Table start, Accidental Discharge DQ question

[sharps4070ss]

Today at a local match we had a accidental discharge and I was trying to find the rule to issue a match DQ.

Situation:

Seated in chair behind table, loaded gun on table.

Upon start signal, engage targets as they become visible.

At the start signal, the shooter stood up, and while grabbing his gun, he hit the trigger with his middle finger.

(Gun was still sitting on the table.)

His shot hit a target down range, but he clearly hadn't aimed at it.

The best rule for a match DQ we could find would be 10.5 (Unsafe Gun Handling)

For the record, the shooter was not arguing against a DQ, he felt that he clearly made a mistake (in fact, he stayed and helped for the rest of the day, a real class move on his part, ).

Can anybody find a better (or more applicable) rule?

Lee

Edited June 24, 2012 by sharps4070ss

[DyNo!]

Firing a gun while switching hands.

[Poppa Bear]

10.4.6 A shot which occurs during movement, except while actually shooting

at targets.

Movement . . . . . . . . . . . .Taking more than one step in any direction, or changing

body position (e.g. from standing to kneeling,

from seated to standing etc.)

[Sarge]

The fact that it hit a target only helps the shooter had he wanted to make a case of it. The fact that the shooter admitted it was an AD hurt him. The only one that comes close in my opinion is :

10.5.10 Failure to keep the finger outside the trigger guard during movement in

accordance with Section 8.5.

Edited June 24, 2012 by Sarge

[sharps4070ss]

10.4.6 A shot which occurs during movement, except while actually shooting

at targets.

Movement . . . . . . . . . . . .Taking more than one step in any direction, or changing

body position (e.g. from standing to kneeling,

from seated to standing etc.)

But when does "movement" stop?

He had stood up fully, and was reaching for his gun (the first four targets were taken from that position).

(not to mention that his shot hit one of those targets)

[Sarge]

I'll go out on a limb and say he should not have been DQ'd if that's the case.

[sharps4070ss]

That's why we were thinking 10.5

"Examples of unsafe gun handling include, but are not limited to:"

But that strikes me as too close to "Failure to Do Right"

(and for the record, I didn't think he should be DQ'ed either, because I couldn't find a specific rule)

Edited June 24, 2012 by sharps4070ss

[Sarge]

10.5 is not a violation. It's a set of violations that are described under it.

[sharps4070ss]

But the key part is "but are not limited to:"

Theoretically that could be a catch all for anything.

[Nik Habicht]

10.5 is not a violation. It's a set of violations that are described under it.

10.5 can be cited -- it's not an inclusive list....

[sperman]

You can certainly be DQ'd for Unsafe Gun handling under 10.5. Like Sharps said, it lists some specific examples, but cannot begin to enumerate every possible case of Unsafe Gun Handling.

Nik beat me to it.

Edited June 24, 2012 by sperman

[Nik Habicht]

But the key part is "but are not limited to:"

Theoretically that could be a catch all for anything.

That's the intent. While the rules writers had experience to draw on, there's always the possibility of a new -- heretofore unseen -- unsafe action cropping up....

[Jadeslade]

Is there anything in the rules that say you can't leave the gun on the table and shoot the targets?

[Sarge]

So you can say a shooter is DQ'd for 10.5 and just add that you thought the way he moved from one port to another was unsafe? Seems when we get away from the written rules we open everything up to interpretation. An RO could DQ a shooter for pointing the gun at the ground when he goes hammer down at the end of a stage because he thinks it's not a safe thing to do because if the gun goes off it will throw rocks, etc.

I see new shooters do things every match that are probably unsafe in my "opinion". Such as when unloading they cup their hand over the ejection port. I think that is terribly unsafe and I tell them why I think that. But maybe I should start DQing them so nothing bad happens.

I just don't see using catch alls when it comes to the rules.

[CAB33]

At Nationals a couple years ago a guy fired his gun from the table start, putting a hole through one of the cards at the end of the table.

He was not DQ'ed because the gun was pointing towards targets.

[sharps4070ss]

So you can say a shooter is DQ'd for 10.5 and just add that you thought the way he moved from one port to another was unsafe? Seems when we get away from the written rules we open everything up to interpretation. An RO could DQ a shooter for pointing the gun at the ground when he goes hammer down at the end of a stage because he thinks it's not a safe thing to do because if the gun goes off it will throw rocks, etc.

I see new shooters do things every match that are probably unsafe in my "opinion". Such as when unloading they cup their hand over the ejection port. I think that is terribly unsafe and I tell them why I think that. But maybe I should start DQing them so nothing bad happens.

I just don't see using catch alls when it comes to the rules.

THIS!!!!!

Exactly what I DO NOT LIKE about using 10.5

I wish there was a specific "gun goes off when shooter is not aiming" type of rule than using a catch-all in this case.

Lee

[remoandiris]

His shot hit a target down range, but he clearly hadn't aimed at it.

IMO, if he had argued, he would have won. Shot hit the target. Nothing I could find in the rules say the shooter's eyes have to line up with the sights to "aim". Nothing I could find in the rules says point shooting isn't allowed.

At Area 6, a world-class shooter had a similar experience. CRO overruled the RO because the shot hit the target. Sometimes you just get lucky.

Edited June 24, 2012 by remoandiris

[Poppa Bear]

I also do not think he should have been DQ'ed, but if one was to be issued I would use 10.4.6.

[sharps4070ss]

I also do not think he should have been DQ'ed, but if one was to be issued I would use 10.4.6.

Problem with 10.4.6 is that he hit the target.

I (like remoandiris) can't find anything that says you have to actually aim at a target.

He could argue that he WAS shooting at that target while moving (standing up in this case)

That leads us back to 10.5 IMHO

Lee

[sperman]

I would have no problem issuing the DQ under 10.5. If the CRO or RM overturned my decision, that would be OK too.

[Poppa Bear]

I also do not think he should have been DQ'ed, but if one was to be issued I would use 10.4.6.

Problem with 10.4.6 is that he hit the target.

I (like remoandiris) can't find anything that says you have to actually aim at a target.

He could argue that he WAS shooting at that target while moving (standing up in this case)

That leads us back to 10.5 IMHO

Lee

Which is also based on movement.

10.5.10 Failure to keep the finger outside the trigger guard during movement in

accordance with Section 8.5.

8.5.1 Except when the competitor is actually aiming or shooting at targets, all movement (see Appendix A3) must be accomplished with the fingers visibly outside the trigger guard and the safety should be engaged.

The handgun must be pointed in a safe direction.

He accepted the DQ based on intent. He did not intend to fire the gun at that time so he voluntarily accepted the DQ. If he argued it at all I do not see a way to DQ him unless you can definitively say he was still moving when the gun went off and then use either 10.4.6, or 10.5.10 which ever fits the circumstances the best.

[Sarge]

Another reason to never admit to ANYTHING! Just play dumb, keep shooting, whatever. Once the RO stops you he has to make his case. Don't help him.

[pvhendrix]

The individual involved in the incident seemes to have the integrity, I would like to have in people involved in our sport. He had the intestinal fortitude to know he was wrong and took it like a true good sport. Hear Hear... for whomever it was!

Edited June 24, 2012 by pvhendrix

[BMartens]

If he picked up the gun while sitting and began engaging targets while he stood up, would that be. DQ? Nobody has to aim at a target to engage a target, I hear that comment a lot ...no DQ here. ULSC and score it.

[sharps4070ss]

I also do not think he should have been DQ'ed, but if one was to be issued I would use 10.4.6.

Problem with 10.4.6 is that he hit the target.

I (like remoandiris) can't find anything that says you have to actually aim at a target.

He could argue that he WAS shooting at that target while moving (standing up in this case)

That leads us back to 10.5 IMHO

Lee

Which is also based on movement.

10.5.10 Failure to keep the finger outside the trigger guard during movement in

accordance with Section 8.5.

8.5.1 Except when the competitor is actually aiming or shooting at targets, all movement (see Appendix A3) must be accomplished with the fingers visibly outside the trigger guard and the safety should be engaged.

The handgun must be pointed in a safe direction.

He accepted the DQ based on intent. He did not intend to fire the gun at that time so he voluntarily accepted the DQ. If he argued it at all I do not see a way to DQ him unless you can definitively say he was still moving when the gun went off and then use either 10.4.6, or 10.5.10 which ever fits the circumstances the best.

I don't think you could get a 10.4.6 to stick.

Movement or not, he hit a target. The shooter could claim he was aiming at it.

It would come down to the RO deciphering the shooter's intent, and calling him out on a lie.