motosapiens Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Ok so then explain to me why I can't start my shadow at half cock then, eliminate the part about the rules saying I can't. What is the difference? As far as the glocks and MPs if people want to shoot inferior guns thats their choice The only reason is the rules. Same as the reason for lots of other stuff we do. If you could start your shadow on the safety notch, what would stop people from modifying the hammer to put the safety notch somewhere else. The rule seems simple and consistent to me, and easy to enforce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racer377 Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 I'm not questioning what is being used I'm questioning the fairness of the rule. If CZ came out with a decocker equipped shadow that had the same awesome trigger feel what do you think would happen. The decocker on a CZ gives you half the trigger pull on the first shot compared to non decocker equipped guns. To me it doesn't matter that decocker guns aren't used that much it matters more to me that the loop hole is there to exploit if the manufacture wanted to. Well, it's not really 'half'. Someone else on this site measured the trigger pull and came up with 6-ish pounds fully down and 5-ish pounds at the decocked position. And people are free to buy a decocker gun and have the custom shop (or anyone else) give it the same awesome trigger as the shadow. Shooting my two guns back to back, I just don't see the advantage as being enough to worry about. I especially don't see it worth it changing the rules to force people to manually decock that may not be comfortable doing so. this whole discussion is tempest in a teapot imho. When angus and the rest of the cz team start shooting a decocker models at nationals, let me know and I may care about it. Honestly, it's a heckuva lot more advantage to be able to shoot what are really single-action guns (safetyless striker-fired guns like glock and m&p) in production. Lets complain about that now. I just pulled out my Shadow and trigger gauge. Fully down give a 5lb 10oz pull. half cock gives a 4lb, 14oz pull. That surprised me. If I could come up with a hammer for a decocker gun that had the "decock" notch at 90-something percent cocked like the tuned striker fired guns, that'd be pretty sweet. All it takes is a few thousandths of cocking movement to count as "double action", right? If nothing else, I'd have my marketing people call it "safe action" or some other marketing term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel1212 Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Ok so then explain to me why I can't start my shadow at half cock then, eliminate the part about the rules saying I can't. What is the difference? As far as the glocks and MPs if people want to shoot inferior guns thats their choice The only reason is the rules. Same as the reason for lots of other stuff we do. If you could start your shadow on the safety notch, what would stop people from modifying the hammer to put the safety notch somewhere else. The rule seems simple and consistent to me, and easy to enforce. What stops people from modifying a decocker gun to basically barely decock and be a single action gun with out a safety. I'm completely spit balling here as I'm not a gun smith but the principle is the same....I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motosapiens Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 What stops people from modifying a decocker gun to basically barely decock and be a single action gun with out a safety. I'm completely spit balling here as I'm not a gun smith but the principle is the same....I think. Good question. As you probably know, the decockers are somewhat more painful to work on. Perhaps that's why few serious shooters use decocker models. I suspect if someone started doing it, someone else would notice and quickly pass a rule against it. It would probably fall under prohibited modifications. IDPA rules against externally visible mods probably already prevent such a thing in that game, since the hammer would be in a different place, and that would be visible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel1212 Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 What stops people from modifying a decocker gun to basically barely decock and be a single action gun with out a safety. I'm completely spit balling here as I'm not a gun smith but the principle is the same....I think. Good question. As you probably know, the decockers are somewhat more painful to work on. Perhaps that's why few serious shooters use decocker models. I suspect if someone started doing it, someone else would notice and quickly pass a rule against it. It would probably fall under prohibited modifications. IDPA rules against externally visible mods probably already prevent such a thing in that game, since the hammer would be in a different place, and that would be visible. Why would you pass a rule to make it prohibited, what about it would make any different than a glock that is considered good to go? As far as the hammer being in a different place. It wouldn't be in a different place for that gun, just like the hammer is in a different place for a decocker gun vs a non-decocker gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperman Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 What stops people from modifying a decocker gun to basically barely decock and be a single action gun with out a safety. I'm completely spit balling here as I'm not a gun smith but the principle is the same....I think. See the NROI ruling in post #1 Altering a factory installed decocker to bring the hammer to rest at less than a half cocked position is not allowed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel1212 Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 What stops people from modifying a decocker gun to basically barely decock and be a single action gun with out a safety. I'm completely spit balling here as I'm not a gun smith but the principle is the same....I think. See the NROI ruling in post #1 Altering a factory installed decocker to bring the hammer to rest at less than a half cocked position is not allowed. ....and what happens when CZC makes a decocker gun that travels even less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerba Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 (edited) Slight thread drift. I had a shooter at GA State this weekend that wanted to start the stage with his H&K cocked and locked. I doubled checked to make sure he was shooting production and he confirmed he was. This was about his 5th stage of the match, so I assume he started C&L on the other 4 (and may have done the same on the stages after mine.) hopefully you didn't let him and the other ROs did not either...if he wanted to continue shooting PD. ....and what happens when CZC makes a decocker gun that travels even less. The gun probably would not be on the approved list - hopefully... Its like having a limited gun with out a thumb safety but having a working grip safety....it still is safe but easier for some to shoot. If you think its fair, thats your right to do so, doesn't make it so or that I have to agree with you or that you have to agree with me either for that matter. But you can't have a limited gun without a thumb safety - I don't know a gun with a grip safety and without a thumb safety. If the rule stated hammers fully down on all production guns it wouldn't exclude any gun that way either. The rule stated that way would also be less confusing to newer ROs. It would also make the trigger pull the same for all guns as well. I just showed a co-worker my PCR at hammer fully down and half cock and he said it was a huge difference. The rule is not confusing... - if you have a decocker - use it and it's good to go - if you don't have a decocker - hammer fully down using the trigger what part of that is confusing???? Edited September 12, 2012 by racerba Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motosapiens Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 ....and what happens when CZC makes a decocker gun that travels even less. assuming it is still safe, the world will rejoice and other manufacturers will follow suit and we will finally have a useful weapon in the war against soul-less plastic glocks!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel1212 Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 ....and what happens when CZC makes a decocker gun that travels even less. assuming it is still safe, the world will rejoice and other manufacturers will follow suit and we will finally have a useful weapon in the war against soul-less plastic glocks!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel1212 Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 (edited) ....and what happens when CZC makes a decocker gun that travels even less. The gun probably would not be on the approved list - hopefully... Why, what would make it any different? Its like having a limited gun with out a thumb safety but having a working grip safety....it still is safe but easier for some to shoot. If you think its fair, thats your right to do so, doesn't make it so or that I have to agree with you or that you have to agree with me either for that matter. But you can't have a limited gun without a thumb safety - I don't know a gun with a grip safety and without a thumb safety. XD/XDMs If the rule stated hammers fully down on all production guns it wouldn't exclude any gun that way either. The rule stated that way would also be less confusing to newer ROs. It would also make the trigger pull the same for all guns as well. I just showed a co-worker my PCR at hammer fully down and half cock and he said it was a huge difference. The rule is not confusing... - if you have a decocker - use it and it's good to go - if you don't have a decocker - hammer fully down using the trigger what part of that is confusing???? Obviously it is or there wouldn't be this thread. Edited September 12, 2012 by steel1212 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motosapiens Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Note that I have a limited gun that has no safety whatsoever... just a decocker. Just because you shoot limited doesn't mean you have to shoot SAO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerba Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Why, what would make it any different? Guns need to be approved. Not all guns make it on the list just because they satisfy certain conditions. Pretty much that it's very close to being SAO without a safety probably would not be approved due to safety concern... XD/XDMs No external hammer!!! It's a firing pin similar to the Glock. Again, you have your choice to shoot any gun that is on the list. Obviously it is or there wouldn't be this thread. No - this thread started off with the question (fair enough). The answer was given - clear and concise. The following discussions dealt with why people (you, for one) who didn't agree with the ruling and don't think it's fair. I agree that the rule is not completely clear, but the NROI ruling clarifies the rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerba Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Note that I have a limited gun that has no safety whatsoever... just a decocker. Just because you shoot limited doesn't mean you have to shoot SAO. You can use any gun in limited, I know. Steel was refering to a 2011 type gun and I was referencing such... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel1212 Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Why, what would make it any different? Guns need to be approved. Not all guns make it on the list just because they satisfy certain conditions. Pretty much that it's very close to being SAO without a safety probably would not be approved due to safety concern... Decocker guns, at least CZs, will have a FPB I found out today so they will have a safety. Its no closer than a XD as being SAO it just has a exposed hammer instead of a striker. XD/XDMs No external hammer!!! It's a firing pin similar to the Glock. Again, you have your choice to shoot any gun that is on the list. What does it matter if has an exposed hammer or not? It has a grip safety, it can be shot in limited. Sure its not a 2011 but the preinciple is still the same. Obviously it is or there wouldn't be this thread. No - this thread started off with the question (fair enough). The answer was given - clear and concise. The following discussions dealt with why people (you, for one) who didn't agree with the ruling and don't think it's fair. I agree that the rule is not completely clear, but the NROI ruling clarifies the rule. quit picking and choosing what your wanting to answer. You asked what was confusing. The original poster was confused, as well I was. Sure the ruling clears that up if we knew about it but it didn't make any sense to us so we have the arguments at hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerba Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Decocker guns, at least CZs, will have a FPB I found out today so they will have a safety.[/color] Its no closer than a XD as being SAO it just has a exposed hammer instead of a striker. Some CZ have the FPB - not all. Technically almost all modern guns have some sort of FPB. What's your point again? Oh that's right, you wanted a SAO without an external safety...there's isn't one... What does it matter if has an exposed hammer or not? It has a grip safety, it can be shot in limited. Sure its not a 2011 but the preinciple is still the same. Exposed hammer guns have an external safety...I don't know of one SAO with an external hammer that do not have an external safety. quit picking and choosing what your wanting to answer. You asked what was confusing. The original poster was confused, as well I was. Sure the ruling clears that up if we knew about it but it didn't make any sense to us so we have the arguments at hand. Who's picking and choosing? The original poster asked a question - I agreed that is was fair to ask. The answer was given - clear and concise. What was confusing about the answer??? Really what's confusing??? "The ruling clears that up" - you admitted it that the rule is clear. The only reason it doesn't make sense to you is that you disagreed with it. It's a clarification...on a rule. A lot of rules don't make sense, but it's the rule. You understand the rule...you just don't agree with it. I don't agree with a lot of the rules also, but I don't claim that it's confusing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel1212 Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Decocker guns, at least CZs, will have a FPB I found out today so they will have a safety.[/color] Its no closer than a XD as being SAO it just has a exposed hammer instead of a striker. Some CZ have the FPB - not all. Technically almost all modern guns have some sort of FPB. What's your point again? Oh that's right, you wanted a SAO without an external safety...there's isn't one... What does it matter if has an exposed hammer or not? It has a grip safety, it can be shot in limited. Sure its not a 2011 but the preinciple is still the same. Exposed hammer guns have an external safety...I don't know of one SAO with an external hammer that do not have an external safety. quit picking and choosing what your wanting to answer. You asked what was confusing. The original poster was confused, as well I was. Sure the ruling clears that up if we knew about it but it didn't make any sense to us so we have the arguments at hand. Who's picking and choosing? The original poster asked a question - I agreed that is was fair to ask. The answer was given - clear and concise. What was confusing about the answer??? Really what's confusing??? "The ruling clears that up" - you admitted it that the rule is clear. The only reason it doesn't make sense to you is that you disagreed with it. It's a clarification...on a rule. A lot of rules don't make sense, but it's the rule. You understand the rule...you just don't agree with it. I don't agree with a lot of the rules also, but I don't claim that it's confusing. Ok dude you win, I'm tired of arguing a point that obviously doesn't matter to you. Hell it might only matter to me. Either way I'll continue shooting my old out dated Shadow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skydiver Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 (edited) Decocker guns, at least CZs, will have a FPB I found out today so they will have a safety.[/color] Its no closer than a XD as being SAO it just has a exposed hammer instead of a striker. Some CZ have the FPB - not all. Technically almost all modern guns have some sort of FPB. What's your point again? Oh that's right, you wanted a SAO without an external safety...there's isn't one... HK P7. No FPB. No external safety. Follows definition of Single Action where pulling the trigger only releases the hammer/striker. And it's on the Production list. Edited September 12, 2012 by Skydiver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skydiver Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 (edited) ....and what happens when CZC makes a decocker gun that travels even less. The gun probably would not be on the approved list - hopefully... It doesn't have to be a complete gun. The hammer only needs to make it into the CZ catalog by virtue of: Aftermarket parts are allowed but restricted to those listed in Appendix D4, any other part must be OEM, either offered on an approved model for Production or in their catalog. from NROI Ruling: http://www.uspsa.org...ils.php?indx=36 Since it comes from the factory designed that way, it doesn't go against: Altering a factory installed decocker to bring the hammer to rest at less than a half cocked position is not allowed. as noted from the original post and found in NROI ruling: http://www.uspsa.org...ils.php?indx=30 Edit after: I asked JA for clarification about the "or in their catalog" part a few years ago in relation to replacing some external parts that are not designed for a production legal gun, but fits the gun and his response at that time was as long as the part is in the product catalog, and the gun the part is going into is production legal, its a legal part to swap in. Edited September 12, 2012 by Skydiver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerba Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 (edited) hmmm... Don't agree with all of JA's ruling either...I guess this is one of the ruling I don't agree with. I'm thinking JA was referring to a part made for the PD approved model, not a part made for non-approved model that happens to fit a PD approved model...IDK Edited September 12, 2012 by racerba Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skydiver Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 (edited) See my edit after on post #44. Also the clause starts with "either" indicating there are choices. So the choices are "offered on an approved model for Production" or "in their catalog" . Edited September 12, 2012 by Skydiver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerba Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 HK P7. No FPB. No external safety. Follows definition of Single Action where pulling the trigger only releases the hammer/striker. And it's on the Production list. Who's definition is that? Since it's on the PD list - it's a defined as a Double Action gun - much similar to the Glock and the XD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerba Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Also the clause starts with "either" indicating there are choices. So the choices are "offered on an approved model for Production" or "in their catalog" . Usually what that means is that the part is offered as an option to the approved model. It may not come standard with the production out of the box gun. i.e. Glock 17 does not come with the extended slide release as an out of the box production model. In their catalog, the extended slide release is offered as an option. Hence, it is legal to replace the standard slide release with the extended one. If CZ offers an option for a CZ X gun that is not an approved model. I don't think you can use that part to replace a part on a CZ Shadow (even though it fits) unless it is offered as an option for the CZ Shadow. I believe it has to be offered as an option for the approved model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skydiver Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 If CZ offers an option for a CZ X gun that is not an approved model. I don't think you can use that part to replace a part on a CZ Shadow (even though it fits) unless it is offered as an option for the CZ Shadow. I believe it has to be offered as an option for the approved model. That was my belief as well. But when I went to confirm by beliefs by providing a counter example (eg. part from a non-approved gun), JA had said that my counter example was also legal because the part was in the catalog. The response surprised me, and now I remember the phrase "or in the catalog." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerba Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 The response surprised me,... Coming from JA - it doesn't surprise me... Like I said, I don't agree with a lot of rulings, but he makes them and we have to play within them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now