10.4.3, 10.4.4

[Poppa Bear]

10.4.3 A shot which occurs while loading, reloading or unloading a handgun.

This includes any shot fired during the procedures outlined in Rule 8.3.1 and Rule 8.3.7.

10.4.3.1 Exception – a detonation, which occurs while unloading a handgun, is not considered a shot or discharge subject to a match disqualification, however, Rule 5.1.6 may apply.

10.4.4 A shot which occurs during remedial action in the case of a malfunction.

OK, here is the situation and question. While practicing last night I jammed my gun up solid because I failed to chamber check the bullets in that plastic container. I went down range and pulled on the slide. Did not budge. Got a good grip on the slide and smacked the butt. Did not budge. Got a better grip on the slide and smacked it harder yet. Slide broke free, round hit the ejector and detonated. That stung like you would not beleive, or maybe you will. Fellow shooter said I was lucky it was not a match because I would be DQ'ed for having an AD. I pointed out the exemption for a detonation, and he said are you sure because it happened while clearing a jam. That would fall under 10.4.4.

I know what I think the call is if it happened during a match, but I know there are some out there who have actually dealt with it. So is my ASSumption correct in that all detonations are exempt?

Edited July 17, 2012 by Poppa Bear

[aztecdriver]

I haven't dealt with a detonation yet. In order for a shot to have occurred, it must leave the barrel. Even though the placement of the exception is under 10.4.3, it still applies in that you did not have a shot. As long as you didn't DROP the gun or break any other safety rule (sweeping, 180), no DQ should apply.

Shot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A bullet which passes completely through the barrel of a firearm.

This didn't occur, therefore a shot never occurred, therefore 10.4.4 doesn't apply regardless.

[remoandiris]

Where did the bullet go?

[Poppa Bear]

It and the remains of the case were laying by my feet. The mag was out so I figure most of the explosion was directed up or down with the bullet and case being contained within the port/grip where it immediately fell to the ground.

My injuries were a blood blister on my fore finger and a small cut on my middle finger.

Edited July 17, 2012 by Poppa Bear

[Sarge]

It and the remains of the case were laying by my feet. .

In that case it was not a "shot" so no DQ.

Glad you are OK.

PS I check every round I run through the gun. Even the scrap bucket as long as I know they are safe to shoot.

[Poppa Bear]

4 of the 5 boxes of 100 were checked. Figures I would grab the one box I had not checked. Can't find my case gauge so I ordered a new one but it will not be here until Friday.

I stress to all the shooters I run to NOT cover the port while unloading. I figure the blood blister is from the slide closing on it, the cut is likely from a small piece of brass bouncing off the breech face. If my fingers would have been over the port while I was trying to clear it I do not know what the result would have been.

[High Lord Gomer]

Out of curiousity....what kind of gun was it?

[lcs]

10.4.3 A shot which occurs while loading, reloading or unloading a handgun.

This includes any shot fired during the procedures outlined in Rule 8.3.1 and Rule 8.3.7.

10.4.3.1 Exception – a detonation, which occurs while unloading a handgun, is not considered a shot or discharge subject to a match disqualification, however, Rule 5.1.6 may apply.

10.4.4 A shot which occurs during remedial action in the case of a malfunction.

OK, here is the situation and question. While practicing last night I jammed my gun up solid because I failed to chamber check the bullets in that plastic container. I went down range and pulled on the slide. Did not budge. Got a good grip on the slide and smacked the butt. Did not budge. Got a better grip on the slide and smacked it harder yet. Slide broke free, round hit the ejector and detonated. That stung like you would not beleive, or maybe you will. Fellow shooter said I was lucky it was not a match because I would be DQ'ed for having an AD. I pointed out the exemption for a detonation, and he said are you sure because it happened while clearing a jam. That would fall under 10.4.4.

I know what I think the call is if it happened during a match, but I know there are some out there who have actually dealt with it. So is my ASSumption correct in that all detonations are exempt?

IF the bullet exited the front of the barrel = DQ

All other detonations, the bullet does not exit the front of the barrel = No DQ.

[Poppa Bear]

Out of curiousity....what kind of gun was it?

STI.

[diehli]

It sounds like we're hypothesizing that a detonation can result in a shot. I'd think that'd be a 1 in a trillion occurrence and would probably result in the bullet being lodged in the barrel anyway, due to a lack of force to get it all the way out.

Generally, I think it's safe to say that a detonation is not a shot and vice-versa. One results in a DQ and the other doesn't.

BTW, glad you weren't more seriously injured.

[Poppa Bear]

I would agree. A detonation is a detonation and not DQable. I do not know anyone who would continue after a detonation. Myself until I could check the rest of the box I was not shooting anymore. Once was enough.

That said the question did come up that it was during a remedial action so could 10.4.4 apply. A detonation not being a shot my thoughts were no, but it is such a rare occurance that some might say it is.

Edited July 18, 2012 by Poppa Bear

[diehli]

Yeah, that whole "WTF just happened?!?!?!" thing tends to slow even the steeliest of us down.

And, yeah, aztecdriver got it right referring to Appendix A3. Don't forget the appendices are part of the rulebook and although all definitions aren't there (e.g. you have to refer to 10.5.12 to find the definition of "dummy round" [which includes empty cases for our purposes]), it's a good one to have tabbed for just such an occasion.

[Skydiver]

I think the question comes down to: "If you are RO'ing somebody who has a jam: in the process of clearing the jam the shooter experiences a detonation, do you yell 'STOP!' ?".

For me, if the shooter is fiddling around with a gun because of a jam, I try to get an even better view of the gun to make sure that fingers don't go into the trigger guard, and make sure the muzzle direction stays safely within the 180. I am hoping that I will be able to discern that it was a detonation and let the shooter continue unmolested. I have a feeling, though, that if the shooter uses an unconventional technique (eg. something different from the one described by the OP) I would instinctively call STOP the moment I hear a BANG!. After checking to make sure the shooter is okay, I would figure out that it was a detonation and order a reshoot.

Edited July 18, 2012 by Skydiver

[diehli]

Definitely yell "STOP!" I was shocked at how readily it came out of my mouth when we were practicing ROing during the Level I class I took this past weekend and George Jones pretended to be a nervous shooter and turned into a juggler. I was also shocked at how amped and antsy his gestures with a fake, orange gun made me.

BTW, where do you get the authority to order a reshoot? A detonation would occur while clearing a malfunction—in which case the governing rule is 5.7.6 or 5.7.7—or during ULSC, and it would seem as though you'd already have the time if you've shown the scorekeeping RO the timer. If the time doesn't get seen or is changed by the detonation, then there'd be authority for a reshoot (9.10.1), assuming the gun's determined to be safe (although I'm not sure if 5.7.6 would apply, I'd want the gun checked by the RM).

At least that's how it looks like it should shake out to me.

[Chris iliff]

The Stop command would allow the reshoot. That would be my call.

Gun goes off while competitor is fiddling with it, I'd issue Stop command. Discern what really happened, in this case a detonation, then issue a reshoot. I can't restart him from that point, there are no commands for that. No "continue" command.

Has to be a reshoot, and probably a bathroom break for both of us.

Some might say its scored as is. I haven't dove into the Rulebook looking, could be that is the case. I stand corrected if it is. I don't see how it could be once I stop him though. If I just stood there and said nothing, because I've got spidey senses and knew it was a detonation, he'd have to stop himself (scored as is) or continue (eat the time, score normal).

Edited July 18, 2012 by Chris iliff

[bikerburgess]

I would yell STOP and then investigate the situation, if it turns out that the bullet did not go down the barrel then I would Offer a re-shoot under 8.6.4 I think yelling STOP counts as a external influence. but the re-shoot is up to the shooter to accept.

8.6.4

In the event that inadvertent contact from the Range Officer or another

external influence has interfered with the competitor during a course of

fire, the Range Officer may offer the competitor a reshoot of the course

of fire. The competitor must accept or decline the offer prior to seeing

either the time or the score from the initial attempt. However, in the

event that the competitor commits a safety infraction during any such

interference, the provisions of Section 10.3 may still apply.

[diehli]

The Rules don't support the conclusion of a reshoot other than in the circumstances I described.

"STOP!" does not constitute RO interference when there's a safety issue, unless it turns out that a suspected squib was not one (a squib is neither a shot nor a detonation). See 8.6.1.

[HoMiE]

I would yell STOP and then investigate the situation, if it turns out that the bullet did not go down the barrel then I would Offer a re-shoot under 8.6.4 I think yelling STOP counts as a external influence. but the re-shoot is up to the shooter to accept.

8.6.4

In the event that inadvertent contact from the Range Officer or another

external influence has interfered with the competitor during a course of

fire, the Range Officer may offer the competitor a reshoot of the course

of fire. The competitor must accept or decline the offer prior to seeing

either the time or the score from the initial attempt. However, in the

event that the competitor commits a safety infraction during any such

interference, the provisions of Section 10.3 may still apply.

Different rules if that external influence is your own equipment. I agree with dehli post although I would have to disagree on the timer time to include up to the point of detonation. I would score CoF as shot up to the time of detonation.

Edited July 18, 2012 by HoMiE

[mike l m]

If it is a squib, score stands as is. If RO yells STOP, reshoot.

Mike

[Skydiver]

BTW, where do you get the authority to order a reshoot? A detonation would occur while clearing a malfunction—in which case the governing rule is 5.7.6 or 5.7.7—or during ULSC, and it would seem as though you'd already have the time if you've shown the scorekeeping RO the timer. If the time doesn't get seen or is changed by the detonation, then there'd be authority for a reshoot (9.10.1), assuming the gun's determined to be safe (although I'm not sure if 5.7.6 would apply, I'd want the gun checked by the RM).

At least that's how it looks like it should shake out to me.

Sorry... offer a reshoot under 8.6.4, not order. Good point.

I don't think a gun jam satisfies the condition "the handgun has failed" of 5.7.6 or 5.7.7. A jam is a simple malfunction, not a total failure, in my eyes. To me "handgun has failed" mean the gun has become unusable or unsafe.

Edited July 18, 2012 by Skydiver

[HoMiE]

BTW, where do you get the authority to order a reshoot? A detonation would occur while clearing a malfunction—in which case the governing rule is 5.7.6 or 5.7.7—or during ULSC, and it would seem as though you'd already have the time if you've shown the scorekeeping RO the timer. If the time doesn't get seen or is changed by the detonation, then there'd be authority for a reshoot (9.10.1), assuming the gun's determined to be safe (although I'm not sure if 5.7.6 would apply, I'd want the gun checked by the RM).

At least that's how it looks like it should shake out to me.

Sorry... offer a reshoot under 8.6.4, not order. Good point.

I don't think a gun jam satisfies the condition "the handgun has failed" of 5.7.6 or 5.7.7. A jam is a simple malfunction, not a total failure, in my eyes.

The condition is an unsafe handgun or unsafe ammunition. The ammo caused the malfunction with created an unsafe condition. So you give shooter reshoot and same situation happens again? Do you keep offering reshoot? I've seen this happen before once where ejector caused detonation and another time where there was a case head seperation. In the case of detonation, the competitor was DQ'd. The case head seperation shooter got to reshoot as it was determined he could not have avoided that instance, but the shooter who had to rack slide hard was "at fault' so to speak.

[Poppa Bear]

BTW, where do you get the authority to order a reshoot? A detonation would occur while clearing a malfunction—in which case the governing rule is 5.7.6 or 5.7.7—or during ULSC, and it would seem as though you'd already have the time if you've shown the scorekeeping RO the timer. If the time doesn't get seen or is changed by the detonation, then there'd be authority for a reshoot (9.10.1), assuming the gun's determined to be safe (although I'm not sure if 5.7.6 would apply, I'd want the gun checked by the RM).

At least that's how it looks like it should shake out to me.

Sorry... offer a reshoot under 8.6.4, not order. Good point.

I don't think a gun jam satisfies the condition "the handgun has failed" of 5.7.6 or 5.7.7. A jam is a simple malfunction, not a total failure, in my eyes.

The condition is an unsafe handgun or unsafe ammunition. The ammo caused the malfunction with created an unsafe condition. So you give shooter reshoot and same situation happens again? Do you keep offering reshoot? I've seen this happen before once where ejector caused detonation and another time where there was a case head seperation. In the case of detonation, the competitor was DQ'd. The case head seperation shooter got to reshoot as it was determined he could not have avoided that instance, but the shooter who had to rack slide hard was "at fault' so to speak.

I can see the reshoot for the case head separation if the bullet leaves the gun. Suspected squib where the RO calls STOP and the gun turns out to be clear. If the bullet is still in the barrel then we have a squib and the stage is scored as shot. 5.7.7, 5.7.7.1, and 5.7.7.2.

Under what rule did they DQ the person with the detonation? Unless he broke another rule like either dropping the gun or a 180 violation I do not see a reason to DQ. I can see a reason to withdraw the gun under 5.1.6, or the ammo under 5.5.5 but not a reason to DQ.

[diehli]

BTW, where do you get the authority to order a reshoot? A detonation would occur while clearing a malfunction—in which case the governing rule is 5.7.6 or 5.7.7—or during ULSC, and it would seem as though you'd already have the time if you've shown the scorekeeping RO the timer. If the time doesn't get seen or is changed by the detonation, then there'd be authority for a reshoot (9.10.1), assuming the gun's determined to be safe (although I'm not sure if 5.7.6 would apply, I'd want the gun checked by the RM).

At least that's how it looks like it should shake out to me.

Sorry... offer a reshoot under 8.6.4, not order. Good point.

I don't think a gun jam satisfies the condition "the handgun has failed" of 5.7.6 or 5.7.7. A jam is a simple malfunction, not a total failure, in my eyes. To me "handgun has failed" mean the gun has become unusable or unsafe.

We're not talking about a jam, we're talking about a detonation that results from clearing a jam. In that case, 10.4.4 would apply, except it wouldn't be a shot, just a detonation. As such, the result would be the same as 10.4.3.1, at least in terms of a DQ.

When something explodes outside of the chamber (whether from a primer hitting a rock or a ejector-caused detonation), the RO should stop the competitor for safety purposes. That falls under the purview of 8.6.1.

5.7.7 would come into play when determining the score.

[diehli]

BTW, where do you get the authority to order a reshoot? A detonation would occur while clearing a malfunction—in which case the governing rule is 5.7.6 or 5.7.7—or during ULSC, and it would seem as though you'd already have the time if you've shown the scorekeeping RO the timer. If the time doesn't get seen or is changed by the detonation, then there'd be authority for a reshoot (9.10.1), assuming the gun's determined to be safe (although I'm not sure if 5.7.6 would apply, I'd want the gun checked by the RM).

At least that's how it looks like it should shake out to me.

Sorry... offer a reshoot under 8.6.4, not order. Good point.

I don't think a gun jam satisfies the condition "the handgun has failed" of 5.7.6 or 5.7.7. A jam is a simple malfunction, not a total failure, in my eyes.

The condition is an unsafe handgun or unsafe ammunition. The ammo caused the malfunction with created an unsafe condition. So you give shooter reshoot and same situation happens again? Do you keep offering reshoot? I've seen this happen before once where ejector caused detonation and another time where there was a case head seperation. In the case of detonation, the competitor was DQ'd. The case head seperation shooter got to reshoot as it was determined he could not have avoided that instance, but the shooter who had to rack slide hard was "at fault' so to speak.

I can see the reshoot for the case head separation if the bullet leaves the gun. Suspected squib where the RO calls STOP and the gun turns out to be clear. If the bullet is still in the barrel then we have a squib and the stage is scored as shot. 5.7.7, 5.7.7.1, and 5.7.7.2.

Under what rule did they DQ the person with the detonation? Unless he broke another rule like either dropping the gun or a 180 violation I do not see a reason to DQ. I can see a reason to withdraw the gun under 5.1.6, or the ammo under 5.5.5 but not a reason to DQ.

Exactly right on both counts. There's no authority for a DQ for a detonation. In fact, there's expressly authority that says that a person should not be DQ'd, per 10.4.3.1. Even if it was while clearing a malfunction, that would fall under 10.4.4, which requires a "shot", which, per Appendix A3 and 10.4.3.1 is not the same as a detonation.

[Skydiver]

BTW, where do you get the authority to order a reshoot? A detonation would occur while clearing a malfunction—in which case the governing rule is 5.7.6 or 5.7.7—or during ULSC, and it would seem as though you'd already have the time if you've shown the scorekeeping RO the timer. If the time doesn't get seen or is changed by the detonation, then there'd be authority for a reshoot (9.10.1), assuming the gun's determined to be safe (although I'm not sure if 5.7.6 would apply, I'd want the gun checked by the RM).

At least that's how it looks like it should shake out to me.

Sorry... offer a reshoot under 8.6.4, not order. Good point.

I don't think a gun jam satisfies the condition "the handgun has failed" of 5.7.6 or 5.7.7. A jam is a simple malfunction, not a total failure, in my eyes. To me "handgun has failed" mean the gun has become unusable or unsafe.

We're not talking about a jam, we're talking about a detonation that results from clearing a jam. In that case, 10.4.4 would apply, except it wouldn't be a shot, just a detonation. As such, the result would be the same as 10.4.3.1, at least in terms of a DQ.

When something explodes outside of the chamber (whether from a primer hitting a rock or a ejector-caused detonation), the RO should stop the competitor for safety purposes. That falls under the purview of 8.6.1.

5.7.7 would come into play when determining the score.

So in short, no reshoot because everyone seems to think that if the ammo causes a jam, which then causes the shooter to have a detonation, then the ammo is therefore unsafe, and therefore satisfies the conditions under 5.7.7.

So why is it if the same ammo that causes a jam, but the shooter clears the jam without a detonation, is considered safe?

It's the same ammo that caused the jam. It's the same gun that the gun jammed in. The only difference was that in one case, the probabilities conspired against the shooter and the ejector hit the primer, while in the other case it didn't. Either the ammo is safe or unsafe. Either the gun is safe or unsafe. I don't think it is fair to safe that the ammo/gun is unsafe if it goes bang, but it safe if it doesn't. It's like saying that the space shuttle if safe if it lands, but is unsafe if it blows up.