Exemption for sweeping on the draw

[Ron Ankeny]

I have found many folks who dislike well defined rules are just the opposite of a range Nazi. They come from the "no blood, no foul" camp. At our last match, during the shooter's meeting, I mentioned that I had seen no fewer than 4 DQ offenses transpire across the 3 culbs I shoot at locally through the summer months, with not even one competitor receiving a DQ. Without well defined rules, the situation would be even worse because even more wiggle room would be added. Yeah, some would say if you don't follow the rules in place now, what good does it do to add new rules? My reply is well defined rules add leverage for the folks who really do care about treating each shooter with fairness and consistency when the rule book is followed.

[Neil Beverley]

Actually I think both Vince and Ron are right. And that's the problem. There is scope for the Range Nazi to create his own interpretation of things and then beat the competitors with all sorts of "fun" (not) concepts. And laid back Harry can let it all slide.

The sport deserves consistency. The competitors deserve consistency. Rules, and good training programs, strive to give that consistency.

[Skywalker]

The sport deserves consistency. The competitors deserve consistency. Rules, and good training programs, strive to give that consistency.

Ditto!

I'll have this plated and framed.

[Vince Pinto]

I have found many folks who dislike well defined rules are just the opposite of a range Nazi. They come from the "no blood, no foul" camp.

Ahhhh yes, Ron. I almost forgot about "The Selectors" - the guys who treat the rulebook like it's a menu - they want to pick & choose the rules they want to enforce, and ignore the rest.

Of course this is a terrible disservice to competitors who get burned when they eventually shoot a match where all rules are observed, and you hear them cry "But, back at my home club, we don't have that rule!".

[Jim Norman]

Rules should be logical. Rules should be easily understood and should have criteria that can be easily applied by the majority of people that shoot our sport. Remember at the club level that the ROs are generally embedded in the squads, we rarely have a dedicated RO until you get to a larger match.

The rules regarding target size may require measurements and may require reading carefully to determine allowed and non-allowed targets, that is fine, those rules are not applied by the RO in the split seconds that a competitor is drawing or running between targets or turning.

It is the rules that the RO applies during a 4 second 16 round COF that need to be almost instinctive. Measuring the distance that a shot hits from where the competitor's feet are, or exactly where the gun was pointed during a draw are rules hat by their very nature cannot be evenly applied.

The point of reference of the observer should not play into enforcement of the rules. If I stand to the rear and on the holster side of a competitor, yet near enough to stop him there is a lot I cannot see, but the assistant RO standing 5 feet back has a different view of the angles that are involved, his perception may or may not be correct.

How do we address this? That I think is a paramount question or should be in writing of rules that area applied during the COF.

Up till the beep and after the Range Clear are static decisions. A dropped gun during a COF is essentially a static decision. There are 5 targets visible where I am standing, I am moving to a new position, I can see and I am shooting at targets as I move, how many steps can I take before I am "Not engaging targets" and get called for having my finger on the trigger?

My finger is out of the trigger guard, but curled in during a reload, from one position, it appears I have my finger "on the trigger, for an other it doesn't. How do we call it? This is the type of call that ROs face every match. Lets keep that in mind when we talk about when the draw ends or when a sweep is a sweep and when it is not. If the rules call for to much subjectivity they will never be applied consistently, likewise a rule that is too loose has the same problem. Look for the "Goldilocks Solution" Just Right. It is hard to find.

I bring this up because we are looking at rules that are by their very nature subjective. Please proceed with caution, when making or requesting a new rule.

Jim

[Dead Buff]

Now we have agreement on the rules threads - everybody knows (and seems to agree) that some kind of user friendly and enforceable rule is needed. The BIG Q: how to formulate it?

Jim, you said a rule like this will be hard to find and give good examples of "tough-call" rules that we do enforce...

Vince, Neil and Ron, you guys give a good outline for how the rule should read...

Can we now get some sensible suggestions using the above as guideline?

* I like the finger-off-trigger suggestion....but requires some def on movement...

* I like the 1m suggestion...but is this 1m static or moving (some guys are 4m away before the gun clears leather (or plastic) and then finish off 16 rounds in 4 secs...)

* I like the gun-indexed-on-target suggestion....but see bot above

* I like to leave the rule as is suggestion...but then see Neil longer post above - consistency w.r.t. ALL matches...

* I like the NO sweeping suggestion (will slow down some of those speedy's )...but this will result in either mass DQ's or ignored rule...

Can we combine the above?

My suggestion: combine the finger on trigger and 1m options and try to get something on movement in there and something on what "may" be swept ("May I sweep you Mr RO when I draw without breaking 180"...I know it sounds stupid, but...)....I can only suggest and leave it to the guys with the experiance and brains to formulate

I see this as one of the more serious safety rules we have and it should be treated that way.

[Neil Beverley]

At the risk of sounding picky (but I think it is important) there have now been 2 mentions of "finger on the trigger". There is no such rule. The rule relates to "finger inside the trigger guard".

It would be possible to have to latter without infringing the former, but that is not the rule and the difference is significant.

Vince has specifically asked that myself and Tim Andersen refrain from commenting on our thoughts about the final rule, if any, at the present time to avoid undue influence etc., etc., For now it will be interesting to see what other thoughts there may be on the matter.

[Skywalker]

I still think the draw movement ends with the presentation of the gun onto the target.

If you stand, the gun can be presented to the target (to shoot it) right at hip level; while moving, the gun can be presented to the target (to shoot it) only at eye level.

In the former case the draw ends as soon as the gun has its muzzle levelled with target, in the latter it ends when gun is at eye level.

Having said this, I 'd like to see the exemption for sweeping at draw specifically addressed to the lower torso, i.e. from belt below.

This should help avoiding to DQ 3/4 of competitors when drawing from a seated/supine/prone position, but would also provide enough room for ROs to judge clearly.

I mean, if a RO shall be capable to determine if the gun muzzle breaks 180, or it was not pointed to the target to (legally) engage it, or if the competitor had no right to put his finger inside the trigger guard, he can also be able to tell if the sweeping happened within the draw movement or not, because what he has to watch is only a combination of what he's already watching.

It can't get any easier than this.

BTW, Neil,

the max 45° muzzle upwards is not a regional rule, it's a rule (that incidentally applies to almost all the ranges here in Italy), enforced by the MDs RMs to avoid bullets escaping the backstops/berms.

[Neil Beverley]

I still think the draw movement ends with the presentation of the gun onto the target.

Sky

This can't work. There are some stages that require a draw, then (say) open a door then say move a couple of steps before there is a requirement to present to a target. Your idea would extend the draw to 3 or 4 seconds.

It could work on static starts but we would then need additional wording to cover the scenario I have described above and that gets clumsy.

BTW, Neil,

the max 45° muzzle upwards is not a regional rule, it's a rule (that incidentally applies to almost all the ranges here in Italy), enforced by the MDs RMs to avoid bullets escaping the backstops/berms.

Agreed. But this has become a de facto rule for the Italian Region under 3.3.1.

This discussion raises a similar issue of when does a reload start and end. I think I'll start another thread for that.

[Skywalker]

I still think the draw movement ends with the presentation of the gun onto the target.

Sky

This can't work. There are some stages that require a draw, then (say) open a door then say move a couple of steps before there is a requirement to present to a target. Your idea would extend the draw to 3 or 4 seconds.

It could work on static starts but we would then need additional wording to cover the scenario I have described above and that gets clumsy.

Neil, I guess don't see the issue with a 3 or 4 seconds draw, as long as the competitor is exempted to sweep his lower body only (not his hands), and has to keep finger outside of the guard.

The draw is longer because in a scenario where a competitor has to open a door and/or take a few steps before presenting the gun to a target, the stage designer left a choice to the competitor if to move first, then draw, or do it at the same time.

Now, we need to define what is the purpose of the draw action, to figure out when/where it could end.

My take was that since we're talking about a shooting competition, the intent of the draw is to present the gun on the target, thus the movement ends there.

But, as I'm writing this, I realize I could also accept a more general definition: the draw is the movement that brings the gun, from rest position in the holster, into the competitor's hand(s) to allow gunhandling for other purposes.

The very issue of defining the draw bounds is tricky, since we need to "draw" a line somewhere during an action that's not performed "per se", instead can be actually done at the same time with other actions (opening a door, pulling a rope, jumping down a prop or standing upright from a different position), and we need to define a visual reference (for the ROs) to deem this action concluded.

The bounds where to place this visual reference are: 1) as soon as the gun clears the holster, 2) the gun is in firing position.

These bounds are both visually checkable, but are impractical (the first for leading to DQ most of the competitors as already said, the second for prolonging the draw to an unacceptable extent).

All that's in between could be conceptually acceptable too, but too difficult to check with proper visual reference.

Any suggestion?

[blackdragon]

What I have observed while ROing, Is that by the time I relize that a shooter has swept him self with his draw, He is already shooting, Some times you are out of position and some one in the crowd points it out. Unfortunatley some times the only way to know for sure is if some one starts screaming. And none of us wants that!

Ivan

SCS Vegas