r o mistake

[lawboy]

This is a great example of why we are not allowed to move though out a stage with our fingers in the trigger gaurd.

AMEN!!!!

[Maksim]

I cannot fathom why it is the shooters fault that the RO cannot keep up.

As an RO... you really ought to be able to pick up on small signs that the shooter may back up...

1. You see a magazine drop off of a competitors belt and he may not have enough.

2. You see a competitor over run a target or take it in a different order.

2. Competitor leaves an activator or a piece of steel up.

All of those are big warning flags to stay cautious and at any point be ready to run the hell back as the shooter may back up.

An RO's job is to be invisible.

And I fully agree on the match management aspect of it... put the right RO's on the right stages and squads.

Just recently, was at a match where you have to go downrange, then come back up range shoot a bunch of targets, then go back downrange... Quite a few of the RO's were caught, and the competitor was back uprange faster than the RO... Fortunately targets and RO were on opposite sides. Then again, some of it is also stage design.

[sperman]

Just recently, was at a match where you have to go downrange, then come back up range shoot a bunch of targets, then go back downrange... Quite a few of the RO's were caught, and the competitor was back uprange faster than the RO... Fortunately targets and RO were on opposite sides. Then again, some of it is also stage design.

There is also the misconception that the RO has to be within arms length of the shooter at all times. I call those guys "velcro RO's" because they are stuck to the shooter like velcro, no matter what.

[whitedog]

Why should the RO not be close? If I can catch a squib, and stop him, is that not part of my job? Keeping shooter safe if I can? So he can still maybe count to ten? I believe the RO should be close enough to stop the shooter if he has to.

[remoandiris]

I believe the RO should be close enough to stop the shooter if he has to.

But not be so close as to cause interferes. It is a fine line.

[aztecdriver]

Why should the RO not be close? If I can catch a squib, and stop him, is that not part of my job? Keeping shooter safe if I can? So he can still maybe count to ten? I believe the RO should be close enough to stop the shooter if he has to.

You can do that from a descent distance. Some stages, if you are close enough to lay hands on them - you are far too close. Some people think you NEED to be able to do that - to "control" the shooter. I call BS. You should be in a proper position to protect yourself and others, but if you think you are going to be able to stop someone from breaking 180 on a trigger freeze running full blast down the range, you're not in reality.

[Thomas H]

Why should the RO not be close? If I can catch a squib, and stop him, is that not part of my job? Keeping shooter safe if I can? So he can still maybe count to ten? I believe the RO should be close enough to stop the shooter if he has to.

Last I knew, I used verbalization to stop shooters. I don't have to be within arm's length to do that.

I prefer to stay fairly close to the shooter. Sometimes, it simply isn't safe (due to their movement) or possible (due to the stage design). When that occurs, I'm not worried about it since my eyes and my voice are what control my part of the stage.

It is true that with some new shooters, there are cases where being close enough to physically stop someone may be helpful. However, as people have said, most of the time this is simply not true. And not possible.

I note I can hear a squib from 10 feet away as opposed to 5 feet. And I'm pretty sure I can make myself heard by the shooter at that distance.

Back to the original post---there is no grounds at all for DQing the shooter because the RO failed at their job. Whoever was the "higher up from NROI" (or however that was phrased) was flat-out wrong.

[motosapiens]

Why should the RO not be close? If I can catch a squib, and stop him, is that not part of my job? Keeping shooter safe if I can? So he can still maybe count to ten? I believe the RO should be close enough to stop the shooter if he has to.

Are you planning on tackling him? Or just shouting 'STOP'?

If the latter, you need not be within arms length.

[whitedog]

I plan on being within eye sight of the gun, the shooters hands, and his head. The body normally follows the head. Of course the c.o.f. , the experience of the shooter and terrain dictate distance. Some people do not react to audio stimulus in a stressful situation....butt 99% of the population tract to tactile. No I'm not going to "tackle him" , however I am going to make the attempt to touch him in a controlled manner as I yell stop. People get "tunnel hearing" as well as "tunnel vision" when stressed enough. I'm talking 3-4 feet away...not hugging distance.

Edited August 30, 2012 by whitedog

[remoandiris]

I'm talking 3-4 feet away...not hugging distance.

You mean about one step, on a run, for the average height male.

[Poppa Bear]

Close enough to control, far enough to run.

COF has a lot of closely spaced targets behind tight walls. Total COF is 16 targets in 20' of shooting area. No one can run because they are too close together. I can afford to be a lot closer to the shooter.

COF has targets widely spaced targets. Total COF is 12 targets and 30 yards of shooting area. I need to give the shooter room to start, run, and stop without bowling them over when the shooter slams on the brakes.

I need to know the stage better than the shooter. If they blow by a target, I need to know it before they pass it so I can give them some room to reverse their direction of travel. I also need the room to point it out to any other RO's or people videoing the run so that I can keep them from interfering with the shooters attempt at the course.

[Gary Stevens]

There is no DQ for this. It's a simple stop and a reshoot for RO interference. It happens, but it's not the competitor's fault if the RO gets out of position, and there is no rule to support disqualifying the competitor.

Troy

Is the RO nothing more than a stage prop that you can point a gun at and have no consequences? Isn't the shooter always responsible for their gun?

[Maksim]

There is no DQ for this. It's a simple stop and a reshoot for RO interference. It happens, but it's not the competitor's fault if the RO gets out of position, and there is no rule to support disqualifying the competitor.

Troy

Is the RO nothing more than a stage prop that you can point a gun at and have no consequences? Isn't the shooter always responsible for their gun?

Did the comeptitor purposely turned the gun at the RO?

If the RO is not where I expect them to be.... forward of me... there is little a shooter can do to stop the RO from coming into his line of fire.

Case in Point...

If I am RO'ing a shooter, and I get caught up sleeping, and the shooter jets back uprange or wherever to engage or reengage a target... it is my fault for not paying attention. I am the one that was unsafe, not necessarily the shooter.

At local matches... only if I am running a new shooter, on a fairly safe stage, with no 180 issues or RO traps... will come closer to the new shooter in order to guide if necessary and prevent issues before they happen. Otherwise... I will always be a few feet back and to the side where I am not a distraction to the shooter, but in full view of the gun. If I see a shooter run over a target, or it looks like they are running low on ammo or may run back... there is even more space and I am at full ready to jet back as to not get run over a shooter.

Only one time at a sectional match, was I in a position as an RO, that I felt I was interfering with the shooter and on my own, offered the shooter a reshoot. It was a revolver shooter who was fairly quick and in similar physical fit to me. I was on the full lookout and was in my regular RO position to look at the gun, when all of the sudden the shooter backed up unexpectedly and I was on his 180. He thought he missed a target completely (even though he did not). He nearly bumped me but I was out of his way but not his vision. Personally, if I was the shooter it would of freaked me out a bit, but the shooter apologized to me for startling the heck out of me, and declined the reshoot.

Was it the shooters fault? I don't think so. It was over 100 degrees, we were all exhausted, working the same stage and I did not expect any issues, especially since he shot the stages pretty much the same way as most other shooters.

[Gary Stevens]

There is no DQ for this. It's a simple stop and a reshoot for RO interference. It happens, but it's not the competitor's fault if the RO gets out of position, and there is no rule to support disqualifying the competitor.

Troy

Is the RO nothing more than a stage prop that you can point a gun at and have no consequences? Isn't the shooter always responsible for their gun?

Did the comeptitor purposely turned the gun at the RO?

If the RO is not where I expect them to be.... forward of me... there is little a shooter can do to stop the RO from coming into his line of fire.

Case in Point...

If I am RO'ing a shooter, and I get caught up sleeping, and the shooter jets back uprange or wherever to engage or reengage a target... it is my fault for not paying attention. I am the one that was unsafe, not necessarily the shooter.

At local matches... only if I am running a new shooter, on a fairly safe stage, with no 180 issues or RO traps... will come closer to the new shooter in order to guide if necessary and prevent issues before they happen. Otherwise... I will always be a few feet back and to the side where I am not a distraction to the shooter, but in full view of the gun. If I see a shooter run over a target, or it looks like they are running low on ammo or may run back... there is even more space and I am at full ready to jet back as to not get run over a shooter.

Only one time at a sectional match, was I in a position as an RO, that I felt I was interfering with the shooter and on my own, offered the shooter a reshoot. It was a revolver shooter who was fairly quick and in similar physical fit to me. I was on the full lookout and was in my regular RO position to look at the gun, when all of the sudden the shooter backed up unexpectedly and I was on his 180. He thought he missed a target completely (even though he did not). He nearly bumped me but I was out of his way but not his vision. Personally, if I was the shooter it would of freaked me out a bit, but the shooter apologized to me for startling the heck out of me, and declined the reshoot.

Was it the shooters fault? I don't think so. It was over 100 degrees, we were all exhausted, working the same stage and I did not expect any issues, especially since he shot the stages pretty much the same way as most other shooters.

So the shooter is not always responsible for their deadly weapon? Just depends on the circumstances?

[Maksim]

There is no DQ for this. It's a simple stop and a reshoot for RO interference. It happens, but it's not the competitor's fault if the RO gets out of position, and there is no rule to support disqualifying the competitor.

Troy

Is the RO nothing more than a stage prop that you can point a gun at and have no consequences? Isn't the shooter always responsible for their gun?

Did the comeptitor purposely turned the gun at the RO?

If the RO is not where I expect them to be.... forward of me... there is little a shooter can do to stop the RO from coming into his line of fire.

Case in Point...

If I am RO'ing a shooter, and I get caught up sleeping, and the shooter jets back uprange or wherever to engage or reengage a target... it is my fault for not paying attention. I am the one that was unsafe, not necessarily the shooter.

At local matches... only if I am running a new shooter, on a fairly safe stage, with no 180 issues or RO traps... will come closer to the new shooter in order to guide if necessary and prevent issues before they happen. Otherwise... I will always be a few feet back and to the side where I am not a distraction to the shooter, but in full view of the gun. If I see a shooter run over a target, or it looks like they are running low on ammo or may run back... there is even more space and I am at full ready to jet back as to not get run over a shooter.

Only one time at a sectional match, was I in a position as an RO, that I felt I was interfering with the shooter and on my own, offered the shooter a reshoot. It was a revolver shooter who was fairly quick and in similar physical fit to me. I was on the full lookout and was in my regular RO position to look at the gun, when all of the sudden the shooter backed up unexpectedly and I was on his 180. He thought he missed a target completely (even though he did not). He nearly bumped me but I was out of his way but not his vision. Personally, if I was the shooter it would of freaked me out a bit, but the shooter apologized to me for startling the heck out of me, and declined the reshoot.

Was it the shooters fault? I don't think so. It was over 100 degrees, we were all exhausted, working the same stage and I did not expect any issues, especially since he shot the stages pretty much the same way as most other shooters.

So the shooter is not always responsible for their deadly weapon? Just depends on the circumstances?

The shooter is responsible for their firearm, but is it their fault?

If I am shooting targets and an RO jumps out in front of me in front of the muzzle, is it my fault?

Is it my fault if I am driving down the highway and a deer jumps out in front of my car before I can react? I did not line up and run into the deer.

Once again, it is not the shooters responsibility to slow down so that the RO can keep up with him.

Edited August 30, 2012 by Maksim

[Nik Habicht]

I have a hard time buying that pointing the muzzle at another individual, even an RO who was overrun, isn't unsafe gun handling....

Run in front of my gun and DQ me, and we'll have a long talk at the arb about the connection between "unsafe" and "handling."

Blaming the shooter for the RO's screwup is the worst case of victim blaming that I've seen on this website to date.

Really? So the shooter's always responsible for the gun, except in this case? The RO shouldn't be out of position -- I'm good with a reshoot there. But the competitor doesn't get an entirely free pass here either -- safety's too important. The competitor has a responsibility, the moment that he notices an RO in "a bad position" to find a safe muzzle direction and to stop. If he does that, I'm great with a reshoot for RO interference.

Now, notice the RO, point the gun at the RO and keep moving -- and yes, we'll be having the discussion at the arb panel. I like my chances at the matches I work.....

Much like any other situation on the range, it's not black and white....

[mactiger]

There is no DQ for this. It's a simple stop and a reshoot for RO interference. It happens, but it's not the competitor's fault if the RO gets out of position, and there is no rule to support disqualifying the competitor.

Troy

Is the RO nothing more than a stage prop that you can point a gun at and have no consequences? Isn't the shooter always responsible for their gun?

No, and you know better. In answering the OP's question, where he asks, "what would be the ruling if an RO put himself in front of a shooters gun during the running of a field course?", the answer is simple and straightforward. If the RO manages to get out of position, and gets "in front" of a competitor (and I'm just guessing that in front of a shooters gun doesn't necessarily mean that the competitor pointed the gun at him, just that he's in the wrong place, but either way)then it's a stop and a reshoot. This is not the competitor's fault, nor was it intentional on his part, therefore, no DQ.

The competitor is always responsible for safe handling of his gun, but note that in all the rules, the reference is to the competitor, not the RO. Consider the case where an RO gives the Make Ready command and someone is still downrange. If the competitor draws his gun, is he DQ'd? The answer is NO, because it was the RO's fault. Same thing here.

You can continue to play "what if" for any number of outlandish scenarios, but the question has been answered. There will always be grey areas and times when an RO must use his judgement, but for this simple scenario a DQ is not warranted because the RO couldn't keep up or keep out of the way.

Troy

[Poppa Bear]

A point nobody has brought up is that ANYBODY can call STOP. If I am the timer RO and a shooter reverses course to where I start to be downrange of them, I am one going to start moving to the side so as to create a bigger separation between us. It is better to be down range of the muzzle and at the 90/180 area than the 0 degree area. While doing this I will be calling STOP. It is also my hope that the board RO as well as all of the peanut gallery are also calling STOP.

After we get our breathing back under control and our shorts cleaned out, we will proceed with the reshoot for RO interference if warranted.

[Poppa Bear]

I had an RO get in my way before. I had a different plan for the stage than anyone who came before me. He thought I didn't see a target and didn't say anything, but when I got to the position I planned to shoot from, he was in my way. I spotted him, yelled for him to get out of the way, and stopped shooting.

He apologized for being in the way, and not paying enough attention. I was able to reshoot, with a different RO. He didn't do anything intentionally, he just didn't know my plan, and it was a large stage with some odd angles. He had set up the stage, and didn't realize you could see the target I was going to shoot from were I was. I was engaging from around 1/2 the range everyone else did.

I have shot stages and used a different plan than most other shooters. I made it a point to tell the RO how I was moving just to ensure they stayed out of the way.

I have had others shoot a stage and give me advance warning of their plan, ie. after I take these targets I am jumping back and to the right to get that one. Without the warning I would have figured they forgot about the target and been preparing myself to run forward while they were jumping back.

Yes we should be invisible as far as the shooter is concerned, but I appreciate a shooter who identifies a potential danger to us the RO's based on their stage plan.

[kevin c]

...Yes we should be invisible as far as the shooter is concerned, but I appreciate a shooter who identifies a potential danger to us the RO's based on their stage plan.

My first major I did exactly that - told the CRO that I was turning and moving to the right after coming out of a door and that, from that position, I would be turning around to engage targets off to the left, shooting past the open doorway. He heard me, and stayed close. He DID NOT TELL THE ARO, who nonchalantly ambled out of the door just as I swung back. I had to pull off, otherwise a well known shooter and gunsmith might not be around today.

The CRO did not offer me a reshoot and I was too green to know that I might have asked for one.

Back on topic. I recall being told in my RO class many moons ago that the RO was supposed to be close enough to physically intervene if a dangerous situation was developing: maybe not always withing handshake distance but pretty close. What is being recommended now?

Edited September 4, 2012 by kevin c

[diehli]

Back on topic. I recall being told in my RO class many moons ago that the RO was supposed to be close enough to physically intervene if a dangerous situation was developing: maybe not always withing handshake distance but pretty close. What is being recommended now?

As of ~7 weeks ago, the same thing. Close enough to stop a gun from being pointed at you.

[motosapiens]

Interesting discussion. As a newbie, I am probably not moving at anywhere near the lightning speed of you young fast guys, but I still can tell the difference between a cardboard target and an RO. I may not have cat-like reflexes and agility, but if the RO is in the way when I'm snapping my sights over to the next target, I'm going to point my gun somewhere else, look at him and say "umm, excuse me, I need to shoot there please", or something similar, and then ask for my reshoot if necessary.

This actually happened to me a couple months ago. I shot things in a different (more efficient, imho) order than some of the earlier shooters, and when I backed up for the last target the RO was still standing in a place that would have put him downrange if I kept backing up. So I stopped backing up. He figured it out, and it didn't cost me much time, and it was a local match and I suck anyway, so I kept that score since I had shot the stage well.

I just have a hard time imagining a situation where I could be pointing my gun at an RO or any other person on the range unless that person was hiding behind hard cover unbeknownst to me and suddenly jumped up and yelled 'boo'.

[BillD]

So, on a 32 round field course, the competitor is free to roam around the shooting area until he gets done? And to stay out of his way the RO has to stay at the starting position because at any time during the COF, the shooter may elect to run back all the way to the starting position to make up a shot, like that's going to help him in his times.

I love compound sentences....

[Skydiver]

I just have a hard time imagining a situation where I could be pointing my gun at an RO or any other person on the range unless that person was hiding behind hard cover unbeknownst to me and suddenly jumped up and yelled 'boo'.

That means you have good stage designers who have learned not to build RO traps, as well as "force" you into flow through a stage in a more or less predictable manner while still giving the shooter many options.

[High Lord Gomer]

Discrepancy here:

10.5.5 Allowing the muzzle of a handgun to point at any part of the competitor's body during a course of fire (i.e. sweeping).

10.5.5.1 Exception – A match disqualification is not applicable for sweeping of the lower extremities (below the belt) while drawing or re-holstering of the handgun, provided that the competitor's fingers are clearly outside of the trigger guard. This exception is only for holstered handguns. Sweeping does not apply to a handgun holstered in compliance with Rules 5.2.1 and 5.2.7

...and from Appendix A3:

Sweeping . . . . . . . . . .Pointing the muzzle of a firearm at any part of any person's body.

Based on that I would propose that an RO getting downrange of a competitor is the ROs fault and he should offer a reshoot, BUT...if the competitor sweeps the RO with his gun, I feel that is the fault of the competitor. Even though I realize that DQ could likely be overturned if arbitrated, I would still issue it and let the RM / arb committee argue the discrepancy in the wording of 10.5.5 and the definition of sweeping in Appendix A3.