Exemption for sweeping on the draw

[Vince Pinto]

Cullen,

What we're hoping to separate is:

1. "the draw", namely getting the gun out of the holster, which may require movement of anything from just a few millimetres (e.g. a Limcat holster), to quite a few centimeters (e.g. a Glock sport/combat holster). You can draw, point your muzzle beyond 1 metre and even aim at targets without having your finger inside the trigger guard, right?

2. "the danger", namely having any part of your body covered when you actually have your finger inside the trigger guard. Since the exemption already allows you to cover yourself, the only remaining protection is your trigger finger.

While I personally detest the thought of even an unloaded gun pointed at flesh, at least I get some comfort if the trigger finger is clearly outside the guard.

I.e. the draw ends where the competitor is allowed to (legally) put finger in trigger guard.

Under current rules, the competitor is allowed to stand perfectly still and point his gun 6" away from his foot while his finger is inside the trigger guard

[diehli]

Hrm... just consider the language VERY carefully. If I didn't break the 180, I could point the gun at my head on the draw without my finger in the trigger guard and not be DQ'ed (let alone institutionalized). Just playing "Jim Norman/Devil's Advocate."

[Vince Pinto]

Cullen,

Sure thing buddy. I think the final definition must include "finger" language and something to do with "lower torso". In other words, allow the exemption but further narrow the application.

The Rules Committee is still working on it but, since most of them have disappeared to the European Championships, it's John Amidon and I left holding the fort and, well, we're secretly plotting to resign in protest to become Beach Volleyball ROs ...... the benefits are much better.

[kimel]

Actually, should all body parts be exempted? Isn't the exemption really just for the legs/feet and "maybe" lower torso? (thinking production rigs here) If so, then say so. I would actually take it even one step further and say "strong side leg" although the way some folks wear their race rigs....

Draw starts the instant the strong hand makes physical contact with the pistol. I like the 1 meter circle definition for the end of the draw from a logical point of view but it is going to be virutually impossible to use in practice.

You sweep your weak hand, head, whatever and you are done for the day.

The discussion about fingers is interesting but I don't want to see a "no finger in the trigger guard until the muzzle is pointing more than 1 meter from the shooter" type rule. That puts one HELL of a burden of proof on the RO.

With a AD you have where the shooter was standing and you have physical evidence of where the bullet struck. Easier call.

Think about this whole event that we call the draw: Many folks are pulling sub-second times from beep to first shot (not calling this the draw here). Now, given the definitions of "the draw" that we are starting to discuss here we are dealing with some fraction of that time.

Can you see something that happens during very rapid motion within a segment of time that is maybe .3 seconds long and be able to apply spatial relationships of muzzle direction to some mythical circle on the ground while standing in the proper RO position from the shooter? Now how sure are you of your call? You call me on this and I am going to ask you to define the 1 meter circle around me by pointing out landmarks on the ground and THEN I will draw my tape. If we DQ a shooter for a shot within 1 meter we measure it. Same priciple needs to apply here.

One other thing to consider: Stage calls for drawing the pistol and transfer to weak hand. Is the transfer to weak hand part of the draw? Maybe it is just late but I don't recall this being in the current rules and I can't find it just now running through the book.

I have seen some real funky things happen during the transfer. FWIW...I don't consider the transfer to be part of the draw. A definition that said the draw ended at first shot WOULD include the transfer.

[Dead Buff]

I like the idea of narrowing it down to "from the hip and lower" as example and something to that effect...should cover the weak-hand-grabs-muzzle option and keep Coop safe as well... The arm is attached above the hip right?

Tnx for the extremely fast and useful help Vince...luv this game and its people...

[Jim Norman]

Hrm... just consider the language VERY carefully. If I didn't break the 180, I could point the gun at my head on the draw without my finger in the trigger guard and not be DQ'ed (let alone institutionalized). Just playing "Jim Norman/Devil's Advocate."

I'm famous (or is that infamous?)

But seriously, this is exactly the type of situatioin I try to point to. Welcome to the logical side of life.

[Jim Norman]

Are we once again writing rules to cover non-existant problems. First we have the problem of equipment placement, are you going to regulate the holster angle? Then we have the time frame to consider. As has been pointed out there are a lot of people doing .7 first shots, Just how are you going to position yourself as the RO to not block the shooter's movement and to also observe the .3 seconds of the draw that we are considering and how are you going to back-up what you say.

Finger in trigger guard may be the best of the worst. Measurement presents problems, point of reference is going to play hell with your observation. Clearing the holster we all agree sends the majority home on the first stage.

Let us ask the number one question: Is this a problem looking for a solution? OR is it a solution looking for a problem?

Vince has stated that he would like to see the exemption totally removed. You can't sweep even holstered.

Take this a step further. Start seated with an FBI Cant holster, now lean a bit forward as you stand up while drawing, your muzzle just went WAY past the 1 meter behind you line. Should we, if we are disallowing sweeping also DQ the shooter for a 180 break, even though he has not fully drawn his gun?

Rules are a dangerous thing. Every one that is written removes some level of freedom. Everyone that is written opens up another place to practice range lawyering. (I'll get my tape, you point out the landmarks)

Something to think about.

Jim Norman

[Dead Buff]

Jim

I asked Vince the Q because of our upcoming nats and one stage requires prone/supine shooting. If you draw while going supine and sweep your leg is it a DQ or an exemption on 10.5.5 while drawing? Thus when does the draw end?

Yes I would prefer a no sweeping at all set-up, but that is not practical (not talking practical/tactical/IDPA/wanna-be LEO here.... ). We need enforceable practical/sensible (there is a better word... ) rules. With 99% of the holsters out there 99% of all shooter sweep themselves 99% of the time (yes, those are thumb-suck stats....) so clearly define boundaries and limits while still keeping the sport safe and fun...

I will try not to sweep while going supine, I promise....

[Skywalker]

I.e. the draw ends where the competitor is allowed to (legally) put finger in trigger guard.

Under current rules, the competitor is allowed to stand perfectly still and point his gun 6" away from his foot while his finger is inside the trigger guard

Vince, I don't understand your point, or what you're trying to tell me.

You asked for a definition of the draw: the draw is, technically speaking, the movement you accomplish to extract the gun from the holster.

If we were not talking about an IPSC competition, I'd say that the draw ends as soon as the gun clears the holster.

Since we are inside the context of an IPSC competition, the gun is only drawn to be pointed at a target. Given this assumption, the movement should logically end when the gun is presented to the target (and at that point the competitor is allowed to put his trigger finger inside the guard).

Now the rules say I can shoot a target from hip, if I'm standing still, or with gun at eye level only if I'm moving. Thus, according to the rules, the draw ends in different moments according to what the competitor is doing during the draw.

It can't get any simpler.

[38supPat]

I finf that I don't like most of the answeres given here, for the same reason we have the exemption in the first place. It just doesn't cover all situations. A sitting draw would almost certainly DQ half of a match, because regardless of holster design you almost have to sweep a part of your body. But Not all draws end with an immediate shot. Picking an arbritary distance is hard to judge or police.

It would be easier to say that sweeping your non-shooting hand at anytime during the course of fire is prohibited. Anyother body part is free until the first shooting position is reached. There is really no reason to sweep your support hand at anytime, but legs etc. do tend to get in the way on sitting type draws. Its unlikely that any other body part would be able to get in front of the muzzle after the pistol has reached a horizontal plane.

[BDH]

Great thread, and really gets the gray matter workin! I can't wait until Uncle Vinny figures this one out. Whatever the answer is, it needs to be as bombproof as possible for us to call it accurately and consistently.

Heck, I am still dealing with the 2 minute rule on gun malfunctions. As soon as the new rules go into effect in the US, I have to remember to look at my watch every time someone has any type of malfunction. Funny though, any time someone is trying to clear a malfunction under time pressure, my eyes are usually gluely directly on the gun, not on my watch......

Sorry for the thread drift. Back to our regularly scheduled program....

[mactiger]

As I see it, there are three simple solutions, two of which require rule changes:

1) Unless your finger is in the trigger guard, sweeping is not a DQ. Wouldn't matter then if you were drawing your gun or opening a door.

IMO, this one reduces our safety factor by ignoring one of the basic gun safety rules, but we already do that with the exemption for sweeping on the draw. Vince has said his interpretation for when the draw is over is when the finger is in the trigger guard. I don't have a problem with that, but as Pat points out it's hard to make a single rule that will cover all instances. Many stages would allow for sweeping oneself while manipulating a prop after the draw then, as long as the finger has not entered the trigger guard.

As a case in point, requiring a supine position after drawing may cause some shooters to sweep themselves. Without a strict determination of when the draw is over, there are still rules that cover where your finger is, especially while changing positions, and I think going supine or prone from a standing start qualifies as changing positions, as does moving through a course of fire. So, it's sort of a moot point once the competitor starts moving--his finger must be out of the trigger guard or it's a DQ. Sweeping would be a secondary consideration at that point.

2)No sweeping allowed, no how, no where.

Again, IMO, this would lead to DQ's for almost 99% of the competitors, especially if the course design compels them to start in something other than standing on their hind feet.

3) Leave the rule alone, and continue to leave it up to the RO's judgement as to when a sweeping violation occurs. While it would be nice to define exactly when the draw ends, there would still be enough gray area that the RO's judgement would remain the deciding factor.

My .02

Troy

Edited August 24, 2004 by mactiger

[Jim Norman]

BDH,

Exactly my point, we seem to have some that make rules that others are forced to live with that needlessly complicate our lives. Sort of like most legislatures.

We have a rule that says, no sweeping except on the draw. Why can't we live with that? Do we want to ddesign and require a holster with a set of rails that guides the gun into positon , so that you can't ever pointhe gun at any body part ever? I admit that I work very hard to keep my gun pointed away from my body, the safety on till the gun is up and my finger off the trigger till its time to go bang. I was born with a certain number ofg holes in my body and I would like to expire with out an increase in that number.

But back tot he discussion at hand. If you dissaloowed every start except standing erect, you would still have a problem. The splayfooted shooter will sweep his own feet while drawing even from a Blade-Tec dropped and offset holster. Do we intend to limit start positions? IPSC regulates equipment placement more tightly than does USPSA.

Any rule written should be: Understandable as to its reason. It shouold be able to be applied by any shooter serving as an RO without difficulty in determining that the rule has been broken. It shouold be such that if the rule and penalty are invoked, it is obvious that it should have been. We don't need rules that bring to mind discussions of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

I would leave well enough alone. the draw ends when you are able to engage a target. No target need be present, only that you have acheived the position that were one present you could. That answers the draw and run to a door problem. If you draw the gun and start to move the draw has ended. Meaning that as I draw, I am OK, but as I run the exemption ends as the gun rises to a possible shooting position. I suppose you could argue that if I held the gun straight along my side pointed down that this would be an out to run but still be inthe "Draw"

So lets say after 2 steps the draw has ended whether or not I have raised the gun. This answers drawing on the move. Stand and draw, when I have acheived a shootable position, where were a target present i could engage it the draw ends.

I'll let some lawyerly type put this into ruleease.

JIm

[Nik Habicht]

3) Leave the rule alone, and continue to leave it up to the RO's judgement as to when a sweeping violation occurs. While it would be nice to define exactly when the draw ends, there would still be enough gray area that the RO's judgement would remain the deciding factor.

My .02

Troy

I'm liking this one a lot.....

Removing all judgement calls from the RO reminds me of mandatory sentencing laws.

[Vince Pinto]

There is really no reason to sweep your support hand at anytime, but legs etc. do tend to get in the way on sitting type draws.

You have wisdom far beyond your tender years!

The exemption was always intended to cover only the lower torso, but that's not currently stated in the subject rule, and I've already stated we need to address this oversight. However what I'm now saying is that we also need to further clarify that the exemption only applies if your finger is outside the trigger guard.

The location of the first target and/or what activity you need to accomplish before reaching the first target is less relevant. The exemption deals with sweeping your lower torso (not target engagement), so let's not get distracted with smoke 'n' mirrors.

Draw your gun (seated, kneeling, standing, whatever) with the muzzle pointed at your nether regions - it's a reluctant "OK". Do the same thing with your finger inside the trigger guard, it's "No way, Jose".

[Vlad]

Vince, I completly agree.

<waits for gasps of surprise to stop>

But make sure that the wording prohibits the behaviour after the draw, so pointing your gun at your .. uh ... gun .. yeah thats it ... half way through a course of fire is still a no-no. Which kinda leave us with defining what a draw is, and while the idea that the draw ends when you put your finger on the trigger is am attractive one, RO's may have a hard time seeing it without moving in front of the shooters's 180.

Then you have the problem of defining lower torso. I guess you can use the belt line as a guide but that is again hard to see by the RO.

Frankly I do not think there is a good complete answer. I would just modify the existing rule to limit the sweep on the draw to the lower half of the body and let the RO define when the draw ends.

Vlad

[Vince Pinto]

Vlad,

<cough, splutter, wheeze>

Hmmm. Your "below the belt" idea sounds like a nice solution. Mucho grassy-ass

[Nik Habicht]

Vince,

having seen the occasional high ride duty holster show up on match day you may need to throw that in too ---- some of them require you to bring the muzzle higher than the belt to clear the holster.....

The wording might have to be: Body parts below the belt line or below the mouth of the holster if that's higher than the belt line....

[Vince Pinto]

having seen the occasional high ride duty holster show up on match day you may need to throw that in too ----

The first person to bring up shoulder holsters will be severely spanked, and not in a fun way

[Nik Habicht]

Vince,

So who's gonna spank you? Since you brought it up --- I've figured out how to draw from a shoulder holster without sweeping myself ----- but I'm still working on that pesky 180 problem....

I was referring to highride strong side belt holsters in my previous post --- for anyone who needed clarification....

[Dead Buff]

OK, I like the idea of the draw ends when your trigger finger feels the urge to crush the trigger (no wonder I keep getting Mikes.... ) and the holster movement starts when the finger feels the urge to point at the muzzle (??), but should movement be covered?

When going from seated to standing while drawing = OK

When going from standing to running while drawing = OK

When jumping down a table and swinging across a lake full of crocs while drawing = not OK?

The problem I foresee is that the gamers amongst us will grab their peashooter in the plastic contraption, point the trigger finger toward some pie in the sky and make a mad dash across the whole CoF continually sweeping everything below the knee (while not breaking the 180) and claim they where still drawing 10m from the start posi (NO, I can not demonstrate since gravity is against me currently ). There needs to be a reasonable limit to this as well.

As the rule is currently I can still do all the above a say I was still drawing since I wasn't shooting or ready to shoot...prove me wrong...

[Jim Norman]

Remember folks, there is always Unsafe GUnhandling to cover those items that aree just not exactly definable.

Who ever it was that said leave it alone is inthe lead in my book.

Jim

[Caspian_45]

Have we gotten off topic or is it just me?

We have talked about draws, sweeping, and time limits for malfunctions.

I agree the sweeping of legs and feet is going to be hard to solve.

How about the draw ends when the firearm leaves the holster and upper torso movement starts (leaning or reaching) and/or feet/legs move.

To sweep your hand or arm, you are get'n the cart ahead of the horse. I just don't agree with being allowed to sweep your hand/arm.

Tony

[Neil Beverley]

It has been written here that it would be difficult to properly gauge a 1 metre circle around the competitor.

Is it any more difficult than gauging the 1 metre circle in 10.5.6? Especially considering the wording as being a 1 metre radius. 1 metre from the centre of the feet (how do you pinpoint the centre or 1 metre from the external point of the feet? The latter would, in fact, create a series of 1 metre circles overlapping around the competitor.

Rule 5.2.7.3 discusses 1 metre - see above.

Rule 10.5.3.2 discusses 1 metre - see above, and the competitor could also be moving about a bit as well.

Rule 9.1.1 discusses 1 metre - see above.

Rule 10.5.2 discusses breaking the 90 degree median intercept (commonly referred to as the 180).

Skywalker advises that they have a Regional safety rule of 45 degrees above ground level.

There are several rules that discuss "finger in the trigger guard".

Rule 10.2.2 depends on the ROs judgement as to what constitutes a significant advantage.

I need not go on.

The point I'm trying to make is that it is well established that some decisions have to be left to the RO to call it as best they can, from their perspective, and under the given circumstances at the time.

I have heard from a couple of people that the 3 metre limit for an AD is at least measurable because of the point of impact and is therefore more accurate. However, the feet move and again it has to be relied upon for the RO to call it at the time.

Can we really always be sure that the RO has called breaking the 90 correctly? We certainly can't prove it afterwards.

Can we really always be sure that the RO has properly determined "finger in the trigger guard"? We certainly can't prove it afterwards.

Why are there now some some claims that a 1 metre rule wouldn't be accurate enough but with no reference to all the other similar rules that we have all got used to?

Are you all sure the "finger in the trigger guard" is more accurate?

I'm not trying to state here what the rule, if we adopt one, should be. I'm merely trying to point out that we shouldn't be for or against a particular proposal simply because we don't carry a tape measure (actually I do but that's another story).

What is an absolute fact is that in this sport as in very many others there is often a judgement call. We call our officials ROs, in other sports they may be known as Referees. In football, soccer, cricket, boxing, gymnastics etc., etc. we rely on the call of the officials. They are given the rules as best they can be stated. They then apply them as best they can and sometimes it has to be a split second decision.

I'm not about to intentionally DQ someone for being for being half a millimetre or 1/64 inch over the 1 metre or the same measurement inside the trigger guard. If I'm certain (as I can be) that there has been an infringement I'll take action otherwise I won't.

Whatever the outcome on this matter it will end up as an ROs decision. Even a general reference to "Unsafe Gun Handling" is an ROs decision. Such is the requirement of the sport. We all need to accept it.

I would finally add that I frequently hear calls that we should abandon half the rule book and leave it all to common sense decisions by the officials. Without the rule book we could see some officials deciding that 1 metre is a limit to be used and others 2 metres. While there is still a judgement to be made we need to set the judgement criteria otherwise from club to club, from State to State from Region to Region there would be no consistency. Instead: chaos!

[Vince Pinto]

I would finally add that I frequently hear calls that we should abandon half the rule book and leave it all to common sense decisions by the officials.  Without the rule book we could see some officials deciding that 1 metre is a limit to be used and others 2 metres.  While there is still a judgement to be made we need to set the judgement criteria otherwise from club to club, from State to State from Region to Region there would be no consistency.  Instead: chaos!

Amen, Brother Neil.

It's been my experience that those who don't like well-defined criteria and/or rules come from what I call "The Vague Brigade" who like to have the "power" to make calls based upon their personal views - you know, the "I don't need no stinkin' rulebook - this is my match and I make the calls" type of person. Some people call them "Range Nazis".

Competitors have a right to know, in advance, the criteria which will be applied to all calls, and ROs are obliged to make their calls based upon those criteria.

And if anybody reading this has any doubts about the need for clearer, well-defined rules, just grab a copy of the 13th Edition rulebook and you'll see exactly what I mean.