Grewe

[Alaskapopo]

With that logic you should be able to change barrels too. Sorry I don't agree. On a tube gun the magazine is a fixed part of the weapon. With a box magazine gun the magazine is a component of the weapon. With the same logic our applying you should be able to use different uppers and optics as you see fit on different stages. Nothing at all practical about that and this sport was supposed to have its roots in practical shooting.

Pat

I made no mention of barrels and that changes a more fundamental dimension and core functionality of the gun. Pat, I think you are taking the idea too far there. I have not, nor do I intend to advocate for barrel changes on an Open shotgun of any type.

I know you did not advocate changing barrels. I was making a point. The barrel is no more a fixed part of the gun on a tube fed shotgun than the magazine tube is. Just my opinion.

Pat

I find it funny that we use the "practical" element of the sport to restrict ourselves in thinking outside of the box, considering Practical means "a idea, plan, or method, likely to succeed or be effective in real circumstances; feasible." The only way changing "uppers/magtubes/etc." wouldn't be feasible is if your trying to change it during the middle of a stage after the beep. This is Open guys,we are already a gear race division and we are about 1/3 the size of Tactical at any given time, why act like elitest? I say lets do it and separate ourselves a bit from other division, hell I bet we might pool in some extra shooters, after all look at Trooper Class at Ironman, it is one of the fastest growing divisions, which pretty much allows the "Anything goes" mentality, as long as you can carry it on your own 2 feet. The only differences here is now you can put it in a cart

I look at it like this, this sport has its roots in combat/practical shooting rather we like to talk about that or not here. While open may not seem to be practical in its nature. Its a test bed for real life equipment that ends up some day being refined and put in the field for real life use. Example micro red dots on duty pistols. Its not practical to be swapping gun parts in the field in a real life situation and its definately no practical. Carrying spare detachable mags is practical however. I think we should keep to the roots of the game. If you want to create a division where you can switch guns at will fine but its not open. If that is the case a competator should be able to swap his upper on his rifle from a carbine to a 24 inch long range verison on a long stage or at the very least switch optics, he or she would be able to swap his pistol around depending on the stage. I see this idea as opening a big can of worms. One of those worms would be making open even more expensive as a competator would have to own multiple guns and or uppers, barrels etc. Its a slippery slope in my opinion. I think open is fine the way it is now and does not need fixing. Just my opinion and we all know everyone has one.

Pat

Edited June 26, 2012 by Alaskapopo

[outerlimits]

With that logic you should be able to change barrels too. Sorry I don't agree. On a tube gun the magazine is a fixed part of the weapon. With a box magazine gun the magazine is a component of the weapon. With the same logic our applying you should be able to use different uppers and optics as you see fit on different stages. Nothing at all practical about that and this sport was supposed to have its roots in practical shooting.

Pat

I made no mention of barrels and that changes a more fundamental dimension and core functionality of the gun. Pat, I think you are taking the idea too far there. I have not, nor do I intend to advocate for barrel changes on an Open shotgun of any type.

I know you did not advocate changing barrels. I was making a point. The barrel is no more a fixed part of the gun on a tube fed shotgun than the magazine tube is. Just my opinion.

Pat

I find it funny that we use the "practical" element of the sport to restrict ourselves in thinking outside of the box, considering Practical means "a idea, plan, or method, likely to succeed or be effective in real circumstances; feasible." The only way changing "uppers/magtubes/etc." wouldn't be feasible is if your trying to change it during the middle of a stage after the beep. This is Open guys,we are already a gear race division and we are about 1/3 the size of Tactical at any given time, why act like elitest? I say lets do it and separate ourselves a bit from other division, hell I bet we might pool in some extra shooters, after all look at Trooper Class at Ironman, it is one of the fastest growing divisions, which pretty much allows the "Anything goes" mentality, as long as you can carry it on your own 2 feet. The only differences here is now you can put it in a cart

I look at it like this, this sport has its roots in combat/practical shooting rather we like to talk about that or not here. While open may not seem to be practical in its nature. Its a test bed for real life equipment that ends up some day being refined and put in the field for real life use. Example micro red dots on duty pistols. Its not practical to be swapping gun parts in the field in a real life situation and its definately no practical. Carrying spare detachable mags is practical however. I think we should keep to the roots of the game. If you want to create a division where you can switch guns at will fine but its not open. If that is the case a competator should be able to swap his upper on his rifle from a carbine to a 24 inch long range verison on a long stage or at the very least switch optics, he or she would be able to swap his pistol around depending on the stage. I see this idea as opening a big can of worms. One of those worms would be making open even more expensive as a competator would have to own multiple guns and or uppers, barrels etc. Its a slippery slope in my opinion. I think open is fine the way it is now and does not need fixing. Just my opinion and we all know everyone has one.

Pat

Swapping barrels? Ever carry an M60? That was pretty practical if my memory serves me correctly.

[frag316]

Swapping barrels? Ever carry an M60? That was pretty practical if my memory serves me correctly.

Ehh, that's a big stretch. The M60 and M240 that followed it were designed with quick-change barrels because of the dangers of cooking off rounds or a runaway gun because of high volumes of fire and a myriad of other reasons. All barrels were the same and performed the same. There was never a series of barrels for US GPMGs designed to provide different performance.

A better comparison would be the quick-change barrel system for the ACR or MGI's Hydra AR15 upper receiver. Those are designed to change barrels to allow you to run multiple calibers and barrel lengths off of the same basic platform for more utility. They're quick-change in the sense that it's quicker to go thru the change process with those guns than a normal AR (which would require a bench, vise, receiver block, tools, etc.).

Edited June 26, 2012 by frag316

[dillon]

As a long-time HM shooter, I would like to see 44 mag or larger the minimum in both HM categories, but elimination of the requirement for a 1911 only. 8 round or 10 round doesn't matter, but I don't see a reason to require the 1911. I would prefer to keep this a pump 12 ga as well, but I suspect allowing semi-auto shotguns might encourage more participation. The need to be allowed to remove a holstered empty pistol should force further review of this limitation.The different equipment requirements from stage to stage make this burdensome.As long as the handgun is not removed from the holster, and the handgun was cleared at the end of the stage,I think this is feasable.

[Alaskapopo]

With that logic you should be able to change barrels too. Sorry I don't agree. On a tube gun the magazine is a fixed part of the weapon. With a box magazine gun the magazine is a component of the weapon. With the same logic our applying you should be able to use different uppers and optics as you see fit on different stages. Nothing at all practical about that and this sport was supposed to have its roots in practical shooting.

Pat

I made no mention of barrels and that changes a more fundamental dimension and core functionality of the gun. Pat, I think you are taking the idea too far there. I have not, nor do I intend to advocate for barrel changes on an Open shotgun of any type.

I know you did not advocate changing barrels. I was making a point. The barrel is no more a fixed part of the gun on a tube fed shotgun than the magazine tube is. Just my opinion.

Pat

I find it funny that we use the "practical" element of the sport to restrict ourselves in thinking outside of the box, considering Practical means "a idea, plan, or method, likely to succeed or be effective in real circumstances; feasible." The only way changing "uppers/magtubes/etc." wouldn't be feasible is if your trying to change it during the middle of a stage after the beep. This is Open guys,we are already a gear race division and we are about 1/3 the size of Tactical at any given time, why act like elitest? I say lets do it and separate ourselves a bit from other division, hell I bet we might pool in some extra shooters, after all look at Trooper Class at Ironman, it is one of the fastest growing divisions, which pretty much allows the "Anything goes" mentality, as long as you can carry it on your own 2 feet. The only differences here is now you can put it in a cart

I look at it like this, this sport has its roots in combat/practical shooting rather we like to talk about that or not here. While open may not seem to be practical in its nature. Its a test bed for real life equipment that ends up some day being refined and put in the field for real life use. Example micro red dots on duty pistols. Its not practical to be swapping gun parts in the field in a real life situation and its definately no practical. Carrying spare detachable mags is practical however. I think we should keep to the roots of the game. If you want to create a division where you can switch guns at will fine but its not open. If that is the case a competator should be able to swap his upper on his rifle from a carbine to a 24 inch long range verison on a long stage or at the very least switch optics, he or she would be able to swap his pistol around depending on the stage. I see this idea as opening a big can of worms. One of those worms would be making open even more expensive as a competator would have to own multiple guns and or uppers, barrels etc. Its a slippery slope in my opinion. I think open is fine the way it is now and does not need fixing. Just my opinion and we all know everyone has one.

Pat

Swapping barrels? Ever carry an M60? That was pretty practical if my memory serves me correctly.

A weapon serviced by two people? The other weapons that have switch barrels today still require some tools and most also have a chance in zerop when you switch to a different barrel type. Like I said before its not practical.

[outerlimits]

Lighten up, people. Open should be open-just sayin'.

[Griz]

I'm sure this idea has been shot down long ago, but maybe a way to eliminate the holstered pistol issue would be to require your gear to be the same for all stages. No belt reconfigs. If you want to use a suicide bomber vest for shotguns, you get to wear it for all stages.

Or not

Edited June 26, 2012 by Griz

[outerlimits]

I'm sure this idea has been shot down long ago, but maybe a way to eliminate the holstered pistol issue would be to require your gear to be the same for all stages. No belt reconfigs. If you want to use a suicide bomber vest for shotguns, you get to wear it for all stages.

Or not

I'm sure the folks and safariland would dig that...

[Alaskapopo]

Lighten up, people. Open should be open-just sayin'.

Sorry did not mean to come across like I was offended. I just think the way it is now works pretty well.

Pat

[Chuck Anderson]

I'm sure this idea has been shot down long ago, but maybe a way to eliminate the holstered pistol issue would be to require your gear to be the same for all stages. No belt reconfigs. If you want to use a suicide bomber vest for shotguns, you get to wear it for all stages.

Or not

That would probably work OK for me. I've got enough real estate I could equip for two Ironman stages. The pitfall would be smaller framed shooters who have room for a 30 round shotgun course, 40 round rifle course and a 40 round pistol course, but not room for all three at the same time. And of course tracking it from stage to stage.

Edited June 26, 2012 by Chuck Anderson

[pigfish73]

I'm sure this idea has been shot down long ago, but maybe a way to eliminate the holstered pistol issue would be to require your gear to be the same for all stages. No belt reconfigs. If you want to use a suicide bomber vest for shotguns, you get to wear it for all stages.

Or not

I would definitely go with the "Or not" on this one!

It's not really practical either. There was a stage at Ozark last year that was 42 rounds all shotgun. Everybody was borrowing caddies (Aaron Parmenter was an RO on that stage and he brought a bunch of his 4x4 caddies to loan out - thank goodness)and loading their belts with everything shotgun. You could not wear that many caddies and then put on a holster, mag holders, and AR mag holders too. You literally run out of room to put equipment on your belt (even if you wear a BIG belt like me). I realize a 42 round all shotgun doesn't happen at every event, but stages like that are out there. You just can't wear all the gear you'll need for the match all at once.

I see there have been several posts about removing entire holstered pistols/ outer belts since I commented on it several pages ago (I'm for being able to remove them). If there are safety areas on every stage then removing the entire holstered pistol is not much of an issue. However, if I have to hunt down a safety area every time I reconfigure my rig (every stage) then I agree with The Mayor. There will be a lot of sneaky car/bathroom/behind the tree reconfiguring going on.

[outerlimits]

Swapping barrels? Ever carry an M60? That was pretty practical if my memory serves me correctly.

Ehh, that's a big stretch. The M60 and M240 that followed it were designed with quick-change barrels because of the dangers of cooking off rounds or a runaway gun because of high volumes of fire and a myriad of other reasons. All barrels were the same and performed the same. There was never a series of barrels for US GPMGs designed to provide different performance.

A better comparison would be the quick-change barrel system for the ACR or MGI's Hydra AR15 upper receiver. Those are designed to change barrels to allow you to run multiple calibers and barrel lengths off of the same basic platform for more utility. They're quick-change in the sense that it's quicker to go thru the change process with those guns than a normal AR (which would require a bench, vise, receiver block, tools, etc.).

was thinking something like this...

[Stlhead]

Now that is a stage gun I would like to see in a major match!

Pat,

Think of it this way, you are at work and a situation arrises. You decide as you leave your vehicle what to bring with you to deal with the situation. Even then you most likely have multiple options available to you. You have flexibility in what tool you ultimately decide to use. If you had time to reconfigure a tool to better suit a challenge, then it would seem silly and possibly "Impractical" to not reconfigure the tool. If it is dark, would you not want a gun that had a light? Are you limited to only one pistol at work? Changing an upper on a rifle or mag tube on a shotgun is no different than selecting a different weapon from a rack or tool from a tool box. A Cresent wrench will turn a nut, but a properly sized socket or box end wrench will do a better job. If you have the right tool available, it would seem silly to force the use of a less appropriate tool. The creative solution to shooting problems is the basis for our game, in the limited divisions the challenge is to solve the problem within the guidelines set up by the rules, in open the shooter should be free to come up with whatever they feel will best solve the shooting problem free of equipment restraints, bound only by safety and common sense.

[KentG]

USPSA needs trecognizeze that pistol only matches and 3 gun matches are two different animals... and should be treated as such.

I agree -

but I don't think that's being considered.

I deleted my first post but this is pretty much why. USPSA seems INTENT to take over multigun by assimilation. USPSA rules for multigun just dont work. USPSA should just face it that most of us want IMG style rules and adopt them and make the IMG/3 gun nation partners instead of trying to figure out how to tweak the USPSA rules to take over. Its not going to work. And I think lots of shooters would have hard feeling toward USPSA for trying to be the 300 pound gorilla.

[DyNo!]

USPSA needs trecognizeze that pistol only matches and 3 gun matches are two different animals... and should be treated as such.

I agree -

but I don't think that's being considered.

I deleted my first post but this is pretty much why. USPSA seems INTENT to take over multigun by assimilation. USPSA rules for multigun just dont work. USPSA should just face it that most of us want IMG style rules and adopt them and make the IMG/3 gun nation partners instead of trying to figure out how to tweak the USPSA rules to take over. Its not going to work. And I think lots of shooters would have hard feeling toward USPSA for trying to be the 300 pound gorilla.

Bingo...

[Alaskapopo]

Now that is a stage gun I would like to see in a major match!

Pat,

Think of it this way, you are at work and a situation arrises. You decide as you leave your vehicle what to bring with you to deal with the situation. Even then you most likely have multiple options available to you. You have flexibility in what tool you ultimately decide to use. If you had time to reconfigure a tool to better suit a challenge, then it would seem silly and possibly "Impractical" to not reconfigure the tool. If it is dark, would you not want a gun that had a light? Are you limited to only one pistol at work? Changing an upper on a rifle or mag tube on a shotgun is no different than selecting a different weapon from a rack or tool from a tool box. A Cresent wrench will turn a nut, but a properly sized socket or box end wrench will do a better job. If you have the right tool available, it would seem silly to force the use of a less appropriate tool. The creative solution to shooting problems is the basis for our game, in the limited divisions the challenge is to solve the problem within the guidelines set up by the rules, in open the shooter should be free to come up with whatever they feel will best solve the shooting problem free of equipment restraints, bound only by safety and common sense.

For pistols at work I carry a 17 as my duty gun and a 19 as my BUG. That is one more pistol than most guys carry. I carry a SCAR 17 as a patrol rifle and a Remington 870 14 inch Vang pump 12 gauge for a shotgun. Thats pretty much it. I just think simpler is better. If you could use different rifles on different stages and shotguns I personally feel your losing the intent of the sport. But to each his own. However I would not be against starting a new type of match where that would be possible and see how it works out.

Pat

Edited June 27, 2012 by Alaskapopo

[DocMedic]

losing the intent of the sport...

Careful with that word, the only intent for this sport is that the person who shoots fastest(or scores the most points if HF is involve) wins.

[frag316]

losing the intent of the sport...

Careful with that word, the only intent for this sport is that the person who shoots fastest(or scores the most points if HF is involve) wins.

Ehh, not quite. The intent of this sport is for the person who scores the most points in the shortest time with a given gun wins--when you're talking about USPSA. They have rules about using multiple guns in a single match, and the idea of swapping guns for specific stages doesn't fall into that.

At the same time, I can't see any sport allowing anyone to use multiple guns in the same match, just so they can pick and choose the gun for the stage they're about to shoot. It isn't practical--meaning that in the sense of the "P" in "USPSA."

Why do I say that? Remember back to Cooper's intent when he founded USPSA, and remember what his mindset was all the time. Most people don't have two or three (or five or six) different guns they're going to grab when it comes time to defend themselves when something goes bump at O-dark-thirty. They might have a pistol and shotgun or a rifle and a pistol, but most will have one gun only. No one has the time to go to the safe (even if it's where they sleep) and think "Hmmm, I'm clearing the house (which is a bad idea unless you HAVE to do it), should I take the 1911, my Benelli, or my M4gery?" They definitely don't think "Well, I'll take the Benelli, but I'll have to change out the barrel because I forgot to put the 18" barrel on after using the 26" barrel to hunt ducks." The concept is somewhat ridiculous on its face.

When I have to defend my house, my gun is a 16" M1A (shooting thru the walls is lots easier than around corners), mostly because I don't have a shotgun set up for home defense right now. It's not a dedicated weapon, so my carry 1911 (which is dedicated) is the alternate. But I don't swap major components around willy-nilly. And I wouldn't in a critical situation. That's silly.

[Chuck Anderson]

At the same time, I can't see any sport allowing anyone to use multiple guns in the same match, just so they can pick and choose the gun for the stage they're about to shoot. It isn't practical--meaning that in the sense of the "P" in "USPSA."

You need to come shoot the Crimson Trace Match. You can bring 24 guns if you want and shoot different ones on every stage. Don't care. You probably won't win but the rules there will allow you to do it.

[Chuck Anderson]

USPSA needs trecognizeze that pistol only matches and 3 gun matches are two different animals... and should be treated as such.

I agree -

but I don't think that's being considered.

I deleted my first post but this is pretty much why. USPSA seems INTENT to take over multigun by assimilation. USPSA rules for multigun just dont work. USPSA should just face it that most of us want IMG style rules and adopt them and make the IMG/3 gun nation partners instead of trying to figure out how to tweak the USPSA rules to take over. Its not going to work. And I think lots of shooters would have hard feeling toward USPSA for trying to be the 300 pound gorilla.

Kent, go back and take a look at the post I wrote about why USPSA created the rule set. It has nothing to do with assimilating existing IMGA matches. We did try to get input from many of those MD's. Not to force them to use what we have but to give them the option. USPSA is far from a 300 pound gorilla when it comes to Multigun. More like one of those sad little monkeys they test shampoo on. But there is a purpose for it. IMGA does a great job when it's used by existing match directors and experienced shooters who paid $1000.00 to get to the match. They know what to expect because that same RO has worked a dozen IMGA matches and the MD has put on a bunch. I know what to expect of I go to the IMGA match put on by JJ and Denise. I know what to expect when I go to one put on by Andy Horner. I know what to expect now when I go to one put on by Jeff Cramblitt. Those matches are great, but we're already filling them at a ridiculous rate. With many of the same people. If I go shoot a major IMGA match in W. VA, I'll know at least 100 of the shooters because I shot with them in Raton, or Mesa, or at the Ozark match. Major matches are great but to grow the sport there needs to be a local match level as well. IMGA match rules do not work as well at local level because they leave an awful lot out, which leads to the MD/RM making decisions that may not go along with any logic other than what he feels like doing that way. This is a similar situation to where Pistol matches were 35 years ago. A hodge podge of local matches that had inconsistent rules. Heck when I started shooting it was at a little local 3 Gun tactical match. I quit going because the "rules" they used changed each day, each person and I got tired of getting hit with penalties that were retarded.

If we can increase the number of local matches by allowing clubs to have a ruleset to get them started that will be consistent across the board it'll do two things. One it will allow some new shooters to get involved in the sport without having to spend $500.00 to try it out for their first time. There are also shooters who go to majors because there is nowhere else for them to do three gun. If they can shoot locals and be happy, cool. Just eases the registration loads for the big three gun matches so some of the other newbies starting locally can bump to majors.

[DocMedic]

Ehh, not quite. The intent of this sport is for the person who scores the most points in the shortest time with a given gun wins--when you're talking about USPSA. They have rules about using multiple guns in a single match, and the idea of swapping guns for specific stages doesn't fall into that.

At the same time, I can't see any sport allowing anyone to use multiple guns in the same match, just so they can pick and choose the gun for the stage they're about to shoot. It isn't practical--meaning that in the sense of the "P" in "USPSA."

Why do I say that? Remember back to Cooper's intent when he founded USPSA, and remember what his mindset was all the time. Most people don't have two or three (or five or six) different guns they're going to grab when it comes time to defend themselves when something goes bump at O-dark-thirty. They might have a pistol and shotgun or a rifle and a pistol, but most will have one gun only. No one has the time to go to the safe (even if it's where they sleep) and think "Hmmm, I'm clearing the house (which is a bad idea unless you HAVE to do it), should I take the 1911, my Benelli, or my M4gery?" They definitely don't think "Well, I'll take the Benelli, but I'll have to change out the barrel because I forgot to put the 18" barrel on after using the 26" barrel to hunt ducks." The concept is somewhat ridiculous on its face.

When I have to defend my house, my gun is a 16" M1A (shooting thru the walls is lots easier than around corners), mostly because I don't have a shotgun set up for home defense right now. It's not a dedicated weapon, so my carry 1911 (which is dedicated) is the alternate. But I don't swap major components around willy-nilly. And I wouldn't in a critical situation. That's silly.

Thank you that was a good read, while I see your point you are trying to make I just don't see it being the case in todays version of the "game". I don't think Cooper foresaw us placing red dots, super large mag wells, and compinsators on our pistols when he first came out with concept of USPSA. and besides this is 3gun not pistol only.

I'm not saying all division should have the allowance of changing guns per stage, but I would like to see OPEN division to be able to distinguished itself away from the other division in a way that allows a chance for more participation. I believe the ability to pick and choose the gear or firearms before shooting a stage adds a whole new dynamic to the division, much like picking golf clubs when playing golf. Someone in this thread said if we did ended up doing that, people might feel it becomes a gear race and that they would need to buy that 14inch AR in order to compete or that 24 inch for those long range stages. If these rules did ever come to light it may cast a mirage where that might be the feeling, but I promise you that the same guys that are kicking my ass today, will probably still kick my ass tomorrow (hopefully with a lessor margin..) and besides OPEN is the premiere Gear race regardless.

I see Open division more of a branch off division then a entry division due to the equipment requirements. I don't know many although there are few that come into 3gun knowing they want to shoot OPEN, the few exception are those who came from USPSA OPEN pistol, and those who owned Saigas before hand.

I don't know maybe I like to see OPEN evolve more to what trooper is, I'm not saying you should be able to use 5 different shotguns on one stage (although... if you haven't tried that yet, it adds a complete new dynamic to the sport ) but from what I've seen trooper is growing every year for a very good reason over OPEN, and I believe the biggest reason that is because the current rules in OPEN Fails to address the inherit problems of OPEN not being allow to be well OPEN. Where trooper has virtually no limitations outside of safety other then you must be able to carry it on your back.

As for the 300lbs Gorrila, I wouldn't necessarily say that, as Chuck said this would most likely help the local club seen more then whats already been establish at bigger matches. Recently I was asked by one of the range official that I'm a BOD for if I wanted to be be a MD and start up a local 3gun match. I've been reluctant to give them a answer so far, but if I did decided to do it, I would be deffently intrested in using the Multi-gun rule set as a foundation. I've been to many local out-law 3gun matches, and like Chuck experense the rules are all over the place and I find those rules mostly benefit the said staff abilities But that's not to say outlaw matches don't work as I go to JJ and Denises local match every chance I get, but those 2 have long establish themselves of being able to run a match and have a set rule base that is unbiased. The only other example that I have is MarkP on these forums, he started a USPSA based Multigun match locally, and I know Mark has been working diligently to make sure that they stay up with the new rule sets as it comes out of the USPSA office, and I have seen that match grow into a very nice match over the short period it has been up.

Free OPEN.

Edited June 27, 2012 by DocMedic

[co-exprs]

I can barely manage the three guns I have. Trying to field more than that would bankrupt my patience.

[Stlhead]

Now that is a stage gun I would like to see in a major match!

Pat,

Think of it this way, you are at work and a situation arrises. You decide as you leave your vehicle what to bring with you to deal with the situation. Even then you most likely have multiple options available to you. You have flexibility in what tool you ultimately decide to use. If you had time to reconfigure a tool to better suit a challenge, then it would seem silly and possibly "Impractical" to not reconfigure the tool. If it is dark, would you not want a gun that had a light? Are you limited to only one pistol at work? Changing an upper on a rifle or mag tube on a shotgun is no different than selecting a different weapon from a rack or tool from a tool box. A Cresent wrench will turn a nut, but a properly sized socket or box end wrench will do a better job. If you have the right tool available, it would seem silly to force the use of a less appropriate tool. The creative solution to shooting problems is the basis for our game, in the limited divisions the challenge is to solve the problem within the guidelines set up by the rules, in open the shooter should be free to come up with whatever they feel will best solve the shooting problem free of equipment restraints, bound only by safety and common sense.

For pistols at work I carry a 17 as my duty gun and a 19 as my BUG. That is one more pistol than most guys carry. I carry a SCAR 17 as a patrol rifle and a Remington 870 14 inch Vang pump 12 gauge for a shotgun. Thats pretty much it. I just think simpler is better. If you could use different rifles on different stages and shotguns I personally feel your losing the intent of the sport. But to each his own. However I would not be against starting a new type of match where that would be possible and see how it works out.

Pat

Pat,

Do you also carry a striking tool? Possibly some other less-lethal options? My point is that you will use the best tools for the job from the tools that you have at your disposal at the time, that is "Practical". I am advocating that in open (in my mind the division that most closely mirrors the real world) you would be allowed the same freedom of choice. You chose to carry a G17 as your primary pistol, Hopefully it is in your mind the best tool for the job, same with your BUG. Your rifle is most likely configured in the way that you feel offers you the best chance of assuring the outcome you desire. In noncompetitive situations, people are not confined by rules and can choose the tool that in their opinion will result in the best outcome. Saying that one weapon or another is less or more practical is flawed. There are certainly situations where the features and benefits of one weapon will allow it advantages over others, even if it is a narrow window of application where its advantages are applicable. Specifically what I would like to see would be the option in open to use different guns on different stages, or the freedom to modify a gun to best suit the stage design.

It seems we are in a round about way debating the definition of "Practical" as it applies to our sport. Lets set aside the practical discussion for now. I don't see practical being the reason behind my desire to see open shooters allowed more freedom in 3 gun. The freestyle nature of our sport is a large part of the draw to me and many others I am sure. We are provided the freedom to solve the problems within the rules. Creativity and ingenuity are rewarded in our sport. I think that open is the place that should be afforded the most opportunity to express that creativity. I think that open competitors should be bound by little more than the rules required to assure safe participation. I have shot trooper at the Ironman, and will do so again, many of my friends shoot trooper every year, no one shoots trooper because they like carrying a heavy pack, they shoot it because it is the most entertaining way to shoot a match. The freedom to choose what tool, and how you will use it opens up a whole new level of creativity, and expressing that creativity is unbelievably rewarding. If open more closely resembled trooper I can assure you that me and many of those I shoot with would shoot little else. So I will offer my best most compelling argument to free open, It will make open more fun.

[Alaskapopo]

Another practical issue is for those of us who have to fly to major matches. If open were to allow multiple guns there is no way we could carry that many and could not compete equally. Sorry but I think Open is just fine the way it is.

Pat